If your unsure on how to properly run a pc then I guess it still is...

I've just had great few hours gaming, playing some games using DX10 and playing some old games that are DX9. All of them ran without fault but then again I constantly update my drivers, regularly de-frag, regularly run anti-virus/anti-spyware, in fact all the things I used to do when I ran XP. I also read many sites that review cards and other hardware, most are now using vista. Sometimes you'll see XP in there just for comparison but on the whole there is a general shift over to vista. If vista was really that bad (and I use my pc for many hours during the day) I would be the first to go back to XP. In fact I very nearly did in the beginning but after some patience, SP1(some more RAM) it now runs just as good XP ever did. I'm not just saying that because I've got some sort of twisted loyalty to MS... Like I said if it ran as bad as the posters on this page would have me believe then I would be back to the old os like a shot. The thing is that it runs great,now I'm sorry if that really ruins your day but like you when I use something I expect it to work and for me, it seems, it really does.


Oh and just a word of warning... Whilst I enjoy lively discussion, flaming and trolling will not be put up with. So if you want to see what you've written remain in this thread then please play nice.

__________________

I don't recall flaming anyone, or calling anyone names.

I run computer maintenance utilities regularly as well. Not even those can save a bad operating system at the core of things. The fact of the matter is, you shouldn't have to keep maintaining your computer. XP I had to maintain every couple of months, Vista far more often.

And I would guarantee you that those same games would run smoother on XP. (The DX9 ones at least)

The only real reason to upgrade to vista is DX10, for now. Originally DX10 was vista specific because it Microsoft was going to require VRAM virtualization, as in, to be able to use normal RAM to help out your graphics card. However, Nvidia ran into some trouble making drivers for it, so Microsoft made it optional. So there is no longer any technical reasons for DX10 to be solely for Vista (though it never really was impossible for XP, just a headache and another expense). So don't expect DX10 to remain exclusive to vista for much longer with the vast majority of users and developers still using XP.

Again, you are yet another example of the person who thinks just because you have no issues with it, it is a good operating system. You need to realize that an operating system is the backbone of a computer, and especially with windows computers, a large amount of people are going to be using them. So the experiences of many far outweigh the experiences of a few.

If you are trying to prove that Vista can run as well as XP for some (although that would be an ambiguous claim), then fine, congratz, you are one in a thousand. However, if you are trying to prove that vista was a better designed operating system and that the people who "bash" it are just vista haters who can't maintain their computers, you are very wrong buddy. There is no one who can claim the vast majority of people have had a good experience with vista, and that's the fact you keep failing to grasp.

Y O U a r e I N S I G N I F I C A N T c o m p a r e d T O t h e M A J O R I T Y!

And I don't believe I flamed anyone in this post. If I have I expect a warning with examples as to where I have flamed before this is deleted.

Oh, and if you even think about claiming that high end computer users are the ones who have good experiences with vista, don't even go there. Real high end users of computers know how operating systems really work and what makes them stable etc.

I'd put a bet out there that 95% of you here are just "relatively" knowledgeable computer users. (As in, no real engineering degree in Computers. Maybe a couple of you are experienced tech help guys, but that is hardly enough to qualify you as an expert on software design.)

hmmmmm someone needs to learn the definition of trolling and flaming...maybe someone just can't handle a real debate with logical facts amidst all this vista fanatic orgy???

Well, the first problem was caused by the use (or misuse) of a registry cleaner which had deleted an entry it should not have. Microsoft, you will notice, do not have a registry cleaner. They advise strongly against their use as they ofetn do more damage than good. A registry with superfluous entries is not impeding the operation of the OS.
Perhaps the second issue is marginally within your original statement but relates to the fact that Microsoft decided to drop an old VPN concept but unfortunately did not explain the alternative set up route.
The third issue. Any new software can have deeply buried flaws. In the case of the Firewire problem - it is history. Microsoft were concerned when the problem arose and after worlwide investigation, cured it with an update. (As you will read)
Still not "crashing worldwide"
Don't misunderstand me. My preference for Windows is based on real-life experience, not just habit.Anyone is entitled to an opinion either way.
In way too many cases, people condemn operating systems or applications that they've never even used, or that they've only fooled around with for a few minutes or a few hours on a demo system at the store or a friend's computer.
In fact, some of the most adamant criticisms I hear about Vista come from some of my colleagues who have never run the OS. They'll admit that they're basing their opinions on what they've heard from others, but insist that if those others are saying it, it must be true. I hear people proclaim, "I've never used Vista and I never will" - just as proudly as they proclaimed the same thing about XP a few years ago.
There are some good, legitimate, reasons not to upgrade to Vista. If you have older hardware that's not supported and you don't want to buy new peripherals or a new machine, or if you have applications that won't run on Vista, that's a perfectly good reason to keep XP.
Fwiw. Voice of reasons complaint is an echo from your first link. The problem was not caused directly by Vista, but by misuse of a particularly heavy registry cleaner. " Why do you think Microsoft is already scrambling to come up with the new operating system." They are not. "7" is on a normal schedule, if you look back into the history of their releases.
Lorenkjr's post hardly warranted your attack. I have used Vista 32 and 64 bit heavily since early Beta releases. I have had no problems other than self made experimental ones.

