PDA

View Full Version : Windows Vista



Alt
30th January 2007, 16:58
Before I nag, apologies for being away for a while. I didn't feel the need to post or thread here until B5 came out :D ...that's until I realized their weren't any opinionating threads on Vista. Guys, you don't hate Vista that much do you? ;) Anyway, I have a poll. (I was gonna go outline some things about Vista, but I'll leave you perfectly capable guys to do that). Basically, do you or do you not like Windows Vista? Please explain why/not.

Vista is not ftw because it is not pro third party security firms, its too expensive in Europe, I feel its not as flexible as its predecessors, some could argue its requirements are why too high and I think the same could have been achieved using a Windows custom theme and a security patch. Post your comments.

Ging
30th January 2007, 17:08
I honestly couldn't say until I've spent some time with it as a regular user. But from what I know, I'm going to stick right down the middle and say "it's better in some ways than XP, but worse in others (increase in DRM for instance)"

Tsukasa1105
30th January 2007, 17:46
Eh. Ultimate is dual-booted on my machine at the moment, and some features of it are really nice (media center works great). Unfortunately though, my brand new 8800 has no drivers available for it, and it seems lots of mfrs are having issues with porting their drivers. I'd hold off until crysis or some other must-have dx10 game comes out before getting it.

Gusdor
30th January 2007, 17:46
Consider me hypnotised by the shineys!

Daedalus
30th January 2007, 17:49
Usually I upgrade my stuff whenever I can but I'm staying off Vista for at least a year.

Right off the bat some of the stuff I use won't be compatible with Vista. There won't be third-party driver support for less-known hardware/software that I might use, leading to all sorts of confusion. Then there's that DRM bullcrap I've heard of... ;)

The interface looks nice, but it's not worth it.

Alt
30th January 2007, 17:57
I would have to agree. It wouldn't be unwise to wait for a year, or maybe two before considering purchase of Vista. It'll be less expensive and better one would persume (feedback, virus threats, major backdoor locks etc).

hutch
30th January 2007, 18:06
I've got it.
I <3 my job.
(no, its not all that great)

Ging
30th January 2007, 18:36
It never was going to be all that great - it's just an OS!

khu
30th January 2007, 18:39
Apart from playing the Halo 2 PC port, I see no reason for it.

Night Raider
30th January 2007, 18:41
Well, there just isn't a big motivation to move to Vista just yet. Maybe that will change in the next couple of months.

The.ViruS
30th January 2007, 18:51
I used it regular during testing and I can hinestley say nay, wont be using it for a while. XP is much more stable for my system. The theme looks nice but is terrible for gaming which is what I use my PC for. I get 15FPS increase using XP rather than vista. Need a better PC for it and on Trainee wages I cant afford. XP FTW.

legoman
30th January 2007, 19:29
I honestly can't say at the moment as of yet since I actually need to use the program for a while and get a certain feel for it. But I can certainly make the assumption that I'll probably be boycotting it because of all the anti-stuff I like to do on XP.

So yah, it's too early... on the other hand, if someone else is willing to share a bit about it then that'd make a difference.

Sil
30th January 2007, 19:42
I might go there for Age of Conan, DX10 -- style. But, by then, I'll have drifted so far away from computers I'll be munking about at a measly 70wpm when I get back.

Yeesh.

Zabiela
30th January 2007, 20:05
As always, a release doenst tell me im ready for it, or for that matter its ready for me.

Alt
30th January 2007, 20:10
I see the dumber/internet virgin benefitting more from Vista than anyone else. Vista actually includes what Microsoft calls security. Mmmm the test of time...

Sil
30th January 2007, 20:58
As always, a release doenst tell me im ready for it, or for that matter its ready for me.
Er. Right. *Just got off the phone with his girlfriend*

No cumment.

Zabiela
30th January 2007, 21:24
Er. Right. *Just got off the phone with his girlfriend*

No cumment.

lol

Kira Yamato
31st January 2007, 00:26
I wont be looking in to Vista until they've had a chance to let the hackers beat on the new TCP Stack. That way I wont get caught in a hacker attack with my new computer getting ruined. Once they've closed a good deal of the major holes in the new TCP Stack for Vista, and made it a bit more stable then it should be worth something.

Demented
31st January 2007, 03:38
/slap Sil

More money?
Something I don't need?
"ftl"

Ah, internet brevity, how I love thee.

Gusdor
31st January 2007, 10:08
I wont be looking in to Vista until they've had a chance to let the hackers beat on the new TCP Stack. That way I wont get caught in a hacker attack with my new computer getting ruined. Once they've closed a good deal of the major holes in the new TCP Stack for Vista, and made it a bit more stable then it should be worth something.
Rofl, the paranoia comes complete with 'technical terms' this time around. And pray tell, without Wiki-ing it, what is a TCP Stack?

