Lol, MS should have put like "Vista Basic Ready" instead of "Vista ready"... simple things can cause big problems...

now here is a lawsuit which I think they deserve.

I mean, if they put lower system requirements on, more people will buy it, or more people will buy the more expensive version, thinking their compters will run it.

and that imo is a scam.

@ russianboy. i do agree 100%. i belive it's a scam too.....MS :shadedshu

Think about it, it means more people think Vista can run on their PC amd that means more sales!

I don't recommend even pirating it unless you have a beefy computer.

Pirate it if you have a low-end computer... I'm not saying where, but there's a custom edition called "Vista Lite"... runs off 256MB RAM, 200MHz CPU, and 8MB GFX...

vlite is your friend




they also said that FSX can run on vista with 512 mb....i'd like to see that :laugh:

Well they are getting sued over .Net also right now.... Microsoft is always getting sued for something and they are always loosing, but for now the fines from the courts don't matter to them. Its going to be the complete lack of people buying Vista now that its been dubbed ME2 thats going to hurt them. I know people who know NOTHING about computers and they know the bad news about vista and its hype. *currently anyways*

russianboyThink about it, it means more people think Vista can run on their PC amd that means more sales!

I don't recommend even pirating it unless you have a beefy computer.

Beefy? My computer's not beefy, lol.

I can't say I fully agree with this lawsuit. Microsoft it seems is always getting sued for something, I bet MS lawyers are having a profitable career. I think Vista runs slower then XP on every machine. Sure the lower end pc's are going to take a bigger performance hit, but come on people, slap some ram in that rig. Any flavor of Vista should have at least 1Gig. of ram imo. I just saw a laptop at the store the other day with Vista Basic, a Celeron and only 512mbs ram. You know that thing is going to be a slug. So some nOOb goes and buys such a ram-less rig and gets wind of this lawsuit and feels he is entitled to compensation because his rig is to slow with Vista. I bought Vista HP the 2nd week it was out. I feel it is doggy at this time. Am I freaking out about it and feel I need to sue? No I am not. I bet SP1 will help smooth Vista out.

So where do I go to collect my compensation after this class action lawsuit. I bought my Vista HP upgrade, I surly must be entitled to something. :slap:

GLDI can't say I fully agree with this lawsuit. Microsoft it seems is always getting sued for something, I bet MS lawyers are having a profitable career. I think Vista runs slower then XP on every machine. Sure the lower end pc's are going to take a bigger performance hit, but come on people, slap some ram in that rig. Any flavor of Vista should have at least 1Gig. of ram imo. I just saw a laptop at the store the other day with Vista Basic, a Celeron and only 512mbs ram. You know that thing is going to be a slug. So some nOOb goes and buys such a ram-less rig and gets wind of this lawsuit and feels he is entitled to compensation because his rig is to slow with Vista. I bought Vista HP the 2nd week it was out. I feel it is doggy at this time. Am I freaking out about it and feel I need to sue? No I am not. I bet SP1 will help smooth Vista out.

So where do I go to collect my compensation after this class action lawsuit. I bought my Vista HP upgrade, I surly must be entitled to something. :slap:

Wouldn't matter if MS lawyers were working on cases or not, they have them on a yearly salary.

vista gives me so many headaches

I relate new versions of Windows to new car models -

it's generally best to not go out and buy something like that when it's brand new to market, give it a year or two for the manufacturer to get all the MAJOR quirks out of it - y'know, the simple stuff they overlooked because they were in too much of a hurry to get to market.

Maybe Microsoft will be forced to write operating systems that don't need high-end hardware to NOT run like shit.

imperialreignI relate new versions of Windows to new car models -

it's generally best to not go out and buy something like that when it's brand new to market, give it a year or two for the manufacturer to get all the MAJOR quirks out of it - y'know, the simple stuff they overlooked because they were in too much of a hurry to get to market.

This is a band aid, not a fix.

Band aids like this is what gives people the excuses for shitty products being put out.

I hope this lawsuit goes through and hits them hard. I've seen a ton of "vista capable" computers where vista would be nothing but a nightmare to run on it.

And I hate being asked about it.

vista is actually fine. I love it, and most problems with compatatbility should have been expected. people just like to complain. although, when I was buying a new hd at futureshop, I noticed the vista ready logo, then saw the shitty system... it's about time someone sued them

I'm glad this is going to court, also - I've been sick and tired of MS pulling crap like this for years. I was happy when they lost out on the IE lawsuit years ago. The monopoly has to be brought down, IMO - if we actually had a strong competitor against MS, then we might not be paying $200-$500 just for a friggin spaghetti coded, loop holed, accident prone OS. MS has a horrible track record of releasing bootlegged quality materials right out of the gate.


