Should I get Vista yet?

B

bonghitter400

Weaksauce
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
75
I have been waiting for Vista to come of age with thier drivers, but considering I have a pretty new build and I haven't installed tons of hardware or software yet, I'm thinking it may be the perfect time for an upgrade.
I've read up on all the problems and they seem to be almost entirely driver related, but installing new drivers is just something that comes with the territory of building your own pc from scratch so what's the big deal? After all, I only play the newest games that have drivers now that work for Vista, and all my hardware is compatible with drivers now available.
What I really want to know is will I see any major improvement in performance to make it worth the trouble and expense this early in the game, or should I wait just a little longer until more bugs are worked out and the drivers are more mature?
And if it is time, which version has everybody been running? I plan on getting Vista Ultimate just because I have the extra couple of dollars, but does it really make a difference for gaming/general home use?
 
There's really no compelling reason to switch to Vista. Transparent window frames are pretty much the only thing that separates it from patched XP visually. Speed wise it's slower and requires more resources.

Combined to undeveloped drivers and general quirks I'd say the smartest thing is to wait untill the first service pack (unless a new Windows comes actually first).

Maybe in 6-10 months DX10 will start becoming a reality and perhaps, a service pack will emerge. Then I'd say it starts to have a little appeal. Not much and definately only for gamers or people who like to play with a new OS for fun.
 
As with any thread like the this, the answer lies with you, not with us. A few simple searches online will tell you if you have drivers available to you or not. You can also quickly check into your apps and games to see if they are compatible.

Assuming Vista passes those tests, and you wish to get it, the version is entirely up to you. I'm not sure why so many thing different versions will handle games differently, but that's not the case. Take a look through any of the myriad of charts comparing each version, and pick the one that's best for you.

In the same way I can't tell you what to have for dinner, because I don't know your likes/dislikes/allergies/etc, etc, no one on an online forum can tell you if Vista is right for you or not.
 
I know no one can decide if it's right for me, it's just that I'm torn right now.
I think I know what to do- I'll get myself imbedded in another project that will take up all my time and resources for awhile, this way I won't be inclined to dive into it just yet.
The same thing happens all the time with me, I will read a post or an article about something and start thinking "I must have that". It doesn't matter if it's a game or a program or some hardware (like the watercooling setup I have that is just complete overkill).
Just like the htpc I'm plotting to build as soon as I come back from vacation, I read an article about how streamlined they can make all your media accessiblity, and poof! there I go again.
I'm going to wait.
 
I have Vista 64 Ultimate, it's not that bad. It is just a matter of getting use to something new. Some games like BF2142 run like a dream. For some reason CS:S feels a bit sluggish, not laggy but sluggish some times. By that a mean things don't react as fast, I am not able to quick scope with my AWP like I can in XP. BF runs smooth as butter. I have not tried any of my other games just yet, but will soon.

As for general programs, yes Vista is a hog, in XP my CPU stays at 0-1% with XFire, and Ventrilo running along with others like FireFox, and Media player. With the same stuff open in vista my CPU is at 5-8% and jumps to 10-15% every now and then. It also uses a lot more RAM. However while this may sound bad, my programs do seem more responsive compared to XP. I just don't think Vista was well optimized for dual core yet. Just by looking at my load balance compared to XP. Overall I am getting use to it.

This is all on rig in sig.
 
Proxy said:
I have Vista 64 Ultimate, it's not that bad. It is just a matter of getting use to something new. Some games like BF2142 run like a dream. This is all on rig in sig.
Click to expand...

That's my new obsession. BF2142.

The see-saw bumps slight back toward Vista.....:(
Decisions, decisions...
 
I have Vista Ultimate 32. I also just built a new rig and 2142 runs real smooth.
 
bonghitter400 said:
That's my new obsession. BF2142.

The see-saw bumps slight back toward Vista.....:(
Decisions, decisions...
Click to expand...

Vista works wonderfully for me. Given a choice, I would NOT switch back to XP. For a lot of people, once they get used to Vista there's no going back. There's too many little improvements that make a difference, despite those who would tell you that it's XP with a facelife (which is bullshit, it's much more than that).

