Why I wont be using Vista again (Long)

[Thiassi]

There's not one point in the original post in this thread that I've EVER
had problems with in Vista. Not on any of my 3 PC's with various Vista
versions installed.

What is the whole sort by date problem in the recycle bin about?? I'm
looking at it now and there is a "deleted date" column with the ability
to click on it to sort, as with XP.

All of those problems described are either down to lack of user
knowledge on how to customise Vista (which is easy) or down to hardware
specs/issues. For example, did you try any performance monitoring when
the PC was sluggish to narrow down what might be the issue? Could it
have been your page file was set too low for the amount of RAM you had
installed, for example?

Many people are quick to point theit finger at Vista but what about
some basic troubleshooting beforehand?


--
Thiassi

 

[golan]

"David" wrote:

> The transition from XP to Vista has been my BEST transition to date and
> Vista is more stable on my setup than XP. Makes me wonder what you are
> doing wrong.

Vista sux.
It is more unstable and slow than xp in the same hardware.
It needs much more space on hard disk.
Even to launch the simplest task an annoying window appears requesting
approval of the user.
and more, and more and more.

 

[golan]

"Thiassi" wrote:

>
> There's not one point in the original post in this thread that I've EVER
> had problems with in Vista. Not on any of my 3 PC's with various Vista
> versions installed.
>
> What is the whole sort by date problem in the recycle bin about?? I'm
> looking at it now and there is a "deleted date" column with the ability
> to click on it to sort, as with XP.
>
> All of those problems described are either down to lack of user
> knowledge on how to customise Vista (which is easy) or down to hardware
> specs/issues. For example, did you try any performance monitoring when
> the PC was sluggish to narrow down what might be the issue? Could it
> have been your page file was set too low for the amount of RAM you had
> installed, for example?
>
> Many people are quick to point theit finger at Vista but what about
> some basic troubleshooting beforehand?
>
>
> --
> Thiassi
>
I installed Vista two days after his official throwing.
and guess what!
There were already 78 critical updates!

XP rulez !!!!!

 

[03hdfatboy]

Thiassi571451 Wrote:
> There's not one point in the original post in this thread that I've EVER
> had problems with in Vista. Not on any of my 3 PC's with various Vista
> versions installed.
>
> What is the whole sort by date problem in the recycle bin about?? I'm
> looking at it now and there is a "deleted date" column with the ability
> to click on it to sort, as with XP.
>
> All of those problems described are either down to lack of user
> knowledge on how to customise Vista (which is easy) or down to hardware
> specs/issues. For example, did you try any performance monitoring when
> the PC was sluggish to narrow down what might be the issue? Could it
> have been your page file was set too low for the amount of RAM you had
> installed, for example?
>
> Many people are quick to point theit finger at Vista but what about
> some basic troubleshooting beforehand?

I agree 100%
I guess their not old enough to remember how many issues XP had when
it came out LOL
The transition to Vista was a LOT easier to me.

FATBOY


--
03hdfatboy

MY Baby....
RAIDMAX Smilodon Dirk-Tooth case
OCZ Extreme Gamer 850W PSU
ASUS P5W DH Deluxe
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 Kentsfield
VIGOR GAMING CLT-M2I 92mm Thermal Electric CPU Cooler
CORSAIR Dominator 4GB
ATI X1950XTX + ATI X1950CF
ATI HDTV Tuner (pre flag)
400Gb, 320Gb SATA Seagate Barracudas
i-rocks e-SATA W/500Gb Seagate
1 Sony/NEC 7191s & 1 Sony/NEC 7190A
Acer AL2216WBD
Logitech G15 Gamer & Mx518
Vista 64bit/ XP Pro 32bit

 

[Dick Hurtz]

"golan" <golan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1D880278-14F9-4702-A5AC-FDB1E8B2823B@microsoft.com...
>
>
> "David" wrote:
>
>> The transition from XP to Vista has been my BEST transition to date and
>> Vista is more stable on my setup than XP. Makes me wonder what you are
>> doing wrong.
>
> Vista sux.
> It is more unstable and slow than xp in the same hardware.
> It needs much more space on hard disk.
> Even to launch the simplest task an annoying window appears requesting
> approval of the user.
> and more, and more and more.
>

Yeah, yeah. Whine whine whine. People spouted the same line when XP was
introduced, and how Windows 2000 was so much better, and how they wanted to
downgrade, addax yadda yadda. Its getting tiresome. Stay with XP if you like
2001 technology. The rest of us will enjoy Vista.

