Microsoft's New Vista Ad Campaign: Microsoft Mojave

[rjohnstone]

Transferring 200GB from one drive to another drive via usb 2.0 on the XP machine takes about 3 hours, on the vista machine.....TWELVE hours!!!!

That's not a Vista issue, that sounds like a hardware issue.

Sounds like you had the drive plugged into a USB 1.1 port on the Vista PC or there was a board problem. (Most cheap PC's use USB 1.1 ports on the front panels and USB 2.0 ports on the back)

I run 4 external USB 2.0 drives (500GB each) on Vista Ultimate and the transfer rates are just fine.

And 4 hours to transfer 200GB over USB is pathetically slow.
I've transferred 500GB from drive to drive in less than an hour.

 

[iMouse]

Um....not quite.

see, I was just wondering where the stereotypical misconceptions of vista came from, now you made such statement.

who told you vista need 3GHz and 4G RAM? Or you just saying it and bet nobody here know anything about vista? LOL, I have hands-on with 3 Vista machines, from 1G RAM to 2G RAM, from 3GHz AMD Athlon64x2 to Intel CoreDuo, to Celeron 1.8Ghz, Vista runs FINE.


Apparently, you haven't touched enough Vista boxes to truly know what a technician's nightmare it is. The security alone is a nightmare to circumvent in order just to get a spyware/malware infected Vista box clean. Permissions everywhere....meaning that if you or a Trojan changes permissions on a registry key or system file, you're in for a boatload of hidden problems that creep up weeks later.

Vista (32-bit) does not run on anything very well unless you're looking at a mid to high range Core 2, Xeon, AMD Athlon 64 or Phenom and at least 3GB of RAM. Performance seems to be a bit better on the Vista 64-bit versions, but that leaves out everyone still running high-end P4, Core Duo or Athlon XP processors.

Low battery consumption on a notebook? Not if it is paging the hell out of the drive because the Microsoft VM solution is inefficient. Reminds me of the VM management used by legacy Apple operating systems from the late 90's.

Vista is a pig. Microsoft needs to pull an Apple and tell their legacy users that your 15 year old software isn't gonna work with our next OS. You're either in spec or you're left out. Legacy compatibility is killing security and performance in their newer products. While I know nearly all Microsoft apps are pigs (i.e. Office Mac 2008), they can stand to lose a few pounds by cutting the cord to those who feel their copy of Dbase 3 should still run on Windows Vista.

 

[rychencop]

i hope they plan to do more than that. finding a few goofs that have never seen vista is not going to be enough. vista is fine though...better than xp anyway. i'll never switch back though.

 

[bsamcash]

Wikipedia says it all:

Criticism

The study has been criticized as cherry-picking positive reactions and not addressing many of Vista's problems. For example, users did not have to install Vista and the necessary hardware was already setup for them, thus bypassing any criticisms of hardware and licensing cost. Participants weren't asked to work with peripheral devices (such as printers or scanners), nor were they asked about compatibility with older software. Participants did not have an opportunity to try the software themselves but were demonstrated certain features by a salesman.

Another point to note is that Microsoft explicitly states they choose people who have never seen and experienced Vista before in the website, this adds doubt as to how "professional" the reviews are. People who have not seen Vista's interface a year and a half after its release would most likely be people who do not care about computers, and thus they may not see the problems an experienced computer user would. This may be seen as a subtle illustration of how amateur the testers are, as Louis Cheng has noted "a person who has never seen a machine before will still be stunned by the weak and slow rotations a faulty washing machine gives,"
While presented to appear as a valid experiment, some of the videos show the guides persuading people into positive reactions, even to the point of placing words in their mouths, so there was strong and deliberate experimenter bias.

 

[bluesboy77]

Okay, I have to pile on here. As I type this on my Macbook Pro, I'm sitting next to my desk that has Vista machine sitting on it that is right at the 1 year mark. I have had nothing but problems with that machine from the start right up to now. The PC is a Core 2 Duo with 4GB of ram and still Vista will run slow, hand out lots of the BSOD, shut the machine down on it's own for some some kind of error, it runs slower than slow and I'm about to have to reinstall the OS again to try and get this thing running better. The stupid PC is only used by my two sons for some light internet, MS Word and some light gaming, and it's still a POS.

My wife uses a 4 year old HP laptop with XP on it that works like a champ and never has any problems. In my experience, regardless of what all the Windows lovers say, XP is 10 times better and more stable than Vista.

Thankfully I don't use either machine, I'll stick with my MacBook Pro and within the next 6 months I'll be pitching out the Vista machine for an iMac. Other than the occasional need for MS Word, I'm totally MS free and loving every minute of it.

I am a Mac fanboy that was shown the light after using Vista for a couple of months, I'll never go back to a PC again by my own choice. I only have to use a XP machine at work.

Thanks for letting me vent and pile on, I'll go back to lurking in the corner again.

 

[Dustman]

If I was not already using OS X, these commercials would not convince me to switch to Vista. At all. All they cared about was how pretty it looked. And how nice the new box looked.

