Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Is Windows Vista Ready? 'No. God, no.'

Posted by Zonk on Thu Aug 03, 2006 02:53 PM
from the swelling-with-confidence dept.
torrensmith writes "Paul Thurrott answers the question that some IT folks are asking: 'Is Windows Vista Ready?' His answer is not only no, but 'No. God, no. Today's Windows Vista builds are a study in frustration, and trust me, I use the darn thing day in and day out, and I've seen what happens when you subject yourself to it wholeheartedly. I think I've mentioned the phrase "I could hear the screams" on the SuperSite before.' He also addresses the more important question, 'When Will Microsoft figure out what's important?' and to Paul, like most IT pros, its not about when the next OS will be released, it is about having the OS work."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by daveschroeder (516195) * on Thursday August 03 2006, @02:56PM (#15842221)
    ...how can Microsoft still be saying RTM by November with corporate available in December?

    How can Vista possibly be ready on time?
    • by timster (32400) on Thursday August 03 2006, @03:02PM (#15842268)
      Well, they say that, but when pressed on the issue they insist that they will definitely release on those dates, for sure, as long as it's ready. When asked whether it will be ready, the answer is that they are pretty sure. Bottom line is that nobody in the whole world can say with any certainty when Vista will actually be released.
    • by rickb928 (945187) on Thursday August 03 2006, @06:38PM (#15843546) Homepage
      ... were waiting for Windows 3.1.

      Or Windows 95.

      or Windows 98.

      or Windows NT 3.51

      or Windows 2000.

      How quickly we forget...

      This isn't long at all. Microsoft is re-inventing the wheel here, and it will take a while. and it will suck mightily in many areas for the first release and first service pack.

      Gang, I first ran Windows when it was called 'Windows'. And had a CPU board in the box. I thought I would grow senile before they fixed it. I was rewarded with Windows 2.0, which broke my favorite (ok, only) game. 3.0 was a joy, I need only reboot every few hours or so. 3.1 and then 3.11, and I need only reboot twice a night, while using a dialup ISP to run AOL. Admit it, you did too. Or IRC. Or USENET.

      I neglected OS/2 at this point. Just as well. Only my bank, my ATM, and my whacked buddy were running it. Who cared? It was almost like Windows. Almost.

      With 95, I bought the upgrade, installed it without trouble, and ran it without rebooting for *29* days! Woot! Then the first service pack came out. Never ran that long without rebooting again.

      Windows 'ME' we will let rest in peace. I never ran it save for testing and support. Poor blighters that got it pre-installed. We forget...

      The NT saga was just as painful. 3.0 stank. 3.1? 3.51 was tolerable compared to nothing. 4.0 finally rewarded us with a server that needed rebooting only once a week. My Novell servers sneered, and rightly so. And they lost. You think Microsoft has security trouble now? NT exposed the kernel like a pervert at the playground. Very bad. We forget...

      2000 at least delivered on the promises. After a service pack. We forget...

      I am in no hurry to buy Vista. I may even let it cook until SP1 is out. Besides, I got lots of other stuff to look at. Suse, Fedora, Ubuuntu, the list goes on...

      But carping about delays with Vista? Yeah, whatever. I hope you get it quickly. those who want it NOW, you deserve it quick. And dirty. Ewwww.

      We forget...

      rick
      • by Senzei (791599) on Thursday August 03 2006, @03:46PM (#15842599)
        I think they've given up on Windows for the future, and are looking elsewhere for help.
        This has to be some kind of a troll, no one with any speck of sense in their head would possibly believe something this stupid.
        • by codemachine (245871) on Thursday August 03 2006, @04:56PM (#15843075)
          Apple sort of did it with OS X, basing it on Mach and BSD instead of Linux (well actually it was NextStep, but whatever).

          This is a model that MS could use as well. Open up or borrow the base layers, and build on top of it. With MS being in the virtualization market, backwards compatibility becomes less of a problem, as it can be built into the new OS.

          Heck, rumour is that Apple has already implemented this Windows compatiblity this with OS X 10.5. Apple may have a better successor to Windows XP than Microsoft does.
          • by Elektroschock (659467) on Thursday August 03 2006, @07:02PM (#15843659)
            Apple sort of did it with OS X, basing it on Mach and BSD instead of Linux (well actually it was NextStep, but whatever). This is a model that MS could use as well

            True, just another 5 years of development. Or microsoft licenses Tiger and builds a wine based compatibility layer...

            but honest: Why does Ms develop IE when there is Firefox? IE is a product that is not sold. No one buys Windows because of IE.

