@Milihpen: Its true that Vista runs differently on one machine than on another. That is true of all software, but it is more noticeable with something as low level as an OS. Vista has its issues, though at this point many of them have been resolved, and the OS is stable at this point. It has been more than a few months since the last time Vista froze on me or failed to boot properly.

As for your specific problems: the Vista Installer is known to Blue Screen on computers that have 4GB of RAM installed. The solution is to is to run the installer with 2GB in your system and then add the other 2GB back afterwards. A hassle, yes, but its not something you are going to have to do often. As for your WoW/Ventrilo problem, I don't use ventrilo, so I don't know if it has compatability issues with Vista. If Ventrilo is compatatble, then I my guess would be that the issue lies with one of your memory sticks. The extra memory load might be causeing you to access a bad spot in memory that you wouldn't reach under regular cercumstances.

psycoking

I'm gonna agree with Milihpen. I've seen more than my share of PCs with excellent hardware, far above the norm, which just HATED having Vista anywhere remotely near them. I've never seen a Vista-related problem that was, in any way, user error.

Squieonat

@Bamboo:
I have an AMD X2 4600+, x2 nVidia 8600GT, 4GB OCZ RAM, 1 IDE and 2 SATA harddrives, and a DFI Lanparty SLI-DR.
I bluescreened 2 times during the Vista 64 Install, and subsequently every time I tried to load up WoW and Ventrilo at the same time on both Vista 64 and Vista 32.
I had all the latest drivers. I had all the latest patches.
Now, tell me what I'm doing wrong here?
"OH you must be doing SOMETHING wrong!"
No, it can't POSSIBLY be because the Operating system has problems, could it? Does everything always have to be user error? Just because your experiences differ from others doesn't mean that the OS is flawless.

Milihpen

I ask you a question.

What OS have XBox360?
What OS have Wii?
What OS have PS3?

we don't know, and we don't care... because OS are bad for gamming. The big the OS, the smaller the game. You want a OS the be a small and functional as posible.
With windows, you absolutelly want the NT Kernel, and nothing else, other (maybe) plug-and-play. But you have a strong plugandplay with Windows 2000. So the better windows OS for gamming sould be Windows 2000. But Is not W2K because Microsoft don't want to, and release his latest versions of DX to XP, so you are forced to use XP for gamming, and now is tryiing to force people to Vista with DX10. But DX10 is not still not valuable enough (will be soon, but not this year).

So stick your machine in Windows XP SP2, and avoid Vista, and you will get better framerate, and less frezzes.

tei

I upgraded from Vista to Linux ;o

GUNJAM

@Jimbo4: can they really do that? and does this wok even without internet? How?

ban_hammer

With the Vista 3-years-lifespan, shouldn't we be hearing about some new OS soon? Maybe one that works too?

I'm not buying Millennium 2 by now...

Malmer

all i know about vista:

my pc is about 7 years old,
processor speed of 2.1ghz or so.
running xp service pack 2, no problems or slow-downs.

my cousin's desktop is only about a year old,
processor speed almost 4ghz.
running vista home premium, i believe.
dog slow, mouse pointer sticks, and printer is incompatible.

both machines have 512mb ram,
the vista machine uses 75-90% ram when doing nothing.
that's just to run whatever the fuck desktop window manager is.
don't have access to mine right now,
but explorer don't use 50mb ram in xp.

snowlock

I wont put vista on a system. It's a horrible OS and I'm uncomfortable that M$ can remotely disable my hardware.

Jimbo4

@mergedwarrior: I was just kidding, I am running the vistor myself, but I do miss my macbook pro heaps.

and yeah, there's no affordable mac out there that plays games, with or without windows, but at least you have better productivity software. It's really weird that the userbase is so much smaller, yet the quality of software put out on the mac is just... astronomically higher.

vista itself is alright, I'll go ahead and be a little shallow, but I'm kindof glad that they made it all pretty, xp was becoming kindof an eyesore after 5 years.

mescalineeyes

MS says: "Here, Dr. Freeman, have a MedKit!". But it gets in your way while handing it to you, and slows you down.

biznatch

I'm running vista sp1. I would say that the performance increase is noticable, but it's not much.

