TEN good reasons to upgrade to Windows VISTA right now

  • Thread starter Thread starter invader
  • Start date Start date
I did the research too but cannot agree with your logic. Having better things to do than reinstall
perfectly good software (none of which is more than three years old), I choose the upgrade path from
Windows XP Pro SP2. I deinstalled the items the advisor told me to prior to installing Vista
Ultimate, pre-installed the Vista patch for Quicken 2007 (and other such patches), but still had
problems with getting connected to my wireless network when all was said and done. It wasn't until
I switched my network to "broadcast SSID" was Vista able to connect. Prior to that, every attempt
to manually join my own wireless network by typing in the SSID into the dialog box failed. For
security reasons, I normally don't broadcast my network's SSID.

I also found out the hard way that my scanner and photo printer (both from HP) are part of their
"planned obsolescence" to get me to part with more money on newer editions of perfectly fine
hardware. No thanks. Contributing to the solid waste disposal problem just so HP can earn more
money is not for me.

Bottom line: It's unlreasistic to assume most people have time to perform a clean install of Vista.
 
.. and what do you have against Linux? Each operating system has its
niche and will be used accordingly. Furthermore, I don't believe I've
mentioned or endorsed Linux in any post in this forum. Is everyone who
doesn't like Vista a "Loonix Loser" ????
Click to expand...

That's how I read it, anyone that doesn't like Vista or complains about it
is a *nix zealot.

That is SERIOUSLY not the case at all.
 
Conor said:
Loonix losers...takes very little to please little minds..
Click to expand...

Using your trusty shoot the messenger and then insult them? How tired
and old that is getting!

Vista: the Windows Me of NT.

Alias
 
And no, I'm not simply Microsoft-bashing. I like XP. I've used every
version of Windows from 3.1, and each version has offered significant
benefits. Vista is the first version where it is difficult to find any
significant improvement from the previous release.
Click to expand...

You have hit the nail on the head.

What benefit does Vista offer me ? is the question everyone needs to ask
themselves. Unfortunately, most people don't get to try before they buy.

I myself see no benefit what-so-ever, since XP runs rock-solid on my PC,
and I have it really tweaked out.

I know all of the s/w I use runs fine in XP.

I don't have/haven't had any security issues with viruses/malware.

And for $50, I could get the entire Stardock suite of desktop
'enhancements' to make Windows look exactly like Aero, plus a LOT more
customization features.

So what's the point in upgrading ?

99+% of Vista users are Vista users because that's what the OEM's are
selling.
 
Simple, then... go back to XP and cease sharing your opinions about Vista
here. Opinions matter little. Example: my opinion is that Vista works fine
for me. No problems. Does my opinion matter to you? No... does your opinion
matter to me? No...
Click to expand...

I see. So nobody should share their opinion about Windows Vista. How should
consumers make their decisions then? From the TV commercials? Take
Microsoft's word for it? Roll the dice?
 
Except if you have a previous Windows version and you buy Windows
Vista as an upgrade, you ***CAN'T*** do a fresh install!
 
DanS wrote:

[...]
I don't have/haven't had any security issues with viruses/malware...
Click to expand...

I see a couple of problems with that argument. First, the days of
obviously disruptive malware are pretty much over. The most dangerous
malware is now designed to be invisible to the victim. Perhaps an
expert can make your claim accurately but most of us have no idea
what is going on under the hood.

Second, if the great new Vista security features had been introduced
in Win2k (like they should have been) we probably wouldn't have the
horrible problem with bot-nets that we have today. And *that* is
reason enough for me (a *nix user) to push my Windows friends into
using Vista. (And that includes my wife who can't be bothered to
worry about malware.)
 
Conor said:
Except you wouldn't know because you've not used it.
Click to expand...

Who is more objective, the person watching the car wreck or the people
in the car? MS has *never* released *any* OS that was ready for prime
time. What makes you think now will be any different?

