Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Evening Safety Dance

View
10 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >

10. Re: No subject Mar 29, 2008, 19:39 g_mann
 
"NVIDIA Responsible for Nearly 30% of Vista Crashes in 2007."

I just wanted to say in your face to all the people who thought Microsoft was responsible for all Vista crashes.

These know it all wend up knowing nothing at all

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
9. Re: No subject Mar 29, 2008, 11:53 wtf_man
 
Video card drivers and the fact that they were freggin' awful for the first three months of video for both ATI and nVidia is probably a solid reason why everyone thinks Vista is crap. A shame that both card manufacturers chose not to make solid vista releases until AFTER vista's release, even though they had release candidates for half a year before it came out...

Uhm, there's a lot more reasons that Vista is crap, but I'll get into that in a second.

As for the video drivers... Microsoft completely changed the driver model so there was bound to be growing pains, and not just for video drivers. I think most informed people understand that, and I agree that is why a lot of people were not early adopters. Until the driver situation is much better than it is now, people (especially enterprise IT) will hold back on deploying Vista.

Other reasons Vista is crap -

- It doesn't play with a network well, even after SP1 (Although it's better)
- It's a bloated resource hog, even MS admits that, which is why they are focusing on streamlining and modularizing Windows 7. Server 2008 is actually a great product with the core installation option. Most people would rather dedicate system resources to their applications than have the OS hog up the system for a fancy idle desktop. It's sort of like the bad DOS versions that took up so much of the 640k limit that you couldn't launch half your applications, although not quite as bad - and more specifically, the 32-Bit version of Vista.
- Hardware and Drivers aren't the only stability issues. There are tons of older applications that won't run on Vista or are fairly unstable. MS has always touted their backwards compatibility, and this time they dropped the ball. Fortunately Windows 7 should have backwards compatibility via built-in virtual machines (An unconfirmed rumor, but MS would be stupid not to... Apple did it for both OS9->OSX and PowerPC->Intel sucessfully.)
-The phone-home-ware is getting ridiculous. People are starting to get peeved with the amount of crap (not just WGA) that phones home and potentially violates their privacy. http://tinyurl.com/2ptclh
While some people don't care about that stuff, others do. Frankly, I don't like potentially giving any info to MS (or any other company for that matter) nor any potential CONTROL over MY machine.
-There's tons of other little reasons like features dropped, Draconian EULA, forced stealth updates (XP too - another control over your machine issue), DX10 on Vista only to force upgrades, etc. that by themselves aren't too big of a deal, but it adds up.

The more MS tries to force control and has more of a closed system (vendor locked / limited choice), the more turned off people get.

/shrug

This comment was edited on Mar 29, 11:57.
 
Avatar 19499
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
8. LOL Mar 29, 2008, 09:04 4D-Boxing
 
I'm with Creston on this one...

This is from the article Microsoft's software is only responsible for 17.9%, but you've also gotta give the big M credit for the 17% that's "unknown."

17.9% + 17% = 34.9% and 34.9% > 28.8% and the article says but you've also gotta give the big M credit for the 17% that's "unknown."

Why isn't the article entitled MS responsible for nearly 35% of Vista crashes in 2007?

LOL was that article written by CNN lol spin those numbers baby spin!!!

This comment was edited on Mar 29, 09:05.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
7. Re: Riiiiiight. Mar 29, 2008, 08:34 MMORPGHoD
 
Seeing as I no longer crash under XP, I really don't care who is responsible. Let me know when crashes occur under Vista just as often as under XP and I'll upgrade my gaming OS.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
6. Re: Riiiiiight. Mar 29, 2008, 01:33 Chicken
 
Creston:
The crashes are measured by user submissions from the error reporting tool that's been in Windows since XP, if you open the court evidence exhibit 1 pdf you can see every driver crash report down to individual crash reports not just percentages. (pg48)

This is from an internal email between MS employees so I highly doubt it would be from made up information.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
5. Riiiiiight. Mar 29, 2008, 00:06 Creston
 
While it wouldn't surprise me if Nvidia was responsible for every known crash in the world, since they write crappy drivers (just like ATI btw), am I supposed to take this pie chart seriously?

Some chart just gets put up, no mention of sources, how this was measured, when something gets attributed to Nvidia vs Microsoft (for example, if Nvidia's driver makes a bad call to DX10, causing DX10 to crash, is that Nvidia's fault or MS's fault?), etc etc etc.

Who measured this? MS? If they did, does anyone really believe that MS would be upfront about it if the data turned out that 60% of the crashes were their fault?
Steve Balmer : "Fuck that, blame Nvidia! Or Google!"

As a SABR-metrics nerd I require a bit more transparency and explanation in numbers before I accept them as believable.

Creston

 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
4. Re: No subject Mar 28, 2008, 23:42 verybad
 
I seriously enjoy Vista, I've had no problems. It's a resource hog yeah, but all new OSs are regarded that way till the hardware catches up. It's great for 64bit computing (I use it for 3d modeling/rendering cause it handles more RAM). It's not for old machines, but on new ones it's fine.

A lot of the bandwagon stuff is really getting boring. What problems has Vista caused you?

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
3. Re: No subject Mar 28, 2008, 22:30 Bone43
 

Video card drivers and the fact that they were freggin' awful for the first three months of video for both ATI and nVidia is probably a solid reason why everyone thinks Vista is crap.

Vista is crap period, maybe after SP2 it might get better but then there all the DRM crap and... well you get the point.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
2. Re: No subject Mar 28, 2008, 21:26 Cutedge
 
Video card drivers and the fact that they were freggin' awful for the first three months of video for both ATI and nVidia is probably a solid reason why everyone thinks Vista is crap. A shame that both card manufacturers chose not to make solid vista releases until AFTER vista's release, even though they had release candidates for half a year before it came out...

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
1. No subject Mar 28, 2008, 21:00 [VG]Reagle
 
first!  
Avatar 8515
 
I am MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH better now.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
10 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo