Have mercy on the Less experienced!

[Tepid]

reformating: There are still a lot of people that have no problrm with Vista.

Yes, and I am one of them.

If all you do is go on the internet, get your mail, and perhaps create a few documents or use a couple of proven programs, you will not have a problem. It will do everything you want it to. there is no problem. If you realy want to USE the system to it's fullest extent (Networking, advanced user, Heavy multimedia and streaming), the blue screen of death starts showing up often.

This is Absolutely 100% not True. At all, not even a little bit true.
I do all those things and more and have never, not once, ever had a BSOD because of it. I also, RIP Home Movies from camcorder and build advanced DVD's for the family. I do heavy rendering with TMpeg, VDUB, Audio Converting, Photo Rendering.
I also heavily game on my system with Vista.
And you are absolutely incorrect on your assumptions, which appears to be saying that anyone who tries to do those things is going to experience the same problems you are. Which is not true.

Your system may not be up to the task, but I can assure you that mine very much is and has been since May of 2007.

Who knows.... Maybe it's me messing up....

Yes. It is either you, Or your system just isn't what you thought it was supposed to be. But then a lot of people got ripped by the big OEM's or by trying to self build a system and totally under bought on hardware, or bought junk.

If it makes you feel better, yes, I have had maybe a total of 2 or 3 BSOD's since day one, and they were all my fault. I have not had a single one that was caused by windows in general, or software I have installed. I have had software crash on me, but it was not compatible and I had a feeling it would do so before I started so I knew what to expect. Infact, only that software crashed, and not everything else with it, unlike days of old XP.

I also work with Portable software testing and using. I download and install/uninstall a lot of software just checking it out. I clutter my system pretty good at times.

I have to do clean ups and maintenance (something that most people who complain about their PC's ,, DON'T DO).

I'm sorry, I don't mean to jack this thread, but it needs to be stated that your problems (even if they are reported by many) in windows usually are not windows problems, but user problems. You need to learn how to buy/build a better system and you won't have those problems. Do real regular maintenance with good software. And yes, it is hard to find, determine, there is so much crap out there.

Your generalization of .. (email and web only, don't try and really use your system or beware of BSOD's) is just uncalled for no matter how frustrated you are with YOUR PC. It is YOUR PC, that has the problem. It is NOT a general windows problem.

Don't get me wrong. Vista has some issues, not many, and is a very solid system overall on the right hardware. You obviously (and many others) made poor choices.

As for formatting regularly, No, never had to do it out of need that the system was in peril.
I have however had to do it for other reasons. Mainly cleanup and getting reorganized. And I have only done that a total of maybe 3 times.

I am however, now running Win7 7264 x86 and it still needs some polishing, Runs a bit faster and smoother than Vista in most areas, notably boot up and starting of apps.
Win 7 is another very solid system over all.

*******************

As to the original Topic. I have probably tried using every File manager on the market. And I still come back to Explorer. Vista/7 explorer is much better than XP. Although I do wish is was a bit more powerful.

Copenhagen is where Windows really needs to be at.
Too bad it ain't there yet.

 

[cbleman]

Good for you! It's true, Not everyone has problems with Vista. Just me, and others like me. Large groups of people all having the same or similar problems indicates to me, that there may be an actual problem, or there was a problem when the interface was designed. the latter is why this thread was started. As I said in the original post. perhaps it IS me. It's just that more people I talk to have had frustration with Vista than not. I'm glad you haven’t had problems.
You are also right about user problems. These are also some of the MOST frustrating things; and sometimes NOT the users fault! Have you tried switching from XP to Vista, and setting up a network connection to an FTP client? It's easy! ....If you can find out how to do it. My Network Places disappeared. The most logical place then, to look for a menu item to create a new network connection one would think, is under Network. Nope... Not there. Old menu items and icons disappear for no apparent reason, sometimes to surface buried under an array of options with no, or inadequate documentation. Change is good! ....but there must be a way to keep the re-learning curve down. hence the reason for the thread. It's a plea for KISS, when redesigning the interface. Yes.... I don't like Vista. But that wasn't the original purpose of the thread. Perhaps it was me that got off topic. I was just trying to make a point using Vista, and may have gotten carried away. It dosn't change the fact that people have problems with it; but that's a topic for another thread.
As far as hardware is concerned, Should I have to buy another computer every time a new operating system comes out, or should the new operating system keep (Slightly) older systems in mind. Yes... There is a point where harware is outdated. At what point is that? ....also a topic for another thread.

