Why Do Some People Hate Windows Vista?

[Jason Dunn]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.infoworld.com/article/08/02/05/06NF-save-xp-vista-hate_1.html' target='_blank'>http://www.infoworld.com/article/08...sta-hate_1.html</a><br /><br /></div><em>&quot;You rarely hear about a new OS causing people to panic. But IT consultant Scott Pam says that's exactly what his small-business clients are doing when they install Windows Vista on new PCs and run smack into compatibility or usability roadblocks. Pam's clients are not alone: Since InfoWorld launched its petition drive on Jan. 14 to ask Microsoft to continue selling new XP licenses indefinitely alongside its Vista licenses, more than 75,000 people have signed on. And hundreds of people have commented &mdash; many with ferocious, sometimes unprintable passion. &quot;Right now I have a laptop with crap Vista and I'm going to downgrade to XP because Vista sucks,&quot; reads one such comment. Where does all the vitriol come from?&quot;<br /><br /></em><img border="1" src="http://images.thoughtsmedia.com/resizer/thumbs/size/500/dht/auto/1202850494.usr1.jpg" alt="" /><br /><br />This article discusses one of the major problems that Microsoft has with Windows Vista: the negative public perception of it. Sure, Microsoft has sold 100 million licenses, but I can't recall any version of Windows in the past that has generated so much angst. Why do some people have such strong reactions to Vista? Do they simply not like change? Or do they have genuine concerns about ways in which the new OS is actually worse? Or have expectations of an operating system simply changed and Vista isn't meeting those expectations?<br /><br />Myself, I think Vista's a huge leap beyond Windows XP - it's hard to put my finger on any one feature as being &quot;the&quot; reason to upgrade; it's more like my overall perception of my computing experience is better. My Vista systems don't seem to bog down like my XP systems did, especially after applications have been left idle and minimized for a while. That's not to say that I don't mutter a curse prior to uttering the word Vista now and then, especially when things like file copy are involved. And there are dozens of minor user interface irritations that need fixing, such as the password field not having keyboard focus when a system comes out of screen saver or monitor suspend.

[brianchris]

I couldn’t agree more on why people hate Vista so much. People hate it when their system slows down (or crashes) because their operating system (Windows XP and earlier) is unsecure, SO Microsoft makes changes and releases a security hardened OS. Obviously, there are huge application incompatibilities suddenly, but at exactly one year and one week from Vista’s launch date, I blame application developers for not upgrading their apps to be Vista compatible. I can’t tell you how many applications are “Vista Compatible” by turning off User Account control, which makes the OS less secure. Could Microsoft of coordinated better with developers in advance of Vista’s launch?.....perhaps even delayed Vista’s launch even further than they already did to give time for developers to get familiar with the massive security changes? Probably (I don’t know how much of that was done or not), but this is a case of Microsoft being damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

[whydidnt]

I certainly don't fall into the "hate Vista" camp. I'm running Vista Ultimate on couple of my machines and XP Media Center or Pro on a couple more. My original plan was to upgrade all of my PC's to Vista -- I still have 3 unused licenses sitting here. After getting Vista and using it though, I can't find any compelling reasons to move those machines from XP. Unless you have new equipment with tons of memory it's just plain slower. The file copy operations as you mention are a joke. I have found awful Wireless network performance-often dropping the connection in the middle of those slow file copies. I sure that's a driver problem, but yet again, not one I experience with XP.

There just isn't enough benefit provided by Vista to overcome the lousy driver support and poor overall performance. You indicate there is no one thing that makes it better. In all honesty, I struggle to find any little thing that makes it better, sure it looks better, but that really isn't any big deal in my day-to-day computer usage. I've disabled UAC, so don't receive benefit from that. I have been a long time user of Copernic Desktop Search and find it superior to Vista's built in search feature, so I don't use that. The Mail and calendar are improved, but of course won't sync with Microsoft's own Mobile devices, so I still use Outlook 2003 for those functions.

