Beta

×

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!

Vista RC1 Build 5728 Publicly Released

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the new-build-out-the-window dept.

317

ClausValca writes "Doing some late-night surfing last night and came across a post over at Cybernet News: Limited Time Only: Vista 5728 Available To The Public. Although apparently intended for the TAP and Technical Beta Testers....it is available for download to the public via this Microsoft public download page for Vista 5728. There is a link on that page as well for direct download of the latest 64-bit flavor of that version as well. An Ars Technica post also has some background info on the new release. Techweb is reporting that Microsoft is specifically asking for feedback on this release, so make sure and let them know what you think."

cancel ×

317 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Beta is the new Alpha and RC is the new Beta (5, Insightful)

ergo98 (9391) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173769)

Wasn't there a time when "RC" literally meant release canadidate as in if this works we're burning this exact image on the retail CDs? Nowadays release candidates are really betas, and betas -- which are supposed to be feature complete, almost 100% apps that are only being tested for technical faults, are really alphas, with endless new feature additions and changes.

Re:Beta is the new Alpha and RC is the new Beta (0, Redundant)

OverlordQ (264228) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173903)

This isn't an RC.

FTFA:

This build (5728) has a number of improvements and updates from RC1, but has not been put through the same internal testing process as RC1 and therefore may be unstable in certain installations.

Re:Beta is the new Alpha and RC is the new Beta (4, Interesting)

ergo98 (9391) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173915)

This isn't an RC.

FTFA:

How does that undermine what I just said? It quite clearly indicates that RC1 was in no way in hell a real RC -- it was a beta. The code diff between RC1 and what actually goes gold with be massive.

Yeah... (0)

Poromenos1 (830658) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173909)

So what's your point? :p

Re:Beta is the new Alpha and RC is the new Beta (3, Interesting)

brassman (112558) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173935)

The explanation given is that they've frozen the API, and you are safe to develop against it. To the extent that is true, the "RC" designation would seem to be justified.

(In other news, I have this bridge between Brooklyn and Manhattan, for sale cheap. Paypal accepted!)

Re:Beta is the new Alpha and RC is the new Beta (5, Interesting)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173959)

Freezing the API does NOT mean its a release candidate in anyone's universe except Microsofts'.

A release candidate should be what the term implies - something that is actually a candidate for release as the final product, not something that you throw over the wall and hope that it stinks a bit less than the previous attempts.

That they're still beta testing should tell you something about how much their development culture continues to suck.

So, download it early, download it often, and help artificially inflate those "look at the interest" numbers ... just don't install this trojan:

In addition, once you install Windows Vista RC1, you cannot roll back to the previous operating system installation--you will either have to acquire and install the final released edition of Windows Vista or reinstall a previous edition of Windows

Nice way of getting people to forget that XP already does everything they need, and locking them into having to buy an upgrade at retail prices.

Re:Beta is the new Alpha and RC is the new Beta (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16174049)

Now that even Mozilla's release candidates aren't really expected to become the final release, can you really blame Microsoft for their nomenclature? It's like ergo98 wrote: RC is the new beta, and this time it isn't Microsoft's fault.

Re:Beta is the new Alpha and RC is the new Beta (4, Informative)

Guppy06 (410832) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174159)

"In addition, once you install Windows Vista RC1, you cannot roll back to the previous operating system installation--you will either have to acquire and install the final released edition of Windows Vista or reinstall a previous edition of Windows"

That's interesting, considering that Windows XP will let you roll back to the previous operating system.

Re:Beta is the new Alpha and RC is the new Beta (1)

kestasjk (933987) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174205)

You're not suggesting that this hidden download for developers is a way of getting people to "forget about XP", are you? Does it have some sort of amnesia inducing software or something?

Re:Beta is the new Alpha and RC is the new Beta (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174363)

Contrary to what the article says, its not a "hidden download" that was somehow leaked. Anyone can download it without having to go through all sorts of hoops to get to the download page, and it downloads fine without Internet Exporer OR Windows.

Any "leak" is completely intentional.

Re:Beta is the new Alpha and RC is the new Beta (2, Interesting)

ben there... (946946) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174215)

In addition, once you install Windows Vista RC1, you cannot roll back to the previous operating system installation--you will either have to acquire and install the final released edition of Windows Vista or reinstall a previous edition of Windows

Nice way of getting people to forget that XP already does everything they need, and locking them into having to buy an upgrade at retail prices.

