10 reasons not to get Vista

Baked:

I'm sure others have seen these sorts of reviews/stories before.....

I would have thought the same old arguments that were used back when XP came out wouldn't be used again......sure the actual details are different etc

But these are the exact same sorta things people posted about back when XP was just a baby.

Compatibility, Price, Resource Hungry, No Major Improvements etc

I bet Bill gets a laugh out of reading news articles like this one.....AS THE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS ROLL IN $$$$$$

Oh how many copies of XP have been sold now ??? How many users have converted over to XP ???

Vista is fresh, modern, 10 times more user friendly than XP or any other OS out there currently.

Microsoft have applied the KISS to vista and turned out a great OS in my opinion.


Sure we all know there will be issues for a little while but like XP they will be fixed and forgotten in no time.

GG MS

tin:

I knew I didn't want to buy Vista. Now I'm not sure I'd even use it if I got it for free.

One thing that ticks me off about MS is how they break everything, call it a required change, then bang on about backwards compatibility. From what I can tell, Vista is about 10% compatible and 90% weird and unnescessary changes.

Anonymous:

You can actually insist on XP from Dell etc.

If more people did that, then maybe even Microsoft can't get rid of XP. Just like Intel can't get rid of the x86 even thought they tried with the Itanium. Same for IBM when they tried to shift to MCA instead of staying "IBM PC Compatible"

If enough people ignored Vista and stuck to Windows XP, even Microsoft would have to remain "Windows XP Compatible".

And then we can concentrate on genuine innovations and features rather than helping Microsoft extend their monopoly via the frog boiling method.

This is the number one reason to not use Vista.

Mr. Safety:

The one problem with this reason is that MS has absoluetly no problem with burning off XP disks, and distributing them for $X. However, unfortunately with the release of Vista, they are getting rid of support for XP.

This means that if the amount of XP use remains the same, there will be no continued effort to patch up security flaws that undoubtedly still exist, and within a few years (or months), people will be forced to use Vista, as XP will be comparative to a block of swiss cheese. As it is, it IS swiss cheese - but most holes have yet to be found. They will be, and without support, they will remain open.

Other than that, I agree. I would strongly suggest avoiding Vista for now - let other people get exposed to security flaws, etc. first, and then (once MS is forced to lower the price, and fix it) upgrade when XP is too far gone. I personally was using ME until 2 years ago - though that really wasn't any better - it's all MS.

W. ME. The Best:

My PC is capable of running Vista, but I never switched from ME to XP. I will never download XP anything on my system. I was told by IT Professionals that XP was a nightmare and to stick with ME home. Good operating system without the bugs, which takes up less memory. Windows Me is great for regular computing, but some problems exist with the games. Even though ME was created after Windows 2000, some companies, like Corel, quickly forget about ME. I like this operating system, but you eventually have no choice and are made to upgrade. I think I will hold out until they come out with a new operating system.

SekoraWild:

Windows ME? WOW! My friend, i don't know if you know, but Windows ME was in Top10 worst software applications EVER created (not just by Microsoft, ever!). WindowsXP is probably the most stable and secure OS you can get.

koko:

Windows 2000 Professional

Roffle:

Have you been living under a rock ? Here's a few operating systems that are both more stable and secure than Windows XP. Some are more well known to the general public than others. Mac OS X, UNIX, GNU/Linux, Solaris, FreeBSD. Of course there are more but you get the picture.

Caz:

The only reason they are safe is because people cant be arsed to hack those OS as most peeps are Windows. Thats why the are safe

Elixxxx:

And because (talking about Linux) as same people can develop it or help developing, the same user can make it more secure; there have been viruses for Linux, (when it was even less used) but people have make it a better system every time.
I don't know how many people are developing private software, but we are millions working on many programs, systems, modules, etc. at the same time, which make it far more efficient.

Big DJ:

Microsoft is actually planning to come out with another operating system called "Singularity OS". Singularity OS will be even MORE bogged down than Vista, which already takes about 3 gigs of ram just to boot up, and about 6 to run it after it's booted, along with about a 4.5ghz CPU. Apparently those of us using a Pentium 600 with 512 ram are going to be left in the dust. I Like XP, and I like my computer, so microsoft can keep their little operating systems that don't work. I Actually installed vista basic on here for a laugh one night, as I was reformatting anyways. As soon as it started up, all I saw was messages upon messages popping up "Cannot find driver for this, and that" It couldn't even find the driver for my keyboard and mouse, the most simple of hardware objects. Stick with XP, if microsoft stops updating it, I'm sure somebody else will take it upon themselves to build updates.

Pyrrha:

I looked at ME....Once! & regretted it! It was a poor Windows 2000! 2000, was very good. & who are those “IT PROFESSIONALS”? That you trust so much, introduce me to them so I can slap them for saying Stick with ME! XP WAS a nightmare as is all of Microsoft’s “NEW” OS’s. This is a largely known fact. But XP is now one of the most stable systems. I guess you’re going to be the one person that purchases Singularity OS too huh? Sekorawild your quote...HILARIOUS! “Windows ME? WOW! My friend!” lol, so true!

Pax

Ammomother:

Interesting point i am a vista user, it came free with my pc and to be fair i don't really care both windows xp and vista have incredibly irritating security and thats why i switch it off ive never got a virus never had my bank cards hacked never and out of curiosity ive rand anti virus checks and anti spyware and still couldn't find anything. so what do we learn... use 95/98/me 2000 vista, xp or even applemac but turn the security off them all its just useless and irritating

Elixxxx:

It didn't came FREE, it came included in the price. If it were possible to get a computer without OS or with a FREE (like free beer) OS, it'd be cheaper.

Anonymous:

Don't forget MS does not care, and they never listen to the user. XP will be obsoleted in 5 years weather anyone goes to Vista or not. Linux(I use this instead of Windows at home) and MAC are viable alternatives. Linux does take some knowledge of configuring, dependencies, and permissions, but the price is right. I only know what my friends that own MACs say about them, and they do not have anything goods to say about Windows. Maybe it's time to go to a MAC.

samfish:

don't like MS but also not Linux. the most "fun" with Linux
is to install software. each version require many pre-installed software. it just like a installation tree never ends. After all "make", you still need pray for "make install" make no errors. One thousand commands with a stupid "man" help manual. Use interface is so unfriendly that no comercial usage at all..

Mackenzie:

Say it with me now, "package manager." Package managers are these lovely things that you can either use from the command line or by marking a few little checkboxes and hitting "OK" and then they download and install whatever program you want and all of the dependencies automatically. Your argument died last century.

cig_r:

it would be cool those little checkboxes if the missing shit isn't your lan driver.
Windows xp is easier and more functional than linux. It's all about the "kill the bill" thing. If he is the devil or not I don't care, his OS is good and final point.

Mackenzie:

Oh, I'm sorry. I must have missed the point where Windows included drivers for ethernet NICs. I must have completely imagined needing to use a second, already-configured, already-online computer to download drivers to a flash drive just to use a wired internet connection on a fresh installation of Windows. I must have imagined it daily for months working at computer repair shop where we were constantly reinstalling Windows.

HoboBen:

"No commercial usage" eh?

Linux is big in the commercial world, more so than on the desktop. It's used in video editing, demanding scientific data processing, audio editing, cgi animation and rendering, and mainly as servers.

Google use Linux servers, as do most of the websites on the Internet.

Even if you don't believe Linux is right for the home desktop yet (though I'd argue that it is!), it's definitely the leader in the commercial world.

Luke:

that is cool EVERYONE Revolt !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Go LINUX!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

X should be a vowel do you say a or an XBOX

regards Luke

lulz:

yeah, an xylophone, an xerox...

mouton:

I certainly hope you're being sarcastic.

bsmooth:

I think window vista is a kinda cool new program but it do lack some glitches like the tool bar on the side of the besk top its has problem with it. it also had a problem with macafee program but the vista has the same features of xp so i think vista should of waited intill 2010.

-Zawada-:

XBOX has an invisible E at infront of it. If you repeat the word then you notice you say exbox which is different when you say xerox.... most words have an e where needed..extremely for instance, but since Microsoft Wanted a 'cool' name they stuck with X.

By the way...most of these reasons are valid, but ive been using Vista for a year and have had no problems. I dont use my computer for more than simple functions and a few games, but the interface is just beautiful...

so dont diss it if you havent tried it

(The price is a big deal...I didnt part with my own cash for it so its all good)

Anonymous:

I am a hardcore gamer. That is 90% of my computer usage. I refuse to buy into Vista because of all the DRM/HDCP included. I didn't ask for it. Its being forced down my throat. Gates knows this. Hardcore gamers don't want Vista.

DirectX 10 is the answer. Start making games that only upgraders can play. This is like making a game which comes on DVD... DVD is now standard in all home computers. But games still come out on 7CDs instead of DVD just in case someone doesnt have a DVD drive yet. Unless my hand is forced in order to play the next best game.... I wouldn't install Vista if I was paid handsomely to.

kill-9:

halo2 for the PC will only play on vista. i would imagine the list of "vista exclusives" will get longer by the day.

Anony:

Halo PC sucks anyway, Why do you think HALO2 PC won't be the same?.

agamer:

idiot. halo pc is NOT a bad game, but actually a lot of fun. especially the standalone ce version

anarchy:

This games sole purpose is to convert people to vista. MS have no plans to make a profit out of the game, otherwise they would make the game available to XP users.
The game has already been developed for Xbox, so this means MS have a 'reason' for people to use Vista. They claim Vista has the graphical capabilities to support this game, that is rubbish, the game was made a long time ago. Its just another way MS is exploiting the windows home user for profit. XP is no longer making enough money.... time for a new OS.

Anonymous:

Because the last people who should whine about "cost" would be gamers. So you did not upgraded your computer for matching more hardware requiring new games, releasing every day? I mean com'on, if you are a hardcore gamer, you already have a computer that can work 5 vista at same time. You must have much better hardware to run Oblivion than Vista recommendations to play it smoothly.

I'm using P4 2.6, 7200 IDE harddisks, X800"AGP" video card, Windows Vista works much more smoother than my XP at this moment. My only luxury is my "2 Gb RAM" which are 333 Mhz (that can't be matched for many gamers)

Basically, Vista works smoother, better, safer.

dj:

What games are u running? i play supreme commander,cs source and the battlefield series. i have just upgraded to dual core and have 2gig ram. u recomend vista?

keLz:

I heard the new mortal kombat titles would be released on only vista compatible PCs. how true is that.
God knows i want to play MK on ma PC. Y did they even take it off in the first place?

Brian Trausch:

if you feel so unmatched and if windows vista is actually a better operating system, why didn't you at least give us your name?

Anonomis:

Traucsh is right

Jo:

People xp had the same problems that vista has when it came out MS made it open to the public not for the profit or gamers but so they can stay ahead of mac and work out all the bugs before mac puts out their new os this is common sense.

Anonymous:

I'm into gaming myself, can't wait until GTA 4 comes out on PC, hope it comes out on that platform, it normally does. I just love GTA. Played all of them starting from GTA 3 to San Andreas. Only PC version only. I just hope that most future games can still run on XP. HALO 3 is only Windows VISTA, hope most games now and for the next few years are still XP compatiable. Only thing is this directX10. You can only get it on VISTA!

gamer man:

i am a VISTA gamer and am very pleased. through time i've heard ppl complain about this software a rave about that one, but bottom line is they ALL have good points as well as bad points... they all need patches, they all cost a little more, one has this and another has that, etc... would you grumblers rather go back to the days of atari and video arcades? geez, lighten up....

Vomitron:

There is no reason why Vista only games should be Vista only, Halo 2 is supposedly Vista only, but there is already an XP patch floating around for it. The same goes for all other Vista only games. Halo 3 is on Xbox 360 not PC (yet), btw. The DX10 argument is BS as their is nothing revolutionary in DX10 that would cause it to be Vista only.

B, b, but new shaders and realism,

Yeah those can run XP just the same (basic hardware requirements notwithstanding)

Anonymous:

Unless you want the old games like cs or ut2003, you should go for Vista. Hardcore gaming, as I see it, is more for sport than actual injoying the game and it´s elements. Actual playing means you want all you can get of everything. Say, I´m willing to upgrade my rig with new hardware, vista (in time) and so forth not only to get the best performance, but for future use and stability.
For the average user, vista may not be needed. But for those who love games and see themself injoying these for future times, you can´t miss the vista upgrade. This is of course for the DX10 upgrade. When playing future games, you really want the best graphic. As for those vista problems you listed above, I laugh about it. Analysis of the text more than show how distasteful the author were at the time of the writing. problems should always, if they are based on facts, be listed neutral. "You can´t scare me Paul"

Mickey101C:

New games will support DX 10 yes, but they will also support DX 9.
Game creators will not cut their purse strings and only make DX 10 games from now on.
Only Halo 2 is Vista Only and Microsoft will learn that they will lose revenue because of this. Any way Halo was boring, running down corridors and reaching spawn points with excessive amounts of enemies; Halo 2 will be the same.

Church:

I hate Microsoft yes. But I will defend Halo because it was created by Bungie and distributed by MS. Also Halo has a great story, great gameplay, better graphics (Halo 2) than most other games and some next gen ones. And the fact that it is on the PC with a Keyboard and Mouse makes it easier to play. I will hope to God that one day you will realize that you have made a mistake by criticizing one of the game series that has defined this past generation of gaming.

Iceman:

Oh!!!I agree with you..I hate MS but Halo is undeniable The supreme game. It is such that the US army use it.

john:

Went down the local puter store and had a look. Home basic ... which is the version my puter can run [1.8gig, 2gigs ram, 256 vid card] ... according to M$'s vi$ta checking tool, is nearly $400.

I don't know about anyone else, but I find this price outlandish for an o/s version that is only supposed to deal with basic computer work. Even the upgrade is $200 for home basic. I think I shall be spending my puter dollars elsewhere from now on.

Justin:

The price is nowhere near that now, it's $199 for the full version and the upgrade is $99, with additional licenses available for $50 each, up to three.

Mickey101C:

Go online and purchase the OEM versions of Vista.
Home Premium is about $120.

mathew:

FIRST OF ALL GO TO EBAY I PICKED UP HOME BASIC FOR MY PC DIDNT WORRY IF IT COULD RUN IT OR NOT AND WHACKED IT ON DUDE IAM RUNNING 2.8GHZ SOCK 478 250 GIG SATA HARD DRIVE 1 GIG RAM RUNS OK THO 3X 1 GIG STICKS OF RAM SHE WILL WHOOP THE AS OF XP ANY DAY APART FROM ITS DUMMIES SPITS EVERY NOW AND THEN AND XP STILL HAS EM TOO AND MOST OTHER OS SYSTEMS SO SHOP AROUND MATE ULL FIND THE RIGHT PRICE LIKE ME CHEERS MATHEW

Anonymous564:

foooooooooooool llololololololololollololololo

Anonymous666:

All that and still no lower case.

linux:

Windows vista is the worst OS ever released by microsoft. Bought it for just some week ago. and decided to install it. when my xp stuffed up.

I have somewhat of an NASA computer. e6600 @ 3.5ghz ,8800gts 640mbit,2gb ram pc8500 @ 1/1, with 2 250gb sata2 in raid 0 in gsata ports/kables.

Any way, in windows xp i have all around at highest settings in every game around 100-300fps.. And in vista its not even close to that. It's 20-30fps lower that means 70-270fps. And that's a big jump just to change the os. and one outher thing i realy hate is that when you have just installed vista you have around 45-60 processes.

So yeah in vista you have support for over 3gb ram and have dx10. But then again to drive vista like xp you need to at lest have 4gb ram and ever little thing on your computer clocked to max. I'm probly gona change back to xp again and maybe install vista next year when i have bought a new computer. This is just so lame of vista to even teel that vista is good for gamers, movie creators and so on, it's just rubbish.

