MegastyThere 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) :o

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.

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.

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

dude grow up

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.

Yay another argument about why vista sucks/is great. Some people (I'm looking at you east :D) 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:D). 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.......

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?

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.

MopeyMartianOkay, 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?

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.

hatMS 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 :rolleyes:

hatI'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.

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?

farlex85Yay another argument about why vista sucks/is great. Some people (I'm looking at you east :D) 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:D). 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, :slap: :laugh:.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.

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.

"its so-far-flop"

Great non-impartial reporting there. :rolleyes:

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

EastCoasthandleBut 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
-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.
-double stands 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

And you say I am crying foul, :slap: :laugh:.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.

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. :ohwell::)

EastCoasthandleThe 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. :)

farlex85As 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.

farlex85And 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. :ohwell::)

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 ;)

farlex85That 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.

farlex85Yay another argument about why vista sucks/is great. Some people (I'm looking at you east :D) 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:D). 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! :laugh:

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.

Plz make the bashing stop :banghead:

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

EastCoasthandleWe 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.......

MegastyPlz make the bashing stop :banghead:

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

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

MegastyDang, 120 ppl being pwned at the same time, talk about a Kodak moment :D

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 :wtf: 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.

SwansenUm??? 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.

I still cant convince anybody that Vista is any good :wtf:

SwansenUm??? 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 :toast:

farlex85We're not bashing, please others interject w/ logic, I'm not mad (a little exhausted from repeating myself:laugh:) , 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 :o

Musselsthats 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.

Swansenwow..... 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.