            MS may outsource a lot to open source... It is an ideology trap created by the media.
            • by mreed911 (794582) <mreed_911.yahoo@com> on Thursday August 03 2006, @08:00PM (#15843879)
              Why does Ms develop IE when there is Firefox? IE is a product that is not sold. No one buys Windows because of IE.

              If I had mod points I'd mod you insightful. Why indeed?

              Some could/would argue that Microsoft develops and releases IE because they have to refine their own networking and shell (explorer) code, and IE is just a UI on top of those that happens to hit http:/// [http] links. They'd say that if they depended on Firefox, and Firefox "understood" that as a developer community, that Firefox could influence the direction of Windows development because it would be a core component - and one that Microsoft doesn't control.

              I tend to agree with that. Microsoft doesn't want to spend cycles on a "free" product that's become ubiquitous... but they don't have a choice - they can't give up control to an outside developer pool and cede control over the direction of Windows in re WWW access. So, given that they have to maintain control, and maintaining control requires maintaining, to a degree, market share, they can burn just enough cycles to a) make it work enough for 90% of people out there and b) add enough new things / change enough things to generate PR about "why IE is teh bomb!"

              You do remember that IE was, at one point, sold on store shelves and had a SKU, right?

              • by ceoyoyo (59147) on Thursday August 03 2006, @08:53PM (#15844067)
                That's a pretty complicated reason. I think the real one is simpler. By using IE Microsoft can dictate to a large extent how the web works. Yeah, there are standards and standards committees and such, but really, if it doesn't work with IE, it doesn't work. So MS makes IE just a bit different than the standard (do you REALLY think that all MS's programmers can't implement web standards properly?) and by doing so web page developers' support for everybody not running Windows is an afterthought at best.
              • by pnewhook (788591) on Thursday August 03 2006, @09:36PM (#15844205)
                IBM sells services and the occasional bit of hardware

                I'd say they sell more than the occasional bit of hardware to sell over $24 Billion worth in 2005. And that's down from 2004's $31 Billion.

                But you are correct saying services is where the money is. IBM made over $47 Billion in revenue from their services division last year.

                To put those numbers in perspective, Microsoft's revenue for the entire company was $39 Billion.

        • Not Linux... (Score:5, Interesting)

          by MsGeek (162936) on Thursday August 03 2006, @05:17PM (#15843190) Homepage Journal
          ...BSD.

          I suspect there is already a skunk works project uniting aspects of Vista with some sort of BSD kernel/userland as we speak. FreeBSD? NetBSD? OpenBSD? Who knows. However, the BSD licence would allow them to completely "Borg" their chosen version of BSD and keep everything closed up tight.

          BSD is a venerable OS at this point, proven stable and secure. Vista is in very scary shape right now if TFA is to be believed. If Microsoft released a "Windows" with BSD under the hood, they could in one stroke get rid of the earned perception that Windows is an insecure OS with stability issues.

          They could do worse. As in maintain the status quo.
      • by Overly Critical Guy (663429) on Thursday August 03 2006, @04:23PM (#15842869)
        Thurrott isn't a Microsoft shill

        You've got to be joking. I've traded emails with this guy, and his lack of technical knowledge is surprising. He actually argued with me at one point that Apple's Spotlight was inferior search technology because it requires plug-ins to tell it how to read third-party file formats. I mentioned that Vista's search technology wasn't powered by a goddamn crystal ball and requires the same thing to read third-party file formats. He didn't reply.
        • by jcr (53032) <jcr&mac,com> on Thursday August 03 2006, @04:57PM (#15843078) Journal
          . He actually argued with me at one point that Apple's Spotlight was inferior search technology because it requires plug-ins to tell it how to read third-party file formats.

          He was probably echoing something that some clown from MIcrosoft sputtered in reaction to Spotlight.

          The funny thing about that is that it's Spotlight that sent MS back to the drawing board on this whole searching buiness. Their previous plan was that third party developers would have to conform their way of storing documents to work with the filesystem-as-RDMBS model, unlike the spotlight model where you write an importer that decides what metadata matters for your particular document types.

