digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

PC maker Acer hits out at Windows' Vista operating system

physorg.com — The head of Taiwan-based personal computer maker Acer, Gianfranco Lanci, hit out at Microsoft's Windows Vista operating system, saying that the "entire industry" was disappointed by it.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • strictnein, on 10/10/2007, -116/+15Who cares what Acer says? Seriously. What a no count company.
    • WiseWeasel, on 10/10/2007, -4/+62They are the fastest growing PC vendor in the US. By this time next year, they will likely be in the third spot in the US. Worldwide, their growth is pretty amazing as well. Whatever they're doing, they're doing something right...
      • qbyte, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1Fastest growing? It was started in 1976 and is still far behind the real movers and shakers. They aren't the fastest growing PC vendor in the US. They're the slowest to catch up PC vendor in the US. This is because they have yet to come out with anything innovative or competitive.

        With that being said, I do agree with their statements about Vista.
    • felman87, on 10/10/2007, -1/+35yeah, number 4 is such a ***** number
      • championchap, on 10/10/2007, -10/+3Don't even win a medal for coming 4th. May as well have not competed.
    • DocHoliday22, on 10/10/2007, -6/+35Acer sells decent PC's for low cost. If it wasn't for Acer those that couldn't afford PCs or laptops would be ***** out of luck.
      • marx2k, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I stopped reading right after "Aces sells decent PC's"

        Because of Acer, those that buy Acer PCs are ***** out of luck
    • munter1942, on 10/10/2007, -6/+55Who cares what strictnein says? Seriously. What a no count Digg poster
    • potp, on 10/10/2007, -1/+29Acer was also one of the pioneers of shipping their low end machine with linux. i love acer. they dont go for flash or bling. They just make computers that have what you need and nothing more and that too for a decent price.
    • Septimus, on 10/10/2007, -18/+4I agree, Acer suck. The main reason their ***** laptops can barely run Vista is due to their rubbish custom driver support.
    • NeverAcquiesce, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10Acer computers: Great power to price ratio but ***** build quality and god awful customer service (especially here in the UK).

      This is my experience with them. I am NEVER buying Acer again.
      • rabidstrike, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2very true..recently my 1652 which is like a year and half old started to crack by the lcd lid hinges. I opened it up and was appaled by the quality of the plastics and the structural engineering is simply ridiculous. They are just getting bye thanks to the general sturdiness of the components, even the motherboard is a mechanically stressed structure. Plus there was this time when I upgraded to the recommended BIOS to support vista and the display just died. Acer wouldn't help me unless I paid and I had to touch type by trial and error method to downgrade the bios. Thankfully it worked.
        don't buy acers. It's not a good long term investment.
    • OwdenBowden, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2Maybe if they all did the same thing MS would actually put out an OS that works.
    • GeekyGerge, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I have vista running on my Acer. It did have crap ram.
    • lukee, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Acer also does manufacturing of MacBooks, IIRC.
      • ShrimpCrackers, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Sorry you're thinking AsusTek and Compal. Macbook Pro's are by Quanta.
  • LordSkywalker, on 10/10/2007, -6/+50Only reason I recommended Acer back when I worked at Staples is because the don't load their laptops with *****. We did seem to get a higher amount of returns on them though. Don't know if it was the hardware though, a lot of morons would return laptops just because they'd ***** it up within two weeks.
    • thelastknowngod, on 10/10/2007, -7/+5well the times they have changed. acer comes with more ***** than anyone else.
      • benguild, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10Incorrect. Acers are the easiest to sell, for me anyway. I recommend them, because as Skywalker said, they don't load ***** onto their PC's, and they blow HP and Compaq out of the water (yes, I know they're owned by the same company). Just wish they would put a decent amount of RAM in there to run Vista...
        • zybch, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3Yeah, 512Mb minus 64Mb for the on-board video) is utterly pathetic!
    • aussieNickuss, on 10/10/2007, -1/+14I recently set-up two Acer laptops. They were loaded with their fair share of crapware.
      • daza, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Exactly. Acer in Australia load their PCs with heinous amounts of bloatware.
    • megaloid, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9Have you bought a computer with Vista preinstalled? I did. One thing I have learned as a Vista user is that it is entirely possible to have the operating system ***** *itself* up. It's amazing. At some point, Vista hit a snag with its own, official Microsoft software updates, and attempted to download and install the same packages over and over. The help database was, of course, not very helpful. It took a clean reinstall to restore sanity to new computer.

      While I am not a software engineer, I am also not one of those rubes who doesn't know how to delete the crapware icons from his new Best Buy machine. So, I surmise that if I'm doing two reinstalls on a six-month old computer, God knows what kind of difficulty the non-computer-literate masses are having with Vista. In the great scheme of things, this translates into a lot of customer frustration and lost productivity.
      • fatsobob, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I have an acer laptop that came with vista. I tried to use it, but after a while I switched to XP. Acer has a great driver site that has both the vista and xp drivers available.
      • ScornedPatriot, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2In XP if it tries to download the same updates and install them over and over, you just delete the software distribution folder in the windows folder and that fixes it. Not sure if it works in Vista, but it's worth a try.
    • johnboyjr, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1was that that acer laptop that got 30min battery life
    • thorimm, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Acer doesn't come with Bloat? HAH! They're worse than HP! Acer now includes some nice 'productivity' software that uses 40% of the CPU when the computer is IDLE.
      Brand new, out of the box.
    • geneticlemon, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Are you sure you weren't working for Best Buy?

      http://antoniocangiano.com/2007/07/10/the-ugly-truth-about-best-buy-refunds
    • OBKenobi, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1http://digg.com/tech_news/PC_OEMs_Lambast_MSFT_For_Malodorous_Vista
  • JD52, on 10/10/2007, -35/+77This all leads back to the fact that Windows Vista "will not" run with all the pretty bells and whistles on a normal average priced computer. Did Microsoft and all the computer manufacturers really think that people would buy an ass load of top end hardware just to run Vista (slower than XP mind you) with pretty lights and interfaces but no real useful new features?

