# Microsoft's 'new' OS Gets a Website



## btarunr (Jul 27, 2008)

Last week, Microsoft conducted an experiment in San Francisco, USA where 120 users with a negative opinion on Windows Vista were introduced to a new OS to which a majority of them gave positive feedback, only to discover it was Windows Vista under the covers (covered here). Microsoft now wants to publish its results in a new website presumably with promotional tones over its so-far-flop Windows Vista operating system. Results come out in the form of videos, text and presentations. The website titled "The Mojave Experiment" can be reached here.





*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## WhiteLotus (Jul 27, 2008)

It seems those people are going to feel rather embarrassed. I bet on either that they had never played with Vista, and relied on bad reviews to fuel their negativity - or played with it at the very start when there were all manner of driver issues. Now Vista is settling down and it is turning out to be very good.

However - i wonder just what the test they performed were. All just playing with the way it looks or delving right into the makings of it?


----------



## ShinyG (Jul 27, 2008)

I agree with WhiteLotus, the 120 users probably never got to use Vista before, so it was pretty easy to "fool" them.
There is something that Microsoft is right about: there are lots of people that bash Vista without trying it. Of course there are also hundreds of people that tried it and hated it, but they are going to be harder to convince. I like their step by step approach. I bet people will start using Vista more if MS would collaborate more with AMD and nVidia to promote DX10 games.
As for me, I tried SP1, looked nice, worked very well on my PC in my sig, but I had problems installing my old Wacom tablet, because Wacom decided not to offer Vista support for serial tablets and force users into paying hundreds of dollars for newer USB tablets... For people not new in the tablet business, Wacom is the MS of tablets, being the biggest manufacturer of decent usable graphics tablets. No competition means they are having hard time convincing users to upgrade, because of the simple fact that their new tablets don't bring anything new to the table, except USB and some extra buttons! Lack of competition is dreadful 
So MS is not the only evil doer, hardware manufacturers have their share in Vista's poor adoption rate!


----------



## Ben Clarke (Jul 27, 2008)

The way it looks, most likely. It's not too difficult to create a new desktop theme.


----------



## Nitro-Max (Jul 27, 2008)

This is no suprise really i saw this coming and even said vista its self is just a test station and the next operating system with be based on vista but with mass improvement.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 27, 2008)

all you'd need to do was say, change the colors/theme, and replace all words where it says vista with mojave.


thats kinda the point they're trying to make tho, 90% of people who hate vista have never used it more than 5 minutes. - if at all.


----------



## WarEagleAU (Jul 27, 2008)

I personally dont hate Vista. My wifes lappy has it. I like it really but its just a hog on resources for her laptop, where as XP wouldnt be


----------



## KainXS (Jul 27, 2008)

Ben Clarke said:


> The way it looks, most likely. It's not too difficult to create a new desktop theme.



all they had to do was use windowblinds lol


----------



## unsmart (Jul 27, 2008)

Maybe MS should look at what they changed to make it Mojave and offer that as a option. Could be people don't like the default theme and don't really know how to change it. Really though if you took Linux and had techs set it up on nice PC most people given 10min would think it's great but give them a disk to take home and it's a different story.


----------



## Megasty (Jul 27, 2008)

Dang, 120 ppl being pwned at the same time, talk about a Kodak moment 

As for me, I don't care about vista being a resource hog or whatever. More or less, I want it to be so. What's the point of having a superpowerful PC if it doesn't get taxed by the OS. You can even turn down vista so it looks & feels just like XP  I even have vista running on an 8 yo rig. As these pc parts get more powerful, so should the OS. Bashing something that you haven't even use is plain stupid.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jul 27, 2008)

They only gave people a 10 minute demo, come on folks, think! Some of you based your opinions as if they were fully converted.  They were only given a few minutes to observe Vista (some believe is a re-skinned GUI but we don't know), not fully use it on their own time.  Then they lied about it instead of saying nothing about it. This is nothing more then pure marketing stunt and, for the most part won't change most users minds about it.


----------



## cdawall (Jul 27, 2008)

i work at BB and sell desktops/laptops with vista everyday adn there are4 opinons of vista god i'll never use that crap,, doesn't it have a alot of issues with programs, is it as easy to use as XP, and wtf is vista

its really easy to convince response 2, 3 and 4 to get it just out of hey you know the only things that wont work well with vista are VPN, industry specific programs, etc. your using it for web browsing you'll be fine. it still is a MS product and feels like XP did you konw that sort of thing.

now those people dead set on sticking with XP are pains. they all have the same issue vista is slow, vista doesn't work with older computers, i'm used to XP my response to that is vista is slow when you put it on an old single core P3 with 768mb of ram. hence why your getting a new pc. want to konw why old things don't work well with new programs? simple they are old try and find XP drivers for a P1 desktop its the same as finding drivers for a P3 for vista its all about relativity. your new pc will work fine with vista now get over your preconcieved notions that you read on freaking cnet.

those kind of people piss me off. i understand the people who can't use IE beacause they need specific CAD/CAM programs of VPN or sometihng but the ones who just can't stand change can GTFO


----------



## Triprift (Jul 27, 2008)

Megasty said:


> Dang, 120 ppl being pwned at the same time, talk about a Kodak moment
> 
> As for me, I don't care about vista being a resource hog or whatever. More or less, I want it to be so. What's the point of having a superpowerful PC if it doesn't get taxed by the OS. You can even turn down vista so it looks & feels just like XP  I even have vista running on an 8 yo rig. As these pc parts get more powerful, so should the OS. Bashing something that you haven't even use is plain stupid.



I coudnt of put it better myself Vista has copped alot of flack but imv with windows updates and sp1 is now like wl said turning out to be a very good os.


----------



## Kei (Jul 27, 2008)

I think this is a fantastic thing Microsoft has done. There are sooooo many people out there that love to condemn things before they use them and spread nonsense/misinformation/lies just to make their points more "valid". This is probably one of the most hilarious tests done ever but honestly it gives me an idea...

Maybe AMD should do the samething with their Phenom lineup and call it something else just for a test...they got the same rap as Vista did when it came out and we see how that turned out. There are a lot of people changing their minds about the Phenom, but still it'd be nice to see those people using old systems yet still talking trash use one and talk about how sickly fast it was only to find out it was a 2.2Ghz Tri-core or something. 

K


----------



## wolf2009 (Jul 27, 2008)

Megasty dude, I agree with you. 

Before trying vista i felt like everyone says it is. After trying it i found it be a lot better. Ok its a resource hog, but if i bought a quade core proc, 4gb ram, good graphic card, why not put vista on it ? 

It solved my big problem yesterday here
http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=66893


----------



## Kei (Jul 27, 2008)

EastCoasthandle said:


> They only gave people a 10 minute demo, come on folks, think!
> Some of you based your opinions as if they were fully converted.  They were only given a few minutes to observe Vista, not fully use it on their own, then they lied about it instead of saying nothing (and let the subjects make up their own mind about the OS). This is nothing more then pure marketing gimmick and, for the most part won't change most users minds about it.



c'mon....majority of the people that bash Vista didn't even give it a 5 minute demo be proclaiming it crap. 

K


----------



## Wshlist (Jul 27, 2008)

Someone should get some vista fans, present windows95 to them but renamed windows7 and watch them rave about how stable and wonderful it is.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 27, 2008)

wolf2009 said:


> Megasty dude, I agree with you.
> 
> Before trying vista i felt like everyone says it is. After trying it i found it be a lot better. Ok its a resource hog, but if i bought a quade core proc, 4gb ram, good graphic card, why not put vista on it ?
> 
> ...



vistas windows update is a LOT better than XP's ever was. it not only gets a core driver (say, a direct3D only video driver with no Cpanel) it actually gets vendor drivers.

My video card and soundcard (auzentech) get WHQL drivers and control panels off windows update... its very convenient (and they're usually up to date as well)


----------



## Shadowdust (Jul 27, 2008)

ShinyG said:


> As for me, I tried SP1, looked nice, worked very well on my PC in my sig, but I had problems installing my old Wacom tablet, because Wacom decided not to offer Vista support for serial tablets and force users into paying hundreds of dollars for newer USB tablets... For people not new in the tablet business, Wacom is the MS of tablets, being the biggest manufacturer of decent usable graphics tablets. No competition means they are having hard time convincing users to upgrade, because of the simple fact that their new tablets don't bring anything new to the table, except USB and some extra buttons! Lack of competition is dreadful
> So MS is not the only evil doer, hardware manufacturers have their share in Vista's poor adoption rate!



I have to agree with you on that. I used to be one of those guys who thought Vista sucked until I got my new Pavillion DV5Z laptop. The interface and performance of the actual OS is fine. I've found that hardware and software manufacturers seem to think this was a great opportunity to force people to purchase new software and hardware rather than offer support for even two year old products. 

Back in 2006, I purchased a copy of Quicken 2006 Home & Business to upgrade our aging Quicken 98 at work. When I tried to install it on Vista, it would continually crash. I looked up the issue on Intuit's website only to find out that Intuit claims that it is impossible for them to provide Vista support for the product.  I also just found out that Quickbooks 2006 suffers the same flaw. So those are two programs I am forced to upgrade if I want to use them on the new laptop. 

So yeah, my complaints are definitely with the third parties who *choose* not to provide Vista support.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jul 27, 2008)

cdawall said:


> we have people from MS at BB do that at least once a month



And, I am sure that customers get more then 10 minutes to play around with Vista to make up their own minds, correct?  I am sure (if you are around) you would give them *ALL* the time they need if it means converting them over to Vista and they:
-won't be restricted to a 10 minute demo
-nor company policy to lie to customers that the OS goes by another name


You see what I did there?  If what MS did is so wholly then you should be able to do the exact same thing on your job at BB.  But you can't! This is one reason why double standards have a negative reputation.






Kei said:


> c'mon....majority of the people that bash Vista didn't even give it a 5 minute demo be proclaiming it crap.
> 
> K



Give me a break, a 10 minute demo is suppose to be a revelation?  Are you kidding me, (this is a joke right)?  I'm willing to believe that within that 10 minute demo they saw pretty, pretty, shiny, shiny and if it's true then yes it would yield positive results. But what about Vista itself? You know, the OS they would use at home. The OS they lied about to begin with.  You cannot get the subject's experience in that because it was only a "10 min demo" of Mojave.  

You can get more experience out of CC, BB or Walmart then in that survey and it speaks nothing of the opinion of Vista but only the demo.


----------



## Kei (Jul 27, 2008)

No I'm not kidding you, I'm pointing out that we ALL know (including you) that majority of the bashers don't give it 5 minutes of their time to even use if they've ever even touched it. Now we see that when they actually sat down with it for 10 minutes it wasn't nearly as bad as they though.

Nobody said they liked it the results aren't even on the website yet (read the page), they're simply saying that when they ACTUALLY USED THE PRODUCT they did not claim it was crap. I know you're using XP and nobody is saying that XP is bad, we're simply saying that when people actually sat down and used Vista they found it to be just fine.

Relax and stop reading too deep into things or you'll start an pointless argument with the next 10 people on the post and the thread will be closed down.

K


----------



## cdawall (Jul 27, 2008)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Give me a break, a 10 minute demo is suppose to be a revelation?  Are you kidding me, (this is a joke right)?  I'm willing to believe that within that 10 minute demo they saw pretty, pretty, shiny, shiny and if it's true then yes it would yield positive results. But what about Vista itself? You know, the OS they would use at home. The OS they lied about to begin with.  You cannot get the subject's experience in that because it was only a "10 min demo".
> 
> You can get more experience out of CC, BB or Walmart then in that survey and it speaks nothing of the opinion of Vista but only the demo.



we have people from MS at BB do that at least once a month

i'm not a big MS fan but at least you can't say there not trying to fix what they fucked up


----------



## Octavean (Jul 27, 2008)

So is that pronounced “Mo-Jo” or “More-Jive” ?


----------



## cdawall (Jul 27, 2008)

EastCoasthandle said:


> And, I am sure that customers get more then 10 minutes to play around with Vista to make up their own minds, correct?  I am sure (if you are around) you would give them *ALL* the time they need if it means converting them over to Vista and they:
> -won't be restricted to a 10 minute demo
> -nor company policy to lie to customers that the OS goes by another name



they get more than 10min to play around but honestly the BB crap they put on it (called archie) makes the $2000 velocity lag so its not a true experience


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jul 27, 2008)

cdawall said:


> they get more than 10min to play around but honestly the BB crap they put on it (called archie) makes the $2000 velocity lag so its not a true experience


That's not true at all and you know it .  My local BB allows you to play with Vista on their machines as is.  What you get at home is what you can play with at the store.