Unless you install to a different partition/disk. Then it's no problem rolling it back.

Re:Beta is the new Alpha and RC is the new Beta (0, Troll)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174387)

Two issues:

  1. Most people don't have an "extra" partition (I've got 10 spare ones that I use to install trials of linux distros, but I'm not your average user). For most users, they'll just install over their current copy of XP
  2. Release Candidates - the new crack cocaine. "The first hit is free." Who's going to want to have to re-install everything they do between now and next July?

Re:Beta is the new Alpha and RC is the new Beta (2, Informative)

chrpai (806494) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174317)

It says "or reinstall a previous edition of Windows". They aren't locking you into buying Longhorn. They are just saying you can't rollback to a previous persion of Windows without doing a full reload. I just got a new Gateway MX6920 for only $800 and it's running Vista, Aero/3D Flip and my development/fun tools just fine. There is no way in hell I'm going back to Windows XP on this machine.

Re:Beta is the new Alpha and RC is the new Beta (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174471)

Anyone who got XP pre-installed, and doesn't have their recovery disks (or their recovery disks are b0rked), is shit out of luck. Ditto if they haven't got their disk for their mother board, their video card, etc.

Same goes for anyone who bought a retail version, or has the original cd, but can no longer read the teeny tiny almost unreadable micro-font that they printed the product key in, so they can't re-activate it. Or its deteriorated with age, because they were stupid enough to put the sticker on the PC as per the bogus instructions saying you "had" to put the license key sticker on your PC, instead of keeping it in a safe place.

Re:Beta is the new Alpha and RC is the new Beta (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174467)

Freezing the API does NOT mean its a release candidate in anyone's universe except Microsofts'.

Microsoft's universe is about 95% of the domestic PC market and not much less than that world-wide. In this universe you build for the Windows API.

Re:Beta is the new Alpha and RC is the new Beta (0)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174501)

Microsoft does NOT represent the majority of the computing universe.

The majority of the computing universe is in embedded processors - and you won't see them calling beta code a "release candidate."

Would you want your car, your cell phone, your landline, your dvd player, your television, your monitor, your lcd display, your printer, your scanner, your microwave, your coffee maker, your watch, your calculator, and everything else running code that was as crappy as Microsofts "Gold Master", never mind RC?

Just because Microsoft doesn't have a clue doesn't mean everyone else has to buy in. The majority haven't, because people won't put up with that sh*t. Its only in the PC world that people have come to the point where something that's even mediocre exceeds expectations.

Re:Beta is the new Alpha and RC is the new Beta (1)

Kaenneth (82978) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173989)

Depends on your point of view; if you're manufacturing new hardware, writing a device driver, or just making an application, this is pretty much it, the Windows 'Platform'. But if you need new hardware (like CableCards) device drivers (Bluetooth, DirectX 10...), or applications, you may have to wait for them to be done. Microsoft makes referance drivers, it's up to ATI, nVidia, Hauppage, AMD, Intel, etc. to fill those gaps.

The house is built, now it needs furnishings. You could just move in the old stuff from your apartment (the sofa the dog died on, your parents old coffee table, that bent lamp, and those Nagel prints, that microwave that makes your dental work spark... AKA Windows 98/XP applications and drivers) but better things for the new house would be nice to get eventually.

Re:Beta is the new Alpha and RC is the new Beta (1)

Millenniumman (924859) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174529)

I disagree. Think of all the release quality applications (e.g. Gmail) that are called beta.

How long? (1)

Kyokugenryu (817869) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173777)

How long are people allowed to use this version? Will it up and die after a lockout one day?

Re:How long? (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16173795)

It locks mid next year

Re:How long? (4, Informative)

brassman (112558) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173895)

June 2007. (I see an AC replied but he has a score of zero, so I don't feel completely redundant posting this at 2.)

Had this puppy for a week already and may actually get around to installing it, this time....

Re:How long? (2, Interesting)

norite (552330) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174349)

What's stopping someone from changing the date in the BIOS to, say, september 24th, 1990, then doing a clean install?
If Vista thinks it's still 1990, and you make sure it doesn't phone home for the correct date, will you have 17 years worth of use?

Link to 64-bit edition (5, Informative)

unixmaster (573907) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173779)

Re:Link to 64-bit edition (1)

ergo98 (9391) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173809)

Just as an FYI for others, after launching the Java applet Akamai download manager, it sat at 0 bytes for probably 5 minutes, and then started downloading at 350KB/second or so. So have you patience if you try to download this — I'd almost cancelled the seemingly failed download when it finally started up.

