I'm almost afraid to look. I've got a little PC experience, but I'm a long time Mac guy. I'm on a borrowed PC right now running on Vista, and ugh. I get to use it because the owner has other machines and installed Vista on this one as a test. He hasn't got around to stripping it off again, so the machine is idle. He hates it, and from what I've seen, there's good reason compared to the the version of Windows on his other machines.
Posted by Fred Stearns on March 9, 2008 at 1:25 PM
Interesting. So, Microsoft knew that their software was an overpriced piece of non-performing code before nit even hit the market. When I bought my new PC last fall, I required that I had "downgrade" rights to XP before I bought it. As it turned out, the PC came with XP PRO installed with a disc so that I could downgrade to Vista, if I were so foolish. I had read enough about Vista before I bought my new PC so that I could see that Vista was an example of bloat ware. NONE of my peripherals have Vista drivers. I concluded that Vista was released as in a pre-Alpha state and, from what I have read lately, may have progressed to the alpha state.
What we need now is an enterprising genius to develop an operating system that will run any program developed for the Windows platform that is well-written, tight code, rather than the uncoordinated overwritten code that permeates the amrket these days.
Interesting!
What I find funny is that everyone hates Microsoft, and everyone is dumb enough (me included) to still use its products , hence making MS and Bill Gates one of the most successful companies ever. Windows has its flaws since the beginning, and since the beginning people were complaining, and still it dominates the pc-world.
If it is not programming a proper software - manipulation and marketing is what microsoft does outstandingly well.
I just ordered two new computers for my wife's law office...both with XP. My computer guy will install Vista only if it is with the understanding that there will be problems, lots of them, and he isn't liable for trying to fix them.
I have an upgrade to my "Vista Capable" lap top on my shelf for about a year. The machine hums along just fine with the XP Pro installed at birth. I thought about putting the upgrade on EBay, but couldn't bring myself to stick some one with it!
I was a Mac user long before I started using PC's but because of work had to switch over. Now I have my eye on one of those new Mac Air Books but since everything I and my husband do is on a PC including my copy of Photoshop CS3 it will hard to switch back because of the monetary output involved. Does anyone know if these new Mac Laptops are dual-boot and if so can I install my CS3 on it?
Posted by Kah Kit Yoong on March 9, 2008 at 11:09 PM
"Does anyone know if these new Mac Laptops are dual-boot and if so can I install my CS3 on it?"
Hali I don't see why you can't run XP & OSX on a Mac Air. I would suggest a MacBook Pro would run better though. The 2 system will chew up most of the memory on the Mac Air. I run XP & Leopard on my 2.33 Core 2 Duo 15"MacbookPro with 2G RAM no problems.
I started in computing by buying the original Mac (400K floppy drive, no hard drive), then a few years later my work forced me into the Windows world.
Vista is the catalyst that sparked me to buy a Mac Pro last month, and start the migration away from Windows. My daughter will leave for university next year with a new Mac laptop.
Game over: final score is Cool Mac guy in the TV ads 2; Fat PC guy 0; .
Posted by Paul Mc Cann on March 10, 2008 at 6:09 AM
Quick Google shows 2m copies of Leopard sold versus 88m copies of Vista.
Further Google shows http://www.google.ie/search?hl=en&Ir=&q=Apple+leopard+problems
Working for Microsoft does not automatically make anyone an expert on Software.
I am no apologist for Microsoft just a happy Vista user.
Posted by Garth McElroy on March 10, 2008 at 7:37 AM
My parents bought a new Dell notebook a few days ago and it came loaded with Vista. They also bought MS Office 2007. Guess what, they can't install MS Office!! They were getting errors during the install and spent 1.5 hours on the phone with Microsoft support and the problem is still not solved. Pretty bad when your own software can't be installed on your own operating system!!
Posted by Paul Inglis on March 10, 2008 at 8:11 AM
Hi all,
I'm a PC user and have been for years! I'm also running Vista Ultimate with no problems at all. I have all the relevent drivers, etc... I can see any problems nor why everyone hates it so much!