And some time you can suddenly start to get this freez lag in game and in movies becuse of the always updating checking for updates of the whole computer.. and the menus are just like how the hell am i suppose to find that and so on... naah i can give you all a recomendation if you are thinking about getting vista.. "STICK WITH XP FOR AT LEAST 1 YEAR MORE"

ME!!!I AM ME:

i got it...the PPOE on it sucks!!i was calling dell to come up and check it

AndrewM:

All fair comments but at the end of the day, the Vista OS will win out because of a lack of alternatives. And before any Linux Spruikers jump up and down, I have in the last week tried installing 3 different distro's, Including an Old Red Hat, uBuntu and Suse from the APC DVD. They all failed on the system i built for it. And guess what, XP Pro went without a hitch. To cut it short i eventually got Suse working on another system. Point to all this is that Linux Spruikers should spend more time making an OS that works out of the box rather than putting energy into telling us all that Linux is a better or equal alternative.

Anonymous:

Why did you use "Old Red, Suse and Ubuntu",
it would be a good idea to try the newest
copies of each. Would you expect Winddows 3.1 to
work compatibly on a Core 2 Duo box with a
Geforce 8800 card?

Greg Holland:

Exactly. Rag Vista all you want, but this time next year do you really think the population will be using ubuntu or any other OS? I guarantee there is more bugs in that OS than Vista. Forget that a multi billion dollar company is releasing it, and imagine that a bunch of dudes writing an open source OS are releasing it and I bet everyone would be singing the praises... True???

Anonymous:

So basically you don't want any rights and you are going to stop using torrents and p2p networks. And the general public has no alternative other than linux. Lies, theres are hundreds of OSes that are available, i can think of 3 different ones off the top of my head that are becoming more and more amazing and user friendly every day, ReactOS, Mac OS X, and the infinite flavors of Linux. I for one will not be upgrading to Vista. And I will offer my services to friends to help them get a different OS other than M1Cr0$h4f7

Anonymous:

Sorry, but i guess you know you are clueless and thus shouldn't spread all that nonsense.

First off all, p2p networks and Torrent Clients do work with Vista. You seem to have gotten the DRM part wrong. You can even still play non DRM Media and use DRM-incompatible software.

ReactOS is an interesting project, but even ReactOS developers are going to tell you that it is still far away from anything an enduser would want to use.

Linux is still troublesome to install (which was the point of critic here i guess) if your hardware is less than 5 years old. I just got through a very painfull opensuse 10.2 install myself (and i know what i'm doing) because my aging Geforce 6800 isn't supported out of the box.

Mac would be an upgrade path of course, but it also will mean you have to buy a complete set of new Hardware and you have to rebuy all you comercial software.
Plus, most Macs have an TPM-chip, so if you aren't as paranoid about them, you are obviously biased.

Of course there are plenty of other OSses for PCs around but none of them has a big (comercial quality) software base and emulators are too slow for real use while compatibility layers which exist (wine) are so incompatible that they are basically useless (even an ancient Photoshop 5 crashes it as soon as you start realy using it, so we dont even have Win95 compatibilty yet).

So while i will not Upgrade to Vista i can absolutely understand why people will do that.

Tony:

RE...Mac would be an upgrade path of course, but it also will mean you have to buy a complete set of new Hardware...

Vista needs big hardware resources, particularly if you want to get the most from it. So, if you need to buy a new OS such as Vista which will also mean buying new hardware, well, you might as well look at buying a Mac.

Macs are safer than Vista too - I can't imagine for one moment that a home user setting a Vista PNRP domain name on their computer is going to be safe for very long

Anonymous:

The people who are most interested in getting Vista are those people who play games (DirectX 10). If you have an PC that is capable of playing recent games (1+GB Ram, DirectX9 compatible Graphicscard, 2+GHz CPU) then you have an Vista compatible PC.

I have seen it run well on an 1GHz Pentium M with 786 MB Ram.

Macs also force you to buy an Display as well, people who have an PC obviously already have an Monitor. Mac fanatics always compare prices on the basis that you buy an new monitor every two years which obviously isn't the case in PC-Land. The only Macs you can buy without buying an Display are the MacMini and the Mac Pro.

The Mac Mini will never be an Upgrade to your PC because of its 1999 Level GPU (yes, it has Pixelshaders but it doesn't even have Hardware T&L and thus is useless even for basic 3D applications).

The Mac Pro is absolutle overkill (who needs two double core CPU? - most of you apps will not gain any speed from it, except if you spend all day compressing videos) and thus costs twice as much as someone would spend on an resonable PC.

If there would be an resonable desktop Mac without integrated Monitor (whos silly idea is that anyway... what are you gaining from an integrated display? That you can scrap your Diplay as well if your computer died an early death and vice versa?) i could be tempted, but until then i'll stick with linux (beeing someone who can live with its much more problematic install and maintanance).

Tony:

RE The people who are most
***********************************
Yous said: "The Mac Mini will never be an Upgrade to your PC because of its 1999 Level GPU (yes, it has Pixelshaders but it doesn't even have Hardware T&L and thus is useless even for basic 3D applications)."...

Agree with your sentiments, but it is quite possible that the Mac Mini will be upgraded to an Intel Core 2 Duo etc around March along with the OS X Leopard release.

The Mac Mini costs $949 (including OS X), whereas Windows Vista Ultimate costs $751 alone.

So, if the Mac Mini gets updated in March, all one needs to do is plug it into your existing keyboard, mouse and display.

If you don't need 3D, well, of course, you can get the Mac Mini now.

Just because Vista will be on the market by the end of this month, doesn't mean everybody has to go rushing out to buy it straight away. It would be worth waiting say 6 months for Vista to settle down (patches etc) and also to see what Apple's response is. Oh, and, who knows, Ubuntu's next release might even catch up to the Mac too...

Jazzor:

Let me help you with the price a little my friend:

Windows Vista Ultimate FULL Package (including x86 and x64 DVD Versions): $379.99

Link:
http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Windows-Vista-Ultimate-VERSION/dp/B000HCTYTE/sr=1-1/qid=1169560831/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/105-5579057-9339653?ie=UTF8&s=software

Windows Vista Ultimate UPGRADE Package (including x86 and x64 DVD Versions): $259.99

Link:
http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Windows-Vista-Ultimate-UPGRADE/dp/B000HCTYTO/ref=wl_gtwy_ty/105-5579057-9339653?%5Fencoding=UTF8&coliid=I2B8ULV3Y2A9RF&colid=NGZDI6G3ATSH


Brand new Compaq Presario v6000z AMD Turion Dual-Core T50 / 1024 MB DDR2-SDRAM /Windows Media Center 2005 with a free coupon for a Windows Vista Home Premium Upgrade: $704.99

Link:http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/shopping/computer_can_series.do?storeName=computer_store&category=notebooks&a1=Usage&v1=Everyday+computing&series_name=V6000Z_series

......

Aleksa:

Macs also force you to buy an Display as well, people who have an PC obviously already have an Monitor. Mac fanatics always compare prices on the basis that you buy an new monitor every two years which obviously isn't the case in PC-Land. The only Macs you can buy without buying an Display are the MacMini and the Mac Pro.

Well, I am a graphics designer, and curently using PC/Win combination. Problem is I can't swich to Linux becouse of obvious sotware problem. As we all await release of Vista and very fast end of support for all software made for XP My only choice at this point must be MAC

The Mac Mini will never be an Upgrade Your PC because of its 1999 Level GPU (yes, it has Pixelshaders but it doesn't even have Hardware T&L and thus is useless even for basic 3D applications).

I have tried MacMini, and mentioned iMac with integrated monitor (24"/Intel core2duo...). Both of them are not "good enough" for me at this point, and my long term planing.

The Mac Pro is absolutle overkill (who needs two double core CPU? - most of you apps will not gain any speed from it, except if you spend all day compressing videos) and thus costs twice as much as someone would spend on an resonable PC.

Well, MacPro on any speed with 2GB of RAM is mine ultimate solution. And not for 1 or 2 but minimum 4 years period. And with 23" HD monitor certified for prepress (wich I had tested) I don't have to worry about my work. Also all software I currently use I don't need to upgrade or buy again, becouse they work with same licence numbers and activation (checked personally) :) So, if you look on tihis my way, it make sence. And with new mac I can still use old Win and windows applications if I ever need to.

Base575:

If you are looking at cost. What does Mac Hardware cost, and what is the price of a PC? I think if you check the price difference, you chose to upgrade your PC...

Vista works perfectly, I have minimum requirements to run it on. I just love the search features. And yes you will have some driver issues.

Linux has the same problems, and more of them. Developing drivers for the number one sofware company of the world is more profitable than for a couple of linux users...

rock:

1.i want mac mini without o/s.
2.mac mini is having tunner port or not.

Anonymous666:

Mr Moderator, did you really approve this?
Its unintelligable.

Anonymous:

if you think the latest distros are hard to install. After having installed linux for many friends who were fed up with Windows (for all sorts of reasons) I have run into very few glitches at all.

Annonymous:

P2P is crippled in Vista you PC illiterate moron and 9 out of 10 games crash on Vista. Vista is a piece of crap! Deal with it idiot!

The chosen one:

P2P runs great in Vista and none of my games crash, i have medal of honour, halo, halo 2, UT GotY, UT 2004 installed at the mo and they all work good and dont crash, Btw i run Vista Ultimate and PC is faster with Vista than XP, Get it, Got it, GOOD:

gamercenter.info:

I don't understand where people get off with bagging vista. think of it this way, what are YOU doing to the OS to make it stuff up on you.

I have a Dell Dimension 8300 (Circa 2003) and a Dell XPS M1210 notebook (brand new) both running Vista Home Premium.

I have never encountered any issues with it. P2P works perfectly fine. Games run great (LoTR:BfME, BF2, WoW, C&C:Gen, HL2, GTA3/VC/SA, Defcon, STALKER, NFS:MW, the list goes on.....)

The only ever problem I had was ONE blue screen, and that came from my 6600GT's fan conking out and overheating, it was a fan issue not a tech/software issue (got a brand new one that runs sweet now).

I sit there and thrash my computer around, tweak this, change that, color this, change registry entry of that and nothing, no crashes, no unexpected shutdowns, not even a single whimper coming from my machines.

As I said before, while you are bagging Vista, sit down and figure out WHY IT IS SCREWING UP.......it could easily be your own fault.

I admit that Vista may not be best for the basic user, you do need some tech knowledge just in case of any stuff up that might happen, but still treat it right and it will bring you years of joy!!

swannee:

qoute[Linux is still troublesome to install (which was the point of critic here i guess) if your hardware is less than 5 years old. I just got through a very painfull opensuse 10.2 install myself (and i know what i'm doing) because my aging Geforce 6800 isn't supported out of the box.]

Seems to me you are the clueless one here I can install Mandriva 2007 without a glich and all hardware drivers are installed except the nVidia graphics card, on the same machine with vista you can forget about your sound blaster live working at all and the rest are at best unstable beta drivers at this point most Linux dristro's have much better support than Vista, If you don't know how to configure a linux dristo on your computer, doesn't make it a bad OS, just means you need to do a little home work ;)

Mackenzie:

I got my laptop last July, brand new. Within 4 hours, it was running Ubuntu. It was my first time installing Linux. I installed the Vista RC for a few days, and that royally sucked. I have a perfectly-working 3D desktop on Ubuntu, but Aero was junk and Vista couldn't run the screensaver properly. Ugh. For the first 3 months I had my laptop, I couldn't use the SD card reader, but I wasn't aware of that at the time since I didn't try it. I've only learned recently that it wouldn't have worked. The card reader has perfect support now, though, and it's been less than a year.

The rules:
- ATI sucks. Even on Windows their drivers suck, but on Linux you have to wait 6 months after the card comes out to get their crappy drivers whereas on Windows you get bad drivers immediately. ATI cards will work with 2D just fine.

- Nvidia and Intel are supported as soon as the hardware becomes available. Nvidia will need binary drivers for 3D which you can get from nvidia.com or from the distro.

- Don't try to use a release so old that the hardware wasn't invented yet.

- Intel wireless will be perfect. Others will work with a little fiddling.

- Most hardware will not require looking for drivers online because most stuff is supported in the kernel.

And by the way, Linux supports more hardware than any other OS, so you're a liar. A fresh install of Windows (not from a restore disk, a REAL one) will almost certainly leave you with no ethernet drivers. At least Linux has all ethernet drivers working out of the box, even if only some wireless cards work immediately. Neither will work with Windows until you find a different computer from which you can download drivers and then hope that the new Windows install will be able to use your flash drive without looking for drivers for it too.

je.saist:

So, you tried Red Hat, and not Fedora. You tried Ubuntu which uses the Gnome desktop. You also tried Suse, with is an RPM distro.

So, let me get this straight, you did not try Mepis? Here, I'll even copy in the download pages for you : http://www.mepis.org/node/1462

Just a friendly word of advice AndrewM: Before you go out and bash distributions for not working, do not do these things:

1: Use older distributions: Unlike Windows which only sees major changes to the operating system about every 5 years or so, major changes to Linux can occur on monthly or weekly basis. The hardware that didn't work last week may work with a new kernel or a different hardware detection method.

2: Use distributions that only have one desktop Environment: Red Hat/Fedora, Ubuntu, and Suse are all backers of the Gnome enviroment, which is great. If you are not coming from a Windows world. If you are a Windows user you probably want to start out with a Distribution that uses KDE instead. What you really want to do is try multiple distributions each with a different desktop. Try a Gnome, try a KDE, try an IceWM, try something with FluxBox. Trying 3 distributions that all use the same desktop is not going to do anything to help you.

3: Do not use Compilation discs. Get the latest release straight from the distribution vendor. The problem is with compilation discs is that they cannot ever guarantee that you have the most recent version. In this case because you were using a DVD that still included Red Hat, which has not been released under the Red Hat name for over a year. That places your DVD set at least a year old. Again, all this does is hurt you.

SO, yes, we do have an OS that works better out of the Box. Your F.U.D. is most certainly not appreciated.

AndrewM:

None of the points you list even come remotely to out of the box success.
When I am building systems for clients, I have not got the time to stuff around, I want to install out of the box.
When a consumer wants to upgrade on OS they want out of the box success.
The vast majority of users/consumers do not have the IT skills required to muck around researching distros, versions, shells or whatever. So once again I say that Vista, and Windows in general, will be a winner because in 99% of cases, it works for Joe Consumer.
To all the people who got a bee in thier bonnet. It was a challenge. Make on OS that Joe consumer can buy from "Hardly Normal" or "Officewarts" and then you will having reason to shout. I personally would love a competitor for Windows & Mac, it means I can offer clients a choice. I cant do that now.

Burlingk:

You are right.

If you are an IT customer, you want out of the box success.

However, if you are an IT professional, then it is your job to do that research. That is what you get paid for. You get the headache, so that your customer can get the best possible experience.

If you are too lazy to pick up a new CD, or download a new ISO, then you belong in the windows world, where you aren't allowed to do that anyway.

If you try to install outdated software, then you are going to have a harder time than you will with updated software.

If you are looking for an easy setup, and high chance of success, go for a MODERN package based distro.

Stear clear of things such as Gentoo (Awesome system for a person who loves to tinker), and Slackware (Easier than Gentoo, but still not the easiest) in favor of newer distros such as Ubuntu, Fedora Core (Not my preference of course), Suse or the like.

As for being able to pick up a disk at the local computer store, that is up to the resellers not the distro producers. The people who produce a distribution put a lot of work into creating a ready to use product. It is up to the merchants to decide what they will sell. In turn, it is up to the customers to let the merchants know what they want to see sold.

If you don’t “have the time to stuff around” while you are working on a client’s machine, then do so between projects. If you give your clients options then many of them will probably still choose windows because it is what they know, but it will also look good for you that you actually told them there was a choice.

Most of all though, if you are building a machine for a client “DON’T for the love of God(whichever one you believe in) use a CD off the back of a PC magazine!”

Fred McKinney:

Je-saist, I concur wholeheartedly on Mepis, of which I am a very satisfied user, too. Given the radical changes that Micro$haft wants to force down us all, I think Vista will really tick a lot of people off. It's like Micro$haft has forgotten what made them great in the first place, and I don't think that very many people will put up with it at all, especially once they learn about the alternatives.