Running Vista on a new dell laptop, and Win7 on an HP Touchsmart. and XP on a Sony Vio Desktop

 

[Antman]

New Coke

Perception IS reality.

Vista sucked, therefore, it failed. Vista failed, therefore, it sucked.

 

[Tepid]

Perception IS reality.

Vista sucked, therefore, it failed. Vista failed, therefore, it sucked.

Yes, and that is the point,,, among many the perception IS,,,

It's vista, therefore it sucks (i'll try it anyway on my old 4 year old PC without upgrading, or I have to because I need a new PC and it came with it, but I was only willing to spend 300 or 400$ on it, why is it sucking?> and it failed, therefore it sucks even more.

People should know what Minimum and Recommended Requirements means by now.
As all games/software/OS's come with them marked. And should know that the Minimum is to get a picture on screen and may be usable, but realize it will be degraded performance, with Recommended meaning it'll be a bit better, but you know you will need higher specs to make it work fully. And if you have been buying, using software for the last ten years and don't know that, then it is your ignorance that should frustrate you most.

And when it comes to an OS,....
Minimum means, don't install anything else
Recommended means, ok, you can install a few things
Want more, you need to provide more resources
That is the nature of all things computer, and should be well known by now.

*************

As far as hardware is concerned, Should I have to buy another computer every time a new operating system comes out, or should the new operating system keep (Slightly) older systems in mind. Yes... There is a point where harware is outdated. At what point is that? ....also a topic for another thread.

In this case yes, you did, in the case of XP (de ja vu anyone?) yes you did.

Win 7 may run on a bit older system as they have streamlined it a bit more, but once you start loading it down with software (ITunes, Norton 360) and other junk, your system is going to choke.

Software advancements, (provide more functionality, and try to improve performance) but you can't have both. One has got to give. And you may need to add RAM to get a performance boost.

Either you advance or you stagnate. Vista is a huge advance, far more stable than XP has ever been (on the right hardware).

I blame ignorance of many, and the big OEM's for selling underpowered systems.

You get what you pay for, and everyone should know that when it comes to technology.

*********

See here ...

And pay very close attention to....

Additional requirements

Actual requirements and product functionality may vary based on your system configuration. Windows Vista Upgrade Advisor can help you determine which features and edition of Windows Vista will run on your computer.
While all editions of Windows Vista can support multiple core CPUs, only Windows Vista Business, Ultimate, and Enterprise can support dual processors.

 

[Antman]

A tepid response, not.

I purchased Vista, retail, at the same time that I built the system listed in my system specs. I also replaced my existing XP era/class video capture card, TV tuner card, and RAID controller card. I kept my SB X-Fi Platinum - it still performed the single function that I purchased it for.

Vista was pretty to look at. My beautiful wife liked using it much better than XP. To a certain degree, I liked it well enough, but somehow, I felt a bit removed from my hardware. Vista was just "too thick" for me. I dealt with driver issue after driver issue. After about three months, I removed it from my system. I also have several PC techs in my employ, many of them loathe Vista. On the other hand, one in particular sees it much the same way I do - as a revenue stream.

I have no pressing reason to abandon XP for Windows 7. XP does everything I use it for almost perfectly well. There are a few usage tweaks that I like in Vista and Win7, but the functionality of XP remains intact. Like many of the more experienced and truly knowledgeable members here, I am not as affected by some of the security issues as a number of you are. You sleep around, you get the clap.

Here, the OP has asked for mercy - he is due this mercy. The majority of users, likely 99%, are simply using a tool. They have no need or desire to be "computer geeks". They need their desktop to function reliably and completely, and to operate as easily as a telephone, fax machine, copier or coffee pot. It is in the audience where Vista failed. "I can't watch the video my sister sent in email because I need to spend another hundred dollars" is an "epic fail", to borrow a younger vernacular.

For those of us who are the geeks, nerds, and bit heads, the issues, problems and wizardry of our preferred OSes are exactly what they are. Who among you uses a single OS? Have mercy on my customers. They have provided me a nice home and livelihood and they are funding my children's education - the same way you might be funding your plumber's dreams.

BTW, I love Windows 7, insofar as you can love an OS.

 

[cbleman]

"They need their desktop to function reliably and completely, and to operate as easily as a telephone, fax machine, copier or coffee pot. It is in the audience where Vista failed. "I can't watch the video my sister sent in email because I need to spend another hundred dollars" is an "epic fail", to borrow a younger vernacular."


