Comments on: History repeating? Recalling the Vista 'upgrade'

With Microsoft's Windows 7 beta all the rage, it's easy to forget the Vista operating-system purgatory that many people were stuck in.

[IndioITMan]

So, from Aug 07 to 1/08 (four months) you had major issues with Vista (pre SP1)?

Yet for over a year now, you've been 'putering along quite nicely and the only thing you can say about Win7beta is "Wahhhhh! When Vista came it was broken...Waaaaahhh!" ?

Go back over the past couple of years since the iPhone (heck, iPod) came out and count how many times SO many people who just had to have "it" first paid more than the next guy just 3 to 6 months later, for a better version that fixed some bugs and made it better (only to be shafted by a price drop again in 3 to 6 months, as is typical of most Apple 'shinny' products)

You rarely hear about those incidents within days of them happening (mostly because of the large number of 'pawns'...er...'early adopters' don't want to endure long lasting embarassment) and you've got nothing better to write about than a 15 month old experience?

You should've stuck with XP if you didn't want to try out the 'new and improved' Windows ME...I mean Vista; or at least gone back to XP and stuck with what you knew worked.

I hope you have something constructive to say to your fanbase the next time you post and not another rehash of old news that no one (but Balmer) cares about.

[ymaxy]

You, Sirs are dumb. About as dumb as you can get. Any idiot that is trying to run on a $400 calculator they call a computer deserves to have all the hell they are going through. Get a decent computer and it will smoke any iMac, Ubuntu and whatever the hell else you are using. All the Mac users - please shut up. You are trying to run Vista on a $1200 to $2500 systems and yell it runs great? DUH!

[IndioITMan]

@ymaxy ...that's "$1200 to $2500 systems..." made with PC parts (all Intel and nVidia inside LOL) They just pay a whole lot more for the same (or lesser) parts because "they just work!" in their Mac's.

[ymaxy]

Faster CPUs, MoBos and nVidia chips. Look at the specs of those. That's why i said that if you spend the same amount of money on a Win based PC, it'll smoke any competition. Mac has the Honda approach to the computers, they don't ask you whatcha want, they give you what you need. That is about the only positive thing about Apple i can say.

[pithenumber]

cough
I need a faster graphics card, now Apple, give me one

Macs has many good things, price/performance is not one of them
The OS is better than XP and Vista, but Windows 7 is better than most OS I have used, including many flavors of Linux

[mytutorguy]

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong but I feel that Vista and Windows 7 are not that critical to my everyday computing needs. Apparently Intel didn't think Vista was either in that their refusal to "upgrade" to the over-touted OS probably encouraged their long-time partner, Microsoft, to push Windows 7 off on the public. Single or small network users have no need for all this "technology" which in most cases is simply more bells and whistles and an effort to continue seperating us from our money when we are FORCED to upgrade almost ALL of our hardware in order to run these "super systems." All operating systems are vulnerable to new viruses such as Downadup, Conficker or Kido, but as stated by those who know, it is mostly aimed at large networks and there have been NO reported incidents involving the little guys like me and a couple million others. Microsoft could fix XP by plugging the security holes or by simplifying the whole shebang. All I want to do is play a few games, write an email and browse the web. I don't need touch-screen capabilities, tabs or see-through screens. All I want is a reliable OS that doesn't cost a small fortune, but instead of fixing their current OS, Microsoft spent millions of dollars selling Vista to an unsuspecting public. Were any of you readers aware that the commercials for "Operation Mojave" was judiciously edited to omit the fact that the people who were so impressed with the system weren't actually allowed to USE it, rather, they were SHOWN the finer features on state of the art machines. We are completely innundated at every possible moment with marketing tricks and ploys; encouraged to spend money on newer, "better" stuff when in fact, it's NOT better, only prettier. I will run XP as long as humanly possible. I've already supported Mr. Gates' company for far too many years to careen blindly into yet another learning curve full of frustration and headaches. It's taken me nearly FOUR years to get my XP machine the way I want it and I'm not about to toss it all away for bragging rights.

[drbyte]

Do Vista users/buyers get a discount on Windows 7?

[BigGuns149]

I am sure that there will be some type of retail upgrade version for Vista users although if history is any guide it probably won't be much if any cheaper than the OEM versions of Windows 7, which is rather unfortunate in that while Windows 7 is more than a SP for Vista the changes are minute enough that Vista users shouldn't have to pay quite as much for the upgrade as the OEM cost of Windows 7.

According to various stories Microsoft will provide free upgrades to Windows 7 for anyone buying Vista after July 1st though. In theory one would then get two OS licenses for the price of one (Vista & Windows 7) and could then upgrade to Windows 7 when they felt comfortable with upgrading. The only caveat is that I hope that they run said program better than they did with Vista because a lot of people waited a long time to get their copy of Vista.

[ShadowL]

Life after Vista is a MacBook Pro. Thanks Windows you helped me to find the best computer I ever owned

[MTGrizzly]

"Vista had issues on upgrade, yes it stringently required new drivers if not new hardware (recall that for most major Mac OS upgrades, the hardware demand was simply an entirely new computer)'


Well, let's see...

I have used Macs since the 512k version. I have never encountered an OS upgrade that required "an entirely new computer." And I have moved through every OS Apple has ever made for Mac.

True, Mac OS X will not work on PowerPC 603's, [I never bought a PowerPC 603 machine], but Mac OS X came out after 603's were state of the art. PowerPC 604 and 604e's will run Mac OS X. I still have a G4, [which has a PowerPC CPU], that I use as a server. It has been through System 9 and every version of OS X and OS X server I have thrown at it.

So, it looks like not every Mac OS upgrade required a new computer, and, most certainly, not every "major" upgrade required a new computer. Vista, on the other hand, didn't even work with some computers labeled, "Vista Ready" [or words to that effect].

[pithenumber]

10.6 requires a new machine
dropping PPC support

[MTGrizzly]

"Soon, within a few years, there will be NO choice. We will have a simple terminal and we will all store our applications, documents, pictures and all the rest on Microsoft's servers"

The current move to "cloud computing" is just another way of saying that you will be forced to use a "terminal" that runs off a centralized machine. Freedom from this 'centralized server' was the biggest advantage to computers with their own CPUs - in other words, personal computing power.

I, for one, am not interested in trusting Microsoft, or anyone else, with my data and/or applications. No sane person would buy this just because Microsoft says it's better...

[MTGrizzly]

"The thing that has always bugged me about the great and powerful OS X is that you have to keep buying it (upgrades at least annually @$99 a pop) and "major upgrades" cost even more and break everything that used to work with the previous version(s) so you either have to replace your periphrals or your Mac...or both! Yuck.
This video pretty much tells it like it is: http://tinyurl.com/dfhz7z"

First thing, you link doesn't work.

Second, you should actually know what you are talking about. Incremental upgrades are free. I still get upgrades on 10.4, even though it isn't the current version of the OS. Sort of like Windows gives away service packs...

Major upgrades cost money. I doubt anyone ever gave away a copy of Vista, (or any other version of Windows for that matter), and Vista upgrades cost more than major upgrades to OSX.

"everything that used to work with the previous version(s) so you either have to replace your periphrals or your Mac...or both!"

This is really a laugh. I have never replaced hardware because of a change in OS software or hardware, (I even used ADB peripherals on my first G3's, when there were no ADB ports.)

Saying you have to replace a Mac or your perpherils doesn't make sense. It is also untrue.

I fail to understand why it is that Microsoft fans think that it is necessary to make up lies about Mac OSX and Apple hardware.

If you don't want to change to Mac, then don't do it. Be honest, don't make up reasons why you want to continue using Microsoft.

[pithenumber]

most of things you said are made up by fanboys, like Mac fanboys and Linux fanboys, PC fanboys lie

[Mark Holloway]

The problems I had with Vista was so many software programs were no longer compatable and I had to search the web looking for a fix ( Many times one had not been developed yet ) and Vista seemed to have Defcon 4 security features you had to adjust but I did like the speed. It took about a month of adjustments but Vista is running good on my 3 month old computer. I guess I am one of the lucky ones.

[ymaxy]

Use the compatibility mode for older software. I installed Lemmings on Vista and it works great. Vista is a great OS. People just need to learn how to use it.

[iknowenough]

im with you on this one, Mark. i cant really relate to any of the problems that are so popular with windows users except a few bugs here and there. but if youre reasonably tech-savvy and have been around for the past few years, you could easily navigate vista and not have to switch to mac just because your confidence was crushed by apple propaganda.

[dbwsr]

I have had 95 98 ME XP and now Vista. I tested Vista when it first came out, and was having just a few problems, until it's release, then tons. I really hated giving up my Audigy 2 ZS Platinum, until somone wrote a program and posted it. None from Creative. I run XP and Vista side by side, I think that is what you have to do to get Vista to do what you want. If it givens you any backtalk, you go to XP and then move delete or whatever. No problems with running programs on that XP system. While Vista has a media center, I have somehow got rid of it, nothing but problems. I have bought programs to do what I want to do. So, why do I need another system, I don't I can tell you this, I can partition format and install in my sleep. I am not budging on the next system It will offer me nothing, but more thrills and chills.

[mattyc09]

IndioITMan, I don't really think you have any idea what you are talking about. OS revisions for OS X usually come out closer to 2 years apart, not "at least annually". 10.4, for example came out in 2005, 10.5 in 2007, and 10.6 still isn't out yet and we are now into 2009. Also they are not $99 a pop. Further payed releases are just the "major upgrades". The smaller upgrades are free as extensions of the current revision (example 10.5.6 is the current one, this is the 6th update to 10.5). The exception to this was (IIRC) 10.1 which came out very quickly, but was a free upgrade for 10.0 users.

Furthermore you do not have to buy them. Also unless you have extremely bad luck you do not have to buy a new Mac to use the new OS as long as it is on supported hardware... same as any PC with Windows. Also bricking a machine with a software update is extremely extremely rare, reset the pram or go from the install CD would recover most any mac.

[cawpin]

"(For about two of the four hours, the Microsoft support person was remotely controlling my computer, and I was not present for much of that time.)"

Ordinarily, calling Microsoft for paid support is unthinkable, but at that time, I had little choice. "I had wasted so much time trying to configure Vista to work with some level of stability on my network that I just couldn't afford the additional time to figure it out on my own," I wrote."

That's funny. It wouldn't work on your network yet worked just fine for two hours while the MS agent was connected to it?

[rgersmrk]

It's pretty obvious that Brooke hasn't tried out the Win 7 public beta. I did a clean install. Took 15 minutes to install and had drivers for every piece of hardware. Noticed sound driver was pretty weak after using the OS for 5-10 minutes. Installed the Vista driver no problem and now everything runs great, even better than XP.

Of course after Vista SP1 came out (plenty of time for driver manufactures to come out with mature drivers) Vista ran perfectly fine as well. Can't wait for the final version of Win 7. I'll get a copy for my desktop and my new netbook (Win 7 is made for netbooks).

[klaytonfreak]

Before you get all bent out of shape about Windows 7 perhaps you should try it. I can tell you that after using it for a few weeks already it is a vast improvement over Vista.

[volman1]

I have installed Windows 7 twice so far. One was build 69xx andthe other is the Beta. I have had one piece of hardware that does not have a driver that will work and it is my tv tuner card. It is an older one but I would not be suprised to see a driver released for it by the time Windows 7 comes out.

Both installs went suprisignly smooth. I have had no erros or crashes so far. I have a dual boot with Vista and the programs on my Vista drive have no problems running.

I think the main problem with Vista was the hardware requirements and people's unreasonable expectations that old hardware would continute to work. On the other hand, there are many newer systems that were Vista ready which should never have had vista installed on them. Bad choice by Microsofot/Intel or whomever you want to blame for slapping Vista ready or compatabile stickers on every computer that was coming out at the tiem of Vista.

One thing people forgot is the huge amount of hardware/software available for Windows compared to apple. It is impossbile for Microsfot to make sure it all works.

Apple is very strict about hardware/software. They make their own computers and Microsoft does not. This is a huge advanatge when it comes to speed and reliability.

I have never owned an Apple computer. I have been happy with PC's and Microsoft for the most part. I do have a 3G iPhone which is fantastic. It is by far the best phone to use for media and internet use. As a phone it lacks several basic features (cut/past, mms, bluetooth file trasnfer) but the interface is great and the ease of use is impressive.

I guess my point is that Microsoft seems to be headed in the right direction with Windows 7 from my use of it.

[MongooseProXC]

Enough badmouthing Vista CNET. If you don't know how to use a computer then you definately should not be writing about one. How is AAPL doing in the market today?

[sanjayb]

Better than MS. Apple had great profits while MS announced layoffs.

[Seaspray0]

The profits are up, but the stock AAPL hit a 1 year low a few days ago. That being said, I don't recommend you judge anything by a single indicator (i.e. stock price) the way MongooseProXC did. Rather than take the fanboy mentality and focus on a single negative item, you should look at the big picture... The economy has changed drastically in the last 6 months and almost all stocks are down. The effects of that huge change won't be seen in statistics for some time to come when companies release sales figures for the comming quarters. And, all that pales in comparison to the benefit this country would gain should the steelers lose the superbowl.

[sirrobertm]

Several people have mentioned that it runs better on a Mac, because they got a score of 5.0. How much did this Mac cost? My machine, which I bought in March of '07, has a score of 5.3. Even laptops can easily beat the 5.0 score mentioned.

[joshsc]

And lest we not also forget the throngs of people who were beta testing as well as YOU THE MEDIA that over and over told us how wonderful and life changing Vista was going to be once it was released. YOU the MEDIA told us that it was the best OS MS had come out with EVER.....However after its release, you were so very quick to bash MS for all the problems. MAKE UP YOUR MIND You either like it or you don't.

You're like two year olds... can never be happy with anything.

[bobjones32]

Wow, another stupid sensationalist anti-Vista article created for the sole purpose of garnering clicks. Fantastic.

[homercles82]

Yep problems with a minor release. Never happened with 98se or Windows ME.

Not at all.