Vista nightmares.............................

[JohnnyWalkerBlackLabel]

Anyone else using vista?

if so feel free to vent your frustrations right here, who knows someone might be able to help (or help you on a 3way call cursing out Microsoft tech support)

I'll start

Vista updates are plentiful, the most recent one updated my pc and since then I've lost all direct connections from my pc to my smartphone, and my audigy soundcard cuts in & out during movie viewing

[mbf]

yes, its the most ass-suck os i ever have worked with.

my company "upgraded" to vista in may and we couldnt get a ONE YEAR OLD epson printer to work because of lack of drivers. i could go on and on.....

[Vicki Richter]

Anyone else using vista?

if so feel free to vent your frustrations right here, who knows someone might be able to help (or help you on a 3way call cursing out Microsoft tech support)

I'll start

Vista updates are plentiful, the most recent one updated my pc and since then I've lost all direct connections from my pc to my smartphone, and my audigy soundcard cuts in & out during movie viewing

It has done that wierd thing to me where it recognizes the device, but it doesn't give me access to it. My EOS Digital Rebel camera connects, shows connected, but no screens pop up to download the photos. I also can't access it directly with a drive letter. It's very annoying. I installed the drivers from the manufacturer Canon.

[rvince]

/me is a happy Ubuntu user... :-)

[uncutflmeat]

Had Vista since it came out on my new laptop (didn't have a choice at the time but to go Vista). I have to say I've had a few minor problems, nothing dissimilar to other versions of windows but overall it's been much better than I expected. I hate those pop ups asking if you are sure.

My other machine is a Linux Mandriva server and that's just awesome.

[ILuvGurls]

My computer is 8-9 years old, reading all this stuff about Vista is causing me to procrastinate about buying a new one. I might wait until i am confident that all printers etc are Vista compatible.

can't say that i blame you.....

bought a new 'puter back in january, i think, but any way i had the choice between vista and xp. sounds like i made the right choice. although i can update to vista later for free.

[Kriss]

my audigy soundcard cuts in & out during movie viewing[/b]

ARE YOU USING WINDOWS MEDIA PLAYER?

LOOK ON WWW.SOURCEFORGE.NET FOR "OPEN SOURCE" FREE SOFTWARE FOR VISTA.

I FOUND A PROGRAM CALLED "KANTARIS" THAT PLAYS EVERYTHING

IT IS A VERSION OF "LIDEO-LAN VLC PLAYER" SO WONT KEEP ASKING FOR CODECS. SOURCEFORGE IS A GOOD SITE, RELIABLE FREE PROGRAMS, BETTER THAN WINDOWS

GOD BLESS THOSE NERDS...........

[Quinn]

/me is a happy Ubuntu user... :-)

Yeah, Ubuntu is good stuff. I have Vista – AND IT FUCKING SUCKS THE HUGEST DONKEY COCK EVER. Yes, I'm a touch cranky today, hence the potty mouth.

-Quinn

[JohnnyWalkerBlackLabel]

I'm using ultimate, although I seriously doubt it would matter what version, I've heard complaints from people using various versions, I have Ubuntu, I was using it through Vista but now, I think I'll just go ahead and install that puppy on the partition I dedicated for it. I didn't really know how bad this thing was speed wise until I witnessed a brand new iMac G5 start up in less than 20 secs, I was pissed

[TomSelis]

The funny thing is XP just got relatively stable. I'm just going to chill for another year or so before copping Vista.

[BeardedOne]

The funny thing is XP just got relatively stable. I'm just going to chill for another year or so before copping Vista.

Yah, this has been my experience with all things Gate...er...Microsoft. There's a patterned transition period (3.0 to 3.1 to 95 to 98 to ME to XP) where all the shit rains down. I hate it, but while I am somewhat of a genius (Very smart) I'm not all that bright (Quick thinking) and am still trying to suss out stoopid DOS shit that a two-year old can code in his sleep. For this, I have a tech staff that starts the average war story with "I told Eric (Raymond).../Richard (Stalman).../Linus (Torvalds)...". Geniuses all, but it's hell to get them to put shorts on and come to a meeting. :roll:

I usually wait a year, at most, before upgrading an OS and I still have machines on premise that are running 95, 98, and ME just in case. And, somewhere, there is still that Legacy of the Ancients game that I like (Commodore 64).

