Vista sucks, despite all that is said around

Monopoly money comes in many flavors: 7, Vista, XP, 2K, ME, 98, etc.

Moderators: Flying Fox, Ryu Connor

Re: Vista sucks, despite all that is said around

Postposted on Sat Sep 27, 2008 10:07 pm

Looks like we have a winner. PRIME1 is the thread stopper. :P

Since you guys don't seem to have found something new in Vista to bitch about, and at a nice round number of 40 this is now a good time to lock this.

So if some other gerbil needs to vent about Vista, they won't get further opportunity. You guys have ruined it for him/her. Any new threads adding nothing to this so-called debate will be faced with summary lockage.

* LOCKED *
Image
The Model M is not for the faint of heart. You either like them or hate them.

Gerbils unite! Fold for UnitedGerbilNation, team 2630.
Flying Fox
Gerbil God
 
Posts: 24440
Joined: Mon May 24, 2004 2:19 am

Re: ATI AGP 'Hotfix' Drivers Not Signed; Windows Forbids

Postposted on Fri Jan 14, 2011 9:34 am

scpulp wrote:
The Lord of the Flies wrote:And speaking of Vista and 7, I'm intending to avoid those and stick with XP as long as I possibly can. I guess I'll have to switch eventually, like it's inevitable, but not now, I don't! No *beep*ing way!


You can make something of a case for XP over Vista, but 7?



No, you can't...well not unless you are one of those vista sucks windows 7 rules type of people.

Compared to Xp's launch Vista was a cake walk.......
Strong or weak in the end we are all dead.
YeuEmMaiMai
Gerbil
 
Posts: 57
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 4:42 pm

Re: ATI AGP 'Hotfix' Drivers Not Signed; Windows Forbids

Postposted on Fri Jan 14, 2011 9:39 am

YeuEmMaiMai wrote:Compared to Xp's launch Vista was a cake walk.......

That's a pretty low bar; XP was a mess at launch. Compared to XP SP2/SP3 Vista was a train wreck.
(this space intentionally left blank)
just brew it!
Administrator
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 37739
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2002 10:51 pm
Location: Somewhere, having a beer

Re: ATI AGP 'Hotfix' Drivers Not Signed; Windows Forbids

Postposted on Fri Jan 14, 2011 9:51 am

I've been on the Microsoft Beta team for over 10 years. Vista and ME have been the only version of their OS's I refused to install on my personal machine. Vista and ME were both ~fixed~ to some degree after the fact. But for me Vista's lack of a decent Human interface is the icing on the crap cake.

No sir, I would never willingly take a bite.


On the flipside. Windows 7 is probably the best OS I have seen from Microsoft bar none.
mackintire
Gerbil
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:23 pm

Re: ATI AGP 'Hotfix' Drivers Not Signed; Windows Forbids

Postposted on Fri Jan 14, 2011 9:55 am

just brew it! wrote:
YeuEmMaiMai wrote:Compared to Xp's launch Vista was a cake walk.......
That's a pretty low bar; XP was a mess at launch. Compared to XP SP2/SP3 Vista was a train wreck.
Most of the problems with Vista were 3rd-party drivers that were either not available when the OS launched (even after a year of open beta) or shouldn't have been released without more QA. NVidia's crappy drivers caused more Vista crashes than any other source.
i7-4770K, H70, Gryphon Z87, 16 GiB, R9-290, SSD, 2 HD, Blu-ray, SB ZX, TJ08-E, SS-660XP², 3007WFP+2001FP, RK-9000BR, MX518
JustAnEngineer
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 15443
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: The Heart of Dixie

Re: ATI AGP 'Hotfix' Drivers Not Signed; Windows Forbids

Postposted on Fri Jan 14, 2011 10:10 am

mackintire wrote:On the flipside. Windows 7 is probably the best OS I have seen from Microsoft bar none.

Win2K was very good for its day as well. The only reason I eventually ditched it for XP was that a lot of commercial software stopped supporting it.

JustAnEngineer wrote:Most of the problems with Vista were 3rd-party drivers that were either not available when the OS launched (even after a year of open beta) or shouldn't have been released without more QA. NVidia's crappy drivers caused more Vista crashes than any other source.

I don't know if I'd agree that drivers were responsible for most of the problems, but yes I agree that at least a significant percentage of the problems were driver related. But from the end user's perspective, it doesn't matter much whose fault it was -- people just want their computers to work.
(this space intentionally left blank)
just brew it!
Administrator
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 37739
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2002 10:51 pm
Location: Somewhere, having a beer

Re: ATI AGP 'Hotfix' Drivers Not Signed; Windows Forbids

Postposted on Fri Jan 14, 2011 11:18 am

Vista..... let me see.

