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 Service Pack One Almost Here

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the like-a-really-lame-christmas dept.

286

arogier writes "After numerous delays and an actual release reversal, the official release date for Vista service pack one has been set for Tuesday, March 18th on Windows Update and Microsoft Downloads. It will be released as an automatic update on April 18th. 'It's unclear so far how a February snafu will affect SP1's roll-out. Last month, after Microsoft pushed a pair of prerequisite patches to users, some reported that their machines refused to finish installing one of the fixes, then went into an endless series of reboots. Several days later, Microsoft pulled the update from automatic delivery, said it was working on a solution and promised it would "make the update available again shortly after we address the issue."' It would be a good time for those planning to adopt early to perform requisite backups and locate their restore media."

cancel ×

286 comments

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

First (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22770880)

Please mod me down because this is a first post!

I got the, er, "early adopter" version. (5, Funny)

arrenlex (994824) | more than 6 years ago | (#22770882)

Great news, but it doesn't matter to me anymore. I already pirated it from bittorrent. Read that again. I was so desperate to make it work I had to STEAL FIXES for an operating system I LEGALLY BOUGHT. Says a lot about Vista, doesn't it.

Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. (2, Interesting)

idiotwithastick (1036612) | more than 6 years ago | (#22770898)

Seriously, they sure took their time didn't they? I might have thought that with the poor reception of Vista they would be quick to push service packs, but apparently something held them up, even some quick fixes would be nice (though at least they still have updates coming through Windows Update). Personally though I'm scared to pirate it from BitTorrent, not because of viruses but I'm afraid it will break compatibility with stuff; one patch earlier this year prevented me from booting into Windows, and it was one of the "Recommended" patches that would automatically update.

Updates? Ha! (3, Informative)

camperdave (969942) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771934)

though at least they still have updates coming through Windows Update

I applied one of the updates (KB944533) and it killed http. Internet explorer would not open up web pages, but would give the "server could not be reached" error. I was able to ping just fine, and I could reach the page from another computer on the same network. The kicker was that the patch not only knocked out IE, but Firefox as well. Things worked fine after uninstalling the patch. Of course, the patch got re-installed the very next day.

Yesterday I decided to install some more patches, hoping that they would remedy the bug in KB944533. Nope! In fact, the DHCP client stopped working. I could no longer get anything but APIPA addresses. I uninstalled those patches, hoping to recover, but no dice. I decided to roll back the machine about two weeks, and now it blue screens.

Now Microsoft isn't the only culprit. A language pack update in Ubuntu is killing a number of my KDE apps (k3b in particular). So I have two machines that I have to run unpatched operating systems on, because patching them causes them to not work. At least I have a choice to ignore the patch with Ubuntu. Windows applies the patches without asking.

Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. (2, Insightful)

spintriae (958955) | more than 6 years ago | (#22770924)

You can't steal something that's being given away. And your complaint is equivalent to walking into a restaurant, ordering a meal, then complaining that they didn't immediately bring you the uncooked ingredients.

Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. (5, Funny)

Solra Bizna (716281) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771066)

It's more like ordering a meal, then complaining that they DID immediately bring you the uncooked ingredients, hoping that they'll have time to cook it for the people who order later.

-:sigma.SB

Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. (2, Funny)

William Robinson (875390) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771596)

No....It's more like ordering a uncooked ingredients, then complaining that the waiters were wasting time cooking the food unnecessarily confusing themselves without knowing what exactly customer has been looking for.

Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. (5, Insightful)

CmdrGravy (645153) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771714)

Not quite, a better analogy might be that it's like going to restaurant and recieving a mediocre and unsatisfying starter and main course and when it comes to pudding being told that the pudding isn't ready yet and if they were to serve it to you immediately you might get ill and die. Nevertheless even hearing this advice you then break into the kitchen and gobble down the partially cooked pudding rather than taking the perfectly sensible option of going to the lovely homely Penguin tavern next door where they're serving wholesome, nutritious and filling meals for nothing, and with free beer.

Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. (2, Interesting)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771636)

No, it's more like ordering your meal. Then the restaurant takes 5 years to prepare it, all the time exclaiming that it's going to be the best meal ever. Then, when you get it, you find out it's complete crap, and it takes them another year just to get around to fixing it. Even after they fix it, it still isn't as good as the tried and true hamburger, which you could have got without even waiting the intial 5 years.

Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. (1)

bkaul01 (619795) | more than 6 years ago | (#22770978)

I got the "early adopter" version, too, but I wouldn't say I was desperate for it, just curious. :) Really, my problems with Vista, other than uninformed Mac users incessantly asking me what problems I have with Vista, have been pretty much nonexistent. I grabbed SP1 just to see if I'd notice a difference on the improved file transfer speeds.

Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. (2, Insightful)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771216)

If your Vista experience is so trouble-free then why are you even thinking about file transfer speeds (a well-known trouble point for Vista)? I certainly never think about that, haven't needed to in years...

Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. (2, Informative)

wish bot (265150) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771344)

New Vista laptop: let me list the woes...

1. Adobe Creative Suite install fails. Aparently not an uncommon problem. Finding a fix that works...far too long.
2. Internet Expoder crashes on start-up. Also not a unique issue. Fixed by full reinstall.
3. Blue screen of death (yes, it does exist!). Happens randomly while idle (twice so far).
4. Super slow copy to network folder from optical disk.
5. Enough random crashes when dealing with large files (no problem with similar hardware and XP, with less memory).
6. The much vaunted "Areo Glass" interface seems mostly bling and little substance. For example, if there is a single login dialouge box in the middle of the screen and no other windows open, it's REALLY difficult to tell at a glance if it has focus or not!
7. Too much window border in my windows and not enough window. Unmaximised windows seem to have a really deep top-bar.

Plenty of other gripes. Enough that the difference between this and XP SP2 is day and night, while OS X 10.4/5 is in a totally different league altogether.

Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. (2, Informative)

sc7 (1141597) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771412)

1. Good luck with CS3 on Leopard or Linux too. 2. Probably rare. I've instaled Vista on tons of machines, never saw it, so your case is very isolated. 3. Again, maybe you, but overall I've yet to BSOD on Vista. 4. Yessir, I'm hoping this is fixed in SP1 5. I deal with large files (well to me, as large as 20GB at a time), and Vista generally handles them better than Xp or any OS X, although about on par with most linux distros I've used. 6. BLING? I think it's just enough ellegance (spelling?), It's not the overkill that was OS X 10.0-10.3, and it sure as hell doesn't have as much useless "for show" garbage as compiz. 7. I'll give you that, although on my new widescreen, it's almost a moot point. Your last sentence proves you're just looking for every little issue, and are really a mac fanboy. I could pull a LONG list of still unfixed issues in leopard, and even tiger, but maybe I'm just able to realize every OS will have it's issues.

Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. (1)

blind monkey 3 (773904) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771676)

Don't hold back, otherwise you'll look like you're making it up.
Slow network speed is a killer for me (Vista on a notebook networked to a Samba box.. no probs with other OSes - or XP).
Vista is 64 bit, I have programs that do not work, Cisco client is one but there were a few - I've found work-arounds. Drivers aren't an issue as it was pre-installed
Notebook came with 512mb ram - shared video...do I need to elaborate? It should be a criminal offence to sell Vista with 512mb ram - now has 1.5 gig and is OK ....
had trouble installing VS2008, after trying to fix the dotnet framework stuff for 2 days, gave up and did a complete reinstall of the entire OS and put VS2008 on first.
There are problems with Vista, I hope they'll be addressed (hopefully not by pointing fingers at problems with other OSes).
I find OS X quite good, it has problems too but it definitely feels better finished - a bit like comparing the linux gui to the Windows gui in my opinion but Windows has it's strenths too - the main one is what you jumped on, lots of apps. My preference is still Linux but then I don't really use all the bells and whistles gui stuff and most of my needs are served by what is on offer with Linux (programming, music composition, recording etc - yes, all of these can be addressed by Windows but at what cost CUBASE, guitar pro, fruityloops etc for a hobbyist? Great apps by the way but I'm more than happy with the Linux offerings).
My work requires work with VS (which is an excellent IDE, again, my opinion) which is the main reason for Windows with me but it is a reasonable OS in it's own right, like I said earlier, I hope they fix the issues and make it better.

Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. (1)

uberchicken (121048) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771578)

I was having all sorts of glitches (wireless- and display- related) that eventually convinced me to downgrade to XP; before I did though, Dell remote logged in and fixed a bunch of bios & driver issues. It's like a different machine now. I think the memory usage is still annoying enough for me to downgrade as planned though.

Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771660)

Here's my favourite bug. The other day, I had a bunch of windows. Probably about 20, with about 10 tabs open in one of my IE 7 windows (Usually use firefox, but I was testing some webdev). Slowly it started running out of windows that would open. Every time I wanted to open a new window, browser tab, the start menu, or even get this, a drop down box, I would have to close another window. But it wasn't just that, It was slowly running out, so I couldn't just keep my initial 20 windows open, I had to close down extra stuff. I was in the middle of debugging something, and didn't feel like rebooting. So I slowly worked my way down to about 3 windows and then just decided to reboot, as working on the machine was getting completely unmanageable.

Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. (1)

Killjoy_NL (719667) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771662)

1. Friend of mine had this problem, quite annoying. She had to open a cmd prompt, register 2 dlls and leave the cmd open during install, that fixed it.
2. Don't use IE, so not a problem for me
3. I had 1-2 as well, changed a bios setting and it's been rockstable ever since
4. Haven't done that, but file transfer speeds have been ok-ish so far, hope they will go faster after sp1
5. Haven't had that experience and some of the stuff I do is pretty heavy, big files, media editing, heavy games, etc
6. I switched to the classic win2000 look, no aero in my windows, no sirree
7. Not really a problem, 24" screen with 1920x1200 resolution helps :)

Only gripe so far is that Assassin's Creed crashed periodically, but Vista keeps on running.
Longest uptime til I wanted to reboot, 61 days non stop.

Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. (0, Flamebait)

cheekyboy (598084) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771984)

1) CS2 works fine, who needs another expensive update with no benefit.
2) porn sites do that,but thats whats firefox is for.
3) Why did you buy a Toshiba laptop dude
4) You seriously use MS File Explorer? Use 2xPlorer or Synctoy dude.
5) FIIK
6) Turn that OREO off.
7) OSX is just as bad really...

Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22772018)

Great news, but it doesn't matter to me anymore. I already pirated it from bittorrent. Read that again. I was so desperate to make it work I had to STEAL FIXES for an operating system I LEGALLY BOUGHT. Says a lot about Vista, doesn't it.
I so agree MS totally fucked up the release plan for this SP, especially vs MSDN subscribers, but.. downloading service packs from bittorrent.. if I didn't care about security and privacy at all on a given machine, maybe.. You do realize that these can be pre-compromised/rootkit'ed in a number of ways that you have absolutely no way of ever determining, right?

Awesome!! (2, Funny)

moogied (1175879) | more than 6 years ago | (#22770886)

Service Pack One is almost ready for release!! That makes it what, three more packs before its ready for release?? Not sure..

Re:Awesome!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22771168)

SP1 is almost here. That's almost worth talking about.

Moment of truth... (4, Interesting)

FoolsGold (1139759) | more than 6 years ago | (#22770890)

Now to see how many "I'll wait for SP1 before moving to Vista" people actually follow through.

Re:Moment of truth... (5, Interesting)

Sheen (1180801) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771014)

I am probably the only one on slashdot who uses Vista AND likes it. I have had exactly 1 issue with vista since I got it in Jan. 2007, that was a missing driver, which appeared on vendor site Feb. 2007 (webcam). So personally I can't see why everyone is slamming it so much. I will never go back to XP. ( this is not ment as a troll post, im just saying what i think of it.)

Re:Moment of truth... (1, Funny)

DigitAl56K (805623) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771042)

Come on now Bill, enough with these alias accounts. We know it's you...

Re:Moment of truth... (1)

FoolsGold (1139759) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771046)

Don't worry dude, I like it for the most part as well.

BTW, giving an opinion that counters the Slashdot groupthink is a harmless exercise, so long as you aren't looking for postive karma. :)

Re:Moment of truth... (-1, Troll)

404 Clue Not Found (763556) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771072)

Really? It does everything XP does and only has one missing driver? I dunno why everyone is slamming it either then.

Re:Moment of truth... (3, Interesting)

El_Muerte_TDS (592157) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771084)

I don't have any issues with Vista. It and other programs crash just as often in Vista as they did in XP. But my problem with Vista is not that it has issues, its that I have to completely overhaul my workflow which I've been using since Windows 95 (and improved it ever since). A simple example is the new explorer thing. It no longer has a drop down box with all the parent directories, it shows some kind of history. Backspace no longer goes to the parent directory. In fact, there isn't even an "up" button, just a "back" button. It's more like a webbrowser than a file explorer. I never browse backwards, only forwards. Besides that it's much like a webbrowser, it doesn't allow be to customize the layout and remove all useless elements. Like the favorite folders, I don't need it, just show be the directory tree. I also needed to hack the registry just so that explorer will keep using list view for all explorer windows (dumb directory profiles).
And that's just one of my annoyances with Vista compared to XP, others include: wasting memory using seriously heavy weight services (Mobile Device Center (aka. ActiveSync) uses 50MB in total while idle), windows search (it's not that great unless you index everything), slow file operations, even more useless eye candy (including stuff you can't turn off), ...

