Windows Vista: Is it worth it yet?

Depends on what kind of games you play, how many cores your processor is, and whether or not you're trying to squeeze every last frame out of that second.
 
[quote name='CaptainPlanet!']Depends on what kind of games you play, how many cores your processor is, and whether or not you're trying to squeeze every last frame out of that second.[/quote]

yup.

I use vista 32 bit and I think its worth, if you're building a new rig you should definately get it because I mean eventually you will probably have to.

If you dont have it and arent building a new rig, right now at this moment in time, you dont need to upgrade, but eventually you will and should.
 
[quote name='CaptainPlanet!']Depends on what kind of games you play, how many cores your processor is, and whether or not you're trying to squeeze every last frame out of that second.[/QUOTE]

I play a wide variety of games including new ones so there's that. And I'll be getting a new laptop soon with duo-core.
 
It's been worth it for some time now. I've used it since before the commercial release and it's been nothing but a pleasure to work with.
 
there's really a WHOLE LOT less wrong with vista than people would have you believe. the whole thing about how terrible it is is really an internet myth.
 
[quote name='smoger']there's really a WHOLE LOT less wrong with vista than people would have you believe. the whole thing about how terrible it is is really an internet myth.[/QUOTE]

That's really what I was thinking too, I kept seeing/hearing that vista sucks but nobody really was providing any reason.
 
Vista sucked for me when I used it because it refused to let ports forward and because it refused to even let uTorrent run, not to mention that it's a resource hog.

Are those good enough reasons?
 
I beta tested Vista and I hated it. And then I got a free Ultimate version from that Live Search club a while back. After a few simple tweaks it was great. I never understood the complaints people have.

Most the people I have heard say "Vista sucks" DONT EVEN USE IT. Or at most they used it for a few minutes and dismissed it. And right now its still cool to hate on it by people won dont no better.

I wouldnt say go out and spend $300 on it if you already have XP. But if you are buying a new PC dont waste your time with XP anymore. Vista is just as good as XP in most regards and better in many others.
 
[quote name='musha666']I beta tested Vista and I hated it. And then I got a free Ultimate version from that Live Search club a while back. After a few simple tweaks it was great. I never understood the complaints people have.

Most the people I have heard say "Vista sucks" DONT EVEN USE IT. Or at most they used it for a few minutes and dismissed it. And right now its still cool to hate on it by people won dont no better.

I wouldnt say go out and spend $300 on it if you already have XP. But if you are buying a new PC dont waste your time with XP anymore. Vista is just as good as XP in most regards and better in many others.[/quote]

aLot of the hate comes from the 64 bit edition which has problems with a lot of software, but that Is not microsofts fault.

Everyone knew exactly when vista was going to launch, and then when it came out NO ONE had their drivers and pathches ready.

Everyone now blames microsoft for this, but developers had plenty of time to get stuff ready.


Everyone in the world just assumed that what worked with xp would work with vista, but since they re wrote the whole windows OS, this was not the case.
 
[quote name='Liquid 2']Vista sucked for me when I used it because it refused to let ports forward and because it refused to even let uTorrent run, not to mention that it's a resource hog.

Are those good enough reasons?[/quote]


Like anyone who actually knows what they're talking about will tell you, just because it handles resources differently doesn't make it a hog. Vista has the best memory management of any OS currently on the market.
 
I got it for my new machine 2 weeks ago, and I'm rather impressed with it. I really think that most of the complaints about it stem from user error.
 
Vista is fine now. Most of the kinks are worked out, and I have no issues outside of the few games where I have to run on XP Service Pack 2 to run properly (Diablo 2, Freedom Force and Jade Empire)
 
[quote name='n25philly']Like anyone who actually knows what they're talking about will tell you, just because it handles resources differently doesn't make it a hog. Vista has the best memory management of any OS currently on the market.[/QUOTE]
I'm not talking about resource management, I'm talking about the sheer demand for resources it has.
 
I'm sticking with XP until it's not supported any more :cool:

I've got it tweaked just how I like it (looking like Windows 2000) and it performs damn well for me.

But I'm a hold out like that. I think I used Windows 2000 for a good year after XP was released.
 
[quote name='Liquid 2']I'm not talking about resource management, I'm talking about the sheer demand for resources it has.[/quote]

I think we can all agree that xp requires more or less 512 mb to perform smoothly.

Vista requires 1gb, my parents compaq runs it on 512 but its pretty slow.

For gaming 1 Gb to 2 GB on xp are ideal, for vista 2gb is.

Are the memory differences all that different?

I think its a given that newer software requires more power and more memory, so is it that much of a surprise that vista does as well?

