Vista: Yay or Nay?

aneeshm · December 28, 2006, 11:40

I'd like to ask people here whether or not installing (or rather, upgrading to) Vista would be a wise move. Will RC2 remain free forever? What are the new features that make it better than XP? What are the flaws or snags? And does my hardware support it?

2 GB RAM
3200 + 64-bit processor from AMD (should I go with the 32-bit Vista to avoid driver problems?)
More than enough HDD space (SATA disk)
6600 graphics card (will this be too slow or too little?)
nVidia A8N-SLI Deluxe motherboard, with integrated sound (will this give me driver trouble?)

And does it play nice with other operating systems? Does it include a bootloader which detects other operating systems and gives the user a choice? Or do I have to boot from a LiveCD and fix the bootloader back to GRUB manually?

LordShiva · December 28, 2006, 11:44

RC2 will stop working in June 2007.

Worth it, IMO. Definitely will be in June, 2007.

flipside · December 28, 2006, 11:45

Not yet. Let it f*** up for a while. There is no compelling reason to change. In approx. a year or so change.

Solver · December 28, 2006, 11:48

This is a case where you can definitely skip a version and upgrade to the next one. I do not see any features in Vista that would make it a compelling upgrade. And don't get me started on Vista's memory usage.

aneeshm · December 28, 2006, 11:50

Originally posted by LordShiva
RC2 will stop working in June 2007.

Worth it, IMO. Definitely will be in June, 2007.

Any way to make it overlook the fact that it is supposed to die?

And what will be the cost of Vista when it comes out? That's my biggest problem, actually. It'll be something like 5,000 Rupees, which is way too expensive for an OS.

All my important data is on Linux, nothing is on XP, so even if something screws up, I won't have a problem. Is it worth it then?

Jon Miller · December 28, 2006, 11:50

Generally Microsoft hasn't worked out enough of the bugs to make it worthwhile to change until SP2 or so.

JM

aneeshm · December 28, 2006, 11:51

Originally posted by Solver
This is a case where you can definitely skip a version and upgrade to the next one. I do not see any features in Vista that would make it a compelling upgrade. And don't get me started on Vista's memory usage.

Could you please be a bit more specific? As in, could you tell me what is it that is new? And what is it that is broken?

About the memory usage - is 2 GB enough?

aneeshm · December 28, 2006, 11:52

Oh, and seems nobody has answered one question - is my hardware powerful enough?

LordShiva · December 28, 2006, 12:01

Hardware looks fine. 2GB is enough. And you'll want to go with 32-bit unless you intend to upgrade beyond 4GB.

Vista Ultimate is listed at $400 (non-upgrade), which is pretty steep. Home Premium has almost the same features (it's missing some of the Business Edition features like Bitlocker, which nobody will use, and other useless stuff) will cost half that. Though I'm sure it will be, er, available for much cheaper in India, eventually.

Dinner · December 28, 2006, 12:02

I wouldn't buy Vista as an upgrade though when I buy a new computer it will certainly come bundled with Vista. It does seem like bloatware though.

Solver · December 28, 2006, 12:06

Why use the 32-bit version if you pay for a 64-bit processor?

Well, Vista has a revamped interface, which I don't really consider a major feature. The sidebar is nice, for many, but there's a crapload of applications that will do that for XP. It has automatic backups which are pretty good though. Speech recognition is included, though I'm unsure how good it is.

Vista has a lot of new annoying security popups with its new user access control. Something that I feel is greatly annoying...

aneeshm · December 28, 2006, 12:06

Originally posted by LordShiva
Hardware looks fine. 2GB is enough. And you'll want to go with 32-bit unless you intend to upgrade beyond 4GB.

Vista Ultimate is listed at $400 (non-upgrade), which is pretty steep. Home Premium has almost the same features (it's missing some of the Business Edition features like Bitlocker, which nobody will use, and other useless stuff) will cost half that. Though I'm sure it will be, er, available for much cheaper in India, eventually.

It'll be "available", all right. Going into any more details would get me banned, though.

Of course, the funny thing is that only Vista Ultimate will be "available" - why would a bootlegger bother with anything lower? It's all the same to him, anyway.

LordShiva · December 28, 2006, 12:09

Originally posted by Solver
Why use the 32-bit version if you pay for a 64-bit processor?

Because software and driver support will be an issue for the near future, and because the 64-bit version doesn't yield a performance advantage unless you have >4GB of RAM.

