Windows Vista review roundup

The time has come, friend, to grab that plastic box, curse a few times while you try to figure out how to open up the dang thing, and then finally fire up that historic DVD: Windows Vista. What was that? Waiting around for the pundits to have their say? Well, we suppose that wouldn't hurt -- if you want to be all namby pamby about it. The overall verdict right now seems quite lacking in enthusiasm. Sure, it won't bust up your box or anything, hardware support is mostly alright, and improvements to stability and eye candy are commendable, but Vista just doesn't seem to have a whole lot of must-need features to make it a must-have for most users. David Pogue, in his December review, calls it "Looks, Locks, Lacks." Things are much easier to use in general, but inconsistencies are often jarring, and certain added features don't seem entirely fleshed out, making the OS -- which was five years in development -- feel rushed and in noticeable need of that SP1 update. There's also a penchant for preferential treatment of Microsoft stuff, such as IE RSS feeds, which some Mac users might find disappointingly familiar. On the numbers side of things, bit-tech has discovered a 10 percent performance hit in most operations in comparison to XP, which isn't noticeable on high-end PCs, but might be enough of a reason for low-end users to hold off for the moment. Walt Mossberg found that, at times, "Vista could be maddeningly slow even on new, well-configured computers." Conclusions definitely varied, though most reviewers do agree on one point: the number of different versions is way too confusing, and the full versions of the OS are too expensive. Most still agree that Vista is the best version of Windows yet, but it looks like you'll still have to figure out if it's the best for you.

Read - CNET (7.0 HB, 7.4 HP, 7.4 B, 7.8 U)
Read - Walt Mossberg
Read - David Pogue
Read - PC Mag (3.5/5)
Read - bit-tech (9)
Read - Technology Review (switching to Mac)

[7of7 @ Jan 30th 2007 1:53PM]

You guys should add this one, it's very balanced and doesn't fall for the anti Vista FUD that the FOSS people and the Apple people are putting out.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16873608/

[CTG @ Jan 30th 2007 2:08PM]

"And then it hit me, the reason why I switched from Mac to Windows Vista. Because it is new. Because I am naturally curious about most things tech, and not only because it’s my job. Because I believe in second chances. And thirds and fourths and fifths. For sure, I’m enormously impressed with Windows Vista to the point of respecting it as a choice for friends and family if they so choose.

But I really miss that peaceful, Zen-like quiet I felt with my Mac when I’d wake it up or put it instantly to sleep. For me, it just works right, without really having to think about it.

So I decided to switch again. From Vista, back to the Mac — to the brand new, white MacBook on which I told this story."

Found his way back home where he belongs.

[Andy @ Jan 30th 2007 2:19PM]

Did you realize that the 'MS' in MSNBC stand for Microsoft? How can you possibly take a review of Microsoft's flagship product on msnbc.com seriously?

[telepheedian @ Jan 30th 2007 1:55PM]

10 times the size of XP and no killer app. No wonder people are saying this will be the last one

[Christopher @ Jan 30th 2007 1:56PM]

Ok.. I'm going to say it.. Look at Leopard (Please.. I want you to know it looks like Vista, and I think it's better even though you have to spend 1000+ more for the same machine.)!! Now that I got that out.. You Mac fans can relax.. LOL!

[Karl @ Jan 30th 2007 2:05PM]

I hate David Pogue. He has very little insight in to the whole industry. It's a wonder he became a journalist in the field for such a distinguished paper.

Vista is, without a doubt, the best version of Windows yet. That doesn't mean it's flawless: heck no. I've been running it since Longhorn, and I've had my fair share of grievances with it. But that doesn't mean it's not a step in the right direction.

What lots of these analyses fail to look at is longhorn. Longhorn shaped Vista. When Microsoft took on the LH project, they realised that Windows as a platform was a pig. It was too inflexible. They could try pretty it up, but it was too disorganised to become a secure, well-performing OS. That's the mentality they had when designing Vista. As such, although Vista isn't bursting with innovation, it's a stable platform for the next versions of Windows. It's a good foundation for building something amazing. And Micrsoft have the talent inside the company to do that.

Karl

[IgnorantTechie @ Jan 30th 2007 9:10PM]

I will have to agree and disagree with you on your statements. First of all, Vista MAY be the best version of Windows yet but that statement can not be analyzed at this time. Windows 95, 98SE, XP were the best Windows OS's yet for their time...but I don't believe that Windows Vista ANY version does for the Windows line what Windows 95 did. Windows Vista is what Windows XP SHOULD have been.

We should be running Windows on a new file system with innovation added to the system instead of previous issues fixed for approximately $200-$400 USD. With Windows 98, it was said that Windows needed to be re-written. It was clear and obvious then that there were too many lines of code that didn't need to be there.

So yes, (as of right now, Day 1) Windows Vista is the better OS to have been released. I won't be purchasing it though, as to me it is just a patch...a service pack to Windows XP...

See my other comments for more of my opinion which is exactly what this is.

[Karl @ Jan 30th 2007 10:01PM]

Actually, I don't just mean that Vista is the best today in that it has the latest technology.

Although it might not have many innovative features, it is a major rehaul of the Operating System. Seriously, the list is endless for the number of core changes that have been made to Windows with Vista. I believe that XP was a good system, and for it's time, it was all that needed to be done. Vista shows us how that didn't scale. Microsoft had loads of innovative ideas for the next Windows: ideas like WinFS. But that was not technically possible. They were building the framework whilst building the OS on top of it. It just couldn't work, and WinFS' performance impact was underestimated. Vista's major overturn is what Windows really needed. There's no use bemoaning the lost features, because having a stable platform is much more important. To consumers, who will see better applications for Windows, better security, and better use of newer hardware. To developers, too, who will have a more solid foundation to build upon, and new systems like the DWM to innovate on.

And really, you may not like people being charged for housekeeping the platform, but just think of all the money Microsoft has lost by committing to it. Gates and Ballmer could have denied Allchin's request to restart the LH project. After all, it basically meant throwing millions of dollars worth of research, and years of development time in bin. You really have to respect them for that sort of decision. It can't be an easy sell, and it was a very unpopular move with the stockholders.

Microsoft did rewrite large sections of Windows after Windows 98. It was called NT. And it's a very efficient, flexible, modern kernel.

[MewMewtwo45 @ Jan 30th 2007 2:09PM]

Yes, Vista has been in development for five years, but remember that Microsoft more or less reset the project about two years ago, and that's where we have the Vista we know today.

[E @ Jan 30th 2007 2:14PM]

Microsoft should pay consumers who use Vista some money every time there is a service pack to their OS. This should be considered a "fee" for having to put up with the OS prior to the service pack. This would also be an incentive for MS and others to get it right the first time.

I am sick of these service packs. Who the hell sells a defective product, make you keep it, and makes YOU have to work to fix it when it always breaks down. New features in the packs are just to appease the masses... makes me sick.

[Dave Bergschneider @ Jan 30th 2007 5:14PM]

E, why would you say something like that. All the software and OS vendors give out updates or service packs of sorts. Just because they don't use an elementary vocabulary or name it after some near extinct animal to so should not be held against them.

More on the topic of perfection, since when has there ever been a perfect application. There will always be some way to improve both stability and features in any software. The problem is, features or defect enhancements are thought up everyday by millions of people in which it is impossible to keep up with.

[marc @ Jan 30th 2007 2:14PM]

Adding that much over head for the hardware seems ridiculous. Are the recent versions of OSX anywhere near as hardware intensive as Vista?

[Alan Strangis @ Jan 30th 2007 3:35PM]

@ Andy "Did you realize that the 'MS' in MSNBC stand for Microsoft?"

Big LOLz for not reading the article.

[Joey Geraci @ Jan 30th 2007 4:47PM]

Do you realize that MSNBC has had no relationship whatsoever with Microsoft for many years now? Yes, they kept the name, but that is the only connection between the two companies now.

