Why Is Vista Crucified?

[GreyWolf]

Put it this way...

I'm currently running Firefox 3 with seven tabs open, Winamp and uTorrent.

It's using 1.6GB of RAM.

Good thing I have 4GB.

I am running FF3 with about 6 tabs, a media player, Pidgin(IM), Thunderbird,Picasa,Limewire,IRC client, Terminal and a text editor.

My box(ubuntu) is using: 597MB of RAM (out of 2GB)

That is one of the reasons why Vista was crucified. It practically expands to fit the size of its container.

on boot my XP installations are usually using around 350MB. I am prtty sure if I ran all those aps I would not be getting much more ram usage than that...

[SykomantiS]

You wanna know what's wrong with Vista? I got 3 words for you: DRM & Tilt bits!
Go read "A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection" by Peter Gutmann. Then you'll understand.
All da people who love Vista so much... have you run any HD content on it yet? HD isn't very mainstream on PC's yet, but just wait until it does become mainstream, then the fecal excrement is gonna hit the rotating air circulator...

HD video files on harddrive, yes. nothing wrong with it. HDCP from an optical disc, don't have the cash to buy one of those drives, so no.
But like I said, HD video files on the HDD don't give any problems at all.
Why should it?

[Hex_Rated]

Syko, if you downloaded the HD video like a demo or whatever it is probably DRM free. DRM sucks balls but you've got the choice of not running a fully HDCP compliant machine (Vista/GPU/monitor), the video will just downsize to SD or ED.

I don't see any benefit of running HD optical media on a PC yet, if I wanted Blu Ray for my TV, I'll just get a PS3. They took forever to move from CDs to DVDs, they'll take even longer to move to Blu-Ray.

I'm sure the 4GB sticks are 1,000,000

I was wrong, the flash write cycle times on my 4GB corsair sticks (which I use for ReadyBoost) are 100,000. Still more than enough I reckon, especially with wear levelling built in.

[Prime]

Syko, if you downloaded the HD video like a demo or whatever it is probably DRM free. DRM sucks balls but you've got the choice of not running a fully HDCP compliant machine (Vista/GPU/monitor), the video will just downsize to SD or ED.

I don't see any benefit of running HD optical media on a PC yet, if I wanted Blu Ray for my TV, I'll just get a PS3. They took forever to move from CDs to DVDs, they'll take even longer to move to Blu-Ray.

I'm sure the 4GB sticks are 1,000,000

I was wrong, the flash write cycle times on my 4GB corsair sticks (which I use for ReadyBoost) are 100,000. Still more than enough I reckon, especially with wear levelling built in.

Considering i have had 2 4GB corsair sticks fail under warranty from normal use, i will never by another one.

Correct, the more you use a flash disk, the less reliable it becomes. I think you can write to an address in the memory no more than 1 million times before it becomes a bad sector.

Close. Most USB Flash Drives are guaranteed for 10,000 writes. Some, more expensive ones, are guaranteed for 100,000. In terms of Readyboost 10,000 isn't much, really. Does anybody have practical experience pertaining to this, i.e. have a drive fail most likely due to wear caused by Readyboost?

Most flash I've used in embedded devices are 1,000,000 writes. And those are cheapass 16kB chips so I'm sure the 4GB sticks are 1,000,000. They usually have built in wear levelling that tricks it into alternating blocks, extending the life further. I don't think you should be worried about flash write failure. By the time the stick breaks in 20 years you could probably buy another one for 50c... Or a 1TB for R50.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wear_levelling

Lol, its along time since i read the article. I did a research prject on flash memory for Varsity last year

[spearone]

So does that whole plugging a flashdisk into vista to give you more "RAM" actually work?

[DarkStar]

Only if you have 1GB or less of actual RAM.

[Hex_Rated]

So does that whole plugging a flashdisk into vista to give you more "RAM" actually work?

To me it seemed to make a big difference, this was with 2GB RAM on 32bit Vista and 4GB RAM on 64bit Vista. And if you think about it, it should. Instead of paging stuff to the hard drive, it pages it to flash. Flash has access times measured in nanoseconds, that's 3 orders of magnitude better than the HDD.

