Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Why Does Everyone Hate Vista?
- Thread starter in-ten-city
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Mac: Hello, I'm a Mac
Security: Mac has issued a salutation. Cancel or allow?
PC: Allow. And I'm a PC.
Security: You are returning Mac's salutation. Cancel or allow?
PC: Allow
Mac: OK, what gives?
Security: Mac is asking a question. Cancel or allow?
PC: Allow. He's part of Vista, my new operating system. PC's have a lot of security problems so he asks me to authorize pretty much anything I do.
Security: You are pointing out Vista's flaws. Cancel or allow?
PC: Allow. I could turn him off but then he wouldn't give me any warnings at all and that would defeat the purpose.
Security: You are coming to a sad realization. Cancel or allow?
PC: Allow.
Sorry, I couldn't resist.
Security: Mac has issued a salutation. Cancel or allow?
PC: Allow. And I'm a PC.
Security: You are returning Mac's salutation. Cancel or allow?
PC: Allow
Mac: OK, what gives?
Security: Mac is asking a question. Cancel or allow?
PC: Allow. He's part of Vista, my new operating system. PC's have a lot of security problems so he asks me to authorize pretty much anything I do.
Security: You are pointing out Vista's flaws. Cancel or allow?
PC: Allow. I could turn him off but then he wouldn't give me any warnings at all and that would defeat the purpose.
Security: You are coming to a sad realization. Cancel or allow?
PC: Allow.
Sorry, I couldn't resist.
This troll thread, having nothing to do with Windows on a Mac, should be deleted. Move along ... nothing to see here.
_
_
I currently have Vista Ultimate installed on my Boot Camp partition, and like others have mentioned. That whole "Cancel or Allow" is terribly annoying, hopefully when leopard comes out they'll be much better drivers for the MBP that'll allow things like full native resolution to an hdtv and the power management driver/software is fixed.
Also, it's not so much a flaw, but the amount of inconsistencies with-in the OS just bug the crap out of me. Same thing as OS X, but I feel there are less inconsistencies with-in OS and hopefully leopard will fix that as well.
Also, it's not so much a flaw, but the amount of inconsistencies with-in the OS just bug the crap out of me. Same thing as OS X, but I feel there are less inconsistencies with-in OS and hopefully leopard will fix that as well.
What nonsense is this? Have you ever used Vista?
Efficiency does not equal low-resources used. Efficiency means utilizing what hardware you have, and Vista simply, does, not, perform.
Your argument about "Well, of course it needs high-end specs" fails because it doesn't acknowledge that many high-end specced PCs are failing to use their power because the OS is too resource-hungry for its own uses, read: efficient.
And as for later comparing setting up Windows to driving a Mercedes, whereas OS X (the easy one to set-up) to riding a bicycle, well that's clinically insane, sir.
I call troll on this one.
I had it installed for a few months and ended up removing it. It just kept annoying me. The security features are obnoxious. You install a program, decide you don't want it and then uninstall it. You find that it has left some files under Program Files and try to delete them. Vista won't let you, even if you're an administrative user. You don't have access to that. Hell, you don't even have write access to the root of the c: drive.
That's one example of my problems. I felt like Vista wanted to be in charge of the computer instead of letting me do what I wanted to do. It was in the way too often, and I'd rather not mess with it. You can probably turn some of that stuff off, but I don't care for tinkering - I just want to do what I want to do.
That's one example of my problems. I felt like Vista wanted to be in charge of the computer instead of letting me do what I wanted to do. It was in the way too often, and I'd rather not mess with it. You can probably turn some of that stuff off, but I don't care for tinkering - I just want to do what I want to do.
I agree as well, but also from a 3D imagery POV directX is rubbish that's why I've completely moved to Linux.
- Driver support is rubbish, I still have no sound, and for the first 3 months had no wireless internet either, all becasue the drivers didn't exist (this in part is the manufacturers fault.)
- It shaves about 4fps of my games when compared to windows XP on my machine.
- It crashes on a more regular basis on my machine than XP did (an achievement in itself)
- It has increased resource requirements as the resource management is lax compared to xp.
- Why have 8 versions? when 2 (or maybe 1) would surfice.
- The networking settings are now a pain in the a$$ to change, the options layout is very converluted, the new network map is good though.
- You get the choice of annoying security popup boxes telling you when the tinniest thing has changed or been accessed, then when you turn this off you get other annoying warnings reminding you that you have turned off the first set of annoying security features!!! This has been much better implemented in other OS' e.g. OSX.
- It doesn;t suport some of my "CD/DVD Tools"
Here's why I "hate" Vista (I know there are repeats in here, but these are all based on direct experience, and I approached it--I think--without an axe to grind):
* Driver and software support is still a lot worse than XP. I know this will work itself out over time, but for now, I don't really want to pay to upgrade hardware and software.
* It is really quite expensive. I don't have an infinite supply of money.
* OK, I understand the need for UAC, but for PETE'S SAKE, WHY, oh why does it make me click through multiple dialog boxes to authorize one operation? And why does it sometimes, after I've essentially confirmed twice, tell me I can't do what I was trying to do after all--with a third dialog box I have to click through. Grrrrr. And all the screen mode changing throughout the process is stupid, too. Basically, I think the whole UI for it is highly annoying junk.