[stevenb43]

I am a small computer dealer that sells mainly laptops and 80% of the laptops I have sold with vista have come back and the customer requests to have xp put on it....

[Ecstatic]

I love and hate it: I have a new Dell XPS 410 (E6600 dual-core, 4GB RAM, RAID II hd's, etc.) running Vista Ultimate, and when it works it's the bee's knees, way beyond XP. But when it doesn't--and that's all too often--it craps the bed like an incontinent 95-year-old geezer. I ran BCDedit to allot 3 GB to programs and 1GB to the OS, which was an improvement, but not enough, so I think I'm going to turn that down, make it 1.5GB for the OS and 2.5 GB for the programs (4GB RAM on a 32bit OS....oh well....it sounded good at the time).

I get weird errors like "cannot load resource DLL" when I launch Windows Explorer (doesn't tell me which DLL), yet the program works. I'm humming along, then I go to open a program: the screen kind of flickers as the program tries to launch but fails. Or in PS, Save for Web won't load. Or I run of memory (with 4 freakin' gigabytes of RAM? doing shite that I did on my 5-year-old XP with 1GB RAM no problem?). The litany goes on.

I'm about to call Dell Tech Support again, and if they fail me, look around the neighborhood for a 14-year-old who knows his shite. Thing is, there are so many variables on top of Vista to work through: Norton "Ghost" (I forget what they renamed it); the RAID II hd's; the RAM allotment in BCDEdit; legacy software (Homesite is my primary web authoring tool, but it was written in 2001).

Yeesh, ya hadda ask.

[kukm4]

I'm using ultimate, although I seriously doubt it would matter what version, I've heard complaints from people using various versions, I have Ubuntu, I was using it through Vista but now, I think I'll just go ahead and install that puppy on the partition I dedicated for it. I didn't really know how bad this thing was speed wise until I witnessed a brand new iMac G5 start up in less than 20 secs, I was pissed

Have you considered dual boot?
Have XP and Ubuntu

[Castor_Troy05]

I use Vista, and have had absolutely zero problems.

I guess I'm just lucky

[peteincollege]

I had been a windows user all of my life, but a few months ago i bought a macbook and now i could never go back. The Mac OS X is so much easier to use than xp or vista. I have a partition with xp installed via boot camp software so that I can still do my gaming and play around with Office 2007 until it comes out for the mac, but other than that i avoid windows like the plague. OS X is so much more powerful and easier to use than xp was, and from everything that I've heard, it's way better than vista.

Also, the next iteration of OS X is scheduled for release in October, and Leopard is supposed to totally kick Vista's ass two miles out of the water. vista finally caught up to Tiger, but Leopard will put macs five years ahead of windows.

[Ecstatic]

So how much HD space does Vista take up?
Harddrives are cheap; it's the RAM that you need be concerned with, and Vista wants 1 GB of RAM.

[voy4her]

i bought a new comp with Vista. 2 weeks later i returned it, went to Frys bought a mobo, a processor, a couple gigs of ram, a tower, a PS and a video card. Then i bought Windows XP. Now i have no more problems.

I would vehemently suggest that if you are considering getting/using/upgrading to Vista that you wait until at least the first Service Pack is released. If you are a gaming enthusiast, i recommend staying with XP until at least the 2nd Service Pack is released.

Vista has some nice functions and ideas, but was poorly Q&Ad, theres compatibility problems up the wazoo, more driver/video card problems than i could have imagined possible.

Hasta la Vista, IMO.

[voy4her]

So how much HD space does Vista take up?
Harddrives are cheap; it's the RAM that you need be concerned with, and Vista wants 1 GB of RAM.

So does that then mean that a computer needs more than 1GB of RAM to work with Vista? would 1024 be enough or would i more likely need 2048?

the OS itself will eat the better part of a gig of ram. You'll need 2 gigs if you want to be able to do the stuff you could do on XP with 1G.

[voy4her]

Anyone else using vista?

if so feel free to vent your frustrations right here, who knows someone might be able to help (or help you on a 3way call cursing out Microsoft tech support)

I'll start

Vista updates are plentiful, the most recent one updated my pc and since then I've lost all direct connections from my pc to my smartphone, and my audigy soundcard cuts in & out during movie viewing

It has done that wierd thing to me where it recognizes the device, but it doesn't give me access to it. My EOS Digital Rebel camera connects, shows connected, but no screens pop up to download the photos. I also can't access it directly with a drive letter. It's very annoying. I installed the drivers from the manufacturer Canon.

Vicki, have you disabled the UAC? In vista alot of times the commands you send to open an APP or recognize hardware takes a long time to get thru, you may have to alt tab and look at your toolbar for the orange flashing prompt, which wants you to confirm the damn command you gave 5 mins ago.

Id recommend disabling the UAC so you are essentially running all programs as an admin. Then id go into your hardware/device manager and instruct it to check for new hardware. If this doesnt work uninstall the drivers and try again.
IF these suggestions dont work you may need the help of someone who was willing to put up with more bullshit than I was...

[voy4her]

It might help to know which version of Vista you're all using....are they all bad?

supposedly ultimate works a lot better..but id stay with XP.

[voy4her]

I love and hate it: I have a new Dell XPS 410 (E6600 dual-core, 4GB RAM, RAID II hd's, etc.) running Vista Ultimate, and when it works it's the bee's knees, way beyond XP. But when it doesn't--and that's all too often--it craps the bed like an incontinent 95-year-old geezer. I ran BCDedit to allot 3 GB to programs and 1GB to the OS, which was an improvement, but not enough, so I think I'm going to turn that down, make it 1.5GB for the OS and 2.5 GB for the programs (4GB RAM on a 32bit OS....oh well....it sounded good at the time).

I get weird errors like "cannot load resource DLL" when I launch Windows Explorer (doesn't tell me which DLL), yet the program works. I'm humming along, then I go to open a program: the screen kind of flickers as the program tries to launch but fails. Or in PS, Save for Web won't load. Or I run of memory (with 4 freakin' gigabytes of RAM? doing shite that I did on my 5-year-old XP with 1GB RAM no problem?). The litany goes on.

I'm about to call Dell Tech Support again, and if they fail me, look around the neighborhood for a 14-year-old who knows his shite. Thing is, there are so many variables on top of Vista to work through: Norton "Ghost" (I forget what they renamed it); the RAID II hd's; the RAM allotment in BCDEdit; legacy software (Homesite is my primary web authoring tool, but it was written in 2001).

Yeesh, ya hadda ask.

IMO the explorer.exe program is what is causing most of the hurrendous performance problems. Hopefully theyre looking at it.. TBH there were so many issues, I got error #s that werent listed on the microsoft websites and noone could tell me what they were, the update feature stopped functioning several times, i had to format the computer 3 times in 2 weeks.. a brand new computer...thanks but no thanks...

[ezed]

Here is the complete tutorial. It should help you with the problems you're having.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Phk-s21oaM

[kukm4]

the OS itself will eat the better part of a gig of ram. You'll need 2 gigs if you want to be able to do the stuff you could do on XP with 1G.

Is that excluding Aero Glass feature?

[zerrrr]

The hard drive just crashed on my laptop and was looking at getting a new one before deciding to just have the hard drive replaced and all my data moved over.

When looking at the laptops I was shocked that they are not designed for Vista. The ones I saw had 2 USB slots and 2GB of RAM so if Vista takes up 1 GB and I buy Office 07 (which I expect is another RAM hog) most of it gets used up rather quickly. That means if I want to upgraed my RAM I have to buy a USB drive and give up 1 of my 2 slots. What crappy design.

I also have a 5 year old Epson printer which I doubt there is a driver and I am not junking the printer. It prints better than my mom's new Dell printer.