          Right after spotlight was shown, MS went out in a panic to buy something that looked like it, and they grabbed an app that did full-text indexing of mailboxes.

          -jcr
      • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 03 2006, @05:22PM (#15843217)
        No, Vista will definitely be released before the year 2029; The Terminator clearly tells you this when he says "Hasta la Vista, baby".
  • Someone initiated a vote for the Tech Beta testers to see if there will be a Beta 3. It's accessible only for techbeta, but it's here [microsoft.com]
  • Then wait (Score:5, Insightful)

    by truthsearch (249536) on Thursday August 03 2006, @03:00PM (#15842254) Homepage Journal
    No point in having an OS that frustrates you when you already are using one that frustrates you less. Users don't care about release deadlines (other than some who want the latest toys ASAP). The only people who care about Vista release "deadlines" are corporate stock holders. There's no value in rushing it out if you end up angering customers who may later switch to another vendor.
        • Re:Then wait (Score:5, Insightful)

          by JonTurner (178845) on Thursday August 03 2006, @04:04PM (#15842741) Journal
          >>What about the great hordes of corporate Microsoft certified IT weenies
          >If MS drops the ball hard enough, for long enough, Apple will take these customers.

          You don't know how true this is. Way back when, I was a Mac developer and my shop was also involved with the Windows 3.0 beta. The contrast was striking -- Microsoft reps treated us like gold -- they sent us free compilers, books, checked in to see how we were doing, offered assistance, etc. Apple, however, charged a small fortune for their compiler/development tools (MPW), we bought the multi-volume Inside Macintosh documentation out-of-pocket, paid for membership in their developer's groups, etc. The difference was like night and day. Apple acted like it could live without us, MSFT acted as though it COULDN'T live without us. Microsoft made it cheap and easy to port our software to Windows and made us want to develop for Windows.

          Flash forward to 2006. I believe the tables have largely turned. OSX is a great environment to be productive, Apple includes their fantastic XCode development environment and developer documentation with every new Mac, etc. Meanwhile, Microsoft now charges a LOT of $$ for Visual Studio Enterprise Extreme Radical 2008 .Net (and yes, I am aware it is technically possible to develop .net apps from the command line just as it's technically possible to build your own house using nothing more than an axe and a drill) and unless you wanna get screwed and pay full price next year when there's an update you'll pay to join their developer club. IMO, MSFT has gotten complacent and Apple is now wooing developers.

          The Alpha geeks I know are now carrying Macbooks and writing code on Macs. Funny what a difference a couple decades makes.
          • by Rimbo (139781) <rimbosity@s b c g l obal.net> on Thursday August 03 2006, @06:51PM (#15843607) Homepage Journal
            Yes, but the MPW compiler did have those groovy error messages [netfunny.com]...

            These are some of the error messages produced by Apple's MPW C compiler. These are all real. (If you must know I was bored one afternoon and decompiled the String resources for the compiler.) The compiler is 324k in size so these are just an excerpt I hope. I'm not sure where I stand on the copyright issue. Tony Cunningham

            "String literal too long (I let you have 512 characters, that's 3 more than ANSI said I should)"

            "...And the lord said, 'lo, there shall only be case or default labels inside a switch statement'"

            "a typedef name was a complete surprise to me at this point in your program"

            "'Volatile' and 'Register' are not miscible"

            "You can't modify a constant, float upstream, win an argument with the IRS, or satisfy this compiler"

            "This struct already has a perfectly good definition"

            "type in (cast) must be scalar; ANSI 3.3.4; page 39, lines 10-11 (I know you don't care, I'm just trying to annoy you)"

            "Can't cast a void type to type void (because the ANSI spec. says so, that's why)"

            "Huh ?"

            "can't go mucking with a 'void *'"

            "we already did this function"

            "This label is the target of a goto from outside of the block containing this label AND this block has an automatic variable with an initializer AND your window wasn't wide enough to read this whole error message"

            "Call me paranoid but finding '/*' inside this comment makes me suspicious"

            "Too many errors on one line (make fewer)"

            "Symbol table full - fatal heap error; please go buy a RAM upgrade from your local Apple dealer"

            "Trailing comma not permitted in enum definition. (This time I'm letting you off with a warning)"
              • Re:Then wait (Score:5, Informative)

                by kfg (145172) * on Thursday August 03 2006, @06:11PM (#15843438)
                In my spare cycles I think about what it would take to reconstitute civilization from scratch.

