Vista...Nightmare..!!

[De_Bunk]

3/4 of my software don't work anymore...

:covereyes

Oh well...

DB

[Oliver]

3/4 of my software don't work anymore...

:covereyes

Oh well...

DB


Why did you "change a winning team" in the first place? (considering that you used XP)

[Ian Osborne]

Can't you downgrade back to XP and wait for Vista SP1? By then, most of the software will have patches too.

[Wolfman]

I went the route of buying a new computer that has both XP and Vista. When Vista works, it is great, and I definitely prefer it over XP; but there are a number of key incompatibility issues both with some of my software, and with some of my hardware (printer, scanner, etc.).

Both my printer and scanner are old enough that it is pretty much certain there is never going to be any upgraded software to make them compatible with Vista. Basically, if any particular hardware is no longer being sold, then there is not going to be any software update. Having XP on my computer ensures that I can still use these when I need to.

However, fact is, I'll be buying a new printer soon; and need to replace my scanner anyway. The new hardware I buy will be Vista compatible; as will any new software I buy. So, as a part of the natural process of things, my Vista will become more and more useful, and my XP will become more and more obsolete.

[Normal Dude]

I returned my vista computer after three days and re-married XP.

[De_Bunk]

I am seriously thinking about divorcing Vista as well...Too many boxes and asking permission for practically every button press...

Its a shame 'cos its fairly nice to look at...I'll give it a while, see how it goes...We gotta leave WinXp's apron strings sometime...

:)

DB

[Wolfman]

Curiously enough, I've had relatively few problems with Vista (certainly fewer than I had when I first bought XP). Most of my software is now Vista-compatible, and am planning to replace my hardware with Vista-compatible stuff soon, as well.

The learning curve was a little steep at first, as they made significant changes to how things work in Vista, so it took time to figure out how to get even relatively simple tasks done (but I had exactly the same problem when I first switched to XP). But once I've figured it out, it functions more smoothly and efficiently than XP, with a number of features that make it both more attractive and more convenient.

Having XP there as a back-up is an absolute necessity, for those times when I have software or hardware that absolutely won't work on Vista; but even having both systems available to me, I now spend over 80% of my time on Vista, only using the XP when I absolutely need to.

[a_unique_person]

I am seriously thinking about divorcing Vista as well...Too many boxes and asking permission for practically every button press...

Its a shame 'cos its fairly nice to look at...I'll give it a while, see how it goes...We gotta leave WinXp's apron strings sometime...

:)

DB

The boxes and questions for permission are it's enhanced security. You can turn that off. Unfortunately, you can't turn on a switch to let the old hardware drivers work. WTF Microsoft thought it was doing when it went to a whole new driver model I'll never know. You would have thought they would have at least had a compatibility mode for the old drivers.

Apart from that, Vista doesn't really offer anything over XP. Windows is just an OS, it's the applications and peripherals that matter.

[De_Bunk]

It is very pretty to look at tho'...

But you gotta have at least 2Gb of RAM...

Nice features...Some nice extras...But...i'm now stuck with it...

I'm running dual core and 4Gb RAM and i am continuosly using over 30% of the RAM...

I absolutely dunno what for...

Never mind...I might give a blow-by-blow account of living with Vista...

I already know it don't like ZoneAlarm...Not one bit...Not at all...Something is very wrong there...

AVG AV works with Vista...I had to dump my 2005/6 Norton AV...

Some of the old software ( when i loaded it ) claimed that i needed 'Administrator' rights, before i could continue...no matter what i done..or where i found the .exe file...

BUT...some of the ol' stuff worked perfect...software that was deemed old for WinME...

Go figga...

Be careful tho'...BSD happens a lot when running the old .exe's of your favorite programs...Make a restore point...

I'm off now to explore what other things Vista can and can't do...

:hit:

DB

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Two words: OS X

[Moochie]

One word: Linux :D

Actually, I'm staying with XP -- my set-up works wonderfully well, and I see no reason to change it.

When I get around to buying a new machine, which is some years down the track, I will try to have the store set it up to dual-boot Linux and Vista. I aim to use Vista only for absolutely necessary functions -- games -- and Linux for everything else.

M.

[Corsair 115]

I'm still running Windows 2000 and won't be giving it up unless absolutely forced to (and maybe not even then).

