Regretting my purchase of Windows Vista

[Dv8ted2]

Vista is XP with a bunch of eyecandy bullshit added.

Actually, it uses the core of Server 2003.

[GMaq]

Hi,
I fully realize that this thread is not a "Switching to Linux" thread, so I'll say my bit and get out of the way. I think the underlying reason SOME people upgrade to Vista is boredom with XP, if this is the case before anyone blows their 500 bucks on Vista, why NOT at least have a look at Linux? It's free to try and use, comes in multiple flavours, a choice of at least 3 fully realized Desktop environments which can be switched within the OS if you are getting bored. With all due respect to all the "I tried it 5 years ago and my so and so hardware didn't work right" comments, hardware compatibility is the least of Linux issues now, even if you tried it 6 months ago chances are your issues have already been fixed. I'm not saying Linux is everyone's cup of tea, but at this point in it's stratospheric development it's worth a serious look to anyone interested in changing their OS. If I've piqued your interest openSUSE 10.3 is really worth a look, but any of top ten at www.distrowatch.com ( like Fulci said) are worth a look.

Don't end up regretting Vista, have a look at other options before you leap.

[Krispy Kritter]

Way to go Steve.

Hope all of this helped with your problem.

[halsboss]

Vista is XP with a bunch of eyecandy bullshit added.

Actually, it uses the core of Server 2003.

Nearly right, guys.

It's actually the hollywood-enforcer version of windows designed to limit what users can do with their PCs, (anecdotally, from people in the know) containing something like 30 checks per second for things like protected video/audio data transfer paths etc...

and people wonder why the hell it's slow and requires beefed up hardware - blame Bill getting into bed with hollywood against the consumer's right to control their own PC...

[Nelson37]

Other than fellow geeks, I have yet to hear of Anyone who has "downgraded" to Vista. Unfortunate souls who do not know any better get it because it came on their new PC. Haven't had anyone bored with XP. Extremely few express any opinion whatsoever, the user does not care about the OS, as long as it works.

Linux does have a real chance here, but the Community has to do something. Get A Product. Consumers do not want to choose between 37 flavors of OS. Pick ONE, get it working with as much hardware as possible, and MARKET the SOB. Make a single install disk, and get an OS that can be supported and used. 37 flavors just won't cut it.

Sure, there is a combination of Linux and other apps that can be made to do any particular job, mostly. But there needs to be ONE that does ALL jobs, or at least the majority of them. "Well, with This Distro and That Desktop you can do These jobs, but not Those, for Those your need the Other Distro and the Other Desktop, but then you can't do the Other Thing". Linux functions in the marketplace as a specific app, not a general OS.

The Linux Community has a historic opportunity to knock Microsoft off the top of the PC food chain. Their inability to get organized and focused on a single goal will almost certainly prevent this from happening. They will fail just like IBM failed, for almost exactly the opposite reason.

[GMaq]

Way to go Steve.

Hope all of this helped with your problem.

That's what sucks about posting rhetorical questions, you already know the answer before you post!

[classfour]

Linux may not have much of a choice anymore: Some are being sued for copyright infringement due to the use of a "windows like" interface - dating from an early 80's patent. If the Linux crowd doesn't band together, they'll all fall to the wayside.

I've been forced into Vista. It was on a new PC, and I'm too cheap to buy XP.

What I've discovered thus far is this: Administrator ONLY for the account.
Turn the UAC (User Account Contol) off. Make certain the software that you install is Vista certified; and it actually runs about as well as XP on that particular machine.

After these modifications, I'm actually growing used to the user interface.

[JohnnyMalaria]

Linux may not have much of a choice anymore: Some are being sued for copyright infringement due to the use of a "windows like" interface - dating from an early 80's patent. If the Linux crowd doesn't band together, they'll all fall to the wayside.

If it's early 80s then it is not an issue now. i.e., anyone can create an OS with a window-based GUI without infringement (as long as more recent patents aren't violated).

I've been forced into Vista. It was on a new PC, and I'm too cheap to buy XP.

Not a problem - you are entitled to an XP product key as long as you don't use Vista and XP concurrently. You need to get an XP CD-ROM. Contact your PC vendor and request an OS swap. Alternatively, call MS.

[classfour]

Thanks for the info on m$ XP.

http://desktoplinux.com/news/NS8579738057.html

Is regarding the Acadia/IP Innovations lawsuit against Novell and Red Hat.

[lordsmurf]

as I've got the software I need for the foreseeable future

That's another thing that I get a good laugh at, I go to my aunt's house and she proudly shows me she now has the latest Photoshop installed. She doesn't need any version of Photoshop let alone the latest. Irfanview or <gasp> the image utilities in Windows are more than sufficient for what she does, crop, rotate etc.

Adobe CS3 Master Collection will serve me for years to come. Adobe Photoshop CS3 Extended is a masterpiece. Even I don't necessarily need every last function it has, but it's nice to know they're there.

[nTekka]

Anyway, desktops are never the appropriate device
to play videogames. That's what the game consoles
and the arcades are for.

=====================

want to try some FPS? your arcade/console vs my mouse/keyboard gaming machine aka desktop computer? I hope you don't mind the embarassing deaths and helplessly running in circles trying to get a head shot. You could buy a separate mouse/keyboard accessories but then doesn't it feel like a computer to you?

Its kind of dissapointing to hear that computers aren't an appropriate device to play video games when they are one of the best driving forces for innovation in games. Game consoles are becoming more and more computer-like... connect the dot anyone? They practically are computers now!!

