A
Alan
Guest
Re: I'm so tired of this...
On Dec 2, 9:14 am, Charlie Tame <char...@tames.net> wrote:
> See below :-
>
>
>
>
>
> Patrick Annette wrote:
> > Dave Harris wrote:
> >> I have never witnessed so many Windows Vista haters all in one
> >> newsgroup. I agree that Vista is much more difficult to install than
> >> prior versions of Windows. But, even the moderately capable computer
> >> user can install it with much less hassles if they bothered to prepare
> >> their computer by installing the Windows Vista Upgrade Advisor and
> >> conducted a little research before attempting an upgrade.
>
> >> For the Vista haters or those who simply don't know what they're
> >> doing, I have three suggestions: (1) keep your Windows XP; (2) take
> >> your computer to a professional and have them install Vista; or, (3)
> >> go buy a Mac! It's much easier to upgrade OS X.than it is to upgrade
> >> to Windows Vista.
>
> >> Stop the hatin' and feel the love for Windows Vista!
>
> > Seems like running the Upgrade Advisor would tell you what you need to
> > know before upgrading. Of course the originator of this thread bought a
> > new laptop with Vista, so that's hardly at issue for him.
>
> > In my case the computer was about a year old with dual core Athlon, 2 GB
> > memory, and two nVidia 7600GT video cards, each of which had been
> > assigned its own IRQ in the device manager. I was happy with the XP
> > Media Center which was running with two monitors each driven by its own
> > video card, one for the desktop, the other (32" HDTV monitor) for the
> > Media Center program. I only wanted to use Vista because a friend
> > needed help with his new computer with Vista. So I ran the upgrade
> > advisor, and carefully studied the results. The only problem indicated
> > was that I would need a new driver for my Ralink wireless card. I'm the
> > cautious type and made sure I had a full recoverable backup of XP using
> > Acronis 9.0, a bootable recovery CD for Acronis, and all the necessary
> > files, particularly the wireless driver, but also various program
> > installation files.
>
> > The installation took several tries to get what I wanted, and was rather
> > painful, but I was always sure it would work eventually. And finally
> > Vista was in place and seemed to be working. Then I tried the Media
> > Center. There was no picture at all on the TV. It took me awhile to
> > figure out that the second video card was not working, and the device
> > manager said the device could not find enough resources (paraphrasing).
> > Wait a minute, I thought, surely the device doesn't find resources, the
> > OS works with the BIOS to assign them. Basically it was saying there
> > were not enough available IRQs. I tried disabling in the BIOS all
> > unessential devices that would use an IRQ, like floppy disk controller,
> > LPT ports etc. Still the same problem, no IRQ assigned to the second
> > video card.
>
> > I opened a ticket with MS, and spent an ungodly number of hours talking
> > to "technicians" in India, over the next few weeks (April 19 to May 15).
> > They had me repeat (several times) all the things I had already tried
> > and were always sure to tell me that they were definitely going to solve
> > my issue (never the word "problem" to be used). They were very
> > persistent, and toward the end they were calling at 10 PM, rather than
> > my requested 9 to 10 AM. I finally had to tell them that I did not want
> > to work with them anymore because it was taking too much of my time and
> > that I was giving up on installing Vista on this computer. SOmeone on a
> > message board claimed to have contacts inside MS who had told him that
> > this was not a Vista problem, it was a problem with the BIOS, and the
> > motherboard manufacturer should provide a BIOS upgrade. Funny, it
> > worked with XP but somehow the BIOS failed with Vista.
>
> > This is obviously something that could have worked, because it did work
> > with XP before I installed Vista, and now works again with XP after I
> > got rid of Vista. Somehow Microsoft botched the resource allocation for
> > this particular motherboard/chipset. I know this feature works for
> > some computers with two video cards, but not this particular one under
> > Vista. So, is the Upgrade Advisor adequate? No, i don't think so. If
> > XP could handle the resource allocation, Vista should have been able to
> > also; if Vista could not handle it, the Upgrade Advisor should have told
> > me so.
>
> > Am I a Vista hater? Not really. After the debacle above, I purchased a
> > HP laptop with Vista, and am getting fairly comfortable with the OS.
> > Remote Assistance works like a charm. Vista doesn't seem like a great
> > leap forward, but it's OK. We wouldn't want to see Microsoft go broke,
> > so they have to put out a successful OS every few years. By definition,
> > Vista is the current success.
>
> > Patrick in Walla Walla
>
> Well said Patrick. The upgrade advisor is not much use to some people,
> seems like that may be rather a lot of people, although what percentage
> that is we don't know as we tend to only see the complaints.
