Vista explorer saves viewing options for all dirs

i think this is one of the most annoying things i didn't even resolve by using registry hacks. in XP, i say that the explorer shall not save the viewing options for directories and it worked. in vista i don't have a chance... they all look random unless i say "apply style for all directories"

man i hate this :/

Yet one of the many reasons why vista sucks.

this is almost the only reason.
but WHY does M$ think to know whats better for me? i want to use MY settings...
any fix for this? any MS hotfix or update released or in development?

Only? hardly, games that work fine on xp have to be hacked up (usually) to run on vista (for example, assassins creed didn't even install on vista in a tech demo for IGN - which means more development time) AND it requires dx10 gfx cards, which sucks for people that have already pimped out their box with stuff for xp (last-ish gen). And simply this: its slow.

Ooh look, another Vista hate wagon to jump on :/

Google much?

http://www.vistax64.com/tutorials/70819-windows-explorer-folder-view-settings.html
http://www.windowsreference.com/windows-vista/force-the-all-items-view-to-all-folders-in-vista/

I've had close to 100 games and demos installed and yet to find one that was less than perfect.


The best example you can come up with is a beta version given to the media that doesn't involve you at all? Figures. Most of the people who claim to know most about Vista's problems have no personal experience.


No, it doesn't.


Again, presumably not talking from personal experience. I find it much faster than XP, which was no slouch itself. It's far, far more responsive.

My point was, it takes developers longer, which means longer wait for consumers.

mmm

my software renderer runs at 90 FPS in XP - at 110 FPS in vista!!! i testet these facts after installing the OS and all drivers. seems like vista optimized BUS speeds etc...



the first one swaps the problem with the solution, if you know what i mean ;) the second one gives a proper solution, but still worse than XP. i guess i have to live with it unless you give me another advice?

I've swapped from XP Pro SP2 to Vista64 Ultimate SP1. Vista is definitely far more responsive here too. XP tends to start out quick on a fresh install, but slows down noticeably after all the drivers/updates etc... are installed. I haven't noticed this progressive slowdown on Vista. It starts off snappy and has remained that way even with all the extra stuff installed.

You don't need to use DX10 cards for Vista, you just won't get Aero interface without one. See VirtualPC. It emulates some crappy 8MB card from many years ago but Vista installs and operates fine on it, just no Aero.

You don't need DX10 for Aero. Works fine on my old 6600GT. DX10 is only really used to enhance a few games and doesn't actually effect Vista at all as far as I can tell.

Cool, didn't know that. Do you get the working 3D "switch between windows" effect in the quick launch as well?

Can't wait for Flow to be released;)

Instead of spamming the forums with every little thing you hate about Vista, I came up with this rather good idea - stop bloody using it and find an OS you *do* like.

Either that or go and moan to Microsoft about it.