Windows Vista

[DNA]

I was just looking to see how many people where runing Vista and what they thought? I am runing it and have found very few issues as of yet, NOT like Windows 64.... A few drivers not out there yet, but even then ones Microsoft said I would have issues with I am not at this time.

 

Well tell me what you all think?

[shadow]

Well we will have to see if Windows Vista ends up like UT2k7 and is delayed until next year.

I read it's suppose to be out by Christmas, but you never know.

[Foo]

Windows Vista... I promise I'll never touch it, blu-ray, hd-dvd, and HDCP products, or anything else TCPA related after I'm done with CS:S etc.

[stutters]

now that my floor is covered in spare parts, i'd like to put together a test machine for this. the screens look, how do you say, mac osx/kde-ish.

[FroBoZZ]

my friend is running vistas/osx. he says vistas is not much better than xp performance wise but has upgraded the looks a little so its at least reasonably better.

[random_n00b]

For me personally, I don't see any benefit to using it just yet.

 

The user account protection is certainly on the right path, but it's presently too annoying to use (they are working on it though). I currently still prefer taking a standard NT5.x limited user, granting write access to Program Files, HKLM\Software (except HKLM\Software\Microsoft), and delete access to the All Users\Start Menu areas. Pretty much everything works properly, it takes surprisingly little time to set up, and you still get most of the limited user security benefit (ie; no system drivers can butt themseleves in). I suspect that a lot of what UAC provides will be incentive to software developers to make things work properly in limited user mode, which will be retroactively beneficial to NT5.

 

The visuals are nice, but I'm more of a Windows Classic fellow. Pretty much the only style I've used for a long amount of time is Wurp, with the dark style. The glass in Vista is okay for the window borders, but I think that it looks pretty bad in the picture viewer and in Windows Media Player where there are interface elements on top of the glass.

 

The performance sucks, but being a beta, is easily forgivable. It gets better after a little while though (I'd suppose after the indexing service finishes doing what it does), and it's certainly not unusable slow. I suppose it's not much worse than an out-of-the-box XP install, but I'm picky, and I'll start ripping things out over the next few days to see how quick it can really go.

 

IE 7 is good, and certainly looks better than IE 7 on Windows XP. Having it run in a minimum privilege account is undoubtedly the best idea Microsoft has had for securing that thing in a long while, and they've done a really good job of making it transparent to the user.

 

The games manager is promising, and while I haven't had much chance yet to test it out, it did automatically added Quake III in for me after I ran an already-installed copy on another partition (must've grabbed the cover art and rating info off of the Internet). Pretty slick.

 

Last, the one thing I really miss here is an option for a greyscale-based ClearType. The subpixel antialiasing on all the text looks bad with a CRT, and the whole thing looks terrible with no text antialiasing (the default system font, Segoe UI, is heavily geared toward being rendered with ClearType on). Linux's FreeType system has a great level of customizability, and Microsoft really needs to meet their competitors here.

 

Overall, I really don't find it so much better than the current Windows and Linux offerings, and it certainly doesn't impress me like Apple's OS. I figure that with the added security and protections, it won't fall apart so easily under the management of uncaring users, but as a computer geek, I don't yet feel the need for Windows Vista.

[Cujo]

installed it on my laptop. so far it's awesome what they've come up with for mobile platforms. so much tweaking of power consumption. my battery life has definately increased despite running aeroglass. driver support is still on it's way and a couple older games don't work properly. overall though i'm quite enjoying it.

 

you definately have to disable that uac crap and i want to find a way to get rid of all the dumb user folders. xp is bad enough with forcing a separate administrator account. vista looks to be worse. i don't get viruses/spyware/etc why must they try to force me to have all this extra protection??

[random_n00b]

Yeah, driver support is definately impressive for where they're at with the system. Vista had drivers for my nForce 2 NIC, and was able to get the rest from Windows Update (except for my printer, but I wouldn't expect that). The only device that failed to install was the game/MIDI port for my Sound Blaster. One thing I was really impressed with was how well the rollback feature works now...

