Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

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

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the swelling-with-confidence dept.

578

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."

cancel ×

578 comments

If even Thurrott is saying this... (5, Insightful)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842221)

...how can Microsoft still be saying RTM by November with corporate available in December?

How can Vista possibly be ready on time?

Re:If even Thurrott is saying this... (4, Informative)

timster (32400) | more than 7 years ago | (#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.

Re:If even Thurrott is saying this... (1)

The Real Toad King (981874) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842341)

Also, he even says in the article that
After five years of delays, another six months isn't going to make a difference.
They're just taking their time and answering with "soon" whenever asked about a release date, IMO.

Re:If even Thurrott is saying this... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15842512)

You make the mistake of assuming that release == ready.

Re:If even Thurrott is saying this... (0, Flamebait)

noidentity (188756) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842562)

"Bottom line is that nobody in the whole world can say with any certainty when Vista will actually be released."

Prepeare to be amazed!

Vista will be released at the same time as Duke Nukem Forever. Unfortunately, our sun will have run well before then and the universe's time counter will have run out of bits.

Considering their recent acquisitions: (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15842324)

Based on their recent acquisitions I'd say the'll base in on Linux.

It looks like every company they've been buying are Linux companies (except Groove, which was a recruting move to get their CTO - and evne groove used competing technologies (BDB, now from Oracle)).

I think they've given up on Windows for the future, and are looking elsewhere for help.

Re:Considering their recent acquisitions: (4, Interesting)

Senzei (791599) | more than 7 years ago | (#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.

To the person who asked the question... (0, Troll)

RagingFuryBlack (956453) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842231)

I thought it was common knowledge that even at times of release, microsoft products aren't ready for consumers. What the fuck were you thinking?

Re:To the person who asked the question... (1)

pete6677 (681676) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842511)

History has shown that Microsoft products aren't stable until the second service pack. That's about when I'll upgrade to this Vista crap.

the force is strong with this one. (3, Funny)

User 956 (568564) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842232)

I think I've mentioned the phrase "I could hear the screams" on the SuperSite before.'

Yes, it's almost as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced.

Re:the force is strong with this one. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15842364)

I think I've mentioned the phrase "I could hear the screams" on the SuperSite before.'
Yes, it's almost as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced.
There, fixed it for you:
Yes, it's almost as if millions of voices suddenly tried to cry out in terror, and were suddenly silenced by DRM.

There is a vote on this in the beta program (4, Informative)

gcnaddict (841664) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842233)

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]

Wow (2, Funny)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842235)

Maybe he's Fair and Balanced. After all, we had all kinds of opinions about his WGA reporting.

Vista? (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15842236)

Windows XP isnt ready as a fully featured stable product yet.

Re:Vista? (4, Informative)

rapett0 (92674) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842448)

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? (2, Insightful)

IAmTheDave (746256) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842542)

Agreed - SP2 is definately what one should be running, but it's definately the best.

For Mac fanboys (that includes me) SP2 isn't that bad, considering that Tiger is on 10.4.7 - that's like XP being on SP7.

Getting off of the 9x kernel was the first great step, and 2000, XP, and 2003 are solid OSes. MS is right in one aspect - a whole boatload of the OS problems are caused by 3rd party drivers, hardware, and software.

As for viruses and rootkits, etc - all OSes are hackable. MS just happens to be the OS that turns a virus into a nuke instead of a pesky BB pellet, were it written for Linux or OSX.

Re:Vista? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15842552)

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.


I call bullshit. I have a friend that had Winblow$ XP, crashed every other day. On top of that had viruses spyware. He finally gave up when I gave him a Ubuntu Live CD and didn't crash once after that. He ended up installing Ubuntu and never had a single crash since. When will people realize that Linux is easier to use and much more stable and secure than any version of Micro$hit Winblow$. If you weren't a M$ fanboy, then you wouldn't post lies to support Winblow$ XP. In your case, LUG isn't short for "Linux Users Group" but rather "Losers Using Gross-operating systems-such-as-winblow$"

Re:Vista? (1)

Short Circuit (52384) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842567)

XP is the most stable operating system I've seen come out of Redmond, with the exception of DOS.

However, Linux has me spoiled. I was pissed when I discovered I couldn't use remotedesktop to log into an XP Pro box while someone else was logged in locally.