TaMs

I had nothing but problems with the 64-bit version of Vista, thanks to NVIDIA's God-awful drivers for the 8800 GTX. Even with all of the recommended hotfixes, I found myself unable to go more than five or ten minutes without the display going black due to the device drivers screwing up. I might give it another shot whenever SP1 is released, though, as I really want to take full advantage of my hardware.

kubevubin

@GogolCoats: $189! You haven't looked hard enough

That being said, I've been running Vista x64 on a AMD X2 4800+ w/ 2GB DDR400 for about a year now. I ran into a few problems when I first installed it, but that was mainly due to underdeveloped drivers, and thus I don't consider it to be Microsofts fault. Since then, hardware developers have learned how to make Vista drivers and MS has released more than enough patches. For at least the last six months my system has been running as smooth as butter. I have no plans of moving back to XP, and in fact I prefer Vista. Yes, there are performance hits with games (about 5-10% if I remember correctly), but given the parts of Vista that I like, I can more than live with them.

psycoking

@fullmetal7: But then you don't get around all these Vista problems people have been reporting.

Usama

@mergedwarrior, Spoit: : Sure you can. I like how some people still haven't realized that you can install Windows on all new Macs.

fullmetal7

@mescalineeyes: And then you can't play any games!

Spoit

@mescalineeyes: Hahaha, MAC. You can't play games on one of those!

mergedwarrior

get a mac

mescalineeyes

I'm probably gonna swap out XP for Vista soon. I tried it a while back for 3 weeks and didn't like it, but more and more friends of mine are moving to it and they often turn to me for computer help. So, it would probably be good to familiarize myself with Vista. If SP1 improves game performance a little bit, that's just a bit more incentive to try it again I suppose.

@Bamboo: Some of us whiny little girls can't afford new hardware. $80 is a lot of money if you can't spare much, not to mention the cost of Vista itself or a computer that comes with Vista but only has 1 or 2 gigs of RAM. Also, not everyone knows how to upgrade their own RAM - they might have to pay someone to install it for them. If you step down from your pedestal you might be able to see that other people are having much more trouble with Vista because they can't instantly implement your "obvious" solution.

天人

Dream Scenes for the desktop background is kind of fun :|

I don't do much heavy pc gaming but I get about an average 10 fps less in Vista on WoW and my Steam games. I doubt this service pack will improve that much but I'll give it a whirl.

Pornosaur

I'll wait for a complete comparison between official Vista SP1, and official XP Pro SP3.

I already know the results, but I'll wait anyways.

Still, as a laptop user, I'm only interested in Windows 7 now... but I'll probably have already switched to another machine once it's released.

Bokusatsu_Tenshi

I have Vista, and I love it, just look at how it looks for God's sake! I am so intelligent!

Gigith

Windows 7 (that's the next MAJOR release, not point upgrade) is tentatively scheduled for late next year, making any investment in Vista and Vista workarounds a complete waste of time and money. Not that I believe MS will make that date, but it should show where their mind, money, and heart is. So far, no PC game is exclusively DX 10, and games exclusive to Vista (Halo 2 etc.) are easily hacked to play under XP, where they experience a significant performance increase.

Recent emails acquired during the ongoing "Vista Capable" lawsuit reveal that Microsoft's own executives were feeling burned by Vista.

Bottom line, Vista was a half-baked abortion wrenched out of the wreckage of the Longhorn fiasco in order to salvage face and mindshare, then rushed to market regardless of the damage to customers. Major structural fixes are going into Windows 7. Do not get stuck holding this turd if you can at all avoid it.

ValeshniPastruk

Vista x64 users like myself are already on SP1. Gotta say, file transfers are much faster. Gaming is better than before, but its still a bit wonky.

COD4 loads faster than TF2. I think thats strange, or totally STEAM'S FAULT.

mergedwarrior

@Bamboo: I've been thinking of going 64-bit. Is there anything I should be aware of Bamboo? Like a heads up (kind of how Ubuntu has problems, or did?, with Flash in 64-bit because there's no true support).

