# Why do people hate vista?



## andy_mitch92 (Nov 3, 2007)

Ill admit that I dont have a computer with vista on it, but i have used several dell xps laptops and one dell e521 with vista on it and i blows away my computer and i run xp home. I do see where people would be mad if they went out and got a copy of vista to run on their xp rig, i would be mad too if i spent 250$ for an os that pushes my hardware in the ways vista does. My thought on the thing is that M$ was setting a high bar for hardware companies to get over and as im seeing it its the hardware companies problems not M$ fault that they tried to build a new os that would push things. So why is it that no one can take it and admit that they may not have the right hardware to run vista like xp runs.


----------



## pc-tech (Nov 4, 2007)

Because, Vista doesn't work work with many programs and not many printers/cameras/scanners are compatible with it


----------



## Geoff (Nov 4, 2007)

Not to mention that the more advanced users know all the tweaks and where everything is located, but when switching to Vista or any other new OS, it takes some getting used to, and a lot of people dont like to suddenly change.  It also uses a lot more resources.


----------



## Matt_91 (Nov 4, 2007)

i find it slower when running applications and games. It boots faster, but it's slower than XP after boot


----------



## andy_mitch92 (Nov 4, 2007)

i think that you are beeing to picky, if you wanted every camera or printer in the world ever made to be compatible with it, then they would never advance the technology and we would be stuck with xp. and also changing things is fine with me and anyone else who wants to mess around with stuff, if you already know all there is to know, then wheres the fun in it


----------



## ThatGuy16 (Nov 4, 2007)

I have used both, and i say i like vista much better and think it is faster than XP. I think it uses its resources better and alot of people mistake it as a resource hog


----------



## Geoff (Nov 4, 2007)

ThatGuy16 said:


> I have used both, and i say i like vista much better and think it is faster than XP. I think it uses its resources better and alot of people mistake it as a resource hog


It does use more resources, but so does any new program vs an older version.  I have Vista on my laptop and XP on my desktop, there are just a few things that I dont like about Vista.  For one, the extremely annoying UAC and permissions that pop up every time you do something.  Networking settings are also a pain, because you need to go through 3-4 different menus before you actually get to the network connections page.


----------



## ThatGuy16 (Nov 4, 2007)

[-0MEGA-];805570 said:
			
		

> It does use more resources, but so does any new program vs an older version.  I have Vista on my laptop and XP on my desktop, there are just a few things that I dont like about Vista.  For one, the extremely annoying UAC and permissions that pop up every time you do something.  Networking settings are also a pain, because you need to go through 3-4 different menus before you actually get to the network connections page.



This is the MAIN reason alot of people hate vista UAC! geez, disable it in User Accounts... I guess most people think you can't disable it!


----------



## vonfeldt7 (Nov 4, 2007)

yeah UAC does suck, I also disabled that shit.

Other than that...I don't mind Vista at all, it's never crashed on me, and seems to run fine.


----------



## Geoff (Nov 4, 2007)

ThatGuy16 said:


> This is the MAIN reason alot of people hate vista UAC! geez, disable it in User Accounts... I guess most people think you can't disable it!



I disable it whenever I install Vista, although it's still a pain in the ass before you disable it.


----------



## ThatGuy16 (Nov 4, 2007)

[-0MEGA-];805586 said:
			
		

> I disable it whenever I install Vista, although it's still a pain in the ass before you disable it.



Yeah, but it took me 1 minute to disable it 

I have had my system built for about 2 months and havn't had a single freeze or crash yet with vista.


----------



## andy_mitch92 (Nov 4, 2007)

thats exactly the experience iv had with it, I have never had it freeze up on me, and xp freezes all the time, though i do very heavy multi-tasking for a 2.5ghz processor


----------



## fortyways (Nov 5, 2007)

There's a few reasons:

Some can't afford it or aren't willing to invest in it so they have to hate on it to make themselves feel justified.

Others make the mistake of comparing a brand new OS to WinXP SP2.. which was the result of endless hot fixes.

Others are too dumb to customize their OS.. can't turn UAC off, can't turn Aero off, can't turn Indexing off, etc.