>
> Both my 7950 cards worked, but not as well as with XP, to keep it short
> when I switched from XP to Vista I had to get under the desk and swap
> connectors. Don't recall exactly but of the 4 possible video connectors
> I could only use 2 to get the resolution I needed, and these were not
> the same 2 for Vista
>
> Add to this that enabling SLI mode trashed the lot and oh well. In fact
> I decided SLI gave no useful improvement so used on card for something
> else, and since have found Vista okay with dual displays. Of course
> drivers have changed too.
>
> What irritated me though was not so much Vista, sure I think a lot of
> things got changed just to make it look different, and I think UAC is
> far less a security measure than it is pretending to be, but the major
> irritation was that the various responses users with problems got here
> amounted to :-
>
> It's not Vista it's the hardware makers...
> It's not Vista it's other software...
> It's not Vista you are an idiot...
> It's not Vista your hardware is not up to it and you should have known...
>
> Now, I try to take the view the ordinary user sees when he she goes into
> CompUSA etc any in good faith buys the latest and greatest and installs
> it, often destroying his / her chances of easily getting back. Many have
> no recovery plan, Vista claims to be preserving things (But doesn't
> really want that this is very risky) and users end up discovering the
> hard way that a hell of a lot of things they are used to plain do not work.
>
> There are a number of things that irritate, for example some networking
> functions go slow or stop because the default is a new technology that
> doesn't match what users likely already have. (It tries to self adjust
> throughput). Related is the fact that I bought brand new network cards
> which had no compatible drivers despite saying so on the box, something
> evidently changed between the retail release and the production of those
> cards.
>
> These were just a "Nuisance" to me, and to many of the "Hobbyists" and
> "Enthusiasts) here (And I do not mean that disrespectfully but if you
> come here willing to answer questions without pay you do it as a hobby
> regardless of your real skills which may be considerable) and there
> seemed to be a total lack of understanding or even contempt for ordinary
> people who really just want to use the darned thing and by the time they
> get here are, shall we say, more than a little pissed off with it all.
>
> I happen to believe that all criticism can be constructive, even if it
> not meant to be, the value comes from how it is taken, not how it is
> given, and all the complainers, even those ranting have one thing in
> common, they are CUSTOMERS.
>
> I think my biggest complaint is WGA / WPA and the fact that contrary to
> statements mad when WGA was introduced (that were not wrong but
> misleading) the combination has become a "Kill Switch". Frankly I could
> stand the warnings, even defended Microsoft's right to do this, but
> having been shut down a few times now for trivial reasons (latest being
> a device driver that Windows Update installed ?????) fine, if MS want to
> insist that it is a stolen copy and make me jump through hoops to
> "Prove" that it isn't I will keep my options open by other means.
>
> All companies have to "Tolerate" an amount of theft. It is wrong, it is
> unlawful, but if you kept getting nailed by Wal-Mart's security devices
> my bet is that eventually you would nitpick everything Wal-Mart does and
> eventually shop elsewhere. Generating a bad reputation if not what
> Wal-Mart wants so they don't strip search their customers as the exit
> the store. Seems like the RIAA and MS both think they can get away with
> this because it is not Physical.
>
> But I do think that complaints and problems need to be acknowledged
> rather than denied, it is obvious that there will be some problems with
> Vista, no project that big can avoid them.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I own a Dell Latitude D830 it came with vista business. I originally
bought a different one but motherboard was bad so dell replaced entire
system as it was only 2 weeks old. my first one came with good old xp
they screwed up and sent this one with vista. I own my own computer
repair shop. (albeit a small one) it still is my livelihood. and a
good one. i know desktop and hardware very well. heck its all i do
all day every day. Vista is full of interesting eye candy but really
from a functional point of view a step backwards just like winme was.
i am very much into fps games and right now am playing Bioshock. on my
original D830 it ran fine. specs on both are as follows intel T7400
dual core 2.2 ghz. 4 gig of pc2-667 mhz ram. 120 gig sata2 hdd (7200
rpm) Nvidia nvs 140 video card with total onboard and shared system
memory of 2578 meg. however, on vista bioshock refuses to run at all
as does quake3 unreal tournament and many many other games. According
to vista my Video driver is to old and my video card is outdated. well
lets see this system was built 6-9-07 that doesnt seem to me to be
very old. hmmm works with xp but vista says no good lets see hmm is it
a vista issue or a computer hardware issue??? well common sense says
that if it works with xp and vista is supposed to be SO MUCH BETTER it
should work with vista right?? well it doesnt. so it must be a vista
problem. no, not an issue a PROBLEM. as with many other PROBLEMS. with
vista. come on now give us a break vista is just like windows
milleniium was a piece of junk. i was one of the original beta testers
of vista and when ms took out the winfs file system vista went from
being pretty sweet to just another piece of millenium garbage. that is
my thoughts on this ****?? did anyone notice that i never once used
the word hate in this statement? just stated the facts well part of
them it would take too long to state all the problems.
