Customer Reviews:
Showing reviews 16-20 of 104
 How Many Windows, Let Me Count the Ways April 8, 2008
Ophella Paige (Reno, Nevada)
4 out of 5 found this review helpful
First there's Vista Home Basic which, like all the versions of Vista, has your basic digital media features like Windows Photo Gallery, but it doesn't do Aero. You get Windows Flip, but no 3D and no live taskbar thumbnails. If that stuff means nothing to you, go with it.
Second there's Vista Home Premium. Add Flip 3D and Aero to the version above and the availability to do scheduled backups. Also you get Windows Media Player, which you don't get with Home Basic. Windows Media Center can truly can handle all your Media needs. It comes with HDTV support, Xbox 360 Center Extender compatibility (which means nothing to me as I'm not a gamer), Windows DVD Maker and Windows Movie Maker.
Third there's Vista Business. You get everything you get in the above versions, but no Windows Media Player, but you do get business features like Windows Fax and Scan, offline files and folder support and Remote Desktop. If you're a business person, then perhaps this is the version for you.
Fourth there's Vista Ultimate. With this version you get it all, the business stuff plus the media stuff.
And then there's the Upgrades, like the four versions above, they are all upgrades to the SP1 versions.
So far we have eight versions. The first four, plus the four upgrades. That's eight different prices. But wait, I'm not finished. There's four more upgrades, you can upgrade from Home Basic to Home Premium, from Business to Ultimate, from Premium to Ultimate, from Basic to Ultimate.
That's a lot to digest. Then there's still a version you can't buy, one you've got to be a Microsoft Assurance customer to get, called Windows Vista Enterprise.
That's a lot of windows in the Microsoft Operating System house, but I'm guessing there are only three versions that will be of interest to most. Vista Home Basic, because it's the cheapest. Home Premium, because you get the Aero interface and Windows Media Player, or lastly Vista Ultimate, because with this one you get it all.
I was pretty confused when I started this review and maybe I still am, a little, but I think I've got it all sorted out in my head and I'm wondering if I've been any help to you, dear reader, at all. For the money, Basic is the best deal, but me, I'd go with Home Premium or even Ultimate, because I can afford it and because it's the latest and the greatest.
Now with all that out of the way, do I like Vista? Absolutely. I've been an XP girl for way too long. I didn't upgrade straightaway when Vista first came out, because I'd heard all the horror stories. I have Vista now and I'm happy with it. Will I go back to XP? Answer, no. I've got Vista now and I'm sticking with it.
 Windows and Hardware Conspiracy May 17, 2008
John A. Furner (Va)
4 out of 7 found this review helpful
I just bought XP Pro because MS is supposed to phase out XP in June of this year. Go to InfoWorld and read about why the world is up in arms with MS. Over 200,000 signatures have signed the petition to save XP.
And MS is loving every minute of it, as well as all PC and hardware manufacturers. Why?
Vista has promoted the sale of new PCs, Printers, Scanners, etc. This is a win-win scenario for MS, PC and hardware manufacturers. And Vista is killing off most of your applications, but running MS's Office, games, and other applications. Does this sound familiar (IE vs Netscape wars)?
Because Vista does not work, everyone must buy a copy of XP because OEM versions on one machine can't be installed on a new machine. And neither can any other packaged version be installed on a "second" machine. And if you replace all your hard drives, you will have to go through the 40 digit validation process on the phone with MS. Arrgggghhhh! I've had hard drive failures and had to bear this MS criminal investion phone process, because MS software is too stupid to know I'm using the same Motherboard and Processor. How arrogant!
All of the different packaged versions of the same Windows OS were created to take advantage of everyone. A few years back I bought XP 64. It was not supported by Adelphia (now Comcast) and I could not even get on the Web.
I believe MS was fully aware that Vista would not work on most machines, and knew that it would promote PC sales for Enron-like companies; MS gets to double its income by selling flawed Vista and then double-dip by selling XP Pro/Home to make our expensive PCs work. Next, in 2010 MS will triple its income by selling Windows 7 or its next version. MS learned well from all of its other OS failures (95, 98, especially from Millennium).
MS and PC hardware manufacturers are in the hog pen together, selling Windows, Printers, software applications,and on and on. Aren't most of the hardware manufacturers behind the power curve, not producing drivers or driver updates for Vista?
I think Congress needs to do some investigating, that is, if they are not already in MS's deep soft money pockets!