----------



## cdawall (Jul 27, 2008)

EastCoasthandle said:


> That's not true at all and you know it .  My local BB allows you to play with Vista on their machines as is.  What you get at home is what you can play with at the store.



ours have archie on them i can take a pic if you want....we have like 3 machines that don't have that on them and thats because it causes a BSOD on the new HP comps with built recovery partitions.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jul 27, 2008)

cdawall said:


> ours have archie on them i can take a pic if you want....we have like 3 machines that don't have that on them and thats because it causes a BSOD on the new HP comps with built recovery partitions.



Your skating by my point.  Customers can use the PC in store as is to get a feel of what programs are available on that PC before they make a final purchase decision.  This has nothing to do with archie. Point being the double standard being praise by some (lying to customers of what OS is used and limiting them on said OS) when you (a worker at BB) cannot do based on company policies, procedures, rules, etc.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 27, 2008)

these people have always had the chance to mess around with vista. the fact that 10 minutes (without preconception) was enough to change their minds, means that they hadnt even been motivated to spend that much time even messing with vista in a store.

what this shows is that FAR TOO MANY people will just say 'eww vista' AND THEY HAVENT EVEN SPENT 10 MINUTES ON A VISTA MACHINE. there is more than enough opportunities to try it out, but the most vocal vista haters dont bother! they spend all their time ranting instead.

why do you think the people who DONT use vista complain about ram usage, whereas the people that DO use it, dont? whats the difference? who to trust?


----------



## Kei (Jul 27, 2008)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Your skating by my point.  Customers can use the PC in store as is to get a feel of what programs are available on that PC before they make a final purchase decision.  This has nothing to do with archie.



Forgive me for sounding like I'm arguing with you (I'm not), but you do indeed have a vaild point.

However..."You're skating by my point" we all know that the test was done to show that when people actually give it even a little time that Vista is not a bad/crap/horrible/bug infested/unstable OS. It's just like XP was when it started only prettier and with more features. I liked it before SP1 but not with SP1 it's wonderful to me.

The only point this experiment is trying to make is that if people would stop reading internet posts as their only way of getting opinions on a program then they'd find out that most of it is untrue.

K


----------



## cdawall (Jul 27, 2008)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Your skating by my point.  Customers can use the PC in store as is to get a feel of what programs are available on that PC before they make a final purchase decision.  This has nothing to do with archie. Point being the double standard being praise by some (lying to customers of what OS is used and limiting them on said OS) when you (a worker at BB) cannot do based on company policies, procedures, rules, etc.



true enough and to be honest most people who try it like it so take that you wonderful vista haters



Mussels said:


> these people have always had the chance to mess around with vista. the fact that 10 minutes (without preconception) was enough to change their minds, means that they hadnt even been motivated to spend that much time even messing with vista in a store.
> 
> what this shows is that FAR TOO MANY people will just say 'eww vista' AND THEY HAVENT EVEN SPENT 10 MINUTES ON A VISTA MACHINE. there is more than enough opportunities to try it out, but the most vocal vista haters dont bother! they spend all their time ranting instead.
> 
> why do you think the people who DONT use vista complain about ram usage, whereas the people that DO use it, dont? whats the difference? who to trust?




on the ram usage i have to say who cares beacuse now it seems to be a game who can show the most damn ram in a machine the gateways, dells and HPs all boast 6GB in highend and 4GB in midrange/lowend machines....

want to know the 1st question most people ask me when they look at a machine how much ram does it have. want to know the second question whats ram


----------



## Mussels (Jul 27, 2008)

cdawall said:


> on the ram usage i have to say who cares beacuse now it seems to be a game who can show the most damn ram in a machine the gateways, dells and HPs all boast 6GB in highend and 4GB in midrange/lowend machines....
> 
> want to know the 1st question most people ask me when they look at a machine how much ram does it have. want to know the second question whats ram



even today i was asked by a 'pro' IT guy who saw my storage system 'holy crap, 3TB! thats a fast computer!'

most people dont know what these things mean. they read it and simply assume its correct... and vistas early opinions (due to the leaked betas) were all negative... so they simply parrot that stuff.


----------



## cdawall (Jul 27, 2008)

Mussels said:


> even today i was asked by a 'pro' IT guy who saw my storage system 'holy crap, 3TB! thats a fast computer!'
> 
> most people dont know what these things mean. they read it and simply assume its correct... and vistas early opinions (due to the leaked betas) were all negative... so they simply parrot that stuff.



its true the world is full of morons


----------



## btarunr (Jul 27, 2008)

Mussels said:


> even today i was asked by a 'pro' IT guy who saw my storage system 'holy crap, 3TB! thats a fast computer!'



Sig-quote worthy.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jul 27, 2008)

In this bullet point they say:
"Over 120 computer users (mac, linux, XP and win2000)"'

However, in the Cnet article it was written:


> Spurred by an e-mail from someone deep in the marketing ranks, Microsoft last week traveled to San Francisco, *rounding up Windows XP users who had negative impressions of Vista*.



This is why I said then to take an email from the marketing department with a grain of salt.  1st these people were called Pro XP users now they are called computer users.  They have more holes in this survey then swiss cheese.



theJesus said:


> Oh darn, I was hoping they had actually released the details now so people would shut up about it lol.  Of course I'm sure on tuesday everybody will stop complaining about the lack of details provided, and start complaining about the ones that were provided.


Make sure you read the above quotes when you watch the video  




			
				cdawall said:
			
		

> true enough and to be honest most people who try it like it so take that you wonderful vista haters



I do not hate vista (something I've said before). I am only pointing out the hyporacy.



			
				Kei said:
			
		

> Forgive me for sounding like I'm arguing with you (I'm not), but you do indeed have a vaild point.
> 
> However..."You're skating by my point" we all know that the test was done to show that when people actually give it even a little time that Vista is not a bad/crap/horrible/bug infested/unstable OS. It's just like XP was when it started only prettier and with more features. I liked it before SP1 but not with SP1 it's wonderful to me.
> 
> ...


A demo was used in this survey. As you put it, a little time was invested but it was for the demo, not the PC as is. All this hype about the subject's experience has so far been about a demo they labeled Mojave (something they created) and not Vista (as they would use it at home with their own PC).  But lets wait for the videos and see what they reveal.


----------



## Kei (Jul 27, 2008)

btarunr said:


> Sig-quote worthy.



I'll see your suggestion...and raise you another one.



			
				cdwall said:
			
		

> want to know the 1st question most people ask me when they look at a machine how much ram does it have. want to know the second question whats ram



I think we should all write a book 

K


----------



## theJesus (Jul 27, 2008)

Oh darn, I was hoping they had actually released the details now so people would shut up about it lol.  Of course I'm sure on tuesday everybody will stop complaining about the lack of details provided, and start complaining about the ones that were provided.


----------



## IcrushitI (Jul 27, 2008)

I thought and read that the number one complaint of Vista was the DRM infestation. 
  That their is at least 15 services or more of some sort that reports back to MS about your computer and habits. When you check the agreement to install, MS says that it has a right to give that information to third party qualified companies that work or deal with MS.


----------



## Bluesman (Jul 27, 2008)

*VISTA Features*

I was going to stick with XP-PRO on my desktop based on the opinions of many at techpowerup that VISTA sucks.  Fortunately, I was able to buy a new ASUS laptop with Vista installed - my Toshiba laptop, at 720 mhz, was dying.  After a steep learning curve, I decided to install VISTA on my desktop.  I've found that it loads faster and I now know the tricks to solve all my novice issues encountered with my laptop.

I like VISTA because the OS kernal handles large graphic loads better, the UAC protects against rootkits or hacks, and I like the false security of protected mode IE.  The UAC can be less of a hassle with TweakUI and some select group policy changes - still you need the UAC hassle in my opinion to stop rootkits from installing under the admistrator banner.  As to compatiblity, you can run a program in XP compatibility mode within the file properties section and/or run in with administrator rights without compromizing system security.  I fixed startup program conflicts using Task Scheduler where you can delay startups on some programs that don't like to start side by side, like zonealarm and windows sidebar.  (I had a similar problem between zonealarm and speedfan in XP which I fixed with a freeware program called Startup Delayer.)

Regarding VISTA problems in general, every single event issue that has cropped up I have found solutions for through google.  In my early XP days google did not exist, so finding such solutions only came through my company IT guys.  And I had a huge number of problems with XP SP-1, due to compatiblity errors and user snafus.

As a caveat, both of my machines have 4 gigs of RAM, good dual core CPUs, and excellent hardware and cooling.  As has been said before, future OS'es need newer hardware.  I loved Win 98, thought XP was a step down but moved on with no regrets - as the newer hardware and software for XP was a huge improvement over Win 98.  The same will happen with VISTA and hopefully some linux OS versions.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jul 27, 2008)

Here is what a HP Pavilion DV 2000 looks like 

T2400 1.83GHz
Intel 945GM
1024 MB (max 2048 MB)
80 GB HD

Card Reader
SD, MMC, MS, MS Pro, xD

Optical drive
DVD DL writer with LightScribe 

Intel GMA 950 using 128MB @ 1280 x 800 
Integrated sound
The thing that stands out most was the fact they were not confident enough to let it run "Mojave" with 1 Gig so they upgraded it to 2GB of ram.  Also, those with positive testimonies about Vista become moot when their PCs are more powerful then posted in their bullet point.

But as I've said before, lets watch the video and see what it shows besides the praise.


----------



## Megasty (Jul 27, 2008)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Here is what a HP Pavilion DV 2000 looks like
> 
> T2400 1.83GHz
> Intel 945GM
> ...



Which will probably leave us all rolling in the isles just as MS hopes for


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jul 27, 2008)

Megasty said:


> Which will probably leave us all rolling in the isles just as MS hopes for



Explain? I thought this was about people down playing vista who suppose to have never used it.  Not about laughing at the misfortunate of others because they were fooled while others still believe that these individuals are "Pro XP users" (which turned out not to be true based on the current bullet point in the OP). Are you now implying this is about being vindictive and no longer about vista's image?


----------



## thoughtdisorder (Jul 27, 2008)

theJesus said:


> Oh darn, I was hoping they had actually released the details now so people would shut up about it lol.  Of course I'm sure on tuesday everybody will stop complaining about the lack of details provided, and start complaining about the ones that were provided.



Hey, Jesus joined TPU! Cool! (Welcome Jesus!)

Regarding Microsoft and their marketing stunt, that was aimed at the very folks who ask "what's ram"....Amazing how worked up everyone can get over their OS....Come on, live and let live. What would Jesus do?


----------



## Megasty (Jul 27, 2008)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Explain? I thought this was about people down playing vista who suppose to have never used it.  Not about laughing at the misfortunate of others because they were fooled and some believe they are Pro XP users ( which turned out to be a lie based on the current bullet point). It's suppose to be about Vista image, not about being vindictive.



Its not about misfortune or anything like that, I just find it humorous that folks bash vista w/o trying it. On the other hand, this IS a MS stunt, or rather a setup. It could be handled on 2 fronts. 

The 1st is that MS is just getting a bunch of ppl together, calling them what they want to, & saying that they all loved vista. The ppl involved don't hate vista at all & they just want to be noticed, i dunno. 

The 2nd is that these ppl are really anti-vista in some way, shape, or form. MS just modded vista to look more like XP or did nothing to it at all (just renamed it)

I won't be laughing at the folk but at MS itself. I don't know how much salt a person would have to have to buy into this marketing BS. They want to enhance vista's image but _making it look like they tricked XP users_ isn't a good way to go about it.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jul 27, 2008)

Megasty said:


> Its not about misfortune or anything like that, I just find it humorous that *folks* bash vista w/o trying it. On the other hand, this IS a MS stunt, or rather a setup. It could be handled on 2 fronts.
> 
> The 1st is that MS is just getting a bunch of ppl together, calling them what they want to, & saying that they all loved vista. The ppl involved don't hate vista at all & they just want to be noticed, i dunno.
> 
> ...



I see, thanks for clarifying. But I have to ask, who are the folk that bashed vista without trying it? How are they being identified as such?  Can it be said that this term is being used by anyone who at the very least shows indifference about the OS?


----------



## Megasty (Jul 27, 2008)

EastCoasthandle said:


> I see, thanks for clarifying. But I have to ask, who are the folk that bashed vista without trying it? How are they being identified as such? Can it be said that this term is being used by anyone who at the very least shows indifference about the OS?