    I won't even start on the DRM *****.
    • theonlyvlad, on 10/10/2007, -13/+28How the hell can that be fact if I'm running it on one right now, just fine?
    • BitSlash, on 10/10/2007, -14/+39Yeah that makes no sense- I'm running Vista on a 2 year old laptop and it's really smooth-
      2Ghz AMD64, ati xpress 200m, 1GB ram. Aero runs fine, and it loads faster than XP, only downside is maybe about 4 fps drop when gaming. Stop buying cheap wal-mart computers.
      • Eddible, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Was just about to say pretty much the same thing. All these people who claim Vista needs excessive amounts of RAM and a dual core processor have obviously never even used Vista. I have pretty much the same set up as you but I have a ATi Radeon and a P4 3Ghz and Vista runs fantastically.
      • ElBruelsio, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1But what are you parents running?
    • estvir, on 10/10/2007, -13/+38> I won't even start on the DRM *****.

      Considering you were stupid enough to try and say that no average priced computer would run Vista I doubt you would be able to say anything about DRM besides "LOL M$ LOLOLOL" before you went back to watching videos on YouTube.
    • AlexFerny, on 10/10/2007, -13/+7All the pretty bells and whistles should not be such a resource hog :)

      Look at Linux with Compiz-Fusion and all the effects on, looks nicer than Vista, even with emerald glass theme it still uses hardly any resources with XGL.
      • toxicityj, on 10/10/2007, -11/+6look at Linux blah blah. no one cares about linux, douche.
      • GMorgan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6They aren't that big a resource hog. Aero runs on my GMA950. Not as powerful as Compiz though. Still the real issue for me is wasted HDD space and a few irritating rather than show stopping flaws. Also they need to fix UAC so it retains the password for x minutes.
      • KielKilla, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6I can play Half Life and Total Commander with aero and all the other features enabled. I cannot even play Tremulous with beryl enabled.
        • ScornedPatriot, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I play CS Source with Beryl enabled. You must have an ATI card. LoL
    • YuriSakazaki, on 10/10/2007, -7/+20I'm using Vista with full Aero on a computer that's a good 4 years old, 1 gig of ram, Athlon 2800+. Runs smooth as silk. I have also yet to encounter any of the "DRM *****" people spout off at the mouth about without having any understanding of it whatsoever.
      • Giga, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0There is DRM in Vista? I hadn't noticed ;)
    • bluenova, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12JD52, they planned for the future. Vista is going to around for a long time and hardware will overtake the software as it did with XP. I don't like or use Microsoft products, but it makes sense for the latest release to be for today's high-end machines/tomorrow's low-end machines,
    • FutureGuy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6I brought a PC for 600$ and it runs Vista Ultimate (all bells and whistles) just fine and it runs WOW as smooth as silk.
    • toxicityj, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3why the hell does this comment have so many diggs? its wrong. Average computers aren't ones with 256mb ram and crappy processors anymore. They're packing dual core processors and a gig of ram. People always look at it as "Microsoft is trying to make more money by making their OS require a more powerful computer". But I look at Vista as an innovator of sorts. It's taking us away from the 256mb ram/crappy processor/128mb graphics card days, and pushing us into the more-powerful computer days.
      • DarkDx, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0But what Happnes with people don't wanna buy new computers, or don't have money?
        • cassusfett, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Then they probably don't have enough money to buy a brand new OS now do they.
    • untzboy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1the only cool feature is that voice type thingy
    • dr3d, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1$700 hp computer bought 2 years ago running Vista Ultimate w/ zero probs
  • Civil44, on 10/10/2007, -10/+93I'm running vista right now and its a pretty cool version of windows But its not worth the money their asking thats for damn sure...
    • estvir, on 10/10/2007, -14/+6Barely over $100?
      • schoate09, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6For what, the crippled home basic version upgrade?
        • estvir, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5No, for Home Premium which is all more or less everyone needs.

          http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832116202 - $119 for Home Premium [OEM]
          http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832116143 - $149 for Home Premium [Upgrade/retail]

          And even the retail copy is only $200 and I bet you whores waste much more money on things which aren't as important (It's your freaking OS yet so many people will go spend another $500 on a new video card to get an extra 10 frames).

          Yeah, there's your 'crippled' version, how about next time you do some 'research.' Oh, and don't forget the tons of way to get more discounts or free copies of Vista from various things such as education related.
          • meatmcguffin, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Home Premium is not Ultimate Editon and is therefore *artificially* crippled by definition
          • estvir, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1No, if you want to try and be all technical you could say that Ultimate, by definition, has 'bonuses' rather than being crippled.

            And if you wanted to be even more technical his crippled comment was referring to Home Basic therefore any comparison between Home Premium and Ultimate isn't really important/valid.

            The bottom line is, your post is stupid, irrelevant and most importantly, desperate.
      • Eddible, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Where do you buy your software? China?!
    • tylerjames, on 10/10/2007, -9/+11I was running the thing for free (through school) for a few months - and it wasn't worth the money!
    • sadatoni, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Agreed. If it hadn't come pre-installed on this computer I would be running XP instead.

      Of course it's a high-end machine so I don't see the problems of the low-end ones.
    • untzboy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Any OS over 50 bucks is too much. It's a bunch of potential you're buying and lines of text. The 3rd party apps are what is useful, not some 3d pop-up book crap. !!!I just bashed of Windows in a diginfied and mature manner.( not using M$)
  • PATSCRU, on 10/10/2007, -9/+73still on XP and will be for at least another year....
    • TimOgg, on 10/10/2007, -9/+12I will only be moving away from XP when forced to or i can move away from MS all together.
      • estvir, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3I bet you whined about horrible XP was too.

        "Oh, XP sucks, wah wah, yet I still use it."
        "Look, a new version of Windows is out but that sucks too (I have not used it) and I'm sticking with XP LOLLOOL TAKE THAT BILLY"
    • TexanPsycho, on 10/10/2007, -8/+6Too true. I got a new PC last December and got Vista for $20 when it came out. I changed back to XP in less than a day.
      • KielKilla, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3I did it for the lulz!
      • blobert, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3More than a day to test out an OS? Yikes.... . My wife and I had a very open mind and high expectations for Vista on her new Acer Aspire 3680 and I also wiped the OS and installed XP SP2 within the same day, TexanPsycho's entry is not fake.
        • Gizza, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5I was actually the complete opposite. I got a Vista DVD for the shipping cost when I bought XP. 3 months later when Vista was released and I got the DVD it sat on my desk for about 2 months because I was going to wait for SP1. Then one day I was bored, so I decided to give it a shot. Haven't looked back. The new Windows Explorer and search is enough to keep me from going back to XP.
  • lordtyros, on 10/10/2007, -17/+59News flash, Acer: Most people didn't buy a new pc for XP either. Here's how the PC market goes: Microsoft releases new OS, people bitch and moan that the previous Windows had just gotten good, so they're not switching. Eventually, their computer is too old, so they buy a new one. This new computer has the new Windows on it. They get used to it. Start again. *****, my parents had a computer running Windows 98 until last year, when I upgraded it to XP. They're used to that now, but when it's time to get a new computer, they'll start using Vista and like it.

