Was Microsoft Vista Window a Failure
- Thread starter grgnng
- Start date
I skipped over Vista due to all the negative chatter about it, went straight from XP to Win 7. After using Win 7 for a few months, I acquired a laptop with Vista on it. I was surprised at how similar Vista was to Win 7. I didn't find anything particularly bad about it, seemed to run fine on that laptop. However, I didn't try to use it for any actual work, I sold the laptop to someone else so I really don;t have extensive experience with Vista.
From my reading, I gather that Vista's fairly heavy resource requirements, compared to XP, was it's real downfall. It required better hardware and more RAM which required a more expensive computer. People tried to run it on under-powered machines with too little RAM and were disappointed. Win 7 requires less resources but the other thing is that typical systems are more powerful now and typically have more RAM than when Vista was introduced. That makes Win 7 run very well on current hardware and so it was much better accepted.
From my reading, I gather that Vista's fairly heavy resource requirements, compared to XP, was it's real downfall. It required better hardware and more RAM which required a more expensive computer. People tried to run it on under-powered machines with too little RAM and were disappointed. Win 7 requires less resources but the other thing is that typical systems are more powerful now and typically have more RAM than when Vista was introduced. That makes Win 7 run very well on current hardware and so it was much better accepted.
Not true, look at the close releases of 98, ME and 2000 A history of Windows - Microsoft Windows. Vista was not the shortest.
Personally, I loved vista and had no problems with it. Most people who had problems were on hardware that didn't have drivers (not microsoft's fault) or using very out of date software.
Dngrsone
Daemon Poster
- Messages
- 1,032
I don't consider Vista a failure. ME was pretty much a fail, though.
I don't like Vista because it was designed from the bottom up to be friendly to stupid users and it made doing certain things much more difficult for power users who had been using XP for so long. Also, it gave a false illusion of security to the aforementioned stupid users by asking for permission for every little thing...
If anything, Vista seems like a beta for Win 7...
I don't like Vista because it was designed from the bottom up to be friendly to stupid users and it made doing certain things much more difficult for power users who had been using XP for so long. Also, it gave a false illusion of security to the aforementioned stupid users by asking for permission for every little thing...
If anything, Vista seems like a beta for Win 7...
The_Lucas
Daemon Poster
- Messages
- 749
Have to agree with you there. Another reason why I didn't switch to Vista was UAC and the fact that before an update you couldn't disable it, like you can now with Windows 7. UAC drove me nuts while fixing somebody's laptop a few months ago.
Dngrsone
Daemon Poster
- Messages
- 1,032
Tell me about it... every time Vista would update on my wife's computer, it would turn Windows Firewall back on and break the internet (I have a hardware firewall, so Win Firewall would interfere with it).
bhetajones
Solid State Member
- Messages
- 19
I actually really liked some of the new features that were introduced in Vista, until one day I started getting random freezing of everything and memory dumps by the Blue Screen of Death. I thought that it had to do with the Vista OS, since everyone talked bad about it. But in the end, it was a motherboard issue, not related to the software at all. I still stopped using Vista then and got a new computer with Windows 7.
As a user mentioned above, Vista really was a beta for the success that Windows 7 is.
As a user mentioned above, Vista really was a beta for the success that Windows 7 is.
Similar threads