                In my spare time I actually go out and try it. I've posted about some of it over the years.

                Making the jump to metal (and I'm talking copper, not iron) is the highest hurdle, even if you already know how it's done. After that it's really all downhill, but not, as most people might expect, because it makes things possible. I can make a drill that will put a hole through a block of granite with nothing but plants and a bit of sand. Metal just makes things so much faster that one man can accomplish more in a given unit of time.

                I mean, what if the whole of the world was reduced to the technology of Survivor Island, basically subsistance living?

                See that phrase up there; "even if you know how it's done"?

                It's the figuring shit out that takes the time. I guesstimate that a group of about 24 people on a reasonably resource rich land and sufficiently motivated to do so could rebuild from standing naked to pre atomics in about a decade, if they already know how shit's done (oh yeah, and if none of them have modern "issues." The big, strong lug is gonna haul stone and five foot two, eyes of blue is gonna spin and weave; and that's the way it is).

                To save technology don't save too many things, save knowledge and make the things from it. Turns out that people are really quite capable of making some amazing things from nearly nothing. Who woulda thunk it?

                Nor are we always as advanced as we think we are today. See those blue jeans you're wearing? Ancient Egyptian technology, only if he needed to the Egyptian would know how to duplicate them starting with no more tools than his bare hands. If you'll settle for linen instead of cultivated cotton all you need can be found along nearly any riverbed.

                That's actually how American pioneers went west. They didn't carry much in the way of clothing because they knew all they needed to acquire more was a riverbed and some time. We're talking fine woven linens here, not crude bearskins or something.

                The most prized possession they tossed into the wagon in Conestoga? An axe head. That first bit of worked metal is a godsend.

                KFG
                • Re:Then wait (Score:5, Interesting)

                  by ScuzzMonkey (208981) on Thursday August 03 2006, @06:59PM (#15843643) Homepage
                  Ah, but it's not just the knowledge, it's the availability of the resources.

                  You get to the point where you start needing petroleum products, how easy is it going to be to get access to those oil reserves with your bootstrap technology, now that all the easy pickings are gone? Same thing with a lot of metals... the easily accessed deposits have been mined out, and the hard to get at stuff requires higher technology... which may well require the hard to get at stuff in the first place. Catch 22.

                  I think what things would look like if we had to restart civilization from scratch would involve entirely different kinds of figuring shit out... it would be about reuse and recycling rather than re-implementing old technologies from whole cloth. Why spend time with wood and stone when you've got a bunch of metal already laying around? I don't think the jump to metal actually would be the hard part; I think the jump to non-petrochemical bases would be the hard part.

                  Yeah, yeah, it's all off-topic, mod me down, I know.
  • by RonnyJ (651856) on Thursday August 03 2006, @03:00PM (#15842257)
    Of course it's not ready - it's still a beta - it hasn't even reached the first 'Release Candidate' stage.

    More importantly though, will it be ready in time? From the relevant part of the article, which of course is omitted from the Slashdot summary:

    Will it be ready in time? Actually, I think it could be.

      • Here's a possible answer. Many of the new consumer level features aren't present in corporate versions of Vista. Microsoft might be trying to get the core os done and then give them a little more time with the end user fluff. It might also be a shakedown cruise. IT people will most likely start testing vista right away for later deployment and find bugs in the process. I suspect a very quick SP1 release within 3-5 months of corporate customers getting it. Remember NT4 had a service pack immediately. Its also possible they will pull their old games and release a "b" release and later do a special edition or some crap. Windows Server R2 reminds me of Windows 98 SE. It allows them to EOL buggy software faster after they've got a service pack or two under their belts. It also is a great revenue source as people re-buy what they already have. Ballmer is calling the shots now and he's a greedy guy.
      • by dan828 (753380) on Thursday August 03 2006, @03:41PM (#15842574)
        The answer (put forth by a MS guy at a seminar I attended), is that many enterprise users bought software assurance contracts with the understanding that they'd get Vista as part of the contract, and a good portion of those contracts will be ending this December. No Vista this year would mean some bad PR at the enterprise level.

