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!

Windows Vista Beta 2 Available for Download

samzenpus posted more than 8 years ago | from the get-it-while-it's-hot dept.

444

prostoalex writes "Microsoft Windows Vista Beta 2 is now available for download from Microsoft's official site. If you remember seeing reviews of it already, Microsoft made downloads available to a limited set of customers last month. For PC users that are already running Windows Vista Beta 2, Microsoft put together a list of additional downloads like product guide and feature lists."

cancel ×

444 comments

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

First post (1, Offtopic)

ntufar (712060) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493538)

Here goes my karma...

Re:First post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15493730)

You have to have karma in order to burn it >:(

Ooops, Antitrust (5, Interesting)

Ckwop (707653) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493543)

Okay, go to the "resource centre link", provided here [microsoft.com] here for your convenience. What do you notice? I'll give a hint:

Download the Windows Vista Product Guide

Available in Microsoft Word format (60 MB) or the new Windows Vista XPS document format (12 MB) . (emph mine)

Where the hell is the PDF? Aside from the fact that this is really fucking annoying it has some really worrying implications. They're trying to boot out the PDF format, which is nice, open and ubiquitous with their own format - and they're using their monopoly on the desktop operating system market to achieve this.

Let me be the first to call "Antitrust. Thanks for playing Microsoft! Please give the EU another 600 million euros.

For me, this little bit of text says it all. There's no PDF, they're pushing their own format that they know nobody uses. This shows that even after multiple multi-million dollar settlements and huge fines from the EU the company has not changed one bit. They seem to be acting much like a heroine addict, in that they're moving from one crime to the next, getting bigger and bigger fines but no matter how much you fine the company it is still pathologically anti-competitive.

I do have to say that the longer Microsoft remains on this path, and refuses to comply with the law, the more likely that it will meet it's end equally as sticky as the heroine addict. Is it a rule that all big companies go the way of AT&T eventually?

Simon

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (2, Informative)

Professor_UNIX (867045) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493564)

They're trying to boot out the PDF format, which is nice, open and ubiquitous with their own format - and they're using their monopoly on the desktop operating system market to achieve this.

And you find this surprising? Here's another newsflash, try watching videos on the MSNBC website without running Microsoft Internet Explorer on Windows. Of course they're trying to hold onto their monopoly, it's what dying companies that fail to innovate do.

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (-1, Offtopic)

Xamedes (843781) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493598)

mod parent down and its not informative

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (4, Insightful)

Threni (635302) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493680)

> Of course they're trying to hold onto their monopoly, it's what dying companies that fail to
> innovate do.

You're confusing fantasy with reality, I'm afraid. You mean it's what the world's most successful companies do.

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (1, Informative)

DaHat (247651) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493566)

Before griping too much, why don't you spend some time and look into what XPS really is [microsoft.com] and see that while being similar to PDF from a regular unskilled user perspective, the options and features it supplies are widely applicable to many different levels and applications.

How many printers do you know that ship today or will be out within a year allow you to send a raw PDF file to it and have it print as is without any kind of client spooling and image degradation? XPS lets you do that.

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (3, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493639)

For its shortcomings, PDF is an open standard. Can you say that about XPS? Imagine what would have happened if Microsoft tried to force a proprietary networking protocol on you, rather than just complying with TCP/IP?

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (4, Insightful)

DaHat (247651) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493675)

PDF is an open format? That explains why Adobe doesn't fancy the idea of Microsoft including PDF exporting functionality into Office 12!

As for the openness of the XPS... why don't you hop on into the site linked to above and visit the Licensing Overview page [microsoft.com] .

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (1)

peragrin (659227) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493687)

Yes it is. XPDF, KPDF, and a host of other Open Source applications use PDF daily withot fees. Rumour has it that Apple is using PDF free as well though I do believe Apple slid a little something Adobe's way to be kind. (I don't have proof either way)

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15493713)

Show me where in the license it says "unrevocable", then you can talk about openness. It's not a standard if it comes with strings attached.

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (3, Interesting)

Evro (18923) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493660)

How many printers do you know that ship today or will be out within a year allow you to send a raw PDF file to it and have it print as is without any kind of client spooling and image degradation? XPS lets you do that.


You make it sound like that's such an awesome feature... who cares? 10 years ago I could drag a PDF to the printer icon in Mac OS and it would print it. Why not just open Acrobat and hit print? I still fail to see how this makes it worthy of a completely new format.

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (2, Interesting)

DaHat (247651) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493701)

Apparently you don't know much about print spooling... in short print spoolers tend to play to the lowest common denominator between printers in such a way that images spooled on the desktop end up getting dithered a few times before heading to the printer unless there is some decent software on the system that is designed specially for the printer... and this software isn't always free.

