Windows Vista RC2
-
October 12, 2006 06:36
4.0/5
I enjoy the Vista RC's. The only problem I have with this release is the compatibility bugs. I typically run AVG Free Edition for antivirus. It worked on RC1, but not RC2. Nero also doesn't work, but then it didn't work on RC1 either. Those are the only two programs I've had trouble with so far. The improvements from RC1 to RC2 are negligible and if you're currently using RC1, I'd say stick with it. Also, the CNET review is flawed. It says RC2 doesn't have the Program Compatibility Wizard. I don't know where they're getting this from, as I still have it in mine. Just right click on the program you want to run, click properties, and on the last tab you can select the compatibility wizard and which windows version you want it to run under. -
October 12, 2006 02:11
Mediocre
1.0/5
What You See is What You Get, it's beautiful but ... oh my god.. toooo heavy.
I think Windows Vista = Windows Me , they both will not last for one year.
Sayonara Windows Vista, i'll better wait for your next generation. -
October 12, 2006 06:02
4.5/5
I've been using 5744 for several days now, the media center features are great, as are most other parts of the OS - The article mentioned that the Program Compatibility Wizard was not present, NOT TRUE! I have used it several times - not always with good luck, had some trouble with Premiere Elements - but otherwise okay - Over all, I like this better than the previous build, I would have waited to buy Vista based 5564, based on this one I'll get it right away. The most important thing to me is that it looks so much better than XP - And the Media Center software is significantly more refined than version 2005 - a much more pleasurable experience! Good job Microsoft. -
November 12, 2006 11:27
Terrible
0.5/5
Windows vista is like the first snow of the year oooo ahhh now i want spring to come. My first issue was speed. While testing it on 3 diffrent pcs I got annoyed as hell. Even on my Athlon 5000+ X2 64 Bit proccessor Windows XP 64 bit edition runs a hell of a lot faster. My second issue... How many of you use 16 bit apps? If you didnt raise your hand you shouldnt even bother reading my statement. THEY ELIMINATED DOS COMPLETELY. Over half of the apps that you go to the store and buy today are 16 bit which mean DUN DUN DUN THEY WONT RUN ON VISTA. Server files for games. Oh hell you might as well just play on someone elses pc instead of your own becouse it aint happening. Emulators for systems you cant get anymore out the window. Or rather out of windows. DOS while it may not seem very importaint to the average user is the best way to modify and create programs even today. The whole using the wheel button on the mouse in order to go from window to window is annoying as well Its much easyer just to click on the bottom bar on your screen. It also uses 15 GIGS of hard drive space. While to me Thats nothing considering i have 2 350 GIG HDs in my pc, to some people with older systems that have say only 100 GIG hard drive Thats over 10 Percent of your harddrive space. And hell if your even bothering looking at your pc and you only have a 40 or 60 gig hard drive hell thats only a couple of DVDs backed up away from being filled. Do you know how long it takes just to do a low level defrag on 15 GIGS ??? I mean come on. It will prob be another year before i will either bother to switch which is really strange for me i mean i just sold my athlon 4200 so i could get my athlon 5000 you get the picture. By then they should have programs that will run on it. I never ever EVER thought I would say this by MAC's OS X is better than this ****. Its a pretty version of XP that cant run anything right now. IN january enjoy vista. Then when you have to buy Windows XP becouse of the fact that you couldnt get the damn thing to work properly dont say we didnt warn you. -
October 21, 2006 08:24
Mediocre
1.0/5
Microsoft sent me the disc to upgrade to
Windows Vista RC2. Since it came from Microsoft. I did the dumb thing and assume it was safe to install. I read the directions and follow them. Worse mistake I have ever done on the computer. Unless your are an expert I would not advise anyone to down load the program. It took $306 dollars working with a Tech support group to get my computer back to almost completely the way it was before I installed the program. -
October 16, 2006 05:22
Excellent
2.0/5
Overall the Vista RC2 "demo" shows just how far off-base M$ has gotten with Windows. It's not really a new version of Windows as it is a new OS with a barely-similar looking interface. It is very different with no means of changing it to the older familiar and IMO more intuitive format. Toolbar-like additions seem oddly placed, are permanently placed (can't hide/remove them) and often require more steps to do the simple tasks you need to do daily to just get around in the system.
The new interface coloring is nice, in that you can customize the transparency of BG windows, and the exact shade/hue of it. The bad news is you can't realistically remove it. Turning it off for the "Classic" theme removes the bordered edges and some of the spacing of the window making the interface seem incomplete and like pieces are literally missing.
