Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
144 of 169 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
A Decent Upgrade..., February 2, 2007
BACKGROUND: I have used PCs and Macs on a regular, working basis, for 12 years. I approach each platform as a tool, not a social statement. Except where gaming is concerned, computers are tools and that's all they are. Just like a swiss army knife for the digital age. For some jobs the Windows tool has been more effective for me, for other jobs Mac OS X has been more effective. And it's not a question of "graphics vs. business", which is about the dumbest oversimplification in the history of modern computing. Anyone who tells you that does not use both platforms on a regular basis. If they did, they'd know both are robust in the range of jobs they can accomplish: accounting, charting, office, mainstream database work of all types (Oracle, SQL, Filemaker, etc), photographic and digital post-production, audio production and post-production, 3D modeling and animation, CAD, C/C++ programming, web development, mechanical drawing, presentations, spreadsheets, illustration... the list is ENDLESS. And almost without exception, every big name program is made not only for Mac and Windows, but many times Linux too. In short, if a person can't get a lot of great things done on either platform, the problem is the user, not the operating system. ; )
MY TAKE ON VISTA
XP PRO USERS: IF you have a fully updated, stable install of XP Pro and your apps are running efficiently, I do *not* recommend a Vista upgrade until MS releases the first major service update, which is likely to include some security updates too. Most experienced XP Pro users will not benefit from upgrading to Vista right now unless they love to play with new software and/or are an early adopter types who can trouble-shoot most problems.
WINDOWS 95, 98, ME USERS: 1) If you are not considering the purchase of updated hardware and software soon, YOU SHOULD. : ) If you ARE considering a new computer soon, and are using a much older system this probably means you are just a casual user, dabbling with internet, word processing and other simple tasks. For this group it probably makes sense to order your new computer with Vista, and not XP installed. Vista is a much nicer system than any of the older variants, and is also much more stable and more secure than the older systems. It provides useful information to you more quickly, it's easier on the eyes, is more capable in terms of its features, and in general is less of a PITA than these heavily outdated Windows systems.
Just be prepared to spend a good chunk of money on a fancier system than you're used to, because you're not going to run Vista efficiently without:
A) Lots of RAM (Gigabytes, not Megabytes)
B) Fast Processors (that's plural, as in, more than one - and at more than 2GHz a piece preferably)
C) A very powerful video card and a big hard drive (as in, more than 400GB)
INTERFACE: to be fair, Vista *does* borrow (and I use that term loosely) A LOT from Mac OS X, which is why people say it looks nicer. It *does* look and feel more streamlined and elegant, there's no question. All the new window transparency, sidebar widgets, streamlined glassy buttons... that was all inspired by Apple's OS design. That's a big part of why it took MS so long. Aside from problems making the clunky parts of XP better, MS was watching Apple update its system about every 18 months, in order cherry pick some of the best "bells and whistles" for Vista. Much easier watch Apple innovate every year, see what works, and then every so often... imitate. It's a little shameless, but honestly it's a good business tactic. I don't admire MS for this, but I understand it, and that's enough because as I say... computers are tools. Not "who we are". Yes Mac users (the ones I've known anyway) are creative thinkers, trend setters and take the road less traveled... but it's the quality of their work and their art, not their computer, that defines them IMO.
FEATURES: there *are* some new additions that make it easier to:
A) Get the information you need from online sources, without actually going online
B) Find files more quickly (once the LONG indexing process is completed - think hours, not minutes)
C) Organize files more easily, and in general get around the system more easily.
D) Work on your pictures, music, etc.
Sidebar: It's worth noting Apple is readying a major update as well, which -among several other things- will bring full 64bit support and a feature which lets users run XP Pro or Vista inside the Mac, at full speed, with all your peripherals. In fact, if you're willing to use a beta component, you can do that right now on any Intel-based Mac. There are even 3rd party virtualization products that will let you run Windows XP and Vista apps inside OS X (IOW, you don't have to deal with the MS Explorer, task bar, etc - just the window and tools of your Vista application).
SECURITY: sadly, because some idiots have nothing better to do, there will be attacks on Vista in the near future and some will be successful, that is guaranteed. Because every "digital delinquent" on earth is going to try and break it in some way, shape or form. There will be worms, trojan horses, all that stuff. The hope is that the number of those attacks that are successful will be fewer than with XP, 98, etc. I believe they WILL be fewer with Vista, but they will still be a concern. Vista has some holes that have already been exposed in programming circles. So IF YOU DO UPGRADE, don't relax and think you're safe from people trying to take over your computer, crash it or whatever. You're *not* safe. No Windows system will ever be truly safe unless it isolated from outside attacks (i.e. on a closed network where everything that goes in the machines is tightly controlled).