My brother is one of them. He keeps on saying vista is a slow POS but he has never touched it, even when I suggested that he could play with a vista rig I'd just put together. He's always into new hardware but he turned me down flat. He told me he didn't want to get _infected_ 

I'm actually indifferent about vista & XP. XP had its time to shine & I simply moved on. When the next OS rolls out, I will move on to that from vista. I can see how ppl with older rigs don't want to upgrade but ppl with new, fast rigs should want to get the most out of them. I can't imagine any of my quad rigs fumbling around with XP.

When it comes to MS, I don't know how they will protray the surveyors but it will be crystal clear when the video comes out


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jul 27, 2008)

Megasty said:


> My brother is one of them. He keeps on saying vista is a slow POS but he has never touched it, even when I suggested that he could play with a vista rig I'd just put together. He's always into new hardware but he turned me down flat. He told me he didn't want to get _infected_
> 
> When it comes to MS, I don't know how they will protray the surveyors but it will be crystal clear when the video comes out


I see, so that would make that just your brother and not "people" per say.  Ok I understand that.


----------



## hat (Jul 27, 2008)

If vista didn't suck MS wouldn't have to pull this little stunt in the first place.


----------



## Megasty (Jul 27, 2008)

EastCoasthandle said:


> I see, so that would make that just your brother and not "people" per say.  Ok I understand that.



I was just using him for an example since he is so close. There are a slew of ppl in my circle that hate vista. I can atest for some of them since I know they tried vista (I made them ). 
All I want is for them to have some grounded hate. There are ppl out there that hate vista just because it is. I can't even preceive the way these ppl think - so maybe I should say they don't exist, its easier to get by that way


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jul 27, 2008)

Megasty said:


> I was just using him for an example since he is so close. There are a slew of ppl in my circle that hate vista. I can atest for some of them since I know they tried vista (I made them ).
> *All I want is for them to have some grounded hate.* There are ppl out there that hate vista just because it is. I can't even preceive the way these ppl think - so maybe I should say they don't exist, its easier to get by that way



I can agree with some of this as it make sense.  However, what I do not understand is some who are labeling everyone who is indifferent to Vista as such (the other side of the coin).  If someone doesn't care for vista doesn't mean they dislike vista, for example.  What I seem to get from this (and the other thread) is that if people try vista they will automatically like vista as if they were spell bound (per what is being implied about the survey).  As with any level of perception, some can/will hate vista 1st, try it and still hate vista.  Therefore, really didn't change their opinion.

Example:
Someone tells you they are not hungry but you insist they try apple pie, it's so delicious, etc.  After peer pressuring them to try it they take a bite and their attitude remains monotone.  Sure, you got the person to try it but if it's not what they want it won't change their opinion of it (talking from a perspective of people who mean what they say).


----------



## Megasty (Jul 27, 2008)

There are many levels of indifference when it comes to vista. That's what I find so weird about what MS is doing. All they seem to be doing is listening to all the hate mail they're getting about vista crashes & crap. In turn, they make it worse by focusing on ppl who hate vista & incompassing them in this huge group that really doesn't exist. The avg user has no idea what going on in their pc. Of these avg users, most of them experience vista errors & crashes that comes with having a computer. That's the most common indifference that's out there. 

When vista first came out, it was garbage but so was XP. That is another gray area of ppl that merely dislike vista because they are comparing it to how stable XP _is_. Vista is much more stable after SP1 than XP was after SP1. I'm not completely against my peers that never tried vista & hate it but I can't listen to them complain about something they never used. I made that clear to them. So when they finally ended up trying it & still hating it, I was able to listen to their bashing (to a point) 

What MS is doing is not entirely wrong if the ppl never actually tried vista like they said, but who are these ppl & what lvl of concern do they have (love, hate, indiff, etc.). MS is trying to make some kind of moot point with vista but all they are really doing is turning themselves laughing stocks with those who are in-the-know, like ourselves.


----------



## Atnevon (Jul 27, 2008)

WarEagleAU said:


> I personally dont hate Vista. My wifes lappy has it. I like it really but its just a hog on resources for her laptop, where as XP wouldnt be



Its a resource hog, as a resource user. The way Vista uses RAM is like a cache, more than a temp storage, For example, it preloads some data for what Vista sees its user use the most. My laptop, though on 1gb of RAM, has noticed my pattern of immediately going to Firefox when I boot up. 

So, Vista speeds up my process of booting what I use most. In reality, this is what the increased RAM usage is doing. Benchmarkers are P.O.ed because their 3DMark 06 is 1000 points off. 

Boo-Hoo. Vista 64 is great. Sure there are not as many supported programs for 64bit systems, but having a safer, stable environment for my computer is worth having. For god sakes, stop making overclocking a sport. (not directed towards WarEagle)

As for the support of other vendors, they are just as guilty. (Nvidia crashes anyone) The problem is that Apple did such vast marketing campaign to make Vista look bad. Then agian, the average user has no idea how to even update drivers. Which is why Microsoft has had a hard time explaining how decent their OS is, and if you use it for more than 5 min, you might actually see how decent it is.

Personally, I wish Steve Jobs would stop passing hos products as Elitist, and people would overall give something a "personal" trial before bashing. Then I realize, I wake up, grab some cerial, and realize how stupid people around me actually are. Thanks TPU for having some computer sense.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jul 27, 2008)

Megasty said:


> There are many levels of indifference when it comes to vista. That's what I find so weird about what MS is doing. All they seem to be doing is listening to all the hate mail they're getting about vista crashes & crap. In turn, they make it worse by focusing on ppl who hate vista & incompassing them in this huge group that really doesn't exist. The avg user has no idea what going on in their pc. Of these avg users, most of them experience vista errors & crashes that comes with having a computer. That's the most common indifference that's out there.
> 
> When vista first came out, it was garbage but so was XP. That is another gray area of ppl that merely dislike vista because they are comparing it to how stable XP _is_. Vista is much more stable after SP1 than XP was after SP1. I'm not completely against my peers that never tried vista & hate it but I can't listen to them complain about something they never used. I made that clear to them. So when they finally ended up trying it & still hating it, I was able to listen to their bashing (to a point)
> 
> What MS is doing is not entirely wrong if the ppl never actually tried vista like they said, but who are these ppl & what lvl of concern do they have (love, hate, indiff, etc.). MS is trying to make some kind of moot point with vista but all they are really doing is turning themselves laughing stocks with those who are in-the-know, like ourselves.



To sum this up, this will be Mac's next ad.  I wonder if the same people who laugh/taunt or make trivial references at the people in survey will equally laugh at the new Mojave Mac ad.


----------



## unsmart (Jul 27, 2008)

Just because we care about this crap doesn't make use better or smarter then the person who cares about cars or cooking. Most people view the PC the same as a TV or Stove,big names, big number,better product.
 I see nothing wrong with " vista bashing" based on reviews, we do it for hardware and it's OK. If I said the HD2600pro sucked based on reviews no one would tell me to buy one and then make up my mind. the Sites like this and Cnet are here to offer previews to people how for many reasons can't or choose not to install software/hardware without any info. 
 Vista had it's issues when released and was placed on retail PCs that where less then optimized for it. You can't blame the average user for not wanting vista when most reviews at release where negative. This stunt by MS is more of a "look at Vista now" played off as people hating for no reason. 
 I have had a copy of vista form release and one for SP1 but have never felt the need to install them. Both my PC are DX10 and dualcore with 2gb ram, theres just no driving force for me to upgrade now. I don't care for shiny,pretty and don't have a lot of time learning new tweaks and tricks.


----------



## cdawall (Jul 28, 2008)

hat said:


> If vista didn't suck MS wouldn't have to pull this little stunt in the first place.



dude grow up


----------



## ShadowFold (Jul 28, 2008)

Vista did suck at launch when I tried it but now its my new OS home. Its seriously way better than XP not just for DX10 but for everything else. Just seems faster and more stable.


----------



## farlex85 (Jul 28, 2008)

Yay another argument about why vista sucks/is great. Some people (I'm looking at you east ) keep crying foul and trying to make it seem like microsoft has done something wrong here, and saying people keep pointing the finger at them saying they hate vista. Others say how great it is. Really, this isn't about whether vista is good or not. This is for people who simply have not tried vista but b/c of the negative stigma it has gotten automatically disregard it as a bad os. If they tried it and didn't like it, that's fine, obviously not everyone is going to like the same thing. This particular os has gotten such a bad rap though that people who know virtually nothing about computers will say they don't want vista. How do they know? Cause some jackass like myself said they wouldn't (I would never say that). The point is not whether microsoft made a good os, or whether they conducted a good study. This is simply counter-marketing that is and has been needed from them for some time to at least attempt to open people's minds a bit. I think it may be too late, the negative seeds have been sewn too deep, and threads like this are proof.......


----------



## MopeyMartian (Jul 28, 2008)

Okay, so now I'm seeing a lot more praise than I did a year ago for Vista.

The only reason I haven't tried it is because there's no way to "try" it on my PC without spending $100.  I'd love to see if it's compatible with all my hard/software but I'm hesitant of course.  

My brother might let me build him a gaming PC soon so perhaps I'll see how Vista Premium works on his new rig.

So Vista gets the A-OK from everyone here now?


----------



## hat (Jul 28, 2008)

I've personally used vista. Went back to XP. One of my uncles doesn't like it either, the only reason he uses it is because he has to get used to it because he's in charge of the computers at the company he works for. And no, he's not the typical nooby IT guy. One of the specific reasons I don't like it (this goes for my uncle too) is because there is no option to actually format the hard drive.

When formatting a drive in XP, you have two options: quick format and regular format. All the quick format does is it goes in and says "ok this drive is formatted to NTFS now". The regular format checks every sector on the hard drive and makes sure it's a good sector. Bad sectors are "blocked off", and not allowed to be written to.

What happens when you install vista, and it writes to a bad sector because you were forced to go with the lazy(quick) format? It would be even crappier than it would be on a normal install.

I stand behind what I said origionally. MS made a shitty product and it got bad revies because it sucked, so it sold poorly. Remember when MS blamed poor sales on piracy? Yes, that must be it, because everyone knows how to pirate an OS. Sarcasm aside us do it yourselvers, at least when it comes to buying computer parts and building it ourselves are a very small portion of the computer market. Most people go out and buy a Dell or other prebuilt system, which comes with an OS already installed... eliminating the need to pirate an OS. And it's not like everyone who builds computers by hand like you and me pirate operating systems, that is a small percentage of a small percentage of people.

Vista is plagued with bad reviews and poor sales because the product itself is poor. Sure it may be a decent product NOW, but it's had a lot of work done on it, which should have been done before it was rolled out of the R&D department of MS.

MS dropped a turd on the market and now that they've polished it they are re-marketing it as something better.


----------



## farlex85 (Jul 28, 2008)

MopeyMartian said:


> Okay, so now I'm seeing a lot more praise than I did a year ago for Vista.
> 
> The only reason I haven't tried it is because there's no way to "try" it on my PC without spending $100.  I'd love to see if it's compatible with all my hard/software but I'm hesitant of course.
> 
> ...



Not everyone, but yes, I would say the majority here approve of vista at this point. If you play dx10, and care more about your qualitative experience w/ a os than looking at fps or how much ram is being used, my guess is you'll like it too.


----------



## Megasty (Jul 28, 2008)

hat said:


> MS dropped a turd on the market and now that they've polished it they are re-marketing it as something better.



Yeah, a polished turd is better than the steaming pile that it was. I must admit that I didn't care for vista at all b4 SP1. It was much too unstable no matter what I did to it. I probably got BSOD 3 or 4 times a week for no reason & game crashes that resulted in BSOD (non-driver related). The dreamscene BS also ended in terrible BSOD so I could even use that. SP1 seems to have corrected all of that since the only crashes I had since installing it was due to gfx drivers. I install vista on new HDs all the time. The full format is a pain but I usually don't have to sit through that mess


----------



## cdawall (Jul 28, 2008)

hat said:


> I've personally used vista. Went back to XP. One of my uncles doesn't like it either, the only reason he uses it is because he has to get used to it because he's in charge of the computers at the company he works for. And no, he's not the typical nooby IT guy. One of the specific reasons I don't like it (this goes for my uncle too) is because there is no option to actually format the hard drive.
> 
> When formatting a drive in XP, you have two options: quick format and regular format. All the quick format does is it goes in and says "ok this drive is formatted to NTFS now". The regular format checks every sector on the hard drive and makes sure it's a good sector. Bad sectors are "blocked off", and not allowed to be written to.
> 
> ...



you dont like vista because it doesn't have a pair of options for formatting hat thats just stupid honestly have you used the product since SP1? have you used server 08? have you seen all vista can do? do you just like complaining to see people respond?