The Al Queda mind set (AQMS) is in warp drive in the U.S., the AQMS financial version that is (also oil, mortgage ARMs, medical, drugs, and so on).
 Decent OS, fine for casual users with modern peripherals, still problematic for power users March 27, 2008
David Pearlman (Arlington, MA United States)
3 out of 3 found this review helpful
Microsoft released the Vista operating system in late January 2007. Microsoft hyped it as a major upgrade to Windows XP. But the operating system has hardly lived up to the hype. In fact, it would not be unreasonable to say that the general response to Vista has been negative, especially in the "power user" community.
Why?
The problem is partly one due to Microsoft's success: With Windows XP, they had finally released an operating system to the general public that was both stable and full featured enough to satisfy most users. Though there were some difficulties with XP early in its release cycle, most of them were fully addressed with the first service pack, and, in addition, by the time of that first service pack release XP was compatible with the vast majority of both software and hardware being used.
Ultimately, the end user sees this: Windows XP is a stable operating system that is compatible with almost all applications and hardware released this century.
Into this sea of complacency, Microsoft released Vista. Promising a "new and richer experience" (isn't it always thus?), Microsoft claimed better security, greater stability, a wiz-bang new colorful interface, faster launching applications (especially Microsoft Office OS related apps) and better search capabilities. All well and good, but hardly that compelling to the average user. Still, newer is often better, it DID look cooler, and so...why not?
Why not indeed!
What might not have been apparent on the surface is that Vista is, in fact, a major rewrite of the internal OS engine. This is a big problem, because while the end user might not SEE those changes, those changes affect most of the software and drivers that interact with Vista. That means that on a Vista system, MANY applications and drivers written for previous operating systems (including XP) do not work. In some cases, manufacturers rapidly issued updates or new versions that were supposedly compatible with Vista. But in some cases, the new versions were buggy, in other cases, the user was required to buy the new version, even if it didn't offer much additional functionality, other than Vista compatibility. And then there is the issue of hardware drivers. Many manufacturers support new drivers only as long as the hardware is current. In the world of PCs that can be a very short window indeed. This means that many peripherals, even those sold just a year or two earlier, lack working drivers for Vista. And, unlike earlier OS updates, drivers written for a previous OS typically do NOT work with Vista.
The situation when XP arrived was appreciably different. XP was, in fact, a modestly modified version of the Windows 2000 operating system that had been sold (primarily to businesses) for several years. As a result, most Windows 2000 drivers would work with XP, and even if they did not, it did not take much work by the manufacturer to get them to work. XP/2000 was also able to run a large percentage of apps written for earlier OSes without problem.
So, the curb appeal of the new Vista operating system was significantly diminished by the lack of compatibility with software and peripherals. Of course, not everyone cares about such compatibility. In fact, a good fraction of Windows users care mostly about using their PC to check email and surf the web. Surely Vista does that fine.
Well, yes, and not so much. Yes, it runs the operating system applications fine. Yes, it runs Microsoft Office fine (though even there, there were some early glitches). BUT, in order to run those apps with a reasonable degree of responsiveness, Vista needs more resources than its predecessors. A LOT more resources. Whereas Windows98 could make do with 128mb of memory, Windows 2000 with 256mb, and XP with 256 or 384mb, Vista really needs 1Gb or more of memory to run properly. Similarly, while previous OSes could run satisfactorily on older CPUs (even as far back as a 600-700Mhz Pentium 3 for XP), Vista is simply too much of a resource hog for that. That means that if you're running on an older, trusty PC, don't even consider an OS upgrade to Vista. But how about your newish, nifty PC that came with a whopping 512mb of memory? No, sorry. Yeah, Vista will install. But it'll run like a slug. You want to install Vista and have all those compatibility problems with older software and hardware? Well, you'll have to pay for that privilege, not only by buying the OS, but also by buying a lot more memory. Memory prices have dropped precipitously in the past year, but it's still another cost, and another hassle to the casual user who might not otherwise care about the incompatibilities.
Bottom line: Vista looks nice and runs well on a power PC with lots of memory and a recent powerful processor, but the advantages over XP seem modest and the software/hardware hassles are a problem.
I'm a power user, and until this point I have removed Vista from all the PCs I've purchased in the past year (save one experiment machine) and replaced it with XP Pro. The incompatibility issues are the killer for me.