Re:Link to 64-bit edition (1)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174353)

It completely locked my firefox like nothing I have ever seen before.
I (for the first time) had to use task manager to shut it down.
Even the chrome wasn't refreshing, it was totally taken over.

Re:Link to 64-bit edition (1)

baadger (764884) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173941)

Anyone got the direct link for the x64 version that doesn't require the akamai download manager?

Re:Link to 64-bit edition (1)

baadger (764884) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173999)

Found it [windowsvista.com]

5728?? Surely you can't be serious! (-1, Troll)

dangitman (862676) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173783)

Excuse me while I wet wet my pants. Sure, release candidates 1 through 5727 were pretty boring, but now that #5728 is here, that's an exciting breakthrough that is surely worthy of front-page news!

Not RC1 (3, Informative)

the linux geek (799780) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173785)

This build is not RC1, it's part of the RTM tree. They're currently up to 5731, and this build is about a week old.

Re:Not RC1 (1)

eddy (18759) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173811)

I guess that's why TFA say "This build (5728) has a number of improvements and updates from RC1"?

Direct ISO Download Link (3, Informative)

in2mind (988476) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173797)

http://download.windowsvista.com/preview/rc1/en/x8 6/iso/vista_5728.16387.060917-1430_x86fre_client-l rmcfre_en_dvd.iso [windowsvista.com]

X86 version.

File size: 2622MB
Type: 32-bit
Name: vista_5728.16387.060917-1430_x86fre_client-lrmcfre _en_dvd.iso
Build Number: 5728.16387

Note: Your Beta 2/RC1 product keys will still be valid for this version.

************** From TFA *************

Re:Direct ISO Download Link (1)

spyrochaete (707033) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174043)

Thanks for reprinting the link.

It's a real shame that they didn't put an updated version of x64 up there. That's the version that really needs some tweaking. Maybe the problems I experienced are more on the driver side but I found 64-bit to be much slower up to and including release 5600.

My opinion???? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16173803)

.... It Sucks!!!! Who cares anyway? It's going to be released to the public all the same!

So, is this like, RC2 ?? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16173831)

Whenwillitend?

Feedback (4, Funny)

QuantumFTL (197300) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173851)

Techweb is reporting that Microsoft is specifically asking for feedback on this release, so make sure and let them know what you think.

Probably a bit too late to ask for POSIX interoperability, eh?

Re:Feedback (2, Funny)

Random BedHead Ed (602081) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174285)

Not at all. I just dropped them an e-mail and asked them to ditch Explorer.exe in favor of KDE, and they said that would be fine and I should see it in the next RC. The FSF has convinced them to include Bash in place of cmd.exe, so that will be a nice improvement, too. I understand their shift from using the NT Kernel32 to Linux might not appear until the final release.

Re:Feedback (2, Funny)

Millenniumman (924859) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174571)

I heard that they were switching to HURD.

How about dumping all that DRM? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16174299)

Microsquish should be happy to dump all that nasty DRM in response to customer wishes, too, right?

Re:Feedback (1)

0racle (667029) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174329)

I suppose you could if you like asking for already [microsoft.com] included [microsoft.com] features [microsoft.com]

Product Key (1)

efuzzyone (919327) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173857)

Does one needs to buy a Product Key for testing this release candidate?

Re:Product Key (1)

in2mind (988476) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173881)

Does one needs to buy a Product Key for testing this release candidate?


FTA :
Note: Your Beta 2/RC1 product keys will still be valid for this version.

Re:Product Key (1)

NewsSurfer (1000129) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173887)

No, I think it is a FREE download...

Re:Product Key (1)

Darundal (891860) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174115)

Nothing that takes your soul as payment for usage can be quantified as "free"...

Re:Product Key (3, Informative)

ben there... (946946) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174231)

You'll need a product key from here [microsoft.com] . Pull down "select your location" in the Download section. Fill out some stuff and you get a product key.

sexy (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16173863)

Carnage Blender [carnageblender.com]

babes

Plays nice with boot loaders? (2, Interesting)

eddy (18759) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173875)

Are Microsoft still nuking everything in their path, or do they play nice with the MBR now?

I think we're beyond blaming incompetence if they don't play nice...

