First Gaming Pc....

Rezident · 10 Jan 2008 at 11:39

pre1twa said:
You haven't used Vista have you? Please don't post stupid comments like this. Overclockers' forums should be a place where people can get helpful advice, lets not ruin it eh?

I have been using Vista for months. Also using XP. The fact is Vista crashed again the other day for no good reason (was just surfing, nothing remotely intensive), XP hasn't crashed in a long, long time. I'm not saying don't buy Vista (I bought it) but don't tell Meathman that all of the problems with Vista have been sorted out, as per the question he asked, because they have not. He has not used Vista and I suppose it would be reasonable to assume that something that was released by MicroSoft over a year ago would have all it's problems fixed, but that has not been my experience. If Vista has always worked perfectly for you and you never have any problems with it, then you're very lucky, but that's not what I've heard from many users.

Also, in light of MS's three-year OS cycle, I know at least two people (and I'm sure there must be more) that are skipping Vista and going straight from XP to whatever comes next (Windows 7?). That is a legitimate option for Meathman, so we should tell him about it shouldn't we?

gareth170 · 10 Jan 2008 at 11:48

Rezident said:
I have been using Vista for months. Also using XP. The fact is Vista crashed again the other day for no good reason (was just surfing, nothing remotely intensive), XP hasn't crashed in a long, long time. I'm not saying don't buy Vista (I bought it) but don't tell Meathman that all of the problems with Vista have been sorted out, as per the question he asked, because they have not. He has not used Vista and I suppose it would be reasonable to assume that something that was released by MicroSoft over a year ago would have all it's problems fixed, but that has not been my experience. If Vista has always worked perfectly for you and you never have any problems with it, then you're very lucky, but that's not what I've heard from many users.

basicly your saying its vista fault but u should serious look at your hardware..... theres nothing wrong with vista..

willhub · 10 Jan 2008 at 11:54

Most problems happen when people dont set up there OS properly, when Vista is configured properly and all the **** removed its a brill OS, loads faster than XP, much more responsive.

gareth170 · 10 Jan 2008 at 11:58

willhub said:
Most problems happen when people dont set up there OS properly, when Vista is configured properly and all the **** removed its a brill OS, loads faster than XP, much more responsive.

but also its down to the hardware too, even motherboard

willhub · 10 Jan 2008 at 12:01

gareth170 said:
but also its down to the hardware too, even motherboard

He has awsome specs so it aint his hardware..

gareth170 · 10 Jan 2008 at 12:05

willhub said:
He has awsome specs so it aint his hardware..

u can't know that thought... hardware doesn't just mean inside the case.... also it depends if that all his full specs in his sig

Rezident · 10 Jan 2008 at 12:08

gareth170 said:
hi

every system is different. maybe one of your hardware doesn't like vista so it's making it unstabe. it doesn't mean vista will be unstable on all system. i run xp,vista32 ,vista64 on my main system and both vista's are very stable.. my girlfriend system doesn't like vista as it crashs a lot because of one hardware in her system so shes running xp...

How's it going?

You're probably right, but it's not like I have any bizarrely obscure hardware on any of my systems (Gigabyte, Nvidia, Intel etc.) and it's not as if I'm the only person I've ever heard of who's had problems with Vista.

He asked if the problems with Vista had been sorted out and they have not all been. I hope and pray that they will be, for eveyone's sake, but I'm not going to tell the poor guy that they have been when I can see, on my systems at least, that they have not. He should see both sides and, in all likelihood, he'll buy Vista anyway for DX10 (they got me with that one

), but at least he'll be prepared for the potential issues.

gareth170 · 10 Jan 2008 at 12:17

Rezident said:
How's it going?

You're probably right, but it's not like I have any bizarrely obscure hardware on any of my systems (Gigabyte, Nvidia, Intel etc.) and it's not as if I'm the only person I've ever heard of who's had problems with Vista.

He asked if the problems with Vista had been sorted out and they have not all been. I hope and pray that they will be, for eveyone's sake, but I'm not going to tell the poor guy that they have been when I can see, on my systems at least, that they have not. He should see both sides and, in all likelihood, he'll buy Vista anyway for DX10 (they got me with that one ), but at least he'll be prepared for the potential issues.

hi

im ok thanks mate..

have u tryed vista sp1 rc1? it may help.. or checking your drivers for each of your hardware?

maxtoon · 10 Jan 2008 at 12:22

Jihad said:
Vista is far more stable than the likes of XP, I thought Vista was more stable months ago, one thing I've noticed is I NEVER get "Windows Explorer has stopped working" or whatever like I used to on XP now and then.

agreed, I had been using XP pro for many years but now have converted to Vista64 Premium. It is extremely stable in ways XP can only dream of.

It is a far better OS to use and has never crashed once in 6 months.

Rezident · 10 Jan 2008 at 12:24

gareth170 said:
basicly your saying its vista fault but u should serious look at your hardware..... theres nothing wrong with vista..