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jul 28, 2008)

farlex85 said:


> Yay another argument about why vista sucks/is great. Some people (I'm looking at you east ) keep crying foul and trying to make it seem like microsoft has done something wrong here, and saying people keep pointing the finger at them saying they hate vista. Others say how great it is. Really, this isn't about whether vista is good or not. This is for people who simply have not tried vista but b/c of the negative stigma it has gotten automatically disregard it as a bad os. If they tried it and didn't like it, that's fine, obviously not everyone is going to like the same thing. This particular os has gotten such a bad rap though that people who know virtually nothing about computers will say they don't want vista. How do they know? Cause some jackass like myself said they wouldn't (I would never say that). The point is not whether microsoft made a good os, or whether they conducted a good study. This is simply counter-marketing that is and has been needed from them for some time to at least attempt to open people's minds a bit. I think it may be too late, the negative seeds have been sewn too deep, and threads like this are proof.......


But you cannot answer the question of who these people are.  You have generalize those individuals that either don't like vista or indifferent towards vista as either hating it or never trying it.  So where is the proof the these masses of people who never tried vista yet hate it?  No one has provided a source to this new fountain of PC elitist who made such comments.  

The survey as far as I am concern is invalid base on what was already discussed.  But people like you easily ignore the facts:
-The very subjects tested in the survey were referred to as being XP Pro at first via cnet article from MS's marketing department.  Later are called PC users in the OP. proof 
-Next, they had to upgrade the laptop from 1 to 2 GBs of ram in order to conduct this illusion.  I find it odd they couldn't/wouldn't use the laptop as is when all that is suppose to be required is 1GB (per their own website). 
-double standards being impose that it's OK for MS to tell people that Vista is Mojave and limit them to a 10 minute demo.  But if you work at BB, CC, etc you cannot do that.  
-etc
-etc
And you say I am crying foul,  .The proof is right in front of you but all you have done is post generalizations, vague anti vista comments and say that I'm crying foul in the face of the facts presented against this survey found in this and the other thread.  

In closing, because you failed to recognize and accept facts presented can only discredit your own opinion on me and anyone else who question the survey as a whole.


----------



## hat (Jul 28, 2008)

Vista only gives the option for quick format, no long format. No checking for bad sectors. So it's entirely possible to have parts of your OS written to bad sectors, causing all kinds of funky problems. That's not reason enough? Ok, how about that annoying thing where every time you want to do anything in Vista, it asks you if you were the one who did it. This just sucks. If someone is skilled enough to take over your computer, I'm sure they could hack that gay little security measure away. I wouldn't be worried about this if it asked you if you wanted this when you start up the computer after the OS is installed for the first time, but nope.


----------



## wazzledoozle (Jul 28, 2008)

"its so-far-flop"

Great non-impartial reporting there. 

Just because some of the tech-media has taken Vista on a witchhunt doesn't make it a flop.


----------



## farlex85 (Jul 28, 2008)

EastCoasthandle said:


> But you cannot answer the question of who these people are.  You have generalize those individuals that either don't like vista or indifferent towards vista as either hating it or never trying it.  So where is the proof the these masses of people who never tried vista yet hate it?  No one has provided a source to this new fountain of PC elitist who made such comments.
> 
> The survey as far as I am concern is invalid base on what was already discussed.  But people like you easily ignore the facts:
> -The very subjects tested in the survey were referred to as being XP Pro at first via cnet article from MS's marketing department.  Later be called PC users in the OP. proof
> ...



As for the first part, I have already said in the other thread I do know who these people are, I encounter them on a daily basis. People who are buying new computers, and don't know much about them, almost always have a predisposition to disliking vista. 

I haven't posted any generalizations, I could get more specific about particular people if you like, I thought I made it clear I have been referring to personal experience. I haven't said a single thing that should be constrewed as anti-vista as well, I love vista and have defended it numerous times, not as much in these threads, b/c as I've said, it's not the point.

And what is this proof you speak of? Skepticism is not a form of proof. I have to repeat myself again I guess, I agree that the study is not to be trusted fully, as it is from their own marketing department. That doesn't mean MS is doing anything wrong.

What facts have I ignored, I don't have much opinion of you at all outside of this forum, which all I could say is perhaps you are stubborn and don't like to be wrong, but who does, you just don't seem to be understanding me, perhaps that is my fault. It's mostly trivial anyway.


----------



## farlex85 (Jul 28, 2008)

EastCoasthandle said:


> The very things you've asked are found in the post you've quoted.  All you have done is ignore what I've presented to soapbox your own opinions.



That is not proof, that is your own soapbox of opinions (which I agree w/ factually, but it's missing the point). You haven't really presented anything, just needlessly broken down something which is irrelevant to my point. I can see your not going to get my point, and this will be fruitless, so it is what it is.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jul 28, 2008)

farlex85 said:


> As for the first part, I have already said in the other thread *I do know who these people are, I encounter them on a daily basis. People who are buying new computers, and don't know much about them, almost always have a predisposition to disliking vista. *
> 
> I haven't posted any generalizations, I could get more specific about particular people if you like, I thought I made it clear I have been referring to personal experience. I haven't said a single thing that should be constrewed as anti-vista as well, I love vista and have defended it numerous times, not as much in these threads, b/c as I've said, it's not the point.


-Saying you know who these people are is a generalization. You could be more specific (which is the opposite of being general) but you haven't.  Which completely contradicts your own comments.



farlex85 said:


> And what is this proof you speak of? Skepticism is not a form of proof. I have to repeat myself again I guess, I agree that the study is not to be trusted fully, as it is from their own marketing department. That doesn't mean MS is doing anything wrong.
> 
> What facts have I ignored, I don't have much opinion of you at all outside of this forum, which all I could say is perhaps you are stubborn and don't like to be wrong, but who does, you just don't seem to be understanding me, * perhaps that is my fault. It's mostly trivial anyway. *



The proof you quoted but ignored, LOL that proof.  Skepticism is not a valid explanation of why you are responding to my opinion.  That's just an excuse to respond yet ignore the points I've made.  You only repeat yourself because you haven't addressed why you are responding to my post.  The first sign of a soapbox post is that you admit that you have to repeat yourself.  The very things you've asked are found in the post you've quoted.  All you have done is ignore what I've presented to soapbox your own opinions.  Another reason is when you admit you are being trivial in why you are responding to my opinion on the survey  




farlex85 said:


> That is not proof, that is your own soapbox of opinions (which I agree w/ factually, but it's missing the point). You haven't really presented anything, just needlessly broken down something which is irrelevant to my point. I can see your not going to get my point, and this will be fruitless, so it is what it is.



We can agree to disagree but after quoting my own post and ignoring the points I've made makes it clear you can offer no logical defense, explanation or business standard that justifies what I've observed. Having said that, good day.


----------



## FatForester (Jul 28, 2008)

farlex85 said:


> Yay another argument about why vista sucks/is great. Some people (I'm looking at you east ) keep crying foul and trying to make it seem like microsoft has done something wrong here, and saying people keep pointing the finger at them saying they hate vista. Others say how great it is. Really, this isn't about whether vista is good or not. This is for people who simply have not tried vista but b/c of the negative stigma it has gotten automatically disregard it as a bad os. If they tried it and didn't like it, that's fine, obviously not everyone is going to like the same thing. This particular os has gotten such a bad rap though that people who know virtually nothing about computers will say they don't want vista. How do they know? Cause some jackass like myself said they wouldn't (I would never say that). The point is not whether microsoft made a good os, or whether they conducted a good study. This is simply counter-marketing that is and has been needed from them for some time to at least attempt to open people's minds a bit. I think it may be too late, the negative seeds have been sewn too deep, and threads like this are proof.......



Wait... A logical and coherent thought in the middle of a ridiculous argument? Preposterous! 

These types of threads are always entertaining to just sit back and laugh at, and this one takes the cake. Marketing is used to convince people to buy a product, so trying to argue about its integrity is completely worthless. This is just like people getting worked up over the new Snickers ad featuring Mr. T for being "homophobic"... except there isn't a Snickers gun, and there definitely isn't Mr. T.


----------



## Megasty (Jul 28, 2008)

Plz make the bashing stop 

Can we just wait to see what MS will entertain us with


----------



## farlex85 (Jul 28, 2008)

EastCoasthandle said:


> We can agree to disagree but after quoting my own post and ignoring the points I've made makes it clear you can offer no defense. Be that as it may...



One more time, I have not ignored what you have been saying. I AGREE THE SURVEY IS INVALID. That third hyphen point you make about double standards is not really true, nor rellavant. The other two I agree with, I'm not going to say to believe something coming like this coming from the company that makes the product. The other things you said in the post I directly addressed. And once again, companies do things such as this all the time, and MS should have done this sooner, it doesn't matter that a marketing survey is biased, it's a given that it's biased and doesn't really need to be discussed. And once again, although the survey isn't in of itself valid, I have myself frequently encountered the exact trend the survey claims to have found. I really don't know how to make myself any more clear.......




Megasty said:


> Plz make the bashing stop
> 
> Can we just wait to see what MS will entertain us with





We're not bashing, please others interject w/ logic, I'm not mad (a little exhausted from repeating myself) , I doubt east is either, just difference of points.


----------



## Swansen (Jul 28, 2008)

Megasty said:


> Dang, 120 ppl being pwned at the same time, talk about a Kodak moment
> 
> As for me, I don't care about vista being a resource hog or whatever. More or less, I want it to be so. What's the point of having a superpowerful PC if it doesn't get taxed by the OS. You can even turn down vista so it looks & feels just like XP  I even have vista running on an 8 yo rig. As these pc parts get more powerful, so should the OS. Bashing something that you haven't even use is plain stupid.



Um??? thats extremely counter productive, and wasteful, the more resources an OS uses, the more power it draws, ect.  OS's shouldn't use more resources, they should use less, whats the point of having a super powerful computer?? multitasking with zero hitches, and doing whatever else without the OS in the background slowing everything down.  Honestly, an perfect OS would leave NO footprint, but thats next to impossible.

On Vista, the problem still lies here.  More or less Microsoft has a product that works, its stable for the most part, and mostly secure, yes, Vista is "now" better than XP, but thats the problem.  It should have been better from launch, not a year later, we pay Microsoft a crap ton of money for what reason??? so they can release sub-par operating systems, then have the paying users work their bugs out, because they are cheap.  Right now, they are getting what they deserve, i say boycott Vista for this simple reason.  Thats to show that Microsoft doesn't have absolute control and we won't buy whatever they feel we should, or something new just because they made it.  If they want to stay on top, their are going to have to start producing quality from the get go, period.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 28, 2008)

Swansen said:


> Um??? thats extremely counter productive, and wasteful, the more resources an OS uses, the more power it draws, ect.  OS's shouldn't use more resources, they should use less, whats the point of having a super powerful computer?? multitasking with zero hitches, and doing whatever else without the OS in the background slowing everything down.  Honestly, an perfect OS would leave NO footprint, but thats next to impossible.



thats completely false logic. the power resources the more power... no. ram uses power just being on, it doesnt go up that much to use it.

vista caches it, so its a one off anyway for the most case.

again this is just an uninformed person who's never actually used it... you're making assumptions here.


----------



## Duxx (Jul 28, 2008)

I still cant convince anybody that Vista is any good


----------



## Megasty (Jul 28, 2008)

Swansen said:


> Um??? thats extremely counter productive, and wasteful, the more resources an OS uses, the more power it draws, ect.  OS's shouldn't use more resources, they should use less, whats the point of having a super powerful computer?? multitasking with zero hitches, and doing whatever else without the OS in the background slowing everything down.  Honestly, an perfect OS would leave NO footprint, but thats next to impossible.



An OS is just what it is: An operating system to be used directly with the programs installed on it. Vista is configured to be a multimedia system of programs itself. These programs will tax any system on there own. Of course it will slow down systems which cannot handle the taxing but having these super fast systems w/o an OS to match is stupid & anti-progressive. 

