6 things you don't like about Vista

[Spooky]

Briefly;

Actually that key we call the Windows key is not a MS invention at all. Its actually an Apple invention. Many years ago before keyboards were standardized into what we use today, very early computers used a modified version of the old teletype keyboards, there was a key present in the location that today we call the Windows key. When the very first apple computers hit the market many years ago (no I don't mean the MAC, this was wayyyy pre-MAC), the first key boards used on those systems were made just for Apple computers and were an adpatation of the older teletype keyboards and the key was there. As a result of Apple's insistance that their keyboards be used as a standard the key was left in place for 'future use'. MS saw the key and as a result of feed back that wanted a single key to hit to bring up a menu or do something else MS decided to put the key in use and today we have the Windows Key.

[LeveL]

Microsoft could have done a lot more with Vista than what they have done.

As was pointed out here, why arn't the things that are already in Windows

fixed? Like Notepad. I mean before making new features?

Look at how good VLC Player is compared to WMP. Does WMP come with

all the codecs you need like VLC does? Nope. Does WMP root itself deep

into your OS like VLC Player does not? Yes!

Microsoft seem to deliberately make it so things are hard to remove.

They should be releasing Vista so its gives you the same freedom as

Windows 95 or Windows NT - remember how you can optionally add

things or leave them out? As Vista sets up it could say "do you want to use

WMP11/IE/OE/media Center/on and on and on" but you have no choice,

its a 6Gb OS or nothing.

[dAbReAkA]

u could've just said "i hate windows, i hate microsoft, i hate the world..", u hater!

[Spooky]

Maybe every one in the windows forum should start posting here: The Other White Meat

[Innocent Devil]

sorry for the double post

Edited December 19, 2006 by Innocent Devil

[Innocent Devil]

1: file transfer time calculation

Wat a stupid idea ??

wen i tranfer a 1mb file from 1 partition to other first windows calcuates how much time it takes to do that

(might doing some benchmarking every time)

after completing the calc it just transfers

ha ha ha....

to calculate ~ 1 min + to transfer 1 sec =1min1sec for 1 mb transfer

this can be really annoying for large files

2:Horrible Network Connections control panel applet

i just want to connect via Dial-up

not at all thikin abt file or resource sharing

3:No componet Choices

if my s/m is not premium and still vista ready

i cant run DVD maker and so on

then why it get installed and give the message "This program cannot be run bacuse u dont have XXXXXX harware"

4:Resource Protection

with all 5 yrs wat r they doing ??

if they can't , and somby is doing to enhace it, why they protect it ??

5:Lokdown kernel

kernel protection will finally go to a place were cracker will break it put payload it it and fo someone can privent it (like AV makers) unable to do that legally

[Deman]

B. An item dealing with the Vista UI

Having to type out the domain login (if you've got more than one domain) or computer name (you can't expect people to know the .\ shortcut) for the splash login screen can get pretty cumbersome. Why not show the available options/domains to the user

E. An item dealing with Vista anti-piracy/activation

The KMS is too silent for my liking, you're not sure whether it's working or not working unless you visit a client machine and see whether it's "Genuine". I'd prefer to be able to sit at the KMS and see what's going on, sure scripts are good but i'd like a GUI as well.

D. An item dealing with Vista networking features

I don't like the way Vista doesn't tell you that the DHCP has timed out and you've lost connectivity, with XP you had a hazard icon and a bubble saying what happened, with Vista you don't get anything. This has caught a number of tutors and students out where IE/Firefox would simply hit an immediate "page not found" and scratch their head wondering why (it was there a second ago). XP was very good at IP address renewals, this is much worse and really unacceptable

UAC is there for good reason, we all want Windows to be more secure but we b***h and moan when they try to do things to make it more secure. Linux users have enjoyed this feature for years and many enter SU without even thinking about it, oddly enough I've seen a couple Linux users who b***h about UAC but have no problem with SU??

[jfjunior]

I could not agree more!!! You have summarized everything that I think is wrong with Windows in general and continues with Vista.

cheers...

1) I don't see it as a stable platform. Way to buggy for a RTM release, it's how Microsoft releases software nowadays, Microsoft's RTM should be Beta. It's not stable enough IMO for business use until at least SP1, if not SP2.

People have said that about every windows release (since Win 95 at least). Yet, millions of users and tons of large places have used the RTMs without a single problem (or very minor issues - often drivers). I don't recall of any major/critical bugs that ever made me wish I had waited for a service pack.

2) Besides DX10, and new Aqua GUI, What am I getting above Windows XP? Not anything worth jumping through the activation/WGA crap that treats me like a thief.

There's hundreds of new features/enhancements/new stuff and what not. Lots of it is VERY significant/real improvements IMO. But then again, it depends where cuts the line as "how much makes it worth it", and for some people, there just couldn't be enough no matter what.

As for the activation & WGA crap, as much as I despise being treated like a thief and an OS vendor installing spyware (at least trying to) on my PCs, it's really not all that different from XP. XP had a mandatory activation for almost everyone - just not corporate customers. Most people pirated that one, hence the recent whining about activation, as there is no bypassing it now. WGA? Yep, XP's got that too. The ONLY real difference is that Vista has to be re-activated every 180 days. If being automatically re-activated twice as year (should be totally transparent) is a reason to not use a far superior OS, you're never going to upgrade past XP (think you'll be running XP in 50 years?)

3) When I'm ready for something that looks like Vista, why not go with the orginal; Mac OSX?

Perhaps because one doesn't want overpriced ghey looking hardware with a crap OS that doesn't run any of the software I need and want? Game selection for that "platform" is reason enough for 99% of home users to never want to buy one. I need a mac like a hole in the head - it's the absolute, very last resort IMO (right before not using computers anymore ever, and even then, I'm almost hesitating).

4) When Vista come back from sleep or hibernate, it loses the network connections sometimes. When it does, you end up having to reboot the machine to get them back.

Sleeping (or hibernation) disconnects the network on any OS. Some OS/hardware/driver combinations have more problems than others. Vista is FAR better than the older versions of windows WRT this. If you're having problems, I wouldn't instantly blame the OS (very well could be drivers). And that shouldn't be a reason to reboot - ever, on any OS. You just have to reinitialize it (manually reconnect).

Seriously, there's a lot of FUD, misinformation (like the "no RAID support" in another thread, like it's not there just because someone doesn't understand it!) and such being said about Vista nowadays. Like the "it's bloated" claims from people that have seemingly forgotten about every previous windows (or ms office) release, where everybody said the exact same things! (bloated/same OS with a new skin - because they can't tell apart from GUI changes since they have no idea of the underlying stuff nor care about it/bothersome activation stuff/etc). Some people try to resist change, they're confused and have to actually learn something, so they all say "this new xyz feature sucks, it was so much better with [version -1]!" just because things are done differently, even if it's improved a lot.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Vista is a perfect OS or anything. UAC is definitely a PITA, but then again there were countless linux folks saying it basically needed this to be secure... Much of it is "damned if you do, damned if you don't". Sometimes you just can't win.

Same with the drivers signing. You have millions of people making the same old tired BSOD jokes. And if you read into their online crash analysis service, you'll see that nearly all crashes (the vast majority) are because of bad drivers. So to reduce crashes (and undeserved perception of a buggy OS), the solution is to reduce usage of crappy drivers, which should help in the long run. But now folks are whining about it (wanting to load drivers that can likely make their machine crash - and them in turn blaming MS for making an unstable OS). Their "solution" is to totally disregard singing and load any old crappy drivers regardless - it's not much of a solution either... So they decided to force ppl to use signed drivers as much as possible (the next best thing after "all drivers being perfect/having no bugs at all" which is impossible), but then ppl complain. Again, you just can't win.

Give it 6 months to a year, and most people will be using the latest version, and those "Vista sucks" people will be very quiet. They'll be used to the new ways do to things, there will be more drivers, it will ship on all new PCs, etc. Eventually, most people wouldn't ever want to switch to anything older (like most people wouldn't want to go back from XP anymore nowadays). But there will always be a small minority who will stick to the older OS'es for a very long time (like those still running 9x nowadays). It's annoying to read all that negative stuff all the time, so I usually try to ignore it altogether. It's only a matter of time before they stop...

Repeat & rince with the next version of windows, and the following, and ... ("it's bloated!", "it does nothing the old OS can't do!", "same OS, just a new skin!", "DRM!", etc)

[bkraptor]

A. An item dealing with the Vista shell, limited to 60 words or less.

Bring back the old "Up one level" button. I can probably live w/o it, but I certainly miss it.

B. An item dealing with the Vista UI, limited to 60 words or less.

Favourite links? WTF - if it won't work why force me to use it?

Personalization? Either return to the old tab style, or make everything using the new look. Stop using both the new look AND one-tabbed windows. Also you should make everything easier to find, I shouldn't be digging in the System properties to go to the Performance window to be able to click the "Adjust visual effects" link, which BTW, has a UAC-like shield icon on it, suggesting you'd need administrative privileges to access it, which it doesn't need.

C. An item dealing with the core functionality of Vista, limited to 60 words or less.

Why have symlinks/junctions if there's no way to create/manage them by default. And why have them at all if they simply won't work (except for those that YOU create manually with junction.exe)

D. An item dealing with Vista networking features, limited to 60 words or less.

Wow... the network and sharing center just sucks. So much bloat... And double clicking the network icon should default to "Manage network connections" instead of DOING NOTHING!

Also forgot to mention... SPEED. It is unacceptable for a high end PC to feel like Windows XP running on 256 MB RAM.

Edited December 27, 2006 by bkraptor

[jdoe]

I didn't play very much with Vista but for now only two things come to my mind about Vista that I don't like...

1) The minimum computer resource requirements

2) The classic Explorer Shell is gone

These two points will make me wait for a new computer and then make a decision if I want those new GUI stuff before XP is not supported anymore by M$. Until then, I'm very happy with XP and will stick to it.

[TheTOM_SK]

1. Protected Mode in IE does not work with UAC disabled.

2. Even as a system admin I still can not do anything I want.

3. Explorer refuses to obey the settings (applied to all folders).

4. Useless services, eg Software Licensing to run Control Panel.

5. As bkraptor posted, it feels like Windows is running really slow.

6. I had to take ownership of all files just to be able to remove them.

Edited December 27, 2006 by TheTOM_SK

[enuffsaid]

I haven't dug into Windows Vista yet so can't say much about it. Besides I'm quite happy with my WinXP Pro. However, I do have one issue with Vista I *can* talk about.... $$$

Me being an IT pro and wanting to have the best / biggest version, I'll be looking at Vista Ultimate. But at 400 Euros it seems priced a bit (understatement) to steep.

But that's just my (poor man's) opinion.

'nuff

[aviv00]

the mostly buggy thing that i think about vista is:

http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html

vista use our sources to something we are not gain nothing.....

[spacesurfer]

THIS IS NOT A RANT THREAD - THIS IS NOT A CRITIC THREAD - SO PLEASE STAY ON TOPIC AND WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE REQUESTED INFORMATION -PLEASE DO NOT BE CRITICAL OF ANOTHERS POST Thank You

What were you thinking??

[Idontwantspam]

• System requirements. Yuk. The computer crawls at 512mb ram.
  
• UAC. I know, I can turn it off. I'd like to be able to have a "whitelist" of programs to allow. Maybe have each user have a list of allowed programs that don't require a UAC prompt, so that each time I run an MMC snap in, which is quite often, I don't have to wait while the screen goes dim, the system groans and lurches, a UAC box slowly appears, and then click Continue.
  
• The logon prompt. Bring back the NT style logon prompt!! I know it's not all pretty, but I much prefer the "Classic" logon prompt, where you can select the domain, and then type the username and password. Much more professional; much fewer resources needed. Better. Also, the fast-user-switching setup is lame. If I lock the computer, anyone else can still log on by pressing Switch User. It doesn't secure the computer for you and ONLY you. Yes, I know it can be disabled. Good thing. Also, there's nowhere to type the user name, so an admin can't unlock the computer if someone else is logged on!
  
• Have during setup an option to install certain components or not. Do you want IE? What about WMP?, etc. Then, they could be installed later.
  
• Have a "classic" version of explorer. Maybe on the first log-on, the user could choose "Vista" explorer or "Classic" explorer. The classic version could basically be explorer.exe from windows xp, only with the fancy vista icons.
  
• What's up with the press ALT to get the menus? Just leave them there.
  
• Start menu. Bring back the XP start menu.
  
• Did I mention UAC?
  
• Why, oh WHY did it take me TEN MINUTED (literally!!) to find the network connections place? Where i could configure the ethernet adapters? Control panel > networking, much around, no, not here, my network places (hard to find...) look for link, no not there... ARRGGH!
  
• OK, that's all for now. Not to rant or anything, but my initial experiences with Vista have been quite negative.
  

I think this topic should be stickied.

Edited July 12, 2007 by Idontwantspam