Vista Crash Rate

[davidsword]

Vista has been said to be "virtually crash proof" Personally Vista Ultimate has been really good to me; not crashing once. IE7 and WPG have occasionally crashed along with an app every now and than, but nothing I cant blame on the OS. Has Vista ever crashed on you? (minus the users who blatantly disregarded the System Requirements label on the box and installed Vista anyways) If so got a story to tell why?

[wizard]

Vista Home Premium has not crashed on me. Though, honestly, I haven't used it much (dual-boot with XP Pro).

[CubanPete]

Vista is stable, it is the incompetent end user who ends up crashing it, not the OS it self

[Levi- The perfectionist]

Vista is stable, it is the incompetent end user who ends up crashing it, not the OS it self

lame. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crash_%28computing%29

If crashes happen its because theres something wrong, such as a driver conflict. Sure these can be fixed by the user, but the point is, if it was a reliable and stable OS (with good support for various hardware etc- this is what makes an os stable) you wouldnt have to. You should try and argue that Windows 95 is stable and that its all the user's fault. you could probably win the arguement saying its the user's fault for installing 95 in the first place on modern hardware.

that said, I've so far had only one problem with Vista in terms of stability.

I ran my isight camera (on my macbook pro) and it crashed. lack of webcam driver in Vista? or my own dumb fault for not installing it off my bootcamp disk?

it works both ways really.

Vista's driver support is every bit as good as OSX tiger... actually I take that back a little.

Because Apple know what hardware their OS runs on, the drivers are always perfect. Thats the advantage of having an OS not freely available to all hardware. Thus OSX by concept alone will always be more stable.

(I voted No in the poll... 'cause its only crashed once, and it was partially my own fault, so there... )

[Addiction]

it only crashed with me when i tryed to mod the ux theme, but that was my fault haha. other than that it has been real smoth .

[spyro94]

Vista hasn't crashed on me either, even though I am one of the users who "blatantly disregarded the System Requirements label on the box and installed Vista anyways"

[Peskat]

It crashed on me several times, but I was using unsupported drivers for my Sound Blaster Live 5.1 and my USR wifi card...

Damned things reached "end of support" before they lost all use... I mean, why would I need anything over 5.1 EAX2 or 802.11g...especially the 802.11g is still the latest, since the 802.11n is not yet out....

[Slewed]

Vista crashed for me, but in all fairness i was using Beta2. I don't mind crashes, just as long as i get some visual feedback that the program has crashed, for example in Beryl the window of the program becomes desaturated so it is obvious the OS is waiting for a response.

In windows we cannot tell whether the program is processing or crashed especially if the developer did not think this through.

[Boog]

I know that I can not use Vista's DVD burner application....it gets around 20% and goes to BSOD everytime. So I've had to purchase Cucusofts software. I also know that even with the latest Vista drivers my wacom causes BSOD when I use it in Fireworks and Freehand.

[iGo]

Vista crashed on me (the gool ol' BSOD) while I tried playing WMPHD content in WMP. Turning off Hardware Acceleration solved the problem.

For the record, I DID NOT blatantly disregarded the System Requirements label on the box and installed Vista anyways. It's running on C2D mobile processor with GeForce go 7400 graphic with Microsoft WHQL certified drivers installed for both Video and Sound... and WMP is native Vista app, WMP-HD is proprietary MS format, so there is NO Third-Party app or drivers BS going on.

Though, after turning off Hardware Acceleration solved WMPHD problem.

Besides that incident, Vista crashed on me once more.. but that was totally third-party app's crap system files.. so I won't put blame on Vista.

Otherwise Vista has remained pretty stable.

But to think that.... MS's OS crashed on me on will-in-recommended-limit hardware with MS's own drivers while running MS's own video format in MS's own media player.... go figure !!

[Astyanax]

Vista is stable, it is the incompetent end user who ends up crashing it, not the OS it self

*ding*

Unless you're using unsigned, beta drivers.. in other words; Drivers from nVidia and Creative.

[iGo]

*ding*

Unless you're using unsigned, beta drivers.. in other words; Drivers from nVidia and Creative.