The bottom line is that I would take it on a new computer, but the $$$ and frustration to upgrade an existing computer is completely out of the question. On the other hand, I'll may never buy another new PC.
* Driver and software support is still a lot worse than XP. I know this will work itself out over time, but for now, I don't really want to pay to upgrade hardware and software.
* It is really quite expensive. I don't have an infinite supply of money.
* OK, I understand the need for UAC, but for PETE'S SAKE, WHY, oh why does it make me click through multiple dialog boxes to authorize one operation? And why does it sometimes, after I've essentially confirmed twice, tell me I can't do what I was trying to do after all--with a third dialog box I have to click through. Grrrrr. And all the screen mode changing throughout the process is stupid, too. Basically, I think the whole UI for it is highly annoying junk.
The bottom line is that I would take it on a new computer, but the $$$ and frustration to upgrade an existing computer is completely out of the question. On the other hand, I'll may never buy another new PC.
Speaking of e-machines, that is the one PC in the household at the moment. personally nobody here wants vista on that computer. my reason is that it won't work right. In order for vista to work properly we will have to 1. upgrade the **** out of the machine or buy a new one. 2. it will use too much RAM and resources for the OS to be beneficial in my opinion. this seems totally silly to me, because OS x can work on G3 processors. backward compatibility, people.
Personally I find Windows XP to be much better despite the fact that the inner workings of Vista have seen a relatively major upgrade in comparison to WinXP. The reasons I don't like Vista are:
I prefer using XP and of course Mac OS X (more Mac of course!)
- The User Interface. I just can't get used to it. Even when using a big monitor at 1920x1200 everything seems cluttered and big. Using the same resolution there is more space when using XP than Vista.
- The new Windows Explorer has much more options than in XP but it is cluttered
- I hate the fact that Microsoft has hidden many options. Changing the resolution requires more clicks than before and when the user finds how to do something he/she could easily do before, the same old dialogue comes up. This is not a new interface, its just a front-end for novice users that NEVER used a computer before!
- Performance. Do I need to say more?
- Drivers are still a major issue. Many devices and most of all in Laptops have problems with drivers. I expect though that this will change in the next couple of months.
- User Account Control is badly implemented.
I prefer using XP and of course Mac OS X (more Mac of course!)
People, please stop posting. He hasn't posted a thing on this site since yesterday evening. Just let it go.
I am sorry my friend but I don't get it. Why should we stop posting? I was just answering to the original question...
Because just about every post provided a valid answer. The guy stuck a soft spot and has left. We're talking to ourselves.
And I hope you don't wasn't directing my comments at you personally - I was just noticing that there have been about 20 posts in this thread since the guy last responded. If my tone cause you to feel otherwise, I apologize.
It mimics osX much more than XP, a lot of the legacy apps don't work properly, driver issues and dumb useless security measures.
In my case its Filemaker, XP certified and my old V6 runtime runs better on Vista than XP. Problem is that version 8 is unusable in Vista because of some strange interface problems, don't know how well v9 runs. Then i'm not talking about DOS apps many people rely on.
Vista is a glorified XP, not the new and rewritten OS Microsoft is working on the last 10 years. Vista is indeed the Millennium version of XP, unneeded and unwanted by the majority of PC users.
Mac users on the other hand find it the best Windows to date.
it's not only Vista, it's MS
http://www.windows-sucks.com
There are explained all the reasons why Windows has always sucked. But yes, Vista is definitely the ultimate insult.
http://www.windows-sucks.com
There are explained all the reasons why Windows has always sucked. But yes, Vista is definitely the ultimate insult.
Since you seem to refute anything people give you for their opinions on Vista on why they don't like it, why don't you use Vista for awhile, then use XP, and then make the choice yourself on which one you want to use.
Simple answer is that it runs like a beta (software related) when they had five years to work on the thing.
Simple answer is that it runs like a beta (software related) when they had five years to work on the thing.
I have not left, I am well alive and have read all of the responses. I haven't responded because I feel I said all that needed to be said thus far and there hasnt been much that really elicited a response that would contain anything new.
I'm pretty offended though that people have taken such a negative tone in answering me... I asked an honest question and did not expect such negativite, loathful, and defeatist responses. Yes, there were a few well thought out and rational responses, but for the most part, people kept repeating the same platitudinal and unrelated arguments. For the sake of objectivity here, lets try to leave our abberant emotions aside, and try to communicate in a more coherent manner. I know, it may be hard, as many here just naturally have lots of rage when it comes to anything microsoft...but please, don't take your microsoft hatred out on me...
I have not left, I am well alive and have read all of the responses. I haven't responded because I feel I said all that needed to be said thus far and there hasnt been much that really elicited a response that would contain anything new.