[Ecstatic]

So how much HD space does Vista take up?
Harddrives are cheap; it's the RAM that you need be concerned with, and Vista wants 1 GB of RAM.

So does that then mean that a computer needs more than 1GB of RAM to work with Vista? would 1024 be enough or would i more likely need 2048?

the OS itself will eat the better part of a gig of ram. You'll need 2 gigs if you want to be able to do the stuff you could do on XP with 1G.
The sweet spot seems to be 3 GB of RAM: 1 GB for the OS and 2 for the apps (32-bit apps running on Windows can only access up to 2 GB of RAM; my experiment was to see if, by extending the available applications (non-OS) RAM to 3 GB I could allow PhotoShop to grab as much of 2GB as it wants and still have 1GB left for other apps, but other factors seem to be hindering this performance level).

[Ecstatic]

IMO the explorer.exe program is what is causing most of the hurrendous performance problems. Hopefully theyre looking at it.. TBH there were so many issues, I got error #s that werent listed on the microsoft websites and noone could tell me what they were, the update feature stopped functioning several times, i had to format the computer 3 times in 2 weeks.. a brand new computer...thanks but no thanks...
Interesting observation, voy4her. Perhaps I should look for a third party explorer to replace the native winexp. It's a crappy design anyway: now, instead of the very useful display of the filesize in the status bar at the bottom of explorer, you get either nada or the overdone "preview pane" which gives you another icon and data you probably don't need.

Other explorer problems: The default display is icons, and changing the settings to display either list or details only affects the current folder (at least, I haven't yet found where to change the settings for all folders, which is my preference and was the standard with XP and 98: when I switch views, I want to affect ALL folders until I switch again).

What's worse is the idiot decision at M$ to make the default for any folder containing images (regardless of what else is in the folder) display the details: Name, Date taken, Tags, Size and Rating. WTF?! Who cares about some arbitrary rating? Or tags? Default details should ALWAYS include Last Modified Date, which is quite often the most useful bit of data aside from filename, and even over filesize. Yet again, it seems you can only change this setting for each folder, not universally.

Another annoyance is a supposed improvement: whenever you rename or save a file to a folder, explorer automatically shifts the listing to place the file in its proper alphabetic sequence. You might think this is desirable, but not if you're importing or renaming multiple files into a folder. Especially on import, I want to see the entire sequence of recently imported files at the end of the listing and not have to hunt and peck for them in the rearranged listing.

I could go on, but more to the point: Anyone know of a good Vista-compatible third party replacement for explorer?

[Ecstatic]

the OS itself will eat the better part of a gig of ram. You'll need 2 gigs if you want to be able to do the stuff you could do on XP with 1G.

Is that excluding Aero Glass feature?
I think Aero Glass takes even more RAM.

When I bought my new PC, I almost stayed with XP. I surveyed all my friends and colleagues regarding whether to go with Vista or XP (including some peeps who post here), and the opinion was split 50/50. The main point against Vista was the caution to wait for SPII (which was my original intent), while the main point for Vista was that XP will be EOL at the end of 2007 and all new sw releases will be tooled for Vista, so I would have to eventually "up"grade anyway, and no one wants to upgrade a Windows OS on a PC (better to start fresh).

I was kind of pushed into an early purchase because my wife's Win2000 PC died (actually, the hard drive, but the machine is too old to be worth retrofitting), so we needed a new PC. She's a software engineer, but actually doesn't push a PC nearly as hard as I do (no Photoshop, no multiple browsers, less multitasking; in fact, she primarily uses her PC to VPN to her workstation at work), so my "old" XP was more computer than she needs. OTOH, I was really pushing the limits of that PC given very heavy PS use plus multiple other programs and it only having 1 GB RAM. So I bought the new PC and she inherited the old. If hers hadn't died, I would've waited another year or more and picked up another gig of RAM instead in the meantime.