[Midzuki]

Videogame consoles and arcades have always been computers,
AFAIK. Usually running a dedicated and non-bloated OS that
cannot interfere with the game itself. Old MS-DOSs were a decent
match for the OSs of the currently-"outdated" arcades and consoles.
Not evrything coming from M$ is necessarily 100% pure evil.

:P

++++++++++++++++++

[lordsmurf]

Videogame consoles and arcades have always been computers,
AFAIK. Usually running a dedicated and non-bloated OS that
cannot interfere with the game itself. Old MS-DOSs were a decent
match for the OSs of the currently-"outdated" arcades and consoles.
Not evrything coming from M$ is necessarily 100% pure evil.

:P

++++++++++++++++++

No. They use special ROM boards.

[Midzuki]

lordsmurf wrote:

No. They use special ROM boards.

As I was already suspecting,
my definition of operating system appears to be
broader than yours.

+++++

[nTekka]

If you agree with consoles/arcades being computers with low level OSes... then why did you say computers were never meant for gaming?!? lol You're one weird fellow! I mean that in a good way

[RLT69]

Actually, it uses the core of Server 2003.

Dear god. Hate to break it to you but Server 2003 is based on the same technology as XP!

That's kind of why people say Vista is XP warmed over.

There are ZERO advantages to moving to Vista. It's a resource hug without any of the new features Longhorn was suppose to have. Drive support is crap. 64 bit support is the same as 64 bit support XP - crap.

Everyone know's this is ME. Even Microsoft is admitting it's a mistake. Microsoft has extended the support of XP! Dell and other OEMs continue to offer XP on their machines - they were suppose to stop offering XP once Vista shipped. The reasons being companies are not buying it. There are too many problems with Vista.

Wait until Windows 7 hits the market. Vista is done.

[Dv8ted2]

Actually, it uses the core of Server 2003.

Dear god. Hate to break it to you but Server 2003 is based on the same technology as XP!

That's kind of why people say Vista is XP warmed over.

There are ZERO advantages to moving to Vista. It's a resource hug without any of the new features Longhorn was suppose to have. Drive support is crap. 64 bit support is the same as 64 bit support XP - crap.

Everyone know's this is ME. Even Microsoft is admitting it's a mistake. Microsoft has extended the support of XP! Dell and other OEMs continue to offer XP on their machines - they were suppose to stop offering XP once Vista shipped. The reasons being companies are not buying it. There are too many problems with Vista.

Wait until Windows 7 hits the market. Vista is done.

I beg to differ. Microsoft has not wavered. They had a plan in mind to release SP1 shortly after the initial release. Driver support will be better after SP1. You are spreading FUD. People were saying the same thing about XP when it was first released. They were saying XP was 2000 warmed over and offered no incentive to upgrade but I found reasons.

Vista has a simplified networking model, a better security model and features like readyboost. Those were enough reasons for me. People scoffed at XP's security. Vista improves on that and yet ABM'ers continue to point fingers. You cannot please everyone all the time.

[JohnnyMalaria]

Win2K was NT4.0 warmed up which was NT3.51 warmed up etc.

MS are responsible for OS Warming. Al Gore will save us with his Internet.

[pepegot1]

Does anyone know what computer manufacturers still offer Windows XP as a choice, instead of imposing Vista upon the buyer?

[SandyB]

I have also been doing this for over 20 years, and I have only 2 words for you:

DUAL BOOT

[lordsmurf]

Win2K was NT4.0 warmed up which was NT3.51 warmed up etc.

MS are responsible for OS Warming. Al Gore will save us with his Internet.

Win2000 was about as far away from NT4 as it can get. Have you ever used any of these? Especially with IIS?

[JohnnyMalaria]

Yes, both extensively (no need for IIS). My affirmation stands. As well as my satire.

[lordsmurf]

Windows 3.1
Windows 95 OSR2.5 (Rev. C)
Windows 2000 SP1 (SP5 better)
Windows XP Pro SP1 (SP2 better)

These stand out to me as the only Windows OS to make great strides in functionality and stability over previous versions. It was usually the 2nd or 3rd update to the OS before it was worthwhile too.

[jagabo]

Does anyone know what computer manufacturers still offer Windows XP as a choice, instead of imposing Vista upon the buyer?

Dell, HP...

[classfour]

Dell will ship with XP - provided you customize it when you order.

That's a step up from May when I bought my Dell: You could only get Vista on consumer ordered machines.

[classfour]

Kept reading about, found out bad news on my basic Dell - has Vista Home Basic = cannot downgrade to XP per the EULA or Microsoft.

I'm going to keep working with it - the machine is running very good, not buggy at all after I've gotten it set up. It took alot of surfing....but it works now.

[Midzuki]

nTekka wrote:

then why did you say computers were never meant for gaming?!?

Midzuki had written:

desktops are never the appropriate device
to play videogames.

I like to play KOF XI and Tekken 5 DR @ the arcades, and
I'm pretty sure (and glad ) they are not running on top of
any version of MS-Windows or Mac-OS.

And yes, your apparently-intentional "misunderstandings" are already driving me tired.
-.-

===========

[Midzuki]

lordsmurf wrote:

Win2000 was about as far away from NT4 as it can get. Have you ever used any of these? Especially with IIS?

What IIS is good for

++++++

[JohnnyMalaria]

Depends on what your definition of iis is....

Regards,

Bill C.

[Midzuki]

"OverBloated Wannabe Internet Server", mayhaps?

+++++