Usama

@Kirbytheslayer: In-Kirby XMB: Wow, so you never tried running it again? Or did you install another OS (like XP) and that never happened? Because that sounds like an overheating issue, which I don't think should happen with the specs you had. I don't know how much of it is Vista's fault really.

Usama

I have Vista 64 and have not had any problems at all.
I also installed the SP1 when it was accidently offered to Vista 64 last week, and so far no problems at all.
And what is with the 2 hours install time in the post?
It too at most 20mins. and did it all itself, without me having to sit there and having to keep hiting reboot.

For the rest of you whiny little girls complaining about Vista, you are doing something wrong, either using some old hardware, trying to skimp on parts, or something. The game hardware forum I frequent has a bunch of other guys on Vista 64 and 4 gigs of RAM like my system, and no problems.

And before you complain about 4 gigs of ram, you can get that as cheap as $79 on newegg.com, so that is no excuse.

Bamboo

@Usama: I mean that the fan started getting really, really loud, and the whole comp shut down and refused to turn on for three hours.

Kirbytheslayer: In-Kirby XMB

I agree with Jocaju Office 2007 is enough to make me want to break shit. I'm a pretty patient person...I don't know what this garbled bunch of shit is they now call Office....sorry had to rant.

Other than the HORRIBLE interface for office vista is OK with me.

tljent

@jocaju: Office 2007 is beyond awesome. I used 2000 / 2003 for a long time at work (Excel mostly), and after getting used to 2007's interface I can say that it is a great product - and for reasons besides removals of its technical limitations (row / col limits, etc).

Dorphat the Insomniac

@jocaju: Actually, I love Office 2007. Don't label me as a Microsoft fanboy, because honestly I haven't had any problems with Vista! I also run Ubuntu and XP MCE 2005 on this box (XP was on there in case I did have problems w/ Vista).

Usama

@gusiskirby:

Why are you stuck with it?

I tried it for a while, vomited, then went back to XP SP2.

topaz420

I built a new computer and I have a brand new XP Professional on box waiting to be installed, then I thought, why not install Vista which is the latest OS? So, I bought the Vista Ultimate thinking it would blew me away...man, what a mistake, I can't believe that I bought that piece of cr**. Now, how come they managed to make a OS inferior than the last one? They had 5 years to make better than XP, but instead was worse. MS doesn't care about quality anymore, just profit.I won't even start on Office 2007.

jocaju

It sure sucks that I'm stuck with Vista, but this does look promising.

gusiskirby

I hope so. My friend has a 8800GT and a 3.0 GHZ dual core, and it can barely run Oblivion.

gamadaya

Well, running a dual-boot system with XP and Vista on, so far I've been sticking mostly to XP due to the noticeable performance hit in Vista. And the crashes. And the fact that Vista thinks I'm an idiot. But I'll give SP1 a try and see how the two run after that.

But, I have to admit that I am scared of Vista after seeing it go nuts on a laptop a few weeks ago. It made a restore point while installing updates, then got stuck in "Installing update 3 of 3" for eternity. Rebooting into any mode saw the same screen. System Restore took me back to the "Installing update 1 of 3" then got stuck on "3 of 3" again... after throwing everything at it, including Linux which failed to boot too, the only option it gave me to get the PC working again was something delightfully called "Full destructive recovery" which wiped the entire hard-drive and reinstalled Vista. Fortunately I had managed to get into DOS and manually backed up the user's files via USB, but your average Vista user would have lost everything. So yeah, I am scared of Vista. Wary, but willing to service-pack it up and see what goes on.

Ungruntled

Meh.
I will stick with XP for now.

Those results are a little better. However they don't address a multitude of other issues. XP is still the better choice, I see no reason to change still.

GHamilton

@THECapedCaper: curious, why hopefully? you hope gamers make a push for vista? have seen how much it costs? 189 dollars for a used upgrade license is cheapest i found available. sp1 still doesn't fully unhinder performance and the only thing positive going for vista right now from a gamer's perspective is you can enable AA and HDR simultaneously in UE3 titles (with performance hit and slight hassles). the only valid reason to switch to vista is because it is there.

