VOGONS


Is Vista now Retro

Topic actions

First post, by candle_86

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

So Vista is 3 weeks outside of support with less than 1% market share, does it not qualify for Retro

Reply 2 of 248, by keenmaster486

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

"Retro" is a notoriously undefined word.

My answer is, "not by my definition of it." Because my definition of a retro OS is one that is too far out of date/unsupported to be usable as a productive system, compatible with other OS's, file types, internet standards, etc.

For instance, you's have a tough time using Windows 98 to browse the modern Internet - especially on the hardware it was meant to run on.

Or it'd be impossible to find a word processor for DOS that produces (full potential) file types compatible with modern Microsoft Word.

But even an OS such as Windows XP could easily do any of these things with no issues at all.

I flermmed the plootash just like you asked.
World's foremost 486 enjoyer.

Reply 4 of 248, by keenmaster486

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
PhilsComputerLab wrote:

To me it is 😀

Hmm, so what's your definition of "retro" then? 😀

I flermmed the plootash just like you asked.
World's foremost 486 enjoyer.

Reply 6 of 248, by James-F

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
candle_86 wrote:

does it not qualify for Retro

No.
Retro is something you love after 20 years.
Vista is something you forget and never think about till the rest of your life.
😎


my important / useful posts are here

Reply 7 of 248, by dr_st

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

Vista is a good but not useful OS. It just got stuck in a bad place in terms of features and capabilities, due to Microsoft's timeline and what it did and did not put in Vista. Kind of like, I don't know, Windows 98 first edition. It may have been a good upgrade over 95, but once 98 Second Edition came out, that improved everything 98 had to offer and added some, there is no point in using the first edition. Similarly there is also no point in using Vista.

I still run it on my main desktop, just because it's what happened to be there when I built it, but I cannot think of a single thing that is not served just as well or better by either XP or Win7. So I don't think it will ever become appealing to the retro crowd, just like it is not appealing to the modern users right now.

https://cloakedthargoid.wordpress.com/ - Random content on hardware, software, games and toys

Reply 8 of 248, by Scali

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
dr_st wrote:

Vista is a good but not useful OS.

What makes you say it's not useful?
It does the job, doesn't it?

dr_st wrote:

I still run it on my main desktop, just because it's what happened to be there when I built it, but I cannot think of a single thing that is not served just as well or better by either XP or Win7.

Yes, you can say that now, but then again, there isn't a single thing that Win7 can do better than Win10 either. That's progress.
To me, Vista was a nice improvement over XP. Partly because the user interface is just nicer than XP (I didn't really notice it at first, but once I used Vista for a while, going back to XP every now and then felt limited and unpleasant. The difference between Win7 and Vista is much smaller).
And partly because it offered DirectX 10.
For me, Vista is Crysis and GeForce 8800.
And that is because I already used XP x64 before that. Else Vista would also mean x64 for me.

But yea, playing Crysis in DX10 mode on an 8800 in 64-bit, that was pretty damn awesome at the time. And only Vista made it possible.
You'd have to wait 2 more years until Win7 would arrive.

But I would argue that Windows is by definition not very retro-ish, because it is so backward-compatible. I can still play Crysis on my current system, and it's better in every way than it was 10 years ago on my GeForce 8800 (I can play it in 4k now, teehee, and it actually still doesn't look very dated). So why would I want to buy an older, slower machine, and install Vista on it?
It's not like Win9x or DOS where you actually need an older PC with specific hardware to play certain games that no longer work on newer PCs (at least, not without emulation).

http://scalibq.wordpress.com/just-keeping-it- … ro-programming/

Reply 9 of 248, by dr_st

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

Not useful in exactly the sense I described. Everything Vista can do: either XP can do just as well or better (retro-oriented) or Win7 can do just as well or better (modern-oriented).

As far as Win7 vs Win10 goes - I would agree that Win10 (and 8.1) are mostly a super-set of Win7, but Win7 does have some appeal, exactly because the differences between it and 8.1/10 are greater than between it and Vista. Two major things I can think of are:

  • The user interface was dramatically changed in certain aspects with the mix between desktop and modern styles
  • Drivers for certain generations of hardware for which the manufacturer provided Win7 drivers, but abandoned them before Win10. Typically Win10 will only have inbox drivers for them, which may mean lack of support for specific advanced features. Between Vista and 7, on the other hand, with them being only 1 generation apart (and especially given how everybody wanted to jump off the Vista bandwagon), there is hardly anything that is supported on Vista but not on Win7.

There are probably other smaller things that can accumulate to a big picture making Win7 at some point more useful for certain "Retro" tasks than Win7. The thing with the SecuROM/Safedisc/whatever it was DRM comes to mind. Or has that been resolved?

Last edited by dr_st on 2017-05-02, 12:28. Edited 1 time in total.

https://cloakedthargoid.wordpress.com/ - Random content on hardware, software, games and toys

Reply 10 of 248, by spiroyster

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I quite liked vista when it came out. Very stylish compared to previous incarnations, and I didn't switch back to 'classic' theme unless I had too. Unlike XP which felt too 'telly-tubby' after a while, then became second nature to switch to 'classic' theme after a re-install o.0. There was an awful Aero related redraw issue which made 'drag and drop' look like completing a game of solitare, that was the only real issue I remember having. I still have a Beta2 Vista Product Guide which is quite a stylish 300 page book outlining all the features. It was also about this time that laptops having 'glossy' screens was 'main-stream' and so it fit the style of Vista well imo.