(So was my cousin...I kicked him off in the middle of a COD2 round. :)

Then wait (4, Insightful)

truthsearch (249536) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842254)

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 (1)

Biff Stu (654099) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842348)

What other vendor? Us /.'ers can grasp of using alternatives like OSX and *nix, but what about the great unwashed masses of home users who only know windows and aren't comfortable with the concept of exploring another OS, even if OSX is ultimately easier to use. What about the great hordes of corporate Microsoft certified IT weenies? I don't see them seeking an alernate vendor.

Re:Then wait (1)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842517)

There's no value in rushing it out if you end up angering customers who may later switch to another vendor.
What other vendor?

IT head honchos at any large corp that uses Windows have probably been factoring the XP ---> Vista upgrade path into their plans for a year or three.

Don't forget that a lot of the corporate customers have bought into the "Microsoft Software Assurance Upgrade Program [microsoft.com] "

Re:Then wait (1)

f00dif00 (769342) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842587)

Oh, yeah, what other vendor is that? Yes, I do run Ubuntu.

Of course it's not ready - it's still beta. (5, Insightful)

RonnyJ (651856) | more than 7 years ago | (#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.

Re:Of course it's not ready - it's still beta. (2, Informative)

truthsearch (249536) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842333)

But it is in "feature freeze." Therefore if there are design issues it will probably be released with them if they don't allow it time to go through another whole cycle.

It is RC1 now... (1)

antdude (79039) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842361)

According to the recent build(s) (5487? and 5472), the bottom right said: Windows Vista(TM) RC1...

Re:It is not RC1 yet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15842397)

The real RC1 is slated for August 30th, 2006. The current builds say RC1 at the bottom, but that's just in prep for the August 30th release.

Re:It is RC1 now... (2, Informative)

RonnyJ (651856) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842399)

It isn't finalised as RC1 yet though - pre-Beta 2 builds also displayed 'Beta 2'.

Re:Of course it's not ready - it's still beta. (3, Informative)

MrFlibbs (945469) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842375)

Ah, but TFA also predicts an October release date would be followed by a steady stream of patches. The gist of the article is that several things are seriously broken and Microsoft should not ship Vista until it's ready, whenever that is. He admits he has no idea if that's this October or August 2007.

The article also raises the question as to why enterprise users are getting Vista first since they typically are slow to update. Perhaps because they're already paying for upgrades? TFA doesn't pose an answer -- the author just says he doubts very many will attempt an upgrade until SP1 and so why not give it to the consumers first.

Re:Of course it's not ready - it's still beta. (4, Interesting)

laffer1 (701823) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842445)

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.

Re:Of course it's not ready - it's still beta. (1)

RonnyJ (651856) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842453)

Ah, but TFA also predicts an October release date would be followed by a steady stream of patches.

The article only predicts those if they "arbitrarily hit their latest release promise" - i.e. if it's not ready in time, but Microsoft ship it anyway. As he says, he thinks it "could be" ready.

Re:Of course it's not ready - it's still beta. (5, Interesting)

dan828 (753380) | more than 7 years ago | (#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.

Fix-it man. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15842266)

"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.""

Maybe we should give him the same advice some get when open source is criticized? If it's good enough for us, then it's good enough for him?

Is it ready? no. so? (1)

Klaidas (981300) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842272)

It's not ready, so? Is it anything new about it?
First thing, it's still beta. And if open source/free software betas are almost 100% usable, that doesn't mean that Windows are like that too.
The second thing, I don't think they can do so much in such time *personal option*
Well, we just have to wait and see how it turns out

Re:Is it ready? no. so? (3, Interesting)

peragrin (659227) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842351)

There is a major difference betwen a F/OSS beta and a MSFT beta.

F/OSS beta's are basically feature complete and are being error tested.

MSFT beta's don't even have the full feature set yet and are being error tested while new or rewritten componets are being set into place for the first time.

I have been using Firefox since the 0.3 days of Phoneix. Since that time it has maybe crashed 2 dozen times. Can you say the same about ANY MSFT product?

Re:Is it ready? no. so? (1)

ScaryFroMan (901163) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842407)

XP? It's only crashed on me once, and that's because of a shitty driver when I was doing a reinstall over a new hard drive.

Re:Is it ready? no. so? (2, Funny)

suggsjc (726146) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842573)

Thats great for you, but how many times has solitare crashed for you? Well if your answer is like most all XP/Windows users, then ***that*** is what is defined as stable for them. AND, solitare has been redesigned! A (if not THE) reason for people to upgrade!

