http://www.windowssecrets.com/2008/10/09/02-Bugs-and-lack-of-apps-plague-64-bit-users
now do you think windows 7 be ok.
Vista-Bugs-and-lack-of-apps-plague-64-bit-users
(14 posts) (8 voices)-
Anonymous
UnregisteredThe only reason I am not using 64 bit HP o.e.m. is because M$ could not be bothered
to write 64 bit drivers for their own finger print reader.Also windowwasher doesn't work on 64 bit Vista also.
Otherwise I would love to be able to exhaust my 64 bit AMD processor.
Posted 16 years ago # -
hotdoge3 everyday you write something negative about microsoft. When I first got to the forums it was always about Vista and now your attention is shifting to windows 7. I see you post links to people's opinions about it, but never see anything having to do with your own personal experience.
For someone to take such a resolve against MS they would have to be getting paid. I don't even listen to the rhetoric anymore, but I am curious as to who is paying you.
Unfortunately, I can't find the post I was wanting, but I will continue to search. This one will do till then.
http://www.mpdailyfix.com/2006/12/paid_blog_review_services_the.htmlPeople who read this, don't buy this hog wash that gets spewed out everyday. I am buy no means a MS fan, but to start criticizing a program that hasn't even been released is to much. MS gives out the OS to developers is so they can make drivers for their hardware or software. As for hardware not working on vista before hand has mostly been resolved now, but it wasn't MS fault, it was the programmers and developers of the hardware being lazy and either not writing the programs or or not writing them properly. So what does MS do, they write their own programs for hardware and software, which is how you can download drivers for them from MS. There are thousands of printers and cameras and other such devices and I personally think MS has done an excellent job at keeping up. Yes, some companies do write their for the update process, but those are the reputable ones.
Do ya'll know that there are over 40 billion lines of code in the windows 7 OS + Vista. To make a change OS isn't as simple as a patch, programs work together and making a change to one effects everything else.
http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/forums/index.cfm?action=showthread&threadid=339020&forumid=23
http://www.itwire.com/content/view/20545/1103/
http://blogs.technet.com/vytas/archive/2008/06/28/another-vista-post-good-bye-xp.aspx
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1931913,00.asp
http://blog.miccas.net/
On the this last one, they give stats that 89% of vista users are satisfied with it.You can't try something out that is as big as an OS for a day or two and make an informed decision about it. I have a Vista Ultimate 64bit, Vista Ultimate 32 bit, Vista 32bit, did have XP pro(still have disc), Xp Home, Ubuntu Server, and Mythbuntu. I enjoy all of the OS, but I am on the 64bit the most. I am the xp the least, in fact hardly ever. I did like most, not like vista at the beginning, but after you learn to use it, it is far superior to xp and far more stable. The stories you here about bsod and compatibility, isn't MS fault, again it is the lazy programmers fault for not making the drivers properly. I could keep going, but I think my point is made.
Don't just criticize to criticize, say something informative that is based off of experience. I know a guy that is testing windows 7 and all his software worked on it, some had a few glitches. That's not to bad for an OS thats what 2 years from being released.read the comments made here from a negative article about windows 7,esp. techiexp's, he explains it in detail http://forums.pcworld.com/message/152320#152320
Lee, yours problem is an exception, there is no excuse for MS not having a 64bit driver for it, especially when they push the 64bit systems more than the 32bit. The 32bit driver should work though, the drivers for 32bit systems work on 64bit, it just doesn't work the other way around.64itdrivers on a 32bit system won't work.
I think I am going to copy and paste in the negative posts about MS ever day I see one on this site,unless it is constructive. shame I am not getting paid to post to.
I thought this site was suppose to be about free software or getting help about software, not MS bashing.Posted 16 years ago # -
my_name_is_brad
Memberwell said tx. Vista has its bugs. I don't think anyone would argue otherwise. It's the nature of the beast though. You can only patch and update an OS for so long before some serious rewrites are in order, and that introduces growing pains.
We saw the same ruckus when win 95 was introduced, then again when more or less every version after 98 was released. Sometimes things work, and sometimes they don't. Speaking as a developer, I can tell you that no matter how much testing you do on any project, you can never account for the myriad of configurations that will be presented by users.
The biggest problem is system requirements, but people need to be realistic. No one in their right mind would develop an OS that is optimized for current technology. It takes several years to recoup the development budget, so of course the OS will have higher resource requirements. It's built for the technology coming, not the technology that exists. Anyone that says Windows 7 will be any different is fooling themselves.
I'm no fan of MS, but I really don't hate them either. It just kills me that folks are so quick to judge.
Posted 16 years ago # -
I tried typing out why MS did what they did with xp and making people upgrade their computers to run Vista, but its not worth it. People are going to think what they want anyway. Here's a car analogy, Why would you want to put the engine of 2009 porsche in a 88 ford taurus or how about the electronic system of 2008 vette on a 86 vette if it could work. You wouldn't, so why would your computer be any different.
Nobody wants to buy new software and hardware, but for sake of progress people, it is time to move on.
On a programming lvl, not having to make software backwards compatible would not only make your computers faster, but let you have better more efficient software. This all goes a little deeper than I am able to coherently explain, but it is the gist of it.My_name_is_, I couldn't even begin to fathom the difficulties involved in programming.
I sympathize with the small companies or small time programmers having to write for two different systems. I think I'm thinking of it correctly. I'm not sure how it works, do you design it for the new system and then try to apply legacy programming.It is the big companies being lazy that irk me. Brother,canon, and other printer companies that diddled around when in the beginning of vista that helped in the cause of Vista blame. Heck,there is still a lack of 64bit xp drivers from what I understand.
My only real programming comes from back when I was teen playing on my TI 99/4a, spending hours just to make a ball bounce across a screen. Even though this is basic programming code, it has helped me to understand the issues that you guys have gone through over the years. Other than that, I toy with Lua and a tad bit in html, but its just for games. I have never wrote my own though.
Posted 16 years ago # -
Archangel
MemberI purchased a new notebook about a month ago with Vista. As already stated, you have to get use to it but I have yet to find a bug...................
Personally I liked 2000 Pro the best but later on using XP Pro, well I began to like it as much if not alittle better. LOL
Its just a growing thing from DOS to Windows Vista and soon 7.
Posted 16 years ago # -
Hello all!
I just don't understand why anyone would want/need to upgrade from 2000/XP - are there things out that XP can't handle? I don't need the "pretty" GUI.
I bought a laptop with Vista and found it dreadfully sluggish compared with XP, so I wiped it clean and installed XP - it flies...
If they release something BETTER though I would gladly upgrade.Just my 2 pence.
Posted 16 years ago # -
Rezidue - I would guess that your laptop may have done better with a more memory. Not to long ago I upgraded from 512mb to 1 gig of ram just to run XP. I would assume that Vista is also a resource hog.
My problem is that I can't afford to upgrade as fast as the technology does. I run a hand me down computer with a 1.7GHz Celeron CPU. I was, just a few weeks ago, able to upgrade to a 128meg video card because they are now under $40. I am sure I could get Vista cheap because I have a relative that works for MS but I don't know how my system would handle it. I also don't see the need when XP works great for me. If it ain't broke, why fix it?
Posted 16 years ago # -
There is nothing wrong with 2000,ME, or 98. I have an old laptop with keys missing on the keyboard with 98 on it. I let nieces and my daughter play with it. Don't ask me why they would rather use a an old laptop than a newer system, guess its being able to carry it around. They love it though. The old win 98 laptop actually smokes xp on boot and the xp is on a amd 5000+ ddr2 1066 system. I personally didn't care 2000 or ME,even less for ME, and skipped right to xp. I'm not going to bash them though, cause I didn't take the time to learn them, I could have ended up liking them more than 98 if would have given them a chance.
Its really just a matter of preference. As for Windows 7 from what I hear, it is suppose to be pretty sweet and its not Vista with a memory cut.
They just used the kernal from it to build windows 7 off of and no that doesn't make it vista. They also got rid of all the graphic intensive apps that cause vista to bog down and change it the the memory footprint to 256 kilobytes. I am not positive about the 256K, I heard was listening to the Tech Guy show when they brought it up and I was doing something at the same time, so they might have been discussing something else.I would just hang on to what you have now and wait for W7 to come out. MS can't afford another mistake, this one will be what they preached vista would be and more. Just don't expect something blow your socks off, its just an OS.
For security reasons, I would go ahead and upgrade when its released or soon after. These hackers and internet scum of the world are just waiting for old OS to come across their web sites or download one of the programs. These new bugs aren't designed to destroy your computer, they are designed to utilize it and the old computer systems can't run the needed software anymore to catch them. For instance, regardless if you like Adaware, it only supports to 2000 pro, but eventually they won't support it. People think that its as simple as just writing the needed code in it to make these type of programs work for OS, but the problem is if they do, it diminishes the effectiveness of the drivers and scanners need to run effective scans.
It falls back into that legacy support. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legacy_system
I am far from an expert and all these posts are a bit simplified explanations and I probably a little bit off in my descriptions, but for the most its true or accurate.Posted 16 years ago # -
Anonymous
UnregisteredMichele said, I think it's unfair to blame Microsoft for other software companies who choose not to support the operating system you right Michelle, Just wish Microsoft support Vista in office 2007 in power point no driver for sound? yes Vista is will be better with sp2 come out & I know some who like Vista but XP do more than Vista, Vista come with 32 bit & 64 bit IE 7 I'm not say that mac is better it may be just think & like Windows 3.11 95 98 XP I have & all go well only 80% like Vista think 99% with XP
http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/vista/windows_vista_no_longer_matters.htmlhttp://www.appscout.com/microsoft_windows/
Microsoft Issues Windows 7 Security Update
Security Update for Windows 7 Pre-Beta ( KB958644 )Well, that didn't take long. Windows 7--almost but not quite yet in pre-beta--already received its first security update.
http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article5006025.ece?Submitted=true
http://www.wariscrime.com/2008/10/29/news/microsoft-shuts-up-the-windows/
http://education.zdnet.com/?p=1923&tag=nl.e539
The Ghost of Windows Me
http://www.infoworld.com/article/08/10/29/OS_X_Snow_Leopard_vs_Windows_7_1.html
Mac OS X Snow Leopard vs. Windows 7
http://apcmag.com/can_ies_architect_explain_why_its_so_bloated.htm
Microsoft's platform architect for Internet Explorer, Chris Wilson, admits Microsoft has done both good and bad things in IE over the last 14 years.
http://apcmag.com/microsoft_turns_to_pirated_windows_users_to_boost_ie7_market_share.htm
Posted 16 years ago # -
I have to say hotdoge3, at least this time you posted some personal experience, although its through a friend. My point is the bashing MS most everyday cause you don't like. There are plenty of posts that are for any side you want to look for. Finding unbiased sources has become a real problem. What happened to reporting facts not opinions.
See, I can post links in my favor to.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=847
http://blogs.computerworld.com/five_reasons_why_vista_beats_mac_os_x
my favorite (bad language though)
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=macs_cant
http://forums.modojo.com/showthread.php?t=145873In regards to the Mac, the going saying is that it is safer. What is not realized is that the hackers spend their time finding flaws in the windows based system, because it is the most used OS. The major flaw with mac in my opinion besides price is the lack of software and choices. You are at the mercy of MAC and what they want.
These are links to a contest were the mac gets hack first before windows and linux. See all the hackers have to do is focus their attention on the mac. There is more money in hacking windows users, cause there is more users.
http://www.macworld.com/article/132733/2008/03/hack.html
http://www.infoworld.com/article/08/03/27/Gone-in-2-minutes-Mac-gets-hacked-first-in-contest_1.htmlSave your comparisons to Windows 7 till after it is released. To criticize a pre-beta version is low. When you read(post) an article from a mac user about windows, what do you think your going to read about.come on
And as for linux not being able to be hacked, wrong look here
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/03/01/1077989482304.html
http://it.toolbox.com/blogs/managing-infosec/linux-hacked-more-often-than-windows-2003-23371My point is through all my posts is an OS is a preference. Yea, I hate the crap MS pulls, but that is bad management + over management. They need to go through a do a big CEO layoff, trim the upper lvl fat. The ones there now make terrible choices anyway. I will agree with IE7 sucking, but only cause it is so slow. IE8 is better, but it is slow to. I use FF3 which is great, I have used Opera, it is ok to.
Posted 16 years ago # -
Anonymous
UnregisteredI like Microsoft 3.1, 95, 98, & XP all go good,Txnnok I don't see criticize a pre-beta version is a update not a good to get.
http://www.betanews.com/article/Microsoft_1_in_10_Vista_printer_driver_installations_fail/1226349968
Posted 16 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.