You said '10' twice

Steve Hewitt said:

"Vista is Windows 6.0 compared to XP which was Windows 5.0.

Leopard is OS X 10.5 compared to Tiger which was OS X 10.4."

First off Windows XP is 5.1, 2000 was 5.0, not that version numbers mean a great deal in this context.

However, if you really want to focus on such little things, Leopard is OS X 5.0 and Tiger was OS X 4.0 since the X is OS X stands for (drumroll please) 10! Remember that before Mac OS X was Mac OS 9. So, lets see, MS updates Windows from 5.0 (2K) to 5.1 (XP) and this is an upgrade that you consider significant but Apple updates Mac OS X from 4.0 to 5.0 and that is just a service pack?

As for the price of Vista, it is too much for too little. I recently bought a PC to use as a server. It came with Vista Basic and could barely function whereas it runs along nicely with CentOS 5.0 and which is the most sophisticated OS? Don't answer that, you probably think Vista since it is version 6.0 and CentOS is only 5.0. This is why MS Word went from 2.0 to 6.0 in one step.

In the busines world Vi$ta is a rarity.

I work in the real world, and I install stuff on small Business networks on a daily basis, sometimes 3-4 different networks a day.

In the last 12 months, I have seen less than 20 Vi$ta clients.

Why do you think this is?

Because it offers nothing to the small business user, that's why.

Look at it-you need a new faster PC with more memory, just to run the same software at the same speed. (the software that actually works with it, that is).

There is no upgrade incentive, quite the opposite.

What exactly would you gain? more crashes.

I have recently (About 4 months) Had a brand new Laptop from RM (Educational supplier's).

2gig of ram dual core Intel core2 with Vista business edition on it. (runs like a 386 at times)

Vista is shit3.

I cannot adequately articulate how this non-operating system makes me feel, but I'll try.

1. not in control of anything.

2. nervous about when something will just inexplicably crash.

3. bored as I wait about half a day for it to start up.

4. bored as I wait about half a day for it shut down.

5. just fucking angry.

6. perplexed about what GNU/Linux operating system I'm going to replace it with and whether I should even bother emulating a Microsoft Op on in at all, after my experience with Vista only Photoshop and fruityloops are going to persuade me that its worth it.

i have never used such a bag of shite as Vista and I once used suse back in the day without an Internet connection. Vista really is as annoying as Dependency hell.

out of the 4 month I've had my new laptop one month has been spent in the "no drivers", "Windows is checking for a solution to this problem" and your basis "this program is not responding" state. All of those are clearly euphemisms for "This operating system is shit"

I don't care if you like Windows, hate it, whatever

If you are considering buying Vista, don't. It offers nothing apart from resource hogging, flashy graphics and drm that's too easily triggered and again, cripples performance.

To me this is like the Windows ME release. In other words a complete fuck up.

So like I said, doesn't matter if you're a M$ fan or not, just don't do it to yourself, don't fall for the bright shiny objects - wait for the next version.

Don't waste my time talking about Apple's OS or Linux, your arguments about whether they're better operating systems or not are redundant. Of course they are. But that's irrelevant to someone who doesn't want to, or can't use them. I know what's wrong with Windows, I know what's right with the others. So don't waste your time telling me.

I'm talking purely in terms of Windows and to those that either have to, or want to use it. History has shown that Microsoft release a completely fucked up operating system between what I shall call their better versions. Windows Vista is one of the fucked up versions, and if you have any sense whatsoever you'll wait for whatever they release. When they fuck up on the scale that they have with Vista, the next version usually comes along pretty smartish. I reckon next year, or by 2010 at the latest.

@ Steven Hewitt

10.5 is not a service pack. It is a OS upgrade and feature change. By that argument, windows 98 and ME are not OSes, they are Service packs for 95 that MS charged for. Same with XP (but from Windows 2000).

Just because Apple didnt throw out everything, doesnt mean its a patch.

@Herby

"Now things would be REAL complete if Lotus Notes ran under Linux as well."

http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/19940.wss

Since 1996 man! Sadly, no Domino Designer (yet, 8.5 in the works), but still - where have you been?

http://www.qtzar.com/blogs/qtzar.nsf/d6plinks/HOBS-7B3QUY

@James McGregor

"I'm definitely upgrading from XP to Vista because I want a 64bit Operating system that is windows based.