Thank you Antman. If you need to purchase near top of the line equipment to get an OS to run properly, (And I don't think even that would help in my case.) the problem MAY lie with the OS.
I have had ill behaved programs crash and disappear off the screen without taking XP down. I cannot say the same about Vista. I too had driver problems, and other issues.
Vista is pretty to look at, and not everything is bad. ....but it DOES have to work first. If it works for you, GOOD! keep it. This is not a war. Be happy for yourself. Nobody else matters. (Just don't design software with that attitude. hehehe.)
Like Antmans techs, My initial trial of Vista lasted less than 90 days. It just didn't work for me. The only reason I have it on a laptop, is because of waranty threats. Even then; if this OS works out, Vista will disappear.

WIN 7 still needs quite a few tweaks, and polishing, but it looks like it's going to turn out to be a fairly stable OS. Stability and usability are what’s important to me right now. Pretty is low on the list. Cross platform compatibility (Windows) would be nice also. Playing with others is important. I posted the earlier FTP issue on the networking thread also. That seemed a good place for it. I still haven’t heard anything back. I would like to see that fixed, or an explanation of why a fix isn't needed.

I also wonder why I cannot get a folder view with a single picture on the folders (Like in XP) instead of the open folder look with pages sticking out. This is pretty low on the priority list, but if anyone has an answer......

 

[Tepid]

As I said before, it is XP DeJa Vu all over again.

Every single one of the complaints on stability, looks and functionality were all expressed about XP when it first arrived. With all the same resistance to it. Now people can't/refuse to give it up. Almost all of them were fixed with hardware upgrades, namely RAM (for the most part) and Video. And 3rd Party Vendors slowly getting on board with proper drivers, and software. The same holds true with Vista.

Back then, People refused to give up 98SE and Win 2000 for all the same reasons express about Vista and soon, 7.

Back then, "Why can't I run XP on my 386/486 with 64M of ram and all my software?"
When it was found later that 512M was unheard of and the sweet spot.
Oh and today, in XP with newer setups and latest software, 1G is pretty much minimum for RAM if you want XP to run smoothly. So, it is not only the OS that should be taken into account when it comes to functionality/stability, you have to look at all of it as a whole.

What are you running (software wise), how good is the hardware/drivers. Am I providing enough resources? Is this the right OS for me?

Just cause you and other have had problems, doesn't make it the sole fault of the OS.
And refusing to look at all of it as a whole, you are just pointing fingers in the air and saying there's the dark cloud causing all my problems, even if is a 100 miles away, that's what I'm blaming for my problems, regardless of the real reason/s.

 

[Antman]

You may well be the most experienced and brilliant tech on staff, but we are running a business. The customer comes first. While you are correct, for the most part, in the whole of your argument, you are not progressing in the discussion. For refusing to see the big picture while insisting that you are focused on it, Tepid, you're fired.

 

[cbleman]

Yes, Tepid, you are correct. XP did meet resistance, and did need post production tweaks. These I believe however were ironed out within 24 months.

BTB.... How long has vista been around?

 

[fseal]

28 months? And with Vista SP3 (Windows 7) it's good to go right?

I've been usig Vista since day one, before actually since RTM. I like the improvements to the UI and the small tweaks here and there in W7 a lot. But I have always loved Vista, it is a major improvement over XP in nearly every way. But frankly, W7 still has virtually every "problem" that made Vista "Suck".

Vista did not suck, but simple things like changing the name of the "Add/Remove" prgrams control panel to "Programs and settings" is enough to send some people into hysterics. I've whitnesed it live.

The only REAL difference in launching Vista and W7 is that 2.5 years out, enough hardware manufaturers have gotten on the ball with the new driver model that the initial hardware incompatibilities with W7 will be lower. But there are some Vista drivers that do not install on 7 due to poor installers Arg! All the UI changes that made people cringe are still there and even "worse" as far as the people that think Vista "Sucked" goes. As cool as the new task bar is, when released I expect a HUGE backlash against it

So yes, "impression is everything" and Vista's impression went south fast because of the jarring changes from XP coupled with unfortunate hardware incompatibilites because so many companies (HB, SB, etc) didn't take Vista seriously till it was too late. We can only hope that Vista has softned the blow by now and that W7 gets a fair chance by the mass public this time around. Frankly though, I'm not optimistic.

 

[Tepid]

Fseal I agree.

As for the customer always being right. Well, that is not always true. And if the budget doesn't call for it, then you don't give them what they can't afford.

But that doesn't make Vista horrible by whatever perceived notion there may be.