As for me, I've been a very happy Linux user for the past two years and haven't looked back at all. In fact, the thing that pushed me into it was I began getting a LOT of error messages popping up in Windows 2000, even after a fresh re-install, so I gave some CDs I had of Mandrake a try, and they worked beautifully. However, I eventually found that Mandrake/Mandriva is not the most stable Linux distro in the world, and so this past summer, I switched to Mepis, and it's a truly wonderful distro that I encourage everyone to try.

In fact, like quite a few other distros are doing, Mepis also lets you try it directly from the CD without having to install it first. Bear in mind, though, that since it's reading from the CD, things will be a bit slower than if it was installed on your hard drive. If you should decide that Mepis is for you, there is an "Install" icon on the desktop that will launch installation, either by itself or as part of a dual-boot system.

Micro$haft, of course, wants to try to prevent anyone from switching to Linux, and as such, the CD burner that comes with Windows XP doesn't burn ISOs properly. But there's a free CD-burning program that does called Deep Burner, which you can download at www.deepburner.com.

But as for me, Mepis has proven itself to be fully capable of doing just about anything I want or need on the computer. Just like Ubuntu does, Mepis also has the Synaptic package manager, which makes installation or un-installation of programs a piece of cake to use. There's no reason at all not to try it, and it's a distro I encourage everyone to at least try.

Anonymous:

Linux has been the ONLY platform I have used to work out of the box. The last time I installed Windows XP on a reformatted drive, I had to install a number of additional drivers just to make things work, even as basic as sound and graphics support. I run Ubuntu and the last time I ran the installation it detected and setup everything without a hitch. I guess I have gotten pampered with Linux installation and had forgotten what a pain in the ass installing Windows really is. I think you must be either a troll or have pretty exotic hardware, but even that I find hard to believe since Linux has such great support with exotic hardware as it is.

Alleister:

Yeah, people who aren't of your opinion just *have* to be trolls, right?

It is enough to have an "recent" (that is, only 2-4 generations old) Graphics Card and your install will be troublesome.

Want examples? Geforce 6800 which was released in 2004(!) will crash your Ubuntu (or Suse or Fedora or whatever) install and will require you to download and install the proprietary nVidia drivers from a console without any help, which is asked a little much from an user that doesn't have good linux knowledge.
If nv drivers don't work at all, why do distributions try anyway to run you Graphicscard with them? That's just stupid.

If you have more than one Soundcard installed (which is quite common because of crappy onboard sound devices everywhere) then you will have a fun time manually modifing configuration files (of course anyone new to linux does that while sleeping) on you Ubuntu installation.

If you have an 5.1 sound system that sounds like crap in stereo mode, good luck getting upmix to actually play stereo sources in 5.1 upmix (and i don't mean 4.0 upmix, which doesn't solve the problem). I gave up on that in Linux and simply don't listen to music on Linux.
In Windows that is a nobrainer.

Not to forget that there are still applications missing for many tasks. There aren't realy good alternative for video editing, Gimp isn't an replacement for Photoshop, there aren't any real replacements for Music compositing software that you can get on Mac and Windows and who could blame the commercial application developers. Linux support is a nightmeare for non OSS software.

bg:

You haven't tried installing Linux recently (last year or so), have you? I'm not saying that you are a troll, more of an misinformed or very unlucky individual. I have had no problem on installing several Linux distributions on a lot of machines, also desktops. My teenage (17) sister installed Ubuntu Edgy by herself without any problems at all, to be honest i have to add that i had to burn the CD for her, burning a CD out of an iso file is too much for her. She has used Linux ever since for all her purposes: iPod, photos, text editing, instant messaging, viewing web pages etc. Both of my parents use Linux (57,58) and never had any problems with it whatsoever. I myself have used Linux for more than five years and since a year or so I haven't used Windows for purposes other than occasional support at work. I had some sound problems with the new Creative sound cards but hardware issues are not too much of a bother with modern Linux distributions. To be frank the only people that should not consider switching to Linux at this stage of development of the system are are frequent Excel (advanced functions), Photoshop and Acrobat users, hardcore Windows gamers and professionals who require a specific piece of software running on their PC's.

Anonymous:

To be frank the only people that should not consider switching to Linux at this stage of development of the system are are frequent Excel (advanced functions), Photoshop and Acrobat users, hardcore Windows gamers and professionals who require a specific piece of software running on their PC's.


isn't that everyone?

aldraia:

It isn't everyone. What about the "normal" users.
Internet, chat, mail, job/school works with office and little more?
And they aren't a minory...
I'm not saying that everyone must go to gentoo (but it will be ok :P), but there are a lot of "light" distributions that a windows user can install easier than windows.

Pyrrha:

I agree with “Brian Trausch” on the Name thing & unmatched comment!

What I will say is that I use Vista on my desktop which is a P4 3.2 GHz, & 1.5Gig of ram. It’s not the best of machines but... XP wouldn’t find any drivers for my Asus p4c800 Motherboard!

Vista however, didn’t have the drivers, but I thought oh well, let’s see if Vista will find them for itself? I was sure it wouldn’t as I needed a sound driver and a raid controller driver, & XP never on any machine would find those things, that is the one thing with xp you always have to find some driver online. But vista found them online for me & installed them.

I will admit that Vista is bad, in the sense that if I could I would use XP, it’s faster! Safer (less holes!) & not a drain on the systems resources. The name changes too, Properties is now “Personalize”, Add & Remove is now “Programmes”, stupid things like that just aren’t worth changing!

Also the AUC is ridiculous in Vista, it asks you weather not you want to confirm the action you have started, but doesn’t prompt for a password. WHATS THE POINT!!!

Linux whoever, now that is a decent system! Passwords everywhere you look as security. I only use Vista to the extent I do because I feel Microsoft OS’s DO have a place. But Linux is definitely something everyone should look into! Apart from Gamers! For obvious reasons. But then the majority of software has a bad part somewhere! Even XP with the drivers! Linux for having to know so much as it’s not end user friendly & Whine doesn’t really work! Generally one man’s gold is another’s trash!

& to be honest if you’re the average person who knows nothing about computers & thinks that you “INSTALL THE INTERNET”! then you’re never going to know about Microsoft or anything else Linux doesn’t even exist in the computer illiterate persons vocabulary! & that is why Mr. Gates will always make money!

I’m going to stop typing now. Sorry!

Pax

rg:

Try using xandros v4 we have found it perfect for home and office use and childs play to install PC's

burlingk:

Graphic cards have always been one of the stickiest topics in the Linux world. Some producers are more cooperative than others, but often times it takes months for them to produce linux compatible drivers. This leaves linux users to wait, or to undertake the task of creating the drivers themselves.

Without any documentation to go by, this takes time.

At the moment, the 32bit version of the Ubuntu install has no problem detecting most video cards, especially if you use the live CD.

However, last I checked there were still issues with some of the 64 bit drivers.


Unless you really want to get ever little last possible bit of performance out of your machine, the 32 bit versions of the OSes work just fine on a 64 bit processor. ^_^

Anonymous:

dude, nv6800 work fine with the nv driver. True you won't get direct rendering support (ergo not all 3d features) but it will give you a display! And yes, to get the good drivers you have to install them from the Nvidia site, BUT that is more of a legality issue than the distrobutions fault. some less popular distro's will set up restricted drivers 'out the box' but the mainstream distros want to avoid the legal destruction.

Stane:

>Want examples? Geforce 6800
FALSE - SUSE10.0 installed & working

>If you have more than one Soundcard installed
Some FALSE - SUSE10.0 plag&play. (ESS+i865-internal) Configured only for Skype - it has really stupid settings.

>If you have an 5.1 sound system that sounds like crap in stereo mode,
FALSE - SUSE10.0 + Audigy2ZSPlatinum plag&play.

>here aren't realy good alternative for video editing
FALSE - STFW

>there aren't any real replacements for Music compositing software
FALSE - STFW

>Gimp isn't an replacement for Photoshop
Some FALSE - Gimp is not for prepress, and is no have some usable gadget, but for web & base task is very good. By the way, you can start Photoshop in linux. "wine" is help for you :)

PS & look for http://freshmeat.net

g_liquor:

ignoramus - the world owes you nothing

ed:

Fud, pure and simple. i have owned many different systems, and the only time i ever failed to install linux was red hat 7, 5 years ago. it was as simple as putting in a real modem, not a winmodem. But i did have to read a bit, pretty technical shit for a grade 9 dropout(me, not you)
.

Anonymous:

You're forgetting an important piece of information here. Microsoft don't particularly care if their OS installs on a computer or not. The have in the last week tried installing Windows on 3 different computers, Including an Old Red Hat, uBuntu and Suse from the APC DVD. They all failed on the system i built for it. And guess what, XP Pro went without a hitch. To cut it short i eventually got Suse working on another system. computer/manufacturer hardware, on the other hand, knows that they will go bankrupt if their PCs don't run Windows or their hardware doesn't have a Windows driver. This is even more evident since Microsoft is throwing all of these stupid regulations at hardware vendors knowing that they will have to adopt them if they want to remain in business. Your comment about installing Linux is very anecdotal, I have personally installed countless ditributions a number of times on many machines with no issues, and I've found instaling Windows a nightmare (I have called the license validation 'phone number soooooo many times because people come up to me for help when their legally licensed Windows system thinks they have pirated it). However, I can imagine the vast barrage of completely factually accurate anti-Linux comments there would be if Linux Torvalds made the next version of Linux refuse to work if hardware-crippling features X, Y and Z were added.

Linux (and other Free Software systems) has to put up with whatever the industry throws at them, and personally I think they have done a damned good job so far. Just as an analogy for your comment:

I have in the last week tried installing 3 different Windows versions, including an old Windows 98, Windows XP and Windows Vista. They all failed on the G5 Mac system i bought for them, the Playstation 3 I got, my GameCube, my Xbox, Amiga, etc. And guess what, Linux went without a hitch on all of them. To cut it short I eventually got 98 working on an x86 system. Point to all this is that Windows Spruikers should spend more time making an OS that works on the boxs rather than putting energy into telling us all that we can't listen to our music or play our videos. Oh wait, Windows fanboys can't do that at all, since they would get sued by their beloved Microsoft for getting Windows running on different architectures like PPC, CELL, etc.

Now, that is not meant to be taken seriously, but I am saying it to show that neither should yours.

Anonymous:

Windows NT 4 had versions which ran on PPC and Alpha

Anonymous:

Maybe you should spend more time making sure the system you are building is compatible with Linux? There are myriad choices of compatible hardware if you take the time to look into it. Don't blame Linux for not being compatible with whatever junk you slap together.

helios:

Typical of those MS apologists that want to to discount Linux out of hand.

Linux is more than a few top=of=the=list names at distrowatch.com...and even if those were the only ones you looked at, the current number six distro is PCLinuxOS. I have installed it on over three hundred computers individually and several hundred others via server terminal ghosting.

It has failed on 8 of them. Compare that with XP that failed on over 200. Many people have discovered this distro by its only means of advertising...word of mouth. It has come from the 68th place to 6 in less than a year. There is a reason for that, ya think.

Call foul or "fanboy" all you like. When I put the disk in and install it on a fairly reasonable hardware set, it boots and works without a hitch. 12 year old kids and 84 year old great grandmothers are using it without a problem at all. Give it a try. Should you have any problems getting it to work, I will have Alice get ahold of you and walk you thru it.
http://blog.lobby4linux.com/index.php?/archives/70-86-Year-Old-Great-Grandmother-Hoists-The-Jolly-Roger.html

Should that fail, Freespire is a can't-miss alternative to Windows...As soon as you are tired of being used for a MS punching bag, you will take the time to try these. Go see Alice.

helios

Geert:

It is true Linux sux because it is to dificult to install, it is not because it's free that it becomes a good product, I rather pay for a windows version than having problem with linux.
10 reason not to use Linux
1: it sucks
2: to many version of linux
3: to dificult to install
4: you can not use youre wind prog on it
5: not a gaming os
6: no support
7: it's ugly
8: it is not compatible with every pc out of the box
9: if you got problems phone youre mother because nobody wil help you
10: it's old

Lawrence:

Linux is a very good platform. Try to listen to the Linux Reality Podcast "www.linuxreality.com". It's a matter of choice. There are things Linux really shines. It's stable, solid and just works. You just need to follow instructions and that's all. Of course for the average Joe who doesn't have time to learn and no intention to learn would feel that it's a little different and will opt for a Mac of Windows. But for those who is willing, the experience would be worth it.
I've been using Linux for more than a year now at and I could say that it's worth it.

outboard:

1. it only sucks if you tell it to suck
.... windows software sucks when you tell it to blow

2.I personaly enjoy choice and so do most of the worlds population .. and have you ever bothered to count the versions of microsoft operating systems server and client ???

3.if you know very little about your system hardware any operating system is dificult to install .. windows may appear to have installed easily but what has it actually installed to where and how much of it is what you want and how much is redundant inpractical garbage that was put there 10 years ago and never removed cos microsoft doesent revise they just add. Modern linux os are far more user friendly and easy to install try one

4.no you cant use your windows programs on linux .. you can not use your apple IIe programs on it either and even Mac programs wont work .... these are diferent "OPERATING SYSTEMS" same as trying to run a petrol driven car on deisel ... won't work Different "OPERATING SYSTEM".

5. not a gaming operating system ... no coment on this maybe you are looking for a play station / xbox / wii not a pc .

6. have you ever tried getting suport from microsoft ... linux has more suport then you can poke a stick at ... forums of users who actualy know how to solve problems not just help desk employees who type your problem into a help and suport box the same as is shipped with the operating system .. hang on they are giving you the same answers you already got when you used the help on your start menu.
7. pick a version you like the look of not one you find "ugly" or put a pot plant on your desk

8. Define compatable ... as new hardware is being developed so are the drivers for it,linux in the past has had trouble keeping up however the newer versions now are compatable with almost all hardware and if you find something amiss you just do a google search and you are sure to come up with a solution ... microsoft suffers from the same difficulties and the solutions you find from microsoft tend to be written in technical terms by technicians .... very hard for you to understand .... linux solutions tend to be written by real people who are understandable (apoligies to techy types )

9. If your mother knows more about computers then you this maybe a solution however if you try using google you are more likely to find the answers you are looking for ... this is also true of mirosoft Operating systems ... a google search is likely to produce results faster and more accurately then microsoft suport

10. windows is old too and dos even older and if it gets down to tin tacks you still cant use windows efficiantly without knowing something about dos the difference between the 2 is that when something dosent work or dosent work well with windows they add a fix where as linux systems remove the garbage and replace it with something that does work that is probably why linux is tiny compared with windows .


so yes sir linux sucks if you tell it to suck where windows will suck when it wants too and blow when it wants too and you will not have any control over what hapens on your pc. If you are happy to have bill in control of your pc by all means get yourself a new copy of vista it looks pretty right ou of the pretty box and will make you feel real smart because it looks like you are doing something and has little pop up windows telling you your doing something but when you learn something you will move to linux and then you will know it is you doing something and not microsoft " big brothering " your computer.
it is only when we admit we don't know that we begin to learn something

timmeh:

1.) that is an opinion not a fact.
2.) Is that really such a bad thing?
3.) You haven't tried Fedora, Opensuse, or ubuntu have you?
4.) see 3
5.) Try Cedega, I have yet to find the game I can't play.
6.) Do you know how to google?
7.) Major distros have had 3D desktop graphics much longer than windozzzzzz (compriz is a good example).
8.) Other than Wireless, which is easy to fix, you're wrong again.
9.) Once again try learning how to use the internet.
10.) If Linux is old, then windozzzzzz must be ancient.