I'm pretty offended though that people have taken such a negative tone in answering me... I asked an honest question and did not expect such negativite, loathful, and defeatist responses. Yes, there were a few well thought out and rational responses, but for the most part, people kept repeating the same platitudinal and unrelated arguments. For the sake of objectivity here, lets try to leave our abberant emotions aside, and try to communicate in a more coherent manner. I know, it may be hard, as many here just naturally have lots of rage when it comes to anything microsoft...but please, don't take your microsoft hatred out on me...
For the most part, the only reason you received hostile responses is that you snapped back at anyone who honestly answered your intial question (Why Does Everyone Hate Vista?) You asked for their opinion, they gave it, and you said their opinion was worthless. Hardly fair.
My two cents: I dislike Vista. Not for any technical reasons, but for the fact that it just feels clunkier and more obtuse then XP. For me personally, that's important in an OS.
What it boils down to is this choice: do you want a brand new OS that still has a few kinks to work out (like any new OS, especially a Windows one), or do you want a battle-hardened os that has been out for 5 years?
Or, perhaps more importantly, you have a Mac. Why do you need Windows? If its for a particular piece of software, check whether it was built for XP or Vista, and you've solved your problem.
I'm not sure what hardware you guys have tried vista on to say its slow but I find it pretty much as responsive as XP. I use Vista Business 32bit at work on a Core2 Duo E6300 system with 2gig ram and at home I run Vista Ultimate 64bit on a Core2 Duo E6600 with 4gig ram.
I've also installed Vista business from our MSDN version on a P3 800Mhz with 768mb ram, 40gig HD and a Radeon 8500. Was very usable to be honest.
Also I have encountered only two devices so far I was unable to get working. One was my old (and I mean old) Audiophile 2496 sound card which I dont even use anymore and a Logitech webcam. Also these problems were on the 64bit version. The webcam does work in the 32bit version.
As for it being resource intensive - it really isnt. If you have the ram, it will take all of it using its superfetch service which preloads some items instead of leaving the ram unused. This speeds of launching of commonly used apps. If you dont want this feature, it can be turned off via services. It uses much more disk space than XP - about 12gig on a clean install but its because it installed all options on the HD. There is no more add/remove windows components. There is only turning on/off now. This is not an issue anymore as the smallest HD you can possibly buy is 74gig these days unless you go out of the way to get a smaller one.
The security nagging thing is just a way for everyone to bit*h. You can disable it with like 2 clicks and the computer will be have like XP. I'd leave it enabled if I gave a computer to my mother.... lets put it that way.
Game performance is slower as drivers are not as mature. Its a huge problem. I benchmark 171 FPS in Doom3 instead of 190 FPS. I dont even know how I can live with this performance hit.
Too many versions? Hows that a problem. Just frigging pick one. I mean how the hell can you shop at a grocery store with SOOOOO many things on the shelf if you cant decide on a version of Vista. Decide what you cannot live without and pick the right version that will fit the bill.
Vista has been as rock solid as XP for me on both systems so I'm unaware of the instability problems. Also my GF is not calling me all the time with help with vista on her notebook so obviously she's doing fine too. Incidentally she purchased the cheapes POS Toshiba she could get which has 512mb RAM, shared memory and Vista Basic. Oh and a Celeron CPU too. Vista is still not horribly bad on there. Yes its slow but much better than I would have imagined it to be.
Anyway thats all. People whined the same when XP first came out too so......
I've also installed Vista business from our MSDN version on a P3 800Mhz with 768mb ram, 40gig HD and a Radeon 8500. Was very usable to be honest.
Also I have encountered only two devices so far I was unable to get working. One was my old (and I mean old) Audiophile 2496 sound card which I dont even use anymore and a Logitech webcam. Also these problems were on the 64bit version. The webcam does work in the 32bit version.
As for it being resource intensive - it really isnt. If you have the ram, it will take all of it using its superfetch service which preloads some items instead of leaving the ram unused. This speeds of launching of commonly used apps. If you dont want this feature, it can be turned off via services. It uses much more disk space than XP - about 12gig on a clean install but its because it installed all options on the HD. There is no more add/remove windows components. There is only turning on/off now. This is not an issue anymore as the smallest HD you can possibly buy is 74gig these days unless you go out of the way to get a smaller one.
The security nagging thing is just a way for everyone to bit*h. You can disable it with like 2 clicks and the computer will be have like XP. I'd leave it enabled if I gave a computer to my mother.... lets put it that way.
Game performance is slower as drivers are not as mature. Its a huge problem. I benchmark 171 FPS in Doom3 instead of 190 FPS. I dont even know how I can live with this performance hit.
Too many versions? Hows that a problem. Just frigging pick one. I mean how the hell can you shop at a grocery store with SOOOOO many things on the shelf if you cant decide on a version of Vista. Decide what you cannot live without and pick the right version that will fit the bill.
Vista has been as rock solid as XP for me on both systems so I'm unaware of the instability problems. Also my GF is not calling me all the time with help with vista on her notebook so obviously she's doing fine too. Incidentally she purchased the cheapes POS Toshiba she could get which has 512mb RAM, shared memory and Vista Basic. Oh and a Celeron CPU too. Vista is still not horribly bad on there. Yes its slow but much better than I would have imagined it to be.
Anyway thats all. People whined the same when XP first came out too so......