why was vista bad?

[ALXAndy]

Every now and then Microsoft feel that they need to change the under workings of Windows. It's mostly because they're bored.

 

For example, the first truly bad OS they put out was Millenium Edition, or, Multiple errors. It was bad because they changed the OS underneath and removed DOS. They did leave a core shell of sorts in place but the OS was buggy and terribly unstable.

 

XP was just Windows 2000 with a facelift, so that doesn't count as a 'good' OS. 2000 was a good OS. XP was Microsoft's first use of NT in the home. It was stable because it was based on 2000, which was NT based and is what is used for businesses. The only reason 2000 didn't enter the home properly was because they refused to code a version of Direct X for it. In the end hackers took care of that and Microsoft decided to officially release it..

 

With Vista they again changed the under workings. For example, hardware accelerated sound was made redundant, which caused no end of issues. Instead of the OS allowing the sound card to contain hardware to take care of the sound they made it run on software only. This pretty much spelt the end for Creative, who had made their business on hardware accelerated sound cards. 

 

There were also other huge changes. Massive upheavals of code, which made it sort of new which then makes it buggy. IIRC until you updated to service pack 1 it could actually kill a mechanical hard drive.

 

7 was to OSes what XP was to 2000. It was just Vista with service packs, a good clean up of the code and a new front end.

 

8 is set to be another Vista. It seems that M$ fuck up every other OS.

[ALXAndy]

Oh and who can forget this?

 

Windows Really Good Edition.. lmao

 

http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/winrg

[kaneandtaker]

Microsoft admitted themselves Vista sucks.

[kuzimins]

In my language Vista means chicken.

[ultimatemythbuster]

I had so many driver compatibility issues, that Vista was banned from my computers as soon as the 7 beta was available.  And Vista UAC, how we loved you.

[ultimatemythbuster]

Oh and who can forget this?

 

Windows Really Good Edition.. lmao

 

http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/winrg

My train of thought:  browsing forums, browsing forums, 20 minutes later, I really need to stop clicking on links in the forum.

[GoodBytes]

Microsoft admitted themselves Vista sucks.

Link?

 

Every now and then Microsoft feel that they need to change the under workings of Windows. It's mostly because they're bored.

LOL, no. When XP was released, Microsoft already dump it at the bin. Security was non existent for tomorrow (at the time, make that past, from today's view). Microsoft started planning on a new kernel, the moment XP was released. Development of Vista slowed down a lot, due to the emergency SP1 and SP2 of XP due to critical security issues as XP security was like a dry wall, with so many plastered holes that there is more plaster than dry wall, and the plaster was all cracked and peaces fallen.

For example, the first truly bad OS they put out was Millenium Edition, or, Multiple errors. It was bad because they changed the OS underneath and removed DOS. They did leave a core shell of sorts in place but the OS was buggy and terribly unstable.

The reason for ME, is because Microsoft wanted to merge home and business Windows OS. They knew that Windows 2000, "nothing" would work properly for home users in terms of games, and many programs. So a poor decision was made, to take Windows 98, and slap Windows 2000 kernel inside instead of MSDOS. What a mess that was. I think Microsoft was too scared that the in development, and not ready in time, Windows compatibility system would fail. Well it did fail in the most part. It did help many programs and games though. But by the time Windows XP was released most program was adapted to Windows NT. Games, as always, and as you guessed it... currently releases got updates with a patch, old games no.

 

With Vista they again changed the under workings. For example, hardware accelerated sound was made redundant, which caused no end of issues. Instead of the OS allowing the sound card to contain hardware to take care of the sound they made it run on software only. This pretty much spelt the end for Creative, who had made their business on hardware accelerated sound cards.

Actually they are perfect reason for this.

It is right here: http://channel9.msdn.com/Shows/Going+Deep/Vista-Audio-Stack-and-API

There were also other huge changes. Massive upheavals of code, which made it sort of new which then makes it buggy. IIRC until you updated to service pack 1 it could actually kill a mechanical hard drive.

Nha.

7 was to OSes what XP was to 2000. It was just Vista with service packs, a good clean up of the code and a new front end.

Well.. if you go that way: Windows 98 was a "service pack" of Windows 95, same for 2000 over NT4.x and NT3, and so on.

 

8 is set to be another Vista. It seems that M$ fuck up every other OS.

Actually Windows 8 is doing better than Vista, surprisingly.

 

I had so many driver compatibility issues, that Vista was banned from my computers as soon as the 7 beta was available.  And Vista UAC, how we loved you.

[ultimatemythbuster]

Link?

 

LOL, no. When XP was released, Microsoft already dump it at the bin. Security was non existent for tomorrow (at the time, make that past, from today's view). Microsoft started planning on a new kernel, the moment XP was released. Development of Vista slowed down a lot, due to the emergency SP1 and SP2 of XP due to critical security issues as XP security was like a dry wall, with so many plastered holes that there is more plaster than dry wall, and the plaster was all cracked and peaces fallen.

The reason for ME, is because Microsoft wanted to merge home and business Windows OS. They knew that Windows 2000, "nothing" would work properly for home users in terms of games, and many programs. So a poor decision was made, to take Windows 98, and slap Windows 2000 kernel inside instead of MSDOS. What a mess that was. I think Microsoft was too scared that the in development, and not ready in time, Windows compatibility system would fail. Well it did fail in the most part. It did help many programs and games though. But by the time Windows XP was released most program was adapted to Windows NT. Games, as always, and as you guessed it... currently releases got updates with a patch, old games no.