So... rather than force each printer manufacturer to have to build their own high end interface to the PC, Microsoft builds a standard and allows hardware and software makers to target it... kinda sounds like the evil that is DirectX doesn't it? You know, that evil thing that makes games so incompatible with different hardware and configuring your system a nightmare when you change hardware devices, IRQ's or games? Oh right, that doesn't really exist with DirectX anymore... that's how it was before we had a common standard for such applications.

You can really summarize the difference and reason for XPS as the difference between analog or digital... say in display devices. In VGA the monitor is told "this pixel is about this color" while in DVI it is told "this pixel is exactly this color". While in both cases it is up to the end device to decide exactly what will be drawn to the screen and how, DVI is at least providing far more detailed (and more abundant) information with which the display can do it's job.

Which kind of precision would you like to have in your printer?

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (5, Informative)

Tony Hoyle (11698) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493743)

So Microsoft want to make printer manufacturers use their own proprietary protocol rather than Postscript which has been doing this job rather well for the last 20 years?

You also don't seem to know how print spoolers work. They do *not* work for the lowest common denominator, they are pretty much device independent until they hit the driver itself... even Windows uses a display language to describe the page rather than Bitmaps (Unix of course use postscript throughout, so if you print a postscript document on a decent printer no driver is ever involved).

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (2, Insightful)

azuravian (850674) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493802)

So, it's ok for Adobe to push their proprietary protocol, but not MS. Admittedly, I don't know a lot about print spooling, etc., but isn't PostScript a decidedly Adobe created format.

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (0, Offtopic)

hey (83763) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493682)

Brendan, why not get a job with Microsoft -- that'll pay off your loans.

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (4, Insightful)

gowen (141411) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493684)

How many printers do you know that ship today or will be out within a year allow you to send a raw PDF file to it and have it print as is without any kind of client spooling and image degradation? XPS lets you do that.
So, XPS implements the same technology that PostScript has implemented for years, only using the wholy inappropriate XML, rather than a stack based schema.

Oh, and PostScript being an established, stable open standard, of course.

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (2, Interesting)

GeffDE (712146) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493689)

Before asking badly designed rhetorical questions, maybe you should know a little more about your subject. Mac OS X handles all of their graphics through PDF. That's what it sends to printers, and that's what its windowing layer, Quartz, uses. So maybe XPS does that, but so does PDF. In addition, PDF supplies "options and features" that are "widely applicable to many different levels and applications." I mean, Macrodobe is basing a whole new Flash application type system around PDF. As I said, Mac OS X uses PDF exclusively for displaying any sort of graphical content. So not only is PDF the standard for portable documents it is extremely versatile.

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (5, Informative)

amorsen (7485) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493695)

How many printers do you know that ship today or will be out within a year allow you to send a raw PDF file to it and have it print as is without any kind of client spooling and image degradation? XPS lets you do that.

Err, just about all decent printers? Support for Postscript Level 3 basically implies support for printing PDFs.

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15493697)

How many printers do you know that ship today or will be out within a year allow you to send a raw PDF file to it and have it print as is without any kind of client spooling and image degradation? XPS lets you do that.

I just tried that and guess what? It printed a load of garbage. How appropriate.

Re:It's Another Closed Standard (2, Interesting)

asphaltjesus (978804) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493705)

If you go to this link: http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/xps/xpslicense.mspx [microsoft.com] You will find, This CNS provision will only apply to companies engaged in the following businesses: Independent Hardware Vendors (IHVs) focusing on printing technologies that consume XPS Documents in printers IHVs focusing on scanning technologies that create XPS Documents with scanners Independent Software Vendors (ISVs) that support the above types of IHVs through the development of Raster Image Processors (RIPs) and drivers You'll then notice there are Microsoft patents involved in the closed standard. Conclusions? 1. Typical OSS project is screwed 2. Closed standard designed to extend and extinguish competitors. (So is PDF in some ways) I'm not saying Adobe is the good guy here, but the print industry has had YEARS of working out the kinks in PDF's. I'm not sure what Microsoft brings to the table.

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493732)

Please explain why I would want that feature?
I can already print PDF documents just as easy as any other document, and I can even print them from practically every OS to every printer.

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15493569)

They're trying to boot out the PDF format, which is nice, open and ubiquitous with their own format - and they're using their monopoly on the desktop operating system market to achieve this.

Shocking! Unheard of! Never will the intelligent US-American comsumers let this happen by buying the MS-tax for every PC thei buy at WalMart.

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (1)

genckas (660936) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493578)

They _are_ trying to boot PDF, but its such a lost cause that they will eventualy give up (like with other things). Most companies/organisations use PDF exclusively, I don't see how it pays for MS to go into this whole war, isn't it cheaper to just pay Adobe a licence fee? Am I understanding it right, that they need to pay it to use PDF?

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (1)

MMC Monster (602931) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493656)

Technically, they don't need to pay anyone to use PDF format. PDF is an open format that is well documented and (apparently) contains no patents (or, none that anyone has come forward and complained about).

