electric_shaman
Level 2
Posts: 223
Bacon Aficionado
|
 |
« on: February 02, 2011, 08:45:29 AM » |
|
So I'm itching to play SMB on my Macbook, but unless I wait for the Mac release, that means installing Windows in a partition.
And the only Windows install CDs I can get my hands on are for Vista.
So exactly how bad is Vista? I'll eventually end up using this partition for other things apart from playing SMB, so should I look around for an XP or Win7 cd instead?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Suyo
|
|
« Reply #1 on: February 02, 2011, 09:48:49 AM » |
|
On a scale of 0 (awesome) to 10 (horrible), Vista is a clear 15
Well, not THIS bad, but yeah. The biggest weakpoints are that it needs lots of resources (and lags Super Meat Boy), and the UAC. When my sister had a virus on her PC, we were able to install the removal software so it could remove the virus - but UAC blocked the start of it. Vista didn't even prompt for approval - it just quit the application without any notification.
So if you can get it, use XP or 7. If you are installing Vista, disable UAC and set the graphical effects down to a minimum.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
juxtapose519
|
|
« Reply #2 on: February 02, 2011, 10:05:35 AM » |
|
I'm running it on Vista just fine, on a laptop none the less.
7 is definitely superior, but after I shelled out for the Ultimate edition of Vista, Microsoft isn't getting another dime of my money.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
orci
Level 2
Posts: 203
orci the magnificent
|
|
« Reply #3 on: February 02, 2011, 10:19:02 AM » |
|
So bad that I usually refuse to talk about it. The day I bought my laptop (a few years back) the first thing I did was format my harddrive, wiping out Vista, and install Windows XP.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Smilindeth
Fresh Meat
Posts: 1
|
|
« Reply #4 on: February 02, 2011, 11:49:14 AM » |
|
Vista was actually a nice OS. It was HARD to get a virus on it. If you managed to get one, you had to either fail hard, or be trying to get one (Or you turned off the only slightly annoying UAC that even XP has to an extent). Service Pack 1 fixed most of the problems people had, but it is a bit of a RAM hog, so if you don't have at least 2GB, I don't suggest using it. If you do, might as well try it out.
And to compare it to XP and 7...
XP - Greatness, but low in security by default.
Vista - Shiny XP + Super Security + A tad much RAM being used.
7 - A service pack for Vista that added a few new features and lowered the security some + some optimization to work a bit cleaner.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
juxtapose519
|
|
« Reply #5 on: February 02, 2011, 12:22:31 PM » |
|
Ya, people don't really realize how similar Vista and 7 are. Windows 7 is nothing more than a big upgrade. They optimized it, and added some convenience features.
Vista was only really a train wreck when it launched. After SP1, most of the problems were fixed, but the damage was already done. People were already convinced that it was a giant turd.
It's still a turd, but mostly because Microsoft just abandoned it because they knew it was doomed.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
FlipTaco
Level 2
Posts: 253
Black belt in vegetable & condiment housing
|
|
« Reply #6 on: February 02, 2011, 12:24:22 PM » |
|
And to compare it to XP and 7...
XP - Greatness, but low in security by default.
Vista - Shiny XP + Super Security + A tad much RAM being used.
7 - A service pack for Vista that added a few new features and lowered the security some + some optimization to work a bit cleaner.
Lolwut. Windows 7 is a step up and beyond Vista in just about every way; I'd hardly consider a new OS just a service pack. Vista isn't incredibly bad, but I'd highly recommend getting either XP or 7 instead if you can. Vista can and will be troublesome occasionally. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
juxtapose519
|
|
« Reply #7 on: February 02, 2011, 12:33:39 PM » |
|
Lolwut. Windows 7 is a step up and beyond Vista in just about every way; I'd hardly consider a new OS just a service pack.
Vista isn't incredibly bad, but I'd highly recommend getting either XP or 7 instead if you can. Vista can and will be troublesome occasionally.
It's hard to believe, but it really is the case. They didnt' build 7 from the ground up, they just gave Vista a fresh coat of paint so no one would notice. Yes, there's a bunch of stuff they fixed, but they could have done the same thing with another patch. It was more of a marketing decision to make 7 than it was a technical decision. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
HybridStars
Level 2
Posts: 248
DIAMOND SHOVELS
|
|
« Reply #8 on: February 02, 2011, 12:34:39 PM » |
|
Not very. SMB and Minecraft running at the SAME TIME is minimal lag for anything. Unless you're downloading a big-ass thing it lag a bit, but still, I use it on my home PC. This is my XP laptop :/.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If at first you don't succeed: die die again.
|
|
|
CaRniVoRe
Level 0
Posts: 99
What if Indiana Jones made an Indie game o_o
|
|
« Reply #9 on: February 02, 2011, 02:17:04 PM » |
|
I wish they would just release like "XP Enhanced Edition" or something. Change nothing except the ability to go past directX 9.0c and the ability to address more than 3.x gigs of ram (32 bit. I realize 64 can). Nothing else needs to change. But noooooo. Instead, lets take a shit in a box and call it Vista. Then, shortly after, spray Febreze on the shit, rebox it, and call it 7. Fail.. so much Fail  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The problem with the gene pool is that there's no lifeguard.
--Steven Wright
|
|
|
|
General Stuff
