|
And the spending doesn't stop at just buying the new OS, thats just a drop in the bucket. Many vendors are not providing free updates to their products. If you want to use their product on Vista you need to buy the latest version. ie Acronis True Image, WinRar, VMWare, etc...
|
|
|
|
|
that's what I'd check off.
It's just another OS upgrade. It takes more effort to muster up a good rant on it, than it does to just use it. Color me indifferent!
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire!
Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)!
SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0
0 rows returned
Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
VCF Blog
|
|
|
|
|
Do you?
regards,
Paul Watson
Ireland & South Africa
Andy Brummer wrote: Watson's law:
As an online discussion of cars grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving the Bugatti Veyron approaches one.
|
|
|
|
|
StijnDP - no offense to you, as you seem more rationale and level-headed about it than most I've seen. Your post just happened to trigger something that has been in my head for some time.
The "Vista 64-bit" complainers out there really started bothering me a while back. Mainly because you can find them all over the web.
What these people have to realize is that it isn't a VISTA problem they are running into, but rather a 32bit vs. 64bit problem. Though I can't even really call it a problem, because it's behaving as designed - that is designed for a 32bit operating system.
The real problem is people thinking they can use the latest and greatest operating system without consequences. I pretty sure the MAC people know what I'm talking about. I've read about it quite enough to know it happens with just about every new release MAC has done. Software stops working, and a new version must be obtained to work on the new OS. There is a benefit to this though. It means no trying to support old outdated methods anymore, and a concentration on moving ahead with new ideas - it's up to the software developers to keep up.
While it's nice Microsoft puts so much effort to allow us to run programs that really should never be run again, I think it's time we start moving forward - dropping support for old programs. If this paradigm were followed, I think we might see a faster move to 64bit computing - not to mention a little less painful of a switch too.
64 Bit is great, but the move is going to be really slow (if not non-existent) until someone steps up and releases THE killer application/operating system that will run ONLY on 64 Bit. Until then we will continue to see this "problem."
*** OK - rant over (feels so good to get it out of my system) ***
That said, I do like the new Vista operating system. I myself have Vista Ultimate 32 bit installed at home (never had a problem running old software - except for stuff meant for DOS coming on a 5 1/4 diskettes - which I don't think would even run on XP), mainly so I wouldn't have problems running any games (which so far all run fine for me). Though I also like Linux - I seem to favor Fedora Core for the UI, yet I usually SSH into the machine to do anything. Hmmm... I must just be weird or something.
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, it is a VISTA problem. I have been running Window XP 64 for around a year now. All my hardware works fine on XP 64 and anymore I have not had much trouble finding XP 64 drivers. Install Vista 64 and good luck MS requres all 64 bit drivers be signed. MS has allowed use of unsigned drivers on Vista 32 but refused to allow them in Vista 64. This means drivers that would otherwise be useable do not work in Vista.
I am a big fan of VMWare Server and put 4GB memory in my host box to support my virtual machines. Vista was nearly unusable in a virtual machine so I thought what the heck lets try running vista directly on the hardware and run vmware on vista.. bad idea. After installed Vista 64 I couldn't install VMWare because the drivers weren't signed. Why VMWare wont release signed 64 drivers is beyond me. Vista 32 only supports about 3GB of memory (and probably uses it all) forcing me to cut back on virtual machines, so think I'll stick with XP for now. I liked Vista about as much as that stupid ribbon bar in office 2007 anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Ok - PART of it is part of the os. It doesn't mean however, that it is a flaw in the OS (I do know there are flaws - and I am NOT an MS fanboy) - it is working as intended, just some poor decision making as to how 64bit unsigned drivers will work (though I can understand their want for better security).
Most complaints about it I've heard/read though are all about the software side of 64bit, and don't mention the above hardware issue.
|
|
|
|
|
Kurt Harriger wrote: MS has allowed use of unsigned drivers on Vista 32 but refused to allow them in Vista 64. This means drivers that would otherwise be useable do not work in Vista.
Kurt Harriger wrote: After installed Vista 64 I couldn't install VMWare because the drivers weren't signed.
That's complete BS. Just the other day I installed VMWare on my Vista Ultimate x64 machine. The drivers were not signed, and Vista asked me what I want to do, cancel installation or permit VMWare to install drivers. And all is fine.
The point is, you just might be doing something incorrectly.
|
|
|
|
|
VMWare workstation supports vista but not the free vmware server. It has been several months since I last attempted. But I'm not the only one that's had this problem.
http://communities.vmware.com/thread/104125[^]
- Kurt
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, sorry about that. Missed the "server" part.
|
|
|
|
|
Codeproject has clearly voted no and that's strong considering we're a MS oriented site. So, MS are going to redraw the product and go back to the drawing board, right?
They can hardly ignore the power of a internet based survey.
|
|
|
|
|
Why should they start listening to people now?
djj
|
|
|
|
|
They ought to. They are expected to listen to the grievances of millions of users and they are obliged to provide a best user experience. Vista claims to provide a superior user experience but there seemed to be so much of hiccups that cloud it like anything. It would be great if Vista Team could address these to provide a more better and robust product.
|
|
|
|
|
You're nuts. MS doesn't listen to its developers. We're relegated to the trash heap. MS only listens to the myopic ideas of large corporations.
MS Word is DONE. Nothing new is needed for 99% of its users, but it changes the file format anyway, and then puts in some bobble for high end corporation users.
Borland listened to its developers and exploded past MS early on. Then they lost their way.
MS for a few years, listened to us. But now, we are nothing to them. There is no support nor respect for people in the trenches doing the work that supports the OS.
REVOLT! I CALL. Let us RIDE through the streets calling all programmers to arms. Mwhahahaaa
Seriously, MS has to figure out where the money comes from. The largest profit are the corporate installs of thousands of computers. MS gets 100% profit from those companies, but we only buy a couple of copies of their products for our development. Who would you listen to.
|
|
|
|
|
I like vista a lot actually for all the small things they added/changed. But I had to say no because a lot of games run like *** on vista64. Too bad ms can't even do a thing about that problem.
|
|
|
|
|
StijnDP wrote: But I had to say no because a lot of games run like *** on vista64
Interesting the ones I've tried (although it hasn't been exhaustive) run flawlessly on Vista x64 Ultimate. The only one I had trouble with was SA-MP (San Andreas Multiplayer), running the server, but solved that by running it as an administrator (obvious really since it had to launch other programs / connections).
|
|
|
|
|
Half-life 2, Portal, Team fortress 2, episode one, ...
Crysis demo is also very bad. I have to run settings on high and no AA @ 1920x1200 while I know I have a lot more power in my machine.
Shutting down Aero everytime I want to play helps a magnificent amount.
|
|
|
|
|
StijnDP wrote: Shutting down Aero everytime I want to play helps a magnificent amount.
You _do_ realize aero turns itself of when you start a fullscreen directx application, right?
|
|
|
|
|
In most games yes but I can't help it if some are bugged, _right_?
|
|
|
|
|
I have to say, after using Vista at work for a few weeks now, I appreciate the difference and clarity in text rendering across all applications. There's a noticeable difference between Vista and XP on that front... if you're using IE 7 on XP and like the clarity of text, imagine that for all your apps and you've got Vista.
Again - only comparing Vista to XP here.
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Ellison wrote: I have to say, after using Vista at work for a few weeks now, I appreciate the difference and clarity in text rendering across all applications.
Then you should've switched to Macs years ago. And they still do it better btw.
|
|
|
|
|
Yup! I knew I'd get this response - that's why I made a point to state my comparison was just with XP.
I cut my Pascal/C/C++ programming chops on macs back in the 80's. I'll always have a soft spot for them. But as long as my bread & butter requires PC's, I'm there to stay.
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Ellison wrote: Yup! I knew I'd get this response - that's why I made a point to state my comparison was just with XP.
Well, at least I didn't let you down.
|
|
|
|
|
Vista, in my humble opinion is not as good as XP from a GUI perspective for one major reason.......I WANT MY OLD WINDOWS EXPLORER BACK....(OK rant over)
|
|
|
|
|
Doesn't the task bar properties allow you toggle to the default start menu?
|
|
|
|
|
When you can do a standard install of Vista 64 bit without pulling DIMM's from your machine and get drivers for common things like printers, scanners, microphones, etc ... then maybe I'll like it. With all the spiffy virtualization stuff going on, I'll never understand why MS didn't just create a little virtual XP box to run old drivers (printer and the like, not video) in ... perhaps in SP8
|
|
|
|