View Full Version : Have you installed Windows Vista?
well,
it's time for another poll yet and since this topic is all over the world, we don't want to the be the last to ask you this question.
Have you installed Windows Vista?
We are curious about your replies ...
cheers,
cal1s
Heh, not quite sure what to vote here!
I have installed it previously... I have Vista Business Edition (free & legally) from MSDNAA (http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/academic/default.aspx)...
I've used it in the past, but found entering the my pass 100 times/day to do my normal tasks infuriating... which resulted in me disabling one of the main security features...
As it's free... I might try it again... however i'll probably stick with Windows XP, Mac & Sabayon Linux... :)
(He says... hoping that KDE 3.5.6 will compile OK on Sabayon)
arathalion
02.09.07, 03:56
lol...
im not sure what to vote either... i wish i could honestly vote "Windows... whats that?" but alas... i am cursed with the knowledge.
no supprise to some that "I prefer Linux"
We ll wait and see, that is always the best decision.
halloweenfoxy
02.09.07, 05:21
I'll handle it like back with windows XP
Stick with my windows as long as possible and have them weed out all the stuff thats anoying with it before I get the new one.
I'd rather not. The operating system it self sound s restrictive and invasive. For years, Ms has sold us on the idea of multitasking. And now they eliminate in completely. I find this, unacceptable. But, as usual. I'm sure Gates money and power, will force us to use it. I'll wait till then.
The bottom line with Vista is there is nothing it will give me that I want, and much that it may muddle that I already have. Rather than get Vista I'll just find some way to mess up some random part of my system (like happened to my wife's machine when I finally updated it to XP, only because if I didn't I could no longer buy virus updates, and it was cheaper to pay $90 than buy a new machine yet). Then I'll end up with the same result but I won't have to pay for Vista.
I am hearing discouraging things about Vista and past game compatibility, too.
When you put it that way, I suppose i'm lucky I get it free, along with over £10,000 worth of other MS software...
The bottom line with Vista is there is nothing it will give me that I want, and much that it may muddle that I already have. Rather than get Vista I'll just find some way to mess up some random part of my system (like happened to my wife's machine when I finally updated it to XP, only because if I didn't I could no longer buy virus updates, and it was cheaper to pay $90 than buy a new machine yet). Then I'll end up with the same result but I won't have to pay for Vista.
I am hearing discouraging things about Vista and past game compatibility, too.
ball lightning
02.09.07, 21:13
I am, but not untill next year or when i need a new computer.
Sicar Eneco
02.10.07, 04:58
I have installed it previously... I have Vista Business Edition (free & legally) from MSDNAA (http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/academic/default.aspx)...
Getting the same here. Sadly, they forgot to give us a key this week; So I'll be getting it only next week. (Not sure to be happy as it's free, or sad because it's Windows)
So, option #2 for me. I'll install it very soon :3
i have vista ultimate here 64bit version, but somehow dont dare to install it.
:)
cheers
I am, but not untill next year or when i need a new computer.That's me. My PC is running great, and Jade Empire - Special Edition is for XP. Why would I upgrade? I'll prolly have to buy a new PC for Dragon Age, anyway, so it can wait until then.
Alright, I just installed Vista and I am to my surprise extremly satisfied!
It's the best Windows Microsoft ever done.
I'm completly "WOW" :P
I just need to upgrade to 2GB RAM .. even 4GB maybe ...
Cheers,
cal1s
arathalion
02.12.07, 23:34
dont worry, itll blue screen soon... probably while you are in the middle of watching something... its annoying... the "copy protection" will get on your nerves... and if something breaks it all breaks.
just give it a minute.
which copy protection?
ive a legal copy of vista :)
cheers,
dont worry, itll blue screen soon... probably while you are in the middle of watching something... its annoying... the "copy protection" will get on your nerves... and if something breaks it all breaks.
just give it a minute.
arathalion
02.12.07, 23:44
vistas copy protection. the one that doesnt let you watch "pirated" movies...
basically you start watching something that vista deems pirated, or start using software that it thinks is pirated, and it bluescreens.
i havent got any problems watching movies.
might be because im using a valid installation and have installed all codecs ...
cal1s
vistas copy protection. the one that doesnt let you watch "pirated" movies...
basically you start watching something that vista deems pirated, or start using software that it thinks is pirated, and it bluescreens.