[01 @ Jan 30th 2007 2:26PM]

Wow, can't believe I made it on the first page....

anyway, I think it's intereting that the readers here are probably some of the least impacted and most opinionated about Vista. No review is going to make any of us switch (either way) or switch back (again, either way) Vista has been along time in the making, and shows it. There are some definite improvements over XP, and a lot of things that Mac users will find familier from OS X, but none of it really matters if Vista works for you. I won't be rushing out to pick up Vista because
A) I'm still madly in love with my MBP and don't have a professional reason to put any windows OS on my computer. If I end up working somewhere that I need it, I'll toss it on and check out Office '07 and the eye candy.
B) My desktop can't handle it. (actually, neither of them can) Both towers are over 3 years old, and running XP is a chore sometimes.
good luck to everyone that's loading it up right now, I'll be waiting a while

[mattb @ Jan 30th 2007 2:34PM]

Mac OS X cop out, but i do like the way they copied exposé it looks cool, but the only problem is that the other windows cover up the majority of the other windows.

[applesucksLeo @ Jan 30th 2007 2:37PM]

The best Vista reviews have been from Mac users who have actually used Vista , according to Leo Laporte and others. But i`m sure Jobs will be cranking out more FUD adverts with that "jeepers creepers" A-hole. The only thing more amazing than Vista is the new Office (available as free downloadable trial). Makes Open Office look silly by comparison.

[Mikeyg @ Jan 30th 2007 2:41PM]

if you think it is expensive in the US you should see the price in the UK. $249 US compared to around £230 in the UK (~$450) what a stupid rip-off

[errrduh.... @ Jan 30th 2007 2:43PM]

I just ran the upgrade on my existing box last night and surprisingly things seem to be running smoother now. After a recent video card upgrade, I regularly encountered system hangs or all out crashes. Now everything seems to be much more solid, if just a very tiny bit sluggish.

[Tony C @ Jan 30th 2007 2:59PM]

I used to think Bit-Tech was pretty balanced and solid in terms of reviews, but for them to give Vista a 9 out of 10 when all the only performance they benchmarked was Xvid & MP3 encoding, WinRAR and SuperPi (with a 3%-18% differential slower than XP), pretty much just gloss over the features and shortfalls, saying nothing we really haven't heard about before, and use lots of screen shots to take up copy space...

No. This is NOT a review. It's what's commonly known as a "first look" and should in no way merit any sort of definitive recommendation or product rating, let alone a number just one notch down from a perfect 10.

Compare it to the other reviews out there and it's nothing more than kissing Microsoft's ass, pure and simple.

[Todd @ Jan 30th 2007 3:10PM]

How do you do a Vista review roundup without including a link to Paul Thurott's reviews? He's got the good and the bad covered at http://www.winsupersite.com

[CharlieX @ Jan 30th 2007 3:12PM]

As a old convert from PC to Mac - I'll be interested to see how Vista compares in terms of ease of use, overall stability, and sexiness. It'd take a lot more than fanboy praise to get me to go back.

[Nick @ Jan 30th 2007 11:09PM]

the stability issue will never compare. All they are doing is adding sexy GUI, that will cost you a pretty penny to have hardware that will support it, and actually starting to make their stuff secure, for the most part.

[Kenno @ Jan 30th 2007 3:17PM]

Because of how I use my main computer, both a business networked machine and a home comuputer, I need "Ultimate" to get everything I have today. "Ultimate" costs $644NZD for the upgrade -- no wonder no one is even stocking it. I'll sit this one out and see how "Riveria" shapes up.

[Rick Lyon @ Jan 30th 2007 3:19PM]

Saw a CNET review on CNN which touted Vista's clever new futuristic 'window transparency'. Yea, couch, ok, OS X has only had then for 5 years now.

[Nick @ Jan 30th 2007 11:11PM]

yeah.. but Vista has "Widgets" that.. ohh.. shit sorry.. i mean "Gadgets" that are forever ontop of your desktop.. how cool!

[Rick Lyon @ Jan 30th 2007 3:19PM]

Love the weather and clock Dashboard Widgets.