As of a few days ago, Microsoft has released the long-awaited service pack update 1 (sp1) for Windows Vista. As is typical, the sp1 update is an important one, and it aims to address many of the most severe bugs with the new operating system. I was hoping that maybe it would also address the many remaining incompatibility issues. So I duly installed the new Windows Vista Ultimate SP1 as a fresh install on a top notch machine (Dell Inspiron 530 quad core Intel 2 processor, 3Gb memory, 500Gb hard drive, etc.) The install went fine. The annoying Windows activation went fine. Once it was installed, I didn't really perceive any big changes from the non-sp1 install. Then came the big test: Would the new service pack be any more accommodating of the older software I have that has previously been incompatible with Vista (including Photoshop plugins, music processing software, etc.) I can say, unfortunately, that no, software that was previously incompatible remains incompatible. No surprise there, but it was worth a try. Similarly, Microsoft has promised greater driver compatibility with this service pack, but when I tried a few older (post 2000) hardware peripherals that hadn't worked previously...they still wouldn't work (and in some cases the company that made them no longer exists, so there's no way there will EVER be a new driver).
OK, is there really ANY reason to consider an upgrade to Vista if you already have an OS? Well, the Media Center functions of Windows Vista Ultimate are nice, if you want to use your PC to control all your media (music, video, etc), especially if you connect your PC to your TV. However, the same functionality is available through Windows XP Media Center. There are some new desktop sidebars that are nice (and which appear stolen, at least in concept, from the Mac). The Aero interface is pretty, although it is relatively meaningless in terms of functionality. Vista offers some additional security features, although at the same time it will drive you to pull your hair out with the continual prompts aimed at "protecting" you.
In the end, I can't say I'd recommend this OS unless you buy a new PC (in which case you're not likely to have a choice). If you have XP installed, I can't imagine any compelling reason to upgrade at this time. Perhaps by the release of the second service pack, driver and old software compatibility will have improved enough that the story will have changed. But for now...nice try, but not yet any cigar.
 Works better than I expected March 28, 2008
M. A. Ramos (Florida USA)
3 out of 4 found this review helpful
I must admit I was one of those that avoided Windows for years. I finally tried it with Windows ME that came with a computer I bought. I heard a lot of bad, but since all I did was check web sites, e-mail and play games; it was perfect for me. I did not change again until I went to Windows XP Pro years later. And my brother fought with me to drop ME, though I still have the OS stored in its jewel case. Now onto the OS we are reviewing.
Once again with all I have heard I was nervous to install this; I would normally wait until Vista had its SP2 release before trying it normally if at all. So I decided to do a clean install. Vista does want the hardware it wants, and is not happy with all my XP hardware. Even though I far exceed XP requirements because I game so much. I have a very good video card and 1GB of Ram. But I do not have a dual-core system, though one is on the way with 2 GB of memory. But it had no trouble installing at all.
With XP Pro everything ran great and fast. On this computer Vista is running bit slow. But this I attribute to my computer so will not blame the software for this since I expected it. But I do love the Media Center functions of Windows and the Aero interface. Plus it allows you to place Widgets; I guess Windows calls them Gadgets, on the sidebar to allow better control of projects or various options on hand. Actually too many options for me, but I am sure many will love the options. I mean I do not really need to know the temperature outside. I live in the tropics where it is always hot. But it does let me use all the keys on my new keyboard and that is nice. Though I usually forget they are there and try to load things the old way. I guess I will learn.
What I do not like of Vista on this computer is that performance is slower than on XP Pro and that your everyday tasks often taking longer to perform and the setup options seem harder to find. This I think will just take getting use too and the new computer should speed everything up. What I cannot stand the constant security pop-up messages. If I have installed a program and ran it should know I will continue to want to run it at other times. I prefer the way XP handled my Pics, but that may be because I have not used Vista enough yet. I cannot figure out how to change the size of my photos yet. I would stay with XP Pro until you have to upgrade or if you are really into new technology and/or Multimedia networking.
But what everyone says is true; Vista wants the hardware it wants. So if you do not have the recommended hardware, do not get this software. If you have all the requested hardware then go ahead and get this. I did not have all the loading problems of those I read on various threads. But I would like to say once I again I did a clean install from CD. I do like the new look with Vista Ultimate and will take some more time to get use to it, but so far so good. May be trivial but I also like using the full-motion video as my desktop wallpaper. And I look forward to connecting it to me TV.