Regardless of what you decide to do, if you do get Vista don't waste your money on Ultimate. There's really no benefit unless you see yourself using the few features it has over Home Premium. Go find a features comparison chart and see for yourself. I only have Ultimate because it was free, otherwise I'd have Home Premium.
 
Well I have Vista Ultimate 64 on 2 core 2 xeons and game play has much hesitation. You press keys and wait, very frustration. Yes I have 15k hd's also.

I also have a XP machine with a Opyt 175 and it is the same speed which should not be.

since the dual xeon's are 3.0 ghz 2 core and the Opty is only 2.4 2 core
 
Russell said:
There's too many little improvements that make a difference, despite those who would tell you that it's XP with a facelife (which is bullshit, it's much more than that).
Click to expand...

Yep new bugs, annoying new interface (not finding things where they used to be and having to waste time searching them). New network code introducing problems in mixed networks just like XP and W98 conflicted with eachothers. Maybe some consider that improvement and fun, to me it's simply mindbogglingly annoying to have my work hindered with unnecessary interface changes.
 
Finn said:
Yep new bugs, annoying new interface (not finding things where they used to be and having to waste time searching them). New network code introducing problems in mixed networks just like XP and W98 conflicted with eachothers. Maybe some consider that improvement and fun, to me it's simply mindbogglingly annoying to have my work hindered with unnecessary interface changes.
Click to expand...

What you find annoying, many others find more intuitive. Do you refuse to buy a new car because the dashboard would be different than your old one? Stick to the facts and not opinions.
 
djnes said:
What you find annoying, many others find more intuitive. Do you refuse to buy a new car because the dashboard would be different than your old one? Stick to the facts and not opinions.
Click to expand...

Yep. Thanks, that's exactly how I feel. Just because whatshisface up there hates the interface, doesn't mean everybody will. I've noticed that some people just like to hate things.

If Vista isn't for you that's fine, but that hardly means that it's for nobody.
 
Russell said:
Yep. Thanks, that's exactly how I feel. Just because whatshisface up there hates the interface, doesn't mean everybody will. I've noticed that some people just like to hate things.

If Vista isn't for you that's fine, but that hardly means that it's for nobody.
Click to expand...

I have no reason to change from my DOS 3.3. Oh wait...:p
 
Russell said:
Yep. Thanks, that's exactly how I feel. Just because whatshisface up there hates the interface, doesn't mean everybody will. I've noticed that some people just like to hate things.

If Vista isn't for you that's fine, but that hardly means that it's for nobody.
Click to expand...

Once you try Superfetch, you never go back :)
 
Finn said:
There's really no compelling reason to switch to Vista. Transparent window frames are pretty much the only thing that separates it from patched XP visually. Speed wise it's slower and requires more resources.

Combined to undeveloped drivers and general quirks I'd say the smartest thing is to wait untill the first service pack (unless a new Windows comes actually first).

Maybe in 6-10 months DX10 will start becoming a reality and perhaps, a service pack will emerge. Then I'd say it starts to have a little appeal. Not much and definately only for gamers or people who like to play with a new OS for fun.
Click to expand...
Vista has many features that you can't do with XP. Read up on the Vista kernel.

Finn said:
Yep new bugs, annoying new interface (not finding things where they used to be and having to waste time searching them). New network code introducing problems in mixed networks just like XP and W98 conflicted with eachothers. Maybe some consider that improvement and fun, to me it's simply mindbogglingly annoying to have my work hindered with unnecessary interface changes.
Click to expand...
I consider the interface to be much better than XPs. It took a day for me to learn where everything is. I used to use classic view for the control panel in XP, but I've found the way vista groups everything to be a lot better. Or you can set it back to classic if you really want.
 