----------



## UriA702 (Nov 5, 2007)

I have UAC disabled and Windows defender disabled and overall am pleased with vista, it has a lot more security features even though i have disabled them. My biggest complaint is application launch time, it is terrible at that. works pretty well for me on my desktop on my laptop it sucks, but i blame that on the low speed 4200rpm sony HD not vista. 
Vista will be solid once sp1 is released. If you have downloaded all the updates you will notice a pretty big improvement in performance, I guess people like XP better cause it's simple, straight forward and it works well, while vista requires maintainance and some tweaking. I really like the file system as well.
I hate the transparent windows and all other visual effects, but it's pretty easy to see why that would appeal to folks, marketing a product that looks better convinces idiots that it will work better, when in software we see that it pretty much works the opposite way.
I do also agree with the others who have said that vista is stable. It is very stable on the two machines I run it on.
The main problem is compatibility issues and ignorant people comparing the brand new operating system to xp SP2, which had two service packs. Folks love to complain, were so used to microsoft doing everything wrong that it's natural to bash them, so that's what everyone does.


----------



## UriA702 (Nov 5, 2007)

fortyways said:


> There's a few reasons:
> 
> Some can't afford it or aren't willing to invest in it so they have to hate on it to make themselves feel justified.
> 
> ...



fortyways, but you need to understand that the majority of users are those "Dumb" folks who are convinced that using configuration tools will cause irreversible damage to their illiteracy. Whether we like it or not, we geeks are the minority and the people who sit there and are like "what are dem buttons here for" are the majority. But that's Microsofts fault for building that junk in the first place. Remember folks when longhorn wasn't going well Vista was developed, so given the time frame Microsofts engineers and developers had to work on Vista, I'd say it's OK, not great but OK. Just like any other large software upgrade, the early adopters will pay the price as far as compatibility issues go. We will be having this conversation once again when the next version of windows comes out.
Just thank the lord that Vista isn't as bad as ME


----------



## andy_mitch92 (Nov 5, 2007)

no kidding ME was a disaster... rushed, and thats not the way to do things


----------



## fortyways (Nov 5, 2007)

UriA702 said:


> fortyways, but you need to understand that the majority of users are those "Dumb" folks who are convinced that using configuration tools will cause irreversible damage to their illiteracy. Whether we like it or not, we geeks are the minority and the people who sit there and are like "what are dem buttons here for" are the majority. But that's Microsofts fault for building that junk in the first place. Remember folks when longhorn wasn't going well Vista was developed, so given the time frame Microsofts engineers and developers had to work on Vista, I'd say it's OK, not great but OK. Just like any other large software upgrade, the early adopters will pay the price as far as compatibility issues go. We will be having this conversation once again when the next version of windows comes out.
> Just thank the lord that Vista isn't as bad as ME



How did I not convey my understanding that most people are computer-illiterate? They don't know anything, so they bitch and whine, and then they listen to each other and agree because it makes them feel safe to agree with people. That's exactly what I said.

If you're suggesting that operating systems should be dumbed down for idiots, there's always Mac.


----------



## Shane (Nov 5, 2007)

i do like Vista,Its better than Xp.

and i dont think it uses as much resources as people say it does 

i have it Dual booted with Xp pro here but i still use Xp as my default os because my main game i play doesnt work on vista very well (they are working to patch it)


----------



## INTELCRAZY (Nov 5, 2007)

[-0MEGA-];805545 said:
			
		

> Not to mention that the more advanced users know all the tweaks and where everything is located, but when switching to Vista or any other new OS, it takes some getting used to, and a lot of people dont like to suddenly change.  It also uses a lot more resources.



That would be known as lazy...

I love Vista, I picked up quick on it, if you know XP pretty well then you should have no problem with locating Vista stuff...


----------



## patrickv (Nov 6, 2007)

guys relax, one of the main reason ppl hate vista is not cause of the UAC it's actually the OS itself. sudden change !! the looks and everything and also programs don't work.
but oh well why should we argue this is there an online survey about vista ?