[mbf]

some of you people seem way to nice to billy and his company...i mean, really.

after 26 years of ms-os on pc-systems - is it really too much to expect this company come out with something not so overfraught with troubles as vista???

where there are no drivers available for a ONE YEAR OLD PRINTER from Epson????? how long have they been working on it ???? oh, wait till the service packs come out...yeah sure. let the users (or rather "the beeing used" ) play the beta testers just once again.

but what mostly enrages me bout vista clearly is how resource-hungry it is. c mon, 2-3 gigs of friggin RAM just to run an OS???

there they again are so behind the trend. instead of tailoring an os that works well with laptops (= light on resources) they do just the opposite and go bloat-as-bloat-can.

and from an engineers point of view: a technology that needs way more ressources than its predecessor, yet does the job as well or only slightly better is indeed a BAD BAD case of engineering. ( cars or software, no difference)

[ShemaleFan]

I stay on XP :idea:

[Ecstatic]

You missed that opportunity during December and January. The Option is no more unless you find a scratch and dent item. Microsoft no longer supplies XP to the OEM's as an OS anymore. If you want to buy a PC from BB or CC and then format it and add your own copy of XP or 2000, then you can do so. But, you void the warranty of that PC when doing so.
Some vendors, such as Dell, still offer a choice of XP or Vista on certain models. I could've purchased my XPS 410 with either OS, but opted to move forward...er, backward...and bought Vista.

[JohnnyWalkerBlackLabel]

3gb is the entry point

my next motherboard is an Asus Blitz Extreme, over the top yes, 8 gigs of ram on board? HELL YEA!!!!!!!!!!! More than enough junk in the trunk to keep my videos, music, chat groups, HA forum browsing, webcam private shows for [hehe], and Madden '08 all at the same time??????????????????? Priceless

the RAM is what kills you as a consumer, 3 gigs of decent ram these days will set you back as much as the most OUTRAGEOUS MOTHERBOARD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! that shit makes no sense

[lookn4nuttin]

Ahh, yes... Microsoft. I haven't upgraded since XP SP1. I'm sticking with it. Everyone I know who got service pack 2 or Vista has had nothing but problems. I run into very few problems with SP1 and won't upgrade to Vista until most software demands it (which hopefully won't be anytime soon, God willing)

[Ecstatic]

Oh, I don't know, JW. RAM is SOOOO much cheaper than it used to be. Anyone remember the early 90s when 4 or 8 MB of RAM was bitchin'? You can buy a gig of RAM for what it used to cost for a MB.

To really use more RAM effectively, however, you need a 64-bit OS, not 32-bit.

[Ecstatic]

Yes, but;

1) You can't walk into a Dell store and have this performed(Circuit City, Best Buy)
2) Dell will end this XP as an alternative after November.

The best bet is to BYOS.
True, and true. Sigh.

I still think that the best, most stable OS ever developed was erected 5500 years ago on Salisbury Plain in England: Stonehenge. Half of the firmware has fallen over, yet you can still calculate all sorts of astronomical events with amazing precision using the alignment of those stones. heh.

[kukm4]

[quote=voy4her]IMO the explorer.exe program is what is causing most of the hurrendous performance problems....
I could go on, but more to the point: Anyone know of a good Vista-compatible third party replacement for explorer?

Not sure if it will run in vista but you can give AcdSee a try.
I use old version 2.41 and love it. If you ever used Winfile.exe back on 95/98
its similar to that but much better, has thumbnail preview for pics, it can do
multiple renaming of files. Try the demo you can still get it at ldversion.

http://www.oldversion.com/

http://www.oldversion.com/program.php?n=acdsee (2.42)

They maker newer version ( http://www.acdsee.com/)
but seem too bloated and bulky, 2.4 has everything I need.

[tgirlzoe]

I'm a happy Linux user (Debian/Ubuntu) for the past 8 years. You kids are funny.

1GB RAM just to use Word? That's simply ridiculous. Yes, I think 256MB+ is good these days if you want to run Firefox and all those other memory-hungry applications but CPU doesn't matter hardly at all. The only reason why you need CPU is for math-hungry things like compiling. Even with having to slow down my compile cycle, a 300MHz computer is perfectly acceptable for daily use. A friend of mine had gotten a new computer last year because hers was too old and so I offered to take the old one. The only thing I had to do was to pick up a 128MB chip to bump it up to 192MB so that Firefox was usable (although Opera did run on the 64MB RAM).

