A third of Vista PCs downgraded to XP?

Published on August 20th, 2008

Posted by Eideard in Research, Technology

Vista’s death march picked up some pace after a metrics researcher revealed that nearly 35 per cent of PCs built to run the Windows operating system have been downgraded to XP.

In a survey of more than 3,000 computers, performance testing software developer Devil Mountain Software estimated that more than one in three new machines had either been downgraded by vendors such as Dell, or by customers once they bought the PC…

That’s a damning verdict on an OS that Microsoft still wants frustrated customers to love.

The software beast has already admitted it made some pretty big mistakes with Vista. Now, after trying some heavy duty marketing, Microsoft has finally conceded it’s high time to move on by explaining how MS will engineer Windows 7.

I left the wonderful world of Microsoft OS’ three years ago. Never looked back.

56 users responded in " A third of Vista PCs downgraded to XP? "

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url

# 1 dosequis said, on August 20th, 2008 at 6:08 am

1/3 downgrades = 2/3 suckers.

# 2 xwing said, on August 20th, 2008 at 6:13 am

I think XP will be the last decent OS from Microsoft. OS X is just so far beyond Vista and then 10.6 Snow Leopard is adding even MORE stability and speed. No, I think Windows is on the way out. Midori, their online OS may end up being something, but they’d better hire back all the folks they lost to Google and Apple to do it right. Otherwise, the upward trend of Apple will continue. And, like the author, I quit using Windows about 5 years ago and haven’t looked back either. Not to beat a dead horse, but ‘Get a Mac’.

# 3 Company Meetings said, on August 20th, 2008 at 6:18 am

An “upgrade” to Microsoft Vista is a downgrade
It goes to show you that even the largest , most profitable corporation in the world has to keep its “eye on the puck”
Service levels and paying attention to customer’s needs , wants and concerns are everything
Up on the top floor , it was rah rah Bill Bill Bill
Imagine the graphs and charts at Microsoft meetings with all the corporate groupies and yes men attending these meetings
Yet no one had enough guts to tell Bill the truth – which he did not want to hear
Or were they seriously deluded on the top floor ?
Who knows ? Who really cares ?
It all comes down to listening to your customer not the graphs and charts at company meetings with all the rah rah – “best thing since sliced bread “

# 4 OvenMaster said, on August 20th, 2008 at 6:29 am

“Of course the people on the team represent the way we get feature requests implemented and develop end to end scenarios, so the challenge is to have the right team and the right structure to maximise the ability to get those done – neither too many nor too few.”

The people that “requested” hardware-level DRM issues, sluggish performance, and high hardware requirements, peripheral driver unavailability sure weren’t the end users. You know, the ones that actually have to USE the product?

Vista’s beta testers should have been real-life everyday PC users, not software developers and hardware engineers. The public got saddled with an NTFS version of Windows ME as a result.

Would it be too much to ask Micro$oft to get input from average people and not just those who are tech-minded, so Windows 7 doesn’t crash and burn too?

# 5 QB said, on August 20th, 2008 at 6:32 am

Most corporations I know have a standard image with XP. Many, if not most, have upgraded their versions of Office mainly due to improvements (not my word) in Outlook and the associated server pricing. They are also concerned about external file compatibility with other organizations. Kind of a dumb idea but there you go.

Most of these companies have no reason under the sun to move to Vista. The associated costs would be heavy with little or no financial return. Vista licensing could be free and they’d stick with XP.

One CIO I know said “Why would I want to upgrade to Vista? I don’t need to play Halo 2.”

P.S. Server 2008 may be a corporate winner for MS, but strangely they never talk about it.

# 6 Thinker said, on August 20th, 2008 at 6:35 am

FUD FUD FUD, don’t you have other news to cover?

# 7 OvenMaster said, on August 20th, 2008 at 6:53 am

Of course, Windows 7 just may be doomed before it even gets out of the starting gate:

“Microsoft also looks set to walk away from its existing GUI model, and we’re guessing that will probably happen after Windows 7 (a kernel based on Vista) and possibly Windows 8, which brings the arrival of the new OS easily into the next decade.

http://tinyurl.com/5fbhzo

# 8 Nimby said, on August 20th, 2008 at 6:54 am

I use XP and Linux so I really don’t know much about Vista. But I hear the new Mojave OS is just the bee’s knees!