NEW TO COMPUTERS? For most purposes, you will want to at least consider getting a Mac, as the user experience is still preferable in my opinion to Vista and easier to learn. Apple is also using the fastest Intel processors available, so you're not giving up any speed or performance like in the old days. Things that bug me: Vista still requires a lot more time to drill down through dialog boxes and XP-like preferences, and is still not as intuitive from a user interaction point of view as OS X. Part of improving a computer interface is reducing its complexity, not just making it more attractive. Sadly, in some areas MS borrowed the attractive part of Apple's designs, but not the simplicity.
PS - some may wonder: will I be running Vista on my Mac Pro to get some of my work done? Yes. I will run both Vista and OS X in their latest incarnations, but both from the Mac to save on hardware expenses. Good luck and happy computing, Vista or otherwise!
|
|
|
136 of 160 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Not exactly "Wow," but then, I'm sort of glad for it--no problems, at any rate, March 20, 2007
| By | Squonk (The dark forests of Pennsylvania, where hunters follow by moonlight my silvery trail of tears) - See all my reviews |
If you've been living under a rock for the past year or so, perhaps you can be excused for not having heard about Microsoft's new edition to the
Windows canon. For all others, Vista has become a fact of life, whether or not you actually run the operating system yet. Check out a tech website and you'll find a Vista screen shot somewhere, either depicting some impressive overclocking results via CPU-Z, or else simply for no other purpose than to show the world, "Yes, I can run Aero--aren't you jealous?" In fact, it's hard to avoid Vista these days. And, as always seems to be the case, most of what you hear is probably negative.
That's where I come in. I've waited a while before writing this review, both to test the operating system and to wait for the horror stories to fade away. They haven't. And this can only mean one thing: the positive stories aren't getting through because most people who are satisfied with a product generally don't feel the need to comment on it. Now of course you've probably seen quite a few anxious posts (most likely in all capital letters) either bashing Microsoft for everything under the sun, praising Vista indiscriminately, making it seem as though you need a $5000.00 enthusiast-class computer to run the thing, or boasting about Mac's venerable OS X and how Windows Vista is nothing more than a bad copy thereof. Needless to say, none of these sorts of things helps, and all of them create a sense of confusion and negativity that reflects heavily on the product. And, if you analyze them closely, you'll realize that *none of them actually says anything about Windows Vista.* If you don't believe me, then just go visit Apple's discussion area and check out the iPod pages. You'd get the impression that iPods were the worst products ever made and that every single one has problems. Yet, if this were the case, then why have in excess of 100 million units been sold thus far? The answer is obvious: people seem compelled to review products only if something went wrong with their experience. In short, people confuse review sites with complaint forums.
Therefore, as the self-proclaimed Dr. Prog, I feel it my duty to step out of my usual mode of reviewing progressive rock albums and give an honest, no nonsense review of Microsoft Windows Vista Home Premium.
-THE INTERFACE-
Ah, yes. You've heard all about the new Windows Vista Aero interface by now. And virtually every screen shot you'll ever see will feature Aero. But it's much more than just pretty, glass-like window frames. Aero includes many new enhancements to the UI, such as the live thumbnails that appear when you mouse-over minimized windows. As the name suggests, these actually update in real time, so if there is a video or an animation playing in the window, it will appear in the live thumbnail. This is very useful. Perhaps less useful but scoring about an 8 on the 1-10 "coolness factor" scale is the oft-mentioned 3D-Flip, which allows the user to view a three-dimensional representation of all open windows, along with offering the ability to virtually paw through these to bring the desired window to the forefront. These are the things you'll hear the most about.
What you don't hear so much is all the general changes that have been made to the overall interface. The new icons are photo-realistic and size-scalable. They start out a little large, but you can set them to any size within a wide spectrum. The explorer windows have been radically redressed, with a new breadcrumbs backward navigation tool that beats the old address bar hands down (you can retrace your steps in a logical, step-by-step manner, instead of using the cryptic addresses). Also, they're spruced up with decorations that recall the visual aura style of some of the new wallpapers. Speaking of which, these are for the first time actually usable, unlike in previous versions of Windows, where the wallpapers have been small and grainy.