Anonymous:

Linux Isn't for Morons I mean Linux is so easy to install Just read the some of the Install Forums come on Ubuntu is the easiest one to intall of them all my 12 year old can install it. Proves to show that Linux isn't for MS Lovers

john:

Bravo.....totally agreed with you man. I don't care how they like to boast about Linux, it will 'never' replaced Windows as the mainstream os. First of all too many distros since its open source. 2, no real support from real company as they are free os. 3, these nerds only interested in keeping Linux to themself. That's why its already a massive improvement when they finally came up with gui instead of 'dos' like os. last but not least, is Linux really that much faster than Windows. Not that i can see now that it's windows like. Oh, it's definitely not user friendly to all Windows users.

Pyrrha:

Linux Ubuntu is definitely faster & would say some of the KDE distros are too!

Pax

David07:

I feel obliged to critique this article as I feel it is very misleading. I will address it point by point.

1. You don't need it:
True, but then you got on to say it doesnt do anything new, when it does. The breadcrumb, previous file versions and the new start menu with it's instant search for programs or documents feature is enough (by themselves) to convince 100% of the clients I have talked to about it to upgrade.

2. Cost $$: This is relative, Vista Home basic is not a whole lot more than XP home was.

3. that's a matter of opinion, see 1. For the features it offers i have already sold many people on it, so to them it is not overpriced.

4. I just finished installing Vista RC2 on a Duron900 with 512 ram, it runs similar to XP with aero turned off.

5. Driver Support: So far every system i have put RC2 on (now 9 systems) has installed without a hitch and 90% of the time has even installed wireless drivers ect off windows update automatically.

6. Applications that dont work: Vista hasn't even been released yet! Address this at the time of release where you can expect ALL of these companies to have vista capable versions available.

7. Big fat target:
Vista is untested in the wild? Right...

8. UAC: It will annoy power users i agree. Those same power users know how to protect their pc anyway. For standard users that don't install or change things everyday (and yes this is actually the target audience) it is not an annoyance at all.

9. DRM is for holleywood, what's this got to do with MS? If MS hadn't done this then if/when DRM is on every tv show then mediacentre wouldn't be a viable alternative.

10. Again this is an enthusiast's problem and will not affect the majority of the target audience. It would be nice if they gave more freedoms here though.

As for the linux comments, as AndrewM pointed out, it's a LONG way away from being a viable alternative.

Please Ashton, this was a very biased, unfair and borderline anti MS article. I would expect more from APC.

Lane Campbell:

Linux is a viable alternative for some with a much lower cost of ownership initially and over an extended period of time. To be fair though it does require a tremendous learning curve for Windows only administrators and it means re-education.

It's hard to take your position seriously on Vista when you spelled Hollywood wrong. I can hope that english isn't your first language but still now that Firefox has a built in spell checker it should have caught that. Unless you actually use Internet Explorer in which case please refrain from commenting further on any subjects regarding technology.

Ivan:

I can't believe your arguments.

By the way, in "It's hard to take your position seriously on Vista when you spelled Hollywood wrong", shouldn't it be "wrongly"? "Wrong" is an adjective, and I guess that you need an adverb here, "wrongly", even English being a second language for me.

Anonymous:

'Wrongly' is ill-formed English. 'Incorrectly would be the word to use in this instance.

burlingk:

By the way, in "It's hard to take your position seriously on Vista when you spelled Hollywood wrong", shouldn't it be "wrongly"? "Wrong" is an adjective, and I guess that you need an adverb here, "wrongly", even English being a second language for me.

Please remember that the internet is an interneational thing. Many people here probably actually speak American english, in which case "wrong" is often used either way, and "wrongly" is almost never used.

Anonymous:

the only thing worse than reading your waste-of-space comment was writing this response.

Anonymous666:

Firefox is too buggy to be useful and Opera does not not work consistantly, so, as much as you may not like it only Internet Explorer is viable.

David Ozols:

You find Firefox buggy compared to Internet Explorer, I am shocked.

DjDarkman:

"1. You don't need it:
True, but then you got on to say it doesnt do anything new, when it does. The breadcrumb, previous file versions and the new start menu with it's instant search for programs or documents feature is enough (by themselves) to convince 100% of the clients I have talked to about it to upgrade."

WOw how cute new start menu ,and it can search like a win95 ,yeah ,that`s a real good reason to 100% convince me to give m$ hundreds of dollars.

"2. Cost $$: This is relative, Vista Home basic is not a whole lot more than XP home was."

A 3000$ server is also relatively cheaper than a super computer that consts a few million dollars.

"3. that's a matter of opinion, see 1. For the features it offers i have already sold many people on it, so to them it is not overpriced."

You don`t quite know why did it "many people on it" ,but you can prove it to me by giving me a list of those "fetures".Cause you always use this word ,but never explain it ,so this makes youre sentenses ,meaningless advertisments.

"4. I just finished installing Vista RC2 on a Duron900 with 512 ram, it runs similar to XP with aero turned off."

Simmilar?again an uncertain word ,let`s just say I don`t know how a Duron900 works with an Xp ,and by the way ,I hope you are not trying to explain that Vista doesn`t have enourmouse HW requierments ,cause 512 RAM is much ,but you probably buy that from your`re pocket money ,so it doesn`t seem much to you.

"5. Driver Support: So far every system i have put RC2 on (now 9 systems) has installed without a hitch and 90% of the time has even installed wireless drivers ect off windows update automatically."

What type of 9 systems ,it`s easy to say 9 systems ,without specifying them.

"6. Applications that dont work: Vista hasn't even been released yet! Address this at the time of release where you can expect ALL of these companies to have vista capable versions available."

In reality this means that every day you have to pray for the companies that made the software you purchased finish it`s "porting" to vista.So you buy vista and wait at least a month to be able to use your favorite programs.

"7. Big fat target:
Vista is untested in the wild? Right..."

Tell that to the people ,who will be infested with viruses ,and by the way M$ told everyone that Vista will be super secure ,and if you pay for an OS you expect it to be secure ,this thing that you say is just a poor excuse that windows prasising zealots usualy spread ,rather than say "You got a point there.".

"8. UAC: It will annoy power users i agree. Those same power users know how to protect their pc anyway. For standard users that don't install or change things everyday (and yes this is actually the target audience) it is not an annoyance at all."

Windows will decide if I`m allowed to delete a file or not ,yeah real nice ,so what will be next?a windows version that doesn`t let me power on my PC unless it thinks that I have privleges to push the power button?UAC is a lame immitation of unix priveleges ,the main difference is that in *nix system`s it works.

"9. DRM is for holleywood, what's this got to do with MS? If MS hadn't done this then if/when DRM is on every tv show then mediacentre wouldn't be a viable alternative."

Strange looks like M$ accidently supports every technologie that takes away people`s freedom.

"10. Again this is an enthusiast's problem and will not affect the majority of the target audience. It would be nice if they gave more freedoms here though."

Not even you belive this.You pay for and OS ,and you got to pay for it again if you switch your PC.


"As for the linux comments, as AndrewM pointed out, it's a LONG way away from being a viable alternative.

Please Ashton, this was a very biased, unfair and borderline anti MS article. I would expect more from APC."

This is a very objective arcticle ,it`s contents fit reality ,and don`t think that the linux distro`s want to be alternatives to Vista ,because Vista`s far from being a user friendly OS.So don`t write stupid things just because you like windows ,it`s a fact that you don`t know what *nix operating systems are.

Steve Olcott:

"As for the linux comments, as AndrewM pointed out, it's a LONG way away from being a viable alternative."

In the words of Mr. Linus, "Linux is not, and was never meant to be, a free alternative to Windows. Linux is meant to be a free alternative to UNIX."

----------
Steve Olcott
GNU/Linux User Since '97

Duf:

There is an old adage that applies to MS Window users, and it goes "you can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink".

I am a reformed MS addict. started using Win 3.11 then 95, 98SE ME, and finally XP. A year ago found PCLinuxOS. Go back to Windows? Who needs restrictions where you need to buy three lic copies for three computers? MS addicts are that because they think all Linux is commmand line work. I doubt with PCLinuxOS if I have used the command line more than a few times. It is so much like using Win 98 but this time its on Steroids.

Vulcan:

this artical pointed out 10 reasons not to get Vista , but how about 100s reasones to get Vista :D

Vista is still a good choice if you buy new PC.

Philippe:

And what choice exactly do you have when you buy a new PC????

Wes:

To me it would seem there is no other choice when you buy a new PC. Unless of course you go and install something like Linux.

Anonymous:

There's always the option of getting a Mac. You can run XP/Vista as well on it if you need Windows-only apps (or just use Parallels, etc.). that way, you get the super-duper-ness of OSX.

Phlosten:

...Unless of course you get Home edition or the next one up in which the license terms prohibit you from running it in a virtual environment.

Anonymous2:

Yeah, and Microsoft is capable of making house visits to see if somebody is running it in a virtual environment.

Are you really going to let a single line in the license to keep you from using it?

I can understand people not pirating software, but following the license to the letter? How come you even read it?
Most people don't seem to read it.

Anyway, back when this article was first made, it seems some of these points may have held some ground, but this is no longer the case.

I've been running Vista Ultimate 64bit (I downloaded it! YAY! I've always wondered why people buy overpriced software like Windows..) for a month, and I haven't had any problems.

Also, as to software not running on Vista.. that's up to the developers.
Some software also did not run on XP at first (I remember C&C: Renegade wouldn't run for a while, but they fixed it)

Vista is far superior to XP in terms of backwards compatibility, even with the 64bit version.
So far, it's detected when a program is 32bit and emulated it, and the only program that I had to run in compat mode (NFSU:C...) worked just fine.

Some people say that 64bit OSes not being able to run 16bit programs is a problem because there are still some 32bit programs with 16bit installers.. well, it's time for these programs to move on.

I also haven't encountered one of these installers yet.
There is no reason to use these installers, unless a program hasn't been outdated for years.

Many people seem to blame Vista for problems like these, but in reality, software developers are to blame.

They did not take into account new operating systems coming out, so for example, some InstallShield installers will not work because, in trying to be an "intelligent" installer, it checks for your OS version..and sees you aren't running NT/2000/XP and closes down.

Other programs are generally the same, and in InstallShield's case it can't be solved with compat mode because the program that needs to be run in compat is the msi file, not the exe file which just extracts the msi file and runs it.

This is similar to how some websites will work in IE but not in Firefox (or Opera, etc) or vice versa.

This is because they have used IE JS or CSS specific code that doesn't work in the other browsers, or (more similar) used browser detection code for compatibility.
But in their efforts to be compatible with everything, they did not take into account new versions of browsers (some sites work with IE 5-6 but not with IE 7 because it does not check for >6, but ==6).

As a result, these browsers won't execute some of the code because the website's JavaScript told it not to.
Boom!

Burlingk:

And what choice exactly do you have when you buy a new PC????

There are a few choices.

Easy Option A: Get a Mac.
Not So Easy Option B: Just get the machine with Vista. (I say not so easy because of all the reviews I have heard)
Somewhat more complicated option C: Skip the price of an OS all together, and build your own. This takes a little more technical skill, but even a newbie can do it if they take a few hours to do research.

Yes, this is a viable option now. Most modern producers of computer parts color code everything, and actually include manuals. ^_^

Download a copy of Ubuntu (or Xubuntu), stick in the disk, let it boot. If it works, hit the install button. (Yes, the default install disks for the newer versions of Ubuntu are live CD's. You get to choose if you keep going as is, or actually install it. ^_^)

If you are a novice user, then you can just fill in the blanks that Ubuntu asks for, and let it do the rest on auto pilot. It will even set up a swap partition for you.

If you are an advanced user and want to tweek things, all the tools you need to prepare your drives are included. :-)

Eli:

I heard this about Windows XP, SP2 and now Vista. You people echo the same FUD like a broken parrot. Vista will be a huge success for MS as all its recent OS's have been.

Anonymous:

it will be a success for the same reason aol is a success, for the same reason walmart is a success, for the same reason mcdonals is a success.. marketing and advertising.

Anonymous:

I run vista on a laptop with strange drivers and components and ati graphics. Everything flies smoothely, but then again I guess i'm not a dumbass. I realize that vista has one of the best back ends of any operating system. Its people who open up the front end of the computer to problems that find their copies of vista messed up. Outrageously priced? Who just walks out and buys an operating system anyway? Most people just recieve them as oem copies packaged with their computers. And upgrading to it. People often upgrade computers, and its not like get into the vista bracket is a huge upgrade for most people. Espescially because of the ATI 1050 radeon card. Very cheap, and gets vista going WITH aero support. My one computer that runs vista with no aero but on only 512 meg of ram and an 800mhz processor runs fine. Just none of the visual perks, but all of the nicely coded operating system perks.

Anonymous:

"...but all of the nicely coded [...] perks."

Haha that's quality.

Anonymous:

Just get a Mac and you will have an OS that works the way you expect one to.

Don Madison wi:

I have been using microsoft products for 20 years...The way I expect an OS to work is NOT TO WORK

Anonymous:

Try Ubuntu out first like this: Video for people hesitant of a Lunix system

Then download or receive the disk from this website: www.ubuntu.com

Maia B:

Vista will be a success because it is pretty. The vast majority of people who use computers don't know a thing about the machine they're using, they just know what it looks like. And Vista looks good. Also, in response to the first point, doesn't Vista use 64 bit processing? If you have dual-core processors or something else that can take advantage of 64 bit processing, wouldn't it be worth your while to upgrade?

Maia B:

Vista will be a success because it is pretty. The vast majority of people who use computers don't know a thing about the machine they're using, they just know what it looks like. And Vista looks good.

Also, in response to the first point, doesn't Vista use 64 bit processing? If you have dual-core processors or something else that can take advantage of 64 bit processing, wouldn't it be worth your while to upgrade?

Tsiolkovsky:

Even with Windows XP I started to look at Linux as an alternative to unstable and expensive system and programs. A couple of days ago I was checking out Vista on my computer and as you say it is a complete disaster. Slow as hell, the new Aero interface can't even compare with beautiful Bery. And what is with all this restrictive technology like DRM and TCPA infesting Vista? Is MS in bed with greedy people at MPAA and RIAA? After all this negative experience, I was convinced it was now the best time to switch to Linux and never look back. I'm using Mandriva Linux 2007 and all is working out of the box and it is even 64-bit. Even more things than in Windows XP, not to mention Vista.

Satai:

It's probable, that no of this reasonable points will stop crowd from buying Vista :-/

Dave Radden:

What else is new? Linux on the desktop never took off and we get more FUD from a linux fanboy. Where did we hear this before? Oh yeah...back when XP was being released. Sorry, you lose again.

Anonymous:

The sad thing is that no matter how bad Vista is, how onerous or even downright offensive Microsoft's licensing, most of the world, IT "professionals" and consumers alike, will still respond with "thank you sir, may I have another" instead of lifting a finger to explore the alternatives out there. It just shows a big marketing budget + laziness = a very easily controlled populace.

For the "communication appliance" way that most people use computers there are at least four alternatives: MacOS, Linux, various flavors of BSD, BeOS/Haiku (haiku-os.org). Every one will have its eccentricities and glitches, but only Vista has a monopolistic, control-freak, mega-corporation behind it.

Jason:

They run Office, they are less irritating to use. Granted you'll get games 6-12 months after PC release (if at all!) but that's the great thing about running the same architecture as every PC - dual boot. Oh and don't forget the spyware thing - I haven't run an antivirus/spyware cleaner since I switched in 2002. I think the barriers to moving to Mac are far reduced than when they were PowerPC based machines.

Joathan:

Oww, what's an idea!! And in the time you could bought the new game, every friends you know who are playing at this game bought the new expansion that is not release, or for a game that will not be release for mac, so that you can't play with them. Funny... So, the only things you could do is to modify some pictures or make movies, ohhh i forgot: I DON'T HAVE ANY *****ING DIGITAL OR VIDEO CAMERA, so the only things i could do is to modify picture of me in front of my mac. And about the virus, there are virus for mac, and exploit also. And the most ridiculous things is that it is that nobody who have a mac know that.