If that was for me, I suggest you read my post again... carefully. I'm using Signed drivers for my video from Microsoft only (unless MS is providing me BETA drivers without labeling them beta). Secondly I'm not using Creative drivers for my audio. Audio drivers are from Sigmatel, and last I checked those drivers are WHQL certified (which means that those are NOT beta, NOT unsigned and FOR vista)

That's the reason why I was sarcastic when I said :

MS's OS crashed on me on well-in-recommended-limit hardware with MS's own drivers while running MS's own video format in MS's own media player.... go figure !!

And I also mentioned that other than this incident, second crash was because of incompatible third party application and overall vista has been pretty stable so far. Just in case you missed reading that.

[Stony]

Hehe, I'll never install Vista on my PC

[Astyanax]

iGo even though those drivers say their by Microsoft they are NVIDIA'S DRIVERS. They are just standard video drivers, you cant play 3d games on them.

[rjohnstone]

No crashes from Vista. It's run perfectly for me.

I have crashed it once by loading "questionable" drivers for an older wireless card, but that was my fault, not Vista's.

[iGo]

iGo even though those drivers say their by Microsoft they are NVIDIA'S DRIVERS. They are just standard video drivers, you cant play 3d games on them.

Yes, I know that... even on XP with Microsoft drivers for nVidia hardware, one cannot play games... until you install proper nVidia drivers.

Though I would assume that, with Microsoft Drivers (rebadged WHQL nVidia drivers) regular stuff on windows should work. Since Aero, 3D screensavers and stuff work fine... is it too much for user to assume that HD content should work without troubles. Go VMR mode (High-Quality mode as microsoft calls it) and WMP crashes on it's proprietary format... switch to Overlay mode to get it working.

Oh by the way, I tried using Hardware overlay mode and it works with current MS/NV drivers but Hardware VMR mode now crashes only WMP (luckily not entire system).

All in all, my point is.... like the phrase 100% security, saying that system is 100% Crashproof is still a myth. No matter what, one tiny winy little thing is always there to prove you wrong. I'm not anti-vista, since I've managed to crash OSX as well in past (without third party app or hardware, for a record). So when Microsoft calls it OS Virtually Crashproof, there is a good reason why they call it Virtually and not Fully.

I would sure give a thumbs up to MS, for evolving Windows Core to the level of Vista from mishaps like Windows ME and Windows 98. It was a good idea to fully adopt NT core and XP proves it. Vista is XP into it's matured, adult stage (albeit with overdone, loud and rubbish graphical treatment). I'm loving vista in windows classic mode for it's stability over XP with funky VS.

[ItIsMine]

I haven't had Vista crash on me YET, though I will be half expecting it at some point sooner or later.

[Astyanax]

All in all, my point is.... like the phrase 100% security, saying that system is 100% Crashproof is still a myth. No matter what, one tiny winy little thing is always there to prove you wrong.

It's beyond me how people can blame Microsoft for Third Party drivers giving them issues. They arent getting cut a nice big check for going to each company and helping them. The only thing companies like Creative and nVidia had to do where to ASK FOR HELP. Hell ATi seemed to be the only smart ones out of the bunch, I read they WENT TO MICROSOFT FOR HELP. The one thing you do not want to do is screw up drivers for a brand new OS. That kind of thing will stay with you for quite some time. I mean sure, no ones perfect and it takes time to do these things. But with that being said when you miss the Beta 1, Beta 2, RC1, RC2 mark (Creative) it just shows you don't care. Lets not go into detail about nVidia plastering everywhere that it WOULD MAKE the January Deadline but instead completely fall face first into a toilet that had forgotten to be flushed after being used.

Saying that its less stable because nVidia's display drivers are utter shit is nonsence.

[Island Dog]

I haven't had hardly any problems with Vista so far.

[iGo]

It's beyond me how people can blame Microsoft for Third Party drivers giving them issues. They arent getting cut a nice big check for going to each company and helping them. The only thing companies like Creative and nVidia had to do where to ASK FOR HELP.

I know that current nVidia drivers are not fully Vista compatible. But when Microsoft includes drivers for specific hardware in the OS install, is it too much to expect that those bundled drivers are trouble free for regular operations? Are you trying to say that Microsoft's WHQL program for assuring optimum driver compatibility with their OS is not Microsoft's own responsibility.

Unless you are skipping/ignoring things I've been writing in my post.... let me put it again. I'm using bundled video drivers in Vista for now, I haven't updated or installed third-party video drivers. Because I'm still testing vista and I want to be have proper run through with base install of Vista. So if MS Native Application crashes the MS OS, who is to blame? specially when you know the hardware drivers are included in Vista DVD, with MS WHQL certification... how come nVidia drivers comes to direct blame here unless I install drivers directly provided by nVidia?

Now it's beyond me how someone can disregard everything others has to say, because someone is total denial. It seems to me that you have to go over in complete disagreement whenever someone has anything to against vista/ms. I have no doubt about Vista's superiority over previous Windows versions, but any OS... be it OSX, Windows or Linux cannot be 100% crash-proof. Even when you meet all hardware requirement, all proper drivers requirement there is always something that can crash OS. It could be mistake of user, system file conflict, memory page operation to name a few.

If your system running Vista never crashed, good for you... But that doesn't mean that everyone else who had slightest problem with Vista are stupid. My XP system in office never crashed in last 2 years, but my home system (as exact config as my office system) crashed twice. My home and office system are almost replica in terms of hardware, software and programs install, yet you can see the difference in crash rate. My mac mini running OS X tiger must have crashed almost 9-10 times in a year, but my iBook with Tiger crashed only once in last 3 years.

If you are to say that it's always and 100% always user's fault that OS crashed then it's like assuming that Humans should not operate OS's, OS's should operate Humans... that way nothing crashes ever. Because if Vista is that perfect, MS will never have to release any critical/system updates for vista.

[davidsword]

nVidia + Vista =

(/07.02.07 image removed, cleaning out my server)

*sigh*

http://www.aqua-soft.org/board/showthread.php?t=43399

[Astyanax]

I know that current nVidia drivers are not fully Vista compatible. But when Microsoft includes drivers for specific hardware in the OS install, is it too much to expect that those bundled drivers are trouble free for regular operations? Are you trying to say that Microsoft's WHQL program for assuring optimum driver compatibility with their OS is not Microsoft's own responsibility.

You do notice that 99% of nVidia's driver releases are BETA DRIVERS and are not WHQL right? I think they might have had maybe 2 or 3 WHQL driver releases. Meanwile ATi has had how many? 5? And that will go up to 6 by the end of the month. It's not Microsoft's product. Sure they should help out with it, but did nVidia even care to ask? NO.

If your system running Vista never crashed, good for you... But that doesn't mean that everyone else who had slightest problem with Vista are stupid. My XP system in office never crashed in last 2 years, but my home system (as exact config as my office system) crashed twice. My home and office system are almost replica in terms of hardware, software and programs install, yet you can see the difference in crash rate. My mac mini running OS X tiger must have crashed almost 9-10 times in a year, but my iBook with Tiger crashed only once in last 3 years

Exact same config? Same Processor, Memory, Videocard, Motherboard, Hard Drives, CDRom, Floppy, Powersupply and sound card? Wow, very odd indeed.

If you are to say that it's always and 100% always user's fault that OS crashed then it's like assuming that Humans should not operate OS's, OS's should operate Humans... that way nothing crashes ever. Because if Vista is that perfect, MS will never have to release any critical/system updates for vista.

HELLO? Who's skipping out on who's posts here? I'm blaming nVidia for their neglect to fully support their own product wile also simotaniously attempting to tell people to shut their face about it being Microsofts fault for not helping or delaying the OS to give them time. You do realise that they had delayed it far too much as it is? Delaying it more could have had serious consequences.

Now it's beyond me how someone can disregard everything others has to say, because someone is total denial. It seems to me that you have to go over in complete disagreement whenever someone has anything to against vista/ms. I have no doubt about Vista's superiority over previous Windows versions, but any OS... be it OSX, Windows or Linux cannot be 100% crash-proof.

