Vista is stupid bloating pig

New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
5,216
Best answers
0
First off, I found the title of the thread hillarious. Kudos for that alone.

Secondly, i'm not surprised. Vista was 'designed' to work on the top of the range systems. 2gb of RAM is about average for a gamers rig isn't it? I agree 800mb idle is quite a lot (what's it even doing?) but it's to be expected of the new generation of OS. Besides, 1gb of RAM is what my two-year old rig came with, and that runs it 'ok'. And who uses FAT32 anymore?

It seems to be joining the new wave of 'upgrade or we refuse service' trends that have sprouted up recently (DRM thread).
 

sub

Active Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Jun 18, 2003
Messages
5,960
Best answers
0
An operating system should not be hardware intensive. We don't need crap like a 3d desktop or whatever else they're putting on Vista. We need an operating system that runs well and has few bugs. I'm perfectly happy with XP to be honest.
 
New Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2005
Messages
526
Best answers
0
Heck, 95 was fine. Well, in the modern day, it would be awesome if all operating systems took up little space like that. Who cares about visual effects on your desktop. It's all about the other stuff
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
5,216
Best answers
0
Sub said:
An operating system should not be hardware intensive. We don't need crap like a 3d desktop or whatever else they're putting on Vista. We need an operating system that runs well and has few bugs. I'm perfectly happy with XP to be honest.
That's the thing, they've got an OS that runs well and has few bugs, so now they're concentrating on aesthetics. After that all they need is to make it run well and have few bugs =P

I'm still buying it.
 
Lost in space
Banned
Joined
Oct 21, 2003
Messages
814
Best answers
0
Sub said:
An operating system should not be hardware intensive. We don't need crap like a 3d desktop or whatever else they're putting on Vista. We need an operating system that runs well and has few bugs. I'm perfectly happy with XP to be honest.
There are operating systems that have few bugs, aren't hardware intensive, and have 3d desktops...

See this thread: http://forum.esforces.com/showthread.php?t=61798

o/
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
May 14, 2003
Messages
1,929
Best answers
0
I'm pretty sure I read that it unloads itself in its entirety into the pagefile whenever you start a game, or something along those lines.

Oh, and slightly off-topic: Wasn't Vista originally going to be able to play games just be inserting the CD/DVD into the drive without installing? Am I thinking of something else?
 
Live free or die by the sword
Retired Forum Staff
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 1, 2001
Messages
7,416
Best answers
0
Smith, Direct X 10's main goal was what you just mentioned, and I'm sure alot of X-Box 360 technology will be brought to bear in that regard.

As for 2GB being standard memory, are you on crack? That may be the standard want for a gaming rig, but it is hardly the standard have. Standard would be (by my count) 1GB of DDR3200. I'm sure everyone wants 2 GB of DDR2, but that's a bit off from being the norm.
 
New Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2006
Messages
515
Best answers
0
Is Microsoft really hoping to win the hearts of the crowd by making Vista a frigging hardware crunching OS?

Even these days 1gig RAM is "wow", 800MB for idle mode -_- What Are they thinking :/
 
Lost in space
Banned
Joined
Oct 21, 2003
Messages
814
Best answers
0
Kimfu said:
What Are they thinking :/
Chapter 11 bankruptcy lol

I'd say 90% of people I know at the moment have 512 megs of ram, and a select few have 1 gig or >, and a couple are even running 256 megs. Around here the most common is definitely 512 megs... and I'm willing to bet they won't be upgrading to Vista if a hardware upgrade is necessary as well.
 
Live free or die by the sword
Retired Forum Staff
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 1, 2001
Messages
7,416
Best answers
0
I agree that 512 is by far the most common average user, since most people don't have gaming rigs.
 
Pwns Mastasurf at TF2
🌠 Staff
Retired Forum Staff
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 7, 2001
Messages
5,115
Best answers
0
512 Megs, and that's the max my mobo can handle :p 512 is definately standard. M$ is just getting too far ahead of themselves too quickly methinks. Surging ahead without letting consumers catch up. I mean yeah, it'd be sweet to have Vista and all the fancy bells and whistles and shiny, and I'd love to have a computer that'd run it, but let's see....oh right, no money because I'm a student :p MS should have developed another OS in between XP and Vista.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 3, 2002
Messages
2,490
Best answers
0
I don't know how much I'd trust that site. I prefer to not take the Internet at face value unless the word is from the people themselves or from like, CNN.com.

If it is true, it's ridiculous. Though I imagine that you can probably turn off all of the things that require that insane memory usage anyway.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Jan 17, 2003
Messages
1,276
Best answers
0
I hope Vista doesn't sell one bit, maybe that will change Microsoft's mind as to what customers really want. Then again it ain't gonna happen. ;(
 
Lost in space
Banned
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 21, 2003
Messages
3,608
Best answers
0
If someone finds a security flaw, writes a virus that consumes a lot of memory & someone running vista then all hell I would imagine brake lose pretty easily considering how much memory it will consume while idle or even in use.

What will become of people who use photoshop or do video editing & only have one gig of memory in their machine and run vista?. Microsoft should really look into system optimizations if anything (the os optimizing itself to work at it's best dependent of the system's hardware) and then maybe I would consider, & only then that I would use Vista.
 
New Member
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Jun 17, 2003
Messages
3,397
Best answers
0
I read on the site that you can remove most of the programs that are running on Vista removed and most of it will be into the classitc view and also I think you can get the "original" task manager back.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top