# 9 Woolly Mittens said, on August 20th, 2008 at 7:05 am

Microsoft gambled that PC would keep getting bigger and faster, not more compact and modest as is the current trend.

Vista may work perfectly well, but it’s just a very unfortunate mismatch to current requirements.

# 10 Somebody_Else said, on August 20th, 2008 at 7:10 am

When will the FUD end.

We just rolled out Vista on all of our machines at work. It was the most painless Windows upgrade we’ve ever done.

# 11 Gregg said, on August 20th, 2008 at 7:26 am

One CIO I know said “Why would I want to upgrade to Vista? I don’t need to play Halo 2.”

Use a Mac? Play….nothing! Well, World of Warcraft anyway.

Agreed, no real reason to upgrade to Vista….at this time. The same thing happened with XP. There was no need to upgrade until enough stuff came out that was exclusively for XP.

# 12 LuckyPierre said, on August 20th, 2008 at 7:32 am

If not for several applications that have only Windows compatibility, I’d have gone to a Mac more than 10 years ago. I suggest that Apple encourage application developers to create Mac compatible versions of their S/W, especially business oriented programs.

# 13 QB said, on August 20th, 2008 at 7:36 am

#10

Out of curiosity, why did your company upgrade? Obviously there was some cost/benefit rationale, I’m genuinely interested what that is.

# 14 TVAddict said, on August 20th, 2008 at 7:37 am

I like the part of the interview where Vista is compared to a work of art. ROTFLMFAO. Which bit to remove? How about the DRM.

# 15 Somebody_Else said, on August 20th, 2008 at 7:38 am

#12
Have you tried updating the wireless drivers? Is the adapter in the right mode (B/G instead of A)? Have you tried booting from a linux CD and seeing if the wireless works? I’ve gotten a notebook with a dead wireless adapter before. There are a lot of things I would blame before I started blaming the OS.

My experience has been great with most desktop wireless cards and Vista. In most cases it didn’t even need to download a driver.

# 16 Improbus said, on August 20th, 2008 at 7:42 am

#10 obviously works for Fantasy Island, Inc. At this company all Microsoft products work flawlessly and nary a bug is found. At Fantasy Island even Microsoft’s “marketing” works.

# 17 Somebody_Else said, on August 20th, 2008 at 7:48 am

#14
We use a lot of software with 64-bit variants (AutoCAD and our own proprietary software) and we were buying a few dozen new machines. 64-bit XP was a pain to deal with and we didn’t notice any performance loss moving to Vista, so we went ahead and moved completely to 64-bit Vista. Now we can run all of our software on any system. Other than getting new anti-virus software we didn’t have to change much. Our IT guys seem to like it a lot.

The hardest part for most people has actually been Office 2007. I like it, but a lot of people were really confused by the new interface until they had a chance to play with it for awhile.

# 18 JimD said, on August 20th, 2008 at 8:00 am

The Upgrade for both XP and Vista is of course, GNU LINUX !!! And with OpenOffice, you can outfit a complete “business workstation” – FOR FREE !!!

# 19 Thomas said, on August 20th, 2008 at 8:05 am

#12
My developers do code on Vista and one the whole there is no difference to XP. However, IIS7 is a pain. I know that my biggest complaint is that for all of Balmer’s ranting about “developers, developers, developers” Microsoft never seems to consider them when designing an OS. If they had, you would have the ability to run IE6 side-by-side with IE7. Developers want the *exact* same functionality that will exist on the production server.

#18
I agree that most complaints about Vista are really directed at Office 2007. Other than general “where did they hide it” problems, I find that most users have no trouble transitioning to Vista. However, Office 2007 is a bigger hurdle.