    Non issue.
    • zybch, on 10/10/2007, -6/+19That seems to pretty much match the pattern I've seen as well.
      But you forgot those jerks who bitch and moan about the new OS when the majority of them haven't actually used it!
      • MacParrot, on 10/10/2007, -8/+5Oh, you mean like the way you bitch and moan about OS X without having used it? You mean like that?

        Use what makes you most productive no matter who makes it.
        • toxicityj, on 10/10/2007, -4/+8I bitch and moan about OS X BECAUSE I've used. God awful piece of ***** with a terrible interface. Although I can see why it appeals to the everyday idiot.
        • KielKilla, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4I use OS X on a weekly basis. It's crap.
        • secleinteer, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2toxitityj is right - OS X is an absolutely horrific ***** and the interface completely sucks ass. I would never pay for one of Apple's overpriced pieces of shiny ***** running their piece of ***** OS. Windows sucks too (not as much as OS X - XP that is, I don't know about Vista), but who can tell the difference between those two ***** OS's when you're on Linux anyway ;)
        • ScornedPatriot, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3I'd run windows Vista over OSX, It's god awful. Then again I do prefer Ubuntu. I use pretty much every OS out there at work (obviously not all the various linux distros)
        • chrisxkelley, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1heres an idea: arguing on the internet about whos operating system is better is ***** retarded.
    • SeBBBe, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2A lot of people I know load XP onto their new machines that come with Vista...
    • returnofajedi, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2You're right (and I dugg you up because of it), but there's a reason for all the bitching and moaning that went on (I would say a more than average amount than in the past). Remember all those new technologies that we were promised with Vista? Yea, never got here. That's why a lot of people, mostly tech (myself included), have despised everything that Vista stands for. It stands for a lack of promise to the consumer because MS has gotten lazy. Lazy is the perfect word here. Pretty up the OS all you want, but we're still working with the same underlying file system, no Firewire-B, no PC-to-PC sync, and a slew of other things we were promised. To me its the same OS, except prettier, with a lot more security crap and holes thrown in. Sorry, but I have no good reason to switch over until either support ends for XP, or I get a sweet DX10 game.
    • untzboy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1moaning is what makes vista better, because MS actually listens
  • PhreakMac, on 10/10/2007, -28/+13Vista blows - plain and simple.

    Oh yeah ask MS how much help they had from the NSA creating it.
  • Lane, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9Gianfranco Lanci doesnt care at all about vista but rather his bottom line.i do admit windows vista is an absolute shadow of what was promised so many years ago though. the winidows UI still does not feel fluid between relatively underused aero transparency and lack of any real honest to goodness features. its obviously not worth a non-upgrade price tag but then what software is? what is amazing in vista is its compatibility even operating under 64 bit. i have no doubt that in two more hardware cycles vistas system specs will seem quite tame.
    • GMorgan, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2You do realise that without a serious change in manufacturing process (which is under way but won't be ready for some time) that gains in hardware capability are going to come very slowly. Windows is too monolithic to really make use of SMP effectively so it comes down to can we increase the number of transistors in a single core without having heating and power consumption issues.

      Quantum leakage is a serious issue right now. It's why Intel dropped the Pentium 4 on it's ass and went back to Pentium M (which is a modified Pentium 3) and modified it to work nicely in parallel (Core 2, Core was basically just an M). We can stack up multiple cores but you have to have the OS to deal with them, the reason multicore took an age to arrive is because Windows just hasn't been set up to take advantage of it (tends to have expensive process spawning and a lot of monolithic code, not good for SMP). It's not enough to simply add spinlocks and declare your system to be SMP capable, the software around it has to be designed to take advantage of multicore. This is really the problem with multicore, there is no silver bullet wrt it. You have to code your application to specifically take advantage of it (there are some exceptions, GUI's can be threaded quite easily).
    • FutureGuy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2what are you talking about Vista comes with a ton of features.
      http://arstechnica.com/reviews/os/pretty-vista.ars http://arstechnica.com/reviews/os/vista-under-the-hood.ars
  • bakkouz, on 10/10/2007, -19/+23I have Vista on my machine, P4 3.0 Ghz, 1 GB RAM, 512 MB Nvidia Geforce 7300 video card.
    I've been running vista on it for about 2 months now and i'm really happy with it, it runs Aero smoothly, the performance is great, gaming is great.
    no problems what so ever.
    • jcm267, on 10/10/2007, -10/+5I had vista home basic for about 2 minutes on my new laptop before "downgrading" to XP Pro. The laptop couldn't even handle the OS out of the box. Literally I'd click on the start menu and would have enough time to get up and get a glass of water before it would load.

      relevant specs:
      Intel T2080 dual core 1.73mhz
      512 mb pc4200 ram (since upgraded to 2gb)
      128mb shared memory video card

      Honestly, no one needs Vista. Not even if you are into games. There is nothing that most of us do today that cannot be done in XP... and it's not nearly as much of a resource hog. This same laptop that flies in XP is a complete piece of ***** when it's running the Vista Home Basic.
      • millerbrad, on 10/10/2007, -2/+11Well, now that you have 2GB of memory, VIsta would work fine. With 512mb, you're wasting your time.