Simon Cowell:

You comments read like a person still caught in the time warp of the 80s

Whatever you can do on a PC, I'm doing it on a Mac. I'm playing the latest PC game on my Mac cos I have the most compatible hardware and OS. Ever heard of Bootcamp or Parallel? And I'm doing on video editing using Final Cut Pro and editing photo using my BUILT-IN video cam. Can you use Final Cut Pro or iMovie?

So far the so called virusses are created by security company as proof of concept and not in the wild virusses on PC

Pls spread ur FUD somewhere else

Anonymous:

using my BUILT-IN video cam

that is the biggest non feature ever. you sound as dumb as the comercial. but hey, at least you can upgrade that stock camera right

Divebus:

Of course there are Virus and Exploits for the Mac - and Linux in all flavors, but not 135,000 of them like on Windows. Unless you're intent on creating problems for yourself, all of the exploits available on the Mac require someone sitting at the keyboard with the Administrator password to install them.

Anonymous:

Sure, there are exploits for the Mac and Linux, but not 135,000 of them like in Windows. Also, unless you are asking to get hacked on the Mac and Linux, you need someone sitting at the keyboard with the Administrator password to install and run these exploits on Macs and Linux.

Games? Get a fscking Xbox.

Anonymous:

if i have to use windows on a box, is there a choice ?
i see the problem in the microsoft life cycle: will i get security updates for win 2k in next autumn ?
how long i get security updates for windows xp ?

CSMR:

All the reasons may be applicable in some circumstances except number 9. At worst having DRM capability is a feature you will find useless. Many people will find the feature useless. But no rational person should find a capability to be a positive deterrent.

Anonymous:

If you ask me, the AUC is a plus, if it works as intended.
Some of the other things like 3rd-party software incompatibility will go away with time.
The rest will always be reasons NOT to buy.

Anonymous:

Just binned off XP Pro from my laptop and installed Xandros (Linux)

This is a machine I use for work and I am MORE than happy with the results.

Can't see me looking at Vi$ta any time soon!

Anonymous:

The real good proper new features in Vista that are worth the upgrade are for people who're working in those PARTICULAR RESPECTIVE fields. As for the bundles apps and tools, every one has a better alternative on the market for those who truly need it.

* Desktop Window Manager (dont confuse it with WPF) is cool. Apps and developers should take advantage of it.
* Windows Imaging Component. This is really good for photography professionals as any graphics format can be supported as WIC is extensible. We had audio and video codecs till now, now we'll have image codecs!
* A true color management solution at the OS-level for again photography pros.
* Implementation of Shadow Copy as Previous Versions. Yeah I know this originated in Server 2003 but it's not in XP.
* Improved printing quality due to new printing path. Again for design pros.
* Truly improved HAL-independent image-based setup and deployment
* Expanded Group Policies and better admin tools. Useful for enterprises.
* IIS7

Lastly, definitely improved security but then how come ppl are surviving on XPSP2?

What for consumers? The basic apps...oops...accessories? Mac OS X. What for multimedia pros? Mac OS X.

Reasons not to upgrade:
- Nothing much for consumers
- No one seems to be having absolutely zero issues
- Very expensive

EyeAm:

I can't wait to purchase Vista Ultimate, at $379 (Amazon.com price). Microsoft has spent years on this OS, building much of it from the ground up, and it is reputed to be the most stable and secure of all the Windows iterations. I suspect it will take twice, perhaps triple the effort of hackers and malcontents to bring it down.

I am looking forward to seeing for myself if the reported boot time is true (i.e., it boots or reboots in 5 seconds).

Much of these 'reasons' listed in this article do not apply to me nor bother me. My machine definitely supports Vista. If anyone would like to check their own PC, find the Microsoft Windows Vista Upgrade Advisor and see what problems your attached hardware might present--it tells you where you may need to upgrade, and what issues there could be.

Regarding the lack of support mentioned in this article, those things are frequently true for many new OSes. But on the flipside, Vista will run many programs that were made for previous Windows versions, the same as XP can do now.

And those who wish to run Linux programs on Vista--no problem. As it stands now, I'm running GIMP and some other Linux on XP without a problem. I ditched SUSE in favor of Windows, because it's just not ready for the desktop (I would equate any Linux distro as no better than Windows 3.1 or Windows 98 for much of the reality there--with few things even exceeding that and attaining a level of Windows 2000.)

Kurt Trevor:

EyeAm,

Don't be too sure about this dude. I've been running Vista for over a month (corporate, Ultimate version, final release). I was tasked to do initial testing of the system for possible deployment in our company. Sure thing, the system installed without a hitch on my computer. I didn't even need to install any drivers for my system. (My system is an ASUS P4S-533/Intel P4 2.6Ghz processor/1 GB ram/Nvidia GeForce 5500 128MB/two 80GB harddisk/Intel NIC). Worked liked a charm out of the box (with Aero). But, as you can see, I am using a fast computer. Wow, the effects are ok and I was totally blown by the interface.

I spoke too soon. After installing our company's firewall client (Microsoft ISA server), DAMN!!!!! It doesn't work! I thought this piece of s**t was from Microsoft? After googling a bit, I found MS ISA server client is not compatible with Vista. I had to wait 4 days for them to release a BETA that works with Vista. This was totally unacceptable.

The next installation was for my programming software. I picked up my Microsoft SQL Express 2005 and started installing, and guess what? A dialog informs me that "this application has compatibility issues with Vista"... WHAT?!!! A software from Microsoft not compatible with Windows? Crap!!! I can't believe Microsoft has released a "crippled"/"broken" piece of software to corporate customers. To my dismay, even our Symantec Corp AV version 10.2 (supposedly compatible w/ Vista) has issues with Vista.

After three reformats and several installs, I eventually found a good formula:

Vista, AVG Internet Security 7.5, MS Office 2007 beta (worked flawlessly), ISA Server client beta, MS SQL Server Express 2005 (with configuration tweaks) AND NONE OF MY OLD DIRECTX9 COMPATIBLE GAMES. (The games were installed for my "personal evaluation").

I ended up ditching Vista after an agonizing three weeks. I am now writing this comment on Windows XP with a Firefox browser. I will not recommend Vista for corporate customers (or home users for that matter). Let's all wait for SP1 and pray that software vendors release Vista-compatible versions. (or take the easy Linux path....)

cranborile:

If Vista is selling slow in a few years Microsoft will just stop supporting XP and force people to buy Vista. Linux distros such as Ubuntu are good but you need to be savy with the PC to use them. XP is good and will hopefully be supported for many years to come. Upgrading to Vista will not be an option for many due to the cost of the OS and the hardware needed to run it. I have a P4 3GHz with 1G of ram, a decent graphics card, pleanty of storage space and XP. I cant see myself needing a faster PC or new OS any time in the near future.

nebyah:

My rebuttal is better than that other guy's rebuttal.

raindog:

Another smug almost unread homeboy blog from one of the afraid of comments set. For that reason alone I rebutt your suggestion your rebuttal is better than the other rebuttal.

PS: it does offer comments after all, but I still rebutt this rebuttal.

nebyah:

I consider myself re-butted, though not sure I understand the comments remark.

Being butted the first time was traumatic, but now I have been rebutted so many times it is really quite ho-hum.

Also, please feel free to remove the "almost" from "almost unread".

On the positive side, I was aiming for smug.

raindog:

Smug is good!

soheil:

surprise i didnt pay a cent to install vista. i decided to download it from torrent and test the ride for a short period. i tell you something, even free vista dosent worth it. with all hardware upgrade and software compatibility problems after you get bored of new look there is nothing in vista to keep you there.folks if you want to test this OS you have to use torrent version because after spending 300 USD you cant convince yourself not to use it because of the money you paid, not because of OS features.

Matt:

Almost every Australian over 26 still think Microsoft are the evil company out to take over the world. Seriously they do have a lot more than just an OS to worry about, unlike Linux and Apple - Microsoft is a huge company Vista is only a part that makes it up. You waste your time complaining about it why not shut up and move up with they way technology is moving.
I am running Vista RTM right now that I was given for being a Connect tester, it is running fine on a computer I got 4 years ago. Application compatibility is the application creators problem they dealt with this fine when the change from 98 to 2000 to XP and even to XP Sp2.

Almost every magazine in Australia that is dedicated to computers seems nothing but full of articles from some opinionated 35 year old who thinks the government is watching them. (oh and all of the advertising that actually makes them successful)

L'observattore Romano:

"Creative is in the process of coding a layer for its drivers to translate EAX calls to the OpenAL API which is seperate from Vista, but going by past experience with Creative drivers we won't see these any time soon."

I generally agree with the points made by Ashton, but he should really have checked info about Creative workaround for old games in Vista. The tool or a "wrapper" is called "ALchemy" and is avaialable as beta download from creative website already:
http://preview.creativelabs.com/alchemy/default.aspx
The point about driver mess in IT remains valid but actually Creative had came out with all drivers already...

Gorax the Mighty:

Such flaming!
Realistically here gang. For your average user, Vista won't be needed. And considering that said average person doesn't have a large disposable income, they won't be byuing new computers till about when Vista SP1 is out.

Myself being a Linux user, I'm a little obliged to say that the latest version of Ubuntu and Debian install perfectly out of the box on my home made tower and older Dell laptop. Again, being real here... Linux is great, but really isn't for everybody. Anyone can learn Linux (if my mom can, ANYONE can), but you have to have the desire. If you don't feel the nee to switch, Linux will be impossible.

Of course, the frustration with Vista's DRM and high system demands will definately push many teetering on the edge over to Linux. But in best case scenario, we could have maybe 5-6% of users running Linux... enough to demad a little respect, but still staying safely under the malware radar.

ket:

Something about DRM:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1H7omJW4TI&search=trusted

Brian:

I wouldn't call giving money to charity "throwing money away" You're such an asshole.

ORD:

As a programmer this spells the death of innovation. Vista digital rights management locks down the specs for the operating system. You can kiss good buy any kind of creativity when microsoft take away the ability independent programmers to understand the underlying system and come up with their own software. Further more all hardware (or driver) complying with the specs for drm will be at risk of being bricked if microsoft revoke the encryption keys. How would you feel if your new $500 graphics card was bricked because the vendor went bankrupt and did not pay microsoft their dues.
here a good starting point to learn more
http://badvista.fsf.org/

Anonymous1:

Whos to say that if your Graphics drivers are bricked you will even be able to use your PC? Will Vista just refuse to display anything because drivers are not digitally signed? If thats the case how are you supposed to install updated drivers that are signed without a display?

I can see the guys at Microsoft put alot of tought into that one....

Ashton Mills:

Nor would I. If you read the point again you'll see that buying Vista is the reference to throwing money away, and that if you really wanted to lighten your wallet, a far better use would be giving it to charity.

And thanks everyone for the excellent comments so far!

kjh:

No, paying for Vista is throwing money away.

ord:

As a programmer this spells the death of innovation. Vista digital rights management locks down the specs for the operating system. You can kiss good buy any kind of creativity when microsoft take away the ability independent programmers to understand the underlying system and come up with their own software. Further more all hardware (or driver) complying with the specs for drm will be at risk of being bricked if microsoft revoke the encryption keys. How would you feel if your new $500 graphics card was bricked because the vendor went bankrupt and did not pay microsoft their dues.
here a good starting point to learn more
http://badvista.fsf.org/

mrchristopher:

In Short

Vista is the new Windows ME but with the Oos and Ahhs of a more graphicial interface (somewhat) with newer applications which can easily be used as standalone installs for Windows XP yet giving end users on all levels the added irritation of restrictiveness.

Simply put end users don't want to be confined to the matters of DRM and lack of support due to restrictions aimed towards the so-called-protection of digital media with endeavors of constricting banter.

The XP Home & Pro Effect (Part 2)

For the longest time there have been controversial questions of how similar Windows XP Home and Windows XP Professional were suppose to be until applications put both of the operating systems to the test to prove that even though the differences may seem small but however when tested in (real world situations) shows to have highly noticable effects of difference. Take for instances the use of Active Directory. You never see business's using Windows XP Home for Active Directory workstations not to mention how most software reacts between the two operating systems. Not only on a consumer level is Windows Vista flawed out of box but is yet again being discriminated with the onset of three different versions of Windows Vista by Microsoft. Look familiar?

Anonymous:

It has the word windows in front of it.

xxdesmus:

I feel dumber for having read your article.

1. Isn't true. When have you ever HAD to upgrade to something?

2. I know you're not trying to say Linux is ready for the "normal" user, because that is just ridiculous.

3. It's not overpriced. It's the exact same price that XP was. You can get a copy of Ultimate OEM for $199 right here.

4. You don't have to upgrade your hardware if you have a computer that has been purchased in the past 2-3 years. If you're computer is older than that then you really should expect to run a brand new OS in all its glory. That would just be naive.

5. Personally, I have been using Vista since it was still Longhorn (yes, that long). Every single piece of hardware has worked for the past 1.5 years. You're really stretching for excuses, and you clearly don't know much about the facts.

6. Applications are always going to have to be switched over to a new OS when you have a major upgrade. The same thing will happen with Leopard, so will that not be worth the upgrade either? It's up to the vendors to get there product ready.

7. What a silly argument. We shouldn't move forward with technology because it is new. We should stay with the old stuff because it is old and already patched. This is just stupid, moving on.

8. Then just disable UAC princess, it's easy to do. It can be useful, but they need to keep tweaking it. Right now it's still to invasive, but it is not the end of the world.

9. Then don't use content that is DRMd. Again, I have been using Vista since it was still Longhorn and I have never had a single problem with any of my media. This isn't Microsoft's fault. Blame the RIAA, blame the MPAA. They are the people requiring this s**t be included.

10. Precisely, who reads those licenses anyways? If you don't like the license then just do what 98% of users do, just ignore it. The chances that they will track you down (or even know) if you are using Home Premium in a virtual machine (for example) are virtually 0.


You are definitely struggling for reasons to aid fuel to your little "I hate Microsoft" fire. It shows and it's pretty sad.

Your reasons are weak at best, and you come across like you are whining.

Did Microsoft beat you up and take your lunch money or something?

Anonymous:

It's not just Microsoft Australia who is shafting the aussies on technology prices. It seems to be common practice for most companies to apply the exchange rate from USD to AUD and then add 30% (I'm looking at you, Acer). The real question is why? Do these companies not understand that they are fostering a grey import industry?

Example: It's cheaper for me to buy an acer travelmate 8215 from the US and have it shipped here, than to buy the Australian model which is specced much lower!

So, yes, Microsoft has put Vista at a ripoff price point, but only because they know Australians are used to it and don't know any other way. When in Rome...

Brian:

You guys are all going to using windows vista in two years. XP is going to eventually lose support, and you will be forced to upgrade or have an inferior system. The question isn't should I get vista. It's when should I get vista.

Thehound:

Face it, Vista is a nightmare and many here who are rebutting what is said here are products of a monopoly. Microsoft has indeed forgotten what made them a great ally in computing, despite inherent OS bugs. Microsoft meant the ability to have a choice. A choice in hardware manufacturers. A choice in 3rd party of even free open software.Who is the major company that didn't despite having a more solid OS by almost all counts? Apple. Apple locked you into hardware they approved of and the same went for software. History is now repeating itself, only with a few more players, but yet a bigger monopoly. Microsoft Vista supports DRM down to the driver, as has been stated before. Meaning if M$ doesn't officially license and support it, you can't use it. Also, it supports hardware based DRM in which someday hardware that doesn't support that will be incompatible with new software, drivers, and other DRM-crippled content. Some of you may already have it on your motherboard if you bought a high-end Intel CPU+chipset after May 2006. This enables determination at a hardware level of whether you're allowed to use certain content, including music and video.Apple has become more liberal by a slight margin just in time for this "technology". Coincidence or clever marketing? You be the judge.For those who don't know, DRM also collects loads of information about you. Now you can't opt out of it. How does it feel to have big brother knowing about all your porn viewing habits? Or your awful taste in music?