More general changes include the absence of menu bars in most areas of Explorer, including IE. These can be replaced momentarily with a tap of the Alt key, at least until you learn how to navigate without them. Also, the animations are much better than in previous versions of Windows, particularly the one you see when copying a file. In addition, the Start menu has been reworked drastically. It doesn't even say "Start," anymore; instead, it's simply a blue orb with the Windows logo. The first big change is the way programs are accessed: gone is the delicate and finicky ever-expanding hierarchy system, where a slightly overzealous hand could miss the mark and close the entire desired level. Now, the All Programs button leads to an Explorer-like listing of folders, each clearly named, and each of which opens and closes with a single mouse click. Each time the Start menu is opened, the folders reset themselves. Also, they are automatically alphabetized. The Start menu also contains most of the system links usually found on the Desktop (Computer, Documents, etc.), which is why the only thing on the Desktop the first time you boot up is the Recycle Bin. And, in case you have seen screen shots or have tried out Vista already, the search bar at the bottom pulls double duty as a replacement for the Run command utility.
Speaking of search, though I seldom ever find myself wondering where my files are (I suppose I'm unique in this respect), many people have far more data to keep track of than me, and thus they will greatly appreciate the enhanced and pervasive searching facilities of Vista. There are search boxes virtually everywhere in Explorer, including the Start menu. There is even one in IE7, though it is not integrated with the system search.
But, as you've probably noticed, this is but a list of interface changes and additions. I assure you the list could go on and on, and I know I'll receive more than one comment reminding me about some feature or other I've forgotten. I'll read those when they come and add material as necessary. But, aside from this, how does this new interface really impact the end user? To be perfectly honest, though it's certainly pretty and a few parts of it required a little adjustment, it didn't feel much different from previous Windows versions to me. But, to be honest, this is a good thing. Perhaps you've heard that it's a nightmare to learn Vista. That's a load of hogwash. A few things are renamed, a few things have been moved around, and on the whole everything looks prettier. But it's still Windows; it accomplishes the same tasks and it works virtually the same as it always did.
-INCLUDED SOFTWARE BUNDLE-
Taking a hint from Apple, Microsoft has included a compliment of digital media manipulation software. While of course iLife is superior, there is one issue that must be cleared up: iLife is not an integral part of Mac OS X as you may have been led to believe. Older Mac users must purchase it; it only comes with the newer Macs. Therefore, Microsoft Windows Vista, to be purely technical, offers the most comprehensive digital media suite ever offered stock with an OS. However, technicality is seldom practical, and Microsoft's inclusion is no iLife killer. Still, the included calendar (new in Vista), photo viewing and editing application (new), Windows Media Player 11, Windows Movie Maker, and Windows DVD burning program (new) are nothing to scoff at. No, they won't replace dedicated, professional stand-alone programs, but let's be honest: neither will iLife.
The new Internet Explorer 7 is a step forward from the piece of Swiss cheese IE6 was, insofar as security. New features include a phishing filter, tabbed browsing, and improved security. Additionally, IE7 runs in protected mode, also called a "sandbox." The idea is that this one application is cordoned off from the rest of the system, thereby making it more difficult for malicious software to take control of your computer. But that's more for the security section of the review. The new IE7 is certainly more attractive than the older versions, and the version in Vista offers enhanced visual appeal that the XP port of the software lacks. To be perfectly honest, I still use Mozilla Firefox (mostly because I can't stand those blinking ads on Web pages, and there is a Firefox extension that gets rid of that annoyance once and for all), but if I had to, I would have no qualms using IE7.
The new incarnation of Window Media Player is really no different from the XP port. It still doesn't support AAC, and it still doesn't handle gapless playback. As an iPod user and a progressive rock fan, respectively, I can gather only one thing from these shortcomings: it's time to break out iTunes. Don't get me wrong: WMP is not at all a bad tool. It's still the default player on my system for most audio types. However, once an iPod owner and prog rocker, always an iPod owner/progger. I still say iTunes is king, if only because its interface is cleaner, it supports my audio device, and it offers gapless playback.
I haven't extensively tested the Windows Movie Maker application, but I have read that it is updated very slightly from the XP version. The photo editing tool is completely new for Vista, and after a little experimenting I was pleased that, though simple, the controls offer nice results. This application is on par with many of the basic image editing software packages you'll see offered with digital cameras, printers, and the like. The other applications have yet to receive my testing, only because I don't often burn DVD movies, and I haven't entered an event in a calendar in about ten years.
