Why Does Everyone Hate Vista?

[contoursvt]

Well maybe they should have had antivirus installed and maybe they should have done a memory test. Nearly all crashes are generated by memory errors or external factors. Maybe it was crashing as a result of the virus. We have 15 machines at work now with vista and I run it at home and its bullet proof.

I used Vista the day we got it installed at my school. I got a virus in under 5 minutes. That's one of the reasons why I hate Vista, along with an ugly UI and random crashes. I tried to open more than 6 apps at a time and the complete OS bugged out and fried.

Seriously, what missinformed person told you that and how could you believe it without really thinking about it? There is no reason what so ever a PC with windows cannot have that many or 3x that installed.

On my PPC iMac at one stage I had over 100 applications installed, you could never manage that on a PC.

 

[RainCityMacFan]

Well maybe they should have had antivirus installed and maybe they should have done a memory test. Nearly all crashes are generated by memory errors or external factors. Maybe it was crashing as a result of the virus. We have 15 machines at work now with vista and I run it at home and its bullet proof.

It's a school. I rather have my school districts spending money on a system that rarely gets a virus (Mac OS X) then spending it on a WinPC which most likely will get virus (since kids around my age will go to weird ass sites, in school.) and spending money on virus protection and such.

Seriously, what missinformed person told you that and how could you believe it without really thinking about it? There is no reason what so ever a PC with windows cannot have that many or 3x that installed.

Absolutely, but w/ the same hardware and different OS (Mac OS X and Vista [or XP]), which OS do you think could keep multi-tasking those applications the longest w/o crashing or rendering it unusable. I'm just saying I think Mac OS X is a more capable OS compare to Vista (only Vista, I have no hate against XP).

Plus if you want to play DirectX10 games then you'll have to get Vista and not to mention that by January 2008 XP will not be sold (by OEMs and maybe retail) and not supported ([security patches, etc] 2009).

 

[reflex]

dont mean to be rude or anything, but GMA950's run osx perfect. even a g3 imac 400mhz can run it perfect.

i would like to see you or anyone else put vista on an equivilant 400mhz 640mb ram computer with 8mb gpu. (i have this)

I've never had a GMA950, so I don't know how it runs OSX. But a lot of people think it doesn't run it very well and say so. More or less like a lot of people say Vista is crap.

On my PPC iMac at one stage I had over 100 applications installed, you could never manage that on a PC.

Installed applications take up hard drive space, nothing more. Until you run them, of course.

 

[contoursvt]

Many thousands of corporations run their server infastructure on windows boxes. Things like web servers, mail servers, application servers, db servers, file servers and a host of other things on Windows server products? Many find windows server prodcuts to be quite solid and reliable and go months and months without reboots and the only time might be for scheduled reboots due to security updates and such (not because of actual problems). These servers do multitask you know. Also the next server product (longhorn) will be based heavily on Vista's core.

Also, if a school cannot spend the $15 a year on a volume license (per workstation) when they saved a whole bunch of $$ on the actual computer purchase, then I dont know what to say. Companies with thousands of employee run Windows boxes and I'm sure some of those employee might surf to weird places too. If you got AV on the box for such a low price and are protected, then whats the issue. Lets say a company can purchase for $600 a half decent dual core computer and a LCD monitor and for the sake of arguement they saved $300 on the hardware compared to Apple hardware and OSX, how many years of AV will that buy for that computer with the $$ saved? At $15-$20 a year, thats like 15 years

Btw, I suspect that most businesses tend to run Windows so my thinking is that in a school environment, it might be better to learn windows because when they hit the workplace, they already know how to use it properly and know their way around. Same with MS office and such.

It's a school. I rather have my school districts spending money on a system that rarely gets a virus (Mac OS X) then spending it on a WinPC which most likely will get virus (since kids around my age will go to weird ass sites, in school.) and spending money on virus protection and such.



Absolutely, but w/ the same hardware and different OS (Mac OS X and Vista [or XP]), which OS do you think could keep multi-tasking those applications the longest w/o crashing or rendering it unusable. I'm just saying I think Mac OS X is a more capable OS compare to Vista (only Vista, I have no hate against XP).

Plus if you want to play DirectX10 games then you'll have to get Vista and not to mention that by January 2008 XP will not be sold (by OEMs and maybe retail) and not supported ([security patches, etc] 2009).