[Soapy Sam]

DB, shut down Aero and revert to Classic Windows look.
Then compare Task Manager and see how much memory it frees up.

Sounds like you upgraded an existing machine. I bought a machine with Vista preloaded and found dual booting XP can be difficult- got a floppy drive? You'll probably need it to install XP on your new SATA drive. If you get it running, it probably won't support your new hardware. Pain in the neck.


I recall finding XP an improvement over 98SE in several ways, notably in handling digital photos. Having had Vista now for a couple of months, I have yet to see a single advantage over XP.

[tkingdoll]

I bought a PC for my office with Vista on it, and hated it until Scotth showed me how to turn off the stupid security prompt, and a few other tips.

Now I find it pretty good, it works with all the software I've installed (Office, of course, Macromedia Suite, PhotoShop) and is fine with Avira Antivirus and Spybot S&D. I don't really need it for anything else. I do have some problems getting my XP laptop to talk to it via the wireless, but that's a router problem not a Vista problem.

Having said all that, it isn't doing anything for me that XP doesn't also do. If it wasn't free with the machine, I wouldn't have paid for an upgrade. I certainly haven't for my laptop.

[cyborg]

What makes you think it was free with the machine just because it was pre-installed?

[tkingdoll]

What makes you think it was free with the machine just because it was pre-installed?

It's not, it's built into the price. But you can't buy a machine without a pre-installed OP for the same price in the same store, so what's the difference? Other than semantics, of course. :rolleyes:

[Ian Osborne]

Can't you demand your money back for the OS if you don't plan to use it? I seem to remember a Linux fetishist making headlines for doing just that.

[gnome]

WTF Microsoft thought it was doing when it went to a whole new driver model I'll never know. You would have thought they would have at least had a compatibility mode for the old drivers.

Could Microsoft have some kind of deal with hardware manufacturers that would love to have their customers forced to upgrade?

[tkingdoll]

Can't you demand your money back for the OS if you don't plan to use it? I seem to remember a Linux fetishist making headlines for doing just that.

Hrm, interesting question. I doubt it in most stores (I bought my PC in Comet) as they have pretty watertight T&Cs when you buy.

I guess you could ask for the same machine without any pre-installed software but I bet they'd charge more rather than less (cause they'd have to uninstall it).

I'd say if you're not a mainstream OP user, you are better off either building your own box or at least not shopping on the high street. The big computer retailers aren't set up to cater to niche users and they're not economically attractive anyway. Customisation isn't important to Keith McTwoKids or Ms McCheapestOfficePCPlease (me), and that's most consumers.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

One word: Linux :D


Many words: OS X is built on top of UNIX. :D

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Can't you demand your money back for the OS if you don't plan to use it? I seem to remember a Linux fetishist making headlines for doing just that.

I suspect headlines was about all he gained from the experience.

[Ian Osborne]

Hrm, interesting question. I doubt it in most stores (I bought my PC in Comet) as they have pretty watertight T&Cs when you buy.

I guess you could ask for the same machine without any pre-installed software but I bet they'd charge more rather than less (cause they'd have to uninstall it).

I'd say if you're not a mainstream OP user, you are better off either building your own box or at least not shopping on the high street. The big computer retailers aren't set up to cater to niche users and they're not economically attractive anyway. Customisation isn't important to Keith McTwoKids or Ms McCheapestOfficePCPlease (me), and that's most consumers.

I think he got it back from Microsoft rather than the retailer, probably under an antitrust agreement. You're right about customisation not being the realm of the mass-market retailer, though. The profit margins won't allow for pre-sales service beyond putting it in a bag.

[Ian Osborne]

I suspect headlines was about all he gained from the experience.

Very true, but it's probably exactly what he was after too! :D

[a_unique_person]

It is very pretty to look at tho'...

But you gotta have at least 2Gb of RAM...

Nice features...Some nice extras...But...i'm now stuck with it...

I'm running dual core and 4Gb RAM and i am continuosly using over 30% of the RAM...

I absolutely dunno what for...

Never mind...I might give a blow-by-blow account of living with Vista...

I already know it don't like ZoneAlarm...Not one bit...Not at all...Something is very wrong there...

AVG AV works with Vista...I had to dump my 2005/6 Norton AV...

Some of the old software ( when i loaded it ) claimed that i needed 'Administrator' rights, before i could continue...no matter what i done..or where i found the .exe file...