        And just because Vista precaches programs into memory, I wouldn't really consider it a memory hog. Why have 2gb memory on your machine if you're not going to use a good chunk of that memory most of the time?
      • r3zonance, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Give Vista another go, if you "shared memory video card" is a GMA950 and Home Premium then even the pretty Aero glass and stuff works on it, which surprised me.
      • patterson, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Yeah I agree. I have a laptop with Home Premium on and everything runs fine. I only have 1GB of RAM and a GMA950 with an Intel Core 2 Duo 1.66 GHz and everything runs fine, even if I've got Firefox, Windows Mail (why can't you minimize it to the taskbar!?!), Word and Messenger open. It runs just fine with that, although I haven't tried Photoshop on it yet, which could be fun!
        • Gizza, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1You could never minimize outlook express to the taskbar. Outlook you can. In fact, not even Thunderbird can be minimized to the taskbar without the extension. Dumb really.
      • mrferg, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Well when XP first came out I bought a 900mhz Sony Vaio laptop with 128mb ram, well that damn thing couldn't even run XP smoothly. It's not Vista's fault, it's manufacturers being cheap with hardware. Put a decent video card and some goddamn RAM in your PC's you cheap ***** OEMs!
      • WermerSkoch, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Maybe it was so slow because it's only 1.73 mhz (according to your post)... ;)
    • TimOgg, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1I wish i could afford that, but alas i am broke
    • SeBBBe, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2I have Vista on my machine. Core Duo 2.0 GHz, 2 GB RAM, Mobility Radeon X1800 256 MB and everything runs like crap. If I close the lid, the screen wont turn on again (wtf?), games are much slower than under XP and it all feels sluggish and there are bugs everywhere. XP and Ubuntu both run far better.
  • tnatharik, on 10/10/2007, -3/+12I use Acer. With Windows XP.
  • nosajman, on 10/10/2007, -21/+38I switched to ubuntu after my windows machine kept getting viruses and spyware. I'm never going back
    • benguild, on 10/10/2007, -6/+43Cool, but that isn't Windows. It's you. I've been using Windows for a while without any protection, I'm fine. Always have been. People just gotta think before they open their warezzzz!
      • jcm267, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8The last time I got a virus was in september 2001 when I plugged my computer into the university's network and got, I believe, the nimbda worm. It attached itself to the McAfee virus scan that the school made us put on the computer before they would let us join the network... and using the virus scanner's engine changed all my executable files to itself.
      • brufleth, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6I agree Ben. I've been using a Windows XP pro install that was upgraded from Windows 98SE for about six years now. I've never had a need for a clean install.
      • GMorgan, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6If you haven't been running a firewall then chances are your machine is on a bot net. You wouldn't notice it if it were (baring some slowdown).

        You maybe can get away without an AV but a firewall is crucial, even on Linux this is true. Anyone who isn't running a firewall is a moron.
    • TypeEE, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Usability wise, windows + mac os x is far superior than ubuntu. I am a developer and I have tried to use all 3 to develop, ubuntu is just not a good desktop yet. (However, I can set up LAMP in no time which makes it the best webserver)
      • JonLatane, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Wow. Just wow. Really? For development, it's a toss-up between OSX and Ubuntu for me. Windows just doesn't have basic tools that developers need - like ***** GREP. And screw Cygwin - it's even more trouble. Makes it a pain to work with other people's code. I'd put OSX on top mostly because of XCode (more often than not, I'm using Eclipse on any of the platforms, but I love developing Cocoa), but for the ~80% of the time I'm not working on OSX programs, Ubuntu is right up there with OSX and several steps above windows.
    • mrferg, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I tried using Ubuntu on multiple machines, I switched my laptop back to 2000, my main machine is now Vista, only my file server still runs Ubuntu. I like to run games and software that isn't a knockoff of the real thing. But it is damn good for running Samba!
  • CraigCarlyle, on 10/10/2007, -24/+6Acer is just upset that their cheap and ***** PC parts can barely run the OS. They make budget PCs.
  • Nadare, on 10/10/2007, -8/+15Users of digg get the obvious, why is Acer missing out, expecting a surge in sales because of a new OS. Most people who really wanted vista most likely already met all the system requirements since they are relatively low to start with.

    DRM is *****, but with the studios it was DRM or nothing, so Microsoft chose DRM.
    @nosajman: "my windows machine kept getting viruses and spyware" I'm sure what you meant to say is that you clicked on every pop up that appeared and installed random 'free' programs.
    • MacParrot, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Or that you don't know how to protect your system. Windows can be virus/worm free if you take the proper, easy steps to protect yourself. If you can't be bothered, then get a Mac. So far, (though it certainly won't last forever) malware free.
  • daxsymbiont, on 10/10/2007, -19/+33put linux on your PCs for free.

    problem solved.
    • petedee, on 10/10/2007, -9/+9Not being funny but linux is way to complex for the average PC user, its just too different from windows
      • mvent2, on 10/10/2007, -3/+7Not Windows =/= Too complex. Mac OS X? Ubuntu?
        • Spr0k3t, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Ubuntu is a distribution of Linux. Mac is based on BSD. Is it really that complex?
        • mvent2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I was just proving that just because an OS isn't Windows doesn't mean its a travesty. In fact you may find some alternatives more usable than Windows, and I listed examples like Mac OS X and Ubuntu.
        • r3zonance, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Not Windows == Unfamiliar to most users.

          Most of what your "average user" wants to do with a computer will be perfectly fine and almost identical on Mac OS X or Ubuntu.
      • daxsymbiont, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6"its just too different from windows"

        and if anyone was not running windows, windows wouldn't be that familiar to be impossible (for some) to use something else.

        linux is not as hard as some say, it's also about not being used to it.
      • petedee, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5I tried ubuntu, I gave it a fair shot for about 6 months. I loved some of it (like a single repositary for files, easy installation etc) but as soon as something went wrong then I was down to writing in the console to try and fix it, not really the most freindly experiance imo.

        If I were to introduce someone to a operating system who had never heard or seen windows then my choice would be OS X simply because you can set it up and leave it running without virues etc.

        I guess what I'm saying is that there is a reason that windows is the best selling OS.
        • Spr0k3t, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The issues you had are being addressed through bulletproofx... this is similar to the safe mode you may already know. Wait until around April once KDE4 bugs are worked out and try it again... I've been nothing but impressed with Linux and the communities involved.
        • r3zonance, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1And that reason is the monopolistic and illegal tactics employed by Microsoft towards its OEM partners.
        • kazamx, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Your right, Linux isn't right for everyone, yet.

          With every new release however the amount of time you need to spend in terminal decreases, the complexity is reduced and compatability gets better. Look how far forward Microsoft moved from XP - Vista. There are some very nice changes but not many HUGE improvements.

          Then take a look at how much Linux has moved forward in the same time frame. Its almost a different OS. Now imagine as Linux keeps that development pace up what it will be like compared to the next version of Microsoft.

