# 20 Reasons why vista can fail



## napster007 (Aug 7, 2007)

> Having been forced to use vista for almost 4 months now I can truly say it is so riddled with problems it may be another five years until it is actually ready for the masses. My journey with Vista began about four months ago when I purchased a new Vista ready HP computer, big mistake. After I decided that I would go back to using XP until Vista bugs were worked out I was told by HP that they would not provide any drivers for XP, so basically I was stuck with Vista unless I wanted to try and track down my drivers from the hardware manufacturers which is a process I have not attempted yet. My biggest complaint so far with vista is that it runs incredibly slow, even with maxed out specs. My computer I purchased meets all the specifications plus some but performance is still not nearly as good as it should be, so I can’t imagine a two or three year old pc running it. The few visual effects of Vista are not really worth the resources it consumes so I disabled them from the very beginning hoping to get a little more speed out of a brand new computer with the following specs: Core 2 Duo 2.13, 2 gigs of Ram, 500 gig hard drive, and a Geforce video card with 512 ram, with specs like these windows XP would fly but not Vista it just coast along slowly. I really wanted Vista to live up to the hype and promises Microsoft pushed on us, but if memory serves right XP did take years to perfect and then it was time to upgrade again.
> 
> *s2.supload.com/thumbs/default/vistpen.jpg​
> 
> ...


 
source- *www.jawjab.com/


----------



## iMav (Aug 7, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

1) Hardware doesn’t run well on Vista (even new hardware)

- bull sh!t

2) The new security of Vista is overkill most of the time, being prompted for every little thing is bad enough but Vista even labels existing applications as suspicious.

- not knowing how to use isnt the OS's fault

3) Lack of drivers for older and newer hardware.

- hard ware manufacture's fault not Windows

4) Power options do not change automatically for laptops depending on whether you are plugged or unplugged from a power source.

- not knwoing how to use isnt the OS's fault ... power options are truly amazing in vista (use it to know what all u can do)

5) The Start Menu has been redone with a completely different look, unfortunately it is hard to navigate and find what you are looking for.

- anything new takes some time to adjust doesnt mean its bad and vista's start menu is actually more neat and easy to use once u knw whats what

6) Rebooting a Vista machine is supposed to be faster, but it actually takes longer to reboot than XP.

- dont know havent felt anything like that

7) The much talked about Aero UI is great to look at, but with all the resources it takes just to run it all you will be able to do is look at it and not actually work on your pc.

- 2gb ram and is truly a bliss to work

8 ) The many different versions of Vista will be confusing to some basic computer users who are not sure of what exactly they need so in the end they will probably figure more expensive means better and pay for a version they don’t need in the first place.

- more options better it is though i feel business and home premium could be clubbed together

9) Horrible graphics performance that was not an issue with XP.

- 

10) Although the look is “improved” basic functions like add/remove programs are hard to find.

 maybe the person who typed the artcle is blind

11) VPN doesn’t work correctly, even though there are a few work arounds for this it is still not an easy process.

- dont know

13) Firefox runs ten times better than IE7 in vista.

- 2gb ram and both are same

14) The sidebar is another resource hog.

- bull sh!t

15) Readyboost seems like a good idea if you can get it to work.

- lack of knowledge isn the OS's fault

16) DVD playback through windows media player or media center lacks quality.

- again i think that guy is blind

17) Minor changes to hardware may prevent the system to boot up.

- 

18. No “open with” when right clicking on a file.

-  ... press shift and rite click there it is (for file types that have appz assigned) for the 1s that dont it has it by default

19) My brand new Netgear Eva8000 streaming media device will not work wirelessly with vista due to some tcp stack problem in vista (it did work perfect with xp).

- no idea

20) Windows Improved search is a total mess and not very accurate

- most ridiculous statement ... it surpasses most of arya's bull sh!t


----------



## napster007 (Aug 7, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

check the source out


ps - have you even used vista???


----------



## iMav (Aug 7, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

 since beta stages ... 

my desktop - vista ultimate
notebook - home premium


----------



## napster007 (Aug 7, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

^^how do you find it?? from ur comments it seems ur a windows "die hard fan"


----------



## xbonez (Aug 7, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

u don't need to be a die hard microsoft fan to like vista. there may be lots of things to say against it, but all sid and done vista is a gr8 OS


----------



## comrade (Aug 7, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

oneday we will be forced to use vista..so better install it and adopt to the environment...good or bad..they all new technologies..lets sail with it.


----------



## gxsaurav (Aug 7, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

I hate heavy rain & light outs  

Anyway, is the auther on pot. Was he using Vista alpha 1 .

 5) Start menu is easier instead. Just Search for whatever u want. 
6) check whether Clearpage file on shutdown is on or not. It is off by default.

9) In what? Games? Ever tried blaming the hardware manufacturer

10) Start -> write "pro" u will get it 

12) Ever tried looking for updated version.

16 & later ) He sure is a linboy


----------



## max_demon (Aug 7, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

Vista SUX , really .


use open source , OM


----------



## tarey_g (Aug 7, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*



> 4) Power options do not change automatically for laptops depending on whether you are plugged or unplugged from a power source.


bullsh1t

Haha, even vista installation is careful abt power options, it does not allow you to install vista while on battery power, prompts to plug in the power source so that installation proccess has not to suffer if battery power dies between install process.


but, i dont like the new start menu too. Atleast they should have given th option for the old menu. About the sidebar , i personally dont use fancy widgets and if you think it slows down you can shut it off anytime. The statement abt search is the most dumb one i have read from some time. 

People just plug in their crappy pen drive and expect the PC will work like on steroids. To such people "Its not replacement for your RAM noobs , and use the right flash drive according to the min specs for readyboost."

Author can not find 'open with'!! what a shame, why then he is even reviewing the OS.


----------



## infra_red_dude (Aug 7, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*



> 1) Hardware doesn’t run well on Vista (even new hardware).


Agree. haf faced it. but can't entirely blame vista.



> 2) The new security of Vista is overkill most of the time, being prompted for every little thing is bad enough but Vista even labels existing applications as suspicious.


agree again. very annoying for advanced users. so most of them turn it off. but not-so-advanced users get into the habit of allowing everytime they are prompted. UAC needs more intelligence!



> 3) Lack of drivers for older and newer hardware.


again true. faced it.



> 4) Power options do not change automatically for laptops depending on whether you are plugged or unplugged from a power source.


lol... i didn't write this article.. but surely my case!!! happens wid me. but i dun blame vista for it. mebbe the battery is faulty or the acpi hal is the culprit.



