Slashdot: News for Nerds


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

Thank you!

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

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

Why Vista Won't Suck

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the i-like-the-look dept.


creativity writes "ExtremeTech is running an article on the new features of Windows Vista and why it is a must upgrade for all Windows users. They take apart the marketing hype and tell you what exactly to expect in Windows Vista. They specifically pick out less-hyped features like a kernel which has new Heap Management and details on SuperFetch, which is Vista's application cache."

cancel ×


yet Lunix fags will still hate it (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14821079)

FP by the way!

Re:yet Lunix fags will still hate it (1)

Sfing_ter (99478) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821116)

yes we will.
it does not like my hardware(athlonxp 2400/ati 9600 256mb/1g ram)
it runs like hammered feces on decent hardware

Re:yet Lunix fags will still hate it (1)

wesw02 (846056) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821187)

Couldn't have said it better myself. hmmm.......Maybe great minds do think a like.

More like great fags think alike (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14821205)


Re:yet Lunix fags will still hate it (1)

7of7 (956694) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821293)

Perhaps your computer is borked in some other way because Vista runs great on my hardware (Pentium M 760/Go-6800/1gb). Maybe your Athlon XP just can't compete with my notebook processor.

Re:yet Lunix fags will still hate it (0, Offtopic)

protected_static (949443) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821268)

What, you think you're on a WoW server?? WTF?

1 reason vista will suck (0)

rootofevil (188401) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821081)

You have to buy a new monitor (basically)

Re:1 reason vista will suck (1)

IflyRC (956454) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821141)

Could you please elaborate? Why is a new monitor needed and what monitors on the market now will be defunct, which will work?

Re:1 reason vista will suck (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14821158)

He's been brainwashed by /. groupthink into believing that vista won't work without a DRM display.

Re:1 reason vista will suck (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14821206)

It will work with a non-drm display, but you won't be able to play certain media at full resolution without a drm monitor.

Re:1 reason vista will suck (2, Insightful)

Skye16 (685048) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821362)

then don't buy the fucking media? be pissed at the media cartels for trying to make you buy crippled entertainment, not vista. just wait a few days and get an HDDVD rip on BT.

Re:1 reason vista will suck (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14821210)

Basically, Vista will be HDCP [] enabled, so if you want HD and protected content on it, you have to have a DRMed up monitor that can process HDCP.

Re:1 reason vista will suck (3, Informative)

jorenko (238937) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821239)

What he means is that if you want to watch HD-DVD or Blu-Ray media that is protected by HDCP(which practically all retail movies probably will be) at a resolution higher than what's possible with a regular old DVD under Vista, you'll need to buy a monitor that also supports HDCP. But this is also the case for your TV and other equipment and in no way impairs other functionality of Vista.

Re:1 reason vista will suck (1, Troll)

GuyverDH (232921) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821256)

Reason #1 - Unless the vendor pays M$ loads of cash to certify their drivers and sign them (or purchase the ability to sign them, themselves) the monitors / devices will have to use the built-in generic M$ drivers.

Reason #2 - When a vendor goes defunct and 3rd parties pick up the flag to write / maintain drivers for said hardware, there's not enough money in it to pay M$ to sign / test / certify said drivers. So no 3rd party driver pick-ups anymore.

Reason #3 - In order to play DRM'd content, your display must be of the *bullshit* signed / approved type. Without it, you can have the greatest video card in the world, and nearly the greatest monitor and still only get crap resolution to display on from the content. Couple this with nearly ZERO functional video cards to support this new digitally signed hardware, and the same spot for monitors, it will be some time before the market catches up and releases new hardware to *enable* these features.

Reason #4 - It's from Micro$uck - so it has to suck.

Re:1 reason vista will suck (1)

billcopc (196330) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821297)

If you can't fix the hardware, then you fix the software. Someone somewhere's going to come out with a software fix for this misery. It might not make Microsoft too happy, but it will be necessary if these companies dare take HDMI seriously.

Re:1 reason vista will suck (1)

Psykosys (667390) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821152)

You mean you have to download new drivers, which isn't very much like buying a new monitor at all?