I remember when Xp first came out and people were freaking out the same way that they had to install 1 gb of ram to play games, oh how the times have changed.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/09/14/so_how_much_memory_does/

heres an old link where people couldnt believe microsoft was recommending a minimum amount of memory.
 
[quote name='p00ndawg']I think we can all agree that xp requires more or less 512 mb to perform smoothly.

Vista requires 1gb, my parents compaq runs it on 512 but its pretty slow.

For gaming 1 Gb to 2 GB on xp are ideal, for vista 2gb is.

Are the memory differences all that different?

I think its a given that newer software requires more power and more memory, so is it that much of a surprise that vista does as well?

I remember when Xp first came out and people were freaking out the same way that they had to install 1 gb of ram to play games, oh how the times have changed.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/09/14/so_how_much_memory_does/

heres an old link where people couldnt believe microsoft was recommending a minimum amount of memory.[/QUOTE]

Not to mention the sub $50 deals on 2gb of RAM - that kind helps too
 
[quote name='Liquid 2']I'm not talking about resource management, I'm talking about the sheer demand for resources it has.[/quote]

Again you don't know what you're talking about. If you know how to configure it it runs beautifully in a low speed single core processor with a half gig of ram and a 64mb memory card.
 
[quote name='crystalklear64']Using 804mb here idle. Vista.[/quote]


How many processes do you have running. which version of vista? How much of it is prefetch which is memory it gives back when you need it
 
[quote name='nikkai']Not to mention the sub $50 deals on 2gb of RAM - that kind helps too[/quote]

This is well and true, but I'm of the opinion that an operating system should use as little system resources as possible. Just because hardware prices decrease doesn't mean you should release bloated, buggy mounds of code. This applies to all software, not just Windows.
 
[quote name='Serik']This is well and true, but I'm of the opinion that an operating system should use as little system resources as possible. Just because hardware prices decrease doesn't mean you should release bloated, buggy mounds of code. This applies to all software, not just Windows.[/QUOTE]



Agreed - just pointed out the pricing to show industry trends.
 
Yeah, on the one hand my wallet loves how RAM prices keep falling, but on the other hand I fear it will give software developers less reason to optimize their code; why bother if everyone can just pop in 2 GB of RAM?
 
Do they still have the issue with SQL? When I bought my laptop for school SQL would not run on it. I found out that some people were able to get it to run on Vista but were not able to connect the program they wrote in VB.Net to connect to SQL.
 
[quote name='smoger']there's really a WHOLE LOT less wrong with vista than people would have you believe. the whole thing about how terrible it is is really an internet myth.[/quote]

So absolutely true. I work with Vistas and have never had any problem. It seems that most of internet fandom that writes reviews for vista or mac afficanados (sp) or mac fans.
 
All I know is that I am running Vista and I hate it. I have a Core2Duo with 4GB of Ram running the 64 version of Vista. For some reason it won't let me smoothly run both Windows Media Player and Firefox at the same time (they'll run, but usually freeze when starting up, and sometimes take like 5 minutes to load). I've tried to figure out what exactly was wrong, but can't. It's something about those two programs. I also have a lot of problems browsing windows in explorer if I have other programs open.
 
i've switched from xp to vista, and i like a lot fo the features of vista, but a lot of my old programs dont work with vista, 1st thing i did was buy an additional 2gb of ram, so i got 3gb now, everything runs great, but i probably havent optimized it either, only thing thats annoying is that it asks you everytime you open a program or anything that could be threatening to your computer, but thats also a good thing and i do believe you can turn that off, but i choose to keep it on and my computer virus free

overall, if you have xp and jump to vista you'll get use to it
i remember the 1st time i used xp i thought it shitty, but eventually you get use to things and they become the standard
 
[quote name='greyzieoriental'] only thing thats annoying is that it asks you everytime you open a program or anything that could be threatening to your computer, but thats also a good thing and i do believe you can turn that off, but i choose to keep it on and my computer virus free [/quote]
You can probably google "turning UAC off in Vista" and get step by step instructions to turn that prompt off. I'm putting Vista Home Premium on my new build so we'll see how it goes. I've just noticed that complaint a lot and I plan on turning the UAC (user account control?) option off ASAP.
 
You can probably google "turning UAC off in Vista" and get step by step instructions to turn that prompt off. I'm putting Vista Home Premium on my new build so we'll see how it goes. I've just noticed that complaint a lot and I plan on turning the UAC (user account control?) option off ASAP.
Click to expand...

Go to control panel and user accounts and the option is right there.
 