Paegus
31st January 2007, 12:38
tilt bits, drm, bloat, shite looking theme and having to enter a password every time you need to blink gives it 2 big :thumbdown:s

that said however i don't rule out using it at home after it's been hacked to bits by umm... people, patched up by MS and hacked to bits a few times... aka 12~18 months.

too bad i'll doubtlessly have to use it with clients who think they know better :'(. then again some people still use NT 3.5 :)

Kira Yamato
31st January 2007, 12:57
Rofl, the paranoia comes complete with 'technical terms' this time around. And pray tell, without Wiki-ing it, what is a TCP Stack?

Gusdor, microsoft products are not all that safe. You can get your CPU brunt out in under 10 seconds if a Hacker felt he wanted to do that.

A TCP stack, or more accurately a TCP/IP Stack is the programming that tells your computer how to connect to, and work with the internet. The TCP/IP, or Transfer Control Protocol/Internet Protocol Stack in XP has been around for a long time. At least since Win98 and may date back as far as 95.

What Microsoft tends to do is copy a lot of code form the previous operating system. Usually if they don't update it, they don't check it, and thats how the back door in the thumbnail viewer survived from a very early windows and ended up in XP. (Edit: It was patched in '05 I believe.)

Now the TCP/IP Stack is usually patched when it's put in to a new OS, but with Vista they decided to start form scratch. What does this means is hackers have not yet had a good shot at breaking through the stack. So Microsoft doesn't have that much of an idea of where the real weaknesses in the Protocols are. So until about service pack 1-2, it will be fairly easy to break in to Vista, with out using back doors.

Gusdor
1st February 2007, 00:21
thats assuming the pigout about security was just BS.

Im running Vista atm and pretty much ANY system tool you use require user input as a confirmation for it. This includes show/hiding system folders. Sharing folders. Deleting protected files.....even showing all running processes (a whopping 44 from a fresh install...yowch)

Kira Yamato
1st February 2007, 00:48
It's easy to get into Vista, then once you're in you can hijack the system, and then by pass any security. Because once again these security precautions come form MS, and MS security tools are the first to get broken. Plus they don't need input from you to add key loggers to your system, or view your privet, non-system folders.

Now if you have the proper security measures; a Good Anti-Virus, a few Good Anti-Spyware/Anti-Adware, a Good Firewal, and a router you should be fairly safe. But if some one gets through your router(It's not impossible), they're gonna get in to your computer. I'd also like to point out to you that Vista is the OS to hack right now, because it's new, and a lot of businesses use it. That makes you a target over the XP users.

Ging
1st February 2007, 01:48
It's easy to get into Vista, then once you're in you can hijack the system, and then by pass any security.

That sort of statement right there needs citations...

I've yet to hear of a single 0-day issue with Vistas TCP / IP stack - but I do know for a fact that MS were fixing bugs in it for a fair old while (look up Symantics paper on it - the number of issues they talk about goes from something like 11 to 2 over 3 beta releases of Vista and that was from a fair old while ago).

Now, the Symantic paper is pure black box attempts at getting in - a dedicated type may well find an open path way by examining the stack at the byte level, but it's going to take a fair bit of effort and they're unlikely to expend that effort just to get into average joe's machine.

I'll also point out that your claim that "a lot of businesses use vista" is completely bogus - barely any will be, unless they purchased machines in the last few months and are completely new startups.

Sil
1st February 2007, 06:33
I was under the impression that there is no completely safe firewall or OS. I'm sure that, if someone wants to bad enough, there *will* be a way into your system for them.

It's not that hard to imagine, is it?

-<<SyycK>>-
1st February 2007, 07:12
My thing with Vista is that they're saying that its faster than xp...

But

Look at the difference in the system requirements.
Not getting it until I'm sure the speed isn't just from the hardware upgrades.

Gusdor
1st February 2007, 09:21
My thing with Vista is that they're saying that its faster than xp...

But

Look at the difference in the system requirements.
Not getting it until I'm sure the speed isn't just from the hardware upgrades.
Hah yeh quite. Its a bit slower for gaming. Windows itself is lightening fast however

Alt
1st February 2007, 09:59
I suppose what you ask yourself now is, whats the point (at this point in time) in buying Windows Vista?

Gusdor
1st February 2007, 10:39
There is no point if you are gaming.

The organisational tools far surpass XP

GrimReaper84
1st February 2007, 10:43
There is no point if you are gaming.

The organisational tools far surpass XP


*cough* DirectX 10 *Cough*

Ging
1st February 2007, 10:47
There's nothing out that makes use of it yet though...

