Yet more proof that MS know Vista is poor

Vista is better than XP in every way, most people that knock it still have XP!

Most people think Vista is rubbish because of poor drivers written by hardware manufacturers! They've got nothing to do with MS!
 
I've had Vista since about July 2007, never had any problems with any drivers, and never even contemplated going back to XP.
 
crestj said:
Vista is better than XP in every way, most people that knock it still have XP!

Most people think Vista is rubbish because of poor drivers written by hardware manufacturers! They've got nothing to do with MS!
Click to expand...

But in what way? What can you do on it that you couldn't on XP :confused:

I'm not saying it doesn't run fine for you, I just don't see all these amazing improvements.

The biggest feature of it was removed just before release (new file structuring).

Is it more intuitive or user friendly? Not noticably.
Does it run apps and games faster? Not really.

So what exactly does it do apart from have a pretty ui?

There's no really anything new that even warrants a whole new OS release. It's just a cash cow for MS.
 
Last edited:
Olibubble said:
Sorry, I don't buy that.
Click to expand...

Not asking you to buy anything, nor do I actually care if you accept it either. This was argued over yonks ago more than once and you will only be next in line for "Not buying it"

Compare them for yourself, and once you do, you will see where I am coming from, but until then...
 
FatRakoon said:
Not asking you to buy anything, nor do I actually care if you accept it either. This was argued over yonks ago more than once and you will only be next in line for "Not buying it"

Compare them for yourself, and once you do, you will see where I am coming from, but until then...
Click to expand...

Maybe you have your quad core set up wrong if thats the case. I know that on the same platform the Vista machine with 4Gb is able to swap between applications more fluidly than XP with 2GB. So I have tried it myself, and I still don't buy what your saying. Not that my own experience will bother you of course, as you so obviously don't care. :)
 
Sorry, no, its not that I dont care, because I do

However, I have already been through this very same old arguement before and this will be the third time now and in both the previous times, many many people said that I was wrong and worse, and we went through loads of slagging off until people really did run some tests as I was asking them to, and sure enough, I was proven correct.

I can safely say that of all the people who said I was wrong and then proven correct on this very same old arguement, you are well over the 100th

Im not saying that XP+2GB is faster than Vista+4GB, thats not what I said at all...

I said, and I am pretty much quoting my words here :-

My Opteron 939 system running 2GB of RAM under XP64 is able to "Flick" through many more apps much smoother and quicker than my Conroe Quad Cores can with 4GB under Vista64.


Now, I have 2 Quad core Intels, and both have 4GB

My Opteron has 4GB too now, but, when I compared them, I found that the Opteron was definitely much smoother when runing XP64 and it was able to float in and out of any number of apps without a single glitch or any kind of hiccup.

Both the Intels on the other hand, one running XP and the Other running Vista, could occasionally glitch, sometimes not much and hardly noticeable and sometimes I would have to wait for a short while...
 
Ok, well, I have given Vista64 another shot.

I went through conecting and disconnecting the drives for hours today until Vista finally saw them in the same order that the BIOS does, and of course, for it to let me install to the Raptor as C:... Not much to ask, but clearly somehting thats been very awkward for it to date.

The thing is, that this is fine if I have only one or two drives, but 4 and it screws them up all *** time.

But, so far, so good.

Right, well apart from the normal Vista issues that get ironed out after a fresh install ( Many of which Any version of Windows gets ), what are my issues with Vista at this time?

O&O DeFrag.
This is somethign thats been a bugger since day 1
V8.6 is the earliest Vista compatible version and my v8.5 Serial works on it just fine.
v10 for some reason seems to ignore my serial number, and says that its good but then O&O becomes a trial version??? - So, back to v8.6
I pretty much feel that O&O DeFrag v10 is an utter pile of horsecrap anyway, so I uch prefer v8.6 - v8.6 looks more professional too, not like the cartoonish crap that v10 is.
Anyway, cut the moaning about the visuals, how does it perform?
Badly. Just now, I highlighted my 6 partitions ( 4 internal drives, but F: is a 60GB chunk off D: and one 400GB External that has my ISO Images / Installs etc )
I clicked on Analyse and... Well... Nothing.

Some 5 or 6 minutes later I get a dialog box telling me that the O&O DeFrag container has stopped working and would I like to look for a cure online?

This has happened every single time I have tried to use O&O DeFrag on Vista...

I can select one drive at a time and its fine, although I have not yet done that on this particular install.

Never does it with any 32 or 64 Bit versions of 2K, XP, or 2003, only Vista.

Anyone else seen this?

O&O DeFrag is fine on my Vista Prem 32, but then thats only got one drive with 2 partitions.

---

Im using the customised disk this time round, I intergrated SP1 into it and that will hopefully help, but of course thigns can go wrong with any custom disk, but so far, its running fine... I have somehow lost the Areo theme now though, dont know where that went to? and even though I downloaded the latest nvidia drivers half an hour before I installed it, it wanted to download the latest drivers, so I let it, they installed and guess what? - its still in my list and it wants to download them again!?!??!?!?!