BUT...some of the ol' stuff worked perfect...software that was deemed old for WinME...

Go figga...

Be careful tho'...BSD happens a lot when running the old .exe's of your favorite programs...Make a restore point...

I'm off now to explore what other things Vista can and can't do...

:hit:

DB

Make yourself an administrator. You can also fiddle with compatibilty rights and other things if you set the properties for an exe directly.

Using 30% RAM is no problem. If you never use more than 30% of RAM, you have wasted your money buying too much.

[Ian Osborne]

I've found a link about the guy who got his money back for an unused copy of Windows, and here it is (http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35610). He got the refund from Dell, who preinstalled the OS, but it doesn't say whether he got his machine from a retailer.

I believe it's part of the End User Agreement that if you do not accept the terms, you can return the software for a full refund. If so, this should be binding on OEM copies too.

[De_Bunk]

I have my PC's made to my spec...

And i asked for Vista...Just to see what it was like...

Like i posted before...I'm now stuck with it...

I've already worked out the 'Administrator Rights' problem...

But...it dont seem to work on stuff like PcPitstop...even tho' they claim they are 'Vista ready'...

But...things are looking up...I'm gradually getting used to it...but i still got a lot to discover about certain features...

Down at the PC shop...all the display PC's were showing that they were running between 37 / 45% RAM usage with Vista...( and thats with nothing going on ) and the processor running at 1%...

I'm on it...checking everything out...seeing how it works in laymans terms...

If i find anything i can't work out...I'll post it here..

Thanks guys...Your help is appreciated...

:)

DB

[Wudang]

http://www.wincustomize.com/articles.aspx?aid=160358&mid=93

5 mistake MS made with vista. The author frogboy is Brad Wardell of Stardock systems.

[De_Bunk]

One really annoying thing is that Vista doesnt have thumbnail view for images and vids...

[Morrigan]

I'm still running Windows 2000 and won't be giving it up unless absolutely forced to (and maybe not even then).
Damn straight. :)

[De_Bunk]

Ok...sorted the thumbnail issue..Its to do with what 'performance' level you run at.

[MortFurd]

What do you folks do that you need admin rights all the time?

Turning off the security confirmation is just about the worst thing you could do. That leaves you wide open for the viruses and crap that make life even more difficult.

Think about it. What's worse: Typing a password and clicking OK a few times, or having a PC that gets hosed and won't run right and you can't fix it?

[HarryKeogh]

Think about it. What's worse: Typing a password and clicking OK a few times, or having a PC that gets hosed and won't run right and you can't fix it?

Having your girlfriend click on the history button and see what you were really looking at on your computer.

[Deus Ex Machina]

Vista is alright.I won't say I was wowed out about it but there are several pretty cool things - the restore points, volume shadow copy service, policies etc are a marked improvement over anything MS has produced in theOS world. Bitlocker is very cool too.

If you don't have the RAM then turn off aero which, while cute, really isn't doing anything special.

I prefer my Mac for any real work but if I am going to use a windows environment then Vista is prety good.

[opqdan]

What do you folks do that you need admin rights all the time?

Turning off the security confirmation is just about the worst thing you could do. That leaves you wide open for the viruses and crap that make life even more difficult.

Think about it. What's worse: Typing a password and clicking OK a few times, or having a PC that gets hosed and won't run right and you can't fix it?It's weird, I always hear everybody complaining about this aspect of the OS (though everybody used to complain that this DIDN'T exist, go figure) but nobody has been able to tell me why they get it all of the time. I use Vista at home and work (Ultimate in both places). And the only time I ever get the UAC confirmation dialogs is when I am installing software. My favorite part is the people who complain about the dialog, but have no problem opening up a terminal and using "su" when in Linux. :) It's a double edged sword, do you allow the user to do absolutley anything without confirmation or do you request authorization for every move. Maybe there is some sort of middle ground, but I would rather the 2nd over the first.

Personally I am a fan of Vista though I see zero reason to bother with an upgrade from XP, which is a lot coming from somebody who, up until December was a Linux user. The only reason my home desktop is running Vista is that I ran Linux for years and lost my WinXP disk.

The "5 Mistakes..." link above is interesting and I agree that an "Always allow this action in the future" checkbox will go a long way towards making things simpler, but I think his example is rather trivial. How often does a person really change their IP address that the extra 4 clicks makes that big of a difference? Heck, how much of the market actually uses static IPs anyways that this would be important to?

