Why Vista Sucks...

Permabanned
Joined
11 Aug 2004
Posts
361
Location
Manchester
Why would you ever want to upgrade to Vista from XP.

Whats the point in having to add more memory, purely for the OS. For games, certainly, for applications, of course, but for the OS... As for AERO and GLASS. Whup-de-doo. Well worth wasting 512 Megabytes on.

What EXACTLY does it offer in the way of upgrades over XP? (apart from the appaling attempt to look like a Mac that AERO/GLASS is). Is there increased usability?? Certainly not. An example.

Networking. How many people on this board have two computers. How many are linked up on a home LAN. Lots.

Windows vista. Network Map, Network Center, Network List, Network... Blah, blah. Lots of different windows, doing the same thing...

CONTROL PANEL - NETWORK CENTRE

> Personalise
> Change to Public

If you chose Personalise, you (whooo) are able to change the title. Although it says network, you are only changing the title. You are not chaning the domain or the workgroup. Following this, is the same option as on the previous window. >Change to Public. You also have the option of bring up the properties of the LAN connection. You know, the area where you can change the IP setting, etc.

Who designed this? What is the point of the network centre? NONE!! All it does is confuse people. It serve's NO purpose. And why cant I change the workgroup from and of the NETWORK pages? Why on earth do I have to go to the SYSTEM...

MS has got so big, it hasnt got a clue anymore about usability. None. It would make so much more sense to have ONE page that will enable users to setup a home network/broadband. With ADVANCED tabs to change certain settings (DHCP, etc).

I have spent nearly 1 full hour, chasing my tail around the network tabs, and they make NO logical sense to me. Vista kept telling me I was on a Business Domain, and I kept saying "No, im a home user, with a local LAN". It kept telling me to Reset. It kept changing my WORKGROUP back to WORKGROUP. I changed it to my own setting, RESET. Why?? Why RESET... How many years since XP... And still I have to RESET because I have changed WORKGROUPS??? Its like the days when you had to reset because you changed resolution. I managed to get my workgroup up and running.
But in the process found that MS removing the My Network Place, etc, they havent made networking ANY easier. Just the hoops are now in different places. Some Hoops are not even needed AT ALL.

Windows firewall... Great... Now all the parents can rest easy, knowing its 'firewalled'. Yeah but, its MS firewall. On every machine. At least previously virus writers, and spyware had to combat different flavours of firewalls. Not any more. You think a firewall on every machine is going to be safer. Not if its the same firewall with every machine.

Parental Control. Why not rifle through your kids draws and read their diary, and install secret cameras in their rooms, and record all the telephone conversations they have, and employ a spook to watch and film every move they make. This isnt about parenting. Simple solution. If you dont trust your kid. Tell them you dont. Put the computer in the living room. Buy a console, buy them games for their own age. Be a bloody parent.. Dont let MS be the daddy.

Improved security. What!!! So I get asked my permission to change network settings, change time settings, blah, blah. MS gave everyone ADMIN access way back. To change things know will break windows back. Its too late.
Far too much legacy...

Look;

1991 - Windows 3.1
1994 - WIndows 95
1998 - Windows 98
2001 - Windows XP
- Erm....

Each on of those upgrades was worth it. More functionality, better connectivity, improved interface (usability). Each upgrade taking between 3-4 years.

Its been 5 years. WinFS isnt being released - if ever. So what are we left with. I know boss, we have a new menu. We have moved em about a bit. Yeah, we have modded the interface with Windowblindz.. Erm, sorry, AERO.
Oh, added a sidebar.

Erm, on XP, im using vanilla themes. Thats right, Windows Default. I woudlnt install a sidebar to save my life. what NEED do I have for a massive clock, when the one in the bottom corner serves me well. Why do I want my pictures to be shown on a tiny slide show. Am I really that anal I need a CPU metre?

MS keeps putting the release date off, because after all those years, it hasnt got anything new. It hasnt fixed any of the design flaws of XP. It isnt any further intuitive than XP. (Worse, if anything)... And MS knows this. And, with the price of the Intel Macs coming down, and the ability to dual boot. Im considering getting one, keeping my XP, installing it on the Mac, and test driving a different OS all together..