But it all boils down to a single question: why would you exchange your XP for Vista?
So far I haven't found anything.

It's faster (5, Interesting)

Toreo asesino (951231) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771120)

Having bought a new Dell laptop with Vista on that's lower spec than my work machine (policy is to update desktops later this year), my laptop almost always feels far more responsive.

Plus, there's other unsung stuff in Vista i've not seen in any OS - the problem solutions centre (not sure exactly how to translate into English); when I got it I had my one and only BSOD in Vista. Shocked, I rebooted and as soon as I was back to the desktop Windows pops up a message saying "I see something real bad happened; do you mind if I see if there's a solution online?". Click Yes, comes back saying "Ah I crashed because of this driver; there's a update to it here which will fix the problem". It's never happened since.

So yeah, there's reasons Vista is better. UAC is top too; I like to know when a program is gonna try and change my system (some try that you'd never think would - denied).

It's an upgrade without a doubt. I wouldn't pay specifically to upgrade mind you, but I appreciate the changes as they come anyway.

Re:It's faster (3, Insightful)

El_Muerte_TDS (592157) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771178)

I'm using Vista on a brand new Dell XPS. But the problem solution center didn't help me in any case. I had 3 BSODs so far (since mid Januari 2008), and the solution center thingy never gave a usable information. So I've stopped using that thing.

As for UAC, I've put that into silent mode because it annoyed the hell out of me. I know it's meant to be obstructive. But I need to use a couple of legacy applications. The UAC blackout thingy actually wrecks havoc with multi screen setups and DirectDraw applications. Or at least, it did for me. It would have been nice if it didn't nag me every time I started an application which I pre-configured to be run in administrative mode. That would at least solve some of the problems I have with UAC.

Re:It's faster (1)

Toreo asesino (951231) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771592)

If it's the 1530, goto the dell site and get the latest everything except wireless; specifically the chipset drivers - which you'll want direct from Intel (install only the driver, not the other thing too).

Also, it really helps putting the drives in SATA mode, not HCPI mode.

Oh, and SP1 too :)

Re:It's faster (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22771238)

Vista may be able to explain why it crashes, but I prefer an OS which is more stable from the start, i.e. Linux.

And as for programs changing system settings; that's hard to do in linux when you run programs from a user account rather than root. It's not Microsoft's fault that in the Windows software ecosystem, programs tend to do things which affect the whole system, not just their own settings. In linux, programs co-operate a lot more and they have individual settings (per program, per user) unless something is specifically system-wide.

UAC is a bit of a botch. Unable to implement the notion of Least Privilege in their operating system, Microsoft punts the decision to the end user, who is typically unqualified to decide.

Re:It's faster (2, Informative)

totally bogus dude (1040246) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771260)

XP has something similar to the "problem solutions centre" as well. Like the other respondent, it usually doesn't have anything relevant, and just gives you a generic message like "such and such a driver crashed, go to the vendor's site and see if there's a newer one". I think it comes up as an option in the error reporting wizard, if you choose to send the error report.

Re:It's faster (1)

Jaruzel (804522) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771338)

I LIKE the UAC. There, I've said it. Feel free to stone me. ;)

Seriously tho, it's a good sanity check. I tend to use all the tools for Active Directory quite a lot, and having the UAC pop up, reminds me that I'm about to do something potentially dangerous.

-Jar

Vista is much slower (3, Insightful)

Per Abrahamsen (1397) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771590)

Having bought a new Dell laptop with Vista on that's lower spec than my work machine (policy is to update desktops later this year), my laptop almost always feels far more responsive.
Most likely, your old machine had accumulated crap over time, and resinstalling XP would have given an even larger speedup. Vista is far less responsive on my Thinkpad X61s than XP was on my Thinkpad X40, comparing them side by side. Only the cpu bound tasks like compiling are faster, due to the faster hardware.

"I see something real bad happened; do you mind if I see if there's a solution online?".
Yeah, whenever my own programs crash I get that one. It doesn't find any solutions though, I still have to debug my own code.

It did once claim to have found a solution to system crash, pointing to a Lenovo page that did not exists.

UAC is top too; I like to know when a program is gonna try and change my system (some try that you'd never think would - denied).
That is the one thing I like about Vista. I think of it as the Microsoft answer to "sudo". It was annoying at the beginning, where you had to press yes so many times. Makes me worry about whether it will have the intended affect, or simply teach people to press "yes" whenever they see a pop-up.

It's an upgrade without a doubt.
Most people at my work who have "accidentally" ordered new PC's with Vista have ended up asking the it support guys "downgrade" them to XP. I have been stubborn though, waiting to see if it gets better with time. It does, but nowhere near enough to compensate for the initial drop in productivity.

Re:Vista is much slower (4, Informative)

Toreo asesino (951231) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771962)

Most likely, your old machine had accumulated crap over time, and resinstalling XP would have given an even larger speedup.
Most likely it's stuff like SuperFetch in Vista doing what it's designed to do in fact. For once I've got an OS that's gonna use the memory i bought with the machine. That's what it's designed for, and it does it very well. FireFox opens faster than IE6 does in any XP machine; fresh or otherwise. Believe me, Vista is faster if you have the memory.
And all the palava about Areo grinding systems down is rubbish too; it's all 3d accelerated (read: using hardware features otherwise doing nowt), so that too has no effect of performance. Feels very snappy in fact, especially with SP1 which i've been running for a couple of weeks now - it's the Vista that should've shipped.
There are some things i don't like about Vista of course; the dumbed down explorer for one, and the higher memory requirements for another, but it does load stuff faster than XP, no doubt.

Re:Moment of truth... (4, Informative)

vux984 (928602) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771708)

A simple example is the new explorer thing. It no longer has a drop down box with all the parent directories, it shows some kind of history.

This is one of those things that you really have to spend time with and adust too, because in actual fact, Vista really improved on this.

If you click on the 'location bar' or whatever its called, it shows you the current path, eg. c:\users\documents\whatver... and has a history drop down of the last several folders. I agree this is sort of lame. There is also a back/forward button which behaves as it would in a browser; and the back/forward buttons aren't all that bad.

