 Loose WireHere, Hold My Beer And Watch This
Premium Member
join:2003-04-16
Denver, CO |
Vista Users - What's the Point?So I've read several reviews of Vista and have yet to see a single reason why this is a functionally better O/S then XP.
I realize XP will still be supported for some time, so have no sense of urgency, but frankly am inclined to load Linux to box and start to learn it.
To those that are running the Beta version, what do you think is the point of "upgrading" to Vista? |
|
 redxii
Mod
join:2001-02-26
Michigan |
redxii
Mod
2006-Oct-28 2:51 am
Those who want DX10 will have to. No DX10 for 2000 or XP. Halo fans wanting to play Halo 2 on PC will have to have Vista. |
|
|
| |
to Loose Wire
Functionally and this is all my opinion:
I like the interface better, as well as how the user's home directories are setup, more unix like. I like the fact that with the 64bit version any kernel mode drivers have to be signed. Those are just a few, there are others, but to be perfectly honest the only reason I'm going to be updating is that I have an MSDN subscription that allows me to with no extra cost. |
|
 jefe
Premium Member
join:2001-05-19
Northport, NY |
to Loose Wire
I think the OP posed a damn good question. I'm not a gamer and couldn't care less about DX10 or Halo. I know that eventually I'll have to upgrade when hardware and software start to become incompatible with XP. But in the short term, it seems like Vista is like a new model car...just different enough to try to separate you from your money.  |
|
dave
Premium Member
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio |
to Loose Wire
|
|
BenInTx
Premium Member
join:2001-01-17
Wichita Falls, TX |
to Loose Wire
As an early user of XP x64, I would avoid this OS for at least months, if not longer. At least with x64, there was little (or more likely, no) driver support for most things in my system. And, if you have any older (6 months, 1 year, etc.) laser printers, card readers, video cards, sound cards, DVD burners, network cards, etc., you can probably forget about drivers being written. Vendors will concentrate on their new product lines.
If I were building a system again, with current Vista approved devices, I'd use it for sure. Upgrades, especially since Vista will REQUIRE signed drivers, no way I'd use it. |
|
dave
Premium Member
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
1 edit |
dave
Premium Member
2006-Oct-28 10:09 am
The situation is different. Vista, being just a new version of the OS, ought to be able to use XP drivers. (Signatures are only required on 64-bit Vista).
The move from 32-bit x86 to 64-bit x86, however, requires at the very least that the author rebuilds the driver for different hardware. And it also required that the author had been following correct programming practices for 32/64 bit source compatibility. Want to take bets on how many drivers were 64-bit clean? (No, I have no idea really, I'm just cynical about my fellow programmers).
Actually, Vista should be helping the 64-bit driver problem get solved. If you want to get a driver certified by Microsoft ('approved for Windows' or some such thing), then you MUST submit a 64-bit driver. The 32-bit driver is optional (i.e., you can submit 64-bit only, or 64-bit plus 32-bit, but not 32-bit only). |
|
jefe
Premium Member
join:2001-05-19
Northport, NY |
jefe to dave
Premium Member
2006-Oct-28 11:13 am
to dave
I read that white paper, dave, and still don't see anything to start breathing hard about. At least for a user like me. I do see some things in Vista that put me off. For example, built in support for DRM and the discussed-elsewhere feature of having to buy a new license if you change hardware a third time. I think a lot of us are going to take a wait and see attitude. To me Vista doesn't appear to be a quantum leap like Win98 to XP was. |
|
| |
to Loose Wire
The only thing nice about Vista its the screen savers and background pictures, whats disgusting is the Microsoft backdoor installed for the American Goverment at least they think its very well hidden |
|
 SSidlovOther Things On My Mind
Premium Member
join:2000-03-03
Pompton Lakes, NJ |
to GILXA1226
said by GILXA1226:Functionally and this is all my opinion: ...cut... I like the fact that with the 64bit version any kernel mode drivers have to be signed. ...cut.. I find this a disadvantage. There used to be a lot of odd hardware companies that couldn't afford to have signed drivers or that the signed drivers take longer to market. There's also third party drivers that can't afford to have the drivers signed. |
|
JimF
Premium Member
join:2003-06-15
Allentown, PA |
JimF to jefe
Premium Member
2006-Oct-28 12:09 pm
to jefe
said by jefe:I do see some things in Vista that put me off. For example, ... the discussed-elsewhere feature of having to buy a new license if you change hardware a third time. Do you have a link for this? How much of a change is allowed? It seems to me that WinXP reactivation is actually getting easier, and they seem to be putting more emphasis on the Windows Genuine Advantage validation than on the original product key. Maybe they are going backwards? |
|
| |
to SSidlov