Everything else I agree with.

[Ian Osborne]

Vista's security lampooned (http://movies.apple.com/movies/us/apple/getamac/apple-getamac-security_480x376.mov)

[RayG]

I suspect headlines was about all he gained from the experience.

Apparently the guy in this link (http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7040) got $199 back.

That's certainly better than a kick in the pants.

RayG

[Ian Osborne]

Apparently the guy in this link (http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7040) got $199 back.

Only because it wasn't defended. It's madness to expect to get the retail price of the software back, and not what the OEM paid to Microsoft for it. By that logic, you could buy a cheap, second-hand desktop with Windows pre-installed, demand your money back for Windows, throw the PC away and make a profit.

[Wowbagger]

So far, the new OS has not given me any significant, lasting problems. A few of my old games cough up BSODs, but it is possible that this is a graphics driver issue, not strictly an OS issue.
Virtually all the apps. I want to run on it seem to run well. Then again, most of my apps are newer versions than what others might be running.

And, I did have a brief diver-related nightmare on my new Tablet PC, after upgrading Vista Business (which came with it) to Vista Ultimate (which I purchased, because I went temporarily insane). This was an upgrade from one Vista edition to another - you wouldn't expect hardware driver issues to crop up, but they did! Fortunately, after a few hours with tech-support, they were resolved.

Overall, I am impressed with the OS, and have gotten used to its simplified interface. Although there is a small number of things I would change. Most of them are minor points, such as placing "Invert Selection" in the Organize menu. Not everyone will know to look for it in the classic Edit menu.

To make up for that, there are a bunch of small things I do like, very much:
* When renaming files, the extension is NOT automatically selected. So, you can rename 'em faster, without worrying about removing the extension.
* New options when you are warned of a file overwrite: You can either replace it, cancel the move or copy, or keep both in the folder with one of them automatically renamed.
* etc.

There are big things I like about it, too. But, most of them are not a big deal, really.

[voidx]

Kudos to DB for actually making an attempt to familiarize himself with Vista before going totally half-cocked that its junk or a piece of crap.

As mentioned, turning off the UAC is not a good idea. UAC actually virtualizes the registry and user profile settings. When you install an app with UAC and don't have full admin rights, it makes the registry changes and system file changes on virtualized copies of the files and the registry. That way, a standard user can only screw up their own profile, not the entire install of Windows.

UAC is exactly like using SU in unix/Linux, or like being prompted for the root account and password in say Redhat Workstation. Administrator users in Vista only have to click Continue. I really fail to see what's so time consuming about this, as it only comes up when making changes to the system configuration or registry. You can also change these settings in the security policy settings so that for Admin users, you can simply get rid of the prompt, while it still appears for standard users.

This means that UAC is still active and still working, but for Admin users the prompts are auto-answered so to speak. I'd argue there's no point to doing this either. Admins should just click continue and be done with it. Its not that big a deal in my opinion.

You can also attempt to run applications in compatibility mode as well. Its an option in the context menu if you find the .exe file. It may or may not work, but the option is there to try.

Is XP still a good OS. Certainly, and it has a good few years of lifecycle support from MS as well, so for home users especially there may not be any strong killer reason to change. Aside from the fact taht OEM distribution will make XP unavailable very shortly, and so you'll have no choice but to purchase Vista. However, I don't see that as a negative by any means. There's no benefit to staying on XP or 2k, aside from perhaps compatibility with old legacy hardware and apps that won't work in compatibility mode.

[gnome]

Well, there is also performance issues... doesn't XP perform better on machines that aren't heavily loaded with RAM?

Also, does the UAC perform the protective tasks better than the free and unintrusive software available for free for XP?

[Wowbagger]

Well, there is also performance issues... doesn't XP perform better on machines that aren't heavily loaded with RAM? This is what I've also heard. That is why I only really recommend it on new machines, with lots of RAM.

Upgrading from XP is not very compelling, for most people.

Also, does the UAC perform the protective tasks better than the free and unintrusive software available for free for XP? Better, I am unsure about. The UAC* system is quite comprehensive. Other solutions might be less obtrusive, but they might also leave holes open, for the sake of convenience.