But the real magic is when you have a folder/file in one of the lower panes (left or right) selected, then the location bar displayes a sort of breadcrumb view.
eg: [myname] > documents > whatever >

clicking on the myname / documents / whatever will take you directly to that folder. So that's our up button. Not only is there a button that goes 'up one level', but you can also usually go up 2 or 3 or more levels directly.

On top of that clicking on the '>' bring drop down lists of the folders within that folder... so if I'm in 'whatever', and I click the '>' next to 'myname' I get a list of the subfolders of myname... so without leaving where I am, with 2 clicks I can navigate directly to an 'uncle folder' (alternate child of the parent of the parent). You gotta admit that's pretty slick.

So we've got easy navigation up one, two, three, or even more levels, as well as directly into the children of any those levels.

Backspace no longer goes to the parent directory.

Its now: alt-uparrow

That's not so bad.

Frankly, compared to most file explorers I've used including Mac OSX's finder and Windows XP, Vista's is pretty good - once you take the time to learn its quirks and shortcuts.

it doesn't allow be to customize the layout and remove all useless elements. Like the favorite folders, I don't need it, just show be the directory tree.

Under [username]/favorites/links you can easily customize / remove any links you find useless, or replace them with ones you'd find useful (as I've done). Unfortunately if you remove all of them its not smart enough to suppress the section entirely; I imagine there's a registry hack for that, but really, in my case a link to documents, desktop, and a couple project folders is actually pretty useful are actually really useful, so I'm actually glad to have them there. And I got rid of the searches, music, and pictures crud.

I also needed to hack the registry just so that explorer will keep using list view for all explorer windows (dumb directory profiles).

Actually, there is a checkbox under Tools -> Folder Options -> Remember Each Folders View Settings

If you uncheck that, it pretty much disables the 'directory profiles' you are talking about, if I understood you right. You shouldn't need to 'hack the registry'.

But it all boils down to a single question: why would you exchange your XP for Vista?
So far I haven't found anything.


I think for most people that's a fair assessment. But when you buy new hardware, unless there is a specific compatibility reason to get XP I'd recommend vista over xp nearly any day.

No there's plenty (2, Insightful)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771250)

I've been using Vista 64-bit since not long after it was released and I'm quite satisfied (I'd have moved back to XP if I wasn't).

The reason people slam it so much here is because they badly want it to fail. It is predominantly FUD.

The echo chamber effect is a big reason you hear so much. Someone has a bad experience with Vista, or perhaps just makes one up, and writes/talks about it. Thsi then gets repeated by people who hate MS and want to see Vista do poorly. You discover that these people have never actually used Vista, they are just repeating something they heard somewhere. So it sounds like there are more people having problems than there is.

Of the people I know that have mostly bad things to say about Vista, I'd say at least 90% have never actually used it. They "Read about it somewhere," or "Some guy they know told them," and so on. They have no experience with it, other than perhaps having seen it on a computer. They are simply repeating stories. Of those that have used it and dislike it, almost all of them actually have an issue with something else, that they are blaming on Vista. For example a coworker was pissed because his DJ hardware/software combo didn't work. Ok, well check compatibility first, and that isn't a Vista issue. It doesn't support Linux either.

Another problem is people who try to run it on insufficient hardware. This happens with basically every Windows release that I can remember. I remember all the complaints that Windows 95 didn't run well on 4MB of RAM, even though that was the minimum. The response was, of course, yes that's the MINIMUM, not the "gets good performance" amount. Same deal with Vista, people have old systems with insufficient hardware, particularly RAM (since not that long ago RAM was real pricey). They install Vista and find it doesn't perform well, and thus get angry.

All in all, you can just expect to see continued Vista hate on /. and other sites like it for some time. I also expect that it won't matter. Most people will get Vista as they get new computers, and it'll slowly become the dominant Windows since it'll work just fine for those that get it.

Re:No there's plenty (4, Informative)

penix1 (722987) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771618)

Of the people I know that have mostly bad things to say about Vista, I'd say at least 90% have never actually used it. They "Read about it somewhere," or "Some guy they know told them," and so on. They have no experience with it, other than perhaps having seen it on a computer. They are simply repeating stories. Of those that have used it and dislike it, almost all of them actually have an issue with something else, that they are blaming on Vista. For example a coworker was pissed because his DJ hardware/software combo didn't work. Ok, well check compatibility first, and that isn't a Vista issue. It doesn't support Linux either.


I'll ignore the fact that you are doing exactly what you accuse others by repeating hearsay and address the "it doesn't work on Linux either" remark. That would be valid if it ever did in the first place which it didn't. Let's compare apples to apples here. Vista's main competition isn't Linux or OS X even. It is XP. In that context, the program does work in XP and not in vista. It sure is a Vista issue. Say what you like, but that sounds like a Vista sale lost if that is the driving factor for switching for that user.

Another problem is people who try to run it on insufficient hardware. This happens with basically every Windows release that I can remember. I remember all the complaints that Windows 95 didn't run well on 4MB of RAM, even though that was the minimum. The response was, of course, yes that's the MINIMUM, not the "gets good performance" amount. Same deal with Vista, people have old systems with insufficient hardware, particularly RAM (since not that long ago RAM was real pricey). They install Vista and find it doesn't perform well, and thus get angry.


Umm....No! They were SOLD on the fact that the NEW machine they bought was "Vista capable" from the get-go when it wasn't. Hence the class action lawsuit. Bait and switch is still illegal in the US at least until the Microsoft lobbyists pay off, er, "contribute to" Congress to change it. There is a big difference between buying a new machine based on the word of the supplier that it will work fine with the new OS and buying an upgrade where it is anybody's guess. That is the difference here.

Re:No there's plenty (5, Informative)

Linker3000 (626634) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771680)

"The reason people slam it so much here is because they badly want it to fail. It is predominantly FUD."

Sorry, that's not quite right. I have a negative view about Vista because, having had to install it on a laptop so I can support some of my user base that have Vista, I have had:

1) The laptop screen saver not waking up *sometimes* and so I have to toggle the laptop in and out of standby to carry on working.
2) A wifi driver that blue screens *sometimes* on resuming from standby so if 1) happens I may lose my work in progress.
3) A damn stupid box that pops up every time I run notepad++ warning me about the program.
4) Mysterious periods of disk thrashing.
5) Mysterious periods of wifi not connecting.
6) A need to buy 1GB more RAM to make the thing stop plodding.
7) RDP sessions mysteriously failing and needing a registry key deleted to get things going again

Now, I am sure some of these things are fixable with some tweaking or with some patching, and perhaps the wifi issue is down to the chipset company, but the number of hoops my users I have had to go through to make simple things work is extraordinary and timewasting. Unlike XP (or 2000 or NT), rarely has Vista been an 'out of the box' solution to a new install.