Why not.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
4 Nov 2002
Posts
15,502
Location
West Berkshire
If you don't like it, don't install it, and don't buy it when it's released. Job done. XP will be supported for about five years after Vista is out. Bill Gates isn't going to come around to your house and personally shoot you if you choose not to use it.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Feb 2004
Posts
20,543
Location
England
one word. search. wtf are they thinking? i cannot for the life of me perform the simplest search operations for files on my hard drives. :mad:
 
Permabanned
Joined
11 Aug 2004
Posts
361
Location
Manchester
I have been dual booting vista since its beta2 release.

I am dissapointed, that after such a long wait, it offers me so little. I have been a MS user since Windows 3.1

Im just gutted. The end of a long romance is here I think. I was looking forward to using SQL to query my OS. I wanted to be able to search through all me emails from Natalie containing my name. I wanted an improved interface that flowed logically.

Whilst most of the discussions are about how fast it runs, how good glass an aero is, what the minimum spec is, once you have used it, and really used it, you realise that its pants...
 
Permabanned
Joined
11 Aug 2004
Posts
361
Location
Manchester
I have another.

BCDEDIT... Used it yet?

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/wi...c349-427c-b035-c2719d4af778.mspx#BKMK_bcdedit

Go figure...

Now, thats what I call progress from good old BOOT.INI

If you cant be bothered linking, here is a snippet.

"Examples
The following command sets three operating system entries in the boot manager display order:

Bcdedit.exe /displayorder {c84b751a-ff09-11d9-9e6e-0030482375e6} {c74b751a-ff09-11d9-9e6e-0030482375e4} {c34b751a-ff09-11d9-9e6e-0030482375e7}"

I re-installed windows XP. I lost vista. I did a repair with the Vista DVD. It got vista working, but I lost XP. There is no Boot.ini to link to multi(0)rdisk(0)disk(1)partition(1) "Windows XP".... Oh no... BCEDIT...
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Nov 2004
Posts
4,788
Location
Hertfordshire
Nice rant :D

Remember though, its still a Beta and is an indication of what the final product will be like. Many products change dramatically going from Beta to release.

I agree that much of the user interface seems to be designed with useability for the average user in mind, possibly in the hope that more people will be able to get involved with certain aspects of computing that, at the moment appear daunting or inaccesable in XP or indeed previous versions of Windows.

The more techincally minded amongst us or those who want more control over their settings or who are used to the 'old style' interface etc will get a bit frustrated (take the current incarnation of UAC, or like you mentioned, the network centre for example...), but I think it will just take a bit more time to adjust to a new working environment - exactly the same way we all did moving to Windows XP.

At the end of the day, if you don't like the changes for whatever reason, and your current OS does everything you need it to do, and you dont see any point in changing, then don't. Problem solved :) However, I'd reserve judgement till you see the final release.
 
Permabanned
Joined
11 Aug 2004
Posts
361
Location
Manchester
I know. Good to get it off my chest... :D

I know its a beta.. :D

I know I dont have to buy it :D

But I can certainly tell you, as it stands, its garbage...

And to still be in BETA after 5, yes FIVE years, with not much to offer over XP, I wouldnt hold my breath. Unless MS pulls a rabbit out of a hat, I stand by my comments.
 
Soldato
Joined
28 Jul 2003
Posts
4,053
Location
Dundee
i also agree with the way the layout masks the old networking properties control panel, and that UAC is a monster :mad:
 
Permabanned
Joined
28 Jun 2006
Posts
769
Location
Midsomer Norton
i have downloaded a vista add on for xp and to be honest i have to agree with all of the above comments, i thibk that it is a complete waste of time, another thing putting me off of it is that you wont be able to copy cds or dvds, so what is the point of having a dvd burner if you cant copy dvds.

Out of curiosty what other software is there that you can do these sorts of things on, if anyone knows let me no please :(
 
Permabanned
Joined
17 Jan 2006
Posts
1,971
Location
Haskins
tbh, i think i'm going to stick with XP for a long time. As has been said, certainly the BETA 2 release offers no REAL advantages over XPH or XPP.