Garth - I'm running Office Professional 2007 with Vista no problem! (PM me if you're still struggling and I'll try to help via email if possible).
If any one is switching from PC to Mac and have a disc copy of Photoshop CS3 that they'll be binning let me know I'll give you something for it!
To be honest the difference between PC or windows and Mac is closing fast! The only thing to tell them apart is Microsoft has 95% of the World market!
Just to let all those know that are using XP - I had more problems with XP than I've ever had with Vista!
Posted by Cliff Beittel on March 10, 2008 at 9:38 AM
I'm a PC user and have been for years! I'm also running Vista Ultimate with no problems at all. I have all the relevent drivers, etc... I can see any problems nor why everyone hates it so much!
Paul, if you read the N.Y. Times article linked at the top of this page, you may begin to understand people's ire with Vista. Senior Microsoft people knew the "Vista Ready/Vista Capable" marketing slogan was bunk. My only experience with Vista was helping my aunt buy a new desktop. She was a Windows 98 user, I'm an XP user, and neither of us were comfortable with Vista. It seems to have all sorts of cosmetic changes that make it hard to use if you already know an earlier Windows system, and it seems very slow (which has been corroborated in testing). So what exactly is the point of the "upgrade"?
Posted by Paul Inglis on March 10, 2008 at 10:33 AM
Hi Cliff,
I've used many Wins from a few earlier models then, '95, '98, 2000, NT, Millennium, XP and now Vista. For me Millennium and XP was a pain in the butt! Nothing but problems, especially with emailing. I persoanlly have found Vista on my machines to be quick and problem free. It also has an improved security!
Maybe I'm the only one!
The only thing I will say bad about vista is it does need a lot of power! in the RAM department and a fastish processor!
Hi everyone,
I have been reading comments concerning vista for a time now. But, I am a little confused. Is it when you try to upgrade to Vista when the problems arise? I purchased a Toshiba laptop last spring with Vista and I have not encountered any problems. But, maybe it is just lurking to raise it's ugly head! Not sure, but I have to say I am happy with my purchase and Vista (so far) You guys are making me nervous, though!
From my experience with it it seems to be a very fluid operating system. Oh and my memory is almost full and it is still working fine.
Posted by Paul Inglis on March 10, 2008 at 3:34 PM
Hi Mary,
I'm the same as you with regards to Vista as it has served me exceptionally well since its release with no concern AT ALL and I doubt it will. I had thought of switching before Vista as XP was a nightmare but since I’ve had Vista – I love it!
I disagree with a lot said about Vista and know how some staff are at Mircosoft – Something’s will never change!
Posted by Bill Pelzmann on March 10, 2008 at 5:05 PM
Are any of you happy Vista users also running Lightroom ?
I've seen one post stating that the current LR is VERY unstable with Vista and should not be installed until LR ver 2.0 is released. Has this been your experience?
I have occassional LR lockups with XP, but no database corruption - so it's a nuisance, but not a show stopper.
Posted by Mike Leakey on March 10, 2008 at 5:22 PM
After 2 or 3 months of major problems with Vista it now seems to have settled down. I ended up having to re-install windows and since then it is working fine.
I use Lightroom and don't have any problems (now).
I did have problems getting CS3 to install but eventually it worked.
I know others have been very happy with Vista but I spent probably 8-10 hours with Dell support trying to stop my machine from crashing and until the re-install nothing they suggested helped.
And even though the machine running vista is newer and has better specs, my 18 month old Sony laptop runs the same programs faster.
I'll admit I'm not especially computer savvy but is it too much to ask to be able to plug a machine in, load a few programs and expect it to work?
mike
Posted by David Bostedo on March 10, 2008 at 6:09 PM
Mike - You've hit on the strangest/scariest thing I've heard about Vista - that it's actually slower with some applications than XP. I can deal with all the problems I may encounter if I upgrade, but if everything works correctly I don't want it to be slower. I've seen some benchmarks that ran slower on Vista, although the difference was very slight. I'm surprised, though, that you've actually noticed something during general use. Have you benchmarked the two machines in any way?
