StarDestroyer.Net BBS

My old trusty laptop crashed, so I bought a new Dell with Windows Vista recently.

Let me just say, this is the worst operating system ever.

Even besides the fact that iTunes and a bunch of other programs are not compatible (because they haven't released new versions yet), which is a bitch in and of itself, the anti-virus software that they recommend you install is horrible. It prevents me from doing anything, including downloading updates for the anti-virus software. My printer isn't compatible, so I can't print.

It doesn't come with audio drivers for some bizarre reason, so I can't play music.

Hell, even Microsoft fucking Word doesn't work.

I hate Microsoft and Windows Vista.

Vista isn't ready for OEM, that much I know.

I wouldn't say it "sucks", because some of the new features are quite nice (especially for supporting users of the OS), but the all but absolute lack of drivers does mean that it's not ready for the general public, and OEMs should stick to windows XP and let people upgrade to Vista on their own. (So that at least when they find out their shit doesn't work they can go back to XP and wait until it does).

It sounds like Dell completely fucked up your install. Aside from Nvidia's video drivers, which have gotten better with the past couple of versions, I haven't had any problems with Vista. MS Office works fine, I've got QuickTime Alternative for my QT movie files, and all of my other hardware (including the frakin X-Fi) and programs run (some need Admin rights for compatibility, but that's no big deal).

You can wipe your machine and put XP back on it, or try to get another copy of Vista (that isn't polluted with Dell shit), and put it on.

iTunes is running on Vista64 for me. Word 2007 works fine; I haven't tested any older versions. I've had no issues with audio driver unavailability on two machines, though I hear Creative is lagging behind.

As for antivirus/anti-malware software, I'm using a combination of Windows Defender and McAfee VirusScan 8.5 Enterprise.

Ziggy Stardust wrote:My old trusty laptop crashed, so I bought a new Dell with Windows Vista recently.

Let me just say, this is the worst operating system ever.

BS. Everyone I know that has seen or used Vista has loved it. The changes over XP are quite good. Anyway WindowsME is far worse

Even besides the fact that iTunes and a bunch of other programs are not compatible (because they haven't released new versions yet), which is a bitch in and of itself,

Funny, I seem to be running iTunes right now and it is working fine with my install of Vista, I haven't come across any program that hasn't worked in Vista, save for a few specific third-party management tools, but that is to be expected with a new release. Give the devs a bit of time to update their software and things will change.

the anti-virus software that they recommend you install is horrible. It prevents me from doing anything, including downloading updates for the anti-virus software. My printer isn't compatible, so I can't print.

Haven't tried it so can't comment, you could however try Avast.

It doesn't come with audio drivers for some bizarre reason, so I can't play music.

If it hasn't come with drivers then it is Dell's fault, not Microsoft or Vista. Head to Dell's website and see if it has some for download, or you might want to try using Microsoft Update. When I installed Vista all drivers were automatically downloaded from Microsoft Update and worked fine.

Hell, even Microsoft fucking Word doesn't work.

Don't know what version your running, but I've tried Office 2007, 2003, 2000 & XP on Vista, and all worked fine.

I hate Microsoft and Windows Vista.

Newsflash: Microsoft doesn't write the hardware drivers nor the third party programs, they seem to be your problems. A new release will require some changes and have some teething problems. Give the software writers a bit of time. In 4 to 6 months things will be very different. Hate Dell for not giving you drivers.

Vendetta wrote:Vista isn't ready for OEM, that much I know.

I wouldn't say it "sucks", because some of the new features are quite nice (especially for supporting users of the OS), but the all but absolute lack of drivers does mean that it's not ready for the general public, and OEMs should stick to windows XP and let people upgrade to Vista on their own.

Not neccessarily. All it requires is that OEM's actually check that the hardware they're selling will work with Vista, instead of just banging a system together. Where I work we have sold quite a few Vista systems since launch, do your homework on the hardware and you wont have a problem.

Just for the record, my copy of Office is 2003. And Avast works beautifully in Vista 64.

Creative's drivers do need an updated, non-beta, WHQL release, the December beta drivers work fine (and Alchemy rocks).

Now, Quicktime doesn't work for me (can't figure that one out), but the Quicktime Alternative codec does, as does ffdshow. I don't use iTunes, so I can't comment on that.

This here is grounds enough for me to not switch to Vista anytime soon, and the other aspects of Vista evaluated in a couple of other Reg articles just reinforce that assessment.

I'll consider it in a couple of more years, but certainly not before there's at least one service pack out.

Edi

I found this to be pretty enlightening. Between their vaunted new UI and lackluster improvements to security, I've avoided switching.

