Top ten terrible tech products

IshTue 20 November, 2007 9:25pm

Vista wasn't a flop, it just wasn't as great as we would have hoped. I wouldn't have considered upgrading if it wasn't for DirectX10. Next-gen games using this will be a step above, visually.

RobFri 23 November, 2007 2:31pm

No, no VISTA WAS DEFINITELY A FLOP. This has to be the worst technological failure in the last 20 years. It almost made me switch over to Mac, it was just that bad. No argument possible, period.

Bryan TheilmanSat 24 November, 2007 5:44pm

Wow you sure can tell who the apple idiots are.lol I have been running vista since before it's release and the only program I had problems was... get ready.. I tunes!! Big surprise apple had a lot of time to get ready and did nothing to get it fixed. In fact it took a patch from Ms. to get apples POS software to work. And If apple's os was so great why don't they open it up to run on any system out there? Oh ya then they loose control over the limited hardware it can handle and people would start complaining about how incompatible it is. Do your research too and you will find there is way more security holes in apples Os then MS and takes them way longer to patch them. It's amazing how quickly people forget the release of XP and all the same crap was said about it too and now the same people are saying it's the best ever. People hate change and anything new they will fight.

AnonymousTue 27 November, 2007 12:07am

People should be OUTRAGED at Microsoft. For nearly a decade we wait for an OS that's superior in running all of our apps/games/etc... and out comes this piece of s*** that runs awful even on awesome machines. Oddly enough, the computer that vista ran best for me was on work laptop which was a MAC! I've never even been close to a Mac Fanboy, couldn't stand them or Jobs. But I have to say, Microsoft really s*** the bed on this one.

AnonymousTue 27 November, 2007 1:56pm

Aaaah... Vista! I loved the smooth transition from XP on my 12 month old hardware. I got my Gig of RAM, check, my overly expensive graphics card, check. Everything looking good, here we go... no problems whatsoever, everything running like clockwork. THEN, I suddenly woke up and realised I'd fallen asleep midway through the 6 hour install process (including downloading all the required driver and software updates with the requisite restarts every single time. I got so bored waiting for the PC that during one of the annoying restarts I decided to upgrade the 8 year old Mac I have lying around to Leopard (Nice 800MHz G4 with 256Mb RAM) - all went well and the Mac was up and running again in less time than it took the PC to boot back up. In fact, I then used the Mac to download all the other driver updates I needed for the Vista 'upgrade' because it was just quicker that way.

Leopard's a decent enough OS (nothing spectacular, but does it's job properly and without any hassle), but Vista's a dog of the most mongrel order!

Guilherme BarrosWed 28 November, 2007 6:13pm

Hail all,
I've read some of your comments, and I have some objections to do.

1- Vista really sucks. Do you know why? Because we live in a world where half of the population can't even afford a computer. We live in a world where not all people were born fron a frekin' rich father and can buy lots of expensive parts for a PC just to run a freakin' expensive and horrible OS.
2- To you guys who say Leopard Sucks, I say that you're wrong. I have run both systems, and I'm very happy to say that Apple got it right, Microsoft didn't.
3- Another thing, if you think windows is perfect, I tell you it's a horrible copy of MAC OSs.

And I AM a Apple fan boy. Do you know why? Because I used to use vista. Yeah, that's right. I was all like "vista rulez man! It's great!" when my father bought an iMac. So I had an experience on both platforms.

So screw you Microsoft fanboys! You don't get anything right. Try to use a mac before saying the Vista rulez and Leopard sucks. Apple corrects problems. Microsoft creates them.

cya!

JohnQSat 24 November, 2007 5:55pm

Vista has one thing going for it. Direct3D 10. My company is working with Microsoft on this. OpenGL is a graphics standard that is not enforced by anyone. As a result, my company has to test every driver release on every workstation graphics card for our software. The software contains over 40 workarounds to accommodate OpenGL bugs that keep on popping up.

Microsoft is taking DirectX graphics to the same level of standardization as printers. They are doing the hardware testing. Their goal is the exact same display for any graphics card. The divide between expensive workstation cards and game cards is now gone. Our complex hi-tech applications will run the same on a $400 system with on-board graphics as a $10,000 system with a $2,000 workstation card. The difference is speed. The quality of the display is the same.

This is a big win for third world countries. Needless to say, our sales are improving.

Of course Microsoft could have implemented this on XP.

AnonymousTue 27 November, 2007 8:00pm

I'd like to second the post above concerning RealPlayer. That my friends, is/was truly horrible software.

Oh, and what about the Atari game E.T.? That was my first experience of utter disappointment with a new piece of software...

MikeTue 27 November, 2007 3:26am

Vista was going to be an upgrade until they decided they weren't going to be able to finish the filesystem in time and ended up stripping it out. They would have been better off to just build the 3d stuff on top of XP.

Microsoft should take a page out of Apple's book, build on top of a linux or bsd kernel and use one of the existing filesystems. M$ has been trying to duplicate Apple usability for 20 years now and have cut all kinds of corners resulting in a horrible interface. The one thing they have done well is create a bunch of users who think they don't have any other options. What they don't realize is that while they have been using whatever OS comes pre-loaded on their systems and pressing ctrl-alt-del like they are in a coma, Linux window managers have surpassed Windows in usability using the principle that less is more... which is what Apple was doing all along. In their obsession to put Windows on every computer in the world, they stopped trying to do so by building a better OS and started trying to do it through license cops, congressional legislation, business deals with PC makers, and slick marketing.

I've been using Linux exclusively for the past two years and I recently had to go back to Windows when I moved to a new client. EVERYTHING in Windows is painful, by comparison.

