|
| Windows Vista Ultimate with SP1 | 
 enlarge | From: Microsoft Software
Category: Software
List Price: $339.99
Buy New: $87.92
You Save: $252.07 (74%)
New (76) Used (5) from $87.92
Avg. Customer Rating:  104 reviews
Sales Rank: 57
Format: Dvd-rom
Platform: Windows Vista
Media: DVD-ROM
Edition: Ultimate
Autographed: No
Memorabilia: No
Shipping Weight (lbs): 3
Dimensions (in): 7.5 x 5.2 x 1.6
MPN: 66R-02261
Model: 66R-02261
UPC: 882224661447
EAN: 0882224661492
ASIN: B0013O77GM
Release Date: March 19, 2008
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
|
| Customer Reviews:
 Big-time overhead, slower, confusing May 28, 2008
1 out of 6 found this review helpful
I have heard so many people complaining about Vista and now I know why. The overhead in this OS is way over the top. I have a brand new iMac - and when I say brand new, I don't just mean for me - this particular model just started rolling off the assembly lines 3 weeks ago. It's a 24" model with a Intel Core 2 Duo 2.8 GHz processor and 512MB of dedicated graphics memory. I installed Vista using VMWare Fusion which is rated to be faster with Vista than via Parallels per the latest benchmarks published in PC Magazine.
Even the box this thing came in was confusing. It took me 10 minutes to figure out how I was supposed to open this odd acrylic box without destroying it.
VMWare Fusion had the whole system installed in about an hour and a half - one of the fastest Windows installs I've seen, other than when I installed XP, of course.
I don't have any apps to run in Vista, so I spent hours just trying out every feature I could to get a good appraisal of it and to give an adequate review.
It starts up slower than XP, likely to do to the bloated overhead. Right-clicking doesn't get the snappy response it should. Apparently my 512MB of graphics memory is insufficient for Vista - because only the Windows Flag screensaver will run - the others tell me I need a new graphics card. Hello? It has 512 MB of dedicated VRAM. How many GB of graphics memory does Vista need?
Ok - no big deal, so I just can't review the screensavers - fine. Then I went to play Freecell. I'm not sure what was going on in the board room meetings in Redmond when they decided to work on existing games in Windows - but yowza - the overhead is ridiculous. You never have played Freecell this slow in your life.
Things that should be very low overhead like WordPad, the Start Menu, etc. are just stuttery slow. I mean it is torture. The system is also frankly, patronizing. Do computer users really need to be alerted when they open an empty folder with the text "This folder is empty" ? A lot of alerts that repeat over and over seem to assume that the user is not simply new to computing, but also incapable of forming short term memories.
As with Windows the alt-tab key combo cycles through applications, on the Mac, command-tab cycles through apps as well. Because there was no overt way to remap the keys on the Windows side, I was unable to activate the Windows flip feature. I've yet to try Vista in BootCamp - but it's something I would never do in real life. I'm a Mac user. If I use Windows, it's because I have to, not because I want to - and I want Windows open in another window so I can copy-paste and drag and drop between the two operating systems.
It may not be fair to compare apples to oranges here, but I have no other reference point. When Apple came out with each new version of it's Mac OS X operating system iterations, there were loads of videos telling you how to take advantage of all the features. The new OS, Leopard, runs on my 6-year-old Mac w/o any upgrading and it flies on it. Even with SP1, Vista is just slower by an order of magnitude than XP.
I use XP at work and was very frustrated moving from Office 2003 to 2007 because all of the menus I knew were gone and moved around. I feel the same way with Vista - familiarity is simply not embraced with this 'upgrade' - you are simply thrown into a whole new environment, replete with many of the old problems, at a much slower pace.
As a Mac user, I buy a new Mac approximately every 5 years... that's all I need to really stay current and on top of the latest technologies and software. With Windows, however, you really need a new CPU every 2 years or sooner to make sure your hardware is space-age savvy enough to be able to run the glitz from the new software that Redmond rolls out. I don't see overt advantages to Vista. Their built-in firewall tries to protect you, but to the point of torturing you to death. It is less intuitive to use than its predecessors and I don't see what it does that's new that makes an 'upgrade' worthwhile. This entire OS seems like an utter failure. This is not simply a preference issue of Mac over Windows - putting preferences aside, Vista is simply slow. It has too much bloat compared to XP to make it a pleasant change. If it's more advanced, it should be more compatible (not less), snappier (not slower) and easier to use (not increasingly less intuitive)... especially at the cost - it should be doing something good for you, not punishing you.
 Better than I thought May 26, 2008
0 out of 2 found this review helpful
I'll level with you: I'm a geek for technology. That said, I think Microsoft did a nice job with Vista Ultimate. Be warned that you will need more computer horsepower to show off all of Vista's bells and whistles - the Aero display is stunning but requires a decent video card.
My opinion is that if your computer is running fine with Windows XP, there's no reason to jump to Vista; but if you bought a computer with Vista Ultimate you'll be in for a nice improvement in the Windows family of products.
Great operating system May 22, 2008
0 out of 2 found this review helpful
When I first migrated to Vista, I wasn't sure I'd like it. Now I love it. It has so many great features. I especially like the Sidebar. I also like that you can set up photos into your screensaver. I no longer need to purchase a digital frame. I just use the screensaver.