Re:Plays nice with boot loaders? (3, Informative)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173923)

Short answer - it doesn't even play nicely with other versins of windows.

In addition, once you install Windows Vista RC1, you cannot roll back to the previous operating system installation--you will either have to acquire and install the final released edition of Windows Vista or reinstall a previous edition of Windows

This is their way of getting people to nuke their current XP installs, then having to buy the final version of Vista by July 1st.

Re:Plays nice with boot loaders? (1)

Tim C (15259) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174065)

Well, I can't find the text you quote, but I did install Beta 2 and it most certainly did not nuke my XP install. I suspect (but can't prove, obviously) that the text refers to "upgrading" your XP install - ie installing Vista over the top of it. What they're saying is that if you do that, you can't then uninstall/roll back and return to your previous install, which is fair enough.

This is their way of getting people to nuke their current XP installs, then having to buy the final version of Vista by July 1st.

Thereby pissing them off, pushing at least some of them to alternatives such as Linux or OS X? MS may be evil and arrogant, but they're not stupid. (And before you argue that most people won't be able to make the switch, only those who are able to would be installing the RC in the first place, public or not...)

Re:Plays nice with boot loaders? (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174191)

You just have to click on the "Additional instructions can be found on the Customer Preview Program website" linky on . http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/getready/pre view.mspx [microsoft.com]

Of course, most people are just going to download it and install it. Their WTF Moment(TM) is next June.

Installation limitations
There are three installation scenarios for Windows Vista RC1:

  1. You can do a clean installation. This process will overwrite any data that you have on your hard disk or on your installation partition. The overwritten data will be lost and unrecoverable.
  2. You can upgrade an existing installation of Windows XP.
  3. You can upgrade an existing installation of Windows Vista Beta 2.

No other installation scenarios are supported. Upgrading to this beta from any other edition of Windows requires a clean installation, as described in option 1. In addition, once you install Windows Vista RC1, you cannot roll back to the previous operating system installation--you will either have to acquire and install the final released edition of Windows Vista or reinstall a previous edition of Windows. Before installing Windows Vista RC1 on any computer, please remember to back up all your files.

How many people are going to try to re-install XP ... they have the original w/o the service packs, etc., and can't even get on the net long enough to download them w/o getting p0wn3d ... or they can't find the drivers for their now-not-the-latest video card, or their mobo ... and say "frig it, guess I have to pay the MS tax after all ..." ... or go out and buy a new computer ...

Re:Plays nice with boot loaders? (2, Interesting)

fithmo (854772) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174237)

This is no joke. I installed Vista beta 2 on my primary drive, without changing the format of my secondary drive, and then I reformatted the primary drive again while reinstaling XP Pro SP2 (because I couldn't stand Vista).

Now my secondary drive, which I didn't give any instruction to change, is completely unreadable. I've tried using Partition Magic, Partition Table Doctor, and GParted (from Linux on tertiary drive), and none of them can even identify the file system - which should just be NTFS - let alone read the data. It just shows up as 60GB of unformatted space.

I'm sure the data is still there; it was readable in Vista and I've installed XP enough times not to fuck up there. Vista never told me it was making any changes to that drive at all, and I think I would have noticed since it would have popped up at least 3 security confirmations.

p.s. I know I shouldn't use my primary machine as a sandbox... shutup :P it still shouldn't have happened.

Re:Plays nice with boot loaders? (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174411)

A friend of mine had a similar experience 2 weeks ago when he bought a new 320-gig drive, doing a fresh install under XP, so I don't think its limited to just Vista ...

Re:Plays nice with boot loaders? (1)

ben there... (946946) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174253)

Short answer - it doesn't even play nicely with other versins of windows.

Yeah, it upgrades it when you pick upgrade, just like it always has.

Unless you install to a different partition/disk, then it just adds another entry in boot.ini for you to select when it starts up, like it always has.

Re:Plays nice with boot loaders? (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174445)

That "WHOOSH" noise you just heard was the Original Poster's question flying right over your head.

Look at the wording in the subject heading - boot loaders - plural. NOT just the Microsoft boot loader.

... in other words, it replaces any existing boot-loader with its own brain-dead one, and if you have other operating systems installed, you have to reinstall a proper multi-boot-loader (not a Microsoft-only one).

So no, it doesn't play nice with boot loaders.