# 20 Pmitchell said, on August 20th, 2008 at 8:07 am

I have a new laptop with vista home premium ( go figure what that is ) I expected the worst but so far I am very pleasantly surprised it has run almost flawlessly the only problem I have had so far is the preinstalled Mcaffe wont update, other than that it has been surprisingly robust. I admit it is much more difficult to navigate when working on and setting up commercial networks and it asks 5 millions times if a really want to do something but over all I have been pleasantly surprised.
I have a laptop with xp and desktop that I do not plan on upgrading anytime soon in fact the desktop is going on 5 years with a single install of xp and is functioning perfectly (that is a record among the people I know for longevity )

# 21 Stu Mulne said, on August 20th, 2008 at 8:08 am

I’ve got XP-ME on two machines. One’s fairly good, and the other’s merely a little flaky. XP was a lot more stable…. That said, I like the thumbnail view of a minimized window and the sidebar. I don’t like being unable to access most of the nominally shared files on either machine from the other. (A “server” of sorts on an XP box is a little help, but….)

(The Vista version of Solitaire is dumbed down to the point of silliness….)

I had to replace my A/V software and a couple other things, but, other than WP8 refusing to save files, most of that was minor.

It’d be nice if I could get SP1 on one of these boxes, but it refuses to install. If I let “Auto-Update” do it, it says it did, but only takes a minute or two. Trying to do it manually results in a barf about halfway through, with an incomprehensible error message and useless follow-up.

I have a retail copy of XP I could subvert (the machine it was running on is deceased), but pure inertia (and the “maybe” factor of finding drivers) have kept me from swapping it on that machine.

“Disappointing” is a polite statement.

I can’t switch to Linux or Apple – my clients are running mixes of Win98 and XP, and, well, aren’t about to switch out 20 machines just to keep me happy.

Same old same old here – push in a bunch of “it would be nice” features, without fixing other issues, and with bugs in the new stuff, too.

Regards

# 22 Somebody_Else said, on August 20th, 2008 at 8:17 am

#22
Yeah, they did make sharing more complicated with Vista. I got it to the point that I can share any folder, but when I connect from another machine you have to put in your user name and password. Kind of annoying. I run FreeNAS instead of Windows on my fileserver so it’s not something I have to deal with very often.

If SP1 won’t install you’re probably missing a driver somewhere. Updating the motherboard/chipset drivers might help, and make sure there aren’t any yellow exclamations in Device Manager.

# 23 mrmigu said, on August 20th, 2008 at 8:20 am

i was forced to get vista with a laptop that i purchased, and honestly i havent really had any problems with it. i have and will not purchase vista with free alternatives like open office.

This means that i am unable to sync my windows mobile device to windows mail, because you need the version that comes with office to be able to sync. Luckily I was able to find a program (finchsync) to sync my windows mobile device with thunderbird.

# 24 OhForTheLoveOf said, on August 20th, 2008 at 8:20 am

I agree it’s a lot of FUD… but not all of it.

I have Vista because it came preloaded on my Toshiba… and once I killed the UAC BS and set up Kapersky, I never had another problem.

The only reason I haven’t kept Vista onto my desktop is simply because of compatibility issues… but those issues are more logically blamed on drivers from a few hardware vendors (I’m looking at you, Creative Labs) and on the fact that I still run a number of apps that are long in the tooth.

I think Vista is fine. Kill Aero and UAC, set up your own security, and turn the desktop back to the Win2K appearance (if like me, you want absolute simplicity), and its fine.

But that is, just the problem. It is fine. And fine is a word that typically means the same as, “there just isn’t anything new or innovative, but it works.” So in fact, Vista, which works fine, offers me no features or benefits over the existing OS (aside from cosmetic stuff), eats up more power, and costs more.

Essentially, it’s only real problem is that no one needed an upgrade from XP in the first place.

But it works just fine.

# 25 GetSmart said, on August 20th, 2008 at 8:21 am

One of my good friends has Vista and seems to have few real issues with it. Another old friend who does development and database work declares they will pry Windows 200 from his cold dead hands as it was the last quality piece of software that Microsoft produced. Different strokes and all that.

# 26 Paddy-O said, on August 20th, 2008 at 8:25 am

#24 True. In addition it requires more hardware than XP did to run fine. On these threads I haven’t been able to get one person to list the real benefits of using Vista over XP for the average home or business user.

So, higher h/w requirements (more $) & no additional benefit = crap product.