Finn said:
Yep new bugs, annoying new interface (not finding things where they used to be and having to waste time searching them). New network code introducing problems in mixed networks just like XP and W98 conflicted with eachothers. Maybe some consider that improvement and fun, to me it's simply mindbogglingly annoying to have my work hindered with unnecessary interface changes.
Click to expand...
If I encounter any of these bugs, I'll be sure to get back to you. I've been using Vista for four months now, not a single complaint. Except my sound drivers, but people have been preaching the ills of Creative for years. That's not something that started with Vista.
 
Don't base your opinions on some of the people here. Just because they are too cheap to buy Vista themselves, sets them off on a crusade against it.

The fact is: I haven't had a single Vista problem ever. EVER. Not a compatibility problem, not a driver problem (other than the Dell crappy printer- which is Dell's fault), nothing to complain about. On the same hardware- it is faster than XP, yet offers tons more improvements.
 
zacdl said:
Don't base your opinions on some of the people here. Just because they are too cheap to buy Vista themselves, sets them off on a crusade against it.

The fact is: I haven't had a single Vista problem ever. EVER. Not a compatibility problem, not a driver problem (other than the Dell crappy printer- which is Dell's fault), nothing to complain about. On the same hardware- it is faster than XP, yet offers tons more improvements.
Click to expand...

Either your full of BS or you've never tried to work with Vista. Maybe it works at home network and with games. At business use it introduces multiple problems starting from app installation to complete app failures. There are network related problems also as presented in other threads.

Originally Posted by djnes
What you find annoying, many others find more intuitive. Do you refuse to buy a new car because the dashboard would be different than your old one? Stick to the facts and not opinions.
Click to expand...

Umm.. yes for example I refuse to buy one of those rediculous new cars which have the speedometer stuck in middle of the dashboard and everything else messed up to be unuseable. I'll continue driving my Mercedes with it's traditional dashboard, thanks!

Originally Posted by ChinChang
Vista has many features that you can't do with XP. Read up on the Vista kernel.
Click to expand...

No thanks. There are no features on Vista that would be _needed_ in daily usage. If there were, I'd recommend people to switch to Vista as XP wouldn't be up to the task. Only problem is that XP is already fully up to the task and performs flawlessly even where Vista fails. Most businesses use legacy hardware and software.

And to all of you who think you can just switch to classic interface if you don't like the new one You're wrong. The client expects me to solve his problem, not to redefine his desktop views. This leads me to having to relearn and remember a third OS interface for no reason whatsoever except someones lame desire for bling bling on desktop.
 
Finn said:
This leads me to having to relearn and remember a third OS interface for no reason whatsoever except someones lame desire for bling bling on desktop.
Click to expand...

The reason is "Times do and must change," and that's all that matters. If you choose to stick with the old OSes, and support the old OSes, that's fine. But when a customer calls or contacts you for issues with Vista, I certainly hope you're not as negativistic in their presence as you surely come across here when it comes to dealing with problems.


If you were, I'd politely ask you to go away and I'd hire someone that actually knows what the hell they're talking about.
 
Precisely!

To the topic poster:

Whether people 'like' Vista or not isn't what you need to consider. Bottom line is that it's the latest version of Windows and that means it's what the bulk of Windows users will be running sooner or later. If you are purchasing an OS to install on a rig, and there are no specific hardware/software compatibility reasons for you personally to get in the way, you might as well purchase and install it right now. Makes no real sense at all to spend money on the older, now superseded version if the newer version isn't going to present you with insurmountable problems.

Like some hardware which just isn't supported under Vista.
Like some essential software programs which just wont run under Vista.

If you don't have those problems, and you have money in your hand ready to spend, might as well get vista now. You're going to end up doing so sometime down the track anyway!
 
Since Vista is not supported by a major part of the softwares currently in business use, it's a client's own problem if he obtains an incompatible OS to run his computer. Having said that I'm sorely peeved off by MS forcing all new hardware into Vista for no reason putting the clients between the rock and a hard place.

It causes and will cause problems problems and problems after problems. All that could be avoided by simply using XP instead.

I don't so much hate Vista, I hate the fact that it's being pushed upon people by force and therefore I must deal with it.

