Windows Vista: Fear Thread...

Bryan X

Producer
Joined
Feb 10, 2003
Messages
3,469
Reaction score
6
Points
0
Real Name
Bryan
I just ran the Windows Vista Upgrade Advisor. Passed all tests. Not too surprising though.

My System:

3.2 Ghz Dual Core CPU
2GB RAM
PCI Express x16 video w/ 256MB on board
250GB Hard Disk

The only warning it gave me was for my printer, a Canon IP4200, that is said Vista didn't currently have a driver for.

More interesting will be running the Advisor on my son's PC, an old 866Mhz machine. But I don't plan on upgrading him to Vista anyway. That can wait until we replace the computer in the next 12 months.
 

Ronald Epstein

Founder
Owner
Joined
Jul 3, 1997
Messages
55,551
Reaction score
11,266
Points
9,110
Real Name
Ronald Epstein

I'll be on line the day it is released.
 

Ken Chui

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jun 20, 2003
Messages
976
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Looks like January 2007 as a release date is out (article)

With the movie industry pondering a delayed HDCP implementation date, there should be more hardware options available to me when I build my new PC later this year (can't wait for the DirectX 10 video cards based on ATI's R600 GPU - 64 pixel/vertex shaders and DDR4 memory
)
 

Todd H

Go Dawgs!
Joined
May 27, 1999
Messages
2,270
Reaction score
164
Points
1,610
Age
51
Location
Georgia
Real Name
Todd

I probably would have picked it up if I hadn't just bought a new 20" iMac Core Duo. Since buying it and playing with OSX I haven't touched my Windows box. I could use Boot Camp and dual boot between the two I suppose. Wonder if my iMac passes the Vista test.
 

Ken Chui

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jun 20, 2003
Messages
976
Reaction score
0
Points
0

It all depends on when my employer receives a copy (hopefully, before their licensing arrangement with Microsoft expires or is restructured
).
 

Chris

Lead Actor
Joined
Jul 4, 1997
Messages
6,788
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Being an MS Partner, I will receive one early; we have a Vista meeting here this week so they can give us the new Betas and walk us through hardware recommendations.

Right now, the biggest issues are still drivers. Vista seems to share a lot of the same driver issues as say, Windows XP64bit.

At this point, I am fairly unimpressed wth Vista. It's not bad, but it seems like a very evolutionary not revolutionary upgrade to Windows XP. The reason why this is bad is that Windows XP has now been on the market for 4 years, by the time Vista is out, 5. You would expect some significant major OS level changes to occur which would rectify some of the bigger issues we run into.

But it just isn't the case. Vista Ultimate doesn't have easy Active Directory connectors to Windows2003 server, it's basically the same end around as WindowsXP. No real introductory support for better logon security - biometrics, etc. It's all still driven by the manufacturer... and those who have those parts (including MS) don't have anything Vista ready yet.

Vista has made only minor changes in NTFS, so minor that a regular WindowsXP can read and write to the file system with no risk - a perk and a disadvatage. Where a newer relational file system would have been a major advantage (WinFS) it's still miles behind in beta.

The inclusion of WindowsDefender is a mixed blessing. While it's a neat idea, Microsoft's product is often over-zealous and can, at times, cause as much harm as good. More user-interactive after market products perform that niche very well.

There are things I like about Vista, but with so much still needing such major work, it's hard to give it ringing praise as a next generation.
 

Ronald Epstein

Founder
Owner
Joined
Jul 3, 1997
Messages
55,551
Reaction score
11,266
Points
9,110
Real Name
Ronald Epstein
Chris,

Very much enjoyed reading your thoughts.

As someone who cannot wait until Vista becomes available,
I am very sad to learn that it will not be as revolutionary as
many of us would have hoped. You are correct in assuming
that after 5 years we would have expected something.....more.

I think that in the next year or two I am going to look into
purchasing a Macintosh. I have always heard that the OS is
hundreds of times better than XP. The only thing that has kept
me from buying a Mac is software compatability.....

....but now, thanks to BootCamp and all the praise it is
receiving (including very positive benchmark results), I can
run all my windows program on a Mac.

I think ultimately Microsoft is shooting itself in the foot with
offering such a subpar OS upgrade when Macintosh has been
doing it so much better for years and NOW has suddenly become
windows compatable.
 

Ray Chuang

Screenwriter
Joined
Jan 26, 2002
Messages
1,056
Reaction score
0
Points
110
Chris,

I think you need to wait for the next major beta drop coming (probably) in August. I've heard that this new beta drop is the true feature-complete version and there will be significant changes over the current beta drops.
 

nolesrule

Producer
Joined
Aug 6, 2001
Messages
3,084
Reaction score
1
Points
110
Location
Clearwater, FL
Real Name
Joe Kauffman
Ron, before you jump in with a Mac based on what you've heard, you might want to play around with someone else's Mac for a few days to see if you really like it. Not everyone likes the Mac OS.

Also, with the BootCamp Macs, you'll still have to run Windows on it in order to run Windows apps, so it really is just a dual-boot system. You might get tired of rebooting your computer everytime you want to switch between a Win app and a Mac app. That's something you never hear people mention or even think about, and people need to take that into account in their cost/benefit analysis.

I found this video online of a BootCamp Reboot. Might want to watch it to see if you have the patience.



Or you can pay yet another $50 beyond the Mac and Windows license so you can have a faster switchover, but then you lose the use of USB and DVDs (although they expect to get that working eventually).

FYI, I'm not a Mac hater. I just find no use for them. I'm not at all impressed with Vista either, so I'll be sticking with XP for awhile. Of course, I'm of the opinion that if you need more than one operating system, use multiple boxes, network them and invest in a KVM switch.

There will always be pros and cons to everything. You need to weigh them all before jumping straight in.

Edit for spelling correction
 

Glenn Overholt

Producer
Joined
Mar 24, 1999
Messages
4,203
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Does anybody remember? I think it was about a year ago when someone somewhere said that Vista - for security purposes, was going to be hard wired (onto a chip, I guess). This was supposed to prevent illegal copies and help with viruses and such.

Glenn
 

Chris

Lead Actor
Joined
Jul 4, 1997
Messages
6,788
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Don't totally discount that. Vista has been marketted to us partners in many different ways. One of the perks of Vista to major OEMs is the branding of the OS to BIOS. This is being done on some level with WindowsXP, but with Vista, it's truly unique and a monumental "no move" benefit for larger OEMs like Dell, HP, etc.

Vista will allow those manufacturers the ability to permanently link that copy of windows with the BIOS specifically on that machine, making it impossible to move. That's one of the incentives that they hope to reach out to even smaller OEMs down the way, or so they tell us.

Look, I'm not bashing Vista, there are a lot of things that Vista got right. And it fixes several issues and addresses a few others.

In regards to OS/X, I'm just not as sold as others. I keep a machine around running OS/X, and it's nice. But I feel about it the same way I do about Linux on a partition on my PC. It's a great OS with lots of potential... and it lacks the easy access to software volumes that MS has. Whether or not I love Windows, applications I care about come out on a Windows platform first, and sometimes only; as comparative to waiting and hoping on a Mac.

I am still an advocate that Apple could put up a really good fight with MS if it would unbrand their software and allow it a more open install base. I've seen OS/X 10.4.5 installed on a generic, off the shelf Clone PC and run with pretty good performance. Fact is, if Apple wanted to compete, that's what they would do. I get it, the Mac is it's own slice of simplicity and blah blah blah, but Apple will never have the marketshare to command the research and development dollars to get done first by anyone until it broadens out.

Apple is 6% of the marketspace. As long as they stay permanently their hardware only, that's about as far as it can grow.

I've tried Bootcamp. It's interesting. It's also funny how running the same application (Doom III as the example I've seen tested) the application runs faster (more FPS) in the Windows then on the OS/X on the same machine.. don't know if Apple intended that.

I get that they will supposedly put out a feature complete beta soon. Fine. But I can't see them radically changing but rather finalizing what is already there. I did the betas for other OS, including Windows 95, and let me tell you: Win95 months away from being released made people's heads spin. Compared to WfWG3.11, it was a complete rethink, a different idea from what anyone had.

I want them to keep a lot of the good ideas in XP, but some of their are major things that needed changed that didn't get changed, and some that were changed, but not necessarily for the better.

Microsoft needs to put out some major under-the-hood changes to significantly provide "oompf" for Vista or they may find themselves marketing another "Millenium" type product while people wait for a version of Vista that supports WinFS, which will come much later.
 

Steve Berger

Supporting Actor
Joined
Sep 8, 2001
Messages
986
Reaction score
8
Points
110
Pardon my intrusion on this thread, but why would a purchaser (of any type - business or individual) want this "benefit"? (a guaranteed no upgrade policy?)

A lot of things can kill a motherboard, especially the ones with all of the built-in functions (sound, video, network, etc). This "benefit" sounds like a perfect reason to avoid Vista.
 

Chris

Lead Actor
Joined
Jul 4, 1997
Messages
6,788
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Don't think I ever pointed it out as a benefit to the purchaser.
But it has always been high on the want list for the seller, especially larger OEMs. Larger OEMs (dell, hp, gateway, etc.) have long viewed this as a problem. They believed that many users were able to build together aftermarket PCs cheaply by using "their" OEM licencing which diminished their market to sell.

In other words: rather then a major repair of your PC, they want you to buy again. Technically, according to the EULA, you don't OWN windows XP, you technically "lease" it, basically, and it is tied to the hardware it was purchased on in an OEM form (retail box is a different story). Because of that, it is supposed to be permanently attached to the hardware, and if the hardware significantly changes you are supposedly obligated to buy a new copy. Most people have discovered you can call MS and just have it re-activated with a phone call.

But MS has been testing this out; under the new WGA system, even people with HPs have found that a motherboard change, etc. means that they are no longer seen as "authentic windows" even though their XP Home is what they received.

This is the first move in the means of BIOS based branding, and it's an important step for MS. MS believes that BIOS based branding - which is exactly what Apples does in order to protect OS/X - is an important step in protecting large OEMs and eventually smaller ones.

I'm not saying you as a consumer like it, I'm just saying that's how it is.
 

Chris

Lead Actor
Joined
Jul 4, 1997
Messages
6,788
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I've spent the weekend playing with Vista after hearing all the perks and the like from those touting it at the Microsoft meeting here in KC on Thursday.

The fundamental problem with Vista is one that I don't think is addressed by Microsoft's continual talk of "new features being added". That isn't the problem. The problem is that for power users, so many of the common tasks are made cumbersome to impossible that it defeats a big part of the purpose of upgrading.

I know of numerous users who keep the base icons out on the desktop (my computer, my network, etc.) along with whatever they most frequent. That's a staple within older versions of windows, so the fact that they are there makes it handy. The display properties tool within Windows Vista is garbage. Theme management and creation, as well as icon assignment is virtually non-existant, it simply cannot be done. So, instead, users find themselves dragging icons out of the menus onto a desktop. Yes, I get it, Microsoft has so greatly improved the tools that you don't need them. But what Microsoft forgets is that familiarity is part of it's advantage. While it is great that they move toward an entirely new lookout, the ability to "roll back" for those who are very familiar with current environments will be a major perk. The failure to provide for it- which so far is exactly where it is going, creates a distance between the user and the OS.

Admittedly, I'm someone who likes to pop open a CMD prompt every now and again to fish things out. I grew up on DOS and I still find it at times to be incredibly easier and more efficient to do what I want to do.

Vista takes some of that frustration to all new levels. Because of the way in which the management interface and updates are handled, the user is provided minimal information about what kind of updates are being downloaded and what the purpose of them are. To get that kind of information requires a user to manually do so, click INFORMATION and then MORE.

Is Aero Cool? Yes, and there are many things that I find interesting about Vista that I think are the right directions.

But fundamentally, outside of a change in interface, has Microsoft really altered anything so groundshaking that I say "wow" ?

No, not really. In fact, many of the base components remain completely untouched which makes Vista a Microsoft-Bob like Shell on top of Traditional XP. Yes, I realize there is more to it then that, but let's cover what is not, and will not change:

* File System remains NTFS. Yes, there are new options for Disk Encryption - but be prepared, as MS explained to us in a tech meeting, if you use it and your motherboard or another device fails, your data is WORTHLESS. They will never issue a recovery or backdoor because doing so would make the entire technology a joke, so if you use it, be prepared, you better be backing up. This makes it not nearly as convenient, safe or movable as current drive encryption which can allow for a drive to move to a different PC, etc. provided the right codes.

* Drive management (WDM) while changed does not provide a more open or user-oriented standard, rather, it further closes the driver standard with regards to authorized drivers, which puts smaller firms innovation in the realm of hardware on the real backburner.

