Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Vista Startup Sound to be Mandatory?

Posted by CowboyNeal on Thu Aug 31, 2006 08:24 PM
from the any-sound-you-want-as-long-as-it's-this-one dept.
Toreo asesino writes "There has been lots of debate in the past few days over Microsoft's plan to make the startup sound in Windows Vista something that can't be specifically silenced by changing the sound settings in the control panel. Users would be able to avoid hearing it by manually turning down the speaker volume, but then they would have to turn that volume back up to hear anything else."
+ -
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This discussion has been archived.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.
  • wait until everyone learns that the new start up sound is the microsoft eula, read out loud, in nonrepeating segments
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 31 2006, @08:27PM (#16020885)

    This is a typical case of product-focused vs. user-focused thinking.

    Has it occured to anyone that a user might just wake up early morning and wants to turn on his/her computer without waking up sleeping family members?

    For this very reason one of the first setup steps I always do on a new machine is to turn off the startup sign.

    • by Aeiri (713218) on Thursday August 31 2006, @08:50PM (#16021031) Homepage
      Has it occured to anyone that a user might just wake up early morning and wants to turn on his/her computer without waking up sleeping family members?

      Just today I walked into the "Maximum Quiet Study Area" for our univerisity's library, and popped open my laptop and turned it on. My gkrellm instance sounded my "alert" sound (which is actually very rare, the load was too high from the boot apparently), and I rushed to hit the mute button.

      The startup sound on Vista would be before any multimedia keys are registered if it's at all like XP is, and that wouldn't have worked. Laptop speakers don't have volume control!

      If Vista does require this, and I hear someone turn on their laptop with "welcome to Windows Vista!", I'm going to throw their laptop out a window, no pun intended.
    • Not just the startup sound, but all of the sounds, like I want to hear if I click my mouse, my mouse can make that sound on its own, and I don't need a sound every time one of those alert buttons pop up, they are on top anyway so I'll see them, right?

      But then again, with OSX it isn't possible to disable the startup sound either (or so I've heard) so if people would make a fuss about this, then why not continue at apple?
        • by GizmoToy (450886) on Thursday August 31 2006, @09:38PM (#16021313) Homepage
          You don't even have to mute it before you shut down. You can shut the laptop down with the sound on. When you press the power on button, start holding down the Audio Off/Mute button on the keyboard. Hold it until you see the Apple. Bingo. No startup chime, and sound is still enabled (or disabled, whatever it was before) once you get to the desktop.
        • by Dhalka226 (559740) on Thursday August 31 2006, @11:05PM (#16021717)

          But Apple can do no wrong here on /., so the point is moot.

          There. I fixed it for you.

          Look, this is either an idiotic thing that should be an option controllable by the user or it's not, and whichever it is, it is regardless of how many times somebody might reboot their computer.

          It never ceases to amaze me how many excuses people here can come up with for why their double standards aren't double standards. I expect no less than 5-6 more in reply to this post.

              • I still check in on those boxes. One has 994 days of uptime, and the other has, as of last week, 1190 days.
                I know you said you worked, past tense, for the company that owns those servers. But you must realize that however spiffy those uptime stats may be, they also mean that critical updates and service packs have not been installed. Most of the security-related patches require a reboot, and 2003 Service Pack 1 certainly does.
    • by fm6 (162816) on Thursday August 31 2006, @11:25PM (#16021802) Homepage Journal
      For this very reason one of the first setup steps I always do on a new machine is to turn off the startup sign.

      I do it because having some corny sound play every time I reboot is just too much to bear.

      What really bugs me is that Scoble says he can "see both sides" of the issue. What kind of workplace culture does Microsoft have, where they'd even consider imposing such an obnoxious feature?

      This isn't going to happen, of course. The "you have got to be kidding" emails must be already pouring in. But the fact that this is an issue says nasty things about the Redmond mentality.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 31 2006, @08:29PM (#16020896)
    Delete or Rename the file? or has that functionality not made it into the filesystem yet?
    • by FLEB (312391) on Thursday August 31 2006, @08:39PM (#16020968) Homepage Journal
      File?

