Genocidicbunny
Bug squasher
What about when you do need that memory? Does it detect that you need it and release it? or does it just say: "Nein!" and refuse to let go?
Lots of the problems Vista had were caused by 3rd party drivers, and are now fixed, and Vista performs just as well as XP assuming you have decent hardware. I don't know about the squeal, my laptop with Vista never did that. Off the top of my head, Vista has better security, precaching, DX10, and let's face it, Aero looks great; honestly, it's not what it should have been given the 5 years development time, Microsoft spent the first half goofing off.But regardless of that, I still highly recommend XP over Vista. There's a reason for Vista's bad rep - incompatibilities, instabilities, poor drivers, higher hardware demands, no real gains. For me, it greatly disliked Civ3, refusing to run it every so often until I reinstalled the OS (reinstalling the program didn't help), gave graphical glitches that XP does not, causing the mobile Intel processor to emit a loud high-pitched squeal (which XP only does on battery, not plugged in as well as with Vista, and not as loud as Vista even when unplugged), amongst other annoyances that I don't feel like remembering. XP may be old, but it's good. Where else would you even consider buying an inferior product simply because it's newer and has some newer but currently not helpful features?
Microsoft gave 3rd parties plenty of time to write drivers, but they didn't start until the last minute.Another point: Sure, nVIDIA et. al. didn't do so great with drivers, but how can you expect them to? Vista introduced new graphics and audio subsystems, so you have to expect driver problems. And you can't expect nVIDIA to put millions into training for a new system overnight - if Microsoft really wanted a clean launch they could've helped hardware companies financially with training for the new standards and all. Expensive, yes, but with all their Windows profits not really in the grand scheme of things.
Another point: Sure, nVIDIA et. al. didn't do so great with drivers, but how can you expect them to? Vista introduced new graphics and audio subsystems, so you have to expect driver problems. And you can't expect nVIDIA to put millions into training for a new system overnight - if Microsoft really wanted a clean launch they could've helped hardware companies financially with training for the new standards and all. Expensive, yes, but with all their Windows profits not really in the grand scheme of things.
And the fact that it uses up ungodly amounts of memory. Dont get Vista unless you plan on having more than 3 gigs of RAM and no legacy drivers and dont care for a new UI or etc.
So you pipe in to call me stupid and ignorant?
Id like to think that with 15 years of experience, I know what makes a good OS and what makes a bad one.
Speedo said:It doesn't take long watching most Vista bashing to see that the people involved generally have no real idea what they're talking about. Your comment about its memory usage eximplifies those kinds of arguments, and yes, it's completely ignorant of how the OS functions, it's stupid, and I'm getting tired of hearing it repeated after a year and a half.
When the system itself uses up 1 gig at idle? Maybe I did have searching and indexing on..but still.
Or non average users could just buy some more RAM, it's dirt cheap.I guess its unfortunate that some users arent 'average' then? Because you know, they don't matter.