In reality, they should probably pay Adobe a lisencing fee and get "real" PDF support and not worry about a anti-trust case. Though even bundling Adobe-backed PDF creation maybe enough to resurface antitrust issues. (Imagine a small company that is trying to sell a cheap PDF solution to XP users.)

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (1)

Bloggins (783115) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493581)

Yes, but have you noticed what has been happening to the sticky pieces of AT&T?

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (4, Interesting)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493584)

Technically though it's their website and they can put whatever lame duck format on their they want. I don't think they'll get rid of PDF. Look at WMF it's technically a replacement for Postscript yet people still use that.

The XPS format will either get opened up or nobody but MSFT websites will use it. Especially since Vista will still run Adobe...

What you should be questioning is why XPS exists at all. PDF seems to do the job of portable document format just fine being that it renders [or can be rendered] pitch perfect anywhere. Unlike say Word which is a just a crime against professionalism...

Tom

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (-1, Flamebait)

DaHat (247651) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493624)

What you should be questioning is why XPS exists at all.

Those of us who know exactly what XPS is do not question it at all because it is quite clear... despite the lack of seeming malicious intent from Microsoft.

Maybe you too should do some reading [microsoft.com] on the topic or watch a video [msdn.com] .

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15493789)

You already linked upstream to Microsoft to show us how great Microsoft's new format is. Please stop spamming Slashdot.

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (2, Funny)

alexhs (877055) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493750)

Especially since Vista will still run Adobe...

Don't give them ideas...

"Vista isn't done until Adobe Acrobat won't run"

Software Freedom (2, Insightful)

Bios_Hakr (68586) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493603)

As an individual, you have the freedom to decide what you put on your website. Aside from a few taboo subjects, you have the freedom to do pretty much whatever you want.

Why should MS be different?

Sure, you can point at artificial market constraints as a reason MS should play nice. But, at the end of the day, you either support freedom in the software marketplace, or you don't.

If you support free software (and individual freedoms), you have to believe that MS should be allowed to publish *their* documentation in whatever format they choose. If the market likes the XPS format, then the market will go that way.

If, however, MS tried to make Acrobat run poorly or not at all, then you'd have a valid complaint.

Remember, by providing documentation in their own format, they are not removing your choice. You are still free to download Acrobat at your leisure.

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (2, Interesting)

cliffski (65094) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493609)

Good. PDFs suck. My system is 99% stable, the only two things that lock it and grind it to a halt are Battlefield 2 crashes and opening a sodding PDF file. The sooner that cludgy file format dies the better.
Im sick of having to read stuff formatted for print on a computer screen.

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (5, Informative)

m-wielgo (858054) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493672)

download Foxit PDF Reader http://www.foxitsoftware.com/pdf/rd_intro.php [foxitsoftware.com]

It's much faster than Adobe Reader at opening a PDF file and being a self-executable, requires no installation

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (0)

DaHat (247651) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493610)

To follow up on my previous post [slashdot.org] , if reading to learn more about what XPS isn't your style, take a look at this Channel 9 video [msdn.com] from August last year which walked through all of this... maybe then you'll have at least some factual information from which to make a judgment.

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (1)

pintomp3 (882811) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493616)

you expect them to post a pdf? how bout a one of those "get adobe acrobat here" buttons too? maybe their videos should be in quicktime too. of course microsoft is going to push their formats. nothing new.

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15493738)

No, we expect them to face reality and use HTML/PDF and DivX.

The motivation of corporations (3, Informative)

zoeblade (600058) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493635)

They seem to be acting much like a heroine addict, in that they're moving from one crime to the next, getting bigger and bigger fines but no matter how much you fine the company it is still pathologically anti-competitive... Is it a rule that all big companies go the way of AT&T eventually?

Quite possibly. The documentary The Corporation [imdb.com] pointed out how such corporations, while legally people in some respects, would be more like psychopaths [abstractdynamics.org] than any other kind of people, as they do whatever they can get away with on their quest for more profit, showing a complete disregard for morals and the law.

If it's cheaper to break the law and pay a fine than it is to obey the law and profit less, they'll break it.

Corporations have no conscience (2, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493707)

That's pretty much what they are: People without any kind of moral.

Morals are something we have, because we feel remorse for doing something "bad". We have morals, because our conscience is nagging when we have something to blame on ourselves that we did wrong. It enables us to function in groups.

Corps don't have that kind of mental safeguard against going postal. Corporations don't act by themselves, they use their employees to act for them. Those are, by definition, human beings who WOULD have a conscience. But that conscience doesn't kick in, because they can brush it off on the corp.

You're about to fire someone. You even know him, he's deeply in debt, has a sick child, his wife died half a year ago. You wouldn't fire him, your conscience would nag you for kicking him out. Yeah, his stats don't look good, but hey, considering his situation, that's understandable. You'd normally give him a little time to recover.

