Hardware Analysis - Re: Are you Vista Ready? No?

Re: Re: Are you Vista Ready? No?

Merc — 2007-05-04T17:31:17-05:00

(See screenplay at the bottom)
The folks here that are vehemently defending Vista are missing the point about what Vista is and is not. Vista IS a commercial product. Plain and simple. It is a product that must be enticing enough to get customers to open their wallets and fork over hard earned cash in order to enjoy the benefits this new product offers over that which they are presently using.

Now, what does this customer base want? What would entice Joe Average to go down to the local store, get out the cerdit card and buy Vista:

1. Speed: "Vista will increase the speed of your system by 15% across the board." Now that gets everyone's blood boiling and would draw foks into the store. Unfortunately Vista doesn't increase the speed of your system, or your games, or anything, it slows them down so scratch that. I know I can't see the difference between 115 FPS and 70 FPS but that is the biggest load of BS any fanboi can use to defend whatever component he is defending. That 115 FPS is important because when a scene gets very hardware intesive on a 22" display that 115FPS suddenly decreases to 60 FPS. Folks pay for the big cards to make sure that the FPS never dip below 60. The much touted 70FPS is all you can see doesn't mention that under heavy load that 70FPS dips to 20FPS.

Vista slows your system down so I'll leave my wallet in my pocket for now.

2. Security: "Vista is the most secure OS ever offered and will protect you from the bad guys." Lot's of folks care more about this than increased speed. Is Vista more secure? Not really since the main security feature is an incredibly annoying refusal on the part of the OS to allow the user to install anything. Since most folks disable this ridiculous nuisance, Vista security goes down the crapper and is probably on par with patched XP. Not bad but no improvement, so wallet is still tightly locked up here.

3. Ease of use: " Vista is Easy to use" Is it. As said 127 times earlier, I haven't used it so I don't know. No one here has said it is easier to use so I'll assume the interface experience isn't a good or a bad. Unfortunately, status quo doesn't get the wallet out of my back pocket.

4. Great looking: "Vista Aero is beautiful to look at" I guess it is and I certainly do want to have that interface on my desktop. My rig can handle the load easily but most in the wide world cant. Yeah its pretty but it drains laptop batteries like no other OS ever has and you better have the hardware to run it. This is a very nice enticement but damn you pay for it. Drained batteries and new hardware are a huge turnoff for most folks out there so I'll call this a true statement but with too many negatives to get anyone but an enthusiast to switch over.

5. Low Price: Price should be based on the value of a product. You want to charge top dollar you better be offering top dollar quality. At $225 for a retail copy Vista should offer every single item above. If it did I'd place my order at Newegg right now. The fact of the matter is it offers none of the above, yet MS wants you to shell out $225 for it because it cost them billions to make. LMAO

Little screenplay, now, to illustrate the problem with Vista. Picture a MS Rep as a new-car saleman talking to Joe Everyman on the floor of a big, shiny, PC Store with RAM Rep, Nvidia Rep and various other Reps standing by their respective Vista-ware all around the floor........

MS Rep, "It ain't that bad and is certainly more stable and secure (inside reps twisted head: well, at least for now) than some of our earlier initial offerings. A little buggy but we'll work that out and the driver situation should fix itself (inside MS reps head: after everyone sells that two year old crap and buys new stufff). Yeah it slows thngs down, especially games, but who can see the difference between 120FPS and 90FPS anyways (inside reps head: except when the action gets hot and heavy and the difference is 60FPS and 30 FPS, that kinda sucks). Yeah, it drains the batteries on your laptop but the desktop graphics are worth it (Reps head: Hoo boy, even I ain't buying that one)"

Customer is looking skeptical but that shiny new desktop is enticing.

MS Rep continues, "So all in all it is a nice ride and will be even better after we patch the crap out of it. What do I have to do to get you to take this OS home with you? Make me an offer and I'll take it to the manager and see if we can work it out."

Customer is thinking, thinking, thinking.... insde customer's head: Well its slow but I need a new video card anyways, it IS a little more secure but that horrible pop-up thing has to go. I can leave my laptop plugged in more...hmmmm...thinking

Customer to MS Re, " Ok, I like its looks. I can deal with the other stuff. I tell ya what, I'll give you $50 right now for it if you throw in the Vista mouse pad."

MS Rep is stunned. "Well, sir, that's mighty generous but this little baby lists for $225."

Customer looks stunned now, "You gotta be F'ing kidding me! What are you nuts?" Customer starts laughing with incredulity "HS, are you guys freakin nuts?" More derisive laughing. "No thanks, I'll drive the XP a little longer." Customer walks out the door laughing and shaking his head muttering HS to himself.