          I believe that the 'year of the Linux Desktop' will be the year Microsoft releases its next OS. At that point LOTS of people will be looking at upgrading their comps and for the first time, Linux could be the better choice for the average consumer.
        • marx2k, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0A lot of people mention how Linux is fine until something goes wrong and they have to open up a terminal to fix it. What exactly do Windows users do when something goes wrong on their system? If your mom's Acer XP box all of a sudden did not boot up past the "Windows XP scrolling blue bar screen" what would your mom do? If your mom's Acer XP box didn't recognize some piece of hardware she attached to it, what would she do?
      • Flamekebab, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4It's not too complicated for my mother. She's 64 and I've not had to walk her through anything on it in about two years.
        When I first tried out Vista I was overwhelmed by how stupidly complex some of it was, I'm used to using Ubuntu all the time.

        Why the hell do I get a gksudo-like popup box asking me to authorise even the puniest of little tasks?
        Deleting a start menu entry? Are you sure?! REALLY!? k.. *mutter mutter* It'd be a good idea, but it's so overused in Vista that I imagine users will pretty much ignore it, making it useless.
        • GMorgan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Don't forget desktop icons. The real problem is that of course Windows merges a system wide and user wide menu and desktop file set (when you make hidden files visible you get two files called desktop.ini on your desktop). When deleting from the system wide set you need authorisation because it deletes a file that doesn't belong to you.

          Of course Linux has all it's menu items as system wide (you can have local ones but it's rare). Then the DE just masks out the ones that you 'delete', then you can have system wide settings and still allow the person to change them. Quite simple but clearly beyond MS.
      • Flamekebab, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2It's not too complicated for my mother. She's 64 and I've not had to walk her through anything on it in about two years.
        When I first tried out Vista I was overwhelmed by how stupidly complex some of it was, I'm used to using Ubuntu all the time.

        Why the hell do I get a gksudo-like popup box asking me to authorise even the puniest of little tasks?
        Deleting a start menu entry? Are you sure?! REALLY!? k.. *mutter mutter* It'd be a good idea, but it's so overused in Vista that I imagine users will pretty much ignore it, making it useless.
    • brufleth, on 10/10/2007, -6/+5My time isn't worthless and Windows consumes a small fraction of the time that is required to run linux.
      • dwhitbeck, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Time required to run Linux? What does that mean?
      • mossblaser, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0-- i cant be bothered re-typing the comment that digg just truncated to 3 words --

        bury at will
      • DestroyFascism, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3LIke spending 4 hours to fix the resolution/////
        • marx2k, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Doesn't take me 4 hours to open up nvidia-settings, select a resolution and hit Apply.
    • untzboy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Two things: shut up, no ones interested, and I refuse to use a command prompt again. DOS almost killed me and my manhood.
      • marx2k, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Sounds like someone was born into Win3.11 or later
  • Slikkster, on 10/10/2007, -9/+5It's really more a testament to XP's stability and usability than anything else. The days of sea-change computing for OS's are slowing, for sure. And, quite frankly, advanced OS's normally drive hardware improvements. If Acer doesn't want to play ball, tough. P.S. Enough of the Ubuntu stuff, already. That's all we need, more fanboys.
  • Keefo, on 10/10/2007, -5/+13I have Vista 64bit Ultimate on two of my computers, one is a pretty decent computer Dual Core AMD 64 6000+, 2gb DDR2 ram, 8800 GTX.

    and a AMD 2ghz Athlon, 512mb RAM, Nvidia FX 5200, and Vista runs perfect on both, except a few bells on the second computer.

    No compatibility issues, and runs games exactly the same speed at XP give or take a couple FPS.
    • zybch, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6I've always had pretty high end computers, and I have yet to encounter any problems with Vista apart from its total inability (along with every previous version of Windows) to remember where the hell I position my windows and re-open them in the same place!
      God that pisses me off!
  • saltmiser, on 10/10/2007, -7/+5is it just me, or does it seem like whenever I try to use ubuntu it crashes...
    mind you, I'm running a dual head using video cards (not monitors) about as old as the universe. Right now, I have FreeBSD Xorg 7.2 and everything is running fine. But I'm not too sure what ubuntu does, but it just doesn't do it right. Maybe ubuntu needs to make old hardware work too?

    Idk, when I heard pc venders were shipping ubuntu, I laughed because of my personal experience with it. Then I sat there and though "well if they work to make everything for _their_ machines work with the os, things might work well." Since I def know that my problem with ubuntu is hardware. Seems like that's everybody's problem these days.
    • wired2Linux, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Thats always going to be a problem, since hardware drivers are mostly written by the community, The reason OS X works so well is because it's standard hardware, and I suspect that Dell's drivers for their machines will be bang on, because they will have people write them. If you are bleeding edge hardware your gonna have a problem, and if your older hardware, your gonna have a few other problems... Kinda middle ground works well :)
    • Spr0k3t, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2On the boot of the LiveCD, go to the options and select NOAPIC. If that doesn't work, check the ubuntuforums.org for your motherboard to see if there is a fix already in place.
    • untzboy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1It's not rare for Ubuntu to cause something to crash, whether you all like it or not. My friend tried to get Ubuntu on his XP PC. Ubuntu killed it. Now guess who's running Vista?
      • marx2k, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Someone who doesn't know how to partition correctly?
  • helcat, on 10/10/2007, -9/+23Having been a Windows user for so long I've only recently made the switch to Mac and am loving it... and let me say that I'm looking forward to Leopard being released!!!
    • mossblaser, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5I got a mac and really, its a fantastic OS but I have never used something that is so restrictive about what you can do with it. I love the apple hardware - good looking and even good value* and also I know I can run Linux on it (and generally I do!). Mac OS can be summed up by this quote: "Mac OS: Made by a designer, for a designer". Its good but really only a little better than using windows (its major letdowns are lack of descent (free) software and its restrictive nature, but its made up for by its style and speed). My biggest problem with Mac OS is the fact that it is generally no more stable than XP - for instance right now, my clock and the area where the icons are at the top right of the screen has frozen. Its just a lot of annoying little things like that. Also I do like maximize in many situations (Internet in particular) and have no option to do so without some little utility.

