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 RC2: More Refined, But Still Not Perfect

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the is-it-soup-yet? dept.

217

jcatcw writes, "Scot Finnie continues his lovehate relationship with Windows Vista. He installed the latest beta, RC2, on three machines. First problem: drivers — too many of them that should be available just aren't. User Access Control remains annoying and Vista's Software Protection Platform puts antipiracy above user security. Software compatibility is still in need even at this late date. However, previous problems with the Media Center were absent." And turnitover writes to point us to PC Mag's RC2 review. Their bottom line is that they expect an RC2+ or even an RC3 before it goes final. Here is PC Mag's slide show.

Update: 10/09 19:33 GMT by kd : michigano writes: "This late in the game and Microsoft has pulled firewire support from their OS! No one knows if its permanent."

cancel ×

217 comments

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

Poo (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16367223)

First poo

Re:Poo (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16367323)

So what you are saying is you are number 1 in number 2's

Re:Poo (1)

voice_of_all_reason (926702) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367603)

Hey, nothing wrong with being proud with what you're best at.

Re:Poo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16368795)

Somehow, this all actually relates to the topic at hand.

So which is it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16367237)

He installed the latest beta, RC2, on three machines [CC].

Is it a beta release, or is it a release candidate?

Re:So which is it? (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367305)

It's a beta.

Re:So which is it? (1)

thoriphes (984506) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368923)

In my mind, there's really no such thing as a FINAL Windows Build and Service Packs prove this. Sure, SPs will throw in a new version of Windows Media Player, but it's really the bug fixes you're after. That said, it seems Microsoft is providing more of a service than it is a product. Since any version of Windows will have its share of latent bugs, any so-called "release candidate" is nothing more than a beta that is perhaps 70-80% bug-free.

Re:So which is it? (5, Insightful)

Lxy (80823) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367391)

All RCs are betas.

Not all betas are RCs.

Re:So which is it? (2, Interesting)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368033)

RC isn't a beta; it stands for Release Candidate, the stage after beta, meaning it's been released as a candidate for RTM to fish out any remaining unseen bugs.

The only improvement I've seen in RC2 over the last release is that Vista is no longer randomly blue-screening for me on startup. However, UAC is still INCREDIBLY annoying (you'll see...), it still takes too long to boot compared to the 12 seconds that OS X takes on the same hardware, and none of the sloppy interface issues have been fixed. It's a really inconsistent experience and still gaudy as hell. Some of it honestly looks like an amatueur KDE theme. This is surprising to me, since surely Microsoft can afford high-quality graphic artists. It was a relief to switch over to the Windows Classic theme, although some controls come out even uglier.

All that said, a couple of games that gave me incompatibility warnings in the last release no longer do so. I laughed last night when I discovered that accidentally hitting the Windows key STILL boots you out of a fullscreen game. That thing has to be the most worthless key ever invented. TheInquirer is reporting that Microsoft is telling industry partners that Vista runs games 10-15% slower than XP does. We'll see if that pans out according to benchmarks.

Re:So which is it? (1)

Planesdragon (210349) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368163)

I laughed last night when I discovered that accidentally hitting the Windows key STILL boots you out of a fullscreen game. That thing has to be the most worthless key ever invented.

Odd.

1: Doom3, at least, is fully capable of telling the windows key to frack off.

2: Look up "windows shortcut keys" in the Windows help files. It's a fairly useful key. (And if you don't like it, you can always just remove it and cap the button. might take you all of ten minutes.)

Re:So which is it? (1)

na641 (964251) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368283)

Yes, this is just another issue that people pin on Microsoft when its really a problem for software developers. It's just like alt + f4 closing games. Good developers code this out... lazy one's dont. Just how TFA criticizes MS for not providing hardware drivers :|

Re:So which is it? (1)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368303)

Some games do ignore the key; some don't. There are a lot that don't, including recent ones. I'm aware that the Windows key is tied to several system shortcuts, but about the only one that some people use is the Run command. As for removing the key, it's silly that I would have to do that.

Re:So which is it? (1)

gral (697468) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368261)

I use Litestep on Windows, and have the Window Key programmed to about 15-20 shortcut keys. It works pretty good for me.

Re:So which is it? (2, Funny)

Kozar_The_Malignant (738483) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368141)

>Is it a beta release, or is it a release candidate?

With recent Microsoft products, evidence suggests it should be considered a Beta up to the release of SP2.

Perfect? (4, Insightful)

Klaidas (981300) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367261)

Still Not Perfect
First thing - it's a RC
Second thing - This RC is more like a beta :)
And well, when was anything perfect?
There's always more work to be done for everything, including vista

Re:Perfect? (4, Insightful)

grammar fascist (239789) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367339)

No kidding. These people expect too much. What do they want? A release candidate that's actually fit for release?