Posted by Paul Inglis on March 10, 2008 at 6:26 PM
I run lightroom on Vista with no problems from day 1! (Started version 1.0 now running 1.1.3)
I will say in order to run Vista well you need at least a Core 2 Duo processor around 2.0MHz and at least 2GB of RAM. In this day and age most new software need more power whether it be Wins or Mac!
When I ran XP it was a Pentium M Processor and 1024MB this isn't good enough for Vista!
Posted by Paul Inglis on March 10, 2008 at 6:37 PM
The way in which a machine is built will determine how it will run. It is more than just what processor is used, or how much RAM, or the graphics card. It's how it is put together!
PC users have a wide choice such as Dell, HP, Compaq (now HP), Sony, Toshiba, and so on! Mac users have 1 (one) and that's apple! Therefore PC users have to decide which machine (from hundreds), from which company (double figure) - the reviews don't help much - experience does!
This has little to do with microsoft - hence good and bad experiences with Vista!
Posted by Mike Leakey on March 10, 2008 at 8:08 PM
David,
My comments about speed are primarily related to Lightroom. The program loads faster and the thumbnails are generated faster on the Sony Laptop.
BTW: The new desktop is a Dell 2.4 MHz Quadcore with 4 MB of Ram. Whether it's a Dell or Microsoft issue I don't know... I'm just happy I don't have the system crashes as before.
mike
Posted by Mike Leakey on March 10, 2008 at 8:11 PM
One other thing.... I have read several places that those with Vista Ultimate and other top end versions have had much greater success than those that don't.
mike
Posted by David Bostedo on March 10, 2008 at 8:16 PM
Mike - Quick question - are you running Vista 64? Otherwise, why the 4 GB of RAM? Just curious, because I thought 64-bit Vista was supposed to be better.
LOL , ya what. Core blimey Mac won't even run half of what I use ............or have to use. As for XP, well lets see what you have to say to Vista in about a year and half.
It took me quite awhile to get used to Vista (stubborn old coot), but now, I wouldn't go back to XP for anything. Cost, well who remembers what XP pro cost a few years back. Heck Vista is cheap.
Lets see, awww heck, no way am I going to use this new Windows 3.1, I'll stick to DOS thanks......... or why would I go to this new Win95-Win98 when 3.1 runs just fine, what do you mean I need more ram........or, naaa I'll stick to Windows 98 because that new XP looks yuck and its so slow and again, it needs more ram and a faster cpu ............or give me Mac so I can run half my programs please !!!
I better go, time for a coffee
Danny <---- The devil made him do it and he had to do it on Win 3.1
Mac vs. Windows is a quasi-religious issue. It's rare that anyone's mind gets changed.
But it's interesting that Apple has been able to successfully leverage dissatisfaction with Vista into a lot of Mac sales. With the Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Zone(tm) operating, it's hard to tell, but there do seem to be significant number of experienced Windows users shift to Macs.
PC Magazine did report in February that the fastest Windows Vista computer was . . . a Mac Pro, running under Boot Camp. And some of us believe that the Mac has a much lower life cycle cost than an equivalent Windows box - all those savings on Norton, you know - but the trade-off is there is only one vendor.
But seriously, I've never understood the debate. A computer is a tool, like a hammer. Do folks get in heated debates over what brand of hammer they use? Find a platform and OS that does what you want.
Estwing or Plumb for a hammer, simple fact Jim and yep, we are particular about that. What makes me smile about the issue, is that I've seen quite a few people that use Mac for one instance, that have to use a Windows emulator on Mac to run Photoimpact, which someone uses and they wanted to try it as well. The person will remain anonymous .
So to run a Windows emulator on a Mac, is a bit like wearing wellies and using an umbrella on a hot fine day ............ IMO or using a cheap $5 hammer on $200,000 job. I've never seen a Windows user, using a Mac emulator, what for. The software is already there.
Its interesting and we could all use Linux instead. Gulp !!!
