Is Vista a Trap?

logube writes "BBC has up an article about the trap of installing Vista in your existing desktop. Written by Tim Weber, a self-confessed 'sucker for technology,' this article is a good introduction to the pain and extra money required to get going with the newest version of Windows. See how you can spend an extra 130 british pounds, and still have no working webcam! Says Weber, 'It took me one day to get online. The detail is tedious and highly technical: reinstalling drivers and router firmware didn't work, but after many trial and error tweaks to Vista's TCP/IP settings, I had internet access. Once online, Creative's website told me that my sound card was a write-off. No Vista support would be forthcoming.'"

Re:Does Vista have anything we need?

[mastershake_phd]

Directx 10. They could have put out an XP version. (of course that doesnt sell CDs) You will need DX10 for upcoming games. Security updates (there still must be holes). Besides that I say wait as long as you can.

My Vista Install

[Rycross]

Burn the MSDN image, grab RAID drivers for my onboard RAID, put the drivers on my USB key, then boot the Vista install disk. Go through the usual setup with the drivers. Reboot. All hardware is auto-detected and drivers installed except for my Creative Audigy 2 sound card. Pull the drivers from their site and install. Update nVidia drivers while I'm at it. Works great, no problems.

Re:this was expected

[Kamots]

Um... you're aware that there was a 64-bit flavor of winXP? That had all sorts of "fun" with drivers?

I'd assume that's what the AC is talking about, but hey, that's just me.

Re:Does Vista have anything we need?

[DrDitto]

A list of new features: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_new_to_Windo ws_Vista [wikipedia.org]

And this is news how?

[MarcoAtWork]

win98 -> 2000, lots of problems with lack of drivers for older hardware
2000 -> XP still problems with lack of drivers for older hardware (although maybe not as many)
XP -> Vista well, what do you think?

How much is too much?

[NeoPaladin394]

To a degree, the points made in TFA are to be expected. Heck, even a bunch of MS's own software is incompatible with Vista (big boys like .NET Framework 2.0 and SQL Server 2005, last I checked). There have been alot of changes, and it seems unrealistic to expect companies to roll out new drivers that are 100% right off the bat.

That being said, there seems to have been a huge jump in paradigm from XP to Vista. Even though I know I'll be modded down for this, I like XP. I've installed the operating system with faulty RAM, and it STILL worked great after I replaced the chips. Its driver support is just awe inspiring, and about the only driver I have to manually set up on a fresh install is my sound and video card, and for the most part it was like this at release.

Vista? You need up to date hardware and specific drivers. Not just 'decent' or 'good' hardware, but edging on unnecessary from the point of view of what I would expect my family to spend on a PC. A day just to get onto the internet? How many technical and monetary hoops are we expected to jump through? I've experienced similar problems with learning Linux and finding drivers, but in that case there were forums and community solutions. Vista leaves the users at the mercy of third party companies.

I don't see myself going to Vista, in all honesty. Two steps forward, three steps back.

DON'T INSTALL VISTA ON 2002 COMPUTER

[DrDitto]

Rule for Idiots: If you bought your computer earlier than 2006, then don't install Vista.

Re:No mention of DRM

[blind biker]

Thanks, but I don't need anyone correcting me with something that's wrong. Microsoft has full prerogative in deciding what their OS does with regards to DRM. No law mandates the use of DRM, so it's purely Microsoft's choice.

Your "correction" is also wrong in another way: it's not just the music industry that has a stake in Vista's DRM - the movie industry is just as, if not more, interested in that "feature" of Vista.

The trap is this guy's stupidity

[Bullfish]

As others have said. Enough of this crap. We all know it will take vista a year or so before it is truly ready... but the drivers are not MS's doing. The hardware vendors want you to buy new stuff so they don't support the old. MS has given them the tools to make the drivers, they just don't want to do it.

Frankly on a lot talk on this drivers issue is from people talking out of bopth sides of their mouth. People who blame the hardware manufacturers for a lack of Linux support seem to be the ones to blame MS for what is the hardware manufacturer's responsibility. You want to upgrade cause you like the tech, well go on-line and see if your old hardware is supported, and that includes printers and other peripherals. To not do so is just stupid. When I build a Linux box, I make sure the components are supported befire I buy them.

This is the same as the PS3 stuff. I have a Wii, I like it a lot. I will never buy a PS3. But enough of that stuff too. It is killing the variety of stories available on this site.

Re:throwing up my hands

[ivan256]

Except that Linux has had practically universal network and soundcard support for years. Even if the network hardware only has Windows 2000 binary drivers, you could load them with the NDIS module...

It used to be that if you wanted all of your hardware to work, you ran Windows. Looks like the tables have turned.

Re:Does Vista have anything we need?

[Rycross]

Have you actually used Vista? Your post history seems to suggest that you haven't.

1 Day?

[nbritton]

1 Day? Windows is for suckers, buy a Mac.

Re:Does Vista have anything we need?

[@madeus]

I'm no longer running it because it wasn't very stable (read: Vista and things like Media Center were not stable from a clean install, not the third party software drivers were unstable), but it's pretty good for games, at least it seems like it will be when driver support is there.

For example, I installed the Beta Nvidia drivers, which while giving me over all worse performance because of a lack of SLI support, did actually give a demonstrable and perceptible performance boost (as promised), even though the drivers were not file.

DirectX 10 is the thing that's likely to get me to upgrade again to it, hopefully by the time it's 'mainstream' a service pack or two will be out.

Re:A Trap for Idiots

[SDF-7]

Wow, completely missed the section of the article where he clearly says he *ran* said Upgrade adviser (which is what led to a Graphics card update among a few other things) but that he later still had problems with unsupported/non-functional hardware the adviser didn't give a peep about, huh? Give you a hint... second part of the article after "A blunt message"... starts with "But this was probably not enough, so I downloaded Microsoft's Vista Upgrade Advisor."

Sheesh.

Re:Starting to annoy...

[FunWithKnives]

... doesn't have a single decent image-browser ...

Gwenview [sourceforge.net], Picasa [google.com]...

... dc++ client ...

Is in production [berlios.de]. Check the CVS [berlios.de] for latest builds.

... office suite ...

I really don't understand why you included this. OpenOffice.org [openoffice.org], KOffice [koffice.org], AbiWord [abisource.com]; all more than comparable to MS Word.

... Not to mention decent looking fonts ...

In Debian based distros, sudo apt-get install msttcorefonts. Rather simple. Other distros have packages of their own.

In short, I'm under the impression that you haven't really tried to use a modern Linux distro for more than the five minutes it took you to stereotype it, say, "This sucks because it's not what I'm used to!", and go back to Windows.

Re:throwing up my hands

[omicronish]

Every time there is news like this the fanboys shout 'you shoulda known' and 'get new hardware'. I have a better idea. Let's call Vista not an upgrade but a wholesale replacement of your computer and many of your applications. Most of your data will work in the new system but that's about it.

No - Vista is barely less of an upgrade than switching from XP to a Mac.

Sure, so what hardware and software did you have to replace?

Amount I've had to spend in addition to purchasing Vista: $0. I built my AMD Athlon 2700+, 1 GB RAM, Radeon 9800 Pro in 2003 (hardly new). All my software and scenarios work, including:

• Visual Studio 2005, including debugging without UAC prompts
• Subversion, TortoiseSVN
• Foxit Reader
• Paint.NET
• Nasa's World Wind
• ffdshow, Xvid codecs
• VLC
• Civilization 1 (for Windows 3.1), 2, and 4 (I don't have 3), Quake 1 through 4, Guild Wars, Baldur's Gate 1 and 2, SimTower, SimCity 200, SimCity 4, Age of Empires 2, WarCraft 3, Diablo 1 and 2, and others. In fact, I don't recall a game that doesn't work.
• I've captured video from my camcorder, edited it, and performed video encoding without problems. No DRM invovled.
• I've ripped CDs at lossless rates (the builtin WMP supports WMA, WMA lossless, MP3 up to 320 kbps, and WAV), and burnt it. Again, no DRM involved.
• Was able to watch DVDs on my 1920x1200 monitor.
• Can access file shares on XP fine.
• Printing to both local and networked printers work; while typing this I connected to my brother's XP machine downstairs and printed to his printer. Setup was a couple mouse clicks.

I'd love to hear other people's experiences, but please include details.

Re:Yes, they force you to use it

[Dog-Cow]

He did check hardware compability. Using the Microsoft-provided tool to do so.

So stop lying just so you can insult people. Perhaps slashdot needs a "-10 Blatent Liar" mod option.

PEBKAC?

[lostboy2]

I've never seen or used Vista, or the author's system, and I may just be a little grumpy this morning. But, based on his descriptions, the author sounds like someone who thinks he knows more about computers than he really does.

From the article:

Now here is the dirty little secret of all the expensive PC helpers out there. Upgrading hardware is really easy... it's usually just a case of carefully lifting out the old and slotting in the new piece of kit.