I am very pragmatic when it comes to Vista, but quite simply if you put identical machines running Vista and XP side by side (OK, let's give Vista some more RAM to start) and use them both for a short while, my money's on Vista being more of a PITA to use and less easy to navigate: things that took a few clicks to get to are now buried and we have had to wait for revised or new beta versions of some apps just to get some things going. Some users were on Office 2002 - but Outlook has problems with that so we have had to pay to upgrade some, while others have been moved to a Scalix pilot system.

Sure, Vista is not a train wreck, but it's a bloody big detour on the road to efficient computing with many rough edges and a cost loading. I know it will get better over time, but when it hit the ground running it was still getting dressed and keeps tripping over its pants.

Re:No there's plenty (1)

dbIII (701233) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771774)

I must admit after hearing for years how fantastic Longhorn was going to be and seeing the 32 bit Vista result I'm bashing it mostly due to disappointment. The 64 bit version also seems to be a step down from the quite good 64 bit Server 2003 that has been out for a couple of years. I don't use the thing I only fix it on the admittedly few installs in the place where I work so I've only seen it at it's worst. The biggest problem I see with it is laptops that really do not have the specs to run it coming with it preinstalled. Another problem is the maximum usuable memory is so close to the floor of the minimum memory required to make it functional in the 32 bit version (not fully compatable with the Pentium Pro and later unfortunately).

Re:No there's plenty (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22771834)

Of the people I know that have mostly bad things to say about Vista, I'd say at least 90% have never actually used it. They "Read about it somewhere," or "Some guy they know told them," and so on. They have no experience with it, other than perhaps having seen it on a computer.
Really? Thus far in my experience those who dislike it are paying customers.

For myself and the company I work for, we tested it in a production environment for some 6 months. HP Pavillion laptops supplied by HP with Vista Business. Plug said laptops into HP's own docking stations, and instant blue screen is ours. Not on one laptop, not on 10% of the laptops, but on 100% of the 100+ machines we purchased.

Weeks of back and forth with HP (who we can only assume had similar back and forth with Microsoft) provided no assistance. Clean installs, updated drivers, and plenty of wasted hours yielded nothing. Our solution? Scrap Vista and head back to XP Pro.

It's a similar story for the 200 Lenovo desktops that went on trial. Previously we had a fleet of 1600 Windows 2000 Professional desktops. The 200 brand spanking new Vista desktops failed miserably, and XP Pro once again proved it's might not only with our internally coded applications, but even with day to day stability of Microsoft applications (including Office 2007). As such, all new Windows desktops will be XP Pro for at least another 3 years.

We certainly didn't make our decisions based on hearsay or what we've read on some blog. We tested it internally for a good length of time, and Vista proved itself to be flaky and unstable at best, and burning company profits at worst. YMMV, but our current fleet of now 2200 machines (which are planned to double in 12 months) will be staying XP Pro. In another 12-24 months we'll repeat the testing to see if things have progressed, but for now courtesy of Microsoft's corporate licensing, XP Pro stays.

Re:Moment of truth... (1)

IndieKid (1061106) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771290)

You're not the only one. I installed it in April 2007 and although I had one minor issue installing it (missing nVidia drivers for a 'fakeraid' setup), I've not had any issues since. Before I decided to go with Vista I tried out Ubuntu, but for my home use Vista is a lot less hassle.

I mainly use my home PC for media management (music, videos, photos), Photoshop and the occasional game of COD4 or TF2. Sure, XP might be faster for Photoshop and playing games (although for games the difference is so marginal as to not be noticeable now), but the Windows Media Centre front-end is great if you have a HDTV connected (even Windows Media Player can do decent upscaling with the right graphics card) and Windows Photo Gallery is very useful too.

I actually find going back to XP at work annoying now; I really miss features like the built in search and the new explorer interface.

Re:Moment of truth... (2, Insightful)

dreamchaser (49529) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771754)

Nope, there are a few more of us. I use various OSes for various things. Vista is not all that bad on a machine with sufficient power.

Re:Moment of truth... (1)

Dahlgil (631022) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771866)

I too like Vista. I installed Vista as an experiment a few months after it came out with the full intention of sticking with XP till SP1. While there were a few issues, my positive experiences outweighed the negative by a reasonable margin and I never went back. A year later (i.e very recently), I upgraded my hardware and moved to x64 Vista--again as an experiment. With all the FUD out there about x64 creating all kinds of compatibility problems, I was amazed at how few issues I had. All of my hardware works (even a seven year old film scanner), and nearly all software I've thrown at it--even a few older games that I tried(like Independence War 2 and Ground Control) work perfectly. True, there is no longer a 16-bit subsystem in x64, but for the few 16-bit apps around that I like to use, Virtual PC runs them just fine. Vista has some annoyances, I'll admit that, but none serious enough for me to even consider giving it up. In fact, when I do need to use XP, it does feel kind of "old" now. Naturally, with all the people out there, I don't expect everyone to have my experience, but after having gone from VIC-20-> Atari800-> DOS2.11-> DOS3.1-> DOS5.0-> DOS6.0/6.21/22-> Windows3.1-> WindowsFW3.11-> Windows95-> Windows98/SE-> WindowsME(yuck!)-> WindowsXP-> WindowsVista_x86-> WindowsVista_x64 I can honestly say that upgrading to Vista is pretty much like every other upgrade, some part pain, but mostly a benefit (with the two possible exceptions of DOS 6.21->6.22 and Windows ME.

Re:Moment of truth... (5, Insightful)

sunami88 (1074925) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771034)

Now to see how many "I'll wait for SP1 before moving to Vista" people actually follow through.

That was, they'll wait for SP1 to pass judgment. Not wait for SP1 then blindly buy.

Re:Moment of truth... (1)

rolfwind (528248) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771152)

I know enough people who didn't switch from W2K to XP-Pro until XP SP2. May be the case here too. That, or when they get a new computer -- as it's not worth the standalone upgrade cost alone for most people.

Re:Moment of truth... (1)

FoolsGold (1139759) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771184)

I'd say that's a fair enough comment. I like Vista, but I sure as hell wouldn't pay money for it (not directly at least). If it was pre-installed on my machine, I'd have no problem, but I can certainly understand why people running a perfectly good copy of XP wouldn't see any reason to spend money on Vista.

