VISTA

Hi Everybody; Got a question. I'm thinking about a new computer but most everything I see comes preloaded with Vista. I have heard quite a few negative comment about Vista.Watcha think? Should I go ahead and get one with Vista and then what? Should I keep Vista or reload it with XP?

Any help thanks ijn advance. IGGY

Reply to
Radionutz
Loading thread data ...

Look around. I bought one in December, with XP. There will be no Vista in this office for the foreseeable future, maybe never.

If you go with Vista make sure _all_ the software you need will run under Vista. Some of mine doesn't.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Joerg

Neither. Buy the system without an OS, and install some Linux. Ubuntu is good. Save money and get something that works.

--
 [mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net) 
 [page]: 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
CBFalconer

Go for Windows XP. On new laptops you have to slipstream the SATA drivers in your Windows XP CD to be able to install. Search for nlite which is a nice easy to use utility which can use to slipstream drivers, applications, service packs etc. into your XP CD. i.e. You can add all your normal apps and settings, and when you install this custom CD everything is setup as you would like it.

Regards Anton Erasmus

Reply to
Anton Erasmus

Vista is not too bad, and it actually has several useful improvements over XP. However the first thing that you have to do with Vista is turn off bells, whistles and stupid precautions. There may be also the issues with the legacy software and hardware compatibility, however in many cases they can be resolved by one way or another.

Vladimir Vassilevsky DSP and Mixed Signal Design Consultant

formatting link

Reply to
Vladimir Vassilevsky

I'm surviving on my XP machine, and waiting for Microsoft's next OS (Codenamed, I think, "anything but Vista"). Hopefully they won't screw it up this time.

I can use Ubuntu for almost everything I need, but there are some microprocessor tool chains that won't work under Wine; I'm not quite ready to just stick my nose in the air and say "no" to customers with incompatible toolsets.

But if the next rev Microsoft OS is as bad as Vista...

--
Tim Wescott
Control systems and communications consulting
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Tim Wescott

I had strong reservations about buying a laptop with Vista. But in the real world there is not much choice without limiting what I can run and costing a lot more. So I bit the bullet and bought a nice laptop on sale with Vista Home Premium. Later I found that some vendors don't claim to support the "Home" versions of the OS. I have no idea what is different about them. I don't even get why MS has so many versions.

I found numerous teething problems mostly having to do with the additional security of Vista. Turns out that a significant portion of this is not really "new", but rather the defaults are set more stringent. I've also heard that some of the problems are because programs have not been written to the MS guidelines so that even though they worked on other versions, they are now broken under Vista. I have not found any programs that won't run although I have found some "anomalies" with programs I have been using. Much of that has to do with programs writing data under the "Program Files" folder which is now more protected. In fact, if an uninstall does not fully clean up a directory there, you can't delete the folders without a lot of work.

So there are clearly things you will not like.

On the other hand, I don't see it as the "great evil OS" that some make it out to be. I never used XP having Win2k on all of my older machines. The networking is ***MUCH*** improved over what I was used to. In fact, the only thing I haven't been able to get working with Vista is connecting all of my computers using a wireless router and I attribute that to the problems of setting up and debugging under Win2k.

I guess the question comes down to what is your alternative to Vista? Many computers can be bought with a version that gives you rights to run XP. But that costs $100 more if you can believe the gall! So you can run XP if you choose. You can also still buy machines with XP if you look hard enough. But when I searched, these were mostly older machines that are overpriced given the stale hardware.

There are any number of sites offering advice on how to deal with the issues of Vista, so you won't be alone. If you need new hardware, I think Vista is still a viable option for an OS. On the other hand, when I get one of my older machine back up from a PSU failure, I plan to install Ubuntu and see if I can figure out how to use that alien beast. So far I have not been impressed with the open source community under Linux. It seems like you always have to learn so much about how things work rather than just how to use them. But then maybe I am just used to the way that Bill does things.

Rick

Reply to
rickman

This sounds off topic, but maybe you're one of the regulars here...

If you are running modern software (Windows 2000 or later), there is nothing wrong with Vista. I am in charge of some dozens of computers, several of which run Vista, and I use about six computers constantly. If anything, Vista is a tad more reliable than XP. Windows 7 is better yet, but it's only in beta right now.

If you are wanting to run badly written software from the Windows 95 era, you're probably already having problems under XP and Vista may make them slightly worse.

As far as I can tell, the mean reason Vista has a bad reputation is that people keep telling each other they're supposed to hate it.

Reply to
MC

Particulars?

Reply to
MC

...

What is bad about it? Are you speaking from actual experience?

Reply to
MC

er

USB

Reply to
linnix

Vista is usable. I spent about a year using it almost daily on a laptop before blowing it away and installing XP. As Vladimir said, turn off all the useless junk (including Aero unless you have RAM and cycles to burn). The cheaper versions are a bit crippled in some respects, but it ran pretty much everything application-wise and by now updates are available that run well under Vista.