No problem

Vista is not even worth comparing to XP if you are talking about a 32 bit system. But if you tried XP 64, you'll know that the XP version is SO bad it makes Windows ME look like a resonable alternative!!!

But then again

But then again , when a minimum of 92% of all systems in use are not capable of Vista support and most laptop makers offer bulk purchasers in the Business sector the roll back option ! Thus leaving only the public buyers to be the unfortunate guinea pigs for what appears to be currently a flying turkey of limited means , just how much is too much ?

@Steve Hewitt

[quote]

Vista is Windows 6.0 compared to XP which was Windows 5.0.

[/quote]

How about... 2000 was Windows NT 5.0, XP was Windows NT 5.1, Vista is NT 6.0

If you're classing non-major version increments as "service packs" then by your definition XP is a service pack to Win2000 which costs money.

Vista a standard?

@eugene

Vista will *NOT* be the next standard. (unless MS is paying for voting again)

Standards are open, such as the unified POSIX architecture - large Sun Workstations, the current Mac Mini et al running Leopard etcetera.

Vista is such a pile of absolute total f***king sh*t that I am banning it from my laboratory as a security risk, never mind the lack of useability, and s l o w.

I've mentioned before - and I'll say this again, I am a Microsoft Partner with hundreds of ISO images VLP of their products in my cupboard. Mosty excellent and creative pieces of software. The VLP ISO XP SP2 image is used nearly every-day, and all of our new shiny Vista ISO discs are left on the shelf, untouched, gathering dust, unloved and totally in need of recycling to make ashtrays or something.

'ELLO POLLY!!!!! Testing! Testing! Testing! Testing! This is your nine o'clock alarm call!.....This Vista is no more! it has ceased to be! it's expired and gone to meet 'Steve Balmer! 'it's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'it rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'it to the OEM chain 'it'd be pushing up the daisies! It's metabolic DRM processes are certainly 'istory! it's off the twig! it's kicked the bucket, it's shuffled off it's mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!! VISTA IS AN EX-OS!!

@ Ian Matthews

You're disagreeing with something I didn't say :) If you're going to the trouble of commenting on someone else's comment, at least read it.

Ultimate is the only vista edition you can remote desktop on to, as well as have the media center stuff.

@James McGregor

Try completing the following in 10 words or less with something convincing... "I'm definitely upgrading from XP to Vista because ..." Hard, isn't it?

It depends....

"I've upgraded from XP to Vista because the support for offline folders is in order of magnitude better"

I've been running Vista since early betas, and while it still has a huge number of issues (just like XP did when it first turned up), it has just enough improvements that make me put up with it. Although it's also not ideal, I found by turning off a few things (UAC for one deffo) and the SP-1 update, it is far more credible.

For Business Use I'm still recommending XP Pro and will do for a long time - there are too many changes and pitfalls to make it viable yet there (P.S. I'm using it in business - the only person as a test, so I know!), but for home use, everyone I've seen with it does like it - it does have some nifty bits for those types of usage profiles.

If it was down to me though, I'd be running Windows 2000 Pro still, that was rock solid. MS should have kept the Business vs Home fork they had for real as that made a lot of sense and resulted in a less bloated and rock solid OS.

Paris cause she's not fussy what she runs with.

switch !!!

my bro in law bght new vista pc few months bck, waitin to switch bck to xp, hope xp price will come down.

Vista will be on your PC(s) eventually

I guarantee it.

Once 3D video cards are powerful enough to run a killer DX10 game at full resolution with all the options on fast enough. There is not that 'must have' DX10 game out yet. You kids will be the one's who make sure you eventually have it installed in order to run that game.

MS made a shrewd move there.

So bitch and whine about it all you want. You WILL have to install it (Or have a PC with it preinstalled) at some stage in the future.

@ Dick Emery (seriously?)

>> You WILL have to install it

Will you people listen to yourselves? I've GOT to install it, because MS is going to FORCE me??

F*** me with a chainsaw...

Paris, because she must have tried that, right?

if you can't polish a turd, make it cheaper!