      No, I imagine it'll involve subtly hacking a grafted-on Windows 2000 version of NTOSKRNL.DLL while fending off the frothing-at-the-mouth system-file protection and changing HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\SystemEnhanc ementLayer\{0092-02D1-26E5-0990}\Security\Initiali zationProtocolIsTrue to 210 (decimal), then making sure never to install any patches.
      • by jafac (1449) on Thursday August 31 2006, @11:43PM (#16021869) Homepage
        Yeah, there's this nasty BITCH of a mechanism called Windows File Protection - where many of the common system files have backup copies in a hidden subdirectory called dllcache. If you delete the system copy, the os "detects" it (via a filter-driver), and copies the backup from dllcache.

        In some cases, the fix is to simply delete the dllcache version - if what you're trying to do is delete the file. But there's also an added level of hackery for a subset of these protected files, because they're also redundantly backed up in a .CAB file in dllcache - and that .CAB file has a manifest that has checksums and digital signatures socked away in a jet database or registry hive somewhere - theoretically, one could ONLY update one of these files via the Microsoft Installer Service API.

        So for files that are protected with this extra level, no, it's not really possible to change them via hex editor. I know that there used to be hacks in 2000 to disable WFP. I also know that in 2002, Microsoft did not have the expertise, in house, to answer a developer support question on WFP behavior (for a developer of BACKUP software - ie. "what happens if I restore the system to a previous version via backup software? - answer: nasty stuff. Which is why imaging software became a very popular way of backup and restore windows desktops).

        No - I know that guys like Marc Russinovich probably have a much better understanding of how WFP works. But this is my understanding after having to deal with it. Frankly, in the past few years, when I've had to remove spyware and malware from systems, there's an eerie resemblance in self-protection techniques between WFP and malware.
  • What in the world? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SuperMog2002 (702837) on Thursday August 31 2006, @08:29PM (#16020898)
    Do they seriously think annoying the users who care enough about their systems to turn off the Windows startup sound in the first place is really a good idea?
  • by jleq (766550) <jleq@charte r . n et> on Thursday August 31 2006, @08:30PM (#16020904)
    They will have to come up with some kind of way to turn it off. The majority of broadcast automation applications still run on Windows. When I worked at KDKD, we had all the on-air PCs set to "No Sounds"... It's always funny to hear a Windows sound on the radio.
  • Bottom line (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Spazmania (174582) on Thursday August 31 2006, @08:30PM (#16020905) Homepage
    Here's the bottom line: If you have to ask the question, "Should the user be able to change this?" then the answer is: YES.
    • Re:Bottom line (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Pedrito (94783) on Thursday August 31 2006, @09:07PM (#16021144) Homepage
      Here's the bottom line: If you have to ask the question, "Should the user be able to change this?" then the answer is: YES.

      Actually, from a software design point of view, that's not necessarily the correct answer. If you make everything configurable that every user would possibly want to change, then you're looking at a UI that's going to be almost impossible to navigate, at least when you're talking about an OS the size of Vista. That said, I think this is a case where it should be something the user can change.
      • Re:Bottom line (Score:5, Informative)

        by Spazmania (174582) on Thursday August 31 2006, @09:31PM (#16021275) Homepage
        Mozilla Firefox is a counter-example to this argument. There are about a bazillion things you can change by entering "about:config" in the url bar. The vast majority can't be changed via the menus and thus don't clutter the UI. Yet they're readily available for anyone who does want to change them.
  • Perhaps... (Score:5, Funny)

    by punkrocher (775394) on Thursday August 31 2006, @08:32PM (#16020924) Homepage Journal
    It will be something along the lines of this? [youtube.com]
  • by amigabill (146897) on Thursday August 31 2006, @08:36PM (#16020943)
    It's my freakin computer, you better let me silence it if I wish. Maybe I don't want to irritate people in a cafe, lobby, waiting room, whatever with noises coming from my laptop. Maybe I just don't want an "I'm ready to be used" noise. Maybe I don't care if you think it's convenient. Maybe I dont care if you think it's cool or pretty sounding. Maybe I just want the stupid thing to be quiet.

