First PC World gets all up on the soapbox that
(until a certain date) the MacBook Pro is the fastest PC the mag had tested, but consider the next step taken: PC World has boldly declared Vista #1 with a bullet in their Biggest Tech Disappointments of 2007. Ok, sure, we get that it's "disappointments" and not "crappy products" -- the two imply very different things, and it's hard
not to be somewhat disappointed by any product that took the better part of a decade to come out -- but if PC World harshing on Vista this bad doesn't smack at all of linkbait, well, we don't know what does. Oh, and here's that link.
P.S. -Seriously though, can Vista get a break here? We mean, honestly, it ain't all THAT bad.
posted December 17th 2007 1:56AM
i have vista on my laptop, i havent really used it that much yet
but so far, i havent really had any major problems w/ it yet.
i still like my XP better, but vista aint bad either
Call it bad luck, but I had a hell of a time getting Windows XP MCE to work reliably. I have since upgraded my system to Vista H.P. and I have had nary a problem since.
I have an Apple and it works great. I just switched from Windows to OS X and it is the best decision I have ever made. Just upgraded to Leopard and it runs beautifully. My friend, however, was tricked into buying Vista and he is eternally sorry. That stupid OS has been nothing but trouble and I am the one who fixes it (or tries). he actually took it into the Computer Science building at my university (Oregon State) where everyone had macs. What did they tell him? Through the POS PC at a wall and go buy a mac.
Do you work for Apple? :)
Haha I don't work for Apple (if I did I probably would have re-read my previous post and substituted "through" for "throw", the intended word), but I sure do appreciate their products. I got a macbook pro and I've had it for six months now. Hands down it is more reliable than any windows system I've ever used (and I started at Windows 3.1).
I have tried Vista 32 bits in a laptop for 4 months and give up.
Problems: performance, silly security system, excessive use of memory, excessive use of the hard disk.
I understand the incompatibilities with some software,
i mean you know that every new major software release have to sacrifice a little of compatibility in order to add features as performance, security or easy to use.
However this version of windows has not give enough
improvements, even when i updated to 4GB it was still
the same crappy speed, come on, a 2.4ghz core 2 duo 4gb of ram is not enough to run Vista at lighting speed?
Vista has major problems if you have a louder hard disk
with Vista you will hear it all the time, the autodefragmenter, the index service, the restore point service and i dont know wich service more all writing to the disk like mad services. Slowing you down in the process.
I remember that updating from Windows 3.11 with 4Mb to
Windows 95 with 8mb, windows 95 was faster.
Updating from Windows 95 8Mb to Windows 98 SE 32MB, Windows 98 was equaly faster and with more features.
Updating from windows 982SE 32MB to windows 2000 256MB,
Windows 2000 was almost equally faster but more reliable
(not need to reinstall every other month).
Updating from windows 2000 256mb to windows xp sp2 512MB
Windows XP was equaly faster and the startup of windows
was faster.
Updating from windows xP 1GB to Windows Vista 4GB,
Windows Vista was notably slower, more difficult to use.
Not real improvements (Except by: DX10, Search of program files in the start menu, Possibility to skip some files if are damaged in file operations)
For people who use windows for more than office and games i mean a IDE for development, some database server
some web server Vista is to slow.
When i say more difficult to use, let me give you
two examples:
How do i select all files in a folder except by one or two? (I dint found and answer yet)
How do i search all files contents in a folder recursively? (I found it but is to complicate)
I will wait until SP1 i have innocent hopes however that will be improved.
You don't even know how to use windows much less vista. Select all files in a folder ctrl+a moron. There is an integrated search feature in the freaking explorer window. As for your computer being slow I call B.S. I have three computers with Vista at home the slowest one is a P4 3.0Ghz with 2GBs of RAM, it had only 1GB and I decided to upgrade it to 2GB a few months after installing Vista just in case I might need it. I never reached over 70% constant RAM use with 1GB the 2GBs was precautionary. Go buy some virus scanners and spyware scanners and clean off your computer. People complaining of slow computers are usually the ones with crapware on them.
As i say i don't use windows only for Office and card games as a Secretary
or for gaming only. I have installed Oracle, Sql server Express, tomcat,
NetBeans, Subversion, and a long list of applications for work that i will
not list to not bore you. And i also know how tu use linux, but using XP right now.
In that situation for a programmer Vista is to slow and resource wasteful,
For the performance point of view you can't invalidate my statements.
I hope as every body that they improve it with Vista SP1 and SP2
Blind, or Just Don't Want to See? There are many performance test out there.