Sheesh.

Re:Perfect? (2, Insightful)

stubear (130454) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368185)

ummmm...note the candidate part. That means it's being judged for quality todeterminf if it in fact is good enough for release. This goes beyond the beta stage because the RC is feature complete, unlike a beta which still has bits missing and features that either need to be refined or added/removed.

Re:Perfect? (3, Insightful)

gardyloo (512791) | more than 7 years ago | (#16369141)

This goes beyond the beta stage because the RC is feature complete

    Erm... Like support for firewire?

Re:Perfect? (3, Informative)

DittoBox (978894) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368229)

Yes. That's the point of an RC. RC builds are candidates for release and as such are Feature Complete. If any show-stoppers are found then they fix them and release another RC build. If, after a reasonable amount of time, no more show-stoppers are found then the RC is retagged and reversioned as the final build and subsequently published.

Release Candidates are supposed to be fit for release, if they aren't then changes are made to make them fit for release. Hence the term "feature complete" (depending on the project or manufacturer, some people consider betas to be feature complete or near-feature complete, where as Alphas are still in product and functional development) Once they are ready, they go "gold," that is the "gold master" media images are created and the product is manufactured for general popular consumption.

RC v SP (3, Funny)

Alaren (682568) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368353)

No, no, "fit for release" is the by-line for Service Pack 2. According to the Microsoft Versioning Procedural Handbook:

Beta: Alpha, minus the codename
RC1: Users will QA for us!
RC2: Users who were disgusted by RC1 will QA for us some more if we change the version number
Release: If we wait any longer, our stock will suffer
SP1: In the F/OSS world they call this the "stable" build

RC1 switched me to Ubuntu. Too late for RC2 to change my mind.

Wearing a Perfect Tux. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16367461)

"And well, when was anything perfect? "

Linux is.

Re:Perfect? (0, Troll)

noidentity (188756) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367601)

Here's what you can say once it's released and people are criticizing it:

First thing - it's the first release
Second thing - The first release is more like a beta :)
And well, when was anything perfect?
There's always more work to be done for everything, including vista

OK (1)

El Lobo (994537) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367271)

Comon dogs!!! Fresh flesh. Remember the /. template MS==BAD, Evereything else == GREAT!

Drivers... (4, Insightful)

crossmr (957846) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367273)

Drivers are done on a per company basis. Since vista isn't out, there is no reason to expect official support of any kind on a particular device. As far as piracy controls go... There has to be an exchagne of money there somewhere. Microsoft has more than enough money to tell DRM companies to screw off, so they're getting compensation of some kind. Likely exclusive contract extensions from places like Sony, and other perks to ensure certain DRM compliance.

DivX Drivers... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16367579)

"There has to be an exchagne of money there somewhere. Microsoft has more than enough money to tell DRM companies to screw off, so they're getting compensation of some kind."

So did Circuit City.

Microsoft and DRM (1)

Dobeln (853794) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367929)

Microsoft hope to be a (the?) major conduit for media content reaching the home in the future. However, they can only make money off content if it is protected by DRM, otherwise piracy will be able to become "too mainstream", seriously eating into profits.

Hence, they support DRM as long as it's not harsh enough to dissuade a significant portion of their customer base. Which the current setup will probably not do.

RC2 is the first "buggy" version for me (5, Interesting)

cojsl (694820) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367289)

I have a bench machine that I've tested with Betas1&2 and RC1&2. All except for Beta2 have been pretty bug free, but RC2 fails at the "testing hardware" dialog during install, and after reboot will not give me the Aeroglass option, unlike all previous versions. I'll do some digging later this week to see how to force a re-test of hardware for compatibility, but this was dissapointing after 3 functional previous releases

Re:RC2 is the first "buggy" version for me (1)

HolyCrapSCOsux (700114) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367761)

To be honest, the only problem I had with this RC is: after being on for 3 days, it went to sleep and never woke up. (power save). After a hard reset, the registry was corrupt or missing and repair did not work.

On the plus side, the XP installation on the same box could access the Vista files.

I havent had the time to reinstall and test further, but...

Re:RC2 is the first "buggy" version for me (1)

Khuffie (818093) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368159)

I had good luck with RC2. The only issue I had with RC1 was that Media Player wouldn't play avi files very smoothly, and media center would crash whenever I open my video library. They've been fixed in RC2.

First problem: drivers (2, Insightful)

Viriatus (886319) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367309)

Isn't that the big problem that Linux has?

More refined guys, in SP1 :) (4, Interesting)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367319)

No time for more refined. Unfortunately that's it.

It's obvious there's lots of patchwork in it. I browse the control panel and display properties and get the same feeling I have when looking at work I did in the last minute with a glue and duct tape.