Re:1 reason vista will suck (1)

rootofevil (188401) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821196)

vista requires HDCP support for the full vista experience, which is significantly different than new drivers, isnt it?

Re:1 reason vista will suck (1)

7of7 (956694) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821231)

As will all other next generation OSs which want to display Blu Ray or HDDVD content.

Re:1 reason vista will suck (1)

Keith Russell (4440) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821359)

Correction. Vista requires HDCP support only for full resolution HD-DVD and/or Blu-Ray playback, as mandated by Big Media.

That is all.

Re:1 reason vista will suck (1)

CavemanKiwi (559158) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821215)

Only if you want to watch HDTV content from a blue-ray disc or a HD-DVD disc at full resolution. Although I have a feeling there would be a software that will make this happen with video card and monitors that don't have HDCP support.

Sorry to be Negative.... (4, Insightful)

conJunk (779958) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821089)

Sorry to be so negative, but this is like the Highway Division saying "Well, we got tired of projects taking 15 years to complete, so now we're going to do them in one year!"

If it's true, great, bully for them and well done, but I'll believe it when I see it. My hopes aren't too high for all these cool fixes/features to actually function as advertised. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised, who knows?

Re:Sorry to be Negative.... (1)

coldtone (98189) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821271)

I'm not optimistic. It seams like Microsoft has lost its greatest asset. Talented developers. They don't make great software like they used to (Word, Excel). [] The worlds largest notebook.

Re:Sorry to be Negative.... (2, Informative)

Skye16 (685048) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821307)

Having played with it for 13 days after getting it off of BT, I can say that Vista is as much a change away from XP as Linux is. I actually found it easier configuring things in KDE and Gnome than I did in Vista -- how crazy is that? Of course, this is mostly because every configuration you could do via a particular widget on the control panel has been moved to another widget, or hidden, tucked away in the shadows to the left, but it's much different.

Whether or not the security model truly is secure is something I can't answer. However, Vista pesters you for permission to run just about every exe out there for the very first time, assumedly before it has been registered as 'safe'. I don't remember 100%, but I believe it required me to create a separate user account on installation, along with the administrator account. Of course, since my activation would expire after 14 days, I really didn't give a fuck if someone would be able to compromise my system, so I ran everything as Administrator anyway. Therefor I can't really tell you if it requires Administrator priveleges to install programs.

It did make use of a C:\Users\ folder, however, which was rather nice.

In any event, I'm sure you can find the DVD ISO on one of the torrent networks so you can check it out yourself. I like to give Microsoft a hard time just as much as the next guy, but in all honesty, this is a very, very slick and polished OS. I had vowed never to buy it and to move to Linux, but now I'm questioning my decision. Now it's a question of all the DRM restrictions I would have to endure.

Don't be sorry (2, Interesting)

QuaintRealist (905302) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821311)

I remember my last intentional switch to Windows (Win 95). It, too, was going to have all these wonderful new features (better GUI, better memory management, multitasking). I tried for 2 years to get the same level of stability I had in DOS, and then went to OS/2. And machines which didn't ship with Win 95 were even more of a beast to get working correctly if you had added stuff to your box.

IMHO, "upgrading" to Vista will be the same thankless task, and it will be at least a year before machines shipped with Vista are going to be "right". Microsoft will rush this job because it's already so late that they almost have to.

It won't suck... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14821094) will blow, in six different ways

Re:It won't suck... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14821254)

Vista won't suck because it's actually a microsoft designed vacuum cleaner.

Limited Users (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14821110)

Will you still have to run most programs as Administrator in order to get them to work correctly? Everytime I want to burn a DVD-R on my computer, I have to switch from using my everyday limited user account to the Administrator account. That's just wrong.

Re:Limited Users (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14821199)

It's called "Run as..."

Re:Limited Users (1)

stupidfoo (836212) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821317)

Shift+Right Click

if you're using Windows 2000

Re:Limited Users (1)

slaker (53818) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821233)

Nero Burnrights []

I realize that not everyone with Windows will have Nero, but it's a common solution to a common problem.