Just because it's new and someone wants it, doesn't mean they can afford it or have it.
We might all be using Mac instead by many peoples perception of that OS. You have to know your product, which a lot of people think they do, but don't. I am not saying I know everything, I don't. And I am not suggesting that no one else knows or doesn't know anything. I am sure there are a lot of people here that know more than I do. But I know enough to know what will make things work, and I know how to tell a customer what they can get for what they can afford.

I'm sorry, I'm a pretty straight shooter when it comes to this stuff. Am I wrong sometimes, absolutely, and I can admit it. But I am not going to just side with someone cause I want their business either. I want my customers to trust that I am giving them best they can afford to have. And if that gets me fired, then so be it. I don't want to work there.

And if Vista/7 isn't it, then they get XP, or whatever.

As for the changes in Vista, well, once you get use to them, Most of them, not all, are better than they are in XP.

 

[cbleman]

Fseal: An intelligent, and well thought out response. (although I don't think you will change peoples mind about Vista.) One would hope that the driver problems in Vista will be ironed out in 7. Why were the "Jaring changes" made in the first place. We can never go back to a lot of the XP names because of Vista. Then the people who "Cut Their Teeth" on Vista will scream. Things like that name change you mentioned don't seem to have a reason for the change. It doesn’t help one bit and hinders a lot. and that's just a minor one! It's the main reason I started this thread. Changes were made, and in my personal opinion, nobody really cared about, or thought what the people who had to USE the OS would think; or what kind of havoc it would cause when the things they used all the time disappeared. (If you can't find it, it's still gone!) I am all for change if it helps the overall product, but I think someone just thought it would look better. Earlier in this thread, the up arrow in the browser was mentioned. Millions of people USED that arrow. I still think it needs to be brought back, but during the discussion there actually was a reasoned excuse for removing it. To bad the people who rely on that arrow had no way to know what that reason was. Even then, what kind of trouble would it be to bring it back, and help out the people who used it. Why make things hard for no reason. Please..... Developers..... Keep the users in mind when you do something and have mercy on us all.

 

[Tepid]

alot of the changes made were for the better. There are explanations out on the net.
Alot of the changes are (once you re-learne) more productive. Some unfortunately aren't. My main rant is about people complaining about it's stability when Vista actually is the most stable and secure MS OS to date.

Some of the underlying changes (in my opinion) were to throw off all the old virus/malware attacks. Some of the more well designed still manage to exist, and that brings up UAC. Not the best implementation I know, and the controversy on that rampages through many a thread and debate. But it is still useful and informative, and I always knew there would come a time that it would be circumvented. But I am getting into something else deep. So I digress.

Maybe I do come off as harsh at times, and I don't always explain myself in the best way, but it is really passion about people making accusastions where none should exist, for reasons they don't fully understand.

All that does is feed the anti-MS semitism. Vista may not be perfect but it is far better than XP. And 7 is even better (could have probably been a service pack, but who knows). And when many who don’t know that Vista is actually better than they experience due to all the reasons I mentioned before, then they are being sold short.

It may come across as fanboyism, it’s not, I have plenty of complaints about MS. But I like the OS, and it should get a fair chance to be as good as it can be.

There are a lot of reasons for the way Vista is/was, and most of them came from complaints about how things were done in XP. Well, some of those things just didn’t pan out properly for whatever reason. But it doesn't take away from the fact that Vista is actually a very stable OS. Anyway.

 

[fseal]

Yeah the missing up one level arrow button is a great example of how vista/w7 is lightyears ahead of XP UI wise, but the mere change has people freaked out.

The up directory button was removed because that very functionality was put into the navigable address bar. Not only can you go up one level but two or three or even off onto a branch if you want. It requires exactly the same mouse movement and button click, but you can do 10 times more with the navigable address bar than the up arrow button.

But... the question is, does any "normal" daily windows user care? It's so hard to please the simple/casual user and the enthusiast user at the same time.

I wonder if "Microsoft Bob" might not make a comeback at some point. I.e. an "XP Mode" UI. They did that for XP (Win2k mode UI) because of virtually nothing more than the color changes in the UI :/

I wonder if that was from early feedback or a higher level of paranoia inside MS about the (by todays standards) relatively subtle changes to the UI?