Re:Plays nice with boot loaders? (1)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174279)

The parent was asking about overwritten MBR's, not overwritten operating systems. Doing an OS upgrade has never allowed you to "roll back" in the way you describe; it would just be a way too complex operation. The answer to the parent's question is however still a no, the Vista MBR still ovewrites other ones at install.

Re:Plays nice with boot loaders? (-1, Flamebait)

pdpTrojan (454023) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174523)

SHUT THE FUCK UP! You are so fucking stupid. Please just stick a gun in your mouth and blow your brains out.

Re:Plays nice with boot loaders? (1)

gkhan1 (886823) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174033)

BTW, if people are having problems with this, you can easily back the MBR up in linux using the dd command.
dd if=/dev/xxx of=mbr.backup bs=446 count=1
Note that this isn't the entire MBR, just the first 446 bytes of it (its 512 bytes long). This backups only the booting-code and not the partition-table (which you may have changed during install). Then pop in a LiveCD, mount your drive and execute
dd if=mbr.backup of=/dev/xxx bs=446 count=1
And you have your old nice bootloader back. In both examples, replace xxx with the name of your drive.

It's not optimal, but it's a decent way to preserve your grub when installing a microsoft OS on your hard-drive.

Re:Plays nice with boot loaders? (1)

bmo (77928) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174053)

"or do they play nice with the MBR now?"

Ha ha ha ha ha ha

Troll? Funny? Interesting? There are so many ways for you to be modded.

"I think we're beyond blaming incompetence"

It's been over 10 years since they started nuking OS/2 MBRs. There's nothing to think about anymore.

--
BMO

"... let them know what you think." (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16173899)

I think I don't need it. I would have to buy new computers to use it and I don't see any benefit to justify the expense. In past, I've upgraded when there was some benefit to be gained. For instance, I went to Windows (3.1) in the first place so I could run CorelDraw. I could do stuff that previously had been available only to Mac users. The choice was clear cut and I was delighted to switch.

Microsoft alienated me with the first commercial release of XP. You couldn't change anything about your computer without calling them for a new authorization number. There were also the rumors that XP was 'calling home' with information about what was on your hard drive. I vowed that XP would never enter my house and never sully my work computer. I switched to Linux. It does everything I need done. Why would I switch.

My wife's computer runs Win98. If it weren't for OpenOffice, she would have to switch to be able to read files that her customers send her. As it is, OpenOffice reads all those files just fine, so she doesn't have to switch either.

Microsoft is going to have trouble selling Vista. They are also having legal trouble in Europe. Their response is to say that the economy will be boosted if everyone switches to Vista. http://www.linuxjournal.com/node/1000097 [linuxjournal.com] They're nothing if not creative. But no thanks anyway Bill.

Re:"... let them know what you think." (2, Interesting)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173983)

Doesn't mean you shouldn't download it ... and download it often. Help artificially inflate all those future numbers projections, AND run up their bandwidth bills with akamai.

Another reason to download it multiple times even if you're running linux - since you'll have multiple legit copies of the fonts, codecs and other dlls, you can use them on multiple linux boxes.

Hard disk space is cheap - if you've got an old drive hanging around, stuff the multiple images there, and put it on a shelf for "future reference."

Change Log (1)

psycln (937854) | more than 7 years ago | (#16173911)

I wish they wrote A ChangeLog.txt like most of the people in the biz.

Re:Change Log (4, Funny)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174005)

I wish they wrote A ChangeLog.txt like most of the people in the biz.

They did - and they saved it in Word format, and its corrupted. So far, 3 employees have been wounded by flying chairs for suggesting they use OpenOffice to open and re-save it.

My experience with Vista (-1, Flamebait)

ColinPL (1001084) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174021)

  1. Installed Vista
  2. Installed network drivers (3Com 3C940)
  3. Start -> Connect to -> Set up a connection or network -> Connect to the Internet -> Broadband (PPPoE)
  4. Entered my username and password
  5. Error: The wizard cannot create the connection
  6. Rebooted into Windows XP
  7. Command Prompt -> format d: /q

Re:My experience with Vista (2, Funny)

in2mind (988476) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174087)

Command Prompt -> format d: /q
So much for a 2.5 GB download!!

Re:My experience with Vista (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16174105)

Good god man,

If you give up that quickly on Windows, an OS that often takes the approach of insulating users from functionality through a very fine-tuned UI aimed for maximum user friendliness, then I hate to think what must have happened when you tried an OS that takes a "more power to the user" ideology, like say, "Linux"?

