Is windows Vista any good?
- Thread starter iStepable
- Start date
- Status
Mikesword221
The man with no plan.
I would hold out on XP until more of the bugs are fixed. But Vista has not screwed up on me once. So wait a while.
Monster Iestyn
Fangtastic
I'm not really keen on having a Vista, even though I have seen some in my own home. I still don't see the point of everything having to look different in Vista, as I like the look of XP better, mostly because I'm too used to it.
Sniperific
Member
Maybe this will answer my questionsteveb96 said:
Cue
ALAM STOP BREAKING THE S
I've had absolutely no problems with it, to be honest. This is 2008, if you can afford Vista you can damn well afford a decent computer. If Vista isn't working for you, why didn't you upgrade your PC beforehand?
Next you'll be saying Windows 95 is rubbish because it won't run on your old 10mhz Celeron. :<
Next you'll be saying Windows 95 is rubbish because it won't run on your old 10mhz Celeron. :<
Sniperific
Member
WINDOWS 95 SUCKS *stabbed*Cue said:
But yea i got my pc with vista last year and it crashes on almost everything i run *This program has stopped working etc....*
Sonic Destiny
dealer of Retribution.
you might have installed it with odd settings... or.... you may have a sucky RAM and or memory stick.Silent_Snipe said:
Yes, Vista is good. But stick with XP for a while, Vista isn't worth upgrading to right now.
I used it for several months (Without service pack 1, since that wasn't available) and it ran fine. 1GB RAM, single core Athlon 3500+, Geforce 7600GT. Ran perfectly with Aero.
Also note that the graphics card doesn't need to be uber. A Radeon X1050 or Geforce 7300GS are both sufficient... And again, note that you don't need to use Aero.
All my programs worked fine, too. If a program doesn't work, then it's possible that the program just isn't written for Vista. Don't blame MS if some program doesn't work. (But then, you could, since they scrapped the code from XP and started from scratch on Vista)
In short... not worth buying and installing on a computer, but is worth using if it's preinstalled. Can be VERY fast and stable. (Which it was for me.)
I used it for several months (Without service pack 1, since that wasn't available) and it ran fine. 1GB RAM, single core Athlon 3500+, Geforce 7600GT. Ran perfectly with Aero.
Also note that the graphics card doesn't need to be uber. A Radeon X1050 or Geforce 7300GS are both sufficient... And again, note that you don't need to use Aero.
All my programs worked fine, too. If a program doesn't work, then it's possible that the program just isn't written for Vista. Don't blame MS if some program doesn't work. (But then, you could, since they scrapped the code from XP and started from scratch on Vista)
In short... not worth buying and installing on a computer, but is worth using if it's preinstalled. Can be VERY fast and stable. (Which it was for me.)
Dr.Pepper
Member
I have Windows Vista Home Basic and it runs just fine on 512MBs of ram. Vista can be just as responsive as XP if you have a decent PC, although Vista is nowhere near as efficient since it requires more than 5 times the CPU power and ten times the RAM XP needs. (And that's just Home Basic, which is just a lighter, stripped-down version of Home Premium.)
The only problem I have with Vista is it won't run my scanner's software or GM6, and updates take forever for it finish installing. It took 4 hours for it to update to SP1!
If you can stick with XP, I'd do that instead of getting Vista and wait for 'Windows 7' to hit the shelves. (Yes, MS is already talking about releasing another version of Windows next year.)
The only problem I have with Vista is it won't run my scanner's software or GM6, and updates take forever for it finish installing. It took 4 hours for it to update to SP1!
If you can stick with XP, I'd do that instead of getting Vista and wait for 'Windows 7' to hit the shelves. (Yes, MS is already talking about releasing another version of Windows next year.)
Sniperific
Member
Oh god here we go again T_T, cant they at least make vista fully compatable with xp first?Dr.Pepper said:
Mine isn't as funny as yours, but it's still funny. I'm not saying you should switch to a Mac, though.Silent_Snipe said:
Anyway, if you're the kind of guy who has a lot of programs that you bought for your XP, then they might not work on Vista. You might need to upgrade the programs by downloading them on their main site, though. That's really the only problem I have with Vista, yet I'm not the kind of guy who has lots of software for the XP. Besides that, I don't have any other problems with Vista.
Plus, if I installed something on Vista and didn't work, then I just right-click the exe file and go to "Run as Administrator". That hasn't failed me yet.
Sniperific
Member
Also XP runs faster than vista and allows you to run more programs at once without lag unlike vista due to it taking to much ram up.Chaos Zero 64 said:
Slurgly
Member
Here's my opinion. I've used XP and Vista and they both have ups and downs. Vista does run faster and the basic windows programs are updated and a little better. It looks nicer too. Vista also runs newer computer games way better. BUT, the only downside about Vista is that it doesn't run a lot of programs that work on XP, and the compatibility doesn't work, but there is a new Vista being made that will work with old programs.
So basically, I think Vista is better, unless you have old games you want to play.
So basically, I think Vista is better, unless you have old games you want to play.
Sniperific
Member
Meh i run all my games under the compatability windows xp service pack 2Slurgly said:
JigglyWiggly
Member
As usual people who hate vista are just stupid, Vista is fine. Most modern computers now come with at least 2 gigs of ram, laptops too. Vista tends to use more ram because of prefetch. Prefetch looks at the programs you use often and stores them to your ram rather than your hard drive for quick loadings instead of accessing your hard drive, this is very useful to laptops with 5400rpm hard drives. Vista also has a vast majority of drivers, even SCSI and RAID drivers built in which saves me a lot of time especially on server 2008. Vista is built on the NT kernel just like XP. Vista also has more protection built into it, which does consume a bit more resources and the dreadful UAC. UAC is garbage just disable it.
Basically nothing is wrong with vista, people who complain it has compatibility issues with their voodoo graphics cards are just stupid, ditch your legacy hardware. If you complain "I have no money", get a job. For 500 dollars you can get a dell pc, with a q6600, 2-3 gigs of ram and an intel x3100 gpu(which is easily upgradable). If you think 500 dollars is a lot, cry some more.
Basically nothing is wrong with vista, people who complain it has compatibility issues with their voodoo graphics cards are just stupid, ditch your legacy hardware. If you complain "I have no money", get a job. For 500 dollars you can get a dell pc, with a q6600, 2-3 gigs of ram and an intel x3100 gpu(which is easily upgradable). If you think 500 dollars is a lot, cry some more.
- Status