> 5) The Start Menu has been redone with a completely different look, unfortunately it is hard to navigate and find what you are looking for.


agree. i prefer xp's startmenu wid vista's search. (xp's start menu only for the "All Programs" thing)



> 6) Rebooting a Vista machine is supposed to be faster, but it actually takes longer to reboot than XP.


happens wid me again!  but mebbe i haf not-so-great hardware. i don't blame vista for this again.



> 7) The much talked about Aero UI is great to look at, but with all the resources it takes just to run it all you will be able to do is look at it and not actually work on your pc.


no comments, vista basic here.



> 8 ) The many different versions of Vista will be confusing to some basic computer users who are not sure of what exactly they need so in the end they will probably figure more expensive means better and pay for a version they don’t need in the first place.


surely not! 
vista basic: basic stripped down edition
vista home premium: home users
vista business: office/enterprise users
vista ultimate: enthusiasts (anyone can be included in this category)

its as simple as that. if users can't choose one version then i can only laugh at their IQ level!!! 



> 9) Horrible graphics performance that was not an issue with XP.


agree. when it comes to drivers, vista is still in nascent stage. the drivers need to mature.



> 10) Although the look is “improved” basic functions like add/remove programs are hard to find.


not always. average users who are used to the prev. versions may feel so. but those who've started wid this and the advanced users will not feel so.



> 11) VPN doesn’t work correctly, even though there are a few work arounds for this it is still not an easy process.


hafnt tried it out.



> 12) Software that is supposed to be windows compatible shuts down randomly.


isolated cases.



> 13) Firefox runs ten times better than IE7 in vista.


agree partially if not fully! 



> 14) The sidebar is another resource hog.


completely agree!



> 15) Readyboost seems like a good idea if you can get it to work.


true if u try to run readyboost wid any drive. but works wid the certified drives although the performance has not improved at all, in my case.



> 16) DVD playback through windows media player or media center lacks quality.


but it does the job.



> 17) Minor changes to hardware may prevent the system to boot up.


hafnt faced this problem.



> 1 No “open with” when right clicking on a file.


thats the most silly reason one can give on why vista sucks!!!!



> 19) My brand new Netgear Eva8000 streaming media device will not work wirelessly with vista due to some tcp stack problem in vista (it did work perfect with xp).


vista is not be blamed alone for this.



> 20) Windows Improved search is a total mess and not very accurate


yes, it needs to be improved. but i don't think its a total mess. it works!


----------



## kumarmohit (Aug 7, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*



> 1)* Hardware* doesn’t run well *on* *Vista* (even new hardware)



Hardware on Vista!!!!
Since when did *Hardware *start running *on Vista*,I thought it was *Vista which ran on Hardware*.


----------



## comrade (Aug 7, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*



			
				kumarmohit said:
			
		

> Hardware on Vista!!!!
> Since when did *Hardware *start running *on Vista*,I thought it was *Vista which ran on Hardware*.



actually i ran out of money in gettinh vista


----------



## Arsenal_Gunners (Aug 7, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

Well I love the vista start menu.It is less cluttered than xp.


----------



## iMav (Aug 7, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

*drivers isnt vista's fault* .... and cant be a reason to say vista sux ..... its the hardware manufacturer who has to make his hardware compatible and not the other way round


----------



## Ankur Gupta (Aug 7, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

Yeah you have to get a feel of the new start menu before you actually start liking it...
And yeah every OS has its drawbacks but then it cant be said "it sux" just because of those...


----------



## sandeepk (Aug 7, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

What is this? Not a single thing is here to be taken seriously!! It shows the lack of knowledge of the writer.


----------



## shantanu (Aug 7, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

is this a review.. ? shouldn't this be in chit-chat or fight club.. ? asking you people ?


----------



## iMav (Aug 7, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

shantanu leave it here ....


----------



## alsiladka (Aug 8, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

*1) Hardware doesn’t run well on Vista (even new hardware)*

Well, it is a new OS, the hardware which you are using it with were all made to suite XP, buy the new hardware made for Vista and then give your opinion. The older hardwares are not able to utilise Vista's capabilities. I dont think there are any DirectX 10 cards available out there.

*2) The new security of Vista is overkill most of the time, being prompted for every little thing is bad enough but Vista even labels existing applications as suspicious.*

You have my acceptance for this, i mean why do i need to be prompted if i want to delete an entry from the start menu or i want to paste files from my backup external drive to my personal music, video and pictures folder? Insane!!

*3) Lack of drivers for older and newer hardware.*

Wov, what an statement!!! For a Windows which came with a hell lot more number of drivers on DVD than the previous editions of Windows, the "lack" of drivers is not understandable. And with the passage of time, if you keep whinning on why your 10 year old hardware is not working, well, i have no answers for that.

*4) Power options do not change automatically for laptops depending on whether you are plugged or unplugged from a power source.*

I wish they would have implemented this feature. I would have loved something like this.

*5) The Start Menu has been redone with a completely different look, unfortunately it is hard to navigate and find what you are looking for.*

Man, you really mean it? If finding what you were looking for was hard in the Vista start menu, then what do you have to say about the XP start menu? All you have to do is search for the start menu entry, it will find itself automatically for you.

*6) Rebooting a Vista machine is supposed to be faster, but it actually takes longer to reboot than XP.*

This was because people were supposed to use the Sleep feature of Vista more than shut down. Personally, i shutdown only on System updates or software installs.

*7) The much talked about Aero UI is great to look at, but with all the resources it takes just to run it all you will be able to do is look at it and not actually work on your pc.*

Well, thats strange. Although i am using Vista on an Old laptop with the Vista basic UI, so i cannot comment on this.

*8 ) The many different versions of Vista will be confusing to some basic computer users who are not sure of what exactly they need so in the end they will probably figure more expensive means better and pay for a version they don’t need in the first place.*

Wov, just because users are stupid, you should not act smart and better.

*9) Horrible graphics performance that was not an issue with XP.*

Again, wait for DX10 cards, and blame the graphix card developers for not coming up with satisfactory drivers for Vista. I still remember the months after the launch when nVidia itself accepted that is is not able to come up with satisfactory drivers for Vista and their main priority as of now is going to be developing performing drivers for Vista. But then, why blame them?

*10) Although the look is “improved” basic functions like add/remove programs are hard to find.*

Why are the hard to find? Its right there in the My Computer navigation bar? What else do you need, a desktop icon?