 

After I had installed the latest ATi drivers, I was presented with a large amount of corruption on odd things like the background in Solitaire and anything with pixel shaders in Source. So, I hit the rollback button in the device manager, the hard disk chugged for a while, the display flicked once, and it was done. No reboots - Windows never even mentioned it as a suggestion - and I was back with the stock display drivers working as expected.

 

Now, they just need to make an uninstall routine that reliable and effective which works on applications, and I'd be thinking more highly of Vista... just imagine...

 

Oh, you've got SearchBarDoublePlusGood installed and giving you popup ads? Just go to Add/Remove programs and take it out. It'll work as long as you didn't disable that uac crap. Maaaybe someday.

[J. Dunlavy]

Anyone who likes Vista is a tool. While it is an improvement, I'm worried it'll be laden with DRM support. I'm also not a big fan of Aeroglass or the system requirements for Vista.

 

Can my computer run it? You bet! Do I want to install a SLOWER, more CUMBERSOME version of Windows over my perfectly good Windows XP x64 install? Not on your life.

 

For most advanced users, Vista is a step backwards. It's basically a dumber version of Windows with a few cool gimmicks.

 

Security? You know that "Run As" and "limited user accounts" exist on Windows 2000 & XP, right? Vista is a NEW OS with tons of new holes to plug.

[FroBoZZ]

ya, windows is just a load of crap. makes you wonder how one of the largest companies in the world is staying like that (ok, maybe exaggerated). its amazing how much better osx is than any current operating system. you dont need to know much about computers to know that microsoft has been getting lazy with the quality of their operating system. Guess they put all their brain power into the 360, which is going to be the top console of the 3 new gen ones.

[Cujo]

hmm given that windows xp has been their best, most stable operating system yet i don't see how they're getting lazy.

[benjester]

hmm given that windows xp has been their best, most stable operating system yet i don't see how they're getting lazy.

 

I have to agree with Cujo here... In my opinion (10 years of IT) I think Windows is only getting better. Microsoft has dumped more money in to development of vista then any other product (yes, including the xbox 360) that they produce. And vista is so much more then what you guys are talking about... to the average users, vista is a dream. To us advanced users, it is more of a pain to customize the things we want, but really, they are getting better... the roles are just reversed now. You don't have to be some uber leet IT person to understand and customize windows anymore... now it is geared for lower end users. That may or may not be a bad thing.

 

I think Vista will be a great product when it is finally complete, and I'm sure it will have a delayed launch like normal. I don't plan on seeing the os hit shelves until spring of 07.

[FroBoZZ]

didnt mean that current xp wasnt their best operating system. just comparing it to using osx. have to say osx is in a completely different league, as well as linux. of course i run xp cause its easy to maintain, no work like linux would be (just installing it for starters)

[YoMamma]

hmm given that windows xp has been their best, most stable operating system yet i don't see how they're getting lazy.

 

I agree with XP being their best and most stable OS, which makes me wonder how many people are going to bother buying Vista when it's released.

[ConGregation]

loaded it on. Looked nice. Couldn't get vid drivers to work. Took it off.

 

I did like IE7. Other than that I didn't mess around with it much.

[nut]

vistas out now?!?!

 

 

 

where do you get it???

 

 

 

 

=)

Edited June 12, 2006 by Capt.Coconut

[ConGregation]

vistas out now?!?!

 

 

 

where do you get it???

 

 

 

 

=)

Its a public beta.

[Cujo]

loaded it on. Looked nice. Couldn't get vid drivers to work. Took it off.

 

I did like IE7. Other than that I didn't mess around with it much.

 

nvidia or ati? my 6600go in my laptop has no problems. i'm about to load it on our media center pc that has a 9600pro.

[stutters]

this just came across digg, thought you guys might find it relevant:

 

"Vista: Why You Should Install the 32-bit Version Regardless of Your CPU"

I too installed vista x64 and couldn't figure out why my audio and network devices would not work. The Vista x64 version only supports properly signed 64-bit drivers--none of which exists for most hardware. The author gives several reasons to avoid the x64 version at this time. Great read.

http://www.tech-recipes.com/microsoft_vista_tips1426.html

note: link may appear down due to high traffic. mirrored for your pleasure.