With all the accusations flying around of people critiquing Vista without actually trying it. I must say I have tried it, despite not liking what it stands for. Call it morbid curiousity or what you will. For starters, I don't think the interface of the OS is anything to complain about. Resource usage is a double edge sword. It puts too many eggs in 1 basket so to speak. It hogs the RAM and CPU to a point on a good machine that it actually produces practically 0 response time for all aspects of the user interface, adding to the aesthetic value. However, it fails to shift resources where needed making me notice a significant slowdown on an AMD Athlon FX-62 with 2 gigs of RAM for everyday legacy XP apps and games. The kill comes sooner on some lesser tested machines which may have trouble just running the OS unless you're a super tweaker. Something that many blatantly accuse Linux of requiring knowhow for. I agree app and driver support will come in time. An OS is designed to accomplish your objectives, not sit there and be pretty and fast in itself. Bill Gates even forgot that on Win2k+ and it's been getting worse.(not that I'm saying 2k is pretty, I'm simply referring to various bloat). I feel the OS sucks too many resources for DRM related things(themes don't eat that much) which is not in the interest of the end user. The old EULA was nothing to worry about compared to implications this could have. This erases what made many fall for Windows over a Mac besides software support-oh yes I'll attack this one a bit later!

I would like to accuse the masses rebutting this in turn, of not really trying Linux. I can understand the difficulty of "command line" versions for users so used to a GUI. I happen to like one myself. Ever think of trying one of the Ubuntu family? I use Kubuntu myself. It installs in a snap to about the same point Windows does. I have yet to find a sound card that isn't immediately detected by Kubuntu. Same goes for keyboard, mouse, etc. I have only had issue with 1 graphics card in all my installations and converting people. It happens to be one of my own, which is a very new model(Radeon X1950PRO XGE). The only issue here is driver support, which I managed to cross compile to please the card. This is a bit advanced but it fixed the issue. What happens when Windows has a buggy driver or no suitable driver? You're forced to wait until they're ready to release a new one. This doesn't happen often in Windows, but it's not too often in Linux neither. What usually happens, which did happen with the card in question, is it loads a general software driver just as Windows does, just to give you basic display capabilities.Standard for it is 1024x768@60 Hz. Kubuntu has also never failed to detect CPUs or network devices, not even on my Athlon FX-62. If something does fail, the community helps you for free. I disagree about the bugs unless you use unstable versions readily available, which are clearly marked as such. Installation now on most distros, not just the Ubuntu family, is a snap with an auto-compiler that is as second nature as a Windows installer, once you're familiar with it. Packages are even more intuitive. Eye candy? It's got it! It can also run smoothly on my old 448 MHz Pentium 3 that I keep around for lighter tasks. Linux gives you advanced ways to configure around problems, but distros like Kubuntu have made it a goal to set defaults that are safe, but will work for most users nearly out of the box. May I also add that I have had some unstables crash, but I could always recover from it without a format! Price of free sounds good too.

To me, given what most users do outside of gaming, it's a viable alternative for a good many users. Microsoft just has the commercial market so cornered now due to how your money speaks to software makers. That's why you don't see your favourite app you use in Windows for Linux. However, the community does work hard at making equal or better alternatives that's just a matter of getting used to. What makes Microsoft think they can get away with Vista is that you depend on them. That's sort of the scheme AOL counted on for so long with their B$. Why charge so high? Why don't they fear DRM will kill their market share? Why would they release something that's such a cosmetic update only to the end user(besides the TCP stack) and expect them to pay? They know society's disease when a monopoly from a company that they have used for years occurs. Again see AOL.

To the issue of hardware support, using Linux is the only answer. They are the old Bill Gates as freedom goes, only the OS only costs you the bandwidth to download it. You spoke for Bill Gates with your money to get every company on the market to make a compliant and easy to install driver for Windows. You brought the software companies crawling to Bill. You can do the same for Linux. Companies will make compliant software and hardware drivers if there is a large enough base of people only willing to buy the software or hardware if it properly supports their OS. Until then, you might learn compiling a driver from scratch, donating to an effort to make one(trust me, they will oblige), or just looking at the public compatibility lists before buying new hardware. I can almost guarantee what you have is supported, if it's more than 6 months old, by default.(in terms of GPUs which is actually the slowest to get supported).

Remember people, dependency is the only thing that enables a monopoly. Enjoy your software, but don't be married to it. Be willing to go elsewhere if you must. This is what will make the next OS from Bill Gates DRM-free. He wants your money. Let him know he has to give you what you want to get it.

weefs:

Sitting in front of an OSX box, laughing my ass off at linux and windows users. Sucks to be you.

Anonymous:

...That pretty much says it all. It's funny watching all of the FUD-slinging. With my Intel MacBook, I can actually CHOOSE to use Vista, or not. I can CHOOSE to use Linux, or not. I can CHOOSE to use Mac OS X...or not. Of course, Mac OS X wins out every time.

alang:

I totally agree with Ashton and will not be going to vista or xp. I'm staying with Ubuntu which I have configured to do everything they can do. Vista is just sp3 for xp and a money maker for microsoft if all you windows people let them. Good luck and se you on the other side soon.

Anonymous:

I've read the 10 reasons and I have to conclude:
true you don't really need it,
and if you don't play games and stuff on your pc, you probably could still use your windows 98 combined with a pentium 2 or slow pentium 3
and, you don't really need games on a pc..
or watch movies on it or listen to music
so let's all trade our pcs for a pentium 2 and just surf on the internet once in a while
you divided the costs and the fact that no hardware really supports vista in point 2 - 6
a) it will get cheaper eventually
b) if you don't need tha aero interface and you still need to upgrade your machine
well
then it'll probably not be a bad idea to do so
c) nvidia 8800 ...
no offense, but you're whining about the price but you would buy a nvidia 8800

7.
so true
absolutely no beta testing or anything
no one could just download windows vista beta 1, 2 RC 1 and 2 and try to hack it...
wait a second...
WE COULD'VE DONE THAT

8.
Ow yes, the neverending whiners
-windows XP isn't safe enough!!
we demand more safety!!
-ok we made windows vista with the same kind of safety as they made mac and linux, only a couple things are different
-hey this s***s!
I have to g**d*** click on ok to install something

ok sometimes you need to click a couple of times on ok
wow
and I still have to push my powerbutton if I want my computer to start up

newsflash
you can't expect windows to magically know what is a virus and what is not

so how would you solve it ?
you can't make the OS know, so you'll have to ask the user
now make something safe but please be carefull, we don't want to make the users read 2 lines of text and make them decide if it's ok or not

9.
blame the record companies or whoever came up with the idea
or maybe the people who made the idea necessary ?
never downloaded music illegally ?
ofcourse you haven't
your the perfect boy/girl

10.
I'm not even going to start about this...


conclusion

you whined about xp, you whine about vista, and you'll still whine if MS sells you mac OS 11 with a more windows like skin and says it the next version of windows

same whiners, different windows

Anonymous:

Some things towards a previous poster...

Apparently somebody thinks that without Windows Vista you can't play games, listen to music or watch videos. Wow, isn't it amazing how i do that now?
A Nvidia 8800 provides LOADS MORE graphics power for your computer, it provides something more.
What does Vista provide apart from more locking down with DRM and more "do this for your own good"? NOTHING. If you buy it just for Halo 3 you have problems mate.
It isn't "whining" it is stating the facts. Who says use a Petium 2? YOU DID.
And by the way...



"7.
so true
absolutely no beta testing or anything
no one could just download windows vista beta 1, 2 RC 1 and 2 and try to hack it...
wait a second...
WE COULD'VE DONE THAT"




I'm gonna burst your little bubble by saying that, which you reply to point 7 with, is illegal. You go hack Vista, you get thrown in jail / fined etc. I think the term is "Script kiddie".....

Whining? No. People saying things which are true? Quite possibly.

No excuse for 10? Oh, so you've ran out of really lame excuses then? seems you have.

Enough of my rant now. But one more thing...
How much do you get payed by M$ so say that stuff?

Magnus Otterson:

Some of you may be in IT profession or aspire to be but if you are I would never hire you.

I've used and understand all these OSes and they can be made to do anything the user wants them to do. That is why it is called "SOFTware".

As far as the which OS should you choose if you want the best available OS:

Vista x64.

No question, it's not even close, although OS-X's roots in BSD UNIX prejudice me to be easy on OS-X. However, OS-X is decidedly inferior and the only reason it gets any press at all is because Jobs likes to prance aound like a German in a Techno Club in this effeminate pseudo-European all-black garb and suck up to Hollywood 'Big Whigs'. The press, seeing this are all over it because of the 'cool' factor. You know how journalists are: desperate to be famous themselves so they cling to the famous' every word as if these people are demi-gods banished to Earth. Pathetic...

That's not even taking into account the near universal support of Microsoft consumer platforms by any third party SW House that's to be taken seriously.

Also, I for one love how Microsoft has locked down the OS so that incompetent SW developers and script-kiddies cruising Warez boards have less access to concepts their little pea brains can't comprehend.

So to summarize:

If you have work that needs to be done and done well or want to enjoy the best entertainment and hobby options a computer can offer: Vista

If you want to be cool and counter-culture (as defined by Hollywood of course): screw wasting another second of your time on anything that requires true intelligence and creativity: just get on out to Hollywood and let them know you've been sufficiently brainwashed into being ready to do anything they desire.

Uriah:

People need to decide what they want to do with their computer. If you want the best video, Audio and gaming right out of the box, Windows is the choice. If you want the freedom to explore the OS and learn some of the more complicated aspects of computing like programming with less expense, GNU/Linus or an open source BSD is the way to go.

Windows is buggy, but it's out of the box functionality out weighs such issues. Not everyone is like me and wants to compile MPlayer from source to watch Windows Media Videos. I haven't used Vista, and Probably will not soon since I would prefer a better computer then the one I have. I am very familiar with windows (used them since 3.11) and like it for vCD Creation and some other multimedia uses. My desktop is a dual boot system that has XP and a version of GNU/Linux I am testing. My Laptop is OpenSuse 10.0 only. I can do the same things on my Laptop as I can on my Desktop, But There are a few things I just prefer to do on Windows.

Just stop the "This OS is better" rants, and Use the one or more that is Best for your individual needs.

-Uriah C.-

Anonymous:

Try FreeBSD.

Anonymous:

Screw Linux. I just installed Ubuntu and i've spent about 2 hours trying to install LAN and Audio support for my very common ASUS p5B Deluxe motherboard. What a joke. I don't cop any of that with vista.

David Carron:

I dont' really understand what the fuss is about. I have a desent graphics card, (7600 GT) 2 GB of ram, and a Pentium 4 3.2 ghz. 22" Wide LCD, Running adobe creative Suite, Macromedia Studio 8, and it all runs fine! And my games still run flawlessly like on XP.

Sure its a bit to get used to. But whoever wrote the article complaining about Vista, that just upgraded from Windows ME just 2 years ago is very pathedic. How on earth can you cope with one of the worst operating systems ever made...and then try to tell people Vista isn't worth it. Its obvious that guy doens't want to spend money at all to upgrade.

Listen folks, in 6 months a lot of major patches will be fixed. And within a year, current standards are going to double from what they are now. So either way, everyone is eventually going to get Vista. Its just wether or not you want it now or later.

raindog:

I've watched all these posts and the litany of "My OS beats your OS replies" and I think for me at least there is one reason why I've come to despise Vista with a passion.
I'm not particularly anti windows, I use windows along with most of the other popular OSs each of which have their strengths and weaknesses.
The thing that is so vile with Vista and to some degree XP before it is the vender trying to tell me how to suck eggs. Or more to the point which brand of eggs I should suck.
Integrated photo printing but has to be Kodak.
Integrated media downloads but has to be bigpond.
Even doing a network setup the OS will attemp to sign you up to a buddy ISP.
Reasonable pricing only if I purchase a Windows OS bundled with a new name brand PC.
I've had a gutfull of Bill deciding whats right for me, and I'll make my own mind up thanks all the same.
The real reason to avoid Vista is simply "Freedom of Choice" to use what product and services I decide without hinderance, be they MS, Linux or any other flavour.

Anonymous:

M$ DRM seems to have sprung from the philosophy of 1984 (George Orwell), in trying to control the world.

Has M$ patented the philosophy as a business method (patentable only at USPTO), not sighting 1984 as priorart?

Anonymous:

Windows Vista is the best.

Easy Speed:

Vista is a downgrade unless one upgrades to Vista ultimate. Do some research and see what is missing from home premium and business that is in XP pro.

Ross:

I agree with almost all of the points in this article but there is one single reason why Vista may have some value - it is the only 64 bit software from Microsoft which will be supported and with most new PCs sold in the last few years being 64 bit it makes sense to be finally moving toward 64 bit computing at the OS level. It is a shame Microsoft didn't display the intestinal fortitude to simply not release an x86 version as this two version release has resulted in a release which is simply not as good as promised.

unknown:

I am PC and mac... I'm getting Vista free from HP and I'm probably only going to see what they've stolen from mac's design... Then to XP or Ubuntu, but if I had my choice.. I'd take another Mac into my home any day.

MS stole period.

Wrecklass:

The number of people who are saying they are power gamers so they will upgrade to Vista astounds me. See my blog about the problems with Vista and gaming.

Bottom line, paying for Vista is like spending hundreds of dollars to get worse performance in gaming. All of those new Security features in Vista make it slower. Anybody who says that they are a power gamer and they have a computer that can run Vista so they are going to upgrade is not a power gamer.

No self respecting power gamer would even consider getting a new OS that slows down their games. Frame rate is king in online gaming, and Vista is death to frame rates.

PowerGamer:

You know, I bet you haven't even used Vista yet. Do you REALLY believe you'll get worse performance in gaming under Vista? Have you actually tested this?

Anonymous:

reason #11 - its ugly; mac os x is so much more attractive. :-)

Anonymous:

yes i agree!!!

MACLINUX:

The only WOW I made was "WOW thats one Fuggly looking GUI....................."

Mackenzie:

- WOW where'd they hide that tool
- WOW this is slow
- WOW that's it?
- WOW a company as big as Microsoft can't manage to make a 3D desktop capable of rivaling Compiz/Beryl/Compiz-Fusion?
- WOW how can something as lacking in features as Aero be such a memory hog?
- WOW why do I need such high specs?
- WOW I'm lost
- WOW UAC prompts for non-Admin things
- WOW Microsoft stole sudo/gksudo and managed to make it suck

Should I go on?

Easy Speed:

The code was written by Dumb and Dumber.

MAC:

And by the end... Like it did with XP before, everybody will have vista because you have no choice and because it is working better... Why you people are afraid of change... That's what is all about...

harvyk:

There are some interesting comments here, but lets put things back in to perspective. Linux is good. It's free (for the most part) it could use a little help in the user friendliness part and for what most home users do it will do it nicely out of the box (out of the ISO files) and there are heaps of people on the web that will provide support, if you get a commercial version of linux you will get support thrown in. Windows is also good. It works out of the box. Loads of software is compatible, heaps of support and with an addon (MS Office) will do most of the things a home user would want to do easily.

The problem is Vista is a different beast again. Yes we have had numerous beta’s for testing available however non of these have been able to be developed and released in the real world. The people who tested it in that stage where the uber geeks and the people who usually suffer from new and shiny syndrome. They are hardly the people who are going to find the bugs and report back. It’s still a system where the initial distribution bugs are yet to been found, they will be found, but not after a lot of heartache from primarily engineers having to build their companies SOE’s (Standard Operating Environments)

OK XP had some nice features over 98 \ ME \ 2000, but these where all features which could be obtained already. The additional features which are now in Vista could already be obtained easily with XP, and in fact some of the new features have been lifted straight out of Windows 2003 server (google volume shadow copy).

