Microsoft Responds To "Save XP" Petition

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Microsoft has responded to one of the “Save Windows XP” petitions by reminding people they have already delayed its demise once and that feedback from partners and customers, not petitions, are what shape their decisions.

"We're aware of it but are listening first and foremost to feedback we hear from partners and customers about what makes sense based on their needs," a spokesperson told Computerworld Australia.
Click to expand...
 
Wonder how many people who signed that petition have tried Vista lately- I haven't really had any issues w/it at all, and I went from XP Pro 32-bit to Vista Home Premium 64-bit. I also just find Vista to be a genuinely better OS all-around, with its primary problems arising from unfamiliarity- user unfamiliarity and software developer unfamiliarity (the new infrastructure for drivers and the like has required many companies to create entirely new code just for Vista, and they're still working the kinks out of those). Crap that attempts to further prolong the life of XP will only further delay rectification of Vista's software problems as developers continue to divide their resources between XP and Vista.
 
TerranUp16 said:
Wonder how many people who signed that petition have tried Vista lately- I haven't really had any issues w/it at all, and I went from XP Pro 32-bit to Vista Home Premium 64-bit. I also just find Vista to be a genuinely better OS all-around, with its primary problems arising from unfamiliarity- user unfamiliarity and software developer unfamiliarity (the new infrastructure for drivers and the like has required many companies to create entirely new code just for Vista, and they're still working the kinks out of those). Crap that attempts to further prolong the life of XP will only further delay rectification of Vista's software problems as developers continue to divide their resources between XP and Vista.
Click to expand...

I agree. However that doesn't mean much as people will still bitch. Just wait till Windows 7 comes out.
 
Click the reply button => "Are you sure want to post a reply to this thread" dialogue box comes out => Click yes button => Write up a post => Click the "submit reply" button => "Are sure to submit your post and let others read it?" dialogue box comes out => Click the yes button.
Click to expand...

This is what would happen if this forum is hosted on a Vista machine :D
 
The people signing the petition are probably customers, otherwise they wouldn't care how long XP was for sale.
 
Vista is the new Windows ME.
Some people will say its great. Everyone else will wait for the next OS.

Win2K>WinME
WinXP>Vista

History repeats.
 
TerranUp16 said:
Wonder how many people who signed that petition have tried Vista lately- I haven't really had any issues w/it at all, and I went from XP Pro 32-bit to Vista Home Premium 64-bit. I also just find Vista to be a genuinely better OS all-around, with its primary problems arising from unfamiliarity- user unfamiliarity and software developer unfamiliarity (the new infrastructure for drivers and the like has required many companies to create entirely new code just for Vista, and they're still working the kinks out of those). Crap that attempts to further prolong the life of XP will only further delay rectification of Vista's software problems as developers continue to divide their resources between XP and Vista.
Click to expand...

I agree
 
Vashypooh said:
People who call Vista the new windows ME make me laugh.
Click to expand...

Same here. ME was a legitimately buggy piece of shit, basically took 98 and cobbled shit on (which 98 also did from 95), until it was completely unstable and prone to crashing. Vista is simply a new driver model/kernel which requires brand new everything from hardware manufacturers. That's their fault, not Microsofts. If Vista sucks for you, start writing petitions to your hardware manufacturers to get their asses in gear, not to Microsoft asking them to stay stuck in the past.

P.S. I liked Vista, but I'm using Linux now.
 
i'm still having issues with vista....... dwm keeps fucking crashing on me
 
TerranUp16 said:
Wonder how many people who signed that petition have tried Vista lately- I haven't really had any issues w/it at all, and I went from XP Pro 32-bit to Vista Home Premium 64-bit. I also just find Vista to be a genuinely better OS all-around, with its primary problems arising from unfamiliarity- user unfamiliarity and software developer unfamiliarity (the new infrastructure for drivers and the like has required many companies to create entirely new code just for Vista, and they're still working the kinks out of those). Crap that attempts to further prolong the life of XP will only further delay rectification of Vista's software problems as developers continue to divide their resources between XP and Vista.
Click to expand...