Alias
 
Consumer's need to investigate, aka due diligence, prior to jumping on the
Vista bandwagon. I would certainly NOT hope that because I say "I have no
problems with Vista, runs fine here." that anyone would run out and purchase
Vista and install it based on my observations of how it works here.

Conversely, I think it would be a shame for someone who reads all the
negative opinions in here to shy away from investigating whether Vista might
"work" for them.

Your "opinion" is that Vista is slower than XP. My "opinion" is that Vista
is, generally, as fast as XP, in some cases way faster, and in some cases
slower. Whose opinion wins?

Your "opinion" is that UAC sucks. My "opinion" is that it doesn't suck. Who
wins? Who cares? I don't hang in this NG to "win"... I hang here to try and
assist others with Vista.

My point is I don't think consumers should make a decision on whether to try
Vista or not based on your or my opinions.

Lang
 
I tend to agree with you, Lang. I've grown to like Vista, I've
been using it mostly since about June. Perhaps, I'm having
some version of Stockholm syndrome. ;-)

I still have XP on three computers, two of those I dual boot with
Vista. In some areas, I believe XP is still faster. Especially, copying,
moving, and deleting files. This is so true when copying or moving
files across a network. For whatever reason, Vista can be excruciatingly
slow during this process... has been that way for me since Beta2.

Even though I use Outlook for email and only use WinMail for newsgroups,
I think WinMail is absolutely horrible in performance. I believe the neglect
to be intentional, so that users will move to the ad supported WLMD.
There's a lot more I could say about WinMail, I'll spare you.

As I and others in this group have said for a long time- UAC is too
obnoxious and many users will just turn it off. It needs to be adjusted/fixed.
It's like having a seat belt that chokes you to death, folks won't wear it.

However, I think the biggest disappointment for some is the lack of
"Wow". I haven't felt that at any point, I've just gotten used to Vista
and that's why I use it.

Also, after all the years since XP was released and a new image based install
for Vista, the problems are still the same old same old. Sure, for the most part,
Vista is as good as XP, perhaps, a bit better all around. But you'd think, that
after all the development and years put into Vista, we'd get more than "as good as XP"
and " a bit better". Windows XP was a huge improvement over Win98 or
WinME- *huge*. So far, the same can not be said of Vista over XP.
Yes, there were similar problems upgrading from Win98 to XP. But, you
know what- XP was a totally different code base than 98. Vista is *not*
a totally new code base. It's built from Server 2003's code. Server 2003
is the brother of XP.

I expected more from Vista.... I'm sure once many users get past the gee wiz
of Aero glass- they'll be thinking the same.


Take care,

Michael


Lang Murphy said:
Consumer's need to investigate, aka due diligence, prior to jumping on the Vista bandwagon. I
would certainly NOT hope that because I say "I have no problems with Vista, runs fine here."
that anyone would run out and purchase Vista and install it based on my observations of how
it works here.

Conversely, I think it would be a shame for someone who reads all the negative opinions in
here to shy away from investigating whether Vista might "work" for them.

Your "opinion" is that Vista is slower than XP. My "opinion" is that Vista is, generally, as
fast as XP, in some cases way faster, and in some cases slower. Whose opinion wins?

Your "opinion" is that UAC sucks. My "opinion" is that it doesn't suck. Who wins? Who cares?
I don't hang in this NG to "win"... I hang here to try and assist others with Vista.

My point is I don't think consumers should make a decision on whether to try Vista or not
based on your or my opinions.

Lang
Click to expand...
 
Consumer's need to investigate, aka due diligence, prior to jumping on the
Vista bandwagon. I would certainly NOT hope that because I say "I have no
Click to expand...

and how are they supposed to investigate? One of the key ways for them to do
so is to read the experiences of other users of the software. I fail to see
how limiting free speech (even if it is a voluntary limitation as you
suggest) is going to benefit the consumer. The consumer can see both my
opinion and yours and decide for himself how to evaluate them.
Your "opinion" is that UAC sucks. My "opinion" is that it doesn't suck. Who
wins? Who cares? I don't hang in this NG to "win"... I hang here to try and
assist others with Vista.
Click to expand...