There is a fine line for systems that cannot handle vista, that's why vista has system requirements. In context, every pc user with pre-vista systems either have system that can or cannot handle vista. The group that can handle it have the choice to upgrade or not. Saying that the OS simply shouldn't be what it is doesn't justify the means faster hardware. If games & programs are becoming more taxing to faster hardware then it makes all the sense in the world for the main OS to become more taxing as well. Its just up to the user whether to use it or not, if they have that sort of luxury to make that choice. Choice is everything 




farlex85 said:


> We're not bashing, please others interject w/ logic, I'm not mad (a little exhausted from repeating myself) , I doubt east is either, just difference of points.



I wasn't actually referring to your or east's points, it was more of a general statement


----------



## Swansen (Jul 28, 2008)

Mussels said:


> thats completely false logic. the power resources the more power... no. ram uses power just being on, it doesnt go up that much to use it.
> 
> vista caches it, so its a one off anyway for the most case.
> 
> again this is just an uninformed person who's never actually used it... you're making assumptions here.



wow..... do you know me some how??? I have used vista, for a whole semester (2 months) and around every other day in the library, so thanks for letting me know i've never done something before, i'll make sure to ask you before i say something, just to make sure i have or haven't used it before??? So with every OS release they should use more and more resources??? how is that productive? thats just ridiculous?? seriously, give me a reason why an OS SHOULD use more of anything??  OS X isn't a resource hog, more or less, and depending on the Distro, new Linux released use the same or less resources, half the reason Microsoft doesn't is so that hardware vendors will sell more because users will have to buy new hardware to run the new OS, thats common knowledge.  Did i not say that Vista is in fact better than XP??? because i most definitely did, and i'm not going to re-state my reason as to why Vista should not be supported by consumers.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 28, 2008)

Swansen said:


> wow..... do you know me some how??? I have used vista, for a whole semester (2 months) and around every other day in the library, so thanks for letting me know i've never done something before, i'll make sure to ask you before i say something, just to make sure i have or haven't used it before??? So with every OS release they should use more and more resources??? how is that productive? thats just ridiculous?? seriously, give me a reason why an OS SHOULD use more of anything??  OS X isn't a resource hog, more or less, and depending on the Distro, new Linux released use the same or less resources, half the reason Microsoft doesn't is so that hardware vendors will sell more because users will have to buy new hardware to run the new OS, thats common knowledge.  Did i not say that Vista is in fact better than XP??? because i most definitely did, and i'm not going to re-state my reason as to why Vista should not be supported by consumers.



well you're talking crap. you state these assumptions about why vista runs so slow, yet they're made up. OMG IT USES RESOURCES THATS STUPID.

erm, every version of windows has used more resources. in fact, ever since DOS every OS upgrade has used more. thats been going on for a loooong time. go back to win 98 or 2000 if you're so obsessed.


----------



## farlex85 (Jul 28, 2008)

Swansen said:


> wow..... do you know me some how??? I have used vista, for a whole semester (2 months) and around every other day in the library, so thanks for letting me know i've never done something before, i'll make sure to ask you before i say something, just to make sure i have or haven't used it before??? So with every OS release they should use more and more resources??? how is that productive? thats just ridiculous?? seriously, give me a reason why an OS SHOULD use more of anything??  OS X isn't a resource hog, more or less, and depending on the Distro, new Linux released use the same or less resources, half the reason Microsoft doesn't is so that hardware vendors will sell more because users will have to buy new hardware to run the new OS, thats common knowledge.  Did i not say that Vista is in fact better than XP??? because i most definitely did, and i'm not going to re-state my reason as to why Vista should not be supported by consumers.



Use more resources to gain more functionality, simple as that. Would you have us have a stripped down vista that we could run our p3's w/ 256mb of ram on? I know many would. Comps require upgrades, and it's a balance back and forth, more powerful software, more powerful hardware. We could stick w/ not having to upgrade, and we'd stay right where we were......


----------



## Megasty (Jul 28, 2008)

Duxx said:


> I still cant convince anybody that Vista is any good



Don't worry about it...the seeds have already taken root. Some ppl actually have reasons why they dislike vista & that's good enough for me, no matter how petty they are 



farlex85 said:


> Use more resources to gain more functionality, simple as that. Would you have us have a stripped down vista that we could run our p3's w/ 256mb of ram on? I know many would. Comps require upgrades, and it's a balance back and forth, more powerful software, more powerful hardware. We could stick w/ not having to upgrade, and we'd stay right where we were......



If I can get Vista to work on my old Armada 110 (when it even died several time while installing XP) then it can install on anything at that lvl...


----------



## AddSub (Jul 28, 2008)

Ah, good ol' corporate propaganda at work. If Microsoft spent half the money, resources, and time on actual product development that they spend on bullshit marketing campaigns like these then all these product and service quality related screw-ups they have been having ever since they decided that NT multiuser server architecture could be ported to and would be a good idea in a largely single-user client-oriented world, well these screw-ups, they would be non-existent to a large extent if all this attention was redirected in such a way. 

But, nope, like any other mega-corp or aspiring mega-corp for that matter, they are pretty much only concerned about how well they can market their products. Quality be damned, it's not how good or useful a product is, but how good or useful a product _*appears to be*_ (Example: every Apple product released this century so far.)

Hype it, hype it, and hype it some more, and once enough units have been moved, pushed, and sold, and once the obvious defects show up, then let the marketing department and the official bullshitters work their magic.


----------



## Swansen (Jul 28, 2008)

Mussels said:


> well you're talking crap. you state these assumptions about why vista runs so slow, yet they're made up. OMG IT USES RESOURCES THATS STUPID.
> 
> erm, every version of windows has used more resources. in fact, ever since DOS every OS upgrade has used more. thats been going on for a loooong time. go back to win 98 or 2000 if you're so obsessed.



??? crap?? i didn't start the name calling, ether way, there is obviously going to be some jump, in the amount of memory, cpu usage, ect, in a new OS.  However, the jump that Vista took was unnecessary, Linux and OS X are doing the same thing on about nothing.  Yes, Vista can be set-up/bought to run on minimal hardware, but they don't advertise it?? and you also loose functionality.  So, i am now curious, why do you defend Vista, Microsoft is a for profit company, they don't care about you, why do you care about them?  They should make quality products, and they don't, it took XP, what? seven years to get where it is?? thats just dumb.  If windows was a free program, then whatever, wouldn't matter, but its something we pay for.  By paying for faulty equipment, you only encourage more of the same, that holds true for anything.  





> "OMG IT USES RESOURCES THATS STUPID."


 When did i say that? your putting words in my mouth.  On that, if your trying to prove a point, attacking or belittling some one will only hurt your reputability.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jul 28, 2008)

AddSub said:


> Ah, good ol' corporate propaganda at work. If Microsoft spent half the money, resources, and time on actual product development that they spend on bullshit marketing campaigns like these then all these product and service quality related screw-ups they have been having ever since they decided that NT multiuser server architecture could be ported to and would be a good idea in a largely single-user client-oriented world, well these screw-ups, they would be non-existent to a large extent if all this attention was redirected in such a way.
> 
> But, nope, like any other mega-corp or aspiring mega-corp for that matter, they are pretty much only concerned about how well they can market their products. Quality be damned, it's not how good or useful a product is, but how good or useful a product _*appears to be*_ (Example: every Apple product released this century so far.)
> 
> Hype it, hype it, and hype it some more, and once enough units have been moved, pushed, and sold, and once the obvious defects show up, then let the marketing department and the official bullshitters work their magic.


Excellent post! This sums up what I've been pointing out.


----------



## farlex85 (Jul 28, 2008)

AddSub said:


> Ah, good ol' corporate propaganda at work. If Microsoft spent half the money, resources, and time on actual product development that they spend on bullshit marketing campaigns like these then all these product and service quality related screw-ups they have been having ever since they decided that NT multiuser server architecture could be ported to and would be a good idea in a largely single-user client-oriented world, well these screw-ups, they would be non-existent to a large extent if all this attention was redirected in such a way.
> 
> But, nope, like any other mega-corp or aspiring mega-corp for that matter, they are pretty much only concerned about how well they can market their products. Quality be damned, it's not how good or useful a product is, but how good or useful a product _*appears to be*_ (Example: every Apple product released this century so far.)
> 
> Hype it, hype it, and hype it some more, and once enough units have been moved, pushed, and sold, and once the obvious defects show up, then let the marketing department and the official bullshitters work their magic.



Welcome to the modern age. This isn't new, marketing has been part of the capitalistic world for a while. MS has actually underhyped vista, and have instead allowed word of mouth and sheer company force (putting it on all new pc's b/c, well, they can) to spread vista. As I said, they should have done this sooner. W/ the internet the way it is, a company like MS cannot afford to simply let the public spread the word themselves. If you let the competition and disgruntled users speak for you, there's a good chance you won't get a fair chance (not that MS needs a fair chance ).


----------



## Megasty (Jul 28, 2008)

Well MS better make sure they hype up windows 7 as much as possible. Word-of-mouth cause nothing MS bashing (not that they don't deserve to be bashed)


----------



## Swansen (Jul 28, 2008)

Megasty said:


> Well MS better make sure they hype up windows 7 as much as possible. Word-of-mouth cause nothing MS bashing (not that they don't deserve to be bashed)



Honestly though, i really hope Microsoft returns, they have barely hyped 7 at all, and i hope they don't, all i want it a rock solid OS.  If they deliver that, my opinion on Microsoft will sway a good deal. (i'm not getting my hopes up....)


----------



## HAL7000 (Jul 28, 2008)

Well, *MS at its best...perfect deception*. To think MS had to do *a blind study* to begin with trying to prove who what when and why Vista is so wonderful. 
*All they had to do is lower the price, throw away all the other versions of vista, make and support 32/ 64 bit Vista.* Macs got it made never having to really worry about what version to load outside of obvious upgrades. 
MS needs this band wagon, fix whats there and stop bullsh*tting the general public about why ignorant people can't recognize Vista disguised. Are they saying that the average users are stupid? I have always had a love hate relationship with MS. I really want to jump into vista, but can not justify the cost of the OS when I mainly game on my rig. Even though I am building a new gaming rig again, I most likely will load in XP Pro again. Esp. since I would use oem vista and then the way I change MB's, MS won't allow me to. So my Corp. ED of XP will do me just fine until they get their sh*t together.


----------



## mab1376 (Jul 28, 2008)

But I just changed my windows partition over to vista finally... :shadedshu

If you have a powerful enough machine, it's really nice since they finally worked most of the bugs out of the drivers.


----------



## farlex85 (Jul 28, 2008)

Swansen said:


> Honestly though, i really hope Microsoft returns, they have barely hyped 7 at all, and i hope they don't, all i want it a rock solid OS.  If they deliver that, my opinion on Microsoft will sway a good deal. (i'm not getting my hopes up....)



What is a rock solid os? It's hard to say, many want a stripped down quick windows, I personally like the direction vista is going. It's improbable at this point that MS will release a os that all enjoy, and that doesn't get bad press imo. Some will say, at least it's not vista, others will hate it cause they have to upgrade, others will love it, ect. Effective marketing, coupled with a launch that is stable and does not suffer compatibility issues (which is going to be a huge challenge), will likely be the primary factors in the success of Windows 7.


----------



## Bundy (Jul 28, 2008)

Swansen said:


> ??? crap?? i didn't start the name calling, ether way, there is obviously going to be some jump, in the amount of memory, cpu usage, ect, in a new OS.  However, the jump that Vista took was unnecessary, Linux and OS X are doing the same thing on about nothing.  Yes, Vista can be set-up/bought to run on minimal hardware, but they don't advertise it?? and you also loose functionality.  So, i am now curious, why do you defend Vista, Microsoft is a for profit company, they don't care about you, why do you care about them?  They should make quality products, and they don't, it took XP, what? seven years to get where it is?? thats just dumb.  If windows was a free program, then whatever, wouldn't matter, but its something we pay for.  By paying for faulty equipment, you only encourage more of the same, that holds true for anything.   When did i say that? your putting words in my mouth.  On that, if your trying to prove a point, attacking or belittling some one will only hurt your reputability.



Can you explain how Linux and OS X "do the same thing"? If they did, then they would use the same amount of resources. The truth is, they don't. If those operating systems put the same effort into things like superfetch, then they also would fill your RAM up.

It's my observation that bashing Vista makes non tech people sound knowledgeable and smarter to non tech people. Those are the same people who ask Cdawall about RAM.

Micrsoft should have kept the test to itself, it has provided good information to them but it is flawed in design. Publishing the results will mean people argue over the design rather than the results. Provided us with a nice debate though


----------



## Mussels (Jul 28, 2008)

the 'jump' vista took is 7 years worth of jump for gods sake.

in 7 years i've gone from 128MB of ram costing $150 to 4GB of ram costing $140. i've gone from a celeron 400Mhz with no L2 cache to a 3.6GHz quad core with 8MB of L2 cache.

any argument about an OS 7 years later needing a system less than twice as fast as XP, is really clutching at straws - a new OS is for new PC's, or decent spec old ones, NOT for old rigs in general.


