Jump to content

Has Vista fullfilled your expectations?


cringemaster
 Share

Almost a month after its release, Has Vista fulfilled your expectations?  

93 members have voted

  1. 1. Fullfilled?

    • Very Fullfiled - Its AMAZING, Worth the wait!
      5
    • Fullfiled - Nice new features...
      15
    • Neither Fulfilled nor Disappointed - Nice update, but could've been better
      15
    • Disappointed - Kinda hoping for more...
      11
    • Very Disappointed - It took six years for THIS?
      36
    • (null) Have not used Windows Vista - Just want to see the polls
      9
  2. 2. Have you switched or planning to switch?

    • Yes, I have switched to Vista
      32
    • No, I have not switched to Vista
      19
    • Yes, I plan on getting Vista
      8
    • No, I do not plan on getting Vista
      28
    • (null) Just want to see the polls
      8
  3. 3. What features fulfilled or disappointed your expectations (According to the End-User features on Wikipedia)

    • 1 - User Interface - Fulfilled
      44
    • 1 - User Interface - Disappointed
      33
    • 2 - Search - Fulfilled
      41
    • 2 - Search - Disappointed
      36
    • 3 - Sidebar - Fulfilled
      25
    • 3 - Sidebar - Disappointed
      51
    • 4 - IE7 - Fulfilled
      27
    • 4 - IE7 - Disappointed
      48
    • 5 - Media Player/Media Center - Fulfilled
      33
    • 5 - Media Player/Media Center - Disappointed
      40
    • 6 - Update - Fulfilled
      37
    • 6 - Update - Disappointed
      35
    • 7 - Security - Fulfilled
      23
    • 7 - Security - Disappointed
      50
    • 8 - Editions and Pricing - Fulfilled
      10
    • 8 - Editions and Pricing - Disappointed
      65
    • (null) Have not used Windows Vista - Just want to see the polls
      12


56 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Vista turned out to be a bit of a waste of time to me. Felt much like when I first migrated to Linux. I could get some windows programs to work but not others. IMO it was easier to get window based programs to run using wine on linux than it was to get them to work with vista's security features along with other bumps and snags in the road.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Practically my whole career has been devoted to supporting Windows and Windows based networks and products. Back in the late 90s when the government pursued it's anti trust lawsuit against Microsoft, I was one of the most fervent Microsoft supporters and apologists. Sure I knew several superior products were wiped off the map by MS, OS2 and Netware just to name a couple, and I'm sure others as well, but still I thought the lawsuit was just sour grapes from beaten competitors.

 

Since then my entire disposition to MS has taken a 180 degree shift. MS truly is a monopoly, actually more of an evil empire. I'm really turned off by their Draconian tactics and bullying of their competition. How they can keep producing buggy software and getting the masses to continue to shell out hard earned $$$ is truly beyond me.

 

Anyway, sorry about the rant, but with Vista, all I see is a way for MS to push their greedy claws deeper into everyone's wallet. It was available to me before actual release due to the MS partnership with the company I work for and overall I'm not very impressed especially considering the price. Although in all fairness, the eye candy is awesome, but that's the extent of the Kudos I will give it. From an ethical and professional standpoint, I would recommend OS X any day before Vista. But from a financial standpoint, I hope many people buy Vista so I can continue to put food on the table.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It did fulfill all my expectations... because I expected it to be a turd, and it is! :)

 

:P

 

Same feelings here. Without even mentioning OS X, many Linux distros are a lot better than Vista. But the funniest thing is that in my experience Wine and Crossover support more Windows apps than Vista, and even the hardware drivers are better in many cases (except ATI cards).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously my feelings for Vista are much stronger than most here. When XP came out, I almost religiously avoided it. I hated it...I stuck with my copy of Windows 98 until August of 2006. The lack of iTunes was the only thing I disliked. My Pentium II 400 MHZ comp that was brand new when 98 was released (First edition, mind you), outran almost EVERY WinXP system I had ever used. So, by the time I finally migrated to XP, I didn't have long to wait. All my annoyances with XP aside, it really wasn't that bad. On the other hand, my 64-bit copy of Vista absolutely murders my copy of XP Media Center.