        And yes, this is entirely hearsay.
  • FTA (Score:5, Funny)

    by Reverend528 (585549) on Thursday August 03 2006, @03:03PM (#15842283) Homepage
    In other words, Microsoft should have simply pulled an Id Software and said they'd ship Windows Vista when it was ready. Period.

    I believe that is called "pulling a 3d Realms".

  • by 10Ghz (453478) on Thursday August 03 2006, @03:06PM (#15842309)
    OK, OK, so it's still in beta. But it seems to me that he is having problems with Windows that are not solely restricted to Vista. Why does he then put up with it? Why not simply say "Enough!", and try Linux or Mac instead? Surely the alternatives couldn't be any worse? Is it simply because he earns money by writing about Windows, so he HAS to put up with it, so he could pay the bills?
  • by amliebsch (724858) on Thursday August 03 2006, @03:07PM (#15842317) Journal

    How many times is Slashdot going to be suckered by Paul Thurott? He has one basic strategy: first, review it poorly. This gets him all kinds of attention and credibility as people rush to hold him up as such a wise person, who is willing to tell the truth! Then, later, surprise! Everything he wrote before is better now, and $PRODUCT is the best thing ever to exist, and if you believed him then but don't believe him now, you're obviously a lying hypocrite!

    Seriously, people, get a grip. This is a set-up for when Vista is available to consumers, at which time - mark my words - he will write about Microsoft's amazing efforts to pull off the seemingly impossible and deliver a polished product that, despite not completely living up to Paul's high standards, is still the best ever made! Highly recommended!

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 03 2006, @03:08PM (#15842322)
    Where I work we've got a software product which to be kind would be best taken out and buried in an unmarked grave at midnight (with the mandatory stake, garlic and silver bullet) at some lonely crossroads.... its buggy, seriously flawed implementation of our design (the software is a third party product built to specs from my company). Every month we lurch from one crises to another but our programme management team will not face reality and allow us to slip release... we must release on time no matter how flawed is the message.

    With 6ish months to go until drop dead date we can only fix major or critical issues which will seriously impact functionality of the entire system.

    I have total sympathy with the MS developers and designers as I suspect they've got the same bone headed project managers as my firm :(.
  • by antdude (79039) on Thursday August 03 2006, @03:09PM (#15842327) Homepage Journal
    I am also using the latest Vista builds (not the public beta 2) at work. It is still NOT ready to me because it drives me nuts. The biggest complaint I don't like about it is the User Acess Control (UAC). I know it can be disabled, but the design is just annoying (memorized alt-c hot key so I don't have to move and click with the mouse) and I don't think it will be changed much. For every thing I run as an administrator seems to pop up the permit/deny. I read this interesting article [jimmah.com] about why UAC works this way. It remindes me of the way Mac OS X (10.2.8 -- haven't used the newer versions) works.

    What's worse on this test machine (ASUS K8V SE Deluxe, Athlon 64 3200+ 754 CPU, 512 MB of RAM, etc.), my screen tend to black out before and after the pop-ups occur. I don't see this problem on a co-workers' computers. Maybe it is because of the old ATI Radeon 9600 All-In-Wonder video card. I am using the Aero effects (very pretty). Or worse, the pop-up is in the taskbar minimized without focus. So I can be using a program that calls another EXE, then nothing happens because I haven't granted permission because it is minimized!

    Other things that bugged me:
    1. How do I access c:\ProgramData\Application Data\? I keep getting permission denied even though my account is already set with an administrator access.
    2. How come tab, arrow keys, and F3 keys don't work in command.com/CLI? I miss being able to recall history and hit tab for autocomplete.
    3. In command.com, I cannot seem to change long paths with cd command like: cd "Program Files". It says: Parameter not correct - "program.

    I was a bit surprised when MS decided to declare RC1 a few builds ago (5472?). I really hope Microsoft decides to delay again and take their time! So what if it loses money! They're rich and can get more after Vista is released with few problems. Make it good and maybe I will use it at home (using XP, Linux, and Mac OS X). :)
  • wow (Score:5, Funny)

    by dolson (634094) on Thursday August 03 2006, @03:09PM (#15842329) Homepage Journal
    So Vista isn't close to being ready. I'm sure that if it is pushed to shelves as scheduled, that nobody will buy it because it is so incomplete. And nobody will pirate it either. This will definitely be the Windows killer that we have been hoping for.