----------



## Megasty (Jul 28, 2008)

XP was just around for too long. Too many ppl gotten use to it. So when vista was finally born, ppl treated it as the new cute baby that could only pee & poop, while XP remained the 7 yo that could do everything a 7 yo could do (including drive you nuts with viruses). I could go on with the analogy but I'm pretty bored right now so I should stop


----------



## HAL7000 (Jul 28, 2008)

Megasty said:


> XP was just around for too long. Too many ppl gotten use to it. So when vista was finally born, ppl treated it as the new cute baby that could only pee & poop, while XP remained the 7 yo that could do everything a 7 yo could do (including drive you nuts with viruses). I could go on with the analogy but I'm pretty bored right now so I should stop



I understand the analogy, but seeing that OEM's are wanting XP around for a while longer tells me that it is more than hating vista. It is having a OS that can support all that surplus hardware over time that OEM's need to unload and need a OS to support it. OEM's would hurt plenty if XP was to disappear today. I can understand many points of view but as this whole study suggest is that people are not using vista due to ignorance. This is bullsh*t propaganda at its best. Vista is doing fine and many people have adopted it, MS has to many versions and people feel that if they can't afford the best version they hold off because they feel they are buying less of a OS. MS needs to address OEM's better and then the general public better. They need to learn some ideas from Mac's and make a singular OS that rocks all our worlds.


----------



## Swansen (Jul 28, 2008)

farlex85 said:


> What is a rock solid os? It's hard to say, many want a stripped down quick windows, I personally like the direction vista is going.


  Yes, ok, more or less rock solid, i'm not being literal, there is no such thing as a perfect OS, for that matter, its debatable that there is such a thing as a good OS.  Honestly, i would like a pretty windows, like Comiz-fusion on Linux (without compiz's issues) and yet, it should still be nimble, (like Linux 3d desktop is)


bundyrum&coke said:


> Can you explain how Linux and OS X "do the same thing")


  Ok, on a side note, i'm sorry for not being extremely specific.  (not attacking anyone)  The same thing as in, more or less what Microsoft brings to the table for 3d desktops, only with minimal hardware usage.


Mussels said:


> the 'jump' vista took is 7 years worth of jump for gods sake.


Didn't give me a reason why you are defending something that only cares about your pocket, and gives you a faulty product.  (yes, its fine now, but wasn't that way from the start)  Vista was suppose to be MUCH more than it is.  It was suppose to redefine windows, really reliable, secure, fast, nimble, new file system ect.  They didn't really deliver on much of that, however 7 is suppose to rectify that problem, and it better.  Also, your missing something, the consumer market is a small portion of the computer world.  Corporate offices, businesses, ect, all uses computers like us, (minus some) and some of those companies still use 98, some still use 3x.  Where am i going with this?? the company market is HUGE, and many of them have no reason to upgrade their operating system because they are using the same software for years, beside for better support, reliability, and security.  Their opportunity cost of upgrading to a new OS and all its features is outweighed by them having to upgrade hardware on hundreds of machines.  Your also not thinking about what the average user does, browse the internet, read e-mail, maybe edit some photos, maybe watch some videos.  There is no reason to have a dual core machine, or anything higher than a Nvidia 6 series or equivalent card to do all that.  Yes, new hardware will be much faster, and better, and people will probably benefit.  However there is NO reason a new OS should use twice the resources of a previous generation OS, none at all and you have yet to give me a viable reason as to why.  You can run a Linux distro which is on par with Vista on a machine thats 5 years old, thats all i have to say.  Lastly, windows 7 is "suppose" to be great, and use less resources than Vista, so that kinda goes against your statement that a new OS should use more resources.  Ether way, all of that is irrelevant, Vista should only have one version, two versions at most, and lower the price, one can be the power hungry thing it is, the other should be stripped down version, but not loose any functionality, (minus appearance)


----------



## theJesus (Jul 28, 2008)

thoughtdisorder said:


> Hey, Jesus joined TPU! Cool! (Welcome Jesus!)


Heh, I've been lurking these forums quite a bit lately, and thought it was about time I started throwing around my $0.02 


thoughtdisorder said:


> Amazing how worked up everyone can get over their OS....Come on, live and let live. What would Jesus do?


My sentiments exactly


----------



## HAL7000 (Jul 28, 2008)

Swansen said:


> Yes, ok, more or less rock solid, i'm not being literal, there is no such thing as a perfect OS, for that matter, its debatable that there is no such thing as a good OS.  Honestly, i would like a pretty windows, like Comiz-fusion on Linux (without compiz's issues) and yet, it should still be nimble, (like Linux 3d desktop is)
> Ok, on a side note, i'm sorry for not being extremely specific.  (not attacking anyone)  The same thing as in, more or less what Microsoft brings to the table for 3d desktops, only with minimal hardware usage.
> 
> Didn't give me a reason why you are defending something that only cares about your pocket, and gives you a faulty product.  (yes, its fine now, but wasn't that way from the start)  Vista was suppose to be MUCH more than it is.  It was suppose to redefine windows, really reliable, secure, fast, nimble, new file system ect.  They didn't really deliver on much of that, however 7 is suppose to rectify that problem, and it better.  Also, your missing something, the consumer market is a small portion of the computer world.  Corporate offices, businesses, ect, all uses computers like us, (minus some) and some of those companies still use 98, some still use 3x.  Where am i going with this?? the company market is HUGE, and many of them have no reason to upgrade their operating system because they are using the same software for years, beside for better support, reliability, and security.  Their opportunity cost of upgrading to a new OS and all its features is outweighed by them having to upgrade hardware and hundreds on machines.  Your also not thinking about what the average user does, browse the internet, read e-mail, maybe edit some photos, maybe watch some videos.  There is no reason to have a dual core machine, or anything higher than a Nvidia 6 series or equivalent card to do all that.  Yes, new hardware will be much faster, and better, and people will probably benefit.  However there is NO reason a new OS should use twice the resources of a previous generation OS, none at all and you have yet to give me a viable reason as to why.  You can run a Linux distro which is on par with Vista on a machine thats 5 years old, thats all i have to say.  Lastly, windows 7 is "suppose" to be great, and use less resources than Vista, so that kinda goes against your statement that a new OS should use more resources.  Ether way, all of that is irrelevant, Vista should only have one version, two versions at most, and lower the price, one can be the power hungry thing it is, the other should be stripped down version, but not loose any functionality, (minus appearance)



*I agree completely with this assessment. *


----------



## Bundy (Jul 28, 2008)

Swansen said:


> Didn't give me a reason why you are defending something that only cares about your pocket, and gives you a faulty product.  (yes, its fine now, but wasn't that way from the start)  Vista was suppose to be MUCH more than it is.  It was suppose to redefine windows, really reliable, secure, fast, nimble, new file system ect.  They didn't really deliver on much of that, however 7 is suppose to rectify that problem, and it better.  Also, your missing something, the consumer market is a small portion of the computer world.  Corporate offices, businesses, ect, all uses computers like us, (minus some) and some of those companies still use 98, some still use 3x.  Where am i going with this?? the company market is HUGE, and many of them have no reason to upgrade their operating system because they are using the same software for years, beside for better support, reliability, and security.  Their opportunity cost of upgrading to a new OS and all its features is outweighed by them having to upgrade hardware on hundreds of machines.  Your also not thinking about what the average user does, browse the internet, read e-mail, maybe edit some photos, maybe watch some videos.  There is no reason to have a dual core machine, or anything higher than a Nvidia 6 series or equivalent card to do all that.  Yes, new hardware will be much faster, and better, and people will probably benefit.  However there is NO reason a new OS should use twice the resources of a previous generation OS, none at all and you have yet to give me a viable reason as to why.  You can run a Linux distro which is on par with Vista on a machine thats 5 years old, thats all i have to say.  Lastly, windows 7 is "suppose" to be great, and use less resources than Vista, so that kinda goes against your statement that a new OS should use more resources.  Ether way, all of that is irrelevant, Vista should only have one version, two versions at most, and lower the price, one can be the power hungry thing it is, the other should be stripped down version, but not loose any functionality, (minus appearance)



Why should Mussels give you a reason for something he didnt say? Mussels was being critical of the accuracy your posts, not being supportive of MS.

Some of your other quotes:
 "Honestly, an perfect OS would leave NO footprint, but thats next to impossible." - that depends on what type of operating system you want. I've got an old computer that runs DOS from BIOS and nothing else. It fits your description and it's fairly useless. In my opinion, a perfect OS maximises hardware utilisation. Everyone has different ideals.

"half the reason Microsoft doesn't is so that hardware vendors will sell more because users will have to buy new hardware to run the new OS, thats common knowledge" - I'll quote Mussels for the response - "well you're talking crap". I mean, was there any basis for making such a statement?

We all have had good and bad days with MS OS but please lets try and debate from an accurate perspective.


----------



## candle_86 (Jul 28, 2008)

are we still arguing about this, i figured this thread would be dead, but guess not, and let me say one thing.

In 5 years if your XP everyone will laugh at you and say your an OS dinosaur the world moved to Vista


----------



## vrdublu (Jul 28, 2008)

I have been trying to convince family, friends and co-workers that Vista is indeed a good OS for almost 2 years, and now this.  It's not perfect that's for sure, but I think the industry helped fuel alot of the BS that's surrounded Vista, including those Mac commercials


----------



## yogurt_21 (Jul 28, 2008)

candle_86 said:


> are we still arguing about this, i figured this thread would be dead, but guess not, and let me say one thing.
> 
> In 5 years if your XP everyone will laugh at you and say your an OS dinosaur the world moved to Vista



ummmm. in 5 years people will have moved on far beyond vista and most likely beyond windows7 as well. it'll be like, huh xp? wow we're all on windows 9. 

imo vista will end up being more like windows ME in the history books, not because of stability but because of sales. the huge push for vista makes no sense to me when windows 7 is due out next year. 

today it's "hey buy vista" tomorrow it's "hey buy windows 7" xp had an abnormal reign and many people aren't going to switch till it no longer suits their needs. which unfortunately is going to take awhile.


----------



## Triprift (Jul 28, 2008)

candle_86 said:


> are we still arguing about this, i figured this thread would be dead, but guess not, and let me say one thing.
> 
> In 5 years if your XP everyone will laugh at you and say your an OS dinosaur the world moved to Vista



Apsolutely mon but my bet is there will be ones who do because they wont like windows 7 cus of its likeness to vista


----------



## Mussels (Jul 28, 2008)

so far the only two arguments against vista are

It seems to prefer 250-500MB more ram over XP
the backup options are hiding

the arguments for are that its a lot more stable, more virus proof, and more user friendly 
(i've done ONE tweak to improve wireless performance, other than that windows update and the OS itself fixes/indentifies problems for me. its almost boring)


----------



## Triprift (Jul 28, 2008)

Networking seems to be easier as well none of the bs of stuffing around with setting just plug in the cabel and hello i can see you sweeeeet


----------



## Mussels (Jul 28, 2008)

Triprift said:


> Networking seems to be easier as well none of the bs of stuffing around with setting just plug in the cabel and hello i can see you sweeeeet



yes that too. even without a DHCP server, vistas auto assignment allows the machines to see each other. in XP, you had to manually assign them or you'd have no connections between machines.

wireless setup is also massively improved for the most part.


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 28, 2008)

The Mojave Experiment

=

How Windows Vista should have ran when it was released. 


---------


This is funny, this is like a developer that releases a hyped game, and it turns out to a be a bloated and buggy game, and then patches it to run the way it should have when released, a year later...And at that point tells journalists to come review their game again. However, what journalist in their right mind would go back and review a product a year later? They will not do this. So...Trick them, tell them it's a new os, then release to the public it was the same product. Great.

Marketing campaign on the horizon I suppose.


EDIT: Made improvements to more accurately portray what I was trying to write.


----------



## Triprift (Jul 28, 2008)

yep for sure man wireless goes great for me occasionally it wont connect to the internet on startup nothing a reboot wont fix


----------



## bugmenot (Jul 28, 2008)

They're not going to include footage of the 80 test subjects who said it sucked. Or of the one old lady that became uncontrollably violent after five minutes of exposure to Mojave.

And how clueless do you have to be to not know you're using Vista? Where these people drugged?