My opinion isn't that "UAC sucks". I've stated that it pops up numerous
annoying dialog boxes and ultimately will provide no significant security
once users start ignoring and blindly clicking those dialog boxes. This is a
valid observation and opinion and its up to the consumer to evaluate it. The
consumer can decide whether or not he wants the UAC popups.

Furthermore, I'm not the only one who feels this way. There are numerous
similar observations in this newsgroup, and UAC is a major subject of Apple's
anti-vista marketing campaign.
My point is I don't think consumers should make a decision on whether to try
Vista or not based on your or my opinions.
Click to expand...

Then what should they base it on? Microsoft's and Apple's marketing
departments? The so-called "experts"? Get kid who works at Best Buy?
 
Michael,

Concur on the file issues. Haven't tried file management over the network
with Vista, and, yes, even local file management can be aggravating. Not a
defence, but wonder if file management impacts system performance? At any
rate, I will modify my recommendations to include the file management issue.

I, too, only use WinMail for NG's. It works fine for me in that area...

Well, we agree to disagree on UAC. I don't have a problem with it.

Ah, yes... Wow. I readily agree that it's pure marketing hype. Not something
I've ever considered as it relates to using Vista.

Whether Vista is a totally different code base than XP means little to me.
It has many advancements, IMHO. Brother, sister, cousin, in-law, doesn't
really matter to me. The only thing that matters, I think, is does it work
acceptably on one's system? If yes, then woo-hoo. If no, then life sux. I
guess I've been lucky to be part of the woo-hoo group. And most of what
determines which group one subscribes to is if one's third party drivers are
up to snuff.

I'm not saying Vista is perfect. That would surely indicate that my IQ is in
the idiot range. And... it's hard for me, especially considering how solid
Vista has been on the seats on which I'm running it here, to dismiss it. I
use it, I like it. One hopes it will only get better.

Lang


MICHAEL said:
I tend to agree with you, Lang. I've grown to like Vista, I've
been using it mostly since about June. Perhaps, I'm having
some version of Stockholm syndrome. ;-)

I still have XP on three computers, two of those I dual boot with
Vista. In some areas, I believe XP is still faster. Especially, copying,
moving, and deleting files. This is so true when copying or moving
files across a network. For whatever reason, Vista can be excruciatingly
slow during this process... has been that way for me since Beta2.

Even though I use Outlook for email and only use WinMail for newsgroups,
I think WinMail is absolutely horrible in performance. I believe the
neglect
to be intentional, so that users will move to the ad supported WLMD.
There's a lot more I could say about WinMail, I'll spare you.

As I and others in this group have said for a long time- UAC is too
obnoxious and many users will just turn it off. It needs to be
adjusted/fixed.
It's like having a seat belt that chokes you to death, folks won't wear
it.

However, I think the biggest disappointment for some is the lack of
"Wow". I haven't felt that at any point, I've just gotten used to Vista
and that's why I use it.

Also, after all the years since XP was released and a new image based
install
for Vista, the problems are still the same old same old. Sure, for the
most part,
Vista is as good as XP, perhaps, a bit better all around. But you'd
think, that
after all the development and years put into Vista, we'd get more than "as
good as XP"
and " a bit better". Windows XP was a huge improvement over Win98 or
WinME- *huge*. So far, the same can not be said of Vista over XP.
Yes, there were similar problems upgrading from Win98 to XP. But, you
know what- XP was a totally different code base than 98. Vista is *not*
a totally new code base. It's built from Server 2003's code. Server 2003
is the brother of XP.

I expected more from Vista.... I'm sure once many users get past the gee
wiz
of Aero glass- they'll be thinking the same.


Take care,

Michael
Click to expand...
 
Invader,

First off, allow me to applaud someone who has differing opinions and
doesn't write posts that devolve into name calling. Much appreciated, for
real.