    Right.

    Microsoft can box up a petrified turd and people will still buy it.
  • How could it be ready yet? They haven't perfected the DRM obviously, and you can't release an operating system that might allow someone to burn CDs with impunity, or use an evil analog video input device.
  • Don't care (Score:5, Interesting)

    by resmungo (905153) on Thursday August 03 2006, @03:11PM (#15842349)
    The upgrade from 98 to XP was a no brainer because of how much more stable
    and quick XP was. Vista honestly has nothing I want. The longer they take
    the better since I heard that the next DirectX will be Vista only, probably
    just to piss me off when I can't play new games.
    • Re:Don't care (Score:5, Interesting)

      by steveo777 (183629) on Thursday August 03 2006, @03:33PM (#15842497) Homepage Journal
      As long as Vista doesn't end up like Windows ME, I'll be happy. ME was the absolute worst Windows OS experience EVER. I'd rather run 3.1. Back when ME came out, I worked as a tech intern for a warehouse/distribution center. There was me and my boss. That was it for tech support there. He would by Dell workstations every few months when one of the PCs crapped out and I couldn't fix it with spare parts. It was 2001 and there were still a lot of Windows 95 and a few 3.1 machines still being used. The 3.1 machines were out in the warehouse and my boss didn't care what happened to them, or about the fact that I was out rebooting them three times a day.

      The thing that got me the most is that he was adament that windows NT, 98, 95, and ME were all more stable than 2000 which came on the new machines. I even set up tests where I left an NT, ME, and 2000 machine running with Office 97 running on each for three days. The NT machine was running like a slug, the ME machine BSODed after about 6 hours and two more times. In the end, he allowed 2000 on my machine, but the reality of it was that he was afraid to learn a new OS.

  • by Bobby Orr (161598) on Thursday August 03 2006, @03:14PM (#15842383)
    And then there are the online pundits, many of whom are barely old enough to legally buy alcohol. These guys are classic. Let's just say that a lack of experience and a strongly worded opinion don't result in the most coherent of arguments and leave it at that.
  • linux or windows? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by edmicman (830206) on Thursday August 03 2006, @03:29PM (#15842474) Homepage Journal
    So which is more difficult for XP users to switch to? Linux or Vista?
  • Folder Art (Score:5, Funny)

    by flathead_iv (155332) <ihbryant@nospam.ou.edu> on Thursday August 03 2006, @03:30PM (#15842481) Homepage
    Why did I just waste four years making nice album art for music folders and custom folder art for photos?


    Yes, why?

  • Just Plain Bad (Score:5, Interesting)

    by HermMunster (972336) on Thursday August 03 2006, @03:38PM (#15842536)
    I signed up for the free download of the beta. After the download I installed it on one machine, a lesser of the many machines I have. Nonetheless it was a very capable machine. It was an AMD2500+ with an nforce2 board. It also had a 128mb 8x gforce 4 AGP card. Topping it off was an 80gig HDD with 1 gig of DDR 333 RAM. Oh, and it had a wireless card in it from ASUS.

    As you can see that machine is very capable by today's standards.

    I did a clean install without any other partitions. The install went well. After it booted up and I was able to work with it I noticed there was a driver for the video card but there was no AERO interface features. I searched and searched to see if I could find a spot to force it on. After some searching I found nothing.

    I also found that the wireless card was essentially non-functional. This was also very disappointing. I connected up a wire and installed the nvidia drivers that were available for Vista. I managed to get to the internet and do all the updates where Microsoft's online update finally found a driver for the wireless NIC. I installed that and rebooted. After booting the OS reports that the connection for this is limited or has no connection.

    I worked with it for a while. I looked and looked for video drivers that might provide me with the AERO interface. I also looked and looked for drivers and found none.

    Most of the chipset drivers I had to use were older XP drivers. It was a serious hassle trying to get and install vista drivers.

    I let that machine sit for some time but went back to it periodically to try to learn more about the interface. Networking sucked pretty bad. I couldn't find drivers for some devices. The lack of the AERO interface indicated that this was just XP with a new face. Sure there was IE 7.0 but I had given up on IE long ago in favor of Firefox. I looked at the configuration screens. Confusing but everything seemed to be there. One thing to note is that there were too many ways to get things done. There was a high percentage of features that didn't work and it was obvious that even the screens that did pop up for configuration often had the old XP graphics--indicating they were just altering existing code to work with Vista.

