Hey guys, its me again, and, as you may have noticeed, I neeed to update my 'PC specs" tab by September, as I currently don't have a working PC. . . When I do get my 'ol PC back though, I want to upgrade to OS system Vista, which is said to be an upgrade to Windows XP, which I've worked with for three years. I opened this thread to talk about 'probelms with Vista', as I have heard that there are some recent errors with this OS. Post your comments please. . . please.

I've been using ultimate since the day it came out, i don't know what your talking about. There are some things that need tweaked, yes, but overall it all just boils down to some incompatibilities of older programs. If you do find errors while using vista, just search google and look for a forum help page. That is where i have gotten all of problems ironed out, and even they were just mediocre little file downloads

People are very opinionated about Vista, those who love it downplay its faults and those who hate it exaggerate its problems. So instead of causing an argument with Rifleman & his Vista goons when they undoubtedly show up by telling you what I think you should do, I'm just going to list reasons why I personally have not upgraded to it:

- Vista renders my sound card useless when running Directsound3D applications, it is unable to reproduce EAX or 6 channel surround. Shitty software emulations can go a short way to remedy this with supported applications, but it's not good enough.

- It hogs around twice as many resources under similar conditions to XP, until heavily tweaked. But then the equally heavily tweaked XP still uses less. This result of this is hampered OS performance on some systems.

- DirectX10, the single benefit of upgrading to Vista that's relevant to my gaming interests, is a shambles.

- I don't like its restructured layout.

- The much-touted functionality improvements are useless to me.

- Incompatibilities with programs, especially games.

- DRM bullshit (I do actually like my HD videos to play in HD).

- Inferior performing, less stable drivers.

- Vista was such a failure Microsoft have knocked development of its successor into overdrive. With Windows 7 they aim to improve on all of Vista's faults. Upon its release in a year or two Vista will be obsolete.

- Almost every single person on this very forum who were lumped with Vista and used to say "oh it's not so bad", after switching back to XP, realised how deluded they really were for putting up with it.

Long story short - there's nothing wrong with XP, there's things wrong with Vista. It can only ever be a downgrade in experience and usability for me. So I'm sticking with XP until I have at least one good reason to switch.

Vista owns, 'nuff said. Been using it for a year on 3 machines, nothing wrong with it.

i haven't had any problems with vista yet but i still prefer xp.

it is fine, just make sure you have a system that can run it properly.

I've used it sense it first came out, it works great.

Also your drivers and incapability statement is kinda bs.

Sure it don't work with super old games and such.

But drivers, most drivers have vista support.

Haven't we already had a topic similar to this?

My personal opinion to this is that I have had no issue with Vista 64-bit. I don't know about 32-bit though.

Sorry, are you talking to me?

I use vista and Xp. In my own opinion i think the XP xomes out as a winner. I have had driver problems with Vista and the compatibilty issues.

I think that Vista is still behind on XP, the only good thing i could find for vista is the DX 10 support. Otherwise i don't see why I would go for Vista, everything that it has XP also does, and XP does it better. Ok it looks all new and fancy but thats not what i am in for, i prefer my system to work well under pressure and do well in games. I see that Vista is much much slower in the gaming expirience, and in other tasks such as encoding files.

And for the Microsoft fact that its more secure, well i am not even sure about that. I haven't had any problems with XP security, all you need is a good Anti-virus.

Oh and vista gets on my nerve, i mean is it really a security threat to change the name on a notepad file, or a music file?

Maybee i will upgrade when Microsoft stops all support for XP, but thats what in like 2010?

2014 is when all support ends.

Any news about XP Black Edition 4.0?? I think its a pirated ratnest, but maybe its worth bringing up.

I wasn't going to come in but thanks for being full of yourself again.

What games in particular were you talking about incompaitibility issues? Was running TR2 on my Vista yesterday Like 1992 or something, so just wondering how old lol

It's not like I keep a list but the most recent games that spring to mind and have had issues are M2:TW, CoH and its betas and even patches once, ArmA, The Witcher. Keep an eye on patchlogs long enough and you'll notice there's usually fixes popping up specifically for Vista. Check the official support forums of most games and you'll find the majority of posts are on Vista systems.

Again, it's not a terrible OS and lots of people get on with it just fine, but you'll never catch me using it.

Ever?

Ell I play COH and MD2:TW without problems on my laptop wichs runs on vista.

That's why I said "have had issues". If you hop on the bandwagon late several patches after launch of course you're not likely to see any major issues, they get patched. I think Med2 still has some sort of visual bug related to nVidia Vista drivers, though.

Indeed it does.

Take note, yet another developer this year doesn't recommend Vista.

Just wondering, does anyone here have XP SP3? I do and it works well but I never really thought of asking everyone here what they think about it.

I do, it's mostly just security fixes and a few minor features over SP2, nowhere near what SP1 or SP2 was. Some people report a slight performance increase, though.

Yeah, I had a little issue with Windows Live Messenger but all I had to do was reinstall and everything was fine. PC works very well.

i had a prob with SP3 on my other pc, it for some reason disablebled all windows updates and i couldn't install windows live messenger
or any other microsoft programs, twas fucked up, fixed with a clean install.

That is why you should go vista. Sp3 has soooooo many problem i would avoid it like the plague.

vista on laptop

1. The OS is not directly at fault for service Pack updates going bad, they are not reproducible issues. XP SP3 and Vista SP1 alike can suffer from just one of the hundreds of updates they install not going smoothly, usually, poor maintenance is to blame.
2. I want to know specifically what some of these oh so awful commonly known problems with SP3 are.
3. You don't even use it, so forget that I doubt you can provide any.
4. 2 more applications have come to my attention that have reproducible Vista specific issues today - iTunes 8 and Clear Sky on Vista 64-bit.
5. Moved to a correct thread seeming my comment has kicked off yet another unwanted debate.