 

[Bobby McNulty]

"Dick Hurtz" <null@unix.site> wrote in message
news:4KidnTsfT5RzrlvanZ2dnUVZ_uWlnZ2d@comcast.com...
>
>
> "golan" <golan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:1D880278-14F9-4702-A5AC-FDB1E8B2823B@microsoft.com...
>>
>>
>> "David" wrote:
>>
>>> The transition from XP to Vista has been my BEST transition to date and
>>> Vista is more stable on my setup than XP. Makes me wonder what you are
>>> doing wrong.
>>
>> Vista sux.
>> It is more unstable and slow than xp in the same hardware.
>> It needs much more space on hard disk.
>> Even to launch the simplest task an annoying window appears requesting
>> approval of the user.
>> and more, and more and more.
>>
>
> Yeah, yeah. Whine whine whine. People spouted the same line when XP was
> introduced, and how Windows 2000 was so much better, and how they wanted
> to downgrade, addax yadda yadda. Its getting tiresome. Stay with XP if you
> like 2001 technology. The rest of us will enjoy Vista.
I am happy with Vista.
Works for me.
Bobby

 

[Frank]

Lorne wrote:


....it's plan to see that you and Vista were never meant for each other.
You proly expected Vista to simply be XP with some nice eye candy. As
you discovered it isn't.
It is a new OS that requires you learn where things are and how to use
it and it's new and improved features. If you ever stayed with Vista
long enough to actually learn about it then going back to XP is a real
downer and makes XP look old and clunky. Also it makes the items moved
in Vista make sense. One tends to go "ahhh...I get it".
Obviously you didn't.
Frank

 

[03hdfatboy]

^What he said.^


--
03hdfatboy

MY Baby....
RAIDMAX Smilodon Dirk-Tooth case
OCZ Extreme Gamer 850W PSU
ASUS P5W DH Deluxe
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 Kentsfield
VIGOR GAMING CLT-M2I 92mm Thermal Electric CPU Cooler
CORSAIR Dominator 4GB
ATI X1950XTX + ATI X1950CF
ATI HDTV Tuner (pre flag)
400Gb, 320Gb SATA Seagate Barracudas
i-rocks e-SATA W/500Gb Seagate
1 Sony/NEC 7191s & 1 Sony/NEC 7190A
Acer AL2216WBD
Logitech G15 Gamer & Mx518
Vista 64bit/ XP Pro 32bit

 

[Not Me]

I remember, I beta'd both (and 95/98/ME).
The difference is, even with the bugs XP was a vast improvement over NT or
ME.
I don't see the improvement here. Just a little eye candy and a few things
rearranged and called improved security.
Others will argue it's a vast improvement, but not in function.
I just want my machine to run my programs with a decent amount of speed.
If I want pretty, I'll go to an art gallery.
If I want a Nanny, I'll check into daycare.
I know that I am NOT a typical user, but I never had security issues with XP
and don't see what all the fuss is all about with Vista's supposed
improvement in security.
But I only keep a couple hundred machines running, I don't know nearly as
much as many here that keep their 1-2 systems up.