Re:Moment of truth... (1)

UbuntuLinux (1242150) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771500)

It is clear now that Microsoft is scared witless by Linux, and the furious adoption that utter disasters such as Vista are creating. People are switching to Linux in droves, and MS know it. Thats why they had to get Vista out so quickly, but they rushed it, and thats why they ended up with an OS that is riddled with usability issues, security concerns and incompatibility.

At times like these, it becomes quite clear who the *real* computer users are; those are the ones intelligent enough to switch to Linux, or who use it already. Everyone else is a sheep, and they deserve what they get.dd

Backup - but do backups work properly yet? (4, Informative)

dbIII (701233) | more than 6 years ago | (#22770894)

I believe there is/was a shadow volume copy problem with Vista that prevented complete backups. If shadow volume copy does not work you will not be able to back things up like the registry. Either way a complete disk image will work since you do it from outside of the OS. This can be done with "partimage" on knoppix for free or Acronis and various others for a nicer UI.

Re:Backup - but do backups work properly yet? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22771070)

Hell, I used to use 'dd' to make backups of my Windows XP partitions back when I dual-booted with Linux. It's amazing how effective fundamentally ancient Unix tools are...

The scariest part... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22770904)

Anyone else think the scariest part about the release is that they announced it a few days beforehand?

I mean... wow. I don't know what to think.

Somehow... (3, Funny)

unbug (1188963) | more than 6 years ago | (#22770912)

... I can't help but pity those poor Vista users. What should be simply the release of a patch has become a major "event" which people actually have to prepare for and which, from what I hear, is even causing something quite similar to mild panic. But then again, you do get great DRM for your troubles.

Re:Somehow... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22770936)

And this is different from a new kernel version how?

Re:Somehow... (4, Insightful)

nixeagle (1237044) | more than 6 years ago | (#22770988)

Random stuff does not break. Look at the emergency patching and releasing of the kernel that all distros had to go through a while back to fix the VM splice bug.

All those distros managed to push a replacement kernel in a matter of hours/days that did not adversely affect user systems that I could tell.

Likewise, this patch of an operating system that you pay for ought to work as smoothly as the free one. I'm not really sure how comparable the two are, but it is interesting that the linux distros were able to pull a hot fix like that without too much user consternation.

Re:Somehow... (5, Insightful)

unbug (1188963) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771080)

And this is different from a new kernel version how?
One big difference is that the Linux kernel (which is the one you mean, I presume) is usually updated in much smaller increments which means that every single update has less chance of breaking things. Another big difference is that kernel updates only update the kernel, not X, KDE/Gnome/whatever and all those programs which your system won't run without. These are updated separately which, again, means that there's less chance of breaking things.

Re:Somehow... (1)

jimicus (737525) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771448)

Another big difference is that kernel updates only update the kernel, not X, KDE/Gnome/whatever and all those programs which your system won't run without. These are updated separately which, again, means that there's less chance of breaking things.

Only the kernel? No way of knowing if it's broken or not without a reboot and if it is broken then a reboot is probably the worst thing you can do.

You're living in a dreamworld if you think any sort of update can ever be 100% guaranteed will never under any circumstances break anything. If that was the case, larger organisations wouldn't need change control procedures. This is the same regardless of OS - and more than one Linux distribution has released updates which have broken functionality.

Though to be fair, it does rather seem that Microsoft have some low standards compared with, say, Debian.

Re:Somehow... (2, Informative)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771138)

If a kernel upgrade makes your system unstable, rolling back is just a case of selecting the previous kernel from grub.

Infact there are few systems that would need a full restore, as long as you can get to a tty you can usually rollback any update you don't want (distros vary but it can be done in a debian system)

Re:Somehow... (1)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771346)

I know you're just a troll, but what the heck, here are three differences:
(1) No-one is forced to adopt the latest kernel by the desperate desire to just get the OS to do what it's supposed to do.
(2) It takes a very special degree of buffoonery to have the money MS has to throw at problems and come up with a solution like Vista. The kernel is thriving on a tiny fraction of that budget.
(3) If I want to fix Vista myself I can't because it's proprietary.

Looks like you fail.

Re:Somehow... (2, Insightful)

FoolsGold (1139759) | more than 6 years ago | (#22770974)

Like I said elsewhere, SP1 is somewhat significant because a lot of people have stated they will move to Vista once the first service pack arrives. Now we have to see if that will actually happen.

I won't comment on the DRM because it really isn't as serious as a lot of Slashdotters think.

Re:Somehow... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22771472)

You just commented on the DRM.

No comment. (4, Insightful)

WK2 (1072560) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771670)

I won't comment on the DRM because it really isn't as serious as a lot of Slashdotters think.

I won't respond to your comment, but DRM is BUILT-IN to the Operating System. How much more serious can it get?

Re:No comment. (1)

FoolsGold (1139759) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771700)

Alright, you've snared me, now I have no choice but to comment I suppose. :)

The DRM in Vista is not serious if it has little impact on the end user. It doesn't stop me from playing my movies regardless of format, it doesn't stop me playing my music regardless of format, so what's the big deal?

I've never checked, but I hear it does mean you can't setup a kind of audio loopback ability to record the audio the system makes, but very few people require such capabilities, and hence out of all the potential Windows users, it makes crap-all difference (myself included). If it's a problem, then don't use Vista, simple. Apart from that, I can't think of any Vista DRM that's actually been a serious problem for work or play, so like I said, it's not as serious as suggested.

The PRINCIPLE sucks of course, but the practical implementation isn't really much of a problem except for a few boundary situations.

Re:No comment. (1)

penix1 (722987) | more than 6 years ago | (#22772028)

You are correct that DRM isn't a problem for unprotected media. It is a blow to fair use backup on protected media though. Try backing up that HD media you purchased and see how far you get using only Microsoft tools (no cheating and using those illegal pirate specials). Try playing back a backup you may have managed to make once the original goes tits up.

Re:Somehow... (5, Insightful)

sunami88 (1074925) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771038)

... I can't help but pity those poor Vista users. What should be simply the release of a patch has become a major "event" which people actually have to prepare for and which, from what I hear, is even causing something quite similar to mild panic. But then again, you do get great DRM for your troubles.
I don't have mod points, so bring on the Flame bait mods. What do you call the Mac OS distribution system? Updates or epiphanies.

I just want an accurate frame for your post, Mac troll or Linux user.

Re:Somehow... (1)

unbug (1188963) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771098)

I just want an accurate frame for your post, Mac troll or Linux user.
Hmm, so according to you the merit (or lack thereof) of what I'm saying depends on what OS I use. I can't say that I subscribe to that view so I fear you'll just have to take a guess. Just to make it more mysterious, there's at least one other OS which I use fairly regularly.