Crazy_Buffet_Happens

Hopefully this will help gamers make the push for Vista. I've been looking for a reason to get it on a new PC for me and this update will definitely get me to update to the OC.

THECapedCaper

I hope SP1 fixes my laptop's inability to detect mice and iPods plugged into the USB ports. Oddly enough, it still detects flash drives and my Xbox360 controller.

ectogamut

The problem is that MS is trying to push an agenda on us rather than making sincere efforts to improve PC gaming. Games for Windows Live is case in point - a cynical attempt by MS to control the PC platform. Vista exclusives, more agenda pushing.

ErskinPig

I tried Vista on one machine (for use as a media PC), and reverted it back to MythTV/Linux within 2 days.

If I hear that they've fixed it so everything will run faster on my hardware, I'll try it again. Or when SP3 is out (it usually takes Microsoft 3 service packs to get stuff working properly). But for now, XP works fine.

Doshu

@Darkest Daze: When I had my e4300 and 7600GT I was running it at 1280x1024 and it would slow down occasionally, so I would mostly play at 1024x728 (ew). Now I have an 8800GT and a widescreen 20" monitor (yes, I upgraded all my parts these past 2 months) and play at 1680x1050 and no hiccups.

Usama

@MantisDragon: ! I was unaware. XD I feel retarded now. Thanks, lmao

_woLf

@Kirbytheslayer: In-Kirby XMB:
I have a 7800gtx and e6300 @3ghz and the demo was choppy. I think the problem was that I wanted to run it at 1680*1050 and all high settings. Once I get a new video card I'll finally play the full game.

Darkest Daze

XP sucked before the service packs, too. I wish MS would stop rushing OSes so we wouldn't have to hope for service packs.

ShaggE

@Kirbytheslayer: In-Kirby XMB: Yeah, well I never ran the Demo, I ran the full game. I did run COD4 demo though. Still I had no problems with performance on the machine. If it helps my chipset is nVidia 650i and RAM was by A-Data until I upgraded to Corsair. What do you mean by wonky?

Usama

I've only got small problems with Vista that include a poor network card that worked great with XP, and mics not working well with speakers (echoes speakers more than it hears me). Other than that Vista hasn't really been all that bad.

Sheen_Latrine

@_woLf: That is UAC, it can be turned off from the Control Panel.

MantisDragon

I really don't have any problems gaming with Vista on my Gateway P-6831FX laptop. But of course, the heaviest thing I was doing with it was the UT3 demo. Good to hear that SP1 might shape Vista up for gaming, too bad after spending almost $1500 total on a laptop I don't really have much money to spend on games for it.

MantisDragon

@Usama: Really? I'm running a 7600GT with a 2.4 GHZ core on Vista, and the Bishock Demo kept acting all wonky on me.

Kirbytheslayer: In-Kirby XMB

Atleast it's an improvement. That kind of reduction on Crysis does seem odd, so I'm sure that's something that will be fixed in the near future. Does SP fix the whole "Would you like to do this" every single time you open something? I'd assume so, but I don't want to read the entire release notes -,.-

_woLf

Weird, my first comment didn't post or something. Anyway I wrote that I haven't had any problems with Vista and Bioshock or COD4. I was running an Intel Core2 e4300 (oc to 3.0Ghz) with a 7600GT. Now I'm on a q6600 (oc to 3.0Ghz) and 8800GT and things have only gotten better. Vista has been kind to me, in gaming and in every other task. Looking forward to Vista SP1.

Usama

Meh, stick with XP for me.

balls187

well, ive got a pentium dual core in my laptop, with vista premium, and the revolutionary (sarcastic) Intel 945g chipset, and I can't play WoW. So all I can hope for is better support in the future for games, mayb?

nopposan

... Them's some odd results for Crysis

Too bad there wasn't a comparison between Vista and XP.

SnakeCL

Cool. I haven't had any problems with my Vista, Bioshock and COD4 run very well on it. This was back when I had a 7600GT paired with an Core2 e4300 (oc to 3.0Ghz) and even now with a q6600 (oc to 3.0Ghz) and an 8800GT. Looking forward to SP1.

Usama