Why Do People Hate Vista?

[Ghost Ranger]

Id say the default GUI that comes with a lot of modern linux distro's is pretty damned intuitive. It might not be familiar, but its easy to get around in and therefore fairly easy to become familiar with.

Unfortunately most people freak out when something is different with their computer's GUI.

 

[warpus]

...

Clearly there is software that will only run on Linux/Windows/Mac. But when you're comparing OSes you don't compare individual software, you compare a category of software, to eliminate the OS dependency. Otherwise you end up comparing the software itself, and not the OS (e.g. MS Office is better than OpenOffice, IMO, but that doesn't make Windows better than Linux, necessarily, any more than a better CD player makes a VW Fox better than a BMW 5-series.)

If you say "I don't like Linux because it doesn't have much software written for it", then that's a valid argument.

But saying "I don't like Linux because it doesn't run Windows software" is as strange as saying "I don't like Windows because it doesn't run Mac software"

IMO Linux is a far superior operating system to Windows. However, I prefer Windows, because a lot more software that I like to use runs on it.

 

[kryszcztov]

Another area windows is "better" is in GUI. People recognize and know how to use it. Although you can make a Linux computer look exactly like Windows, people wouldn't know how to do that either. Most people don't know how their computer functions and expect it to just work.

I disagree. This week my brother asked me to find something on his new laptop with Vista, namely the funtionality to share folders on a home network, something I know on Windows XP. I had never touched Vista so far, and was quite embarassed to be unable to find the thingie after a few minutes (wasn't going to spend hours on that). It seems he found out thereafter, but it's protected with some password, etc... Vista isn't intuitive at all to XP users. Basically it comes down to this : experience. Little children in classrooms have a good experience of Linux (lucky guys !) when they don't know Windows already. You say Linux distros have a worse GUI because you're used to Windows, nothing else. Linux distros now have a solid GUI BTW.

As far as the video game argument goes. If this were consoles and you had one console with tons of games and another that could be good if consumers and game publisher just gave it a chance they would get laughed and called a crap gaming console. A consumer buys a game and the overall experience is their concern. Industry politics is not. Does everyone get that involved in the industry politics of every product they buy? No. The Gap can bomb Levis for all I care. Gaming on Linux sucks. As a product Linux is severly lacking in that area so they put a bandage on the problem by trying to run Windows games. That is not a solution that is going to fly with most consumers.

It takes people like me to stop feeding the cow.

Games made for Linux are as good as games made for Windows. The experience is excellent. But MS has the big advertising bucks. Companies that produce games for Windows also have big advertising bucks. Free Linux games have *no* advertising budget. Commercial Linux games are usually made to run on Windows, to rake in the money, and then have a patch, or a port, to run on Linux. But not all commercial producers are so "nice", and refuse to port, or even license, their works for Linux. (I intend to discuss this with Firaxis when I visit them next week.)

Oh please, update us about it when you're done !

 

[GrandAdmiral]

For the last several years, I used Win2K at work, and Linux at home. A few months ago my wife bought a new system. It came with Vista, of course. What a nightmare! Neither one of us could find anything. Nothing was "intuitive". Nothing was where it "belonged". Give me KDE, or even Win2K, before you try to unload Vista on me as a "useable interface".

I went from XP to Vista and there was no learning curve for me. Most things were in the same place, a few things were renamed and a few buttons were changed around. It pretty much just felt like I changed the theme on the same OS. My mom is horrible with computers but she was used to using XP and Win2 at work. I gave her my old machine which had Vista on it and she has had no problem finding things. This is a person who couldn't even figure out how to turn their speakers on. Of course that one experience is just anecdotal evidence but I haven't seen any Vista users that where totally lost. Its not a radical change from the previous version.

Games made for Linux are as good as games made for Windows. The experience is excellent. But MS has the big advertising bucks. Companies that produce games for Windows also have big advertising bucks. Free Linux games have *no* advertising budget. Commercial Linux games are usually made to run on Windows, to rake in the money, and then have a patch, or a port, to run on Linux. But not all commercial producers are so "nice", and refuse to port, or even license, their works for Linux. (I intend to discuss this with Firaxis when I visit them next week.).

I'm not saying you can't make a game that will run just as good on Linux. I'm saying the overall experience is not as good. Being abe to go buy a huge selection of games and run them natively on your machine is a better experience than hoping for a port or using some type of virtualization. Advertising and getting game developers to back your platform is a huge part of creating a quality gaming platform. I understand the reasosn Linux is lacking in this area but the flaw still exists regardless.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

double post.

 

[Genocidicbunny]

I went from XP to Vista and there was no learning curve for me. Most things were in the same place, a few things were renamed and a few buttons were changed around. It pretty much just felt like I changed the theme on the same OS. My mom is horrible with computers but she was used to using XP and Win2 at work. I gave her my old machine which had Vista on it and she has had no problem finding things. This is a person who couldn't even figure out how to turn their speakers on. Of course that one experience is just anecdotal evidence but I haven't seen any Vista users that where totally lost. Its not a radical change from the previous version.