I want to see some good proof of the "only 1GB" theory before I believe it. To me it sounds like a load of crap that some Linux lover would have cooked up in a dodgy benchmark. Sorry.

It makes sense that it only makes a huge difference with small amounts of RAM but large amounts should still benefit from the DLLs and other random access type files that are stored in there after rebooting / waking the PC. When I put my PC to sleep and it wakes up instantly. By the time the screen is on it's ready to use.

Prior to Vista Service Pack One (SP1), ReadyBoost was quite ineffective when the computer/laptop was put to sleep. ReadyBoost failed to recognize the data in the cache and restarted the caching process when returned from sleep mode. Vista SP1 addresses this problem.[11]

EDIT:

This should silence the 1GB critics.

2GB system showing a 10% performance increase in FPS in CoH:
http://www.gamespot.com/features/6165439/p-2.html

In more memory intensive applications you'll see even bigger gains, I didn't even expect to see in game gains, only general reaction time decreases.

[spearone]

Cool, thanks. Not that I use Vista though. Just asking.

[thrillseeker75]

what are the requirements for flash drives to speed up the system? because windows says this flash drive doesnt meet the requirement characteristics

[Prime]

Ok, i have just installed ultimate 64. Its looks good. It is only using 1 gig of ram in standby. Have yet to do a benchmark.

[spearone]

It is only using 1 gig of ram in standby.

That is just plain sick.....

[StarBound]

From a gaming point of view it had dx10 exclusively for it. It only forced gamers to upgrade to be able to outfit your fararri with a strobe light and gold plated hub caps but at the cost of your cruising speed. It opened up the 64bit lane but it didn't force anyone to move over to it.

Looking at it in that light Vista was only created with mind on cashing in on hardcore gamers before MS will release a proper 64-bit next gen OS.

[Prime]

It is only using 1 gig of ram in standby.

That is just plain sick.....

I'd be interested to know what XP's processing use is in standby because vista's is is between 1-4%

[Frozenfireside]

I've got that LCD display that shows usage and with nothing happening it's at <1%.
Of course you could just press ctrl+alt+del and view it in performance monitor.

[Zana]

The reason being is because as what everyone says it requires more ram and new hardware to run smoothly and a resource hog... but that was the case with all new windows OS, people who had windows 3.1 bitched about 98 being a resource hog years back... if you have the hardware... you may have the vista experience and enjoy it...

and secondly if you stuck with an old 5 year old pc , it would torture the machine, and can just about do typing and stuff... never mind graphics etc... yup still got my old faithfull running
((^_^))

[Prime]

The reason being is because as what everyone says it requires more ram and new hardware to run smoothly and a resource hog... but that was the case with all new windows OS, people who had windows 3.1 bitched about 98 being a resource hog years back... if you have the hardware... you may have the vista experience and enjoy it...

and secondly if you stuck with an old 5 year old pc , it would torture the machine, and can just about do typing and stuff... never mind graphics etc... yup still got my old faithfull running
((^_^))

well thats tantamount to trying to install XP on a p1.


WTF would people want to do that? And then expect it to work...

[Hex_Rated]

They were marketing low spec PCs as Vista Ready and when people bought them they were absolutely disgusting. Celerons with the minimum amount of RAM and onboard graphics that struggled with Aero. One of the reasons that people hate Vista, they got burnt and there was an outcry.

There were law suits, dunno what happened but MS definitely raised the certification to much higher standards.

[Prime]

They were marketing low spec PCs as Vista Ready and when people bought them they were absolutely disgusting. Celerons with the minimum amount of RAM and onboard graphics that struggled with Aero. One of the reasons that people hate Vista, they got burnt and there was an outcry.

There were law suits, dunno what happened but MS definitely raised the certification to much higher standards.

Thats the problem with all these funny PC shops, they cut corners and screw the unknowledgable

[-Prometheus-]

........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................

[RuadRauFlessa]

Vista deserves every bit of reputation it got. In some instances you won't see a difference but Vista needs a pretty good specced machine just to start up properly. Try it on any other slightly older machine as some have and it won't run properly if at all. I can not say the same for XP and have tried it on some rather old machines and it still runs smooth enough.

