General discussion

Locked

The big OS whine

By Oz_Media ·
Once again we find ourselves in the middle of a MS pi$$ing contest. Which OS is better ,as if that is actually a question needing an answer.

First off, whatever works for YOU is best for YOUR case.

Vista users don't say " YOU HAVE TO INSTALL VISTA", but anytime the OS is mentioned, XP fanboys start the endless line of useless complaints, for what reason I really do not know.

Perhaps it is the thought of being left behind? Everyone likes to be 'up to date' in the PC market, if that's possible.

Perhaps it is that they have just got the hang of the last OS and feel challenged at the thought of learning something new?

Perhaps they just buy into the BS and rumours that are spread all over the net,explaining why we read the same unqualified and incorrect assertions all the time.

So with this recent flood of Vista haters and XP fanboys, the typical 'new vs old' OS rant we've all been seeing since Win98 replaced Win95, it is exactly the same, but why? What is the need for one to trump another, why is there even a contest between the two?

THE NEW HARDWARE COMPLAINT:

Why should I go and buy new hardware just so I can run Vista?

I have NEVER heard a Vista advocate say that, unless someone really wants to use Vista and has older hardware?

With Vista, you DO need the hardware to support it, with XP it was the same, with Win2K with Win98 etc it has always been the same. But with Vista offering multicore processor management, a new PC witha multicore processor is best used with Vista than XP (though some people are so admantly opposed to Vista they downgrade a enw PC to an older OS that doesn't manage the core processor as effective, okay, not at all then.

Just like when it was a battle of the grahics cards, you want to play that game? Upgrade your P2 to a P3 and add RAM, GPU etc. That doesn't mean that the game "sucked" though. In fact usually the opposite.

If you have older equipment and don't want to reinvest in a new PC, or don't have a need to DON'T. Simple, easy, quick, next forum.
Why must pople in such cases, spend all day posting about how Vista forces them to buy new hardware and how its just a big scam? I have yet to see the Vista Gestapo in my town.

Vista is too slow

Okay well I put that complaint rather politely, compared to the real speed complaints; but as we've seen here ourselves, and thanks to our peer tk, there really is no actual perofmance difference between the two OS's, especially a noticable one.
If anything Vista is actually faster, on newer equipment, where multicore processors take advantage of the improved Vista management system to increase process management.

So that myth, is just....myth. I am confident that some user with an older system, who has tweaked Xp over the ast 5 years, will find Vista slower after a frsh install. But again, that goes for just about any OS and should be expected.
XP is faster for you? Then stay with it and S__U.

"Vista is just a bunch of bloatware and eye candy"

Yup, said it myself when XP was released. I was happy win Win2KPro, it was sleek, streamlined, small and fast. But Windows XP also comes with the ability to run it in classic mode and spare yourself from the Fisher Price looking layout that has become so favoured today. Most XP users are aware of this feature and that it can be enabled or disabled, however those same poeple are the first to complain about Aeroglass used in the Vista GUI.
Don't like eye candy? Turn it off like you do in XP.

Vista doesn't work with legacy applciations at our office.
Okay, that is a fair and very valid issue to discuss when it comes to upgrading an entire network. However, your legacy applications are NOT the responsibliity of Microsoft. Their OS doesn't "suck" because your office has proprietary, legacy software that will not run properly on Vista. Again, it is a new CHOICE of OS, you are not being forced to use it.

"Same as ME its a flop!"

well obviously, Vista is NOT the same as ME, is far more stable than XP ever was out of the box and is very secure.

That comment just doesn't hold water in any way, its pure BS. Again though, people feel a need to say so as if their pride is hurst by a new OS being released that they either don't want to learn, can't afford to upgrade to or just don't feel a need fot it, which are all fine and valid reasons for staying put, without teh need to BS about it in order to validate your decision.

The problem is, anytime someone even mentions using Vista, some idiot XP junkie has to jump in and tell some BS story about a friend's cousin's aunt who knew a guy who shook the hand of a guy who's dog ate in the alley behind a guy's house who said Vista sucked, and therefore Vista sux.

Or the old, "I tried Vista and after 10 minutes put XP back in." or " I am telling all of my clients that buy new PC's to downgrade to Vista" (providing them a great disservice in the process).

But these same people put up with XP's short comings for the last 5 years because you had no other choice but to tweak it and learn it and wait patiently for the updates to make it a useable OS.

The bottom line is, no matter what operating system you use, there will always be a company looking to write a new one and introduce new features into the computing world, that's what movers and shakers do, they inject the world with a desire to progress and improve.