----------



## patrickv (Nov 6, 2007)

INTELCRAZY said:


> That would be known as lazy...
> 
> I love Vista, I picked up quick on it, if you know XP pretty well then you should have no problem with locating Vista stuff...



oh really ? how much time do you think will take you theming vista ?
with xp you simply download the ux patcher and apply themes but vista you have to actually look for this so called vistaglazz, set permissions , backup files,
apply a theme which apparently is not 100% stable or known to work


----------



## PosterManiac (Nov 6, 2007)

I dont hate VISTA. Simply it needs higher configuration which I am not thinking of changing it soon. But I have seen my colleagues using a home edition and I am start to think to upgrade my XP now.

I think Vista is going to be great but not as much successful as XP.


----------



## dakaptin (Nov 6, 2007)

I have Vista 64bit ultimate and have no problems with it except a few programs dont know how to run on it. UAC is annoying but I can see how it'd be useful. I have it off. 

and regarding crashes:NEVER had one yet!!!!! and more to the point, never even realised until I was reading this!!! thats how stable it is! 

Vista does know how to strain a HDD to the max especiually multitasking an I highly reccommend installing it on a smaller and very fast HDD with all other stuff on another HDD - anyone who has anything to say about this must first ask them selves how many HDDs do I own and run!!!!!

all in all, although my comp gets a performance score of 5.9 (3Dmark06 of 11800), I think that it still takes all the same time to do stuff on it because the programs all need more resources now too!


----------



## 2048Megabytes (Nov 8, 2007)

The reason I dislike Windows Vista 64-bit is all the software out there currently is 32-bit.  So what is the point in getting a 64-bit operating system?

Why should I also give more money to Microsoft everytime they come out with a new operating system?  Windows XP seems to be fulfilling all my wants in an operating system currently.  

I just uploaded Ubuntu 7.10 to my system currently and I am learning how to use it.  Cost me a grand total of about$4.60 for someone else to make Compact Disc for me.  That is a lot better than burning over $90 on Vista.


----------



## X2BreakOfFate (Nov 8, 2007)

You know, alot of you people are pretty pathetic...
Oh know, I have to go through one extra menu because UAC likes to protect my computer from potential harmfull occurences... Oh no, its a resource hog on my computer that shouldn't be running Vista anyways. Oh no its a new operating system and some things dont work with it like a printer from 95'  what ever should I do, this makes no sense. Oh no, this Camera doesn't work, its all Microsoft's fault for making a crappy operating system and not taking responcibilty for all of the four billion hardware and software out there. Oh no, I have to click four times to get to my networking and it doesn't even work because I'm to ignorant to try and learn and accept the fact that it is alot easier than it was in XP along with everything else. Its new, but its easier, and all of you are stubborn if you think otherwise. Oh no, these video games I waste my life with dont work as well with Vista because Vista uses my graphics card more than XP did and I dont think that within FIVE FRIGGEN YEARS BETWEEN XP AND VISTA I SHOULD NEVER HAVE TO UPGRADE. 

Wow, think about it people? Vista is better, your just to stubborn to look at it from a distance a realize hey! Its acctually usefull and doesnt have a crappy interface. Half of you love linux and complain about Vista being hard to use. Hell linux takes a crap load of more time to setup and get working right than vista does. It comes with Aero, tell me when Beryl didnt take forever to set up and when you could double click and install a driver without downloading an dtyping a million lines of command? Seriously, owned.


----------



## paratwa (Nov 8, 2007)

What is actually better about Vista? It's pretty? It's cool?

Games run slower, DX10 is a sham.

I am not saying I hate Vista, but just like I did with XP, I will wait until SP2 before converting. 
Right now Vista has nothing to offer me. Just like XP really had nothing to offer me when I was using 98. But yes, XP is much more stable than 98 was, so it was worth converting to XP. 
Maybe in a couple of years I will make the change, but not right now.

Besides, I have a feeling that DX10 will be ported to XP, mostly because of lack of sales of vista, and the game companys are going to pressure Microsoft into porting it.

Just like Dell and a couple of other companys are selling XP again in their new systems.

Why are they doing it? Because the people demanded it. They did not want to purchase a system that has little or no support for hardware (printers, cameras and such).

Why are people crying about the lack of support for their older equipment? Are you kidding?
 If you are in your teens, and have not spent years buying printers and other things to run with your system, then it's not a big deal.
 When I spend a couple of hundred for a printer, I expect that printer to work on any windows based system I buy. Why throw away equipment that is perfect, except it won't run on Vista.

That's a pretty arrogant way to think if you ask me. Newer is not always better!


----------



## INTELCRAZY (Nov 8, 2007)

patrickv said:


> oh really ? how much time do you think will take you theming vista ?
> with xp you simply download the ux patcher and apply themes but vista you have to actually look for this so called vistaglazz, set permissions , backup files,
> apply a theme which apparently is not 100% stable or known to work



Not a damn bit of time to set that up... Hmm...well at least Vista has native support for SATA optical drives... You guys draw it out and blow it way out of proportion...


----------



## paratwa (Nov 8, 2007)

INTELCRAZY said:


> Not a damn bit of time to set that up... Hmm...well at least Vista has native support for SATA optical drives..



The magic of slipstream!


----------



## patrickv (Nov 8, 2007)

INTELCRAZY said:


> Not a damn bit of time to set that up... Hmm...well at least Vista has native support for SATA optical drives... You guys draw it out and blow it way out of proportion...



yeah right am pretty sure you don't have the time. probably you don't wanna do it cause you don't want to mess it up huh ?


----------



## INTELCRAZY (Nov 8, 2007)

patrickv said:


> yeah right am pretty sure you don't have the time. probably you don't wanna do it cause you don't want to mess it up huh ?



What? That's the dumbest thing I have ever heard.... Guys, it is like XP, only prettier and a few BETTER interface location features...



Well for one thing "tracert" doesn't work...


----------



## ThatGuy16 (Nov 8, 2007)

INTELCRAZY said:


> What? That's the dumbest thing I have ever heard.... Guys, it is like XP, only prettier and a few BETTER interface location features...
> 
> 
> 
> Well for one thing "tracert" doesn't work...



Exactly, most people that "hate" vista have used it for one day and complain about the UAC feature that they are too dumb to figure out how to turn it off, and or they are trying to run it on a celeron with 512mb of ram . And im getting sick of the 32 vs 64bit debates were most people dont even know what they are talking about and will try to find any way to prove any helpful information you give wrong.


----------



## INTELCRAZY (Nov 8, 2007)

ThatGuy16 said:


> Exactly, most people that "hate" vista have used it for one day and complain about the UAC feature that they are too dumb to figure out how to turn it off, and or they are trying to run it on a celeron with 512mb of ram . And im getting sick of the 32 vs 64bit debates were most people dont even know what they are talking about and will try to find any way to prove any helpful information you give wrong.



+1
In 32 vs. 64, it boils down to "drivers vs. RAM"... I took both, what are they arguing about?


----------



## patrickv (Nov 8, 2007)

ThatGuy16 said:


> and or they are trying to run it on a celeron with 512mb of ram



duh im the one who ran vista on 512 ram and a celeron , i didn't complain the only thing which pissed me off is that according to MS vista can be run on this spec.
well they didn't put in mind that after starting software installation vista would go haywire, did you go to microsoft.com and check out vista requirements ?
really lame !!


----------



## INTELCRAZY (Nov 8, 2007)

patrickv said:


> duh im the one who ran vista on 512 ram and a celeron , i didn't complain the only thing which pissed me off is that according to MS vista can be run on this spec.
> well they didn't put in mind that after starting software installation vista would go haywire, did you go to microsoft.com and check out vista requirements ?
> really lame !!



Umm...no b/c Celeron D, which I assume was the CPU, were obsolete 2 yr's ago... And 512Mb of RAM was dead around that same time... This isn't 2000 --> XP, which was a useless upgrade.. Have you seen my desktop screenshot? If so, look at all the software that is all over mine.. Mine is actually pretty solid and quick, so I ask you, define haywire please? Let's just go back in time and make Vista with 98's requirements, then you guys would say that all this nice hardware is overkill... Make up your friggin' mind...


