Even worth it upgrading to windows 7 from vista 64bit ultimate?

dr.stevil

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
9,159
If you guys want to be obtuse. Fine. I know... that you know... what I'm talking about.

People that bought Vista........especially Vista Ultimate got screwed. Can you guess when was the last time I saw an Ultimate Extra? Do you know how many times I've had to open up my case to take our 2GB of ram so I can re-install the fucking operating system. Then wait for 9 hours while Vista original upgrades itself to SP1 so it can act halfway decent.

It is a travesty. I can't believe that some of you condone this.


Why didn't you buy home premium edition instead of ultimate? They release extras every now and then (actually, I'm fairly positive they released some dream scene content right before xmas)

as for memory, not sure what to tell you... I've never had to pull 2gb of memory to install it (with the same amount of memory)
 

MrGuvernment

Fully [H]
Joined
Aug 3, 2004
Messages
20,420
jeez

Do you people work for Microsoft? I'm guessing thats entirely possible.

I guess it's good for the economy to see so many people who don't give a shit about money. Or about getting the value they thought they were getting. I mean hell, most people would say that we deserve a refund on Vista to begin with. I think most of those people never used Vista. But nonetheless.

You Microsoft employees (or people who must be getting this stuff free somehow) must not understand how much we real people pay for this stuff. They shouldn't be releasing Windows 7 and say now pay me another $400 to upgrade to this cause it's better than the fuckup we named Vista, they should fix fucking Vista not ask me for more money.



okay

1. You are not being forced to buy a new version of windows
2. No one forced you to Buy the Ultimate Versions which you didnt really need, you could of gotten the much cheaper Home premium you CHOOSE to buy the version you did, heck you could of bought the $100 home basic.


You seem fixed that somehow someone, somewhere is forcing you to do all this crap, just cause new cars come out every years doesnt mean you have to buy one.

Sure, Vista has some bugs, but arent they still supporting it and going to release another service pack for it, is not like they just said, sorry Vista no longer gets any updates.

As others said, vista to 7 is with in MS normal OS release cycle.
 

wrangler

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
3,929
If you don't have a Vista SP1 install, or at least have the network install burned to a disc somewhere, then you seriously fail.

Also, 9 hours? If it's because you're on dial-up and you know that SP1 is a large install, why the hell didn't you get the network install to begin with so you never had to download it again? Did you bitch about XP when SP1, SP2, or SP3 came out? What are you going to do with SP2 for Vista?




Yes, it's a known issue that was fix LONG before SP1 was released. Again, if you KNOW that your system has a certain problem, then it's your fault for not taking advantage of the fix that solves it.

"seriously fail"

lol

Learn to speak correctly and not like a pimply faced kid and I might take you seriously.

I was not able to use the network release, which I downloaded and burned to a disc, because it did not support a language pack I had installed.
 

BinarySynapse

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 6, 2006
Messages
15,103
"seriously fail"

lol

Learn to speak correctly and not like a pimply faced kid and I might take you seriously.

I was not able to use the network release, which I downloaded and burned to a disc, because it did not support a language pack I had installed.

Tell me what was grammatically wrong with my statement?

There is a network install version that included multiple languages. Even if that wouldn't work you can call MS and pay them a nominal fee (shipping and handling) to ship you a Vista SP1 disc. Surely your 9 hours was worth far more than $10-20, wasn't it?
 

illuminate

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Messages
1,895
Or should I opt out and give the finger to Microsoft and keep Vista and eventually merge into Linux.

There's your answer.

You need to think about it like this: There are still MILLIONS of people using XP. Even after Vista and now that 7 is starting, they still use it. Vista will be around for 4-5 more years.