I mean why Vista is defragmenting the disk all the time, i i have to lost
20% performance per disk I/O all the time to gain 10% performance because
the disk is defragmented is (-10%) decrease of performance for nothing.
For the gamer point of view DX10 new games are cool, but they are also
dx9 compatible so i wil wait until most are dx10 minimum.
For the usability point of view i will respect your opinions.
Probably the secretary will be happy to see that IE7 by default doesnt have
so confusing menu in top, for me it causes me headeaaches i need most of the time
options of that menu, also if monitor has more resolution now, why hinding the menu
The same problem with office i like the two icons bar, because i need all the time
icons from both of them but now by default they use only one icon bar
in the age of 1900*1200 screens!! wonderfull!!
Also the secretary will be happy to see that the search options have been improved
with many USEFUL features and not confusing stuff and only searching in indexing
folders only when searching by content. When my crappy Java IDE use to fail
to find a file containing some specific string of code, i use to recurre to
the almost perfect windows search system of windows 2000, but later winxp added
some stuff no not search on hidden folders and a lot of crap to protect secretarys
to damaging theirs system, and Vista added some new rules as not searching in
directories not indexed when searching by content. Oh thanks microsoft.
By the way linux search is more crappy than Windows.
Off course i now Crtl - A but i was saying how to select some and no others in
a fast way, in XP i have the option: Edit/ Invert Selection, so i select
the few ones i don't want and latter use Inver Selection
There is also a litle QA problems, why i want to see the bar
"Name Size Type Datem Modified" in file explorer if i am using icon view?
If you din't understand me correctly sorry but english is not my mother language.
And yes i have antyspyware and virus scanner (free ones) that i run every other day.
Vista doesn't defragment your hard disk all the time, what are you talking about? Even then, Vista stops using resources when they are needed for stuff you want to run, for example Vista on my computer uses like 70% RAM all of the time, but when I run a big game, it can take how much RAM it needs, without ever maxing it out. Same with hard disk, if you need your hard disk then it stops doing whatever it's doing when idle.
These comments are a clear indication of why there is a "Geek Squad" and it is still in business. People are apparently incapable of understanding hardware limitations, how to use an OS, etc.
I am writing this to you after cramming Vista HP onto my old laptop and it works just as good, if not faster than XP.
Mobile AMD Sempron 1.8 Ghz
1.25 GB RAM
128 MB shared with ATI Radeon
80 GB HDD
If it can work with that kind of hardware I do not understand how people are having trouble with it on superior equipment.
That would be more convincing if you had data, because all the benchmarks that I've seen say that XP is faster than Vista. Maybe your computer has a MAGIC Sempron that you traded the family cow for.
I am one of the biggest Apple fan on earth!! :P and I use Vista and I must say that it is pure sh*t! I agree 100% with PC World!! Everyone should experience Mac OS X!! lol
Pleople, poeple, people.
I can't believe ppl actually read or listen to anything PC World has printed.
allow me to rap it up, PC World is crap and has been crap even when I was in school.
no one reads it or buys it, they will do anythign to get there name out.
PC World, if you want to read half ass, untrue storys then buy PC WOrld
For a magazine titled as "PC World" they aren't doing a good jobs of doing fair reviews. It's almost as if it's as wannabe "Mac World". OSX Tiger was pretty good, and the upgrade to Leopard stunk, crashes more often and it's slower. so much for that slogan "it just works" but right now "it no longer does". At least with vista everything still works for me and it's not much slower than XP. I didn't have much problems and my software ported fine. I love the new Office suite and Microsoft has done a great job to it. Mac folks are just jealous because they don't get to experience it on the mac yet. Another thing about the new office suite, programs like word are now more suitable for small laptops because you can easily hide/show ribbons giving you more room to work. better than office 2003 for sure.
I've had so many failed attempts trying to get .NET Framework 3.5 installed on my Vista machine I have completely given up. i am going to try and put XP on it so I can dual boot and play with the new Visual Studio development tools
My beef with Vista is (besides it slowing down the system more than XP with useless "eyecandy" that I can't seem to turn off) is mostly that it uses very unrecognizable icons.