TravisTue 27 November, 2007 3:58am

Vista is a flop, and I'll tell you why, It's not because of the stupid resources required to preform tasks, it's not because it's a Microsoft product, it's not because of any of these things. Lets face it, these problems occur with almost all versions of wWindows on release. It's because for the first time in Microsoft History the previous version of Windows (XP) outsold the new version (Vista) in the 1st month of release.

'nuf said

Oh and by-the-way I do own both Vista and XP and have used both. the DX10 is simply not good enough to warrent the upgrade, and you'll find the industry will continue to use DX9 until Vista has WIDESPREAD adoption, which looks doubtful at this point.

DhavalTue 27 November, 2007 8:19am

Guys, I have used Windows Media Player for a very very long time. I remember I downloaded Windows MP-9 for two hours on my dial up. Then, i downloaded ten, which was the best WMP yet. Then came Windows media player 11. Worst Product I have ever used. I downgraded TWICE! So, I switched to iTunes, and Winamp and I must say. Windows sucks NOW. It was great earlier. But it Sucks at this point in time

bob@aol.comFri 30 November, 2007 12:25am

"it just wasn't as great as we would have hoped."

WTF? "We"? Are you a Microsoft employee or just another ravenous fanboy?

AnonymousTue 20 November, 2007 10:01pm

Agreed, but Vista was just too pointless. It's not in the worst 10 but it deserves to be on a list like this. XP is almost decent now, almost 6 years on.

AnonymousWed 21 November, 2007 3:45pm

What about Leopard? Leopard users are downgrading to Tiger as well. Despite its cool innovations, the security issues, data erasing bug, firewall issue, and other things make it just as repugnant in its first incarnation as Vista, in my opinion.

AnonymousWed 21 November, 2007 6:11pm

Nobody is downgrading to Tiger you idgiot. Ok maybe a few people who are to stupid to figure out killer features like stack and time machine. All other problems you have mentioned are either complete BS, already patched, or not even partially significant. Don't try to make Leopard, an OS improvement to an already superior OS, comparable to Vista, a brand new half-baked OS that doesn't even allow you to set up the most basic of hardware including Microsoft Mouse/keyboard products, printers, etc. Do your homework before you post absurdly dumb remarks.

AnonymousMon 26 November, 2007 3:15am

Out of the millions of new Leopard up-graders, I have read of only one person, yes, thats correct, just one person who went back to Tiger! Most of the complaints were few, and most of those flaws have ALREADY been fixed with the recent Leopard update 1.5.01!

Check your facts before posting such bias and untrue so called facts! The real fact is that out of millions of Leopard early adopters, most of the reviews of Leopard have been thumbs up!

AnonymousWed 21 November, 2007 6:07pm

Leopard's been out less than a month. Vista's had most of 2007 for Microsoft to get their act together and fix these issues. And Leopard came what? 18 months after Tiger? Vista had 5 years, there's no reason for Microsoft to be having this many issues. Not saying Leopard's perfect either, but Leopard's already had a major update released for it, and Microsoft hasn't made nearly enough headway in fixing Vista.

anonymousWed 21 November, 2007 11:28pm

WHAT???
I have Windows Vista, and I think it deserves to be
THE TECH PRODUCT OF THE YEAR.

daviWed 21 November, 2007 11:52pm

LOL THAT IS SO TRUE. VISTA IS A MEMORY HOG!

RGZThu 22 November, 2007 3:54am

Barcode Battler was awesome! where can I buy one?

StephenThu 22 November, 2007 7:17am

I must strongly disagree with the Vista entry. What's funny about the horde of Vista criticism is that all of it - all of it - applies just as much, and in many cases better, to XP's initial release. Hardware incompatibility? Check. I had to toss a perfectly good scanner because no XP-compatible drivers existed. Software incompatibility? A thousand checks. I had far more compatibility problems with pre-SP1 XP than I do with Vista.

When I see PC users lambasting Vista, all I can think is, "How quickly they forget."

AnonymousThu 22 November, 2007 8:38am

i also have to fight back against those vista comments.
i recently got vista and i can happily say that it is one of the most enjoyable pieces of tech i have come across (others being the zen vision:m and wii). for all who say it is unstable and not compatible with hardware and software i can only reply in saying that: i only have a small amount of virus protection and have NEVER suffered from one security breach, i have used many hardware accessories and components with vista and have never had an issue, similarly i have never had a problem with software incompatibility. the one thing i can say is that vista eats memory up like nothing else. these are all things that i encountered regularly in a fully updated virus protected xp.

but compared to leopard vista is bliss. i have used leopard on my dads computer and can agree that it is visually attractive and has a nice interface. however, he has encountered numerous software issues with quality programs that simply wont work on his mac and the computer went through a week long phase of crashing unexpectedly. also, many hardware items that work with my vista do not work with leopard.

i am not a microsoft fanboy, these are just my experiences. and also, if more than like 4% of people actually had macs/leopard im sure there would be a hell of a lot more viruses and what not. the reason there isnt is because hackers so cbf buying them.

GeorgiThu 22 November, 2007 9:34am

Totally agree 'bout Vista - I even won't consider to install it if it didn't come pre-installed on every new PC.
Who said people are downgrading from Leopard to Tiger - they're not. It's just that they didn't properly install Leopard. Whereas if you install Vista on a recommended Dell you;ll still have problems and you'll still want to assassinate Gates, personally.
Wow I had forgot 'bout the Tamagotchi :D I had one or two and I really don't want to acknowledge it because it was utter crap.