FTA (5, Funny)

Reverend528 (585549) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842283)

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".

Re:FTA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15842312)

It was iD software that originally coined the term.

Stating the obvious. (3, Informative)

Chaffar (670874) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842288)

Well if Vista was half-ready it would already be on the shelves. The holes can always be patched later... (Not flaming Microsoft particularly, but software developers in general :)

Remember Windows 95? (4, Insightful)

MSFanBoi2 (930319) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842292)

I do.

People said the same thing for years before and after its release about it's compatbility with Windows 3.x software, about how un-behaved the beta's were, but that didn't stop it from becoming the most popular OS in the world for quite a few years...

Cry, agnostic version (0, Offtopic)

ch-chuck (9622) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842301)

No, God, if there is a God, No!

Ubuntu !! Ubuntu !! Ubuntu !! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15842303)



Get Ubuntu !! and God will love you again !!
Winders is fer luzers !!

Re:Ubuntu !! Ubuntu !! Ubuntu !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15842394)

Rite U R

Re:Ubuntu !! Ubuntu !! Ubuntu !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15842507)

Winders is fer luzer

I take you like Ubuntu cause you don't have to properly type commands on a command prompt in a more decent Linux distro?

It seems you are the proof Ubuntu is userfriendly...

Re:Ubuntu !! Ubuntu !! Ubuntu !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15842580)

cp myahole upiehole

Why does he use it then? (4, Interesting)

10Ghz (453478) | more than 7 years ago | (#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?

Re:Why does he use it then? (1)

MSFanBoi2 (930319) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842541)

Maybe he would have more problems with Linux or Macs?

Didn't apple take a few releases of 10.x to provide just what they promised in 10.0? Didn't Apple just release a massive update for security updates?

Won't get fooled again (5, Insightful)

amliebsch (724858) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842317)

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!

Hm sounds like deja vu (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#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 :(.

Re:Hm sounds like deja vu (1)

pete6677 (681676) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842566)

You work for SAP?

Re:Hm sounds like deja vu (1)

Al_Maverick (939029) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842569)

Im sure you are working on a desk next to mine. :)

Agreed. My two cents... (5, Interesting)

antdude (79039) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842327)

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). :)

Re:Agreed. My two cents... (1)

dinodipp (553320) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842388)

did you try to change c:\program files\ to "c:\program files\" ? By the look of how you write it it sounds like you didn't include the "

Re:Agreed. My two cents... (1)

antdude (79039) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842550)

Yep! I always did in UNIX, Linux, Windows, etc. I found out wthat I was supposed to use cmd.exe, not command.com. Thanks to the previous poster for catching that. :)

Re:Agreed. My two cents... (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842417)

GOOD GOD, MAN! You're trying to run Vista with 512 MB of RAM?!?!? Jeez, no wonder you're having troubles.

-Eric

Re:Agreed. My two cents... (4, Funny)

antdude (79039) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842493)

Here is what even funny. Co-workers have Dell machines (Intel Pentium 4 CPUs) with 1-2 GB of RAM, and THEIRS run slower than mine!!

Re:Agreed. My two cents... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15842434)

As far as points 2 and 3, you should probably try running cmd.exe instead of command.com. command.com is a port of the command line shell from the Win9X line of OSes. cmd.exe is the "new-fangled" command line shell for the WinNT series, which acquired many of the features you seem to miss so much when XP came around. Even better yet, you should try PowerShell (formerly msh, formerly Monad).

Also, they haven't declared RC1 yet. That will be in a month or so.

Re:Agreed. My two cents... (1)

antdude (79039) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842510)

Oooh, that explains why I had problems. Thanks! I didn't know they were different (never noticed). :)

Re:Agreed. My two cents... (1)

NSIM (953498) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842591)

> 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. You do know that command.com & cmd.exe are two completely different beasts. Command.com is the old (way old) 16-bit shell, cmd.exe is what you should be using and will not give you the problems outlined above.

Haha (1)

MassEnergySpaceTime (957330) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842328)

"Or take IE 7. Please."

wow (4, Funny)

dolson (634094) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842329)

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.

Of course it's not ready yet (4, Funny)

From A Far Away Land (930780) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842343)

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 (5, Interesting)

resmungo (905153) | more than 7 years ago | (#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 (4, Interesting)

steveo777 (183629) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842497)

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.