I remember, long ago, when IBM were arrogant, despised, unloved and people flocked to MS because they gave people back control of their computers, provided an OS you could play with, development tools that worked (I cut my PC programming teeth on MS C 5.x on DOS). Everyone wanted, but nobody believed, that IBM would fall from leadership. MS seem to think they too are unassailable... hopefully Vista will cause their pedestal to sway.

Anyway, back to the subject.

http://www.polishedturd.com/

EEE PC

Microsoft are doomed... my daughter is pestering me to get her one for school... it does exactly what she wants, web access, plays MP3s, has a wordprocessor and spreadsheet program... and it's light and fits into her backpack with all her books...

I'll be getting myself one as well this summer to replace the Palm Tungsten E I currently cart around

2008... the year of Linux... finally...

Vista... no matter how much lipstick you put on it, it's still a dog with lipstick on it...

Oses that suck

Sitting on the sidelines reading the endless "Vista, Shite or Gold?" debates, I have concluded that the #1 issue with Vista is that it doesn't solve the user's problems.

Just like a bad website! (vide http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com)

That this should be the case is no surprise. Some years ago I was yakking with a dude who did contract work for Microsoft, and one of his remarks has stuck in my mind: namely that Microsofties are "incredibly arrogant."

Between their arrogance and their company's monopoly, it seems like Vista was designed to impose Microsoft's concept of "what the users need" on the world, while getting in bed with the media companies and implementing retrogressive DRM throughout the system.

Did would-be users want more DRM? No. If anything, they wanted less DRM, preferably none at all.

Did potential users want their computer to piss away endless CPU cycles validating drivers 60 times a second? No. They wanted, if anything, an OS that made the highest possible fraction of CPU power available to applications.

It's going to be interesting to see how this all plays out. AFAICT, Microsoft still thinks they can force their customer base onto Vista, but as long as there is any kind of escape hatch (Mac, Linux, FreeBSD, etc) this time-honored strategy is at great risk of failing.

After all, if your old, expensive, perfectly functional software won't run under Vista, nor will a lot of your old, expensive, perfectly functional hardware, nor can Vista read your old, expensive, important documents created in old word processors and spreadsheets...after all, if this is the case, one might as well bite the bullet and switch to a system that is less coercive in its outlook.

Flame because, yes, I'm ranting.

Already bought it, but.........

I decided to upgrade last Christmas when the 8800GT came out. To make a long story short I found it simpler just to replace the video card in my circa 2005 Athlon. I bought Home Premium Vista, but it's just sitting in the shrink wrap. I just can't make myself go through the trauma of software that doesn't work or requires an upgrade, not to mention 4GB of Ram just to run smoothly. I've thought of selling it on Ebay, but doubt there'd be any takers. Woe is me........

Have a copy

Why bother buying sit when ya can knock it off the net for nothing , it's the cheapest way , mind you I went back too XP afterwards , vista gave me the shit's

cheaper

> Price cuts in the rest of the world are expected to follow real soon.

Like that would happen in Malaysia.

Quoting what a computer store told me when XP's price went down but they're still maintaining the same price: "Yeah, sure, the price went down. But shipping prices went up. Petrol isn't getting any cheaper. We have to bring it in from Singapore, ya know? And our rent went up too".

> You WILL have to install it (Or have a PC with it preinstalled) at some stage in

> the future.

As long as it's NOT my PCs. Although if I have a son and he does insist on it (anyone want to help me go to the moon, kick some NASA engineers ass, and get some geek-loving girls back?), I'd try to talk him out of the self harm he's going to put himself through.

Still not there

NO, no, the idea is that they'd PAY ME to run the rotten thing. Even then, I'm not sure I'd have time for all the hassle and fixes I need to make it work even 90% as well as XPpro now does.

Vista Lover, Vista Hater?