And yes...I realize many...OK...almost all of the features are ripoffs...

I can live with that...I'm glad to have the Vista search and all that jazz that came with it.

 

Now, when I get my wireless card to work with SUSE Linux...That'll be another story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bet by summer, more Apps will be compatible with Vista than linux or crossover (although they really already are, reality distortion field). Honestly, everyone's bias makes them look ignorant.

 

As for digging into our wallets? Whats up with Leopard, or the new monitor with your iMac. Enjoy...

 

Seriously, I want OS X for a legit dual boot so bad, but I refuse to buy Apple hardware.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

;)

 

Same feelings here. Without even mentioning OS X, many Linux distros are a lot better than Vista. But the funniest thing is that in my experience Wine and Crossover support more Windows apps than Vista, and even the hardware drivers are better in many cases (except ATI cards).

I'd really like to see some sort of info backing up your claim that Wine/Crossover supports more apps and that Linux has better drivers.

 

I really would.

 

Vista is now my primary/favourite desktop beating out Ubuntu/OS X as my last favourites. It does more or less everything they do, better, and it has other extra things they're missing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bet by summer, more Apps will be compatible with Vista than linux or crossover (although they really already are, reality distortion field). Honestly, everyone's bias makes them look ignorant.

 

As for digging into our wallets? Whats up with Leopard, or the new monitor with your iMac. Enjoy...

 

Seriously, I want OS X for a legit dual boot so bad, but I refuse to buy Apple hardware.

 

http://forum.insanelymac.com/index.php?showtopic=43269 post #13

 

As to bias and ignorance, your own posts show plenty of them. Example: you refuse to buy Apple hardware. I refuse to buy a turd like Vista.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i wonder how many copies vista sold till now hmmm

 

anyways i won't say again what i think about vista, 6 years just for a new gui and a "fake" desktop engine(that doesn't bring improvements tho) r too much

 

it should have been called XP SP3 instead

While retail sales are a bit down Vista is doing damn well in other areas.

 

How is the 'desktop engine' a 'fake' ?

 

SP3 ? Err, you might take that back after reading http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_new_to_windows_vista

 

 

And why so many versions? OS X has only one (+ Server)
Because they have more people to cater to. With OS X it's on Apple's chosen hardware (So you don't have to worry about whether Aero will run or not), there aren't very many configurations (Whether said PC is at someone's home, school, business, etc), etc.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because they have more people to cater to. With OS X it's on Apple's chosen hardware (So you don't have to worry about whether Aero will run or not), there aren't very many configurations (Whether said PC is at someone's home, school, business, etc), etc.

 

 

Poor excuse. OS X is at least the equivalent of Vista Ultimate (as to features) but sells for a lot less and serves all the needs you mention just fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as Apple being more expensive, that may be true, but to me this is irrelevant. The point I was making about MS reaching farther into our wallets has to do with MS eliminating their competition. You can't deny that this is already happening, everyone knows that there is already software that will only run on Windows, and I'm not just talking about games or internet browsers, I'm talking about the software that runs businesses. If you depend on this software to do your work, then you have to buy Windows.

 

With no competition, the MS monopoly could get as lazy as they want, put out whatever {censored} they felt like and U and I would be forced to pay whatever they wanted us to pay for it. This is just simple economics. Look, they're already bumping up the price structure for Vista, so you have to pay more for Vista to get the same level of features you had under XP. There are some who would argue that if MS went to such extents, that market forces would intervene, MS would lose business and never be able to pull it off. But when you see what I see every day, where 100% (yes 100% that's not a typo) of business desktops are running Windows and more than 95% of business servers are running Windows, I say were already beyond the point where we can count on market forces to rectify the situation. Now the numbers I see may not be representative of the country or the world as a whole, but I bet they're pretty close.

 

So I, for one, am willing to pay additional for a product which I perceive as a viable and damn good competitor to an established monopoly. I only wish one day Linux would become stable enough to run on the business desktop, then that would eliminate all argument as to who to pay more to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...