why is vista so bad

you'll probably see me here if problems come up though

"It needs four times as much RAM as XP to run (eight to twelve times of GNU/Linux)"
-> The minimum RAM recommendations are 384MB for Ubuntu 7.10, 128MB for Knoppix 5.1.1, 128MB for Linspire, 256MB for SUSE, 512MB for Mac OS X 10.5, 128MB for XP, and 512MB for Vista. The 4x comparison of XP to Vista is valid, but how do you figure the 8x to 12x compared to Linux distros?

"It never stops nagging"
-> You can disable UAC if you find it annoying. Your choice here.

"Unless you are really lucky, you have to replace all your peripherals"
-> Quite an overstatement, but it is a major problem.

"You have to pay three times the cost of XP"
-> XP Home retailed for $199 while Vista Home Premium, the equivalent of XP Media Center, retails for $239. Hard as I try I can't see how that's 3 times as much.

"Unless you pay for an upgrade of your software, or bought it within the last three months, it won't work in Vista"
-> The vast majority of my software from when XP launched back in 2001 still works, although some must be run (successfully) in Compatibility Mode. Also, by stating it must have been purchased in the past three months you're claiming that there was not a single program that would run on Vista from the day it launched this past January through August. That's quite a shocking claim to anyone who used Vista prior to September.

"Backwards compatibility with the files of your friends using XP is pretty much non-existent"
-> The filing system remains the same, and the operating system does not inherently deal with file types. Perhaps you are thinking of Microsoft Office 2007, which debuted a new OOXML format? (You can still save to the older format if you like, and free readers for the new format are available.) This is NOT a Vista-related problem.

"It has already had more than 100 updates from Microsoft to seal all the holes in it"
I count 60 updates pushed out to Windows Vista users, including ones designed to add new functionality. Perhaps that 100 also includes updates pushed out through Windows Update for other software you have installed? And how many did Mac OS X 10.5, less than 2 months old, have at last count? (Hint: Over 20) And how many unpatched security flaws does Ubuntu 7.10, also 2 months old, have? (Hint: Over 27) Multiple that out over a year and see which OS has more security woes.

"Aero is just eyecandy, not a true feature"
-> True, but it's desired by many who thought Microsoft had fallen far behind.

"You are still vulnerable to viruses, spyware, adware and other malware (Macs and GNU/Linux don't have this problem)"
-> Malware is indeed a much greater threat to Windows users, but others are not immune either. How about all of those nice little remote execution vulnerabilities, though? Seems those plague all operating systems to date.

"You have given up the rights to your computer. Microsoft owns it. You just rent it."
-> You purchase a license to the software. Does Microsoft do that? Yes. Apple? Yep, them too, and they specify you must install it on Apple hardware. And even Ubuntu, Knoppix, and the others insist you agree to their terms, even though the software is free. And not a one will declare you the owner of the software, just a licensee.

"You still have to search around for software and updates for software and drivers."
-> Most come through Windows Update. I wish it was that simple under most Linux distros!

"BSODs (Blue Screen Of Death) is still there, they just changed the background colour."
-> Sorry, no color change. They're still blue. Check your facts.

"You still won't get any real help if you choose to pay an outrageous price for support from Microsoft"
-> Support is mixed, but it is free for the first 90 days.

"Vista phones home, just like XP, just better hidden"
-> Yes it does, though they didn't exactly try to hide it.

"When you update software, the entire system has to be rebooted"
-> Not always, and look at SP1's hot-patching feature.

"It still fragments your harddrive"
-> All have fragmentation issues. Windows is usually the worst, though.

"The registry can still be clogged by software that doesn't uninstall properly"
-> Define "clogged." The registry has so little of an impact on performance under the later versions of Windows it's unnoticeable even to a stopwatch. And isn't it the software uninstaller's responsibility to, you know, uninstall the software properly? Why blame another company's mistakes on Windows?

"Should you choose to upgrade your hardware with more than one extra, you will have to call Microsoft and prove, through a lengthy process, that you have bought Vista to get a new license-key"
-> Only partially true. 1.) It takes multiple hardware changes to force a reactivation prompt unless you're talking about the motherboard. 2.) That "proof" usually involves saying "Hi, my name is John, here's my product key, I'm calling because I replaced my motherboard, and I've only installed it on one computer." Takes approximately 5 minutes and your word is generally all the proof that's needed. 3.) They don't give you a new product key...you still retain your current one.

"WGA can render your perfectly legal version of Vista useless at any time"
-> Yes, that is a problem. However, if you're following the SP1 news you know that "kill switch" is being removed.

"Programs still just hangs for no reason whatsoever, often resulting in having to do a reboot"
-> Again, usually the fault of the program's author. Blame the faulty party.

"A program that crashes, lose all information since last save"
-> Again, that's up to the author of the program how crashes are handled. That goes for all operating systems, not just Windows.

"A program that crashes wants to send a report to Microsoft, claiming it will help them improve, but you can still have the same crash over and over for years"
-> Yes, Microsoft tries to identify problems and find solutions. But if it's a problem on the program author's side of the fence there's little they can do.

Some of your points are valid, but most of the 'faults' you listed were one of more of the following:
1.) Note entirely accurate.
2.) Problems of other operating systems as well, not just Windows.
3.) Caused by mistakes made by third-party developers, not Microsoft/Windows.
4.) Going to be fixed by SP1.

Looks like Vista isn't nearly as bad as you think.
John

Minimum RAM recommendations for Ubuntu Live CD is 384 MB alright. Alternate install can be installed and run faster than a P3 1.5GHz 1.5GB RAM XP-machine with as little as Pentium 366MHz 192MB RAM. That's the truth, because that's what I did less than a year ago. There are distros out there that will run with less than 50MB RAM. I was talking about MINIMUMs here. 50 vs 512?

UAC can be disabled, but it will still nag you from IE with the same question. I have used Vista and disabled UAC, rebooted and still got it with IE.

Most people have peripherals older than a year. I have yet to see someone claiming peripherals older than that "just working"

OK, I concede the point. Three times as much is wrong for just the OS

You have been truly lucky. I wonder why people keep hanging on to XP or down-/upgrade to XP because none of their programs work under Vista? At least not without having to search and install and reboot for two weeks. (I have done re-installs of both XP and Vista, and after a month's use, that's generally how long it takes unless you have a CD/DVD with drivers and programs you have downloaded. And that's usually illegal (copyright). You also have to consider that people don't buy a new computer and decide to buy new versions of programs they already have, adding perhaps a few thousands more to the price of the computer.

OK, got a LITTLE (not ironic) carried away on that one.

Well, my sister just bought a brand new laptop. On sale for less than a month. The updates needed to install was 76 in a clean install. Usually updates will be incorporated from the OEM up until the date they installed the OS.

I still hold to it that Aero is needless. And it sucks up more resources than it should. How come you need 256MB of dedicated graphics memory to run it when you can do the same in GNU/Linux with 128 MB of shared graphics memory?

Granted, remote execution is a problem in all OS of date. However, that is one VERY small portion of it all. That security flaw can be fixed in your router. Not so with all the rest plaguing Windows.

The (L)GPL, Mozilla, MIT, BSD, CC and other licenses grants you the ownership of the software in that you can use it, keep it, copy it, change it and redistribute it. (The terms under which you do this is regulated somewhat differently in the different licenses. Usually you just have to ship the license with the program or alterations and show what you have done) If you change anything in Windows, they come after you with a legion of lawyers and a lawsuit for millions of dollars.

Most Linux distros have repositories/central servers containing all updates for the system and a whole host of programs and libraries. Currently, Synaptic (Ubuntu package manager has 23324 packages ready for install within seconds) Windows Update updates Windows and a few Microsoft programs. Have you seen an update to ZoneAlarm lately? Or how about AVG? Photoshop?

Last time I did check my facts, they were black. But I guess they decided it was too DOS-like (the best OS Microsoft has bought to date)

And how do you get to that free help? Last time I tried getting help from Microsoft on a freshly booted Vista machine, I was given two choices: NOK1500,- for 30 minutes phonesupport or NOK899,- for the ability to get five e-mails answered.

Phoning home does not mean what you see or expect, but the quiet things like checking licenses on your software, preferrably Microsoft programs. There are enough stories about people installing software, running it for extended period without connecting to the Net. Then, after a while on the Net they get a message saying they have done something illegal.

I have used XP for quite a while, and also been around Vista enough to know about rebooting. My sister's brand new computer needed five reboots before the system even started. It needed 15 reboots during updates. It needed three more when installing software. I have rebooted this Ubuntu once in the last two months due to an update: Yesterday after a kernel update.

I have seen no sign of fragmentation on my ext3-harddrives. I have not used Reiser or JFS, but they too are hailed as fragmentation-free. I have only heard about having to defragment on FAT- and NTFS-filesystems (which Windows uses)

Clogging means registry "keys" not being deleted after uninstallation of software, even if the program has been added and removed with the Add/Remove Programs "utility" of Windows. That is not the fault of third-party programs. And why do Windows still use the registry? It's not needed. GNU/Linux prove that

Re-activating the OS shouldn't even be an issue, period. I know a second harddrive and switching your DVD station is enough to force this.

I know SP1 deactivates the "kill switch" but then we're back at: nagging.

Not necessarily the reason of the program. A story I find disturbing: A class of 20 would-be Windows administrators shall install it first, to learn the process. They have 20 identical machines. Before giving out the discs, the teacher says: During install, one or two of you will experience a crash. We do not know why, as it is never the same machines or same discs involved. We have asked Microsoft, but they don't know either.

Still, sending an error report? If it doesn't help anyone, why do it? I usually run VLC (best media player ever) on Windows. I can stop the file from playing, have VLC open for extended periods of time, no problem. I may close it down as the very last thing I do before shutting down. Nothing to interfere with the program. It will close cleanly, then ten seconds later, Windows will declare the program had an internal error and needs to be closed. I use that more than anything else, so I see it a lot with that program, but I also see it in quite a lot of other programs.

I will agree to not being as eloquent in my previous post as I should have been.
I remember remote execution being the one problem identifiable to other OSes.
Third-party developers make mistakes, but in my experience, Windows is the root of the problem
They claim much of this will be fixed with SP1. XP needed SP2 and hundreds of updates to get rid of 95% of the problems it had. You would think that with such a lengthy development schedule as Vista has had, it wouldn't need SP1 for about two more years.

I still think Vista is crap. It will always be crap. It's just as bad as I have said.
I know of two things Microsoft has done right: Buy DOS and fool IBM to pay them for it. Develop XBOX.

* I've experimented with some of the bare-bones Linux distros that can operate on 50MB of RAM and a couple hundred MBs of disk space, but they made Windows 95 look like a work of art, both graphically speaking and figuratively with regards to functionality. Can you name any that offer the functionality one would expect to find in a modern operating system and a reasonable GUI?

* After disabling UAC on numerous systems I haven't seen IE prompts. Odd. What were they concerning?

* Some companies have had better luck with legacy hardware compatibility than others. HP, for instance, made an effort to have Microsoft bundle updated drivers for their printers with Vista, so many of them work without any user interaction or download. All-in-ones are a different matter, though. Epson has updated drivers for many of their older products, available for download. There is still a vast array of older hardware, as recently as 2006, that isn't Vista-compatible, but must be downloaded directly. Replacing at least one peripheral is likely, but not replacing them all.

* On the update front, I go by the number of updates shipped out to a clean base installation of the retail product. OEM versions are often over cluttered and receive extra updates the manufacturer deems necessary. Right now I'm seeing 60, but that includes multiple updates for Vista Ultimate extras such as DreamScene, Bitlocker, and Hold'Em, as well as a couple mandatory updates to support SP1's installation.

* Aero can do with 128MB just fine, depending on the card itself. I agree with you, though, they need to do better. Even Window Blinds can do more with less on an XP system.

* But remember, that's still not "owning" the software...it's still a licensing process despite there being just a few lenient terms. There are still limitations, they can take action against violators, etc. See the Software Freedom Law Center's lawsuit against two violators of the GPL.

* During development there was even a red screen of death, but since Vista's launch they are been the same old blue.

* The free support is via e-mail, phone, and/or chat, as detailed on this support page. Likewise for the Norwegian support center.

* Yes, I'm well aware of the phoning home process, done on average every two weeks and upon every major change Windows detects. There was a huge media frenzy when security researchers stumbled upon it under Windows XP last year, after which Microsoft backed down the frequency and gave a public disclosure. Thus, its existence under Vista is much less of a secret than it initially was under XP.

* Actually the Windows Add/Remove Programs "utility" is simply a launchpad for the uninstallers provided by the third-party software. That third-party software is responsible for creating the registry entries, including the others that add itself to the Add/Remove Programs list, maintaining a list of files/settings that must be reversed upon uninstallation, and enacting those changes. Windows just provides a unified center for launching those uninstallation routines...it isn't responsible for their function. Thus, if a program fails to uninstall it is almost always the fault of improper development of that application or corruption. I'll hold off on addressing the existence of the registry as it's a topic unto itself.

* Replacing your hard drive is not, by itself, enough to necessitate a reactivation. It may have been the final straw, so to speak, but something else started accumulating those points first. Sorry, but I'm not sure what you mean by a "DVD station."

* Nagging doesn't impede the operation of the OS, and is the most lenient way of addressing piracy aside from simply dismissing it. Considering how rare it would be for the average user to encounter it erroneously, and how quickly the problem can be corrected, it's nothing to complain about. Although, perhaps you have a better alternative in mind?

* Under Vista the error reporting system is a little more productive. There are plenty of cases where it will identify a problem and tell you of a known solution or ongoing incompatibility, information gathered from previously submitted reports. If it is something that Microsoft can fix on their end to resolve compatibility issues it's great to know about as well.

Overall, I agree with out that Vista is not nearly what it could have been. After nearly six years of development all of the original 'four pillars' were pulled to avoid long delays which still came. And a lot of the performance issues should never have been. Some may need/want to stick with XP for the immediate future, but I still consider Vista a positive release and a valid successor to XP, which can be built upon and hopefully see some of the promised functionality reinstated in Windows 7.

John

One I forgot to adress earlier with regards to the registry and "clogged up": One machine in particular I have, a Dell PowerEdge 500SC (P3 1GHZ 512MB RAM) had never been cleaned of bad registry "keys". I don't use a stop-watch, but count the number of times the slider goes across the screen. After using CCleaner to clean out those registry keys, that slider went from 26 passes to 5. That is truly noticeable improvement.

If you want to crash a website, it's just as easy to let everyone running Linux access Microsoft's website at the exact same time. And with each distro having its own website to download from and many of them having several mirrors and P2P-download, I believe it will be hard to crash them.

On small distros: What do you mean by functionality in a modern OS? To me, that means Internet-connectivity, word processing abilities, printing, graphic abilities, IM, disc-burning, sound, video. All of which can be found in Damn Small Linux. Of course OS-graphics won't be as high-end when running such a system, but DSL still can show High-Resolution.

Prompts from IE came when downloading a file and wanting to run it, not store it. With UAC off, it still asked if I wanted to run the software.

Unless you always have the newest and the best of peripherals, and have more than two, you are likely to have to replace two of them with new ones. I have heard people buying printers (just printers, not all-in-one) one month before Vista was released. New printers, scarcely six months on the shelf. When they get Vista it won't work. Third-party, OK. But what is it about Vista that makes it necessary to have to make two drivers available? Or even XP vs 2000/2003/98/95? It is basically the same system at the heart of it.

I go through the list of updates before I install them. Things I don't need I don't install. On that list of updates for my sister's computer were no third-party updates. Not one. And she doesn't have Ultimate, but Home Basic.

Aero can do with 128MB? I'll grant you a little leeway on that one since you don't specify whether that 128MB is shared (No RAM on graphics card, it shares the system RAM) or dedicated (RAM on graphics card). Still, my experience and research suggests 256MB dedicated on a 2GB machine is needed unless you want to feel like you're sitting watching cold molasses.

About "owning" software. Under the FOSS-licenses, NOONE really owns the software. You may be the inspirator, instigator, super-maintainer, maintainer or user of the software, but noone OWNS it. What they do own is the right to think and act for themselves.

About that "free" support: That's Vista Ultimate you're talking about. How about showing me Home Basic or Premium?

Why does Add/Remove not work better? If you actually made it like several people have made (un)install programs, it would be worth a hell of a lot more, and it would really help keep your machine clean.

I did not say that Hard Drive alone was enough. I added a DVD drive (In norway it's called a station. Forgot my English for a moment)

Nagging is the worst impediment on the use of an OS. Install updates that require a reboot. How many times do you have to tell the OS that you will reboot later? How many times, should you get a revoked license, do you have to tell the OS that you will re-activate it later? As for it being the "most lenient way of addressing piracy", have you read any history on Microsoft? They actually encouraged piracy up until around Win95. Not openly of course, but they did. That's a proven fact.

By several cases it can identify, how many are we talking about?

Take a look at the history of computing. Microsoft started in the 70's. It has now been nearly 30 years of development. GNU was made sometime around mid-80's. it couldn't talk to the hardware. Linux, the component of GNU/Linux that does, was made in 1999. Less than 20 years later, it is now just as good at most things, better on stability and security, and the few things it can't do as well as Microsoft's Windows is due to Microsoft and Windows making anti-trust agreements with OEMs. Microsoft has even agreed that GNU/Linux is better than Windows. Not openly, but if memory serves me correctly, they used Red Hat for their servers until 2004/2005, while claiming NT/2000/2003 was the best server-OS.

And please don't claim that generalities should be dismissed. I just don't want to use a week writing a paper on the facts. I can show you specifics if you want to, but they are numerous and would be best put together in a PDF for download. Or you can google it. "Vista problems" should give you enough reading for the next month.

since vista is fairly new there are many bugs. Microsoft has been working on it but there have been even more bugs since they started. Microsoft is disappointed with vista for as spending 6 years of there time along with 6 billion dollars. but even Microsoft is recommending that you go back to xp if you are not satisfied. the odd thing is that i am using vista right now.

Sorry for the late reply...the bad weather knocked out communications for most of the day yesterday.

-> Registry cleaning helps when there is a corrupt or malicious key present that's causing a problem. Not just malware, but registry keys that, say, load a third-party addon to Explorer as well. Note that it's not due to the sheer number or "build-up"...there could be just one key that wasn't there upon a clean installation of Windows and that one key causes all the problems. Also, stating which "slider" that was makes a HUGE difference, particularly if it involves searching your hard drive for a particular file. The registry cleaning could have been coincidental. Too few details to draw any conclusions at this point. (Fallacy: Hasty generalization.)

-> Microsoft's site is distributed across numerous server farms, and there is a backup system in place to maintain priority parts should something happen. If there are so many problems with Vista, though, why do you have to resort to complaining about Microsoft's website as proof that the operating system sucks? (Fallacy: Red herring.)

-> DSL is a good example. It is functional while being extremely light on system requirements. But now consider this: Who would find it appealing given possession of any modern PC? Ubuntu is the most common Linux distro among the general population for a reason...people want more.

-> IE has its own Internet Options...check the Security tab. That's nothing new under Vista.

-> Drivers, unlike standard software, must be designed for the specific OS, regardless of how small the change might be. With Vista, Microsoft reported nearly rewriting the kernel and countless APIs. It's not the same at the heart of it. Plus, remember Vista x64 requires new signed drivers as an additional security precaution.

-> And every single one of those updates specified Vista as being the product being patched, not the .NET framework, CAPICOM, etc?

-> The ATI Xpress 300 with 128MB integrated graphics can still handle Aero. I'll grant you it's not always pretty, especially when playing video or games, but it does work.

-> FOSS licenses is just a general category, encompassing the likes of the GNU GPL. But as I said above, there ARE restrictions. Consider the fact that such licenses usually forbid the selling of the software at prices that exceed the cost of production/distribution. Also, "see the Software Freedom Law Center's lawsuit against two violators of the GPL." You don't own it will no strings attached, you license it on their terms.

-> ALL versions of Vista come with the free 90 day support plan. The Vista Ultimate link was simply an example. Here is the full list of links. As you can see, even Vista Home Basic is included.

-> Programs are supposed to come with uninstallers to ensure their proper removal. Microsoft, Apple, Canonical, etc don't know what files and registry entries to modify/remove because they didn't write the software. They know as much as you or I about all the third-party software in the world. Thus, they leave it up to those who know best...the third party developers. Those who design the special uninstallers to remove programs that were left behind do their best to determine what to do by looking at a list of known programs and searching for installation logs. They fail fairly often, though, for they are still in the dark making pot shots a good portion of the time.

-> I don't have the point system in front of me, but I know a graphics card and hard drive combined can be enough. I've replaced hard drives and DVD burners together before without a problem, but it does vary, I'll give you that.

-> "Nagging is the worst impediment on the use of an OS." Wouldn't you consider the existing kill switch worse?? Again, what's your better alternative?

-> "They actually encouraged piracy up until around Win95. Not openly of course, but they did. That's a proven fact." I'd love to see the proof.

-> I've seen a couple dozen, including reporting a Vista compatibility issue in Firefox and linking me to the Mozilla website where more information was provided. I have no idea how many there are total.

-> "the few things it can't do as well as Microsoft's Windows is due to Microsoft and Windows making anti-trust agreements with OEMs" I partially disagree. Agreements with OEMs is a good portion of why they have such high sales, but the OS having some features Linux has been unable to match thus far is mostly due to funding. They can hire new developers or license technologies from other companies where Linux distros can't either because of a lack of funding or because the code Microsoft uses is proprietary to a third-party who won't let it be inserted in open source code.

-> "Not openly, but if memory serves me correctly, they used Red Hat for their servers until 2004/2005, while claiming NT/2000/2003 was the best server-OS." I agree with you there. I believe the reasoning they gave was that if malware was targeted at their products the servers would remain running, which is why they used a combination. Rumors persisted, though, that it was an informal acknowledgment that Linux servers were better. We may never know how true that was/is.

I believe you've succeeded in making a case for Linux distros as a valid alternative, comparative to Windows in most aspects. However, many of your arguments for why "Vista sucks" are a bit moth-worn.

John

Vista hate sites

Search words "Vista Sucks"

http://www.desktoplinux.com/articles/AT8288296398.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Windows_Vista

http://blog.nordquist.org/?cat=31

http://freshman-15.blogspot.com/2006/01/vista-sucks.html

http://www.aaxnet.com/editor/edit043.html

http://www.aaxnet.com/editor/edit043.html

Search words "I hate Vista"

http://www.yelvington.com/20070722/i_hate_windows_vista

http://www.yelvington.com/20070722/i_hate_windows_vista

http://www.ihatevista.co.uk/forum/


search words "linux is better then vista"

http://blogs.ittoolbox.com/linux/locutus/archives/why-linux-will-always-be-better-13499

http://www.seopher.com/articles/29_8_of_xp_users_may_move_to_linux_over_vista