I disagree, saying at least it is not as bad as Windows 95 at launch means nothing. Vista has not been just released and is not experiencing a bunch of unintended bugs it’s been around for over a year now. It should be MORE backwards compatible than XP was and more stable. Instead what people got is a semi 3d desktop, gizmos (seriously was this needed), a system that asks you incessantly and constantly about if you’re sure you want to do something (until to disable almost all of its provided security features), and has one of the worst compatibility issues of any current OS.
In an effort to move technology and their bottom line along they tried to force a migration to Vista. They did not want to support older protocols so they just cut them out figuring that there consumer base would just get new equipment so that they could use MS new OS. The forced migration for DirectX10 was a blatant finger to gamers considering that most of our collection of software will not run in Vista.
Now I am not a Microsoft hater. The company has done great things for the PC. Made the computer more accessible to million with Windows (as opposed to DOS), produced many great games (Age of Empires, Mech Commander 2), and has developed systems that help businesses go further on less capital. Participation in protecting games from censorship. And yes they are a business they have the right and the purpose of making money.
But much of there recent actions have annoyed me to no end. So much so that I try to avoid giving them business. Yes I am a windows user, but out of necessity rather than choice. Kinda hard to be a gamer on Linux or a Mac.
The reason Vista I horrible (at least for my purposes) is that instead of building on what made XP Pro a great system, they did the exact opposite. They lowered its driver database and they decreased software compatibility. Having to run some games in DOS Box was annoying on XP (have a Win98 box still running cause of that), using Virtual PC on Vista should not of been necessary at all. They decreased hardware compatibility, like everyone was going to run out and buy new equipment for Vista. They got rid of 16bit support for programs so 32bit programs with 16bit installers will not work (rather install but you know what I mean). All in an effort to not have to support past platforms and protocols, as if it really would have been a challenge for them to do so.
I am glad that Vista is so unpopular, I am glad that most games are still DirectX9, and I am glad that Microsoft is taking a hit on Vista. Maybe the next time around they will make a product worth getting.
If anyone from Microsoft is listening (and I doubt there is) here the system EVERYONE wants. Make it backwards compatible to the point of nausea. Make it so backwards compatible it will read punch cards. If you need to use Virtual PC for anything its not compatible enough. Fix the audio abstraction layer to work with existing cards, we bought those expensive sound cards for a reason we want hardware acceleration for direct sound without having to use an OpenAl wrapper. Stop rearranging the location of internal applications in every OS release, it does not help anyone. Stop wasting development time on fancy desktops if we want that we will download/make a theme. DirectX10 is not worth a new operating system and should be able to process DirectX9, fix it. Oh yeah we do not need ten different versions of the operating system, the most functional and versatile should be the only one sold, period. Do these things and you will get an operating system that people want to buy. Rather than the slow forced conversion method you are trying by sending it out on most new PC’s. Which has not worked, just look at Dell still sending out new comps with XP.
Like I said I appreciate a lot of things MS does but Vista is not one of them. Ill be forced eventually to it but today is not that day.

Your sentiments are not alone, VaultReader. I can’t reprint some of the things I’ve heard people say about Windows Vista I read on my blog here at AVault due to the use of multiple obscenities in their posts.

In an interesting move, Alienware still offers new computers with XP as an option (as of last week, when I looked). Considering how expensive Alienware is, and how they pride themselves as top of the line, the fact that they consider it worth their rather expensive bandwidth to offer XP as an option indicates that even businesses feel as you do.

As far as Virtual PC goes, it does not work with all versions of Vista, including my version: Home Premium. Microsoft will not support its use on my OS; the same OS they themselves put out. This mystifies and saddens me.

I just started playing D2 LOD again on US East. Would love to have some more pals to game around with, if you and the missus are interested. my username is bcmcknight77. msg me sometime if you want to play.

Jason that’s my whole point with the multiple versions of the Vista OS. Why would Microsoft make so many versions that are just levels of functionality.

It is not like Windows 98 and Windows NT where 98 was a operating system for everyone and NT (as a completely separate OS) was just for servers and certain work stations. I would of just used 98 for that stuff considering the compatible and bugs in NT but that’s another issue.

