Vista Stinks... Here's Why...

Sirtovin

Sirtovin

Senior Switcher Tech Guru
Why would I want to pay over 200 dollars for an upgrade or worse pay 400 dollars for ultimate when I could buy a new PC for 400 dollars or save another 200 dollars and get another PC...

I have also heard that Vista is STILL incomplete... It was suppose to incorporate WINFS... But noo... They dropped that back to Server Edition Longhorn... Which Vista was previously named... and than changed...

I am glad I am a Mac fan now... 129 for OSX seems fair than to shell out up to 400 dollars for a full upgrade...
 
WinFS was dropped a long time ago - partially because it was apparently slow.

Vista is certainly expensive to buy.
 
Vista is supposed to be a revolutionary product... therefore it is urgent to wait before making any final comment. Wait until the first user's have gone through all issues, wait until Microsoft has made the first corrections, wait until the hardware and the other software is optimized for it. We'll see 12-18 months from now if it really is so bad as many say, or if it's a better evolution of XP.
 
All MS software seems expensive to buy, compared to standard Mac apps (not counting pro apps, but you get what you pay for there)

I'm sure the initial outlay is compensated for by saving money buying OS X when upgrades come along and software such as iWork.

Andy
 
Well, Vista isn't nearly as revolutionary as "Longhorn" was supposed to be (I know Vista is just the new name, but the name change came along with a lot of big changes to the promises, so I consider them separate concepts). For a while it was going to be something really new, like OS X was to OS 9. However, I think it's more comparable to OS 8. Both were beefy, fancy upgrades of their predecessors, but both were really the same at the core. And both pale in comparison to the promises that had preceded them! (Longhorn and Copeland.)

Well, it's better than the move from 98 to XP, anyway, or OS 8 to OS 9. Neither of those was very impressive, IMHO.

Anyway, considering that it usually takes Apple a few months to work out the kinks of their major releases (which are not as "major" as Vista), and it took Apple 2-3 years to work out the kinks of OS X, I can't be too harsh on MS.

And honestly, it does look like MS has done a lot right with Vista. And for the first time since Windows 3, they've released a Windows that doesn't have a really dumb name. :p
 
I get the impression that Microsoft have been getting a lot of things right with Vista, which is just as well, because otherwise it would be curtains for Windows. However, from everything I've seen, I'm glad I switched to Mac.

The pricing is pretty high, and the hardware requirements of Vista will require most users to spend a fair bit on upgrades in order to install it. Support for many devices is still patchy, with many people I know telling me things like "Vista is $%#% amazing, man! You gotta switch back from Mac! Mind you, I can't use audio yet because my soundcard is unsupported, and I also can't burn dual-layer DVDs on my particular drive, and I haven't got a driver for my scanner either."

I switched to Mac because I hated wasting my time and money on trying to make my computer work properly - they should do that out of the box, without needing hours of mucking about.

There are a lot of things about Vista that I really, really hate. I feel that the transparency effects in the interface are there more to impress people than to make the interface better - if anything, the transparency makes it harder to recognise which window you're in and what the title is. The Expose rip-off looks like they saw how it was done on a Mac, and then said "yeah, but wouldn't it look better in 3D?" without actually stopping to think that maybe the design of Expose was intended to make windows easier to read and identify. What's the point of putting them in a 3D 'pile' and then sifting through them?

I will give Microsoft credit for getting Vista out - albeit years late, stripped down and still a fair way behind Mac in terms of usability. However, I value my time and money too much to look Redmond's way again, at least for the foreseeable future.
 
How do you guys think Vista stink? You have not try to use Vista yet. Lets hold our breath till we know for sure.
 
vista's newly upgraded security reminds me of a Chris Rock skit

" "I take care of MY kids" - you're supposed to, you dumb mother[hubbard]!"

" "I aint never been to Jail" - what do you want, a cookie?!"
 
We discussed the whole Vista shebang at lunch yesterday, and we basically agreed on the following:

- Hardware producers might have asked to design the thing so people need new hardware to use all features of the system. HArd to prove, but think about it. Think DirectX 10 etc

- it's absurd for the standard user to switch if he's not going to buy a new PC anyways. MAkes no sense, and is not needed if he has a fully patched up XP SP 2.

The rest has to develope. We tried it out for about two or three months now (we got Vista early through the MSDNAA-program at our university), and the verdict so far is: people are all over the GUI, but apart from that you do not hear much about anything else. Everyone always tells you about the new 3D window thing or whatever that he discoverd, not about any "real" features.

Guess the whole thing has to sink in and develop.
 
Having used Vista now for several months from Beta 2 to the finished product I can say it is a fine operating system. Am I the only one who gets really annoyed by the whole switch thing, I, like many have not 'switched' from PC to Mac or vice versa. I am a computer user who embraces both platforms with equal enthusiasm.

Firstly on respect to the cost, as has been mentioned there is a lot more in this windows update than in the usual Mac point update say from 10.3 to 10.4, so assuming that most Mac users take all point releases you will have bought 4 upgrades if you buy Leopard in the same time frame as XP to Vista, add them up and you get roughly the same cost.

Yes WINFS was removed sometime ago, but what has been removed from Leopard ? Answer we don't know because Apple are so secretive about what they plan to include in the first place.

Symphonix, if you think computers work with peripherals 'out of the box' you have obviously never encountered Epson scanners and OSX:)

For a fair assesment you need to give Vista, or any other OS a chance and at least 6 months of use, and then judge it on more than cosmetic appearance and platform predjudice.
 
Its probably better to say nothing that mention loads of stuff that gets removed later - people assuming, if things are removed, that there is trouble with the design or implementation.
 
Which reminds me that Apple _still_ hasn't brought back "minimize in place", a Dock feature of early Jaguar betas. I'd _love_ to use that feature, and no I'm *not* going to buy something running on APE for this. ;) (I've had too many kernel panics because of WindowShadeX alone...)

But on topic: Bill Gates in an interview has bashed Apple quite a bit. ;) -> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16934083/site/newsweek/
 
he sounds very bitter, actually. Steve Jobs' growing confidence/baiting has had it's effect. these people really don't like each other.
 
Fryke, when was the last time you used APE? Because the newest version seems to run a whole lot more efficiently than before-- when I boot up, I have much more free RAM now than previously. Never had a kernel panic from an Unsanity product either, and my system is fairly riddled with 'em. ;)

As to the new interface in Vista, must say I don't understand why so many reviewers have been gushing over it. Was truly looking forward to seeing the new GUI in action but was rather let down by the childish color scheme and clutter. Makes me appreciate the subtle sophistication of the OS X interface. Despite the unfortunate brushed metal.
 
I read that interview. Gates needs to learn to at least mask his psychological issues, if not resolve them. It's embarrassing.

Apparently he lives in a fantasy world where Microsoft announced "Windows Flip" before Panther's Exposé, Vista's search before Tiger's Spotlight, etc. This is simply not true. Anyone who's been following the business knows that. It's possible that Microsoft had been working on these things behind the scenes before Apple, but I doubt that, and Gates's own quotes suggest otherwise — he laments that perhaps Microsoft was too public with its features.

He is also under the delusion that hackers take "total control" of OS X every single day, and that Windows is virtually impenetrable. Whaaa?!

I wonder if he actually believes this stuff. Either way, there is something wrong with his head, and it seems to be showing more and more with every interview.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top