In MS's effort to secure the OS and fight piracy on behalf of Hollywood they've added too much bloat and not provided enough end-user benefit. Seriously, why should we have to put up with poorer performance and not really see any end benefit. I have two nearly identical laptops, one running XP and one running Vista. They are both stable, both run pretty well, but the XP machine is faster at just about everything. I use the Vista Machine the same way I use the XP machine, and at the end the day, I'm always left thinking, so how did Vista make my computing experience better? I usually struggle to find an answer, and that is why I don't see any reason to deal with the hassle and headache of upgrading the rest of my machines to Vista at this point in time.

[EscapePod]

The PCs I built purposely for Vista are the very best I've ever had in the 28 years I've been building and using. Vista is by far the best OS I've used. I just have a hatred for HP because several of my old printers and scanners don't have full blown drivers. Oh, they work with Vista, but are missing a few of the bells & whistles there XP software pack had. I use that equipment quite well with my ubuntu PCs now.

I like ubuntu -- can't beat the price. However, my main PC is Vista.

[rzanology]

this erks me to no end. why do people attempt to run new software on old hardware and expect it to work? then say things like "vista runs like crap on my old laptop" who fault is that? why is it that apple can tell people your old hardware is of no use and thats fine. when microsoft does it...."oh my god...i can't belive microsoft....im sticking to xp! the nerve of them!" this is getting out of hand. i am a system admin for citi....and we're pushing out vista very aggrively....and ofcorse this means replace all hardware with hp dual core machines. people cry up and down when i tell them their getting vista. "oh i heard it sucks....its slow...it wont work" when i ask them why it sucks...they can't answer....they dont know...its just what they heard. so i force it down their throats....a week later...they pull me over and try to explain to me what they think its cool. and how much they love it. vista is rock solid....if the people running their mouths actually used the os on hardware its supposed to be used on everyone would agree...vista is pretty good!

[marlof]

The copy of Vista I received for free with my notebook is still lying unopened in my closet. When I received it last year, I didn't want to reinstall everything again. And I have absolutely no issues with XP at the moment, so I just keep running that. No Vista Angst, just lazy. :-)

[Stinger]

My machine is running Windows XP MCE and I'll tell you why...

A couple of months after Vista was released, I decided to build a new PC and bought a copy of Vista to go with it. I went with the 64-bit version since I'd run the 64-bit version of Windows XP without any problems.

All of the hardware I purchased was certified as Vista capable. However, that seems to be stretching the truth. As soon as I install Vista, I came across massive problems. I was getting blue screens and freezes every 5 minutes. Basically, the driver support was terrible. Even software that worked fine on XP 64-bit edition refused to run on Vista. Most bizarrely, Vista refused to communicate with my router. Swapping out the router solved the problem.

I've bought every new Microosft OS at launch since MS DOS 6.22 and I've never had anything like as much problems as I had with Vista.

And so I went back to XP. Everything works and I'm happy with it. Maybe driver support has improved since I first tried installing Vista, but where's the incentive to try? I couldn't see any convincing argument to upgrade. Aero is nice but largely pointless. The security features are nice, but I never had any security problems on XP. The upgraded version of MCE is nice, but the XP version is good enough. Even DirectX 10 isn't much of a draw now that the Xbox 360 has so many good games out for it.

Microsoft now has the same problem with both Windows and Office. They've both reached a state of 'good enough' so there's not much incentive to spend lots of money upgrading to the latest version.

[bluemax]

When the world went from Windows 98 to Windows ME we heard the same kinds of discussions. Driver issues, application issues, lockups, blue screens. Everyone was relieved when Windows XP came along - but - it had the same issues. Scanners didn't work. Photoshop didn't work. Its really slow. There were all kinds of complaints and it dragged on for months. Eventually everyone bought new hardware and paid (sometimes big money) for software upgrades and the furor died down.

I don't understand why Vista has gotten so much bad press for so long. No, I'm not using it. My system is new enough to satisfy but too old for Vista. I've heard these impassioned statements but have not heard any real explanations why people don't like Vista.

So, rather than just say you HATE VISTA. I'd like to know exactly why.

Bill B

[jeffd]

Theres lots of reasons people hate vista..

#1 it cost a helluva lot of money, and everyone knows it still has many bugs and incomplete features in it still. Who in their right mind wouldn't be pissed?