Icons are supposed to be simple and quickly and easily recognized just like roadsigns. That's why I prefer Palm over Nokia. Palm has simple icons, Nokia's icons make me dizzy with all the motion. Mac icons (even in Leopard) are easily recognizable but Vista icons are too different from XP icons and too similar to each other. I end up having to read the description of each icon which slows down the user experience even more.
i didn't realize so many idiots read engadget, LIKE OMGZ VISTA IS BADDDDdd b/c i hurd it on the teevee and i nevar used itz but i hurd itz no good
Yeah maybe you people with Vista running slow should:
Get a better PC or
Don't use the OEM discs that have all kinds of bundled shit
I just wanna slap the crap outta the Jeepers Creepers punk ;
Ive used vista for 4 months now and ive had no problems at all. Sure I could have tooken peoples word on why it sucked (old equipment that wont work) it actually worked faster and better on my computer that I bought two years ago with MCE 2005 the tuner for tv, graphics and everything else just worked.I dual boot xp pro people say its faster its not on a noticible level and I havent used pro in over 2 months. My point you can use a crappy looking os (go back to 98 and thats what I fell like booting to xp) that works with your crappy stuff or go for the new you can always go back I havent.As for work its probably limited as most workstations are.
You must be using Vista to make your links since one is NOT evident where you indicate it should be.
As for Vista not being all that bad flush it before the narcs kick in your door.
I think Engadget should do their own biggest tech flops of 2007.
Forget those stupid computer magazines for dummies and their darn top (insert number here) lists.
I've been using Vista since I bought it, nearly a year ago.
I have no problems with it, its far better then XP.
If Saad Rabia doesn't work for Microsoft, I'll bend over and kiss my own...
Isn't this all a bit: the new Ford/Chevy isn't a piece of crap; I like it, so therefore any other opinion is wrong... and I'm better than everyone else because I know how to modify my engine and actually have the time to be wasting with assembling/disassembling the components to get it to drive the way I want to - anyone who just wants to just drive it is an idiot, and anyone who doesn't know the detailed workings of the engine is an idiot...
I mean really, why should any product force users to know how it works under the hood instead of letting them use it? Just because I like messing with my system doesn't mean my requirements equal everyone else's, and for the majority of business and casual home users, Vista is fail. It's not because of the UI changes; it's the interoperability with their expectations.
I have been using vista for about 3 months on a quad core, 4Gb , nvidia 8800 ultra 768mb computer. I love vista. is it perect. NO. I have had some bad drivers but I reinstalled vista and everything works just fine. I have used xp for the past 5 years and it was hard at first to make the switch. My dad got vista 5 months before me so he had time to learn. he gave me some advice. he said forget about xp just think logically where something would be located and I could find everything. or you could just use the search function. I have used macs.(I hate them). I have to use macs at school every other day for digital animation and the one I use keeps freezing. vista by far is the best OS I have used but xp is my favorite because I know where evrything is. I have an xp laptop and a vista desktop. I use my laptop more because it has all of my file but I am slowly switching. well their is my 2 cents. and dont comment back with your pro mac comments. talk about vista or how biased pc world is.
I have had no problems with Vista. It runs more secure and reliable than XP. I have used leopard for a while now and I keep coming back to my PC to do the work. My PC is just faster with Vista (albeit my PC is custom built and outperforms anything Mac can dish out). I think it is all about personal preference. If you like Mac, use it. I am a gamer and a developer so I find Vista 64 bit works great for me.
All that PC World is a bunch of people complaining about technology and a bunch of ads. There is nothing the least bit helpful or witty in the whole magazine. They frequently have lists of the "best programs" etc. but all they are are things everyone already knows about or crapware that none wants.
Personally, I think Microsoft needs a performance reset. As I've said in previous posts, I think software in general, and Microsoft software in particular, is getting slower at faster rate than hardware is getting faster. And this problem acutely affects Vista....
TrackBack: http://dataland.wordpress.com/2007/11/28/performance-reset/
Personally, I think Microsoft needs a performance reset. As I've said in previous posts, I think software in general, and Microsoft software in particular, is getting slower at faster rate than hardware is getting faster. And this problem acutely affects Vista....
TrackBack: http://dataland.wordpress.com/2007/11/28/performance-reset/
this actually makes me laugh my ace off.
stupid windows,
GO MAC! :D
I just read about this at slashdot.