Foot? (2, Funny)

Yonatanz (798506) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821120)

For a minute there I was looking for the foot icon.
Oh silly me.

For some odd reason (was:Foot?) (1)

Lead Butthead (321013) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821252)

I get the mental imagine of a boot stepped on a human face when I read the bit about foot icon...

Re:Foot? (1)

LehiNephi (695428) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821374)

Joe Sixpack doesn't care about these new "features". Here's a summary:

-rewritten kernel
-rewritten SW/HW interfaces
-heap improved
-power management. I can't leave this one alone. In Vista, when the tech support guys tell you to "reboot", Joe Sixpack will be even more confused: "you mean even though my computer was off, it wasn't really off!?" This is just a lame way to avoid the "long boot time" complaint. (Linux is also guilty here)
-USB drive caching (SuperFetch)--USB drives are fairly fast right now. Joe Sixpack won't care
-new driver model--for the sixth time, it's transparent (assuming it works)

In other words, Joe Sixpack has absolutely no reason to upgrade. Of course, few of us ever HAVE had a reason to upgrade

Improvement on windows (1)

AusIV (950840) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821121)

It'll be an improvement on Windows. That doesn't really say much.

Personally I use Windows for a my Laptop and Linux for a server. When vista comes out I'm going to take a look at it. Unless vista really suprises me, I'm switching my laptop to linux and never looking back.

from the (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821123)

"really quick read" dept.

!FUD (1)

M0b1u5 (569472) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821124)

HMMM. The exact opposite of FUD. Who's getting paid here?

Re:!FUD (1, Funny)

Foofoobar (318279) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821154)

Now every Microsoft product comes with FUD generator built in.

Re:!FUD (1)

MassEnergySpaceTime (957330) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821285)

"Now every Microsoft product comes with FUD generator built in."

Haha. If I knew how to mod you up, I would.

Re:!FUD (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14821283)

The opposite of FUD?

Confidence, Relaxation, Assurance and Positiveness?

Hang on though - that would be CRAP.

Not the question... (1)

fak3r (917687) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821127)

We know Vista will have a ton of advantages over previous Windows incarations, either by innovation or outright copying ideas that have come along and work, so the question should be 'Why would Joe User -or- Corporate Cathy want/need to upgrade from XP, vs 1) staying with XP (or 2000) 2) migrating to another OS (Linux?) that won't force them to buy new hardware or 3) move to Mac, since they have to buy new hardware anyway.

Oh, and if someone posts, "This is the year for Linux on the desktop" now, well, it'll be foretold.

Vendor lock-in in 3 easy steps: (1)

benjamindees (441808) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821263)

1) Your computer breaks.

2) Purchasing searches for a new one, and buys the cheapest one they can find -- a new Dell with Windows Vista.

3) Office envy sets in, and soon the entire dept./company has to have a new Pentium (IV/V) with (256/512) megs of RAM and whatever flashy new screensavers or icons Vista will come with.

At most companies, this is exactly how it works. Greed and envy and laziness mean that 90% of corporate users will fight to stay on the Windows upgrade treadmill as long as they can.

5 Reasons Why Vista WON"T Suck (4, Funny)

Foofoobar (318279) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821130)

1. DRM is good for you. It builds strong bones and healthy muscles.
2. Using half your memory for your windowing tool will impress all your friends.
3. Now you can set the color of your blue screen of death to mauve or taupe.
4. You know the customer support is only going to be better.
5. Collectable virus game built in! Better than Pokemon on crack.

Re:5 Reasons Why Vista WON"T Suck (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14821262)

MS is making a vacuum cleaner?

Winshit vista is not needed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14821131)

There already is a "Sleep" or "hibernate" mode, it's called turning the computer off totally. That feature has existed since computers were invented.

My upgrade path (1)

Iphtashu Fitz (263795) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821146)

Well lets see, I finally broke down and upgraded to Windows XP about a month ago when I decided to upgrade my old PIII 800 Mhz machine. Given that, I figure I'll upgrade to Vista about 5 years or so after it's been out.

Re:My upgrade path (1)

mordors9 (665662) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821186)

That should be about the time that Vista Service Pack 3 is released correcting some security bugs. Probably a good time to adopt it :-)

Exsqueeze me?! (4, Insightful)

ettlz (639203) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821150)

From TFA:

SuperFetch also takes advantage of external memory devices--plug in that spare 256MB USB key (any size will work, really) and Windows can cache a lot of the working set to it. It's not as fast as your system RAM, but it's much faster than randomly grabbing small bits of data from all over your hard drive.

Aside from the fact that modern hard discs are supposedly faster than USB 2.0, isn't paging out part of the VM to a hot swappable device just dope-assed? Shurley shome mishtake!

Re:Exsqueeze me?! (1)

macosxaddict (559557) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821192)

Ouch. So much fear. Flash memory fails after a certain number of write cycles. I predict lots of crashes as memory sticks that people leave plugged in wear out.

Re:Exsqueeze me?! (1)

YU Nicks NE Way (129084) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821329)

Caching the working set from a Windows app is a lot different from caching the heap. You can't cache the heap on a removable device without risking a bit of twitchery, but you absolutely *can* cache unrelocated program code, which saves you seek time on the hard disk.

Re:Exsqueeze me?! (1)

Fulg (138866) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821343)

[...] isn't paging out part of the VM to a hot swappable device just dope-assed?

Yeah, that's not the only weird thing from TFA. For example in the introduction:

"The whole kernel has been reorganized and rewritten to help prevent software from affecting the system in unsavory ways."

I don't believe for a second they rewrote the fscking NT kernel. It may have been adjusted, tweaked, overhauled (insert favorite term) but it hasn't been rewritten.

I don't get it, "Rebuilt from the ground up" is always seen as a positive thing coming from a Marketing dept or a review, but for me (as a developer) that always spells trouble. Rewrite == new untested code == new bugs == stuff that worked before won't anymore.

Re:Exsqueeze me?! (1)

shotfeel (235240) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821365)

Not to mention that most USB keys aren't going USB 2.0 speeds. AFAIK all the ones I have are USB 1. And how does latency compare on the two systems (USB vs. hard drive)?

Removable; Magnetic vs flash (1)

Short Circuit (52384) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821367)

Writable USB mass-storage devices aren't really hot-swappable on Windows or Linux. Both operating systems use filesystem caching to speed up operations on the devices. These caches have to be flushed, usually by unmounting the filesystems, before the device can be removed. So "Click here to safely remove F:" is a necessity either way.

As for speeds compared to hard disk drives, SATA offers a higher theoretical throughput than USB2.0, but the seek times associated with magnetic drives limits this to the point where I get similar performance when comparing my 250GB external drive and my internal 80GB one. Flash memory devices virtually eliminate seek time issues, though. I get better performance with a key fob than I do with a local magnetic drive.

Time will tell (1)

wesw02 (846056) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821156)

I guess time will tell, but judging by microsoft's past history the only way this will work out good, is if some source code comes out and it gets modified to an extreme extent (in my opinion).

Haven't we seen this sort of thing before? (1)

Schezar (249629) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821157)

We did a show [] a short while back when the last article [] telling us why Vista won't be horrible appeared. I hate to say it, but this one doesn't really give me any more reason to give Vista a second look than that one did.

For every "improvement," they seem to be adding at least two shortcomings: no unsigned drivers, DRM, etc... I've kept both Windows and Linux around for the longest time, but I'm getting the feeling more and more that Windows XP is going to remain on my other partition indefinitely.

Wait a second... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14821168)

Many users view Windows XP (and Windows 2000, and previous Windows versions) as unsafe. No matter how many patches and updates Microsoft releases, the foundation of the OS itself the kernel is designed and built in a way that prevents it from being truly secure. The only solution, it is argued, is to redesign and rebuild the kernel with a focus on security and stability.

Isn't this what linux people were saying more or less all these years and were called zealots by MS fanboys?

Ohh, crap. (1)

aix tom (902140) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821178)

More of that "intelligent" pre-loading of programs and files. I want the OS to do what I WANT, not to do do what IT THINKS I WANT.

