What's wrong with Vista?

[I_Like_Swordchucks]

18 - You've got to really know what you're doing to get anything out of it. Vista runs amazingly on my PC, possibly even better than XP did, but only after weeks of tweaking and changing settings. Most people don't either have the know-how or the patience to get Vista to work the way it should.

[Dagoth]

Isn't there some kind of inane DRM 'feature' in there, as well?

[Arlia Janet]

19- Drivers. Companies can't get drivers for their hardware on Vista because it's difficult to manage and Microsoft isn't helping them. A lot of big name drivers like Nvida just don't work.

[Fifthfiend]

Originally Posted by Dagoth

Isn't there some kind of inane DRM 'feature' in there, as well?

It's not so much one DRM feature as a whole goddamn mob of DRMs all slamming their dicks into your computer in some kind of fuck-frenzied electronic gang-rape while Bill Gates watches on a camera masturbating furiously, but yeah.

[Aerozord]

20- and this is big for me, many computers cant possibly run it. To get the RAM and graphics card needed to run it and run it well would fry your average mother board.

[I_Like_Swordchucks]

Originally Posted by Aerozord

20- and this is big for me, many computers cant possibly run it. To get the RAM and graphics card needed to run it and run it well would fry your average mother board.

I'm sorry, but this one is just wrong. All you need is a motherboard capable of supporting a graphics card (either AGP or PCI-E) and 2 GB of RAM. That comprises a shocking majority of motherboards, including several between the price of $50-$75. My mobo only cost about $55 on Newegg, and it runs it like a breeze. So unless you're calling the 'average' motherboard something that can only support 512 MB of RAM, no AGP or PCI-E slot, and shit for integrated graphics (which you'd actually have to work to find), Vista will not and never fry it.

Sure a lot of older computers can't run it, but thats generally due to a slow processor/lack of RAM/lack of video card more than an unworthy mobo.

In fact, I'd wager that I could put together a computer that could run Vista and run it well for under $500.

[Demetrius]

That is still beside the point, the massive invasion of privacy and the lack of support makes it easier to put together your own linux box.

[bluestarultor]

The fact that their license agreement basically says "we own your computer and there's nothing you can do to try to stop us!" I personally had enough of a problem with XP's Genuine Advantage bullcrap without buying a system based on it.

[Aerozord]

Originally Posted by I_Like_Swordchucks

I'm sorry, but this one is just wrong. All you need is a motherboard capable of supporting a graphics card (either AGP or PCI-E) and 2 GB of RAM. That comprises a shocking majority of motherboards, including several between the price of $50-$75. My mobo only cost about $55 on Newegg, and it runs it like a breeze. So unless you're calling the 'average' motherboard something that can only support 512 MB of RAM, no AGP or PCI-E slot, and shit for integrated graphics (which you'd actually have to work to find), Vista will not and never fry it.

Sure a lot of older computers can't run it, but thats generally due to a slow processor/lack of RAM/lack of video card more than an unworthy mobo.

In fact, I'd wager that I could put together a computer that could run Vista and run it well for under $500.

I did look it up, and your typical modern motherboard maxes at 2 gigs, and not many people have a graphics card at that level and you would be suprised how many motherboards like a AGP. I think pushing the RAM alone to its max is asking too much. And take it from me, burning out a motherboard is not something you want to do.

Yes you probably could build a computer to run vista, but 90% of people buy them pre-made and un-upgraded. So if your computer is two or three years old you dont have a prayer of running it.

[I_Like_Swordchucks]

Originally Posted by Aerozord

I did look it up, and your typical modern motherboard maxes at 2 gigs, and not many people have a graphics card at that level and you would be suprised how many motherboards like a AGP. I think pushing the RAM alone to its max is asking too much. And take it from me, burning out a motherboard is not something you want to do.

Yes you probably could build a computer to run vista, but 90% of people buy them pre-made and un-upgraded. So if your computer is two or three years old you dont have a prayer of running it.

You're arguing something completely different now. You said earlier that the average motherboard COULDN'T run the RAM or video card needed for Vista, when clearly any motherboard over $40 could. Now you're saying not many people HAVE the RAM or the video card needed for Vista. Sure. A lot of people don't. But thats because they don't have the RAM or the video card, not because their motherboard isn't good enough.

And no, 2GB of RAM will not burn out a motherboard. Even if it is the maximum memory supported (and many support 4 and 8GB, more so than do 2GB), utilizing that full 2GB does not hurt it. It only hurts it if you use higher latencies than are recommended.