"03hdfatboy" <03hdfatboy.35h2u8@no-mx.forums.net> wrote in message
news:03hdfatboy.35h2u8@no-mx.forums.net...
>
> Thiassi571451 Wrote:
>> There's not one point in the original post in this thread that I've EVER
>> had problems with in Vista. Not on any of my 3 PC's with various Vista
>> versions installed.
>>
>> What is the whole sort by date problem in the recycle bin about?? I'm
>> looking at it now and there is a "deleted date" column with the ability
>> to click on it to sort, as with XP.
>>
>> All of those problems described are either down to lack of user
>> knowledge on how to customise Vista (which is easy) or down to hardware
>> specs/issues. For example, did you try any performance monitoring when
>> the PC was sluggish to narrow down what might be the issue? Could it
>> have been your page file was set too low for the amount of RAM you had
>> installed, for example?
>>
>> Many people are quick to point theit finger at Vista but what about
>> some basic troubleshooting beforehand?
>
> I agree 100%
> I guess their not old enough to remember how many issues XP had when
> it came out LOL
> The transition to Vista was a LOT easier to me.
>
> FATBOY
>
>
> --
> 03hdfatboy
>
> MY Baby....
> RAIDMAX Smilodon Dirk-Tooth case
> OCZ Extreme Gamer 850W PSU
> ASUS P5W DH Deluxe
> Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 Kentsfield
> VIGOR GAMING CLT-M2I 92mm Thermal Electric CPU Cooler
> CORSAIR Dominator 4GB
> ATI X1950XTX + ATI X1950CF
> ATI HDTV Tuner (pre flag)
> 400Gb, 320Gb SATA Seagate Barracudas
> i-rocks e-SATA W/500Gb Seagate
> 1 Sony/NEC 7191s & 1 Sony/NEC 7190A
> Acer AL2216WBD
> Logitech G15 Gamer & Mx518
> Vista 64bit/ XP Pro 32bit

 

[jarhedch]

This is my second experience with Vista, my first with the 64 bit side
of it. My wife's laptop came with Vista, and she has had ZERO trouble
with it. Never a crash, never a blue screen, nothing. I had issues
installing, only with SATA drivers, and I have an occasional issue with
a SATA DVD driver still, but other than that, it has been stable beyond
belief so far. Once I got it up and running (a serious pain in the back
side i might add), i haev been generally happy with it. Some things are
different, but can be changed to suit. don't like UAC? shut if off,
first thing I did. Don't like being told an .exe file "may be malicious
software", tell it to shut up. It's all able to be shut up. For the most
part, I like Vista, I'm happy with it, and things are stable. Driver
issues abound, but let's face it, XP had teething issues, too. Vista
will take some time to get running, especially on the tails of success
XP had, but it will work, and things will get better. Is MS blameless?
not by any means, but I gotta be honest, The writer of this thread
sounds like they need a defrag, anti-virus run, and maybe some more RAM,
and a major cleanup of their system. Sounds like it needs some
maintenance. My wife's laptop was sluggish and slow with 1 G of RAM,
installed 2gigs, RUNS GREAT!! no problems at all.


--
jarhedch

 

[Alias]

Dick Hurtz wrote:
>
>
> "golan" <golan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:1D880278-14F9-4702-A5AC-FDB1E8B2823B@microsoft.com...
>>
>>
>> "David" wrote:
>>
>>> The transition from XP to Vista has been my BEST transition to date and
>>> Vista is more stable on my setup than XP. Makes me wonder what you are
>>> doing wrong.
>>
>> Vista sux.
>> It is more unstable and slow than xp in the same hardware.
>> It needs much more space on hard disk.
>> Even to launch the simplest task an annoying window appears requesting
>> approval of the user.
>> and more, and more and more.
>>
>
> Yeah, yeah. Whine whine whine. People spouted the same line when XP was
> introduced, and how Windows 2000 was so much better, and how they wanted
> to downgrade, addax yadda yadda. Its getting tiresome. Stay with XP if
> you like 2001 technology. The rest of us will enjoy Vista.

The difference is that even MS knows Vista sucks so they extended how
long XP can be sold. This was NOT done with pre XP or any other MS OS.
What does MS know that you don't?

XP was not ready for prime time until SP2. This is an irrevocable fact
and SP2 was released in 04, not 01.

Alias

 

[Dave]

"Not Me" <cargod01@bresnan.net> wrote in message
news:uNnkJWeeIHA.4376@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>I remember, I beta'd both (and 95/98/ME).
> The difference is, even with the bugs XP was a vast improvement over NT or
> ME.
> I don't see the improvement here. Just a little eye candy and a few things
> rearranged and called improved security.
> Others will argue it's a vast improvement, but not in function.
> I just want my machine to run my programs with a decent amount of speed.
> If I want pretty, I'll go to an art gallery.
> If I want a Nanny, I'll check into daycare.
> I know that I am NOT a typical user, but I never had security issues with
> XP and don't see what all the fuss is all about with Vista's supposed
> improvement in security.
> But I only keep a couple hundred machines running, I don't know nearly as
> much as many here that keep their 1-2 systems up.