Vista weather or not you were using ultimate or home or 64bit is essentially the same system. There all on the same install disk for crying out loud (the 32bits), why would anyone want the reduced functionality of home when Ultimate is the best solution for everyone.

If Microsoft wants a certain price for their OS just charge that. Do not make crappie versions of your OS (which are somewhat cheaper) just to try and get a few more dollars from people. The frustrations that people will get using the less functional version will cost Microsoft more in the long run and probably has already.

My brother runs a Vista 64 rig I built for him, nice setup, but more than half of his gaming collection will not run natively on it. And when he uses Virtual PC on his rig (and some older games still do not function within it he says) you take a significant performance hit on your PC because you are trying to run two OS on the same time. Not to mention ways to screw it up with the resource allocation Virtual PC makes you set (his words, I have yet to try.)

Hell now that I think about it why is there a 32bit and 64bit system why couldn’t the 64bit been made to handle 32bit? I positive it’s possible, especially for the price Vista Ultimate 64 costs.

Ok ranting again, your right Jason, there is no reason Virtual PC should not work with your Vista Home. But than again there is no reason Vista should of been made that you have to use Virtual PC to run programs in the first place.

Whether not weather**

You know , Vista is not bad after you get all the patches downloaded from Windows Update. I bought an EMachines T3626 Desktop PC and it had Vista Premium loaded on it. It also had a Sempron Processor 3800+ 2.2ghz and 1gb of Ram. I put in a PNY Geforce 8400 GS and loaded 2GB of Ram (if it wasnt for newegg being so dirt cheap on ram I wouldnt of did the upgrade) and it runs like a champ. ‘

Im playing older games like NHL 2001 and it runs just fine.

It certainly is not XP but it has come a long way.

Thanks, Ben, we might just do that if we are hanging out on Battlenet US East.

As for Virtual PC and multiple OSes, Vaultreader, I’d be interested to know if your brother likes 64 bit in other respects.

As for Vista not being bad if you have the updates, Jason Carver, I will point out that it is difficult to get those updates if Vista won’t install the drivers for your wireless adapters that come on the disk. And I do agree on one thing: when running things Vista can run properly, it does run well.

Heh Jason – you say you got your Vista PC networked with an XP machine?? That must be a first – see technet forums on XP/Vista networking.

So congratulations – how did you do it??

I have found my way round Vista sufficient for most things but it sure isn’t anything worth paying for. Gamers should dual-boot.

Give me a freaking break.

Are you really so facile as to blame your OS for some chicken and egg network driver issue?

Seriously, why in the world do you expect your OS to be responsible for who-knows-what crap drivers you are trying to install for some collection of hardware that you bought because you thought it was a “good deal”.

I’m not sure why people think they can buy stuff and bolt on their old hardware and software and then point the finger at their new OS when they run into issues. Backwards compatibility, security improvements, and a relatively open hardware platform that enables competing (i.e. inexpensive) peripherals, all come at a price.

Yes, you flat out are being unreasonable. Your point on networking is that you had some old hardware that you needed to go out and get updated drivers for? Your point on dx is that an old version isn’t installed? Your point on game compatibility is that you had issues but found workarounds for a game from 2001?

What’s funny is that you seemingly are savvy enough to at least look to the correct sources for fixes yet those companies are above reproach and do not have any responsiblity. Did you bother to check if your wireless network adapter was supported in Vista and get the appropriate drivers ahead of time? Did you complain to Blizzard about not patching their game to install correctly in modern OS’s?

Sticks:

I didn’t do anything out of the ordinary. I let Vista discover the network and my settings are Private Network. Now, Vista seems to be slow in displaying other computers on the network in the Network View or on the Network Map. It’s taken up to five minutes to sort it all out on some days. But if you tag the computers and directories you want as favorites, you don’t have to wait for Vista to sort the network out after boot up. Just boot up, and start browsing via favorites. I don’t know if my advice helps or not, but there you go.

On a related note, Vista, like every other version of Windows I’ve ever used, sometimes hates transferring large amounts of data over the LAN. But since I’ve had problems transferring data in sizes over 1 gigabyte over a LAN since Windows 98, I can’t really complain about Vista.