I have read a hundred times, i love vista, i hate vista,

and the lovers say, the haters have no real grounds, and its all hardware or drivers etc.

and the haters, are usually sheep, or people that can have lagit reasons for hating it, but to be honest, is there one person out there that has never had a crash or problem on ANY operating system.

if 1 person has never had anythig ever not work, then they are either a computer gos, or the luckiest person on the planet.

anyhow, i have vista ultimate (yup branded already) at home.

and i like it.

have i had problems?

well yes, and as an IT professional its bloody annoying having to spend ages just trying to get things that should work by default work to work.

heres the clincher,

i have a problem at the mo,

Vista wont load DotNet 3 or 3.5, (and then in turn vs2008 coz it needs 3.5)

also all updates dont want to install autoamatically. they lock, need unlocking, rebooting, history clear down, ok next update please.

im not even sure to be honest if they are actually installed, (as the history is now removed). aaaaaugh. anyway, Vista wont even install its own parts.

it does perform ok, i guess,

i do get a blue screen of death every time i try to turn on dreamschene. so thats turned off,

oh and media center seems to be a nightmare with a 3 monitor setup (well 2 monitor + 37" HDTV)...

and it about the same speed as my old 2000 machine o guess for running apps.

(i now have a quad core. 1.5tb raid system, good graphics, & 4gb ram)

am i happy?

let me answer that after sp1.

Not quite, chaps...

@Anonymous Coward:

"Windows is for herd-following morons who don't know any better.

OS X is for people who want to use their computer rather than fighting it.

Linux is for people who are better with computers than talking to other humans."

Clearly, you don't use your computer for anything more serious than posting inane, strawman arguments like this to The Register - since there are plenty of real, commercial reasons that people still use Windows. Try working in industry, and you will see what I mean. I say this as a dedicated Solaris man, and no, I don't have problems talking with people.

@Dick Emery:

"Once 3D video cards are powerful enough to run a killer DX10 game at full resolution with all the options on fast enough. There is not that 'must have' DX10 game out yet. You kids will be the one's who make sure you eventually have it installed in order to run that game.

MS made a shrewd move there.

So bitch and whine about it all you want. You WILL have to install it (Or have a PC with it preinstalled) at some stage in the future."

If it weren't for the hugely-successful games console market, I might be inclined to agree. But this isn't 1990 anymore - and people don't buy PCs for games in the same kinds of numbers they did when Wing Commander came out. The decline of the PC gaming market started with the release of the original Sony PlayStation in 1994, and has been eroding ever since. For quite a while now, many of the best games have come out on consoles first, with the PC platform being included only as an afterthought.

Microsoft's choice of fragmenting the DirectX market with Vista will actually harm the PC as a gaming platform, and accelerate its demise. No games publisher will publish for DX10 only, unless they really want to go out of business. With a choice of the Xbox 360, PlayStation 2/3 and the superb Nintendo Wii, who would willingly buy a PC for their kids to game on, when they can just buy them a console and a cheap Linux/BSD/Solaris box? Less headaches for me, more fun for the kids...

Oliver.

Hands up

Who thinks that Vista only products are being worked on? Seriously. Anyone think that? Developers will be thinking "Vienna, one year to wait... So why not just patch the software for Vista and wait for Vienna..."

Even M$ brought out "halo 2" as vista only but "gears of war" was Xp as well. So they are back tracking on their own games. M$ back pedal or the developer get hard line for the XP compatilbilty?

@Kirstian K

You answered your own question I think. Your spec is fairly high end and Vista runs fine (barring all the issues) Your system is what, 2000 quids worth new and you are the IT professional who knows what he is doing. Kind of puts you above the issues most people have.

I have Vista ulitmate and I like it to look at, I can't use it as it falls over all the time. I had to get a 1600 machine to run it. I am an IT professional and I use it at work supporting end users. That have a 512 - 768 meg ram, 60 Gb harddrive, no GFX card (on board) and 2.0.ghz chips. printers using serial ports and software from windows 98. It's not pretty.

Vista is another Windows ME

I have no intention of upgrading to Vista and I do not have to pay for it - I have access to it through a volume license agreement with the Public Sector.

It seems to me that Vista is like Windows Millennium Edition and best avoided, I could fill pages about all the reasons I won't upgrade but here are a few:

1. On a personal basis the product is way too expensive and does not deliver value for money, the fact that UK and US pricing are not on par exacerbates the situation and I do not accept the “localisation” excuses.