Deciding which Vista version to install can be a difficult decision and can really limit what you can do with your system. Here are practical hints which should help a user decide which version to install. I decided to write this guide after installing 64-bit and 32-bit vista systems on several test boxes.

With the gaining popularity of 64-bit chipsets/processors, many users now have the ability to run either 64-bit versions (x64) or 32-bit versions (x86) of software and operating systems. However, if you only have a 32-bit processor, your choice is easy...

 

You can only install the x64 version of Vista if you have a 64-bit processor.

 

For those with 64-bit processors, it seems obvious that installing the x64 version of vista would be ideal. The x64 version has increased security based around the 64-bit structure and programs compiled for 64-bit processors will likely run faster.

 

 

What's the problem with installing Vista x64 on a 64-bit system?

 

1. Most hardware does not currently have 64-bit drivers.

 

Out of all the boxes that I have installed x64 Vista on, I could always get it to boot up. However, the lack of 64-bit drivers for many hardware devices typically left me without any chance of burning DVDs or listening to audio. Networking devices and card readers were frequently not supported as well. Vista x64 is pretty but it's not very fun without network access or audio.

 

2. In Vista x64, any driver that is not properly signed will not be able to enter the kernel and will fail to load.

 

Think how many times you have ignored that warning that a certain hardware driver is not properly signed. With vista x64, if your driver has not be blessed by Microsoft, it will not work. Forget about it.

 

I have tired to get around this by booting with the F8 option Disable Driver Signature. It doesn't make a difference.

 

3. Vista x64 currently does not backward support most x86 (32-bit) drivers.

 

For the most part 64-bit systems run 32-bit applications very well. However, vista x64 doesn't run x86 drivers... at least at this stage.

 

4. Vista x64 does not support 16-bit software.

 

You may think that you never, ever run 16-bit software. However, XP actually handles this legacy fairly well.

 

5. Very little x64 software currently exists.

 

x64 software runs better on a x64 system with an x64 OS. Currently, however, there is very little x64 software out there. If you have that magical combination, you do get a nice performance boost. Currently, however, this combination is way to far ahead of the curve.

 

 

Conclusion:

 

Most users with 64-bit hardware should install the 32-bit (x86) version of Vista.

 

Vista x64 is the turning point for operating systems as they transition to 64-bit. Currently, however, the majority of users will be very disappointed by installing Vista x64. The lack of 64-bit drivers for most current hardware will be very disappointing and frustrating to most users. Why push for 64-bit now anyway? The performance gains promised by 64-bit will not be seen for years until 64-bit compiled versions of software is the norm

[nut]

vistas out now?!?!

 

 

 

where do you get it???

 

 

 

 

=)

Its a public beta.

 

 

i'm not going to DL it... theres no real point... i am just going to wait until it comes out for real.

 

[discom]

How long does it take to install/uninstall?

[Cujo]

thanks for that info on the 64bit. i've cancelled that download now.

 

discom, install takes about an hour or a bit less on my laptop. uninstall would take as long as it takes to install xp back on.

[ConGregation]

loaded it on. Looked nice. Couldn't get vid drivers to work. Took it off.

 

I did like IE7. Other than that I didn't mess around with it much.

 

nvidia or ati? my 6600go in my laptop has no problems. i'm about to load it on our media center pc that has a 9600pro.

Nvidia. Started install when it pops up that the drivers were intended for Vista and since it couldn't find the vista operating system it was cancelling the install. Go figure.

[SiX]

running 64 bit with no issues what so ever, and i am able to install drivers, your information is wrong. Ive disabled uac as i found it very annoying, but I like what they have done with it as i work for the geek squad and people are idiots. you can make vista look like win2k if you want but aero isnt bad. and if you want to call me a tool go right ahead, fan boy!!!!1! everything i have tried has worked so far. Theres one thing i cant get and thats 5.1 sound, it only gives me an option for 2.0 sound. see screenshots in my edit.

 

six

 

Edited June 14, 2006 by SiX

[[Mmmm]Homer]

I just wiped Vista from a backup system here at work. Looks decent enough, but I couldn't get any Realtek network drivers to work of any version. Although I did get video workiing for an nVidia card. (Did you download the latest from nVidia Rev?)