Re:Ohh, crap. (1)

pigs,3different1s (949056) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821323)

Good point. I hate when it "corrects" my e-mails when I purposefully type something that is case-sensitive, and have to correct it's "correction".

Obligatory Clippy... (1)

benjamindees (441808) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821324)

"It looks like you're trying to run a program!"

"must upgrade" (1)

Topherbyte (747078) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821183)

I read that as "must avoid."

OS X here I come...

Just say NO TO DRM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14821203)

Repeat after me: "NO!"

Why Vista WILL SUCK (0, Troll)

mrnick (108356) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821222)

It is written by Microsoft.

I hope I live long enough to visit Bill Gates grave!

Nick Powers

Re:Why Vista WILL SUCK (1)

nagora (177841) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821275)

It is written by Microsoft.

Indeed. If you want to see a great example of the blind leading the blind you should have a look through the IE team's blogs. What a bunch of useless twats; no wonder MS can't get a decent system out the door if that's the sort of "talent" they hire.


Oh look an MS story on /. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14821225)

I'm sure we'll see some thoughtful discussion.

The one feature that I'm looking forward to is... (1)

edawstwin (242027) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821227)

Tired of listening to some music or playing a game, and having that instant-messaging sound blast out your ears because it's five times louder than your other sounds? Vista will have per-application volume control. Problem solved.

I've been wanting this for years in Windows.

Why Windows * Won't Suck (4, Insightful)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821229)

Why limit yourself to Windows Vista!?

Windows Me

"Windows Me: PC Health Features Keep PCs Stable, Secure and Reliable -- and Take the Frustration Out of Computing for Home Users" (source) []

Windows 2000

"Our primary goal is to improve security and safety for all our customers -- consumers and businesses, regardless of size -- through a balance of technology innovation, guidance and industry leadership," Gates said. "We're committed to continued innovation that addresses the threats of today and anticipates those that will undoubtedly emerge in the future." (source) []

Windows XP

"Windows XP is the most secure and dependable operating system we have ever produced." (source) []

Windows Vista

"In Vista, it should be much more difficult for unauthorized programs (like Viruses and Trojans) to affect the core of the OS and secretly harm your system." (source) []

And one reason not to. (1)

miffo.swe (547642) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821242)

There is one reason bigger than everyone else that says Vista will indeed suck. DRM, just refuse the rimjob.

That better be on a scale of 5! (1)

zubinjdalal (816389) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821243)

Because if Vista rates an Athalon 64, with a gig of RAM and 248MB of video RAM as 4 on 10, I wonder what it expects a 10 to be!

often (0)

revery (456516) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821246)

They take apart the marketing hype

It is often at this point in a product's review, when the hype has been carefully peeled away from the packaging, the box has been delicately opened, and the packing materials have been placed in neat piles and sorted according to color or specific gravity or biodegradability, that there is a moment of panic and surreal confusion as realization dawns: the box is empty, and we are left with nothing but ribbon and tinsel and wrapping paper.

I usually try to make something from the ribbon and tinsel and round things up with a few paragraphs about the pretty, pretty paper.

Auto Scheduled Defrag (1)

Thnurg (457568) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821257)

No need to manually defrag anymore according to the article.

It will happen automatically and slow your harddisk to a crawl in the process.

How about creating a file system that doesn't suck instead?

Re:Auto Scheduled Defrag (1)

SydBarrett (65592) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821336)

Doesn't seem really automatic, it's just the same dumb scheduling program thats been around since win95.

THE Sixth Reason Why Vista Won't Suck .. (1)

guzzirider (551141) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821259)

Silly Micro$oft gazillion character alpha-numeric serial number replaced with MC\VISA\AMX number and expiration date. (Much easier to type in)

Boot up music replaced by ka-ching ka-ching

Hardware needed to run vista? (1)

Chowser (888973) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821264)

We're talking about a "must" upgrade here but what about the specs necessary to run it? Sure it's going to be better, but joe-average can't even buy a computer now and be assured that it will even run vista.