But these things are not the real problem. The real problem I have with Vista is that M$ are trying to extend outside the grounds of what an OS should be doing. It should take direction from the user and assuming that direction does not adversely affect the operating system or hardware it should simply follow the instruction. (remember the old saying a computer does exactly what you ask it to do). Forget the EULA, lets face it, most people have never taken the time to read one and would probably break the conditions on a daily basis without thought (software pirates I’m talking to you), I’m talking about DRM. DRM is by far the worst “invention” ever made. We have a protected content which may or may not work depending on a 3rd party (to our prospective) database which is deciding on if we may access content on our own machine. For me an OS would turn around and say you want to access this file, not a problem. It was then up to the selected program to decide if the file could be accessed. The thing with that is that if the program decided the file shouldn’t be accessed we could always download (or god forbid purchase) a replacement program which would do the job.

I’d say that the ideal time to start using Vista is once the software crackers have worked out how to disable the unwanted “features” in the “allegedly strongest and most secure” OS ever (now if that’s not throwing out the challenge I don’t know what is). Given I was advised of a crack which lets the user do things in Vista in ways MS doesn’t want you to do things within a day of Vista been released to the business community I’d be guessing that time is probably not going to take to long to get here

halcon:

Those people who rushed out to buy it are completely stupid, they have been brainwashed.
Also the moron that said if you are a communist that fear DRM, he lacks of total understanding of what is going on with the not so evolutionary product.
Don't become a victim of Microsoft deluded ploy to lure more people into buying it, it is defective!

Billy R.:

I don't know if I necessarily agree with your article regarding Vista. I purchased a copy of Windows Vista Premium a few weeks ago and I must say that this operating system has worked flawless since the date of my purchase. Cost was more than reasonable for a new operating system that works.

I have used Linux many times and I must say, it is a complete pain in the ass when I have to spend hours researching info on the internet on how to get my wireless card working or my sound working. I lead a busy life as do the vast majority of computer users. Linux will never take off because it's not really standardized and people just don’t have the time nor effort to deal with the various Linux Distributions, especially when no drivers exist for their peripherials. With Microsoft, I can just plug my peripheral in and install the device in minutes.

As for the driver conflicts with Vista, don’t blame Microsoft for that, blame the manufacturers who took their sweet time developing drivers. Nvidia, Creative, and HP have had plenty of time to develop proper working drivers… if anything, it only hurts their own market share when they fail to produce new drivers for their devices.

Any last, but not least, get over DRM, because there is nothing that anyone can do about it… if you didn’t pay for your music or movie well then it’s not yours… plain and simple, unless of course you live in a communist society, then your music is everyone else’s music.

Wolle:

You are contradicting yourself. You blame Linux for not offering drivers for all your latest equipment - and at the same time you say "don't blame Microsoft" for drivers not working on Vista. Ha!
So, the driver problem for Linux is owed to the manufacturers not releasing drivers for (OKOK, the market share...) it or giving technical information to people willing to write free drivers.

The DRM issue...when you buy for content crippled by DRM: YOU DON'T OWN IT, IT'S NEVER YOURS, you just license it. If the licensing company goes bancrupt you'll lose what you'd call ownership. Or if your harddisk crashes. Or if you'd like to consume it on a piece of hardware the company didn't "think" of or didn't license its licensing scheme to...
Even major music labels or Yahoo, or Aplle (well, let's see how honest Steve Job's recent remarks were) start noticing that its a bad idea to punish people for buying stuff and not P2P'ing it by not letting them use it in the way they like it.

Regards.

Frank:

Against my better judgement, I decided to purchase Vista Home Premium to try on my notebook. It always goes to show you should take note of your instincts. Getting the OS to a half way reasonable performing system has been quite painful.

Vista found all of my hardware which seemed pretty promising but it then turned out that some of the drivers were wither unusable or restricted the functionality. Examples of this include:
The notebook has the Nvidia Go 7300 video card. It installed a driver for it but I cannot use all the functions.
It installed the RealTek sound drivers but they did not work properly. I had to find the manufacture and install another driver which almost works properly.
It installed the driver for the in-built camera but the driver caused a number of applications to fail or just crash. These included Messenger not working at all and the MS video editing software to crash. It was not until I found an alternative driver and a registry hack that these programs, as well as the camera started to work.
This is not counting the other applications that do not work, Pinnacle Studio 10 Plus needs an upgrade that is not yet available (maybe March), Adobe Acrobat Pro 6.0, Divx and my Sandisk U3 USB stick does not work. I used to use that for synchronising data and running the apps on the stick. (I guess I will have to buy a new one once it is compatible. The list goes on.
Now, the only thing I can use the notebook for is basic functionality such as using my Office 2003 Pro and web browsing.
All in all, I found that it has caused me to waste countless hours just to get to a point where my notebook is somewhat usable (and by the way…it does say it is “Vista Ready”…pity the hardware manufacture has not been able to supply a single update for using the features for the notebook).
When I purchased the notebook last year, I almost bought in Apple. I changed my mind as I had to big an investment in software for Windows. That now seems pointless as so much does not work. I could have used the Apple for what I am now able to use the notebook with Vista but with a lot less pain. You live and learn. I could go back to XP Pro but I have had enough for the moment spending endless hours for no useful purpose other than to have a machine that just works.

Herman Munster:

Quite an interesting article. Any experienced computer user "knows" that you wait at least a year before upgrading to a new M$ OS. Let them hammer the bugs out. Cause there are tons of M$ fanboys out there that can't wait for them to release the latest OS. Damn even Paul Thruott is saying it isn't M$ best. And he is probably M$'s biggest fanboy ever. Is Vista gonna bankrupt M$? Not a chance! But I don't believe that it's going to be a huge seller either. This is the turning point for Linux and Mac users to begin growing even more. There is going to be a great number of gamers that are going to use it just for DX10. But for those that don't follow tech that closely. There will be a DX10 released for XP called DX 9.0L Although the "L" is unconfirmed as of now. There is going to be compatibility released for DX10 on XP. Don't believe me? Use google for your answer. It's been a long time since I installed RedHat 5. Back then there was little support for Linux. All the guru's always said read the MAN pages for your answer. Which discouraged people from using Linux. Nowadays it blows me away how many people there are to do Linux support. I've been blown away by the amount the Linux forums have grown in massive numbers over the past few years. And how easy the distros are to use now. I'll likely never dump my Gentoo or Slackware boxes just cause once you know linux there are no other distros that compare to those IMO. But I'll still be using Windoze as well. But I totally disagree with the EULA that M$ has put forth if you choose to install Vista. Therefore I will not be policed by M$ so that is my Number 1 reason not to install Vista.

jyfmac:

Windaube is a shit buy a Mac ;-) No problem
what you prefer Quality or Quantity?
achete un mac trouducul !!! windaube c'est de la merde en boite!!! Bill gates n'as aucune vision c'est un opportuniste fachiste !!!
Merci Steve Job Merci Apple
VISTA : Virus Inside Switch To Apple

jyves:

VISTA
Virus Inside Switch To Apple

lv426:

I've recently installed Open Suse 10.2, which is great...all I can say is XGL makes Aero look like winows 3.11.

Bob:

I think Vista is, as they say, "not ready for prime time". I've tried it out for 2 weeks now, and have encountered way too many problems.

Earlier last month I purchased a new Gateway Notebook with Vista Home Premium pre-installed. This notebook is for my grandson who is a college student.

So many functions have been changed. Even the most experienced computer user is going to be very low (for a long time) on the learning curve. For example, the Vista Control Panel no longer contains a DISPLAY icon. Instead, there is another much more vague icon (I can't remember the name) to gain access to the display properties.

Another familiar Windows XP function that is now much harder to find is the FILE EDIT function. I still haven't found out how to do a file SELECT ALL/COPY on Vista. Oh, I'm sure it's there, and I would eventually find it, but why has Microsoft made general usage so much different? There are numerous similar sources of unnecessary confusion.

I expected Vista to provide better performance, improved video editing
functions, and the like - BUT I was dismayed to discover that Vista has
accomplished this while also putting every user back to square one knowledgewise. I hate to think what this will do to office efficiency for those companies who rush out and buy Vista too soon, and I definitely would not want to be in charge of their Information Systems departments right now. What a nightmare that must be!

The worst problem I encountered was trying to get the new laptop to connect to my home network. There are many technical forums - where multitudes of users are complaining about Vista wireless connectivity not working. One of
these forums, for example, is at
microsoft.public.windows.vista.networking_sharing. Take a look.

It took an entire day to get the wireless connectivity problem resolved, and that was on a brand new machine. I hope my grandson will be able to connect wirelessly at school. If he runs into too many glitches I will probably have to get rid of Vista, reformat his drive and install Windows XP.

I also purchased an upgrade version of Vista for my own laptop. It installed OK, but several device drivers were not recognized, and wireless connectivity was just impossible to achieve. I had Windows XP running on that machine, and it was connected wirelessly to my home network during the beginning of the Vista upgrade. The wireless icon on the lower right-hand edge of my laptop screen showed that it was connected.

Unfortunately, after Vista took over, wireless connectivity was gone, and I have spent days talking to Vista MVPs about the problem. Their answers, though well intended, accomplished nothing except to add to my confusion.

When I originally set up my home network, it was a little difficult, but not like this. I was able to create the network without any help at all, and all of my computers connected wirelessly or via CAT5 cable without any undue delays. With Vista, users need help, and lots of it.

From my experience during the last 2 weeks, I have come to the conclusion that users should avoid buying Vista (or new computers with Vista pre-installed) for a year or so - until it is more reliable and enough time has passed so that compatible device drivers are more widely available.

If you are thinking of upgrading your old computer to Vista, it may be too demanding of your existing hardware. Looks like a minimum of 1GB of memory,
2GHZ of speed, and 100 GB of hard drive space are needed for decent performance. The display adapter should be much more capable too, if you wish to take advantage of the Vista video capabilities. With new machines, hardware limitations should be less of a problem, but I still suggest waiting for a year or two.

My 50 cents worth.

MR:

Spam

Phill:

Have 3 machines set up with Vista, one Fujitsu Lifebook (on wireless) and 2 PC's. All are running without any issues. My son plays his games with no issues, my wife does all her business on her laptop and my little rig is running just fine. I even have all of them linked in to Windows Home server. Other than a couple of driver problems (beta), there is really nothing to complain about. Imho of course.

Cris:

I believe, what you have wrote and shared is true up till today. Reports are flooding all over the Net that Vista's UAC are still having problems, many many more. Thank you for your post!

Anonymous5d:

you jelous linux lovers, no one likes your crapy little operating systems, they will never destroy windows

Phlosten:

Jealous Linux Lovers?

Umm, Linux won't destroy Windows, it is quite happily destroying itself.

I'll leave you to your virus infested, unsecure by default world of Windows.

aorith:

I dont understand people who blames "linux" when GNU/linux *BSD etc are there fighting for the users freedom.

Think of an school that has to buy PCs, windows and office to teach, wouldn't it be better if they used that money for more/better pcs with OpenOffice which does the SAME!

Bobby:

MS has eduacation deals and incentives to actually make it quite affordable. Besides I am an IT administrator and when is the last time you actually went into an office and fixed thier linux work stations. Teach the kids what they will use in real life, not what some geek thinks is best that only has a small percentage of the market. Dont get me wrong I love linux and macs and Vista, but not everyone wants to be a computer expert.

Go easy in life:

Dear Microsoft and windows supporters out there, yes, if you do a quick search looking for "Microsoft, Novell, Suse and Linux" you will find that MS is so impressed with Linux, that its giving away vouchers for Suse Linux and backup services to its own customers. Of course some of the comments back in this list tell how bad Linux is, but your MS is spending its ( was your ) money supporting it. Its nice as a Linux user myself, to think that your new Vista $$$ are going towards my operating system of choice.
Now regarding Vista, the hardware is really a problem for many people, many video and sound cards just aren`t working correctly or at all. The basic hardware requirements for Vista with the new graphical features is very high. Many new types of features in Vista have been in Linux for some time now so for me, its old hat.
From what I read on the many web sites that I visit, is that the current version of Vista will give way to the updated version where DRM will truly lock in, together with locked hardware and software. So comments about things working just fine with all multi-media etc won`t hold true for very long.
You will have to pay, thats how MS makes its money.
Linux for users is free, the varieties of Linux stretch into the 100s, many are themed to be cutting edge others very conservative, some super easy and yet others business based.
You have a choice of what you choose, and you switch till you find one you like.
Programs are basically all free to download, and some companies that charge MS users for the win programs give them to Linux users for nix. Oh yes, some of the companies you know also support Linux, people like IBM, Sun, Novell, HP etc etc and even MS.

iMatt:

Microsoft actually has a bunch of Linux Gurus working for them. I have Vista Home Premium, which I got for $60 from studica.com. I think Microsoft did a really great job. The only thing I hate is the constant security pop-ups. Everytime I open an application it asks me to confirm openning it. I don't see Apple in the OEM industry. If they had balls they would have OS X in retail stores, so that it can be installed on home-made computers. Microsoft is not a real monopoly, they have to pay their workers right? I know that a lot of those workers get salaries over $150k per year. I also use opensourced linux based os also. Reason 10 makes the most sense. MS Vista is more stable and easier to use and learn compared to other OS available. Isn't that true?

sigh:

sigh who cares there gunna make there money regardless no matter how much you all bitch. Yes, at the momment Vista is shit. ffs just download it... sigh

SueNZ:

Want to see a moderately fast machine run at Pentium 1 speed? Something that takes longer to start up the first time than Gentoo does to load up? Something that doesn't run your existing XP software? Oh and 1/3 of your HDD is filled already.

Harry:

I know many perople will hate me for saying this, but in my opinion, the most solid MS OS is definitely Windows 98, but Win XP comes up close too.

Windows Vista just does not cut the butter! It takes longer to start up than my friend's old 486DX2 machine!

Dr RJP:

Is anyone out there old enough to remember the Apple II versus IBM Personal Computer battle of 1982?

Well, I do. I've worked with computers since 1970, and I vividly recall how Apple made EVERYTHING PROPRIETARY in their personal computers as opposed to IBM making theirs OPEN SOURCE.

I remember when IBM was encouraging startups like COMPAQ to duplicate their technology (along with Microsoft's DOS OS) while Apple was using its muscle to shut down companies like Franklin -- who made a better Apple II than Apple did.

I remember how the original Mac "magically acquired" the GUI from XEROX, and then had the chutzpah to sue Microsoft for stealing it when they came out with Windows 3.1.

I remember when the difference in software titles for MS-compatible machines versus Macs was on the order of several thousand.

In short, I had as much dislike for Apple then as many people have for Microsoft now. I do not like MS either, but after watching those fraudulent, "I'm a PC & I'm a Mac" commercials," my distaste for all things APPLE has returned.

If someone GAVE ME a new Mac, I'd sell it in a heartbeat, even if it is "better" than a Vista or XP PC.

However, in discussing the merits of one OS versus another, it would be wise to do so unemotionally, and w/o personal bias.

I do not know if I can do that because I am really ticked off at what Microsoft did to Office. Office 2007 is horrendous, so much so, that after 5 days of using it I promptply returned to using Office 2003.

"Newer" should never be equated with "better," and "upgrade" should not be equated with "improved," either.

If people are using their PC's for stand-alone games, then they will not be worried about online security issues since they probably will use another machine for that.

So, the question comes down to "Which OS is best for what you do most, and offers you the most freedom to choose" exclusive of online security issues.

Seems like Vista, on balance, has more minuses than pluses at this stage of its development. I would much rather wait until Vista gets where XP Pro SP2 is now, in terms of development, before making a permanent switch to it. For now, it will be there, on the back burner, on a dual-boot system.

Young Computer Guru:

I must agree with Dr RJP Apple's ads may be funny, but they're woefully inaccurate. Here I reveal dozens of reasons why the PC outclasses the Mac.

"Advertising is the modern substitute for argument; its function is to make the worse appear the better." So claimed Spanish philosopher, George Santayana, long before Steve Jobs was even an Apple in his mother's eye. But Santayana's prophetic sound bite perfectly describes Apple's omnipresent "I'm a PC, I'm a Mac" campaign.