 

[Sbrocket]

I've never had a GMA950, so I don't know how it runs OSX. But a lot of people think it doesn't run it very well and say so. More or less like a lot of people say Vista is crap.

"A lot of people," eh? Anecdotal heresey? Vista relies very heavily on the graphics processor to accomplish its many varied and generally thrown-around effects and "UI upgrades." On the other hand, OSX does not. You could very easily run OSX in Safe Boot mode (graphics card kernel extensions disabled) and be able to use nearly all the core functionality of OSX, where Vista would slow down immensely by trying to run Aero and all its other junk in Safe Mode with the graphics drivers disabled. The only exception to that would be something like Time Machine that's going to be added in Leopard.

Installed applications take up hard drive space, nothing more. Until you run them, of course.

That's not true. I'd venture to guess that a very large percentage if not overwhelming majority of Windows users are affected by "freeware bloat." Of course, its just a guess based on my experience with helping Windows users sort out their machines and seeing what they have installed and how their machine is running. You know what I'm talking about, though. Windows is plagued by all the uncountable IE toolbars and AOL-esque applications that install junk and startup entries all over the Registry and slow machines to a crawl. Its another reason why I think Vista is so bad: it didn't rid itself of the age-old, flawed-in-concept Registry design.

Yeah, the Registry might have been fine back in 1993 when Windows 3.1 was released (yes, it did have the first registry)...but that was 14 years ago. No one in their right might would claim that the Registry is such a great invention that it needed to stay unchanged through multiple generations of OSes. I mean virtually no improvements to its structure or operation in fourteen years! That's ridiculous!

 

[contoursvt]

I hope you know that bloatware slows down a machine not because it makes registry entries but because they are actual applications that are physically starting up and running.

If I put 15 items in your OSX startup and then left the applications activily running in the background, then it would slow down too.

Microsoft down not provide the 'bloatware'. Manufacturers install it on their computers. Has nothing to do with microsoft. Should be up to the end user to decide if they want to remove that crap or not.

Imagine you went to a car dealership and to sweeten the pot, they filled the trunk with free sample size packages of stuff and you drove it home. Would you leave all that crap in the trunk and complain that driving is too slow? No you wouldnt. You'd leave a few goodies and candies in your glovebox and take the other useless crap they threw into your new car and remove it.

"A lot of people," eh? Anecdotal heresey? Vista relies very heavily on the graphics processor to accomplish its many varied and generally thrown-around effects and "UI upgrades." On the other hand, OSX does not. You could very easily run OSX in Safe Boot mode (graphics card kernel extensions disabled) and be able to use nearly all the core functionality of OSX, where Vista would slow down immensely by trying to run Aero and all its other junk in Safe Mode with the graphics drivers disabled. The only exception to that would be something like Time Machine that's going to be added in Leopard.



That's not true. I'd venture to guess that a very large percentage if not overwhelming majority of Windows users are affected by "freeware bloat." Of course, its just a guess based on my experience with helping Windows users sort out their machines and seeing what they have installed and how their machine is running. You know what I'm talking about, though. Windows is plagued by all the uncountable IE toolbars and AOL-esque applications that install junk and startup entries all over the Registry and slow machines to a crawl. Its another reason why I think Vista is so bad: it didn't rid itself of the age-old, flawed-in-concept Registry design.

Yeah, the Registry might have been fine back in 1993 when Windows 3.1 was released (yes, it did have the first registry)...but that was 14 years ago. No one in their right might would claim that the Registry is such a great invention that it needed to stay unchanged through multiple generations of OSes. I mean virtually no improvements to its structure or operation in fourteen years! That's ridiculous!

 

[RainCityMacFan]

You do realize that many thousands of corporations run their server infastructure on windows boxes. Things like web servers, mail servers, application servers, db servers, file servers and a host of other things on Windows server products? Many find windows server prodcuts to be quite solid and reliable and go months and months without reboots and the only time might be for scheduled reboots due to security updates and such (not because of actual problems). These servers do multitask you know. Also the next server product (longhorn) will be based heavily on Vista's core.

I'm not familiar with servers and such but this "article" is what I found against your statement that Windows server products can go months and months (how many?) without a reboot...

Lastly, if a school cannot spend the $15 a year on a volume license (per workstation) when they saved a whole bunch of $$ on the actual computer purchase, then I dont know what to say. Think about it. Companies with thousands of employee run Windows boxes and I'm sure some of those employee might surf to weird places too. If you got AV on the box for such a low price and are protected, then whats the issue.