----------



## Mussels (Jul 28, 2008)

bugmenot said:


> And how clueless do you have to be to not know you're using Vista? Where these people drugged?



thats kinda the point. it means that the people who hate vista are merely repeating what others have said, and their level of true knowledge is so low they cant even recognise the OS.

i mean sure, some people have tried it and still hate it - but they arent these people.


----------



## laszlo (Jul 28, 2008)

i haven't tried vista so i can't say if is a good os; as a regular user all i care is that the old xp is still good,stable fast also so where is the reason to change it? Many people won't make hardware upgrades just to run a new os who is better maybe at points they never use it ex.: 
http://www.dell.com/content/topics/.../business/xp_smb?c=us&cs=04&l=en&s=bsd&~tab=2 

The same problem is at companies who have hundreds or thousands of pcs;they won't change os even if MS give them for free so xp will die slowly with the hardware who has run it.

"Mojave experiment" MS has wake-up but too late this won't increase the selling of Vista till XP is still official supported by them;a failure because they show only 120 user instead of 120000...


----------



## xfire (Jul 28, 2008)

So did this 120 users get to test xp on the same machine. For all we know these 120 people might have been running P-4's and MS might have setup c2d's.
I tried vista for a few minutes(don't know if it was basic,premium etc) but I found the networking options were more hidden than xp. I couldn't set the internet on that(I was asked to setup internet) but from the few minutes I used it was ok but I think it was the basic version without aero.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 28, 2008)

xfire said:


> So did this 120 users get to test xp on the same machine. For all we know these 120 people might have been running P-4's and MS might have setup c2d's.
> I tried vista for a few minutes(don't know if it was basic,premium etc) but I found the networking options were more hidden than xp. I couldn't set the internet on that(I was asked to setup internet) but from the few minutes I used it was ok but I think it was the basic version without aero.



its not that they're hidden, its actualy easier to find.

In XP you had to right click network and hit properties to get the extra menus (hidden to most users) in vista you double click, and the old 'hidden' options are all listed on the left hand side.


----------



## Wile E (Jul 28, 2008)

hat said:


> Vista is plagued with bad reviews and poor sales because the product itself is poor. Sure it may be a decent product NOW, but it's had a lot of work done on it, which should have been done before it was rolled out of the R&D department of MS.



How is that any different than when XP rolled out? Terrible reason not to like Vista. Have you even tried it recently?

As for the lack of the "long format" option, Vista automatically checks the drive when you start the install. Once you get to the format option, the bad sectors are already mapped out.

And nobody has managed to get around that "annoying security pop-up" by any other means than social engineering. No auto installing malware has gotten around it yet.

You are, unfortunately, just another misinformed Vista hater.


----------



## wazzledoozle (Jul 28, 2008)

Wile E said:


> How is that any different than when XP rolled out? Terrible reason not to like Vista. Have you even tried it recently?
> 
> As for the lack of the "long format" option, Vista automatically checks the drive when you start the install. Once you get to the format option, the bad sectors are already mapped out.
> 
> ...



http://www.pcworld.com/businesscent...s_despised_uac_nails_rootkits_tests_find.html


----------



## xfire (Jul 28, 2008)

Mussels said:


> its not that they're hidden, its actualy easier to find.
> 
> In XP you had to right click network and hit properties to get the extra menus (hidden to most users) in vista you double click, and the old 'hidden' options are all listed on the left hand side.


Well in Xp the way to setup the net was to run the wizard and select the option where the net connection is always on but on Vista there was no such option.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 28, 2008)

xfire said:


> Well in Xp the way to setup the net was to run the wizard and select the option where the net connection is always on but on Vista there was no such option.



ah, using a modem? i always use routers, which is a simple plug and play as far as thats concerned.


----------



## xfire (Jul 28, 2008)

This isn't mine. It's for someone else I know who didn't even know his laptop had vista. The net is provided directly to cable using static IP. The settings may be hidden but some linux distro's have it hidden even far off.
In any case I'll be "trying" vista ultimate.


----------



## Swansen (Jul 28, 2008)

Swansen said:


> Ether way, all of that is irrelevant, Vista should only have one version, two versions at most, and lower the price, one can be the power hungry thing it is, the other should be stripped down version, but not loose any functionality, (minus appearance)



On a side note i am done, secondly woah.... Accurate perspective?? from "my" perspective, it is accurate.  Your not taking into consideration that different people know different things, as they live/work in different places, ect, ect.  I'm sorry i wasn't EXTREMELY to the point again, you guys take being literal to a new level.  I could add a couple words to what i wrote to make it a little more to your specifications, but i'm not going to, i said it at 1am, and whatever, it happened.  I'm sure bundyrum i could go through and pick out a crap ton of crazy things you said in this thread, but i'm not going to.  Lastly, i stand by what i said, and more so my last sentence, (since were sticklers here, its a run-on)
end.


----------



## Bluesman (Jul 28, 2008)

hat said:


> Ok, how about that annoying thing where every time you want to do anything in Vista, it asks you if you were the one who did it. This just sucks. If someone is skilled enough to take over your computer, I'm sure they could hack that gay little security measure away. I wouldn't be worried about this if it asked you if you wanted this when you start up the computer after the OS is installed for the first time, but nope.



As I understand it, VISTA treats all users initially as non-adminstrator.  This prevents rootkits and other hacks from invading your system by pretending they are you with your adminstrator rights.  Because there are onscreen prompts, it is very difficult to hack around this security.  As I posted on a previous page, the UAC can be partially curtailed by using TweakUI and selected global policy changes.  These just minimize the warnings and give you access to files and directories while preserving the barrier to mimicing the administrator for the rest.  XP does not provide this security barrier; i.e. where rootkits and other malicious files mimic the administrator.  And this is not a "little security measure" as every user is a non-administrator intially when files, directories, or startup programs are at play.

My main reason for moving to VISTA was the above security strategy and the enhanced OS kernal.  Initially, I did wait until SP-1 for my desktop because my laptop's early VISTA version showed there were still growing pains for this OS.


----------



## cdawall (Jul 28, 2008)

hat said:


> Vista only gives the option for quick format, no long format. No checking for bad sectors. So it's entirely possible to have parts of your OS written to bad sectors, causing all kinds of funky problems. That's not reason enough? Ok, how about that annoying thing where every time you want to do anything in Vista, it asks you if you were the one who did it. This just sucks. If someone is skilled enough to take over your computer, I'm sure they could hack that gay little security measure away. I wouldn't be worried about this if it asked you if you wanted this when you start up the computer after the OS is installed for the first time, but nope.



give up hat everyone of your points has been proven wrong maybe the issues you have with vista are purely user related



Wile E said:


> How is that any different than when XP rolled out? Terrible reason not to like Vista. Have you even tried it recently?
> 
> As for the lack of the "long format" option, Vista automatically checks the drive when you start the install. Once you get to the format option, the bad sectors are already mapped out.
> 
> ...



would you look at that someone did there research _before_ posting


----------



## hat (Jul 28, 2008)

cdawall said:


> give up hat everyone of your points has been proven wrong maybe the issues you have with vista are purely user related


Proven wrong?
So there is a choice for doing the long format when installing Vista? Where? I didn't see one.

And there ISN'T an anoying security "feature" that asks you if you wanted whatever program to run every time you do something? Strange cause it sure appeared for me whenever I tried to run something. Yeah sure it can be disabled through a funky program like TweakUI, which is fine for you and me. How many average users know about TweakUI?


----------



## farlex85 (Jul 28, 2008)

hat said:


> Proven wrong?
> So there is a choice for doing the long format when installing Vista? Where? I didn't see one.
> 
> And there ISN'T an anoying security "feature" that asks you if you wanted whatever program to run every time you do something? Strange cause it sure appeared for me whenever I tried to run something. Yeah sure it can be disabled through a funky program like TweakUI, which is fine for you and me. How many average users know about TweakUI?



UAC (that "annoying" thing you speak of) can be disabled through the control panel. Wile E already explained the format thing. I seem to remember another thread where you said you don't use anti-virus or anti-spyware cause you don't need it. Well, enjoy is all I can say.


----------



## jgrahl (Jul 28, 2008)

10 minutes? C'mon like they could honestly say they enjoy it after 10 minutes.  10 minutes is not thorough enough.  I highly doubt they were able to use the applications they always use at home.  What was the computer user level of those interviewed?

I have used Vista for 4 months before going back to XP.  I tried hard to like it.  I consider myself advanced with computers and can fix almost any problem I have.  My experience is 15+ years.

Problems with Vista including SP1 32 or 64 bit
- not all 32-bit programs are compatible.
- the sound control scheme causes hardware / software conflicts
- it doesn't network well with Microsoft XP Home Edition or Win98 (some people care)
- The games folder does not work with all games
- It still runs 3D applications 10% slower on the same hardware than Windows XP
- not enough programs utilize the increased amount of available ram
- Too few games or applications REQUIRE Vista and / or DX 10
- Most of the new features can be downloaded for free, legally, onto Windows XP

What Vista offers to me that is good
- User account control
-
-

That is the only thing that I liked about Vista.  However, it's not enough for me to change.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jul 28, 2008)

farlex85 said:


> UAC (that "annoying" thing you speak of) can be disabled through the control panel. Wile E already explained the format thing. I seem to remember another thread where you said you don't use anti-virus or anti-spyware cause you don't need it. Well, enjoy is all I can say.



Yet again you are unable to answer the question in which you decide to respond to (which includes my post).  Why don't you stop arguing with people if you are not going to offer any information in posts like this.


----------



## farlex85 (Jul 28, 2008)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Yet again you are unable to answer the question in which you decide to respond to (which includes my post).  Why don't you stop arguing with people if you are not going to offer any information in posts like this.



 I responded directly to his questions, and I directly answered all yours as well, go back to the last page and see if you can't figure it out, I thought it was pretty clear.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jul 28, 2008)

farlex85 said:


> I responded directly to his questions, and I directly answered all yours as well, go back to the last page and see if you can't figure it out, I thought it was pretty clear.



Actually, no you haven't answered his questions



> Proven wrong?
> So there is a choice for doing the long format when installing Vista? Where? I didn't see one.





> Yeah sure it can be disabled through a funky program like TweakUI, which is fine for you and me. How many average users know about TweakUI?



I think you need to go back and re-read my post because you didn't answer it at all.  You think you have but according to what you posted you have not, only argued as you've done with the other user. In all, you really need to stop arguing with users that post in this thread (or any thread for that matter).


----------



## farlex85 (Jul 28, 2008)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Actually, no you haven't answered his questions
> 
> 
> 
> ...



lol, whatever you say all-knowing east. It's called debate. You don't have use tweakUI, it's easily disabled in the control panel. Wile E already expained the format thing. Did you not understand that?

Here was my last response to you maybe you missed it. http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showpost.php?p=903957&postcount=70


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jul 28, 2008)

farlex85 said:


> lol, whatever you say all-knowing east. It's called debate. You don't have use tweakUI, it's easily disabled in the control panel. Wile E already expained the format thing. Did you not understand that?
> 
> Here was my last response to you maybe you missed it. http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showpost.php?p=903957&postcount=70



LOL, and you still do not answer his question nor did you read my post to even see if what you said even relates to my post.  You cannot debate with a person if:
-you do not limit yourself to the topic in which you decide to debate about
-you do not understand what it is you are responding to
-you ignore the subject(s) in which you decide to debate about. 
At this point it becomes arguing, check yourself.


----------



## farlex85 (Jul 28, 2008)

EastCoasthandle said:


> LOL, and you still do not answer his question nor did you read my post to even see if what you said even relates to my post.  You cannot debate with a person if:
> -you do not limit yourself to the topic in which you decide to debate about
> -you do not understand what it is you are responding to
> -you ignore the subject(s) in which you decide to debate about.
> At this point it becomes arguing, check yourself.



If I need to spell it out for you: No not every user can use tweakUI. However, this is not needed as the user can disable the option from the control panel which most users are quite comfertable using.


----------



## Bundy (Jul 28, 2008)

jgrahl said:


> 10 minutes? C'mon like they could honestly say they enjoy it after 10 minutes.  10 minutes is not thorough enough.  I highly doubt they were able to use the applications they always use at home.  What was the computer user level of those interviewed?
> 
> I have used Vista for 4 months before going back to XP.  I tried hard to like it.  I consider myself advanced with computers and can fix almost any problem I have.  My experience is 15+ years.
> 
> ...