Spending all this money just to have what is supposedly the "latest and greatest" but doesn't work right is sad. Computers worked fine 5 or even 10 years ago and the same one works fine today.

[Mike_j]

i have vista ultimate but quickly put xp pro back on as vista seems to have way to many issues as far as im concerned at the moment. oh & i run a gigabyte GA_P35C_DS3R mother board with 8 gig of memory

[voy4her]

If i were to go into say a "Best Buy" or a "Circuit City", would it be likely that they would allow me to buy a laptop with XP instead of Vista? Or is it too late to buy a new laptop with an XP option. Everywhere i look i see Vista as the OS but i don't know if it's even negotiable to get the XP anymore?

NEVER EVER EVER use BestBuy for computers. Their staff are clueless, all the geek squad do is reformat computers and try to con you into letting them install things for you to run the price up further. On top of that, their return policy on computers is 14 days, and chances are it'll take you longer than that to run through the troubleshooting options with Vista.

BestBuy dont offer XP on any machine, at all.
If you want to buy a pre-assembled comp with XP id recommend going to the Dell outlet store online and selecting the appropriate options you want, and check XP or Media Center as your OS of preference.

Otherwise, build your own. If you have installed RAM successfully, or have installed a PCIE video card in the past, you can do it yourself. I had a much harder time assembling some of my nephews toys at xmas.

[youcancallmeclaire]

I still use a 25mhz Apple Powerbook 520c with 20mb of ram for instant messaging and occasional web browsing. It has problems with javascripts, but it sort of re-enforces the point that 1gb for an OS is a little ridiculous. Even if it ~does~ have a cool transparent theme.

I switched to Mac OS five years ago, and I would never go back to anything MS. My G4 (DPfw800) has run nearly constantly, 24 hours, since 2002 and I have never had a problem. Total system crashes could be counted on one hand.

Eventually, my Dell got the Ubuntu treatment.

I haven't had the urge to tear a mobo out, light it on fire, and throw it out the window in a loooong time. (Except for when I was doing maintenance on my mom's HP. omg.)

[mbf]

I still use a 25mhz Apple Powerbook 520c with 20mb of ram for instant messaging and occasional web browsing. It has problems with javascripts, but it sort of re-enforces the point that 1gb for an OS is a little ridiculous.

agreed. i have a powerbook duo 230 c with similar specifications, must be 15 ys old by now, still use it a lot for stuff like writing, e-mail, that wonderful claris data bank . sure, cant watch movies on it but what dont need that. and, its still the lightest laptop i ever owned.

i

[Ecstatic]

Thanks for the recommendation, kukm4. Of course I should note that I run Linux on two servers, WinXP Pro on my laptop, and OS X on my mac in addition to this new workstation running Vista Ultimate.

[mbf]

lol this is "drop the pants, geek, show ur silicone"

ok, i got

a commodore amiga
an apple powerbook duo 230c
a 486 pc for running old adventure games
a pentium 100 running an older linux distibution
another pentium 100 running win 98
a pentium 400 running windows 2000
a silicon graphics indigo2 running irix
an ibm/lenovo thinkpad dual core running xp

yes, i am a friggin geek

[Quinn]

lol this is "drop the pants, geek, show ur silicone"

ok, i got

a commodore amiga
an apple powerbook duo 230c
a 486 pc for running old adventure games
a pentium 100 running an older linux distibution
another pentium 100 running win 98
a pentium 400 running windows 2000
a silicon graphics indigo2 running irix
an ibm/lenovo thinkpad dual core running xp

yes, i am a friggin geek

The old Commodores were really great machines, for their day, and very reliable.

-Quinn

[youcancallmeclaire]

lol this is "drop the pants, geek, show ur silicone"



Yaaaaayyyyy omg.

I have.