Personally, I plan on going directly from XP to Windows 7 (64-bit) some time this year on at least one machine and to avoid having any Vista machines to maintain.

formatting link

Reply to
Spehro Pefhany

ew

What's bad about the plague? Do you need actual experience to know it is a bad idea not to avoid it.

Dimiter

------------------------------------------------------ Dimiter Popoff Transgalactic Instruments

formatting link

------------------------------------------------------

formatting link

Reply to
Didi

I'm not quite sure what that's about either. The only significant difference between Home Premium and Ultimate is that you can't remote into Home Premium using RDP. I run both (on different machines) and usually don't even know which one I'm running. But I agree, the proliferation of versions is for the birds.

Exactly. Vista requires the programmer to acknowledge that it is a multi-user OS and that (for instance) programs shouldn't write into the directory where they are installed -- they should write into the user's file space instead. Actually, Vista is more tolerant of this than a properly configured XP system would be; Vista can intercept these things and shadow them into user file space.

The idea that a program shouldn't write into the folder where it resides is, of course, extremely old news to anyone who knows the difference between /bin and /usr in UNIX.

(BTW, if you are an embedded system developer, you will have to deal with embedded system tools that still seem to be written for single-all-powerful-user Windows 95. In the embedded systems field, you're supposed to be using a 15-year-old PC.)

Bingo. And they only worked if security settings were wrong (allowing everything to run as administrator all the time) under the older versions. Sadly, some so-called Windows programmers are still programming for DOS! (For some of the guidelines see

formatting link

The really big new thing in Vista is that Administrator isn't omnipotent. Instead, you give the go-ahead whenever administrator privileges are actually exercised (same idea as "sudo" in UNIX).

Startup is much better, too. XP has the annoying habit of not *really* listening to you for five minutes or so after it claims to have booted up. Vista prioritizes things differently so that you can get on with your work. Vista makes the useful distinction between "run this whenever there is a login" and "run this before the logged-in user does anything else". XP does not.

I use a wireless router and haven't seen any difference between XP and Vista. One gotcha -- Did you remember to set the name of the workgroup when you installed Vista? That happened to me twice this weekend after installing Windows 7 Beta on 2 different machines, both of which mysteriously went off the LAN... until I set the workgroup name.

Reply to
MC

I find wine to be a PITA. Have you considered VirtualBox and operating a trapped, caged, tamed copy of XP or Win2k?

Reply to
larwe

On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 17:17:05 GMT, "Radionutz" wrote:

I'll add my own odd comments about my own requirements, use, and plans. Probably none of it will apply to you, but what the heck.

(1) I have gotten into a practice I don't want to change, over the years. I develop client software on a virgin hard disk with only one partition (unless the project requirements dictate otherwise) and place a fresh, bootable copy of the operating system on the disk. The disk goes in a labeled case and is placed on a shelf. The reasoning is mostly that I've had hard disk failures that were irrecoverable. Doesn't happen often, but when it does I don't want that fact to impact other clients. (I've also had wayward software writing over the boot block and other critical areas, but I don't suspect that is nearly the problem it used to be, with Vista.) I could consider the idea of racking in a data disk for each client and keeping a single boot disk on the machine... but there are at least two immediate problems there: (a) I often need to install custom drivers and, sadly, there is no arrangement I'm aware of that allows Vista or XP even to examine a second hard drive during real-mode and then protected mode booting processes so that only those drivers are loaded. I don't want the installation of any kind of software for one client to in any way affect the situation for another; and (b) I don't always use the same machine all the time. I move things around the office area and if I'm careful about the machine purchases and keep them working for a time then I find I don't have to re-install the O/S just to move the boot the client drive on a different work area. These requirements tend to push me towards embedded development on Win98SE, as the licensing from Microsoft actually permits this arrangement and there is no trouble with calling up, automatically or manually, some Microsoft process for getting new keys for every client/machine combination I might consider

-- not to mention the cost in extra drives and my time. Linux and FreeBSD are both attractive in such scenarios for obvious reasons, but they also have limitations -- for example, some "proprietary JTAG drivers" for cheap JTAG hardware are only readily available under Windows. But although it's a little bit muddier in some ways, it's also clearer in others. So it's not entirely difficult to consider and work towards, where possible.

(2) I need as few operating systems to support, as possible. Too much wasted time learning to work with every new thing that comes down the pike. Luckily, in embedded development areas, this isn't usually required. I'm not developing applications for end-use under Windows operating system families, in fact they are OEM instrumentation by and large, so clients don't really care about having be writing to Windows APIs of the newest order of the day. So I can afford my attitude. Sometimes, there is a need to _interface_ with a Windows machine, using a custom driver, for example. But in that case I can arrange a single machine for that purpose that doesn't have to fit the working model in (1), above.

(3) Microsoft changed their licensing with Windows XP and later. Enough so that it is too far away to be serviceable in my working model. The details why are myriad, so I won't belabor them here. But it no longer can be made to work for me that well.