If you "don't see the improvement here" (I am assuming you mean Vista) here
are a couple of articles you should read thouroughly.

They are quite long
http://arstechnica.com/reviews/os/pretty-vista.ars/1

http://arstechnica.com/reviews/os/vista-under-the-hood.ars

Do as you wish after you read the articles.......but I am sure after you
read them you will understand there is more to Vista then "Pretty".
For someone who manages 200 machines it is something you should know wether
you agree or not.

 

[Mellowed]

"golan" <golan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1D880278-14F9-4702-A5AC-FDB1E8B2823B@microsoft.com...
>
>
> "David" wrote:
>
>> The transition from XP to Vista has been my BEST transition to date and
>> Vista is more stable on my setup than XP. Makes me wonder what you are
>> doing wrong.
>
> Vista sux.
> It is more unstable and slow than xp in the same hardware.
> It needs much more space on hard disk.
> Even to launch the simplest task an annoying window appears requesting
> approval of the user.
> and more, and more and more.

Where have you been?? Everybody knew that Vista required updated hardware
before it was released. So what!! Updating to Vista with old hardware was
never recommended. As for your 'annoying' window, that is the UAC. Turn it
off if it is such a bother. No need to whine about it.

As far as 'unstable'? Bull Sh**. This OS is solid. I've had it for one
year now and not one crash. It is so much easier to 'bitch' about something
than to do your homework.

 

[Frank]

Alias wrote:

> Dick Hurtz wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> "golan" <golan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:1D880278-14F9-4702-A5AC-FDB1E8B2823B@microsoft.com...
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "David" wrote:
>>>
>>>> The transition from XP to Vista has been my BEST transition to date and
>>>> Vista is more stable on my setup than XP. Makes me wonder what you are
>>>> doing wrong.
>>>
>>>
>>> Vista sux.
>>> It is more unstable and slow than xp in the same hardware.
>>> It needs much more space on hard disk.
>>> Even to launch the simplest task an annoying window appears requesting
>>> approval of the user.
>>> and more, and more and more.
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, yeah. Whine whine whine. People spouted the same line when XP
>> was introduced, and how Windows 2000 was so much better, and how they
>> wanted to downgrade, addax yadda yadda. Its getting tiresome. Stay
>> with XP if you like 2001 technology. The rest of us will enjoy Vista.
>
>
> The difference is that even MS knows Vista sucks so they extended how
> long XP can be sold.

Liar!

This was NOT done with pre XP or any other MS OS.
> What does MS know that you don't?

Liar!
>
> XP was not ready for prime time until SP2. This is an irrevocable fact
> and SP2 was released in 04, not 01.

More of your lies?
Get lost mr liar, mr troll, mr spammer, mr bigot, mr coward.
Frank

 

[the wharf rat]

In article <#A363SgeIHA.484@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl>,
Dave <dcox1961@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>If you "don't see the improvement here" (I am assuming you mean Vista) here
>are a couple of articles you should read thouroughly.
>

Yeah, ok, so I read them. What besides a new graphics stack does
vista offer again? The new and soon to be required WinFX API? Runs on XP.
Or maybe being able to set sound card output volume on a per-application
basis is the killer app for Vista? Or is the rewritten IP stack that doesn't
work properly the ne plus ultra of the desktop world?

Come on. Vista is just a buggy NT rewrite with an accelerated
desktop.

 

[zachd [MSFT]]

"golan" <golan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1D880278-14F9-4702-A5AC-FDB1E8B2823B@microsoft.com...

> Vista sux.
> It is more unstable

What specific crash are you seeing? What's the fault data according to the
Problem Reports and Solutions Center control panel?

> Even to launch the simplest task an annoying window appears requesting
> approval of the user.

What specific simple task are you doing that is requiring approval? The
authentication prompts should be pretty exclusively limited to things
requiring administrative privileges.


I have no desire to sway your opinions in any fashion, I have every desire
to solve problems. =)

Regards,
-Zach
--
Speaking for myself only.
See http://zachd.com/pss/pss.html for some helpful WMP info.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

 

[rtdavide@yahoo.com]

On Feb 28, 7:22 am, "Mellowed" <nos...@spam.com> wrote:

>
> As far as 'unstable'?  Bull Sh**.  This OS is solid.  I've had it for one
> year now and not one crash.  It is so much easier to 'bitch' about something
> than to do your homework.