AnonymousThu 22 November, 2007 12:31pm

"How quickly they forget," you say? Are you out of your mind? It's been more than 5 years since XP's release! It's easy to say that after waiting for 5 years, we weren't expecting an OS that doesn't work with our everyday programs and hardware.

What's really worse is that they MS hasn't been to keen on actually resolving Vista issues. Instead, they keep on pretending that Vista is all this and that, when it can't even be compatible to the most common software and computer peripherals.

So considering the wait, Microsoft's actions (or the lack thereof), and all the disappointment that came with it, I must say, Vista is pure rubbish. It deserves to be in this list.

JackFri 23 November, 2007 4:48pm

I just can't believe that they put Vista on here over Windows ME (or for that matter Microsoft Bob). ME was by far a worse operating system and more of a let down than Vista. Though I will admit that the logical statement-- Vista : XP :: ME : 98 --is probably not far off. The things that Vista got right it did get really right, whereas ME got pretty much nothing right.

Jerry S.Sat 24 November, 2007 12:45am

Anybody moaning about Vista being a flop, or it being a performance hog is just mad that it doesn't run as well on their dated computer as Windows XP did. Upgrade your machines and stop being a whining bunch of losers who can't afford another stick of memory.

AnonymousSat 24 November, 2007 12:52am

What about the cuecat? The idea was pretty much the same as the barcode battler, except that instead of trying to trick you into thinking you could have fun you were supposed to scan bar codes an then the "cat" once connected to your computer would take you to the relevant web site. I just can't understand why that never caught on.

AnonymousSat 24 November, 2007 2:19am

I just don't get all the Vista bashing. I got a new laptop almost a year ago and haven't had any issues. I know 4 others that have Vista also and they haven't had any problems ether. Personally i feel that most that put down Vista are mac fanboys that have never even used Vista. And no im not an apple hater.. I just ordered a MBP not because there is anything wrong with my Vista laptop but because i work in IT and want something new to play with. Also, to those who are crying about Vistas memory requirements. Should we all downgrade to windows 3.11 because it requires less memory than XP??

Bottom line is: there is nothing wrong with Visa if it’s on the right hardware. If you don't have the right hardware then stick with XP.

TrebuinSat 24 November, 2007 4:01am

Vista isn't a half bad release. My Vista is running at around 650 Mb with 2 gigs installed and XP running around 450 Mb with 2 gigs. This isn't gross difference between the two with the tech changes. It's also nice that my 64-bit Vista is acting virus-proof over the XP machines going down like crazy at work. Quite a bit of stuff run ridiculously faster: Encoding, decoding, encrypting, network calls, CAD, math functions, all these at around two times as fast. However, games run anywhere from slightly faster to slightly slower and general programs load at an unnoticed and uncared for speed. The GUI is now rendered through the video card which can cause performance loss if you run in a window with Aero running at full capacity.

Vista does bite the dust with this being the worst part that I have noticed: WinSXS folder is huge, 6.5 Gigs on my drive. This exists for compatibility and grows constantly with installed and upgrades.

I honestly think that Windows XP has been around too long allowing more effort to go into that as opposed to making a decent new OS. Vista has seen many features removed making it barely different from XP on the user end. Vista Ultimate was supposed to include new features that were deemed "not finished," but it disappointed me greatly as it originally included a card game, a security feature that I cannot use, language packs that does me and probably the entire world no good, and "dreams" a form very similar to ATI's Video desktop, only dreams is much more inefficient. The only new things I have seen was dreams being upgraded from beta to full release. This is terribly disappointing and not worth the extra.

If upgrading, I would only recommend sticking with XP if you're not a high end gamer. If you have to upgrade, go either Business or Home Premium and buy OEM or Upgrade, whichever is less expensive. Business seems to only not offer media desktop, and you can find alternates to that. Home Premium seems to lack some network functionality for business users.

For the business world (military in my case), I used to try to push Vista 64, but I have pulled back greatly due to the lack in 64-bit support and backwards compatibility to 16-bit we needed. There were people greatly happy to see that a lot of software bottlenecks disappeared with Vista 64, but we just couldn't find any hardware vendor that supports 64-bit fully at a lower cost. Dell provides one of the only known fully Vista 64-bit capable machines, the M1330. Most people see no future in 64-bit as it's only benefit is that it can access over 4 gigs of ram. They seem to ignore completely the new random memory security that puts Vista 64 (only 64-bit) equal to OSX. They also seem to ignore the doubled pipeline of 64 and criticize people who see the performance boost of it. There is a lot 32 bit benchmarks run on Vista 64 which will show no performance boost as it measures total emulation of 32 bit. 32-bit software on Vista 64 is only partially emulated as some drivers the software access run 64-bit: 2d graphics, memory access, LAN response (less hardware induced lag for gamers), and a slight few processor calls. If you run a 64-bit benchmark of 32-bit processes, you will see these small increases in performance, as opposed to drops. If you run a 64-bit benchmark of 64-bit processes, you will see double the performance. Keep in mind that this is exactly the same thing as trying to say 16-bit is better than 32-bit, back in the world of Windows 3.11 and 9x, but the world made the move...today the world does not want to make that move.

It's really only worth moving to 64-bit Vista if your hardware supports it...which is almost none. It's only worth moving to 32-bit Vista if you need DirectX 10. Vista is far more compatible, though slower on machines that don't meet recommended specs. The 32-bit side of Vista is really a flop as it does not give the user much of anything new at a huge cost. 64-bit Vista ha

AnonymousSat 24 November, 2007 9:24am

It's because of this infamous rootkit that I refuse to buy ANYTHING with Sony on it...nothing, tv's, computers, cd's...I refuse to give them any of my money and, frankly, I'm amazed that people still buy from them.

