Vista?

[Rob Lowe]

Who is using vista and are there any problems running rfactor with it?

[jrowland96]

I don't have it so I'm not sure, but I think Tim and David have messed around with it. Personally my wife has it on her new Dell, but I hate Vista, and it makes everything so damn slow (all she does is web, email, and solitaire). Even trying to make the interface more like Windows Classic, I have a hell of a time finding funtions and settings. Just before Vista was released I went out and bought another copy of XP Pro.

[davidan]

Rob, rFactor works fine with VISTA. Just make sure you have drivers for all of your devices, that's the only area where you can run into issues.

David

[Mike Tyler]

I installed it and was able to run rFactor with it just fine, but for me it created more problems that I was prepared to deal with at the time. For example even though I was reasonably sure I had set myself up as the admin, every time I changed a file, which of course is a heck of a lot when you're a modder, it took me through a convoluted Q&A process just to make the file change. What was worse was that I have multiple instances of rFactor, yet instead of referring to the individual user files in each instance it redirected each instance of rFactor to a copy of user files that it created without my prompting, or at least I sure don't remember it asking me to do it, in a special ...\Users\Mike\Documents\rFactor folder. Besides the inherent problems with rFactor as well as 3dsMax it also cause me a bunch of grief with my rFactor licensing. Finally after a few weeks of frustrations I swapped back to XP and haven't regretted it yet.

I like the basic operating system a lot, but as far as rFactor and all of the modding I do Vista created more frustrations than I had the time or patience to deal with. Tim and Daivd have both been successful with it however. So I'm sure if I sat down and spent some good quality time studying and researching the operating system a bit more I'd have better success.

[Joe Owens]

I helped beta test Vista 32bit and 64bit versions before its release and thought then that it was overly secured.
Most users just want to get on with what they are doing without the need to answer Microsoft questions at every turn.like "Are you an Admin User","Are you Sure"..you want to do every tiny thing.
Vista is supposed to be for Pro use like XP Pro,but if so then why does Microsoft treat us like we are still in the cradle.Nothing annoys me more than being asked the same question more than once.The most annoying of them all is the one that interupts the program you are using to state that windows has a problem,then asks if you want to let Microsoft know,if you click "Yes" it most times comes back with no answer or just that it could not help,but its Windows that has the problem not the programs,and that darn message box causes a perfect program to crash.
IMHO Win98,Win98 SE were ok,Win XP Home and Pro have way to much stuff installed that uses every turn to sus out your system.
Vista is just like Fort Knox,all security and no go.
I use XP Home.
I tried rFactor on Vista but went back to XP as all the extra security in it just made it a hassle using the sim and doing the work I like to do too slow.
Joe.

[davidan]

Joe, you are referring to User Account Protection control functionality in Vista, and I am not sure if you knew this or not, but that is a service that can be disabled, and turned off -- so that you dont get prompted again. It's one of those things that on by default, but can be disabled with a few clicks. That may have had something to do with Mike's issues as well. Also many of the application vendors have had to create patches and updates for their apps to be compatible with VISTA. Most drivers are now available and optimized, and if you are interested in DX10 games you will have to get VISTA at some point. It's like anything new -- it is different and with that comes change and resistance, but in time it will be the de facto standard we are all using. PS, Service Pack 1 is scheduled to release in the next couple of months ...

[Mike Tyler]

The thing that gets me though, is that even though there's always a way to turn this stuff off, it's never been easy for an average user to located where to turn it off. It's basically like Micorsoft is saying, "Yes, we gave you the ability to turn it off, but we're not going to make it easy for you because we recommend that you don't."

I think Joe summed it up best, just let me click on what I want and what I need and let me get on with it. Don't interrupt my work to ask me about installing the latest update. Especially when I've already told the system only to worry about updates at 4:00 AM in the morning. And if I'm already signed in as the admin then stop asking me if I am the admin or telling me to contact the admin.

I think Bill, needs to focus more on his "Surface" project and leave the OS alone for a while. Now that's a cool toy!

[TimCollier]

I use Vista as my main OS and for racing with rFactor, GTR2, GT Legends, you name it....but I have found that the way I set up the user accounts was really a bad way of doing things and have worked around some of it, but I plan on re-doing it to relieve the frustrations like Mike mentioned above.

Let me explain...

The administrator security function is there for a very good reason, and when my Mom recently purchased a new computer with Vista on it, I figured out why finally.

At my parent's house, my Mom uses her computer solely for Internet, email and banking...and her computer knowledge is decent enough but not enough to let her "admin" her own machine...I'll explain what I mean in a moment. Plus, my nephew who is 6 gets on all the time to play internet games at Nickolodeon and other places, and I certainly didn't want him to get to anything important!! So, here's what I did with her machine.

First, I created the administrator, which was ME, and gave it a password to keep things secure from my nephew (and my Mom, but don't tell her that!). Then, I created a user profile for my Mom, then one for my nephew. This sounds complicated, but it's not. When the machine is turned on, it comes up with three logos, mine, Mom and nephew. From this point Mom can click her icon and it goes to her desktop. When my nephew visits, he goes to the "Switch User" option and clicks on his picture. Now it's at HIS desktop. I can log on (using my password) and it goes to MY desktop.

Now, the point of doing it this way is that I can control driver upgrades, installing system software like anti-virus, or whatever. Anything I do in this space, it asks me if this is just for me or for everyone. I can install programs like Mozilla Firefox and have it only show up for me, or change it so other users can use it. So that much is apparent. But here is what's cool to me.

My Mom logs on, and she open IE to hit the net. It has bookmarks and options that are only for her....anything she adds, changes, deletes, whatever, is only done under her profile. It doesn't affect anything else installed. It's almost like running a shell within Windows. The anti-virus software I installed under admin is there too, and will update and operate globally since it was installed under an admin. So to her, the computer is all set up and everything's fine. She can install programs that are just for her, or for everyone, just like the admin can, but with a big difference....and I'll use rFactor for an example since everyone here uses it.

I install rFactor while in my Mom's desktop, and then after installing it I jump in to play. Now, when I installed it, the entire installation went to the usual location of (e.g.) C:/Program Files/rFactor, but when a driver is created in rFactor it duplicates the Userdata folder files that are added or altered into my Mom's profile folder, and everything she does is kept there not affecting the original installation. Now, while this can make things awkward such as when you are adding setups that you downloaded from the Internet, you just have to remember that they go in the same folder structure location under the profile of the person using the computer at that time. But, if you wanted to place the setups in the main installation so they would be available to everyone, that's when the administrator would need to authorize (and in this case type in a password) to add them to the main installation. Again, this is done so a user who doesn't have admininstrative rights can't mess with an original installation. This would include adding mods and whatever else...which I know can be tedious, but it's a safety net. Keep that in mind.

Now, a user with administrative rights will have the same thing happen if they just install and run the program, but the admin has the ability to set any program to run in administrative mode, which sets the program to run and alter the original installation. This is what I'm doing on my racing machine at the moment so that the data isn't spread between two locations. But after giving it more thought, there have been times I screwed up the installation from copying over a file that I shouldn't have, and not running in admin mode would have saved me the pain it caused.

So, to set things up right next time, I plan to re-install Vista and set up an administrator first and get things squared away (updates, anti-virus, etc..), then create a user "Tim Collier". Within that user I will run Windows the way it was intended in Vista, keeping me from contaminating anything accidentally, and actually preventing me from infecting my system from any viruses or spyware from surfing the net, as they will be restricted to my profile space and not the main installation space.

Does all of that make sense? It's time to head home from work, and I was really pouring this out quickly....also, if David (or anyone else of course!) has any recommendations, please, I'll take all that I can get!!

[Joe Owens]

Tim`s post is excellent and spot on.....but what if I want to use Vista in the same way that I use XP...no one else uses my network,my wife is not into computers.
At this time I just boot my box and my remote server box and they just go straight into one desktop activating all the progs I have in my startup slot.
No PW,no user logon etc...I use it just like a Commadore 64 or Sinclair Spectrum of the old days.
No hassle except I still get useless questions from Microsoft which slows me down.
My router has its own protection circuits and settings that I can setup,so nothing gets in or out of my network without me knowing about it.
I have been building and using computers and other electronic devices since the 1970`s and loved the time when I could get a whole machine code program into the space that is now one file on a modern system.
I am not intested in going forward,just want to work without all of the useless questions etc.
IMHO the least an OS has to do the faster the computer.
Electronic security is the future as that is hotwired,imo no software protection is foolproof.
If I want extra speed I just check out the original boards and change the circuit specs,it works with graphics cards,motherboards etc.. it is just electronic engineering..In fact even an OS could be burned onto a ROM..including Vista.
Joe.

[TimCollier]

You're exactly right Joe, and the power users are the ones who are disappointed with Vista, and also the ones who were the first to switch to it...

With WindowsXP you could set up an administrative system, but you didn't have the safeguards in place to prevent "Mom" from installing a new video driver accidentally and messing up the entire system....but you could also work more freely.

I installed Vista on a new hard drive in this machine, keeping XP and making a dual-boot system. I haven't used XP in 3 months, except in Vista using the Virtual PC app by Microsoft....for those stubborn programs that just won't cooperate with Vista.

I'm still thinking about re-building this installation, and maybe even going to 64-bit....nah, better not press my luck, although I do have 4GB on system memory installed and the machine only sees 3.2 thanks to a 32-bit operating system.