Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

God do I ever hate Vista

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cyclone42
  • Start date Start date
C

Cyclone42

Guest
I am a Linux (Ubuntu) and WinXP user. Got my very first Vista system last week. Never really needed one until recently; I was fine with my Pentium 4 systems, then found a deal I couldn't refuse on a Core 2 Duo for $225 on the Dell outlet store 'scratch & dent' section. Came with Vista, of course.

I am amazed at just how incredibly horrible Vista is. It is a total piece of trash. I still have an old Pentium 3 box lying somewhere, with 256M of RAM running XP. It is lightning fast compared to this 2.4Ghz Core 2 Duo box with 2G of RAM running Vista. And, yes, I do have the BIOS option enabled to make sure both cores are being used.

I just got done burining a new Ubuntu 8.10 disc (can''t find where I placed my old one) so I can blow away Vista and replace it with Ubuntu. On a Core 2 Duo, Ubuntu should FLY.
 
Vista definitely is a resource-hog, that's for certain. I will say, though, I've been pretty pleased with how it runs on my laptop. It's all about the hardware and stuff. I'm surprised that with 2 GB of ram it wouldn't be running terribly well for you... although, I suppose if the ram was really slow, that wouldn't help.

I have a desktop as well, which for a long time had only 1 GB of ram, and with that it ran noticeably slower than my laptop. Recently I bought 4 gigs, though, and ram that was as fast as my motherboard could take, and it runs MUCH faster.

From what it looks like, Windows 7 should be much better in terms of resource management and performance.. unfortunately, unless you have some other avenue for it, you'd have to buy it when it is supposed to come out at the end of the year or so.
 
Cyclone42 said:
I am a Linux (Ubuntu) and WinXP user.

I am amazed at just how incredibly horrible Vista is.
Click to expand...

I was really disappointed when I got my Vista system; I've gotten used to it now.

How long does it take for a Linux system to boot up? Is it much faster than Vista?

Also, I assume I can load Google Chrome and Open Office on a Linux system - correct?
 
Try windows 7's beta. It fixes all the problems with vista, but keeps everything it fixed.
 
Was that scratch or dent on the processor or the memory? I've had problems with my HP Laptop but that seems to be more because of HP putting too many extra programs in with their install. Our Dell Runs perfectly smooth and fast.
 
Go2Guy said:
How long does it take for a Linux system to boot up? Is it much faster than Vista?

Also, I assume I can load Google Chrome and Open Office on a Linux system - correct?
Click to expand...

Linux is not built for fast booting, but once such a system has finished booting it is usually fairly speedy. Depends on what 'window manager' you are using; Gnome is pretty good, but KDE 4 can be almost as slow as Vista.

Google Chrome is an afterthought for Linux. Makes sense; the whole idea about Google Chrome is to do as much to unseat Internet Explorer (and Microsoft) from the browser market as possible. As far as Google was concerned, Linux didn't need Chrome, as it already had Firefox and a variety of other browsers.

Open Office runs very well on Linux.
 
I bought a Dell from the outlet in the last couple of weeks as well. It came with 1 stick of 2G memory. I replaced it with 2 sticks of 2G memory that not only doubled the memory, but also allows it to use dual-channel mode.
 
I have vista on my HP laptop and after getting rid of the crap that hp put on it it has run perfectly. I am guessing you are a fan of John Dvorak?
 
I finally got my HP system running, two years after I bought it.

All it took was sending it to my full-time IT staff at work, and saying it was a priority project. Now it works just fine, but it took a gazillion updates to stabilize it.
 
I've never really had any problems with Vista. I have it, Ubuntu Hardy and now Windows 7 on my laptop. I usually use Hardy and 7 now. 7 feels a lot like Vista to me, but I really like the new taskbar.
 
Vista is a definite resource hog, anything under 4 GB and you have to turn on page filing to play any sort of game. Now with windows 7 beta up and running my 2 GB of RAM work just fine to play even pretty intensive game (Cod 4). They redid the whole memory management system with a pretty cool overhaul on the whole layout of the desktop... Looks pretty close to OS X but with PC power. I liked Vista but Windows 7 may be the next XP for the PC enthusiast.
 
Vista has been solid for me at work. I do like it, but would never roll it out to the others at work. I just dont see a need to. XP is still under support for awhile. I threw windows 7 on a 1.4ghz p4 with 512mb of RAM and it was a champ so I have high hopes for 7. But I really have no real gripes on vista at this time.
 
4gb of ram and 2 years with Vista. No problems except Itunes doesn't always play well. I rarely see over 50% of my memory being used even with 6-7 apps open at once.
 
Vista is fine. It's an upgrade over XP, IMO, though not a huge one.

Disable all the aero garbage, and it's no worse than XP in terms of resources. It LOOKS worse, but that's because vista actually uses all the memory you can throw at it instead of leaving it sit there unused, which is rather pointless.

If I had XP on a machine, I wouldn't upgrade it to Vista. If I had Vista on a machine, after a few minutes of disabling UAC, Aero and all the crap that makes it "better" than XP, it's every bit as usable, and I wouldn't downgrade it to XP.

Ubuntu is fine, I guess. It is still missing a few things that make it unusable for me as a desktop OS, but it's certainly a reasonable alternative for some people. In my experience, it's not worth the paradigm change for people who are agnostic about computers and don't know much about them.

For people who are motivated to use a different OS (for whatever reason), it works fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom
Back