*11) VPN doesn’t work correctly, even though there are a few work arounds for this it is still not an easy process.*

Have not used it yet

*12) Software that is supposed to be windows compatible shuts down randomly.*

I have not even seen this happening with software that is not windows compatible? Isnt that supposed to mean Vista compatible?

*13) Firefox runs ten times better than IE7 in vista.*

Have not used firefox since IE7 got "Pro" with IE7Pro.

*14) The sidebar is another resource hog.*

Then i believe so are Yahoo! Widgets and DesktopX.

*15) Readyboost seems like a good idea if you can get it to work.*

Well, go on, get it to work, buy readyboost ready drives. Even HD Dvds seem like an awsome idea, only problem is i cant get them to work on my normal DVD RAM  . The technology must certainly be faulted!!

*16) DVD playback through windows media player or media center lacks quality.*

Have not tried this yet!! Man, i just realised i have not used DVDs on my laptop since such a long time.

*17) Minor changes to hardware may prevent the system to boot up*.

What do these minor changes constitute?

*1 No “open with” when right clicking on a file.*

Hail thee!! Maybe Vista must be shutting its features on you seeing your profound love for it, As my Vista has an Open With for files.

*19) My brand new Netgear Eva8000 streaming media device will not work wirelessly with vista due to some tcp stack problem in vista (it did work perfect with xp).*

Have not tried all this.

*20) Windows Improved search is a total mess and not very accurate.*

Well, i have not yet found garbage search results!!


----------



## iMav (Aug 8, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

not in fight club hence will only point out 1 thing ... power options when u have ur notebook plugged or unplugged and u can change almost everything in power options


----------



## casanova (Aug 8, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

5) The Start Menu has been redone with a completely different look, unfortunately it is hard to navigate and find what you are looking for.

Can't think going to XP coz of this

13) Firefox runs ten times better than IE7 in vista.

What you wanna say. Is it Vista at fault or IE7 or is Firefox good.


----------



## iMav (Aug 8, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*



			
				casanova said:
			
		

> What you wanna say


 nothing much but that he is a dumb blind fool


----------



## gxsaurav (Aug 8, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*



			
				shantanu said:
			
		

> is this a review.. ? shouldn't this be in chit-chat or fight club.. ? asking you people ?



Shantanu, dude .....didn't u see then penguin logo at the source page  that explains the credibility & unbiased natire of the auther himself


----------



## infra_red_dude (Aug 8, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

tho i don't agree wid most of the points pointed out by the author after which he concludes vista sux, i must say that i've faced about 1/4th of the mentioned problems. but i don't blame vista for it as thats not vista's fault in anyway. i say the same abt linux. if ppl whine that their hardware doesn't work wid linux then its not the fault of the distro!


----------



## pillainp (Aug 9, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

Exactly.

For years now, Linux has been suffering from poor hardware support (this is getting better now, but still not as good as Windows), but you never heard people complaining about the OS, in spite of the often claimed speed with which open source problems are rectified.

Now Vista has the problem of hardware vendors not creating drivers in spite of the two year beta stage, but when older hardware fails to work under Vista, it becomes Microsoft's fault.


----------



## BBThumbHealer (Aug 9, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

Vista Rocks Surely...


----------



## aryayush (Aug 9, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

I hate such articles. It is an article written out of spite and obvious bias. He started out not wanting to like the operating system, so he obviously ended up that way too. It is impossible to use Vista and not praise the instant search, the breadcrumb navigation, sidebar, live thumbnails, etc. If you want to tell us what you did not like, we also want to hear what you did. No product in the world is flawless and if you only list the flaws, it is obviously going to look bad. I see this happen all the time when people who hate Mac OS X set out to "review" it. Articles like those, and this one too, just make the author look like a complete jackass. I give this a 0/10. This sucks!


----------



## pillainp (Aug 9, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*



			
				Aryayush said:
			
		

> I give this a 0/10. This sucks!


Zigackly !!! (As everyone who reads Asterix will know.) 

But sadly enough for Apple, this happens to be my assessment of the Mac vs. PC ads too. This is exactly what they are doing in those ads (Forgive me, this is extremely off-topic to this thread, but I had to say it.)


----------



## aryayush (Aug 9, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

Oh, and BTW, I seriously doubt this guy has used the OS. I think he made the list based on preconceived notions. He came up with twenty flaws, some of which are ridiculous (he says the searching is poor and since he is comparing Vista to XP in the article, does he really mean to say that XP's built-in search was better than Vista's!).
Yet somehow he did not even get around to mentioning one huge flaw in Vista, the sheer uselessness of the much hyped Flip-3D feature. This suggests that he has not really used the OS.


----------



## pillainp (Aug 9, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

Strikes me as strange that you of all people should say that flip-3D is useless. It is pretty useful, and good-looking to boot; and you are the one that always harps on the beauty of the OS (as exemplified by Mac OSX).


----------



## aryayush (Aug 9, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

Form (almost) always follows function in Mac OS X but that is certainly not the case with Flip 3D - you cannot see the full contents of any page except the first one, some windows get completely hidden, there is no way to differentiate between two identical windows (because the titles are illegible), etc. There are a lot of problems with Flip 3D.

And BTW, good design is more than just experimenting with spiffy effects and slapping them onto the operating system. When the whole desktop is two dimensional, how does Flip 3D suddenly become three dimensional and that too over the two dimensional desktop background? How does it get suspended in space when none exists?

Time Machine also employs the illusion of a three dimensional space but if you have seen it in action, which I doubt, you'll see that the two dimensional desktop slides off the screen revealing the endless time lapse beyond. As you "move back in time", you keep getting the illusion that you are approaching the end but it never comes. From a functional point of view, all this is no use but Apple designed all this to support their three dimensional approach. They did not just slap it on. This is good design.

And this also follows function. You are bringing back documents you've deleted in the past; you're bring back things from back in time. Doesn't it make sense to give you an easy to use UI that gives you the illusion that you are actually going back in time? Doesn't it make sense? Doesn't the form complement the function? Now find me one good reason why Flip 3D is three dimensional? And if it is, why is the environment it operates in two dimensional? It is like playing a game where you can only move back and forward but the characters are three dimensional.

Now, if both the function and the form are flawed, how can you say it is a good feature? Everyone I've seen using Vista uses Alt + Tab for daily use and Flip 3D for show-off.


