Comments on: The Bogus Vista vs. Windows 7 Debate

By: rejoice

rejoice — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 08:36:03 +0000

dont say like that vista is a crap. microsoft fixes this problem on the arrival of vista sp2. it has an amazing hardware support including bluetooth, wifi , blueray disc recording. and its performance is almost same to windows 7. some guys saying vista sp2= windows 7 in performance. i love vista and now im thinking to upgrade my os to windows 7. it still not lauched completely. im waiting for that. thanku for reading. my computer specification is pentium dual core with 2gb ram on vista sp2 operating system.

By: Caesar

Caesar — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 13:54:13 +0000

Hey everybody, I am definitely not a computer expert, I’m still a student.
I have used XP since it was launched and with SP3 it does not give me any problem. I enjoy music production, and that takes a lot of energy from a computer to process all the audio. I use for music production an Acer Laptop Dual Core 1.6 GHZ 512 MB RAM, low spec, but it runs my programs very smoothly until I absolutely overload it. I also have an AMD desktop running XP SP3 on 1 GB RAM (forgot the processor’s spec). The laptop is about 1 and half year old, and the desktop is about 4 years old.
Recently I got a new HP Pavilion dv7 with Core 2 Duo 2.0 GHZ and 4 GB RAM running Vista.
I am the ordinary user, although I believe I am competent as I always solve my XP problems by myself, and by XP problems I mean viruses.
When I turned on the HP Vista running laptop, I installed a basic antivirus and restarted it, but it wouldn’t start again. Apparently there’s a bug that causes it to lose its boot record! After long hours of frustration, it finallt started. I installed the usual progs (MS Office etc.), restarted it, same thing happened.
I use photoshop from time to time, I have it on the desktop and on the HP high-spec laptop, it runs in XP as smoothly as it runs in Vista. So finally, I dare say that a low spec computer with XP is an equivalent of a high-spec computer running Vista.
I’m an XP fanatic. I don’t like Vista.

By: Zeev

Zeev — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 16:30:03 +0000

Vista a better OS? Hardly, Vista is another ME style failure. Even MS has given up on it, otherwise they would milk it for a few more years before releasing Win7. Vista is bloated, slow, and if I wanted an OS that assumes I am mentally retarded, I would have bought a MAC. These OS’s that pretend to protect unsavy users from themselves only dumb down the already mostly incompetent every day user, instead of helping them to become more tech savy. But who cares why 2+2=4 as long as you have a calculator right? I want an OS with a very small footprint. Something that uses almost no resources and is very stable. Leave the pretty UI for the mac crowd.

By: Matt

Matt — Sun, 12 Apr 2009 04:58:16 +0000

For all the bad rep Vista earned nobody has a real reason not to like it, it is a little different, but a more secure OS. It gets a bad rep from the average user who does not like change. But i’ll say it again…get over it, Microsoft doesn’t care if people do not like the new interface.

By: Matt

Matt — Sun, 12 Apr 2009 04:50:12 +0000

Vista as a OS is great as far as security goes. UAC is a great feature, no matter how much people complain that the prompt for elevation is a pain, it is there to protect people. The only time it pops up is when you are changing settings, if the average user see’s this a lot they should not be doing what they are doing. Vista compared to xp is black and white on the security outlook, and even user freindly functions. The more I hear people complain about it I just say get used too it. Is it a bad thing Vista warns you about programs that try to download themselves and change you settings???? I don’t think so.

By: James Patrick27

James Patrick27 — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 04:28:53 +0000

I agree that the OS should be judged on performance rather than appearance and that Vista’s “slowness” is primarily due to all the garbage running in the background. Unfortunately you have to be more tech savy to run Vista efficiently then you do Windows Server 2008 (an OS superior to Vista in every way except price).
Microsoft is laying down a great framework but the true next OS will be only 64 bit so that developers can take advantage of 64 bit processing anything else is just repackaging and/or a waste of time.

By: The Bogus Vista vs. Windows 7 Debate | Zoli’s Blog

The Bogus Vista vs. Windows 7 Debate | Zoli’s Blog — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 06:21:44 +0000

[...] Original post by Zoli Erdos [...]

By: kipkniskern (Kip Kniskern)

kipkniskern (Kip Kniskern) — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 07:30:01 +0000

Win7 should be released as Vista Final (meaning it works) http://tinyurl.com/7okdfy – You Go Zoli !!

By: Zoli Erdos

Zoli Erdos — Sat, 03 Jan 2009 13:44:13 +0000

Daniel,

Now we’re on the same side, no need for a new OS. Microsoft knows it too: Win7 is really Vista Final, based on everything we hear about it. It just had to be re-branded for all the bad rep Vista earned.

By: Daniel

Daniel — Sat, 03 Jan 2009 03:02:38 +0000

XP was plagued by the same issues that Vista is when it first came out, but that was 8 years ago. It had bad driver support and lets not even forget Windows 2000 or ME. It is not wise to go out and get a new OS. Give Vista another year and it will be better, give another 4 years and it will be XP.