    And Xbox or Playstation are not good excuses, those are for a different market. There's also a number of people out there using mod chips to regain control of those things if they don't like some decisions from the manufacturer. Just because my Xbox makes a startup noise doesn't mean that I want it to. And just because some Engineer at Microsoft or Sony decided their toy for kids should make a startup noise does not mean I want to hear it on my laptop, tower, or anything at the office in the morning.
  • by gsn (989808) on Thursday August 31 2006, @08:40PM (#16020973)
    "This computer will self destruct in 5 seconds."

    I still hold out hope...

    QUESTION: Why don't you give advanced users the ability to turn this off via a registry setting or something like that?
    Steve: "we're considering just that."


    Yes Steve a registry setting please...
    HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\WinLogon\ShutTheFuckUp
    make sure that dword is set to 1
  • Don't do this (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Tester (591) <tester@tester.UMLAUTca minus punct> on Thursday August 31 2006, @08:41PM (#16020980) Homepage
    This shows how disconnected from the real world Microsofties have become.

    Imagine being in a large university class with 100 or 200 students and half of them boot their laptops at the beginning of the class. The sound will be played 50-100 times, how much more annoying can it get!
  • by EnsilZah (575600) <{moc.liamG} {ta} {haZlisnE}> on Thursday August 31 2006, @08:44PM (#16020995) Homepage
    The startup sound will be the voice of Steve Ballmer saying "Please bend over, this won't take long".
  • Horrible idea (Score:5, Insightful)

    by OnanTheBarbarian (245959) on Thursday August 31 2006, @08:44PM (#16020998)
    Wonderful. This will be a real plus in seminars, as people can't turn on their damn laptops without making a stupid noise. Or on an airplane. Or any other situation (with the kid sleeping in the other side of the room, for example).

    Stupid, stupid, stupid. Unbelievably dumb. A massive triumph of marketing people over reality. How can this can be presented as a 'I see both sides of this fascinating argument' in the article? The argument that lots of other systems do this too is irrelevant; currently, you don't have to do this in Windows - why start making this mistake now?
  • Uh, Macs? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by illuminatedwax (537131) <stdrangeNO@SPAMalumni.uchicago.edu> on Thursday August 31 2006, @08:45PM (#16020999) Journal
    Is the startup sound on Macs customizable? I don't think it is. You turn on your computer and...

    "BAHHHH."
    • Re:Uh, Macs? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 31 2006, @08:58PM (#16021089)
      You can always just hold down the mute button during boot and it won't make the noise (at least I think, it's been awhile since I last restarted). You then let go of the mute button and it will return you to your pre-determined volume level while it's finishing booting.
  • by John Pfeiffer (454131) on Thursday August 31 2006, @08:48PM (#16021022) Homepage
    ...sources close to those in charge of Vista's user interface development say the startup sound will be that of '...[M]illions of computer users crying out, and suddenly silenced...'
  • Reason #1. It's from Microsoft
    Reason #2. It's been delayed 5 times and still won't die
    Reason #3: Fundamentally no better than XP
    Reason #4: Still no shell
    Reason #5: Or compiler
    Reason #6: Takes more space then it really ought to
    Reason #7: New added value bonus DRM compliance goodies!

    ...

    Reason #76: It takes more memory than a weather simulation of Earth just to show the desktop
    Reason #77: "Ultimate Edition"
    Reason #78: Annoying Startup Sounds

    Tom
  • by hruzaden (219079) on Thursday August 31 2006, @08:56PM (#16021076)


    OMG..they have a branded starup sound! Can we have a startup sound too! Please!