----------



## pillainp (Aug 9, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

Well now. Arya has just brought to the for the whole _raison d'etre_ o the Mac OS, _illusion_.

See, i use Flip to see what windows and apps I have open and to switch between them. I don't really need to see what is in each window, since I have each open item labelled neatly in the taskbar.

It just helps that it looks pretty neat. But when you are worried more about looks than function, as with OSX, I guess you would think it sucks.


			
				Aryayush said:
			
		

> And BTW, good design is more than just experimenting with spiffy effects and slapping them onto the operating system.


I always thought this was what Mac did best.

But I have changed my mind, having been forced to use a Mac for almost two months. I find I would far rather stick with Windows (and its flaws, of which surprisingly few bother me) than have someone else's idea of how things should be done forced down my throat.
Ironic that: for a company whose slogan happens to be "Think Different", all Macs are alike (aside from individual product lines), whereas hardly any PC's (the greatest evil) are.


----------



## iMav (Aug 9, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

well arya u really wanna go thru same embarrassment all over again


----------



## infra_red_dude (Aug 10, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*



			
				pillainp said:
			
		

> Ironic that: for a company whose slogan happens to be "Think Different", all Macs are alike (aside from individual product lines)


too good a thot!


----------



## iMav (Aug 10, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*



			
				pillainp said:
			
		

> Ironic that: for a company whose slogan happens to be "Think Different", all Macs are alike


 thats what the different thought is ... every1 should be same all are equal communisim at its best


----------



## gxsaurav (Aug 10, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*



			
				iMav said:
			
		

> thats what the different thought is ... every1 should be same all are equal communisim at its best



Lolz.....Mac - You either work the Jobs way or u don't work.


----------



## tarey_g (Aug 10, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

Ahh , not here too. btw this statement is accurate

_Ironic that: for a company whose slogan happens to be "Think Different", all Macs are alike (aside from individual product lines)_


----------



## aryayush (Aug 10, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*



			
				pillainp said:
			
		

> Well now. Arya has just brought to the for the whole _raison d'etre_ o the Mac OS, _illusion_.
> 
> See, i use Flip to see what windows and apps I have open and to switch between them. I don't really need to see what is in each window, since I have each open item labelled neatly in the taskbar.
> 
> ...


You, like most other Windows users who "try" Mac OS X, started out with the opinion that it sucks, that you were being forced to use it. You started out with the aim of finding the flaws. When you encountered the neat features that would be amazing for anyone switching from Windows, you let them pass without notice and when you chanced upon the problems, which you are bound to encounter when you are switching from a platform you've been using for years and are very comfortable with, you noted them in your head instead of looking for solutions.

No surprise then, that at the end of the two months, you weren't very happy with the operating system. You like Flip 3D, but for some weird, unexplainable reason, you did not like Exposé. You did not like the fact that it mounts ISO and DMG images by default (and those are the only ones you need because Mac developers do not use other formats) or that there is a widget that not only shows you flight schedules but also where the flight is at any given time. You did not notice how aliases (shortcuts) stick to files even when they've been renamed or relocated, you did not notice that you can work with busy files, you did not appreciate the sheer convenience of not having to install applications. There is a lot to like in Mac OS X and the pros far outweigh the cons. But you were blind to the pros so of course the cons were glaringly evident.

I would've believed you if I would have ever met a single person who bought a Mac with the genuine desire to try it out, to learn something new and was disappointed with it. Five people I know have switched to a Mac after me and not one of them has anything to complain about. Of course, I do get the occasional distress calls - my Internet is not working, a VCD I bought is not playing, the Digit DVD is not playing, where can I find software - but I've been able to address everything that's been thrown at me so far and I've never had two calls about the same problem from the same person.

There are thousands of people switching to Macs nowadays and a few of them are bound to dislike it. It is not perfect. It is not for the person who likes to tinker with the OS too much. I am sure you are going to jump at this one, _"Yes, I am such a person and therefore, I did not like it."_ But it is not a universal rule that you can apply to everybody. I used Windows for five years and I used all sorts of hacks and stuff - I followed a lot of Vishal's tipcs, messed around with the registry, installed WindowsBlinds and such, edited the startup items, removed the TCP/IP limit of reserving 20% bandwidth, tried a lot of Linux distros - I've done a lot of those. And I used to like it too. Trying out the latest antiviruses and keeping them updated used to be a fun thing to do. I was just like most people on this forum are. But then I switched to Mac OS X and I was very apprehensive about it too. I would probably not even have switched if I had anything to lose. But I was only seventeen and had not done anything serious with a computer yet. I figured that if for some reason I did not like the OS, I could always go back to using Windows.

And then I used it. I had the same attitude towards it that I had towards Windows six years back, one of curiosity. When I found that the option of playing full screen movies was disabled in QuickTime Player, I tried to find ways around it, when I couldn't play DivX movies, I searched for ways to do so. I did not note it down in a diary so that I could later complain about it on an online forum. That attitude would get me nowhere. Today, I can very confidently say that after having tried out a lot of OSes - Windows 98, XP and Vista, Ubuntu, Kubuntu, OpenSUSE, Fedora and Mandriva and finally Mac OS X - OS X is clearly the most advanced one. Yes, it restricts you choices but that is what makes it better. Of course, there are certain things in which it lags behind Windows, the most disappointing one being that it does not have anything like the incredibly useful System Restore feature in Windows XP and Vista. It will be there in Leopard (and will be a vast improvement over Vista's), but it should have been in Tiger when XP has had it for seven years.

Overall, however, Mac OS X is definitely the best. Almost every review and shoot-out says so and almost every Mac user says so (and almost every Mac user has used Windows and Linux). I say so. Even simple applications like TextEdit and Address Book are very good at what they do. Most of the things are available by default and they actually work, for a change. Compare Address Book to Windows Contacts, Apple Mail to Windows Mail, TextEdit to Wordpad and Notepad. In each case, the former is a better contender for the crown.

As for their motto, it does hold true. In fact, I find that it is the ideal description for most of Apple's products and their customers. You would never use a Mac if you wouldn't dare to be different from everyone else. They cannot possibly make a different Mac for every customer, but they sure as Hell can provide a better user experience compared to the rest of the industry and they quite successfully do. The magic starts from the packaging itself.


----------



## iMav (Aug 10, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

finally arya has accepted facts that we pointed out ...


