Board logo

Is it just me?
trogdor - 12/5/08 at 03:00 PM

Am not sure if its just me, but reading all the bad press vista has recieved since it was released i was really worried about it when i was told my new work laptop was coming with it installed. Its spec was not high, has only 1gb of ram and single core processor etc. But was pleasantly surprised at how good it is!

It runs at a reasonable speed, what i would expect XP too. Looks really cool etc. And runs all the software i was using before, including some relatively out of date stuff. Office XP 2002 etc.

The only prob was trying to install some software that was trying to write to the C drive and despite being administtrator it won't allow it. But have found the setting to disable that.

Yes it is a little annoying with all the dialog boxes saying you sure this program is safe and all the faff with security certifictes. But i do really like it.

Am i the only one?

blakep82 - 12/5/08 at 03:01 PM

i think you are!
i know enough people wanting to put XP on their machines....

Mr Whippy - 12/5/08 at 03:02 PM

I thought it looked (the appearance) great but I'm still not going to use it on my machine plus I've recently found out that AutoCAD 2005 won't install on it.

What was the point of producing such a useless operating system, are they trying to force people to buy new software? Are they inclusion with software companies??

How many times have they done new version and yet every time it’s been a balls up.


[Edited on 12/5/08 by Mr Whippy]

Pdlewis - 12/5/08 at 03:10 PM

I love it so reposive and much more stable than XP. I run it as my TV/PVR where I would have to reboot the XP machine daily to sort out perofrmance/stability issues my vista box (the same hardware which is 5 - 7 years old) will stay up and running sweetly inbetween windows updates think its currently been up constantly for 34 days with no issues.

as well as using it as a media center I also use it as a webserver/file server and terminal server all this on a P4!!! not had one problem with it

[Edited on 12/5/08 by Pdlewis]

trogdor - 12/5/08 at 03:23 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Mr Whippy
I thought it looked (the appearance) great but I'm still not going to use it on my machine plus I've recently found out that AutoCAD 2005 won't install on it.

What was the point of producing such a useless operating system, are they trying to force people to buy new software? Are they inclusion with software companies??

How many times have they done new version and yet every time it’s been a balls up.


[Edited on 12/5/08 by Mr Whippy]


I find more and more these days we are using open source software, with work for example, our website is open source CMS, our client CRM is open source as well as our online shops. The only stuff that isn't is office and IE and that is only MS stuff because the open source CRM doesn't work well with firefox or mail merge at all with open office........

RazMan - 12/5/08 at 03:25 PM

I run both 32 bit and 64 bit versions on my lappy and desktop. The 64 bit flavour can be a bit of a bu@@er when it comes to drivers for older peripherals and software but I wouldn't go back to XP now.

zetec7 - 12/5/08 at 03:50 PM

I've got Vista (32-bit version), and I loaded AutoCAD from 2001...works just fine. If you have any bootleg software, however, it probably won't...it's very discerning when it comes to pass "cracked" software off as original. It seems that the 64-bit Vista is the one with most of the compatibility problems.

BenB - 12/5/08 at 07:07 PM

I've only had a play with Vista once on a brand new laptop that ran like a dog waddling through treacle.....

Doubt I'll bother "upgrading" after that experience....

Daimo_45 - 12/5/08 at 07:21 PM

Or you could use a Mac with a 1.6ghz, single processor running OSX and could prob guarantee it would run better than any high spec'd, dual-core pc running Vista.

Benzine - 12/5/08 at 10:55 PM

I use vista 64. I really like it, not had any problems at all.

quote:
Originally posted by Daimo_45
Or you could use a Mac with a 1.6ghz, single processor running OSX and could prob guarantee it would run better than any high spec'd, dual-core pc running Vista.


but it would mean having a mac

RazMan - 13/5/08 at 05:47 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Benzine

but it would mean having a mac


MikeRJ - 13/5/08 at 09:00 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Pdlewis
I love it so reposive and much more stable than XP. I run it as my TV/PVR where I would have to reboot the XP machine daily to sort out perofrmance/stability issues


Sounds like you had a very broken XP installation. My computer at work runs 24/7 and gets rebooted a handfull of times a year if I ever install new hardware or we get a power outage.

XP is faster than Vista even with the fancy graphics turned off, it's been proven over and over again. Even better is that SP3 is rumoured to give around a 10% boost in speed to a fresh XP install making Vista look like a sluggish pile of dung it is.

MikeRJ - 13/5/08 at 09:04 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Daimo_45
Or you could use a Mac with a 1.6ghz, single processor running OSX and could prob guarantee it would run better than any high spec'd, dual-core pc running Vista.


OSX is really very nice, and the above is almost certainly true when just looking at OS performance. I'm sure if more people actually tried it they would prefer it.

Pdlewis - 14/5/08 at 01:48 PM

Mine wasnt a broken install it was to do with the fact MS hadnt developed the application correctly so full of memory leaks etc. I run XP on a work machine and that is sable (as I code in a VM so not to break it) even then its still not doing all the encoding/decoding work my pvr does