Step 1: Install Linux
Step 2: Try to compile something
Step 3: It breaks, throw-away Linux in absolute disgust
Step 4: Return to pre-configured Microsoft Bob, where it's safe.

To further add to the absurdity of the previous post, the code you are using is _NOT_ finished. I'm not defending Windows, just preaching common sense. It's quite possible it could have been a bug specific to the users setup.

It's uninformative, ridiculous comments like the former that harm Slashdot, offering a stereotypical Windows bashing with no real merit, contributing nothing.

Re:My experience with Vista (1)

ColinPL (1001084) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174177)

very fine-tuned UI aimed for maximum user friendliness

Very bad UI optimized for newbies, with non-meaningful error messages and options hidden in Advanced -> Advanced -> Advanced.

then I hate to think what must have happened when you tried an OS that takes a "more power to the user" ideology, like say, "Linux"?

I have Linux installed on my second HDD and it works well.
When some stupid wizard doesn't work, I can edit the configuration files in /etc.
In Linux (Fedora Core 5) my PPPoE connection works, in Vista it doesn't.

To further add to the absurdity of the previous post, the code you are using is _NOT_ finished.

It's a Release Candidate, which should be 99.9% finished. Not being able to connect to the internet is a major bug.

Re:My experience with Vista (1)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174291)

It's a Release Candidate, which should be 99.9% finished. Not being able to connect to the internet is a major bug.

In his drivers or in the OS?

Re:My experience with Vista (1)

ColinPL (1001084) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174261)

Score:-1, Troll

Not troll, PPPoE in Vista really doesn't work and I won't use an operating system which can't connect to the internet.

vista's new build (0, Troll)

allfunandgames (1000948) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174063)

I think its is a really crappy copy of Mac OSX that has already been subject to viruses and malware. This essentially means that it is just Windows xp SP3 without the playschool look. If you want truly great hardware and the ability to run any OS you want, buy a Mac and forget this bloated, glitchy, virus-infested copy. Mac 5 years and still no viruses! Windows 5 years and 115,000 viruses and counting!

VMWare? (1)

B5_geek (638928) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174071)

Has anybody been able to get this to install in VMware yet? (I have tried a few of the previous builds, but alas it wouldn't boot in VMWare.)

Re:VMWare? (1)

ditoa (952847) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174129)

It boots from the CD but fails to detect the virtual hard disk. Do a Shift+F10 to load a command prompt, create a partition and format it using diskpart, reboot and it still doesn't see the virtual hard disk :( This is with both IDE and SCSI virtual hard disks. If anyone get it work please let me know :)

Re:VMWare? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16174199)

I've had Vista working with VMWare Server; the RC installation detects the VMWare SCSI drive. There's a bug in VMWare Workstation that means the VGA mode used for installation doesn't work so although the installation starts, you can't see anything on the screen.

Put the following in the virtual machine's .vmx file and you'll be able to see what's on the screen to do the installation:

svga.maxWidth = "640"
svga.maxHeight = "480"

Re:VMWare? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16174169)

beta 2 works great under VMware server. It boots fine. No network, no video acceleration but who needs it?

Re:VMWare? (1)

ultranova (717540) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174453)

beta 2 works great under VMware server. It boots fine. No network, no video acceleration but who needs it?

Since the main new feature of Vista is an UI that uses 3D accelerated special effects, I'd say "everyone".

Re:VMWare? (1)

onedotzero (926558) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174443)

Yup, I have RC1 running in VMware 5.5 with VMTools installed (Aero seems to be disabled by default). Only problem seems to be a dodgy USB driver, causing bluescreens on shutdown. I did have a couple of problems installing initially (yes, more bluescreens) but it went through on the 2nd or 3rd attempt.

The kind of feedback they're looking for (3, Funny)

justinkim (513188) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174079)

And just so everyone is clear, 'Replace this steaming pile with Ubuntu" is probably *not* the kind of feedback Microsoft is looking for ;)

Re:The kind of feedback they're looking for (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16174359)

i'd rather install a vista beta from 6 months ago than plague my system with ubuntu, but thanks for the token "unix rules, windows sucks" comment... they're always hits amongst the penguin community

Is it just me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16174133)

...or is the image Slashdot uses for Windows-related articles made up of cracked/broken glass?

I know everyone despises Windows, but the obvious bias doesn't look particularly professional for a top tech site.