Performance rating (1)

spazoidspam (708589) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821266)

I really like the Performance rating tool. This will help average computer users judge how good their computers are better. Right now you ask a normal person how good their computer is and they tell you that "Its a dell", or they tell you "Its a 2 Giga-somthing".

The ratings could possibly make this easier, and it could help educate people about why their computer is so slow. From a sales standpoint this could help as well. Computers could be advetised with their rating instead of stuff that geeks like us understand, but is too confusing for many others. This could help them compare deals and make a more informed choice about the computer they are getting.

Had a wee play with the Feb CTP. (1)

hazmat2k (911198) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821270)

Installed the Feb CTP on my notebook (generic Tosh Centrino. 1.6Ghz, 1Gb of DDR M50). Really impressed with the image quality. Not impressed with the 7.5Gb base install. Nearly every system change is a complete pain in the ass. Maybe I'm too used to XP, but it shouldn't take, going from memory, at least 6 mouse clicks to turn off window animations. Now running Ubuntu.

and the average is.... (1)

rmallico (831443) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821274)

uh... looking at that first photo... the numbers for the 'performance rating' are as follows: 4.4 5.9 5.9 5.9 5.8 with the overall rating of a uh... 4 whassup wit dat?

Not convinced (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14821282)

Many users view Windows XP (and Windows 2000, and previous Windows versions) as unsafe. No matter how many patches and updates Microsoft releases, the foundation of the OS itself--the kernel--is designed and built in a way that prevents it from being truly secure. The only solution, it is argued, is to redesign and rebuild the kernel with a focus on security and stability.

The kernel? Nobody argues that the kernel is insecure. When was the last time the kernel was compromised?

It's the design of Windows that is insecure. Things like making things executable depnding on the filename, or having many applications require Administrator privs. You aren't going to fix that by looking at the kernel.

This stinks of "we've improved the kernel, therefore we are downplaying the kernel in previous versions to make it seem like a huge improvement". This is a tactic used by Microsoft for every release of Windows, for various features. They always talk about how bad some feature is in previous versions and how the new version will be much better. Then they do it again for the next version. And the version after that.

This isn't about improving security, it's about sounding appealing and a big step up from previous versions. It's because their biggest competitor is inertia, not because there was anything particularly wrong with the kernel.

The driver model of Vista has been totally changed.

Again? Fantastic. Remember this, all you Windows trolls who say that Windows has better driver support. This is going to be XP all over again (which was 2000 all over again).

Slick "new" calendar? (1)

rock217 (802738) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821287)

From TFA: The slick new calendar app is a welcome addition to the bundled Windows programs.

So how is this different than outlook? The screeny [] to me looks like outlook+eyecandy...maybe its just me.

a "MUST UPGRADE"? (4, Insightful)

WoodstockJeff (568111) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821290)

If you want it, you must upgrade... everything. Unless, of course, you're currently running the latest blood-still-flowing-from-the-wounds-edge game machine, in which case you'll just need more memory and a better video card.

Why must I upgrade, though? What will I gain that I want in the first place? Better game performance? Not needed, since I don't do games. The ability to run the latest Microsoft Office at speeds approaching what you could do 5 years ago? Sorry, I already jumped ship to other options. Stronger DRM so that I'll be able to play Sony's next CD/DVD/WhateverD? I'll pass...

What I'd like is some tuning on the current operating system, so that it doesn't need more CPU cycles to do simple tasks, like display directories. And how about fewer holes for virii and worms, without introducing a whole new layer of software to protect the last new layer of software, which was to protect me from bugs in the previous new layer...

Oh, wait... that's Linux.

nope (1)

dirker (907397) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821299)

There is now way it wont suck,its windows.

Looks like a forced upgrade for US gov users... (5, Interesting)

xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821303)

Looks like a forced upgrade for US gov users; if AES-256 and "SHA-2" hashs are really going to be US gov security requirements, the only way Microsoft will support them is by upgrading EVERY windows desktop and server to Vista. (For some reason Microsoft has refused to put AES-256 support into any non-Vista version of its SSL stack even though the rest of the industry has been doing so for almost five years now.)