    I then received a copy of Vista in my AP subscription and as coincidence would have it I had just backed up and was whiping my main XP box which has a 64 bit 3200+, 1 gig of ram and gforce 6600GT, and a few hundred gigabytes of storage.

    I did the install and found that I had the AERO interface. I liked it. After using it for a while I downloaded the beta vista drivers from nvidia. I installed them and the system seemed fairly stable. I did notice huge clunkiness to accessing files and folders and determined that it was the promise SATA drivers. I moved my connectors to a different set of SATA ports off the mobo and the clunkiness went away.

    I used Vista for a few weeks and tried to test every piece of hardware--printers, cameras, networking, external harddrives (usb and eSATA). I tried the microphone. Tried burning CD/DVDs. Tried flashcard readers, etc. Most everything worked. The only issue I had was with the file access. Opening a drive could take 30 seconds. Opening a folder after that another 30 seconds, clicking back another 30 seconds. Closing and reopening. More 30 second intervals if it even opened them at all. It didn't matter if it was my IDE drivers, my SATA or eSATA. It was incredibly slow. Often times it would lock.

    No, Vista is FAR FAR from ready.
    • Re:Just Plain Bad (Score:5, Insightful)

      by hackstraw (262471) * on Thursday August 03 2006, @06:42PM (#15843565) Homepage

      I can take the pain of a troll or flamebait mod, but from memory, this search for the killer driver, reboot, and settle for the disappointment is what Windows has been like since 95. It kills me when I'm having Linux issues that are oftentimes obscure and rare and I'm talking with people that come from Windows backgrounds, they say, "Did you download the latest drivers?" "Did you reboot?" I bite my tongue and think to myself, "Real operating systems come with drivers and don't need chronic reboots for them to run. Rebooting means, not running".

      Maybe I'm just getting old or spoiled by Macs, but is there an end in sight to the mantra of fetch driver and reboot and accept things as they are?

      I don't reboot my car, and don't chronically have to update it, and search the web to drive it. I don't have to screw around with my timed thermostat for my house, search the web, reboot, and screw with it. I don't have to do this with my DVR which is a computer and works well. I don't have to do this with my Mac either.

      IMNSHO, for average use, computers are black boxes that just work like microwaves, car stereos, cars, and everything else. They are not a religion or a cult, they are appliances that do stuff.

      I guess I am getting old, and I'll gladly take my sysadmin paycheck for monkeying with Linux, Solaris, BSD, and any other *NIX variant that gets the job done, but for general stuff, I'll just buy a computer that just works. No spyware, no viruses, no popups, none of that crap.

  • by Hairy1 (180056) on Thursday August 03 2006, @03:47PM (#15842608) Homepage
    So why does it matter that MS gets Vista out before Christmas? I'm betting that one of the big problems Microsoft faces is that its Software Assurance program was meant to deliver value, in that it ensured the right to upgrade. If I were an IT manager who had signed up for Software Assurance and paid out tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars, and got exactly sqat I'd probably be a little pissed. I'd probably be reluctant to sign up for another three years because even if MS to deliver Vista the older machines can't even run it, so you can't upgrade. You might also be a little worried that your entire business could be cut off at the knees if Microswoft ever decided to use Windows Genuine Advantage to disable PC's.
  • by twitter (104583) on Thursday August 03 2006, @08:31PM (#15843988) Homepage Journal

    Gaaa, look at all the excuse making and shine on. While the problems he's having are very funny from a man who so often uses the phrase, "just works" [google.com] to describe things that don't, the double think involved is disturbing. What does it take to cure a fanboy?

    Businesses have never lined up to install a new Microsoft operating system. They always install new Windows versions gingerly and years after the fact. We're all familiar with the "wait for Service Pack 1 (SP1)" mantra that many enterprises extol.

    XP is on Service pack 2 but Windoze 2000 is still the most used "enterprise" desktop OS. Why? Because M$ has not added anything of value in six years. Conservative practices are not an adequate excuse here.

    beta testers never think any Windows version is ready: If we left the ship decision to testers, we'd still be testing Windows XP.