  • Two different driver certification processes (thank you Intel), Vista Premium (which meant everything would work correctly) and Vista Ready (which meant the system would probably boot)
  • Human Interface that is not consistent or easy to use
  • File copy mechanism borked on release (Fixed in SP1)
  • Kitchen sink mentality, every service on at start up with crazy cascading dependencies
  • Memory bloat mostly due to Kitchen sink mentality
  • Tools to fix vista required vista to boot, if the origional DVD or the recovery DVD did not work, in most cases you're screwed
  • Volume shadow copy set too liberal by default, resulting in massive amounts of dissappearing HD space for some users (fixed in SP1)
  • Intrusive UAC with on and off switch as the only choices (aka GOD MODE or PAWN MODE)


Not mention the hundreds of other little issues that all snowball into an a generally annoying poweruser or admin experience.


That said, if you have a machine that met the proper (real) requirements to run Vista and are the type of user that only clicks on things on the desktop.... there is no need make a big fuss over it. Just use it.
mackintire
Gerbil
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:23 pm

Re: ATI AGP 'Hotfix' Drivers Not Signed; Windows Forbids

Postposted on Fri Jan 14, 2011 11:41 am

mackintire wrote:Vista..... let me see.


I guess I'm gonna have to send this off to the Vista hate thread. Let's see how much misinformation this one has.

  • Two different driver certification processes (thank you Intel), Vista Premium (which meant everything would work correctly) and Vista Ready (which meant the system would probably boot)
  • Human Interface that is not consistent or easy to use
  • File copy mechanism borked on release (Fixed in SP1)
  • Kitchen sink mentality, every service on at start up with crazy cascading dependencies
  • Memory bloat mostly due to Kitchen sink mentality
  • Tools to fix vista required vista to boot, if the origional DVD or the recovery DVD did not work, in most cases you're screwed
  • Volume shadow copy set too liberal by default, resulting in massive amounts of dissappearing HD space for some users (fixed in SP1)
  • Intrusive UAC with on and off switch as the only choices (aka GOD MODE or PAWN MODE)


  • It was one. The label of Premium vs Ready didn't have anything to do with driver certs. You could either run Aero or couldn't.
  • It had the classic interface and the Aero interface that exists in 7! Are you saying you hate the classic interface? Are you saying you hate the Win7 Aero interface too?
  • Real issue.
  • Windows 7 still has the same service structure and service dependencies are ancient.
  • It runs in a memory footprint as little as 300MB. Yes, that's bigger than XP, but it's been ten years. 300MB is reasonable. If you are one of those who are confused about Superfetch I'm gonna seriously facepalm.
  • And this was somehow different than fixing NTLDR how? The fact that NTLDR was ancient and other 3rd party tools had better support to fix the MBR is not a negative of Vista. I'd also note that 7 didn't "fix" this "problem." This about like bitching that you couldn't read NTFS with DOS back in the late 90s during the NT4 era.
  • SP1 didn't fix that "problem". Vista still has very large % of space dedicated to system state back ups. It is adjustable in RTM and later via the commandline. The VSSAdmin.
  • Yes, and you're probably one of the people who would cut his wrists if you ever used *Nix. UAC was just fine and the SP1 change refined it to perfection. Admin for 7 is less secure than Vista due to the UAC changes pushed. Not that enthusiasts should be running Admin, but that's a lost cause. Enthusiasts are terribad at security.

Not mention the hundreds of other little issues that all snowball into an a generally annoying poweruser or admin experience.

That said, if you have a machine that met the proper (real) requirements to run Vista and are the type of user that only clicks on things on the desktop.... there is no need make a big fuss over it. Just use it.


I somewhat doubt that statement. 7 carries the same behavior as Vista for nearly every task and both Vista and 7 became easier and better to administrate and manage in an enterprise than XP. The ignorance around Vista and 7 is so immense its stunning really.

The Mojave experiment clearly defined what the problem with Vista was and it wasn't the expereience, it was the lambasting in the media it took from the luddites. I think JAE also has a good point about how poor drivers were at launch. Not that Microsoft can fix that. Microsoft also took a hit on application compatibility, but to raise the bar and make Windows a modern operating system that made people stop running Admin they had no choice but to break some eggs (poorly written programs).

I'll be back later to split this thread. It's totally derailed from it's original purpose. Complaining about Vista or 7 not allowing signed drivers is equivalent to asking for a rootkit. Seriously, signed drivers matter. Your kernel is not a plaything.
"Welcome back my friends to the show that never ends. We're so glad you could attend. Come inside! Come inside!"
Ryu Connor
Global Moderator
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 3548
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: Marietta, GA

Vista sucks, despite all that is said around (Page 41)

Postposted on Fri Jan 14, 2011 1:35 pm

Since you can't add to a locked thread...and there doesn't seem to be a rule against addendum.