said by SSidlov:said by GILXA1226:Functionally and this is all my opinion: ...cut... I like the fact that with the 64bit version any kernel mode drivers have to be signed. ...cut.. I find this a disadvantage. There used to be a lot of odd hardware companies that couldn't afford to have signed drivers or that the signed drivers take longer to market. There's also third party drivers that can't afford to have the drivers signed. Read the bold print. Not ALL drivers, just ones that require direct kernel access, i.e. potential threats, or irreversable problems. By forcing a "Licensed" driver, it ensures Microsoft can support it too. |
|
OZO
Premium Member
join:2003-01-17 |
OZO to JimF
Premium Member
2006-Oct-28 3:11 pm
to JimF
said by JimF:said by jefe:I do see some things in Vista that put me off. For example, ... the discussed-elsewhere feature of having to buy a new license if you change hardware a third time. Do you have a link for this? How much of a change is allowed? It seems to me that WinXP reactivation is actually getting easier, and they seem to be putting more emphasis on the Windows Genuine Advantage validation than on the original product key. Maybe they are going backwards? Read this thread - [RANT] vista can only be reintalled once? |
|
jefe
Premium Member
join:2001-05-19
Northport, NY |
jefe
Premium Member
2006-Oct-28 4:25 pm
Roger that Ozo. That was the link I was going to post. |
|
JimF
Premium Member
join:2003-06-15
Allentown, PA |
JimF to OZO
Premium Member
2006-Oct-28 4:57 pm
to OZO
Thanks. I think at the moment it is more a legalism than anything else. If you upgrade your system, you can always consider it the "same" system as before, only upgraded. The real test will be how they implement the activation. That seems to be getting simpler for XP. I had to install a new copy of WinXP on a new hard drive in Computer A (with a broadband connection that allowed for patch downloads), and then transfer it to Computer B (with only a dial-up modem) that was 700 miles away. I had to put in the product key on Computer A in order to update it, and thought there would be a problem, requiring a phone call, when I installed the drive on Computer B. But no problem; the WGA check that was performed on Computer A was apparently sufficient. That is good enough for my needs. I doubt that Vista will really be any different in practice, but we will see. |
|
Shootist
Premium Member
join:2003-02-10
Decatur, GA |
Shootist
Premium Member
2006-Oct-28 5:13 pm
said by JimF:Thanks. I think at the moment it is more a legalism than anything else. If you upgrade your system, you can always consider it the "same" system as before, only upgraded. The real test will be how they implement the activation. That seems to be getting simpler for XP. I had to install a new copy of WinXP on a new hard drive in Computer A (with a broadband connection that allowed for patch downloads), and then transfer it to Computer B (with only a dial-up modem) that was 700 miles away. I had to put in the product key on Computer A in order to update it, and thought there would be a problem, requiring a phone call, when I installed the drive on Computer B. But no problem; the WGA check that was performed on Computer A was apparently sufficient. That is good enough for my needs. I doubt that Vista will really be any different in practice, but we will see. Yeah well if you change the motherboard to a different make and model, or even the same make but different model that is considered a NEW system and you will be charged your ONE MOVE. As I have posted in other threads, "I don't understand why some people have a problem with understanding what the words ONE TIME mean". And that there was never a clause like this in any other version of Windows. |
|
JimF
Premium Member
join:2003-06-15
Allentown, PA |
JimF
Premium Member
2006-Oct-28 5:58 pm
Actually, there is nothing in the new Vista license agreement that Ed Bott posted that even mentioned a motherboard. It is open to interpretation as to what a new system is. All the comments in the other thread were mere speculation based on one poster's comment that MS might be able to detect a new motherboard in Vista. |
|
 jaa
Premium Member
join:2000-06-13 |
to Loose Wire
I see no point in upgrading - ever. License an OS for your computer when you buy it, and stick with it. If you use word processing, email, and internet explorer, a Win98 computer looks pretty much the same as Windows XP. And upgrading the OS usually means you need to upgrade memory as well. While I understand getting Vista when you buy a new computer, I see very little reason to spend the money to upgrade an XP computer. On the other hand, if you have a Win98 or WinME computer, it is worth upgrading to Vista: buy the Vista flavor called "hardware bundle" - that is version #17 that comes with a free computer.  |
|
dave
Premium Member
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
2 edits |
to phattieg
said by phattieg:Read the bold print. Not ALL drivers, just ones that require direct kernel access, i.e. potential threats, or irreversable problems. By forcing a "Licensed" driver, it ensures Microsoft can support it too. 1) Nearly all drivers are kernel drivers, apart from wussy little drivers like audio interfaces and a few USB thingies. 2) Signing's not a particularly expensive proposition. You buy a 'code signing digital ID' from the likes of Verisign. $500/year if I read their price list correctly. That's probably what it costs you to run a software engineer for a day. Sure, it's expensive for 'hobbyist' driver writers, but nothing at all for someone doing it commercially. 3) You sign the driver yourself as part of building the driver. There is no "waiting" involved. Well, apart from however many microseconds it takes to compute the crypto signature. 4) This is not 'licensing', this is 'signing'. And it certainly is nothing to do with havign Microsoft support your driver. They don't support your driver, period. All it's about is attestation: the end user knows where the driver came from. |
|
| dave |
dave to jefe
Premium Member
2006-Oct-28 9:22 pm
to jefe
said by jefe:I read that white paper, dave, and still don't see anything to start breathing hard about. At least for a user like me. Well, that's sort of my point. The OP talks about "functionally better OS" but it's totally unclear what he means by that. To me, the functional aspects of an OS are all about resource management, scheduling, all those traditional operating system qualities. (I don't give a rats arse about user interfaces). |
|
 NY Tel
Premium Member
join:2004-04-09
Smithtown, NY ·Verizon FiOS
|
NY Tel to jaa
Premium Member
2006-Oct-28 9:37 pm
to jaa
said by jaa:I see no point in upgrading - ever. Agreed. I tried Vista as a beta tester. I still have a few machines running Windows 2000 and while I am using them I forget that they are "not upgraded" to XP - they run just as well as XP does. |
|
jefe
Premium Member
join:2001-05-19
Northport, NY |
jefe to jaa
Premium Member
2006-Oct-28 9:44 pm
to jaa
said by jaa: On the other hand, if you have a Win98 or WinME computer, it is worth upgrading to Vista: buy the Vista flavor called "hardware bundle" - that is version #17 that comes with a free computer. Thanks for the chuckle! |
|
 PCInTechkeeping art alive since 1953
Premium Member
join:2004-06-07
Massena, NY |
to Loose Wire
To take this another step backwards... I was perfectly happy with my WFW (Win 3.1x) setup, then that damn Win95 came out. It didn't get better, just made me have to constantly buy a NEW machine. |
|
NY Tel
Premium Member
join:2004-04-09
Smithtown, NY ·Verizon FiOS
|
NY Tel
Premium Member
2006-Oct-28 10:09 pm
said by PCInTech:To take this another step backwards... I was perfectly happy with my WFW (Win 3.1x) setup, then that damn Win95 came out. It didn't get better, just made me have to constantly buy a NEW machine. I guess Vista won't run on my Mitac IBM clone from 1987? It had an 8 MhZ processor and a whopping 10 meg hard drive. It is still in my garage somewhere.  |
|
 sitsinwest
Premium Member
join:2003-09-24
Denison, TX |
said by NY Tel:I guess Vista won't run on my Mitac IBM clone from 1987? It had an 8 MhZ processor and a whopping 10 meg hard drive. Maybe if it has a Turbo switch to run at 12 MHz? (Sorry. I just couldn't resist.) |
|
 Vamp5c077
Premium Member
join:2003-01-28
MD |
to Loose Wire
I personally don't know either... It sure isn't worth the price. There is no advantage I can see, with the same system, Vista will run slower and use more ram. It's like downgrading your system.
It seems MS is also making a bad decision by raping XP users out of DX10 (when in fact it could of been made for XP too) just to sell Vista.
I can't wait for the day of x86 / x64 version of Mac. |
|
 richk_1957If ..Then..Else
Premium Member
join:2001-04-11
Minas Tirith |
to Loose Wire
I'm not a gamer, either, and I couldn't care less about DX10. Windows XP, even 2000-Pro is good enough for me. Add the fact that Vista might not be able to be installed more than once, WGA [with the 'phone home' feature mandatory] and DRM makes Vista a white elephant to me. Eventually, I'll be forced to upgrade but I won't even think about it until at least the first service pack is out, maybe later. |
|
 lrussoIf It Aint Broken Dont Fix It
Premium Member
join:2004-01-09
Albertson, NY |
to bond787
said by bond787:The only thing nice about Vista its the screen savers and background pictures, whats disgusting is the Microsoft backdoor installed for the American Goverment at least they think its very well hidden LOL what |
|
| |
to Loose Wire
The top reasons why users whine about how bad vista is. 1) There computer is like those el cheapo walmart ones or those Jurassic P3 with less than 256 RAM, 64mb vid card with 20GB HD running windows 98/ME. 2) Have a nice computer from a one time investment and cant afford to upgrade the memory/vidcard etc and can't afford to pay for a shiny boxed copy of Vista. 3) Running a pirated/multiple installed copy of Windows XP and don't know how to get around the built in anti piracy check of Vista! This is the reality... Accept it...  |
|
1 edit |
That's it BhuddaBlessU?? JUST 3 reasons?? total?? End of Story?? My top reasons so far are: 1. The $$ monopoly that is microshaft......Worse than a shiny new car to me, it feels like a new "law" that you will have to change to vista..... 2. The conspiracy theories that vista will somehow affect your privacy, as mentioned elsewhere in this thread... Is it possible?? What will m-soft get to know about you if you use vista??? 3. The dx-10 cornering.....Seems ridiculous to me.... Other than your apparent attempt to Ridicule/belittle/incite anger in people wary of jumping on your bandwagon, do you have any other thoughts on the issue??  edit-ok I just looked at post history of "BhuddaBlessU" and realize that he/she appears to be "trolling"..... |
|
·