Not in a corp. You fire him. Because if you don't do it, you're fired as well and someone else does it. Same jusification that fascist regimes (and the people serving in them) used to squelch any kind of remorse. You can't help it. You gotta do it. Or someone else does it.

The difference is that the ultimately "guilty" person is no real person. It's the corp. And corps have no conscience.

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (3, Insightful)

zidohl (976382) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493655)

After Adobe threatened MS with a lawsuit [slashdot.org] for wanting to allow PDF writing for free in Office 2007 i can see why they'd rather use their own format. Essentially, they weren't pushing their own format, they were going to provide PDF support as well as the XPS format, but Adobe it seems will be suing [eweek.com] because they're not charging for the ability to convert to PDF format.

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (1)

Pieroxy (222434) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493736)

Yes, but does it run Linux? ;)

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (1)

vinlud (230623) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493752)

They seem to be acting much like a heroine addict, in that they're moving from one crime to the next, getting bigger and bigger fines but no matter how much you fine the company it is still pathologically anti-competitive.

Well if there is one example of 'crime does pay well' i would say it is Microsoft, why would they change? It works!

Re:Ooops, Antitrust (1)

kthejoker (931838) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493763)

I don't get this argument. Adobe owns Acrobat and Microsoft is unwilling to meet their price on negotiating a continued partnership for Windows Vista. How is this antitrust exactly?

First off, Adobe is itself a de facto monopoly - sure the PDF is open, but Adobe makes any and all money on it, and there are no competing standards at all (they buy all their competitors, including Macromedia.)

Secondly, Microsoft choosing a different format for their documentation is not an antitrust violation, and since they are selling their Office Suite independently (as required by the antitrust settlement), again, no laws are being violated. (You have to be forced to *buy* something for it to matter.)

And finally, many of Microsoft's troubles in the past have been tied to them taking open standard products (a la PDF) and converting them into MS-only formats and software via their monopoly. THAT is what gets them in trouble with the DoJ and consumers. Coming up with a new format for PDF is nothing new for MS; they also had the Microsoft Reader for e-Books, which used its own format. So now they're repeating the same old business, but I imagine every US government agency in existince (which all use PDF as the standard) will nip this one in the bud rather quickly, or force MS to come up with some resoution with Adobe.

Hot enough for ya, al-Zarqawi? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15493798)

WAAAA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Bitch! Say hi to Tookie, ok? Now that you've crossed into eternity you finally get to discover that your religion is for children with severe inferiority complexes. My guess is that by now you're horrified to learn that surgically removing a woman's clitoris is not an acceptable way to prevent her from sleeping with other men, and that Mohammed was a violent, childish, ignorant fraud. And the best part is that when you've been digesting that info for a billion years, you will have just barely begun.

Started downloading... (2, Funny)

k1980pc (942645) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493547)

I hope it works on my ibook or mini - Hope it is not like other MS products.

Upgrade My WinXP Machine? Why? (4, Interesting)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493548)

I am a simple man.

I don't want an operating system with bells & whistles. I don't want an operating system that looks like it has a glass face or real marble or the most incredible anti-aliased font you've ever seen. What I want is an operating system that works and works efficiently.

There's no reason to preach to the choir, I have many machines (most of them Linux) that dual boot to many operating systems but you'll always need Windows because it's kind of the 'industry standard' for some people.

But when I look for an operating system the words 'form','function','marriage' & 'perfect' come to mind but not necessarily in that order. What I mean is, there's a balance I seek such that my hardware isn't stressed just to open a text editor yet the design is simple & friendly to the eye.

I run Windows XP professional & it works. It works well, which is surprising considering my history with the Windows operating system. It can be cut down to a pretty bare point of functionality and I like it.

So, Mr. Gates, why should I upgrade to Vista? Your "feature list [microsoft.com] " (the same damn thing I've been seeing for the last year) doesn't entice me at all. In fact, it scares me. You know what else scares me? It might not run the games I currently play [extremetech.com] ... and I'm not even sure it will run on my current hardware [engadget.com] . Hell, even IBM [neoseeker.com] doesn't seem to want Vista.

Tons of cash for a bloated operating system? No thanks. I'll settle for Windows XP Professional.

Why run Windows XP ? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15493583)

I ran Windows 2000 for years, just because I hated Windows XP for the very same reasons. Now I run Windows XP.
Trust me, you will follow....

Re:Upgrade My WinXP Machine? Why? (2, Insightful)

exit3219 (946049) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493613)

New games will appear, probably Vista-only, as DirectX won't be released for XP. So it'll be either upgrade or play old games. (Unless the game makers will find a way to avoid OS-dependence).

Re:Upgrade My WinXP Machine? Why? (1)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493813)

Games which require direct X 10 (vista only) should be able to degrade nicely just like current games can operate dx 7 or dx 9 pathways.