Back on the floor the Nvidia rep, who has been watching the BS fly, stalks over , red faced to the MS Rep

Nvidia Rep: "WTF do you think you're doing you moron?!?! You promised me this POS would be flying out the door so now I have all these freakin' cards, designed for that Vista POS sitting on the floor, and I've sold 4 all day!!! You better fix that POS or we're both going under! Either that or sell it at a reasonable price! $225 are you nuts?!"

Nvidia Rep's lip is quivering now. RAM Reps and OEM reps are starting to tear up as well. They all trusted MS.

MS looks over the lowly scum whimpering and staring hopefully at him and says "Nah, they'll buy it for $225. Eventually. Don't worry guys, I have lot's of money and if you go under I'll buy you all out at pennies on the dollar. Oops, time for lunch, see ya."

The End.

Re: Re: Are you Vista Ready? No?

ian elliott — 2007-05-04T16:29:32-05:00

A_Pickle said:

Games running in DirectX 9 mode run maybe 10% slower in Vista than they did in Windows XP. There is a slightly higher hardware overhead in Windows Vista than there is in XP, so this slight loss of performance is going to happen. Deal with it.

Did you deal with it? Let's say I deal with it and buy a new graphics card to up my performance 10%. That is another addition cost on the price of Vista isn't it. How it all adds up.

Re: Re: Are you Vista Ready? No?

ian elliott — 2007-05-04T16:24:27-05:00

Sander Sassen said:

And the plot thickens, apparantly Vista's Aero GUI has a healthy appetite for notebook batteries:

Vista draining laptop batteries, patience
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1040_22-6181366.html?part=rss&tag=feed&subj=zdnn

Best regards,

It's just not looking good for vista is it?

Re: Re: Are you Vista Ready? No?

DublinGunner — 2007-05-04T15:28:30-05:00

Well is that not a bit obvious as the Aero glass needs your vid card to do a bit more than it would normally be doing at the desktop

Re: Re: Are you Vista Ready? No?

Sander Sassen — 2007-05-04T15:07:41-05:00

Re: Re: Are you Vista Ready? No?

shuja rahman — 2007-04-29T13:12:53-05:00

jmerc said:

Adobe Flash not supported in Vista 64 Bit. :o" title=">:o">

Some website you adobe flash.

Re: Re: Are you Vista Ready? No?

jmerc — 2007-04-29T12:24:19-05:00

Adobe Flash not supported in Vista 64 Bit. :o" title=">:o">

Some website you adobe flash.

Re: Re: Are you Vista Ready? No?

Brendan Gonsalves — 2007-04-22T15:44:53-05:00

Bobby Phillipps said:

Brendan Gonsalves said:

Mark Allen said:

Wait. I just noticed this. How can you say Windows 2000 was a failure?

During its launch many users had problems installing, running, and shutting down the OS. To make matters worse it wasn't very secure. It was almost as bad as Windows 2.0.

You do realize that Windows 2000, and Windows XP are almost the exact same operating system, with a few nuances, right?

Yes.

EDIT: When I was said Windows 2000 was a failure I was referring to Window ME (millennium). I was under the impression they were they same OS. I was wrong.

Re: Re: Are you Vista Ready? No?

Bobby — 2007-04-22T15:36:31-05:00

Brendan Gonsalves said:

Mark Allen said:

Wait. I just noticed this. How can you say Windows 2000 was a failure?

During its launch many users had problems installing, running, and shutting down the OS. To make matters worse it wasn't very secure. It was almost as bad as Windows 2.0.

You do realize that Windows 2000, and Windows XP are almost the exact same operating system, with a few nuances, right?

Re: Re: Are you Vista Ready? No?

Brendan Gonsalves — 2007-04-22T13:02:10-05:00

Mark Allen said:

Wait. I just noticed this. How can you say Windows 2000 was a failure?

During its launch many users had problems installing, running, and shutting down the OS. To make matters worse it wasn't very secure. It was almost as bad as Windows 2.0.

Re: Re: Are you Vista Ready? No?

dark41 — 2007-04-22T09:55:49-05:00

Its all good Sander. Some of us 'get it'.

Judging by most of the posts of people who have not yet tried Vista, the message is getting across loud and clear.

I really enjoy reading your articles and value your opinion. Keep up the good work.

Re: Re: Are you Vista Ready? No?

Sander Sassen — 2007-04-22T08:25:51-05:00

Dark41,

Thanks for your insightful and level-headed reply. I'm frankly getting more than a bit fed up with the other posters in this thread, as they do not represent the average end-user, but do seem to think the world revolves around them.

As is reflected in my Vista columns Vista does not offer enough incentive for the average user to upgrade, for several reasons, furthermore there's quite a few issues with Vista that won't be solved until the first SP is released which won't be before the fourth quarter of 2007. So for the time being I'm not giving Vista my recommendation. Simply because this website is here to inform not the few posters in the forum that got money to spend, or run state-of-the-art PCs, but for the general public as well. The general public is NOT helped by buying Vista, if only to further up the revenues of Microsoft and hardware manufacturers.