----------



## tarey_g (Aug 10, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*



> I would've believed you if I would have ever met a single person who bought a Mac with the genuine desire to try it out



No one will spend thousands of Rs just to 'try' a mac. I am glad i don't know such ppl who bought it just to try. And if someone paid for it without knowing the system, that someone certainly deservs the OS


----------



## freshseasons (Aug 10, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

My Bad ! But i don't know why some people refuse to accept the fact that VISTA is Good.
   May be if Vista was secluded to few people and would have a Halo ring over it, it would have been another story.Something totally on the line of A la' Premium' Product .
    Whether i would go ranting on Vista is good,is good , is good isn't going to make any difference , i know. But still it wouldn't subdue the fact that VISTA is Good, is good , is good.


----------



## pillainp (Aug 10, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

Arya, I have been seeing the mac since the days of the Mac II. 'nuff zed.
It may be true that the Mac probably has the best user experience of all OS's, but only because all Macs are esentially the same. And also only when seen through the eyes of a person that refuses to accept the weaknesses of the platform and to accept that others are better at the very things the Mac claims to do best.

On the other hand, every single PC running either Linux or Windows is different *simply because the owner or primary user has the ability and the capacity to change his or her system to their own liking. That simple fact entails a learning curve from machine to machine, something Mac users probably would not understand or be capable of.*

Show me a Mac where you can do that. Show me a Mac where the owner does not have to work according to Jobs' liking, where the user can tweak the interface to bear not even the slightest resemblance to the original OS.

My dislike for the Mac is not based on my choosing to do so. It is based on the fact that I had, on an OS that prides itself on being media-centric, to go back to "yucky" Windows to get a job done right that the Mac prides itself on, but was not capable of.


			
				Aryayush said:
			
		

> It is not perfect. It is not for the person who likes to tinker with the OS too much.


Going by your previous diatribes, this would seem to be heresy to the whole philosophy of the Mac, where you are different only in that you are all so similar.

And show me OSX running on the variety of hardware configurations that Windows and Linux are capable of, and even half as successfully, and then talk of the weaknesses of either as compared to OSX, either in appearance or function.

You are talking out of the most closed and monopolistic platform in the history of computing.


----------



## rajasekharan (Aug 16, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

well for me vista has turned bad 

lack of proper quicktime support, even though the fault may be from apple or what ever
the only player that plays all .mov file is my KMP, thats right not vlc, not quicktime , not anyother codecs i tried.

which just effects my aftereffects work at times , and the combustion .
and the lack of support for other s/w like maxwell and like 

in short i will give it a good solid years time to get it stabilized 
may be the company's dont know how to make one that just works well with vista 
or vista is unstable 

any case as with all new OS that comes out these days , i have learned one solid lesson , 
if you dont what your work to turn to a nightmare 
just dont try the new ones , until they are stabilized 

well, am back to XP ...


----------



## koolbluez (Aug 16, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

A 64bit Vista user here... i've faced some probs.. starting with... lack of drivers... hope the sw industry rises to the occassion. DirectX10... most sw & old(take it as not ultra-new) games need DX9... so... i lose my earlier DX10... take for example.. my Nero... it asks & installs DX9... to run.

I'm not able to play my Oni... Devil May Cry... MotoGP....
even after installing DX9.. 

But, I'ld say... Vista is facing a start like XP had years back. Hope the matter brightens up & MS erase out the faults...
It's a good & interesting start for another giant leap for MSkind 

Other problems like right-click... ReadyBoost... UAC... can be solved.


----------



## bL4zE (Aug 17, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!! << just 2 more to add y it suxx *

Just get my Pacenet broadband service working on vista n den i will say dat it roxxxxx !!! but till den it suxxxx like hell !!!! 

btw even xp was nothing untill sp1 came out 

also another problem is dat my Area 51 game doesnt work on Vista


----------



## assasin (Aug 17, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

^^^  try using the compatibilty mode to run games/softwares which r not running in Vista.most of the time they will run after using compatibility mode.

@rajasekharan   quicktime has never been a prob to me.i can play .mov files in WMP11,PowerDVD,Nero Show Time etc.try using Quicktime Alternative.i use it.


----------



## bL4zE (Aug 18, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

Compatiblity also doesnt work  !!! 
bout game is ok but wat bout my pacenet broadband ??? 

hope sum1 finds ans to my broadband issues


----------



## koolbluez (Aug 18, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

Already runnin sw/games in compatibility mode... that WoW64 layer takes care of that... that too runs default in my system...

All 32-bit applications are separately mentioned in the CtrlAltDelete Process panel .


----------



## entrana (Aug 18, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

look guys i read somewhere dont really wanna support piracy but
pirated vista is better because
cracked vista:
1. infinite installations
2. new hardware changes would not affect anything
3. FASTER 
and stuff dont know the source forgot but this is what i read so i think for the first time i think pirated wud actually better so it wud be like windows genuine disadvantage


----------



## assasin (Aug 19, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

^^^  1> Infinite installations of wat????
2>wat hardware change will not affect wat???
3>speed is same.


----------



## Desi-Tek.com (Aug 19, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

vista sucks
os x sucks
linux sucks
sun solaris sucks

xp is addictive


----------



## shantanu (Aug 19, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*



			
				entrana said:
			
		

> look guys i read somewhere dont really wanna support piracy but
> pirated vista is better because
> cracked vista:
> 1. infinite installations
> ...


 
entrana did you start again.. means there was no positive effect on you with a weeks ban.. you need another one... ? just tell me.. how many times should i warn you..


----------



## vish786 (Aug 19, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*



			
				shantanu said:
			
		

> entrana did you start again.. means there was no positive effect on you with a weeks ban.. you need another one... ? just tell me.. how many times should i warn you..



shantanu, this guy is just 13 yrs old, tat is y he's not taking piracy and ur ban seriously.


----------



## shantanu (Aug 19, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

@vish : i dont want a thread for this guy : but i already warned him a lot of times in past :

link 1

link 2

link 3

and this is what the great guy did  :

i am 13 year old

link 1  (spam advert)

Link 2

Link3

see this 

and this

Just read his attitude and langauge.. 

and i welcomed him back today in a thread,..


----------



## Choto Cheeta (Aug 19, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

I am really not suppose to make a comment but I am making one...

@vish786

I dont get you... Whether he is 13 or 31... He is a forum member who is suppose to follow Forum Rules... he was warned many times by out mods, but no change so earned one Ban for 7 days...