    The beta testers are right. With rooted Microsoft machines making up 80% of the world's spam, we can say that no version of their OS is ready, despite the newest being six years old.

    ... beta testers simply like their exclusive little clique to continue as long as possible

    I'm not sure what issue he has with this attitude. It takes non free software to create software elitism and it's all based on someone else calling the shots for you.

    And then there are the online pundits, many of whom are barely old enough to legally buy alcohol. These guys are classic. Let's just say that a lack of experience and a strongly worded opinion don't result in the most coherent of arguments and leave it at that.

    Once again, what a hypocrite.

    We might call Windows Vista a "train wreck" for simplicity's sake. But it's getting better. Seriously.

    Others have noticed he does this every release, [slashdot.org] shilling to get people ready to buy second rate.

    [bad GUI complaints] So you open Network from the Start Menu and wait ... and wait... and wait... while the damn thing finds all your networked PCs and servers. In XP, this process is instantaneous.

    Instantaneous? Microsoft's brain, dead Netbios broadcast based networking protocol has never been instantaneous, quick or reliable. They made it complex in a failed attempt to keep others from being able to work with it. It compares very poorly to something like sftp through konqueror, where you can use organized bookmark folders to very quickly, securely and reliably reach any computer on the your LAN or the whole freaking internet. It looks like the networking in Vista still sucks despite the all the .NET hype.

    Photoshop Elements 4 has literally gotten worse over time. Now, some key functionality simply doesn't work or, oddly, only partially works.

    Is that an apologist reflex reaction, or what? M$ changes, product_x stays the same, but product_x has "gotten worse over time". I know what he means, but the language is amazing. Why can't he just say that vista changes broke Photoshop? He knows that lots of other programs are going to be broken too and that, as usual, everyone will have to replace all of their software when they buy a new computer if they want to maintain their current functionality.

    As an aside, I wondered if GIMP would have the same problems. he does not seem to have ever tried or mentioned that program [google.com]. How funny.

    In IE 7, the rich edit control that forms the basis of the third party ActiveX control we used to post article bodies not only doesn't work, it is actually deprecated in Vista so that it will never work, even if you manually install it. That means

    • Re:Vista? (Score:5, Informative)

      by rapett0 (92674) <liquidgod.hotmail@com> on Thursday August 03 2006, @03:24PM (#15842448) Homepage Journal
      What? Come on now. I know /. is very pro-Open Source, con-MS, but thats ridiculous. I have only had 1 actual XP crash since it came up, and that was due to a fan dying on the graphics card causing it to overheat. XP (Pro anyway, can't speak on Home), is extremely stable and it has been my primary development platform for several years. I was even co-founder and ex-pres of my Alma Mater's LUG, so I am not some MS fanboy. But the blind XP bashing really needs to stop around here, its very counter productive and not even funny anymore.
        • Re:Vista? (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 03 2006, @03:55PM (#15842682)
          "I call bullshit. I have a friend that had Winblow$ XP, crashed every other day. On top of that had viruses spyware"

          - Maybe learn how to use windows? If that were truly the case, there would be far, far, far more outcry than there is. It's stable (not secure), that's all there is to it. Instability is more often caused by 3rd party drivers.

          "When will people realize that Linux is easier to use... "

          - When it becomes true.
    • by MBCook (132727) <foobarsoft@foobarsoft.com> on Thursday August 03 2006, @03:37PM (#15842525) Homepage

      No kidding. I switched last year and I expect OS X to be a little better. I was amazed what the difference was, and using XP often drives me nuts because of how much it misbehaves.

      Now I read about Vista being worse than XP, popping up "Enter administrator password" boxes all the time, etc. They already took out all the interesting Vista features (WinFS, for one).

      The fact is, when Tiger was previewed Apple had all those banners that said "Redmond, start your photocopiers". They obviously need new ones, because in that time they have not only not managed to copy most of the features, but Apple is about to release the NEXT set of great stuff at about the same time as MS's copy of Apple's last 3-5 years.

      If there is something everyone in the computer industry should pay attention to, it's the WWDC keynote on Monday. Vista has become a joke, and I don't expect much to change. Even if they can release it on time working perfectly with all the features they currently say it will have... it will be outdated and uninteresting.