Going to have to agree also. Been using Ultimate x64 for over 6+ months now and no issues with th OS at all. I had one crash and that was because i installed a buggy, poorly written 3rd party app. Uninstalled it and Vista ran like a champ again. With the newest drivers, I'm running nearly as fast as my XP install was.
 
Fooshnik said:
The people signing the petition are probably customers, otherwise they wouldn't care how long XP was for sale.
Click to expand...
Exactly. It may be easy enough for example to use a proxy/alternate e-mails to make multiple petition signings appear legit, who is really going to go to all that trouble?

And why would a pirate waste their time signing it either? Once M$ finally kills off XP, they along w/ the formerly legit customers will just continue using the intabwebs to get a no-so-legal copy of XP. The only roadbump may be once SP3 gets released, especially if they've implemented some form of Vista's UAC like I heard rumors of way back.

Bottom line though, it's an OS on life support. It's time to pull the plug and concentrate on the living. I absolutely detested Vista when it first came out. My cheif gripes being the UAC, which I have since grown to pretty much care less about.. And the fact that my HDTV card maker (DVICO) refuses (blaming Conextant) to support the Fusion 5 RT Lite card w/ proper drivers (use XP drivers they work -- BULLSHIT).. But MCE works just peachy for me sans the DVICO software, although I have to fight w/ the XP drivers still to get basic drivers up (then again I think there is basic drivers in the Vista install for MCE support; I forget); other than than it's OK. Believe it or not, Vista has been pretty damned stable for me for some time now; it was just teething problems initially that I really had any stability issues w/ it.

And sooner or later, those of you using DX10 performance as an excuse will have no choice but to switch.. Eventually game makers will stop putting time, effort and loads of $$$ into developing for an unsupported graphic 'standard'/OS, and the only people left on XP and older OS's will be those playing old games that don't play nicely w/ Vista.
 
Vashypooh said:
People who call Vista the new windows ME make me laugh.
Click to expand...

You know, I know AMD fanboys that swear that their rigs blow away anything that Intel or Nvidia have ever made. Whether or not you agree that Vista is the new Me, it doesn't change that a lot of people, including me, are perfectly happy with XP, and don't see any reason to switch.

Why should I have to learn a new OS? Why should I have to deal with potential hardware and software incompatibilities? Why should I have to "get used" to new features that annoy me? Because MS decided it was time for me to upgrade and that I needed a new OS? They need to keep their employees gainfully employed, so they crank out a bloated, useless OS with no new features I want just so I can give them some of my hard earned cash? Thanks, but the government taxes me enough.

I'm just a(n) (some would say below) average schmo, what do I know? What about the people at MaxPC mag, who have sworn off Vista, or any of the other Internet sites and magazines that have found no benefit to running games or anything else under Vista and DX10? At what point do we say "Hey, yeah, maybe some of the anti-Vista people actually know what they are talking about"?
 
Scenario:
You buy a new PC. It has that new Windows Vista installed on it, Home/Premium Edition, or whatever, so you're seriously pumped. It's nice to be past that old dinosaur of yours. :p

You hook it up, boot it, and scan through the EULA for the phrase "Everybody's doing it," but click "I agree" anyway, when you can't find it. It has you set up your account, then you log in. Wow... "I recognize the Start menu..." and you chalk the lack of recognition to the "new stuff" effect. You realize that your screen resolution is too low. You spend 30 minutes trying to find the Display Configuration Control Panel. When you finally do, you're wondering if it was worth it because your video drivers probably aren't the latest. :confused:

So, you open IE7. Keep in mind that throughout this process, you're constantly being annoyed by popups asking you if you really want to do what you just told the PC you want to do... to which you are always saying yes without reading it at this point... and you're about to browse the net. (Anybody else see a problem here?) :eek:

So you go to guru3d.com, add it to your favorites, and download the latest drivers for your video card. You close your browser thinking you're done only to realize you should probably get the motherboard drivers, too. You open IE7 again... can't find the "Favorites" menu for 10 minutes and then decide to just navigate to the page manually again, telling yourself, "I'm sure it's all worth it for the superfast, supereyecandy of DirextX10." ;)

So after installing your drivers, you need to restart, right? So you hit the red button in the Start menu. It says Windows is shutting down. "That's not what I meant to do!" But it's too late. "No big deal. I'll just power... it... back..." You trail off as you realize the number of updates it says are being installed. So you go out for dinner and a movie. :(

You get back and there are only 4 updates left. "Yay!" :D

30 minutes later, you power the PC back up and install Crysis. It looks kinda pretty, but it seems a bit slow, so you turn on an fps display and are somewhat surprised. So you boot up your "old dinosaur" and find that not only does it run Crysis faster, but it looks just as good as far as you can see. :eek:

... :mad:

You uninstall Crysis and take the PC back and save 2 grand with the satisfaction that you can wait for Windows 7 and miss nothing. :cool:
 
Spectrum17 said:
You know, I know AMD fanboys that swear that their rigs blow away anything that Intel or Nvidia have ever made. Whether or not you agree that Vista is the new Me, it doesn't change that a lot of people, including me, are perfectly happy with XP, and don't see any reason to switch.

Why should I have to learn a new OS? Why should I have to deal with potential hardware and software incompatibilities? Why should I have to "get used" to new features that annoy me? Because MS decided it was time for me to upgrade and that I needed a new OS? They need to keep their employees gainfully employed, so they crank out a bloated, useless OS with no new features I want just so I can give them some of my hard earned cash? Thanks, but the government taxes me enough.

I'm just a(n) (some would say below) average schmo, what do I know? What about the people at MaxPC mag, who have sworn off Vista, or any of the other Internet sites and magazines that have found no benefit to running games or anything else under Vista and DX10? At what point do we say "Hey, yeah, maybe some of the anti-Vista people actually know what they are talking about"?
Click to expand...

They will take it up the ass and move along. End of story. The business world won't just stop because people hate change. Look at how fast Linux releases are, 6 months to a year, how much complaining do you hear from them every time a new spin is out?

Vista is here to stay. It's just that simple. If you want to continue to use a legacy system feel free, but remember when Microsoft cuts support for operating systems, most software distributors do the same.

New drivers? Nah, they wont waste resources implementing their drivers into an old kernel.
New programs? Nah, maybe if your lucky new stuff will work.
Updates to older software? Prolly not.

The technology field is fast paced and full of change, things become more demanding and more is required of the machine. If you cant take change, you are not going to like computers. Ever.
 
kush said:
And sooner or later, those of you using DX10 performance as an excuse will have no choice but to switch.. Eventually game makers will stop putting time, effort and loads of $$$ into developing for an unsupported graphic 'standard'/OS, and the only people left on XP and older OS's will be those playing old games that don't play nicely w/ Vista.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:<sarcasm>Yeah, because who in their right mind would support DX9 after XP loses support. I mean it's not like the XBox 360 uses DX9 or anything. And even if it did, who would want to port all that c++ code, considering that the XBox 360 development kit was specifically designed to support code that ported easily between the Xbox 360 and Windows XP?</sarcasm>

Dude, unfortunately, the lack of performance in DX10 (or even DX9 in Vista) will be a drawback until the next Microshaft console comes out with DX10 or higher. It's just too easy to port games from the 360 to Windows XP/Vista through DX9.

The only way Microshaft can take the performance issues of Vista graphics out of the picture is to actively hobble Windows XP's DX9 stack or improve Vista's, or perhaps make an "update" to the Xbox 360 DX9 stack that causes a significant decrease in the portability of Xbox 360 code. :mad:
 
I'm not going to bother signing this petition despite the fact XP is superior to Vista.

I have no intention of moving to Vista until I have no choice. When I do, I'll just get the upgrade version of Vista because it might have less useless garbage for me to delete. The upgrade version means I'll have only wasted $99. :D
 
Vashypooh said:
They will take it up the ass and move along. End of story. The business world won't just stop because people hate change. Look at how fast Linux releases are, 6 months to a year, how much complaining do you hear from them every time a new spin is out?

Vista is here to stay. It's just that simple. If you want to continue to use a legacy system feel free, but remember when Microsoft cuts support for operating systems, most software distributors do the same.

New drivers? Nah, they wont waste resources implementing their drivers into an old kernel.
New programs? Nah, maybe if your lucky new stuff will work.
Updates to older software? Prolly not.

The technology field is fast paced and full of change, things become more demanding and more is required of the machine. If you cant take change, you are not going to like computers. Ever.
Click to expand...

Soooo much is wrong with that comment. :rolleyes:

First, GNU/Linux (and other related software) is free (as in money) so you aren't forced to empty your wallet for this mythical forced upgrade of which you speak.

Second, except for major updates every 10 or 15 years, linux usually preserves backward compatibility in drivers from previous versions.

Third, why don't you hear as much complaining every kernel update release? Because they are optional. You don't have to upgrade to keep compatibility. Usually, you can go years with the latest software and clunky old kernel. I have. There are even companies, such as Redhat, who will back patch old kernels with security updates for you, so that you don't have to lose security to keep your old clunker.

"The technology field is fast paced and full of change, things become more demanding and more is required of the machine."
It's just too bad Vista can't keep up with the "fast pace" of it's competitors, XP and Linux.

"If you cant[sic] take change," then you should switch to Linux when you find out that Microshaft cares about it's customers so much that they'll discontinue support for your OS.
 
With new drivers, it has been shown there is literally next to no (1-3%) performance difference between xp and vista in dx9....... so quit saying xp is SO much better :eek:
 
I'm all for keeping XP in production for a few months longer until Vista matures a bit more. Even when that time comes, Most (90%) of my customers run proprietary apps that don't run well - if at all - on Vista yet run very well on XP.

On the same token, if the developers re-work their software to run on Vista then maybe my customers will want to upgrade. Only time will tell.
 
I like the tech refresh done for Vista, but hate the UI. If I could get 64bit, dx10, native sata support running under XP, I would be all over it. They can call it something else... like Vista Lite or Vista Gamer.

I was excited about Superfetch, but it's worthless. I think the only reason for it is to cache the bloat of the OS to RAM to make it run at reasonable speed. It eats up 1GB of RAM, no more / no less. It's suppose to have some AI auto tuning algorithm that caches stuff for me ahead of time. For the first 3 weeks I had Vista64 running, all I did was turn it on, wait 10 minutes, then play Company of Heros. 8GB of RAM in the machine, and all Superfetch ever did was cache 1GB of I don't know what - not the one app I actually used every day.
 
This is how monopolies roll. Lessen support for older OSes and hype the new and latest. They're just here to take your cash, and if you're willing to pay then no one is stopping you specifically since others are paying anyhow. There's no stopping it so it's not like the argument is going anywhere. I'm perfectly content with XP but I will take one of these spare days to learn the Vista interface and get use to the irks and quirks. And life goes on.
 
Optimus said:
(or even DX9 in Vista)[/b] will be a drawback until the next Microshaft console comes out with DX10 or higher. It's just too easy to port games from the 360 to Windows XP/Vista through DX9.
Click to expand...

Lack of performance in Vista DX9? What rock have you been under? Stop regurtitating last years forum FUD.
 
TerranUp16 said:
Wonder how many people who signed that petition have tried Vista lately- I haven't really had any issues w/it at all, and I went from XP Pro 32-bit to Vista Home Premium 64-bit. I also just find Vista to be a genuinely better OS all-around, with its primary problems arising from unfamiliarity- user unfamiliarity and software developer unfamiliarity (the new infrastructure for drivers and the like has required many companies to create entirely new code just for Vista, and they're still working the kinks out of those). Crap that attempts to further prolong the life of XP will only further delay rectification of Vista's software problems as developers continue to divide their resources between XP and Vista.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

I wonder how many people who post comments like the one above are using Vista in an Enterprise networked environment, or if it is in a single PC for playing games.

I am trying to support Vista in a large corporate network environment and it has been an utter nightmare. IE7 has broken at least half of my browser-based apps. Network resource browsing is incredibly slow. Roaming profiles do not work as they should. Legacy application compatibility is abysmal at best. Partial blame goes out to the hardware developers because driver support for legacy hardware sucks.

I should not have this many problems with the transition from XP to Vista. If this were a full OS development "reboot" like Microsoft did when they introduced Windows NT, then I am totally cool with blowing up my entire Enterprise and starting over. That is not what Vista is, and I'm completely fed up with having to bow down to Vista's quirks and incompatibilities because you cannot drop it into an existing (working) environment and expect it to function with legacy apps & equipment.

TerranUp16, it is nice to hear you have not had any issues with your HOME version of the OS, but there are a lot of good reasons in the REAL WORLD as to why XP should be available for a longer period of time.
 
Right now for those near their dying Compusa, you can grab Vista Ultimate for $155 (down 40%)
The one in my area looks like they will still be there till the end of the month, so I am waiting on a 50% off before I grab it.

That means it is a heck of a lot cheaper to "play" with it that it was before (Non SP1 of course-make a legit slipstreamed version)
 
LeviathanZERO said:
Vista is the new Windows ME.
Some people will say its great. Everyone else will wait for the next OS.

Win2K>WinME
WinXP>Vista

History repeats.
Click to expand...

congrats on being uninformed. how bout you use the OS before you bash it? :rolleyes:
 
mps said:
:rolleyes:

I wonder how many people who post comments like the one above are using Vista in an Enterprise networked environment, or if it is in a single PC for playing games.

I am trying to support Vista in a large corporate network environment and it has been an utter nightmare. IE7 has broken at least half of my browser-based apps. Network resource browsing is incredibly slow. Roaming profiles do not work as they should. Legacy application compatibility is abysmal at best. Partial blame goes out to the hardware developers because driver support for legacy hardware sucks.

I should not have this many problems with the transition from XP to Vista. If this were a full OS development "reboot" like Microsoft did when they introduced Windows NT, then I am totally cool with blowing up my entire Enterprise and starting over. That is not what Vista is, and I'm completely fed up with having to bow down to Vista's quirks and incompatibilities because you cannot drop it into an existing (working) environment and expect it to function with legacy apps & equipment.

TerranUp16, it is nice to hear you have not had any issues with your HOME version of the OS, but there are a lot of good reasons in the REAL WORLD as to why XP should be available for a longer period of time.
Click to expand...

Well said MPS, well said...

Like you, I face the problems of integrating changes in hundreds of PC's across three campuses in my network.
This is where Vista shows the real motive of MS (money,money,money)

You have a 64-bit OS to handle increased memory space, etc.. that a narrow part of your market needs?
Great! Sell it!
That doesn't mean that *EVERYONE* has that same need! That doesn't mean you drop support for your existing OS base.

When you break entire networks filled with your own products, there's something fundamentally wrong with your method.

If I was the God of OS, my Golden Rule would be:
If someone's computer meets your hardware specs, and the new version cannot run at least as well as the existing version, it's not ready for release.

I wouldn't mind MS being so "forward-looking" if they would wait until that point.
They never do.
Even in the days of DOS, MS used their customers as unwitting and unwilling beta testers.

You look at every OS they've put out and it's been a repeat of the same cycle:
MS releases an OS that's not ready.
People fight with it since MS says they will be cutting off support for the old.
MS comes out with service packs/revisions and a year or two after the initial release, the OS is finally where is should have been before release.

Rinse and repeat...

Anyone remember Win2K SP4 or Win98SE?

Add to that the lag time between OS and app capability.
How many 64-bit apps are there? Heck, how many true 32-bit apps are there?

An app/OS should be able to take advantage of new technology to run better/faster, not require it to be able to keep pace with the old version.

The "fast pace" and "more demanding" arguments are garbage.
In the vast majority of cases, sloppy coding and an unwillingness to go back and fix what is broke is the real reason behind the need for better hardware.

The hardware makers aren't going to complain, since it keeps their market going as well.

I love the bleeding edge of technology, but not everyone needs it to do their work or accomplish their goals.
 
I gave Vista a spin on my aunt's new Gateway that came with it. To be honest, I didn't really care for it. Then again It was just a one time ordeal and not for very long at all. Visually yes, I will grant that it's appealing in many ways. But I don't need a pretty GUI. I need something that's functional and efficient, and maybe the fault lies on my aunt's computer hardware itself (1 gig of RAM and something midrange for a Core 2 Duo processor) but it did not feel functional or efficient over XP to me.

Based on that experience I think I will be sticking by XP for awhile longer. That tune may change once I upgrade my system again, but for right now, I don't think Vista offers me anything that I could personally benefit from. Besides, the wait will also grant the opportunity for third party software for Vista to mature, maybe even a service pack release in a retail/OEM package, as well as more matured hardware drivers, so that will eliminate any early adopter headaches that others have experienced. Don't get me wrong. I'm totally for Microsoft stepping away from the past and trying to improve things, but to be honest it feels like with Vista they've just reinvented the wheel and put nice shiny rims on it.

And to be totally honest? I can see XP sticking around, if only for the fact that there are plenty of old games that may or may not work well with Vista. Starcraft? Diablo 2? I've never tried either under Vista, and don't know if there's a patch for them, but given the fact that both have battle chests sitting on the shelves to this day, and that I still play both, I don't think i could give up XP if it also meant giving those up.
 
For the average home user, Vista is beginning to be ok. I use it and have helped set it up for other people. For the most part, it is stable and does work. There are hardware devices that still have problems and always will -- which is to be expected and is largely the fault of the hardware manufacturers. That said, many of these problems would not have existed had Microsoft not caved so utterly on the DRM infestation that permeates Vista ("Secure Path" etc). Basically, due to the requirements for DRM compliance, many existing device drivers CANNOT work the same way.

However, from a *BUSINESS* standpoint, Vista is a dismal failure.

First off, too many custom applications simply do NOT work properly and never will unless they are re-written. These are apps that work on every version of Windows from 95 through XP -- but choke on Vista. Yes, these apps are ancient, but many are well written and SHOULD still work. There are still things in the core of Vista that are simply BROKEN and I have seen no indication that they are getting fixed either -- i.e. the SP1 Beta's haven't helped. It is simply NOT cost effective to try to rewrite some of these applications simply for the sake of Vista.

Secondly, Vista's networking support at the Domain level is horrendous. Weird things happen ALL THE TIME. Trying to keep a mixed 2K/XP/Vista network communicating with each other is an exercise in frustration. Some days it works. Some days it doesn't. The problem is, it is not consistant and what fixes the problems one day don't necessarily solve them the next!

Server 2008 doesn't look to improve this either -- if anything, it seems to only add yet another layer of complexity and headaches (login scripts anyone -- ye gads!).

Suffice it to say, the parallels between Windows ME and Vista are frightening.
Even ME was USABLE as a Home OS -- it was in its networking functions that it REALLY fell apart.

The problem with Vista is that it suffers from the fact that it IS based on the XP/NT code base -- and this code base is now so large an unwieldy and patched that it is IMPOSSIBLE to make changes of this magnitude without breaking things in unpredictable and potentially unfixable ways. Basically, Microsoft should have never attempted to change this many things in this kernel -- they should have gone ahead and pushed forward with the MinWin design they are now looking at for Windows 7 and never attempted the Vista path in the first place.
 
SamuraiInBlack said:
I gave Vista a spin on my aunt's new Gateway that came with it. To be honest, I didn't really care for it. Then again It was just a one time ordeal and not for very long at all. Visually yes, I will grant that it's appealing in many ways. But I don't need a pretty GUI. I need something that's functional and efficient, and maybe the fault lies on my aunt's computer hardware itself (1 gig of RAM and something midrange for a Core 2 Duo processor) but it did not feel functional or efficient over XP to me.