IE7 horrors / hope ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15842353)

"Or take IE 7. Please. I use IE for one thing and one thing only: The magazine's Web portal requires IE to post articles, and because I post WinInfo articles every day, I need to use IE. Every day. 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."

Good points: DIE IE-only ActiveX controls, DIE!

Bad points: What a waste of years of effort on MS non-standard extensions.

Nelson: Ha! Ha!

The future: Think twice about relying on IE-only extensions for *anything* new. Use cross-browser standard interfaces only.

To some, this is a lot of headache (3, Interesting)

whoisvaibhav (654143) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842354)

I know someone who is developing software for the Vista platform. They are porting their product to the next step. For them, everytime there is an announcement of a delay in release of the platform, it is a cause for a quick meeting to re-assess the risk it poses to their plan.

Hot (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15842359)

"No. God no." "I could hear the screams"

That's the hottest thing I've heard all day.

casual gaming (3, Funny)

minus_273 (174041) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842360)

" I especially like the way I can't delete certain items from the desktop (randomly, it seems, like a game)"

I think we recently read [gamespot.com] about MS' new and improved casual games on Vista

Strange... (0, Flamebait)

squidsuk (850172) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842373)

I don't experience any of these problems with Kubuntu [kubuntu.com] .

Re:Strange... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15842457)

I have been trying patriotisim by having a kubuntu on my notebook. It was such a nightmare to run I revrted back to XP. it seems you are all about marketing the product that is halve done. go get a life

That's all I gots to say about that.... (3, Funny)

Mykid8yours (988498) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842374)

"...like most IT pros, its not about when the next OS will be released, it is about having the OS work."


Yeah, you first have to release the patch to patch the patch that patched the patch before the patch. Once the patches are in place, you gotta patch those. Then the OS might work. If not, patch it again.

Getting biz to upgrade (3, Insightful)

Danathar (267989) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842378)

You think it was hard to get biz to upgrade from win2k to winxp? Wait till Vista comes out. Even WITH Enterprise agreements (ala subscriptions) I don't think CIO's are going to deploy it for years.

The average user is able to use exchange, word, excel and surf the web without constant crashes (unlike with win98). As far as many managers are concerned, if their PC's can do that then their employees OS's are just fine. Microsoft is going to have to have something REVOLUTIONARY to get them to upgrade, OR simply they'll have to end support for XP to force many buisnessess to upgrade.

If even ONE app on the enterprise has to be retrofitted to work with Vista you can bet Vista will be the one put on the back burner, not the apps they have to fix.

oh so obligitory.... (1997 style) (1)

Rooked_One (591287) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842381)

Microsoft Works?

Hey - he mentions Slashdot... (5, Funny)

Bobby Orr (161598) | more than 7 years ago | (#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.

Is it ready for the Desktop? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15842389)

(Retarded Voice): "Is it ready for the Desktop? Is it ready for the Desktop? Is it ready for the Desktop?"

...sorry.. couldn't resist and had to backfire at those linux-desktop-experts-who-use-windows...

According to the article... (2, Insightful)

ENOENT (25325) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842390)

Vista SUCKS because 3rd party software that is documented to NOT WORK IN VISTA and even issues a pop-up to that effect, in fact, doesn't work in Vista Beta 2.

And his company's website is run by evil trolls.

And some unspecified prerelease of Office 2007 doesn't work exactly right.

Therefore, Vista must suck.

(OK, there were some valid complaints in there about Vista. But mostly not.)

I've been using beta and haven't had any problems (2, Interesting)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842391)

Been using the beta since it was released to the public and haven't had any problems at all with it. Seems pretty rock-solid to me already. I game with the latest game software, I've run all sorts of apps, I use my 360 as a media center extender. No crashes, no conflicts, no major troubles. The only problems I've had were with my video card's s-video output (think this is a problem with nvidia's driver, not with Vista itself) and with a freeware app called "pdf995" that I use for converting Word files to pdf.

Just my personal experience.

-Eric

New name for Windows Vista...Windows Vista Forever (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15842393)

I think that name is a better fit.

Paul Thurrott may not be the end all expert but (1)

postbigbang (761081) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842396)

If the release slips, we don't care.

Really. We don't care: because it better freaking work when it arrives. Until then, do what needs to be done, Microsoft, lest thy name become Mudsoft.