But, since i'm a linux guy, you should merge into linux sometime. Get your feet wet
 

spacetrader

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
2,681
to answer op, in normal situations it is not worth it to upgrade from vista to win7. if you had to choose between the two, yes 7 is overall better... but unless you need specialized features of 7 then there is no big difference between the two.

out of my pc's im only spending the cash on the htpc for win7. win7 media center is nicer, and for that it is worth it to me. but my laptop- there is absolutely no reason to replace vista. like you say, the money can be used much better elsewhere in life.
 

wrangler

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
3,929
Look

Would you guys believe me if I said I thought Vista was actually a pretty good OS?

I actually do. Once I switched to X48 and SP1 was out, it's been pretty smooth.

No one is forcing me to upgrade but you guys are forgetting where you are. [H]ardOCP. Of course I'm gonna upgrade. I hold my own gun to my head. That still doesn't mean that Vista kept up it's end of the bargain. It did not.

I'm mad that I spent that money. I wish I'd just stayed with XP. Everybody told me to. But did I listen..................noooooooooooooooo. I had to have the latest OS.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
2,878
Look

Would you guys believe me if I said I thought Vista was actually a pretty good OS?

I actually do. Once I switched to X48 and SP1 was out, it's been pretty smooth.

No one is forcing me to upgrade but you guys are forgetting where you are. [H]ardOCP. Of course I'm gonna upgrade. I hold my own gun to my head. That still doesn't mean that Vista kept up it's end of the bargain. It did not.

I'm mad that I spent that money. I wish I'd just stayed with XP. Everybody told me to. But did I listen..................noooooooooooooooo. I had to have the latest OS.

Everyone who told you to had better experiences, obviously. I'd still recommend Vista x64 over XP if Win7 wasn't on the horizon.
 

GushpinBob

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 11, 2007
Messages
2,721
Its getting ridiculous with the new round of OS releases from Microsoft.
No, it's not. Things are getting back to normal. Windows XP as Microsoft's flagship consumer OS for nearly six consecutive years was ridiculous.

If a three year span between the release of Vista and 7 is ridiculous then the release cycle for each revision of Windows back in the 90s was ludicrous. (Whaddaya mean I have to upgrade to NT4?! NT 3.51 was released just last year! :p)

I bought Windows Vista 64bit Ultimate about a year and half ago, thinking it would be the standard for the next 5 years. Now Windows 7 comes out and it looks like Microsoft wants to stop support for Vista eventually.

Name me a Microsoft OS that has guaranteed lifetime support. It would be inane to be rolling out patches and fixes for every OS release going back to Windows 1.01. People think that they buy a new car or computer or house or whatever and assume that it will be the latest and greatest forever. That never works out that way in real life, especially with technology. If you decide to upgrade to Windows 7, don't get bent out shape when Microsoft announces Windows 8 or whatever it will be called.

I feel like I got burned and sold on Vista because of the DX-10 claims :rolleyes: . My question is it really worth it to upgrade from Vista 64bit to Windows 7? Or should I opt out and give the finger to Microsoft and keep Vista and eventually merge into Linux.

The RC for Windows 7 is out now. Why not give it a test drive on a separate partition and decide yourself? :D

Go to Linux and I guarantee you'll have the same problem with distro release cycles. Like Ubuntu. And Fedora Core. And Debian.
 

Dapperdan

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 17, 2002
Messages
6,105
If you guys want to be obtuse. Fine. I know... that you know... what I'm talking about.

People that bought Vista........especially Vista Ultimate got screwed. Can you guess when was the last time I saw an Ultimate Extra? Do you know how many times I've had to open up my case to take our 2GB of ram so I can re-install the fucking operating system. Then wait for 9 hours while Vista original upgrades itself to SP1 so it can act halfway decent.

It is a travesty. I can't believe that some of you condone this.



Get a better pc with a faster connection and stop bitching
 

wrangler

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
3,929
Everyone who told you to had better experiences, obviously. I'd still recommend Vista x64 over XP if Win7 wasn't on the horizon.

Well. The longest I've ever been able to leave a computer running without having to reboot has been with Vista 64.