Based on that experience I think I will be sticking by XP for awhile longer. That tune may change once I upgrade my system again, but for right now, I don't think Vista offers me anything that I could personally benefit from. Besides, the wait will also grant the opportunity for third party software for Vista to mature, maybe even a service pack release in a retail/OEM package, as well as more matured hardware drivers, so that will eliminate any early adopter headaches that others have experienced. Don't get me wrong. I'm totally for Microsoft stepping away from the past and trying to improve things, but to be honest it feels like with Vista they've just reinvented the wheel and put nice shiny rims on it.

And to be totally honest? I can see XP sticking around, if only for the fact that there are plenty of old games that may or may not work well with Vista. Starcraft? Diablo 2? I've never tried either under Vista, and don't know if there's a patch for them, but given the fact that both have battle chests sitting on the shelves to this day, and that I still play both, I don't think i could give up XP if it also meant giving those up.
Click to expand...


My mother got Vista before me, and I used it only occasionally. Wasn't a fan of it at all. However, I grudgingly picked it up myself. I was surprised. I found that it ran faster than XP and was also a lot more stable (the few crashes I've had have been extremely well-handled by Vista; it definitely recovers a lot faster than XP does from crashes and recovers completely from them when it does as opposed to lagging for an additional period of time). In terms of performance, I've actually seen a slight image quality boost across the board- even in DX9 games, which I find odd. However, I can find no other variable that would affect the image quality when the settings, card, processor, etc... all remained the same. Furthermore, some games, such as Call of Duty 4, have actually performed better under Vista than under XP. I have not seen the performance gap between Vista and XP in DX9 that so many have claimed existed. Performance-wise, my only complaint stems from Company of Heroes: Opposing Fronts, which I'd expected to be able to handle w/max settings (aka, w/the additional DX10 settings) at 1600x1200 at a playable framerate (even if that entailed sacrificing AA), but haven't been able to. I think nVidia cards, Vista, and CoH aren't necessarily the best of friends atm, but I had expected better performance there. However, that constitutes my only performance complaint (and when I step-up my present card to a 9800GX2 or 9800GTX, I will figure out the true reason for CoH: OF's performance).

I can't speak for Vista's performance with business applications, but from the standpoint of a Home user (and gamer), I have definitely found it to be a very solid and desirable upgrade over XP (and never did I expect to say that). As I've stated previously- Vista's problems stem largely from software issues, and there have been great improvements to Vista software since it initially came out- Vista is a wholly different animal now.
 
Don't worry, only one more month of complaining and moaning from the XP clingons, then SP1 comes out and it's all over. :)
 
InorganicMatter said:
Don't worry, only one more month of complaining and moaning from the XP clingons, then SP1 comes out and it's all over. :)
Click to expand...

nah. They'll be whining for a few more years at diminishing levels until windows 7 is close to coming out at which point the mantra will become "YOu can have my Vista CD when you pry it from mt cold dead hands". :rolleyes:
 
Windows Xp should be kept for the slower PCs but the support should be severly limited to the point of almost nothing simply because we don't want to live in the past. It's time to update and get with the times.
 
L33t Masta said:
Windows Xp should be kept for the slower PCs but the support should be severly limited to the point of almost nothing simply because we don't want to live in the past. It's time to update and get with the times.
Click to expand...

basically....
 
I have Vista and XP hooked up to a KVM switch so I can use both for testing purposes. I have UACrap turned off. Vista feels sluggish. Everything on XP happens in an instant. Vista is running a Quad Intel while XP is running an Athlon X2. Even with "the brand new OS" available at the click of a button I still haven't bothered to use it full time let alone switch over. I have yet to encounter any worthwhile feature on Vista that isn't on XP at the same time there's a lot of annoyances with Vista that aren't on XP. This is the first time a new Windows has come out in 16 years that elicited a "meh". At work I'm still leaving everything on Win2K as it still works fine.
 
TerranUp16 said:
Wonder how many people who signed that petition have tried Vista lately- I haven't really had any issues w/it at all, and I went from XP Pro 32-bit to Vista Home Premium 64-bit. I also just find Vista to be a genuinely better OS all-around, with its primary problems arising from unfamiliarity- user unfamiliarity and software developer unfamiliarity (the new infrastructure for drivers and the like has required many companies to create entirely new code just for Vista, and they're still working the kinks out of those). Crap that attempts to further prolong the life of XP will only further delay rectification of Vista's software problems as developers continue to divide their resources between XP and Vista.
Click to expand...