As far as Windows Mail, I cannot be objective because I have never used Outlook or Outlook Express. Reports seem to indicate that...
Read more ›
|
|
|
24 of 25 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Microsoft Takes Six Years to Hit a Foul Ball, August 23, 2007
Background: I am a computer scientist who makes his living as a software engineer and database administrator. I have significant experience with MS-DOS, Windows, Unix, and Linux. Unlike some geeks, I do not hold any particular bias for or against Microsoft.
My honest, objective opinion for now is that Vista is a waste of time and money. As far as I can tell, MS either released it in an effort to generate revenue or to obsolete its competitors software products. There's nothing wrong with generating revenue, but Vista doesn't bring much to the table that improves computing for users. All those billions of dollars and brilliant minds at MS and this is what they come up with? It smacks of a complacent company that is becoming the IBM they once deposed.
A few months ago I upgraded our family computer, but decided to stick with XP. This turned out to be a wise decision. About a week ago, I purchased a new HP laptop pre-loaded with Vista Home Premium. At first it seemed alright, but as I've worked more with it I've come to be quite frustrated by its quirks. As far as performance goes I don't have any real complaints, but I haven't tried gaming on it. The boot and shutdown times are acceptable and application performance has been good once I removed all the HP bloatware. My laptop has 1GB of RAM and for basic laptop computing it seems okay. I'd like to list some of the problems I've encountered as it may be instructive to someone who reads this:
1) Had trouble copying files from a Windows 2000 machine over the network to my laptop. It simply refused to copy one of my files, giving a cryptic "Destination Folder Access Denied" message. I got around this by copying the file to an external drive and then to my laptop!
2) Annoying confirmations. Vista asks you to confirm everything. I turned that "feature" off. The Apple ads are close to true on this score.
3) Had difficulty getting Linksys QuickVPN client software to work. I foolishly attempted installing the version that came with my RV082 router and it didn't work. Unfortunately, it did do some kind of half-baked install and since Vista couldn't uninstall it, I had to do manual registry hacks to remove it from the installed programs list. I then installed a newer version of QuickVPN and it still didn't work. Never had any such problems on XP.
4) My HP 9300 Deskjet has no Vista driver and HP says they won't be releasing one.
5) Wordperfect 2002 refuses to work with Vista. It seems like it's working, but when I click File>>Open or File>>Save it immediately locks up. Vista's compatibility mode (like XP's) didn't help.
6) Had difficulty getting my computer to find other computers/resources once I did get a VPN client working.
7) Have had encounters with several strange and cryptic error messages when attempting to accomplish what in XP were mundane tasks like installing printers and searching for computers by IP address.
Not only is Vista fairly incompatible with software from the recent past, it also doesn't get along all that well with XP. All these incompatibilities would be tolerable if Vista was a quantum leap forward like XP was over previous consumer-grade Windows (95, 98, Me). But it isn't. It isn't more stable, it isn't faster, and it doesn't allow the user to accomplish new and greater tasks.
Update: 9/8/2007
Three weeks with Vista now, and if usability is the metric, Vista is really bad. I've had way too much trouble with many basic tasks. None of my configuration efforts seem to go easy. In particular networking has been a bear. And I'm not writing about just the fact that things are named different and moved around. I'm writing about the fact that nothing seems to work right, easy, well, or consistently. XP was a great release by MS. Vista makes me want to consider other options as my primary OS. It makes me feel taken by MS.
Update: 9/19/08
Another year now and Vista has been improved since then. I've especially noticed improvements to the wireless networking. Re-reading my original words, I think the line about it being a "waste of time and money" is a bit harsh. It would've been better to state it was "not worth the upgrade." I still wouldn't look to buy Vista if I had a fine computer running XP. If I were looking today for a new PC I suppose I would get Vista. Just don't expect all your old softwares to be compatible.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
![Windows Vista Home Premium with SP1 Upgrade [OLD VERSION]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41UjDlEgHsL._SL500_SS90_.jpg)
![Parallels Desktop 3.0 for Mac [OLD VERSION]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51XBcQjLHKL._SL500_SS90_.jpg)
![Microsoft Windows Vista Ultimate FULL VERSION [DVD] [OLD VERSION]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/418ejZRV7AL._SL500_SS90_.jpg)
![Windows Vista Home Premium with SP1 [OLD VERSION]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/410O%2BifrLwL._SL500_SS90_.jpg)