Gusdor
1st February 2007, 11:18
What Ging said. And until games are better patched for DX10, i lose 15fps across the board

Alt
1st February 2007, 17:52
:rolleyes: (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6320865.stm)

GrimReaper84
1st February 2007, 20:20
What Ging said. And until games are better patched for DX10, i lose 15fps across the board

*Cough* Get 2 gig of memory *Cough*


Gamespot Windows Vista Gaming Report (http://au.gamespot.com/features/6164940/index.html?sid=6164940&tag=topslot;title;2&om_act=convert&click=topslot)

:D

Gusdor
1st February 2007, 22:45
*Cough* Get 2 gig of memory *Cough*


Gamespot Windows Vista Gaming Report (http://au.gamespot.com/features/6164940/index.html?sid=6164940&tag=topslot;title;2&om_act=convert&click=topslot)

:D
interesting, ill consider that. Until then I'm reinstalling XP. I can't afford new hardware atm.

Also:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6320865.stm

Yowch. I've been using Speech Recognition all day (its really cool tbh)

One last Note - http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=SW-041-MS
BARGIN BUYING!

Cyborg
1st February 2007, 23:36
after running 109 pounds through a currency converter (about 210 american) it is cheaper to go down to my local fry's and get it for 199.99 for OEM Ultimate

Paegus
6th February 2007, 12:18
so we have a guy at work who dual booted Vista and XP on his workstation and drivers aside it worked fine for a few days. but then vista suddenly decided that his XP partition didn't have the correct file permissions and so re-assigned them all to nothing. At least as far as XP was concerned. then XP, failing to appreciate this service Vista thought it was providing, took to re-re-assigning everything back to Administrator (even his account files and incompletely at that... which is a whole other story). So now every time he reboots into the other OS they promptly do a chkdsk and try to take back what they 'lost'. It's rather hilarious...

Gusdor
6th February 2007, 13:20
Vista doesnt let you run the XP setup to downgrade either. pretty cheaky if you ask me

Boxy
6th February 2007, 13:54
Im banging Vista on tonight, so Ill be sure to let you know if I suffer or do much better in anyway. When I had the RC2 on I had no problems with it at all other than a couple of rubbish games not wanting to run (although in hindsight setting them to run in XP SP2 compatability might have solved that). Im a sucker for shiny transparenty shells so as I said I'll let you know if anythin untoward happens.

Losing 15ps seems weird, I never got that in the beta software. Maybe Gus cant keep a clean machine to save his life...:)

Paegus
6th February 2007, 14:26
well just be careful if you're dual booting it. resetting all the file permissions takes forever. and good luck with that 9800 you have... Vista hates them. on the plus side the blue screen of death is STILL there. though the lack of any and all text on it attempting to describe what may or may not be broke is pretty annoying. also bb4win and TXMouse work on it so at least there's that...


Vista doesnt let you run the XP setup to downgrade either. pretty cheaky if you ask me

well did Windows XP let you run Windows 2000 setup to downgrade? though personally i've never 'run the setup to whatevergrade'... i put the CD in and reboot the way you're supposed to :)

QReaper
6th February 2007, 16:20
Unless there's a massive reason to convert to DX10, then I'm going to have to just stick with XP, from what I've read in this thread.

Boxy
6th February 2007, 18:25
Never had a problem with my 9800 on RC2, so heres to hoping I'll be alright with the RTM version. I'm not dual booting, I'll run it as my main OS. I ran the RC2 as my main OS for about 2 months, no problems. Didnt even feel like Beta-ish software to be honest.

Zabiela
6th February 2007, 18:32
Unless there's a massive reason to convert to DX10, then I'm going to have to just stick with XP, from what I've read in this thread.

There will be.

Paegus
6th February 2007, 19:09
Never had a problem with my 9800 on RC2...

none of the betas or RCs liked my asus 9800xt. i'd install the drivers and it would either not find any compatible hardware or it would install fine but when the login screen came up after the obligatory restart the whole thing reboots continually until you remove the ATi drivers in safemode. the creative 9800 in the workstation does the same thing. surprisingly enough though the stock windows driver are actually functional. you can even play games with them but the performance is crap.

also sucks how they removed the tabs from the desktop/display/screensaver properties thing.

the security isn't as bad as i thought but having the password box appear EVERY SINGLE TIME you do something needing admin rights is really quite irritating though. they should have just ripped off Linux's method completely and had it expire after so much time so you only need to enter the password once and it's good for 5 minutes. then there's the fact that way too many programs are written without the slightest thought to per-user settings and security. steam being one of them. trying to get hammer or games working (aka saving your data) when you aren't admin is almost impossible. it's even harder when you have and use stuff on a different drive whose permission set isn't native to that installation of the OS.

as for Areo (or aero?) i fail to see them point. sure it looks fancy and slick and smooth as glass (har har) but unless you've got the latest hardware and shelled out for the non-cheapo version you either get a mediocre performance of it or you just don't get it at all. though since Blackbox for Windows works fine on Vista when the time comes, as i'm sure it will eventually though hopefully after the DRM and such has been staked through the heart, I'll at least be able to use that instead and save myself those extra clock cycles it wastes on gaussian-blurring whatever's behind the window frame.

but i can always hope it'll play out like another Windows ME and they'll fix it with the next patch...

Gusdor
6th February 2007, 19:25
Losing 15ps seems weird, I never got that in the beta software. Maybe Gus cant keep a clean machine to save his life...:)
Yeh that clean format I did you install the new OS is obviously the cause of my problems.......think then speak buddy.

Boxy
6th February 2007, 23:06
Hey! You report frame loss, I'm reporting fuck all problems. You do the maths my friend. Vista is on and runs sweet, no difference between this and XP besides cool functions and sweet Aero frontend. Im happy with it...

GrimReaper84
7th February 2007, 09:59
*cusses state of comp that makes a OEM upgrade impractical and needing everything but a vidcard for a complete new comp so for a practical jump to Vista has to wait until affordable Direct X 10 cards are available*

Gusdor
7th February 2007, 10:10
Hey! You report frame loss, I'm reporting fuck all problems. You do the maths my friend. Vista is on and runs sweet, no difference between this and XP besides cool functions and sweet Aero frontend. Im happy with it...
So automatically that means not behaving like an autistic child towards the Performance tab is problem :P Clearly....Could be anything. btw, seen how many process it runs from fresh install. 46 I counted :O

Im running Nvidia, you are on Ati am I correct?
My testbed was World of Warcraft - believe it or not, it gets very busy
I also ran the Hidden and noticed periodic jerkiness.

Conclusion - RAM issues. Only 1gig

PS. Installed XP x64 last night. Its the bees knees

GrimReaper84
7th February 2007, 10:14
XP Pro 64 Bit Edition?


Can you say 'compatibility issues'?

Last I looked the list of game that won't work on XP64 for no other reason then it's XP64 was a mile long and getting longer.

Gusdor
7th February 2007, 10:30
WoW runs fine
HL2 runs fine
UT2004 runs better than before
3D studio max renders much faster

The only problem i had was running the installer for ventrillo. But I just unpacked it manually.

Paegus
7th February 2007, 10:36
for me the main problem with that boat is the lack of driver and system apps support. shell extensions and interface tweakers don't work the same because they can't talk to 64bit apps. or if they can, they can't talk to 32bit apps... very annoying.

e: though back to vista for a sec... tell me if you think this (http://www.dailytech.com/Extending+the+Vista+Activation+Grace+Period+to+120 +Days/article5952.htm) is a sneaky marketing ploy or not...

Paegus
10th February 2007, 16:10
had some fun on a vista box today... and got annoyed at the way you sometimes can't do stuff unless you actually log in as the admin user and then got annoyed at the hoops you need to jump through to get there without actually switching user to said admin account so i made these:

&#37;systemroot%\sudo.cmd:

@echo off
runas /user:SUPAUSA "%SystemRoot%\blarg.cmd %*"

where SUPAUSA is the name of the administrator account that ideally (as in if windows was actually designed for multiple users from the get go) you're not really supposed to be logging into too often.

%systemroot%\blarg.cmd:

@echo off
echo Launching %*...
cmd /c %*


now you can Start > Run > sudo regedit and the like instead of having to navigate all the way to it, right-click and run as admin. and incase you're wondering why you can't just runas ... regedit directly doing that gives an elevation error because the environment you're running it from is not the admins.

[/nerd]

crans
10th February 2007, 21:38
Durrrrrhhhhhh, look at dem perty lil colours!

Demented
11th February 2007, 22:59
If you need to hack the registry to get something done in Vista, I'm going to cry.

Tsukasa1105
12th February 2007, 00:19
You only need to do that if you run as a guest. If you run as an admin (like everyone does in winXP) with UAC off (like in XP) everything works fine (like in XP)

Vista just gives you the option to run as a lower account so you can be more secure, which leads you into such problems

Paegus
12th February 2007, 01:07
and ideally you're supposed to run as a non admin for the majority of your activities. but then windows wasn't designed from scratch to be multi-user so it's all an afterthought and thus horribly executed.

though even the linux bods didn't get it right until relatively recently

Demented
12th February 2007, 01:59
Pshaw.

Non-admin accounts are for protecting your computer from the meddling activities of little brothers.