#2 Games..all games.. are slower to varying degrees in vista. considering the far majority of people with the high end hardware capable of running vista are running it for games, this is another huge reason to hate vista. Also DX10 has not shown to be the savior it was touted by MS to be, not worth going over the plethora of doctored flight sim X photos released to show it.

#3 phasing out XP early, something that is still in use on more pcs then vista will for a long long time. This smacks of forcing people to upgrade their OS or lose updates to their exploitable software?

I could keep going.. ^^

[Jason Dunn]

You indicate there is no one thing that makes it better. In all honesty, I struggle to find any little thing that makes it better, sure it looks better, but that really isn't any big deal in my day-to-day computer usage.

Hmm. From a practical, non-looks standpoint, two things that I really like and that definitely enhance my productivity are:

1) Being able to press the Windows key on my keyboard, start typing the name of the app or document that I'm searching for, then pressing down to select it, and pressing down or just enter to start it. I remember having to do a lot more hunting in the start menu under XP.

2) Vista is so much better at XP with memory management. Open up Outlook, minimize it, and come back after an hour and maximize the window. Under XP, the system will grind and grind as it tries to swap the app back into memory from the hard drive. On Vista, everything just "floats" and is lighting fast when restoring windows after they've been minimized for a while.

[Jason Dunn]

A couple of months after Vista was released, I decided to build a new PC and bought a copy of Vista to go with it. I went with the 64-bit version since I'd run the 64-bit version of Windows XP without any problems.

I'm pretty confident in saying that 99% of your problems were because you chose to go with 64-bit Vista. I'm impressed you had no problems with 64-bit XP, because whenever anyone tells me they want to go 64-bit I ask them why, and no one can answer. Unless you're running something that really NEEDS 8 GB of RAM (or more), like a radiology image processing workstation, going 64-bit seems to be a waste of money and, more so, sanity. Everyone I know running 64 bit is CONSTANTLY complaining about bad drivers, applications that don't have 64 bit installers, etc. I certainly believe that 64 bit is the future, but the future hasn't quite arrived yet...

So, I'm curious, why did you go 64 bit on XP? What advantages have you seen living in a 64 bit world?

[Stinger]

So, I'm curious, why did you go 64 bit on XP? What advantages have you seen living in a 64 bit world?

Like you, I'm a curious person. :) There was a free trial, I had a x64 CPU and so I thought I'd check it out. XP 64-bit ran perfectly and the only thing that didn't work was my webcam.

The reason why I went with the 64-bit version of Vista is because I'd had no problems with the 64-bit version of XP. I bought hardware that was "Certified for Vista" and I was under the impression that it meant that the hardware shipped with 32-bit and 64-bit drivers that had been tested by Microsoft. My machine has 4GB of RAM and so there didn't seem to be any pitfalls in choosing that version. How wrong I was. :)

Sadly, I went with the OEM version of Vista so I've got the choice of waiting for compatibility to get better or to buy the 32-bit version.

So whose fault is it. The hardware vendors' for writing crappy drivers? Microsoft's for their crappy Certified programme? Or mine for making stupid, unrealistic assumptions? Probably a mix of all three!

[Jason Dunn]

I bought hardware that was "Certified for Vista" and I was under the impression that it meant that the hardware shipped with 32-bit and 64-bit drivers that had been tested by Microsoft.

Indeed, that's a huge problem and it's quite ridiculous that "Certified for Vista" really only means "Certified for 32-bit Vista". Microsoft is sloppy with this part of their program...:rolleyes:

[ionen]

Better than XP in some regards, Vista it's still the 32-bit generation for Windows.
Windows 7 should do the trick of getting 64-bit computing mainstream - that's what I've heard :)

As for my experience with Windows by now - I'm using an almost three years old laptop from Acer, nothing fabulous about it. I run Windows XP on it (with SP3) and I'm pretty satisfied, i don't do much power computing. I think the most power hog app that I use is Firefox 2 (really).

I've tried Windows Vista several times (at school and at friends) and I really enjoyed using the system, it hadn't crashed for me.
What I really appreciate about WV is its elegant look and the feel of professionalism (that is if one disables the UAC to avoid those warnings).
For sure I'll use Vista for my next machine

[slugbug]

As they say: 'if its not broken, don't fix it."