----------



## patrickv (Nov 8, 2007)

INTELCRAZY said:


> aso I ask you, define haywire please?


 ssure, here http://dict.die.net/haywire/
read number 2


INTELCRAZY said:


> Let's just go back in time and make Vista with 98's requirements, then you guys would say that all this nice hardware is overkill... Make up your friggin' mind...


stop being childish intelcrazy, sure you're a sucker for vista thats fine with me, even though am also falling for it little by little
Microsoft made an OS and they don't even know which requirement to give it..geez


----------



## ThatGuy16 (Nov 8, 2007)

I mean, you can't tell everyone it sucks because you tried it on a celeron with 512mb of ram... of course its going to suck on that system!!


----------



## INTELCRAZY (Nov 8, 2007)

patrickv said:


> ssure, here http://dict.die.net/haywire/
> read number 2
> 
> stop being childish intelcrazy, sure you're a sucker for vista thats fine with me, even though am also falling for it little by little
> Microsoft made an OS and they don't even know which requirement to give it..geez



No they made them higher to get hardware sluts off their grounds & to further accelerate hardware development... Seems like common sense to me, are you too dense for this?


----------



## patrickv (Nov 8, 2007)

heyIntelcrazy, Nice avatar by the way, lol, give it some colours though.
Also it should read "vista capable" instead of "vista supporter"


----------



## INTELCRAZY (Nov 8, 2007)

patrickv said:


> heyIntelcrazy, Nice avatar by the way, lol, give it some colours though.
> Also it should read "vista capable" instead of "vista supporter"



get r and d confused?


----------



## patrickv (Nov 8, 2007)

INTELCRAZY said:


> get r and d confused?



yeah that font..barely see it


----------



## ThatGuy16 (Nov 8, 2007)

patrickv said:


> yeah that font..barely see it



But you can see it?


----------



## Jabes (Nov 8, 2007)

hey I luv vista check out my sig


----------



## LukeAge (Nov 8, 2007)

They hate vista because of all the problems.


----------



## ThatGuy16 (Nov 8, 2007)

Jabes said:


> hey I luv vista check out my sig


----------



## colt1911 (Nov 8, 2007)

I have Vista and it's 64 bit ,but the thing I hate is that the software companies are draging their feet on getting things to work with Vista. Example I can't use IE 7 32 bit anymore it keeps not responding and then closing. Too many webites don't work with IE 7 64 bit. I even been in contact with Microsuck and they can't help. Lkie I said it's not Vista that's the problem.


----------



## Geoff (Nov 8, 2007)

colt1911 said:


> I have Vista and it's 64 bit ,but the thing I hate is that the software companies are draging their feet on getting things to work with Vista. Example I can't use IE 7 32 bit anymore it keeps not responding and then closing. Too many webites don't work with IE 7 64 bit. I even been in contact with Microsuck and they can't help. Lkie I said it's not Vista that's the problem.



IE7 is produced by Microsoft, not another software company.


----------



## colt1911 (Nov 8, 2007)

Yeah I know IE 7 is Microsoft ( that's just aproblem I have right now) what I was refering to is like Java , Adobe for example. By the way Omega is Firefox really that much better than IE 7 ?


----------



## Edgesilhouette (Nov 8, 2007)

I have vista and i really dont have a problem with it, other then it freezes up suddenly sometimes....


----------



## Jabes (Nov 8, 2007)

colt1911 said:


> Yeah I know IE 7 is Microsoft ( that's just aproblem I have right now) what I was refering to is like Java , Adobe for example. By the way Omega is Firefox really that much better than IE 7 ?



I think that ff is alot better then IE because it has alot of add ons and its more secure


----------



## colt1911 (Nov 8, 2007)

Just got through downloading FF looks nice , nowto get use to it. Thanks


----------



## DirtyD86 (Nov 8, 2007)

i have had absolutely no issues with vista, everything has worked perfectly. it was the same story when XP came out, people just need something to b*tch about. yes, it does require a little more oomph from the system, but with half the people on these boards running q6600s and 8800gtxs.... who cares?


----------



## Irishwhistle (Nov 8, 2007)

pc-tech said:


> Because, Vista doesn't work work with many programs and not many printers/cameras/scanners are compatible with it


 
I use two computers with Vista 32 bit and the only program I've had the slightest trouble with is Firefox (it crashes often.) IE 7 works well with Vista and is much more secure than the previous versions, but..... I still don't like Vista. It's always popping up with the stuff I don't want when I don't want it and never the stuff I want when I want it.