Alan
On Dec 2, 9:14 am, Charlie Tame <char...@tames.net> wrote:
> See below :-
>
>
>
>
>
> Patrick Annette wrote:
> > Dave Harris wrote:
> >> I have never witnessed so many Windows Vista haters all in one
> >> newsgroup. I agree that Vista is much more difficult to install than
> >> prior versions of Windows. But, even the moderately capable computer
> >> user can install it with much less hassles if they bothered to prepare
> >> their computer by installing the Windows Vista Upgrade Advisor and
> >> conducted a little research before attempting an upgrade.
>
> >> For the Vista haters or those who simply don't know what they're
> >> doing, I have three suggestions: (1) keep your Windows XP; (2) take
> >> your computer to a professional and have them install Vista; or, (3)
> >> go buy a Mac! It's much easier to upgrade OS X.than it is to upgrade
> >> to Windows Vista.
>
> >> Stop the hatin' and feel the love for Windows Vista!
>
> > Seems like running the Upgrade Advisor would tell you what you need to
> > know before upgrading. Of course the originator of this thread bought a
> > new laptop with Vista, so that's hardly at issue for him.
>
> > In my case the computer was about a year old with dual core Athlon, 2 GB
> > memory, and two nVidia 7600GT video cards, each of which had been
> > assigned its own IRQ in the device manager. I was happy with the XP
> > Media Center which was running with two monitors each driven by its own
> > video card, one for the desktop, the other (32" HDTV monitor) for the
> > Media Center program. I only wanted to use Vista because a friend
> > needed help with his new computer with Vista. So I ran the upgrade
> > advisor, and carefully studied the results. The only problem indicated
> > was that I would need a new driver for my Ralink wireless card. I'm the
> > cautious type and made sure I had a full recoverable backup of XP using
> > Acronis 9.0, a bootable recovery CD for Acronis, and all the necessary
> > files, particularly the wireless driver, but also various program
> > installation files.
>
> > The installation took several tries to get what I wanted, and was rather
> > painful, but I was always sure it would work eventually. And finally
> > Vista was in place and seemed to be working. Then I tried the Media
> > Center. There was no picture at all on the TV. It took me awhile to
> > figure out that the second video card was not working, and the device
> > manager said the device could not find enough resources (paraphrasing).
> > Wait a minute, I thought, surely the device doesn't find resources, the
> > OS works with the BIOS to assign them. Basically it was saying there
> > were not enough available IRQs. I tried disabling in the BIOS all
> > unessential devices that would use an IRQ, like floppy disk controller,
> > LPT ports etc. Still the same problem, no IRQ assigned to the second
> > video card.
>
> > I opened a ticket with MS, and spent an ungodly number of hours talking
> > to "technicians" in India, over the next few weeks (April 19 to May 15).
> > They had me repeat (several times) all the things I had already tried
> > and were always sure to tell me that they were definitely going to solve
> > my issue (never the word "problem" to be used). They were very
> > persistent, and toward the end they were calling at 10 PM, rather than
> > my requested 9 to 10 AM. I finally had to tell them that I did not want
> > to work with them anymore because it was taking too much of my time and
> > that I was giving up on installing Vista on this computer. SOmeone on a
> > message board claimed to have contacts inside MS who had told him that
> > this was not a Vista problem, it was a problem with the BIOS, and the
> > motherboard manufacturer should provide a BIOS upgrade. Funny, it
> > worked with XP but somehow the BIOS failed with Vista.
>
> > This is obviously something that could have worked, because it did work
> > with XP before I installed Vista, and now works again with XP after I
> > got rid of Vista. Somehow Microsoft botched the resource allocation for
> > this particular motherboard/chipset. I know this feature works for
> > some computers with two video cards, but not this particular one under
> > Vista. So, is the Upgrade Advisor adequate? No, i don't think so. If
> > XP could handle the resource allocation, Vista should have been able to
> > also; if Vista could not handle it, the Upgrade Advisor should have told
> > me so.
>
> > Am I a Vista hater? Not really. After the debacle above, I purchased a
> > HP laptop with Vista, and am getting fairly comfortable with the OS.
> > Remote Assistance works like a charm. Vista doesn't seem like a great
> > leap forward, but it's OK. We wouldn't want to see Microsoft go broke,
> > so they have to put out a successful OS every few years. By definition,
> > Vista is the current success.
>
> > Patrick in Walla Walla
>
> Well said Patrick. The upgrade advisor is not much use to some people,
> seems like that may be rather a lot of people, although what percentage
> that is we don't know as we tend to only see the complaints.
>
> Both my 7950 cards worked, but not as well as with XP, to keep it short
> when I switched from XP to Vista I had to get under the desk and swap
> connectors. Don't recall exactly but of the 4 possible video connectors
> I could only use 2 to get the resolution I needed, and these were not
> the same 2 for Vista
>
> Add to this that enabling SLI mode trashed the lot and oh well. In fact
> I decided SLI gave no useful improvement so used on card for something
> else, and since have found Vista okay with dual displays. Of course
> drivers have changed too.
>
> What irritated me though was not so much Vista, sure I think a lot of
> things got changed just to make it look different, and I think UAC is
> far less a security measure than it is pretending to be, but the major
> irritation was that the various responses users with problems got here
> amounted to :-
>
> It's not Vista it's the hardware makers...
> It's not Vista it's other software...
> It's not Vista you are an idiot...
> It's not Vista your hardware is not up to it and you should have known...
>
> Now, I try to take the view the ordinary user sees when he she goes into
> CompUSA etc any in good faith buys the latest and greatest and installs
> it, often destroying his / her chances of easily getting back. Many have
> no recovery plan, Vista claims to be preserving things (But doesn't
> really want that this is very risky) and users end up discovering the
> hard way that a hell of a lot of things they are used to plain do not work.
>
> There are a number of things that irritate, for example some networking
> functions go slow or stop because the default is a new technology that
> doesn't match what users likely already have. (It tries to self adjust
> throughput). Related is the fact that I bought brand new network cards
> which had no compatible drivers despite saying so on the box, something
> evidently changed between the retail release and the production of those
> cards.
>
> These were just a "Nuisance" to me, and to many of the "Hobbyists" and
> "Enthusiasts) here (And I do not mean that disrespectfully but if you
> come here willing to answer questions without pay you do it as a hobby
> regardless of your real skills which may be considerable) and there
> seemed to be a total lack of understanding or even contempt for ordinary
> people who really just want to use the darned thing and by the time they
> get here are, shall we say, more than a little pissed off with it all.
>
> I happen to believe that all criticism can be constructive, even if it
> not meant to be, the value comes from how it is taken, not how it is
> given, and all the complainers, even those ranting have one thing in
> common, they are CUSTOMERS.
>
> I think my biggest complaint is WGA / WPA and the fact that contrary to
> statements mad when WGA was introduced (that were not wrong but
> misleading) the combination has become a "Kill Switch". Frankly I could
> stand the warnings, even defended Microsoft's right to do this, but
> having been shut down a few times now for trivial reasons (latest being
> a device driver that Windows Update installed ?????) fine, if MS want to
> insist that it is a stolen copy and make me jump through hoops to
> "Prove" that it isn't I will keep my options open by other means.
>
> All companies have to "Tolerate" an amount of theft. It is wrong, it is
> unlawful, but if you kept getting nailed by Wal-Mart's security devices
> my bet is that eventually you would nitpick everything Wal-Mart does and
> eventually shop elsewhere. Generating a bad reputation if not what
> Wal-Mart wants so they don't strip search their customers as the exit
> the store. Seems like the RIAA and MS both think they can get away with
> this because it is not Physical.
>
> But I do think that complaints and problems need to be acknowledged
> rather than denied, it is obvious that there will be some problems with
> Vista, no project that big can avoid them.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I own a Dell Latitude D830 it came with vista business. I originally
bought a different one but motherboard was bad so dell replaced entire
system as it was only 2 weeks old. my first one came with good old xp
they screwed up and sent this one with vista. I own my own computer
repair shop. (albeit a small one) it still is my livelihood. and a
good one. i know desktop and hardware very well. heck its all i do
all day every day. Vista is full of interesting eye candy but really
from a functional point of view a step backwards just like winme was.
i am very much into fps games and right now am playing Bioshock. on my
original D830 it ran fine. specs on both are as follows intel T7400
dual core 2.2 ghz. 4 gig of pc2-667 mhz ram. 120 gig sata2 hdd (7200
rpm) Nvidia nvs 140 video card with total onboard and shared system
memory of 2578 meg. however, on vista bioshock refuses to run at all
as does quake3 unreal tournament and many many other games. According
to vista my Video driver is to old and my video card is outdated. well
lets see this system was built 6-9-07 that doesnt seem to me to be
very old. hmmm works with xp but vista says no good lets see hmm is it
a vista issue or a computer hardware issue??? well common sense says
that if it works with xp and vista is supposed to be SO MUCH BETTER it
should work with vista right?? well it doesnt. so it must be a vista
problem. no, not an issue a PROBLEM. as with many other PROBLEMS. with
vista. come on now give us a break vista is just like windows
milleniium was a piece of junk. i was one of the original beta testers
of vista and when ms took out the winfs file system vista went from
being pretty sweet to just another piece of millenium garbage. that is
my thoughts on this ****?? did anyone notice that i never once used
the word hate in this statement? just stated the facts well part of
them it would take too long to state all the problems.
Alan