While I am replying to this specific post, it is more basically just
an addition of my experiences with Vista to this thread. I simply
chose to reply to Mellowed as a spring point.

With the Vista Home Premium I initially bought, I have to say it was
pretty solid. In the sense of not crashing.... Amazingly, since I
upgraded [with a clean install] to Ultimate, I have had almost daily
problems. Computer will simply freeze. Not a blue screen, just the
screen as it was with no ability to move anything. It takes a hard
reboot to move on. Sometimes it will happen 4-5 times in a day. Other
times it won't freeze, but it has happened with alarming frequency.

I'm not sure what exactly the problem is, but my overall personal
experience with Vista has been pretty miserable.
I have one friend that swears it's the best OS he ever used. His
install was quick and easy and he has no problems at all. But my own
experience.... not even close.

I'm not a tech, but neither am I a newbie. I've been using computers
since Windows 95, upgraded to 98 as soon as it came out.
I worked with NT 4 as well, when we had to configure everything
manually it seems... I bought Windows 2000 and XP Pro the day it came
out and never really had the problems so many warned me about.
I have networked computers with different OS's together as well as
different platforms having had macs and PC's working together.
I have built all my own computers.
All this is just to say that I'm not a total newbie when it comes to
computers.

I waited until late november 2007 to get Vista, but I needed to get an
OS and I didn't want to look back.
I do graphics and illustration [I know, we are supposed to all use
macs....] and I have some expensive large scale scanners and printers
that I needed to upgrade, a new graphics card and sound card, but I
did all that the upgrade advisor told me to.

I don't know if the problems are primarily Vista, or perhaps the
peripheral companies that write faulty drivers, or maybe even just an
odd combination of hardware that stumbled, but my experience has been
days and weeks lost to this new OS.

I don't have any particular hatred towards MS, like I said, I had
bought the previous OS's and upgraded without incident. And every time
in the past, things at least worked equally well. This time, my entire
system was slower, with consistent problems in so many areas. Some of
which had to do with me and learning my way around, but some of which
I still don't understand.
I have reinstalled twice and been on tech support trying to sort out
the difficulties for many, many hours with both microsoft and third
party vendors.
My machine is older, but i still have 2 processors and 2 gigs of
ram... I would think it would be enough to get some decent performance
out of Vista. and I don't even think about running aero....just vista
basic.


For all the people that have had smooth sailing with Vista, God speed
for you.
I can't say what the problem is: Vista, my particular hardware
configuration, or perhaps third party drivers or software not really
being ready, but I can tell you that my experience with this latest OS
has left me extremely frustrated.
I'm not likely to roll back, but this has been without a doubt the
worst computer experience ever for me.
I

 

[NoStop]

rtdavide@yahoo.com wrote:

<snip>

> For all the people that have had smooth sailing with Vista, God speed
> for you.
> I can't say what the problem is: Vista, my particular hardware
> configuration, or perhaps third party drivers or software not really
> being ready, but I can tell you that my experience with this latest OS
> has left me extremely frustrated.
> I'm not likely to roll back, but this has been without a doubt the
> worst computer experience ever for me.
> I

You owe it to yourself to look at a possible alternative OS. May I suggest
you take a look at Ubuntu. You'll be able to run the liveCD from your CDROM
drive without committing to it, to get a general look at what Ubuntu is
like. Then, if you choose, you can easily install it on your hard drive in
a dual boot arrangement with Vista, allowing you to run both operating
systems and slowly learn more about Ubuntu and how it all works and whether
it'll do the job for you. Who knows, but you might find Ubuntu is a
solution for you? Worth a try I'd say, if Vista is causing you so much
grief and going back to XP is not an option.

http://www.ubuntu.com

You can download the latest version Ubuntu 7.10 liveCD ISO file, and burn it
to a CD-R. Then you'd setup your computer's BIOS to boot first from the
CDROM drive. Another alternative is ordering the installation CD from
Ubuntu. They charge nothing and ship it out on their dime. Just that it'll
take awhile before you get it that way as opposed to downloading the ISO
and doing it yourself.