----------



## ThatGuy16 (Nov 8, 2007)

I have had vista 64bit running on my system since i built it (2 months) and havn't had a single lock up or crash, the ONLY problem i have had is getting my 2year old linksys wireless card working. But i did get it working.

Like someone stated before, people complain about printers and scanners that are 5 years old not working... maybe thats because its discontinued, therefor no support!?! hence its time for a upgrade


----------



## INTELCRAZY (Nov 8, 2007)

ThatGuy16 said:


> I have had vista 64bit running on my system since i built it (2 months) and havn't had a single lock up or crash, the ONLY problem i have had is getting my 2year old linksys wireless card working. But i did get it working.
> 
> Like someone stated before, people complain about printers and scanners that are 5 years old not working... maybe thats because its discontinued, therefor no support!?! hence its time for a upgrade



Yeah, that's the manufacturer's fault if anyone's apart from the user's... I had my Dell AIO 962 Printer working in Vista... I have a Lexmark 2300 Series now and it's about 2 years old.


----------



## JSpecGC8 (Nov 8, 2007)

Man some of you people seriously need to sit back relax have a cup of hot green tea, or coffee and breath a little.

I dont hate Vista but I will be damn if some programs I paid $200 or more are not supported or fail to work well with Vista.

If I have a 5 year old digital camera that has 5.1mpix(goof off camera), I dont want to buy another one so the software is supported on my computer. 

My serious picture equipment cost me a pretty penny, I am not going to risk dealing with software issues that neither company is willing to address when I have none now.

Vista still has issues that I am not willing to deal with, once they get alot more of the bugs worked out I will change over but until then, its XP!!

So yes right now IMHO Vista is not up to par!!!


----------



## INTELCRAZY (Nov 8, 2007)

JSpecGC8 said:


> Man some of you people seriously need to sit back relax have a cup of hot green tea, or coffee and breath a little.
> 
> I dont hate Vista but I will be damn if some programs I paid $200 or more are not supported or fail to work well with Vista.
> 
> ...



What do you need software for on a digital camera? THEY USE USB, just open the camera's file system, just as easy....


----------



## Le GoogelGuRu (Nov 9, 2007)

I've had no problems with Vista either. It's a great operating system, in my opinion.


----------



## X2BreakOfFate (Nov 18, 2007)

No problems from vista here. See what I don't understand is why people are complaining about it, look at the almighty Linux. You can't just plug in play your camera software with that... you have to learn how to use wine and I bet you that wont work. "I'll be damned if I pay $200... blah blah blah" and I'll be damned if someone compared Vista to Linux giving Linux the praise because it can't run a heck of a lot of hardware without a serious amount of tweaking.
But I guess thats what's good about Linux, you can tweak it to do almost anything...
W/e

Go Vista, Apple..
Linux you hang in their and get my printer working and I'll favor you.


----------



## X2BreakOfFate (Nov 18, 2007)

Oh also earlier someone said something about software companies paying millions of dollars to get their stuff distributed, it wasn't in this thread but one I posted. I said something like not being able to tweak my OS when I buy it is like dominos saying I can't take the olives off their pizza. I understand alot more money is put into software than pizza, but some of us are complaining about our 200 dollar cameras and I would like to give you a little news flash. When you go to an expensive restraunt and get a 40 dollar meal, do you walk out saying "Ill be damned if this doesnt last me the entire week"? You buy something, dont expect it to be good forever, grant it if you just want to talk pictures its great but its not always going to be supported. Thats why I'll never by a high end PC because it wont be long before its not so High End any more. I'll never buy a camera that costs more than 150 because they'll just get better and better and when it gets so good in another few years I'll buy another good 150 dollar camera. Your expecting one thing to upgrade and support the last ten years of work but in reality... these companies that spend millions on great software that none of you can appreciate, they dont need to support five year old software.

"Oh Windows makes me so mad, thats why I'm going to switch to linux"

You may like linux but your camera software still wont work... trust me lol.


----------



## Travis30384 (Nov 19, 2007)

I have a vista laptop, and i would give it a 7/10. It is a great os, but it is jut not stable, and can't do things up to snuff.


----------