A couple of problems with the MacBook Air is its small (80gb) and slow (4200rpm) hard drive and maximum 1.8 ghz processor. The MacBook Pro is much more bang for the buck, so to speak. The basic 15" model is a 2.4ghz, 200 gig sata hard drive and can go to 4 gigs of ram. There is no comparison for Photoshop work. As far as your Photoshop CS 3 is concerned, for a small fee ($50 or so) Adobe will provide you with the Mac version. You must sign a form promising to destroy your windows version.
I don't think that there is any question that a MacBook Air is pretty underpowered for Photoshop work. In addition to the comparatively slow processor speed (1.8 GHz at the high end) and hard drive, the RAM limitation is absolute and the graphics card is pretty weak; graphic memory is shared with main memory instead of on the graphics card. That's not enough HP to run Aperture, Lightroom or PS.
Its interesting and we could all use Linux instead. Gulp !!!
Danny, if you've used OSX Leopard on a Macbook Pro, you'd understand why that's not an appealing option. It's like going from a Cadillac to a Yugo. And similarly, gets harder to do the older you get
Then again, if OSX ever pops up an annoying message telling me I have "unused icons" on my desktop, that might push me over the edge... again...
Guy
Posted by Vandit Kalia on March 13, 2008 at 3:26 PM
Danny,
I am curious - have you ever used a Mac? The reason I ask - I recently switched to Mac (mainly b/c of Vista - an OS that requires 1GB just to work normally is a bloated POS, end of story) and you remind me of the way I was *before* my switch... always wondering why people would use Mac, and working based on a set of assumptions which were not very anchored in reality.
Now that I have a Mac - well, I have no plans to switch back. My wife, after initially laughing at my decision to switch, is buying a Macbook for herself as well and we've added a Mac Mini for our general use. Goodbye Microshaft.
You are right - Mac users occasionally run Windows while Window users never run Mac software. Fair enough. If that is a logically compelling reason for you, then perhaps you might want to consider WHY Mac users are willing to put up with that occasional hassle (and it is occasional, mind you - Macs come with pretty much *everything* you need to be up and running).
Jim is right - these are tools and nothing to get worked up over. Makes no difference to me what others think, as I know how much better my computing experience has been with OS X and what a better tool Mac is. But for your own sake, give it a try... you'd be surprised. If not, enjoy what you use.
Vandit, the problem is I can't. I programme CNC machines with fairly unusual software and sometimes even edit in DOS........still . So unless that type of software comes out on a Mac, theres no way. The main problem I would really have is using Photoimpact, which I use a lot. PS just does nothing for me. So I would have to use a windows emulator and thats just not going to happen. Autocad is fine, because that works on both. But those CNC programmes have me stuck. Autocad is fine because at least the CNC's except DXF files. The machines themselves all run off windows based software.
I guess at the end of the day as already said in here, if it works for you, don't change it. Vista is just amazing for what I do and what I want. Just as someone that loves Mac, why change.
All the best and yes I have tried Mac's with architects.
Discussion
37 repliesWhat we need now is an enterprising genius to develop an operating system that will run any program developed for the Windows platform that is well-written, tight code, rather than the uncoordinated overwritten code that permeates the amrket these days.
As my desktops become older and the software more outdated, I believe I may do the same.
FWIW, my 3 to 5 year old PCs running XP all run just fine.
Amen
Whew! What a relief. Now I have to wait for my nephew to give me a turn, tho.
What I find funny is that everyone hates Microsoft, and everyone is dumb enough (me included) to still use its products , hence making MS and Bill Gates one of the most successful companies ever. Windows has its flaws since the beginning, and since the beginning people were complaining, and still it dominates the pc-world.
If it is not programming a proper software - manipulation and marketing is what microsoft does outstandingly well.
Hali I don't see why you can't run XP & OSX on a Mac Air. I would suggest a MacBook Pro would run better though. The 2 system will chew up most of the memory on the Mac Air. I run XP & Leopard on my 2.33 Core 2 Duo 15"MacbookPro with 2G RAM no problems.
