Hapless Vista Turns 6, Shuffles Toward Obscurity

brucedeluxe169 said:
all MS needed to do to make vista a success was to make device manufacturers release stable drivers for the RTM, and mandate a 2GB minimum spec for a vista premium sticker instead of that 512mb crap they tried to pull, and people would have loved it...

after windows 2000, I still think vista had the best UI look/skin of any windows release
Click to expand...

darkpaw said:
I absolutely loved Vista and still find it very usable other than the super annoying disk thrashing on clean install. That is so easy to notice, especially after having dealt with 7 so long. I couldnt wait to get XP of my system. The only reason I retired Vista immediately is because I got 7 free. I still really like the darker UI of Vista, but the 7 additions of task list and snap keys were a big enough productivity improvement for me to prefer 7 over Vista by a long shot. I'd still take Vista over XP any day.

Not to minimize that some people had problems. My systems could easily handle it, but MS did set the reqs way to low in order to appease intel and the OEMS. Vista never should have shipped on anything with less than 2GB. The hardware vendors also were a big part of the problem. It wasn't really MS's fault they didn't get their shit together, they had plenty of time. I was running Vista betas for at least a year prior to launch and nvidia never once released a driver update in that time, iirc it was like a month after GA before they did.
Click to expand...

The memory and disk thrashing were the biggest problems for Vista. Because the OS was a complete redesign it had a much steeper requirement than the previous operating system. A sub par pc that was running XP definitely wasn't going to run Vista.

There are still pcs out there running Vista on 1GB of memory, and I can't help but wonder how people are using those. (Just had someone ask me to fix something on a laptop with this config) After the operating system, an AV solution, and a few other things boot up the system is already out of free memory.

The disk thrashing I think was the biggest issue for clean installs. Anyone who is tech savvy knew to turn off superfetch, readyboost, system restore, and windows search. Those features weren't quite ready for prime time and just added to the extra workload. After disabling those I never had issues with disk thrashing. If we had SSDs when Vista came out this would have likely been a non issue.
 
Red Falcon said:
^ Windows 8 does not suck as bad as Linux.
In fact, the only thing about Win 8 that does suck is the GUI and the fact it's just a 7 rehash.

The back-end is actually the same as 7, so is pretty much everything else.
Just don't buy it and you will be set.
Click to expand...

Agree. :p
 
Red Falcon said:
Gentoo>Debian! How can I even use Ubuntu, or Debian I ashame myself and the true path to doing the stuff which sometimes needs to be done, but may not be exactly you know, legal, but not for doing normal stuff, because it's kind of annoying for not specialist needs!!! :eek:
Burn me!
Click to expand...

Agree! :p

What do you mean "not exactly legal"?! :eek:
 
RedStarSQD said:
lol you sure you guys work in IT?.. vista was much easier deployed than XP :) anyways, of course people are gonna pick 7 over its beta these days. So while the hate on vista is overdone it is a moot point. hehe
Click to expand...

I don't work in the IT department, they are located 300 miles away, everything is done remotely by them, the biggest thing we can change is a monitor when it fails. No USB drives allowed, 1mb limit on email size, no personalised desktops, no nothing
 
DeathPrincess said:
Agree. :p
Click to expand...

internet_memes_y_u_mad_tho_How_to_troll-s464x332-295395-580.jpg
 
bman212121 said:
The disk thrashing I think was the biggest issue for clean installs. Anyone who is tech savvy knew to turn off superfetch, readyboost, system restore, and windows search. Those features weren't quite ready for prime time and just added to the extra workload. After disabling those I never had issues with disk thrashing. If we had SSDs when Vista came out this would have likely been a non issue.
Click to expand...


Those in know left superfetch on and got more than 1G of ram and understood what SuperFecth was instead of complaining their OS was using more memory than a 10 year old OS..

That was #2 issue, next to slow driver releases and support, was OEM's selling Vista with 512 / 1G in systems, as low end as you could get.. so again MS got crap for something out of their control.

I guess because i had Vista on decent systems, core duo's , 2G of ram and decent hard drives i never saw that performance issues or thrashing, i also always left my computer on so it wasn't always searching once everything was indexed.

Readyboost wasn't that great, i found it did cause problems, my uncle was always trying to use it with his USB key and it did just seem slower.

I still hated they never fixed the saving of folder views!
 
I also left indexing on as well since I got accostumed to windows key+type name. It pretty much just trashed the disk for the first day or two then was done after that. Smoothing out the indexing process was one of the biggest improvements they made to 7.
 
eh my main PC uses Vista... works fine with me so why bother upgrading
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top