A company can purchase for $600 a half decent dual core computer and a LCD monitor. Lets assume they just saved $300 on the hardware, how many years of AV will that buy for that computer? At $15-$20 a year, thats like 15 years.

Actually I don't think a good virus software/suite actually cost 15$ per computer (again I'm not sure if buying in bulks gives you discounts, it probably depends on the company). But I have found that most Anti virus (Norton, Kaspersky, Macafee) costs around 60$. And so 60$ * (amount of total computers) = the total cost.

I hope you know that bloatware slows down a machine not because it makes registry entries but because they are actual applications that are physically starting up and running.

If I put 15 items in your OSX startup and then left the applications activily running in the background, then it would slow down too.

Microsoft down not provide the 'bloatware'. Manufacturers install it on their computers. Has nothing to do with microsoft. Should be up to the end user to decide if they want to remove that crap or not.

Imagine you went to a car dealership and to sweeten the pot, they filled the trunk with free sample size packages of stuff and you drove it home. Would you leave all that crap in the trunk and complain that driving is too slow? No you wouldnt. You'd leave a few goodies and candies in your glovebox and take the other useless crap they threw into your new car and remove it.

Again you are right since this is mainly "Why people hate 'Windows Vista'" and not really a Windows vs Mac...

However one of the problem with Windows is that they licenses their OS to other OEMs and I don't think MS has any control in what those OEM put on their system (except threatening to remove their lisence to distribute Windows) so in the end, usually, the OEMs would put bunch of junk on your computer. If MS and only MS sold computers that had their OS on it then maybe it wouldn't be full of bloatware and programs we don't need.

Oh and when you uninstall programs it leaves a lot of crap in the registry, so it's like them stuffing food into your trunk and you having to clean that out afterwards because the car has so many cracks where the crumbs get stuck... lol.

But just you let people know that most Mac users have actually used Windows and switched to Mac, most of them know from experience and have reasons why they don't like Vista, it's not like you're trying to get people to switch back to WinPC?.. Right?

 

[reflex]

That's not true. I'd venture to guess that a very large percentage if not overwhelming majority of Windows users are affected by "freeware bloat." Of course, its just a guess based on my experience with helping Windows users sort out their machines and seeing what they have installed and how their machine is running. You know what I'm talking about, though. Windows is plagued by all the uncountable IE toolbars and AOL-esque applications that install junk and startup entries all over the Registry and slow machines to a crawl.

Of course you can install all kinds of applications that make your system behave worse one way or another. But I'm sure you could do the same in OSX. Stating that Windows can't handle 100 installed applications is just incorrect.

I just counted 122 installed applications in the "Add or remove programs" window of my XP computer at work. That's not counting the hundreds of little programs that were installed with Windows, or little tools used by the big programs, or the programs I write myself. And this is a computer that I built less than 2 months ago. It runs as well as it did after a fresh install.

Its another reason why I think Vista is so bad: it didn't rid itself of the age-old, flawed-in-concept Registry design.

One of the things about Windows is that it's compatible (though not 100%) with older versions of itself. Removing the registry would instantly throw away a large majority (80%? 90%? I don't know) of the existing applications. Something Microsoft might have done had they wanted not to sell any copies of Vista.

I'm not going to discuss if the registry is a good thing or not, but consider that the Windows folder used to have countless little .ini files because that's where a lot of applications stored their settings. That wasn't exactly a good system either (partly because of the file system of course).

That said, I'm going to leave this topic on this note: you can like Vista (or any product) or not, but please at least try it out if you want to talk other people out of using it.

 

[RainCityMacFan]

That said, I'm going to leave this topic on this note: you can like Vista (or any product) or not, but please at least try it out if you want to talk other people out of using it.

Well put.

I have used Windows Vista Home premium... But I'm just trying to talk any one out of using it if they are comfortable with it, the whole point of this topic was for the OP to know why people don't like Vista.

 

[contoursvt]

KJmoon117, figured I'd first point out that even in OSX,when you drag items to the trash like applications, it leaves behind preference files and possibly library files which you will manually have to remove. If this needs to be done to complete the task, then how is it any different than bits left in windows?

Other thing I wanted to point out is that the link you showed for the uptime thing was kind of silly. Its from 1998!

Anyway here are some picture of the idletime in hours for some of our servers and my box at home which is not mission critical by any means which means I reboot it when I feel like. Idle time is time the server has been up but not under severe loads. Typically idletime is actually shorter than the actual time the computer has been up.