Not that it matters. Eventually I'll need a new computer and with it comes Vista. I imagine most are in the same boat.

Edi wrote:This here is grounds enough for me to not switch to Vista anytime soon, and the other aspects of Vista evaluated in a couple of other Reg articles just reinforce that assessment.

I'll consider it in a couple of more years, but certainly not before there's at least one service pack out.

Edi

I won't be switching to Vista for a number of years as I tend to be dodgy about jumping to a new OS, what I got out of that article is effectively "IE still has problems, but is safer than the previous version. So go use Firefox instead." Rather than anything about the OS itself specifically.

Well...gamers are going to change to vista sooner or later...better than having a mac and getting problems about downloading 'old' patch for games like COD:UO.

Anyway, what with all the mac love here? I will only get a mac when there's more games made for mac rather than PC...

ray245 wrote:
Anyway, what with all the mac love here? I will only get a mac when there's more games made for mac rather than PC...

I'm not sure how you're translating "some people in the thread use iTunes" into "mac love fest".

I'm not the least bit interested in 3D windows and other BS.

Ballmer blames piracy for the poor sales of Vista and he has repeated his threats against Linux.
Now, I utterly dislike piracy, but this is too much IMHO.

General Zod wrote:

Edi wrote:This here is grounds enough for me to not switch to Vista anytime soon, and the other aspects of Vista evaluated in a couple of other Reg articles just reinforce that assessment.

I'll consider it in a couple of more years, but certainly not before there's at least one service pack out.

Edi

I won't be switching to Vista for a number of years as I tend to be dodgy about jumping to a new OS, what I got out of that article is effectively "IE still has problems, but is safer than the previous version. So go use Firefox instead." Rather than anything about the OS itself specifically.

Did you read all three pages or just the first one?

Edi

Edi wrote:

General Zod wrote:

Edi wrote:This here is grounds enough for me to not switch to Vista anytime soon, and the other aspects of Vista evaluated in a couple of other Reg articles just reinforce that assessment.

I'll consider it in a couple of more years, but certainly not before there's at least one service pack out.

Edi

I won't be switching to Vista for a number of years as I tend to be dodgy about jumping to a new OS, what I got out of that article is effectively "IE still has problems, but is safer than the previous version. So go use Firefox instead." Rather than anything about the OS itself specifically.

Did you read all three pages or just the first one?

Edi

I didn't notice that there was more than the first page, so no.

I was pretty surprised when I started seeing the ads for new Laptops that included Windows Vista. Is this common, since Vista has not been out that long? I thought there was more of a delay.

RogueIce wrote:I was pretty surprised when I started seeing the ads for new Laptops that included Windows Vista. Is this common, since Vista has not been out that long? I thought there was more of a delay.

I was browsing through my local Office Depot a few weeks ago and they've already got copies of Vista for sale and computers (laptops & desktops) for sale that have Vista pre-installed. I was rather surprised at that myself.

There are two options for solving your Vista problem. The first would be to try and downgrade to XP. In the past, AFAIK, Microsoft would allow you to "downgrade" to earlier versions of the software, although I don't know if this will still be the case with Vista. The other, smarter option, IMO, is to switch to a free operating system.

I would suggest Ubuntu Linux, as I've installed it on an older Dell laptop, and I got perfect hardware detection out of the box (full sound, networking and proper screen resolution detection). You might not get compatibility with your printer, depending on the model, but a very large number of printers are supported (including, IIRC, all the HP printers). Additionally, you get to avoid the hassles that go with the use of any proprietary operating system.

RThurmont wrote:I would suggest Ubuntu Linux, as I've installed it on an older Dell laptop, and I got perfect hardware detection out of the box (full sound, networking and proper screen resolution detection). You might not get compatibility with your printer, depending on the model, but a very large number of printers are supported (including, IIRC, all the HP printers). Additionally, you get to avoid the hassles that go with the use of any proprietary operating system.

Instead, you get the joy of the hassles that go with the user of many FOSS operating systems

RThurmont wrote:There are two options for solving your Vista problem. The first would be to try and downgrade to XP. In the past, AFAIK, Microsoft would allow you to "downgrade" to earlier versions of the software, although I don't know if this will still be the case with Vista. The other, smarter option, IMO, is to switch to a free operating system.

As far as I know, that policy is still in effect. If you have bought a Windows license, you can install any Windows version up to and including that named in the license but not anything else with more advanced features.

So, someone with an XP Pro license would be perfectly within his rights to install anything from Win95 to XP Pro but not Windows Server 2003 or beyond. Somebody with a Win2000 license could install 95, 98, ME or 2000. Of course, if you install a lesser system, you can't also install the maximum allowed by the license unless you also have a license for the older one.

