Stable, reliable... not Vista

Guess some people are paranoid or scared. I'm running Vista 64bit and have had zero issues. In fact, its faster than XP and just as stable as XP which for me was bulletproof anyway. I couldnt be happier. Thats my experience anyway.

Fisto said:

Okay, I know this is not a new subject by any means...

So I work in radio and write ads.
One of my clients, a computer store, I won't mention the name, gave me these exact words for his copy. Up til now it's been something like "not sure which Operating system is right for you? We have desktops with the proven Windows XP" Now it has changed to this:

"Not sure which Windows Operating system is best for you? Choose from a huge selection of Desktop computers with the stable, reliable Windows XP operating system OR check out the Windows Vista desktop computer packages starting at just..."

With Dell switching to offer XP as well as Vista on their new boxes the little computer store down the street has realized they've got to do something too in order to satisfy a market that's uncertain about this "new and improved" OS.
Obviously this should be saying a lot to Microsoft. Where we all want to be up with the latest and greatest technology it seems Microslack has caused PC users to take a step back.

Click to expand...

Apple had its fair share of quibbles when Tiger came out but by release 10.4.2 most of the bugs have been quashed out.

My XP box has its issues every once in awhile, but overall is pretty stable. I find Vista very stable. Of course, I can leave my Mac on for weeks at a time running 3 to 5 things at once before I need to restart. I don't use PC's that way. Can't.

Apple had its fair share of quibbles when Tiger came out but by release 10.4.2 most of the bugs have been quashed out.

Click to expand...

That's true. The difference is simply that MS is getting a larger share: I don't recall many people advising users to wait, or that Tiger was incomplete etc, or people begging for the previous version to be sold alongside the new one until the bugs were fixed (not that Apple would have done so).

Seems to me Tiger lived up to it's billing much better than Vista has lived up to it's 'Wow".

I have much less concern for vista's early releases then i do for Leopard's

I think if I remember back, 10.4.1 came out a month after Tiger was released? 10.4.2 within three months? By 10.4.2, Tiger was really stable, trouble free, winning praises left right and centre. Just over three months after the release of Vista, it is still not the great OS everyone thought it would be. I was so disappointed when I couldn't go to Vista yet with my new MBP but I need stability, not latest and buggiest.

I've been running Vista since it's release and really like it. It has been both stable and reliable for me.

Carl said:

My XP box has its issues every once in awhile, but overall is pretty stable. I find Vista very stable. Of course, I can leave my Mac on for weeks at a time running 3 to 5 things at once before I need to restart. I don't use PC's that way. Can't.

Click to expand...

Hmmm is it a workflow problem or not enough power stopping you from running your PC harder? Just curious. I abuse my PC pretty bad from time to time and its solid - but I did invest on decent hardware.

zoziw said:

I've been running Vista since it's release and really like it. It has been both stable and reliable for me.

Click to expand...

+1 as I say with almost a shudder. I think Microsoft did it right with the public beta testing this time, as Vista has been rock solid for me too, in performance and stability.

Apple's QC is generally pretty good or has been with OSX Vxxx, lets hope it stays true with Leopard - maybe they should consider some public beta testing too...

Chrispy - great avatar, and so true...