WINDOWS XP PROFESSIONAL..........

Moneysoft made Vista with way to many built in crap that i don't really care for. It has a very ANNOYING SECURITY feature that drives me crazy. Don't really want to pay $$$ just to use the windows areo feature thats so amazing (not really :tdown:) And it tries way to hard to fix a problem for me.:realmad:

But i guess if you like new and pretty things you can buy it. :)
And note if you try install vista on a machine that has windows xp but was orginally made for windows 2000 :dgi: IT WILL CRAWWWLLLLLLL, OR NOT MOVE AT ALL.

I'm not a computer tech and changed my vista back to xp.

I'm comfortable with it and don't really feel there is much I'm missing out on.

In a few years when I have no choice I'll switch, but as all I do is office and internet, don't really see the concern.

I'm not a computer tech and changed my vista back to xp.
I'm comfortable with it and don't really feel there is much I'm missing out on.
In a few years when I have no choice I'll switch, but as all I do is office and internet, don't really see the concern.

you right, never change a runing system.

some!!!! vista versions are able to be downgraded to XP, may be your vista version is able to downgrade to xp, check it out.
greetingz

every PC with Vista can be wiped and have XP installed.

Actually, be sure to be specific as to why you have the opinion of Vista that you do - Features, Speed, functionality, program compatibility etc...
when it first came out i couldn't use it because not many things were compatible - my soundcard etc - i had a gateway laptop also i found the windows programs more difficult and some features non existent especially word templates
the one thing i like is mah jong and purble palace for my little one

Wow.

Several points:

1.The techs in this country (all over the world for that matter) aren't doing their job by properly educating our consumers about Vista and what exactly is involved when a new OS comes out. In truth, we have treated Vista like a new end user app, instead of an OS. We didn't prepare people for it. Bottom line.

2. Many techs seemingly haven't figured out how Vista works yet, even for themselves (or don't care to) - despite the fact that we are supposed to be on the front line in making sure we know every major consumer OS inside and out without jumping to conclusions. If some of us can't get it to work and are unable to define what it takes to run Vista in a stable and efficient fashion, then what does that say about the tech industry? We cannot blame Microsoft because I have been involved in Vista rollouts here and in the US with no issues. Vista is an excellent OS when installed and implemented in a correct fashion.

3. Consumers in general have allowed the negative hype to taint their opinion. As with anything, if someone hears enough bad things about a product, and is not prepared for potential issues, a minor hiccup quickly becomes a major one (then again, this points back to tech firms and dispersal of information)

4. Perhaps Microsoft should not have coded Vista to be more secure and should have waited until Windows 7, despite how easily the Windows XP kernel can be exploited. While Vista is a solid response to claims by the Apple and Linux community that XP was not secure, MS should have seen that too many relatively new techs and experienced slackers are in the industry at this time, all loading Vista on boxes indiscriminately because they believe it's "just like XP" or is "just a dolled-up version of XP". This naivety alone accounts for a large percentage of people who have bought/built an Vista box, have run into problems and then threw their hands up in the air, when they should be RTFM or finding qualified Microsoft personal to assist in finding the solution to their problems.

5. Microsoft needs to nip this in the bud soon or Windows 7 will have the same undeserved negative flack, especially seeing that the general and tech public don't appear to understand exactly how different Vista is. It seems like some of us expected the move to Vista to be like the move from Windows 2000 to XP - and this presumption is a huge mistake that has not been addressed as yet This generation grew up with XP or windows 2000 on their PC's. Their expectations of migration from one OS to another is vastly different.

Monopoly aside, the tech industry owes Microsoft an apology...at least those of us who have not done our research.

Me! I really do not like it!
me too! (so much so im buying me a mac before the end of august)

every PC with Vista can be wiped and have XP installed.
general you is the big man:hammer:

Giving up on Vista? Here's how to downgrade to XP
http://www.pcwelt.de/index.cfm?pid=829&pk=95576

general you is the big man:hammer:
Giving up on Vista? Here's how to downgrade to XP
http://www.pcwelt.de/index.cfm?pid=829&pk=95576

luckily hardware manufacturers wont be giving up on XP for some years yet. but when they do we wont have a choice ... hopefully windows 7 will be a better product though, they messed up big time with Vista.

