Was Windows Vista really that bad?

Not it wasn't.

Vista was awful until sp1, but the biggest problem is it was way too demanding of an OS at the time relative to the average person's computer. It was also being shoved onto shitty celeron prebuilts with like 512mb of ram and a 32mb iGPU where it hardly worked out of the box, rather than just sticking with xp which ran fine on toasters.

Yes, and I paid for it.

Attached: CA9AEF4C-FBD1-4C10-885D-7BE83DE1C132.png (617x446, 80K)

Everything after XP was shit.

>Being surprised Florida is a pile of shit

It was slow as shit even with 2 GB RAM.

Vista was fine. There were just a bunch of loud mouths who didn’t know the difference between 64 and 32 bit.

Just like with 8 there were just a bunch of loud mouths who though removing one button made an OS useless. 8 was superior to 7 in every way.

Vista made me switch to Linux. I switched back when Windows 7 came out.

SP2 was top tier comfy. I wish I still had my old laptop

>7 is good
>8 is trash
>it's 9's turn of being good so they just skip it

>Fraud
>Israel
>Cruz

Lol absolute fact.

vista still runs worse than wangblows 10 on old hardware.

Spot Florida Man. Probably half black and a third Mexican, but still a white nationalist somehow.

Only 2 I ever bought were Vista and 8 lol...

I didn't think it was bad and I only ever had one driver issue with some obscure hardware. When 7 came out I realized how fucking awful Vista was.

Not really, but it made some significant changes which required drivers to be updated, especially for network cards, so it took a while for them to catch up. Until that point, everyone blamed Vista, but the truth is that 90% of the problems were due to manufacturers not updating their drivers for their customers.

This isn't a bullshit story, I did troubleshooting for Vista at it's release and continued doing it for over a year on their escalation team.

it was the hardware that sucked, not the operating system

Everyone's already forgotten how obnoxious UAC was?

Attached: roughing-it-in-the-bush.jpg (1600x1200, 499K)

it was a great impovement over the wretched security model of xp

I'd insta wifu her.

>and is now the most beloved OS of all time
What has GNU to do with this?

- unoptimized mess that needed more resources than it had any right to
- overzealous UAC that drove prove not used to any kind of protection like that insane.
- started the whole 64-bit craze which meant lots of work for device manufacturers for 64-bit driver support
- and a lot more
Neat ideas pushed way too soon

Compared to OSes using Linux kernel - No

You couldn't even rename or delete a folder in the Start Menu without UAC popping

Yes it had awful driver compatibility problems initially, and was unoptimized in general.

But the BIGGEST issue with Vista was that Microsoft bowed down to the computer manufacturers like Dell who still had huge amounts of old ram, and processors that just weren't equipped to deal with Vista being more CPU, ram and GPU intensive.

Especially the Intel integrated GPUs, which were still fairly new at the time and they ran like shit. Yet Microsoft allowed them to certify these shitty slow computers as "Vista capable" even though it knew better.

And then low and behold everyone is angry because it runs like shit on their brand new computer.

Ultimate SP2 was better than 7, but it's launch was dogshit.

Better in what way?

>But the BIGGEST issue with Vista was that Microsoft bowed down to the computer manufacturers like Dell who still had huge amounts of old ram, and processors that just weren't equipped to deal with Vista being more CPU, ram and GPU intensive.
I bet you'd be happy to have stocks of unusable components lying around and having to resort to building PCs that'd be too expensive for common folks

Vista is prettier. I'll fight you over this.

Eh, I'll give you that. Any other way, just no.

They should've been honest with the minimum specs (dual core, 2Gb RAM, decent GPU) and sent everyone else back to XP.

No. Just so many poorfags pirating it, and installing it on their P3s with 512MB of RAM. It of course ran like a dog on those. When run on 21st century hardware, it was fine. As demonstrated by Vista SE (known as 7) becoming the greatest OS ever when hardware caught up a couple of years later.

>t. poorfag who couldn't even afford 1GB RAM in 2006
You'll find most replies are of this kind. Or there's the even more illogical shit, like:

>Vista made me switch to anus. The tiniest tweak made me switch back
If there's one example as to why freetards and their demands are to be ignored, this is it.

>You couldn't even rename or delete a folder in the Start Menu you didn't own without UAC popping
FTFY. So it worked like, you know, every other operating system to exist?

This is the only post in the entire thread to be remotely close to true. Alas, it fell into the same trap most ITT have, boiling down to
>i was 11yo in 2006, and actually believe my bentium 3 with 1gb of ram was still considered ninja at that point
You get a lot of these.

>dual core,
Good man.
>2Gb RAM,
Mah nigger.
>decent GPU
Two out of three ain't bad. Beyond the meme, even then, Aero's demand of video hardware was pitiful. Any discrete graphics ever could run it at full capability and speed - it was the poorfags demanding to run it on their i815 who got assblasted.