Durr:

I feel fully entitled to complain about the OS, since the OS feature, compatibility mode, has not worked properly in the two instances I listed. My success in using it with Diablo II still involved working around its failure in another instance. Furthermore, DirectX9, an important piece of software still supported by Microsoft and used in applications that are being developed right now, did not come with VIsta despite Microsoft knowing it is still in use, supporting it because it is still in use, and knowing full well that Directx10 doesn’t do the same things and is not compatible with DirectX9 stuff. And the developers have done their part. D-Link does have Vista drivers, which you can only get to with an Internet connection. As for the game I am beta-testing, the developers will be including DirectX9 on their install disks when the game is released. That doesn’t change the fact that including both DirectX 9 and 10 on the Vista installation disk would have obviated my need to fool around with it, and would have cost Microsoft NOTHING. Nada. Zip. Not even more than a single man-hour of their time. It’s not like there’s no room on the DVD. And it’s not like they didn’t know it would be needed.

Jason my brother does like Vista 64 Ultimate for average daily use, hitting the web, new games that were made specifically for Vista (or rather Vista compatible) and it installed without problems (clean install). That being said once everything got running finding drivers for Vista 64 is a bit more time intensive than for Vista 32 and not available for all products (even if there is a regular Vista 32 version.) I will admit though that Vista 64 drivers are becoming far more common as most new system are 64bit.

But he is annoyed with the compatibility issue since like most gamers his collection is never “outmoded” but simply growing. And implementing older games in Vista makes there use difficult, if it is even possible. And since gaming is the major reason he spent the cash on a new PC he obviously not satisfied when it come to older titles. For new games he has yet to have an issue and everything has worked. Also some 32bit programs usually system utilities will not function in Vista 64. It literally has a message come up that it wont work on a 64bit system.

As far as networking goes, outside of a router and switch from his modem he does not have any type of home network going so can’t comment on it.

Overall he feels that Vista 64 use is limited. It allows him to take full advantage of his new hardware (aside from the sound card issue I posted on previously) and use the few DirctX10 only products out there. Aside from that, he feels he got far more use out of XP Pro and has maintained his older XP system for many of his needs.

If your wondering if Vista 64 is better than Vista 32 (regardless of version) all I can say is that our only extensive use of Vista was 64 Ultimate so neither I nor my bro can comment on how it compares to your 32bit Vista.

I still think you entirely missed it.

I wouldn’t be surprised if DX9 was on the DVD somewhere.. but really it is on a ton of game CDs\DVDs in addition to being available for dl so sorry.. non-issue. It absolutely shouldn’t be installed by default as not everyone will need it.

The networking stuff is entirely a non-issue. You don’t have anyone to blame other than yourself for getting into a state where you didn’t have internet access to get the drivers you needed. Well, you could also blame your hardware manufacturer for not having drivers in the box (it isn’t like they didn’t have time) but then again they make hardware and to be competitive can’t spend a ton of money on writing drivers.

I don’t really think you have a good grasp on the old game compatibility issue either. Backwards compatibility is a tradeoff.. the more old hardware and software that are required to be compatible, the more difficult it is to innovate and improve the OS. So yes, some old software and hardware just isn’t going to work. Others might need varying amounts of workarounds. That is pretty much true for everything.. go buy a new car and try to play your 8tracks or even cassettes in it.

I mean really. Diablo2 is ancient. The CD says Windows 2000/98/95/NT. To put this in perspective do you wear clothes that old? Have any functioning computers that old? Drive a car that old? Likely not. So you took this crusty piece of software and blame your OS when you have troubles with it? I’m quite sure (and so are you) that if you were to give blizzard a call (you know.. the company that made the software you are having problems with) that they would tell you it wasn’t supported and best case point you to info on workarounds found by other customers.

Durr not to get in the middle of your argument, but Jason makes his point. Yes your right, there was nothing an OS can do if you have no drivers to work with your network card.
But Jason’s point (from my view) and the point of this particular blog is that Vista in all its many incarnations fails to deliver what a broad swath of its customer’s need and want.