(*I am, of course, referring to the User Account Control in Windows Vista. Not the Union Aerospace Corporation, which I am told, has had massive security holes.)

[richardm]

Re: the 30-40% of ram being used while Vista is just sitting there...

A lot of people have complained about vista being a memory hog, but actually at least part of this usage is down to its very aggressive precaching, where it preloads the applications that you tend to use the most so that when you start them up they can start more quickly. Obviously it can drop that precached stuff if it needs the memory for something else.

I've been using Vista for a while on one of my PCs, and I must admit I really like it. There were some issues with drivers initially (I was an early adopter!) but now I only have one device - a digital camera - that is unsupported and I can work around that easily enough.

[aries]

You do know that you can off UAC (useraccesscontrol) in Vista - completely?

If you have multiple users on the same machine, however, I wouldn't advice to do so. But, if you're the only user (as I am) turning off UAC would be the best thing to do, I think...

I can also see UAC as being a good thing, when installing VISTA in big office or in schools, preventing people from downloading and installing programs that are perhaps infected with viruses. For normal people, like me, who just want to play games etc. and use the computer in a normal way, UAC doesn't seem so smart. Especially since everytime you run a program like winzip or a game demo or a a game etc. you will need to click through the UAC prompt.

[voidx]

Well, there is also performance issues... doesn't XP perform better on machines that aren't heavily loaded with RAM?

Also, does the UAC perform the protective tasks better than the free and unintrusive software available for free for XP?
Point taken on performance. You do need good hardware to run Vista, mainly due to the Aero interface. Still, to be honest though I find XP works much better on 1GB of RAM than on say 512MB. RAM is also pretty inexpensive these days, so 2GB optimal for Vista isn't such a big deal in my opinion.

As for the UAC. What free programs are available for XP that virtualize the registry and system files and integrate very tightly into protecting the kernel? I'd be curious to know what they are. I'd have to say that yes, the UAC likely does perform these tasks better, because of its integration with the Windows kernel.

[voidx]

But, if you're the only user (as I am) turning off UAC would be the best thing to do, I think...

I disagree. The only benefit to turning off the UAC is getting rid of the prompts. You effectively turn off a very key part of the new security features in Vista. There is no performance increase to be had from turning off UAC, and you only leave yourself more open to corrupting system files and the like. If that means I have to click continue now and then, that's a very small price to pay.


I can also see UAC as being a good thing, when installing VISTA in big office or in schools, preventing people from downloading and installing programs that are perhaps infected with viruses.

I agree, and this is where UAC really shows its strength. Admins have been struggling with local admin rights for years in 2k and XP. Give users local admin and they have the access to inadvertently corrupt the OS. However, setting them as standard or Power users so crippled their ability to do anything, even say installing print drivers, that it made no feasible sense to do. As a result most companies and simply conceded to giving users local admin rights and adopted a policy of imaging PC's and just wholesale wiping them as a means of fixing issues.

UAC finally gives us a way to give users access to install what they need, but to protect the root system files and registry in the process. Hence where the virtualization comes into play. You can pooch your own profile, but it shouldn't have any affect on the OS, or on other users.


For normal people, like me, who just want to play games etc. and use the computer in a normal way, UAC doesn't seem so smart. Especially since everytime you run a program like winzip or a game demo or a a game etc. you will need to click through the UAC prompt.
Again I'm not sure precisely what your doing to get prompted by UAC as you mention. I don't get prompted every time I start a game. Only when I install it, or install an update of patch for it. Which literally adds a single click to the process. Wholly insignificant in my opinion.

[De_Bunk]

I'm running dual core and 2GB RAM...

I've yet to see the processor go above 60% and the RAM above 50%

So it ain't that bad on usage...

One thing tho' i've realised...It seems to forget certain settings...The 'sidebar' (which is a good, useful idea ) is one of them.

But it is definitely getting easier to use and faster as i realise what to do to make it quicker and more efficient...

So all in all...I'm quite happy with it. No real issues, just a few more button clicks to get used to, so far.

DB

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

WTF Microsoft thought it was doing when it went to a whole new driver model I'll never know.
They like to do that every couple of OSes or so.

~~ Paul

[gnome]

Actually I WOULD make the switch if they finally discovered how to make the drivers read-only so that they wouldn't corrupt themselves every other week.

[Seventhsally]

Going back to the original post- 3/4 of my software *never* worked.. :-)