Uhm, no it isn't, not really. As the author later discovers (but still doesn't realize), getting hardware to work often involves hardware, drivers and OS (and sometimes other software). While we all wish it were that easy, us "expensive PC helpers" have the skills to deal with those cases when it isn't.

For example:

...even after a full day of tinkering with various network wizards

Wizards? This suggests that the author does not know how to get to the properties of whatever network protocol (I'm assuming TCP/IP) he's using and configure them directly.

But which mysterious "PCI input device" was lacking a driver? And what was the "unknown device" flagged up by Vista?

You can find out by following the instructions at
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/298837 [microsoft.com].

I'm not defending Vista, but I also bristle when people devalue and disrespect people in IT/IS. We make things look easy because we're good at what we do. :P

Re:MOD Article Author Retard...

[vondo]

People who run linux. If it ran on the last version, it is almost certain to run on the next. Unless it's 15 year old hardware. No, wait, most of that works too.

Re:Because it didn't affect him?

[PitaBred]

Hope you chose the right combination of video card and monitor, as well as drivers, if you ever wanted to watch that HD-DVD on your box. Oh, your hardware is completely capable of playing that movie at full resolution, it just doesn't have the artificial limitations on a special interface? Go pay more and upgrade your perfectly functioning hardware.

Re:MOD Post Author Retard...

[Dunbal]

Honestly, who does an OS upgrade and not check for hardware compatibility?

      If you RTFA, you'll see that he a) used a Microsoft app that checks your system for Vista compatibility before installing; b) replaced his incompatible hardware before the install with hardware stated to work with Vista by the manufacturer.

      Short of having someone lend him the hardware to try it out with Vista, I don't really see what else he could have done to avoid problems...

Re:Does Vista have anything we need?

[Rycross]

I didn't buy it. I get it via my MSDN subscription (through work). As far as being a fool for running, well lets just say my experience is nothing like yours. I actually like Vista. Its fast and responsive. I go days without seeing a UAC box, but its nice to know my account has user level priveledges instead of admin.

Re:throwing up my hands

[PitaBred]

For every anecdote, there's a counter anecdote:

802.11 works fine for me. Try network-manager/knetworkmanager. All clicky-clicky, and even better than XP's network support IMHO

Volume controls? You mean like the Fn+F6/F7 on my laptop that actually change the volume of my machine? Automatically, with no configuration, in Linux, on my laptop?

Bluetooth seems to work fine for me, too.

Video drives, I just did apt-get install nvidia-glx, and they've worked since then. With Beryl, I get 3D screensavers, everything I could want.

Re:this was expected

[gigne]

Read The Fucking Article RTFA not RTFM.

Re:throwing up my hands

[adolf]

802.11: Certain Linux software (which often likes to bind to specific interfaces and addresses) gets distraught when it doesn't have an IP address, or that address changes after the software is loaded. None of the X-oriented 802.11 configuration methods help the machine be network-connected at boot time. Windows, if it does suffer such a dependancy problem, at least has not bitten me yet because of it. Linux has.

Volume controls: No, not at all like the hardware volume control on your laptop, which will work bloody anywhere. I mean just what I said: My SB Live does not have a functional volume control under Ubuntu. Click speaker icon. Adjust slider. Nothing changes. (Alternatively, I too can turn my brain off and discombobulate your words so that I can create a meaningless, out-of-context response: The volume up/down buttons on my IBM RapidAccess II keyboard don't adjust the volume on my SB Live equipped Ubuntu box, either.)

Bluetooth: Really?

Video: Yep. But nvidia-legacy is the driver I need for my GeForce 2. And Ubuntu breaks it at every opportunity.

Ho-hum.

Re:Does Vista have anything we need?

[JensenDied]

If I need a calender on XP (when I was using it) I would goto the adjust date/time. Thats a calander to the second.
Now if you wanted scheduling I just used Google calander for that, its much nicer being able to check whats going on or add things from where ever I am.

Re:No mention of DRM

[Prof Kayyos]

I'm afraid you are not in the minority my friend. Having just installed Vista last week, DRM concerns's are on the front burner for me. Yesterday a friend of a friend needed a self-recorded VHS tape of the Katrina hurricane's aftermath on his own neighborhood copied to a DVD. I connected his VHS player directly to the cable in of my "Vista approved" Hauppauge video I/O board and easily sucked the picture in via Windows Media Center as if it were a standard TV program (mpeg4). Guess what? I wasn't the owner of the recorded image! Vista DRM'd it as it's own and refused to let me modify it!! Well after breaking out my wink-wink, nudge-nudge, "file conversion program" I was able to get it into a format I could work with -- this was with a one hour tape and even on my AMD dual-core it still took a considerable amount of time to convert between various formats until the video was clean enough and Nero was happy to burn it to a DVD. No doubt that no matter what I plan on doing in the future concerning video files, I will not be naive enough to believe that an XP Media Center type of operation is going to work the same under Vista Media Center. If I have to do something that Microsoft might consider "illegal (??)" to change one of MY video files to a proper format to be burnt to a DVD then I think it's time to seriously consider jumping ship. What should have been perhaps a 3 hour background task turned into an embarassing 8 hour session of mostly experimentation until I got it right. Screw that !