So. It would seem that what you guys are advising, so I don't feel this way again,with no guns to my head, is to skip Windows 7 and in 2.5 to 3 years something better will be out and I can upgrade to THAT?
 

BinarySynapse

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 6, 2006
Messages
15,103
Well. The longest I've ever been able to leave a computer running without having to reboot has been with Vista 64.

So. It would seem that what you guys are advising, so I don't feel this way again,with no guns to my head, is to skip Windows 7 and in 2.5 to 3 years something better will be out and I can upgrade to THAT?

We're advising that you do what you want with your own system. If you want Win7, get it. But don't bitch when Windows 8 comes out.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
2,878
Well. The longest I've ever been able to leave a computer running without having to reboot has been with Vista 64.

So. It would seem that what you guys are advising, so I don't feel this way again,with no guns to my head, is to skip Windows 7 and in 2.5 to 3 years something better will be out and I can upgrade to THAT?

Well, its hard to say for sure how you're feeling about Windows 7. I, and others, are gladly willing to upgrade without the feeling of being burned by Vista (Vista was a solid improvement over XP for me right from the start). So my recommendations won't agree with your opinions/experiences if you aren't gladly willing to upgrade too.
 

Dapperdan

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 17, 2002
Messages
6,105
It was a 680i with a Q6600 and 1.5MB Roadrunner connection genius. It still sucked.

Thanks for your stimulating contribution.

Kind of hard to pass up to tell a 45 yr old cry baby to grow up, what you cant get is that MS is behind the ball in terms of getting new releases out. Now that they are putting something out worth a damn, in a timely manner, a whole new group jumps on the bitch bandwagon.
 

wfalcon

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 7, 2000
Messages
1,916
Look

Would you guys believe me if I said I thought Vista was actually a pretty good OS?

I actually do. Once I switched to X48 and SP1 was out, it's been pretty smooth.

No one is forcing me to upgrade but you guys are forgetting where you are. [H]ardOCP. Of course I'm gonna upgrade. I hold my own gun to my head. That still doesn't mean that Vista kept up it's end of the bargain. It did not.

I'm mad that I spent that money. I wish I'd just stayed with XP. Everybody told me to. But did I listen..................noooooooooooooooo. I had to have the latest OS.

Ok - that being said, why not just learn from your mistakes then and apply it going forward? When MS releases Windows 8 Uber edition with radical changes from the Vista/7 core, be on guard and check out betas/RCs first. You know...fool me once, shame on you...fool me twice, shame on me.
 

wrangler

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
3,929
Ok - that being said, why not just learn from your mistakes then and apply it going forward? When MS releases Windows 8 Uber edition with radical changes from the Vista/7 core, be on guard and check out betas/RCs first. You know...fool me once, shame on you...fool me twice, shame on me.

Probably right.

I'll just have to choke this one down and be more careful next time. Still stinks though.
 

wrangler

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
3,929
Well, its hard to say for sure how you're feeling about Windows 7. I, and others, are gladly willing to upgrade without the feeling of being burned by Vista (Vista was a solid improvement over XP for me right from the start). So my recommendations won't agree with your opinions/experiences if you aren't gladly willing to upgrade too.

Yea......but if someone had asked me, "hey, for $400, we'll improve your XP experience for 2 and a 1/2 years. THEN we'll have a real operating system out, OH and btw, if you want all the cool features that will be another $400. I would have said no.

I don't want to start arguing again. DapperDan, although lacking in eloquence is partly right. Vista was supposed to be out 2 years before it finally made it. But still, XP would have had a pretty good run and no one could complain about that.
 

Joe Average

Ad Blocker - Banned
Joined
Apr 6, 2008
Messages
15,459
To the OP: you got what you paid for with Vista, don't like it, don't use it. Give Microsoft the finger and move to Linux so we don't have to see you post any more complaints about Windows because - believe it or not - you're in the micro-minority on that one. Considering that Windows 7 is available now as a Release Candidate, it's most definitely worth upgrading to, without question, but it doesn't seem like you'd understand that sooo... Ubuntu 9.04 just came out a few weeks back, yanno.

