vista!!!!

reapergato

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 6, 2012
Messages
238
....... Micro$oft officially stopped free support of vista today........ =) thank god maybe it will dissappear now. LOL goooo play with windows ME when you belong.
 

ThreeDee

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 5, 2001
Messages
11,328
I like Vista .. been running great for me on my TV PC for quite awhile now without issue :cool:
 

Gorankar

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 19, 2000
Messages
10,920
Extended support til 2017.
I no longer have a PC running it, but it was a pretty good OS. It is certainly no ME, in fact, at this point in time, it is vastly superior to Xp for most uses.
 

ripken204

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 24, 2007
Messages
1,427
Extended support til 2017.
I no longer have a PC running it, but it was a pretty good OS. It is certainly no ME, in fact, at this point in time, it is vastly superior to Xp for most uses.

I think that vista was much better than XP in every way...
 

MrsOldMX

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
489
....... Micro$oft officially stopped free support of vista today........ =) thank god maybe it will dissappear now. LOL goooo play with windows ME when you belong.

Cool, story bro!

Next time you want to troll an operating system...well you get the idea :D
 

DeathPrincess

Fully [H]
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
18,205
Vista after service pack = windows 7 minus aero snap and homegroup... It was kind of proof of the whole "internet opinion" thing. :p
 

bigdogchris

Fully [H]
Joined
Feb 19, 2008
Messages
18,530
....... Micro$oft officially stopped free support of vista today........ =) thank god maybe it will dissappear now. LOL goooo play with windows ME when you belong.
There is a difference between Mainstream support and Extended support. Vista will still get security patches until 2017.

All the Mainstream support end means that they will not offer free technical support or offer hot fixes for specific problems unless you buy into their hot fix program.
 

Ur_Mom

Fully [H]
Joined
May 15, 2006
Messages
20,595
....... Micro$oft officially stopped free support of vista today........ =) thank god maybe it will dissappear now. LOL goooo play with windows ME when you belong.

Your S key seems to be having problems (Psst: hating Microsoft is not cool anymore).

Vista wasn't bad. I never had a single issue with it. Yes, it pales in comparison to Win7, but most old OS's do compared to the newer ones.

Extended support until 2017, which is cool. I'm glad Microsoft has a definite time frame for support on their products.
 

NICKSTAR

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
3,832
I think Vista got a bad name because it was "before its time" for most of retail.

On enthusiasts' PC's it ran like gold, but when it was slapped on a 2ghz Single core processor and a 512mb RAM it ran like shit.

I worked at Circuit City and I remember from the time of release until the time we went out of business people would come in saying "I dont want any computer with that Vista crap. I hate it." Then I would ask why and it was always the same stuff. "Its slow, it doesnt work with my programs, yadda yadda." Which was terribly wrong.

I thought Vista was light years better than XP when ran on the correct system. Just like I think Windows 7 is even better than Vista because it looks better and they learned from their mistakes just like they do with (almost) every OS.

Sadly im not so sure about 8.
 

digital_exhaust

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - May 2008
Joined
Aug 14, 2006
Messages
6,903
Vista HP x64. Still running just fine. Welcome to [H], and thanks for your opinion.
 

Red Falcon

[H]F Junkie
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
11,540
Extended support til 2017.
I no longer have a PC running it, but it was a pretty good OS. It is certainly no ME, in fact, at this point in time, it is vastly superior to Xp for most uses.

You never used it within an enterprise environment, otherwise you wouldn't be saying it was a good OS.
In fact, it was a terrible OS with horrid back-end functionality with a gui that was, at best, flaky.

Also, as for having "vastly superior" uses compared to XP, I should hope so considering XP was only a 6 year old OS at the time.
 
Last edited:

haileris

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 6, 2010
Messages
458
Imho Vista deterioated badly past the first setup, far worse than XP or WIn 7, but that is just my experience from home user perspective.

I was an MS TAP Vista User for the outsourcing company I used to work for - the machine struggled on manfully but it wasn't too bad :)

The trouble with Vista is that for every innovation (WinSXS) there was some sort of cock up - mp3 playing slowing down the network or 5 vista dictionary word updates for 56 MB (ok more a replacement but still). Even MS people went public - http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/09/business/09digi.html?_r=1

The fact that Windows 7 was released less than 3 years after Vista tells its own story. Vista as a brand was tarnished.
 

GushpinBob

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 11, 2007
Messages
2,721
The fact that Windows 7 was released less than 3 years after Vista tells its own story. Vista as a brand was tarnished.

Which is back to normal release schedule. That 5-6 year period between XP and Vista was a fluke.
 

SuperSubZero

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 21, 2000
Messages
3,780
The fact that Windows 7 was released less than 3 years after Vista tells its own story. Vista as a brand was tarnished.

You know MS is a software company, right? They release software because they can sell software and it makes them money and that's why they exist.

This is why car companies tend to release new cars every year.

If you're having problems with this I'd suggest a basic economics class.
 

YeuEmMaiMai

Fully [H]
Joined
Jun 11, 2004
Messages
30,222
....... Micro$oft officially stopped free support of vista today........ =) thank god maybe it will dissappear now. LOL goooo play with windows ME when you belong.

was hoping to go though the day without some moronic post about Microsoft ending mainstream support for Vista... I am willing to bet that the OP dosen't even know the 2 major problems with Vista that weren't even the fault of MS....but I'll be kind and give you a hint

Nvidia........
 

evanisthecoastie

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 14, 2006
Messages
4,708
Vista was great after the first service pack, no complaints on my end.

It was interesting to see a smear campaign go so viral though.
 

Flyboat

Gawd
Joined
Jan 14, 2006
Messages
630
Vista is great if you have 2gb of ram. When it was release, many computers only have 1 gb of ram. That was one of problems.

I have 4 gb of ram with onboard graphic. I like Vista: all in one.
 

Red Falcon

[H]F Junkie
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
11,540
Vista is great if you have 2gb of ram. When it was release, many computers only have 1 gb of ram. That was one of problems.

I have 4 gb of ram with onboard graphic. I like Vista: all in one.

Even though Win 7 can run great with only 1GB, yet Vista requires 2GB to run at all, right.
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2004
Messages
3,720
Even though Win 7 can run great with only 1GB, yet Vista requires 2GB to run at all, right.

It was the much more aggressive caching/superfetch .... the holder HDs of the time when Vista came out just choked when they were hit by that + all the paging because of the low RAM.

I'm sure if you dropped vista onto a system with 1GB and an SSD or just modern 7200rpm drive with decent seek times, it would perform much much better than expected
 

Red Falcon

[H]F Junkie
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
11,540
It was the much more aggressive caching/superfetch .... the holder HDs of the time when Vista came out just choked when they were hit by that + all the paging because of the low RAM.

I'm sure if you dropped vista onto a system with 1GB and an SSD or just modern 7200rpm drive with decent seek times, it would perform much much better than expected

Aggressive superfetch wasn't the only problem Vista had, but if you enjoy it, then have fun.
 

ThreeDee

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 5, 2001
Messages
11,328
when the Vista pre RC's where out, I had a small network of old gaming computers running it ..Athlon XP's, s478 P4's ..one or two boxes had 2gb of ram .. the others only 1gb... they were set up for teenagers to play games like Halo, Serious Sam 1&2, Descent 3 ..etc .. as well as listen to music, type papers and what not. The OS ran good even then.. I had them all running the uni-processor F@H client almost 24/7 as well..
Printer drivers was the only issue I had with it .. or lack there of anywayz ..
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2004
Messages
3,720
Aggressive superfetch wasn't the only problem Vista had, but if you enjoy it, then have fun.

immature device drivers from the manufacturers being the other problem.... Seriously, Vista and 7 are the same thing as long as you install the same device drivers....

try it one day, Vista was just a bit ahead of its time
 

XOR != OR

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 17, 2003
Messages
11,549
immature device drivers from the manufacturers being the other problem.... Seriously, Vista and 7 are the same thing as long as you install the same device drivers....

try it one day, Vista was just a bit ahead of its time
I actually tried that; had two laptops, one that was "built for Vista", another that was "Built for 7". Loaded up both OSes and used them for a couple weeks ( this was back when I was working at a grocery store chain, and I had a lot of extra time to be futzing around ). Vista, on both the Vista AND 7 laptop, felt more sluggish. And on both laptops, I had the thrashing harddrive issue, where Vista would go off to indexing land and never come back, not even when I started working on the machine.

7, on both, was snappy and responsive.

Vista was simply half baked, that's all there was too it. It wasn't bad..per se..but it definitely wasn't the same thing as 7.
 

Red Falcon

[H]F Junkie
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
11,540
immature device drivers from the manufacturers being the other problem.... Seriously, Vista and 7 are the same thing as long as you install the same device drivers....

try it one day, Vista was just a bit ahead of its time

I have tried it, I did it up until Win 7's release. I'm done with Vista as is everyone else who had the unfortunate luck of having to deal with it's terrible back-end functionality and instability.

Driver incompatibility is understandable due to Vista's new architecture at the time, but for everything else, there was no excuse, and Vista was certainly not ahead of it's time.

OS X 10.4 and 10.5 were far superior to it in every aspect, as was XP, despite it being a 6 year old OS at the time of Vista's release.

Win 7 is essentially what Vista should have been upon release, but I'm glad MS decided to fix all of Vista's problems and actually make a decent OS, despite it being Windows.
 

Gorankar

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 19, 2000
Messages
10,920
7 was definitely more refined that Vista. But Vista was hardly a bad OS, even at launch. Compared to launch Xp, it was a dream. And that was with many, if not most of 2K drivers working just fine under Xp. There is something of a knee jerk reaction on my part to defend it due to the bad rap it got, much of it undeserved, from a great many people; that never used it, hardly used it, or decided to put it on an early P4 system with one Gb of ram or less, or some other piece of antiquated hardware would not work for them.

Vista was great after the first service pack, no complaints on my end.

It was interesting to see a smear campaign go so viral though.

Even b4 SP1, which was more of a security roll up, with some default settings changes, than it was a XpSp2 type of SP, it was a pretty good OS.

Yeah, the "Vista sucks because my third cousin's, girl friend's brother knows a guy that took basic DOS at a votech back in the 90's said so.", was rather prevalent.

Vistas launch would have been, and its reputation would be, far different if the Dells, and HPs of the world had just stuck 2 Gb of ram in systems that sold with Vista on them, instead of 1 Gb.
 

YeuEmMaiMai

Fully [H]
Joined
Jun 11, 2004
Messages
30,222
I actually tried that; had two laptops, one that was "built for Vista", another that was "Built for 7". Loaded up both OSes and used them for a couple weeks ( this was back when I was working at a grocery store chain, and I had a lot of extra time to be futzing around ). Vista, on both the Vista AND 7 laptop, felt more sluggish. And on both laptops, I had the thrashing harddrive issue, where Vista would go off to indexing land and never come back, not even when I started working on the machine.

7, on both, was snappy and responsive.

Vista was simply half baked, that's all there was too it. It wasn't bad..per se..but it definitely wasn't the same thing as 7.

No it wasn't......the people who reviewed it were half baked. Used it from day 1 on the rig below with no issues only installed 7 on it when MS gave it to me for free at a lauch event.
 

XOR != OR

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 17, 2003
Messages
11,549
No it wasn't......the people who reviewed it were half baked. Used it from day 1 on the rig below with no issues only installed 7 on it when MS gave it to me for free at a lauch event.
I tend not to listen to reviewers. They are usually full of shit. I do, however, listen to my end users ( on occasion. I don't like making a habit of it ), and I do listen to my own experiences.

Based on those two data sources, vista was released before it was ready.
 

Red Squirrel

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Nov 29, 2009
Messages
9,211
It's kind of funny to think that Vista's support ends earlier than XP. :D

That means nothing though. What home user actually regularly calls Microsoft?

I had to support windows 98 and 95 for the longest time. The funniest part about having to support windows 95 is that my first computer had windows 98, so I was actually supporting an OS that was technically before "my time" (of using computers). Thankfully those days are over though. In fact I have not been bugged to fix PCs for a while now. *touch wood* but when I do it's XP, Vista or 7.

I personally can't stand Vista and there's lot of things in 7 I find annoying too, but that's just because I'm not used to them, so can't really bash it. Vista/7 is ok by today's standards. The problem is when Vista came out, the typically available hardware was extremely bare minimal to run it well, especially after adding an AV and having a couple apps opened. It did not help that OEMs always try to cram the "latest and greatest" on older generation hardware. I remember when XP came out, same idea. Just because it will install on a machine with 256MB of ram and a <2Ghz single core processor does not mean it will run well.
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2004
Messages
3,720
I actually tried that; had two laptops, one that was "built for Vista", another that was "Built for 7". Loaded up both OSes and used them for a couple weeks ( this was back when I was working at a grocery store chain, and I had a lot of extra time to be futzing around ). Vista, on both the Vista AND 7 laptop, felt more sluggish. And on both laptops, I had the thrashing harddrive issue, where Vista would go off to indexing land and never come back, not even when I started working on the machine.

7, on both, was snappy and responsive.

Vista was simply half baked, that's all there was too it. It wasn't bad..per se..but it definitely wasn't the same thing as 7.

that really was Vista's problem... the aggressive superfetch and caching + indexing... Vista really settled down after a few days of use, and really, is every bit as responsive as 7 is once that inital settling period is finished. Really, the biggest thing is that it needs at least a nice, fast HDD if you have less than 2GB of RAM for it. On 7, as we all agree, this isn't a problem because after initial install, it simply doesn't index/cache as hard as Vista does.
 

GushpinBob

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 11, 2007
Messages
2,721
It's kind of funny to think that Vista's support ends earlier than XP. :D

Mainstream support for Windows XP ended 3 years ago, so no, Vista's mainstream support didn't end prior to XP. Not by a long shot.

Both OSes are currently under extended support, but for less than two years for XP. Vista is under extended support until mid-2017.
 

YeuEmMaiMai

Fully [H]
Joined
Jun 11, 2004
Messages
30,222
I tend not to listen to reviewers. They are usually full of shit. I do, however, listen to my end users ( on occasion. I don't like making a habit of it ), and I do listen to my own experiences.

Based on those two data sources, vista was released before it was ready.

lol ok whatever, I found it to be a welcome improvement over XP but then again I use ATi hardware.........so I didn't suffer from all of the Nivida based crashes :D
 

Ur_Mom

Fully [H]
Joined
May 15, 2006
Messages
20,595
Win 7 is essentially what Vista should have been upon release, but I'm glad MS decided to fix all of Vista's problems and actually make a decent OS, despite it being Windows.

See, it's comments like this that make me question all your other posts. You obviously have a grudge against Windows to begin with. Sure, Vista had some problems, but it wasn't really that bad at the time (When 7 came out, it blew it out of the water - like most OS successors). But, being against Windows to begin with shows that you will find any problems and exaggerate them to the point that it sounds like the whole OS didn't work at all.
 

Red Falcon

[H]F Junkie
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
11,540
See, it's comments like this that make me question all your other posts. You obviously have a grudge against Windows to begin with. Sure, Vista had some problems, but it wasn't really that bad at the time (When 7 came out, it blew it out of the water - like most OS successors).

I'm entitled to my opinion based on my experiences with all variants of Windows, especially in an enterprise environment, where unfortunately, was not Vista's strong point.

But, being against Windows to begin with shows that you will find any problems and exaggerate them to the point that it sounds like the whole OS didn't work at all
I haven't exaggerated anything and I never said the whole OS didn't work at all, now you're making things up.
Considering this is your first post in this thread, it's comments like this that make me question your posts.
 

Ur_Mom

Fully [H]
Joined
May 15, 2006
Messages
20,595
I'm entitled to my opinion based on my experiences with all variants of Windows, especially in an enterprise environment, where unfortunately, was not Vista's strong point.


I haven't exaggerated anything and I never said the whole OS didn't work at all, now you're making things up.
Considering this is your first post in this thread, it's comments like this that make me question your posts.

Second post (this is my third). I didn't say you did, I said that you will (generally). If you go into a product with general distaste, your opinions will generally be negative (not YOU as in YOU, but as a general person). :)
 

Red Falcon

[H]F Junkie
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
11,540
Second post (this is my third). I didn't say you did, I said that you will (generally). If you go into a product with general distaste, your opinions will generally be negative (not YOU as in YOU, but as a general person). :)

Ah, I get what you're saying now, thanks for clarifying. :)
Also, I could have swore it was your first post, so nvm on my above comment on that. :eek:
 
Top