 

Actually they are perfect reason for this.

It is right here: http://channel9.msdn.com/Shows/Going+Deep/Vista-Audio-Stack-and-API

Nha.

Well.. if you go that way: Windows 98 was a "service pack" of Windows 95, same for 2000 over NT4.x and NT3, and so on.

 

Actually Windows 8 is doing better than Vista, surprisingly.

 

So I see you quoted me, but you didn't have any comment?

[DJ46]

I haven't used it either but from what I've heard it was missing that sort of finishedness...

[JcGross]

People hated Vista because it was designed for multicore processors. And when Vista came out they weren't very widespread. When I got my new computer back in the day I put Vista on it and it was fine. I didn't understand why people disliked it so much. It was slick, it was smooth and to me it was stable.

And even more so with win8. It really is a huge improvement over 7 (I'd say even getting rid of the start menu is an improvement, because it was a useless thing imo), it is fast and very stable. I've only had a problem with it once (or twice), but I could always easily fix it. But most people are closed minded and like to bitch about things. Windows 8 happens to be something they like to bitch about. It's mainly because of the new start menu, which is fine imo, and even a 5 year old can master is in a matter of minutes, but some people can't even find the desktop, most likely because they don't even try, because they go into it with their mind already made up. And from there on people just wanted to find excuses to hate win8 even more, fabricating faults in the design and the system. Anyway, that was a bit off topic, but whatever...

[CwGoh]

Vista required a lot of power from the machine, and would crash due to driver among other random issues occasionaly. That's it more or less. It's the worst rendition of Windows between WXP - W8 but was usable. The media made it was than it is IMHO

[s0nrise]

I used to run Vista Ultimate x64 on my PC. Explorer crashed all the time, and despite being a fast computer it ran slowly compared to xp

[MrPete1985]

I never had any issues with Vista, I think the real problem with it was people did not like the GUI changes and there were too many people talking shit about it that never used it.  Also I talked to some people that hated Vista that do not even understand what an operating system is.

 

Prime example:  I put Open Office on my moms laptop running XP and on the family desktop running Vista.  My mom did not like Open Office because the layout was different than MS Office.  One day I heard her say she hates Vista so I call her out and tell her she does not even know what Vista is.  She gets all smart going "yes I do that's what you put on my laptop."  then I said "No, that's Open Office"

[Darren]

I don't know. Bunch of whiney people complained it couldn't run on their 4 year old machine or something. Sure, horrible optimised for crappy hardware. Jeez, it sounds like Crysis or some game people boast about constantly.

[LAwLz]

Can we please stop with the whole "each second Windows is bad"? Everything I see someone say it I think "well there is someone who has no idea what he/she is talking about". That statement is only true if you

1) Ignore some of the Windows versions that were released.

2) think that XP was good (it is actually horribly bad)

3) think that Vista was bad (most issues were ID 10 T, or manufacturers messing up with underpowered hardware or bad drivers)

[Mooshi]

Here is what Windows Vista needed:

 -> A TRUE dual core CPU, that is also 64-bit

 -> 2GB of RAM 400MHz of faster

 

I had a Core i7 920 and 3GB of 1333mhz DDR3 in my old Vista machine and the performance still felt sluggish. Vista needed more than that to run silky smooth. I'd say 6-8GB RAM (depending on platform) minimum for that OS. To Vista's defense, it wasn't an unstable bomb as some people phrase it, in fact, my Vista machine was stable. It all depends on how you use your machine, really.

[Woodypc]

Ran vista on this laptop for the good part of 4 1/2 year without one problem, have had more issues with many other OS.

[TheProfosist]

I think I just posted about if anyone remembered why vista was actually bad, so you have great timing.

[FpsRanga]

i sota like vista but it just ran like shit

[Hunter259]

My solution. Throw an ssd in it with vista sp2. I like vista, its on my macbook, Super duper stable and very fast. People were trying to run vista on p4s and stuff like that. A c2d could run it with 2gb of ram just fine. I just built  a computer for my friend with a c2d 2gb of ram with vista home premium on it. Runs like a dream.

[ygohome]

I never had an issue with vista 64bit and I still keep it around on my desk if/when I need a windows VM.  With Vista I was able to access all 8GB of my ram and it came with all the drivers I needed, unlike xp.   

[TheProfosist]

i sota like vista but it just ran like shit

 

I really wish when people said stuff like this they explained themselves.

[zerouplol12]

Can we please stop with the whole "each second Windows is bad"? Everything I see someone say it I think "well there is someone who has no idea what he/she is talking about". That statement is only true if you

1) Ignore some of the Windows versions that were released.

2) think that XP was good (it is actually horribly bad)

3) think that Vista was bad (most issues were ID 10 T, or manufacturers messing up with underpowered hardware or bad drivers)

i totally agree with you ,and all the ppl saying win 8 is bad just becaouse there is no start button or they dont like the UI

[Emkryan]

I always got random program crashes for no reason. Switched to win 7, it all went away

[Osprey]

Vista was bad for the first few months or so if it's release since it was such a drastic change it had bugs. It got stable relatively quickly, especially the 64-bit version, and was good especially from SP1 forward. Windows 7 didn't have as many issues since it wasn't anywhere near as drastic of a change as Vista, and I suspect their testing methods improved, and that seems to have carried on to Windows 8, even though people may not like some of the decisions that were made, they were on purpose and not an accident.