Yeah cal1s, but it's still physically IMPOSSIBLE to watch a HD-DVD in HD on a Windows Vista machine, or so I hear. The copy protection in Vista currently does not work with ANY HD hardware, which is the major problem. ATI actually was sued over this fact, for claiming they made HD video cards ready for Vista.
Apparently nobody currently does. Nor do they make HD monitors that will work with the copy protection. That's why I'm waiting to upgrade for a year or so.
The only real reason I would upgrade is for video capabilities, specifically High Definition. If I can't even use that, why bother upgrading?
arathalion
02.13.07, 00:28
has nothing to do with how valid your vista installation is. nor your having all codecs. vista has been written to stop piracy. it thinks that something is pirated, it dies.
oh, and microsoft failed at it, it wont work, just piss people off when their legit stuff doesnt work.
might be, but at this time im not interested in HD movies.
its enough for me when i can watch normal movies and DVDs and thats the case for me right now.
everything is working fine and quite fast.
i just need more RAM.
cal1s
Yeah cal1s, but it's still physically IMPOSSIBLE to watch a HD-DVD in HD on a Windows Vista machine, or so I hear. The copy protection in Vista currently does not work with ANY HD hardware, which is the major problem. ATI actually was sued over this fact, for claiming they made HD video cards ready for Vista.
Apparently nobody currently does. Nor do they make HD monitors that will work with the copy protection. That's why I'm waiting to upgrade for a year or so.
The only real reason I would upgrade is for video capabilities, specifically High Definition. If I can't even use that, why bother upgrading?
mate i watched a few movies already and had no issues at all.
cal1s
has nothing to do with how valid your vista installation is. nor your having all codecs. vista has been written to stop piracy. it thinks that something is pirated, it dies.
oh, and microsoft failed at it, it wont work, just piss people off when their legit stuff doesnt work.
arathalion
02.13.07, 00:32
i didnt say that it would do it with every dvd.
also, there is the spike issue
Hmm, I think this applies quite well to this topic :D
Should help you decide, it's a Vista upgrade decision flowchart I found :p
http://img45.imageshack.us/img45/6899/vistaupgradedecisionxu0.t h.png (http://img45.imageshack.us/img45/6899/vistaupgradedecisionxu0.p ng)
How about multitasking? That's the main issue with me. I do a lot of it. From what I hear. It only let's you do one thing at a time. I f you want to do something else, you must shut down what you were doing, and re-sign in and do the next thing. Try makking a CD with the music you had stored on your PC. Try making a CD, and working on something in Word, or some other program.
mate that was already possible in Windows XP.
it's also a matter of what CPU you have.
I have an AMD64 x2 DualCore .... not a single CPU but two ... this way I can choose (most of the time its done automatically) which process i want which CPU to do ...
I never had a problem burning a CD and at the same time doing something else though ..
cal1s
How about multitasking? That's the main issue with me. I do a lot of it. From what I hear. It only let's you do one thing at a time. I f you want to do something else, you must shut down what you were doing, and re-sign in and do the next thing. Try makking a CD with the music you had stored on your PC. Try making a CD, and working on something in Word, or some other program.
It's not an issue of what CPU you have. But what Vista will let you do. Now, I've heard that multitasking has been pretty much eliminated because of Windows new security systems. You want to watch a dvd, you log in. If you decide you want to do something else, you must stop watching the dvd and log into this other program. I also have a AMD dual core CPU. And I can watch a DVD, burn a CD, work on something in MS word, and browse the web, all at the same time. I've been told, you can't do it in Vista, because it won't allow you to do it. Because of it's strict security limitations.
Quoting btcentral,
To start it off, I voted no... After beta testing vista for a while, and playing around with the RTM I’ve decided it's a big no no for me!
Why? Well, as what most people would call a "Power User/Administrator" I found Vista's new security features infuriating! Within one day to do my normal tasks, I found I’d had to enter my password about 100 times… 100 times/day think how much time that could take up, and how much it could slow down your work! And to top it all off, at least half of the features of one of the programs I had wouldn’t work, as Vista will not allow you to save files to folders such as Program Files etc. without disabling *all* of the windows file/folder rights management!
At the end of the day, I’d disabled virtually all the security features, and what is the point in Microsoft developing what they call a “secure” OS, if you have to disable the security features, just to do your average tasks?
