I'm currently running two machines with Vista. My desktop is running the 64-bit version with a quad-core Intel and 4GB RAM. My other is an older Gateway TabletPC with 2GB, runs and an Intel Dual-Core runs the 32-bit. Both machines run Vista well and everything but a handful of older applications I had woudn't load.
The reason why many older programs won't run is due to th stricter API (Application Programming Interface) requirements in Vista compared to earlier operating sytems. If the programmers stick to the API then their applications work fine. If they tried to do some tricks, like accessing hardware directly, or non-supported calls, then they wil crash.
I agree that Vista was a bit 'raw' when it was first released, and this started the bad rap about it. Add to this manufacturers were pre-loading Vista on hardware that in reality could barely run Window XP with any real gusto. I'm talking about those $350 PCs found in WalMart that everyone was buying up like crazy. This caused people, to complain about the speed of the operating system compared to XP or previous versions of Windows.
To add insult to injury since the OS is so new, many device manufacturers hadn't updated the drivers for the new operaing system. This led to compatibility problems with different pieces of hardware such as video cards, printers, network cards, etc., which caused crashes and other poor performance problems. Further bugs were fixed by Microsoft when SP1 was installed, and this has made a big difference in the performance and compatibility with older programs, but new drivers are the best way to go with hardware.
The anti-Vista crowd's biggest complaints are those aimed at the easiest things to solve. The interface can be changed from Aero to Classic where Vista looks more like Windows 2003 Server or Windows XP. These users, by the way, were the same ones that complained about Windows XP when that came out. UAC (User Access Control) is really a good thing, and can actually protect the operating system from getting infected with a Trojan Horse. By blocking direct access to the operating system, a requiring permissions to do so, this can prevent many types of mal-ware from dropping right in and doing their nast things. In the past Windows XP ran with administrator piveledges. This gave any program, even those unwanted ones, to gain access to the core files that are needed to run. Though annoying, UAC is important, and is here to stay. The different flavors of Unix, and Linux have the similar controls in place to prevent access to certain system files without root permissions. Having said this, UAC can be turned off, which mitigates this issue as well but puts the machine at a bigger risk of downloading something that can install its self directly in the operating system, or cause other problems such as having free access to all files on the computer including personal data which is also protected by the UAC.
From what I've been reading, Windows 7 will have an adjustable UAC control-panel applet. Supposedly too according to Microsoft, any program that runs under Vista now will have no problems with Windows 7. We'll have to wait and see how this works out once the final version is released.
John
The reason why many older programs won't run is due to th stricter API (Application Programming Interface) requirements in Vista compared to earlier operating sytems. If the programmers stick to the API then their applications work fine. If they tried to do some tricks, like accessing hardware directly, or non-supported calls, then they wil crash.
I agree that Vista was a bit 'raw' when it was first released, and this started the bad rap about it. Add to this manufacturers were pre-loading Vista on hardware that in reality could barely run Window XP with any real gusto. I'm talking about those $350 PCs found in WalMart that everyone was buying up like crazy. This caused people, to complain about the speed of the operating system compared to XP or previous versions of Windows.
To add insult to injury since the OS is so new, many device manufacturers hadn't updated the drivers for the new operaing system. This led to compatibility problems with different pieces of hardware such as video cards, printers, network cards, etc., which caused crashes and other poor performance problems. Further bugs were fixed by Microsoft when SP1 was installed, and this has made a big difference in the performance and compatibility with older programs, but new drivers are the best way to go with hardware.
The anti-Vista crowd's biggest complaints are those aimed at the easiest things to solve. The interface can be changed from Aero to Classic where Vista looks more like Windows 2003 Server or Windows XP. These users, by the way, were the same ones that complained about Windows XP when that came out. UAC (User Access Control) is really a good thing, and can actually protect the operating system from getting infected with a Trojan Horse. By blocking direct access to the operating system, a requiring permissions to do so, this can prevent many types of mal-ware from dropping right in and doing their nast things. In the past Windows XP ran with administrator piveledges. This gave any program, even those unwanted ones, to gain access to the core files that are needed to run. Though annoying, UAC is important, and is here to stay. The different flavors of Unix, and Linux have the similar controls in place to prevent access to certain system files without root permissions. Having said this, UAC can be turned off, which mitigates this issue as well but puts the machine at a bigger risk of downloading something that can install its self directly in the operating system, or cause other problems such as having free access to all files on the computer including personal data which is also protected by the UAC.
From what I've been reading, Windows 7 will have an adjustable UAC control-panel applet. Supposedly too according to Microsoft, any program that runs under Vista now will have no problems with Windows 7. We'll have to wait and see how this works out once the final version is released.
John