Is Vista really absolutely carp?

Eric_Pisch

vista works fine and is stable (once patched)

however it is very inefficient, its needs approx 30% more cpu and memory than xp/w7

my gaming score went up by 28% just from changing Vista to W7 (mad onion)

all the tests I have seen put W7 performance within a % or 2 of XP which is very impressive when you consider how much more it does.

prowla

I use XP, Vista and Windows 7, and I can't say any one is particularly better or worse than the other.

With Windows 7 I had to set up the Quick Launch myself, it didn't include a driver for an industry standard HP laser printer, I don't like the revised tray area, and I've had a problem with an application working.

Speed problems can be associated with memory (lack of), and also virus checkers.

£$&*"($£&(

I have Vista on a desktop and Windows 7 on a netbook/ultra potable crossover which was an upgrade from Vista. Can't say I notice a great deal of difference between the two and once the UAC is turned off I haven't found Vista too annoying or Windows 7 noticeably better.

Eric_Pisch

prowla wrote: »

I use XP, Vista and Windows 7, and I can't say any one is particularly better or worse than the other.

With Windows 7 I had to set up the Quick Launch myself, it didn't include a driver for an industry standard HP laser printer, I don't like the revised tray area, and I've had a problem with an application working.

Speed problems can be associated with memory (lack of), and also virus checkers.

speed issues are 100% down to the badly coded kernal on vista, even MS admit Vista is a pup which is why they couldn't wait to kill it off and why many in the industry are still on XP, we are rolling over 500 PCs to W7 early next year from XP.

Vista needs more ram (more ram is always better) W7 will happily live in 2gb and runs fine in 1gb on my netbook, vista is just unusable on 1gb

justoaker

I don't think Vista is crap. I've been using Vista for quite a long time now but I haven't experienced anything like what you have said. I think the problem has something to do with the computer. Try checking it out.

DigitalJedi

Put it this way. I'm a self confessed geek. I love technology.

When Windows 3 came out, I installed it straight away. Had Windows 95 installed when it was as a beta. Ditto pretty much with all Windows versions.....until Vista.

I built myself a monster PC and decided to install XP!

At work we recently ordered 250 Vista licenses by mistake. They are currently sat in a box and I can safely guarantee that there will be 250 still there and not one has accidentally jumped into a techie's bag.

At work each time a new version of Windows comes out someone always asks when we are rolling it out across the company. Every techie fights to be the person to create a new image for the business. Don't think anyone bothered with Vista.

When Windows 7 came out as RC1, I installed it on all my personal PC's and my home network is now all Windows 7. We have ppl at work demanding it on their new PCs.

Does that give you an idea of how bad Vista is???

OneADay

DigitalJedi, you can give me those licenses.

Vista Basic is total carp.
Vista ultimate you could start to live with after SP1 but more so after SP2.

The problem with Vista is it slows down after a period of usage and I think its the winxs folder which exists in Windows 7 as well but is not as big (not yet at least).

Once you take away the gloss from vista and win7 - the GUI can be made to look like windows xp. But both are still carp in terms of the file manager.

Program install/de-install in win7 is a little better than vista.
The background processes for system store are a little less noisy on hard disk.
Multimedia support is better on win7, you do not need to manually install too many codecs.
Win7 has no classic start menu and you have to manually configure an alternative - that might explain why its faster than vista. The start menu memory saving is probably why win7 loads a little faster.

Win7 is in my conclusion just vista with sp3 and only a small improvement on vista (but backward in getting rid of classic start menu).

Reggie_Rebel

I've got Vista on two laptops. The one with more RAM, better processor etc is unsurprisingly faster than the other, but neither I would describe as slow.

coolagarry

I have a pc with XP and one with Vista. I much prefer vista and have never had any problems with it. I don't know how it compares with Windows 7 but I have read reports that 7 is not really faster.

Clare_king

Hi, I heard Vista actually takes up more system space than XP - personally I don't like Vista, but maybe that 's just a dislike of new things!