I'm still waiting for somebody to tell me something that it does better than XP. Until then, I'm sticking with what I have.
mate, thats BS.
its not true.
you can do whatever you did in XP in Vista, too.
It has more strict rights management but isnt that one of the facts the linux community was always triumphing over windows users?
now windows has a similar system and the awk awk awk goes on again ...
vista is more secure, much more secure.
you cannot change any system properties without confirming you have admin rights, you cannot install anything without admin rights.
and imho thats just exactly how a secure OS should be.
linux is the same ...
cal1s
It's not an issue of what CPU you have. But what Vista will let you do. Now, I've heard that multitasking has been pretty much eliminated because of Windows new security systems. You want to watch a dvd, you log in. If you decide you want to do something else, you must stop watching the dvd and log into this other program. I also have a AMD dual core CPU. And I can watch a DVD, burn a CD, work on something in MS word, and browse the web, all at the same time. I've been told, you can't do it in Vista, because it won't allow you to do it. Because of it's strict security limitations.
Quoting btcentral,
first of all, security reasons.
thats enough for me personally to change an OS.
and the fact that finally windows benefits and supports my 64Bit CPU.
too many other features .. too much to count ... google for it.
cal1s
I'm still waiting for somebody to tell me something that it does better than XP. Until then, I'm sticking with what I have.
Bill, if you thought by what I said that I meant that you can not multi-task, that's not what I meant at all.
You can multi-task, however the security features are much more strict. If you start any program that is not made made by Microsoft, or Digitally Signed by a valid issuer, e.g. Verisign, then you are asked to enter your password each and every time you start the program.
Also you can not allow programs to save files in the program files folder for example. I use an excellent PHP Design program called Rapid PHP 2006 (http://www.blumentals.net/rapidphp/index.php) it creates temporary files in the a webserver directory to generate file previews - so that you can see what you have coded will look like, I use Apache so in this case "C:\Program Files\Apache Group\Apache2\htdocs\deve lopment\" however Vista blocks me from doing so, as it will not allow you to save anything to your program files folder, even if you give that program "elevated" security permissions.
Also, the interface slows down your computer a lot when compared to XP, and uses up quite a bit of CPU usage generally.
It's not an issue of what CPU you have. But what Vista will let you do. Now, I've heard that multitasking has been pretty much eliminated because of Windows new security systems. You want to watch a dvd, you log in. If you decide you want to do something else, you must stop watching the dvd and log into this other program. I also have a AMD dual core CPU. And I can watch a DVD, burn a CD, work on something in MS word, and browse the web, all at the same time. I've been told, you can't do it in Vista, because it won't allow you to do it. Because of it's strict security limitations.
arathalion
02.15.07, 06:31
if i said something along the lines of "it cant multitask" i ment that it wont multitask (only using the word cause its easer the explaining the complexity of the issue... it will probably let you run word though) when you are using media files.
im not sure how this works with music, but it wont let you run a lot of programs while you are watching movies, for instance, because you might be pirating it.
cal1s, what do you mean by rights management? do you mean permissions? if so, i seriously doubt that its similar. also, to compete with linux they would have to re-write it from the ground up so that the gui is just an interface for the command line, emulating a terminal on top of the gui just does not cut it.
vista is more secure, much more secure.
you cannot change any system properties without confirming you have admin rights, you cannot install anything without admin rights.
and imho thats just exactly how a secure OS should be.
linux is the same ...
no its not.
to change your system you have to be a suid user. (root, though you can give it to other users aswell). if you want to change something as a normal user you have to log in as a suid user (su -) or give a terminal suid rights (sudo). you only have to do this once, unless you want to use a new terminal or are using a gui system (then its every time you open a new window, as the window is basically running su - a terminal behind it.
also, you are incorrect about being about to install anything.
first, you do not install anything on a linux platform. you either unpack pre-compiled binaries (rpm's) (which is, i suppose, the equivalent to installing something under windows) which is a lot more complected, or you compile this things yourself.
anyone can do these things.
what permissions stop you from doing in linux, is (for example) writing to anything outside of ~ (your user dir), now to unpack an rpm, you need to have permission to write to (in most casses) /usr/, which is something that most users do not have permission to do.
if a user wanted to they could compile programs in their home dir, and leave them there. before you say that this could compromise security, i would like to ask how? they can not edit anything, and they dont have read permission on the password files, so they cant "hack" the system.
any program that they do compile and run from ~ will be very limited in its use as it is not owned by root.