I'll reserve comments for later. But let's see who else jumps on the anti-Vista Bandwagon.
Bandwagon? It is a legitimate bandwagon.

-telnet removed
-Hyperterm removed
-command prompt won't go full screen
-can't drag path's from explorer to a command prompt
-breaks many Windows GPO policys

That is on top of the performance, driver, and interface drama. There is a reason Fortune 500s aren't adopting Vista as their new desktop standard. There is no reason to.

me too! (so much so im buying me a mac before the end of august)
Speaking of bandwagons.....

Wow.

Several points:

1.The techs in this country (all over the world for that matter) aren't doing their job by properly educating our consumers about Vista and what exactly is involved when a new OS comes out. In truth, we have treated Vista like a new end user app, instead of an OS. We didn't prepare people for it. Bottom line.

2. Many techs seemingly haven't figured out how Vista works yet, even for themselves (or don't care to) - despite the fact that we are supposed to be on the front line in making sure we know every major consumer OS inside and out without jumping to conclusions. If some of us can't get it to work and are unable to define what it takes to run Vista in a stable and efficient fashion, then what does that say about the tech industry? We cannot blame Microsoft because I have been involved in Vista rollouts here and in the US with no issues. Vista is an excellent OS when installed and implemented in a correct fashion.

3. Consumers in general have allowed the negative hype to taint their opinion. As with anything, if someone hears enough bad things about a product, and is not prepared for potential issues, a minor hiccup quickly becomes a major one (then again, this points back to tech firms and dispersal of information)

4. Perhaps Microsoft should not have coded Vista to be more secure and should have waited until Windows 7, despite how easily the Windows XP kernel can be exploited. While Vista is a solid response to claims by the Apple and Linux community that XP was not secure, MS should have seen that too many relatively new techs and experienced slackers are in the industry at this time, all loading Vista on boxes indiscriminately because they believe it's "just like XP" or is "just a dolled-up version of XP". This naivety alone accounts for a large percentage of people who have bought/built an Vista box, have run into problems and then threw their hands up in the air, when they should be RTFM or finding qualified Microsoft personal to assist in finding the solution to their problems.

5. Microsoft needs to nip this in the bud soon or Windows 7 will have the same undeserved negative flack, especially seeing that the general and tech public don't appear to understand exactly how different Vista is. It seems like some of us expected the move to Vista to be like the move from Windows 2000 to XP - and this presumption is a huge mistake that has not been addressed as yet This generation grew up with XP or windows 2000 on their PC's. Their expectations of migration from one OS to another is vastly different.

Monopoly aside, the tech industry owes Microsoft an apology...at least those of us who have not done our research.

You make some good points there, but Vista does just plain suck! I've moved from AppleDOS and Amiga Workbench to DOS to Windows 3.1 and System 7 and then to NT4 and Win 2000 and XP. Vista is not going anywhere. Windows 7 is going to be its own product, not a successor to Vista. The codebase may come from Vista, but the interface and the general design attitude will be different.

Remember Windows ME? Vista is going down that same road.

Remember Windows ME? Vista is going down that same road.

second, that point of few.

second, that point of few.

ME was better than 98 once it was Setup and Tweaked properly, Vista on the other hand .... even Tweaked (and no additional apps open) it used 384 MB of my shared memory, while XP default only used 8MB. :realmad:

Remember Windows ME? Vista is going down that same road.The real question is why though. Microsoft just had some extra time on their hands?

I have not had a problem with Vista that wasn't solved by swapping out an incompatible piece of hardware or removing a crap piece of software. Am I that lucky?

Also, I haven't met anyone here in Nassau who has really gotten down into the guts of Vista. We still have have peeps who are caught up on cpu and ram specs as if that is the end-all-be-all of performance in a system and thus expect Vista to just work. I usually ask them, "So you really couldn't get it running properly?" They look at me puzzled for a bit and then they get what I'm saying.

It's funny that compared to Linux the skill level to run, install and configure Windows is like driving an automatic car versus a manual shift one. What I'm trying to figure out is given all that relative ease of use, techs are still complaining? I don't understand that.