Vista - Year 2

pucan

So from what i can see there hasn't been much gripping about Vista recently, has SP1 ironed out most of the problems?
I just got a new laptop with Vista Home Premium loaded, i still have the XP license on the older laptop, should i install XP and run with that. IS that possible?
I am going to move over all my programs from the older one, Project & Office '03, Nitro PDF etc.

Shiny

It would be possible to put XP on the new laptop but there might
not be any drivers for XP.

Vista runs fine on new computers that are designed to handle it.
All the moaning has been from people using vista for hardware
incapable of handling it and from those who didn't disable UAC.

Stephen

I've been using Vista since February 2007 and find it just fine. I'm running the 64-bit version of home premium and I would have no hesitation in recommending people go with 64-bit now, especially with lots of new machines having 4+ GB of RAM that you can't fully use in a 32-bit system.

It would be technically possible to install the copy of XP from your old laptop on a new one but this will probably violate the terms of the licence, as most likely the licence on the old one is an OEM licence, which means that copy of windows lives and dies with that machine - i.e. it is non-transferrable.

pwd

I have a laptop on which i installed vista and a laptop which came with it pre-installed.
I hada huge amount of hassle with the "vista compatible" laptop I installed it on because there was an issue with the "vista certified" graphics card driver that caused bsod on startup and was completely undocumented for most of the time. For a long time the only way I could get it to work was by disabling the driver.
On the laptop I have where it came pre-installed it's fine. The only thing is that i use a script to turn off a lot of services in vista when I am playing games with high systems requirements and it makes a noticeable difference: There are a lot of sevices runnng in vista usually.

calex71

been using vista for 18 month on 2 machines with very few issues, the only thing i have issue with is its annoying habbit of not remembering folder views now and again but thats only a minor annoyance

Overheal

I use all the defaults on vista including UAC and I've scarcely had an issue with it.

yoyo

I'm the same, actually think UAC is a good adition, it gives you peace of mind knowing when a program will be running as admin or not, sure linux and OS X has the exact same thing basicly and people dont moan about it?

Nick

There's several things about Vista that really bug me. Here's some in order of annoyance.

• The File Types tab has been removed which means that any file type operations other than the most basic Open command (even creating new associations) have to be done via the registry rather than having a simple interface that has been there since Windows 95. You can't even change the icon of a file type without going through the registry.
  
• I don't like the layout of the new interface. I once said this before and someone told me to use the Windows Classic theme - that's no use because you still end up with the Vista UI, just it looks like Windows 2000.
  
• Dragging and dropping a file on to a command prompt window has been disabled "for security reasons".
  
• The search system is rubbish. Then again it hasn't been good since Windows 2000, even the XP search is crippled.
  
• The context sensitive help system was good for learning what options do but this has been removed so sometimes you see a setting in a dialogue with a cryptic name and have no idea what it does.
  
• The icon placement on the desktop is pathetic. Sometimes when an installer creates desktop icons it places them in the top left rather than after your last icon.
  
• The signed driver requirement for x64, while it's a good idea in principle, I have a feeling it's part of a more sinister agenda. Many smaller vendors are refusing to pay for the cert, therefore limiting their devices to Vista x86. I have one such device, a USB adapter which allows a Playstation 2 controller to work on a PC.

Seems I just hate the shell in general. Windows Server 2008 has the same shell so that's not an option for me either. Not sure what route I'll take after XP. XP isn't perfect either, there's a couple of things I prefer in Windows 95/2000 but I've nowhere near as many gripes about it as I do with Vista.

Overheal

Karsini wrote: »

There's several things about Vista that really bug me. Here's some in order of annoyance.

• The File Types tab has been removed which means that any file type operations other than the most basic Open command (even creating new associations) have to be done via the registry rather than having a simple interface that has been there since Windows 95. You can't even change the icon of a file type without going through the registry.

False. You will find all of those settings in the Start Bar: Underneath the Control Panel link, you will see the Default Programs link. Click That.

• I don't like the layout of the new interface. I once said this before and someone told me to use the Windows Classic theme - that's no use because you still end up with the Vista UI, just it looks like Windows 2000.

And 2k was disgusting. we know. If you can tolerate the improved start bar and the window style itself, its a simple matter to display the classic menus on each window (like file and tools, etc)

[*]Dragging and dropping a file on to a command prompt window has been disabled "for security reasons".

Dont know anything about that.

• The search system is rubbish. Then again it hasn't been good since Windows 2000, even the XP search is crippled.

I agree, but the index is a nifty way to eliminate Startbar navigation... thats been annoying the hell out of me since windows 95.

• The context sensitive help system was good for learning what options do but this has been removed so sometimes you see a setting in a dialogue with a cryptic name and have no idea what it does.

Dont know which menus youre after sure, but in the end its all there in the help-book.

[*]The icon placement on the desktop is pathetic. Sometimes when an installer creates desktop icons it places them in the top left rather than after your last icon.

Now thats just being nitty.