Small issue that I hope will resolve itself... Issues such as that I dont care too much about but the O&O one is a biggie for me, as I have used O&O since 8.5 and I have spent on them, but I am still going back to v8.6.

Lets see how it goes then.
 
Andy100 said:
But in what way? What can you do on it that you couldn't on XP :confused:

I'm not saying it doesn't run fine for you, I just don't see all these amazing improvements.

The biggest feature of it was removed just before release (new file structuring).

Is it more intuitive or user friendly? Not noticably.
Does it run apps and games faster? Not really.

So what exactly does it do apart from have a pretty ui?

There's no really anything new that even warrants a whole new OS release. It's just a cash cow for MS.
Click to expand...

There are loads of little things that don't really add up, but when you take them away and i have to use XP again i miss them. Really big thing for me, is the better split volume control that really in fantastic.

The integrated quick search (i know windows search4 in kinda the same in XP) is superb and a huge time saver most of the time i can't live without that.

Funny i can't actually think of anything else off the top of my head right now but if i was using XP i'd be complaining about little things missing left right an centre!
 
Swapping between apps is painfully slow now in Vista.

Im trying to install UnReal Tournament III and I have all my game ISO's on an external HD, they are mounted with Daemon tools and the Serials etc are in a text file.

I have them this way to both preserve my original disks, and because its much much qucker to install the games this way.

However...

Its just taken over half an hour to install UT3 from the Iso on the External Disk ( XP64 is usually about 30 seconds ) and to top it all, I am using ALT+TAB to go between NOTEPAD which is showing the Text file of the serial number, and closing UT3 and going to the desktop takes about between half a second and one second, but bringing UT3 back up the first time was something about 15 to 20 seconds ( Didnt count till a fair bit into it, and this is a guess ) and then for the second number, it took 14 seconds to get back into UT3 and for the third number...

...Well, Im still waiting.

... I just looked at the task manager and UT3 has stopped responding!

Thats somethign else that has NEVER happened to me when in XP

Ok, its been 10 minutes, I guess I wil kill UT off and try again.

Still not been able to run O&O on more than one partition... Tripe.
 
Hmm... Ok, UT3 went in the second time. I wrote the serial on my hand so I didnt need to ALT-TAB it in.

Gone in fine, I played a game, thankfully, it remember where I am up to, so no loss there.

I am now putting in Company Of Heroes and its deathly slow, so I thought Id watch a SouthPark while Im waiting... Dragged it to KMPlayer and its just taken 12 second for KMP to display and a further 4 seconds for the video to start.

This snail-ness is something that I have never seen with XP64

Whats worse is that under XP64, Im normall running 4 instances of FAH and they are not even in yet, so Im dreadding to see what is going to happen once they are in???

Anyway, so far I have had plenty of hiccups for sure, but its day 1... I can whine all I like but if they are going to iron themselves out, then thats fine... If they are still doing their sillyness in a couple of days then I will be concerned so, force myself to use Vista until I have no choice... Who knows eh?

And, I activated it straight away too... Im 50-50 still on whether that was a good idea or not?
 
I stayed with XP because I didn't want any of Vista's features and thought it was just pointless bloat, but recently I've been using a laptop with Vista on and I love it. It's a great OS, although I'm not gonna upgrade my own PC just yet as all I really want out of it is DX10 and that isn't worth £140. I think I'm gonna wait for Windows 7.
 
30 seconds to install UT3 seems abit quick no? Takes more than 3 mins here when I had it. Vista has been as fast if not faster for me switching between apps, never had a problem. This is with plenty running too, opera, firefox, Google Chrome, plenty of tabs open in each, msn, xfire, transfering files, sidebar stuff, all the other usual stuff running like AV, even when installing a game its still fast, usually slowness when switching applications is due to not enough ram it seems but with 4GB you should never have that problem. Also minimizing to the desktop from games is also quick, no problems here.
 
Ok, 30 mins v 30 secs does indeed seem a little silly, but thats just it... I know that 30 seconds is a little bit of B/S... It takesa bit longer than that but not much... 2 or 3 minutes maybe then, but the 30 minutes was also actually a bit on the low side too, because the progress bar was about an inch in after about 15-20 minutes, and so I watched an episode of SouthPark while I was waiting and at the end of that episode ( Which ios roughly about 20 minutes ) the scroll bar was still only about 3 quarters through, so, I recon in truth, it probably took closer 40 minutes.

Ok, I will do Call Of Duty 4 right now then...I will time COD4
 
Hell, Im grabbing a few screenshots now of COD4's progress and so far, its killing me...

Its now on iw_08.iwd and the time is 11:46 so its neeb going for four minutes and the bar is about a fifth of the way along!!!

Perhaps its a USB issue that I dont get with XP?

11:47 and the bar has not moved yet... Im now on iw_10.iwd however.

Sad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom