Vista is taking a shellacing in the marketplace

[carbon_unit]

When XP came out it was being sold on 800mhz machines with 128mb ram and it ran like a dog compared to windows98/ME on the same machine. The computers will catch up to Vista but it will take a while.

[pianowizard]

When XP came out it was being sold on 800mhz machines with 128mb ram

Windows XP was released in Oct 2001. I just took at look at the Tawbook and the Trwbook to see what Thinkpads were available at that time:

A30
A30p
T23
X22
R30

Many people still run XP on these machines (after upgrading the memory to 256MB or more) and are very happy with the performance, perhaps with the exception of the X22.

Actually, that comparison isn't fair because Vista has been around for 8 months already, so it's better to look at what Thinkpads were available in Jun 2002 when XP was 8 months old:

A31
A31p
T30
X24
R31

There is no question that all of these machines run XP extremely well. I don't think we can say that all currently available Thinkpads can run Vista equally well.

[carbon_unit]

My R61 runs Vista about the same as a T23 runs XP. I have both here and they feel about the same, not exciting. Vista is a bit slower booting but once it is running they are about the same. IMHO

[Truthfinder]

In my opinion, it's not as much a hardware issue as it is a software concern. Most people who are buying a PC or own a PC of the past couple of years can handle Vista, however, the issue at hand is the expensive software that people have purchased over the past couple of three years which will not run under Vista.

I can't see having to trash Photoshop, or have to buy an update just to run Vista. I can name tons of fairly recent programs / software that will not run under the Vista operating system...... Therefore, I will stand by XP for as long as I can.

Just my 2 cents !

[BigWarpGuy]

http://www.computerworld.com/action/art ... _PM&nlid=8
Here is an article on Balmer being on the defense over Vista.

[beeblebrox]

My T60p runs massively quicker than a friends much more powerful desktop running with Vista.

Microsoft really should have postponed the release of Vista to 2009 or 2010 when more people have powerful enough hardware to run it well. Vista in 2007 is equivalent to XP in 1998.

Impossible, because if Microsoft would have had another 3 years until 2010 they would even bloat it up much further.

I remember my experience as a young programmer, decades ago, on the first Apple ][. You program new features into it until you run out of computer memory. Then your program is finished. Same with Microsoft's approach.

Apple on the other hand, has been able to generate excellent code. OS X even runs pretty good on an old iBook with 500 Mhz. Pretty much like WinXP.
Vista is simply a monstrous bloatware blob, like a toad on drugs. If they require ultra-fast processors, additional Flash memory and minimum 4GB RAM, just to operate the operating system itself, then something is wrong.

You could argue, in these times with fast computers it does not matter. But then again, the next Vista 2.0 would probably require 8GB RAM, 4GHZ quad-core and 100GB disk space ... just to run Vista itself!!
And you have not started using your main application yet.
Again, computers in 3 years will just be able to run Vista 2.0, but not much else.

Something is utterly wrong with Microsoft. They spend 6 years with 10.000 people and $6Bn , and we get Vista, which is like WinXP98, as you say...!?
I assume, Microsoft's bureaucracy is as bloated as Vista.

No wonder, that good Microsoft staff is defecting to Google and others.

[draco2527]

My T60p runs massively quicker than a friends much more powerful desktop running with Vista.

Microsoft really should have postponed the release of Vista to 2009 or 2010 when more people have powerful enough hardware to run it well. Vista in 2007 is equivalent to XP in 1998.

I agree, Vista is a resource killer and waiting for "faster hardware" will only provide you with better eye candy. There are some other features in Vista that are cool; but they are just that...cool!

Even if the hardware requierements move up; I think Vista is overkill for most users! There are SO many tweaks and things that most people are going to go crazy...

I did a small trial launch of "Office 2007 Pro" now most people had a HARD time working with it...they always complain that they can't find the "Save As" button even after theyare told were it is located before they even get the application!!! Some will even say " I know you told me were is at, but I can't remember" LOL. The LOGO on the top left stands out like a sore-thumb yet a lot of people don't remember or can't put the two together; and don't get me started on the 'Ribbon". Even I have problems sometimes and I switched back to 2003 Pro...

I think the same will happen with Vista; too many things bundled into one package and in the long run for the average user; it is going to cost a LOT of frustration and headaches and ultimately that will be the downfall of Vista.

The Search function is a PITA; in particular since there is no structure like XP OS. I think this gives everyone an idea on how complex this is going to get, don't look for it because you will not find it...instead...SEARCH...people can't remeber to click on a "Logo" what makes me (IMHO) that they are going to remember the name of a file or application when they are looking for it!

[ANDS]

Maybe I'm just not using my machine enough - but Vista runs absolutely fine for me. I have an R61i and 2GIG's of ram. I think I've had to shut the computer down twice in the last two months.

[GomJabbar]

Well, the Fat Lady's singing...

Bill Gates $2.67 Billion Richer After Microsoft Surge (Update1)

Oct. 26 (Bloomberg) -- Microsoft Corp. Chairman Bill Gates grew $2.67 billion richer today after his company trounced analysts' estimates for sales and profit, propelling the shares to their highest level in six years.

Gates is Microsoft's biggest shareholder, with a 9.3 percent stake. Today the stock climbed 9.5 percent. Chief Executive Officer Steve Ballmer owns 4.3 percent of the company, which means the value of his holdings climbed by $1.24 billion. Earlier, the shares rose as much as 13 percent.

The two haven't seen gains like that since the heyday of the technology boom in 2000, when the stock traded at almost twice today's price. Microsoft reignited investor interest with sales of the Windows Vista operating system and the ``Halo 3'' video game, both of which performed better than analysts predicted.

[jdhurst]

<snip>
The Search function is a PITA; in particular since there is no structure like XP OS. I think this gives everyone an idea on how complex this is going to get, don't look for it because you will not find it...<snip>

Too true. Windows Desktop Search V3.1 has been released as a voluntary update to Windows XP. I have the new one running on my ThinkPad and the old one running on my Desktop.

Three things:
1. The new search (V3.1 = same as Vista) CANNOT find ordinary things that the old search can find. I have a case open with Microsoft on this and at this point, my findings are confirmed. The "cool" new search IS defective.
2. The new search is a PIG. This is the ONLY application on my ThinkPad (of hundreds and hundreds) that brings the machine to its knees. When the new search is indexing, nothing else can run.
3. The new search index is HUGE. Bigger by far than hard drives used to be as little as a decade ago.

Remember the commercials?
"Does Microsoft know where it is going today?" Either, NO; or Now we service only consumers who don't know any better.

... JDH

[mgo]

[quote="draco2527Three things:
1. The new search (V3.1 = same as Vista) CANNOT find ordinary things that the old search can find. I have a case open with Microsoft on this and at this point, my findings are confirmed. The "cool" new search IS defective.
2. The new search is a PIG.

I'm wondering if the folks at Microsoft even know how to fix this "feature". I've read thread after thead where people are pleading with Microsoft techs to do something about the incessant hard drive thrashing due to indexing.

Even the very latest version of Desktop Search for XP seems to run up and down thru the index three times after each boot. That's about a 15 - 20 minute job with my 20k+ files! Nobody at MS seems to know why it does this!

My solution is to not shut down, just hibernate. That works, because the indexing does not re-scan coming out of hibernate.

Another solution is to select out folders that are not important for indexing, but that sort of defeats the whole idea of indexing, doesn't it?

I -like- the concept of indexing, especially since I am running OneNote, and like to look up and re-read older entries, but why have a core feature that does not work and nobody seems to want to de-bug? This is going to hurt Microsoft down the road.

[jdhurst]

<snip>
I'm wondering if the folks at Microsoft even know how to fix this "feature". I've read thread after thead where people are pleading with Microsoft techs to do something about the incessant hard drive thrashing due to indexing.
<snip>

Fairly immediately after I reported the major defect (cannot find) in the new search, it has mysteriously disappeared from the voluntary update list. Maybe someone got beaned over the head with the defect and has gone away with their tail between their legs to fix it. One can only hope. ... JDH