Windows Vista RTM user reviews

Pros It still does everything XP already does...

Cons Uses more resources, nothing impressively new.

Summary Let's be honest, all that Vista turned out to be is a flashy looking version of XP. In some ways, that's great, but honestly, so what? I don't see any reason why people should have to get a high-end PC (which you'd have to if you want to run Vista) so that they can simply get a fancier looking XP.

Vista has been presented as being the most secure Windows to date, and many people point to User Account Controls as an example of that. In my opinion, this does not make my computer any more secure than XP did. All it did was prompt me (sometimes 2 or 3 times) anytime I tried to run an installer, binary, or sometimes even executables. I shouldn't need to verify everything I do repeatedly, and if they are going to implement this, they should make it much easier to turn off. I still dislike the way that Windows Security Center only lets you LOOK at your security status. You don't have the option of turning things on or off on the same window, and why they can't change this is beyond me.

As for the security of Vista itself, it's mostly just hearsay. Since it's using a -slightly- newer coding version (only slightly), there are some malware/virus types that it will no longer be affected by. But this certainly doesn't apply to the majority of problems, and the change in the source coding is so slight that a few weeks of practice will allow a good coder to learn the changes the implemented in the system. So in a month, maybe two tops, there will probably be security issues coming out of the woodwork just like XP had.

As for the stability they are boasting, I saw no improvements. My computer actually crashed the first 4 times I tried to boot it after I installed Vista (and this was on RC2, not even a full beta). I still found myself intimately familiar with my CTRL+ALT+DEL keys and the task manager as well. Although many people think that MS stole the interface from OS X, they clearly didn't steal the source. If you want true reliability, you'll still need to make a switch to Linux or Mac, as this is no better than XP.

So the real selling point boils down to the new glassy Aero look. Which, in reality, will probably sell millions of copies to the everyday consumer. I, however, am not impressed. The focus of an OS isn't supposed to be how it looks. It's supposed to be stability, security, and interface. I saw no noticeable stability improvements and the interface is essentially the same, just a new skin. Want a flashy looking XP? Buy Windowsblinds, they make a Vista skin that is almost an exact replica. Don't waste the money on an OS overhaul istead.

Pros Visually attractive, WPF-powered Apps, Search, Networking, the list goes on and on...

Cons Pricing is ridiculous, way too high per computer

Summary It feels pretty responsive now, but there is the occasional slow down. A plethora of the features in Vista are "under the hood" and therefore it's kind of hard to get a grasp on all the features. I think we will see some very cool applications coming out soon (based on WPF). Price? I think the pricing is ridiculous. I think $400 for 1 copy for 1 computer is a joke. $400 should get you 1 copy and 3 licenses (for 3 separate computers), but we all know that's wishful thinking that will never happen.

Pros Love the media center.

Cons Everything else - slow, not compatable with most of my software.

Summary Wait until more drivers are available. Stick with XP for a year.

Pros Some real, solid improvements both in useability and functionality

Cons Upgrade procedures need urgent attention. Cost?

Summary I've been using 'home computers' since before PCs existed (anyone for Superdos?)

Been 'in the business' since 1991.

I've seen, and worked with, every offering from Microsoft.

Every time; they claim it's going to be faster. It never is; it's usually slower - but I expect that.

EVERY time a new OS is released there are cries of 'it's no good ....'. My experience is that there are always improvements but people tend to comment before they've put in the effort (and it does require effort) to really find out what a new OS 'is about'.

My experience with beta versions of Vista were disappointing (to say the least).

I received the RTM Vista Business upgrade a few days ago.

The upgrade was a nightmare. The online advisor assured me there were going to be no problems (apart from an old version of Nero which I uninstalled). It fibs!

My test machine was running RAID 0 (SATA). I wasted hours just to keep seeing the same blue screen of death (with no pointer to a resolution). That the advisor says otherwise is very, very poor. Wake up Microsoft.

At this point my user rating should be a solid 1 (abysmal).

I so nearly threw the whole lot in the bin; but persisted and installed to a single SATA drive (without incident).

And I'm so glad that I did persist.

I've now had three days of exploring Vista 'in anger' and I have to say that, despite my usual cynicism, I think it's tremendous. A bigger leap than the change from Windows 3.1(1) to '95.

Three days and NOTHING has crashed.

I must warn at this point that the machine I'm using is fairly quick (Index Base Score of 5.0).

Further information: It's part of a domain (SBS 2003) and also has some other obscure/exotic bits.

The first couple of hours were spent just trying to find where the familiar bits and pieces had gone, changes to explorer etc etc. I have to admit it was probably an hour before I realised that, despite the upgrade acknowledging I was on a domain, I was actually logged onto the local account. And then another 10 minutes figuring out how to get the default logon to access the domain. Sloppy again Microsoft!

But now to the good stuff.

Vista ISN'T just about visuals. It is very pretty - but I think enough (too much) has already been said about that.

Running Vista feels smooth - this may not be very technical but, if you use PCs a lot, you'll know what I mean.

I'm not (yet) 100% sold on the new visuals for Windows Explorer but the functionality of copies, renames, moves etc within explorer is vastly improved.

I've seen lots of complaints about 'User Account Control' being inhibiting. Personally, I think the only question is how effective it will prove to be. It doesn't bother me in the slightest. That people, at this early stage, appear to be disabling it; I find disturbing.

I'm astounded by how well it runs existing applications. Applications that I was convinced wouldn't run, do so flawlessly. In fact one application that XP required affinity to be set to CPU 0 to avoid glitches, runs perfectly in Vista. Still early days but, apart from Nero (as mentioned), I've hit no problems so far.

Media Player 11 with XP is impressive - With Vista it's awesome.

My aging Photosmart P1100 isn't supported - but there again it was about a year before a stable driver was produced for XP. In fact Vista responded to a kludge so that it does at least print now - albeit without all the bells and whistles.

I can't begin to do Vista justice in a short review. What I will say is:

If you've used and hate it - try putting some work in. It really is unreasonable to expect to extract full benefit from an operating system by intuition alone. And therein lies the problem; so many people seem to think that expertise comes by osmosis (if that makes sense!).

If you've not used it - don't be put off by the doom-mongers. Though whether it's worth the cost; only you can decide.

So, from a 1 rating to a 8. But for the upgrade fiasco it would have been a 9 - and I don't give 9's easily.