My current recommendation to everyone at this moment is to special order the XP installation if necessary. Soon if that windows goes away, what will they do? Start using pirated licenses? That may well be the bottom line when all else fails.
 
Finn said:
My current recommendation to everyone at this moment is to special order the XP installation if necessary. Soon if that windows goes away, what will they do? Start using pirated licenses? That may well be the bottom line when all else fails.
Click to expand...

XP is nearing end-of-life. What will you do when a worm that exploits the XP firewall comes out and Microsoft isn't even offering paid support for XP anymore? ;)
 
calebb said:
XP is nearing end-of-life. What will you do when a worm that exploits the XP firewall comes out and Microsoft isn't even offering paid support for XP anymore? ;)
Click to expand...

Nothing because nobody is foolish enough to use XP firewall anyway. And if they do, they're asking for trouble as it is. I recommend third party solutions as a rule of thumb on laptops. Desktops are secured by hardware solutions usually. In worst case a new XP install might be needed which is helluva lot easyer than get a proprietary software rewritten completely.

Besides it's extremely rare that anyone uses MS support as it is since it's generally speaking useless like most support services tend to be. It's the biggest trick of the whole industry to make end-users believe they're in trouble when 'support' ends because generally speaking the support can never solve most of the problems anyway. You need a high paid consultant to do that. It may even boil down to a certain person required to do the job right.

You have to realize that if Vista doesn't work the businesses _have_ to use W98 or XP licenses in order to continue doing business. There's just no way around it.
 
I've tried to keep out of the 'point v point' style arguments of late, but some of what's been said here is just plain ridiculous!
Finn said:
Since Vista is not supported by a major part of the softwares currently in business use,
Click to expand...
Piffle and poop! The 'problem' software for compatibility is predominately custom-written stuff. Just aboput all commercial software packages in regular/common use within business environments already have Vista-ready versions available, or will have very soon. Software developers are cutting their own throat if they don''t ensure their products become Vista suitable.

I'm sorely peeved off by MS forcing all new hardware into Vista for no reason putting the clients between the rock and a hard place.
Click to expand...
Goodness? Join the real world, perhaps. Doesn't matter what the product is. when a 'new model' comes out it gets promoted in preference to the superseded model. That's just the way things are! Deal with it!

Also, it is perfectly possible to buy systems which don't have Vista preinstalled.

It causes and will cause problems problems and problems after problems. All that could be avoided by simply using XP instead.
Click to expand...
Since you are commenting from the perspective of a 'support person' it's pertinent to point out that if "problems problems and problems after problems" occur then that is ENTIRELY the 'fault' of the IT support in place. Personnel and the management they report to. Preparations have not been adequately addressed. Nor have retraining needs.

I don't so much hate Vista, I hate the fact that it's being pushed upon people by force and therefore I must deal with it.
Click to expand...
That's already been addressed, in the comments of others.

My current recommendation to everyone at this moment is to special order the XP installation if necessary. Soon if that windows goes away, what will they do? Start using pirated licenses? That may well be the bottom line when all else fails.
Click to expand...
You do realise, don't you, that you are claiming that software piracy is an inevitable outcome of your failure to provide adequate support for Vista-running machines?
 
i would get vista whenyou want yo or feel you have to,i wish i had waited longer,i like
vista ,ut you have to be ready for some problems,hpefully they wil have a service pack2,
if so then that is when i would buy,i believe alot of horror stories are vista,s and operator
error. some must have got so frustrated they didnt't take time to think about ways to install
other problems may not have been vista at all.i have had problems but i anticipated this as
with anything new.
 
I swear, I wish we had a Vista-only forum to where some of this trolling around crap wasn't tolerated.

I think the bottom line is either upgrade with the rest of the population (the FACT is that there are DOUBLE the amount of Vista machines being implemented than XP right now) or get left in the dust. Period.
I imagine Finn here will be anti-Vista until Vienna hits stores (or until he actually uses it, whichever comes first).
Then a whole new wave of "Vienna sucks! Vista is so much better!".
Most of the arguments presented here by Finn (I am naming names as I see nobody else offering these ridiculous statements) can be completely obliterated and debunked. They have time and again in previous threads, it is just that any new posters (like you) don't know about it.
I did see the mention of hardware somewhere... I can tell you right here and now I installed Vista on a 4 year old machine with no problems. Vista detected and installed every single bit of hardware, and it worked right out of the box.

