Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
28 of 29 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Cheaper but no Micorosoft Support, February 4, 2007
This version of Windows Vista is the OEM version, which means that it does not come with a box or a manual, just a "Quick Install" guide. This is the FULL version of Vista but another thing that it is lacking is support from Microsoft. Because this version is intended for (as the title suggests) system builders, whoever that may be, they are the people who are supposed to provide the End User Support not Microsoft. It does, however, still include Windows Update so there do not think that you will not be getting updates from Microsoft, because you do. But if you are building a computer for your grandmother, and she BSOD's Vista, its up to you to fix it; Not Microsoft. Another difference between this version and the full 400 $ version is that this version only comes with the 32 Bit version of Windows Vista, but the full version comes with both the 32 and 64 Bit versions. So if you are pretty technology Savvy and you do not need Microsoft's support and you know what type of processor (64 or 32 bit) then the OEM version is the version for you.
|
|
|
11 of 13 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Is what it says an OEM., March 18, 2007
For the most part its been an OK transition. My recommendation is that you go slow and do your homework first. I'm running a P4, 3.2 GHZ X 800 with 1 GB Ram DDR (upgraded to 2 GB's max for this board),two hard drives, 200 GB (volume 1,2,3,) 160 GB(volume 4,bkf). I wanted a clean load so I backed up on DVD's and formated my hard drives. I chose volume 1 for the operating system alone so in case of problems I could rework it. I put all my programs in volume 2, I had all the original disks to reload if necessary(be careful with this if you have used downloaded software it often has a short time limit of downloading it again, on these I back them up to CD right away and file it for times like this). Volume 3 is for all the data, images, (my Photoshop needs space) ect. Volume 4 is an overflow for volume 3 data and all of my backup and is on a separate 160 GB internal hard drive. For me the time for this planning was well worth it. If you get it done up front it can save you hours or days later. I've learned by my errors. It is also easier and safer to back up data on 3 without having to mess with the rest and if I get a problem which is going to happen the solution is a whole lot simpler. Plus you can lock volume 1,2, in Vista and for the most part keep out all the Cyber bad guys with there Trojans and viruses. On 3, 4 the most I have at risk is the last 2 hours and I can manually adjust that if it is an important project. Vista definitely requires a lot of RAM and space. As you just have to test some programs I good registry cleaner would be a good investment I went with Registry Booster rated 5 out of 5 by Tucows and CNET and I'm happy with it at $29.
The issue of software is likewise interesting, I had less problems than I expected after getting around the "tech support" at the various companies. Example: just bought a top of the line HP printer with the HP wireless printer upgrade. If you go to the HP website at this time it says come back later maybe April or May not compatible at this time. Don't believe what you read. If you push through the maze; you will find in this case a B9180 that the upgraded software and drivers are there just either no one told tech support or they did not want to be bothered. The HP wireless did not work and Amazon took it back which is why I chose to pay a few dollars more on Amazon to get items supplied directly by Amazon. If you know a little about the system you will see that most of what worked on XP with SP2 will work on Vista at least in the interim until that vendor gets an official Vista upgrade.
Pros: I needed the system so I can't say that the transition from XP Pro was a must have and the additions warranted it. Although after the fact I would chose the upgrade to Vista.
The installation was straight forward and by the book. No pun intended because you don't get the book with OEM. I used the Microsoft website, a bunch of forums, and a lot of prayers and found everything that I needed.
Con: My opinion, you can't push the down size of their minimum requirements. You need a whole lot of CPU power, a lot of RAM access, and a good bit of storage.
Many vendors are not up to speed on Vista yet and like always with Vendor tech support even on a good day you are very likely to get the wrong information. I chose not to take NO for an answer and to try my existing programs and then delete and clean the registry as necessary. Don't forget to make a backup first. Sounds dumb like first read the directions, but in this case having a backup copy you can just click on and restore is a big plus and since you can't really read the directions since it doesn't come with anything but the quick start I took a pad and pencil and planned it out.
OEM means OEM, I was building a system and think that I have enough knowledge to get it done. Seems like all is well. If you don't know your computer pretty well, and you are not comfortable in using the Microsoft website, and using outside forums (especially which have good info)this might not be the path for you.
I enjoy being on the cutting edge of tech even if at times I am "slightly tech challenged". Having completed the task I would do it again. A lot of Hype not as difficult as one might think.
|
|
|
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Surprised to find that Vista is actually stable and very nice, November 22, 2007
After having read a lot of reviews on another "egg"cellent site, I was afraid that I would dislike Vista either for incompatibility or the sluggishness of it. I was bracing myself for the worst, but very pleasantly surprised to find that on my clean install, everything worked perfectly. Vista seems much more "automated" than XP and found all the drivers for my hardware automatically from the web. After the very easy install, which by the way, unlike XP, uses a graphical interface, I began to reinstall my software. I chose the 32 bit version of Vista because at the time of this review (Nov '07), Apple's iTunes v7.5 was still not compatible with the 64 bit version of Vista due to a programmer's bad judgment in creating a "hardpath" to a 32 bit Windows file. Evidently, this type of program is unlikely to see an easy fix to 64 bit compatibility.