Victor Galis · December 28, 2006, 12:10

Why would anyone upgrade? (i.e. What at are the compelling features?)

LordShiva · December 28, 2006, 12:12

Originally posted by Victor Galis
Why would anyone upgrade?

Because one can

Being bleeding edge

Solver · December 28, 2006, 12:21

Originally posted by LordShiva

Because software and driver support will be an issue for the near future, and because the 64-bit version doesn't yield a performance advantage unless you have >4GB of RAM.

What crap is that? On Linux, I've been using the 64-bit version since I got a 64-bit processor, and there's some performance increase in everyday stuff. Of course, it helps that all software except Skype is also 64-bit compiled.

Ari Rahikkala · December 28, 2006, 12:23

emerge --sync && emerge --update world to bring yourself to the bleeding edge

Originally posted by Solver
What crap is that? On Linux, I've been using the 64-bit version since I got a 64-bit processor, and there's some performance increase in everyday stuff. Of course, it helps that all software except Skype is also 64-bit compiled.

Eight new general-purpose registers, red zone, argument passing in registers, etc

aneeshm · December 28, 2006, 12:25

Originally posted by Ari Rahikkala
emerge --sync && emerge --update world to bring yourself to the bleeding edge

apt-get update && apt-get upgrade for me.

But sincerely - is it worth it, being on the cutting edge?

Solver · December 28, 2006, 12:27

Certainly not by itself. Being cutting-edge is worth if you need it, not if you don't.

apt-get upgrade though

aneeshm · December 28, 2006, 12:28

Originally posted by Solver

What crap is that? On Linux, I've been using the 64-bit version since I got a 64-bit processor, and there's some performance increase in everyday stuff. Of course, it helps that all software except Skype is also 64-bit compiled.

Even I've been running Linux 64-bit for quite some time (but it still doesn't have a decent flash player

), and I've faced no driver issues. But Windows Vista does have driver problems with 64 bit, last I heard.

Can anyone tell me any way to get flash working on a natively 64 bit Linux system (WITHOUT a chroot)?

Lorizael · December 28, 2006, 12:29

Microsoft has been working on this operating system for five years or so; what's it actually supposed to do? What are its "killer features," so to speak? Or at least, what are its advertised killer features?

Solver · December 28, 2006, 12:32

Flash works just fine for me, although I believe I am using the 32 bit version of it. Maybe. Don't remember really.

The biggest killer feature of Vista was cut. Monad, their new command-line interface. That, coupled with WinFS, had me hoping that Vista could be a good OS. Both these features were cut, however, so I have no interest in using Vista whatsoever. Besides, I prefer an OS that doesn't have ridiculous memory requirements.

Impaler[WrG] · December 28, 2006, 12:32

Being bleeding edge

He uses Linux, he already is. I've heard of a Distro called LinuxMint which is supposed to offer a lot of the media Codexs that most distros lack, such as flash.

Victor Galis · December 28, 2006, 12:33

See, I like performance... each uncessary upgrade bloats my software.

Lorizael · December 28, 2006, 12:36

Anyone from the pro Vista side?

...

Is there a pro Vista side?

LordShiva · December 28, 2006, 12:36

Originally posted by Solver
The biggest killer feature of Vista was cut. Monad, their new command-line interface.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...l/default.mspx

Solver · December 28, 2006, 12:40

Yes I know it's a standalone product now. Doesn't help my faith in Vista though. I became anti-Vista when they cut it, a thing like that should be in the OS, not standalone.

Though I am happy it exists at all...

aneeshm · December 28, 2006, 12:47

Originally posted by Impaler[WrG]

He uses Linux, he already is. I've heard of a Distro called LinuxMint which is supposed to offer a lot of the media Codexs that most distros lack, such as flash.

It's a Ubuntu variant, but I don't think it has Flash for 64-bit.

ixnay · December 28, 2006, 13:53

Originally posted by aneeshm

And what will be the cost of Vista when it comes out? That's my biggest problem, actually. It'll be something like 5,000 Rupees, which is way too expensive for an OS.

If you need more rupees you can always break some pots or cut down some tall grass to find more

Jack_www · December 28, 2006, 15:13

First off I already started a Vista thread here:
http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...2&pagenumber=1

Asher made some good points in support of Vista, and I agree. Vista is a lot better then XP, and I would tell everyone I know to upgrade to it. aneeshm your computer system requirements are more then enough for Vista.