Vista Sucks!

**napho** · April 4th, 2008, 10:19 AM

A new OS from Windows gets a bad rap. 10 years ago a $600 computer had 64MB of 133Mhtz RAM. Today a $600 computer comes with 2GB of 800Mhz RAM. Vista doesn't use anywhere near as much memory or processor as Windows 98 did relatively speaking. My processors have 20x the power my 1999 computer did, and it cost 1/2 as much in real dollars.

**wapazoid** · April 4th, 2008, 07:18 PM

I'm using the 64-bit version on my quad core rig. Besides a few compatibility problems with a couple of older games and needing to upgrade my copy of After Effects 6.5, I don't have many complaints. The new UI features may be annoying to some, but that can be remedied.

**jospams** · April 4th, 2008, 08:37 PM

edit

.......................

**Jared Moya** · April 5th, 2008, 08:51 PM

I've already removed this vaporware from like 6 of my friends laptops already...1Gb of RAM necessary to just run the OS itself is ridiculous if not downright criminal....

**Feather** · April 6th, 2008, 06:59 AM

I will never downgrade to this OS. When XP is no longer supported. I will be running Ubuntu or PCLinuxOS exclusively.

**Carbinedevil** · April 6th, 2008, 08:07 AM

My new Lenovo laptop with 1GB RAM just runs like a turtle with Vista.

After looking at the comments, it is probably caused by Vista. Or is it hardware problem?

On the other hand, I don't really like the interface of Vista. Maybe most of the people like the look, but I find it fat. I prefer the Windows Classic look anyhow; don't call me weird.

One thing I like, and maybe the only thing I like about Vista is its Task Manager as compared to Xp's - I find that I can shut down anything in Vista, unlike in XP, where even after pressing End Process several million times the program is still hanging there, unwilling to disappear. :icon_comp

**ratcat** · April 6th, 2008, 08:26 AM

Originally Posted by Carbinedevil

My new Lenovo laptop with 1GB RAM just runs like a turtle with Vista.
After looking at the comments, it is probably caused by Vista. Or is it hardware problem?

Know the feeling. It weird that somedays it great and other is shithouse, but I've get more shithouse than good. My RAM is small than that.

It depends on the combo, what's running in the background and what your trying to acheive on the frontend at the sometime.

Originally Posted by Carbinedevil

On the other hand, I don't really like the interface of Vista. Maybe most of the people like the look, but I find it fat. I prefer the Windows Classic look anyhow; don't call me weird.

One thing I like, and maybe the only thing I like about Vista is its Task Manager as compared to Xp's - I find that I can shut down anything in Vista, unlike in XP, where even after pressing End Process several million times the program is still hanging there, unwilling to disappear. :icon_comp

I'm quite happy with its skin

bump

**flyingmunky25** · April 6th, 2008, 10:20 AM

sadly the first time ever running vista was beta 2...on a computer with only 512 ram, talk about a big mistake...

**tokoloshe** · April 6th, 2008, 10:41 PM

I don't see how the task manager can be the only redeeming feature of Vista... Ok so "end program" doesn't work most of the time, but changing the tab, and killing the process directly is instant.... or just use processxp to replace the task manager completely...

**Carbinedevil** · April 7th, 2008, 05:03 AM

Originally Posted by tokoloshe

I don't see how the task manager can be the only redeeming feature of Vista... Ok so "end program" doesn't work most of the time, but changing the tab, and killing the process directly is instant.... or just use processxp to replace the task manager completely...

No, what I meant was that even after switching the tabs and using "killing the program" directly, it still doesn't work in XP.

Well of course, thanks for the processxp thing. I'll try it on my other computer that's using XP.

**ROMANTICGUY50** · April 7th, 2008, 07:43 AM

Yeah I tried it Sorry Microsoft, XP is must better... I will be staying with it.

**Christoph** · April 7th, 2008, 01:24 PM

Hey, I just got a new FujitsuSiemens 3 gigs RAM Intel QuadCore (2,4) 500 gig HD etc.

Windows Vista!???

YES!! Its great!

**tokoloshe** · April 7th, 2008, 02:38 PM

Originally Posted by Christoph

Hey, I just got a new FujitsuSiemens 3 gigs RAM Intel QuadCore (2,4) 500 gig HD etc.

Windows Vista!???

YES!! Its great!

Notice how with new pc's 3 gb ram is standard? That's because you need 1 gb to run the OS... So basically you are getting a new pc with 2 gigs of RAM.

They should just figure a way to dedicate certain hardware components to the OS, so that the system specs you choose to buy the pc are actually the system specs you get... Its like when you by a PC wiht a 500 gig HD and then you only can use 450, because of the OS, its recovery crap, and all the ohter vendor shit that is on there. If they advertise a 500 gig HD then that is exactly the amount of space you should get...

Same with RAM. I am getting a new HP desktop today with 3 gigs of RAM, and I am going to have to format it and install tinyXP in order to actually have the 3gb ram and 740 gb HD that I paid for...

OUTRAGEOUS!!!!

**drtoker** · April 7th, 2008, 02:57 PM

Originally Posted by tokoloshe

Notice how with new pc's 3 gb ram is standard? That's because you need 1 gb to run the OS... So basically you are getting a new pc with 2 gigs of RAM.

They should just figure a way to dedicate certain hardware components to the OS, so that the system specs you choose to buy the pc are actually the system specs you get... Its like when you by a PC wiht a 500 gig HD and then you only can use 450, because of the OS, its recovery crap, and all the ohter vendor shit that is on there. If they advertise a 500 gig HD then that is exactly the amount of space you should get...

Same with RAM. I am getting a new HP desktop today with 3 gigs of RAM, and I am going to have to format it and install tinyXP in order to actually have the 3gb ram and 740 gb HD that I paid for...

OUTRAGEOUS!!!!

Um, do you even know what your talking about?
I have a mid-range system, single core 2.4ghz p4, with only 1GB ram.
My system uses LESS then half my ram for the system, and thats fully up and running with uTorrent open and seeding >50GB of files.
I use aero and have not tweaked vista or stop'd any default services.

I have 0 issues running vista with this setup, and have had 0 ram issues since sp1. Although I must admit, ram was more of an issue for me pre-sp1, not sure why...

As for your hard drive comparason, thats a problem with how the manufactures define a byte vs how the OS reads a byte. My new 500GB hard drive reads as a 460GB within windows, without any OS or software on it.