| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| SiSL |
Posted - 02 May 2009 : 18:10:53
"Wow" plotline should be for Windows 7. Just tested RC today and first hands up, even thought it is not any more different than Windows 2000 -> Windows XP difference with Vista, can surely say, this is going to be another nail on XP's coffin finally.
|
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Jezmeister |
Posted - 05 May 2009 : 07:41:10
I don't get a lot of the performance qualms with Vista as such, unless you actually got it for the trimmings... it came with my laptop which is far below minimum spec, vista home basic + aero runs fine, although I have to say boot up is kinda slow. The only real issue I've had with Vista and apart from liking how comparitively lightweight xp is, so I don't have to upgrade hardware quite so soon running XP where I would need at least one more gb of RAM and possibly a new graphics card for vista, the only reason I haven't really got into it is lack of backwards compatibility. where XP usually manages to run older programs not built for it I've found a lot of software I have just won't run on Vista, even with SP1. I could just be incredibly unlucky there though I guess  and it sounds like Windows 7 may be attacking that.
On Windows 7.... I disagree with the reason for it being called windows 7 instead of Vista R1, most people would expect a discounted upgrade at the very least if it was "another version of vista" - this way they make more money... love em or hate em you can't argue with the profit margins lol |
| SiSL |
Posted - 03 May 2009 : 18:43:20
quote:
Originally posted by Classicmotorcycling
I have played with Windows 7 for a while now, and it could be a candidate as it will run, and runs well on the same hardware as XP, just need to check the compatibility issues. There are a few new neat tricks with Windows 7, especially around the networking side.
You should check out new XP Mode for Windows 7, where it runs application on Windows 7, but like VMware Unity style, running an XP in background. Manage to play Street Fighter II (MS-DOS game) on x64 Windows 7 (okay, that's a big test) |
| Classicmotorcycling |
Posted - 03 May 2009 : 16:21:16
The 3 main reasons most companies have not gone Vista is because of staff training, compatibility issues and the cost to upgrade the current hardware. I run the IT department in Australia of a global manufacturing group and this is the reasons all of us worldwide have stopped us from going Vista.
It was horrible enough with the training going from 2000 to XP (yes our workers complain about everything) and we purchased all new hardware which cost a fortune which was not good enough to run Vista, and our engineering department has a lot of apps that we are licensed for, but will not run under Vista.
I have played with Windows 7 for a while now, and it could be a candidate as it will run, and runs well on the same hardware as XP, just need to check the compatibility issues. There are a few new neat tricks with Windows 7, especially around the networking side.
|
| ruirib |
Posted - 03 May 2009 : 15:30:19
Probably so, Huw. The general opinion was that after SP1 the drivers issues had almost gone. There are still issues, which is really weird considering laptops from top manufacturers (mine is a Toshiba Portege m750). |
| HuwR |
Posted - 03 May 2009 : 13:46:47
quote:
I have a few annoyances with Vista, regarding the way wireless networking works, have almost daily problems getting the thing out from sleep mode
I'm inclined to think that is not a Vista issue but a driver problem, my wifes HP/Compaq laptop suffers the same problems as you with her mostly having to reboot the bloody thing to get wireless up and running, but my Asus never has a problem, wireless works everytime it comes out of sleep mode. |
| richfed |
Posted - 03 May 2009 : 09:37:57
I love my Vista!! |
| ruirib |
Posted - 03 May 2009 : 09:36:56
I am everything but an MS basher and that can be seen by my previous posts on stuff related to MS software. I am running Vista SP1 on recent hardware, so I am a bit disappointed with the performance of the thing. Not overall, but there are things that are rather annoying. |
| SiSL |
Posted - 03 May 2009 : 09:03:20
Personally I never had any problems with Vista either, using x64 on my desktop and x86 on my laptop. But Vista somewhat failed to nail XP's coffin. But that's not the Vista's fault but people to be slow on adapting to changes and less tolarable to changes and "cool" to bad mouth them, may be that's a campaign started with OpenSource/Linux fans back then with a grand website.
Computers spread widely during last 10 years more than they ever did and many started their computer lives with XP. That's one of reason XP turned bone of many people. If MS was any fault at this, it is to release new client OS so late after XP.
I remember XP was also PITA slow with lots of incompabilities when it is released too depending on at year 2001.
|
| leatherlips |
Posted - 03 May 2009 : 08:59:11
I have had Vista on my desktop for a couple of years. Within the first year it no longer successfully installed automatic updates. They began to add up and I started haveing lots of little issues with it. I then reformatted the hard drive back and reinstalled everything and have never had a problem since.
I personally like Vista. I never had XP. My first computer had Windows 98. So going to Vista was really a nice change for me.
Incidentally, Microsoft had the "Mojave Experiment" to test people using Vista who didn't know it was Vista. I thought it was interesting. |
| ruirib |
Posted - 03 May 2009 : 05:23:22
Well I have Vista on two laptops, one of which is really new, bought 2 months ago, enough RAM (as much as 32 bit Vista can take), good core 2 duo processor and all and things could be better. I have a few annoyances with Vista, regarding the way wireless networking works, have almost daily problems getting the thing out from sleep mode without it crashing and boot is slow as hell. Really hope Windows 7 will be better on all these counts (the info available so far gives me hope).
I need to say that, in spite of all these issues, I am considering going the Vista route on my desktop too, mainly as a step towards Windows 7. |
| HuwR |
Posted - 03 May 2009 : 03:44:48
have you tried installing windows 7 on that laptop ? cos I bet it wouldn't work any better. |
| Carefree |
Posted - 03 May 2009 : 03:35:44
I bought my daughter a laptop with Vista on it right after it was RTM. I tried to install Office 07 on it and after 10 minutes of waiting for setup to begin, just gave up. I reformatted the drive, put XP on it, and Office installed in just under 3 minutes.
I put Vista on a tower I built in SC and it ran fine, but that was a dual-processor with 8 GB of DDR2. |
| RichardKinser |
Posted - 02 May 2009 : 23:10:16
I've used Vista on 2 laptops at work for over a year now and haven't had any problems whatsoever. For whatever reason, some people think it's "cool" to bad mouth Vista, but if they would actually use it, then they would see there is nothing wrong with it. There is very little difference between Vista and Windows 7, in fact it really should be called Vista R2 just like Server 2008's new release is going to be Server 2008 R2, but the marketing department doesn't want all the people with negative feelings towards Vista to shy away from using it. |
| HuwR |
Posted - 02 May 2009 : 20:00:23
well, I've never had a single issue with Vista64 and other than some slight performance increases don't see that much difference between Vista64 and windows7 |
| Carefree |
Posted - 02 May 2009 : 18:58:17
I've been playing with Windows 7 & Server 2008 for a while on some other machines. I stripped out all the server-only services from Server 08 and turned a copy into a workstation platform. Greased lightning and not one failure yet. That one is a keeper, too. Vista and ME were the Edsels of Microsoft operating systems. |