Yeah.. unlike us Mac users. ;-)

 

[SodiumBenzoate]

Furthermore.. like i said they probably only used vista for 5 minutes or so... in that time its very hard to run into bugs or a crash. IN FACT if vista DID crash within the 5 minutes that would be beyond horrible.

I've used Vista for almost a year now and it's never crashed. Also, I have "only" 2GB of RAM.

 

[SodiumBenzoate]

Vista (32-bit) does not run on anything very well unless you're looking at a mid to high range Core 2, Xeon, AMD Athlon 64 or Phenom and at least 3GB of RAM.

completely false. I've had absolutely no trouble with only 2GB RAM

 

[hulugu]

I've used Vista for almost a year now and it's never crashed. Also, I have "only" 2GB of RAM.

What kind of computer are you using Vista on? What do you think of the performance versus Windows XP?

 

[contoursvt]

I will also add that I've been using vista since it came out (around feb of 2007) and I have yet to see a bluescreen or lockup or a crash of vista itself. Ihave had the odd issue with old non vista compliant applications such as Nero6, but never the OS itself or any newer apps.

I'm running the 64bit version and I started out with 4GB RAM and am now at 8GB since RAM was cheap. Box is one I build with a Q6600 and an 8800GT (I had a 7950GT last year).

Part of what adds to stability is of course solid hardware plus the use of a UPS always helps IMO.

 

[junkmailbonzai]

LOL @ Microsoft

does this not sum it all up?

 

[SodiumBenzoate]

What kind of computer are you using Vista on? What do you think of the performance versus Windows XP?

Dell XPS 720. Aside from the RAM, it's pretty powerful (Intel C2D 3.0 Ghz, NVIDIA 8800 GTX). But Vista certainly doesn't need an absurd amount of RAM - right now, it's using 983 MB, about 1/2 of that is Steam and Firefox, the rest is Vista and various small programs. With similar programs running, OSX would probably use a similar amount of memory. I've seen Vista run fine with as little as 1GB of RAM, though I certainly wouldn't go below that.

I can't really compare to XP because I didn't upgrade to Vista, I bought a new PC that came with Vista. However, Vista hasn't been slow at all.

 

[Industries]

Dell XPS 720. Aside from the RAM, it's pretty powerful (Intel C2D 3.0 Ghz, NVIDIA 8800 GTX). But Vista certainly doesn't need an absurd amount of RAM - right now, it's using 983 MB, about 1/2 of that is Steam and Firefox, the rest is Vista and various small programs. With similar programs running, OSX would probably use a similar amount of memory. I've seen Vista run fine with as little as 1GB of RAM, though I certainly wouldn't go below that.

I can't really compare to XP because I didn't upgrade to Vista, I bought a new PC that came with Vista. However, Vista hasn't been slow at all.

That's the problem!

You can't just say you have 2 gigs of ram, an 8800 and Intel C2D 3.0ghz and declare Vista as not being a pig because it runs good on your system.

It's stupid. Vista is NOT good. Can we move on?

 

[hulugu]

Dell XPS 720. Aside from the RAM, it's pretty powerful (Intel C2D 3.0 Ghz, NVIDIA 8800 GTX). But Vista certainly doesn't need an absurd amount of RAM - right now, it's using 983 MB, about 1/2 of that is Steam and Firefox, the rest is Vista and various small programs. With similar programs running, OSX would probably use a similar amount of memory. I've seen Vista run fine with as little as 1GB of RAM, though I certainly wouldn't go below that.

I can't really compare to XP because I didn't upgrade to Vista, I bought a new PC that came with Vista. However, Vista hasn't been slow at all.

That's a pretty good kit there, you're running on the equivalent of a MacPro. The RAM isn't a serious problem when you have that much power behind everything.

 

[SodiumBenzoate]

That's a pretty good kit there, you're running on the equivalent of a MacPro. The RAM isn't a serious problem when you have that much power behind everything.

The RAM wouldn't be a problem otherwise though. It's not like Vista will grab video memory from the card and use it like RAM if it runs out.

2GB of RAM is just fine for Vista. I'm not saying that Vista doesn't use more resources than XP, obviously it does. But it's not like you need a top-of-the-line PC to run it. Anything made in the last few years (EeePCs/other non-full-feature PCs excluded) should run it fine. As I said, I've seen it running fine on a PC with 1GB of RAM. That same PC was a notebook with integrated graphics. It's certainly not a powerful computer by modern standards.

Obviously if you try to run Vista on an 8-year old PC with 256MB RAM, you're going to run into trouble. But most newer PCs, and certainly anything brand new, will do just fine.

It's stupid. Vista is NOT good. Can we move on?

Have you personally used Vista for an extended period of time?

Vista is good, assuming you pay attention to system requirements and don't try to run it on a very weak computer. It's stable, it works fine. There's definitely room for improvement, but the criticism is so out of proportion to issues, it's insane. Most of the criticism is second-hand, too, which is just asinine. If you haven't personally used Vista for more than a few minutes, you shouldn't be criticizing it. There is very valid criticism of Vista, but saying "YOU NEED 3GB OF RAM OR IT WON'T WORK!!!!" is not a valid complaint, because it's simply untrue. As are the complaints of rampant instability and crashing, especially after SP1.