(no, I'm not new here)

But the other picture- Borg Gates? (1)

way2trivial (601132) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174251)

that you think is perfectly fine? OK by me..

dis microsoft windows, you have a problem with
dis chief architecht, you don't mention at all?

Re:But the other picture- Borg Gates? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16174333)

I didn't mention the Borg pic because it's a lost cause to point it out anymore. That pic has existed for YEARS and it's obvious Slashdot will never change it for something less biased. I don't think it's OK, but since others have complained and nothing has changed, why bring it up anymore?

I only noticed the Windows pic today though.

Re:Is it just me... (1)

kfg (145172) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174427)

I know everyone despises Windows, but the obvious bias doesn't look particularly professional for a top tech site.

Even The Big Blue Brother is beginning acknowledge that "professional" is not synonymous with "assimilated into the machine."

Lighten up and wear wider pinstripes.

KFG

Do I really have to download it to tell them (1)

mario_grgic (515333) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174161)

what I think about it?

vista sucks and I LIKE windows generally (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16174239)

Nothing on linux comes close to the windows desktop imo.

But having tried vista i seriously think its a step backwards for windows.

more worryingly its starts to make ubutu or sticking with windows 2000/xp look like a serious alternative.

MS havnt really innovated in gui design since windows 95.

Vista is like XP but with even more pointless visual effects to turn off, not to meantion it runs alot slower.

Re:vista sucks and I LIKE windows generally (1)

ProppaT (557551) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174371)

"MS havnt really innovated in gui design since windows 95." Which is probably a good thing. If they changed the GUI design every iteration of windows, you'd have a world full of really, really confused users. A Windows 95 user can use XP and vice versa. Having not used Vista myself, I can't comment on this; however, GUI design isn't the only thing that goes into a revision of an OS. XP was a giant step up from any of the other consumer versions of Windows (W2k is not consumer), and it had nothing to do with their GUI graphical overhaul.

You Never Tried Linux Have You? (1)

TheZorch (925979) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174505)

Don't voice an opinion unless you can back it up in facts. The Linux desktop has improved extensively over the years. I frankly don't see what more could possibly be done to get people to finally admit that Linux is truely ready for the desktop. It has everything I want; OpenOffice, a good non-DRM media player, and a GUI that I can customize in ways Windows can't. WINE cna run a number of Windows programs including World of Warcraft. Yes, I need to keep Windows around for Final Fantasy XI because it still doesn't work right under Linux but that will change as WINE improves.

Torrent (1)

Bozzio (183974) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174273)

Vista RC1 b5728 [torrentspy.com]

Has anyone tried downloading by the bittorrent yet?

Re:Torrent (1)

hitzroth (60178) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174397)

It's maxing out my connection and MS is paying for the bandwidth so why would I want to use a torrent?

Re:Torrent (1)

onedotzero (926558) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174463)

I pulled one down via a torrent, but only because I couldn't find an official link. When I finally found my product key, I pulled another copy down from Microsoft and they're idential filesizes. Haven't checked the hash; I just installed the MS one.

DRM and OpenGL? (1)

Midnight Thunder (17205) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174323)

One thing that is keeping me from letting Vista any where near my computer is the fear of excess DRM and lack of OpenGL support. Can anyone, who has used the new system, tell me how founded those fears are? Is the DRM in enough quantitities to cause issue and are you able to run any programs that run OpenGL? I am only interested in reports from people who have tried, not from a friend of a friend of a reporter of some company.

Re:DRM and OpenGL? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16174369)

My experience has been that the OpenGL renderer will work find so long as you install the proper drivers for your video card (NVIDIA seems to work well, at least in the games I've tried). No real differences in speed, though I haven't done many benchmarks yet. DRM is paranoia plain and simple; it's only really related to HDMI/HDCP support and since you'd have similar DRM being used in XP if XP is to support HDMI/HDCP, then I don't see the worry. There's far too much FUD from the Open-source advocates to see the truth sometimes; download the RC and play around with it yourself.

Re:DRM and OpenGL? (3, Informative)

baadger (764884) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174481)

nVidia's latest driver's for Vista [nvidia.com] include an "OpenGL driver for compatibility testing.". OpenGL won't be a problem, it'll be provided by third party drivers like it always has been, there just won't be any software fallback provided by MS (OpenGL in software is useless anyway).

As for DRM, well. Nothing in Vista itself is going to prevent you from copying DVD's, software or music or any other such thing. Windows Media files will still be protected of course, and HDCP will HAVE to be built into all HD-DVD/Blu-ray drives and decoders (read: the hardware) for you to watch this material.