Not always are these improvements worthy, but for the most part we benefit in some part each time something new is created.

So if you like your PC, and you like the performance, enjoy it as is but there's no need to constantly fight tooth and nail in order to justify your decision or detract from someone else's choice.

They build new car models every year, but they are not scamming people who bought one two years ago. They are not forcing people to buy new cars, they are not forcing people to upgrade their cars, they are just doing what ANY forward thinging company does, improve on existing products. Some pople prefer last year's model and that's just fine, but many will see value in the bewer model too.

I am in the process of making my new YouTube video now, "WHY CAN'T EVERYONE JUST LEAVE VISTA ALONE!!!???"

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

15 total posts (Page 2 of 2)   Prev   01 | 02
Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Need the latest hardware

by Jacky Howe In reply to The big OS whine

These are the specs of the System that I use to test Vista and W7. The only thing that W7 doesn't like is my NVIDIA GeForce4 MX 4000 card. I can't play Chess on it like I can on Vista. It also starts up at the same speed as XP and the sofware that I run is at a comparable speed.
Have I mentiond that I must have met Noah cause it feels like an old System. It actually runs quite well for its age.

Gigabyte >> Mainboard Model 8IPE1000P2
Name >> Intel Celeron
Specification >> Intel(R) Celeron(R) CPU 2.40GHz
Package >> Socket 478 mPGA (platform ID = 2h)
Memory >> 2 x 512 MBytes PC3200 (200 MHz)
Various hard drives Sata and IDE.

Collapse -

How I feel about Vista...and why...in short

by jck In reply to The big OS whine

a) My first version of Vista was on a laptop where I had no option of having it installed. Dell made me take it. Then 2 months later, offered XP again. MS made Dell, by legal agreement, only install XP...then went back on that decision.

b) It had drivers that did not work well, and I was constantly having to update from Dell or the peripheral manufacturer for months.

c) To this day, I still have lagging performance compared to XP runnning from an external USB 2.0 drive.

d) Applications written to be "Vista compliant" still lock up (especially at application shutdown). Updates have not helped the matter.


So why can't I leave Vista alone?

Because, it doesn't work as well as XP.

Sure, it hasn't been out as long. That's a given.

But, you would think that (in their (not-so-)infinite wisdom) Microsoft would have made sure that Vista was at least reasonably solid as compared to their current OS product offering (XP) at the time. But, they had all sorts of OS issues as well as not really giving (according to lots of internet articles) 3rd party PC peripheral manufacturers a solid spec for writing their Vista device drivers by for release.

Hence, I still load XP Pro x64 on systems I build as well as Linux later with grub for dual boot.

I am skipping Vista as much as I can. Is Vista now, 2 years later, still the same horrible beast as it was at release? No.

But, I still have issues. And neither MS nor Dell nor the software companies have not been able to resolve the issues I have with running software under it that I do not have with XP.

Collapse -

Longhorn

by jdclyde In reply to How I feel about Vista... ...

That is the thing about Vista, they took MUCH longer to get to market, making comparing the initial issues with XP not a fair comparison. What was it, two years? three years, late?

Collapse -

time to get Vista to Market

by jck In reply to Longhorn

I heard that Vista had been "in the works" for almost 5 years, because of Balmer's "Hailstorm" concept (software as a service) which was the driving force behind the .NET architecture coming to being.

Of course, I remember when Microsoft wanted to make a Windows desktop a browser interface.

Gotta love what some people call "ingenuity".

Collapse -

Just deal with the changes please.

by Thmiuatga In reply to The big OS whine

Any introduction of a new OS brings new challenges, improvements and headaches so you either change and adapt or you don't. No one says or demands that you use either OS and the same goes with the various distributions of Linux.

Vista is multi-core Processor supporting but XP is too. XP x64 Edition (or Windows Server 2003). Mind you there are two x64 Editions of XP and only one of them is straight 64 bit and won't accept drvers, applications or programs that are not 64 bit.

As for Vista, my biggest personal complaint was the excessive navigation needed to find what I needed but I adjusted when I got used to it. I still have issues with XP and linux but I deal with them all one step at a time. I cannot use the Palm software with XP but I can with Vista which is on the laptop.
I cannot use my Hauppauge PVR hardware with XP since the driver application doesn't play well with the x64 Edition which I am running. Maybe with Windows 7 (that I am currently testing)it will be a simpler OS in accommodating the programs and applications that I cannot run under XP x64.

Whatever the changes are, you can't do anything else but take it one step at a time.

Back to Software Forum
15 total posts (Page 2 of 2)   Prev   01 | 02

Related Discussions

Related Forums