[brendan Sheehan jnr @ Jan 30th 2007 10:02PM]

I'm sure you meant gadgets, not widgets? :P

[Tom Reinke @ Jan 30th 2007 3:30PM]

I think one of the big deals with Vista is that microsoft's fan base is nearly split, allowing MAC users and XP fans to bash Vista for all the bad things that are wrong with it (Rushing to get a service pack out, slowed down performance, etc.) Everyone who thinks that Vista is a pile of crap should just download it off of the internet and try it out instead of reading opinionated reviews about how Leopard is amazing or why XP is so much better than Vista is. Then if they like it, they should go out and buy it.

Its just my two cents and I'm sure I'm going to get flamed. (Probably for the whole piracy thing)

[MrWhite @ Jan 30th 2007 4:09PM]

Here's a question, if Vista is a "new" OS from the ground up, why is there an upgrade version? I mean if it truely is a new OS then you couldn't possibly upgrade XP, right? Unless it's just XP with a horrible OS X look alike skin. The other question is, to get "all" the features of vista why does it cost $300 or more for the Ultimate version and OS X only costs $129 for "all" the features and there is only one version of the OS? I mean really, if you truely look at both, Vista has virtually all the features OS X has had for years. Maybe they need to compensate for lost time and money the 5 years it took to develop this POS. That's just my guess.

[Kimi @ Jan 30th 2007 5:29PM]

Maybe it's because with OSX you get to pay that $129 every year for service packs while windows users get them for free?

Sorry, I wasn't very polite there, but I figured you were just trying to inflame people anyway. Why do you feel the need to call it a POS, it really doesn't reflect well on your character.

[Tyler @ Jan 30th 2007 4:20PM]

when is engadget going to do a review of vista?

[kinematic @ Jan 30th 2007 4:51PM]

The best thing about all the comparisons in each review is that when people do get fed up with Vista, they'll remember that it was being compared to Mac OS X, feature by feature. M$ just made it that much easier for people to switch by making it even more Mac like.

[Ryan @ Jan 30th 2007 5:04PM]

Gaming performance article: http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=354

[Tom @ Jan 30th 2007 5:07PM]

it sounds like it is a more stable, streamlined version of windows. For me, my XP is working fine, so I won't be upgrading unless I get another computer. I can't imagine any "must have" features at this point that would movitate me to switch to ANY operating system. But as many have said, it is a step in the right direction.

[IgnorantTechie @ Jan 30th 2007 7:55PM]

According to the article, Windows Vista is "...in noticeable need of that SP1 update."

I'm confused, as isn't Windows Vista just Service Pack 3 for Windows XP? I mean, doesn't an upgrade actually upgrade features?

I have been using Windows Vista Business Edition I got from a Microsoft program and I have been all but impressed. It did have me saying "Wow!" though, as in "Wow! $200+ is a lot of money for a Service Pack...thank god I didn't shell out that cash".

I say Service Pack because again, an Upgrade is exactly that. So you are/were using Windows XP Home/MCE 2005 and go to Windows Vista Home Basic due to it is the only one that is cost friendly...only to find it is a downgrade. Where is the 21st century file system? Where is the rebootless updates promised with XP?

So security is an upgrade? We should all remember that when we buy cars. I'm sure Ford, GM, Dodge etc will love to know that they don't need to perform recalls, and in fact can CHARGE for the work...well, based on MS philosophy.

I will say that in the week that I have used it, DRM hasn't cause any issues...YET. Once it does, Vista will be gone for good and I'll have to be one of those migrating to Ubuntu (sp) or Solaris or (god dreading) OS X...

[newbill123 @ Jan 31st 2007 1:29AM]

While I agree that David Pogue has a definite Mac bias, his book on Windows Vista in the Missing Manual series is one of the best that I've seen on dealing with the new OS. It's not illustrated as well as some of the thin, glossy, color guides, but the descriptions clearly show that he and his researchers spent a great deal of time looking at the OS from the perspective of an XP upgrader, platform switcher, and computer newbie.

David Pogue definitely likes Apple stuff, but in this case, he appears to have spent much more time researching Vista from a fresh perspective than I believe many reviewers have.

