Cutting Prices Won't Save Windows Vista

[napster007]

i agree that vista takes up a lot of system resources but the OS is ment for a bit high graded systems. The world will slowly shift to the new hardware and then everyone will be using vista. If you talk about stability ppl used to think that 98 was the most stable OS ever made(it is) but now xp has proved to be as stable.

Time is what Vista needs. Give it some time

 

[narangz]

I had decided not to post in OS related threads coz of wat goes on in them

But this time I just couldn't resist. So here I go:

^
Guys vista sucks, but not its sales

Vista doesn't suck . I 've 1GB RAM, AMD 64 X2 3800+ & Nvidia 6150 onboard graphics. It runs fine. Never had a BSoD. Actually I forced a BSoD once with a really messed up driver.

And main reason for it is OEM's selling their system with vista only.Give them choice and count the no. of units then . You should conduct a survey to find how many out of 100 millions actually using it right now
Also Sp1 is mainly game centric.

OEM sales only? You forgot corporate sales! I myself removed Vista on my laptop & installed XP. But I came back to Vista. It's my primary OS on both laptop & desktop.

SP1 is not just for gamers! It fixes most of the issues like speed etc.

I'm not here to argue whether Vista is a failure or not

Microsoft dropped the prices pretty quickly didn't they. I wonder how all those who were the first to buy or upgrade are feeling.

The position of customers who bought Vista Ready PCs is even worse; they must be feeling miserable. A class action suit has been filed only in the US, what about other countries?

It was not that quick. It took more than a year to drop the prices. Take an example. You bought N95 in a week's time after it's release & after six months where's the price going?

IMO, OEMs are not the only reason for sale of Vista. Even hardware manufacturers are. I've had a tuff time getting some hardware work in XP and hence had to go with Vista.

True. But I managed to find all the drivers for my hardware. XP ran fine. But I shifted back to Vista. IMO Vista is more stable. I never had to reset my computer with Vista running!

it does hv benifits but wat sort.....

looks n appearance - get xp n vista theme

better details abt file transfer etc....agree...hope xp also has alternative

security...agree....better than xp but dun think ts safest.....m a net freak...already formatted my system 3 times in last 5mnths due 2 heavy intrusion of spywares...

now fr drawbacks-

it sells d system resources....my 1gb ram is alwez 60+ % consumed wit no work....

slowwwwww.....

1. Vista is installed on my computer for the last six months, atleast. I never got infected! There's no virus, spyware or any kind of malware. I use Windows Defender+Windows Firewall+Norton Antivirus 2007. Vista runs fine with all these turned on on my above mentioned configuration.

2. Vista is not for computers of the Windows 98/Me era. It utilises RAM to the best. Memory is not wasted just to show it as free. You need to read about that to understand it . I agree it requires atleast 1GB of RAM to run smoothly. 1GB of RAM(DDR 2-667) costs just 800-900 Bucks these days.

 

[naveen_reloaded]

i dont think vista will go down... actually it way better.. many are hard coded...

give few more months .. vista will beat XP...

xp .. is awesome no doubt .. but vista is better than xp.... in many ways...

 

[CadCrazy]

IMO Vista is more stable. I never had to reset my computer with Vista running!

Lol

 

[naveen_reloaded]

^^^ y buddy???

even i hadnt had restart ??

 

[ravi_9793]

Lol

U really need to have Vista experience. All vista user are well satisfied.

 

[gxsaurav]

wit vista they say...ts time 2 say good bye to 16bit app...so vista doesnt support it....wat if i wanna use....i bought lappy fr my coding purpose whr i needed dos but ts not supported....

Vista has full & proper support for 16bit apps.

it sells d system resources....my 1gb ram is alwez 60+ % consumed wit no work....

Instead of sitting Idle, the RAM is being used for caching purpose.

 

[narangz]

Lol

LOL at your LOL

U really need to have Vista experience. All vista user are well satisfied.

I guess he has already experienced the WOW! But he wont admit it. FOSS rocks! Vista & MS sucks in every department

 

[praka123]

nobody have any problems with ethical issues associated with Vi$ta
I mean THIS
Thing about THIS

 

[narangz]

^^ You already posted a link about DRM in this thread

 

[praka123]

before attacking me for posting DRM+Vi$ta,u shouldve shared ur idea on the spreading of DRM by M$.

 

[narangz]

^^Na. I don't attack anyone. I had anti DRM signature from the last 3-4 months. Changed it some days ago.
Vaise bhi who wants DRM?

Rest In Pieces DRM

BTW- MS didn't 'invent' it.

 

[ravi_9793]

well, I have used vista RC1, and Vista Home Basic. And my experience with vista is very good. Well cant say about others.

And I am planing to buy Vista home premium with my new system. Just need some budget.

 

[Hackattack]

When Xp came out people were saying almost similar things like 98 is stable, xp needs more ram, needs more hdd space (just over a gig compared to about 200MB for 98 ). Same thing is happening to vista.

I've been using vista ultimate for like 3months, no probs no bsod, so many old softwares ran without any prob. I think its better than xp, and I like the networking features, the windows card games looks cool. Though it's a little slow on my slow system, i have no complains,

I think its a good thing people should move towards new things, and prices also are dropping like heaven nowadays, so who cares about hardware, the latest config now after a year is gonna look like PIII.

And why are some guys so upset about the vista hate thing, surely this is not the last OS by Microsoft. Lots of things are lying in the future.

 

[infra_red_dude]

I dunno why but I've never heard saying that Win98 is good while speaking bad about XP. Everywhere.. I mean everywhere ppl were happy about XP and wanted to ditch 98 due to crashes. Guess thats coz they already had tasted the stability of Win2K over which XP basically is built. I dunno why you guys keep saying that ppl hailed 98 when XP was launched. Or mebbe I was in Mars that time!!!

 

[sakumar79]

Actually, Anirudh, if I remember correctly, when XP came and upto SP2, many people preferred Win2k for stability and Win98 for simple home use... Home users found Win98 more home-friendly than Win2k and were willing to take the security risks involved (at that point it was not half as bad as it is today)

Arun

 

[infra_red_dude]

^^^ Yeah Win2K, 98 whatever. But I've never heard people say 98 is/was more stable than XP when launched, as some people here keep saying all the time!!!!

 

[debsuvra]

U really need to have Vista experience. All vista user are well satisfied.

Rightly said and I am quite happy with Vista these days. After getting SP1 and installing it upon a new installation of Vista is just a smooth experience. I am now running even better with Vista SP1.

MS did a fantastic job with SP1. I also have Ubuntu Gutsy Gibbon installer on my old PC and I do not hate linux. But I think it will need more improvement over times.

 

[ring_wraith]

Vista is surely more stable than XP. It just consumes too many resources. Apart from that, it's great.

But I prefer XP, coz I prefer a speedy PC to a pretty one.

@ narangz, if you use all those softwares on XP, then you won't get afflicted either.

 

[NucleusKore]

...As I have said before XP before SP2 pretty much sucked.......

I'll agree on this one. I bought my XP license only after SP2 OS came out.