P.S. Heres something to consider in this thread - but, as always, also remains inconclusive in the authors speculations.
http://blogs.chron.com/techblog/arch...arly_sale.html

Good answers. Seems many people carry negative comments they pick up to everywhere they go, and sorry to say the bashing spreads. What I don't understand is why people spread negative things they seem to know nothing about? Too many posts I have seen lately lack so much substance, it's hard to make any sense out of them.

It was probably the best idea yet for Microsoft to lower OS prices a while back. It certainly gives more people a chance to get Vista should they desire to do so. Though I still find there pricing between 32 and 64 bit somewhat dumb. If you have 32 bit Vista legally obtained you should be able to upgrade to 64 bit at a reduced price. I believe though I could be wrong (as I have not followed this in a while now) that Microsoft still has not provided clear and concise pricing from 32 to 64 bit upgrade's.

That has got to be the single most ignorant comment I have ever heard from anyone who claims to know anything about computers.

I think you should be the one looking back on release dates big guy:
Fine Technology Solutions: Microsoft Windows Versions and Release Dates

Let's analyze this, shall we? Let's start with the last disaster of Microsoft like Vista, Windows ME. Notice the quick 1 year release from Windows 2000/ME period to XP. Why was that? Oh yeah, because ME sucked, and 2000 was just a temporary stable OS for people to use until XP came out. If you are old enough to remember, Microsoft made it very public that a new OS would be out soon. And the majority of people upgraded to XP when it came out. It may not have been the greatest when it first came out, but it was an improvement over the last two operating systems in both stability and reliability, and didn't require THAT much of a hardware upgrade to run very smoothly.

If you want to go that route about looking at release date schedules, you would realize that there has never been a regular schedule of MS releases, they are on an as needed basis, which is why Windows XP stuck around for so long. (Over 5 years, how many other operating systems on that list did that again???). Get your facts straight before making claims based upon them.


Your assumptions are completely uncalled for. You really think all/most of the bad criticism comes from people who have never tried the operating system? This debate may be a little out of your league if you really think so. Sure some people bash it and haven't tried it, or don't upgrade from what they have heard about it. But you can't really believe that the majority of it comes from people who have never tried it, think about what you are implying here.


You know what? I used a condom the other day and didn't get an STD, condoms must be fool-proof!!!111oneshiftone!11


You do realize that the majority of these "sales" are people who buy new systems. And what do most of the people do once they buy these new systems with vista on it? Either they have that free downgrade to XP, or they pay another 100 or so dollars and buy a copy of XP. Microsoft is minting money right now, and even the XP fanboys are oblivious to this.


Now that we are done with all of your biased and mostly unrelated claims, lets go back to the real point, the problems with vista.

Yes, it is a very valid point that registry fixers can cause more problems than they fix. However, you need to ask yourself, why does it happen in vista and not in XP. This is due to what is sometimes referred to as the UserAssist Registry key among many other registry entries that contribute to disk cleanup.

I'm not about to go into all the details for you know-it-alls, but basically this means Vista has put everything that disk cleanup uses to a very public and easily editable location. This is good and bad for obvious reasons. The fact of the matter is, by doing it this way, just like registry cleaners, it can cause more harm than good. It may or may not obviously, just like registry cleaners, and any smart programmer would realize it is not a good idea. Which is again why vista was poorly designed. And makes me and many other people wonder, what else has been poorly designed that we haven't discovered yet that may be disastrous (I certainly don't waste my time trying to discover vulnerabilities with all the inherent flaws in vista's design, but believe me, there are many more to come)


As far as the other two problems with VPN and Firewire, one of you asked for real examples of problems that have caused worldwide distress, I gave you them.

If you would like more, I can supply plenty.

Well if you say it must be true. Personally I will stick with Vista and leave my copy of XP in my desk drawer where it belongs.

That's totally fine.

The main topic I have been focusing on is the title of the thread and its topic. I just felt some people really didn't know their place when answering the original question this thread raised:

"Are people just bashing vista because it's the cool thing to do or is the criticism valid? Is Vista as bad as people say it is?"

Some people felt it had turned into a persuasion thread, as if I was trying to convince you all to switch to vista. It is a free country, People can't be forced to wear seatbelts while driving, or to wear a helmet while biking. If people want to do stupid things or use bad operating systems, I have no problem with it. Neither did Darwin.

For people to make assumptions like that guy earlier stating that most of the bad criticism is from people who haven't tried it, just makes him look like a biased fanboy who has no idea what he is talking about. Just because you have gotten it to work fine does not mean it was the same scenario for the majority of people. Nazi Germany worked for the Nazis, but it sure didn't work for everyone else.

Ok,
I used XP for a long time and enjoyed it whenever I used it. Vista gives me things I like so I continue to use it. For those having troubles with Vista certainly I understand that. Though I would think it does not exactly mean the next Microsoft operating system will work any better for them. Though the ones and I am sure there are ones who have not tried Vista so they will not know whether it works for them or not unless they try it. The only Microsoft operating system I found that was definitely not great was Me. And correct if I am wrong but, they sure abadoned that puppy quickly enough. Anyway, for me I kind of read the article a little different than you may have.