What do you consider old. Have you taken into account that XP came out when you still had P1's XP will run on anything you can lay your hands on today as it is almost 8 years old.

Probably for this reason it doesn't function as good as it should on laptops. Couple this with the general incompatibility with laptops, mostly the wireless components, and it's understandable that some would even flat out refuse to pay for Vista only to revert back to XP.

I blame this on the hardware vendors. They just focus on the sale and thus nails the end user for it. Others like HP will not sell you a laptop without bundling the correct, working drivers with the laptop. They will also not sell you a laptop with Vista if it is not capable of running it decently. I have seen a couple of celeron laptops that actually runs Vista beautifully. If you want to talk about hardware compatibility then blame it on the hardware manufacturers for either not sorting out the bugs in their drivers or not publishing drivers for Vista. I have a wireless nic in my rig but in Vista I can't use it cause the hardware vendor is not going to release any Vista drivers for the card. From their point of view it is a rather old card (between 2-3 years). I can understand that and it does not change my view regarding Vista as it is not a flaw in the OS but a business decision by the hardware manufacturer not to support the card on Vista. They however do have new cards which do have drivers for Vista. So if I want wireless working on Vista all I have to do is get a newer wi-fi nic.

I don't see why after finally having a decent machine without any page file I should upgrade to Vista simply so it can turn it into another average machine. This is probably the most common mindset and it's not worth having all the compatibilty issues if there's no performance benefit. After installing XP I actually noticed a huge performance increase from 9x.

Well to tell you the truth, from a user perspective I have actually noticed a huge performance increase since I switched XP with Vista on my rig. I don't know if it is the DDR3 or any other proper and up to date hardware but yeas I got an increase in performance and usability from a user perspective. I won't say that a benchmark of some kind might not run a tad slower but the whole user experience is 10 times better.

There's a reason why so many bugs make it into the final product. It's called bloatware. Instead of designing one really good piece of software you just keep adding pieces to it and end up with something too large to maintain that most people won't even use 50% of but it gets installed anyway because it's build into the core of the system, like IE.

IE (your example) is built into the OS because you use it every time you browse your HD. It is actually done so that the base footprint of the OS is smaller. In any other case you have linux experience so I can safely assume that you understand the diffirence between an OS and a user interface. The OS is a kernel, nothing more nothing less. Everything around it is just added functionality. You can be my guest and trim down the OS to the point where the only thing is the kernel but then you won't be able to do anything on it. For servers where you only need one thing being done it it makes sence but not for a desktop user. My point is actually that you use more of the 100% than you realize. You think 50% but it is more like 80%-90%.

Why should we have OSs that take up that much at all? Everything I need is right here in XP. Sure as technology progress upgrade as needed but why add so many "features" if you can't even get the basics right. Every extra bit that MS adds I end up replacing with a third party app. Vista won't suddenly change that for me and will more than likely end up breaking the app. So in 10 years time I will in fact be sitting with 100GB of stuff and still only use 1GB of it.

Please enlighten me as to what part of Vista I would like to change with a 3rd party app

So I have to keep on adding more RAM simply so every few years MS can come and use up more of it effectively nullifying most of it. So with the next installment I will need 8GB to run what I now run on 2GB. Exactly where is the progress in that?

It is the price of progress not matter what you say. You want games that runs faster so I will use that as an example. With any program you have two ways of handling data. 1) Reading it as and when you need it from the HDD. 2) Pre-loading as much as you can for what you can predict that you are going to need. The first is memory efficient but it is slooooooow as disk IO will never be as fast as RAM. That is basically why we have RAM. If it is not used to speed things up it is a waste and we could have gone without it where you use the HDD for it like a page file or partition. The second method uses up alot of memory but on the other hand you save processing power and you don't have to wait for data on a HDD to be found or transfered. Data that has already been loaded by an application into memory is, for a lack of a better term, already indexed. The application already knows exactly where that data starts and ends. This means that it does not have to go and search for the data which speeds up access times. It also means that the processor simply has to point it's registers to a specific RAM address rather than waste like 200 clocks to figure out exactly where on a HDD the data is. So I give it to you, what would you rather want A 32MB memory footprint for the OS which is going to be slooooow or a 200MB mem footprint which does not need to go and search the HDD the whole time