Reading the entire list of PC World's 15 most disappointing products, I'd say that they just took the 15 highest profile 2007 products and put them all on the list for idiotic reasons:
Here is the full PC World Magazine's list http://www.pcworld.com/printable/article/id,140583/printable.html
*The 15 Biggest Tech Disappointments of 2007*
#1. No Wow, No How: Windows Vista
#2. What Is It Good For: The High-Def Format War
#3. The Anti-Social Network: Facebook Beacon
#4. In a Sorry State: Yahoo
#5. The Great, The Bad, The Ugly: Apple iPhone
#6. Un-Neutral: The Broadband Industry
#7. Cannot be Completed as Dialed: Voice Over IP
#8. Needs To Change Its Spots: Apple "Leopard" OS 10.5
#9. Sorry, We Already Gave: Office 2007
#10. Is Anyone Listening?: Wireless Carriers
#11. Singing an Old Familiar Zune: Microsoft Zune
#12. Just Another Oxymoron: Internet Security
#13. Web 2 Woe: Social Networks
#14. Screwed up to the Max: Municipal WiMax
#15. Box Unpopuli: Amazon Unbox
Some are legit disappointments, but things like Office 2007 and iPhone aren't (and the reasons they give for putting them on the list are crazy). This article is just for getting hits, that's all. (Oh, and gloating Mac fanboys should check out what is #8 on the list. ;))
Things to ponder; XP ran like a dog with it's legs cut off on machines that were "current" at the time it was released. Dell shipped 1.6GHz Pentium 4 machines with 64MB of PC133 RAM and 20GB hard drives with XP preinstalled (wanna talk about slow?).
As far as PCs go, being "New" only means it's not been used. You can't go out and buy a $699 Wally's special and expect it to run Vista properly. The $699 machines of today were the $1000 machines of last year, and most likely the $2000 machines of the year before. Vista was created with future hardware in mind. Once items like SSD are on the market in full swing the performance of Vista will improve dramatically. Just as XP's performance improved and became more stable as the hardware progressed.
As for the compatabilities in software and some hardware, not to be rude, just to the point, it's trash. XP would try to run anything, coded properly or not. XP allowed pieces of software to make alterations to it's core components all in the name of operating whatever it is the user is installing whether it's good, bad, or in-between. This opens the system up for alterations that can lead to serious security and operational stability issues. Vista is a VERY good attempt at preventing such alterations and miswrote code from running. Many software manufacturers over the years have learned to do things by simply figuring it out on their own how to make a computer perform a particular function and haven't always coded their applications and device drivers to "textbook standards", this is where Vista cracks down as well. For now it is a hassle to many people and businesses who do have need for their older software, in the future, as these software packages become upgraded to "textbook standard" code, then overall the computing experience will be a better/more secure one. For those that have software that was custom-made that isn't Vista compatible and corrections to the code are not possible, Microsoft gives away software called Virtual Server and Virtual PC to be able to run other operating systems as an application.
It's the squeaky wheel that gets all the attention, in this case it's the ones that don't want to admit they have junk hardware and software compared to what's at the top end of what is coming out over the next couple years. Vista is not a day to day replacement to XP as of yet, the software and hardware companies need to get on the ball for that to happen.
Right now Windows Vista is a playtoy for those who like the latest and greatest. Anyone who needs to work with a PC should have a XP machine standing by "just in case".
If you want to place blame somewhere, place the blame on the OEMs like Dell and HP that attempted to force users to Vista by initially removing XP as a choice. Blame it on the software vendors for not coding their device drivers, games, and applications to the standards laid out for the programming language they used to code their software.
Microsoft released their plans and many test versions in plenty of time other manufacturers could have been ready, esspecially with all the delays Vista had. I think everyone see's Microsoft as a bully (which may well be true) and they just enjoy taking shots at them even when they are looking towards the future and really have developed a truely superior PC Operating System.
@Joe:
THANK you for that well reasoned comment. I agree completly, and think that Vista is an excellent, forward-looking OS. I do actually use it as an XP replacement, but only on a brand-new laptop. On my old one (which my wife inherited), I'm stickin' w/XP, because it wouldn't handle Vista well. But for my new hardware, Vista is very stable, usable, and powerful. No issues here.
I'm lovin' Windows Vista yo! Upgraded my HP with 2GB of OCZ RAM from XP to Vista Premium with the free upgrade. I have had ZERO issues. It just works! I'm rockin' RC SP1 as well cuz I'm down like that. XP is old, Mac is gay. Holla!
Well, the "eye-candy" is actually easily turned off. You can either disable the Aero interface, or even apply the "classic" GUI, to look like earlier versions of Windows.