Re:Because it didn't affect him?

[Anonymous Coward]

Basically to me Vista's DRM doesn't add any value, but it doesn't interfere with my work in any way.

It steals the performance of your computer to constantly check if you are a pirate. My audio software works great on XP, and is dog slow (along with everything else) on Vista. To say Vista is an 'upgrade' is like saying an IBM XT is an upgrade from a p4 3ghz.

Anytime MS wants to lock up your machine, it can. Will that interfere in your work? Let's see how little you care when your activation fails for some esoteric reason, and you lose an hour, day, or week of work. Yeah, your tools and media might still be free of DRM, but you lose any advantage of that when you run an OS that you don't control - and doesn't trust *you*. How do you drive your car when your garage is locked up by someone else?

Stop the FUD!

[StinkyGeek]

About being certified by MS...I'm not sure where you are getting your information from, but it is wrong.

Want to develop drivers for Vista, Server 2003, XP, W2k, and possibly older MS platforms? Hit the download button from here http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/devtools/ddk/default .mspx/ [microsoft.com].

Want a kernel debugger and access to the O/S symbol files? Try here http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/devtools/debugging/d efault.mspx [microsoft.com].

Need some know-how on passing the Windows logo requirements? Try here http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/whql/WHQLdwn.mspx [microsoft.com]

How about 64-bit Vista drivers? Well, those have to be digitally signed. Try here for more info http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/64bi t/kmsigning.mspx [microsoft.com]

Total cost to you: Zero. Well, that certificate for signing the 64-bit drivers costs money, but that's not going to MS.

I understand the general /. attitude towards most things MS, but at least try to get the facts straight before you spread FUD around.

Re:Router fimware??? WTF?

[killerdark]

I'm afraid you are WRONG. If you have a router running a Samba share (like me, Asus WL-500gP) You will find out that after upgrading you can no longer access that share. Microsoft decided to switch to NTLMv2 breaking support with all samba 2.x Linux devices (mostly routers and sans)out there. Then you have two solutions, either change the security setting of Vista downwards to be backwards compatible with NTLM or upgrade your firmware to support 3.23 or a higher version of Samba. Hence, you my friend appear to be the idiot here.

Re:Does Vista have anything we need?

[Anonymous Coward]

FPSs, MMORPGs and RTSs all suck on consoles. Considering that I'm only interested in those genres and that online play with a fast control scheme (ie. keyboard and mouse) is a requirement for me to even consider playing, I think I'll stick with my PC.

Re:No mention of DRM

[SScorpio]

Media Center records all content into the .ms-dvr format which contains DRM. However, since you have Media Center you have either Home Premium or Ultimate; therefor you could use Windows DVD Maker which will capture the video without DRM. Media Center's video capture is for TV shows and some of them like sports broadcasts require DRM. If you use the wrong tool for the job it could see it not working how you except.

Re:Conditioned Response

[omicronish]

I'm not sure what lies you've been reading about UAC, but it conditions users to always say "Yes" to security prompts. This is a very terrible idea and in this situation the criticism is well deserved. "You are about to open the Control Panel -- allow or deny?" "You are about to open the Program Files folder -- allow or deny?" "You are about to modify user preferences -- allow or deny? "You are about to open attachment pzxyTrojan.exe -- allow or deny?" Allow.. allow.. allow.. allow.. allow..

All lies; you've never used Vista, have you? I can open Control Panel, Program Files, modify my user settings, and open attachments all without UAC prompts.

Please, if you have a valid annoying UAC experience, post it, and with details. I've run Vista for months and can go for days without a prompt. The legitimate bad experiences I've heard have all involved scenarios that most users will never encounter, such as debugging a networked service that requires admin privileges and access to network shares, in which case you can simply disable UAC. The most a regular user will ever see of UAC is when they install an app, and please don't claim most people do this every day.

Re:MOD Post Author Retard...

[Dunbal]

with hardware stated to work with Vista by the manufacturer.

      Not only do you not read the article, it seems you don't read people's posts either. Why do you bother then?