Vista is just another pretty face on XP & dumber

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

I've been playing Vista Ultimate for about a week and don't see anything I'd
rate as a real advantage over XP except a new pretty facelift and a much
dumber user interface but that seems to be the trend. Vista is tweaked to
make most all of our previous programs obsolete and this makes Vendor furious
since they must pay thousands to get their drivers updated & approved by MS.
Plus we then have to pay Hundeds to update our software and we still have
bugs!!
This is why the Mac people are going to have a serious laugh about using
Vista on Apple PC's since the Mac OS is 100 times more useful and
PROFESSIONAL and you'll soon see a migration to MACs more and more since it's
not as bad of a scam as Windows has become. Vista basically is the Millenium
to WIN98 which wasn't anything really different. BTW, I'm a WINXP user & so
far have never tried the Mac but it's getting closer all the time.
 
I don't think there's much merit to what you're saying. While Vista does
use some XP and earlier code, it really is a new operating system. I, for
one, don't care if any of my old software works on it. I am really tired of
having the advances in operating systems hindered by the need to support old
16 bit DOS programs.

I think Microsoft didn't do enough to eliminate compatibility with existing
software. I would love to see what an operating system could be if it were
designed with the best features of current hardware in mind and no
consideration at all for compatibility with software written for older
hardware.

There are a lot of things in Vista that are done completely different from
XP. While I often find those things to not be intuitive and sometimes the
new way is just wrong, and that's a problem, we all just need to remember
that we're moving on to a new way. Compatibility with the XP UI way of
doing things and compatibility with XP software should not be the goal. The
goal should be to provide a great experience using the latest OS on the
latest hardware.

Dale
 
OOpps... you just lost 3 points of IQ.... quick format and install XP
before its too late
 
Since your post is an opinion, and it's hard to prove an opinion wrong, I
would only state the following:

- People expect a fact lift with a new OS, that's why they have the new
jazzed-up UI. If they had just left the classic interface, everyone would be
complaining about how boring it is and why haven't they done anything to
change it. People are never happy, even when given what they ask for.
- Apparently, you are unfamiliar with how installed programs operate within
this new user environment, and how this helps keep your system from getting
trashed by poorly written programs. It also helps keep junior from crapping
up mom & dad's machine. There is a whole new engine underneath that dumber
UI, not everything that has changed is on the surface. If they had changed
everything about the user interface, people would have complained about that
too. It's be like trying out Linux for the first time where you don't know
anything about where anything is or how to accomplish something as simple
as opening a web page (or trying to install a driver so that your nic or
modem will work - now that can be a challenge).
- I'm guessing, but you probably were annoyed by prompts and disabled UAC,
and now are exposing your system to infection by viruses and other malware.
Once you are infected, you will get to share this with others. People
complain about wanting a secure system, then immediately set about disabling
the security.
- While some programs that rely on specific device drivers need to be
updated, many older programs run just fine under Vista. In fact, I'd think
it's safe to say that it is far more backwards compatible than XP was at its
release. Those that knew of these changes have dragged their feet in
producing compatible driver files, and that's Microsoft's fault how? The SDK
and DDK for Vista have been available for quite some time.
- You've not looked at the long-sought after parental controls, or you are
not a parent.
- People complain that it's taken 5 years for Vista. Well, the hardware
makers have had all that time to come up with compliant device drivers (much
of that code was in early alpha builds years ago) and many haven't yet.
- Macs - what can you say about them? People complain about Microsoft being
closed-source, yet they are able to supply an OS that will run on pretty
much any generically built x86 hardware. You weren't stuck with buying
Microsoft's hardware, you could buy what suited you best. Macs were limited
to only their own hardware for many years, and have migrated to x86 hardware
probably only because someone there realized that there was no future in
their proprietary platform.
- Vista is to XP as Millenium was to 98? Not hardly, not even close. ME was
a logical progression from 98's core, Vista's core uses familiar snap-ins,
but the similarities end there, and those interfaces were left so that the
underlying changes didn't create a whole new huge learning curve like moving
from DOS to Win3.x did.

Just my opinion, based on the roughly 4+ years I've been involved in the
development of Longhorn.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
 
Dale said:
I don't think there's much merit to what you're saying. While Vista
does use some XP and earlier code, it really is a new operating system.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's called XP SE.

Alias
 
Agreed. Lets make it an OS *only* with NO imbedded applets. Lets make
it open source. Lets make it so any/all the software items we want to
use are run as add-ons/plug-ins so nothing is running in the background
(read dozens of 'services' - for example) using up resources.