You can also change the icons - although, I'm not sure what you mean by 'unrecognizable'. Folder icons look like - folders. Drive icons look like drives. Other icons (associated program icons) are simply that program's icon. They look pretty normal to me. Not any less recognizable than XP's icon set.
dont think theres anything wrong or disappointing with vista so wat if the os booted up faster on a mac??? bought 3 copies of vista ultimate yet to find a fault or anything like that!!
i think the biggest disappointment of the year is the iphone not being released everywhere and stupid at&t contracts and apples' stupid strategies(the hackers will beat the apple guys no matter wat) !!!
so i guess vista is hardly even comparable
Folks, the most of you aren't speaking about the OS, but only about the shell (Desktop, Explorer, I don't know how that crap is named) !
As said before, maybe it is a disappointment because there were lots of expectations - probably too much. For me it is still not that bad using it on a daily basis. I also use MAC OSX on a MAC Mini and Linux (Ubuntu) on a Sony VAIO Laptop. The most disappointing being probably MAC OSX or how to make a closed / proprietary OS (MAC OSX) out of an open source initiative (BSD).
I was quite happy with vista until Microsoft sent out an auto"upgrade" which broke my keyboard & mouse drivers and now I can't use Vista at all! I'm now running Ubuntu 7.10 with XP running as a virtual machine (for those programs that don't have a Linux version/counterpart)
Vista has been a plague on my computers from the get-go (Ultimate). It is full of annoying quirks, like context screens that change arbitrarily, constant choking on small tasks, flat losing files, dog-slow indexing, searches that miss files, confusing and overlapping search capabilities (use Google Desktop), arbitrary delays, improper termination pop-ups when programs close, the Windows Gallery Viewer that won't skip over .avi files, then chokes on them and bogs the computer... and on and on.
The worst of all is the choking when file moving and copying, especially over networks: "Estimated time to completion: the lifetime of the universe". Check out the Microsoft Forum
http://forums.microsoft.com/technet/showpost.aspx?postid=1358057&siteid=17&sb=0&d=1&at=7&ft=11&tf=0&pageid=0
I wish I knew what you Vista fans are doing. All my machines are current, all s/w up to date (not Vista SP1), spy/virus checks weekly, regular de-frag and registry cleaning, etc.
It's hard to believe that MS foisted this thing off on the public. It has been a staggering waste of time and effort. MS is having apoplexy about pirating... well, when they feel like reimbursing everyone who has had to use their stuff for grossly unreasonable amounts of wasted time trying to get it just to function, then maybe they have a case. Until then...
Sheesh.
surprised to see all the microsoft employees responding.. must say i dont really care for all the technosnobby attitudes this article has generated. look, i was pretty neutral when i got vista on my new computer, i am not a geek, just an average user. i am shocked at how badly its performance is. its unstable and a memory hog. and i am also how lousy IE7 is as well. i dont know what ms has been doing, but at the rate they are going, they need to stop making software and get into something else, maybe timber or importing or something...
when i
I am a big linux fan and hate Windows in general, but I realise that it's a necessity for me still in a lot of areas, but one thing I said is that I would never go out and buy Vista, and if I could avoid it, probably not upgrade. I just bought a new laptop though that came with Vista Ultimate, and to be perfectly honest, it has some annoying little quirks, but overall everything has just worked (except for MSN not working behind a proxy specifically on Vista but that is solved now too). I was going to keep Ultimate handy for the future and go back to XP but now I don't think I will. For me then, a biggest disappointment rating sounds ridiculous, how long did it take people to start putting XP into full blown common usage, I think Vista will be successful, and I don't think MS did all that bad a job in putting together a good package. I take back not all, but most of my Vista bashing. Plus I look forward to the service pack too!
(And for the record, I am a programmer, a gamer, I watch movies, I use business software, VoIP, work in networking etc.. so my experience with Vista isn't that of a plug & play myspace loving facebooker, it has been pretty comprehensive!)
Vista is the slickest most secure OS out there, I'm sick of sites posting crap reviews about it. I use the OS at work and home on both laptops and a desktop. Issues that I've had on 3 machines.... ZERO
have the flames settled?
it seems that the only people that like vista have never used a computer before. vista is a slow, cluttered resource hog. all the "improvements" are available elsewhere at a better price and usually work better. i know every system has it pros and cons, but i seriously believe that the cons outweigh the pros. dont get me wrong, xp had its problems, but it still worked for the typical user. i'm a programmer by the way, and i used vista for the 30 days just to try it out, needless to say, i didn't keep it. if applications/drivers where still being developed for windows-98, id still be using it. (btw, if u can just disable all the memory draining features of vista, it still leaves u with a lot of used harddrive space, and what was the point in upgrading in the first place?)