[*]The signed driver requirement for x64, while it's a good idea in principle, I have a feeling it's part of a more sinister agenda. Many smaller vendors are refusing to pay for the cert, therefore limiting their devices to Vista x86. I have one such device, a USB adapter which allows a Playstation 2 controller to work on a PC.

No notion of this issue - im on 32.

Seems I just hate the shell in general. Windows Server 2008 has the same shell so that's not an option for me either. Not sure what route I'll take after XP. XP isn't perfect either, there's a couple of things I prefer in Windows 95/2000 but I've nowhere near as many gripes about it as I do with Vista.

Well you can only hope Windows 7 will be better but from what I hear its so far just a Vista-descendant with multi-touch recognition in preparation for all these touchsmart and tablet pcs (and microsoft surface)

edit: to hell with your bullet points!

I used the bullet points because it looked unreadable without them.

The Default Programs application is extremely basic, all it does is lets you set a program to open the file. What if you want to use an alternative option in the right-click menu or change the icon?

About the UI, I can't tolerate the window style, that's the issue. I feel the same about IE7.

pucan

pwd wrote: »

On the laptop I have where it came pre-installed it's fine. The only thing is that i use a script to turn off a lot of services in vista when I am playing games with high systems requirements and it makes a noticeable difference: There are a lot of sevices runnng in vista usually.

Thanks guys.

Vista is running fine itself, some games like ArmA are running terribley though. What script do you use pwd?

Tar.Aldarion

Karsini wrote: »

The Default Programs application is extremely basic, all it does is lets you set a program to open the file. What if you want to use an alternative option in the right-click menu or change the icon?

Why would you want to change this? A mp3 icon for a mp3 file and so on? Nothing wrong with that.
Also I thought you could change em, http://www.vistax64.com/tutorials/83815-desktop-icons.html

BKtje

The signed driver requirement for x64, while it's a good idea in principle, I have a feeling it's part of a more sinister agenda. Many smaller vendors are refusing to pay for the cert, therefore limiting their devices to Vista x86. I have one such device, a USB adapter which allows a Playstation 2 controller to work on a PC.

It's just a warning, you can still install them...? Either that or you're confusing me.

Oiche_mhaith

It’s a bit Microsoft OTT...but still

http://www.mojaveexperiment.com/

cance

I was very bah humbug about vista since launch, excessive memory usage etc etc.

Having received a dual core system with 4gb of ram recently, vista seems far more friendly and usable i just cant see why it needs 1600+mb when sitting at the desktop... its seems awefully wasteful considering how nicely xp runs on 1gb.

I hate the anti idiot user settings, and the prompt you receive about turning off the anti idiot settings... for example i found i needed to stop prompts from the security center just because i didnt want vista to confirm every action i performed.

Updates as well seem very flakey, system hangs on shutdown ALOT... and its intermittent too to make it worse.

and btw...

Which ever idiot in MS decided that "folder options" should be moved will receive a short swift kick in the man berries.

If i wasnt so lazy I'd format and re install xp, but my fedora dvd should be downloaded by now so I'll go for option C

tman

calex71 wrote: »

been using vista for 18 month on 2 machines with very few issues, the only thing i have issue with is its annoying habbit of not remembering folder views now and again but thats only a minor annoyance

Ah yeah, that's about the only gripe I have with it.
Especially annoying if you add an extra field (date modified for example) and it then forgets that the field was there the next time you go into that folder.

Had a couple of minor issues, one of which (display corruption if I left the pc running for a few hours) was annoyingly fixed by a patch that wasn't included with windows update for some reason.
Since SP1 though, that kind of thing is a thing of the past.

An absolutely rock solid OS, and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend x64 to anybody building a new pc.

Tar.Aldarion

Anybody else here have their display driver(nvidia) crashing with vista. Happens to a lot of people, generally happens to me in counter strike source only. Don't know how to fix it. Although nvidia problem, not vista.

Stephen

Nope. What version of the nvidia driver have you got? And what GPU?

Cance: Its designed to use up free memory to speed things up. If an application needs more memory it will just release as much as is needed.

Tar.Aldarion

tried a few drivers, have a 8600gt, it's a VERY common problem if you google it.

'nvlddmkm' and display problem.

PogMoThoin

Older drivers are better, the 169 ones, I'm having the same problem with 17Xseries drivers with an 8800gt Heres some older modded drivers

Tar.Aldarion

Did it actually solve it for you or just make it a bit better?

PogMoThoin

I've had similar problems on another pc with this 8800gt with Xp with the latest drivers, in fact all the 17x.xx series. Tried a few different drivers, clean install each time after running driver sweeper in safe mode. I'm now using a 169.21 driver on Xp and have no problems. Latest Nvidia drivers seem to be crap. Lot of others with complaints with them also if you google.