* Widgets. Be prepared, Widgets are cool, and there will be tons of them, but as a matter of seriousness, does an analog clock on your desktop really help you that much? Poker? Sodoku? Yeah, maybe not. Microsoft's guide toward widgets and RSS is a neat throw out toward Apple's similar technology within MacOS. In fact, a lot of Vista seems to really work hard to BE MacOS. The problem is, it isn't a very good MacOS, and the interface things we loved about XP are sadly missing.

* Management and control functionality are scattered and poorly organized. Within Windows XP, a right click on your desktop puts all options for desktop properties in one application. Within Vista, it brings up a "personalize" menu featuring five different programs you can chose from, each of which handling one specific function (resolution/theme/screen saver) This turns a function that took one click within Windows XP into a minimum of three clicks in order to view desktop properties. Does this really simplify things?


* Speaking of that, even within the current beta we received (5348, there may be a newer one, I'm sure there is, this is what they were handing out however) the device manager is still almost entirely worthless. Even within Windows XP 64, unknown devices are at least labeled somewhat (Epson; FDC-GOLD; etc.) for you to find drivers. Within Vista, it all still remains "unknown USB" real helpful that is. I'm sure this part will change.

* Vista's shutdown/reset routine is laughable. By maximizing the start menu real estate the "hibernate" button takes, and having a swing out present reset/shutdown, it is just confusing. The swing out menu is started by a small sliver - less then 1/4 the size of the large "hibernate" button, which, as a nice touch, looks exactly like the "shutdown" button from WindowsXP.

* DRM. Enough said.

I'm glad that Microsoft danced us up and talked to us about how great Vista would be, and how it would really drive the market. Right now, based on what I have in front of me, I don't see it. With Windows XP betas, Win2k, even Windows 95, you walked out of it saying "There are at least 5-10 features that are fundamental OS changes that significantly impact work". Vista isn't any of those. Unlike XP which really changed the way for USB connectivity, brought NTFS home, as well as significant improvements in networking and drive management.. Vista just doesn't seem to bring a single "functionality" change to Windows that makes you say "this is a must have".

I keep getting email from MS that intones that hey, it's not functionally complete. Ok, fine. But unless the functionality is a total scrap of the UI as well as a change in the file structure, mapping and networking functionality which right now seem like a throwback in usability, I don't know how adding more things helps this frankenstein.

I will post pictures of Vista doing whatever you want (Office2k7? Aero? What do people want to see?) Since I am not under NDA, but rather a partner who like hundreds of others were just handed discs, I have no problems posting thoughts.
 

Ronald Epstein

Founder
Owner
Joined
Jul 3, 1997
Messages
55,551
Reaction score
11,266
Points
9,110
Real Name
Ronald Epstein
Chris,

As always, I enjoy reading your thoughts.

I am a beta tester for Microsoft. I'm currently using Office 2007
and am expecting a Beta of VISTA within the upcoming weeks.

What you have posted here is no different than everything else
I have read across the Internet from those that have tested the
new OS -- it isn't a huge upgrade over XP and in many ways
downright disappointing.

Still, I'm a tech guru. My curiosity and desire to own a new OS
will certainly place me amongst the first in line to own Vista, that
is, if the BETA serves me well.

Question: Can the BETA be used as the primary operating system?
Does it seem to have all the necessary drivers installed so that if
I place it over my current OS that all my peripherals will be compatable?

Thanks for the input you have provided here, Chris.
 

Christian Behrens

Supporting Actor
Joined
Mar 2, 2000
Messages
714
Reaction score
1
Points
110
Location
SF Bay Area
Real Name
Christian Behrens
Ron, unless you have a second machine where you will install the Vista beta, I would refrain from doing so. A beta version of the primary OS on your primary machine is asking for trouble, period.

I know you have a good backup strategy in place, but any desire to play with Vista should not replace basic strategies to protect your data and, frankly, some common sense
.

Regarding drivers, it seems that if drivers for Win64 exist you should be good, otherwise your devices will probably not work, or only provide rudimentary functionality.

-Christian

(Not to derail the thread, but for someone who likes to tinker and play with electronics and computers, I'm surprised you haven't gotten your hands on a Mac yet, at least borrowed for some time from someone...)
 

Carlo Medina

Executive Producer
Joined
Oct 31, 1997
Messages
11,899
Reaction score
1,873
Points
9,110
If MS really wants to impress me...make an instant-boot (or near instant boot) OS.
 

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

Threads
343,726
Messages
4,688,148
Members
141,023
Latest member
salininbmagu