[Galley @ Jan 31st 2007 9:06AM]

Has anyone read a Vista review where they DON'T mention OS X? Vista is an interesting way to drum up interest in your competitor's product.

[worried @ Jan 31st 2007 1:45PM]

I'm worried, here we have the mac nerds and windows nerds spit-spatting (new word in the making) over software performance.

The reason it took me so long to warm to XP was its lockdown on the USERS acces to controls. (yes they were hidden cos they may be too "dangerous" but if you didn't know what to look for you wouldn't have found them that easy in the first place), Vista is just more of the same, starting to feel like we've been strapped into a straight-jacket and left in a padded room with brightly couloured toys.

I've been reading about tilt bits and premium content embargo's etc. V. worried!!

Wait till its been out for a wee while yet I think

[Logan @ Feb 1st 2007 11:29AM]

Vista sucks. Msft should have open sourced it and charged for support. They have enough money and they OWE us for the crappy software they released in the past.

[Chris Longo @ Feb 2nd 2007 12:34AM]

O god vista is horrible when i had beta there were lack of hardware support and drivers then they fixed it now i got a new problem vista doesnt work with xp programs and even older windows programs so the compatibilty issue has not been fixed all there is is now backwards compatibility for xp though in xp it wouldt run older windows 98 or 95 programs the same issue.
another downfall is these service packs ok xp has over 31 of them so when the hell are they gona finaly fix the old bugs and release it right?
next is the price wait till the chinese get it why pay over 300 for vista when i can get a real copy from the oem for 80 bucks with a real serial?
i cant believe microsoft released it unfinished yet again i have not seen any fixes since beta. i think its microsofts last stand osx has been getting better and thers only 1 version and it cost much cheeper to develop for and the compatibility is great now only if it can run on a AMD Chip i be happy to switch because osx uses less resorces and is not spek heavy like vista.
vista looks great but falls short on new features and promises.
i heave heard alot of game developers are not supporting vista because they have all said its too hard to code for and there is no need to upgrade they can pump more out of xp.vista can't run my japanese pc games or even some of my xp programs im so mad!
Vista looks great but lacks support and compatibility.
come on gates enough is enough already!

[zz @ Feb 7th 2007 3:57PM]

Mac OS X has had all these features forever. Vista is nothing but an inferior copy of the OS X. Vista vs OS X...I'll take OS X any day.
Apple Widgets...Microsoft Gadgets, seriously. Vista may be the best version of Windows yet, but it's a bad imitation of OS X. Apple makes THE BEST operating systems in terms of ease of use and functionalilty.

[??? @ Feb 11th 2007 1:46AM]

Before you waste $500 on VISTA ask yourself this
do i download music, movies or pictures for FREE?
if you answered yes than i recommend that you dont get sucked into vista. it is exactly the same as XP accept it looks cooler AND IT WAS DESIGNED TO BLOCK MUSIC AND MOVIE DOWNLOADING. think about it hundreds, thousands of bands trying to make money and everybody downloads thier songs off limewire or morpheus or where ever they can. and what about multimillionare movies, most people like you and i just download them. VISTA has come to gether with an idea, to block all websites that offer FREE DOWNLOADING, to block all P2P software. the other day i decided to upgrade my morpheus and to my surprise anything that i wanted to download would be blocked, i typed in a song, tried to download it and it says, THIS IS A COPY RIGHTED VERSION. they are taking over our entertainment. in 5 years vista will be installed on every computer in the world. go to your daily harvey norman or WOW catalogue and what do you see every single laptop, pc, now comes with vista. vista only came out like a month ago they would have to be mad to offer it for free. maybe if you listen to the song DOWNLOAD THIS SONG by MC LARS you will understand.
pass this on. tell everybody you know, about VISTA. just amagin, teens of the future having to pay for their music and movies.

[Desended @ Feb 28th 2007 5:01PM]

oh dear. pull yourself together man. This is old news. Anyone knows this simple science. Windows security is a piss take anyway. believe me, there will be more hacking solutions towards the vista. More secuirty equals more of a reason, I guarentee.