Ati drivers are rock solid at the moment, seems Nvidia are producing drivers for performance rather than stability, while Ati opt for stability

Capt'n Midnight

Oiche_mhaith wrote: »

It’s a bit Microsoft OTT...but still
http://www.mojaveexperiment.com

IIRC the people where shown Vista but didn't have hands on themselves

Tara Le d'Arion

Tara Le d'Arion wrote: »

Why would you want to change this? A mp3 icon for a mp3 file and so on? Nothing wrong with that.
Also I thought you could change em, http://www.vistax64.com/tutorials/83815-desktop-icons.html

Well I create new associations for files which the applications may not necessarily create themselves. For example I often associate .ax files with regsvr32 so I can double-click to install them, or right-click to uninstall them. That can't be done with the Vista application, it only allows you to choose one function. The link you posted only seems to refer to the desktop icons.

B-K-DzR wrote: »

It's just a warning, you can still install them...? Either that or you're confusing me.

Nope, it blocks them. There are two ways around it but neither are pretty. Press F8 on bootup and choose "Disable Driver Signature Enforcement" but it only remains active for that boot so you need to do it every time you boot. Vista RTM had an option to disable it via bcdedit but it was removed in a hotfix and SP1.

Another way of doing it is to sign the driver yourself using a test cert, but then you end up with a Test Mode banner on your desktop in the same manner as safe mode.

astrofool

If you saw the amount of crashes caused by unsigned drivers in Windows, then you'd understand why MS demands they be signed.

It's also a very cheap and quick process to get them signed, they have automated tools to check the driver.

gamer

THE thing that annoys me is that i cant set my folders to view as list ,with details ,as default view.I usually get icons ,no details view, it doesnt remember the settings,when i change them.
I know theres a registry hack to change this,make it remember folders settings.Have,nt tried it yet, otherwise i think vista is infinitely better than winxp.

Tar.Aldarion

Karsini wrote: »

Well I create new associations for files which the applications may not necessarily create themselves. For example I often associate .ax files with regsvr32 so I can double-click to install them, or right-click to uninstall them. That can't be done with the Vista application, it only allows you to choose one function. The link you posted only seems to refer to the desktop icons.

Oh I dudn't quite follow what you meant, but you can change icons without going through the reg. I would find is surprising if you still can't do the above in some way with vista.

Overheal

cance wrote: »

Having received a dual core system with 4gb of ram recently, vista seems far more friendly and usable i just cant see why it needs 1600+mb when sitting at the desktop... its seems awefully wasteful considering how nicely xp runs on 1gb.

If I've said it a hundred times: the reason Vista uses that much ram is a feature called Superfetching.

I hate the anti idiot user settings, and the prompt you receive about turning off the anti idiot settings... for example i found i needed to stop prompts from the security center just because i didnt want vista to confirm every action i performed.

The UAC only asks permission for administrator level actions, like installing programs or running certain programs in elevated mode. Disabling this feature gives free uncontrolled administrative access to any random program and I for one wont be disabling it anytime soon (especially because I love telling the Adobe Reader update service to **** off)

kaimera

tman wrote: »

Ah yeah, that's about the only gripe I have with it.
Especially annoying if you add an extra field (date modified for example) and it then forgets that the field was there the next time you go into that folder.

Had a couple of minor issues, one of which (display corruption if I left the pc running for a few hours) was annoyingly fixed by a patch that wasn't included with windows update for some reason.
Since SP1 though, that kind of thing is a thing of the past.

An absolutely rock solid OS, and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend x64 to anybody building a new pc.

qft.

x64 on a laptop here and it to bits.

Yeah, teh folder view thing is a bit annoying but not show stopping.

@Tar...using an 8600GT M here in the laptop and I had some gpu crashes in steam games myself. Not recently tho..I'll have to check what drivers I'm running when I get home. I know I only updated a few weeks back

BKtje

Nope, it blocks them. There are two ways around it but neither are pretty. Press F8 on bootup and choose "Disable Driver Signature Enforcement" but it only remains active for that boot so you need to do it every time you boot.

Ah yes i remember this. There is a way to permanently disable it as i did it when i first got vista and have never had to do it since (even with SP1 installed) so there is a way.

I'll see if i can remember how i did it.

Soundman

To disable it, open a Command Prompt and put this command in at the C:\> prompt:

bcdedit /set nointegritychecks ON

To re-enable device driver signing, use this command:

bcdedit /set nointegritychecks OFF



Edit:
Taken from another forum as an alternative:



There is a program called VistaBootPRO. The newest version is 3.2. It's a free program that works
great. After install click on the advanced options tab. Then use the
drop down list to choose the operating system you want to edit. Then
check disable vista driver signing. Click apply, restart your system.
You're done.

BKtje

Soundman: The command prompt method doesn't work since SP1.

I've been trawling through sites trying to remember which method i uses but nothing is familiar. I'm fairly sure that i ain't using a 3rd party software as well.

I'll have a closer look when i get home tonight and am sitting at the machine.

Soundman

Fair enough. Didn't realise SP1 affected it.

Tar.Aldarion

cheers kaimera, pain in the ass! Only affects certain games too, the ones I like!

kaimera

Tara Le d'Arion wrote: »

cheers kaimera, pain in the ass! Only affects certain games too, the ones I like!

Went from the 167.62_x64 drivers to the 177.79_vista64 drivers and I've not had probs with Steam/Source games and thats pretty much all I play on the laptop.