How many companies just did not upgrade their OS because they could not afford the new software or hardware that would be required to work with Vista. Or the multitudes of individual users who started up there new Vista systems to find that they could not use there favorite software (i.e. Diablo 2) and much of there perfectly useable and still functioning hardware that ran running XP plug and play drivers (perhaps that network card issue).

Yes there is an expectation that the third party software and hardware vendors would release new drivers and patches to make their products work in Vista. The point though is that if existing equipment and software worked in a previous OS (lets go with Xp on this one) there is no reason that a company selling its top of the line new OS (lets say Vista 64 Ultimate) should not be able to do what a previous and supposedly inferior product can do.

This idea that to move forward you have to leave most of the previous generation behind is a manufactured idea. Your examples are wrong in most cases many people have older cars (like my self ‘97 Toyota) and I have yet to have a problem getting parts for it from Toyota, hell I can still get a replacement tape deck. Clothes while not something I spend much time or money on also gains new life. How many times have you seen Retro and second hand shops with crowds. There is no reason Microsoft with vast resources and manpower could not of made a fully backwards-compatible product. Especially at the expensive price Vista can sell at ($400 for Vista 64 Ultimate.) They simply chose not to.

That is the complaint, that is the reason for the Blog, and the reason that at least in my mind Jason is correct.

I am not say Microsoft has to do any of what I am saying. It’s a company that follows it own ideas and policies. What many others and I are saying is that there latest product is at the very least disappointing. And does not meet the majority of there customers needs or wants.

For the record I speak for my self, I do not know Jason personally, and I do not presume to speak on his behalf and apologize if I have stuck my nose in where I should not of.

Having gone through the dual hells that were both 95 and ME, I’ll wait until I HAVE to make the move before I VIista. XP has been a good little soldier that’s never let me down. I’m not about to retire him yet.

I have been running Vista for about a year now on two computers, one of which is a media center and the other is a gaming system, and I almost completely disagree with your blog.

First off, I have tons of old school games (haven’t tried Diablo specifically, not saying you don’t have a problem), and compatability has been a non-issue on all but a very few games. I had to go out of my way more often to ensure that I set Win95/98 compat mode in XP with older games than I do with Vista. I would even go so far as to say that Vista is a significant improvement over XP in terms of security, user control, and usability. It can be difficult to make the switch if you are very very used to the way XP works, but even just the language used in Control Panel items ups the accessibility level of Vista over any other previous MS operating system. Much more intuitive.

Vista is also a no-brainer for anybody who uses a computer as a Media Center and doesn’t want to hassle with Linux. Vista’s version of Media Center blows away the one that was previously available in terms of stability, usability, and video quality.

It’s interesting how XP is suddenly the holy grail. You’re repeating the EXACT same complaints (and I mean ALL of them basically) that people voiced when XP was released. I’m curious, where were you then? Either you’re all very fresh in the ‘biz’ or you have lousy memories.

Currently playing Fallout 2 without hassle on my Vista rig btw.

I can’t speak for anyone else, but I started using XP Pro around the time Service Pack 2 came out. Before that, I clung to Windows 98 for many years, mainly because I promised myself I wouldn’t change until I bought a new computer. But that’s just my story.

In Reply to Sticks:
You can successfully run both XP and Vista on the same computer. Start with XP and then partion the drive to hold Vista. Go through the set-up and time consuming BS. On start up it will ask you if you want to run XP or Vista.

To Jason:
From what I’ve read on your blogger’s profile it seems that your cats OS works fine. It’s the operater that has problems. If you ever come see your sister (me) then you can have a whole new experince gaming on a 42inch LCD TV. Nothing’s better then slaughtering people in 1080p.

64 bit

I run the 64 bit on my pc, and must say, that most of my old games Like lundin works great( Bye the way props for Falluot) but i do have some problems with myst, the rivendale all other work fine. And my monky island games exept the first one that runs fine.

I allso had teh problem with wireless routing, i used a belkin, that only had 32bit upgrades, so i had to use a cable to instal wista, an then by a new wireless card. puuhh that took some time finding.

But all in all happy user

PS: dident much care for the xp version.