So What? It's Beta! (1, Insightful)

stevemm81 (203868) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842401)

In Windows Vista Beta 2, Adobe Photoshop Elements 4 would install but issue a warning when you ran it, noting that it was incompatible with Vista. You could ignore the warning and everything worked fine... Now, some key functionality simply doesn't work or, oddly, only partially works.


So, software that openly declares itself to be incompatible with the new OS doesn't work.. And somehow it's even worse when it only works a little bit instead of crashing theatrically or outright refusing to install.

use IE for one thing and one thing only: The magazine's Web portal requires IE to post articles, and because I post WinInfo articles every day, I need to use IE. Every day. 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.


So, his employer created a bizarre, inflexible web application, and the one browser it's compatible with will soon no longer support it? Oh, no! God forbid he should have to use older versions, let alone non-beta browsers, for his nonstandard web apps.

Why did I just waste four years making nice album art for music folders and custom folder art for photos?

Damned if I know...

But my favorite Windows Vista behavior--and believe you me, this was a tough contest--has to be the weird COM object errors I get while cutting and pasting between Paint and Word 2007.

So when using his beta word processor on top of his beta OS, he found some bugs.. Stop the presses.

I don't see why he's complaining. If all these problems were in a commercially released version of Vista, that would be a big problem, but he chose to use the beta version not only for occasional tooling around but for his primary OS. I'm sure it's frustrating that it doesn't work, but I can't really hold it against Microsoft. If he has all these problems with Vista, why not keep an XP machine, or at least an XP partition, around? In a few months these will either be show-stopping bugs or long-fixed, but until then, why does it even matter? Nobody, except apparently Paul, uses beta software for important tasks.

The more Vista gets delayed... (3, Interesting)

linguae (763922) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842406)

...the more time Apple has to add features and functionality to OS X (according to the WWDC 2005, Leopard should be released in December or January), and the more time the FOSS community has to improve its offerings (KDE and GNOME get better with each release, Linux distributions get easier to use, and FOSS software offerings get a bit more compelling).

MS will still have a head start even if Vista is delayed another year, since Vista will be sold on all new machines, and not everybody is going to run out and buy a Mac or install Linux. However, more people are starting to learn about OS X and Apple's offerings (especially the fact that Apple switched to Intel, and the fact that they can still use Windows on those machines if they choose to, although OS X is really good; I showed my parents and siblings my MacBook and they got to use it for two days. They fell in love with it), and more people are starting to learn about FOSS. If Vista isn't all what it is cracked up to be, then Mac sales and Linux downloads would go up.

As for me? I hope that Vista improves. Us Mac and *nix users have to use Windows boxes for work and for school, so it would be nice if we got to use a much improved version of Windows. But, after they have gutted out all of the features that I have desired (such as WinFS and the Monad shell), I'm not so enthusiastic about Vista. And, yes, I've got a chance from a friend to use the beta for a few hours. Vista's interface is pretty nice, IE 7 is a browser worth using, and I am fond of some of the new features. However, everything I can get in Vista in January I already have on my MacBook, and the gap may be larger, depending on what Steve Jobs reveals next week during the WWDC 2006.

Re:The more Vista gets delayed... (3, Funny)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842472)

If only there were a girl that was like this OS [apple.com] ....

You mean, a girl like this [photobucket.com] ?

Re:The more Vista gets delayed... (4, Insightful)

MBCook (132727) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842525)

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.

Re:The more Vista gets delayed... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15842539)

Apple will continue to be irrelevant until they drop their insistence on product tying the OS to the hardware. For now, iPod Sheeple Syndrome will keep them in business, but eventually somebody will come out with The Next Big Thing and that revenue stream will dry up. At that point, the smart money is on Apple starting another downward slide, but continuing to open up their OS - until finally they get taken over or broken up, at which point the OS will be sold separately.

That moment will be the best change Mac OS has of ever becoming a true competitor to Microsoft's Windows.

This is just Vista hype (1)

dtjohnson (102237) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842443)

These same kinds of negative articles also came out about XP at the beginning of its hype cycle. The 'Windows-beta-has-problems' articles all seem to be organized by the M$ hype machine to get people talking about the next Windows version. That's all. Next come the 'we-fixed-all-the-problems-and-now-its-ready' articles. Finally, come the 'Windows Vista is G-R-E-A-T!' articles on or just prior to the release day. Since M$ is cranking up the hype, we can be sure that Vista is now on track to be released.