IE7 still crashes like mad on Google Maps for some reason, and what's with the single tab display properties? What's the point of a tab bar, when you have always one single tab in it? We'll never know.

My Wacom tablet works terribly with Vista newfound tabletPC intelligence, it keep sassuming clicks I never have done, I had to go and basically disable all smart features and it still is funky (I can barely use a combo box with my Wacom in Vista).

It's apparent they'll be shipping it to the factory in few days either way, so I'm just hoping once they're done, they start working on a SP1 to be done for the January release that will fix all this mess.

Re:More refined guys, in SP1 :) (5, Funny)

arthurpaliden (939626) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367575)

Vistas' not done till Google won't run......

Re:More refined guys, in SP1 :) (2, Insightful)

6Yankee (597075) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368337)

What's the point of a tab bar, when you have always one single tab in it?

Perhaps a subtle way of saying to your users: "Pssst. You can open up tabs." If they're hidden by default (as, for example, in Firefox), a user could go for months or even longer without even knowing they were there.

The cynic in me (see sig) wonders if it's actually because the rendering gets b0rked when you reduce the window height to display the tabs...

Love? Hate? (2, Insightful)

webword (82711) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367343)

Who cares about love and hate ?

What matters if it delivers value. What matters if it meets the requirements. What matters if it is usable. What matters is if it delivers on the promise. What matters is support. And so on and so forth...

Re:Love? Hate? Ignorance? (2, Interesting)

rumith (983060) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367779)

What matters is ignorance of 90% Windows users. What matters is nobody knows about alternatives, and nobody cares. What matters is that every single one of them who has the money will sooner or later switch to Vista to keep up with the Johns. What matters is that too many people will do what they think every "law obedient, god fearing taxpayer" should - buy Vista, that is. And finally, what matters is that very soon most software vendors, especially bigger ones, will be 'convinced' by Microsoft to develop Vista-only stuff. And so on and so forth...

Re:Love? Hate? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16369397)

What matters if it is usable.

From the point of view of normal users, this is where "love" and "hate" come into play, e.g. "Vista is so easy to use, I just love it!" or "Vista is such a pain to use, I f-ing hate it!"

Migrate to GNU/Linux, not Vista (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16367435)

Our company did last year, city of Vienna did, it should work out very nicely for you too. Our former XP users love KDE.

No need to put yourself through pains when you can improve security, save money and achieve some level of vendor independence all at the same time.

I overlooked it... (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367443)

One good thing about vista, crackers and wormware writers will start focusing on that and, hopefully, leave my PC alone :o)

Re:I overlooked it... (1)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367979)

One good thing about vista, crackers and wormware writers will start focusing on that and, hopefully, leave my PC alone :o)
[ Reply to This ]


Crackers concentrate on the weakest link, not on the toughest. Old (and unpatched) Windows releases are what they target, Vista will be targeted only if it's significantly easy to exploit (which, if we believe the features, won't be the case).

Re:I overlooked it... (2, Insightful)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 7 years ago | (#16369075)

Crackers concentrate on the weakest link, not on the toughest. Old (and unpatched) Windows releases are what they target, Vista will be targeted only if it's significantly easy to exploit (which, if we believe the features, won't be the case).

They also attack where the greatest number of targets will be. If there's a significant number of vista machines on the net they'll be toiling away trying to break in, I have no doubt they will succede.

Who knew? (1)

jeffs72 (711141) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367447)

Better security = annoyance

Yup (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16367607)

Expect that all the Slashdotters who ridiculed MS for their lack of security in previous versions of Windows to spend all of their time now calling it 'annoying' and 'ridiculous'.

Re:Yup (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16368239)

The reality is, people will cheerfully trade freedom for security, but they will not trade convenience.

It's going to be interesting to see how many people continue to run Vista with admininistrative privileges, just to get around all the UAC warnings. I know I will.

Re:Yup (5, Interesting)

Kineel (315046) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368543)

First off, you cannot just 'run Vista with administrative privleges.' That doesn't work around the problem. What you CAN do is turn off UAC, which is done in the most stupid way possible. You turn off the option and then you must (wait for it) REBOOT VISTA. Excuse me? REBOOT? Then why will anyone ever turn UAC back on if they keep having to reboot to use it.

The problem isn't that Microsoft has implemented UAC, it is the horrible way that they did it. You don't enter a password to install new software, you must click on a button that is on a different part of the screen every time it pops up, and it can pop up a lot if you are doing administrative tasks. So most people will simply choose to disable UAC, reboot, and never re-enable it again. That defeats the entire purpose of the feature.

Proper way to do it: When the user needs to perform an administrative task, have them enter a password, then allow ALL administrative tasks performed within the next several minutes without asking. If the time runs out, ask for the password again. This allows people to perform Administrative tasks without constantly having to click on annoying dialog boxes for every step they perform.