Maybe you're right, there have definitely been problems with the graphics card alright and the good people at BFG are replacing it so I'll see after that. Maybe it's all Nvidia's fault - my ATI fanboy mate would LOVE that

As for there being "nothing wrong with Vista", what about the DRM, PVP, instability, driver signing, compatibility problems, retail pricing (Ultimate is over €500 here!), lower framerates, UAC was SO annoying, even the fact that when I click on something, anything, in Vista, it's that fraction of a second slower than XP, it just feels less responsive? I thought it would be quicker.

Rezident · 10 Jan 2008 at 12:27

gareth170 said:
hi

im ok thanks mate..

have u tryed vista sp1 rc1? it may help.. or checking your drivers for each of your hardware?

Cheers, no I wanted to wait until SP1 is official (anyone know when it's due?).

I really am hoping it will solve the major problems, of course, I was also hoping the Crysis performance patch would make it perform better

gareth170 · 10 Jan 2008 at 12:34

Rezident said:
Maybe you're right, there have definitely been problems with the graphics card alright and the good people at BFG are replacing it so I'll see after that. Maybe it's all Nvidia's fault - my ATI fanboy mate would LOVE that

As for there being "nothing wrong with Vista", what about the DRM, PVP, instability, driver signing, compatibility problems, retail pricing (Ultimate is over €500 here!), lower framerates, UAC was SO annoying, even the fact that when I click on something, anything, in Vista, it's that fraction of a second slower than XP, it just feels less responsive? I thought it would be quicker.

im a ati fanboy too lol

anyway im guessing your running vista64. driver signing and uac are security features. uac can be turned off... as for compatibility problems do u mean drivers or software??,. lower framerates is down to graphic drivers..., maybe something is slowing it down that why it feels less responsive

Rezident · 10 Jan 2008 at 12:57

gareth170 said:
im a ati fanboy too lol

anyway im guessing your running vista64. driver signing and uac are security features. uac can be turned off... as for compatibility problems do u mean drivers or software??,. lower framerates is down to graphic drivers..., maybe something is slowing it down that why it feels less responsive

Hah! After about six months of research I went with 32-bit to avoid compatibility issues

willhub · 10 Jan 2008 at 13:00

gareth170 said:
u can't know that thought... hardware doesn't just mean inside the case.... also it depends if that all his full specs in his sig

Its in his sig and those specs are good end of.

I run Vista 64 and its just as good as Vista 32, had a few compatability issues tho.

rubberduck · 10 Jan 2008 at 13:06

As an OS matures it tends to get more stable. Any new OS will have problems with crashing which to be honest tends to be down to drivers... Can't really blame MS for this as manufactures have had a long time to get these right. As mature as XP is, I would expect most people still experience the odd crash now and again but we tend to overlook this as it's expected. What I'm trying to say is although XP is probably no more stable than Vista people tend to complain a lot more about Vista if they experience a problem becuase it is newer.

Rezident, sorry to hear you have had problems with Vista but I'm sure you'll agree that the general concensus is that Vista is as stable if not more so than XP.

willhub · 10 Jan 2008 at 13:13

It annoys me when you get people saying something along the lines of OMGZ WTF Vista SUKZ XP F T W!!!!, some guy I talk to on MSN is like that and he wont think any different, all he cares about is the extra 5fps in CSS Stress Test in XP :rolleyes:

gareth170 · 10 Jan 2008 at 13:16

willhub said:
Its in his sig and those specs are good end of.

I run Vista 64 and its just as good as Vista 32, had a few compatability issues tho.

but hardware can be external device also. e.g usb devices. so hardware doesn't just mean whats inside the case e.g. motherboard , graphic card, sound card, cpu... if u think hardware is just whats inside the case then im sorry your wrong...

Rezident · 10 Jan 2008 at 13:16

willhub said:
It annoys me when you get people saying something along the lines of OMGZ WTF Vista SUKZ XP F T W!!!!, some guy I talk to on MSN is like that and he wont think any different, all he cares about is the extra 5fps in CSS Stress Test in XP

BREAKING NEWS: Willhub Declares Vista Better Than XP

maxtoon · 10 Jan 2008 at 13:22

Rezident said:
BREAKING NEWS: Willhub Declares Vista Better Than XP

well, he is correct !!!

willhub · 10 Jan 2008 at 13:32

gareth170 said:
but hardware can be external device also. e.g usb devices. so hardware doesn't just mean whats inside the case e.g. motherboard , graphic card, sound card, cpu... if u think hardware is just whats inside the case then im sorry your wrong...

Did I say that? No, but the main part is in the PC... Yes there is printers, external HDD's, usb tablets. I have USB Graphics Tablets, printers, scanners and I admit the scanner is not compatible with Vista 64 or 32, the tablets work with Vista 32 but not with Vista 64 I dont think, good job I dont use them, external HDD's, USB Hubs, USB Memory sticks, headphones, keybaords and mouses all are usually plug and play so no problem.

Rezident said:
BREAKING NEWS: Willhub Declares Vista Better Than XP

I have before lol, I've never said XP is better :confused:

, or I cant remember were I have lol.