 Would Not Install on My PC, but did install on a MacBook April 5, 2008
S.E. Poza (Rimersburg, PA)
3 out of 4 found this review helpful
This review updated on June 4, 2008 (see the section after the asterisks):
I attempted to install this operating system (OS) on my 1.8 Ghz eMachine PC. My PC is on the older side but within the minimum specs required to install the software as outlined on the box.
Since I couldn't get the OS to install, I will talk about the installation experience for the reference of other potential buyers.
The first thing I did was choose to install and run the Windows Vista Advisor software so it could analyze my PC and offer some information on whether or not it was compatible. This required downloading another bit of system software for the Advisor software to run. The Advisor listed software which I had installed under XP that would not run or may have compatibility issues under Vista and mentioned that there may be some Vista functionality that I could not have based on my PC's specs. Note that it did not say that the OS would not run on my particular PC.
I chose a custom install which allowed for the installer software to make the best choices based on its analysis of my PC and it ran for around an hour giving periodic messages and at times restarting. This was all as should be expected. Unfortunately, after some time, my display went black and my external hard drive's access light stuck on red (which means it was no longer accessible). I waited a half hour to see if this was part of the installation process, but there was no change whatsoever. At that point, I had to force a restart.
Upon restarting, I was told that the installation was unsuccessful and that the installation would be undone. When the PC booted back up, it was running in XP in the same state it was in before the installation began and a message encouraged me to have my system analyzed to make sure it was compatible. However, I had already taken this step.
Though I wasn't able to install the software, I was impressed that it perfectly preserved my old system, applications and documents after the failure. In the near future, when I have significant amounts of time to tweak the installation, I hope to make another attempt to see if I can get the OS to install. I suspect that the black screen problem may have been the result of my upgraded video card conflicting with the built-in integrated graphics chip. I suspect Windows Vista may be attempting to tap into the integrated chip and this is causing a crash. I will have to work out how to disable the onboard chip during installation or physically remove the card to verify this. However, it may be prudent for others with a similar configuration (both an integrated graphics card and an upgraded card) to keep my experience in mind before installing Vista.
I will update this review when and if I successfully install Vista and detail how I got it to work should I manage it (and particularly whether or not the graphics card was the issue). I'm giving Vista two stars at this time mainly because of the Advisor software's ability to "warn" the buyer about what might break with Vista and in what way software may fail to function and the way the installer kept everything intact despite the failure to install. While it is disappointing to have the OS fail to install, it's less troubling if you experience no data loss in the attempt.
******************
A few months after failing to install Vista on my PC, I successfully installed it on a MacBook Intel Dual Core 2.4 Ghz with 2 GB of RAM. Installation on the MacBook was smooth and performance very speedy. I had to install the set of drivers that came with BootCamp to make everything fully functional, but I was able to configure Vista to do web surfing independent of Apple's drivers and it ran pretty well even without the correct drivers (it just did not have sound and ran at a default screen resolution). I was also able to smoothly locate shared drives on my home network and make a wireless connection.
Vista's main problem is that it smothers the user with caution and makes you dig around to turn all the warnings off. Every time an application launches or a piece of software is installed, Vista asks for your permission. It can be quite maddening after awhile but can be shut down using the control panel and accessing User Account settings. However, Microsoft really should have added the option to turn off all such warnings to the dialog boxes themselves rather than making the user tinker with the control panel settings.
The only other issue I have had with Vista is its refusal to allow me to use disc images. On a laptop, it's far faster and more convenient to run games off of images rather than having to carry around several discs when you have the whim to fire up a game. Eventually, I purchased a piece of shareware that seemed to do the job for now, but it is clear that Microsoft is doing all it can to circumvent anything with a hint of impropriety, even at the user's expense.
All that being said, I'd recommend Vista Ultimate to anyone with an Intel Mac of the same or greater specs than my MacBook if games or Windows-only software is on your horizon. It runs well and is easy to install. In particular, better support for the low-end integrated graphics cards that Apple uses in its mobile and low-end machines is available for Vista. I couldn't run games available for both Mac and PC on the Mac side because the driver software was incompatible and the Mac has no ability to run older software in compatibility mode. In Vista, I updated the driver software and I ran some very old and well-loved games in Windows XP compatibility mode.
I'd like to upgrade my star rating of Vista to 4 stars for a Mac running BootCamp but I'm afraid I can't edit the star rating after the fact.
|