For good examples of how to do this properly see Mac OS X or most versions of Linux running a GUI.

Microsoft can't even copy good ideas correctly.

Re:Who knew? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16368647)

Oracle.

Who was expecting "perfect"? (5, Interesting)

nine-times (778537) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367459)

Let's ignore people's feelings about Microsoft for a second. A hypothetical software developer has made a lot of changes to their operating system, rewriting a lot of internals, and making huge changes to their UI. Who here is expecting that this hypothetical software release will be "perfect" when it goes gold?

At best, even assuming Microsoft is a great software developer, there will be bugs and problems when it goes out the door. I don't believe that should be our question. My questions are, Is it usable? Will it increase my productivity over Windows XP? Does the new UI offer something beyond being "new"? Are there new features that I'll actually want to use?

Or to bang all of those questions into one super question, Are there any reasons why I'll want to upgrade? If I could add a second, it'd be, Are there any reasons why I won't want to upgrade?

But if you tell me that there aren't drivers for everything yet, well of course there aren't because it's not released yet, but there will be drivers for most things soon. If you tell me there's some little bug on your particular machine, that doesn't bother me. Release broadens the diversity of hardware that software is running on, and so even if everything was perfect in the beta stage, there will be some bugs.

Re:Who was expecting "perfect"? (3, Insightful)

garcia (6573) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367717)

I can answer both of those for you right now:

Are there any reasons why I'll want to upgrade?

Yes.

If I could add a second, it'd be, Are there any reasons why I won't want to upgrade?

Yes.

Of course there are always going to be "features" you'll want to upgrade for and there will be "features" (like DRM) that you will want to avoid. The question is how many people will hold out until the DRM "features" will force them to "upgrade" to the new OS because nothing else will work anymore.

Re:Who was expecting "perfect"? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368343)

My questions are, Is it usable? Will it increase my productivity over Windows XP?

Yes. If your old computer hardware that ran Windows XP dies, your productivity drops to zero. If you buy a new computer, it will come with Windows Vista.

Re:Who was expecting "perfect"? (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368461)

No, it won't. If I have a computer die on me, I can buy PCs from Dell without an OS pre-installed and use my old XP license, which assumes in the first place that my Dell warrantee runs out. Either way, you're not going to see Vista in my company for a couple years, at least, unless there's a reason to upgrade.

Re:Who was expecting "perfect"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16368901)

unless you have an OEM XP license. then you have to buy a new one.

Re:Who was expecting "perfect"? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16368965)

Are there any reasons why I'll want to upgrade?

When the time comes, Microsoft will make you want to upgrade by stopping support for XP.

Whats the point in look at RC's (3, Insightful)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367467)

MS could release builds amazing for their quality and /. would still find something to moan about. I have yet to see any major engineering project work perfectly out the door first time, there are always unforseen issues and problems. After the release of the first service pack is when I will start looking at the capabilities or lack thereof with vista.

Re:Whats the point in look at RC's (2, Insightful)

Chaffar (670874) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368129)

I have yet to see any major engineering project work perfectly out the door first time[...]
So you're saying that I shouldn't expect buildings to stand the first time they're built? Or cars to drive without breaking down during the first week ? Or those projects aren't as "major" as Windows is?

Re:Whats the point in look at RC's (1)

Surt (22457) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368657)

You definitely shouldn't expect buildings to stand the first time they're built. There's not more than a handful of buildings that have stood even a thousand years so far. Whereas a lot of Microsoft software has executed literally trillions of software instructions without error.

Re:Whats the point in look at RC's (1)

604badder (817383) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368679)

"....I have yet to see any major engineering project work perfectly out the door first time, there are always unforseen issues and problems" I hope the bridge you use to work in the morning is on SP2 :-)

Is this with or without hacked DRM? (3, Interesting)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367489)

I was just reading on Gripeline that Microsoft is suing a hacker who has already hacked the DRM components of WinVista.

Inquiring minds with sharpies want to know ...

Microsoft should put UAC password prompts back in. (3, Interesting)

Randolpho (628485) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367541)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this the same guy who first bitched about the UAC always asking for passwords to do anything administrative? (read: mimics SU, only more annoyingly) Didn't Microsoft respond by taking the passwords out?

That was a bad move on both parties' account, IMO. There's a /. post still on the main page that shows why an annoying UAC (with password typing required) would be a Good Thing(tm). Where is it.... where is it.... ah!

IE7 Toolbar Mayhem [slashdot.org]

You basically get a choice (2, Insightful)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368359)

If you run as an "administrator" you are really a normal user, however when the system requires privilege escalation, your credentials are valid for that. So you don't need to enter a password, just give it the ok with a click. If you run as a normal user, nothing changes, except that you don't have credentials so you need to enter a password of those that do.