[quote name='drfunk85']All I know is that I am running Vista and I hate it. I have a Core2Duo with 4GB of Ram running the 64 version of Vista. For some reason it won't let me smoothly run both Windows Media Player and Firefox at the same time (they'll run, but usually freeze when starting up, and sometimes take like 5 minutes to load). I've tried to figure out what exactly was wrong, but can't. It's something about those two programs. I also have a lot of problems browsing windows in explorer if I have other programs open.[/quote]

64bit version is just asking for issues. Did you add any codecs to media player or add-ons to firefox? That would be the first thing I would look at as there is a chance you might have a trouble maker in there.
 
I liked Vista for the first month I had it on my new computer, but honestly it kept slowing down a lot when I was running hardly any programs and many programs I've been using for years had weird quirks that werent' there before. I like the look of it, and it runs smoothly for the most part, but it is a serious memory hog. I put back on XP and haven't looked back yet. Vista is pretty make no doubts about it, but aside from some nifty new features (glass look, widgets on desktop, etc.) I don't think it's worth the upgrade just yet. If you can get it free with your new computer, go ahead and see if you like it. I recommend waiting till SP1 though definitely.
 
I have Vista Ultimate in my Acer Ferrari laptop... I also have a 3 year old Gateway laptop (which was $1000 when I bought it) with XP Home.

My Vista laptop has 2x as powerful as my XP laptop yet the XP laptop is way faster on average. Plus, every now and then, Vista just seems to struggle even if I only have a few things open.

Also, all those permission pop ups annoy the hell out of me.

Honestly, I wish I had a copy of XP to install on my Acer. It would be an amazingly fast machine if I could.
 
Ok, So I ran 64bit Vista for about 1 hour before and hated it. I couldn't get any programs to run (which from reading, is to be expected from 64bit).

That aside,
Are there any real advantages to using Vista over XP (and don't say DX10, because of right now, it really isn't). I'm just very curious as to why so many people are using vista.
 
Short answer to OP: hell no, particularly if it isn't bundled. Wait a year or three.

[quote name='Liquid 2']I'd wait for SP1, if not SP2, unless you want to play some DX10+ games.[/QUOTE]
Yup.

[quote name='n25philly']It's been worth it for some time now. I've used it since before the commercial release and it's been nothing but a pleasure to work with.[/QUOTE]
Mind if I ask how you got it pre-release?

[quote name='n25philly']Like anyone who actually knows what they're talking about will tell you, just because it handles resources differently doesn't make it a hog. Vista has the best memory management of any OS currently on the market.[/QUOTE]
This makes me wonder if you've never used any other OS, or if you intentionally snuck in the "market" part to deflect open source OS's, virtually all of which best Vista in any meaningful *.*management test. I'd also like to see your proof that it bests both of Apple's last two OS's. If you please. Thanks in advance.

[quote name='hiccupleftovers']So absolutely true. I work with Vistas and have never had any problem. It seems that most of internet fandom that writes reviews for vista or mac afficanados (sp) or mac fans.[/QUOTE]
Yea, you know, people that have actually used other operating systems. How dare they compare other OS's! That's not fair! God forbid they use linux...

[quote name='Vinny']Honestly, I wish I had a copy of XP to install on my Acer. It would be an amazingly fast machine if I could.[/QUOTE]
With zero support from ASUS, I tossed Vista off my laptop and reloaded XP with drivers I pieced together from the internet. Try notebookreview.com (or something like that). They're really helpful in that regard.

[quote name='p00ndawg']Everyone now blames microsoft for this, but developers had plenty of time to get stuff ready.[/quote]
Being able to... I don't know... SEE THE SOURCE OF WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO MAKE THEIR SOFTWARE COMPATIBLE WITH would probably help. I'm just throwing that out there.

but since they re wrote the whole windows OS, this was not the case.
Click to expand...
Outright lie.

I run Vista on my home "server" because I use it as a backend for my 360. I run my tv tuner through it (Vista Media Center edition is required for a single digital tuner card... don't even get me started on that stipulation). The setup with the 360 isn't bad... even good for Microsoft. The actual usability of the Vista machine on the other hand... atrocious.

In the interests of full disclosure, I also run a hackintosh, an Ubuntu linux laptop, a Fedora laptop, an XP laptop, and a Slackware desktop. I also drive a Toyota, though I feel that doesn't preclude me from talking about Nissans, which I also own and drive regularly. If you get my drift.
 
[quote name='necrojustice']Vista isn't so bad if you turn off the prompts. I'm gonna have to dual boot so I can enjoy Diablo 2 though :([/QUOTE]

How do you turn off those prompts?

[quote name='dragonsho'] I'm just very curious as to why so many people are using vista.[/QUOTE]

I think a lot of people just wanted to try it... they did and never went back even if they don't like it. I don't like Vista but I've gotten used to it.