Vista is the catalyst that sparked me to buy a Mac Pro last month, and start the migration away from Windows. My daughter will leave for university next year with a new Mac laptop.
Game over: final score is Cool Mac guy in the TV ads 2; Fat PC guy 0; .
Further Google shows http://www.google.ie/search?hl=en&Ir=&q=Apple+leopard+problems
Working for Microsoft does not automatically make anyone an expert on Software.
I am no apologist for Microsoft just a happy Vista user.
I'm a PC user and have been for years! I'm also running Vista Ultimate with no problems at all. I have all the relevent drivers, etc... I can see any problems nor why everyone hates it so much!
Garth - I'm running Office Professional 2007 with Vista no problem! (PM me if you're still struggling and I'll try to help via email if possible).
If any one is switching from PC to Mac and have a disc copy of Photoshop CS3 that they'll be binning let me know I'll give you something for it!
To be honest the difference between PC or windows and Mac is closing fast! The only thing to tell them apart is Microsoft has 95% of the World market!
Just to let all those know that are using XP - I had more problems with XP than I've ever had with Vista!
Paul, if you read the N.Y. Times article linked at the top of this page, you may begin to understand people's ire with Vista. Senior Microsoft people knew the "Vista Ready/Vista Capable" marketing slogan was bunk. My only experience with Vista was helping my aunt buy a new desktop. She was a Windows 98 user, I'm an XP user, and neither of us were comfortable with Vista. It seems to have all sorts of cosmetic changes that make it hard to use if you already know an earlier Windows system, and it seems very slow (which has been corroborated in testing). So what exactly is the point of the "upgrade"?
I've used many Wins from a few earlier models then, '95, '98, 2000, NT, Millennium, XP and now Vista. For me Millennium and XP was a pain in the butt! Nothing but problems, especially with emailing. I persoanlly have found Vista on my machines to be quick and problem free. It also has an improved security!
Maybe I'm the only one!
The only thing I will say bad about vista is it does need a lot of power! in the RAM department and a fastish processor!
I have been reading comments concerning vista for a time now. But, I am a little confused. Is it when you try to upgrade to Vista when the problems arise? I purchased a Toshiba laptop last spring with Vista and I have not encountered any problems. But, maybe it is just lurking to raise it's ugly head! Not sure, but I have to say I am happy with my purchase and Vista (so far) You guys are making me nervous, though!
From my experience with it it seems to be a very fluid operating system. Oh and my memory is almost full and it is still working fine.
I'm the same as you with regards to Vista as it has served me exceptionally well since its release with no concern AT ALL and I doubt it will. I had thought of switching before Vista as XP was a nightmare but since I’ve had Vista – I love it!
I disagree with a lot said about Vista and know how some staff are at Mircosoft – Something’s will never change!
I've seen one post stating that the current LR is VERY unstable with Vista and should not be installed until LR ver 2.0 is released. Has this been your experience?
I have occassional LR lockups with XP, but no database corruption - so it's a nuisance, but not a show stopper.
I use Lightroom and don't have any problems (now).
I did have problems getting CS3 to install but eventually it worked.
I know others have been very happy with Vista but I spent probably 8-10 hours with Dell support trying to stop my machine from crashing and until the re-install nothing they suggested helped.
And even though the machine running vista is newer and has better specs, my 18 month old Sony laptop runs the same programs faster.
I'll admit I'm not especially computer savvy but is it too much to ask to be able to plug a machine in, load a few programs and expect it to work?
mike
I will say in order to run Vista well you need at least a Core 2 Duo processor around 2.0MHz and at least 2GB of RAM. In this day and age most new software need more power whether it be Wins or Mac!
When I ran XP it was a Pentium M Processor and 1024MB this isn't good enough for Vista!
PC users have a wide choice such as Dell, HP, Compaq (now HP), Sony, Toshiba, and so on! Mac users have 1 (one) and that's apple! Therefore PC users have to decide which machine (from hundreds), from which company (double figure) - the reviews don't help much - experience does!
This has little to do with microsoft - hence good and bad experiences with Vista!