Re:Somehow... (1)

dhavleak (912889) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771228)

But then again, you do get great DRM for your troubles.
With a poinless swipe like that you lose all credibility - so the lack of merit did not depend on which OS you use.

Re:Somehow... (1)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771404)

I see the MS trolls are out in force...

Re:Somehow... (1)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771118)

... I can't help but pity those poor Vista users. What should be simply the release of a patch has become a major "event" which people actually have to prepare for and which, from what I hear, is even causing something quite similar to mild panic. But then again, you do get great DRM for your troubles.
I think you're reading Slashdot a bit too much. ;-)

Most people have no trouble with service pack upgrades, as they've been tested a long time before getting released.

Actually, I think Vista SP1 seem to have had a longer testing period than usual.

The DRM comment seems like a a non sequiteur; Vista SP1 includes no "great DRM" extras.

Actually, even Vista RTM makes the DRM thing entirely optional. Those with a brain will just boycott DRM media and avoid it altogether. Like me. Playing pirated HD video on my 50" Plasma. Using Vista.

Re:Somehow... (2, Informative)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771416)

Most people have no trouble with service pack upgrades, as they've been tested a long time before getting released. Actually, I think Vista SP1 seem to have had a longer testing period than usual.


Ummm, were you off-world last month when enough people had trouble with Vista SP1 MS recalled it?

Re:Somehow... (1)

linzeal (197905) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771762)

I am the family tech guy and I see a Vista causing issues with older hardware added after the fact to already stable Vista systems. In one instance they had installed a 16 bit soundcard with no support after Windows 98 and limited support in Linux to a Vista system with 24 bit HD sound because their stereo cables were not color-coded. Vistax64 Ultimate runs decent on my system after I turned off some bells and whistles and made it function and look more like a workstation and less like a kiddie computer.

Re:Somehow... (-1, Flamebait)

ImpactedColon (956434) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771262)

[quote]What should be simply the release of a patch has become a major "event"?[/quote] Agreed. Only Windows users should protect their data during a major revision of an operating system.

Re:Somehow... (1)

DrXym (126579) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771274)

I use Vista and I haven't had any major issues with it. There have been some minor incompatibility issues with some apps that I have resolved, and some annoyances like UAC which I have disabled but in general Vista has performed extremely well. The Vista desktop is *much* better than XP's. Performance overall is slightly better than XP though games seem to have lower performance. I have no issue with the quality of Vista compared to any other OS I've used which all have their fair share of bugs and crashes.

I have had no trouble ripping or burning anything I like on Vista. If there is DRM, it hasn't made the slightest difference to me.

I do think Microsoft is far too tardy with its service packs. Putting everything out in one monolithic update a lot more risky than incremental improvements. Windows Update shouldn't be just for "hotfixes". There should be smaller releases that focus on specific areas.

Doesn't matter! (1)

Sukhbir (961063) | more than 6 years ago | (#22770964)

And how about the poor people like us (in majority) who won't be able to use the BIOS Emulation crack anymore? ;)

Re:Doesn't matter! (2, Insightful)

FoolsGold (1139759) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771004)

Download the Vista Loader (also known as a softmod):

http://www.mydigitallife.info/2007/03/10/vista-loader-20-oem-bios-emu-crack-softmod-update/ [mydigitallife.info]

I know it would be the Slashdot way to convince you to move to Linux instead, but fuck that - you wanna use Windows, this will help you continue to do so. :)

Who wants to service my pack (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22771012)

Who wants to service my pack?

And, in a couple years... (-1, Redundant)

Cygnus17 (661063) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771074)

"Stay tuned for Service Pack Five... Thousand!"

A major upgrade (0)

edwardpickman (965122) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771076)

To avoid any confusion with Leopard they made the letters VISTA really big on the background screen. This is a major advance over the smaller lettering in the initial release. To help add a familiar feel they also brought back Clippy and increased the size of it's floating Window. To help the less computer literate Clippy looks sad when Vista finds incompatible software or hardware. When you activate Office Clippy gives you a big thumbs up and add a verbal, "Thanks for buying Microsoft". It's rumored he looks sad if you activate Open Office and gives a little reminder that a study run by Microsoft proves that open source software causes Erectile Dysfunction.

funny (3, Funny)

joaommp (685612) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771088)

Gentoo 2008.0 was schedulled to be released on that same day...

Re:funny (3, Funny)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771160)

unfortunatly nobody will be seen using the new gentoo until 2009, *begins compiling*....

Re:funny (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771776)

Wow a blast from the past I haven't heard about Gentoo in a while. Sadly enough I never quite got the system with the write specs to get a clean compile.

Re:funny (1)

joaommp (685612) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771884)

It's a zen thing...

bah bah bah (-1, Offtopic)

rice_burners_suck (243660) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771096)

Why don't we skip this service thing and jump straight to the next major operating system, Excalibur? By then, they will decide to use the door, rather than the window, as a metaphor for what you see on the display. Doors Excalibur will be such an improvement in terms of usability. Its biggest feature will be a talking thumb tack that will detect when you're in a hurry to get something printed out or some other simple task, and cause the operating system to slow down, crash, reboot a zillion times, grind the hard drive until the platter is covered in scratches, discover a sudden incompatibility with your printer, or mouse, or your power cable, and just basically do everything it can to prevent you from printing that thing out. And if you try to transfer it over the network, voila! The network doesn't work! Try to put it on a floppy? Bam! The floppy drive can't seem to recognize any disk anymore! Burn it to optical media? It will burn half the file on purpose, inserting errors in random places, and then fail the burn so the disc can't be used anywhere!! And just when you are so enraged that you're about to commit suicide, it will delete the file, overwrite it with random data 10,000 times to make sure you can't retrieve it, and go, "Nah nah nah nah nah!" However, the moment this thumb tack detects that it's too late to print that document out, that its purpose has become obsolete, that you don't need it anymore, poof! It will suddenly pop out of the printer looking all shiny and glossy.

Doors Excalibur. Because you should have gotten a Mac.

Re:bah bah bah (1)

tekrat (242117) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771114)

Amazingly, this sounds exactly like the version of Windows I'm currently using, so why would I upgrade?

Wow (1)

arogier (1250960) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771144)

I don't know if this is a good omen. My journal post about service pack one made the front page, and I'm planning to put it on my system tomorrow. I'm probably going to look like the world's biggest fecal outlet if it corrupt my system tomorrow and I forget to backup. Then again my plan to back up is just rar'ing my documents and splitting it across several DVD's. I guess I'm going to have to pick up DVD's today. eHow I plan to do the install [ehow.com]

Battered person syndrome? (1)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771200)

Did anyone else look at the title of this article and immediately think of "Battered person syndrome [wikipedia.org] "? I did for some reason. Weird.

XP SP3? (1, Insightful)

SeaFox (739806) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771202)

When is XP SP3 coming out? I need to do a reformat of my machine. I have the all-in-one SP2 installer and I don't want to have to download all the stupid patches between SP2 and today separately.

Rock and hard place. (3, Interesting)

apodyopsis (1048476) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771236)

One thing is for certain..

..after the initial release then pull, the bricked PCs, the host of security issues and the whole general fuck up that MS have done over vista so far I predict a cautious, "if I must", approach from sys admins with every possible protection and back-up in place. This is not going to be a stampede for the latest secure patches. Truly MS has been a shot in the foot release for them.

Second the poster higher up: it will sure be interested to see how many of the wait for SP1 adopters now follow through and adopt.

Given the general widely held feeling about the the superiority of XP over Vista I cannot see many people clamoring to do so. But on the flip argument MS will withdraw XP soon to try and force adoption of Vista - this would leave many potential customers between a brick and a hard place.

No bother to me - I've been linux only at home for ~8 years (so I guess I'm biased) - but we sure live in interesting times.

Re:Rock and hard place. (1)

UbuntuLinux (1242150) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771294)

I agree with this person entirely. Microsoft is clearly scared shitless by Linux, and the furious adoption that utter disasters such as Vista are creating. People are switching to Linux in droves, and MS know it. Thats why they had to get Vista out in time, but they rushed it, and thats why they ended up with an OS riddled with usability issues, security concerns and incompatibility.

Its quite clear who the *real* computer users are, and they are the ones intelligent enough to switch to Linux. Everyone else is a sheep, and they deserve what they get.

Re:Rock and hard place. (1)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771916)

It wasn't released-then-pulled. An update for the updater app, which would've allowed people to install SP1 in future, was pulled when it turned out it borked systems. SP1 itself has yet to hit any form of Windows Update.

Vista slipstreamed with SP1 (3, Informative)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771266)

If your interested in downloading and installing a fresh copy of Vista with SP1 integrated, be sure to hunt down the ISO (provided by MSDN).

File Name: en_windows_vista_with_service_pack_1_x86_dvd_x14-29594.iso
File Size: 2943MB
MD5: b09267740ddd1a08d80b04ec6bbc232a
SHA1: bcd715a02739809e477c726ae4b5caa914156429

So far, I've noticed a fast improvement with Disk IO performance with SP1. I think I'm going to take Vista for another spin now that it feels "faster". It's still a memory hog however. I'd recommend 2GB or 1GB at the very least.

Early Adopters Suffer. (2)

headkase (533448) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771378)

Be glad you didn't buy Vista on day 1. The first six months sucked royally I've read and it's only recently become better. For myself, I bought Vista the day that Service Pack 1 was announced so I missed most of the ... joy ... I got on ship when it was reasonably nice. And about 3 weeks ago ZDNet was kind enough to publish MD5's of the final release MS sent them to evangalize about so I was able to acquire a copy, the MD5's matched so the worst it could be was a key collision and the installer wasn't corrupted so it was legit. It even shows the correct build number in System Information. Now since I didn't jump on ship until after they bailed some of the water out its been a fairly smooth ride for me. And since I installed SP1 I guess it's better - some things like alt-tabbing out of games don't wonk (thats a technical term) the system anymore so all in all its an incremental improvement. And it's definitely a lot less of a shock transitioning from XP to Vista than it was from 98 to XP headache wise.

Re:Early Adopters Suffer. (2, Interesting)

Ahrel (1064770) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771958)

Was only the first 2 months for me. After Creative released the driver for my soundcard, all was and has remained well since then. I did buy a 2nd GB of RAM though, because I noticed that things opened slower than in XP, but mainly because I was utilizing over 70% of my RAM with Firefox and Foobar open. The biggest problem I experienced with Vista post the good, strike that, working Creative drivers was getting Star Wars KotOR II and Grim Fandango to run.

Continually, I find myself defending Vista in my circle of peers in class (ironically we use MS Virtual Machine through Vista for our various OS and Network learning needs). In my opinion it's the best OS MS has released yet; and more people I meet seem to dislike it because it's interface is more different than MS has done since the move to 95 from 3.11. XP and Vista do everything pretty much identically, Vista does it more intuitively though, and it does it looking good (which was my primary reason for upgrading, I began using Linux when I learned about Compiz/Beryl and it became commonly stable because I like eye candy).

There are indeed many horror stories on the net but I've got 3 machines in this house that have been running more stable than XP did for either me or my roommate. And all of the machines in the labs at school have never had a problem yet either. So I continue to wonder what exactly is causing these problems for people. Obviously all the machines at school are identical, but the 2 desktops and single laptop at home all have different hardware and software configurations. *shrug* Guess I'm a lucky one, but I'm glad to read that it's been smooth for you too. Hopefully this will become common as people give it another shot with SP1 coming.

Don't care (1)

GNUPublicLicense (1242094) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771478)

What would we care about this service pack? The only interesting thing about this evil non-GPL OS is when it will be phased out of existence.

Re:Don't care (1)

Toreo asesino (951231) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771972)

How about that the 2nd most popular OS in use today is finally getting fixed?

I'd say a lot of people care.

Vista Service Pack One Almost Here (0, Troll)

eiapoce (1049910) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771534)

Does this article means that Vista is coming out of Beta?

normal service? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22771566)

"...then went into an endless series of reboots."

Well, from my experience of Windows, that seems quite normal...

Re:normal service? (1)

cloakable (885764) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771996)

Non, non. The only way this would be normal is a bluescreen at the end ;)

Been running SP1 RTM (1)

pcause (209643) | more than 6 years ago | (#22771906)

I've been running SP1 RTM for a while and Vista since the betas. I find that SP1 has fixed a LOT of the stability issues and BSODs that I had. Speed on some operation is better, but overall, Vista still seems slower than XP.

What I have found is that a lot of issues were caused by sleep/hibernate being broken and that most of the remainder are caused by drivers. The discovery data from the Vista lawsuit shows that MS knew they'd broken lots of drivers and that Intel drivers were pathetic. Vista would have been a step forward for MS if they hadn't thrown out all concern about quality.

Vista SP-1 (1)

PaulG.1 (1198147) | more than 6 years ago | (#22772034)

I loved Vista when I first installed it, then learned to loathe it more and more the more stuff I tried to install. I'm just getting around to tolerating it again and now the SP is due tomorrow. uSoft must be working with the DOD in developing "Marketing Terrorism".
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>