Basically you get to choose how you want it. Now you are right in that normal users won't use the password option but you do have to be realistic here. You can't make security too arduous for people or they'll simply turn it off. We faced that problem with Tiny Personal Firewall back in the Win2000 days. We tried to get people to use it, but it was just too much of a pain. They'd turn it off because they got tired of the massive number of popups. Even though the most secure software firewall ruleset is to make extremely granular rules (TPF 2 make rules per application, port, protocol and direction so if any of those were different it would pop up for a new rule) it was just too much for normal users. What we had to do to make them use it was set it to permit all outbound, deny all inbound (what the MS firewall does by default). Then it didn't bother them so they'd leave it.

Re:You basically get a choice (1)

EXMSFT (935404) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368491)

If you're a user, you also have to specify ANOTHER user's account and password - meaning whatever you're about to do runs out of context from you. Great for installers and applications with profile-specific configuration

My cold dead hands... (0, Offtopic)

night_flyer (453866) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367563)

You will get my Windows2k Pro when you pry it from my cold dead hands (or when I switch to Linux, and that time is getting closer by the day)

So do it already (1)

tclark (140640) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367855)

What's holding you back? It's time to quit talking about switching to Linux and actually do it.

Re:So do it already (1)

night_flyer (453866) | more than 7 years ago | (#16369081)

whats holding me back?

Linux: More Refined, But Still Not Perfect

W2K does everything I ask it to with no fuss, my next machine may have Linux, but then it may have W2K again.

Re:My cold dead hands... (1)

Ruie (30480) | more than 7 years ago | (#16369043)

You will get my Windows2k Pro when you pry it from my cold dead hands (or when I switch to Linux, and that time is getting closer by the day)

Want a free kubuntu disk ? Just ask..

Who do they expect to buy this? (3, Interesting)

ShadowsHawk (916454) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367567)

Besides bundled with new systems, who would actually buy Vista? I expect that we will see a slow adoption rate since most users are perfectly content with XP.

Re:Who do they expect to buy this? (3, Funny)

jfengel (409917) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367799)

Well, given that something like a half-billion PCs are sold each year, that's a bit like asking, "Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"

They'll also sell a lot of Vista licenses to offices whose IT shops want to maintain only a single platform. Once they start having to buy new PCs with Vista, they'll want to upgrade the entire shop. The larger the ratio of users to IT, the more they're going to standardize their systems. It's a convenience for them, like replacing the lightbulbs all at once rather than waiting for them to burn out.

Individual users will continue to use their XP installations for perhaps 3-5 years. Over time bits of hardware fail and it's easier for many to replace the entire thing, especially when that elderly PC starts to feel pokey in comparison to the new computers; the new software will find ways to use the extra CPU power. And with a Windows installation, it may not be an illusion of contrast: between registry/DLL bloat in legal software, and the many users who will be infected with malware, it may actually be slower. Cleaning the OS and replacing components gradually becomes less efficient than just buying a shiny new one.

Re:Who do they expect to buy this? (1)

0racle (667029) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368299)

People who want to play DX10 games. People who like the latest and greatest of everything. People.

And admins who want to administer printers using the Printer management tool that came with 2003R2 without logging into a 2003 server.

Re:Who do they expect to buy this? (1)

cp.tar (871488) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368707)

People who want to play DX10 games.

Why do I feel I'll play them in CeDeGa?

One thing's for sure, I'm not upgrading the XP I have here for gaming purposes to Vista.
It's Jabba the Hutt of operating systems.
I mean, how many GiBs does a default install consume? 12? 20? And that just for a spiffy interface, Notepad, Paint and Solitaire?

Re:Who do they expect to buy this? (0)

redkazuo (977330) | more than 7 years ago | (#16369119)

Of course they can *make* you move by delivering lousier and lousier security patches or maybe a couple that exchange security for performance, since XP users are obviously not gaming enthusiasts...

Small gripe (1)

phpWebber (693379) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367597)

I read the Computerworld article linked in the summary. The writer takes issue with how Windows Vista handles a perceived pirated copy (it starts disabling services). I eventually hit this sentence:

Hello! Is anyone in Redmond actually paying attention to what it's doing?

"Hello?" Have we reached the point where journalists mimic the stock, teenage cry of indignation?
Sorry, but I am really tired of that phrase. Its use restricts author credibility.

P.S. Get off my lawn.

Re:Small gripe (3, Funny)

Old Thrashbarg (963675) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367775)

McFly?!

Re:Small gripe (1)

phpWebber (693379) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368001)

Heh. Well I guess that addition would elevate it.

Hate to love, love to hate (3, Insightful)

UR30 (603039) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367619)

It seems that Vista divides testers in two categories, those who find - to their suprise - they like it, and others who get yet another confirmation of how bad Windows is.

Re:Hate to love, love to hate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16367785)

"It seems that Vista divides testers in two categories..."

I willing to guess that perceived expectations determine which side of the fence they fall. After 6 years in the making, some probably expect something revolutionary while others may find rebranded prior art "as to be expected" from the "leading" software "innovator".

Less of the euphemisms (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16367631)

> Vista RC2: More Refined, But Still Not Perfect

It's Microsoft Windows, of course it fucking sucks!

Random thoughts (2, Insightful)

bogie (31020) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367705)

Photo Gallery needs sharpen! Somewhere there is a funny picture of how inconsistent the interface still can be with button and arrows moving around per application, Wish I could find that link again. Are the minimize, maximize, and close buttons still all screwed up in RC2? http://adacosta.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!E8E5CC039 D51E3DB!6931.entry [live.com]

Do translucent windows add anything to the use experience?
User: "Oh look, at the top of my window through a .25" space I can see part of the text of an icon on my desktop! How very useful!"

But I will say it's coming bugs and all so you all might as well get used to it. Just think of how much money you'll make installing and fixing Vista? Just think of how little I'll be paying for Vista thanks to having MSDN via work...Big kisses to MS now!

Re:Random thoughts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16367905)

Just think of how much money you'll make installing and fixing Vista?


Err... none? For comparison, I recently decommissioned a server that has only been rebooted 3 times since XP was released.

Just think of how little I'll be paying for Vista thanks to having MSDN via work...


Okay, just let me finish thinking of all the time you'll be spending installing and fixing it first!

Big kisses to MS now!


I've seen some pretty gruesome BDSM online but nothing so obscene as that little gem. Seek help now.

Re:Random thoughts (2, Informative)

cp.tar (871488) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368749)

For comparison, I recently decommissioned a server that has only been rebooted 3 times since XP was released.

I'll take it XP wasn't installed on it, then... it takes more reboots just to install it.

Re:Random thoughts (1)

Mixel (723232) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368803)

Just think of how much money you'll make installing and fixing Vista?
Err... none? For comparison, I recently decommissioned a server that has only been rebooted 3 times since XP was released.
I don't think that disagrees with parent. Assuming Vista is buggier than XP, you'd make more money fixing Vista than XP :)

My experience.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16367803)

I installed it yesterday for kicks to see how it's progressed since RC1. The installation is much faster, the bootup is faster, and it doesn't crash as much. The network is VERY fast now. I get a full 1300kb/s on my cable connection that I was lucky to get 700kb/s from hooked to a crappy netgear RP614 and motorola surfboard 5100. That said, a lot of work needs to be done. Also, there are some major annoyances. Turning off things like the sidebar and the constant pestering for permission to do anything should not require a reboot. It needs another 6 months, but I can see progress.

Wow (1, Funny)

valkabo (840034) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367809)

That looks sweet! MAN! Thats gonna kick as- Microsoft made it? Eh, its gonna suck. Fuck gates! HES A MONERY GRUBBING THIEF!!! BASTARD!

It's done (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16367827)

Works better than XP, driver issues, some software due to changes doesn't work.

Face it, Vista is ready. It's more ready than XP or 2000 ever were.

Damned RAID (2, Insightful)

Kyokugenryu (817869) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367863)

I'd love to try it, as I have it on DVD and I got a key, but my Silicon Image 3112 Raid Controller isn't supported!

Re:Damned RAID (1)

jschoenberg (828313) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368047)

Have you tried the XP drivers?

Re:Damned RAID (1)

Barlo_Mung_42 (411228) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368693)

I have the same controller. Just need to download the drivers, load them onto a USB drive (no need for floppy) and when it gets to the stage where it asks for a partition to load on click the Load Drivers button to load your drivers. Poof! it now will see your drive.
I've no idea why the RAID controller folks didn't work harder to get their drivers into the box.

Why perfect? (1)

dryekindrew (1002653) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367993)

I only need it to be good enough.

I went to the vista install fair in mtn view (3, Insightful)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368039)

here's what I wrote about it (I wrote on photog forum since that was my main interest - photo processing stuff):

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?for um=1004&thread=20378448 [dpreview.com]

in short, these things didn't work for me:

- avira antivir (threat to MS on their own 'defender' ?)
- monaco optix xr pro (screen calibrator 'puck'; aka 'colorimeter'. pro photog guys NEED this)
- oem nero6 (I need that for lightscribe work. MS doesn't do LS, I don't think, and sadly neither does unix)
- cisco vpn (I use that to login to work remotely. this is a must-have for me.)

it also didn't like my epson scanner (1640su). a very standard and high quality flatbed scanner - not on the supported list.

it took 4 hours to do an upgrade (at the MS building, on sunday, yesterday) on an amd64 x2 3800 dualcore system. sigh.

its good that I cloned my disk before I brought my box over to them. that disk will get scrubbed and put back on the shelf and I'm back to using XP for pshop/cs2 work - where ALL my hardware and sw continues to work.

zero reason to upgrade to vista. zero. in fact, it brings me backwards and forces me to re-buy perfectly good hardware. that color puck was $300. I will NOT be re-buying THAT again - it works fine in xp and does what its supposed to.

vista is very close to shipping. and there are MAJOR failings. this does not bode well.

