Thread: Vista experiences anyone?

I've got Vista Ultimate running on my P4 3Ghz desktop. When I installed the OS I was advised that there may be a problem running RR under Vista, but I am pleased to say it is running OK, that said, I do not have a Sat receiver installed.
Now on my carpc (Epia M10K) that's got to be a definite NO NO.

I don't recommend Vista yet. It consumes a lot of resources and everything will go more slowly if several apps. are running in underground (Winamp, phoco, radio, etc. unless a Core Duo or similar processor is used.

Anyway, I have read today, don't remember where, that Microsoft will support XP until 2014, so there is plenty of time.

Got it! Here is the article I found about Vista. The article it self is a good start for a discussion.

The link is: http://www.lockergnome.com/nexus/chr...ory/microsoft/

I’ve come to the conclusion that upgrading to Windows Vista would be a horrible decision; allow me to explain why.

1. Cost: The main reason behind doing or not doing most things with PCs is cost. An upgrade to Windows Vista Ultimate will set you back $200 or more dollars. But that’s just the start! Chances are the hardware that runs at speed or soars with Windows XP will run dreadfully slow with Windows Vista. So not only are you looking at the cost of the operating system but you need cutting edge technology to run that operating system. Why in the world would you want to buy new hardware for your operating system? I could understand an application or series of applications (for video editing as an example) pushing you to buy new hardware but not the operating system. The only reason I see in upgrading now would be to learn the new OS and be on the cutting edge.
2. Too Early: There are already plans for a service pack for Windows Vista. Microsoft has not learned their lesson in regards to beta testing their operating system before its release. Those installing Windows Vista at the moment are the Microsoft beta testers. No thanks I’ll wait.
3. Windows XP: Windows XP is the perfect reason not to upgrade to Windows Vista. There is nothing wrong with tried and true installs of Windows XP. The laptop I’m using to write this article with is a Windows XP Media Center and the default Windows install from the manufacturer is what is running on this laptop right now. Sure, I tweaked settings, improved security, and personalized it but it’s running just fine. When you throw in the fact that Microsoft will support Windows XP until 2014 (probably longer) there is no sense in upgrading to a beta operating system. By 2014 will have purchased a PC with Windows Vista pre-loaded.
4. Mac and Linux: Of course, the competition is a great reason not to upgrade. You can nab OS X from Apple on a Mac and get all that Windows Vista 3D GUI magic pretty cheap. Oh, and OS X has been around for years (not days). However, Linux is starting to look like an even better reason to not upgrade to Windows Vista. Get an Ubuntu install running with Crossover Office and I’d be willing to bet money you’ll never look back.

In a nutshell, it’s not smart to upgrade to Windows Vista, at this time. The day may come when you actually force yourself to upgrade but running out and upgrading to the latest and greatest operating system isn’t going to do anything but give you headaches. Hold off for now folks, your next PC will be running Vista anyways. Besides, hardware needs to catch up with the software.

vista has been beta'd for a good while now, then there were release candidates... the beta testing in vista has been huge & ongoing, this is not a beta release by a longshot....

well there you have it folks, in black and white, we might as well close this thread till 2014.

First ill say this, i dont think this thread was intended to debate the subject of to go to vista or not, but rather those who have and or plan to and what there experiences were, key word experience, meaning you've actually did something rather than just read something some where from some guy.

But ill bite anyway, i love a good argument.

1. Cost. This a relative term. What is expensive to you may not be expensive and actually considered cheap to others. He goes on to say that computers that soar with XP run dreadfully slow in vista. I would like to know what he considers a fast xp machine. My box eats xp for lunch and im sorry to say its not dreadfully slow in vista by any stretch of imagination.

2. Too Early. So because they plan to release a service pack its too early. Its funny to me how many people think the service pack is like a golden ticket to trouble free computing. I cant think of a single application that ever shipped that was 100% bug free and even after several updates can claim that its bug free, esp considering the vast varietly of hardware the os has to run on. The bottom line is, if it works with your hardware who cares (other than MS) what it does on the next persons machine.