And let's not forget: Windows 7 ain't technically done yet... could be 3 more months before it's RTM, or less, that remains to be seen, and then add 2 months potentially before it's on store shelves and OEM boxen.

Talk about a thread gone too far... geez...
 

BinarySynapse

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 6, 2006
Messages
15,103
Yea......but if someone had asked me, "hey, for $400, we'll improve your XP experience for 2 and a 1/2 years. THEN we'll have a real operating system out, OH and btw, if you want all the cool features that will be another $400. I would have said no.

I don't want to start arguing again. DapperDan, although lacking in eloquence is partly right. Vista was supposed to be out 2 years before it finally made it. But still, XP would have had a pretty good run and no one could complain about that.

Vista would have been out two years earlier if 1) they didn't have to do code reset, and 2) The urgency of SP2 (an entire OS in and of itself) hadn't presented itself.
 

devil22

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 1, 2003
Messages
3,837
You have a strange pov saying MS releases Vista, charges you $400, then in three years releases a 'real' OS and charges you $400 more. You are saying Win7 is a 'real' OS simply because it's better than Vista, but what did you expect, an OS that is worse? Every release of Windows will be better, and there will always be some angry people who call it a 'real' OS and say the last OS wasn't, simply because the new one is improved. That's just ignorant, get over it already. There's no reason you can't sell your Vista license and go back to XP, or just stick with Vista and not use windows 7, support for XP runs to 2012 I believe, and Vista even longer. You really have nothing to complain about given the choices.
 

maddude

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
3,173
If you guys want to be obtuse. Fine. I know... that you know... what I'm talking about.

People that bought Vista........especially Vista Ultimate got screwed. Can you guess when was the last time I saw an Ultimate Extra? Do you know how many times I've had to open up my case to take our 2GB of ram so I can re-install the fucking operating system. Then wait for 9 hours while Vista original upgrades itself to SP1 so it can act halfway decent.

It is a travesty. I can't believe that some of you condone this.

I bought 2 copies of Vista business and 1 copy of home premium for my media center, I never saw the need for ultimate so I didn't buy it. I have no idea what you are talking about with the need to take out 2 gigs of ram to reinstall Vista. I have computers with 2, 4, and 8 gigs of ram, and never had to take any out. Secondly, why are you reinstalling Vista that often? I installed it about a year ago and have been problem free. For SP1 or any future SP, you owe it to yourself to slipstream the SP into a new image and use that, it's what I did and it's been working great.
 

lathode

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 23, 2007
Messages
1,441
Look

Would you guys believe me if I said I thought Vista was actually a pretty good OS?

I actually do. Once I switched to X48 and SP1 was out, it's been pretty smooth.

No one is forcing me to upgrade but you guys are forgetting where you are. [H]ardOCP. Of course I'm gonna upgrade. I hold my own gun to my head. That still doesn't mean that Vista kept up it's end of the bargain. It did not.

I'm mad that I spent that money. I wish I'd just stayed with XP. Everybody told me to. But did I listen..................noooooooooooooooo. I had to have the latest OS.

Didn't the [H] dislike Vista for a long time and stick with XP? What bargain did Vista not keep up? As everyone said XP was the odd one out, shouldn't have lasted as long as it did. If you bought Vista when it was released you'd get 3 years of use before 7. You wish you stayed with XP and now you state you have to get 7. You contradict yourself. You seem to be very emotional about your OS choice. It's only $100. Not the end of the world. Hell, you can keep Vista and when you build a new PC put 7 on it and Vista on your old PC.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
2,878
Didn't the [H] dislike Vista for a long time and stick with XP?