AnonymousSat 24 November, 2007 10:28am

Bull. I've been using it for nine months and it isn't half that bad. The downgrade to a previous versions is available in XP, better check your facts. Those hordes are Linux users trying to gain market share and thou Vista does have some minor compatibility issues these are mostly due to third party software companies that had plenty of time to make there software ready and didn't. My guess is MSN has a list. I would.

Bill MeadSat 24 November, 2007 3:03pm

Your inclusion of Vista certainly calls into question your objectivity. Change is always difficult for those of us who become acustom to a certain look and feel. I have seen the same hand wringing and winining before, on a variety of upgrades. I am a current Vista user and see nothing of truth in your accessment. It was a change, but change is what technologgy is all about. All of us have a choice, I choose to move forward.

AnonymousSat 24 November, 2007 4:09pm

ok,#10 i kind of agree with. but the thing is it was a flop. it wasnt a new operating system, it was an upgrade to XP.like a patch

AnonymousSat 24 November, 2007 4:10pm

WOW! I can not believe that this amazing os is in the worst products. leopard should be on this list! GO AWAY APPLE FANBOYS!

AnonymousSat 24 November, 2007 5:00pm

I can remember when people downgraded from windows 3.0 to DOS because windows would not run some dos programs. The same is true for every upgrade of windows, some felt better just running the old versions, even downgrading from XP to windows 98 or windows 2000 because xp was "Junk".

It just means that as the computer crowd gets older they are more resistant to change resulting in even the smallest problems with a "new OS" they will turn and go back to the previous versions. It doesnt mean its "Junk" it just means we will adopt it a few years latter than our younger counterparts that are purchasing new computers with vista as we speak.

Poo Poo on your worst tech list, it sounds like you were desperate. Just look at the electric car, at least someone was thinking back in the 80s, too bad we would'nt listen as now we could be less dependent on foreign oil and more concerned about solving something bigger like world hunger or genocide in sudan.

David PageSat 24 November, 2007 5:09pm

Vista's problems are largely payback for years of preferring functionality to safety. Microsoft badly needed to fix those things that XP Service Pack 2 could not, including for example the ability to have users run as something less than full administrators, and better use of hardware protected mode than XPs very limited abilities. Not surprisingly, this caused backward compatibility problems with older hardware that was less standard than a plain printer, and with any software that expected administrator access (includes most installers!).

The result is that you have two camps: those who use Vista on new laptops, preconfigured with drivers for all their hardware, and stick to new attached devices with Vista drivers. These people have mostly benefits - and can turn off User Access Control if it drives them crazy. The other group are people who upgrade, have older proprietary software that won't install or run on Vista, have All in one printers or special hardware without new drivers. These people live in hell, which is why Microsoft has the downgrade option to XP. My office runs endless software not compatible with anything: had to be fixed for XP when we moved from Windows 2000 last year! I figure that with replacement of hardware, final removal of hopelessly outdated software and the like that we'll be able to go to Vista about the time SP1 comes out.

In the meantime, I like Vista on my new laptop, and have no intention of ever upgrading my desktop from XP.

Scott from ModestoSat 24 November, 2007 5:31pm

If a mac user decides to "downgrade" operating systems that is a personal, individual decision. Vista users are forced to do it, the microsoft system is horrible. The apple software is thoughtful, clean, eco friendly, comes in clever packaging and regardless of it's performance on your macbook it is better.

UpbeatdadSat 24 November, 2007 6:52pm

VTech came very close to rolling out a product like the Amstrad email phone. It would have been marketed to 'low-tech' folks like senior citizens who were computer-phobic. By the time all the bugs were worked out and a selling price set, it was clear that cheap PCs would eat this product for lunch.

AnonymousSun 25 November, 2007 1:31am

If you were going to choose a mainstream computer product, a better choice would have been the PC Jr. (Or are you all too young to remember?)

AnonymousSun 25 November, 2007 1:40am

I scrambled to downgrade back to xp. My laptop came with Vista Home and, it was a disaster. Not intuitive, not user friendly and not downgradeable said both Acer and Microsoft.

I am happily using XP again after a very painful experience and no one owning up at ACER or Microsoft for any way to go back to XP free. This laptop came with Vista, No Chilce re license with Microsoft said Acr. Not mt product said Microsofft and got to...is waht I said.

nd, Ma

AnonymousSun 25 November, 2007 2:52am

Vista is a steaming pile of crap!

Tony T.Sun 25 November, 2007 3:43am

You know, I have never used a Mac, and I still think Vista is a TURKY! It brought back nightmares of Windoww NT, ME,and 2000 "Upgrades"! #1, I have kids, as do a few other people here on planet earth, and most of these "upgrades" were nnnotttt Kid Software compatable!!! And I had many hardware incompatabilities as well....Printers, scanners and the like. We would have been better off staying with Windows 95 or 98 at the time. Vista isn't any different. Now I'm not going to go over to the (Mac) dark side but I am going to stick with XP until Microsoft comes out with something I trust again.

AnonymousSun 25 November, 2007 6:04am

An interesting article, I had almost forgotten about some of the products.

Regarding Vista, I was not surprised to see it on the list. The reason I was not surprised was not because I don't like Vista, but because it is the trendy thing to do. Bashing Vista (and MicroSoft) is the way that "reporters" can sound like they are in tune with their readers.

I have a Dell Inspiron that came with Vista Home Premium. While I will be the first to admit that it has given me some problems, over all I think it is the best looking OS on the market today - even better looking than Leopard! I have found it to be overall easy to use, it is not that much different than XP in regarding how to use it on an everyday basis!