How has the victim of these laughable slurs reacted? Aside from a few catty comments from Bill Gates, the world's richest company - a corporation renowned for bullying its competitors - has meekly rolled with the punches. So, in light of Microsoft's total lack of response, I have stepped in to defend the Windows corner.

I've got 32 solid reasons why the PC is better than the Mac, ranging from the over-inflated price tag on Apple's hardware to the under-valued ability to build your own PC from scratch. And I will demolish the vast majority of the spurious claims made by Apple's ad gurus in the process.

1 Service pack don't cost £90

Since Mac OS X was launched in 2001, there have been four "new versions" of the operating system - Puma, Jaguar, Panther and Tiger - with a fifth, Leopard, due imminently. That's almost one a year, each costing a princely £90-£100 - racking up a total bill of nigh-on £500 for anyone who's bought every version. And they say Windows is expensive.

Apple has effectively introduced the first subscription operating system, and has somehow got away with it. If Microsoft had done likewise, Bill Gates would have been before the anti-competition courts quicker than you could say, "isn't £100 a bit steep for a service pack?". The Mac zealots claim that each new cat really is a new operating system, but that argument doesn't bear scrutiny. Take Panther (Mac OS X 10.3): the Apple press release hails "more than 150 breakthrough new features", the pick of which are a new "Finder", a way to see all your open windows at once, and bundled video-messaging software. God knows how insignificant the other 147 were.

2 No price premium for flashy design

There still isn't a PC maker on the planet that can hold a candle to Apple when it comes to product design. But not everyone wants or needs a computer that looks like it fell off the back of a Bang & Olufsen lorry. Macs routinely cost more than their PC equivalents. The cheapest Mac you can buy, the Mac mini, costs £400 and comes with a piddling 60GB hard disk, a meagre 512MB of RAM and no screen. Pop over to Dell, and that same £400 will buy you a Vista PC with a 160GB hard disk, 1GB of RAM and a 17in flat panel. Dell's cheapest system costs just £249.

We're not expecting Dell's bargain-basement models to be brilliant, and Kate Moss wouldn't be seen dead near one, but they'll suffice for a cheap office PC that sits under a desk all day or a computer for the kids' homework. Mac buyers simply don't have that choice.

3 Thousands of decent games

"I was designed for the home," scream the Mac ads. You were? Then how come you've got such a poor bunch of games? At the time of writing, the top-selling Mac games on Amazon.co.uk were World of Warcraft (yawn), Age of Empires III (triple yawn) and The Sims II - a two-year-old title designed for loners who need imaginary friends to compensate for the lack of actual people in their pitiful lives.

Want the adrenaline-filled 3D action and spectacular graphics of Rainbow Six: Vegas? Or a spin round the track at high-velocity in a beautifully rendered Porsche in Test Drive Unlimited? Or even to revisit a seminal classic such as Half-Life 2? Sorry, you can't. Computer says no.

That's not to mention the fact that the PC has a near-monopoly on all the decent graphics hardware. And even if you did want to upgrade your Mac's graphics, you probably couldn't anyway. "Nvidia graphics options for Apple desktops and notebooks can only be purchased through Apple or as Apple update kits," warns Nvidia's website. If you're even half-way serious about gaming, you need a PC.

4 Two mouse buttons

Yes, we know Macs are meant to be so simple your gran could partition the hard disk while solving the Countdown conundrum, but do they really need to be dumbed down to use only one mouse button? A chimp with Attention Deficit Disorder could master two buttons, but Apple's (seemingly not ironically named) Mighty Mouse resorts to a single mouse click by default. Yes, you can easily tweak the driver for two buttons or simply plug in a normal mouse, but a firing squad is too lenient for the imbecile who decided that pressing Ctrl and left-click was a better out-of-the-box solution than a single press of the right button.

5 Broadband just works

It's hardly their fault, but our poor Mac friends aren't always well served by the ISPs. USB broadband modems can fail to work properly on Macs, and when customers attempt to phone the tech-support lines for assistance, they're none too amused when the script-reading drone at the other end tells them to "click on the Start button and select Control Panel". Finding a reliable ISP is hard enough; finding one that also supports Macs is a headache you really don't need.

6 Tailor-made systems

Gaming PCs, video workstations, media centres, digital photo PCs, build-your-own, mini-chassis, midi-towers, business PCs... need we go on? There are dozens of different desktop PC configurations that can be fine-tailored with thousands of specialist components to meet a buyer's requirements. How many flavours do Mac desktops come in? Three. Mac mini, iMac and Mac Pro. If none of those meet your needs, take a hike.

The open architecture of the PC platform, on the other hand, gives you access to an immense range of configurations, enabling you to tailor a PC to your needs without wasting money on capabilities you won't use. It also means you can make modular upgrades, such as fitting a new CPU and motherboard without having to replace your existing graphics card and hard drives. Try that with an iMac.

7 Macs are months behind
If you want cutting-edge hardware, you need a PC. Remember when the Intel Core CPU was released? Apple finally jumped ship from IBM processors, even though PC processors had been outstripping the PowerPC G5 CPU for years. But even though the agreement was trumpeted from the rooftops by Intel and Apple, it still took months for the complete Mac range to go fully Intel. Core 2 was even worse, with almost the whole PC market having them before Apple shipped a single Core 2 Mac.

The same is true of almost all new technology. Not only is there no option to buy a desktop or laptop Mac with an internal HD DVD or Blu-ray drive, you can't buy an internal Mac-compatible one at all. The same is again true of graphics: while the PC has up-to-the-minute 3D video hardware, Macs are an entire generation behind. And while PC users have had super-fast draft 802.11n wireless for nearly two years, Apple users have only just acquired it.

8 Life beyond 1st January

It isn't only children's sticky fingers that will take the gloss off the shiny new MacBook you got for Christmas - the new line-up of laptops announced at the annual MacWorld show every January will leave your cutting-edge gift looking so last year, almost immediately.

Yes, consumer-friendly, cuddly-wuddly Apple decides to spring new products onto its customers just days after the peak buying period every single year, and there's little point in trying to second-guess what the company is about to launch, because it cloaks its announcements with an iron curtain the USSR would have been proud of. Thankfully, there's no such post-Christmas Microsoft jamboree.

9 Superior search facilities

Some People swear blind that the Macintosh Finder is just as good as Windows Explorer. Yet even after five major releases of Mac OS X, it lacks many features that Windows power users take for granted, such as resizing windows from any corner or edge, using cut and paste to move files around, and renaming files from within a file requester. It doesn't even offer a working "maximise window" button. If you just want a computer that looks pretty then the Finder might suit you, but if you actually want to manipulate files then Windows Explorer wins hands down.

10 Safety in numbers

While having one company controlling both the hardware and operating system undoubtedly has its advantages, it also leaves Mac fans with all their eggs in one titanium-clad basket. Apple could, for example, decide to drop Mac OS X at any time - not entirely out of the question now that Intel-based Macs are perfectly capable of running Windows. What would happen to Mac OS devotees and developers then?

It also leaves Apple remarkably vulnerable when innovations go wrong - the ill-fated Cube placed the company in deep trouble, for example, whereas international giants such as HP and Sony can tinker with experimental form factors such as smart displays and UMPCs, without worrying that commercial failure could potentially cripple the company.

11 Sensible support costs

Macs never crash or go wrong, obviously. Which is just as well, because the standard Apple technical support offering is nothing short of scandalous. You could pay £13,500 for an absolute top-of-the-range Mac Pro or £399 for a Mac mini, and you're still lumbered with Apple's standard warranty, which comprises a pitiful 90-days, telephone support and just one year's return-to-base hardware warranty. You can, naturally, pay extra for Apple's three-year protection plan, which costs £129 for Mac minis, right through to a ridiculous £279 for the MacBook Pro. By comparison, our A-Listed Dell ultraportable laptop and Mesh Elite Extreme PC both include three-year, on-site warranties as standard.
It isn't only manufacturer repairs you have to worry about. Take your PC down to your local computer shop and, chances are, they could replace the hard disk or slot in extra RAM without batting an eyelid, with little in the way of labour costs. That same repair shop may well blanche at the prospect of prizing open the sealed iMac casing, however.

12 Microsoft's on your team

Microsoft may be the company everyone loves to hate, and it doesn't always play by the Queensbury Rules, but if there's going to be a domineering, cash-rich mega-corporation in the industry, you definitely want it to be on your team. The PC is, of course, Microsoft's platform of choice, and so the Windows market is the first to benefit from ground-breaking new products such as Office 2007. Mac owners will have to wait until later this year for a new version of Office, and even then it will be largely devoid of the well-received Ribbon interface that Microsoft first introduced into the PC version in January.

Similarly, PC owners with an Xbox 360 nestled under their television can turn their console into a Media Center Extender, allowing them to play music, video or photos stored on their computer through their television - all because Microsoft has its fat fingers in so many pies.

13 Black's still the new black

A veteran IT journalist, who shall remain nameless, was rather taken aback when a fellow commuter plonked down his spanking new black MacBook, before sneering at our man's slightly weathered, older white model. The other Mac owner was clearly a first-rate pillock, but it does highlight the problem of your IT equipment becoming a fashion accessory. PC owners are rarely subject to such style snobbery - I've never heard of anyone being publicly lampooned for sporting last season's VAIO, for instance.

14 The CD-Rom has an eject button

Want to take the DVD out of your Mac's disc drive before it shuts down? Go on then, press the eject button. Hang about, there's no chuffing button on the disc drive! No, it's far more sensible to put the eject button on the keyboard and rely on the operating system to spit out your disc.

And what happens on those occasions when the Mac refuses to open the disc drawer? "If you can't get it to eject, then just hold down the mouse button next time you reboot," says one of our MacUser colleagues. Brilliant.

15 No confusing version numbers

Here are the operating system requirements for Apple's iLife 06 suite: "Mac OS X v10.3.9 or v10.4.3 or later; v10.4.4 recommended." Aperture, meanwhile demands "Mac OS X v10.4.7 (or later)"; while Logic Express 7 recommends "Mac OS X v10.4.3 or later for PowerPC-based systems; Mac OS X v10.4.4 or later for Intel-based systems." And yet Apple's website proudly proclaims, "there is only one version of Mac OS X". Come again?

Even the most complicated Windows system requirements will only specify a service pack, and considering they're only released once every few years, that's hardly likely to confuse your dad when he's browsing the software shelves in PC World.

16 What the hell was that?

If you've been sitting on a train recently and heard an unholy BLAAAANG sound, the reason is simple: there was a Mac owner somewhere in the carriage. For, in Apple's infinite wisdom, it decided that a simple PC-like "beep" from the hardware to indicate the successful start of the boot process wasn't annoying enough. Instead, it substituted the most appalling metallic clanging noise you've ever heard. And you can't turn it off unless you mute the whole machine before you shut it down. Class.

17 Cheap OEM versions

Although, strictly, it breaches Microsoft's licensing terms and conditions, in practice there's little to stop experienced PC owners buying the vastly discounted OEM versions of Windows. dabs.com, for example, is selling Vista Home Premium OEM for £74, which makes it more than £15 cheaper than the latest version of Mac OS X. OEM versions come without the retail packaging and don't include support from Microsoft.

18 Far better media capability

Media-centre PCs have come on leaps and bounds over the past year or so, with a selection of attractive units that won't look horribly out of place underneath the svelte 32in LCD screen in the lounge, nor make a noise like a 747 preparing for take-off. Windows Media Center is now built into Vista Home Premium and Ultimate, and turns your PC into a very effective personal video recorder, with its excellent onscreen television guide and the option to record all the episodes in a series. Apple's Front Row, on the other hand, doesn't offer any television features - in fact, it's little more than a flashy front end for its iTunes software.

19 IT support expertise

When it comes to the workplace, Windows is the predominant OS by a mile. And while its vagaries may drive IT departments up the wall, there's an army of support professionals out there with vast experience of making it work. Switch platforms, however, and you can kiss all that goodbye: experienced Mac OS systems engineers are like gold dust. Couple the PC's comparative ease of support with the fact that almost all business apps are either cross-platform or Windows-only, and you don't need an MBA to spot the smart investment.

20 Not so insecure

Apple makes a great fuss about the Mac's supposed immunity to viruses, and it's true that the platform has historically been less vulnerable to virus attack than the PC. However, to suggest, as it does, that your PC is at risk from more than 100,000 viruses, is ludicrous. Make sure your Windows XP or Vista system is up to date, get a decent virus checker (such as the free AVG Antivirus package or the Amazing F-Secure 2007 suite) and I sincerely doubt you'll be troubled by one virus a year, let alone 100,000.

21 Copious amount of freeware

One of the advantages of Windows' long tenure at the top is the vast quantity of freely downloadable software now available. To be sure, there's an active Mac shareware community as well, but the numbers speak for themselves: the download.com file repository lists more than 55,000 packages of freeware and shareware for Windows, compared to just 4,586 for the Mac. Which library would you rather have access to?

22 What is it with Steve Jobs?

Has there ever been such a self-serving, egotistical, irritating man as Apple CEO, Steve Jobs? Yes, he brilliantly rescued the company from the doldrums in the late-1990s, but boy, he doesn't half bang on about it.

Then there are the Jobs sermons from the mount: earlier this year, for example, he decided to upbraid the music industry for its addiction to DRM with a public statement on Apple's website, which was lapped up by a mass media that hangs on his every word. This, despite the fact that Apple has successfully locked people into the iPod upgrade cycle by applying its own proprietary DRM - but did anyone get to question the great man on this? Of course not, he doesn't do tough interviews.

He continually makes bold claims about his own products, and attacks others, without any basis. Take the claim that the iPhone will "revolutionise the industry". Has anyone even played with a fully working model yet? No.

The PC camp, meanwhile, has the fine, upstanding role models of Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer. Need I say more?

23 The menu is where?

For an interface that's supposed to be intuitive, design-led and superior to Windows, Mac OS has some pretty odd quirks. One of the most annoying is that the menu bar for any given application isn't actually attached to the app itself: it sits at the top of the screen in one of the most bizarre forms of conceptual detachment I've seen in a long time.

24 Full selectiion of peripherals

Macs are shut out from a wide range of products and services, from Windows-only home security kits to music download stores and MP3 players - including the Creative Zen Vision:M. Even relatively simple peripherals, such as the handy U3 memory sticks, are persona non grata on Mac OS X.

25 Build your own computer

Macs are like Happy Meals: there's a shiny menu to choose from, but very little real variety on offer. The open architecture of the PC platform, on the other hand, means you can build your own PC from the ground up (or pay someone to do it for you). With your own choice of case, CPU, monitor and other components, you might even end up with a system designed for your personal workspace, rather than for a penthouse condo on the Lower East Side.

26 The apps don't crash

I'm not denying that Mac OS X is a stable operating system with its Unix underpinnings. But a stable operating system doesn't make a stable overall computing experience, which you'll soon discover if you use Mac OS X as your day-to-day system. The OS is stable; lots of the applications (especially those not designed by Apple) aren't. Random crashes, hangs and programs quitting for no apparent reason are, in our experience, far more common on the Mac than PC. And it often takes a restart to get the errant application to launch again.

27 Tablets and touchscreens

I'm certainly not about to claim that tablet PCs have been a runaway success for Microsoft, but for certain purposes - medical, warehouse management, presenting Sky News - they've become an integral part of the business. Yet, while there's been a Tablet version of Windows since 2002, Apple stubbornly claims it isn't interested in touchscreen technology on the PC. That's a shame, because as HP's IQ770 TouchSmart PC proves, touchscreen PC technology can certainly have its advantages in consumer applications, such as photo editing and web browsing. Indeed, if I were feeling bold, I could even predict that touchscreens will be an integral part of consumer PCs within the next decade.

28 You don't need as much RAM

From the very early days of Mac OS, Windows' virtual memory has always been better implemented than the Mac's. That means a PC that's low on memory might be slow, but it won't be any less reliable. A Mac with low memory has a terrible tendency to fall over in a stiff breeze, which widens the price gap between comparable Mac and PC specifications even more.

29 A Mac's delete key doesn't delete

No, really! Click o