Vista (1)

bml104 (993091) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842444)

If you hate Vista so much why do you waste your time talking about it? Are you using it or XP? I bet you are. It is like talking about the fat girl down the road and then going and banging her every night when your friends are not around.

Let it take its own time (2, Interesting)

k1980pc (942645) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842447)

I think Vista should be shipped only if it is really in a condition to be deployed to corporate environments. We /.ers may be happy with their *nixes and macs.I myself is on mac but I know my data including credit cards other stuff are with different corporates almost all of them which are on Windows. I've worked in multiple banks and I know most of the data is not safe enough from a determined cracker. I hope Vista don't come and make it easier for them.

"No. God, no." (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15842451)

This is also the answer to the question, "Should I buy Windows Vista when it comes out?"

Re:"No. God, no." (1)

dwayner79 (880742) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842460)

Or "Will it run on my current hardware?"

Okay? (1)

punkr0x (945364) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842464)

Maybe I'm not paying attention, but who is this Paul Thurrott? I'd rather read an article by someone who thinks Vista is ready (for what? He doesn't even say.), I'm sure it would make for a more interesting read.

\Windows\System32\Drivers\PXHjpa64.sys (1)

Hakubi_Washu (594267) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842469)

The reason Vista isn't ready for me?
File: \Windows\System32\Drivers\PXHjpa64.sys
Status: 0x0000428
Info: The image hash cannot be found in the system catalogs. The image is likely corrupt or the victim of tampering.
This error occured when booting (not to mention the usual destroyed MBR, etc.), in four fresh installs, after only a few minutes to hours of usage each. Probably a problem with the software I installed, and it's the 64Bit build of Beta 1. Still, Vista turned non-bootable faster than a botched 98 install :-/
Out of curiousity: Does anyone know anything about this? Google doesn't turn up anything for "PXHjpa64.sys"... :-D

What a conundrum (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15842470)

Person 1: "Stupid bug piece of %(#@ that no one else seems to have problems with!!11!1!!!! They shouldn't have released it until it was 100% bug free!!!11111" Person 2: "WOW. M$ relea$e$ each version of Window$ too close to each other!!11!!!" Person 3: "I agree with Person 1, but they should have taken more time to make Administrator-level accounts more secure."

Well, if they tried making it stable... (2, Interesting)

Milky88 (992026) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842473)

...instead of just adding eye-candy all the time. Seriously, it looks like Vista only features better graphics, and few necessary features. Looks like I'll stick with Gentoo through this one (not that I wouldn't otherwise, though).

linux or windows? (5, Interesting)

edmicman (830206) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842474)

So which is more difficult for XP users to switch to? Linux or Vista?

Re:linux or windows? (2, Informative)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842500)

Or OS X? Because face it, some people just don't have the hardware required for Vista. If you're going to buy a new computer, might as well consider all the options. And a Core Duo Mac mini is perfect for most users (apart from gaming).

Things that isn't working anymore on my Vista (4, Informative)

pcontezini (583243) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842479)

Right know i'm building a list of the stuff that is really not working on my vista, and it gets bigger everyday:
* Sound, since i've installed AC3 codec
* Internet Explorer, god knows when it stopped working, the first thing i've done is install firefox, I think IE detected it and stopped working, it has some personality
* Libjpeg in use with Gaim (nothing appers, ok I like gaim in windows, and it worked fine on XP)
* Network access to other windows machines
* The Bug reporter, that uses some IE functionality
* The video's thumbnails freezes Explorer.exe (i've to set it to details on every folder before it loads thumbs)
* Microsoft Visio with spell checking (type Andre freezes every time you try)
* Emule is writing to a folder that doesn't exists (C:\program files\emule\incoming) but, when i try to open what i've downloaded from emule, it works misterously from the neverland! I still can't find the files.
* Unzip anything, it moves the file inside the zip to the outside, and leaves the zip with 0 bytes (nice way to loose your files)

And the list keep growing everyday, total of 2700 bugs send with the automatic bug report, and can't send manual errors because of the great broke bug report.

Folder Art (5, Funny)

flathead_iv (155332) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842481)

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 (5, Interesting)

HermMunster (972336) | more than 7 years ago | (#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.

Vista = the immitation of Mac OS X (1)

mashihabong (864452) | more than 7 years ago | (#15842579)

Honestly, Linux now is even better than Vista.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...