(4) I support some clients whose hardware continues to be modernized but where the original development was with old tools that predate Windows XP and are designed to be installed under Win98SE and have NOT been updated. Or, when they have been updated, they are no longer able to compile the same code as before because the tools themselves are so "modernized" that they eliminated (and replaced) some features with others. My clients would rather I don't spend lots of time redoing the software just to fit the new compiler tools and instead focus on just getting the updates working in their instrument.

Although (4) is not remedied by this, the rest makes me very, very grateful for the inertia that Linux has garnered over time. Vendors are often aware of Linux enough to consider supporting that option, there are some very good tools available at little or no cost, and it all comes at a crucial moment in time where it is really needed as an alternative to consider.

The machines that are pre-loaded with Vista come with a surcharge that they pay to Microsoft. It used to be the case that you paid that surcharge even if a Microsoft operating system wasn't installed (by your request) because Microsoft's OEM arrangements required them to pay a fee for every machine shipped regardless of what operating system was installed on it. I believe that a court decision has demolished that facet of the OEM agreements now, but there is no guarantee that vendors will actually charge you less for a different operating system (other than Microsoft's), even if they don't have to pay a surcharge for each copy. They might just keep the change, so to speak. Some may, though, adjust the price accordingly.

Only you can think about your circumstances, though. Since you are writing in CAE, I imagine you are doing embedded work. But I don't know what kind, under what business arrangements, etc. For example, if you are employed, your employer may only want to have to support one environment and you may need to conform to that. If self-employed you can choose some things, but possibly you only have one machine and you need the widest range of options available to you -- and that also may dictate Microsoft operating systems.

Vista has a HUGE focus in its internals on protecting the rights of content providers. There is an impact on hardware options, given some desire of yours, as well as other factors to consider here. And it impacts the performance of the CPU, as well, I've heard. (I haven't checked, obviously.) So yes, you might want to downgrade to XP. But on the other hand, you might find Vista just fine. I think a lot depends on just how thoroughly familiar you are and how much control you want to have. Microsoft does intertwine itself into your life in some ways, now, if you go with the newest stuff.

There are some answers to the problems I mentioned above, too. Some folks here have mentioned a few and I haven't had time yet to check them out (it's not a simple thing to do.) So perhaps there will be some comments that may make you feel more comfortable with Vista, ones that might even make me wonder a bit. But frankly I intend to avoid Vista, consider Windows 7 perhaps when it comes out and I get a chance to look at the licensing and read a little about experiences people are having (though I still support old development software that installs under Win98SE and has never been updated for the newer operating systems.)

It just depends. Vista may work fine for you. And you do have the option, so I've heard, of downgrading to XP. And if one or the other is good enough, then I think you may be fine.

Jon

Reply to
Jon Kirwan

CBFalc>Neither. Buy the system without an OS, and install some Linux.

Don't forget to mention that if it comes with *pre-installed* Linux

formatting link
(or _any_ pre-installed OS), you can be SURE there are device drivers for that hardware under that OS.

...otherwise check the Approved Hardware List (e.g. stuff that uses Broadcom chips has sucky support; don't expect WinModems to work; etc.).

Reply to
JeffM

A lot of software for my lab equipment that is computer-connected. I do not remember which ones but numerous times there was an explicit mention of it not supporting Vista. I did not log that since it doesn't matter to me.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Joerg

MC (hav>What is bad about it? Are you speaking from actual experience?

FYI: The largely pro-F/OSS and anti-M$ crowd at Slashdot doesn't let much slide WRT the warts and outright open wounds of stuff coming out of Redmond:

formatting link

Joerg has already mentioned unsupported/broken apps.

**This** was a hoot:
formatting link
*-Compatibility

The new pesky blame-the-user "security" "features" have also been mentioned by Richard Collins. (...and having to click *Accept* for every piddling task because of a poor OS security model simply trains users to click OK for everything that pops up).

M$'s anal approach to their source code and M$'s increasingly bad support to hardware vendors makes for a lot of sucky Vista device drivers.

Then there's DRM (mentioned by Jon) Slow disk operations (seems to be related to the DRM) The new approach to unsigned drivers The "Vista Capable" fiasco . . .

...and I thought everybody had learned: If you're going with M$, ***wait until SP3 is out***.

Lewin also mentioned a sandboxed Windoze environment where the Windoze-specific INFECTIONS go *poof* when you close the virtual session.

Oh, and Dell now wants $150 to "downgrade" from Vista to XP (used to be $50).

formatting link
$150

Reply to
JeffM

Well, tell that to the designers of CAD software. It ain't the way they work. For example, it is very normal for a CAD program to write newly created symbols into the library where the software is installed. Professional users know that and back this up accordingly.

That drove me nuts and made me abandon Ubuntu after about two months.

Because they want stuff to work :-)

[...]
--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Joerg

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.