My home server: Win2k Serv, mail, FTP, HTTP, two media servers, file server ( 56 days)
http://powerthings.com/pics/runtime/home_serv.jpg

One of the Domain controllers at work which is also doubling as file serving duties. Its win2k3 (525 days)
http://powerthings.com/pics/runtime/DC1.jpg

Mail server at my work - serving about 150 users - again win2k3 (641 days)
http://powerthings.com/pics/runtime/mailserv.jpg

An XP box set up as a Norton Ghost server and some other little tools (125 days)
http://powerthings.com/pics/runtime/ghost_backup.jpg


So pretty much the only reason I have or we have had to reboot any of these machines is critical updates or something installed that needs rebooting or upgrades in hardware such as more memory..etc. Vista will be no different because its not radically different.

 

[RainCityMacFan]

KJmoon117, figured I'd first point out that even in OSX,when you drag items to the trash like applications, it leaves behind preference files and possibly library files which you will manually have to remove. If this needs to be done to complete the task, then how is it any different than bits left in windows?

You have a point there, but it is easier to delete those manually compare to going inside the registry and deleting strings off.

Other thing I wanted to point out is that the link you showed for the uptime thing was kind of silly. Its from 1998!

Yeah I noticed that lol.

Anyway here are some picture of the idletime in hours for some of our servers and my box at home which is not mission critical by any means which means I reboot it when I feel like. Idle time is time the server has been up but not under severe loads. Typically idletime is actually shorter than the actual time the computer has been up.

My home server: Win2k Serv, mail, FTP, HTTP, two media servers, file server ( 56 days)
http://powerthings.com/pics/runtime/home_serv.jpg

One of the Domain controllers at work which is also doubling as file serving duties. Its win2k3 (525 days)
http://powerthings.com/pics/runtime/DC1.jpg

Mail server at my work - serving about 150 users - again win2k3 (641 days)
http://powerthings.com/pics/runtime/mailserv.jpg

An XP box set up as a Norton Ghost server and some other little tools (125 days)
http://powerthings.com/pics/runtime/ghost_backup.jpg


So pretty much the only reason I have or we have had to reboot any of these machines is critical updates or something installed that needs rebooting or upgrades in hardware such as more memory..etc.

Nice, but then again working with servers isn't something I have knowledge in so I can't say anything about such. Which I'll have to Google/Wiki/etc later.

 

[contoursvt]

Actually most decent registry cleaners (and there are free ones) eliminate the need to go digging through the registry for cleanups. They check files on the hard drives with references in the registry. If there is a registry entry pointing to files (or programs) that have been uninstalled or that dont exist, then it will remove that entry from the registry. Takes about 1 minute to run. Works well. I use one called Abexo registry cleaner. I only run a reg cleaner once every year or so. Its not like I install/uninstall hundreds of apps every day

 

[RainCityMacFan]

Actually most decent registry cleaners (and there are free ones) eliminate the need to go digging through the registry for cleanups. They check files on the hard drives with references in the registry. If there is a registry entry pointing to files (or programs) that have been uninstalled or that dont exist, then it will remove that entry from the registry. Takes about 1 minute to run. Works well. I use one called Abexo registry cleaner. I only run a reg cleaner once every year or so. Its not like I install/uninstall hundreds of apps every day

Heh, I used CCleaner. It was pretty damn good seeing it cleaned Internet history, cookie, prefetch data, etc... and the registry, but there were always some that I had to go in and remove...

My experience with Windows has been mostly great until Vista came out (exception to scanning for virus, defragging etc..)...

 

[in-ten-city]

Thanks for all the input - keep it coming! After carefully thinking this over, I've decided to install a special version of vista I found which includes all of the SP2 patches reprogrammed for vista and worked in as well as a bunch of unofficial patches put together by programmers around the world to make vista run smoother faster and more efficiently.

 

[techlover828]

umm, viruses and memory hog

 

[contoursvt]

Nooooo bad idea I think. If this special version was found online, then anyone could have hacked, changed it or even planted a trojan or virus..etc. If its legit, then I still wouldnt do it because unofficial patches may not have been investigated enough. Might cause you more problems.

I'd just install regular vista and do all the updates. If you have probs with the special version, you'll never know what is causing it....

Thanks for all the input - keep it coming! After carefully thinking this over, I've decided to install a special version of vista I found which includes all of the SP2 patches reprogrammed for vista and worked in as well as a bunch of unofficial patches put together by programmers around the world to make vista run smoother faster and more efficiently.