Cheers.

--
Vista will make you speechless!
http://tinyurl.com/38zv7x

Proprietary Software: a 20th Century software business model.

Q: What OS is built for lusers?
A: Which one requires running lusermgr.msc to create them?

Frank, hard at work on his Vista computer all day:
http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/compost.htm

 

[Frank]

NoStop wrote:


....NO SPAMMING ALLOWED!!!
Get lost you POS lying linux troll.
Frank

 

[Mellowed]

<rtdavide@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:74641fef-0c64-4594-bd7d-ba87d8a157af@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 28, 7:22 am, "Mellowed" <nos...@spam.com> wrote:

>
> As far as 'unstable'? Bull Sh**. This OS is solid. I've had it for one
> year now and not one crash. It is so much easier to 'bitch' about
> something
> than to do your homework.

While I am replying to this specific post, it is more basically just
an addition of my experiences with Vista to this thread. I simply
chose to reply to Mellowed as a spring point.

With the Vista Home Premium I initially bought, I have to say it was
pretty solid. In the sense of not crashing.... Amazingly, since I
upgraded [with a clean install] to Ultimate, I have had almost daily
problems. Computer will simply freeze. Not a blue screen, just the
screen as it was with no ability to move anything. It takes a hard
reboot to move on. Sometimes it will happen 4-5 times in a day. Other
times it won't freeze, but it has happened with alarming frequency.

I'm not sure what exactly the problem is, but my overall personal
experience with Vista has been pretty miserable.
I have one friend that swears it's the best OS he ever used. His
install was quick and easy and he has no problems at all. But my own
experience.... not even close.

I'm not a tech, but neither am I a newbie. I've been using computers
since Windows 95, upgraded to 98 as soon as it came out.
I worked with NT 4 as well, when we had to configure everything
manually it seems... I bought Windows 2000 and XP Pro the day it came
out and never really had the problems so many warned me about.
I have networked computers with different OS's together as well as
different platforms having had macs and PC's working together.
I have built all my own computers.
All this is just to say that I'm not a total newbie when it comes to
computers.

I waited until late november 2007 to get Vista, but I needed to get an
OS and I didn't want to look back.
I do graphics and illustration [I know, we are supposed to all use
macs....] and I have some expensive large scale scanners and printers
that I needed to upgrade, a new graphics card and sound card, but I
did all that the upgrade advisor told me to.

I don't know if the problems are primarily Vista, or perhaps the
peripheral companies that write faulty drivers, or maybe even just an
odd combination of hardware that stumbled, but my experience has been
days and weeks lost to this new OS.

I don't have any particular hatred towards MS, like I said, I had
bought the previous OS's and upgraded without incident. And every time
in the past, things at least worked equally well. This time, my entire
system was slower, with consistent problems in so many areas. Some of
which had to do with me and learning my way around, but some of which
I still don't understand.
I have reinstalled twice and been on tech support trying to sort out
the difficulties for many, many hours with both microsoft and third
party vendors.
My machine is older, but i still have 2 processors and 2 gigs of
ram... I would think it would be enough to get some decent performance
out of Vista. and I don't even think about running aero....just vista
basic.


For all the people that have had smooth sailing with Vista, God speed
for you.
I can't say what the problem is: Vista, my particular hardware
configuration, or perhaps third party drivers or software not really
being ready, but I can tell you that my experience with this latest OS
has left me extremely frustrated.
I'm not likely to roll back, but this has been without a doubt the
worst computer experience ever for me.

===========
RT, I was hoping that somebody would offer suggestions as to why Ultimate
seems to have been the variable causing the problem. I'm using Ultimate
with a clean install (I built the system) and it has been flawless.

It's interesting that your original installation of Home Premium was solid.
It would seem that Ultimate should act the same. It would appear to me that
there is some kind of interaction between Vista and an installed program.
With your experience I'm sure that you have already done the obvious on
uninstalling various programs that could interact, such as your AV,
Firewall, Malware detection, etc.

Why did you replace Home Premium for Ultimate? How did you do a 'clean'
install of Ultimate over Home Premium? Are you running any pgm's now that
were not running with Home Premium?