There are some improvements, such as the document type recognition (which with hidden file extensions make it look like a MacIntosh desktop a lot more) are much more reliable and actually work well. The "media center" is irritatingly simplistic and tends to want to take over everything you're doing when it's running, and even more irritating, only looks at pay sources for media input. It doesn't do a great job at allowing you to, for example, find images through it from a Yahoo or Google or even MSN search engine with free results like you can do in Internet Explorer or Firefox (or any other browser).
On that note, Internet Explorer is the same IE 7 Beta 2 release that is floating around online for free download (from M$), same errors, shortcomings and all. Most troublesome are the lack of updates and the lack of a true engine overhaul/upgrade to keep with the current W3C Standards.
Vista does show signs of promise. The UI while akward and somewhat difficult to learn shows signs of being relatively simple to master. And despite having to acknowledge a change to the desktop or start menu (any system level change) THREE TIMES (Are you sure? -> Yes... This is happening -> Do it. Are you sure you want to let this happen? ->YES!) before it will do it, which makes customizing the start menu a ROYAL PAIN having to wait about 5-8 seconds and basically say yes three times to delete or move EACH LINK in the menu. But some of the changes are nice. The OS has a Calender compliant with ICS (iCal) standards, a seperate Address Book from Outlook/Outlook Express that uses VCards and easily imports/exports them (and older WAB windows Address Book formats) and a set of spyware and antivirus type prevention tools (Windows "Defender" beta - not great, but useful and useable). With some work Vista CAN be a good OS and much better and more powerful than XP, but for now XP is the better option - with the right security added of course. -
October 15, 2006 08:40
Mediocre
1.0/5
I ran Beta 2 before this. I'm actually on RC1 and from what I've read and experienced won't bother with RC2. It seems to get WORSE as they go. Driver support from Nvidia and Creative Labs is horrible. My graphics run worse on the new Nvidia driver and Creative just came out with an RC1 driver over a month after it was released and it does nothing. I still have to use the WinXP 64 driver which only gives my steroe sound through Vista.
I realize this is in Beta still but being the monopoly on the OS market as Windows is, I expected much better, regular driver releases from the big players. -
October 14, 2006 09:49
3.0/5
When I ran Windows Vista RC2 I was unimpressed with a 40-50 minute install, even though after a few screens of initial info (user name, key code, etc.) I could walk away. I was very impressed with hardware compatibilty on my desktop system. The only driver that was not loaded was for my Canoscan scanner, but Canon tech support said they would probably release a driver after Vista was released to the public. I was also very impressed with how quick the OS was, even on my midrange system (AMD64 3500+, on board nVidia 6100 graphics, and 1 GB ram). Vista looks fantastic, but I didn't have enough time to explore all the new features. I had to revert back to XP because two external pieces of hardware that I use everyday (HP iPaq Pocket PC and an iPod) just didn't work well with Vista. I expect that by final release these issues with external devices will be resolved. I wish I had more time to check for software compatibilty, but the few programs I did load seemed to work well. I had downloaded a free version of AVG anti-virus. It wouldn't load initially, but Vista automatically tried to relaod it with new settings and it worked fine. The only two programs that would not work were already documented as incompatible - Nero and Norton Ghost. Again, these issues weren't surprising for an RC. What was surprising was the very high degree of quality, functionality, stability and speed. I am looking forward to the final release although I will probably wait several months to purchase it to make sure compatibility issues will be resolved as far as possible. -
October 13, 2006 03:54
Good
1.5/5
I don't know why I keep trying Vista but I do. I keep hoping that it's not as bad as the last time I installed it, but it is. Visually, it is very well designed. That is it's ONLY good point. My PC's performance was drastically slowed while using it and, according to Microsoft my system meets the requirements to run Vista.
Personally, I will be keeping XP for a long time. -
October 12, 2006 02:08
3.5/5
I really don't have the time to write a big review, so I'll say this: I would never in a million years pay, uh, what was it, $299 for a Windows. Never. I was already puzzled on how RC1 was not considered a beta with its many bugs. Now this one comes out, and it should be RC1, but just barely. This is what happens when you make Windows fancy: There is just more things to go wrong. Also, The install time is exceptionally long. It took me an hour and 20 minutes to install Vista on a 3 month old high-end PC. It took me 25 minutes to re-install Windows XP on to that PC a week later after I was done trying Vista. I think I will stay with XP for a while, even after Vista comes out.