'Upgrade'? (1)

MattGWU (86623) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821305)

You say 'why it will be a must-upgrade for all Windows users' as if any Windows users are going to have much of a choice once it's out for a while. Really, how long will MS let XP kick around and be supported by upgrades, and by other sofware houses, once Vista is out?

I wouldn't call it an 'upgrade', Bob.

AMD Athlon FX-25 rated a 4? (1)

Benanov (583592) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821310)

Someone's getting paid some marketing dollars...


oh yes it will (1)

FishandChips (695645) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821313)

Vista is going to suck all right. It's a huge, resource-hungry, monolithic 1990s idea launched just as we hit rocketing resource and energy costs. Small may be beautiful but if you're Vista then grossly fat is better, apparently.

For many folks, Vista will represent an expenditure they can ill afford. Vista is unlikely to be cheaper in real terms than WinXP; probably it will be more expensive. Then there will be the obligatory AV/spyware stuff for "only" XX bucks more. After that there will be hardware issues, with 1001 sites telling users that they'll need more, more more - more ram, a better monitor, more processing power, yes yes more. And if you've managed to get that far, there'll be the small, haha, matters of DRM and, very likely, an accelerated lack of real support for WinXP. It's boasting and bandwagoning from an industry that doesn't deserve it selling folks stuff they really don't need.

Extreme Tech? Extreme Propoganda. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14821318)

Yes - we must, all of us, rush out and lay claim to copies of Vista for all of our Windows computers immediately! Without this, our planetary orbit will be skewed, glaciers will form, chaos will reign, and Bill's bank account will not be the proper size to counterbalance the Indian subcontinent and Mt. Everest...

Vista sucks. (5, Informative)

millennial (830897) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821320)

I've been beta testing Vista for a while now. After installing Vista, I swear to God - the OS cached every single EXE file on my computer in a folder in the root of Vista's installation drive. Each EXE file is given its own subfolder in this folder, with the same name as the file followed by a unique hash. Each subfolder contains the EXE file and several accompanying files, at least two of which are XML documents.

When all was said and done, this folder took up nearly 5GB on disk. I can't even open this drive in Explorer. I let it sit for about 20 minutes once and my PC slowed to a crawl

Whatever this godawful "feature" is, I hope it is removed for the final version.

Can it Run on Existing Hardware? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14821322)

The latest version of M$ Bloat-ware that brings the latest hardware to a crawl, well that has no value to me.

Would it be so bad if they could continue to improve security and performance, instead of making it bigger with more features that 80% of the people will not use?

Linux continues to work on almost any hardware you can load it into...

As far as the next windows goes - it would be better if it would run on Windows 98 hardware, and
run very well on the newer hardware...

"Security, Security, and more Security"?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14821328)

"To be honest, we don't know how the security features of Vista will shake out. It's still very much a beta product. The real test of the OS will be when it is delivered into the wild, and every virus, worm, and Trojan writer in the world strives to live in infamy by releasing the nastiest malware for Microsoft's shiny new OS."

Uhh, so it "won't suck" because it -might- not be as insecure as XP? That really doesn't sound too promicing...

I'll tell you why... (1)

truthsearch (249536) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821330)

I'll tell you why it's "a must upgrade for Windows users." Because Microsoft will stop fixing bugs [] in your current version of Windows. There are many thousands of bugs listed in their "knowledge base" which state "we know this is an issue but we're not going to fix it in this version." I've been part of a development team which spoke directly with Microsoft representatives on many occasions and when we mentioned Windows 2000 bugs their answer was "buy XP." I quit.

Thanks. But no thanks.

Vista won't suck because.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14821333)

... will it run Linux?

Why Windows 98 won't suck (1)

Schraegstrichpunkt (931443) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821339)

We've all heard it before.