Now if your mother had not been using XP or W2K at work, would she have been able to use Vista so easily?
And it really just depends on the person. I've had Vista at work for a month now, and I have been using XP for a year. Im still not used to the way Vista does things, and often find myself asking colleagues on how to do some things.

 

[Mise]

If you say "I don't like Linux because it doesn't have much software written for it", then that's a valid argument.

But saying "I don't like Linux because it doesn't run Windows software" is as strange as saying "I don't like Windows because it doesn't run Mac software"

IMO Linux is a far superior operating system to Windows. However, I prefer Windows, because a lot more software that I like to use runs on it.

I think we've come full circle now. The point I was trying to make was that people keep criticising Vista for not being able to run the latest games, but neither can Linux. I don't think that that's a valid criticism.

Nor do I think that demanding certain (good) software to work on an OS is unreasonable. "I don't like Windows because it doesn't run Mac software" doesn't make sense if you're talking about Safari, since it's easily replaceable with a Windows alternative. But we're talking about computer games -- there's no point saying, "Okay so you can't play BF2142 on Linux, but you can play TUX RACING!!!!! It's just as good, honest..."

 

[warpus]

I think we've come full circle now. The point I was trying to make was that people keep criticising Vista for not being able to run the latest games, but neither can Linux. I don't think that that's a valid criticism.

See, the difference is that Vista was DESIGNED to run those games.

Linux wasn't.

 

[taper]

See, the difference is that Vista was DESIGNED to run those games.

Linux wasn't.

No, games were designed to run on Vista. Ever see the words "Will Run CivIV" on a package of Vista? How about "Will Run on Vista" on a package of CivIV? (ok, maybe not the best example, but you get the idea.)

 

[warpus]

No, games were designed to run on Vista. Ever see the words "Will Run CivIV" on a package of Vista? How about "Will Run on Vista" on a package of CivIV? (ok, maybe not the best example, but you get the idea.)

Point is that these games are supposed to work under Vista, and not under Linux. Thus criticizing Linux for something it wasn't designed to do is sort of.. strange.

 

[Reiko]

My husband has vista on his computer and he complains it is buggy and a resource hog.

 

[Strider]

No, games were designed to run on Vista. Ever see the words "Will Run CivIV" on a package of Vista? How about "Will Run on Vista" on a package of CivIV? (ok, maybe not the best example, but you get the idea.)

They were not designed to run on Vista, but Microsoft went about saying that they would. Now Vista is out and they haven't exactly delivered. Remember the Vista commercial that had all of the BF1942 soldiers?

 

[Zelig]

My husband has vista on his computer and he complains it is buggy and a resource hog.

My wife has XP on her computer, and she complains it's ugly and slow.

 

[Pentium]

My wife has XP on her computer, and she complains it's ugly and slow.

Well, she is kinda right. Now give her (K)ubuntu.

I really can't see XP being slow in comparison to Vista.

 

[Reiko]

Well, she is kinda right. Now give her (K)ubuntu.

I really can't see XP being slow in comparison to Vista.

I can't see a difference in speed either.

 

[Zelig]

I really can't see XP being slow in comparison to Vista.

It is with high end hardware, XP has poor multi processor performance compared to Vista, and is limited in memory support.

 

[Grisu]

I don't have any problem with people who prefer non-Windows OSes to Vista, it's people who prefer XP to Vista, on new computers, whom I don't understand.

I bought a new computer with Vista on it this year and I'm not impressed by the OS. If I had a spare XP-Licence I'd go back to it, but I don't dislike Vista enough to spend additionaly money to get rid of it.
I just couldn't notice any improvements that would bring me anything ('better' memory management is good and well, but not if it burns that added performance on things I don't need/want).
The Aero thingy looks shiny but gets old fast, I turned it off after a few weeks. Several older apps are not really performing the way I want them to (slower than on XP). My GF's CAD App for one.

I'm still considering investing in another XP licence (Linux isn't an opion, for one because of the CAD-Software and because I mostly use it for gameing). For 'work', surfing, etc. I use my older computer with Ubuntu on it.

 

[MarineCorps]

I can't see a difference in speed either.

There is a difference.

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39291081,00.htm

 

[Zelig]

There is a difference.

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39291081,00.htm

Try using a real benchmark.

My post from a different forum regarding that horrid test:

I've been waiting for this set of benchmarks to get linked on here...

The site that benchmarked this thing is crap, it's a blog where 90% of the posts are bashing Vista and promoting its unheard of benchmarking tool.

Tried getting the benchmarking tool to try for myself, but it doesn't even work, it spits out "Session Error - Current Task Aborted", at the end of the tests, and won't give me a time. I'm not going to install XP simply to test this, but using a stopwatch to time their test, I get ~22 seconds, compared to their 80+ seconds in Vista, on similar hardware... not that that's a useful measurement, but it's about as good as the benchmarking done by the site releasing these reports.

 

[Reiko]

There is a difference.

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39291081,00.htm

Maybe with benchmark tests you can see a difference. I can't notice a difference in speed when I use my computer that has XP or when I use my husband's which has vista.