    "A spiritual side of the branding experience. A short, brief, positive confirmation that your machine is now concious and ready to react."

    Spiritual side? WTF does that mean? Do we get Kool-aid if we format the drive?

    "The startup sound is designed to help you calibrate or fix something that got out of wack when you startup your machine. Let's say you muted your machine, and you don't hear your startup sound, you know you aren't ready to listen to stuff."

    Maybe the power LED being off, the dial at 0 or the red 'no' symbol on the speaker icon might give it away after you hear absoulutely nothing coming from the speakers?

    Of course there are the foot pedal mouse and coffee holder ROM drive crowd to think about. Maybe they can get an offical Vista helemt with a send in postcard.

    "The Xbox has a hard-wired startup sound. "

    Which makes sense. Your siting down to game and the sound system has a mojor role in that experience. It also happens as soon as the machine starts. You know exactly when it's going to happen. It's basically a "hey..it's this loud right now..get your volume set..we're getting ready to game". Not blast you out if you forget where your settings were the previous time and you walked away during boot up.

    People get paid to "think" this crap up. It's amazing.

  • by THotze (5028) on Thursday August 31 2006, @09:01PM (#16021110) Homepage
    The problem with this is that it means that mobile users will be less likely to restart their computers - or power them up, for that matter - in meetings, etc., where you don't want to draw attention to yourself with an annoying startup sound. Now, I'm not sure if there's still an option for turning ALL windows alert sounds off, including the start up sound, which might mitigate this a bit. But on some computers, especially many laptops with softkeys for volume, you've got to ALREADY BE IN WINDOWS to turn the sound off. So say you were using your computer with sound on, say, gaming, turn it off, and boot up 2 hours later in a meeting - you'd have NO CHANCE of disabling a loud and annoying sound that draws the kind of attention to yourself that you REALLY don't want drawn to you.

    It all just begs the question "why?" was the code that they have to turn off the start up sound now SO BADLY WRITTEN that they decided not to migrate it? C'mon guys. And also:

    They've been working on this project as the "#1" priority in their group (past updates, etc.) for over half a decade now. I'd REALLY like to think that they'd have most of this kind of stuff decided already. Did somebody buy everyone in the Windows dev team an Xbox and then an XBox 360? Is that why its taken them 60 months to put together about as much of a feature upgrade as the OS X dev team usually puts together every 18 months? What have they been waiting for? Are they tailor-making Vista technologies to run Duke Nukem Forever? Is that the reason for the delay? Because I really can't find much of a better rationale anywhere else... other than maybe they've cut so many features of Vista in the past few years that no one left working on the project has any idea what code they're actually supposed to be writing.

    Oy.

    Tim
  • Huh? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BCW2 (168187) on Thursday August 31 2006, @09:01PM (#16021112) Journal
    You mean everyone doesn't delete all the M$ noise files at the first boot? Find a winbox that I haven't deleted the media files from, I looked and there aren't any here.
  • by suv4x4 (956391) on Thursday August 31 2006, @09:05PM (#16021126)
    Here are three major OS on the market:

    OSX: built around experience, this OS is made to be simple to use, easy to market, look shiny and tie well with its accompanied Apple hardware. Apple's credo is that they are amazing as hell, and their users will be wowed at whatever they throw at them. As such, OSX provides features such as mandatory startup sounds, mandatory "hardware", mandatory skin and other mandatory "tuned to be kewl" stuff. They have some success, but their market share is still decreasing (currently at meager 2%) because they don't realize that unlike iPod, a PC is (yet) not just another consumer device.

    Unix / BSD / Linux: it's made for professionals, for tinkerers and and people who like control over their machines. Those OS have their share of attempts at eye candy, but the main point of the OS is the ability to go down to the bone and tune it just like you like it, without excess fat and trash around. It doesn't have much adoption with casual folks as a desktop OS because the distros are rarely consistent, require low level knowledge of the underlying system to get the maximum out of it and hardware software doesn't target it a lot.