Nothing like a good old noob hacking your comp.

[tom_squick @ Feb 12th 2007 11:42AM]

I wonder how long it will before I can dual boot Vista and OS-X on my new Mac. Now that would be a real alt ernative for those seeking a state of the art operating system. I guess its time they sorted the men from the boys. No?

[moonbiter @ Feb 16th 2007 12:43PM]

I run both WinXP and OS X on side-by-side boxes. OS X Tiger runs pretty damn well on my 7-year-old 400MHz/1GB G4. My XP box also runs okay too, but it sometimes struggles on what is a newer and faster machine (a 3-year old 2.6GHz/512MB PC; I know I should really upgrade to 1GB, which would probably solve these problems).

All I know is this: I would never try to run Vista on the hardware I run XP on, much less on the hardware I run Tiger on.

[Desended @ Feb 28th 2007 5:00PM]

Howdy, Windows user myself. Argh. Hell thou.

As long as i can play my everyday jedi academy im all good really .Although that could run on 98 chances are. im not a fan for os complication, the newer the are, the more difficult they are for us lazy people.. I dunno, People are opting with mac. and how windows have copied them? Meh, Whatever. Sorry but who gives a shit.

I used a mac os at college, awful, its just taste. i liked the programs, Music software was good. Its just argh. Took ages to load for me and not alot going for it entertainment wise. Maybe thats because its with the security issues with the college. But yeah. Hell. I'll always be a windows user i think, although using 1 Gb of RAM is such a let down, along with these bill gate like system requirements. I probably will Get the vista system, but with talk of the newer windows OS, Am i wasting my time?

give me some feedback, thanks.

[Joey Smith @ Mar 6th 2007 7:36PM]

I am a VERY experienced Windows user (15 years). I have jumped through every Microsoft hoop and gotten more and more frustrated (sick of the updates, crashes, viruses, popups, security flaws, poor performance etc). Purchased 6 machines over this time frame. My most recent purchase (Feb 07) was a Dell laptop with 2GB ram and a 2GHZ processor. Guess what? Over a 5 day period Vista Premium crashed my system AT LEAST 15 times doing SIMPLE operations eg opening control panel, media player, internet explorer etc. Worse still, the BLOATED OS runs as slowly as my late 80's machine. How PATHETIC! Thank you Bill Gates! I returned the Dell laptop with Vista and bought a Mac laptop! I have threatened to switch to Mac multiple times over the past few years. I am THRILLED with the Tiger OS! No crashes, no popups, no viruses, VERY SPEEDY and responsive. Due to my Vista NIGHTMARE, I will NEVER purchase a Microsoft Windows based system again! I have switched to Mac and will NEVER go back! My advice to Wndows users, if you are running XP, KEEP it! XP is stable! Don't waste you money on Vista, IT IS CRAP, total CRAP!!!!!!!!!!!! If you really want to do something clever, BUY A MAC! I ordered the 20 inch iMac on Friday to accompany my Mac laptop! The release of the Vista OS by Microcrap is the best thing that could ever happen to Apple! Mac sales will skyrocket this year!

[dan drom perth @ Mar 8th 2007 1:16AM]

Everyone seems to be mentioning Mac OS X but what about Linux as an alternative to this disaster? (better known as vista)

youd be better off duel booting Windows XP and one of the main linux distros (eg Mandriva, Red Hat, SUSE etc etc). The windows XP would just be for gaming and programs that MUST have windows, basically offline activities, and therefore no internet connectivity so no need for constant updates and patches to be downloaded to keep viruses and hackers out. The Linux distro would then be used for internet word processing speadsheet etc (through openOffice which comes FREE with linux)and in reality emulators like WINE can run alot of windows programs so the need for windows is further reduced.

you couldnt pay me to use Vista after the experience with a friends new laptop last week. The extra security is just an annoyance. The constant darkening screen and asking for permission is no more than "treating you like a child". Im an advanced user and dont need this garbage! and as for the "user friendlyness" what user friendlyness? it 99% forces you to use wizards just to assign a static IP

forget windows use Linux or MAC OS X