I have not heard that this policy would have been revoked with the introduction of Vista. There is no conceivable incentive to doing so because the one and only thing such revocation would accomplish is alienating the small subset of customers who sometimes find the need to do this sort of thing. And as far as e.g. ME systems are concerned, this policy is a godsend. That flaky piece of shit will not stay uncorrupted for more than a week at a stretch if there have been any problems at any point, so in my previous workplace we automatically downgraded users to Win98 if they brought in a WinME machine for any reason otehr than hardware failure. Much easier and less hassle that way and we wouldn't get a boomerang out of it.

Edi

RThurmont wrote:The other, smarter option, IMO, is to switch to a free operating system.

Not always smart depending on what you do with your machine. I cannot run anything other than Windows as some applications I require simply aren't available for anything else. Dual booting is too much hassle when I can do everything fine on windows.

Not always smart depending on what you do with your machine. I cannot run anything other than Windows as some applications I require simply aren't available for anything else. Dual booting is too much hassle when I can do everything fine on windows.

Well the trick is to slowly wean yourself off of those proprietary apps (which I've been doing). I'm in largely the same position, but I have assloads of computers, so I do recognize that this is more of a deal for some people than it is for me. However, one alternative to dual booting is to use VMWare to run Windows.

Instead, you get the joy of the hassles that go with the user of many FOSS operating systems

Which are trivial for most users (with the exception of hardware detection problems, hence my reccommendation to use Ubuntu), since most users can get by with the packages either supported by, or shipped with, their distro.

That flaky piece of shit will not stay uncorrupted for more than a week at a stretch if there have been any problems at any point, so in my previous workplace we automatically downgraded users to Win98 if they brought in a WinME machine for any reason otehr than hardware failure.

I actually managed to use WinME (without reinstalling) from January of 2001 through September of 2004, but it really started to fail in late 2003. The fact that it survived until 2004 before crashing completely continues to amaze me. However, when it worked, I found it less obnoxious than Windows XP.

BTW, do any of you know how to get downgrade media? I'm seriously tempted to downgrade to Windows 2000 on all of my desktops, as I'm about to do a complete reinstall of everything on all of my computers to optimize performance (I want each system to dualboot Windows and Linux, and on Windows I want to use VMWare and create a "high risk" Windows clone VM and a Linux VM). I also have an OEM license for Windows ME that has of course been unused since 2004, that I'd love to downgrade to 98.

RThurmont wrote:Well the trick is to slowly wean yourself off of those proprietary apps (which I've been doing). I'm in largely the same position, but I have assloads of computers, so I do recognize that this is more of a deal for some people than it is for me. However, one alternative to dual booting is to use VMWare to run Windows.

Well, yeah (I do the opposite and run Ubuntu in VMWare) but from the performance and quality-of-use perspectives, to do so is decidedly suboptimal. That, and some people simply do not care about the proprietary/non-proprietary ideology debate And for the OP, he'd have to run Vista in a VM ... which is probably going to be painful.

Which are trivial for most users (with the exception of hardware detection problems, hence my recommendation to use Ubuntu), since most users can get by with the packages either supported by, or shipped with, their distro.

Well, again, it all depends on the user.

I actually managed to use WinME (without reinstalling) from January of 2001 through September of 2004, but it really started to fail in late 2003. The fact that it survived until 2004 before crashing completely continues to amaze me. However, when it worked, I found it less obnoxious than Windows XP.

Howso? Personally, I find it extremely annoying to work with any non-NT-based Windows OS on the desktop.

BTW, do any of you know how to get downgrade media? I'm seriously tempted to downgrade to Windows 2000 on all of my desktops, as I'm about to do a complete reinstall of everything on all of my computers to optimize performance (I want each system to dualboot Windows and Linux, and on Windows I want to use VMWare and create a "high risk" Windows clone VM and a Linux VM). I also have an OEM license for Windows ME that has of course been unused since 2004, that I'd love to downgrade to 98.

Due to the lawsuit with Sun over various issues, Microsoft stopped distributing any piece of software that contained the old Microsoft Java Virtual Machine (which includes Windows 2000). You can't even get it off of MSDN. At any rate, XP is effectively superior in almost every way compared to 2000, so why not just use that?

atg wrote: Anyway WindowsME is far worse

it is true Windows ME was horrible and nothing worked.

RThurmont, if you know anybody who runs a computer repair shop, they are guaranteed to have old Windows versions lying about. Ask around.

Edi