The DRM issue with respect to Vista is all mythic. The only true rights taken away from you in Vista compared to XP are in the 64bit (x64) edition, under which, you cannot install unsigned drivers (unless you add an option to the Vista bootloader which isn't that difficult).

Why on earth should I test Vista?? (0, Flamebait)

Zzeep (682115) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174357)

I have no desire whatsoever to spend my time and resources to download and test software from Microsoft, to help them make it better. First I don't want Vista to be any good. Let them release it and then crash and burn. Second, if they want it to be good, let them test it themselves. They have enough money, and they keep stealing enough money by leveraging their monopoly; they should be able to afford good testers. Maybe I'm just too cynical, but I really don't see the point in helping Microsoft for free. The earlier they get Vista out the of the door the sooner you'll hurt, for example by more DRM, more 'trusted computing' which means you pay more but can do less. So can anyone explain why, other than reasons cult members typically use, I should help Microsoft in getting Vista ready?

Re:Why on earth should I test Vista?? (1)

GFree (853379) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174391)

Because there's no better way to test such a complicated and large project than by the actual people who will ultimately buy (or at least you hope) your project. Open tests are becoming more and more popular I've noticed, particularly with some games such as Dark Messiah and BF2142. If Microsoft wants to do it, what's the harm? Just because they're Microsoft? Lab tests are too confined for such a project.

Re:Why on earth should I test Vista?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16174407)

Maybe I'm just too cynical, but I really don't see the point in helping Microsoft for free.


yes, maybe you are

i mean if you informed them about a bug or suggested a new feature and they actually listened, you'd have to start shitting on apple or some other company that earns you "geek credz" when you rag on them.

Re:Why on earth should I test Vista?? (1)

LaughingCoder (914424) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174457)

So can anyone explain why, other than reasons cult members typically use, I should help Microsoft in getting Vista ready?

As a Windows application developer I appreciate frequent and early looks at the OS so I can build and test my code against it. This is far, far better than getting blindsided by upset user calls when Vista hits the street and my apps all break. So I guess the short answer to your question is, self-preservation. Now, if you are not a Windows application developer then I guess I can understand your sentiment. I suppose it's also safe to assume you are not a systems admin with Windows-based boxes, and you don't support users who *might* end up using Vista. If all of these assumptions are true then you can safely ignore the betas - I don't think MS is really interested in your opinion anyhow if that is the case.

Re:Why on earth should I test Vista?? (1)

uolirod (1001639) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174583)

If all of these assumptions are true then you can safely ignore the betas - I don't think MS is really interested in your opinion anyhow if that is the case.
Sad but probably true. The unfortunate part that's implicit in that statement is that MS doesn't care about the majority of their future users. If you think about it the end users are who keep MS in business. This is what you'll get and you'll like it.

Is it really from Microsoft? (1)

frdmfghtr (603968) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174389)

I'm puzzled as to why MS would be offering a RC for public download from a site that is not part of microsoft.com. Surely MS isn't short on server capacity or bandwidth :)

Seriously though, why is this not part of the microsoft.com domain?

Better idea (1)

cubicledrone (681598) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174449)

Get a Mac

Thank you.

My thoughts on RC1 (2, Interesting)

BSonline (989394) | more than 7 years ago | (#16174565)

Well, it is more stable and a bit faster than the pre-RC1.
It's still pretty.
Explorer likes to hang when transfering files.
IAC is still annoying, and over done.
If Vista doesn't specifically recognize that you own a file, it's read only. This means you have to either download a file, or have it in your directory. Deleting or moving something on any secondary drives (I have 3 other hard drives) is a serious pain. This means usually manually changing ownership, changing read writes, and then repeating this process a couple of times since it doesn't always save the new settings.
Oh, and google's desktop bar is better than the new-built-in-hard-to-disable M$ desktop bar.
And anyone looking for the nifty 3-d desktop should look elsewhere for something to install on XP. Windows are stacked in slightly more than 2-d space, and you have to click a button to view that. Don't worry, you can use that feature to flip through buttons. What happened to rotating windows with side title bars? Hell, don't ask me. I dunno.
Last, and probably least, the "Ultimate Edition Extras", a new windows update category, doesn't even have a sample download. Ultimate edition just gives you all of those fancy (cough, cough) graphic features I mentioned.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

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>