I can see though the marketting people having to specify on the promotional materials "available for XBox, PS2, PC(XP), PC(Vista)"
Whilst there is still a market for XP the game makers won't abandon them.

Hell, microsoft might get so much stick about DX10 that they backport it, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Re:Upgrade My WinXP Machine? Why? (4, Insightful)

Tim C (15259) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493615)

Hell, even IBM doesn't seem to want Vista.

What?! Arguably the single largest corporate sponsor of Linux and assorted OSS projects doesn't seem too interested in Vista?

Say it ain't so!

there's a balance I seek such that my hardware isn't stressed just to open a text editor yet the design is simple & friendly to the eye.

So set the theme to Windows Classic. Sheesh; you make it sound like Aero Glass is the only option...

Re:Upgrade My WinXP Machine? Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15493625)

So set the theme to Windows Classic. Sheesh; you make it sound like Aero Glass is the only option...
Yeah, pay all that money just so you can keep going back to classic. Makes sense ... though not financial sense.

Re:Upgrade My WinXP Machine? Why? (0)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493739)

So set the theme to Windows Classic. Sheesh; you make it sound like Aero Glass is the only option...

That's akin to trying to sell a Lotus race car to someone who only wants to drive within city limits and telling him "So what, simply don't shift past 2rd gear".

He does not NEED the stuff Vista promotes as the best thing since sliced bread. Why bother getting a system (especially if it's far from being free) when you don't need what it offers?

Re:Upgrade My WinXP Machine? Why? (5, Insightful)

jawtheshark (198669) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493629)

No thanks. I'll settle for Windows XP Professional.

Well, while I agree with all your points. The thing is: I said exactly the same a few years ago when I was running Windows 2000. I thought I would never upgrade... Yet, now I run Windows XP Professional. Why? Well, XP had one thing I really liked (and is very useful on a multi-user-home-machine: fast user switching. I only "upgraded" to Windows XP in 2005, so I am "late" to Windows XP. I always end up upgrading late, because I think it's better that other people test the damned thing and find the quirks.

For now, I do not see any reason to upgrade to Windows Vista, but we'll talk again in 2008, when WinXP isn't supported anymore. Currently, I am evaluating FreeBSD as a complete replacement (and I like it...) Perhaps in 2008, I'll be running FreeBSD exclusively. If not, then I'll probably will be running Vista. You'll probably end up in the same boat as me: either a free OS or Windows Vista. Espcially when you buy a new machine and can't get a (legal) copy of XP anymore...

Re:Upgrade My WinXP Machine? Why? (1)

lithandie (627181) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493724)

For now, I do not see any reason to upgrade to Windows Vista, but we'll talk again in 2008
If Vista is released by then... I think 2009 is more realistic..... maybe a servicepack 2 by 2010 :)

Re:Upgrade My WinXP Machine? Why? (2, Insightful)

plutonium83 (818340) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493673)

Honestly, the only reason I'm interested in Vista is the Expose-like feature. I use a mac at school and Expose makes working just a little less frustrating.

Re:Upgrade My WinXP Machine? Why? (1)

vinlud (230623) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493791)

What makes you think you're part of the targeted audience?
Hint: the masses do like glass faces and real marble and don't care about the inner workings of an operating system.

Dual Boot? (1)

suggsjc (726146) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493809)

I have many machines (most of them Linux) that dual boot to many operating systems


Just nit-picking/trolling, but if you can boot into many operating systems then wouldn't it be a mulit-boot? Doesn't dual boot mean being able to boot from one of two operating systems (ie Windows/Linux or Linux/*BSD, etc)?

From dictionary.com:
dual
adj.
1. Composed of two usually like or complementary parts; double: dual controls for pilot and copilot; a car with dual exhaust pipes.
2. Having a double character or purpose: a belief in the dual nature of reality.
3. Grammar. Of, relating to, or being a number category that indicates two persons or things, as in Greek, Sanskrit, and Old English.

n. Grammar
1. The dual number.
2. An inflected form of a noun, adjective, pronoun, or verb used with two items or people.


This isn't a direct shot at you, but I think there are a lot of people that misuse that term.

I got the chance to play with this (4, Interesting)

Saven Marek (739395) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493551)

I got to play with this a couple weeks of go, and I think MS is doing alot better than expected. Earlier reviews of vista and longhorn before that rightly criticized it for some really bad issues but they're very cleaned up now, and given them more than six months more to complete it I think they can ship something great out of this. I don't say it will end up changing the dynamics of a desktop in competition with linux as they are now very distinct systems with their own niches, as vista is just more of the same, but it's more of the same made better.

Point? (2, Informative)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493555)

Why would anyone outside of ISVs download this? So for the cost of re-imaging my system I get to test an unstable, feature incomplete OS that is likely to further the bane of human existance. Not only does the install expire but I then have to pay full price for a legit copy at the end.