I signed that petition and I used Vista from May 5th until February 4th, when I finally reverted to WinXP MCE. I had the following issues:
1. Extremely poor performance transferring files from one disk to another in the same system. Mind you, I'm talking about up to date SATA II drives, 4 Seagate 7200.10s to be specific. And in trying to resolve the issue I reinstalled both the x64 and x86 versions of Vista, both with the drives in AHCI mode and set to emulate IDE.
2. Poor performance with USB transfers. I have several External HDDs that I use regularly. And the "fixes" supplied by Microsoft were only slightly effective at best.
3. Poor Network performance, and strange effects with my Wireless networking not wanting to connect automatically, and then not connecting to the Internet. Plus I had issues sharing files over my local network, where Vista would refuse access from any of the XP machines. On the face of it, these are all things that an OS should do really well. There isn't ANY excuse for not fixing this kind of stuff before Vista was ever released!

Now I had heard that SP1 would at least address the networking issues (maybe!). And I was desperately hoping that it would resolve some of the HDD transfer issues. But when Microsoft decided that I was "too stupid" to install the RTM version, and took down the download links for the latest RC. I decided that I had put up with "as much as I could take"!

I might not have been so irritated if I didn't have an XP machine, with roughly similar hardware, to compare Vista to... I don't know how some of you use your computers? So I can't understand your complacency with obvious issues. I just know that 9 months is long enough for me to wait for fixes to be forthcoming.

The plus side is that I can now go back to using those few pieces of software that wouldn't work properly with Vista. I can expect better performance in the PC games I play. I could even reinstall my old Audigy 4 soundcard. And the only down-side is that I can't really use all the RAM that I now have.

Note: I will keep a disk image of my Vista install. Even though I don't expect to find a real reason to use it. (At least now I can transfer that 19GB of data to a USB drive...)
 
I own and operate a retail computer repair store. If I had $5 for every customer that said they HATED vista... I'd have a lot of extra money laying around.

Customers hate vista. From customers that use computers every day for the last 10 years, to customers that have never used a computer. Every customer that I have interfaced with says they like XP much better. I'd say I've talked to at least 300 people that have vista in regard to their operating systems... and all of them say negative things about it and any of them that have used windows XP at all prior... say they like windows XP much better.

300 or so people... and not ONE positive comment from any one of them.

As a store owner... I sell what peopl want. We do 100% custom builds. To date... I've not sold a SINGLE computer with windows vista on it. Not one of my customers has requested it. I bring it up as an option... and NOBODY wants it.

Microsoft... and the fanboys can say what they want. Right now there is ZERO motivation for people to move to a new OS. They only way they will create the motivation is to KILL the old OS.

Microsoft knows this. You can bet, they will act upon it.
 
orkan said:
I own and operate a retail computer repair store. If I had $5 for every customer that said they HATED vista... I'd have a lot of extra money laying around.

Customers hate vista. From customers that use computers every day for the last 10 years, to customers that have never used a computer. Every customer that I have interfaced with says they like XP much better. I'd say I've talked to at least 300 people that have vista in regard to their operating systems... and all of them say negative things about it and any of them that have used windows XP at all prior... say they like windows XP much better.

300 or so people... and not ONE positive comment from any one of them.

As a store owner... I sell what peopl want. We do 100% custom builds. To date... I've not sold a SINGLE computer with windows vista on it. Not one of my customers has requested it. I bring it up as an option... and NOBODY wants it.

Microsoft... and the fanboys can say what they want. Right now there is ZERO motivation for people to move to a new OS. They only way they will create the motivation is to KILL the old OS.

Microsoft knows this. You can bet, they will act upon it.
Click to expand...

Why do I have a nagging feeling you've been personally feeding negative opinions to your customers, adding to their dislikes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top