Anyone remember when the debuted WIN 2000 (or was it WIN 98) on live TV and it BSoD on initial bootup? :roll:

bassmastavista is actually fine. I love it, and most problems with compatatbility should have been expected. people just like to complain. although, when I was buying a new hd at futureshop, I noticed the vista ready logo, then saw the shitty system... it's about time someone sued them

About the "People like to complain" part... I cant agree more, but there must be something seriously wrong with it if 90%+ of vista owners are the ones that are complaining about it.

I also heard that XP has already outsold vista either this year or last year already (cant remeber when vista was released) so with that in mind do you still think people are complaining over nothing because 'you' think your vista is ok????

Sounds like someone should tell this judge that they were Vista ready... on a technology level.

Nowhere does it state 'take this home and have Vista up and running smoothly like your Windows XP in half an hour or less!'


I knew damn well that my 8800 wasn't going to go off without ANY hitches in Vista, or likewise with programs in Vista. But that's what happens when you go out and buy new technology.


I bet this judge has no concept of what makes Vista different to XP or any other operating system. Therefor, he has no right to 'hear' the case.

Just another lame example of abused litigation.

So tell me this . Who is actually putting the "vista certified" Stickers on the "HARDWARE":confused: Are you all sure it's not dell,HP....etc ? Are they just putting out crappy systems, slapping a vista sticker on it ,and praying? :nutkick: Just trying to ride the vista train "because it's the newest so it has to be the best" :roll: :roll:


This lawsuit will go nowhere:slap: Lemme guess,, 9th district :roll: :roll: :roll:

newconroerSounds like someone should tell this judge that they were Vista ready... on a technology level.

Nowhere does it state 'take this home and have Vista up and running smoothly like your Windows XP in half an hour or less!'


I knew damn well that my 8800 wasn't going to go off without ANY hitches in Vista, or likewise with programs in Vista. But that's what happens when you go out and buy new technology.


I bet this judge has no concept of what makes Vista different to XP or any other operating system. Therefor, he has no right to 'hear' the case.

Just another lame example of abused litigation.

what?

Thats exactly what this sticker says!

"Windows Vista capable" with the funky reworked windows logo.

But in no way shape or form do you get a decent Vista experience, because 99% of those machines are BARE minimum hardware requirements.

This is mostly microsofts fault, but also the OEM's fault.

If you wanna make excuses for new technology becoming more and more bug ridden, well enjoy your shit software/hardware.

If you don't push back for quality from a consumers standpoint, products will do nothing but get worse and worse, when they should be IMPROVING!

No, that's NOT what it says.

"Windows Vista Capable"

And no matter what 'issues' people may have, things ARE capable. Nowhere does it state it's going to be easy, hassle-free and work 100%; besides since every user is different, we cannot identify what exactly "easy" "hassle-free" and "100%" are. Yes, there is a standard, but obviously it's been met, because Vista does run.

Until the stickers say "Decent Vista Experience" or something similar or even fluffed up, then they have no grounds to make any claims.

I remember, not getting Windows 98 for a considerably long time after it was out, and was still riding Win95, as I knew, like it should be a rule of thumb in computing, that a new O/S is bound to have problems. Some have more than others, but people love to forget the pertinent details when they start complaining.

Dippyskoodlezwhat?

Thats exactly what this sticker says!

"Windows Vista capable" with the funky reworked windows logo.

But in no way shape or form do you get a decent Vista experience, because 99% of those machines are BARE minimum hardware requirements.

This is mostly microsofts fault, but also the OEM's fault.

If you wanna make excuses for new technology becoming more and more bug ridden, well enjoy your shit software/hardware.

If you don't push back for quality from a consumers standpoint, products will do nothing but get worse and worse, when they should be IMPROVING!

It is the oem and hardware manufacturer's fault for this by putting the vista sticker on it knowing it won't work!!!:shadedshu

driver66It is the oem and hardware manufacturer's fault for this by putting the vista sticker on it knowing it won't work!!!:shadedshu

But it was a microsoft program :laugh:

considering that vista was released for dx 10, and because the xp copyright will be dead in two years, I think it's done well. dx 10 is game-oriented. almost all games work on vista. if they don't, it's probably because they're old and no-one plays them anymore. looking at the requirements for vista, it's aimed at a high-end market, anyway, assuming mid-range is where most games are played at low settings, low-end being e-mail in ten minutes.

when 95 turned to 98, when 98 turned into me, when me turned into 2000/xp, or whatever order it went in, how angry were people about programs not working right?

actually me came after 2000 :p