My comments about speed are primarily related to Lightroom. The program loads faster and the thumbnails are generated faster on the Sony Laptop.
BTW: The new desktop is a Dell 2.4 MHz Quadcore with 4 MB of Ram. Whether it's a Dell or Microsoft issue I don't know... I'm just happy I don't have the system crashes as before.
mike
mike
It took me quite awhile to get used to Vista (stubborn old coot), but now, I wouldn't go back to XP for anything. Cost, well who remembers what XP pro cost a few years back. Heck Vista is cheap.
Lets see, awww heck, no way am I going to use this new Windows 3.1, I'll stick to DOS thanks......... or why would I go to this new Win95-Win98 when 3.1 runs just fine, what do you mean I need more ram........or, naaa I'll stick to Windows 98 because that new XP looks yuck and its so slow and again, it needs more ram and a faster cpu ............or give me Mac so I can run half my programs please !!!
I better go, time for a coffee
Danny <---- The devil made him do it and he had to do it on Win 3.1
But it's interesting that Apple has been able to successfully leverage dissatisfaction with Vista into a lot of Mac sales. With the Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Zone(tm) operating, it's hard to tell, but there do seem to be significant number of experienced Windows users shift to Macs.
PC Magazine did report in February that the fastest Windows Vista computer was . . . a Mac Pro, running under Boot Camp. And some of us believe that the Mac has a much lower life cycle cost than an equivalent Windows box - all those savings on Norton, you know - but the trade-off is there is only one vendor.
But seriously, I've never understood the debate. A computer is a tool, like a hammer. Do folks get in heated debates over what brand of hammer they use? Find a platform and OS that does what you want.
So to run a Windows emulator on a Mac, is a bit like wearing wellies and using an umbrella on a hot fine day ............ IMO or using a cheap $5 hammer on $200,000 job. I've never seen a Windows user, using a Mac emulator, what for. The software is already there.
Its interesting and we could all use Linux instead. Gulp !!!
Danny.
A couple of problems with the MacBook Air is its small (80gb) and slow (4200rpm) hard drive and maximum 1.8 ghz processor. The MacBook Pro is much more bang for the buck, so to speak. The basic 15" model is a 2.4ghz, 200 gig sata hard drive and can go to 4 gigs of ram. There is no comparison for Photoshop work. As far as your Photoshop CS 3 is concerned, for a small fee ($50 or so) Adobe will provide you with the Mac version. You must sign a form promising to destroy your windows version.
Duane
Danny, if you've used OSX Leopard on a Macbook Pro, you'd understand why that's not an appealing option. It's like going from a Cadillac to a Yugo. And similarly, gets harder to do the older you get
Then again, if OSX ever pops up an annoying message telling me I have "unused icons" on my desktop, that might push me over the edge... again...
Guy
I am curious - have you ever used a Mac? The reason I ask - I recently switched to Mac (mainly b/c of Vista - an OS that requires 1GB just to work normally is a bloated POS, end of story) and you remind me of the way I was *before* my switch... always wondering why people would use Mac, and working based on a set of assumptions which were not very anchored in reality.
Now that I have a Mac - well, I have no plans to switch back. My wife, after initially laughing at my decision to switch, is buying a Macbook for herself as well and we've added a Mac Mini for our general use. Goodbye Microshaft.
You are right - Mac users occasionally run Windows while Window users never run Mac software. Fair enough. If that is a logically compelling reason for you, then perhaps you might want to consider WHY Mac users are willing to put up with that occasional hassle (and it is occasional, mind you - Macs come with pretty much *everything* you need to be up and running).
Jim is right - these are tools and nothing to get worked up over. Makes no difference to me what others think, as I know how much better my computing experience has been with OS X and what a better tool Mac is. But for your own sake, give it a try... you'd be surprised. If not, enjoy what you use.
Vandit
I guess at the end of the day as already said in here, if it works for you, don't change it. Vista is just amazing for what I do and what I want. Just as someone that loves Mac, why change.
All the best and yes I have tried Mac's with architects.