The [H] review was unfavorable toward Vista, but i recall Kyle mentioning how much Vista kicks ass. This was just some random forum post a while back, but I'm sure the [H] review doesn't necessarily reflect the opinions of all the crew, especially since the OS has much improved since then.
 

nullzero

Gawd
Joined
Oct 20, 2004
Messages
786
You have a strange pov saying MS releases Vista, charges you $400, then in three years releases a 'real' OS and charges you $400 more. You are saying Win7 is a 'real' OS simply because it's better than Vista, but what did you expect, an OS that is worse? Every release of Windows will be better, and there will always be some angry people who call it a 'real' OS and say the last OS wasn't, simply because the new one is improved. That's just ignorant, get over it already. There's no reason you can't sell your Vista license and go back to XP, or just stick with Vista and not use windows 7, support for XP runs to 2012 I believe, and Vista even longer. You really have nothing to complain about given the choices.

Not entirely true... Remember Windows ME... it was total crap. Microsoft is trying to squeeze blood out of a turnip, thinking they will get more money from consumers and businesses. Unfortunately they calculated wrong and its a horrible time to get more money out of people. I believe Windows 7 will never really catch on in this environment by the time Windows 8, Windows ME 2010 or whatever you want to call it comes out.
 

Greggy_D

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
424
Here are the release dates:

Windows 95 08/24/95
Windows NT 4.0 07/29/96
Windows 98 06/25/98
Windows 98SE 05/05/99
Windows 2000 02/17/2000
Windows ME 09/14/2000
Windows XP 10/25/2001
Vista (Vol Lic) 11/30/2006

I think another psychological factor is that time seems to pass by faster now than it did in the 90's.
 
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,786
I want to know where in the Hell your getting 400 dollars per upgrade from.. Hmmm OEM vista home Premium is 99 dollors free shipping.. It's a 100 dollors for 2 1/2 years at the least get over it .. I have like 3 blu rays that I watched once that site on the shelf that cost that. Let alone somthing I use day in and day out, that makes my computer work. I'm not mad that i spent 150 on my Ultimate vista. I wanted remote login. I'm tryping this on Win 7 RC right now. I really like windows 7 and have been using as my only os since the beta. People need to grow up.. It's either going to be worth it for you or not. Hell MS is even giving a free copy to try till 2010 what are you all bitching about.. Try it if you like it buy it for not STFU it's that simple.
 

devil22

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 1, 2003
Messages
3,837
Not entirely true... Remember Windows ME... it was total crap. Microsoft is trying to squeeze blood out of a turnip, thinking they will get more money from consumers and businesses. Unfortunately they calculated wrong and its a horrible time to get more money out of people. I believe Windows 7 will never really catch on in this environment by the time Windows 8, Windows ME 2010 or whatever you want to call it comes out.

My opinion is that most people diss Win ME because that's when a consumer usable version of the NT line (Windows 2000) was released, and people started comparing the two. Some people swear that's not true and Win ME was worse than Win98, whatever, that's not how I remember it. Don't really care to get into another war over this topic, so...

As far as Windows 7, it's looking far better than Vista in terms of PR. Months before Vista went gold lots of people in the press were slamming it, not so for Windows 7, that alone should make it do well. Anyways, what's the point of speculating, and doing it so angrily, just sit back and watch how it plays out.
 

travbrad

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 11, 2005
Messages
1,253
My opinion is that most people diss Win ME because that's when a consumer usable version of the NT line (Windows 2000) was released, and people started comparing the two. Some people swear that's not true and Win ME was worse than Win98, whatever, that's not how I remember it. Don't really care to get into another war over this topic, so...

Well everyone's experience varies of course, but I know for me personally Millennium Edition crashed about 5 times PER DAY. Win98 crashed sometimes too, but probably about 1/10th as often. It was better than Win98 in many areas, but the stability was absolute crap in my experience.