I didn't say it was 100% crash proof. There again you misconstrue what I said. So for you're enjoyment and mine here's what I have said:

The only thing companies like Creative and nVidia had to do where to ASK FOR HELP. Hell ATi seemed to be the only smart ones out of the bunch, I read they WENT TO MICROSOFT FOR HELP. The one thing you do not want to do is screw up drivers for a brand new OS. That kind of thing will stay with you for quite some time. I mean sure, no ones perfect and it takes time to do these things. But with that being said when you miss the Beta 1, Beta 2, RC1, RC2 mark (Creative) it just shows you don't care.

Saying that its less stable because nVidia's display drivers are utter shit is nonsence.

Yes, yes I know Vista is NOT perfect, but you can't blame Microsoft for stability issues on drivers they didnt make. It's like someone driving into oncoming traffic and getting in a major accident, then blaming the car dealer for selling them a faulty car.

[iGo]

You do notice that 99% of nVidia's driver releases are BETA DRIVERS and are not WHQL right? I think they might have had maybe 2 or 3 WHQL driver releases. Meanwile ATi has had how many? 5? And that will go up to 6 by the end of the month. It's not Microsoft's product. Sure they should help out with it, but did nVidia even care to ask? NO.

The problem is that you are talking about how lazyass nVidia developers are and I agree with you. So much so that I'm myself planning my next desktop video purchase from ATi. But that's not the point here. I'm not saying Microsoft made those drivers, but microsoft DID INCLUDE those drivers in Vista install. So unless those drivers went through proper testing (as MS claims about their WHQL certification), are we to assume that Microsoft included those drivers anyway? That's what my point it. When you are distributing your OS on dvd with support for number of hardware, you also make sure that the generic drivers that you're including are at least working as they're expected to. I know that these drivers are made by nVidia, but when I download and install drivers are from nVidia's site it's nVidia's responsibility for whatever problem it may cause and when Vista installs those drivers for me in first place from it's installation disk it's MS's responsibility to include clean drivers.

like you said in the end...

It's like someone driving into oncoming traffic and getting in a major accident, then blaming the car dealer for selling them a faulty car.

The problem here is that I bought car from MS, which had nVidia's tires when I bought it from showroom. If the tire was burst, I'd blame MS for putting those tires there in first place. If I had replaced tires to nVidia after I purchased the car, I would have blamed nVidia and firsly myself for putting those tires there (now replace Car with OS, and Tires with Drivers you'll get what exactly I'm trying to say here)

I got your point about nVidia and Creative, and it does hold true. But try and see what I'm trying to say here. It's a same stuff came from two different place, if you buy something from walmart you would contact walmart for any complaint or replacement not the original manufacturer since it was Walmart's responsibility to check the quality of the goods they are selling. But if you get the same directly from manufacturer, it's they are to blame if it's not proper.

Exact same config? Same Processor, Memory, Videocard, Motherboard, Hard Drives, CDRom, Floppy, Powersupply and sound card? Wow, very odd indeed.

It is pretty weird for even my friends who've worked on both the systems. I purchased the parts in two's when I was building my office system as I wanted to trash my old home system since quite some time then. So I built both the system using exact same parts. Even the softwares that I use at both office and home are same. Partitions on hard-drive are same, folders are same, wallpapers are same (I change both whenever I change), and earlier iTunes library use to be of same songs (then shifted all songs on my iBook). The only thing that is different is partition of games. my office system has less games installed. Apart from that, if you sit on both systems it's hard to tell which is which. I know.. some creepy stuff !!

[rjohnstone]

iGo, to answer your question about the included drivers for nVidia cards, Microsoft had to release something so the people who had nVidia cards could install and use Vista.

I think they chose the lesser of two evils. Release crappy drivers (provided by nVidia) instead of none at all.

[iGo]

I was kinda getting that picture, but doesn't it mean that Microsoft deliberately chose to use crappy drivers anyways instead of putting pressure on nVidia to get their acts together? and doesn't it mean that for this move Microsoft is to blame more than nVidia?

Because if user doesn't have built-in drivers and had to install drivers directly from nVidia, there was no way one could blame vista for any problem that might arise due to this action.