Wait and see. I don't really need all that fancy moving windows, for now :p
arathalion
02.22.07, 07:44
Wait and see. I don't really need all that fancy moving windows, for now :p
old technology is old
I'll wait till end of summer for vista when im going to rebuild my system. Until then i can do without direct x ten
old technology is old
True enough
Yes Ihave been using Windows Vista since the first Beta's came out. I have a Microsoft TechNet account and get all Microsoft software for free. Windows Vista is a good and strong OS. If you don't like User Account Control then turn it off. It will not cause any problems for home use. As long as you are safe on the internet. Plus it was only released to the public in January so give them some time to get the bugs out. O and make sure you have a powerfull PC. I suggest at least 4gigs of Ram and at least 512 on video card. If anyone has any questions about Vista please P.M. me. Thanks,
i'd say 2GB RAM is enough. Although a special technique implemented in Vista should really benifit from 4GB RAM (what will be standard RAM usage in computers in about 2 years anyway).
cheers
arathalion
02.27.07, 18:53
name + post count?
interesting...
EDIT: oh, hell, ill say it.
someone that is rather pro microsoft, perhaps one of your mircrosoft employees cal1s, has gone and created a new account, using the name of a popular (my favorite and there for on the boards, as i doubt most people in microsoft even know what linux is) linux distro in his user name, and has gone and posted a rant about how vista is good...
they also thanked the previous post for who knows what reason, as the post says that a) they will install it b) agrees with me that the "new" gui technology in vista is old. it has actually been around for years now.
now, go look at the join date if you dont believe me. that there is his only post.
if you are going to troll with an alternate acout, please do it right.
BuddhaBubba
03.16.07, 21:05
well, the poll is closed but I though I'd comment anyway...
being an on-site computer consulant allowed me too justify buying a windows vista machine to learn and adapt to the new OS before my customers start having problems with it (as you can see, I have to continually remind myself that this shiny new machine is for testing purposes)
anyway, I wanted to see the backwards compatibility and, alas, Nwn2 does not run for me...anyone know a solution? here's my specs:
amd64 x2 +3800
1gb RAM
nvidia geforce7600 gs with 256mb ram
windows vista home premium 64-bit edition
i have a feeling it may just be the 64-bit thing that's screwing everything up :(
arathalion
03.17.07, 02:11
hay, i just bought one of those cards.
atm, you have 3 options
1) downgrade to xp, (you WILL get better performance)
2) buy the latest ati card
3) wait for a new nvidia card to come out, or just wait, with ought being able to play games.
you see, most games dont run under vista, or run really badly. there are several reasons for this (crap software, memory hog, etc.) but i think that the reasons games wont run at all is a DirectX issue.
friend and I tried to get supreme commander to run under his vista install, the exe crashed on startup without throwing an error, if i remember correctly.
the problem, i think, is that your card doesn't support DX10. no nvidia cards do atm, and i think the only card that does is ATI's latest one.
if you can put dx9c on vista, i would try that (well, i wouldn't, as i am anti vista more so than i am anti any other of microsoft's products, for reasons already in this thread), otherwise, install xp or buy a new card.
im sure its not vista thing but drivers issues.
i also have vista 64bit and have no problems at all running games.
here my specs:
AMD64 x2 4400+ » GigaByte (http://board.gulli.com/#) K8N nForce 4 SLi » 2GB RAM
GigaByte GeForce (http://board.gulli.com/#) 7900GT » Samsung (http://board.gulli.com/#) SyncMaster (http://board.gulli.com/#) 930BF
Western Digital 320GB Sata-II » Microsoft Windows Vista (http://board.gulli.com/#) 64Bit
BuddhaBubba
03.18.07, 22:05
thanks for the replies
*Wonders when Vista will be usable for him*
I'm still holding off. The more I read about Vista, the less I want to upgrade. The only thing Vista has that I want is DirectX 10. Besides, I just built the PC I have now a few months back. It's an SLI machine, so I have two video cards. I really don't want to have to replace those in order to use DirX 10. Xp works fine for me, and I don't see why I should be forced to change in order to play new games.
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.