 

[jamesi]

if you have ever used it then you would know

 

[gnasher729]

UAC (user access control???? im not sure on wat it is) to me is extremely annoying. i do not need all of these warnings comming up all of the time. OSX also has these warnings, i get them all the time, that is only because i donot allow myself to be administrator of my computer, if i was an administrator the 'UAC' would hardly be present at all.

You have to understand that UAC is not there to protect you. It is there so that Microsoft can deny any responsibility if something goes wrong. You can turn it off; if you then catch a virus, it is of course your fault. Or you can click "Yes" automatically whatever it asks, so if you let some virus through, that is again your fault. And you have to click so often, if you catch a virus, you could never prove that you didn't allow it to get in.

That has always been the case with Windows: If something goes wrong, it is _your_ fault. That is why many people think Windows is a good operating system; things go wrong, but it is not Window's fault, it is the users fault. They are trained to find the fault in themselves, not in the design of the software. You know how different that is with Macs; if something goes wrong, it is the Macs fault. If you don't understand how to do something with a Windows application, it's because you are stupid. If you don't understand how to do something with a Mac application, it's because the application is stupid.

 

[Fukui]

I don't really *hate* vista, but I think because it was a real let down for what every was waiting for, that and its a batant attempt to out-osx osx in the graphics department......

....anyways, here is what I found when I opened "too many" windows in uh windows......

 

[DoFoT9]

You have to understand that UAC is not there to protect you. It is there so that Microsoft can deny any responsibility if something goes wrong. You can turn it off; if you then catch a virus, it is of course your fault. Or you can click "Yes" automatically whatever it asks, so if you let some virus through, that is again your fault. And you have to click so often, if you catch a virus, you could never prove that you didn't allow it to get in.

That has always been the case with Windows: If something goes wrong, it is _your_ fault. That is why many people think Windows is a good operating system; things go wrong, but it is not Window's fault, it is the users fault. They are trained to find the fault in themselves, not in the design of the software. You know how different that is with Macs; if something goes wrong, it is the Macs fault. If you don't understand how to do something with a Windows application, it's because you are stupid. If you don't understand how to do something with a Mac application, it's because the application is stupid.

i really dont see your point here... that viruses are the users problems and not windows problems?? no, viruses are windows problems, because they fail to stop them!

I don't really *hate* vista, but I think because it was a real let down for what every was waiting for, that and its a batant attempt to out-osx osx in the graphics department......

....anyways, here is what I found when I opened "too many" windows in uh windows......

HAHAHAHAHAHA 94 windows!!! that is a hell of a lot, thats like having..............4000 textedit windows open lol.*

*guestimation

 

[Shotgun OS]

Seriously, what missinformed person told you that and how could you believe it without really thinking about it? There is no reason what so ever a PC with windows cannot have that many or 3x that installed.

I was not told; it happened to me; an experience. Also, just because it can have 3x more than 6 apps installed doesn't mean you can run them all fine at the same time.

 

[Fukui]

HAHAHAHAHAHA 94 windows!!! that is a hell of a lot, thats like having..............4000 textedit windows open lol.*

*guestimation

Yea, well, sometimes when I'm real busy, I get up to around 40 or so windows... add spaces to that, and you easily can increase that number....

anyways, the interesing thing is, when closing all the windows in vista, the color scheme doesn't revert to earo extreme or whatever its called..... kinda annoying...

 

[RainCityMacFan]

I don't really *hate* vista, but I think because it was a real let down for what every was waiting for, that and its a batant attempt to out-osx osx in the graphics department......

....anyways, here is what I found when I opened "too many" windows in uh windows......

Lol I had that happen before...

 

[contoursvt]

It happened to you what? A big hand came out in front of the screen and told you to stop installing? Please give details. What OS, what hardware, how much ram? See otherwise it sounds rediculous.

I was not told; it happened to me; an experience. Also, just because it can have 3x more than 6 apps installed doesn't mean you can run them all fine at the same time.

 

[contoursvt]

Thats kinda weird. I just tried the same and opened a bit more but all was good. Wonder if its got to do with the amount of memory in the system or the video card.

I don't really *hate* vista, but I think because it was a real let down for what every was waiting for, that and its a batant attempt to out-osx osx in the graphics department......

....anyways, here is what I found when I opened "too many" windows in uh windows......