# 27 bill said, on August 20th, 2008 at 8:26 am

I would, I gave my new Dell Vista computer away to another group at work.

I’ll keep my old XP machine

# 28 QB said, on August 20th, 2008 at 8:33 am

I gotta agree with the comments about the new office being confusing. I really don’t like the ribbon, it just isn’t working for me.

As far as development, virtual machines are the only way to go. I use VMWare but there are lots of good options.

The other problem with Vista in the enterprise is that many corporations have some critical third party apps from small vendors that were written 10 years ago (or more) in technologies like VB6 and Delphi. These things are a pain in the ass to test and upgrade.

# 29 pjakobs said, on August 20th, 2008 at 8:33 am

I’ve got Vista on my current desktop machine. Some things work just as good as they did in XP, but performance stinks (it’s not a bit better on a dual core 2.2GHz system than Linux on a 1.7GHz Centrino).
Only reason I currently still use it: it’s fully configured with apps and stuff and has my calender on it.
pj

# 30 Somebody_Else said, on August 20th, 2008 at 8:39 am

#27
For home users the biggest change is mostly the added security. Other than the recent .net and activeX issues there have only been a handful of security issues with Vista, compared with literally hundreds for XP. Plus 64-bit Vista isn’t affected by most of them, including the .net and activex bugs.

#25 and anyone else who turned off UAC:
Have you tried turning UAC back on once you got your computers all set up? When I’m working on a new system I turn it off while I install everything and then turn it back on when I’m done. I very rarely see the UAC popup after that.

I actually prefer the way UAC works to having to type in my password every time I want to do admin stuff in OSX and Ubuntu.

# 31 David said, on August 20th, 2008 at 8:56 am

My experience so far is that Vista is the most frustrating piece of software out of Redmond to date. Hardware or games not developed in the past two years? Forget it. And you can forget about modern games, too. Vista is a massive resource hog that eats up your system memory like the blob.

# 32 rectagon said, on August 20th, 2008 at 9:04 am

My loathing for all things Microsoft is fading quickly when the criticism is unfair. Heck… I tried my darndest to boycott them back in the days when Linux really sucked… but couldn’t get my dial up modem to work and gave up. Now, however, this time around, things are actually unfair. Yes, they are monolithic. Yes, Vista isn’t perfect… but, frankly, it works very well.

# 33 Mark Derail said, on August 20th, 2008 at 9:08 am

I’d run Vista on the following specs:

Quadrule XEON Dual-Cores 3.2Ghz
16 gigs of ram
(server MOBO with PCI-X)
8×250 SCSI HD’s in RAID-10 (4xRaid-1′s JBOD) with dedicated backplane and controller (PCI-X) with 2G of backplane RAM
NVidia 8600GT 512M
Dual power supplies

However, I doubt I could get the Vista drivers for the MOBO & SCSI for such a setup.

Friends of mine actually upgraded from XP to Windows Server 2003 R2 on their laptops.
Runs really well.

# 34 OhForTheLoveOf said, on August 20th, 2008 at 9:09 am

#31 – Have you tried turning UAC back on once you got your computers all set up?

No… What is the advantage? I understand UAC as a security measure and all of my security is controlled by third party apps.

# 35 Paddy-O said, on August 20th, 2008 at 9:13 am

#31 “For home users the biggest change is mostly the added security.”

You’re kidding, right? I made a regular user account for my young daughter on Vista (running AV, AS, FW, etc.) and within days it had 1100 infected files and a root kit on it. Due to the stupid kernel restrictions MS laid on Sec companies (including the anemic kernel APIs) I had to get the root kit out by hand.

So, still waiting for a list of REAL benefits…

# 36 Somebody_Else said, on August 20th, 2008 at 9:53 am

#35
UAC alerts you any time any software requests admin privileges, just like all other major OS’s have done for years. The idea is that it can protect your system from malicious software that hasn’t been identified yet. If you’re surfing the internet or you put in a music CD with a rootkit and suddenly UAC pops up without you doing anything you can click cancel and it wont allow the malicious software to run.

It’s not perfect, but it is a major security improvement.