      Just my two cents


      * It is only good value when bought with an educational discount mind...
      • mcorto, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7"lack of descent (free) software and its restrictive nature", restrictive nature? I _love_ the extendibility of Mac OS X. I load/unload kernel extensions and modify them with no hiccup. The underlying core (management of memory, etc) of Mac OS X is open source, yes you heard me: Open Source. You can do whatever you want with it (you just can't resell it). The only thing that's closed is the UI and the applications that come with every distribution os the OS like Mail, TextEdit, etc. But honestly, why would you need to extend TextEdit? Mail has plug-ins, Safari is based on WebKit (www.webkit.org) which is open source and even the UI is replaceable with some cool utilities. What about free software? First, there are a lot of nice-looking OS X apps that are freeware. Second there are tons of free, open-source applications that you can install using Fink thanks to X11 (almost every linux application, think about ethereal, ettercap, ncourses, nmap, netcat, gimp, nessus, konqueror, etc.). I know there are thing in Mac OS X that could be improved, e.g. maximizing a windows doesn't always yield the wished result... But I think it's definitely a great compromise between ease of use (think about the integration between of iPhoto, iTunes, iMovie, Safari, Mail and how intuitive and cool the UI is) and low level functionality: I can use gdb without problems, I can program low level sockets, I can run Java using Eclipse or XCode, I can crack wireless networks, all stuff that you would do using linux.
  • betacmag4u, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8I work for one of the biggest pc makers......I see lots of problems with business software not compatible with Vista......not MS's fault but still pisses off the customers.
  • ycomp, on 10/10/2007, -2/+11anyone want a faster Vista? turn your animations off.
    • SeBBBe, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11. Without Aero, Vista looks like garbage
      2. It's not the effects that make it slow

      My old PC runs fast as hell with Ubuntu and Compiz. And it looks better than Vista, too.
      • kazamx, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I can't wait for Gutsy with integrated Fusion, Ohhhh baby thats gonna be good
    • iplayyouandme, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Then what's the point of buying Vista if you turn off the only feature it has over XP? Sure, Vista has a different security model but XP if you like dialog boxes. XP is Vista XP sp3.
  • ZeRux, on 10/10/2007, -4/+10I've decided to ignore Vista completely, perhaps when Windows 7 comes out it'll be worth upgrading.
    • OBKenobi, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Hopefully!

      With Steve Ballmer's strategery, you never know. Keep in mind that MS wants to focus on subscription services for Windows 7. Take a guess at how great that will work out.
  • jlubawy, on 10/10/2007, -6/+26haha how ironic i'm actually taking off vista and installing XP on my acer right now!
    • r3zonance, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3how on earth are you typing this :P /sarcasm
    • BobTurtle, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Look up the word irony. This isn't "ironic", it is a coincidence. A coincidence that no on gives a crap about.
  • 574lk3r, on 10/10/2007, -4/+12built a media pc,
    dual core 2 2 gigs ram ect ect,
    had vista on it back in march,
    took it off and went back to xp in april,
    doesent like to run in 1080i,
    and there's no tv software available for my ati all in wonder with vista..
    pretty much useless to me.
    shame, looked pretty...
    • iJump, on 10/10/2007, -5/+6Stop.
      Inserting.
      Line.
      Breaks.
      In.
      To.
      Your.
      Comments
      Like.
      This!
    • Ramble, on 10/10/2007, -7/+3If you're running Hoem premium or Ultimate then Media Center is included. It is really your fault for not even checking something so basic like that.
      • ChildeRoland420, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Why's he getting dugg down for this? Media Center is included in Home Premium and is the "tv software" that the parent says he can't find.
    • elvenseven, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Is that a poem?
    • Ugoff, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1My dad bought a new Gateway desktop a couple of weeks ago. It's a pretty decent computer for what he payed for, AMD Athlon 64 X2 Processor 4600+, 320 gigs HD, 2 gigs of memory, 22' LCD display. I've had the same problems with Vista when I installed a TV tuner and even the Soundblaster. I'm pretty sure it's the drivers. I think the company still hasn't updated the drivers for Vista. I mean it'll work fine but then when I open the "TV" program, it does something weird to the display. I would have the TV running full screen and then when I go back, the whole display shifts to the left 2 inches. It's a pain in the ass to fix again. Then there'll be times when the sound just doesn't work, maybe after an install of something. I'll admit, Vista is pretty nice but It's such a pain in the ass. Please, just wait for the SP.
  • zybch, on 10/10/2007, -2/+14As a tech who has to fix a LOT of Acer machines, the problem they (acer) are having with Vista is entirely one of their own making!
    Selling 1.6Ghz notebooks with less than 512Mb (when you take away the 64Mb for the integrated video) RAM its no wonder Vista totally sucks on Acer PCs.
    • fires, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1What's wrong with selling laptops with those specs if it is all that a certain market can afford? Vista's insane hardware requirements is based on totally superfluous and unnecessary 'features' like the Aero interface. A new operating system shouldn't use more resources just for the heck of it. Seriously, what can Vista do with all the extra required hardware that XP can't?
    • snowball69, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You ignored the cost and marketing factors and target market segment ;)
      The withdrawal of XP in favour of Vista means that entry-level market segment is now badly affected by Mikerowe Soft's decision
  • last4internet, on 10/10/2007, -3/+8For almost a year now I've been fading out my XP machines at home and at work and buying Macs instead. Transition almost complete, just 3 more Macbook Pros to buy. I'm not going back Windows anymore. And I'm not gonna cripple the old PCs boxes with Vista either. They'll stay as almost-unused XP boxes from now on until they die.
  • MJXII, on 10/10/2007, -3/+10I gave Vista a couple of months to win me over and it completely failed. Ended up removing it and using XP again. The disadvantages of Vista far outweigh any advantages for me, but I'm sure the day will come when we don't have a choice anymore.
    • snowball69, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Same here - a few less days. I dual-booted XP with Vista and have never since gone back to the Vista boot entry. Unfortunately due to Microsoft's tendency to scheme (in their own commercial interest of course) I will have to keep the wasted space for Vista should they decide to do anything "stupid" in future like deliberately screwing up Windows-validation or auto-updates.
  • wired2Linux, on 10/10/2007, -6/+0I think Apple needs to get off their ass, make a Version of OS X that can be easily loaded on any Intel machine, and sell it for a decent price, sure it's gonna get pirated, but I think most people would pay for something decent. Then maybe Game makers would start to realize that the world doesn't revolve around Micro$oft.

    I would love to see Linux be more up and coming, but truth is, it's not there yet, but if OS X started to gain more ground, maybe the benefits of Linux would become more wide spread.
    • MacParrot, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Most likely the only way Apple would sell OS X out of the box for "any" PC would be with an installer that would refuse to load if you had non-Apple approved components, In which case, why bother.
    • ElBruelsio, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1If Apple released OS X to the masses it would likely suffer the same problems as Windows. Windows is unstable because it is expected to function on so many different hardware configurations using drivers built by third parties that may not be solidly designed. A well built PC on the other hand, with name brand, reliable parts is going to be very stable and reliable. Apple knows exactly what hardware configuration OS X is going to run on and they can design the drivers and software accordingly.
  • arnoldrimmer, on 10/10/2007, -4/+8To all vista Users "what version do you run?"

    We have 5 License Vista Business for testing and the funny thing is you cannot watch a DVD and 1 License did cost 300 Euros....
    • Keefo, on 10/10/2007, -4/+4Maybe because its a BUSINESS version....... you aren't suppose to watch DVDs at work..... that's also why it has no media player + Media center..... because you are suppose to be doing work.

      Yeah, its not ideal for company's that NEED media, and if you got that version, then you didn't do your research and see what each version has to offer.....
      • digitalbuzz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Well MAYBE as a trainer, you need to show a training DVD but IT installed the Biz version on your laptop...your Acer laptop...
      • snowball69, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1What a total crock of *****. What if you're business is marketing, training, promotion? Or you have a presentation with DVD segment to put before the board of Directors/CEO? FFS!! Dumb!!
    • SuperGillies, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Im using Business edition - there's no media center true but dvds work fine just as well as they do under xp. If you want windows media player to play dvds then you'll need to install the right codec for it but thats true for any version of windows. Personally, I use vlc. The only difference with Business compared to normal editions is that there's no media center, ultimate extras and if you want the pre installed games like chess you have to turn them on in the control panel somewhere (i forget where exactly).
      • snowball69, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I'd recommend PowerDVD. I've been lucky enough to get it bundled as OEM with several DVD recorders I've purchased ;)
        I never use WMP
  • BlackCow, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9I switched from XP to Vista for my self built PC, I like it.
  • Spr0k3t, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1Anyone else thinking "Bong Hit" rather than "Lashes Out"?
  • arnoldrimmer, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1"I switched from XP to Vista for my self built PC, I like it."

    Vista runs on older Pc´s I had till today it installed on a P4P800 Deluxe 3 Ghz Sockel478 PVI with 1 GB Ram and it was slower than XP and the CPU was 5 C hotter so that i did need 2 more Chassi-Fans. Now I have a Dell optiplex 745 i under XP....
    • BlackCow, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Yeah it runs slower on old PCs but surprisingly enough it actually runs faster than XP on faster machines. Vistas super prefetch may use a lot of RAM (pushing 500 MB idle) but if you have 2 gigs of RAM it really makes your PC fly. You can turn off super prefetch for older machines, HP sold my mom a computer with only 1 GB of RAM which is just barely enough for vista, its good for what she does (checking her e-mail, websurfing, and iTunes) but annoying as hell for what I want to do with it heh. Hell I should have just gave her a cheaper PC with Linux, she wouldn't have really known the difference.... cept maby for iTunes but I think there is a hacked version of it for linux. Oh dead, I do believe I am rambling now.
      • snowball69, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"ONLY 1gb RAM"!!! hahahaahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahaahahahah (sorry)

        How Mikerowesoft changes the face of the Earth (and our perceptions) eh?
  • gpmidi, on 10/10/2007, -2/+14The memory manufactures LOVE Vista.
  • jazzjeff, on 10/10/2007, -10/+9I am getting constant call-outs to repair Vista problems. Its crashing many hard-drives and locking them out. Its keeping me seriously busy. Vista is a nightmare. It makes XP look like a godsend and thats saying something!

    Vista - wouldn't have it on my pc in any shape or form. No way.
    • octophobic, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6I fixed it for you. "I am getting constant call-outs to repair Vista problems. It is keeping me extremely busy and that's a wonderful thing. I feel as though my job security is at an all time high!"
      • jazzjeff, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Would be funny and true to a certain extent but its that bad, other repairs in other areas are being delayed or neglected !
    • BlackCow, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1See now I find this strange as Vista for me is actually more stable then XP :-/ What kind of "problems" are you having.
    • lafty, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0i've been using vista since october 2006 (since RTM). No problems at all and I'm using a one core cpu with only 1GB ram (Dell latitude 810). Vista's fine and i love a lot of the new feature built into explorer (like bread crumbs, command modules, favorite links, event viewer, task scheduler, real time search box and the new start menu).
  • Beautyon, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9The real question is why is Acer whining about Vista? They are a company with with annual sales of 11.3 billion dollars; it is complete insanity for a company that big to be dependent on a single product from another company for a boost in (or continued) sales. Acer needs to get behind Ubuntu with some of their 11 billion in revenues to help it further surpass Vista. Whining about Vista is just pointless; they now have a way to live without depending on M$ iterations of windows, and it is a more than viable alternative. I think it is nigh on impossible that they don't know this. If they don't then the management needs to be replaced.
  • flamebot, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3I dont get it... I see people here saying they get viruses all the time. I have XP Sp2, running the free AVG anti virus and Windows Firewall... no viruses here for about a year.

    My advice: stay away from computers.
    • TypeEE, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3If they use firefox+no script, it should protect you from a lot of the malware. Then just don't download programs from untrusted sites. (Downloading some movies or mp3 will not harm). Don't open programs from your email or program received from your msn messenger. That's all it takes to a virus free computer.
      • ElBruelsio, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I think everyone needs to realize how many people there are out there who don't have a clue about any message that pops up on the computer. They can't tell the difference between windows update messages, anti-virus software updates or internet pop-ups. Why? They just don't take the time to read them and understand what they mean and they don't care. Every time I go home my parents have questions about "more stuff" that's popping up on the computer. I'm just thankful they aren't the kind of user that just clicks 'Yes' on everything.
    • BlackCow, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Ha, I have Vista with windows firewall and NO anti virus running FF with noscripts and I haven't gotten a Virus, even when I was doing the same with XP I didn't have problems. I think its mainly a lack of understanding that gets people Viruses, no do not open up that attachment!
    • snowball69, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Same here - XP, AVG, ZoneAlarm H/W firewall. Never had a virus and XP is solid unless I am deliberately cruel to it by running code I wrote myself ;)

      My buddies come over with their crapped out laptops on a regular basis - the main difference is I use Proxomitron and Mozilla (now Seamonkey) or Firefox. The occasions when I use IE are very rare although IE7 is much better IMO. My mate's PCs are always infected with ***** from porn sites and even though I set them up with Proxomitron and Mozilla they *always* ignore advice and let some tit disable everything I've set up to protect them. The funniest part is when they always deny visiting porno sites but of course we know better - esp. with the pix of ladyboys in their IE cache ;)

      The latest guy to do this got his laptop back with admin rights removed, administrator password changed, Spyware S&D installed (with TeaTimer), proxomitron and default browser set to Mozilla after a total nightmare with some really nasty S/W which hijacked IE including a DNS changer.