Lets call it L????.

Dale wrote:

be if it were designed with the best features of current hardware in
mind and no consideration at all for compatibility with software written
for older hardware.
Click to expand...

<SNIP>
 
If you lose 3 IQ points, that will put you into the negative area.. grow up
please and leave these newsgroups for what was intended..
 
Its intention is not one that you can define.

its intention is self defined by the conversation that are related to vista.

General means general, and any effort on your part to reduce its diversity
is what is truly negative.
 
linux has services too...


Dr. Heywood Floyd said:
Agreed. Lets make it an OS *only* with NO imbedded applets. Lets make it
open source. Lets make it so any/all the software items we want to use
are run as add-ons/plug-ins so nothing is running in the background (read
dozens of 'services' - for example) using up resources.

Lets call it L????.

Dale wrote:



<SNIP>
Click to expand...
 
many of the things you say are logical and correct.
HOWEVER, vista could have been much better, and I expected far more
than what vista is.

Vista is a disappointment, a small incremental change, and some of the
changes are not for the better too.

Vista started up as a dream to do wonderful things, and what is it now?
Its a.. hmm i guess its a little better than xp.....
instead of saying WOW that is intelligent design! At last Microsoft
used all its talent resources and money to make the best operating system
that ever was that will lead us beyond 2010.
 
For one, you have only used Vista for a week. Give it some time, look at the
technical documentation if you must. Some of us have been using it for
months.

Obviously, if you look at the technical documentation you will see the vast
changes. There is a reason why the Windows Vista Product Guide is over 300
pages long, and even in that span it doesn't get far into the details. There
are fundamental changes that were made that affect all aspects of the OS.

Finally, I found it amusing how you claim that "the Mac OS is 100 times more
useful and PROFESSIONAL", even though you later admit that you have never
tried the Mac. I'm not going to argue with that, no need to at this time,
but you don't have any grounds to say that. You simply made up that
statistic to fit your purpose.

--
/* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Robert Firth *
* Windows Vista x86 RTM *
* http://www.WinVistaInfo.org *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * */
 
Rick,

I have read your comments and agree to a certain point. While the
underlying code in Vista may be different compared to WinXP, I believe there
are still heaps of code that was reused in Vista.

I myself am a software engineer that have been developing windows based
applications for 6 years now using Visual Studio in Windows XP.

Do you know how many times I've crashed Explorer.exe? At least TWICE per
day. And having worked for Microsoft, you should know that it brings the
WHOLE task bar down and other stuff with it and just leaves you with a pretty
wallpaper to stare at.

I attended the Microsoft Beta2 conference here in Sydney at the Hilton Hotel
and TechEd, and do you know what the Microsoft Rep told us? He said that the
Vista Kernel was revamped so that a crash in the driver at the hardware level
*wont* bring the OS down. Yeh right!

I've already crashed Explorer.exe in Vista Ultimate several times and the
behaviour is *exactly* the same as in WinXP. Are you telling me that
Explorer.exe doesnt crash the task bar in Vista? Try it for yourself!

The explorer.exe may have a fancy interface now, but the underyling code and
beaviour looks the same.

When I first saw the new fancy explorer interface in Vista, I was like wow
they've finally changed the code in explorer.exe but I was unfortunately
wrong.

Also, I once crashed explorer.exe in WinXP pretty badly, and was quite
surprised to see an error message in GERMAN even though I was using an
English version of WinXP. I never saw this error message again, but it said
ACHTUNG and had some description in the explorer error message and I could
not recover windows other than a reboot...
 
MicroFox said:
many of the things you say are logical and correct.
HOWEVER, vista could have been much better, and I expected far more
than what vista is.

Vista is a disappointment, a small incremental change, and some of the
changes are not for the better too.

Vista started up as a dream to do wonderful things, and what is it now?
Its a.. hmm i guess its a little better than xp.....
instead of saying WOW that is intelligent design! At last Microsoft
used all its talent resources and money to make the best operating system
that ever was that will lead us beyond 2010.
Click to expand...

From http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/11255.html

"Yet another approach the company outlined is with regard to service
packs. Ballmer claimed Vista is of great quality, highly secure and most
reliable and as such would not require any service packs. Instead, he
said, the company will depend on feedback from customers to determine
any need for service packs."

Alias
 
Mac people have been saying this since Windows 3.0...

Yet the Mac community keeps getting smaller...

You also don't seem to have your Windows history all that well, Windows Me
came out AFTER Windows 98.


Bill F.
 
Back
Top