Perhaps, though it's more like a couple thousand basic configurations. Still MS does have a track record for releasing things that they know don't work properly. Most of those 3rd party drivers worked with XP which leads me to belief that MS broke them like they broke 3rd party apps. Hardware manufacturers had to rush to fix problems with the way the OS handled their drivers. Not much choice in it really with MS pushing the new OS as there's always someone else willing to take your market share. In the end manufacturers probably also introduced a number of bugs not through any fault of theirs.

No you are actually talking about a couple of million diffirent configurations. you are looking at a equations with ^ not * to work out how many configs needs to be tested. You are also not taking into account diffirent configs of software, regional settings, and slot configurations. There are soooo many variables that it is just not funny. You can on one MB plug in a PCI card and it runs fine in slot 0 and slot 1. Then you use another MB and the specific card will only be picked up by the OS if it is in slot 1. This is all things which needs to be tested. If a HDD is in SATA port 1 the address is diffirent than that of when the disk is plugged into port 0. Also diffirent boards could handle this diffirently. You litirally have a couple billion configuration and setups to test not just in hardware but in conjunction with software. In the ideal world we will all be running virtualization where the hardware does not matter but then you won't be able to utilize your nifty GPU. Also there is a reason why XP drivers does not work on Vista. Simply put the hooks that Vista uses into the driver libraries are diffirent in the two OS's. This actually proves that they didn't just add some new stuff (bloatware) and release it as a completely new OS. There are some major changes in Vista from XP which forced them to change how drivers are managed and thus loaded. Hardware vendors/manufacturers are responsible for the drivers of their hardware. IF there is a problem with the drivers it is not an OS issue but a manufacturer one. If there is a bug in a driver supplied by a hardware manufacturer then it is their fault not the fault of the OS.

Not necessarily. I've had an expensive drive with a stuck bit in the FAT after only a few uses. The assumption is that first of all non of the chips has a faulty or "compromised" cell. To get to multi GB storage you need to use extra cheap components to make it viable. Those "cheapass" 16kB chips are in fact high quality expensive ones if you compare both size and price. Wear levelling only works perfectly if data migrates a lot but if most of it stays unaltered in one place you still end up reusing the same space over and over. They need to fix this short lifespan first before I would consider solid state storage.

Well if data stays unaltered in one place then there is not wear as the same bits will not be written to again. They will just be read as needed. An US based company called SQL Server Central has done a case study to see if it is actually viable to use SSD's in a server environment and guess what.... they found situations where you would like to use it. Take temprary tables in a db for example. The things are slow as they are created on disk, populated, worked with and then discarded. SSC (SQL Server Central) went and configured a bunch of SSD's in a SAN (Storage Area Network) and configured MSSQL to use the SSD SAN for temp tables. They have found a huge improvement in speed. So yes there are places where you would use it. Yes they would have to replace some of the SSD's on a regular basis as they have a limited life span but if you have a \n IO related speed problem then they can be your solution. I won't say that they are the solution for home use as they are waaay to expensive just like I won't say that a full on RAID5 with striping and parity is a solution for home use. For a decent RAID5 setup you are looking at spending at least R100,000 on the hardware and then you still need to know what you are doing. Same with SSD's to get a decent amount of disk space you are going to pay through your neck.

[Hex_Rated]

Vista deserves every bit of reputation it got. In some instances you won't see a difference but Vista needs a pretty good specced machine just to start up properly. Try it on any other slightly older machine as some have and it won't run properly if at all. I can not say the same for XP and have tried it on some rather old machines and it still runs smooth enough.

Probably for this reason it doesn't function as good as it should on laptops. Couple this with the general incompatibility with laptops, mostly the wireless components, and it's understandable that some would even flat out refuse to pay for Vista only to revert back to XP.