3. WinXP, "The laptop I’m using to write this article with is a Windows XP Media Center and the default Windows install from the manufacturer is what is running on this laptop right now"
Now how am i supposed to believe anything this guy says and hes still running a factory install, thats likely bloated with who knows what (and is actually proud of it). The first thing any real geek does when they get a new pc is wipe it and reinstall the OS. And to keep things tidy (cuz everyone knows xp slows down over time) do a reinstall every X months. He just lost me with any credibility right there. Esp since its obvious hes not running vista. So who am i supposed to listen to, the virgin who says sex is overrated or Ron Jeremy?

4. Mac OSX and Linux.
Ok, now mac and linux fans try not to turn the flame throwers up to high i crisp easily. umkay.

Now lets see, since a mac or linux box will not run any of my windows apps, i guess the next thing your gonna say is there are alternative versions of my favorite windows apps, even available for free. Thats fine and dandy if all you do is create spreadsheets and browse the web (not that thats all these 2 OS's can do). So to use myself as an example.
In windows i run on a daily basis.
3dsmax9 - not avaialbe on a mac or linux
photoshop- also available on the mac (linux?)
autodesk combustion - also available on mac
Softimage XSI - windows only
and a hand full of other supporting apps that are only available on windows.
Not to mention games, i wont even begin with the game support for linux and Mac OSX. So now im supposed to give up all my apps i depend on and games i have fun with to switch to linux or OSX. Now if i recall his only justified reason to upgrade your hardware is for your applications, why on earth would i switch OS's and loose these same applications?
OSX would be the closest thing i could switch to if i were forced to, but even there i still dont have any support for 3D authoring unless i want to use Maya (which i dont) and when work is done, ill have to find another way to play my favorite games.

also, RoadRunner dont run on either of those OS's either so needless to say you'll have a pretty limited carputer with either of them too. Oh and OSX has been around for years,... so what did windows just up and sprout out of the ground from nowhere last week? And anyone who thinks MS wrote Vista from scratch is smoking something. Its XP 6.0


these articles allways amuse me. You have to judge for yourself people and not some guy writeing an article with no facts to backup any of his claims.

sounds good to me

Originally Posted by turbocad6

vista has been beta'd for a good while now, then there were release candidates... the beta testing in vista has been huge & ongoing, this is not a beta release by a longshot....

Yes, it has been beta tested for a long time. BUT if that would have caught everything, then they would not be talking about a Service pack already, as they would have done that before release. Obviously stuff has already been found since the public release.

On the other hand, I do not think this is a flaw. Having a few thousand beta testers, then turn into hundreds of thousands of users, sure you are gonna catch stuff that slipped through the cracks.

Bottom Line for me is very simple. Vista is slower, (Proven time and time again), Vista is more hardware intensive (Definitely has been proven). So , if it was 100% perfect, free of bugs ect, I still do not want to use a slower, more resource hungry OS in my car.

if thats right then we might aswell go back to the trully fast and tested windows 95 ...
when i posted this thread i only ment to check whether people have done the inevitable (did i spell that right??) and install vista..

I just installed vista on my desktop in a dual boot with xp until I'm sure that it works well enough for me to use as my main OS, and so I'v ebeen using it for about 5 days now.

So, here's the bottom line. Vista is just an evolutionary windows upgrade. It's not some crazy monster change like 3.1 to 95 and it's also not like going from 2000 to xp, it's somewhere in between.

Alot of functionality has been added and improved upon, and it seems to me
that it's probably a lot easier for a first time computer owner to use vista than any release of windows ever. Like, a lot easier than even xp.

I'm confused by all the people talking about hardware requirements. All the increased hardware requirements are basically for the UI and added functionality of Vista over XP (it's called the future people things advance) . So, just as with many of the unnecessary services in xp (like the useless help and support) these new features which require better hardware (like aero ) can be turned off either through standard dialog boxes or in the services.msc thingamajig . So, that increased hardware argument doesn't really hold water.


The biggest benefits that I can see for in car use are the integrated speech recognition and native tablet support. In the months and years to come, as these features become more and more mature, using the windows desktop in the car (or UMPC) might not be the total pain in the *** it is today, and that's a good evolutionary step.

All this is pointless anyways, because there's not stopping it, it's here. In 6 months or a year we'll all be talking about ________ problem/support/idea in vista instead of xp, and this whole thread will be moot anyways

By the way, anyone who says there's nothing wrong with a tried and true xp install is on some drugs that I'd like to get a hold of.