I am tired of hearing people saying that they don't like UAC. First of all if you don't like it, TURN IT OFF! Of course if you do turn it off, don't complain that your system isn't as secure as before! From what I've discovered, the more you use your computer, the less likely UAC will show up! People it is their for your protecting, and isn't hard to understand. All you have to do is just read what it says, then click the correct button - it is not rocket science!

I am sorry for such a long post, but I am just getting tired of people bashing Vista, just because it is the trendy thing to do. The reality of the matter is, if you don't like Vista, or Windows, or even MicroSoft, DON'T USE IT! There are plenty of other options out there!

Max

AnonymousSun 2 December, 2007 10:32pm

Actualy, i think that vista deserves it's place, for several reasons, the OS is kind of sluggish, and not compatible with all the computer on the market right now, for example my dad bought a notebook the last month, since we are not millionaire, His notebook has not the latest technology, however, is by far a better machine than my own PC(3 years old) , and i have to say that my desktop runs heavily smooth with XP compared with his Vista notebook, I've told him that if he wants to use his computer in a more efficient way he should downgrade to XP (at last).

If vista doesn't run smooth in a brand new PC then it shouldn't be included with it.

Despite my previous arguments i must say that vista isn't bad, at least my dad hasn't had any issues yet, however it's sluggish and, for some people performance is a must, thus if you can't afford a killer machine, then you won't do Yourfself any good with this OS.

AnonymousSun 25 November, 2007 6:26am

Man everyone is really focusing on how bad Vista is. But no one can give me any real reasons as to why it's bad. I have been running Vista home premium for 6 months, and I haven't had any problems. Yeah UAC is a pain in the arse and Vista tries to HELP you with your hardware, but if you have any intelligence at all, you will find that you can disable UAC, and that you have the same old device manager to configure your hardware. As far as hardware compatibility goes, Vista does a pretty damn good job of it. With all of the different Vista-capable hardware configurations out there, Vista can run on damn near every one. And most driver problems that you have with Vista are due to the manufacturer not releasing an updated driver. Sure maybe Vista doesn't just "work" out of the box like a Mac, but let's be honest, Apple only has a few hardware templates by which they have to provide drivers for. And I bet every apple user out there has had problems with 3rd party hardware devices. More so than a windows user. As far as security goes, please feel free to try to hack a fully updated Vista box with firewall and antivirus software. I can be sure that no one here will be successful.

AnonymousSun 25 November, 2007 11:00am

I am, in the most cynical way, amused by the Apple fanboys that routinely post on this site. Despite Apple manufacturing the least upgradeable hardware (iPod or any all-in-one Mac since before I was born for example), people claim Microsoft abuses its consumers. Last time I checked, my 1st gen Zune was syncing itself wirelessly on its new firmware while most 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th gen iPods were busy in UPS warehouses waiting to be returned to customers after their fourth hard drive replacement in a year. Cut MS a little slack on Vista not being perfect; if Apple had to deal with the sheer number of hardware and software variances that the PC market entails, Jobs probably would have lost his job by now. Wait, did I just post this ten years ago?

ShiviSun 25 November, 2007 4:11pm

I totally agree with Vista in the List. When firt had a look at the Vista preview I was impressed and thought finally Microsoft had got around to thinking about usability and ergonomics. But I was totally mistaken. If Microsoft can think that it can push bad engineering as a fresh new product then it is sadly mistaken. Look at the bloat that vista carries and thoughtless approach to workflows in vista. While I can understand incompatibilities with launch of new OS, but what about 11 months in market plus 16 months in beta to sort out these issues already?

Its eye candy is a severe hog on resources. Why should an OS min sys req be 1GB RAM and 40 GB HDD????

By comparision I can comfortably run the new Leopard on 3 yr old entry level eMac with out any upgrade. Can u cite one 3 year old PC on which Vista can run without any upgrade?

Therefore I fullyt I agree that Vista is one piece of Trash!!!!

Martha ClarkSun 25 November, 2007 7:08pm

Wonderful list!

I think Vista should be on this list, only because of it's lack of improvements over XP. I expected Vista to offer me much, much more than XP, and it doesn't. Aero interface is pretty, but other than that, I just can't justify upgrading my computer from XP to Vista at such high prices.

Windows ME should be on this list right up there with Vista...what a piece of crap! I've worked on more ME computer than I can count...amazingly horrible software.

Oh, and screw Sony...as an earlier poster commented, I know I will never buy Sony products again....not after that whole rootkit debacle!

AnonymousSun 25 November, 2007 8:11pm

Vista is about as big a flop as Windows 2000 was. It requires high-end machines to run, and it definetly splitting the tech community into 2 factions; 1: those favoring simplicity and functionality, 2: those favoring flashy graphics, and less functionality for products that cant/wont support Windows. Me? I'll stick with XP Pro, my 'dinosaur' 1yr old laptop can't support vista but sure as heck runs Windows XP very, very well. Vista (yes I did have it installed for a while) ran slow as crud and wouldn't install alot of built-in devices on my laptop.

The last straw was a friend who called me after buying a new Acer laptop with Vista on it, and Vista wouldn't recognize the wireless card, and the Acer website's Vista driver wouldn't work. The fix? Install Windows XP!

AnonymousSun 25 November, 2007 9:03pm

Vista, Terrible, come on, give ma a break. Vista is much easier loading and working with than XP. Wake up and smell the progress!!!!

stephenSun 25 November, 2007 9:42pm

Vista is sensational...

Those security warnings can be turned off. I still havent had a drop of malware/spy/viruses on my machine... Its quick and reliable too. The compatibility mode for software is pretty much foolproof... i've only had issues with a couple of add-ins for Office 2007, and that was an office compatibility problem, not a Vista one.

I was also able to configure it, without problemm, to run all of my corporate apps for work; without patching, or re-coding any of them.

My only beef is that an old blue tooth adapter wouldnt work, and seeing as that cost me $40 - i'm hardly shattered. My new laptop has bluetooth built in anyway.

Check your facts, or employ IT staff with some ability... it might solve your problems.

Frank BaehrSun 25 November, 2007 11:22pm

Nothing has been mentioned about the idiotic need to reregister Vista and XP everytime you have a problem and have to re-install it. That alone makes it a bad product for me and any pc which crashes and needs reinstallation goes back to Win2k.
As for use of resources, Win2k ran a lot better in "modest" machines than even ME or SE. I had it on a laptop with only 32 MB of RAM and it ran acceptibly.

AnonymousMon 26 November, 2007 1:07am

Vista is a DEAD OS, caused by infinite internal politicking -- a phenomenon to be blamed on Steve Balmer and the pushing of Bill Gates aside for, guess ... past 7 years :-). It went through N "code resets" - half for non-technical reasons, half to salvage what a previous "reset" messed up.

It has so many intrinsic performance problems that if it ever lives to see SP2 (even SP1 is questionable at this point) it will have to be as big as the full OS with every single bit touched. We are talking deeply flawed design decisions like core components using XML, exceptions being thrown inside core components (largely on purpose), every operation taking extra "security" hit on several layers, huge parts of the UI written in .NET and all graphics designed with a gamer as a sole audience.

Everything is not black though. If this fiasco causes some good internal changes and Microsoft goes back to it's roots of being a programmer's company with one geeks calling the shots - nothing that can't be fixed in a year or real MS-grade work, OK two :-))

AnonymousMon 26 November, 2007 5:20am

this thread is very amusing to me. You have the mac fan boys who are bashing Vista without ever using the OS, and you have the people who have had an immensely positive experience with Vista. Whichever way you view it, you can't call Vista a flop. You just can't. Did you see in Microsoft's last quarterly earnings release how much money they are raking in from Vista? The even crazier part is that most of Microsoft's large corporate customers haven't even began to migrate yet. Microsoft will be making a ton of money for years to come on Vista. So from a business perspective (which reallistcally is all that matters to these companies), it is no flop.

From a usability perspective, Vista and Leopard are both great. I have a laptop with Vista and my wife has a MacBook Pro with Leopard. Both are solid, but BOTH had minor upgrade issues. In my opinion Vista just improves on all the things that XP didn't do very well (security!) plus some decent new features, but Leopard isn't much of an upgrade either. It just has some 'cool' features that are barely worthwhile and will almost certainly never be used. Time Machine and Geotagging being the first 2 that come to mind. Plus there is absolutely no performance increase. Vista at least offered that if you have the right hardware. The main reason to upgrade to Leopard is for boot camp. If you are going to run bootcamp, you must have Leopard. Works really well.

I definitely agree that ME should be on this list though. That was probably the worst operating system ever released. Sooooooo unstable. I will also never buy anything Sony ever makes again because of that rootkit madness.

AnonymousMon 26 November, 2007 9:15am

Vista is a flop for the simple reason that it fails the primary goal of an operating system - namely "operating your system". An OS needs to allow software access to hardware, that's all. If your hardware performs worse or not at all from an OS upgrade then on what basis is the $300-$500 price tag justified?

If a user wants features like firewalls and desktop effects then they have always had the option to freely download or purchase them. What Vista is really about is denying you that freedom by overriding these things at the lowest level - often to appease 3rd-parties like Hollywood or the US government. It's also a kick in the teeth for XP users who will not be able to use their shader 3.0 compliant hardware due entire to Microsofts refusal to support it - despite this OS still being within its support lifetime.

As a programmer I ask anybody to explain exactly what that extra 1 GB of RAM is actually being used for? If it isn't being made available to your software then it serves no purpose. Even cache memory should give way to the application (as it does on most other systems).

ritesMon 26 November, 2007 10:56am

Barcode battler... it was really funny.. :))

AnonymousMon 26 November, 2007 11:03am

I support the fact that Windows Vista is in this list. Vista disables my Creative SBLive! sound card and the available drivers are all crappy. I simply went back to XP and I have never been happier. I haven't tried Vista again as I don't see a reason why I should go to it. I dare anyone to give me one good reason why I should use Vista? For what reason should I upgrade? It does less than what XP does.

AnonymousMon 26 November, 2007 1:11pm

To the guy who is having problems with his Creative SB card and drivers. Blame Creative not Vista. They're the ones not making the drivers.

Olly NewportMon 26 November, 2007 2:00pm

Wow, I love that Dr. Ashens review, he's really funny, (he came onto my podcast) anyways, thats a really good list.

AnonymousMon 26 November, 2007 10:56pm

Vista killed my dog, and he was a super dog. For this, I boycott Vista and so should you.

AnonymousMon 26 November, 2007 11:52pm

As a single product, Vista is fine. Yeah it's costly, but it does a job. The problem is that it sits alongside XP which does most things so much better, despite being years older. Vista being classed as a "worst technology" is justified when it's compared with the many other OS's available.

AnonymousMon 26 November, 2007 11:58pm

Windows ME comes to mind!

AnonymousTue 27 November, 2007 12:08am

Cnet, what is wrong with you, I like Vista, my friends like Vista. Not everyone hates it, it works, it is better than XP. This was a horrible decision.