Subject: Vista sucks, despite all that is said around

Ryu Connor wrote:
mackintire wrote:Vista..... let me see.


I guess I'm gonna have to send this off to the Vista hate thread. Let's see how much misinformation this one has.

  • Two different driver certification processes (thank you Intel), Vista Premium (which meant everything would work correctly) and Vista Ready (which meant the system would probably boot)
  • Human Interface that is not consistent or easy to use
  • File copy mechanism borked on release (Fixed in SP1)
  • Kitchen sink mentality, every service on at start up with crazy cascading dependencies
  • Memory bloat mostly due to Kitchen sink mentality
  • Tools to fix vista required vista to boot, if the origional DVD or the recovery DVD did not work, in most cases you're screwed
  • Volume shadow copy set too liberal by default, resulting in massive amounts of dissappearing HD space for some users (fixed in SP1)
  • Intrusive UAC with on and off switch as the only choices (aka GOD MODE or PAWN MODE)


  • It was one. The label of Premium vs Ready didn't have anything to do with driver certs. You could either run Aero or couldn't.

    Mackintire: Yes and no. Your statement is true in the loose sense. However one big loophole was that is there was more stability testing and scrutiny applied to the premium compliance drivers than there was to the Vista Ready drivers. Intel asked Microsoft to allow the GMA950 to be used on VISTA. Microsoft created Vista Ready as a result, but dropped some of the more important parts of quality assurance testing that they had in other certification process. All in all, it was a huge loophole that was exploited by many venders.
  • It had the classic interface and the Aero interface that exists in 7! Are you saying you hate the classic interface? Are you saying you hate the Win7 Aero interface too?

    Mackintire: Umm no....try to connect to a wireless network in vista.....try the same thing in Win 7. Heck try to get to the device manager. How many ways in vista can you do that? I think I know of 4. You may start to see my point. Even the layout of the control panel was terrible. Some of the automated tree preference in Vista are still screwy post SP1. Yes I am picky and Yes I expect it to work better.
  • Real issue.

    Mackintire: Gee thanks ;)
  • Windows 7 still has the same service structure and service dependencies are ancient.

    Mackintire: Um again no...Steven Sinofsky on the windows 7 engineering blog said all the dependences have been restacked from the kernel on up so that is you need to call service A to see interact with , say the desktop the minimum number of dependencies would be turned on.
    Also Windows seven has multiple starting states. Some services are not loaded until either called for or delayed until the desktop or user enviroments are fully loaded. This allows the user to perform work and not be held up by additional service the user may or may not need at first.

  • It runs in a memory footprint as little as 300MB. Yes, that's bigger than XP, but it's been ten years. 300MB is reasonable. If you are one of those who are confused about Superfetch I'm gonna seriously facepalm.
    Again.... I think you are making assumptions.

    Mackintire: Vista on a clean install boots to 380ish MB
    Install SP1 and your clean machine now boots about 540MB
    Win 7 on a clean boot is in the 340ish MB fully patched its basically the same as vista.
    Now while installing say..... office 2008 the clean Vista machine will require over 1K of memory to not hit the PF
    The windows 7 machine will be just under 1k in the 700s and not hit the PF performing the same install.
    Keep in mind a significant majority of machines released with Vista only had 1GB installed.
    For the end user the result is an install time difference of well over an hour.
    Load a couple of programs like AV into the OS and the issue becomes much more exaggerated.
    My point is Windows 7 (in my humble opinion) can get by with a normal basic user and 1GB of RAM. But a Vista machine configured the same way becomes an exercise in patience.

  • And this was somehow different than fixing NTLDR how? The fact that NTLDR was ancient and other 3rd party tools had better support to fix the MBR is not a negative of Vista. I'd also note that 7 didn't "fix" this "problem." This about like bitching that you couldn't read NTFS with DOS back in the late 90s during the NT4 era.

    Mackintire: Have you ever tried to use the recovery console in Vista when the bootloader is trashed? good luck. Since all your tools are on a disk drive that is inaccessible you're screwed. Great you have your CD....the CD is going to try to load the tools off your hard disk.....which again doesn't work.
    Microsoft half admitted this issue and fixed it with Win 7. Again the tools are now on the install DVD or service disk and are USABLE and accessible by booting off the install disk or the recovery disk.
  • SP1 didn't fix that "problem". Vista still has very large % of space dedicated to system state back ups. It is adjustable in RTM and later via the commandline. The VSSAdmin.