    Windows: is sitting in the perfect spot. It's easy to use, has a lot of software written for it, works on commodity hardware, and is practical for business, entertainment and more. It's not perfect, and in fact was quite flaky when the consumer branch was based around the 9x core (for legacy reasons). These guys however get a lot of criticism that they are not enough like Apple and not enough like Unix. Windows has no cult status among its users, while *nix and Apple does.

    I have no idea whether it's a complex or lack of confidence in their own strategy, but sometime around XP, Microsoft decided they wanna be more like OSX and Unix, which are dwarfed by Windows on the market of desktop OS. They are just doing it, for no apparent reason, they are not losing market to their competitors on the desktop market, but feel the urge to copy them and be "more like them".

    XP and Vista are trying hard to build a branded experience much like OSX, while other projects like Channel 9, the new power shell, and tons of other admin-related utilities and technologies are targeted to the Unix crowd and appearing more opened.

    Some of this has positive effects on the users of Windows, but some of it, is just plain stupid (like the glassy look of aero.. it's not easier to use at all, it's one of those gadgets you show off in the PC shops, like OSX's scaling icons on the dock bar). Their desire to preserve their "perfect" branding by locking and hardcoding everything in place is just a symptom of this much deeper problem.

    I wish Microsoft would just accept its position in the market, keep the right balance between flexible and preconfigured, and swallow the criticisms, which will come no matter what, versus try and copy whatever fads come along.
  • by DeadboltX (751907) on Thursday August 31 2006, @09:12PM (#16021164)
    The hacked pirated version is looking more appealing the more I read about vista
  • Bummer... (Score:5, Funny)

    by ktakki (64573) on Thursday August 31 2006, @09:18PM (#16021216) Homepage Journal
    Since my first Windows box (WfW 3.11, 1993), I've used an awful lot of different startup sounds, from the sound of breaking glass to the Mac Quadra-era System 7 "CHUNG!", to funny outtakes from voiceover sessions I've engineered.

    My current system at work, which I built around an MSI Athlon 64+ motherboard, is housed in a case that looks like a Soviet-era toaster: dull silver-grey plastic and louvers on the front that look like they belong on the hood of a tractor. I festooned the case with hammer-and-sickle symbols and the letters "CCCP" in red type bordered in yellow. That computer's name is "katyusha".

    Its startup sound is the Red Army Chorus singing the Soviet National Anthem. Just one verse, though. It annoys my employer to no end, but he'll be the first one up against the wall when the Revolution happens. Fucking capitalist pig dog.

    What really annoys me is the faux "click" sound of an unaltered XP install, the one that's bound to Windows Explorer "Start Navigation" events. It's never in sync with the mouse click. Second most annoying is the crumpled paper sound when the "Recycle Bin" is emptied (are those bits really recycled? Hmmm?). I turn those off immediately after an install.

    Somewhat less annoying (but all too common) are users that bind the sound of a toilet flushing to the "Empty Recycle Bin" event. Invariably, they're the sort of person for whom a fart joke is the pinnacle of humor. But they bitch like hell when you bind the sound of a lusty wet ripping flatus to each mouse click. "My computer's been hacked!" they complain. "I was humiliated in front of a client!"

    How d'you like me now, bitch?

    k.
    • by TrekCycling (468080) on Thursday August 31 2006, @08:30PM (#16020908) Homepage
      I think the fact that Microsoft considers this a feature worthy of pushing shows how trivial "enhancements" to Windows have become at this point. They're not bothering to fix what really needs fixing.
      • I think the fact that Microsoft considers this a feature worthy of pushing shows how trivial "enhancements" to Windows have become at this point.

        It's just a marketing exercise.

        Quite smart, really - you generate a lot of hype about something absolutely trivial and get the user community, blogs, forums etc all hyped up. Then you implement the trivially pointless feature you've managed to convince people to really want, and proudly announce that you're responsive to your customers needs.

        Then you can get quietly back to locking them out from their own data with proprietary formats and DRM.