Ooh ooh, let me have my... (1)

Paraplex (786149) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821340) shackles!

asta la vista baby (1, Insightful)

Quirk (36086) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821344)

Not that little old me matters but as of WinXP pro I'm moving off windows boxes. I grew up on wintel boxes from DOS 3.3 up. I went with Win95/NT dual boot boxes then added Mandrake 6. I've purchased major releases of VS Basic pro and VS C++ pro. I've routinely bought new releases of Office Pro and Visio (I think both are great products).

DRM and Windows blackbox security, along with the Ubuntu distro, have pushed me to adopt an OSS only stand. MS will try to cram DRM down everyone's throat. As a Canadian, where copyright laws aren't as rabid as those carrying the American sickness, I don't intend to let MS port American laws into my small piece of Canada. As to security, a thousand eyes are better than a single black box that may, or, may not, have backdoors in place to allow American three lettered organizations to spy on me or pull the plug should their paranoia overwhelm them.

Being a happy later adopter of bleeding edge tech I'm just now building AMD athlon boxes and, on the one I've finished, Ubuntu is doing just fine. Factor in Xen, VMware freeware, *BSD, OpenSolaris and free Solaris 10, and the future of F/OSS is looking very bright indeed.

As are many other /.ers, I'm my family circle goto guy when it comes to PCs and tech generally, so I think it's time to cut the MS cord and go solo with F/OSS as a statement to my small sphere of influence.

WinXP support is set to go on for another 7 years by then I doubt I'll see the need to pay the MS tax just for multimedia, or, maybe, the DRM madness will have been reversed, but I doubt it.

My upgrade path so far (1, Interesting)

raider_red (156642) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821350)

Windows 3.1 (1994)
Windows 95 (1995)
Windows 98 (1999)
Windows XP home edition (2002)
Mac OSX (2004)

The last upgrade has been, by far, the most satisfying.

duh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14821354)

Any OS (other than older Windows) installed on a Windows system is an upgrade.

abhorrent abuse of capital letters (1)

bersl2 (689221) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821355)

features like a kernel which has new Heap Management and details on SuperFetch

I mean, seriously, "SuperFetch"? It's bad enough when one hypes things that are actually hypable; it's much worse when one hypes that which cannot be hyped, such as virtual memory.

Is nothing sacred?

windows? (2, Interesting)

Intangion (816356) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821356)

which version out of the 12 should i upgrade to ;) i think windows vista is likely to do more for linux than anything before ;) i mean what would you rather do, pay for a whole new operating system that is very alien to you, and requires you to upgrade your hardware and alot of software, and is likely unstable (and new so doesnt have a proven usability).. or download a FREE operating system that is also somewhat alien (to windows users), but has proven stability and usablity, also you wont have to upgrade your hardware for it either... oh btw did i mention its free?

i for one am tired of microsoft telling me when i have to drop 2000 dollars for a new computer. your choises are:
A) keep using (and patching) the older versions of windows which become more and more unstable patch after patch
B) keep using the older versions of windows but DONT patch, and then your system becomes more and more exploitable as more exploits are discovered
C) upgrade your hardware, and buy new version of windows every couple of years, (spending potentially thousands of dollars), relearn how to use the new windows, relearn how to use the new office all over again..
D) download a free open source alternative, DONT upgrade your hardware, dont let your upgrade schedule be locked into someone elses marketing plans. dont run the most heavily targetted OS for exploits/hackers. Use open office which seems to be more similar to MS Office than the new version will be. DO enjoy the benefits that come with open source

After using linux for a while going back to windows is extremely painful and youll wonder how you ever managed to use it.

Why Vista Won't Suck (1)

hab136 (30884) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821360)

Reason #1: Because it blows
Reason #2: ???
Reason #3: Profit!!

Can it delete files? (1)

British (51765) | more than 8 years ago | (#14821370)

Can you finally delete files/folders without it giving you a stupid "access denied" for no reason? Plase let me delete aging files with no guff. I'm the user at the computer, so do what I say.

Of course, delete the files in CMD(er, DOS), and it deletes them without guff.

The real reasson Vista won't suck is. . . . . . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14821373)

Drum roll please







Because it will blow!

Thank you! Thank you! I'll be here all night.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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

Submission Text Formatting Tips

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

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

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

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