Refer here *www.thinkdigit.com/forum/showpost.php?p=568401&postcount=494

and then here, *www.thinkdigit.com/forum/showthread.php?t=41532&page=27

read why was he banned and whether the reasons where justified or not...

once again i am sorry, I made one comment where I am not suppose to... I areally appologies, but I make this comment as I support Shatanu's Dicision on the same said actions...


----------



## bL4zE (Aug 19, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*



			
				koolbluez said:
			
		

> Already runnin sw/games in compatibility mode... that WoW64 layer takes care of that... that too runs default in my system...
> 
> All 32-bit applications are separately mentioned in the CtrlAltDelete Process panel .




Still the issue of Pacenet (my broadband) remains as der is no dialer in vista 
n also i cant get querry by typing "raspppoe" in run coz there is no way to install pppoe drivers other than inbuilt 1.

Verdict :- Vista still suxxx


----------



## vish786 (Aug 19, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

other users its Offtopic:  shantanu, delete all the threads related to this entrana/ayush gupta/123asd, after readin this.

@shantanu, chota cheeta...
arre bhai, i'm not opposing shantanu's ban,banning was the right decision 2 do, i said this guy is a kid & he still doesnt know how to behave in a forum even after shantanu has banned & warned him. so give him little dosage abt behaving in the forum otherwise he'll be permanently banned for ever. <this is wat i meant earlier>

@chota cheeta,


			
				Choto Cheeta said:
			
		

> @vish786
> 
> I dont get you... Whether he is 13 or 31...


aryayush has asked his age and to this gauravakaasid replied.


			
				gauravakaasid said:
			
		

> @Arya..thnx for the sms ...also this Ayush is a kid, all of 13 years. lives close to my place re...n y do u want his info??
> <refer post 487 and 491 in All Calcuttans in Digit>


----------



## bL4zE (Aug 20, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

Atlast got solution for pacenet !!! now pacenet dialer works n so does my net  !!! btw i had called da pacenet engg 


VERDICT :- VISTA ROXXX FOR ME NOW


----------



## nish_higher (Aug 20, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

the only thing that makes me feel vista is a piece of s**t is that there r no drivers (for the scanner and hp director,etc) for my printer psc1210..hp people say to get a nu model thats vista compatible..!!
so i'm happy to use it on mac.

IN SHoRT-Nothing Beats Apple OSX


----------



## gxsaurav (Aug 20, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*



			
				nish_higher said:
			
		

> the only thing that makes me feel vista is a piece of s**t is that there r no drivers (for the scanner and hp director,etc) for my printer psc1210..hp people say to get a nu model thats vista compatible..!!



How is this Vista's Fault? DIdn't you buy a compleate new computer (Mac) to run OS X?


----------



## nish_higher (Aug 20, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

i have a macbook pro and an intel desktop.vista is on the desktop.and i'm not happy using my scanner in macbook.coz mostly i print from windows.so its kinda plug in,out,in situation which i dont wanna get into.
i use vista for the internet and playing games.for me there's no substitute for IE.but sometimes even Ie crashes and very rarely some games too-like fear,nfs mw..


----------



## iMav (Aug 21, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

Microsoft makes Operating System ... Hardware manufacturers make hardware and the drivers ...


----------



## Help~Is~Here (Aug 21, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

Here's a video in the PC v/s MAC series giving you the exact picture of the overprotective Vista Firewall!!

*www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxOIebkmrqs


----------



## infra_red_dude (Aug 21, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*



			
				iMav said:
			
		

> Microsoft makes Operating System ... Hardware manufacturers make hardware and the drivers ...


exactly, i'd ask ppl to stop blaming linux too for this. its not the fault of gnu/linux distro!


----------



## praka123 (Aug 21, 2007)

*Re: 20 Reasons why vista $ucks!!*

^  but title of the thread is true for many is a fact


----------



## bL4zE (Aug 21, 2007)

Me back on xp  
dunno why but vista's DX10 kept my pc crashing after running some games dat require DX9... 
also cant seem any way to keep both my front panel audio n rear panel audio working simultaneously  as it does in xp so i have to manually select my default device  pretty irritatin for me 

So now me back on good old xp \m/

n btw vista hogged my 700 mb ram (when idle)  outta 2gb so een after havin 2gb ram i was getting da performance as if i had only 1gb ram 

hope some day vista becomes as gd as xp 
coz xp was also nothing untill sp1 came out


----------



## sakumar79 (Aug 21, 2007)

I remember back when XP was released... It was good but had its share of problems... It was only after SP2 that it became a force to be reckoned with... Not just because SP2 made it more secure, but that the time taken to release SP2 allowed most latest hardware to be compatible with XP and made it possible for easy penetration in the market...

I presume the same will happen with Vista, but maybe to a different scale...

Arun


----------



## iMav (Aug 21, 2007)

bL4zE i think dx 10.1 should resolve ur problem ... though no games have crashed here till now ... carbon, mw, age of mythology, mafia, fifa 07 .... all wrk fine


----------



## bL4zE (Aug 21, 2007)

iMav said:
			
		

> bL4zE i think dx 10.1 should resolve ur problem ... though no games have crashed here till now ... carbon, mw, age of mythology, mafia, fifa 07 .... all wrk fine




afaik DX10 hardware is not compatible wid DX10.1 as i had got a msg frm my MS frnd 
So if it is can u just confirm n temme plzzzz so dat i can put vista again


----------



## Help~Is~Here (Aug 21, 2007)

bL4zE said:
			
		

> afaik DX10 hardware is not compatible wid DX10.1 as i had got a msg frm my MS frnd
> So if it is can u just confirm n temme plzzzz so dat i can put vista again


 
DX10.1 supports DX10 hardware but it's recommended to use 10.1 supported hardware

*www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6824&Itemid=2


----------



## pillainp (Aug 22, 2007)

@praka123:
Why is it ATI's fault when Linux fails to work with its hardware for want of good drivers, but Vista's fault when the same happens with it?

That is hypocrisy. Linux has only been able to manage *most* hardware, inspite of its much-vaunted community support, for the last two years or so. Most hardware mannufacturers almost refuse to even create drivers for it. Does this not mean that Linux sucks too, if I wish to use whatever hardware I have?

You have been outright blaming Vista/MS for the failure of hardware manufacturers to supply proper drivers. That then must mean, by the same yardstick, that Linux is worthless, because lots of hardware does not work on it.