Nobody uses the Windows Firewall? Give me a break! You would have to be pretty darn biased to even begin to argue that (which you just did, so...) You cannot argue that "Nobody uses Windows Firewall anyway, so they won't get an exploit in it". I can tell you right here and right now that 95% of the population is using Windows Firewall and that's all there is to it. They use whatever is put in the box. Heck, in my testing it stopped everything Kerio did- so I ran it along with XP for the past year and a half. Not a single bit of malware.

Nobody uses Microsoft support? More crap. It is useless? Even more crap. You're telling me you've never called in to activate? Heck, they gave me a full-installation key for FREE just to save me the trouble of having to use the Upgrade workaround with Vista.

I think Catweazle pretty much hit the nail on the head with the "forcing Vista on us" topic. Show me one instance, of ANYTHING, where a company released a new product and didn't promote it, in favor of their older and more outdated product?

Although there has been a cutback of the word "FUD" around here... I will throw it in right now. Stop spreading your FUD.
Need I remind you of:
Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt? That is exactly what you are promoting, so stick to the XP threads.
 
The decision to update your OS is purely a personal decision. Is Vista as stable as XP....yes it is stable, but not as stable as it will be after some aftermarket tweaks. Do you really need it now....probably not. Does it work, definitely. Is it new, inovative and full of eye candy...that is for sure.

Vista is in it's infancy right now and will only get better. This is a community of hardcore computer geeks....the question that comes to my mind is why wouldn't you want something new to test out and grow with?
 
^^

I regret even seeing my user name mentioned amid a comment like that'n, zacdl! It's unecessary personal abuse from go to whoah, IMO, and I'd hope nobody thought I was associated with it in any way!
 
crewzen said:
Well I have Vista Ultimate 64 on 2 core 2 xeons and game play has much hesitation. You press keys and wait, very frustration. Yes I have 15k hd's also.

I also have a XP machine with a Opyt 175 and it is the same speed which should not be.

since the dual xeon's are 3.0 ghz 2 core and the Opty is only 2.4 2 core
Click to expand...

Really? My system in sig runs BF2142 like a dream on Vista. What else do you have on your rig?
 
MajorDomo said:
the question that comes to my mind is why wouldn't you want something new to test out and grow with?
Click to expand...
Because Microsoft made it, and Microsoft is the devil. Windows is the devil. Uncle Bill is the devil. DRM is the devil. UAC is the devil.** And so on, with the crap that's usually mentioned in Vista related threads.

** I was being sarcastic. I'm liking Vista quite a bit.
 
MajorDomo said:
The decision to update your OS is purely a personal decision. Is Vista as stable as XP....yes it is stable, but not as stable as it will be after some aftermarket tweaks. Do you really need it now....probably not. Does it work, definitely. Is it new, inovative and full of eye candy...that is for sure.

Vista is in it's infancy right now and will only get better. This is a community of hardcore computer geeks....the question that comes to my mind is why wouldn't you want something new to test out and grow with?
Click to expand...

Domo, I'm with you. The hell with it. What's the worst that could happen? I may have some obscure component or program that still needs a driver to run? Like you said, this is a community of computer geeks- we LOVE overcoming obstacles with our hardware and software because if we didn't we would all just be running boring old off-the-shelf systems. When I survived 2 separate BSODs the other day I felt like a computer GOD! Bill Gates had nothing on me that day! my wife thought I had just hit the lottery I was hooting so loud.
Besides, I'm going to get it one day anyway, so why not now and get a jump start on learning how to use it. Then maybe I can help the next guy with his problems.

I'm beginning to shop around as soon as I post this. Sorry to have caused some hard feelings with this thread, but at least I have my answer.:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top