A Little Lie and You'll Like Vista

[wuzy]

Recently I've came across a few people saying releasing Vista on 32-bit is the biggest mistake. And this forum reinforces this idea.
When you really think about it, it makes so much sense. Basically by restricting to 64-bit almost all the hardwares/drivers(which came naturally) that'll be running Vista will be up to par.

[brentpresley]

It would also put them back on a level playing field w/ just one OS kernel to maintain.

[wuzy]

Uh-oh, the Vista x64 fanboys are out holding the ramparts again. I really don't understand any of the problems you people have with Vista x86 or XP. They both work for me just as well as Vista x64, and if you happen to get Starforce on your PC somehow then Vista x64 goes into self-destruct mode.

Good god, you don't use no-cd crack?
Using StarForce is a sin!

[randomizer]

Vista x86 is a mistake from that perspective of course, but what is wrong with the OS iteslf? It's running alot more stable than XP ever did for me. And it doesn't care about unsigned drivers which annoys me to no end with x64, regardless of how "secure" it makes the OS.

[randomizer]

Good god, you don't use no-cd crack?
Using StarForce is a sin!

It was on dad's PC, I'm not sure what he installed to get it anyway. I had to use the "official" removal tool to get rid of it though.

[YMAA]

Using unsupported drivers was hell when Vista x64 was in its infancy. Hardware manufacturers seem to have gotten the hint and there are now programs and drivers that work with it using signed drivers or some other method to get around it. Remember when CoreTemp wouldn't work?

[randomizer]

Remember when CoreTemp wouldn't work?

Nope, I never had that problem

[Sailer]

Whatever happened to the late, great XP64 Pro. I liked that OS. Oh, I know, M$ decided to bail on supporting it.

[logain]

I have had only 2 issues with Vista in terms of compatibility. One was FFXI. The version of Play Online that I had on my disc would not work under Vista. I just had to download the Vista compatible version and I was good to go. My other one is my older D-link wireless g USB adapters. They have not written new drivers for them and I do not expect them to. Not Vista's fault that D-link is being lazy. At least Play Online offered to help users by offering a compatible version for download of its software. Vista is not to blame for much of what the problems people are having. It is the people making the hardware not keeping their drivers up to date. Also turn off UAC. Much less headache and it does not ask you if you really want to do something every time you want to do it. That is my only real complaint with Vista. They overdid it with UAC. It scares some people into not wanting to do anything with their pc. Even if it was an M$ program you wanted to run or install it would ask. XP/IE was really not much different. You had to accept active X controls to be run for windows update. You would think M$ software would be capable of recognizing other M$ software but noooo we cannot have that, it would make to much sense.

[DaSickNinja]

Oft times, the UAC is a good thing. Some people shouldn't be allowed to use a computer.

[YMAA]

You would think M$ software would be capable of recognizing other M$ software but noooo we cannot have that, it would make to much sense.

I would think a common dupe malware could use to install itself would be to convince the OS that it's from Microsoft.

[SEAL]

Oft times, the UAC is a good thing. Some people shouldn't be allowed to use a computer.

I like how you talk from experience.

[logain]

Oft times, the UAC is a good thing. Some people shouldn't be allowed to use a computer.

I turned it off for my sister. She was too scared to do anything because of the stupid thing.

[Sailer]

I turned it off for my sister. She was too scared to do anything because of the stupid thing.

I had to turn that feature off for my daughter in law. Every time she tried to load a medical program the UAC gave her fits. Maybe its ok for those who are totally dumb, but its a pain in the butt anyway.

[huddy]

I'm a big fan of Vista 64. Not so much for x86...
XP Pro x64... really stable. Support? Not so much
XP Pro x86 meh.
Everything Apple in origin... meh.
Ubuntu Linux... 100% stable and I'm a big fan.

[randomizer]

I'm a big fan of Vista 64. Not so much for x86...

But why? Nobody ever says why.

[qcmadness]

Recently I've came across a few people saying releasing Vista on 32-bit is the biggest mistake. And this forum reinforces this idea.
When you really think about it, it makes so much sense. Basically by restricting to 64-bit almost all the hardwares/drivers(which came naturally) that'll be running Vista will be up to par.

I have not encountered any major problem with Vista 64-bit.

Agreed. M$ should only release 64-bit version of Vista. For people using Vista, I suspect over 99.9% of the hardware are 64-bit capable.

[YMAA]

But why? Nobody ever says why.

What's the point of the 32-bit version? All it brings to the table over XP is DX10 and Aero. If you're going to use Vista, may as well use the 64-bit edition. No reason not to if you have the opportunity to buy both.

x64 has always run more stably for me anyway. 32-bit...meh.

[Farhang]

I have had only 2 issues with Vista in terms of compatibility. One was FFXI. The version of Play Online that I had on my disc would not work under Vista. I just had to download the Vista compatible version and I was good to go. My other one is my older D-link wireless g USB adapters. They have not written new drivers for them and I do not expect them to. Not Vista's fault that D-link is being lazy. At least Play Online offered to help users by offering a compatible version for download of its software. Vista is not to blame for much of what the problems people are having. It is the people making the hardware not keeping their drivers up to date. Also turn off UAC. Much less headache and it does not ask you if you really want to do something every time you want to do it. That is my only real complaint with Vista. They overdid it with UAC. It scares some people into not wanting to do anything with their pc. Even if it was an M$ program you wanted to run or install it would ask. XP/IE was really not much different. You had to accept active X controls to be run for windows update. You would think M$ software would be capable of recognizing other M$ software but noooo we cannot have that, it would make to much sense.

Yeah UAC is a pain in the arse. I think it's a good time i post a part of my upcoming Vista tweaking guide related to UAC:





XTREME CPU Windows Vista Tweaking Guide

--------------------------------------------------


User Access Control (UAC)

OK, after you installed your Vista, it is recommended to disable the User Access Control (UAC).

To disable the User Access Control (UAC):

- Go to msconfig. (Press Windows+R keys and type msconfig)
- Open the Tools pane.
- Scroll down to Disable UAC and click on that line.
- Press the Launch button.
- A CMD window will open. When the command is done, you can close the window.
- Close msconfig. You need to reboot the computer for changes to apply.


Or:


- Go to Control Panel.
- Go to User Accounts and Family Safety.
- Go to User Accounts.
- Click on Turn User Account Control On or Off.
- Uncheck the Use User Access Control (UAC) to help protect your computer.
- Restart.


Note that if you want to disable UAC, you should do this before you install any program. Not doing so can lead to problems later.

Advance Tweak

UAC uses a driver called the UAC File Virtualization Filter Driver or luafv.sys to trick legacy apps (apps that aren't correctly written for UAC's least privilege) into thinking they are running with the privileges they think they need but really don't. Of course, if you aren't using UAC then you do not need this driver loaded. So if you have choose to permanently disable UAC, you may want to disable this driver.
The setting is located in the registry:

This is they key in it's default (enabled):

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\luafv]
"Start"=dword:00000002

This is the key disabled:

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\luafv]
"Start"=dword:00000004

For more info please visit Chris123NT's Page.


--------------------------------------------------

[qcmadness]

What's the point of the 32-bit version? All it brings to the table over XP is DX10 and Aero. If you're going to use Vista, may as well use the 64-bit edition. No reason not to if you have the opportunity to buy both.

x64 has always run more stably for me anyway. 32-bit...meh.

But for most people, 32-bit may cost less.