And for all my bug reports I send in I get ???

At least when you beta test an OSS OS you then get rewarded with a stable OS that you can freely install as you choose... /me hopes Vista never materializes and/or flops big.

Tom

Re:Point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15493588)

So for the cost of re-imaging my system I get to test an unstable, feature incomplete OS that is likely to further the bane of human existance.

Better than the cost of re-imaging + $169 that people will be paying in a few months for an unstable, feature incomplete OS that is likely to further the bane of human existance.

Re:Point? (4, Insightful)

pintomp3 (882811) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493590)

if you have to support windows boxes, you will probably have to support vista some day. might as well get a headstart and get your hands dirty (best way to learn) even if you don't plan on rolling it out for a long time (a long time after release).

Re:Point? (0, Troll)

Tim C (15259) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493596)

If you don't want to run the Beta, fine, don't run it. However, to my mind you lose all rights to complain about misfeatures and bugs if you had an opportunity to find and report them, and didn't.

It's kind of like politics; if you can vote and don't, don't expect any sympathy from me if you bitch about the state of your government.

At least when you beta test an OSS OS you then get rewarded with a stable OS that you can freely install as you choose

Actually in both cases you get exactly the same reward - absolutely nothing. You get nothing that isn't available to everyone who *doesn't* help in the testing. At best you get your name on a list of participants, and the warm glow inside of having helped with something.

Re:Point? (4, Insightful)

h0oam1 (533917) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493721)

"If you don't want to run the Beta, fine, don't run it. However, to my mind you lose all rights to complain about misfeatures and bugs if you had an opportunity to find and report them, and didn't." This seems to me to be total crap. It is not my job (nor the job of most reading this) to test Microsoft's products for them for free. This is a commercial product, and it is Microsoft's responsibility to ship a good working product to PAYING customers. If it were an OSS project, your statement would be valid, but this is certainly not OSS. Since when did quality assurance for commercial software become the sole responsibility of the customers???

Re:Point? (2, Interesting)

RealGrouchy (943109) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493740)

> Actually in both cases you get exactly the same reward - absolutely nothing.

That's not entirely correct either. With neither a closed-source nor an OSS OS do you *get* any direct profit on the sale of that software. But at least with an OSS one you don't *lose* the hundreds of dollars you spend on it.

In both cases, you *get* a decently functioning operating system. But your *reward* for purchasing Vista is bugs, viruses, and probably a decent one-way connection to the government/**AA spy agency of your choice.

If they want to have a closed-source OS, then Microsoft can hire their own monkeys to beta-test it instead of treating its own users and customers like drones.

- RG>

Re:Point? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15493796)

It's kind of like politics; if you can vote and don't, don't expect any sympathy from me if you bitch about the state of your government.

Your entire post in BS, and I really should just use my mod points, but since all the other mods (so far) seem to be completely incompetent, I will comment.

It is everyones right (not) to vote. We in the US are (mostly) taxpayers, and therefore we have every right to bitch and moan to our hearts content about a corrupt, fucked up government whether we vote or not. Therefore, your analogy is total rubbish, as is your original "point." I don't have to beta test a product to complain about its problems, all I have to do is dish out a load of cash when said product is released.

Wake the fuck up mods.

Re:Point? (4, Insightful)

biovoid (785377) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493817)

If you don't want to run the Beta, fine, don't run it. However, to my mind you lose all rights to complain about misfeatures and bugs if you had an opportunity to find and report them, and didn't.

You're kidding right? If I was to pay for Vista (ha ha) and found bugs or misfeatures, I would have no right to complain about them?! You expect me to beta test commercial software on my own time and money before I have the right to complain about bugs in software that I paid for?!

Re:Point? (2, Insightful)

Tumbarumba (74816) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493638)

Why would anyone outside of ISVs download this? So for the cost of re-imaging my system I get to test an unstable, feature incomplete OS that is likely to further the bane of human existance. Not only does the install expire but I then have to pay full price for a legit copy at the end. And for all my bug reports I send in I get ???

You get:

  • An opportuninty to test any software you have developed for compatibility with the updated platform
  • The thrill of being on the bleeding edge, and to play with something before most other people
  • Windows system administrators get a chance to update their skills, and perhaps be ahead in the job market
At least when you beta test an OSS OS you then get rewarded with a stable OS that you can freely install as you choose...

... or you could install an unstable OSS OS and test features not currently available in current stable distributions. Same as what's happening here. Some people will be interested, most people won't.

Re:Point? (1)

CaymanIslandCarpedie (868408) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493741)

cost of re-imaging my system

Why would you do that for ANY beta OS? It is beta after all. So unless you want to install on some spare PC you don't use, just do like everyone else and toss it on a VM. Never a good idea to replace an existing OS which you rely on for your work with a beta no matter who makes the OS. Try it out yes, but don't throw away an existing and reliable OS you can depend on so you can try one you hope that works. There is plenty of free VM software out there (heck even from MS now). Wiping you day-to-day PC you rely on to play with a beta OS is dumber than never doing backups IMO.