Black JacklTue 27 November, 2007 12:09am

Vista is the greatest OS ever created...NOT! I used Vista on a new laptop; I hated it so much that I returned it the next day. Vista is a piece of crap. It took nearly an hour for Vista to configure itself for the first use; it is a resource hog; it is slow; it freezed up everytime the security messages appeared; it's user interface was not intuitive (I had no idea how to get to the command line). Because of this experience, I will not downgrade to Vista

AnonymousTue 27 November, 2007 12:10am

I love the article's tags: "operating system, hackers, death, manufacturer". Win!

AnonymousTue 27 November, 2007 12:10am

... and the MS fanboys crawl out of the woodwork to defend the OS that nobody wants. Just defending that big of a POS by default makes you a fanboy.

AnonymousTue 27 November, 2007 12:15am

I have both vista and leopard for university and entertainment. I think its a bit too harsh to be on this list. But in comparison to the state windows xp, mac tiger and leopard are, vista has really fallen below the standard. give microsoft a couple of years. then it'll be ok lol

AnonymousTue 27 November, 2007 12:16am

I really LIKE some of the things that Vista has to offer. I've been running it since before it was released and it's always worked fine. shut off UAC and give it a chance.

markeTue 27 November, 2007 12:18am

nobody cares about operating systems anymore...dipwads. that cr@p is so 10 minutes ago.

AnonymousTue 27 November, 2007 12:21am

I regret paying money to upgrade to Vista Premium from Windows XP professional. It actually feels like a downgrade. the loss of remote desktop is the most obvious downgrade. Aero is unbelievably useless! I can't think of a single time it did anything for me. I also think the user control system stinks to high heaven. no I'm not an apple idiot, I have always used microsoft OS's since I was 13 and that was before graphical interfaces.

AnonymousTue 27 November, 2007 12:24am

Vista was not only a flop, it is a joke. Microsoft obviously doesn't understand todays' market. When are they going to stop serving us patched versions of Windows 1.0?

UnknownTue 27 November, 2007 12:32am

Vista isnt all that bad, i have been using it since around 1 year now, i also frequently use linux/Ubuntu. Sure there is some changes to be made, there is some compatibility issues but wasnt XP the same when it was released? think about it for a moment...

PENIXTue 27 November, 2007 12:34am

Vista has problems... Lots of problems. Even with these problems, it is functional. With a few control panel tweaks, it's not that much different than XP. With that said, I use it only on my secondary system.

Vista has problems, but it doesn't deserve to be on this list. CNET is just jumping on the anti-Vista bandwagon to stir up some controversy and garner some undeserved attention.

AnonymousTue 27 November, 2007 12:34am

I don't know if this was the "worst" thing in 20 years as one comment suggested, let's not forget Windows ME. I have to admit that while Vista was VERY incompatible to a lot of my hardware and software from the beta to the final release...it has come a long way since. As an ardent M$ hater when this first came out...I now have it on no less than two machines and cannot be happier. Like any other MS OS...you have to tweak it to your needs. Any a-hole can go to MAC...accept the challenge of the MS OS> HEHE!!! Flame away!!!

AnonymousTue 27 November, 2007 12:38am

I've been thinking about this as someone who uses OSX and Linux. The only way MS can get out of this mess is to release XP as a FREE download. If I were one of those that bought this POC called "Vista" I'd be looking into my options into a class action lawsuit.

AnonymousTue 27 November, 2007 12:40am

Whoever wrote this piece is an idiot.

MP3 player with removable storage: "I don't need X, hence it is useless"
Vista: "The mob is saying she's a witch, hence she's a witch"

What an infantilic, oversimplified and narrow way to view the world. Can't Cnet find anyone less clueless to blow his own horn?

Jimmy.Tue 27 November, 2007 12:43am

fanboys. everywhere.

AnonymousTue 27 November, 2007 12:49am

Geeze... Condemning ALL MP3 players with removable media - i.e. SD or other chips is rediculous. There are PLENTY of them that sound good and come with removable media. Granted, the Squircle sounds like a mega-POS, but that doesn't make ALL of them bad. Considering that MOST phones that play MP3s and the like usually have removable memory, your blanket comment throws them into the mix as well. And many of them sound quite decent.

AnonymousTue 27 November, 2007 12:51am

Hey, guy, your Microsoft Employee badge is showin. Seriously, though, there's No Reason At All why a system with 2gb ram, and a Dual Core processor should take ten minutes to boot. Boot Vista Home Basic, that is. And I don't like it when my copy of XP calls me a thief because I try to install it on said laptop, and it said 'no, it was installed on your -old- laptop'. Hey, I formatted that machine before giving it to Goodwill.

I hated Linux, but I hate Vista more. I've found computing happiness in Ubuntu, and the only thing that upsets me now is that my laptop could have cost $100U.S. dollars less without that travesty of an OS bundled.

AnonymousTue 27 November, 2007 12:52am

Windows is a worthless ppiece of sh.., produced by an amoral and UNETHICAL bunch of idiots.
My 2 cents worth ...

BobTue 27 November, 2007 12:53am

Why people say vista is an upgrade? Its slower, has lots of hardware it wont work on, dx 10 does look better but the frame rate get cut way down, so course it gonna look better. I tried it and after all the pop up boxes asking if you really wanted to run a program you just tried to run wouldnt go away I gave up on it. XP runs everything and works well.

JohnTue 27 November, 2007 12:55am

The only thing wrong with Vista was fixed with the most recent patches - before that, I had a hard time using it because it was so slow. But now I turned off UAC (User Access Control) and it is much, much better. I like the interface much better than XP. I've actually got both installed on my Macbook Pro in Parallels and I would prefer to run Vista, but just couldn't until the most recent patches.