Seriously, they must be joking (5, Interesting)

dingen (958134) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368171)

Browsing the slideshow, I found this beauty [pcmag.com] .

Please, somebody pinch me. IE is clogging up 1 GB of memory in the final build of Vista before launch?! Well, it explains the insane sys reqs though.

Re:Seriously, they must be joking (1)

Randolpho (628485) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368531)

Look at the CPU usage: 46 percent. I'm betting he was tasking IE at the time, maybe with a very large web page or XML file. Or maybe with a webpage that loaded some wonky, memory-leaky javascript.

Re:Seriously, they must be joking (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16368611)

Maybe he was browsing a lot of sites just then. Or maybe it just likes to cache heavily, and nothing else needed the memory. (It's not like using more memory takes more power, as using more CPU does. In fact, since it may mean it has to hit the disk less often, using more memory can use *less* power.)

What is funny/sad about that screenshot is that they finally solved the age-old Windows problem ("what's uhcrwj.exe do?"), and solved it in the age-old crappy Windows way (duct tape!).

The Mac uses human-readable names for applications, which means you can have single-icon apps that you can install or move or copy by hand, and also means the Activity Monitor [osu.edu] can show human-readable names. Imagine that.

Microsoft's solution? Keep the crappy filenames, and add a "Description" column. Oi. Really, what do those guys in Redmond have against naming things what they are? OK, maybe keep "cmd.exe" as a link for compatibility, but there's no reason to not use real names for new programs. It's not like anybody's going to be running Vista on a FAT12 filesystem. Call it "Desktop Window Manager.exe", and then drop the ".exe" from the Name column. Naming programs with 3-letter names made sense in 1970's Unix when you had to type them a bunch, but "dwm.exe" is just stupid.

900 megabytes of RAM for IE? (1)

jehnx (556498) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368403)

Why does IE use up 900+ megabytes of RAM? http://www.pcmag.com/slideshow_viewer/0,1205,l=&s= 1489&a=190803&po=14,00.asp [pcmag.com]

Re:900 megabytes of RAM for IE? (3, Funny)

alx5000 (896642) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368617)

It's trying to mimmick Firefox's success... But maybe they got it wrong...

Re:900 megabytes of RAM for IE? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16368717)

PS: Grammar nazis, eat my shorts

Black box testing won't find most bugs (3, Interesting)

garyebickford (222422) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368501)

I used to run a "Software Quality Assurance Workshop" at Tektronix - I was an SQA engineer at the time, so I know a little bit about the topic. In researching this subject and also over time since then, I learned some interesting facts, which should be enough to scare the Vista SQA team.

1. There are strong mathematical reasons why it is near-to-impossible to find more than about 20% of the bugs in a system (of any significant size) using black box testing.

I don't recall the proof. As I recall the most important factor is algorithmic complexity - every additional two-way branch doubles the number of possible paths through the control flow. For perspective, a program with just ten branches requires 1024 different tests, for EACH grouping of input data.

Data issues provide more complexity. Heuristics may help discover as many of the pathological cases as possible. For example, every input data element (variable) must be checked at the 'fenceposts' (ends of the range), inside the range, and outside the range. Inside the range, there may be regions or single values that can affect the usage of other variables (e.g., angles might be defined in [0,2Pi] but tan (pi/2) is pathological), so those are another kind of fenceposts that must be discovered and tested for.

(There are many resources online. Wikipedia/Software Quality [wikipedia.org] is a reasonable place to start.

2. Given a 'good quality' development system using techniques such as structured programming, code walkthroughs, manual and automated code analysis, and some other things, about 80% of the bugs will be in the original design document. (Another justification for Extreme Programming? [extremeprogramming.org] )

Interestingly, something like 50% of these may be arguments regarding usage. "It's not a bug, it's a feature!" is often a valid argument - a 'screwed up menu' for one user may be just perfect for another. Of course, providing options to the user as X11 does, is often itself considered a 'misfeature' for the general public, if not an outright bug.

3. Given the same system, only about 20% of the total resources (time, budget) will be spent in the development phase. As I recall, about 20% -> planning and design phases, 20% to development, 40% during SQA, and the last 20% after release.

4. Again with the same system, the designed, QA'd, tested, and released code will have approximately 1 bug every 200 lines of code (while there are arguments about using Source Lines of Code [wikipedia.org] as a programmer performance metric, it can be more easily justified for this purpose, as we can assume that most languages will have about the same level of ambiguity regarding what is a line of code.) This ratio has been empirically shown to run true across all types of programming, from assembler to 4G database code. I recall reading a couple of years ago that Microsoft admitted a rate of one bug per 80 lines of code, but I don't have a citation, so I can't say for sure.

All modern OS have about the same number of lines (according to the above), using the same metrics - about 30 million. This is apparently true for XP and for various recent distributions of Linux - Redhat, Debian, and others, including the applications that came with the distributions. Therefore, every OS ships to the customer containing something on the order of 150,000 bugs. I once listened to a presentation by the then-head of IBM's OS software support group - I think for OS/360, but it might have been a later product. They released a new version every three months, and customers found another 2000 bugs every time.

A probable advantage of Unix-like systems is the relative independence of different applications and components. Each application presumes less about its environment, and so can be less susceptible to problems caused by interactions within the environment. This helps to break the algorithmic complexity trap cited above. The original 'each program only does one thing' Unix tradition was an even stronger tool in this regard.

As I Recall... (1)

DeadboltX (751907) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368525)

Windows XP wasn't a perfect gem when it came out either. Infact, I remember installing XP on my machine in the first month it came out, and it didn't work very well with my hardware. There were no drivers for my Voodoo3 graphics card, and it took a few months before some users hacked up some working Xp drivers for it(there never was any official support for it from 3dfx)

I kept using Windows98 until maybe 5 or 6 months down the road when XP became usable for the masses.. by this time all the major software companies had versions that worked in XP and all the major hardware companies had drivers that worked in XP..

So how is Vista going to be? I can tell you now.. It will suck completely for anyone who relies on a specific piece of software for work for at least 5 months, and it will suck 85% for everyone who does not buy a new PC with Vista pre-installed (read: a PC with 100% hardware compatability in mind and tested)

6 Months after the release, I'll give it a shot.

fuCkEr (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16368815)

more gay than they Here, please do fear the reaper Ultimately, we The reaper BSD's [theos.com] on his iirecoverable by the politickers

Questions... (2, Interesting)

jesterpilot (906386) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368829)

* Is it possible now to rename, move or delete a document when it's in use by an application?
* Is disk-defragmentation history?
* Does Vista provide a software manager connected to massive software-libraries on the internet, so we can install and update applications en masse?
* Does Vista have multiple desktops?
* Can we choose between different desktop environments?

Re:Questions... (1)

ChronoReverse (858838) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368987)

1) Nope. The old lock system is still there. Irritating. You'd think they'd at least incorporate something into UAC to allow for closing all handles.

2) Theoretically yes. Vista will automatically schedule and defrag itself. A step up from just not telling you about it like on some platforms.

3) And get slammed with even more anti-trust suits? I thought we _didn't_ want to do stuff like that. And we all know there's no way MS would do that for non-Microsoft partners.

4) Even XP had that. However, it's a Microsoft Powertoy (figures). I don't see a built-in option in Vista either (blegh).

5) Hahahah.

Firewire is NOT gone (4, Informative)

ChronoReverse (858838) | more than 7 years ago | (#16368869)

Right now I'm running RC2 and the firewire controller on my Asus A8N-VM is right there in the device manager. However, Microsoft has removed the firewire networking that nobody used.

Re:Firewire is NOT gone (1)

Marcion (876801) | more than 7 years ago | (#16369147)

>Microsoft has pulled firewire support from their OS! No one knows if its permanent ...

>Firewire is NOT gone

Shame, Firewire is fantastic, I was hoping that all the fab external firewire drives would become as cheap as cheaps for the rest of us who do not use Windows.

Re:Firewire is NOT gone (2, Informative)

Wizard Drongo (712526) | more than 7 years ago | (#16369205)

Nobody uses it?? Since when. I find firewire the nicest way (by far) to network two machines when one of them is already configured for ethernet into another network. This is particularly true when (for instance) I want to transfer large files from my laptop to a machine on my Uni's (and before that, my college's) network. Then there is also the fact that most pc's lack gigabit ethernet, so firewire is at the least, 4 times faster for transfer speed. Which, when coupled with the above ease of connectivity (don't have to change settings back and forth for the ethernet etc) makes it a total winner. There's a reason why firewire networking is the default method of files between two macs when you buy a new one...... I currently do this regularly between my Macbook and said Uni pc's with little hassle. Looks like Windows Vista is gonna be even shitter than it was looking to be.....
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>