I don't see why after finally having a decent machine without any page file I should upgrade to Vista simply so it can turn it into another average machine. This is probably the most common mindset and it's not worth having all the compatibilty issues if there's no performance benefit. After installing XP I actually noticed a huge performance increase from 9x.

There's a reason why so many bugs make it into the final product. It's called bloatware. Instead of designing one really good piece of software you just keep adding pieces to it and end up with something too large to maintain that most people won't even use 50% of but it gets installed anyway because it's build into the core of the system, like IE.

Stick to XP. And yes bloatware will cause bugs. But Vista definitely doesn't deserve the bad reputation it has. It's mostly fanboys making a huge noise about nothing. If I didn't get Vista for free I probably wouldn't have upgraded to it because XP did exactly what I wanted when I had a dual core. But if I was buying a new computer, OS and all, I would definitely get Vista. No question about it AT ALL. Vista is necessary for optimized threading on PCs with more than 2 cores. Quad cores perform better on Vista, that's a fact. And after I upgraded to quad, I would have definitely bought it even if I didn't get it for free.

Why should we have OSs that take up that much at all? Everything I need is right here in XP. Sure as technology progress upgrade as needed but why add so many "features" if you can't even get the basics right. Every extra bit that MS adds I end up replacing with a third party app. Vista won't suddenly change that for me and will more than likely end up breaking the app. So in 10 years time I will in fact be sitting with 100GB of stuff and still only use 1GB of it.

Why do we need more than 640KB of memory? Everything some people need is right there in DOS 3.0. What are the basics that they can't get right? I have no problems with any of the so called basics (what are they anyway? Executing files? Opening Documents?) Yes replace everything with a 3rd party app. How many hours will that take? Some people can't afford the time it takes to track down 10,000,000 tiny little utilities. Stick to XP if it's for you, no ones forcing you. Keep your old XP installation disk and use it on every new system. Yes you can't buy XP new, but you can't buy a new model T ford either now, can you? In 10 years time you can still be running XP if you want.

So I have to keep on adding more RAM simply so every few years MS can come and use up more of it effectively nullifying most of it. So with the next installment I will need 8GB to run what I now run on 2GB. Exactly where is the progress in that?

No. Not if you stick to XP. Or unless MS deploys their agents in black trench coats to break into your house and secretly install Vista on your PC in your sleep. I believe they're scheduled to do that on December 21, 2012.

And most of the RAM is used by the applications, not the OS. You have it backwards. Yes there is more overhead, but in 4 years time you will need 8GB of RAM to run Vista properly. The OS won't have changed. Only the applications.

Perhaps, though it's more like a couple thousand basic configurations. Still MS does have a track record for releasing things that they know don't work properly. Most of those 3rd party drivers worked with XP which leads me to belief that MS broke them like they broke 3rd party apps. Hardware manufacturers had to rush to fix problems with the way the OS handled their drivers. Not much choice in it really with MS pushing the new OS as there's always someone else willing to take your market share. In the end manufacturers probably also introduced a number of bugs not through any fault of theirs.

Couple thousand configurations? Ha! There are at least a few hundred (we'll say 300) different variants of motherboards alone and at least 50 different GPUs that are supported by Vista. Couple that with at least another 150 CPUs and you're left with 2,250,000 variants of PCs. And that's not counting sound cards, RAID controllers, Super duper network cards, hard drives, DVD-ROM drives, Bluetooth dongles. Broke the drivers? No, they changed the entire driver model. All drivers needed a complete rewrite. And they all work now. Well at least every single component I have. What are these bugs you go on about? Please list them. I'm sure there are 1 or 2 but not the hundreds you seem to think lie in the kernel and fundamental drivers.

Hardware manufacturers had about 2 years of alpha and beta revision Longhorn releases to play with. Rush? Whatever. Hardware manufacturers are exactly like MS, they'll push their product out as fast as possible. Bugs and all. There's no difference between the business ethics of MS and 1,000s of other billion dollar multinational corporations.