If Microsoft would just take care of a few more niggling issues, I think it would be a great OS.

Let's not forget the backward compatibility this is built into every version (that OS X seems to not worry about) and I think you can appreciate what a great OS it really is.

AnonymousTue 27 November, 2007 12:55am

Where in the hell is ME?!?!?!?!?! It was hands down the most disastrous thing to come out of Redmond ever...EVER.

AnonymousTue 27 November, 2007 12:58am

Absolutely agree with Vista on the list. Our commercial director has bought a laptop for his personal use, and is always asking my IT guys for help with problems....

JeffTue 27 November, 2007 1:00am

Vista has some nice features, but its definately not 15 gigs worth of nice features. Its a bloated piece of crap. If they expect everyone to upgrade their machine to run it, they shouldn't charge as much as the cost of a new machine for the OS. They think that just because they're overflowing with cash, that everyone else is... and thats just not the case.

While many people in the world are JUST NOW getting their first (used) computers, M$ decides they want to put out an OS that won't run on them!

I switched OS's this year myself, to Ubuntu. I didn't have to buy a new machine, I didn't even have to pay for the OS, because its free. And instead of spending all my time either fixing my computer or complaining about how much time I spend fixing it, I instead spend my time using it and I find I am way more productive.

DX10 could have come out for XP... and in fact, I predict that eventually it will. There is too much market resistance to Vista. Game developers aren't going to put millions into developing for a system with such a dismally small user base. And with all the bad press, its not going to get much better. So either game devs will continue to develop for DX9, or M$ will get off their money grubbin hump and put out DX10 for XP.

As far as OpenGL goes, its open... if you're not happy with it, put some effort into improving it.

As far as Apple goes, I think its a great system, but the cost of a new machine isn't an option. If they release it as a full blown OS that will run on any modern PC hardware, I'd give it a shot. But I don't feel like having to hack it to bits to get it to run on my hardware. Why they haven't done that is beyond me. I'm damn sure not going to buy a new machine for Mac or Vista. Ubuntu Linux gives me everything I need.

sbTue 27 November, 2007 1:06am

I hated VIsta until I installed another Gig of RAM (2 gig total) and now it works much better. It certainly is a memory hog.

DidYouSmellThatdotcomTue 27 November, 2007 1:20am

I bought 2 Apple Macbook Pro's 3 months after upgrading to Vista. I'll never go back to Microsoft..my PC is good for one thing, playing World of Warcraft.

AnonymousTue 27 November, 2007 1:22am

How in the world is the Segway not number 1 on this list? Talk about a product that was marketed as going to change the world, then unceremoniously dropping to obscurity immediately. It has been the bomb of all bombs.

AnonymousTue 27 November, 2007 1:24am

Most of the people defending Vista seem to be basing their entire argument on the basis of 98/ME/2000/XP all being similarly bad upon release and suggesting that anyone having problems should simply buy new computer hardware.

UAC, Aero system requirements, hardware compatibility and all the others are not the issue here for me, the issue is that all these problems and those above are considered acceptable behaviour. People should NOT have to buy new hardware just to run the same programs they did before, People should NOT have to accept that the 300 dollar software they bought will finally work as advertised a year down the line. This is not the price of progress, this is extortion.

I'll admit, I use a Mac now, and I haven't tried Vista, but I moved from XP because I saw the problems at Microsoft of treating it's customers like criminals, Lying to consumers, Vendors and Developers, tying everyone in to a single platform (Theirs) through DirectX, .NET and more, all seen in XP long before Vista. Yes it is a shame people forget so quickly, they will be doomed to being shafted for 300+ dollars every 5 years forever.

AnonymousTue 27 November, 2007 1:28am

Most of the people defending Vista seem to be basing their entire argument on the basis of 98/ME/2000/XP all being similarly bad upon release and suggesting that anyone having problems should simply buy new computer hardware.

UAC, Aero system requirements, hardware compatibility and all the others are not the issue here for me, the issue is that all these problems and those above are considered acceptable behaviour. People should NOT have to buy new hardware just to run the same programs they did before, People should NOT have to accept that the 300 dollar software they bought will finally work as advertised a year down the line. This is not the price of progress, this is extortion.

I'll admit, I use a Mac now, and I haven't tried Vista, but I moved from XP because I saw the problems at Microsoft of treating it's customers like criminals, Lying to consumers, Vendors and Developers, tying everyone in to a single platform (Theirs) through DirectX, .NET and more, all seen in XP long before Vista. Yes it is a shame people forget so quickly, they will be doomed to being shafted for 300+ dollars every 5 years forever.

AidanTue 27 November, 2007 1:28am

Vista is certainly not one of the worst products ever. It is however one of the most disappointing. It was too little, too late, and WAY too expensive for what it was. It should have been XP SP 4, or some boxed, optional 'XP 2007' extension that shouldn't have cost more than $50.

Jayjay2Tue 27 November, 2007 1:46am

1) Technology for technolgy's sake is never going to do well.
2) It solved no problems for anyone, introducing a few along the way.
3) I use it, it's okay, but offers nothing more than XP.

AnonymousTue 27 November, 2007 1:54am

You guys don't know what you're talking about. Tamagachi was freakin' sweet!

AnonymousTue 27 November, 2007 1:56am

Vista is only on the list to generate page views (a move that worked brilliantly, I might add). But at least I know to stay away from CNET in the future.

Have you guys heard of AOL or Realplayer Crapware? Or how about Win ME?