I guess my main issue with using this NG for posting opinions is that most
of the posts here are folks looking for help with problems they're having.
Folks that don't have issues don't generally pop in and go "Hey, having no
problems here." Point being; if someone lurks here to make a decision on
whether to move to Vista or not, mostly what they're going to read is
"problems." And I 'm not saying Vista doesn't have problems... but many, and
I acknowledge not all, of those problems, today, are 3rd party driver
related...

On UAC... how is that different than Linux security dialogs? I don't know or
I wouldn't ask... And as to Apple's marketing campaign against UAC...
please... it's only marketing. So we believe Apple's marketing but we
discount MS's marketing out of hand? Hahaha. Funny!

Definitely not the kid at Best Buy. OMG, no!

Lang
 
First off, allow me to applaud someone who has differing opinions and
doesn't write posts that devolve into name calling. Much appreciated, for
real.
Click to expand...

Agreed, there's way too much name calling in the newsgroups and it's
refreshing to not have it for a change!
On UAC... how is that different than Linux security dialogs? I don't know or
I wouldn't ask...
Click to expand...

First of all, any self-respecting linux user only uses the X-Windows system
so far as to open a shell prompt so he can work in text-mode, and be dialog-
free.... :)

It's true that Linux does have user accounts and there are times where one
needs to enter the root password to perform a task that requires root
permission. However, the whole process is somehow more "natural" than it is
with windows. The Vista experience is one of those things where you can feel
it's wrong and that they screwed it up somewhere, but you just can't quite
put your finger on what it is.

A big part of the problem is that while Linux software was always designed
for a multiuser environment, Windows software was not. Hence windows
programmers tended to put files anywhere they felt like it (i.e. c:\program
files\). Microsoft is as much to blame for moving around directories at
random between releases (c:\my documents, then c:\documents and settings, now
c:\users, ...) for seemingly arbitrary reasons. Windows Vista adds a
complicated and haphazard file system virtualization layer to try to make
sense out of this and 'trick' the legacy apps, but IMO it doesn't really work
right. Thus, a bunch of legacy software doesn't work right.

Microsoft would have done much better to:
1) Leave c:\programs files\ alone for legacy applications
2) Legacy apps get limited benefit from UAC
3) 'New Applications' are put in a different place than c:\program files\
and have UAC strictly enforced on them (i.e. they are expected to put their
files in the right places ... or else)

All that is only part of the problem; I still feel like I'm being bothered
with UAC popups at the wrong time and provided with insufficient information
to know whether to allow or deny. I can't quite put my finger on it, but
something is intuitively "wrong".
And as to Apple's marketing campaign against UAC...
please... it's only marketing. So we believe Apple's marketing but we
discount MS's marketing out of hand? Hahaha. Funny!
Click to expand...

Having never owned an Apple, I'm in not in a good position to comment.
However, the advertisement campaign they have is very effective, especially
with the ad about UAC. Again it goes back to Microsoft doing something
*wrong* in the basic design. Linux and MacOS have never had the virus,
spyware, adware, ..., problems that Windows has. Sometimes I get the feeling
that its a case of Microsoft closing the barn doors after the horses have run
away.
 
Well, I think we will continue to agree to disagree on UAC. Meaning, I don't
mind it. You certainly make some valid points about it, like users are not
going to read the prompts and just hit the Enter to key to get rid of the
dialog, but it's not MS's fault if users don't read the dialog. This is
probably a waste of both our time because most users who don't like UAC will
disable it. Can UAC be "better?" Well, what OS couldn't be better? Guess
we'll have to wait and see how SP1 addresses the UAC complaints.

I should think most virus writers target Windows because it has the largest
install base out there. Sure, it has security holes, but so do Linux and Mac
OS. And the Mac ads take UAC intrusion over the top, I think. C'mon... UAC
doesn't throw dialogs for every mouse click or key press or single sentence
in a Mac ad... yes, it's funny, but it's not really true either. It's
marketing. Apple has the "advantage" over PC's of being a closed system. Do
it the Apple way or it's the highway. If Apple had to support the infinite
number of hardware configurations that Windows has to deal with, well...
Apple doesn't, so it can be smug. But that doesn't make Apple right.

Lang
 
Back
Top