Ultimate has many features that the other versions of Vista don't, especially backing up your system.
Nice refresh, but is it compelling? May 19, 2008
1 out of 2 found this review helpful
Vista has gotten its share of knocks, many of them well-deserved. But as an IT professional, and having used XP on the desktop for many years, I decided to give Vista a shot now that it's "mature" at over a year old and with the release of SP1.
XP was starting to show its age ("ugly"), and with Vista, Windows finally looks like it belongs in today's technology world. It's pretty, it's REALLY slick, the interface is more streamlined, and everything is laid out just a little better than in XP. Even little things are easier to use. Copy a large set of files, and the prompt that asks if you want to overwrite existing files let's you click "yes to all", "no to all", AND tells you how many conflicts remain. Much better than XP's Windows 3.1 style dialog.
Those changes in layout are a mixed blessing; much like the transition from MS Office 2003 to Office 2007, many things are in slightly different places and it takes a while to adjust to that.
From an IT perspective, aesthetics are unimportant but they are what is most visible; so Microsoft now provides some lovely images for use as wallpaper, dozens of themes/skins, much better looking icons that look good at all sizes, new screensavers, etc. Some of these things use more CPU than you'd expect.
The Help system actually feels helpful finally, and a new Windows Welcome Center is great for the beginning user. Games have been updated and no longer look like 1990s shareware.
There is support for new technologies like iSCSI.
Security is finally taken seriously, but this is a mixed-bag. Precautionary security pop-ups are a bit too frequent, and worse, take over the screen ("pre-emptive")-- not good for multitasking work-flow. There's drive encryption software included now-- but it's not very robust. Etc.
My favorite addition is the Sidebar, a strip on the side where you can run mini-applications that are always visible. No more separate windows to manage, or kludges using the taskbar for the purpose. A CPU/RAM usage meter is one thing I ran in my Sidebar. The Sidebar also makes good use of the real-estate on wide-screen LCDs.
Compatibility issues have been covered ad-naseum so I won't go into those, but before upgrading check that your favorite apps AND hardware are supported. You can safely assume most current products will work reasonably well, but expect to have to upgrade older software, especially system utilities like anything by Mcafe or Norton.
I ran Vista on a new Dell Vostro with 2GB dual-channel RAM and a fast 2.33GHZ Intel E6550 processor. Your experience may suffer on slower hardware.
All of this begs the question of whether you need THIS edition of Vista. You definitely want to run SP1, which greatly improves the Vista experience. But chances are the few extras for "Ultimate" aren't going to be terribly useful, you'd be just fine with the cheaper Windows Vista Home Premium with SP1.
A more difficult question is do you need to buy Vista for a machine that was presumably already running something else? While there is a handful of software that is Vista specific (such as games using DirectX10), there is little compelling reason to go through upgrade or reinstall hassles otherwise. If you don't need those few packages, and don't care to "keep up" with the newest technology, there's little urgency to go to Vista.
For these reasons, I give Vista Ultimate 4-stars. A much needed refresh, but not compelling enough for 5-stars in this premium-priced package.
Other thoughts: Despite Microsoft's attempt to set system requirements low to expand the possible user-base, you will NOT have a good experience with those minimum requirements. Run Vista only a reasonably new machine, at least double the minimum CPU and memory recommendation.
Windows and Hardware Conspiracy May 17, 2008
4 out of 7 found this review helpful
I just bought XP Pro because MS is supposed to phase out XP in June of this year. Go to InfoWorld and read about why the world is up in arms with MS. Over 200,000 signatures have signed the petition to save XP.
And MS is loving every minute of it, as well as all PC and hardware manufacturers. Why?
Vista has promoted the sale of new PCs, Printers, Scanners, etc. This is a win-win scenario for MS, PC and hardware manufacturers. And Vista is killing off most of your applications, but running MS's Office, games, and other applications. Does this sound familiar (IE vs Netscape wars)?
Because Vista does not work, everyone must buy a copy of XP because OEM versions on one machine can't be installed on a new machine. And neither can any other packaged version be installed on a "second" machine. And if you replace all your hard drives, you will have to go through the 40 digit validation process on the phone with MS. Arrgggghhhh! I've had hard drive failures and had to bear this MS criminal investion phone process, because MS software is too stupid to know I'm using the same Motherboard and Processor. How arrogant!
All of the different packaged versions of the same Windows OS were created to take advantage of everyone. A few years back I bought XP 64. It was not supported by Adelphia (now Comcast) and I could not even get on the Web.
I believe MS was fully aware that Vista would not work on most machines, and knew that it would promote PC sales for Enron-like companies; MS gets to double its income by selling flawed Vista and then double-dip by selling XP Pro/Home to make our expensive PCs work. Next, in 2010 MS will triple its income by selling Windows 7 or its next version. MS learned well from all of its other OS failures (95, 98, especially from Millennium).
MS and PC hardware manufacturers are in the hog pen together, selling Windows, Printers, software applications,and on and on. Aren't most of the hardware manufacturers behind the power curve, not producing drivers or driver updates for Vista?
I think Congress needs to do some investigating, that is, if they are not already in MS's deep soft money pockets!
The Al Queda mind set (AQMS) is in warp drive in the U.S., the AQMS financial version that is (also oil, mortgage ARMs, medical, drugs, and so on).
|
|
|
Copyright
©
2006 Adminpal LLC | |