----------



## Help~Is~Here (Aug 22, 2007)

pillainp said:
			
		

> @praka123:
> Why is it ATI's fault when Linux fails to work with its hardware for want of good drivers, but Vista's fault when the same happens with it?
> 
> That is hypocrisy. Linux has only been able to manage *most* hardware, inspite of its much-vaunted community support, for the last two years or so. Most hardware mannufacturers almost refuse to even create drivers for it. Does this not mean that Linux sucks too, if I wish to use whatever hardware I have?
> ...


 
lol.. whoever might have told you that lot of hardware is not support by linux is either a 'blast from the past' or simply sleeping at his desk.

Wake up buddy, it's not like how you think. There are so many different version of linux and it doesn't mean that since every version doesn't support all hardware that linux sucks. Look at the distros that are being developed by companies like Novell, the new Suse Entriprise Desktop Linux SP1, there is hardly any software that you can think of in the entire world that doesn't work with it.

However, coming to the point of Vista, it's not that new hardware is not supported by Vista. The whole point that Vista has dropped supporting all the generic drivers like it used to do in WinXP, 2000 and 98 for the *EXISTING hardware* in the market is the most appauling and pathetic thing! So, my dear friend, Linux might have slight issues with new hardware drivers but certainly not with existing drivers!!


----------



## gxsaurav (Aug 22, 2007)

Help~Is~Here said:
			
		

> However, coming to the point of Vista, it's not that new hardware is not supported by Vista. The whole point that Vista has dropped supporting all the generic drivers like it used to do in WinXP, 2000 and 98 for the *EXISTING hardware* in the market is the most appauling and pathetic thing



Wrong, Vista even has chipset, USB, Audio drivers of Intel 845G chipset which came out in 2002. Get your facts right. Vista right now has more then 40k hardawre drivers inbuilt...much more then XP


----------



## pillainp (Aug 22, 2007)

So you want support for you hardware that is 10+ years old??
Wake up and smell the smoke:
The hardware manufacturers are not here to give you a free ride. Any driver base for any OS is dependent on manufacturer support. The manufacturer wants you to buy new stuff. Else they would have stopped making them years ago.

Just as with any OS, if your old hardware does not work (and with Linux, your brand spanking new hardware as well) suck it in and go buy new.

Maintaining all the old drivers for all the old hardware would have taken a hell of a lot of space (and then you would have complained that Vista is bloatware), but they do it anyway, and you still complain.

You want the best of both worlds. If its good, it could have been better so you cry. If its bad, you cry anyway.
And Linux, with kernel to kernel support dropped after 5 years, complains.

*The myth of the free OS:*
If you want to enjoy Linux with Beryl but have an ATI card.... *SUCKER*... run out and buy another from nVidia. And you call this open source, all those monkeys coding for so many years and no one has a driver that works???

At least I can enjoy Vista's candy with any card better than an ATI 9600 or nVidia 6 series, *with the default drivers built into Vista*.


			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> Wrong, Vista even has chipset, USB, Audio drivers of Intel 845G chipset which came out in 2002. Get your facts right. Vista right now has more then 40k hardawre drivers inbuilt...much more then XP


@praka123 & Help~is~Here: Show me at least one Linux distro that will support all the hardware the hardware that XP/Vista does, out of the box, with no tweaking.

That basically is what this is all about, you can't/don't have it so you whine whine whine.



			
				Help~is~Here said:
			
		

> So, my dear friend, Linux might have slight issues with new hardware drivers but certainly not with existing drivers!!


You call an OS (Linux) failing entirely to work with a piece of hardware a *slight issue*?? Then why is it such a big issue for you when it is Vista?


----------



## praka123 (Aug 22, 2007)

My comment stand for-Dont you know that before Vista M$ ppl blame Linux doesnot support hardware and blah...now Vista came and it is not supporting many hardwares(afaik) or no better drivers they suddenly wake up to reality.

@pillai:ur comments are outright against the FOSS movement not against Linux that i know.reg Linux,Linux kernel supports by default many drivers and fs which the vista can only dream of  
But the truth stands-*where the hell does anyone told Ati or Via are not supported in LInux*? they are supported.but just bad drivers thats all.And only drivers OSS lacks are wireless apps due to their developers not providing the drivers and some tv tuner cards afaik.
Why Linux works better- if ur considered with "Aero bloat" Beryl?oh u meant Compiz-fusion?did u saw what it can offer?Why the hell ur adamant to prove that Linux fails?YOur mind is preset that Vista is the OS.thats the problem.Let u know Ubuntu or Mac is anytime better than Vista.-this cant be digestible if ur a hard core m$ fanatic.

Do u want to tell the world that all must trash old hardwares due to VIsta releasesd?  this mentality sucks.not all are that rich to get the bloatware with rootkit(DRM) fitted my dear!.I am blaming Vista not only for h/w drivers,the very idea what Vista stands for-that is
"We(M$) determine what you will do on ur computer"-EULA & DRM.
Hope you come sync with the reality.


----------



## infra_red_dude (Aug 22, 2007)

consider this, ati has locked up the hardware whitepapers in a vault, they refuse to disclose. the driver they provide doesn't support all the features. so what will a common man do? will he get to read all the whitepapers in his dream and the next day can he come out wid a working driver? expecting that is plain foolishness. unless the manufac. co-operates this task can't be completed.

i've stood by what was said earlier. if ur hardware doesn't work wid an OS then blame the manufac. its not the fault of OS. jus think how many manufac. come up wid windows drivers and how many provide linux drivers (not from the enthu community, straight from the company). you can count such companies on fingers!

but one must comment the efforts taken by the open source community. most of the drivers haf been coded by reverse engineering! and btw, when u say u can enjoy aero wid an ati card but not beryl out of the box i say the opposite! my pathetic igp runs beryl/compiz, gives me ditto aero in linux and much much more whereas vista gives me the ugliest UI ever built!


----------



## iMav (Aug 22, 2007)

@prakash: a little mis-understanding u have about vista that it requires u to buy new hardware should be cleared ...

my specs are 3 yrs old:

p4 3ghz
512 ddr1
intel 865series mobo
fx 5200

... vista runs smoothly ... all i have upgraded in the last 3-4 years is my hard disk capacity ... same is the case with gx even his pc is 4 years old and he is running vista on it ... so i dont understand how is MS compelling u to buy new hard ware

ur arguement is like sony should make all ps 3 games ps2 compatible ... think for urself how much of a difference would that make ...


----------



## shantanu (Aug 22, 2007)

praka123 said:
			
		

> where the hell does anyone told Ati or Via are not supported in LInux



i am not in discussion.. but would like to share a thing.. about 2 years back.. when Ati launched X200 chipset.. i bought the Msi RS482M2 Motherboard.. i tried installing Fedora core 5 on it and Rhel 4 .. both the editions did not install coz it was not supporting Silicon Image sata controller.. ! i think Xp supports every Sata controller From Sp1 and even Windows 98se and Me support SATA as a Storage device.. ( i cant boot up on it).. 
 PS : I am not offending.. nor i am in this Discussion.. (just wanted to share)


----------



## iMav (Aug 22, 2007)

^^ moderator hone ka eknuksaan


----------



## infra_red_dude (Aug 22, 2007)

^^^ ya faayda??!!


----------



## praka123 (Aug 22, 2007)

shantanu said:
			
		

> i am not in discussion.. but would like to share a thing.. about 2 years back.. when Ati launched X200 chipset.. i bought the Msi RS482M2 Motherboard.. i tried installing Fedora core 5 on it and Rhel 4 .. both the editions did not install coz it was not supporting Silicon Image sata controller.. ! i think Xp supports every Sata controller From Sp1 and even Windows 98se and Me support SATA as a Storage device.. ( i cant boot up on it)..
> PS : I am not offending.. nor i am in this Discussion.. (just wanted to share)


Yes,later kernels supported it.the  same i heard with latest intel boards 965 and jmicron controllers. but newer kernels provide drivers not too delayed.unlike seperate driver cd and searching for drivers over www in Vista.drivers in Linux are mostly built in as modules.although ext drivers exists.
Times changed dude!now Linux (2.6) got better support!Vista is not an option for ppl in many parts of India while Linux is "known" to them by now.thx to Ubuntu,Suse like distros.but yeah,de-addiction(wintow$) takes some time.Hoping for the best-Let the Community OS not only Linux other alternate OS too grows-let the monopoly of Microsoft be shattered down.and not only M$ ,  monopoly shudnt exist in s/w field esp OS and users shud be the dictators what companies shud do unlike forced crippler- EULA and incorporated DRM.but no offense-said the truth.


----------



## Help~Is~Here (Aug 22, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> Wrong, Vista even has chipset, USB, Audio drivers of Intel 845G chipset which came out in 2002. Get your facts right. Vista right now has more then 40k hardawre drivers inbuilt...much more then XP


 
Whatever said, the whole world knows that Vista is not compatible with lot of existing hardware and you can't change that fact even if you try to get it working on a P1 

lol... I can't believe how easily people forget the truth and try to defend it with some apparently genuine reason.



			
				pillainp said:
			
		

> @praka123 & Help~is~Here: Show me at least one Linux distro that will support all the hardware the hardware that XP/Vista does, out of the box, with no tweaking.


 
Like I mentioned before, Suse Enterprise Desktop Linux 10 SP1. It's sad that people even after reading, ask for the same thing.



			
				pillainp said:
			
		

> You call an OS (Linux) failing entirely to work with a piece of hardware a *slight issue*?? Then why is it such a big issue for you when it is Vista?


 
lol... when I mean slight issue, I meant configuration, not 'not working at all'. Again, sad that people take things literally


----------



## gxsaurav (Aug 22, 2007)

Help~Is~Here said:
			
		

> Whatever said, the whole world knows that Vista is not compatible with lot of existing hardware and you can't change that fact even if you try to get it working on a P1



Try getting Ubuntu 7.04 to work on a Pentium 1 with 32 MB RAM. Let me know if it runs


----------



## praka123 (Aug 22, 2007)

^Aha!Vista runs  -tell u try Antix Mepis(apt+deb) with latest packages works fine.but where is M$ and choice  pigs can fly.just got an update for DX10 to DX10.1 ...and wt abt 8800GT -just works with 10.1  users are losers.we(M$,etc) rule you will force u to whtever we want


----------



## freshseasons (Aug 22, 2007)

In its Stand alone package Vista supports more hardware then XP could.
   I still need to hunt for my hardware drivers for XP.
   And about linux.
  Hmm about linux.I simply cannot install and use my V-Data PCMCIA Tata Indicom card with it.
     Vista =productivity for me.


----------



## praka123 (Aug 22, 2007)

this is what is called "vendor-lockin".cant get adjusted to alternate OS.yeah i know many genius exists who cant try Linux,but Vista  they are taught Linux are for geeks  same old story pushed by the "genius"'s company.I wonder why these ppl gets "mind-locked"-Windows is not the final answer and intolerable to other OS's esp Mac and Linux means fanatic who justifies whether he is in hell also to be heaven


----------



## gxsaurav (Aug 22, 2007)

praka123 said:
			
		

> ^Aha!Vista runs  -tell u try Antix Mepis(apt+deb) with latest packages works fine.



Right, & what can u do with this system? Can u run GUI or XFCE? Or Firefox or  KDE?



> just got an update for DX10 to DX10.1 ...and wt abt 8800GT -just works with 10.1



Get your facts right, all features of DirectX 10.1 are supported by DX 10 cards, just few efficiency enhancement don't work in which case you will at max suffer a loss of 5 fps


----------



## freshseasons (Aug 22, 2007)

^^^^
   [ b]True [/b]
    However i will give a sigh of relief , if Linux could just install PCMCIA Lappy drivers and i get to use dialup using linux.
  Then it will stand chance of actually being true.


----------



## gxsaurav (Aug 22, 2007)

praka123 said:
			
		

> this is what is called "vendor-lockin".cant get adjusted to alternate OS.yeah i know many genius exists who cant try Linux,but Vista  they are taught Linux are for geeks  same old story pushed by the "genius"'s company.I wonder why these ppl gets "mind-locked"-Windows is not the final answer and intolerable to other OS's esp Mac and Linux means fanatic who justifies whether he is in hell also to be heaven



Would u mind not whining & helping him to get a proper driver for his V-Data card?


----------



## infra_red_dude (Aug 23, 2007)

freshseasons said:
			
		

> ^^^^
> [ b]True [/b]
> However i will give a sigh of relief , if Linux could just install PCMCIA Lappy drivers and i get to use dialup using linux.
> Then it will stand chance of actually being true.


works out of the box for me on my 3.5 year old laptop. and also on my sis' 'last-week-or-so-purchased' new laptop (dell 1420 wid express card and soft modem). certain winmodems are difficult to setup in linux coz vendors simply refuse to provide linux drivers for it. but nothing is impossible


----------

