Vista Ultimate 64 bit

I am running an Intel Core 2 Quad 2.83 GHz CPU with 4 GB DDR3 ram
with RAID 0 disks (2 ) .Whilst the speed of the machine is very
impressive I am so disappointed with that junk operating system from
MS (Vista Ultimate 64 bit). It is so buggy and stupid. I am going back
to XP 32 bit.
What a waste of money Vista is. Absolute crap

On Mar 24, 11:04*am, wildseed <wildsee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am running an Intel Core 2 Quad 2.83 GHz CPU with 4 GB DDR3 *ram
> with RAID 0 disks (2 ) .Whilst the speed of the machine is very
> impressive I am so disappointed with that junk operating system from
> MS (Vista Ultimate 64 bit). It is so buggy and stupid. I am going back
> to XP 32 bit.
> What a waste of money Vista is. Absolute crap

Can you be more specific about what is broken with Vista?

The same programs that freeze and crash under Vista also freeze and
crash under other versions of Windows. Firefox freezes and crashes in
Linux as often as it does in Windows, except that, as always, it is
easier to regain control of a Linux box without rebooting.

The memory footprint of the OS doesn't seem like a big deal to me on a
box with many gigabytes, which is why MIcrosoft apparently didn't
worry about it.

I wouldn't really recommend the XP downgrade to anyone because
Microsoft says that XP is going to go away, and I believe them.

My box has serious device driver problems with the graphics card. I
gather that there are lots of device driver problems with Vista. The
driver for the card is from last August and Device Manager insists
that it is up to date. It's a new HP box, so, if I wanted to deal
with clueless tech support, I have recourse that I don't intend to
pursue, at least for now.

Microsoft really blew it with Vista, I'll readily agree, but, as a
practical matter, it seems like, either wait for Windows 7 (and any
Service Pack 0 OS from Redmond seems like a bad bet to me) or live
with Vista.

Robert.

* wildseed:
> I am running an Intel Core 2 Quad 2.83 GHz CPU with 4 GB DDR3 ram
> with RAID 0 disks (2 ) .Whilst the speed of the machine is very
> impressive I am so disappointed with that junk operating system from
> MS (Vista Ultimate 64 bit). It is so buggy and stupid. I am going back
> to XP 32 bit.
> What a waste of money Vista is. Absolute crap

Right. Of course it can't be that your hardware is crap, some drivers
are crap, your software is crap or that any other of the thousands
variables causes your problems. Who cares that Vista runs fine on lots
of similar systems. It must be Vista.

Benjamin

"Benjamin Gawert" <> wrote in message
news:...
>* wildseed:
>> I am running an Intel Core 2 Quad 2.83 GHz CPU with 4 GB DDR3 ram
>> with RAID 0 disks (2 ) .Whilst the speed of the machine is very
>> impressive I am so disappointed with that junk operating system from
>> MS (Vista Ultimate 64 bit). It is so buggy and stupid. I am going back
>> to XP 32 bit.
>> What a waste of money Vista is. Absolute crap
>
> Right. Of course it can't be that your hardware is crap, some drivers are
> crap, your software is crap or that any other of the thousands variables
> causes your problems. Who cares that Vista runs fine on lots of similar
> systems. It must be Vista.
>
> Benjamin

I have not liked Vista either, but yesterday I reinstalled the 64 bit home
preimium version with service pack 1 and 2 and it seems now to run just
fine. No problems encountered at all.

But the original version right out of the box was just garbage for sure.

* Lee Waun:

> But the original version right out of the box was just garbage for sure.

I have Vista since November 2006 when it came out for business users,
and while there were some problems (mainly drivers from overlazy IHVs) I
can't really see where ist should have been "garbage".

Benjamin

"Benjamin Gawert" <> wrote in message
news:...
>* Lee Waun:
>
>> But the original version right out of the box was just garbage for sure.
>
> I have Vista since November 2006 when it came out for business users, and
> while there were some problems (mainly drivers from overlazy IHVs) I can't
> really see where ist should have been "garbage".
>
> Benjamin

When I installed it it would not run word 2002 which was my chosen
wordprocessor.

It would run out of memory and crash.

I got vista 64 running office xp Pro. no problem with word or any part
thereof.
The only problem I have is with a tablet which the vendor did not make the
proper vista driver for.

I have usb drives, scanner all plug and play, also NVIDIA graphic card works
like charm for dual display. I can even unplug one display when vista is
running without hassle as long as I power off the display first before
unplugging. Otherwise I would just have to put vista to sleep, wait for a
second or two, wake it up and restore the dual display setting

With Vista 64 I can run a lot more processes, application for longer
duration for stability. The only thing I don't like at times is the uac
thing but I got around some of that by adding permission before some of the
changes

"Lee Waun" <> wrote in message
news:8bd_l.32526$PH1.16299@edtnps82...
>
> "Benjamin Gawert" <> wrote in message
> news:...
> >* Lee Waun:
> >
> >> But the original version right out of the box was just garbage for
sure.
> >
> > I have Vista since November 2006 when it came out for business users,
and
> > while there were some problems (mainly drivers from overlazy IHVs) I
can't
> > really see where ist should have been "garbage".
> >
> > Benjamin
>
> When I installed it it would not run word 2002 which was my chosen
> wordprocessor.
>
> It would run out of memory and crash.
>
>