      The other friends I set PCs up for have zero problems even with Win2K - mainly due to listening to advice!.
  • Rodman930, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12How do you "hit out" at someone?
    • BrokenVisage, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Something must have got lost in translation from Taiwanese to English. Or the author has serious issues with his verbs.
    • snowball69, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Over standard TCP/IP? - not sure which RFC is is

      However to "hit out" is common UK press jargon typical of what is traditionally known as the "gutter press" such as The Sun or Daily Mirror
    • M4tt3r, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"hit out" = "strikes out".... like yelling at someone,...etc.
  • bangmalley, on 08/30/2008, -3/+4i just hope Acer can pre-install Ubuntu rather than other distro.
  • aidsbunny, on 10/10/2007, -5/+0Huh? How could a resource hog like Vista which requires you to upgrade and buy a new computer be a bad thing for the industry?
  • aidsbunny, on 10/10/2007, -6/+0Huh? How could a resource hog like Vista which requires you to upgrade and buy a new computer be a bad thing for the industry?
  • jellygraph, on 10/10/2007, -4/+7I've been Windows-free for over 3 years now and been running Linux on my home desktop, laptop and work machine. No regrets.
    • BlackCow, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1... would you like a cookie? Linux only is a good option for coders only but us people who deal with graphics need Windows (or I guess Mac *rolls eyes*)
      • timbob, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I want a cookie, but I have to click through about forty five dialogs to authorize vista to run it.
        • lafty, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0oooh a hit on UAC.. what are you doing all day? tweaking your windows settings? maybe that's why you have issues with vista!
  • stimpack, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5I like bashing MS, I like bashing Vista, but this article is pointless. The Acer guy obviously wants the OS to boost sales of Acer computers, I don't fault him for that. But an OS *should not* require a new hardware investment, MS did nothing wrong really.
  • bradsjm, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9Vista finally made me switch to OS/X and a MacBook Pro. I'm very happy and with VMWARE I can still run Windows applications when I need it. Reminds me of my OS/2 days really when we could run Windows apps under OS/2... except this time it works :)
    • lafty, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0car to elaborate why you switched?
      • clackerd, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0from bradsjm: Vista finally made me switch

  • Desolite, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2"Never before had a new version of Windows done so little to boost PC sales."

    and why should it? last i checked you can buy an operating system without buying a new PC. which is more cost effective? you tell me.
  • arnoldrimmer, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5we stick with XP until 2013

    I still dont understand why vista is only supportet till 2011 but XP till 2013......
    • TypeEE, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Sound like XP is the stable build and Vista is the beta build.
    • Freshie, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1That was becoming obvious to me when they started raising the price while stripping out promised components.
  • uselessexpert, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I have my laptop running Vista Ultimate, which a matter of fact is an Acer Travelmate 4200, and have no complaints.
    But, the only reason I am running it, is because I got my copy for free since I was part of the beta test. If not, I would still be running XP.

    Overall, I feel Vista is a very nice and solid OS. It is just a matter of time until we get used to it and all those little quirks are taken care of.
    Just like XP when it was first released.
    • Macshiba, on 10/10/2007, -4/+0Windows Vista is a solid OS if you use it for nothing other than Internet. If you use it for anything else, you're going to run into a problem. It has hardly any decent support, and all it does is hog up CPU.
    • Bonzodog, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The laptop I just bought was an Acer Travelmate 4200 WLMi, and it had Windows Vista Home Basic on it, and it was so slow, you could see it re-drawing the windows. The Travelmate is not supposed to have Vista on it, as it only ships with 512MB of RAM, and Vista doesn't work properly with less than a gig of RAM. It also took an hour and a half to complete the set-up, not including the Acer tools, which took a further hour to sort out. I kicked vista off, and installed Ubuntu, which Just worked, desktop effects included (compiz et al), and is very fast on it.
    • BlackCow, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I agree, its a nice looking solid OS with some cool features (I'm so glad they enabled the quick search and I don't care if apple had it first). I find that most people who complain about it are people who haven't tried it. Yeah I ran into disasters being an early adopter for video games but thats because the drivers sucked, they are good now.
  • KielKilla, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6FTA: "Stability is certainly a problem," he said.
    ***** that. I can't even remember the last time Vista crashed on me... I don't even know if it has! OS X on the other hand has crashed on me tons of times.
    • snowball69, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Me neither - but then again I always select "Windows XP" from the boot menu lol!!
  • Macshiba, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4I have Vista on a partition and I use it just when I'm bored and want to play with it. Nothing I use works for me on it, but everything does on Windows XP. I love Windows XP, and I use it more than anything else.

    I also have OS X, which I use just as much as Windows, and I think if someone is willing to go out and buy a new computer just for Vista, why don't they wait a minute, and save up and buy a Mac?
    • thephosphorbox, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Macshiba : Nothing I use works for me on it

      I find that extremely hard to believe. I have plenty of OLD software that I installed on Vista and every last program worked. Granted, two of them I have to run in XP compatibility mode (because they don't like the Aero interface), but they do work. Just another shameless, exaggerated Mac plug.
      • clackerd, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Just another shameless, exaggerated Mac plug.

        c'mon dude. this whole article is one big windows bash. stop pointing out the obvious.
  • insomniac8400, on 10/10/2007, -4/+9This is a joke. Acer is just pissed that for the past year and a half all the ***** video cards in their laptops can't run vista. Hardware manufacturers now have to put 1-2gb of ram in computers and decent video cards. That means no crappy integrated graphics, so better motherboards. All of that lowers profit margins.
  • nurall, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1on mothers day i removed vista from my brothers laptop (Toshiba satellite) because it was running like crap. runs xp beautifully.
  • thailand1972, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Pretty threadbare article - it repeats the opening line "The head of Taiwan-based personal computer maker Acer....saying that the "entire industry" was disappointed by it." THREE times before then talking about Acer as a company, then.....ending. Hardly an article at all. I wouldn't be surprised if this was just one comment taken out of context from an interview.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 89 of 89 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.