Reason not to use Vista

[ilkka_nissila]

You can get an installation disk for the OS but it's ridiculously expensive.

[bgelfand]

This July, I built a computer for my Significant Other and loaded Windows Vista Ultimate. Aside from one very minor problem with the Nvidia display drivers, the system has been rock solid for the past two months. We have not had one "blue screen" in that time nor even an application failure.

 

Of course, I did my "due diligence" before I built the box. It is quite simple. I made an Excel spreadsheet with four column headings:

SOFTWARE/HARDWARE, VISTA READY, UPGRADE COST, NOTES. Under SOFTWARE/HARDWARE, I listed all the hardware attached to the old machine; do not forget your cell phone, PDA, etc. as well as printers and scanners. Next, on the old machine, I went to CONTROL PANEL -> ADD/REMOVE PROGRAMS. This gave me a list of all the software install on the old machine. I entered all the software we want to keep on the Vista machine on the Excel spreadsheet. Then it was a simple matter of going to each manufacturer's web site to see if Vista drivers were available for the hardware, or if the software was Vista compatible. If it was compatible, I put an "X" in the VISTA READY column. If it was not, I searched for a replacement and entered a cost in the UPGRADE COST column and made a note in the NOTES column. The whole process took a few hours and saved days on the install.

 

I would note that there have been a little over 30 patches applied by Windows Update to Vista. The code on the install disk was released to Microsoft manufacturing in late December 2006 or early January 2007. A little over 30 patches in 8 months is the sign of a very stable operating system. There have been about the same number of patches on XP systems in the same time period. In fact there have been almost as many patches on the Mac operating system in that time period.

 

You should be aware that Microsoft has announced that mainline support for Windows XP will end in 2009. Mainline support for Vista ends in 2012. When Microsoft drops mainline support for an operating system, many third party software vendors drop support of that operating system in their products. Case in point, Microsoft dropped mainline support for Windows 2000, although extended support continues. Adobe does not support CS3 on Windows 2000.

 

My recommendation is if you are buying a new computer, get Vista. If you have an old computer running XP, stay with XP unless there is a compelling reason to upgrade operating system.

[ernie_targonski]

Bob,

I have Vista Home Premium running on a Dell. I am no pro photog, or computer expert. What I can tell you is that Canon has updates that work, my 30D and G7 work just like they did under XP. Ny Nikon Coolscan 5000 works fine, Nikonscan and all. My HP B9180 works just fine.... HP has updates. Elements 5.0 is fine. Spyder Pro is fine. What didn't work was older printer drivers for my HP7960, and HP hasn't updated that driver.... so most of the utility is lost for that printer due to the use of generic MS driver.

I have had no "blue screen of death" and the system on the whole seems to be running just fine.

[colinsouthern]

Ronald Moravec wrote:

 

"Windows are full of security problems which I am convinced are there on purpose. "

 

I've got some really bad news for you Ron

 

http://www.macworld.com/news/2007/04/30/daizovi/index.php "Contest winner: Vista more secure than Mac OS"

 

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Myth-Busted-Mac-Security-Santa-Clause-53523.shtml "Myth Busted: Mac Security = Santa Clause"

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16934083/site/newsweek/ "Nowadays, security guys break the Mac every single day. Every single day, they come out with a total exploit, your machine can be taken over totally. I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine." [bill Gates]

 

http://blogs.technet.com/security/archive/2007/03/21/windows-vista-90-day-vulnerability-analysis.aspx

"Windows Vista 90 Vulnerability" - Vista, about 5 - MacOX, about 40!

[erik scanhancer]

"OSX is a great OS like Ellis said, but it's very overpriced."

 

It's free on any new Mac (where it is pre-installed AND bundled on discs) and otherwise it will

cost you $129.-, the fullest version possible. On discs. How overpriced is that?

[roger_smith4]

Dell gives you disks. I'd get a WinXP SP2 Dell for backwards compatibility with devices like scanners lacking Vista drivers.

[bieg]

Wow one hack on a Mac vs 65,000 viruses for windows. Anyone owning a Mac ever seen a

virus?

[steven_clark]

I've seen a Mac virus without owning a Mac actually.

[walter_degroot]

when You buy a branded system you are essentinally hosed.

 

they never give you a real copy of the os, yet you are paying for one.

 

my daughter-in-law did not heed the warning from me.

and got a compaq with a "restore disk"

 

it worked the first time but not the second.

 

Microsoft is the main culprit, if you buy a system an OS must come with it.

If you buy a box of assembled parts,and if you own a real copy of the os or buy a copy with a license. you are set.

 

it is only the finished system that requires an OS to be installed.

the bare bones system from tiger direct or a local dealer will let you stay with xp or 2000, withour paying for and then trashing an installed copy of vista.

 

you will get all th real disks and manuals you might not get with a brand name system, if you take apart and disable the old computer, there is no license conflict.

 

and with mac's if they be better or not, you MUST buy a compete system, no option, you cannot assemble one.

[colinsouthern]

Steven Biegler wrote: "Wow one hack on a Mac vs 65,000 viruses for windows. Anyone owning a Mac ever seen a virus?"

 

Can't say I have - then again, I can't remember the last time I had a virus on any of my PCs either.

 

Additionally, the posts weren't to highlight the 1 hack - they were to highlight the fact that there have been many more security holes found in MacOS than have been found in Vista, over the same time period, making MacOS the insecure OS, not Windows.

[akajohndoe]

So, Bob, do let us know what you end up deciding.

[jimstrutz]

I recently bought a Vista box. I had no problems with the install of software or hardware for it. Everything I use made the transfer without hitch. I do have some old junk that I haven't tried with it, but I don't think I will ever want to, so it's just not an issue.

 

However, for as fast as this system should be, it doesn't show it. It's a substantial update to the XP old box, but I was expecting it to feel quicker than it does. I suspect the nay sayer are right, Vista is a computer hog. Still, it was cheap, and it does what I need it to, and the old one wouldn't do that. It's also completely stable, and so much quieter than the old one.

[james_de_h]

I currently dual boot into Windows XP and Vista. I have also used a Mac Pro with OS X Tiger, and that was set up so I could dual boot into Windows XP.

 

In terms of what each platform does, I have found little difference in stability - a well cared for XP set up seems to be fine. Vista is possibly faster, however, but that may be because the Vista set up I have is running on a 'clean' hard drive without the clutter on the XP disc on the same machine. My gripe with Vista is drivers; my favourite keyboard will not work under Vista and that is why I have not switched. Seems minor, but I have RSI and really need a scroll wheel etc. My old scanner also would not work, but my cheap all-in-one does the same job so this is not a real issue.

 

Mac OS is nothing special and easy to use if you can work with Windows. I would be happy to use either, but Windows appears to have more ancillary software that enables me to do finance and map work more easily. There are Mac alternatives, but shelling out for that lot would be costly. Also I use Office 2007 and I prefer this to the 2003 version (2004?) on the Mac.

 

I would be happy to go with Vista on a new machine if it drives what you want. If not buy a machine with Vista on it but install XP and dual boot. Vista is the future so you may well be forced into it in a the next year to 18 months anyway.

[Hector Javkin]

"Vista is the future so you may well be forced into it in a the next year to 18 months anyway."

 

In fact, you'll only be forced into it if XP is unsupported when you next upgrade. I usually run computers for 3 or 4 years, but I'm considering upgrading sooner, to avoid the VISTA mess until they've got it cleaned up.

[mark_hanegraaff]

<i>BTW, I don't see how Vista SP1 could alleviate "driver issues" as the responsibility for drivers resides with the manufacturer of the peripheral devices, not with Microsoft.</i>

<br>

Third party drivers are often updated during a service pack release.

<br><br>

<i>It's free on any new Mac (where it is pre-installed AND bundled on discs) and otherwise it will cost you $129.-, the fullest version possible. On discs. How overpriced is that?</i>

<br>You have to factor in that OSX cannot be installed just on any PC. The same Intel and AMD hardware used to run a Mac will usually run you about twice as much as the one running windows. Prices are coming down, so I'll give you that.

<br><br>

<i>Wow one hack on a Mac vs 65,000 viruses for windows. Anyone owning a Mac ever seen a virus?</i>

<br>

A lack of viruses is not an indication that a system is inherently secure. If anything the opposite is true. I'm sure OSX is no dog when it comes to security, and like I said before, a great OS, but security can only be measured by one's resilience in the field. In the end there is no real data to support Apple's claims of security.

[richsimmons]

so far, on the two machines that I've used Vista on, I found them to be relatively slow and I find the confirmation windows extremely annoying. There is a rating system you can locate that will tell you, I think the scale is 1-5 on how well the PC will run Vista.

 

Someone talked about Mac OS X being $129 and that being too much. But a basic version of vista is $199 and you cant even log onto a domain with it. that will cost $299 to get the business edition. Premium is $239 and Ulitmate is $399! So where is the savings in that?

 

Also, they want to compare the security issues of Vista versus OSX, but OSX has been on the market about as long as XP. To make a fair comparison you'd have to wait until next month when the new version of Mac OS comes out. Let's compare apples to apples (no pun intended) and keep in mind that there are some people who are PAID for their opinion. All OS's are vunerable to some extent. Let's face it, Mac os is a Unix based system with a gnome like front end. Savy, sophisticated, yes. Perfect? Nah, but what is. There could be virues for the Mac (and they do make anti-virus software for the Mac), but Windows has traditionally been the target because there are so many pc's out there to exploit. The scripting tools made this very easy to do.

 

I use both. I prefer my Mac for graphics, my PC for video (because Sony Vegas only works on Windows and I think Final Cut doesn't cut it), but overall, Mac OS needs less resources to run than Windows.

[akajohndoe]

Quote #1: BTW, I don't see how Vista SP1 could alleviate "driver issues" as the responsibility for drivers resides with the manufacturer of the peripheral devices, not with Microsoft.

 

 

Quote #2: Third party drivers are often updated during a service pack release.

 

And, still, the responsibility of the peripheral device manufacturer, and available from them long before the availability of any service pack.

[john_bright]

"I don't even have an installable copy of XP home (individual) since it was preinstalled on my current PC and nobody ever gives you the intallation disks these days."

 

Bob. A couple of days after I took delivery of a new computer about 18-months ago, here in th UK, a guy from Dell phoned to ask if everthing was satisfactory. I said yes! everthing is up and running, but I was a bit disappointed to see that there were no discs for the drivers and hardware installed on the machine including the Operating System. After an interesting conversation, he said, will you be at home all day tomorrow? I said I can be and two packages full of discs duly arrived by courier the following day. I have about eleven discs in all, covering just about everthing. One of which is Windows XP plus SP2 with the Microsoft booklet. I think they just like to your're a bit savvy, before they send them out.

[bobatkins]

" But a basic version of vista is $199 and you cant even log onto a domain with it. that will cost $299 to get the business edition. Premium is $239 and Ulitmate is $399! So where is the savings in that?"

 

I suspect MS is probably giving Vista away to PC makers (or close to giving it away), just to get it out there since almost nobody is going to upgrade from XP.

 

You can buy a new PC with Vista Home on it for $280, so it's very doubtful if the PC makers are payinmg anything close to the retail price. If you buy a ready built PC, Vista is essentially free. Just price up the components and see how much is left over for the OS!

[akajohndoe]

Vista Home Premium full version on DVD is $218.99 with free shipping at amazon.com.

[akajohndoe]

I cannot imagine buying a $280 PC, it would simply not have the capabilities I need and want. Further, other than businesses, I've never configured a Windows PC to log onto a domain; there's really no need.

 

For the short term, Windows XP Pro with SP2 and more recent fixes is OK for most home users.

 

If buying a new PC, get Vista Home Premium.

[Brad_]

>>> Anyone owning a Mac ever seen a virus?

 

What's a virus? A good thing or bad thing? I'm thinking of installing Parallels and Windows

on my Mac so I can eee what all the excitement is about...

[akajohndoe]

Ho-hum. The old "mac doesn't have viruses" pitch. C'mon back when you have something to discuss. Thread dead.

[JeffOwen]

I asked a similar question not so long ago http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00MVnY and made the decision to go for XP as I KNOW that my image handling programs work OK with XP. Also Vista is very RAM hungry and inefficient.