I do agree Win2k raised people's standards though, which just "exaggerated" how bad WinME was.
 

zoobaby

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 7, 2004
Messages
6,179
My opinion is that most people diss Win ME because that's when a consumer usable version of the NT line (Windows 2000) was released, and people started comparing the two. Some people swear that's not true and Win ME was worse than Win98, whatever, that's not how I remember it. Don't really care to get into another war over this topic, so...

Well everyone's experience varies of course, but I know for me personally Millennium Edition crashed about 5 times PER DAY. Win98 crashed sometimes too, but probably about 1/10th as often. It was better than Win98 in many areas, but the stability was absolute crap in my experience.

I do agree Win2k raised people's standards though, which just "exaggerated" how bad WinME was.

If you had the right hardware (there were some pre-builts that ran quite well), WinME was not bad. It was a step above 98 in terms of reliability. However, if your hardware varied a bit, you had frequent BSODs and lockups. I still felt it was a POS OS and used Win98 on personal systems.

Win2K was stable, if you could find drivers for it. It took developers a long time to catch up with the drivers and the same for XP. Because win2k was so stable, it really pointed out the horribleness of WinME.
 

SirKronan

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Messages
4,730
Been using Windows 7 for barely two days. It's sleek, pretty, stable, fast, and quite nice really, but in this short time I've already found two major problems and one minor problem.

Minor problem:
Installing Adobe CS4 - wouldn't install under any circumstance unless I completely disabled antivirus. This is common enough that it is documented elsewhere on the internet by others. No biggie. Runs fine now, even with AV on, and it installed faster in 7 than it did in Vista 64, even though the hardware is identical.

Major problems:
1. iPod touch shows up as a camera? Even though they have a proper iPod touch icon for it? This is also common and documented on the internet, and requires a fairly lengthy list of steps to manually trod though in order to get your iPod working with iTunes again - although I think that I read that this only affects 64-bit users.

2. No importing of DV form a Mini-DV camera, whether HD or SD. Here is what I found after some searching: "Windows Import Video is not included in this version of Windows. To import live or recorded video from a videotape in a digital video (DV) camera, you will need another video program from Microsoft or another company.
For more information about programs you can use, go to the Windows website."

Following the link takes you to the main Windows 7 information page - NO INFORMATION on "programs you can use" is provided that I could see. At least it was not easy to find. Mini-DV cameras are still incredibly common, especially among those who don't always rush out and by the latest tech. They go to all this work to support older stuff, such as XP VM inclusion, but don't support something that they've supported for years, and even Apple still supports (with the exception of the new aluminum Macbooks).

Anyways - two major and one minor disappointment for me. I need to get these videos imported, and I don't have Pinnacle Studio anymore. I gave it to my mom who lives in another state. So I'll have to import the video on my HTPC upstairs.

It's better than any RC that I've ever used from MS before, but it still needs some touch up in a few areas.
 

iceredwing

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Messages
3,822
i haven't checked, but can't you do that with moviemaker? cause i know you could with xp
 

Joe Average

Ad Blocker - Banned
Joined
Apr 6, 2008
Messages
15,459
The iPod touch shows up as a camera because it's the same circuitry as an iPhone as far as Windows and the USB connection is concerned - the iPod touch IS an iPhone for the most part, just lacking a camera (DOH!!!), the cellular capability and the GPS, so that should not be considered major by any stretch of the word. The icon is the same for both because at first glance from a picture the iPod touch and an iPhone are identical - if you look at their faces off-axis you can pick up the earpiece/speaker hole on the iPhone, but in most images, you won't. So don't expect a 16x16 icon (or even larger) to have that kind of clarity and resolution 'cause it ain't happening.

The DV thing is known, so I can understand that being somewhat of an issue for some folks, but I would say this: those people serious about doing DV work with a camera/recorder they own will not/would not be using the Windows default capabilities to do any video editing/importing/etc. Just doesn't seem like that would happen, more likely they'd use something a bit more capable, or perhaps the software that was included with the camera (Ulead stuff, or Pinnacle, or something similar), but never just the Windows apps.