 

[opeter]

Heh, the main problem i see is that people forget, that when Windows XP came out, the folk back said aslo very negative things. Now, after 7 years, of course Windows XP somehow faster on modern hardware, back than there were no 4xCPUs etc... beetween XP and Vista is 5-6 years difference...

Try running lets say, Windows 95 and you will see, how fast it will be on modern hardware (if you can get to actually running it).

 

[BongoBanger]

That's the problem!

You can't just say you have 2 gigs of ram, an 8800 and Intel C2D 3.0ghz and declare Vista as not being a pig because it runs good on your system.

It's stupid. Vista is NOT good. Can we move on?

Vista runs fine on 1.83GHz and above with 1GB - preferrably 2GB RAM - and integrated graphics.

Vista used to be a pig, now it's not.

Can we move on?

 

[iMouse]

There is very valid criticism of Vista, but saying "YOU NEED 3GB OF RAM OR IT WON'T WORK!!!!" is not a valid complaint, because it's simply untrue. As are the complaints of rampant instability and crashing, especially after SP1.

While I agree that the crashes are mostly complaints from users with bad drivers, bad RAM or other hardware failure, the RAM issue is not. Maybe it's just me, but I like to have more than 2 applications open simultaneously and not have my system tank. Windows Vista on 2GB of RAM? Sure, maybe if you want to keep a few apps open and switch between them, but not if you REALLY want to use it.

Mac OS X can do this without problems on 2GB. Besides, there's no reason that I should have to buy a system spec'ed like an XPS just to be happy about the performance of my OS.

BTW, WTF is with the 45 minute and 3 reboot installation of SP1?

 

[Industries]

Vista used to be a pig, now it's not.

Keep tellin' yourself that, buddy.

 

[Santa Rosa]

Vista runs fine on 1.83GHz and above with 1GB - preferrably 2GB RAM - and integrated graphics.

Vista used to be a pig, now it's not.

Can we move on?

Guessing that would be your preferable rig then.

Vista on my fully decked MBP only just runs smoothly. Even Vista Basic edition or whatever it is would probably be pushing that system to the max.

Keep tellin' yourself that, buddy.

Right on!!

 

[carve]

Hold on, that was an ad? That was horrible.

 

[K-Funk]

Vista (32-bit) does not run on anything very well unless you're looking at a mid to high range Core 2, Xeon, AMD Athlon 64 or Phenom and at least 3GB of RAM.

I'm typing this on a Vista laptop (32-bit) with 2 GB of RAM, and I've never had a problem. I'm not a huge fan of the Vista user interface, but it runs fine.

 

[Syrus28]

Guessing that would be your preferable rig then.

My first laptop was a HP dv6000t, 1.83GHz dual core, 1GB RAM, and intel GMA 950 with Vista Home Premium... My dad kept pressuring me to get 2GB RAM because of what he had "heard", but I was being cheap and got 1GB. It ran perfectly fine. No complaints here.

Vista on my fully decked MBP only just runs smoothly. Even Vista Basic edition or whatever it is would probably be pushing that system to the max.

Only just runs smoothly... That makes sense. It either runs smoothly, or it doesn't. And considering your words, it sounds like it does, but you refuse to admit it. Also, considering you have a fully decked MBP (with out a doubt better than my HP), and complaining about Vista,I can't help but think your exaggerating.

Right on!!

Or not.??

 

[OrangeCrush]

I've watched the Vista and Microsoft negative comments on this forum since I joined.
I've also used Vista Ultimate on 3 computers since it's release, along with 2 running XP, and one running the Tablet Edition.
What I've always wondered is: Have the people bashing it really used it, and if they have, did they know How to use it?
It's really easy to bash something, or someone, if you don't really know very much about it, or them.
Sure I plan on trying a Mac after owing 2 iPhones for the last year, but I've ran several different OS's and Vista is really pretty darned good.

I have used Vista and experienced the multiple crashes and problems with drivers. After seeing the learning curve with Vista and trying Leopard, I switched to Mac. I had a small learning curve, but even my wife who is not at all technical, made the switch relatively painlessly.

The one argument I hear all the time from Vista defenders that grates me to no end is that people have problems because they don't know how to use it. Ugh--it's not like Vista comes with a training guide, and the average person (not the techies that post on websites like this) don't have the time or desire to figure out what changes need to be made to the OS to make it work. What average person cares about is how easy is my new computer to use out of the box, and this is where OSX has been winning people over. Is OSX flawless, no. But is it a better user experience? In my opinion, and I'd venture to say it's true for most switchers, the answer is yes. Is my method scientific? Nope, but I can tell you my wife used to complain to me almost daily about windows, and since we switched, she does nothing but gush to her friends about how great the iMac is.

Don't tell me people don't like Vista because they don't know how to use it. That's a Microsoft problem, not a user problem!!!

 

[DMann]

Keep tellin' yourself that, buddy.

Ditto.