So how about we stay on the ball and look at the overall picture, rather than the narrow perspective of a few users in this forum that seem to dominate every Vista topic with their self centered replies.

Best regards,

Re: Re: Are you Vista Ready? No?

dark41 — 2007-04-22T04:57:19-05:00

I agree that Windows 2000 was the most stable (and I'd add fastest) OS MS has ever built. ME was considered a failure by many, including myself.

I don't have to go door to door to see what people are disabling on Vista. The blogs and reviews are all over the internet. I don't really care to play link ping pong so will let each person do their own research. But I will add that of all my research references, only the editor of Windows XP newsletter seems to agree with the Vista lovers on this forum. The problem is that neither she nor the enthusiasts of HWA represent my average customer, and that's where my main focus lies.

I don't believe any of the so called anti-Vista posts have been shot down nor proven wrong. There are obviously a few Vista users who are delighted with the OS. There are also a few Vista users who are much less than impressed. Its all about opinion and yes, personal preference. Neither is right or wrong, and neither will persuade the other that their point of view is correct. What's important is that people get to see both sides before making their buying decisions.

For the record, posts on forums and reviews and blogs aren't likely to change my mind anyway. What may change my mind is a SP that remedies the current problems.

It appears that the majority of people who haven't yet tried Vista are reading the same reviews and blogs that I am, and are not convinced of Vista's worth by the few supporters here and there. The most telling benchmark is what the consumers are purchasing. For all the hours that I've spent trouble-shooting apps and hardware on Vista, we haven't sold a single system with Vista yet. Not one. Nada. I have 8 machines on the floor that will probably be formatted and sold with XP, since that's what the customers want.

Note about the OEM EULA for Vista: All we've ever used is OEM versions of W2k, XP and Vista. My own XP license has been transferred to complete new systems several times and reactivated hundreds of times with each hardware upgrade and format. All of this has been without question by MS, other than making sure its only running on 1 machine at at time. My experience to date with Vista is exactly the same. While the EULA states that it cannot be transferred and the wording leaves in question which hardware components can be changed/upgraded, MS has reactivated Vista for me without a problem.

I appreciate the Dell link. I was aware a week ago that Dell had starting offering XP on their systems again, but not why.

Bottom line is that there are many many 3-7 year old systems still in use throughout the world. These systems can run XP, but not Vista. The motherboards won't support a decent CPU for Vista, the video cards are very hard to upgrade (PCI cards all almost non-existent in AU, and AGP are still quite pricey and also being eliminated from stock) and the RAM is no longer available (and if it is, its much more expensive than the current DDR2 of the same size). People owning one of these older systems are looking at a large investment to upgrade to a Vista compatible system. In many cases, the only viable option is a new system. Many of these people are faced with ditching a machine that serves their needs just fine but would like more speed, in favor an entirely new system which won't run some of their current programs/games/hardware. Sure, Vista is overpriced, but that's less than half of the cost for these people. (Again for the record, our cost for OEM Vista Basic, Premium, and Business are less than XP Home and Pro now, but the retail versions are substantially higher). In the end, it appears most have decided that Vista is not worth this investment. Suits me fine, as I have better things to do than trouble-shoot their problems with Vista.

Re: Re: Are you Vista Ready? No?

DublinGunner — 2007-04-22T01:50:22-05:00

2000 a failure???? Probably the most stable desktop OS they release apart from XP Pro x64 & Server 2003??

Nearly every office worldwide had their machine loaded with Win 2k (and its variants) after NT4, so I really cant see how you came to that conclusion.

BTW, there were 2 years betwen 2k and XP, and 5 between XP & Vista (Vista was launched in 2006)

Here's the fullest timeline I could gather:
1985 Windows 1.01
1986 Windows 1.03
1987 Windows 2.03
1988 Windows 2.1
1990 Windows 3.0
1992 Windows 3.1
1992 Windows For Workgroups 3.1
1993 Microsoft Bob
1993 Windows NT 3.1
1993 Windows For Workgroups 3.11
1994 Windows NT 3.5
1994 Windows NT 3.51
1995 Windows 95
1996 Windows NT 4.0
1998 Windows 98
2000 Windows 2000
2000 Windows Me
2001 Windows XP
2003 Windows Server 2003
2006 Windows Vista

So really, up until Win 2K, there were new OS releases every year, then only 2 years to Win 2k. The largest gap (not including the 64 bit Server Version of XP, Windows 2003 Server) has been 5 years to Vista.

Thats an incredibly long time.

Re: Re: Are you Vista Ready? No?

CrAsHnBuRnXp — 2007-04-22T01:30:02-05:00

Wait. I just noticed this. How can you say Windows 2000 was a failure?