Running Vista now certainly instigates a vague flutter of nostalgia, for for that reason I consider Vista 'retro'.

Just gonna leave this Bruce tribute here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPv8PPl7ANU
😵

Reply 11 of 248, by Scali

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
dr_st wrote:

Not useful in exactly the sense I described. Everything Vista can do: either XP can do just as well or better (retro-oriented) or Win7 can do just as well or better (modern-oriented).

I suppose you mean it in the sense as 'not having additional value', but 'not useful' implies not having any value whatsoever.
So I would have chosen a different word.

http://scalibq.wordpress.com/just-keeping-it- … ro-programming/

Reply 12 of 248, by candle_86

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

I dunno if you use it as era correct the right parts are nearly worthless for modern tasks.

Core 2 or AMD Phemom 1
2-4gb DDR2
Radeon 2000-4000
Geforce 8000-200

None of these are really useful for modern tasks at an acceptable speed, and support ended awhile ago for all of it.

Reply 13 of 248, by Azarien

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
dr_st wrote:

once 98 Second Edition came out, that improved everything 98 had to offer and added some, there is no point in using the first edition. Similarly there is also no point in using Vista.

Windows 98 SE is a sort of Service Pack for Windows 98, and I agree there's no point in using the original 98.

On the other hand, Vista and 7 aren't that identical. Vista was the last version to have classical (non-ribbon) WordPad and Paint, the last version to have Outlook Express (rebranded as Windows Mail), and the last version to have original Windows 95-ish start menu.

So Vista is definitely more "retro" than Windows 7.

And I like Vista's Aero theme.

Reply 14 of 248, by candle_86

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
Azarien wrote:
Windows 98 SE is a sort of Service Pack for Windows 98, and I agree there's no point in using the original 98. […]
Show full quote
dr_st wrote:

once 98 Second Edition came out, that improved everything 98 had to offer and added some, there is no point in using the first edition. Similarly there is also no point in using Vista.

Windows 98 SE is a sort of Service Pack for Windows 98, and I agree there's no point in using the original 98.

On the other hand, Vista and 7 aren't that identical. Vista was the last version to have classical (non-ribbon) WordPad and Paint, the last version to have Outlook Express (rebranded as Windows Mail), and the last version to have original Windows 95-ish start menu.

So Vista is definitely more "retro" than Windows 7.

And I like Vista's Aero theme.

Vista is also the last to have Quick Launch without cumbersome registry edits

Reply 15 of 248, by Tetrium

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
keenmaster486 wrote:

"Retro" is a notoriously undefined word.

And along with this, the definition of what is retro will differ depending on who one asks 🤣
It will be tough to reach a general consensus about what is retro and what is not, but this lack of general consensus does have the advantage that this consensus has less chance to get stuck in people's minds as if the definition is set into stone or something.

I do remember that on VCF, 486's were already considered 'vintage' after about 10 or 15 years of age or so?

To me Vista isn't really retro (yet!), but XP definitely is 😀

And lets not start the discussion about Win10 being superior in every single way compared to 7. This is simply not the case, or at least it isn't looking from the consumer's point of view. There are many complaints about 10, a friend of mine is even opting to return to 7 due to the problems he's been having the past few weeks. And this isn't everything about 10. People who tell others that 10 is superior in every single awy (or better yet, people who proclaim 10 is some sort of superior form of operating system evolution and claim that all people who don't agree with this are just f****n uneducated retards, is an idiot.

Azarien wrote:

Windows 98 SE is a sort of Service Pack for Windows 98, and I agree there's no point in using the original 98.

98FE...the memories 😵
But at least the 98FE disk had a copy of msbatch on its disk, which the 98SE disk lacked 😜

Whats missing in your collections?
My retro rigs (old topic)
Interesting Vogons threads (links to Vogonswiki)
Report spammers here!

Reply 17 of 248, by dr_st

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

Yep, from the point of look-n-feel, there are indeed some differences between Vista and 7, and if you are picky about some of the particular changes, you may find Vista more 'your cup of tea'.

Ultimately, though, these differences are not as big as Win7 to Win8, and in most cases they are clear improvements with additional functionality. For example - the new taskbar gives you everything the quick launch did, and then some more.

In terms of capabilities, though, I do believe it is how I said. Therefore, in the future, it may (well, who are we kidding, it will 😀) serve its niche purpose for collectors who want to sample everything, but I do not think it will ever become a popular 'to go' OS for any period-correct system.

https://cloakedthargoid.wordpress.com/ - Random content on hardware, software, games and toys

Reply 18 of 248, by feipoa

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

In my book, XP and Vista aren't "retro" yet. I do not really have much to backup how I define it, but I did notice XP running on the computers at the local hospital. I also noticed a few months ago that the local Canadian Tyre was still using XP point-of-sale. These examples by no means constitute the entirety of my conditions to establish the definition of "retro". For me, ME and W2K are retro. W2K3 is not retro.

Ultimate 486 Benchmark | Ultimate 686 Benchmark | Cyrix 5x86 Enhancements | 486 Overkill Graphics | Worlds Fastest 486

Reply 19 of 248, by yawetaG

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

If something is little-used but modern, it's not "retro" yet. The word for modern stuff that sees little use is "niche", which also has the connotation that it concerns a subject that is unloved by most except for a few diehard fans (which is pretty much the definition of Windows Vista 🤣 ).