2. One expects each better version to include all of the features of the previous edition, but M$ removes features such as Media Centre and more from the business edition. (http://tinyurl.com/3843r3). All previous "home" editions have been bastardised with loss of security and networking features so the business edition is the bare minimum, yet it does not include things used by SOHO users. M$ would tell you to get the ultimate edition which has priced itself out of the market (even at the reduced price). The home basic and Business editions should be scrapped except as config options through windows install and active directory.

3. Performance, Performance, Performance. I want a lean and mean version of Windows that extends the life of my old computers. What MS delivered was a slow dog that makes a new Core Duo 6750 with 2gb of Ram run like a 486. M$ needs to give its developers the lowest spec machines so they are forced to write mean code.

4. It is so bloody incompatible, I don't know why, I don't care why, I just want it to work with my currently installed programmes in XP. This makes upgrading to Vista cost more as I then have to upgrade ALL my installed software, except that it took months for these to be provided (if they could).

5. Why change things? The list would be endless but removing menus, changing folders for things like documents and settings, expiring accounts etc etc etc are just a few things that worked perfectly well but have been changed. Hasn't M$ heard of "if it ain't broke don't fix it"? What is worse is that the replacement renamed features are buried away so you can't even find them and even when you do they don’t have the options that were there in XP.

6. Vista is so alien that it requires complete retraining of users and it adds a burden to the support dept. This cost simply can’t be justified for the above reasons. If I have to move users from XP I would be better off moving them to Linux which may also be alien but at least costs much less. When you add the changes to Office 2007 which create the same issues it makes the Linux move even more attractive. For now we will stick with XP unless M$ makes it unavailable or new kit no longer supports XP.

7. I do not like the way Vista behaves when kit is upgraded (e.g. by removing DRM and forcing activation) again these just create support issues. Nobody likes being forced to do things, XP had similar features but they were not so draconian, again there are no such features in Linux.

I have avoided Linux in the past but M$ is pushing me toward it, especially with things like Ubuntu being so user friendly in comparison to Vista. We do not believe M$ will take on board our concerns and so we are moving one department to Ubuntu to see the support issues it raises and the costs/savings it provides.

If M$ wants to keep users it needs to rethink the whole way it develops software AND the so called beta test programme which should have fixed bugs and foreseen the incompatibility issues. However, that would assume M$ would listen to them. I would never be a beta tester because it would waste so much of my time for no tangible benefit. Perhaps it needs advanced beta testers who do a thorough testing and evaluation in exchange for a free lifetime license of the version being tested.

Vista is a lame duck, the sooner M$ comes out with a replacement the better, but it better be damn good, if I were them I would go back to XP and try to build a faster and more compatible OS. This may make Vista a “cul de sac” but it could always offer a free upgrade which any poor sod that has Vista surely deserves!

Its still a rubbish name

Windows XP made its way onto my machine, eventually because it was an easier beast to install; it already recognised all my hardware without the need too hunt the internet for the drivers. The same can be said for Vista, once XP support is withdrawn all the new hardware you buy will slowly become more of a pain to install on an XP machine. This is the path Vista will take to get onto your machine, it will just become easier to setup (given time).

I think, when Windows 7.0 will come around (which doesn't appear to be that far away) Windows Vista will be pushed into the same bin as Windows Me, and Vista will be skimmed over and ignored.

What I don't understand is where all the linux preachers have gone, this comment section is filled to the brim with Mac lovers.

I think people are getting tired of all this operating system noise, I think when the average joe computer user gets tired, they are going to start looking for alternatives and their techie friends will tell them to buy a mac, or install linux for them; which when setup up well (and finds all your hardware) can be a practical machine (look at the eee pc, I haven't missed Windows on it at all; it is a good model for other PC manufacters to follow)

I don't think Vista SP1 is going to be the magic bullet that fixes all the problems, I'm not sure what the user sees as a problem on Vista (such as UAC) micrsoft acknowledges as a problem that needs fixing.

DRM VISTA DRM

all i can say is ive tried to love vista like i do xp but to be honest its a crippled os slow as drm embedded and lets be frank the nsa helped develop it do i need to say any more i persoanlly think if apple did open there os to run on all x86 hardware then it would be goodbye mr gates and hello mr jobs they should seize there chance while vista is still in infancy

I use xp ive installed vista so many times but every time uninstalled it for one reason its to damn slow