Why do people hate Vista?

Post Reply New Topic

It seems like a lot people hated Vista but are excited about Windows 7. Why is this? Windows 7 basically looks like Vista with a few refinements. Out of the box, I had a lot of stability issues with Vista (if I remember right, It was with the Nvidea chipset). But after service pack 1, I had NO issues. No strange errors or crashes or anything. Maybe I was lucky. I ordered Windows 7. I'm not sure if I should put it on my PC when it comes in the mail in Oct or leave it on the shelf and wait for the service pack.

To be honest, I kind of have Mac envy. I don't know if I could forgo some of those programs I have though. I guess I could run a "virtual pc" on a MAC. I'm not sure how that entirely works. How do you right click with a MAC? I assume you would assign a KEY to emulate this within the program?

I can't afford a Macbook pro anyways so I will keep my cheapie Dell and install Win7.

Windows 7 is much better, performance wise, than Vista. I've been running beta builds of Win 7 for a while, and it's very decent in terms of speed and reliability. Windows 7 just seems a bit more polished and responsive, and the UAC isn't as intrusive. It even runs decently on my netbook (I usually run Ubuntu on it).

Because you can't run lot of computer programs on Vista.

I dislike Vista in particular because it is slow, bloated, and will not run many programs. As fare as Micro$oft in general is concerned, I dislike the prices of their product as well as the restrictive licensing terms. I also don't like the fact that by using Micro$oft or other big name software products that my company opens itself to B.S.A. raids or crippling lawsuits should someone caal their "piracy" line and say I'm running illegal software. Completely innocent companies have had to shell out 10's of thousands of dollars because they could not locate receipts for products they purchased.

If the B.S.A. cpmes to my company and wants to do an audit, I will tell them to f--k off. If they get a court order and come in anyway, there will be a lot of bad press for them and no fines for me. This is because my business is run entirely on free software.

My mum and dad both have Vista on their respective computers, and loads of little dialogue boxes pop up every time you click something, so because I can't stand having unnecessary windows open behind the window I'm currently using, I have to click "OK"/close them all every time I click something, which is REALLY annoying. Apparently other Vista users don't have this problem, though.

Anyway, I'm glad I don't have Vista on my laptop, so I only have to put up with it when my laptop is broken or something.

it's so non-intuitive. I hate working on Vista, it's just a mess to find anything there and the menus are weird.

On Mac laptops, you right click by tapping the touchpad with two fingers. You left click by tapping the touchpad with one finger. The newer Macbook Pros don't even have mouse buttons at all, you have to use the tap-to-click method. (Note: This behavior has to be configured in System Preferences. Apple defaults to not giving you a right click) Or you can just plug in any multi-button USB mouse, and it will work as expected. Outside of gaming, there really isn't any particular area where OS X is lacking applications. But purchasing a Mac might not be a good idea. In the past few years Apple has been a bit flaky in dealing with their customers, and you never know when Apple will decide to abandon the product they sold you and leave you out in the cold. Right about now, there are a lot of upset owners of very expensive G5 towers who will no longer be getting any new software from Apple.

People hated Vista because it changed a lot of stuff that people were used to, and it sucked. Vista's hardware requirements were excessively high, especially for the time in which it was released when the typical computer was considerably less powerful than the ones you can buy today. A lot of device drivers got broken while moving to Vista, and there were other assorted headaches associated with it.

Windows 7 is essentially Vista with some refinements and a bit of a performance boost (allegedly). By now many of the issues surrounding Vista (device drivers, unfamiliarity) have been resolved and so Windows 7 is getting a much better reception.

The new laptop I am running now, costs less than a Vista CD and is faster and way more useful.
I never agree with any EULAs, especially the idea of software installing by itself and messing
things up and wasting money on such software from people who reserve the right to damage
it, and charge a lot of money to use it but they still own it, not you.

I reserve the right to own and control computers and NOT pay to agree to give up that right.

My 2 cents...from what I've heard from people even more in the know than I am.

Vista was a pig in a dress. Microsoft made a big deal on how Vista was a massive improvement over XP and would have all these hot and amazing features.

It wound up being oh so much less than promised. It had maybe only 10% of the "improvement" promised, it was more expensive (mandating you buy the most expensive version to have full-functionality) and it was buggy as hell when released for a lot of people where XP was established and stable.

No matter what Microsoft did to fix these issues and make Vista respectable, they realized they burned the consumer, deliberately shortened the service life of Vista and pushed to make the next release to market sooner.

Vista is like Windows95. A lot of promise, but what was pushed on the consumer felt like a mass beta test for profit. Win95 was put out to make a deadline. Win98 and 98SE were the more "debugged" versions of what Win95 was supposed to be but wasn't.

The same is true for Windows7 (or whatever they choose to name it). Windows 7 will be the polished version of what Vista should have been.

Because it's a terrible piece of s**t?

It had it's bugs at the start, but since SP1 onwards I've never had a problem. If anything, I prefer it over Windows 7.

Why it got so much bad press is due to many reasons. This is all personal observation, so I could be wrong.

Word of mouth: People who are dissatisfied will tell others it's s**t and thus they also don't use it/tell others it's s**t despite never trying it. This seems to go for a fair amount of cases.

Laziness of driver developers: Most of Vista's problems were due to dodgy drivers, from what I've seen. Developers took ages to update them and make them fully compatible. Nvidia is a prime example of this, took bloody ages for them to even bother making a functional driver.

Commercial PC market: Shops selling PCs delibrately underpower their machines with crap CPUs/GPUs and filling it with useless 3rd party bloat software to cut costs and make more profit, while disguising them as "fast" by putting in loads of RAM and hard drive space. Most of the time, the only way to get a decent PC is custom building it, which tends to end up even cheaper than buying one from a shop.

People: The majority of people who use computers are Windows users, but also the majority of them aren't savvy with computers. Most computer related problems are from these people, and most problems are by user incompetence. This doesn't just go for Windows, put a non-savvy person in front of a PC running Linux/any other OS and they will likely mess it up too. This is why I guess Microsoft put UAC onto Vista, as sort of a "it's for your own good" measure in order to stop them whining so much. Little did they know, it caused *even* more whining. Linux and OSX didn't have to go through such measures because their market share is so low, so there's less whining.