 

[Antman]

Oh, it's you Bob

Where did the Up Arrow go? Windows 7 sucks.
:sarc:

 

[cbleman]

hehehe I don't think something minor like an up arrow or renaming add/remove programs is going to be a major deterant to Win 7. These things are examples, and very minor. Sweeping changes with no ryme or reason though, bother me It's true you can't please everyone. I have mixed feelings about bread crumbs. Thats one function I feel I will like if I get used to it.
The FTP item I mentioned is a major hit for me though. It's easy! Finding out how to do it isn't. Why should people have to research how to do something they had been doing for years. Was there realy an improvment or reason to hide that menu option?

 

[noyb]

Things are missing in Vista and Win 7 that were in XP.... Make it work - Make it easy - Keep the re-learning curve down. - Unless it's a fix, why make things hard?

Also missing in action since XP ..
The ability to customize the R Click context menus for specific file types.
The ability to make a new task bar and park it on any edge of your screen(s)
Vista and W7 has forgot there’s a difference in the display of (and the purpose for) Icons and Thumbnails.
Mail and Windows Movie Maker has been removed .. Not sure I like the M$ replacements.
Defrag still doesn’t work.

But it’s pretty, has some nice Gadgets and Toys built in ... What more do you want ??
I’m thinking it looks more like my Gson’s Toy box ... As compared to my Tool box.
I can’t figure out what M$’s Plan is ... Besides making money.

 

[system001]

This is the reasons why microsoft releases beta versions, so that we could observe the transitions and can test it know it.

come on most of know that with the advent of xp microsoft has been slowly setting the os up to only work the way they want it to. they have made it harder to customize 7, they have removed "restore previous folders at logon, you disable the navigation pane in one folder and win 7 makes it universal across all folder, i personally did not need nor do not need the added steps to get my systray icon to display the way i want the, cannot hide the action flag, cannot hide the speaker icon, do not need libraries or homegroup on my desktop, regardless of the claims no real improvement with ie8 over ie7, etc...

as far as i am concerned win 7 is nothing more than vista sp2. the only thing in it that makes it standout is the touch screen features. i have preordered the home premium version only because it is only $50 preordered. i have stated in this forum and others that as far as i am concerned win 7 is worth no more than $60, and this is only because of the touch screen features.

explorer is an extremely limited file manager. if you want something that is actually useful, get a 3rd party app like Directory Opus. 90% of its GUI is customizable, and it will give you full control over how you operate. plus, it offers hundreds more features than explorer.

it's not cheap, but like they say, you get what you pay for...

agreed, i have been waiting since win 98 for windows explorer to grow up. i am very big on windows over macs, however the first time i used their finder i was truly jealous. now yesterday i found path finder Path Finder 5 by Cocoatech for osx. i wish someone would do something like this for windows. i use to be able to open my movies folder expand it to full screen set it for thumbnail view and see thumbnails of my movies all the way across my screen without the navigation pane on the left-side. try to do that in vista or 7 and it is going to happen. in 7 if you hide the navigation pane in one folder 7 makes it universal across all folders.

microsoft needs to learn that when we pay for their os regardless of what the click through eula says we own that copy and we do and will tweak it the way we want.

 

[Antman]

I spent $75 on lunch today. I got something of value.

A couple of the most recent posts here reflect a lack of familiarity with the operating system.

FUD for thought.

 

[system001]

As I said before, it is XP DeJa Vu all over again.

Every single one of the complaints on stability, looks and functionality were all expressed about XP when it first arrived. With all the same resistance to it. Now people can't/refuse to give it up. Almost all of them were fixed with hardware upgrades, namely RAM (for the most part) and Video. And 3rd Party Vendors slowly getting on board with proper drivers, and software. The same holds true with Vista.

Back then, People refused to give up 98SE and Win 2000 for all the same reasons express about Vista and soon, 7.

Back then, "Why can't I run XP on my 386/486 with 64M of ram and all my software?"
When it was found later that 512M was unheard of and the sweet spot.
Oh and today, in XP with newer setups and latest software, 1G is pretty much minimum for RAM if you want XP to run smoothly. So, it is not only the OS that should be taken into account when it comes to functionality/stability, you have to look at all of it as a whole.

What are you running (software wise), how good is the hardware/drivers. Am I providing enough resources? Is this the right OS for me?

Just cause you and other have had problems, doesn't make it the sole fault of the OS.
And refusing to look at all of it as a whole, you are just pointing fingers in the air and saying there's the dark cloud causing all my problems, even if is a 100 miles away, that's what I'm blaming for my problems, regardless of the real reason/s.

try again. what people complained about xp was not its stability, rather that it had a extremely high learning curve versus 98 and the fact that the ui looked more like something a child through together. vista pre sp1 was a nightmare. post sp1 it ran great.