To be fair why would they, even if it was better a lot of people still use xp so it makes sense.

Well I would imagine because it's a list of what they recommend to run the game best, hence the mention of high end components like 2GB RAM and 512MB DX10 GPUs.

Well yeah.

So...?

i was joking with my comment before.

I don't know why your hell bent on proving that vista is bad. I mean you don't use it, so i don't see why it effects you if someone else uses it.

I do use it, just not on my gaming PC.

And you're right it doesn't effect me, that's why if the OP came along and said he was going Vista I wouldn't care.

I'm not hell bent on proving Vista is bad, I didn't start this thread, I just posted my opinion and a few facts and left it at that. If I seem hell bent on proving Vista is bad since it's because other people are hell bent on trying to challenge my opinions.

If your an XP faithful, just take a look at how far vista has come from when it first came out before making your judgements. I had known that it was a bit pre-mature with its release, and expected bugs upon receiving it, but was XP any different? If i can recall back to '01 when it was first released, it was a bitch to optimize, just as vista was, and then the Service Packs came and it was like going to heaven, I would expect much the same out of Vista SP2, albeit a bit of the problem child of microsoft where XP is the goody goody one, but still, vista really isnt that bad

Improved drivers and a few optimisations that bought performance increases, welcome improvements, but still not good enough. It'll always be #2 to XP no matter how many service packs you put it through, it uses more resources, imposes restrictions, and cuts out important features. It's just a fact.

Besides, by the time Vista reaches its performance plateau (which it's very close to as it is, and as we've established will never cleanly top XP) though additional service packs, Windows 7 will be out, so why would someone waste their money on something that'll be obsolete by the time they're able to feel the 'benefits' (is there even any?) without the drawbacks.

I think that's an important point actually. It's very well bickering over the established downsides of Vista, but why don't Vista proponents ever counter with their perceived upsides? Is it because there isn't actually any? Vista users are always quick to defend their OS but they're never on the offence, returning the favour. I wonder why?

I am interested.

I use SP3 ,and so far I didn't see any problems .


which game is that ?


not wanting to add oil to the fire ,but here are my opinions of vista:

as you all know I upgraded my PC this year and finally reached the DX10 era,and naturally I went over directly to vista ,hoping to see the benefits of the great vista and it's much anticipated DX10.
to cut it short ,I suffered performance decrease and a few bugs with sound driver .
So I Switched back to XP and hola everything was fixed ,plus 20% performance increase in all games.so yeah xp is a lot better.

Sorry forgot to mention, those specs were for GTAIV, and the other XP recommendation before that being Crysis Warhead.

Also to mention that it in no way hogs resources, just unlike XP it puts RAM to use rather than leaving it to sit there doing nothing. It's easy to talk crap about it when you don't have a clue.

I don't want any of the features it puts the RAM to work on when on the desktop, and I even modify my XP to remove the similar precursor background processes which aren't even half as demanding as Vistas. I prefer to have my RAM doing nothing so it's empty, fresh, and instantly ready when I need it.

In other news, MS has extended their 'downgrade from Vista' programme an additional 6 months.

Well i bought me Gears of War long time ago, and i can run it for like 5 minutes and then it closes itself.
Thats my vista problem;

It's better when it's doing something it can dump in an instant than just wasting it, rather than making efficient use of it, and it's been extended for the simple reason that corporate entities can't just upgrade their entire network to Vista, most are only just moving to XP from Win 2k.

Mysterious warning that gives no title or explanation. I've only gotten 4 or 5 of these, every time i can't figure out what causes them:

Looks like some internet connection problem pop-up.. Dead-on virus dude....

What part of "I don't want any of the features it puts the RAM to work on" is unclear?


That, and most in the business sector who had trialled Vista found that not only did it fail to work with a majority of the common older 2K/XP business applications, but also came with the unattractive costs associated with upgrading components and meet the higher requirements, and buying newer more compatible software. First impressions stick as always and businesses continue to avoid it.

Not my problem


Well all that's pretty much fits into what I said.

Finally it dawns on you. I said pretty clearly in my first post in this topic that to try and avoid any type of communication whatsoever with you, most of my opinions in this thread would given purely from my own perspectives as to why I personally am not using Vista. Nice to see that concept has finally clicked, you can stop talking to me now.


Yeah, that's why I clearly refined that point instead of refuting it...

I was never aiming to convert you, you've made it pretty clear your thoughts on Vista but you still mention points that are no longer valid; drivers for example or other things from before SP1. The main reason you didn't want me to communicate with you is because no one else posts things that are objectionable in the first place, making you the only person to address. It's not because it's you that's posting it, even if you would like to think it is, but rather because you're the only person to post things.

I don't want you to communicate with me because you go out of your way to try and argue everything I say, even my personal preferences.

I have hardware that doesn't work/doesn't work properly with Vista. Interior Vista performance is down to inferior drivers and increased resource usage, the drivers are also responsible for the poorer reliability. SP1 is helpful and undoubtedly turns it into a usable OS but is not a miracle cure for either of those. Point's still valid I'm afraid.

Disagree all and say Vista performs just as well/is as reliable as XP all you want, just don't waste your time trying to convince me. I'll take my own experience and figures over the majority opinion of OCUK any day.

It's not everything you say, you act like I focus on to you, when I really don't



I've never said it was, problem is you're blaming Vista for your components problems. I don't need OcUK to tell me that either.

If you don't focus on me then go bother someone else. My components are working just fine on XP, no problems, they don't on Vista. Now jog on.

I'm only bothering you if you're bothered.