#36
I hate to be rude, but I don’t really believe you since I know from your other comments that you’ve got some sort of irrational hate for Vista.

I really wish people would stop bringing up bogus claims like that story about Microsoft not working with security companies. That story was never true to begin with.

# 37 Paddy-O said, on August 20th, 2008 at 10:28 am

#37 I could care less what you think. I’ve forgotten more about PC security than you’ve ever known.

Have you looked at the APIs in question. Have you worked with MS during the dev of Vista security?

Thought not.

# 38 Somebody_Else said, on August 20th, 2008 at 11:20 am

#39
Well, do you have any proof that Microsoft hasn’t worked with security companies? Any articles that show that detection rates are worse on Vista? Last I checked every major virus scanner was available and fully functional under Vista.

Its just really hard for me to believe you when I haven’t seen any of these issues working around 80 or so Vista machines for the last several months, and I’ve been using it at home since the commercial launch.

I’m tired of the all the Vista FUD.

# 39 raddad said, on August 20th, 2008 at 11:36 am

I downgraded my new Dell from Vista to XP Pro for two reasons. Vista kept blue screening on me. Toward the end it blue screened four times in one week. Also, I realized I would have to spend hundreds of dollars to upgrade some of the development tools I use to Vista compatible versions with no other benefit other than running on Vista. It took a while to locate all the XP drivers, but was worth in in the end. XP also runs much faster on my computer.

I also have this computer dual-booting into Ubuntu, but the poor video performance (I mean movies and TV shows) has kept me from migrating full-time. It’s too bad because Ubuntu has the eye candy as well as the performance.

# 40 Paddy-O said, on August 20th, 2008 at 11:46 am

#39 “Last I checked every major virus scanner was available and fully functional under Vista.”

Except the root kit detection is almost non-existent now.

“Well, do you have any proof that Microsoft hasn’t worked with security companies?”

Sure, study the security APIs vs. kernel access under XP.

# 41 Olo Baggins of Bywater said, on August 20th, 2008 at 11:53 am

Transferring files to a Palm PDA is busted in Vista, and Palm has not released a fix. There’s another big reason not to upgrade. My son is in the process of backing up his stuff in preparation of downgrading this weekend.

Look back at what an OS is supposed to be…a platform that allows you to run your applications. Vista does not add anything most users need or want, such as performance or an easier UI.

IMO, the new Vista start menu is a train wreck, and the “browser-like” dialog boxes are goofy, and why in fsck does the file open/save dialog need a place for urls? A redesign that solves nothing other than the MS Office agenda.

# 42 tcc3 said, on August 20th, 2008 at 12:48 pm

Vista’s a witch! Turned me into a newt. Burn her!!!!

# 43 QB said, on August 20th, 2008 at 12:53 pm

tcc3, did you get better? And does Steve Ballmer weigh the same as a duck?

# 44 Mister Mustard said, on August 20th, 2008 at 1:14 pm

#28 – Else

>>The hardest part for most people has actually
>>been Office 2007.

Office 2007 does nothing that 2003 didn’t do, other than introduce a new, incompatible file format, an absurd “ribbon” interface that takes all the familiar element of 2003 and hides them, and hogs resources.

Vista does nothing that XP didn’t do, other than introduce an onerous DRM “security” system, a stupid translucent interface (which everybody turns off right away), takes all the familiar XP elements, and hogs resources.

I bought a “Vista ready” laptop, and slogged along with the shitty OS and the shitty Office suite for a while. I dumped both, and installed XP and Office 2003, and the machine is screaming like a banshee. Supersonic. I still have Vista/ Office 2007 on another machine, and when I use it, it feels like trying to swim through molasses.

Most people aren’t interested in buying a quad core overclocked machine with 12G of memory just to do what they could do with XP/ Office 2007 with 1/12th the resources.

# 45 Paddy-O said, on August 20th, 2008 at 1:20 pm

#45 Well said!

# 46 deowll said, on August 20th, 2008 at 2:44 pm

Vista is more secure. Vista plays better with more cores. Vista 64 seems to be growing at an increasing rate.

For the end user who isn’t into eye candy that is about it.

It is stable and works well with the new stuff.

I’ve seen more software kicking out Win 98 and expect the same is happening with 2000. XP should still work with just about anything. No need to rush.

# 47 Somebody_Else said, on August 20th, 2008 at 2:56 pm

I’m not going to argue with you about Office. Some people like the new interface, some people don’t. I have an easier time finding things.

I’ve run Vista on everything from a 1.6 GHz Pentium M notebook with 1GB of RAM and an ATI Mobility X700 Grapics chip all the way up to my quad core gaming machine with 4GB of RAM. Vista runs fine on all of them.

The Vista DRM BS was debunked a long time ago:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=673

Now that drivers have matured Vista’s Performance in games now matches XP:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2302499,00.asp

I’m not sure why you guys are hell bent on pretending that Vista is the worst OS ever made. You can see that people are really turning away from XP on the big computer forums like HardOCP:
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1334967

Vista doesn’t just look nice. Its statistically much more stable and secure, its the first really good 64-bit OS for home users, and it does add some cool new features. I use Vista’s media center all the time and the updated movie maker is nice if you need a simple video editor that can handle HD video.

It’s not perfect, but it’s a great OS all around as long as you can get drivers for all your hardware. I think a lot of people’s bad experiences early on were caused by crappy Nvidia and Creative drivers.

# 48 Mister Mustard said, on August 20th, 2008 at 3:35 pm

#48 – Else

>>The Vista DRM BS was debunked a long time ago:

On the other hand, it’s been re-bunked over and over and over again. For example

http://tinyurl.com/6djua8
http://tinyurl.com/5zm2at
http://tinyurl.com/242amw
.
.
.
ad infinitum

>>I’m not sure why you guys are hell bent on
>>pretending that Vista is the worst OS ever made.

It’s not the WORST one ever made, but it’s certainly not any kind of “upgrade” from XP. I provides virtually no advances over XP, and for most people, requires a hardware upgrade. Even new computers that are sold with Vista preinstalled often can’t handle it.

>>I’ve run Vista on everything from a
>>1.6 GHz Pentium M notebook with 1GB of RAM

Haw haw haw! That’s hilarious! What did you do, run .bat files from the DOS prompt???

>>Office 2007 … I have an easier time
>>finding things.

You must not have been very proficient with Word then. I’ve been using Word since the DOS days (as well as WordPerfect, Wordstar, the god-awful Lotus product, etc. blah blah), and I’ve never seen anything that’s as difficult to transition to as Word 2007. Christ, Microsoft even has a web page help site where you can “do” something in Word 2003, and it will show you the convoluted way of doing it in 2007. Just finding the “document properties” is almost impossible without the help page. http://tinyurl.com/y85r6y

And I don’t use nVidia or Creative drivers.

# 49 Somebody_Else said, on August 20th, 2008 at 4:06 pm

The HDCP and Blu-Ray copy protection is implemented in hardware. Microsoft had nothing to do with it, and contrary to the BS in your third link it doesn’t use any CPU cycles unless you’re actually watching a commercial Blu-Ray movie.

Its the same thing with the cable card. If you’re just using a regular TV tuner you can record whatever you want. The cable card is what prevents you from recording certain shows. There’s nothing Microsoft can do about it.

“Haw haw haw! That’s hilarious! What did you do, run .bat files from the DOS prompt???”

It’s remarks like this that really prove that you’re talking out of your ass.

It’s my roommates laptop. He uses it mostly for word and excel stuff, and its fast enough to run less intensive games like Age of Empires III just fine. He won’t be playing Crysis on it, but it works fine.

# 50 Floyd said, on August 20th, 2008 at 4:13 pm

Vista is really good OS.

I use Win XP at work and a laptop with Vista Home Premium at home. Both are stable, though Vista Premium has better video features, and doesn’t crash. If I decide to buy another PC and have a choice I’ll probably get Vista as its OS as well.

Vista Hints: uncheck the “Enable Windows Transparency” checkbox on the screen that lets you choose window colors. I found that a semi-transparent interface is hard on the eyes, and slows the display more than any other Vista video feature, at least with 2 gigs of memory.