1. Mac Classic 25mhz os 6
2. Mac Powerbook 520c 25mhz/4mb ram os 7
3. Mac Powerbook 520c 25mhz/20mb ram os8.1
4. Mac Performa 6400/200 ...no hd.
5. Powermac 7800 ...no hd.
6. Powermac G3 beige 266mhz/320mb ram os 10.2
7. iMac G3 indigo 500mhz... (needs a cd drive. It is not being used and it's lonely. Poor iMac kitty.) :(
8. Powermac G4 MDD / FW800 Dual 1.42ghz/2gb ram os 10.4 *
9. Dell Dimension XPS T450 640mb ram/PIII 450... soon to be Celeron 1.3ghz yay! Dual booting XP SP2 lite / Ubuntu
10. 486 running Win3.1... don't remember the specs. I think it's like 40mhz.

I are geek. waffle.

[youcancallmeclaire]

The old Commodores were really great machines, for their day, and very reliable.

-Quinn

I want one!!

[zerrrr]

some of you people seem way to nice to billy and his company...i mean, really.

after 26 years of ms-os on pc-systems - is it really too much to expect this company come out with something not so overfraught with troubles as vista???

where there are no drivers available for a ONE YEAR OLD PRINTER from Epson????? how long have they been working on it ???? oh, wait till the service packs come out...yeah sure. let the users (or rather "the beeing used" ) play the beta testers just once again.

but what mostly enrages me bout vista clearly is how resource-hungry it is. c mon, 2-3 gigs of friggin RAM just to run an OS???

there they again are so behind the trend. instead of tailoring an os that works well with laptops (= light on resources) they do just the opposite and go bloat-as-bloat-can.

and from an engineers point of view: a technology that needs way more ressources than its predecessor, yet does the job as well or only slightly better is indeed a BAD BAD case of engineering. ( cars or software, no difference)

I agree 100%. How do you let the laptop be a max 2GB RAM with 2 USB's? This means for me to use the neat USB RAM function I have to give up one slot.

[kukm4]

try mini usb hub

http://www.targus.com/us/product_details.asp?sku=ACH75US

[Zenki]

I run a dual boot system on my pc of Windows XP Pro 32bit and Windows Vista Ultimate 32bit. Both run fine and I have not had one instance where I find bugs ect. Vista is new and needs the 3rd party developers to fully move over to the way it runs. There are alot of changes with Vista especialy with how sound playback works ect. There is no reason right now to upgrade to Vista unless you are buying a new computer that has it preloaded. Will Vista run slower on your current PC yes, why? Because its hardware requirements have increased and your hardware has remained the same. If you have XP stick with it for another year or so and allow the market to learn how to work with Vista before you upgrade.

As for mac let me tell you after working now as a computer technician for several years I see mac's on my bench too. Keep in mind Apple only has about 5% of the market so I dont see them often but they come in. Recently more often due to of all things Viruses (by the way for all you safe mac users out there Norton Anti-Virus mac edition is on sale lol). If you look at the rate of problems between mac and pc it makes sense why pc's look less reliable.

-There is very little involvement from 3rd party software for Mac compared to Windows. Apples makes many of the core products that Mac users have and there is nearly no game support so there is no need to worry about stability in that sense.
-If you were to make a virus would you want to hit 5% or 90% of the market? (the other 5% for linux users ect)
-With the larger volume of users and the greater the number of tasks they are asking Windows of the higher the risk your going to find a bug or glitch.

Most code that is wrote today is very sloppy and many software makers have a policy to get it to market fast then patch it later. I think there is very little diffrence between Mac or Windows boxes now. Just look at it a Mac is PC hardware (Intel processors ect).

[john69]

Vista is very bad thing!!!!!!!!!

[stevenb43]

I am in the computer business and have sold about 40 new laptops since Vista's introduction and 28 of them have come back with the customer saying take this off and give xp again....

[Mr_Choc69]

I have had a plethora of issues. I think they rolled it out too quickly. I have constant issues with any secondary products that I have on my system.

But it is "pretty" - LMAO