Re:Point? (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493764)

Nobody's forcing you to download it, install it, run it, send in bug reports or buy it when it's released.

I sure as hell know I'm not going to use Vista any time soon, because I simply don't need it. It may look fancier and have some k3wl new stuff, but I don't need any of it.

Re:Point? (1)

dlZ (798734) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493780)

I own a PC shop and 99% of the machines that come in are running some variation of Windows, mostly XP. So this gives me a nice head start in getting to know the software, even if it is beta. The only Linux machine in the shop right now is the one I'm typing this on, actually. I service Windows machines and manage Windows based networks for a living. I run Linux on all my personal machines. Both have their ups and downs. I'm always very helpful with a customer wants to try out this new "Linucks" thing, though.

direct download links (5, Informative)

pintomp3 (882811) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493556)

getting the serial # is easy enough, but the download page has been overloaded. here are links for direct download of the english iso

Windows Vista 32bit - English
http://download.windowsvista.com/dl/preview/beta2/ en/x86/iso/vista_5384.4.060518-1455_winmain_beta2_ x86fre_client-LB2CFRE_EN_DVD.iso [windowsvista.com]

Windows Vista 64bit - English
http://download.windowsvista.com/dl/preview/beta2/ en/x64/iso/vista_5384.4.060518-1455_winmain_beta2_ x64fre_client-LB2CxFRE_EN_DVD.iso [windowsvista.com]

they should have had a torrent option.

Re:direct download links (1)

xusr (947781) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493626)

Thanks for the links! MS getting slashdotted...that's just amusing.

Re:direct download links (1)

pintomp3 (882811) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493642)

haha, it's been "busy" since for hours, long before the being posted on /. pre-emptive slashdotting?

Re:direct download links (0, Offtopic)

grungy hamster (970187) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493712)

Well, it was on digg's front page yesterday.

Re:direct download links (1)

Wooloomooloo (902011) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493648)

I've been trying to get the ISO since last night but their servers were being hammered to the point I couldn't download 10MB without getting disconnected. I might as well get the file off P2P and use the serial number MS mailed me.

Re:direct download links (1)

bubkus_jones (561139) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493715)

Torrent? Ha. I'm waiting to see when they're going to put out their torrent alternative. At least these download sites are reasonably fast (I'm getting a 500+KB/s average).

That's nothing spectacular (-1, Redundant)

Bromskloss (750445) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493562)

Windows Vista Beta 2 Available for Download
Many, better, systems have been available for download for ages.

WinVista download? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15493571)

OOOhh yah.

I'm going to jump on that puppy right away.Where's that ubuntu CD?

So? (-1, Redundant)

kdougherty (772195) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493573)

Linux has been available for download for many years, as well as FreeBSD! Better yet, when Vista is finished they'll put a hefty price tag on it... Linux and BSD will still be free, to download. Seems like a no-brainer to me.

Beware !!! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15493577)

tHIS IS mICROSOFT SO bEWARE !!!

i AM WARNING YOU lINUX USER, SO BEWARE.

Damn capital letter shift lock key! One of these I'll buy a keyboard that doesn't do that.

thanks for the update (5, Funny)

observer7 (753034) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493579)

ill download my antivirus updates ...maybe if this windows is in the wild it will be detected before i get it

Get Your Crack Right Here!!! (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15493601)

Hey kid! You wanna taste the new Vista? Come over here and try some sweet Vista. Don't worry about expirations, vendor lock in, security, assimilation or anything else. I'll take care of all of it for you.

Come on, kid. You know you want a taste. Come try this new Vista Beta. It's free! And I know how much you like free...

Can't log in using Konqueror (3, Funny)

truedfx (802492) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493604)

Shame on you, such a big corporation not spending a little bit of time on making your site interoperable. :)

Still better than usual (1)

Craig Ringer (302899) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493718)

In fairness, it *does* work using Firefox. So they're doing better than usual. Contrast to Windows Live Safety Centre (http://safety.live.com) which breaks if you even try to do anything in firefox (let alone anything else).

--
Craig Ringer

It actually reminds me... (-1, Troll)

martinultima (832468) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493640)

Of President Dubya's tax cuts. Seriously! They're giving away this thing for free, but only a tiny portion of today's computer users will be able to use it, because the system requirements lock everyone else out. Big, rich, stupid idiots giving free stuff to big, rich, stupid idiots – that's really what it's all about.

They're 2 days late. (5, Funny)

exit3219 (946049) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493666)

Should've released it on 6/6/6.

Re:They're 2 days late. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15493722)

hahahaha, come on, how can you rate that as a 1, thats freaking hilarious!!

Oh great (0, Redundant)

Yeti.SSM (869826) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493702)

Ho hum. 3GB of something that expires July 1st. Great.

I, for one, won't waste bandwidth with that.

Re:Oh great (1)

pneumatus (936254) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493783)

Windows Vista Beta 2 expires on the 1st of June 2007, giving you just under a year to use it.

Re:Oh great (1)

slimboyfatjack (980865) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493787)

Worth reading the page properly - July 1st 2007 - so you've got a year of beta OS goodness and crashes before you need to worry :-)

The only interesting thing about Vista... (2, Interesting)

kooky45 (785515) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493709)

...is where was the photograph taken that's shown on the Vista page at http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/ [microsoft.com] ?

Re:The only interesting thing about Vista... (1, Funny)

fusto99 (939313) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493744)

I took that picture of my wife sitting in my back yard. As you can see, I haven't gotten around to mowing it lately.

Re:The only interesting thing about Vista... (1, Offtopic)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493758)

where was the photograph taken that's shown on the Vista page

Forget about it mate she's too smug for you.

Location of the photo (2, Funny)

adnonsense (826530) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493795)

At a guess I'd say it's taken from the Barrow Downs above Bree looking towards Weathertop. Although that stretch of water could be the River Anduin near Cair Andros, which makes that mountain at the back right Mount Doom. Whatever, if you view just the background the image without the site search input field, you can just about make out nine black dots flying high in the sky.

I admit it, I'm a technology whore (1)

josh_freeman (114671) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493725)

For all my constant bitching about how much I despise Microsoft and hate having to reimage my computer every 6 months because of bit rot, you better bet i signed up for this as fast as my little fingers could type. Yeah, I feel dirty, but assuming my computers will support it and I can actually get the iso, I'll be attempting to install Vista this evening.

Re:I admit it, I'm a technology whore (1)

hador_nyc (903322) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493815)

Yeah, I feel dirty, but assuming my computers will support it and I can actually get the iso, I'll be attempting to install Vista this evening.

Besides making me laugh, thanks, I agree with you. I'm probably not going to install it, don't feel like messing with it; and only have 1 pc running at the moment; but I agree with your mindset 100%!

How does it run (1)

tcoady (22541) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493779)

on Virtual PC on a G5 quad with masses of memory, if at all?

GPU Temp increased dramatically (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15493799)

A co worker of mine is trialing Vista and, from his limited playing with it, he seems to quite like it. As he only installed it on monday night I'm guessing it's this build (we work at a place where we get advance access to MS betas etc.)

The one thing he has noticed though is that the idle temperature of his GPU has increased from an average 34 degrees to 45 degress. And he's not even tried any games with it yet (apparently this used to get the GPU temp up to about 44)

So one thing's for sure - there's definitely lots of hot air around Vista.

Dual Boot? (1)

Eddy Da KillaBee (727499) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493818)

I want to try the beta out. Has anyone been able to install Vista alongside XP (dual-boot)? What about with Linux?

Out of Curiosity (5, Informative)

ghost of perception (974605) | more than 8 years ago | (#15493823)

Despite vowing never to touch vista I decided to try the beta just to see if it is as bad as people claim.

It installed nice and quickly (faster than xp in fact) on my P4 2.4Ghz 2GB ram box duel booting with XP MCE 2005 although vista takes about 4 mins to boot up.

I like the new file explorer interface but from the initial feel it seems to be more about the look than the functionality of the desktop. It is also nice to see an inclusion of a calendar utility which I always thought was lacking from previous windows versions.

Compatability wise; it does not detect my soundblaster pro 5.1 card and will not let me install the drivers for it claiming that windows compatability wont allow me to do so. The same is true of ZoneAlarm Pro and Avast! Anti Virus which I find insulting as a technically minder user but I do understand that most people who use MS products need to be saved from the "lets install anything" mentality.

Open Office and Firefox install perfectly but Vista brings an error halfway through installing Thunderbird.

The display manager will not allow me to set my screen resolution to anything other than 800x600 although the option is there for 1024x768 but nothing happens when the setting is applied and even at 800x600 the screen flickers eratically every few mins.

I have not installed the wireless networking yet but without my firewall, anti-spyware and anti-virus products, I'm not sure that I even want to connect the the internet.

My S-video out is disabled on loading the desktop (closing the analog hole?) which makes the media center funtion useless on my current setup and the DRM is making itself known with periodic popups telling me that x has been disabled quoting "Macrovision corporation" in the details.

Media Center mode in my view has a better interface than MCE 2005 however AVI files will not work (or be added for that matter) in media center mode.

I am going to test the beta out over the weekend but I am currently of the mind that it is buggy bloatware and not something I would trust my fles to but I am open minded enough to accept problems under the fact that it is a beta release and is not supposed to be anything near a proper release candidate.
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>