Enabling the XP GUI (as opposed to the Vista GUI) doesn’t seem to speed things up at all if you already have a PC with 2 gigs of memory.

A trial copy of Office 2007 was installed on my PC. I played with it a bit, but was unimpressed. I don’t like the ribbon controls. I’m using OpenOffice, which is good enough for use at home.

# 51 Mister Ketchup said, on August 20th, 2008 at 4:57 pm

#51 – Here is another Vista hint – Use OSX. Friends don’t let friends use Vista.

# 52 Bob West said, on August 20th, 2008 at 8:57 pm

1 year with Vista, and would never go back to XP. I have XP and Linux on my 2nd PC but hardly use either. I’ve been with Windows since 3.1. Tried a Mac don’t care for the GUI in particular the menu bar.
I like building my own systems. Most of these Vista stories are FUD.

# 53 Uncle Patso said, on August 20th, 2008 at 10:55 pm

# 12 James Hill said:

“My wife recently purchased a new gaming laptop (with red flames and everything), and I’ve spent the last two nights trying to get it to connect to our wireless network. All signs point to Vista being the problem.”

I have heard that Vista is incompatible with one particular brand of wireless routers. A member of my user group had the exact same problem with his wife’s new laptop. It connected immediately with the (different brand) wireless router at our meeting site (public library). (Sorry, it’s been months & I can’t remember the brand.) Try taking the laptop to a free hotspot or two.

# 54 Glenn E. said, on August 20th, 2008 at 11:52 pm

Microsoft has been playing this game of expanding its OS to push the limits of current PC hardware. Forcing users to buy more ram, and larger hard drives. Eventually, opting to get a faster PC to handle the ever swelling size of Microsoft software.

Perhaps these users who dropped Vista, were satisfied with XP on their old PC. And just wanted the speed boost that the new PC’s hardware gave to it. But Microsoft gave the OEMs no choice but to ship new PCes with Vista. The downgrade option allowed users to have a screamingly fast version of XP running with their old media files. Whereas Vista was slower and pickier about the DRM of everything.

Microsoft probably figured 99% of users wouldn’t bother downgrading, after seeing Vista’s “transparent” UI improvements. But I’ve seen old Linux distros that did transparent panes, without the need for newer video hardware. So that’s a big con.

# 55 qsabe said, on August 21st, 2008 at 9:00 am

Get a MAC . .. Yea, so your software will have Steve Jobs personal guarantee on each item. He will after all have test it to assure it was Apple acceptable. .. Oh you want to use software like what is available for windows, but wait, you have one of those MAC’s. Too bad..

# 56 DOS Lover said, on August 24th, 2008 at 4:58 am

Coming from DOS 2.1 through all of MS versions Vista is the biggest disappointment since ME. Win 2K was a real step forward for MS with the exception of lack of entertainment support (drivers), XP eventually resolved that issue. Vista has not really offered any improvement over XP and for certain PC configurations has introduced additional problems.

For all you Vista fans try the following examples:
1.)Monitor your individual network / vpn connections for traffic by just looking at the system tray.
2.)Find some empty real estate in the File Explorer righthand pane to create a new folder
3.)Likewise drop a new file into Explorer (if sub dirs are only content).
4.)Spend 10 times longer transferring files (only affects some PC’s)

All these well used, fundamental features worked in XP but seem to have been made worse in Vista. As an example why after having a massive Windows educated user base would MS change a well known Control Panel features like Add / Remove Programs to Programs and Features? Did it add value or efficiency? No it just takes end users longer to find the exact same XP utility which to my mind is just plain dumb. Given the expense of upgrading, additional support staff training and end-user training required to roll vista out no wonder corporates are staying away in droves.

Having said all that I don’t think MS are stupid enough to release 2 turkey’s in a row so the next iteration should be worth waiting for.

Leave Your Reply Below...

Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
show up immediately, please don't submit it again.

Special Deals 4U

25% off eHarmony subscription with code EHTECH
12-percent discount forever with code TECH
10-percent discount and free month using TECH10
10-percent or 30 dollars off weekly car rental!
Get 10-percent discount on car rental!
Get 10% off rental cars!
Get 10% off Dollar rentals!
Discounts on domain names!