Not necessarily. I've had an expensive drive with a stuck bit in the FAT after only a few uses. The assumption is that first of all non of the chips has a faulty or "compromised" cell. To get to multi GB storage you need to use extra cheap components to make it viable. Those "cheapass" 16kB chips are in fact high quality expensive ones if you compare both size and price. Wear levelling only works perfectly if data migrates a lot but if most of it stays unaltered in one place you still end up reusing the same space over and over. They need to fix this short lifespan first before I would consider solid state storage.

To get multi GB storage you use smaller manufacturing process, not lower quality components . Do you know anything about FLASH memory or do you just pretend to? A 100,000 write limit is huge, I've designed software around 10,000 writes and yes it does pose problems when you're dealing with an embedded device in the field logging data 32 bytes of data every 2 minutes. If you aren't clever about it your logger will only last 13.8 days. But alter the position of the write every time and you get 19 years.

Wear levelling is something that is built into the stick that automatically does what I describe above. It is built into the stick's controller. You obviously don't know what it is if you think it only works on data that migrates. It is the component doing the migration.

[Zana]

They were marketing low spec PCs as Vista Ready and when people bought them they were absolutely disgusting. Celerons with the minimum amount of RAM and onboard graphics that struggled with Aero. One of the reasons that people hate Vista, they got burnt and there was an outcry.

There were law suits, dunno what happened but MS definitely raised the certification to much higher standards.

I agree with you there, this has made people hate Vista than love it in this regards... This sort of machine you tal is better off with XP. But the latest machines with at least 2GB RAM or even 1Gig (minium) should run Vista smoothly with other applications, then Vista as the memory stick advantage which can come in handy for 3D graphics artists like myself for rendering (not for gamining though as speed of memory is slow).
I am considering Vista later when i get whole new PC and its 64 bit with 2GB(4Gb even better) ram etc etc

well thats tantamount to trying to install XP on a p1.


WTF would people want to do that? And then expect it to work...

Exactly, if your PC is not cappable of running vista or even strain with Vista rather keep your XP until you have hardware upgrades
which has happned in the above that some business who sell pre-built machines in order to make a buck, have the bare minimums for entry level with Vista on... where the user cant realy do much and have the full Vista experience, but rather a slaggy glumpy experience, and then crucify vista rather than the company they baught the computer from. where the company should have considered hardware performance vs Vista requirements for enjoyable use.

No. Not if you stick to XP. Or unless MS deploys their agents in black trench coats to break into your house and secretly install Vista on your PC in your sleep. I believe they're scheduled to do that on December 21, 2012

Well over my dead body will they do that !!! Vista would simply hog up all my resources to create and render elfies. I would ask them to replace my Motherboard and provide more RAM , then by all means this would be alowed.
Love and hugs
Danielle

[-Prometheus-]

........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................

[justinufo]

Vista sux.Period.Im speaking from experience.Why do you think m$ is already busy on windows seven?

[Frozenfireside]

How Microsoft's long-awaited operating system disappointed a stubborn fan.

For most of the last two decades, I have been a Microsoft apologist. I mean, not merely a contented user of the company's operating systems and software, not just a fan, but a champion. I have insisted that MS-DOS wasn't hard to use (once you got used to it), that Windows 3.1 was the greatest innovation in desktop operating systems, that Word was in fact superior to WordPerfect, and that Windows XP was, quite simply, "it."

When I was forced to use Apple's Mac OS (versions 7.6 through 9.2) for a series of jobs, I grumbled, griped, and insisted that Windows was better. Even as I slowly acclimated at work, I bought only Windows PCs for myself and avoided my roommate's recherché new iBook as if it were fugu. I admitted it was pretty, but I just knew that you got more computing power for your buck from an Intel-based Windows machine, and of course there was far more software available for PCs. Yet my adoration wasn't entirely logical; I knew from experience, for example, that Mac crashes were easier to recover from than the infamous Blue Screen of Death. At the heart of it all, I was simply more used to Windows. Even when I finally bought a Mac three years ago, it was solely to meet the computing requirements of some of the publications I worked with. I turned it on only when I had to, sticking to my Windows computer for everyday tasks.

and so on
edit: wow I missed a sick argument.