An interesting perspective. I have not had those problems (well most of em). I have been running Vista for over 12 months now, it's networked with XP Home premium (I admit that was a pain to solve), all my games work, and my benches are nice and high (for what I aim to achieve). Oh and the games folder thing? It's just a folder isn't it? I simply put my shortcuts in there and they work fine.

Maybe next time if you ever try again, post up your issues on the forum and we might be able to help solve them. After all, we are all mostly tweaking addicts and now that most of us UNDERSTAND Vista better, many of these issues can now be easily resolved.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jul 28, 2008)

farlex85 said:


> If I need to spell it out for you: No not every user can use tweakUI. However, this is not needed as the user can disable the option from the control panel which most users are quite comfertable using.
> 
> I tend to just skip over the parts I think are obvious for the sake of avoiding redundancy. I am not intending to ignore anyone, you just continue to run in circles around the same things which I address briefly but not extensively. I don't et out to simply disprove everything a person says, and as such don't feel the need to address every point. You yourself have done the same thing you accuse me of earlier in this thread, quoting me and then not really addressing the individual points I made, instead just using your own argument. I don't think anything of it though, I address the post as a whole, and that should suffice. A debate can't be had with someone who won't actually respond though, and simply attacks the method of debate instead.



Your responses to others in this thread has been in attempt to refute what was being posted.   When you are not able to you argue.  Which is a trend I see in your posts.  Even the post you linked is a prime example of that.    You say you've answered my post   yet you have done nothing but argue.  You say your answered his post but all you've done is argue.  You should give it a rest and stop trying to refute any post you don't agree with. Let people have their say and just leave it at that.


----------



## Bundy (Jul 28, 2008)

Swansen said:


> On a side note i am done, secondly woah.... Accurate perspective?? from "my" perspective, it is accurate.  Your not taking into consideration that different people know different things, as they live/work in different places, ect, ect.  I'm sorry i wasn't EXTREMELY to the point again, you guys take being literal to a new level.  I could add a couple words to what i wrote to make it a little more to your specifications, but i'm not going to, i said it at 1am, and whatever, it happened.  I'm sure bundyrum i could go through and pick out a crap ton of crazy things you said in this thread, but i'm not going to.  Lastly, i stand by what i said, and more so my last sentence, (since were sticklers here, its a run-on)
> end.



thats cool, sorry I didnt mean to be so harsh but thats my weakness.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jul 28, 2008)

farlex85 said:


> *sigh* The post I linked was in response to that post before you edited it, and one last attempt to actually get you to see what I was saying. I chose not to further edit my response b/c your edits contributed nothing but trying to argue w/ me (strangely what you seem to be accusing me of). The irony here is you have directly ignored what I have said, and called me argumentative while re-iterating your own points. I have continuously spelled out my responses to appease you, have consistenly answered the post I intended to, but you for some reason feel compelled to tell me to stop and tell me I haven't appeased you rather than trying to debate what I said. You're too hard-headed for me, you are simply right and that's all there is to it. And that's fine, don't be a hypocrite though (let me have my say and don't simply argue w/ me), and if you have a problem w/ my posts report it to a mod, that's their job. But now that you've led this discussion so far from the original topic, and this argument has become so convoluted b/c you can't move on from your own perspective, I'm tired of this attack. In your own words, good day.



It is very easy for you to follow the very post you written (what's good for the goose...).  It's obvious now that you will not debate with the issues at hand and argue with anyone's opinion you cannot refute.  Therefore it's best that you stop responding to my post or anyone else's post that you have to resort to name calling.  In all, I wish you a good day as well


----------



## farlex85 (Jul 28, 2008)

Next time use pm's if you have a problem not pertaining to the topic east. It'll save everyone else from having to wade through your ego.


----------



## FatForester (Jul 28, 2008)

farlex85 said:


> Next time use pm's if you have a problem not pertaining to the topic east. It'll save everyone else from having to wade through your ego.



I've just been reading and laughing, mainly because of the ridiculous things he likes to argue about. I seriously think the only reason he's posting is to screw around with people. The last thread about this topic reached 150 posts, mainly because of his incessant arguing. 

East, you're beating a now rotting corpse of a horse. Seriously, you need to know when to call it quits. All I've seen you do is just instigate a ridiculous topic. Want to know what I mean? Here, I'll give it a shot: Hancock was terrible.


----------



## farlex85 (Jul 28, 2008)

FatForester said:


> I've just been reading and laughing, mainly because of the ridiculous things he likes to argue about. I seriously think the only reason he's posting is to screw around with people. The last thread about this topic reached 150 posts, mainly because of his incessant arguing.
> 
> East, you're beating a now rotting corpse of a horse. Seriously, you need to know when to call it quits. All I've seen you do is just instigate a ridiculous topic. Want to know what I mean? Here, I'll give it a shot: Hancock was terrible.



Yeah I was laughing at first too, then I was just  is this guy not even reading what I'm saying, or what anyone else is saying, is he just not even going to try to have an intelligent debate, does he really find this that important?  Just can't appease some. Vista v.s. Xp has still go the fire in it.


----------



## imperialreign (Jul 29, 2008)

bundyrum&coke said:


> An interesting perspective. I have not had those problems (well most of em). I have been running Vista for over 12 months now, it's networked with XP Home premium (I admit that was a pain to solve), all my games work, and my benches are nice and high (for what I aim to achieve). Oh and the games folder thing? It's just a folder isn't it? I simply put my shortcuts in there and they work fine.
> 
> Maybe next time if you ever try again, post up your issues on the forum and we might be able to help solve them. After all, we are all mostly tweaking addicts and now that most of us UNDERSTAND Vista better, many of these issues can now be easily resolved.



or - if you're like most of us . . . a WIN OS is simply a can of either scrapple or SPAM, depending on what bandaid (read: service pack) that you're blessed with.  Now, we all know that the can itself is a whole lot more useful than the junk that's within - which, BTW, might actually taste good . . . depending on your tastes  - and it's a lot easier to just open the can, dump out the slop, then use it to store your own stuff . . . pencils, pens, loose change, ammunition rounds, hypodermic needles; it's your choice . . .

which is exactly what a lot of us do with a WIN OS - gut it, keep the shell (hell, we even change the appearance of that cause anything is better then the WIN blue, what-the-hell-kind-of-silver-is-that?!!, and the baby's-first-puke-green colors we were given with XP), and put our own goods into the mix . . .

now, everyone repeat with me . . . _we control the OS . . . the OS does not control us . . . the OS is merely a tool to do my bidding . . . I bow to no OS . . ._



As to Vista - tried it, used it, have worked with it . . . not all that impressed.

But, my excuses for not having upgraded yet are dwindling.  Once a DX10 capable game comes out that I really want to be able to play with DX10 settings, then I'll probably go ahead an upgrade . . .

or, if they re-design the friggin audio architecture of Vista, which I personally have a problem with . . . but I'm not going to get into that here, cause I've done beat that into the ground too many times over the last few months


----------



## Thermopylae_480 (Jul 29, 2008)

Please discuss this topic in a friendly and mature manner.  I have no problem closing news story threads if the topic requires a level of maturity that isn't present on the forum.

Nothing brings out the crazy in e-people like a new Windows operating system.


----------



## imperialreign (Jul 29, 2008)

I was trying to be mature, but just lighten the mood a bit . . . many of us here get too serious at times and it turns into bickering and nitpicking

either way - give it a month and I'll probably have Vista installed on my system.  The new STALKER will be worth the upgrade hassel . . . I hope.

good bye great audio latencies 
(although, I could use the experience in dealing with Vista and Creative audio issues . . . perhaps even find better work-arounds )


----------



## Wile E (Jul 29, 2008)

hat said:


> Proven wrong?
> So there is a choice for doing the long format when installing Vista? Where? I didn't see one.
> 
> And there ISN'T an anoying security "feature" that asks you if you wanted whatever program to run every time you do something? Strange cause it sure appeared for me whenever I tried to run something. Yeah sure it can be disabled through a funky program like TweakUI, which is fine for you and me. How many average users know about TweakUI?



Did you read my post at all hat? you do not need the long format option. The Vista disk scans and maps the bad sectors before you even get to tell it what partition to install on.

And if you read your original post about the annoying security feature, you said it's annoying AND pointless because it's not like it would stop anything. Well, you are wrong. Yes, it's annoying, but it damn well does it's job to stop viruses, rootkits, etc. If you have it enabled, there are no rootkits and viruses that can get thru automatically. You would have to OK them first.


----------



## xfire (Jul 29, 2008)

Performing long format too frequently will spoil your hard disk.
With their new O.S release round the corner doesn't it seem pointless to adapt to vista just for the sake of it. How many people actually use it for games and aero. XP suffices for simple browsing heck even linux suffices for browsing and all the low system requirment stuff.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 29, 2008)

jgrahl said:


> 10 minutes? C'mon like they could honestly say they enjoy it after 10 minutes.  10 minutes is not thorough enough.  I highly doubt they were able to use the applications they always use at home.  What was the computer user level of those interviewed?


you're bypassing the intention. They got 120 people who disliked vista (or claimed to) and within 10 minutes of seeing a 'new' OS they claimed they liked it. (90%) The point is not 'vistas great!' the point is that many people have a FALSE negative opinion of vista.



> Problems with Vista including SP1 32 or 64 bit
> - not all 32-bit programs are compatible.


I have not experienced this.


> - the sound control scheme causes hardware / software conflicts


Again not.


> - it doesn't network well with Microsoft XP Home Edition or Win98 (some people care)


Have seen this. Typing the IP works, system name doesnt always.


> - The games folder does not work with all games


True. I dont like it in general. its called games explorer, btw.


> - It still runs 3D applications 10% slower on the same hardware than Windows XP


Untrue. several of mine are faster.


> - not enough programs utilize the increased amount of available ram


lol most of my games do. take that up with the program makers.


> - Too few games or applications REQUIRE Vista and / or DX 10


is that really a flaw?


> - Most of the new features can be downloaded for free, legally, onto Windows XP


you cant freely download UAC, DX10, or the stability and security of vista.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 30, 2008)

I'm not sure if it was this thread or the other mojave, but i'm going to post it here as its the more recent thread.

Someone was bagging out vista fairly irrationally, including comments about flash drives and NTFS not working.

I am here to wonderfully prove you wrong, whoever that was.







I've tested on two intel chipset systems (with intel CPU's) and AMD 64 system (nforce chipset) and a via chipset (P4D). All running vista x64 of one kind or another, and all of them managed at least 10MB/s write and 15MB/s read.


----------



## Wile E (Jul 30, 2008)

Mussels said:


> I'm not sure if it was this thread or the other mojave, but i'm going to post it here as its the more recent thread.
> 
> Someone was bagging out vista fairly irrationally, including comments about flash drives and NTFS not working.
> 
> ...


My Patriot 16GB flash drive does 12-15 in Vista x64 formatted NTFS as well.


----------



## Hayder_Master (Jul 30, 2008)

i hope microsoft release something more flexible os like xp , cuz vista is suck and it is worst product


----------



## Mussels (Jul 30, 2008)

hayder.master said:


> i hope microsoft release something more flexible os like xp , cuz vista is suck and it is worst product



i think its great. its far more reliable than XP, and its certainly 'flexible'

people have only had a year to make programs for vista, while XP has had 7. of course people know their way around XP better than they do vista.


----------



## chron (Jul 30, 2008)

DUHH IVE NEVER USED VISTA, I RAET IT ZERO!  At least talk to the people who have used it and hate it.  They grabbed a ton of the biggest morons they could find for this.  What a joke.


----------



## TheGuruStud (Jul 30, 2008)

Not that I would ever use bitlocker, but it's still 
BS even if you don't use it. I don't think M$ wants you to dual boot haha (I wonder why)

http://apcmag.com/vista_sp1_wont_install_on_dualboot_systems_microsoft.htm

It would be nice if they actually ASKED if you have a bootloader instead of just overwriting it.


----------



## Megasty (Jul 31, 2008)

I really thought I would be to get a kick out of this mojave thing but its really just 55 videos of ppl getting pwned & saying the same thing in the beginning & the end. 

In other words its exactly as I expected - a scripted mess. I do have to admit that I did laugh a few times at the awkward moments when they were pwned. I guess I'm turning evil


----------



## HAL7000 (Aug 2, 2008)

"*The Mojave Experiment*" equates to someone who lost their mojo....If I was to make a pictorial comparison of Vista I would have to relate Vista to the notorious Fat Bastard.

"The Mojave Experiment" should be a great title for the next Austin Power's movie. MS you have done it again by inspiration.


----------