    Mackintire: Again you're response is a half truth. Yes you can adjust it, using either the commandline or the VSSAdmin. But SP1 changes the behavior so that VSS is not as verbose when it comes to gobbling up HD space. It will still use it if the space is available, but the default behavior is not as aggressive. Again Microsoft admitted this but called it a feature not a bug.
  • Yes, and you're probably one of the people who would cut his wrists if you ever used *Nix. UAC was just fine and the SP1 change refined it to perfection. Admin for 7 is less secure than Vista due to the UAC changes pushed. Not that enthusiasts should be running Admin, but that's a lost cause. Enthusiasts are terribad at security.


Mackintire: I personally use Ubuntu and have no problems with it. UAC in Vista was overdone and in your face. SP1 improved it a little....but why the hell do I have to answer a UAC call to run defrag? Seriously?

Mackintire: Don't get me wrong, Win 7 UAC IS less secure, I can agree with that. However it is far more secure to have a win7 machine with UAC on than a Win Vista machine with UAC off. Also you have a much more granular choice in WIn 7 on how you want to adjust UAC. I am an enthusiast and an admin. I have had very few security related issues on my own personal systems. At work we have a mostly proper multi-layered security layout, unfortunately my programmers can not function without poweruser level permissions at a minimum as we write drivers, snoop inject and log data while designing our interface systems. But our level of malware and virus outbreaks are very low. Those that need resources have them, those that don't do not.

Not mention the hundreds of other little issues that all snowball into an a generally annoying poweruser or admin experience.

That said, if you have a machine that met the proper (real) requirements to run Vista and are the type of user that only clicks on things on the desktop.... there is no need make a big fuss over it. Just use it.


I somewhat doubt that statement. 7 carries the same behavior as Vista for nearly every task and both Vista and 7 became easier and better to administrate and manage in an enterprise than XP. The ignorance around Vista and 7 is so immense its stunning really.

Mackintire: As a said before....with the proper hardware and a basic user. Most end users will not notice the difference between Vista and Win 7. In that regard I agree with you , there is a lot of ignorance around Vista and 7.

The Mojave experiment clearly defined what the problem with Vista was and it wasn't the expereience, it was the lambasting in the media it took from the luddites.

Mackintire: The Mojave experiment was not all encompassing. Those machines were properly equipped for the software on them. They also only had basic computer users. Not power users, enthusiast and admins.


I think JAE also has a good point about how poor drivers were at launch. Not that Microsoft can fix that.

Mackintire: They did with Win 7. The fixed the driver certification process so the loopholes were closed.

The Mojave experiment clearly defined what the problem with Vista was and it wasn't the expereience, it was the lambasting in the media it took from the luddites.



Microsoft also took a hit on application compatibility, but to raise the bar and make Windows a modern operating system that made people stop running Admin they had no choice but to break some eggs (poorly written programs).

Mackintire: I'll agree with that.

I'll be back later to split this thread. It's totally derailed from it's original purpose. Complaining about Vista or 7 not allowing signed drivers is equivalent to asking for a rootkit. Seriously, signed drivers matter. Your kernel is not a plaything.


Mackintire: I Completely agree.


Mackintire: I would appreciate my responses being merged with yours so the members can see both sides of the argument and that we are civilized individuals who can agree to disagree on some issues.

Cheers,

Mackintire


Mackintire: I agree I derailed the topic and for that I apologize.

Mackintire: You can call it as you see it but I am fairly certain you are misinformed...or have a different perspective on some of the issues.
mackintire
Gerbil
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:23 pm

Re: Vista sucks, despite all that is said around

Postposted on Fri Jan 14, 2011 2:04 pm

improved it a little....but why the hell do I have to answer a UAC call to run defrag? Seriously?


If you don't understand this... then this entire topic is outside your expertise. Degrag has system wide access to your data that bypasses ACLs. That is an Admin level function, not a toy.

You're also a little off: for example the network applet in Vista is the same as 7, but 7 does sport some new additions to it such as Homegroup or the Wireless system notification icon.

I could go point by point, but there is a a reason this topic/concept is locked. Forty pages worth of reason. I'm not gonna keep kicking this can. Further replies" to the topic will be merged, locked, and unresponded to.

Vista is dead, bashing Windows 7 is the hot thing now.
"Welcome back my friends to the show that never ends. We're so glad you could attend. Come inside! Come inside!"
Ryu Connor
Global Moderator
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 3548
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: Marietta, GA

Previous

Return to Windows

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: FightingScallion, Google [Bot] and 2 guests