My software all installed without any problems, including Adobe Photoshop Elements and Premiere Elements, PC-Cillin 2007, Fidelity Active Trader Pro, Sony Picture Browser with AVCHD Player, and of course iTunes.
Vista is just simply gorgeous when compared to XP. I was a hardcore Apple fan since 1979, having used the Apple //e, Mac SE, Mac IIci, and original Apple PowerBook 20 MB HD. Since I haven't used Apple's OS extensively since the System 7.1 days of the 90's, I can't compare it to the current Apple OS Leopard. I have heard that Vista has taken (i.e. stolen) a lot from Apple's OS X. In any case, Vista is just simply beautiful when compared to XP. It's quite obvious that the graphics for even the windows are rendered with my graphic's card's 3D engine.
As for security, I am uncertain if it is any more secure than XP, but you will probably all want to turn off the "UAC" which is an amazingly annoying feature in Vista where almost any action causing a new file to be installed to be verified by the Vista user. It is really quite amazing that Microsoft actually thought that any user would actually leave this feature on. It's almost something Microsoft would do to just cover their behind by telling a user that it was their fault if their computer was violated if they had turned off Microsoft's "recommended" safety feature. It is utterly the worst obvious feature of Vista, but thankfully, very easily can be turned off.
Regarding hardware, I have a self-made PC with an AMD FX-60 (2.6 gHZ dual core socket 939 cpu), 3 GB RAM (latency 2.5), DFI LanParty UT nF4 motherboard (NOT overclocked), and XFX 7900 GT GPU. This used to be a fairly mid-high end PC about a year ago, but far from it currently. Intel's quad-core CPU's are just tremendously faster (and ridiculously cheap). The DDR2 RAM is also sickenly cheap nowadays.
Why did I list all the hardware specifications that you think only a techno-geek would be interested? Because it's important that you understand that Vista is a much more "active" OS and requires a dual or quad-core CPU. Vista even does a hardware check and gives individual ratings for your CPU, RAM, video, and hard drive. It is thought that in the future, 3rd party software written for Vista will not just state what minimum hardware is required, but give specific ratings on each of those components. This way, you can check to see in a very clear manner, if your specific computer can run a piece of software.
One very last important consideration, is the decision to purchase this OEM "system builder" Vista vs the "retail" version. The "retail" version costs almost twice as much as the system builder OEM version. Unlike the past OEM version of XP, you CANNOT re-install the OEM Vista (32 or 64) on more than one PC (as defined by its motherboard). In other words, if you purchase this systembuilder version, install it. Then in 1 year, by another faster computer, you cannot re-install this single copy of Vista onto the new PC, even if you delete the old copy. The "retail" version allows you to transfer your copy to a newer PC and costs a lot more consequently. The "retail" version also provides you with both a 32 bit and 64 bit installation. Although you get only 1 key and thus can only have either 32 or 64 bit installed (but NOT both), you can switch from the 32 bit to 64 bit version later as you upgrade your hardware or for whatever reason.
I am quite pleasantly surprised by how easy I was able to install Vista and by how fast it runs on my PC. I recommend that you back up all your information before your install, and do the "clean" install, rather than the upgrade. Also, although you can keep your XP on a separate drive or partition and dual boot with Vista, there is a known problem with confusion that occurs with vanishing files important for Windows to perform a RESTORE operation. But, if you use 3rd party software to back up your drives (disk imaging), then dual booting with Vista and XP is a nice option. (Remember, to dual boot, it is tremendously easier to first have XP installed 1st, then install Vista later. If you have Vista 1st, and then add XP, it is significantly more difficult and requires some technical knowledge.)
Sorry if this review is somewhat rambling, but another "last point". Vista uses RAM in a very different manner from XP. Vista will try to have your frequently loaded files ALWAYS LOADED. Studies at Anandtech show that Vista must have a minmum of 1 GB to just be functional. At 2 GB, there is a DRASTIC increase in real world application speed. 3 GB also gives a big performance boost over 2, but not as drastic as going from 2 to 3 GB. Should you get 4 GB RAM, which is the theoretical limit of the 32 bit version? I would say probably not. Because of a strange technical problem, Vista 32 bit will only access 3.5 GB and not the full 4 GB. If your finances will not permit the purchase of more RAM, then Vista does offer a method for you to use your USB flash drive, believe it or not. Just plug in (up to 4 GB usable) your USB flash drive, respond to Vista's request to utilize it, and it will try to use your USB flash drive rather than your hard drive when virtualizing RAM to speed up your OS.
Good luck to all. I certainly was afraid of upgrading after reading so many mixed reviews and knows that it will always take a little "courage" to go and upgrade before Service Pack 1 is out.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
![Parallels Desktop 3.0 for Mac [OLD VERSION]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51XBcQjLHKL._SL500_SS90_.jpg)
