gizmodo.com — Of all the ware Microsoft churns out from its sweatshop of "lightning bolt, lightning bolt" nerds, Windows is the one most inexorably tied to the public image of the company. Although we agree that Vista could have used a bit more time shoved back into the silicon womb for some feature buffing and bug fixing, it's not nearly as bad as people say.
Jun 26, 2008 View in Crawl 4
aliguanaJun 27, 2008
no, the sheep people are over there... *points to the four-times round the block queue for the new iPhone*
metalstormJun 27, 2008
Some things that I like about it are the windows manager that keeps the window drawing quirks you get on XP down to a minimum.Better search, more streamlined updates, superfetch is nice if you have the extra RAM, drivers were kicked out of the kernel so they have a harder time taking down your whole system. Signed driver protection is nice in x64 for protecting general users. Can still work around a hack for it if you are a power user and need something that isn't signed.The address bar in explorer is much better IMO, same with the start menu. I don't seem to remember task bar items remaining after a crash like in XP anymore. Sorta an improvement I guess is that Copying files is more efficient memory-wise (only two copies instead of three needed now) but results in slower copy times.So there are a lot of little things that are better but if XP is working fine for you I wouldn't recommend just buying Vista for the heck of it but I see no point in not going Vista on a new computer given you want/need to run Windows.There are still a few problems with it and my biggest is that since the network stack was rewritten (it really needed to be but still...) a lot of apps that were written against it for XP tend to have problems in Vista. It ends up meaning you have to wait until someone releases the tools for Vista or you write one yourself.
smek2Jun 27, 2008
10 Reason it is not THAT bad? Consider that this product comes from the worlds biggest software company and was developed for 5 years it is a big failure.
insomniac8400Jun 27, 2008
Using it.
bigdaddyphat911Jun 28, 2008
It's pretty bad when you have to post an article with the words "isn't THAT bad". The article goes on about how Vista isn't THAT much worse than XP, and in some ways it's even just as good. I'm confused...isn't a NEW operating system supposed to be BETTER??? Apple: 1Microsoft: 0
kyderdogJun 28, 2008
Your Xp isn't going to stop working,Unless you upgrade too much.
digitalpencilJun 29, 2008
quad core w/ 4gb ram and dual w/ 2 (laptop)like i said though, it's largely irrelevant when XP is always faster on the same set of hardware. Doesn't matter what improvements they've made with the graphics when the OS runs slower than its predecessor. defend it all you want, it's got some good features, it's got some bad features but in the absence of WinFS and virtual folders i cannot for life of me understand why anyone would willingly remove the edge their pennies bought them with hi-end hardware, by using Vista.
chrisduserJun 29, 2008
Thanks. Vista Codec Package did the trick.
metznerJul 7, 2008
<a class="user" href="http://youtube.com/watch?v=eBGIQ7ZuuiU">http://youtube.com/watch?v=eBGIQ7ZuuiU</a>reasons why vista sucks
nascenttJul 19, 2008
Disabling UAC defeats the point of using vista
Closed AccountJul 24, 2008
It may have escaped your attention that the speed at which a usb drive can read/write is far too slow to make this at all useful.Go back to figuring out which anti virus program you like the best.
maxscheieDec 23, 2008
Oh come on! Vista IS bad!They ripped off every single feature that would really have been nice before the release. And now we got an OS that sucks a lot of power from the cpu for a fancy-looking screen.And UAC is annoying. Really annoying. It pi* me off.---<a class="user" href="http://www.vitalis-bensheim.de/">http://www.vitalis-bensheim.de/</a>