In all honesty, perhaps they should have left it with x64 in mind and not x32.

I'm aware of people still having issues when they change to XP with old Scanners etc that STILL are not supported for XP!

All the eye candy is great (if you like that sort of thing), but in corporate terms its useless. Even WIN2K could still pip XP at the post for corporate use. Having said that I run an extreme nlited version of XPP and its ultra quick and reliable. NLite will have a field day with Vista.

Unless they are altering the final version of Vista from its current BETA2 state, then i really dnt think i'll bother!

You could always make sure you've turned on all the customer experience programs, then they'll know what you think..

Office 2007 (BETA)...................now thats a different story!
 
Last edited:
Man of Honour
Joined
14 Nov 2003
Posts
10,949
I am also going to add my support for Gandalf501's rant. I couldn't see a single reason why anyone would use it, I hoped it would revive my faith ad use of Windows. It didn't.

At the moment Mac OS X leaves Vista standing and that is only going to get even better, Leopard will extend the gap and will be out before Vista final I would imagine. Don't get me wrong XP is an extremely good OS but I think Vista is a backward step and unlike Apple, M$ seem to have used the new 'features' to drive new hardware sales in cahoots with their mates, Dell et al.
(chuckles and looks at XPS Gen2 lovingly :D )

I won't be buying it as is my right, in fact I still have a Windows 2000 box at work that performes flawlessly but I am in the process of converting to the Mac platform for work and Linux for home computing, a process that is almost complete. Next I will be buying a shiny new console and M$ can [Bender voice] 'kiss my shiny metal ass' [end Bender voice]
 

Una

Una

Associate
Joined
26 Nov 2004
Posts
2,471
Location
Reading / Lake District
Having also used it a few weeks now I also party agree with the rant. The usability of it at the moment is terrible, so a lot needs to be changed between now and final release. The thing is, microsoft will force people to upgrade to vista whether they like it or not (I.E DirectX 10 could easily be backported to xp). The only thing I really miss from microsoft these days (now im using Arch linux) is visual studio.
 
Soldato
Joined
21 Oct 2002
Posts
18,022
Location
London & Singapore
Remember Vista is a technology release of Windows, much like Windows 95 and NT 3.5 were. It is laying the foundations for another 10-15 years of user experience upgrades.

The Win2000 beta's were equally as bad. But it always comes together and starts looking like a proper product in the last 2 months.
 
Associate
Joined
5 Feb 2004
Posts
342
Location
Rotherham
marc2003 said:
one word. search. wtf are they thinking? i cannot for the life of me perform the simplest search operations for files on my hard drives. :mad:
How can you say that man?

I think that the new all in one search function in Vista is the best thing on the start menu.

I am still undecided about Vista, on one hand I like it because it is new, and new things are better ;)
On the other side though, I would have to agree that it isn't as much of a necessary upgrade as XP was at the time.

I don't really have a problem with any of Vista apart from the networking, you wouldn't believe the troubles i have had just sharing a simple folder on a simple workgroup with a simple XP machine.



ahhh well, it'll be a success and we'll all use it one day :)
 
Associate
Joined
20 Oct 2002
Posts
1,980
Location
Space, the final frontier
Berserker said:
If you don't like it, don't install it, and don't buy it when it's released. Job done. XP will be supported for about five years after Vista is out. Bill Gates isn't going to come around to your house and personally shoot you if you choose not to use it.

The general public may be in for a shock, there is a possibility that once Vista has been released to the public, XP could have a support life of 12-24 months tops!!

Will have to see what MS say Q4 2006 or Q1 2007

As for the OP, I agree they have made it more complicated as i have installed it to dual boot with XP on my laptop, even built a pc in our office which my tech director is using along with office 2007 beta

Issues we have found, when resuming from sleep or hibernate, having to restart the print spooler in order to print.

Mapping network shares does not allocate a drive letter like in XP, therefore applications reliant on a physical drive letter dont work....

When downloading someting, you can specify a path, but if that path does not exist, it doesnt error, but downloads it to somewhere else in your profile!
 
Last edited:
Top