Why are people calling Windows vista
-
Context
I had no idea what was going on until I found this at the bottom of all the comments.THANK you. Thought I was going crazy...
-
The exact same trends go round and round in web design too (and now apps).
At first things were square (because that was all the technology could do) then in the 2000s CSS exploded and everything went colour gradients and rounded corners, just because people could, then that became old-hat and everything went flat and square again, and then rounded came back (but without so many gradients)
Everything is cyclical.
Color gradients weren't a feature in CSS for a long time, people still wanted them and made them using images, same with rounded corners, same with shadows. All this was standardised in CSS in the 2010s.
-
Source: him
"That's what"
She -
The exact same trends go round and round in web design too (and now apps).
At first things were square (because that was all the technology could do) then in the 2000s CSS exploded and everything went colour gradients and rounded corners, just because people could, then that became old-hat and everything went flat and square again, and then rounded came back (but without so many gradients)
Everything is cyclical.
You're forgetting Flash. Flash every-fucking-where between 2002-2010 because fuck your CPU and your browser
-
Necessary "BTW, I'm using arch linux" comment coming through!
Debian Trixie
-
Nothing else works but hey the blacks are blacker!
wrote on last edited by [email protected]I'm sorry you had issues. Win11 runs everything flawlessly for me. Not only that, every complaint I had about the OS was fixed by installing these two apps: StartAllBack and O&O Shut Up 10.
I'll completely switch to Linux once it not only gets proper HDR support, but also better support for DAW and DJ hardware. Until then I'm stuck dual booting Arch, like I have been with the Latest Windows version—and whatever contemporary Linux distro is in vogue—since the 90s. Some things never change.
-
This post did not contain any content.
And it stills looks like shit. Idk, as much as I dislike Windows Vista asthetics, Apple managed to make them look good by comparison.
-
That, and it had a lot of technical changes that broke a lot of drivers and programs. All the technical changes also had lots of bugs that needed to be fixed. And also, Microsoft OK’ed Vista for 512 MB RAM when it should have had at least 1 GB.
When everything started to smooth out, bugs fixed, drivers and programs updated, and computers came with 2GB+ RAM, then Microsoft released Windows 7, based on all of this, and that made Windows 7 shine.
People say that Windows Vista should never had been made but without it, Windows 7 would have suffered the same fate as Vista.
Yeah, my mum bought a laptop that only had 512mb RAM and that ran like shiiiiiit. Trying to troubleshoot for her left absolutely certain that Vista was a dog.
-
but without it, Windows 7 would have suffered the same fate as Vista.
Alternatively they could test their shit in advance. It's not like Microsoft is too poor to afford an array of average computers and a dozen of testers.
Alternatively they could test their shit in advance
A big part of the problem was 3rd party programs that was not ready. A big change was introduction of the User Account Control (UAC) that more or less started to force programs to behave better: Install into program file, save stuff in user profile, don't do dumb admin stuff if not needed, making programs start to behave more like they lived in a multi-user operating system. It was a change that had to be done and it was never going to be a good experience.
It’s not like Microsoft is too poor to afford an array of average computers and a dozen of testers
I think you underestimate how many testers and how much work actually goes into testing both Microsoft's own software and work with 3rd party software vendors to make sure their software worked. This has changed somewhat, with Windows 10 and forward, where you have a lot more beta testing in the public.
I agree that there should have been spent more time on testing Vista and given more time to 3rd party to test their stuff. However, 3rd party software and drivers took, in some instances, 1-2 years after Vista release, before they updated their stuff to work with Vista. There were just not a lot of companies interested in spending the money and time to make make it work as Vista got a (deserving) bad reception, but a big part of the problem was these companies. A chicken/egg situation.
-
Yeah, my mum bought a laptop that only had 512mb RAM and that ran like shiiiiiit. Trying to troubleshoot for her left absolutely certain that Vista was a dog.
Haha yes, I had to go to client with a new desktop with Windows Vista... that only had 512 MB. It was swapping all the time and was useless and I looked like an idiot for bringing a defective computer that we had selected for him. Upgraded to 1 GB and it was fine.
-
Alternatively they could test their shit in advance
A big part of the problem was 3rd party programs that was not ready. A big change was introduction of the User Account Control (UAC) that more or less started to force programs to behave better: Install into program file, save stuff in user profile, don't do dumb admin stuff if not needed, making programs start to behave more like they lived in a multi-user operating system. It was a change that had to be done and it was never going to be a good experience.
It’s not like Microsoft is too poor to afford an array of average computers and a dozen of testers
I think you underestimate how many testers and how much work actually goes into testing both Microsoft's own software and work with 3rd party software vendors to make sure their software worked. This has changed somewhat, with Windows 10 and forward, where you have a lot more beta testing in the public.
I agree that there should have been spent more time on testing Vista and given more time to 3rd party to test their stuff. However, 3rd party software and drivers took, in some instances, 1-2 years after Vista release, before they updated their stuff to work with Vista. There were just not a lot of companies interested in spending the money and time to make make it work as Vista got a (deserving) bad reception, but a big part of the problem was these companies. A chicken/egg situation.
I am familiar with performance testing of complex product, I agree that it's hard to overestimate the insane complexity of this process. But if anyone has both means and obligation to do it, it's a megacorporation that weaseled it's way into being a monopoly with an iron grip on the world's infrastructure. If it wasn't for that, I would agree that it should be a collaborative effort, but when you're monopoly you don't get to blame third party on your unilateral decisions. "I just changed everything about the infrastructure that I forced you to operate under, now your shit doesn't work and it's your fault actually".