Microsoft has decided it seems to move away from such things since Movie Maker never really did generate any interest and they're not about to slam a full blown video editing suite into the OS - they'd get slammed by Pinnacle, Ulead, and perhaps even Apple with monopoly crap again, then the EU would be on 'em, etc. They can't win, they really can't, even when they do something right.

Major problem because it doesn't show the right icon... and here I was thinking I just might have heard 'em all... geez. :)

VirtualDub ftw... been using it for well over a decade now, it imports anything I throw at it, from any variety of hardware I happen to have around. Never had issues with it, and for just importing video, it's tough to beat if the intention is to use something else for post work - but then again it's a dandy video editor too...

i haven't checked, but can't you do that with moviemaker? cause i know you could with xp

Doesn't exist in Windows 7... yanked, pulled, axed...
 

twoeyes

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 15, 2006
Messages
243
If you guys want to be obtuse. Fine. I know... that you know... what I'm talking about.

People that bought Vista........especially Vista Ultimate got screwed. Can you guess when was the last time I saw an Ultimate Extra? Do you know how many times I've had to open up my case to take our 2GB of ram so I can re-install the fucking operating system. Then wait for 9 hours while Vista original upgrades itself to SP1 so it can act halfway decent.

It is a travesty. I can't believe that some of you condone this.

Why don't you just get a new DVD for $5-$10 that includes SP1 ... hell if you called them I bet you could wrangle one for free.


Look how many of us stuck with XP after Vista's release... I didn't switch to Vista until SP1 and I'm perfectly happy with it... There's really no reason to upgrade unless you REALLY REALLY need some fancy new task bar.

I'm actually happy about this because this means they'll cut the prices on vista and maybe make it cost something actually reasonable. :eek:

The fact is with vista the compelling upgrade reasons were - DX10 support, and decent 64-bit support.. I've yet to see anything fundamental like this introduced in Windows 7.
 

demingo

Trump is My President!
Joined
Feb 22, 2003
Messages
2,702
:rolleyes:
jeez

Do you people work for Microsoft? I'm guessing thats entirely possible.

I guess it's good for the economy to see so many people who don't give a shit about money. Or about getting the value they thought they were getting. I mean hell, most people would say that we deserve a refund on Vista to begin with. I think most of those people never used Vista. But nonetheless.

You Microsoft employees (or people who must be getting this stuff free somehow) must not understand how much we real people pay for this stuff. They shouldn't be releasing Windows 7 and say now pay me another $400 to upgrade to this cause it's better than the fuckup we named Vista, they should fix fucking Vista not ask me for more money.

I'm really pissed off too. Same reason but at Honda. I bought an Accord in 2004. Then they released a new model in 05 06 07 08 and 09. I'm getting stiffed. This is insane, do you know how much $16,000 is???!?!? They expect me to pay for the upgrade every year?!??!?!?!?! THATS NUTS!!! They need to give me the new Accord version for free! BOYCOTT HONDA! :rolleyes:
 

theAEoN

n00b
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
2
The iPod touch shows up as a camera because it's the same circuitry as an iPhone as far as Windows and the USB connection is concerned - the iPod touch IS an iPhone for the most part, just lacking a camera (DOH!!!), the cellular capability and the GPS, so that should not be considered major by any stretch of the word. The icon is the same for both because at first glance from a picture the iPod touch and an iPhone are identical - if you look at their faces off-axis you can pick up the earpiece/speaker hole on the iPhone, but in most images, you won't. So don't expect a 16x16 icon (or even larger) to have that kind of clarity and resolution 'cause it ain't happening.

The DV thing is known, so I can understand that being somewhat of an issue for some folks, but I would say this: those people serious about doing DV work with a camera/recorder they own will not/would not be using the Windows default capabilities to do any video editing/importing/etc. Just doesn't seem like that would happen, more likely they'd use something a bit more capable, or perhaps the software that was included with the camera (Ulead stuff, or Pinnacle, or something similar), but never just the Windows apps.

Microsoft has decided it seems to move away from such things since Movie Maker never really did generate any interest and they're not about to slam a full blown video editing suite into the OS - they'd get slammed by Pinnacle, Ulead, and perhaps even Apple with monopoly crap again, then the EU would be on 'em, etc. They can't win, they really can't, even when they do something right.

Major problem because it doesn't show the right icon... and here I was thinking I just might have heard 'em all... geez. :)

VirtualDub ftw... been using it for well over a decade now, it imports anything I throw at it, from any variety of hardware I happen to have around. Never had issues with it, and for just importing video, it's tough to beat if the intention is to use something else for post work - but then again it's a dandy video editor too...



Doesn't exist in Windows 7... yanked, pulled, axed...

Microsoft yanked most of their "unnecessary" software from Windows 7 (i.e. Outlook Express/ Windows Mail, Movie Maker, etc.) so they wouldn't solicit anti-trust flag referees. However, it's all now downloadable seperate (for free) in Windows Live. Newest version has a beta for a fancy new Movie Maker (which will probabally be un-beta in time for WIndows 7 release). Interesting how MS is hitting at iLife (and to a lesser extent, Mobile Me) with Windows Live and SkyDrive... only offering it and all upgrades free. It's true most people expect these things installed with the operating system (OSX does it, but sells it as a seperate product which is just "bundled" for free, which is how they get away without monopoly police chasing them). I'm sure Apple will be filming a new commercial touting how Windows Live isn't pre-installed but iLife is when Windows 7 comes out :rolleyes:.
 

SirKronan

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Messages
4,730
i downloaded this and was able to use it under Windows 7

Windows Movie Maker 2.6

Tried that. Didn't work. When I click import it takes me directly to browsing files, even though the DV camera shows up with no conflicts or issues in device manager. I tried running the old XP movie maker in compatibility mode, but didn't have any success. Windows 7 immediately deletes the EXE file upon installation no matter what I do. I haven't installed the XP VM.

I'm not going to use Movie Maker to edit ANYTHING. I never would. I have years of experience using Adobe Premiere 6.5 and Pinnacle Studio. Premiere was at a previous job in another state. And I gave my only copy of Pinnacle Studio to my mother a while back. I was planning on buying Studio 12 soon, but I have a camera with some footage I need to capture so I can edit later, but they need the camera back - it's not mine. It's just inconvenient to have to do it on another computer. I tried capturing it on my Macbook, but regardless of quality settings it looks like pure crap compared to what I capture with Windows Movie Maker. Again, I'm not going to edit with MM, just capture. Thankfully I have several computers in the house. In the future, I may need to capture video from DV cameras - hopefully by then I have Studio 12. I should. It's just a pain right now, and a feature that they removed that I find myself missing. These are not deal-breakers but they are slightly more annoying than just "minor" issues. I didn't mean major as in earthshattering. Sorry if it came across that way! I was just really frustrated at the time.
 

Lebowski

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 12, 2000
Messages
3,603
Um

I'm a little miffed, too, at spending that kind of cash for Ultimate not that long ago and then getting kicked to the curb.

I love progress but I hate getting stiffed and I definately feel like I'm getting the stiff one on this deal. People who bought XP Professional got 7-8 years out of the money they spent.

Here's an idea, just don't buy it. So MS got 7-8 years out of XP, would you just rather they kept releasing OS after OS after OS? If M$ was doing this soley to make money, why wouldn't they just keep cranking out the updates for XP and let it live on and not introduce new OSes. The RnD for XP has been paid off 100x now. By creating Vista and now Windows 7 they are actually decreasing their profit margin.
They do this because there are somethings the OS can't do because of limitation that were placed in the OS because of hardware limitations.
Good luck installing XP from a USB drive. IT can be done but it's a major pain in the ass. Windows 7 and I believe Vista will do it.
 
Top