I'll admit that I do use my Vista notebook because I've been too lazy to do a clean install on my old laptop. And my new laptop has a huge HD compared to my XP laptop (110GB vs 50GB usable space) and it's got better wireless hardware and bluetooth. Of course, none of those are Vista benefits, just due to better hardware.
 
I still use XP at home, but work bought me a new laptop not long ago with Vista pre-installed. I almost immediately asked our tech guy to install XP, which he did. It ran much faster and smoother for me. Is Vista bad? I dunno, but for me XP sure seemed to work better.
 
[quote name='elwood731']I still use XP at home, but work bought me a new laptop not long ago with Vista pre-installed. I almost immediately asked our tech guy to install XP, which he did. It ran much faster and smoother for me. Is Vista bad? I dunno, but for me XP sure seemed to work better.[/quote]

I bet the laptop was low on memory. Vista needs 1 GB to run smoothly by itself, and 1.5-2 GB to run a lot of applications quickly.
 
[quote name='Richard Longfellow']I bet the laptop was low on memory. Vista needs 1 GB to run smoothly by itself, and 1.5-2 GB to run a lot of applications quickly.[/QUOTE]
From my own experience, I had/have a laptop and a desktop running Vista, both with 2GB RAM. Both were significantly slower running Vista than XP, Ubuntu, Fedora, and Leopard (hackintosh style).

Just throwing that out there. After re-reading my previous post I know I come off totally hating on Vista, but that's not the case. In and of itself, it is usable and decent. When compared to others, it just doesn't cut the mustard for me.
 
[quote name='Richard Longfellow']I bet the laptop was low on memory. Vista needs 1 GB to run smoothly by itself, and 1.5-2 GB to run a lot of applications quickly.[/QUOTE]
Nope, it was a pretty much top of the line new Dell, 2GB of RAM and all.
 
Short answer to OP: hell no, particularly if it isn't bundled. Wait a year or three.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid 2
I'd wait for SP1, if not SP2, unless you want to play some DX10+ games.

Yup.

I don't know what everyone is expecting from sp1, but it's not going to be the miracle cure-all everyone seems to expect it to be. Especially since if you have the slightest clue what your doing it doesn't need much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by n25philly
It's been worth it for some time now. I've used it since before the commercial release and it's been nothing but a pleasure to work with.

Mind if I ask how you got it pre-release?

I've got a Microsoft technet subscription. We got the commercial release in November, around 2 months before it went on sale.

Quote:
Originally Posted by n25philly
Like anyone who actually knows what they're talking about will tell you, just because it handles resources differently doesn't make it a hog. Vista has the best memory management of any OS currently on the market.

This makes me wonder if you've never used any other OS, or if you intentionally snuck in the "market" part to deflect open source OS's, virtually all of which best Vista in any meaningful *.*management test. I'd also like to see your proof that it bests both of Apple's last two OS's. If you please. Thanks in advance.

Managemernt test? Can you even benchmark that? Vista simply uses ram for functionality. No one get's it until they realize that unused ram is useless ram

Quote:
Originally Posted by hiccupleftovers
So absolutely true. I work with Vistas and have never had any problem. It seems that most of internet fandom that writes reviews for vista or mac afficanados (sp) or mac fans.

Yea, you know, people that have actually used other operating systems. How dare they compare other OS's! That's not fair! God forbid they use linux...

That's not what he's saying. Go any any sites with user reviews on Vista. At least half are Apple cultists trying to use the space as a Mac commercial.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinny
Honestly, I wish I had a copy of XP to install on my Acer. It would be an amazingly fast machine if I could.

With zero support from ASUS, I tossed Vista off my laptop and reloaded XP with drivers I pieced together from the internet. Try notebookreview.com (or something like that). They're really helpful in that regard.

Quote:
Originally Posted by p00ndawg
Everyone now blames microsoft for this, but developers had plenty of time to get stuff ready.

Being able to... I don't know... SEE THE SOURCE OF WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO MAKE THEIR SOFTWARE COMPATIBLE WITH would probably help. I'm just throwing that out there.

It's the same deal with programs that don't take advantage of multiple cores. Companies don't want to spend the money to create a patch no matter how little it costs.

Quote:
but since they re wrote the whole windows OS, this was not the case.
Outright lie.

I run Vista on my home "server" because I use it as a backend for my 360. I run my tv tuner through it (Vista Media Center edition is required for a single digital tuner card... don't even get me started on that stipulation). The setup with the 360 isn't bad... even good for Microsoft. The actual usability of the Vista machine on the other hand... atrocious.

*rolls eyes*


In the interests of full disclosure, I also run a hackintosh, an Ubuntu linux laptop, a Fedora laptop, an XP laptop, and a Slackware desktop. I also drive a Toyota, though I feel that doesn't preclude me from talking about Nissans, which I also own and drive regularly. If you get my drift.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top