Articles

Is Windows Vista gone for good?

March 11, 2009 at 11:32:43
Specs: xp pro, 2.1/512DDR

I keep reading about all the problems with Vista and IMO is probably the same as when ME came out and bombed. Now with Windows 7 coming out, will Vista be phased out?
If so, what about the poor people who purchased Vista because it was rammed down their throats with threats that XP was being phased out and could no longer purchase new XP PC's?

Some HELP in posting on Computing.net plus free progs and instructions Cheers


See More: Is Windows Vista gone for good?

Report •


#1
March 11, 2009 at 12:24:26

...The same thing that'll happen to people running WinXP or any other previous version of Windows? (Only with better driver support, because WinNT 6.1 uses the same driver model as WinNT 6.0.)

Report •

#2
Report •

#3
March 11, 2009 at 12:57:08

I keep reading about all the problems with Vista and IMO is probably the same as when ME came out and bombed.

I've said it before, I'll say it again, Vista is the lastest ME. Why Microsoft would bother with Vista when they were already working on 7 can only be summed up with one sentence.

"To make themselves more money"

We all know now that Vista is a POS and to be honest, I feel very sorry for all the people who ended up buying it when they purchased a new computer or laptop. I've never purchased it and I never will. MS knows they can cram any "new" OS down customers throats when it's included in the sale of equipment. Geeks like me buy parts and build their own PC's so we use whatever OS we want. In my case, that's XP Pro and will remain XP Pro until such time as I run into a game or other piece of software that I absolutely must have that only runs on 7. Otherwise, I'll still be using XP 5 years from now. I'm no lemming and feel no need whatsoever to do, or buy, something just because everyone else is.

Now with Windows 7 coming out, will Vista be phased out?

Of course Vista will be phased out. Maybe not as quickly as we'd like though. I wouldn't put it past MS to hold back the release date for 7 until they feel they've milked (or should that be "bilked") every last dime out of Vista that they can. But eventually 7 will replace Vista, and likely XP as well.


Report •

Related Solutions

#4
March 11, 2009 at 13:17:38

Windows Vista and Windows 2000 both served as test runs for new versions of NT. Windows 2000 was the first NT 5 OS; Vista is the first NT 6 OS.

Like Vista, Windows 2000 had serious issues with device drivers when it was first released. Most gamers stayed with 98SE until XP ("what 2000 should've been") was released. Win 2000 was supported by Microsoft for a long time after the release of XP. Under the hood, the two operating systems were fairly similar.

Unfortunately for MS, the same thing happened with Vista. Hardware manufacturers wouldn't get off their collective ass to write good Vista drivers until the OS was nearly a year old. XP users were turned off by the BSoDs and poor performance. I even went back to XP until nVidia released its 16x.xx drivers and Creative finally had a working Vista suite.

By the time Microsoft releases Win 7 ("what Vista should've been"), hardware manufacturers will have mature NT 6.x drivers ready to roll, and users will receive a healthy dose of new eye candy. Win 7 will be seen as the new XP. Most users will forget about Vista, but support for the OS will be provided for quite some time. Vista users will be able to run DX11, WARP, IE8, and many of the other Win 7 goodies because under the hood, the two operating systems are pretty similar.

Socket 939³
Dual-core Opteron 185 @ 3.2GHz
2x 8800GTS in SLI
4GB CL2 PC3200
Blu-ray burner
X-Fi Ti Pro PCI-E
Antec P182
Samsung 24" LCD
Vista 64


Report •

#5
March 11, 2009 at 20:18:18

I think that a key question is this: What will Microsoft charge for upgrading or replacing Vista with Win 7 ? They should charge a bit less than for upgrading or replacing XP with Win 7.

Report •

#6
March 12, 2009 at 08:38:11

I have to disagree with you a bit jackbomb

Like Vista, Windows 2000 had serious issues with device drivers when it was first released. Most gamers stayed with 98SE until XP ("what 2000 should've been") was released. Win 2000 was supported by Microsoft for a long time after the release of XP. Under the hood, the two operating systems were fairly similar.

If my memory serves me, and I admit right now that it doesn't always.........lol, 2000 was pretty darn stable out of the box and came with a much larger driver base than XP or Vista ever did. In fact, I remember installing it and be completely impressed with the job MS did on that particular OS.

It's one big failing was that it sucked totally for gaming. I'm a hardcore gamer btw and have been since before video games were even invented (I was an avid pinball gamer until they invented video games) so you have to know I checked that out thoroughly. You could get some games to run, but they never performed as well on a 2000 platform as they did on 98. Some I could never successfully get to run at all.

When XP came out, and MS finally got some drivers for it, it ran games as good as 98 did and infinitely better than 2000 ever could. But keep in mind, 2000 was a work desktop, not a "home gaming" desktop like 98. XP combined both, the work and gaming in one OS.

I don't believe MS ever intended 2000 to be anything other than what it was/is.....a workstation desktop. Remember, 2000 is when they first came out with Active Directory. While 98 could be made to work in an AD environment (with a few tweaks) 2000 Pro was a solid client desktop that ran beautifully in an AD environment.

XP was a combination of the best of both of 98 and 2000. Which is to say, an NT based (thus giving you the infinitely better secuirty of NTFS) OS that was great for gaming.

I personally had a dual boot system at home for a long time that was 2000/98. When I wanted to game, I booted to 98. When I wanted to work, I chose 2000.

When XP was finally stable, and had a good driver database included, I then switched over to XP Pro and have been very happy with it ever since.

I skipped 95 back when and went from DOS/Windows 3.x to 98. I skipped over ME (never used it even once) and pretty much skipped 2000 except for in a work environment. I've not touched Vista and won't ever buy it period! If I progress beyond XP on the MS OS path, it'll be straight from XP to 7....but as I stated above, that will only ever happen if there should come a game or some other application that won't run on XP that I need or want badly enough to buy 7


Report •

#7
March 12, 2009 at 09:56:17

Curt R: If my memory serves me, and I admit right now that it doesn't always.........lol, 2000 was pretty darn stable out of the box and came with a much larger driver base than XP or Vista ever did.
This is incorrect. Win2K had a smaller driver base than WinXP, which had a smaller driver base than Vista. It was released as a business OS, however, so no one cared enough to have the second rate drivers Vista (and WinME) were stuck with.

Report •


Ask Question