MS Vista

[Guest Troy Halliday]

Just wondered if anyone had been brave enough to download the new beta version of Microsofts new operating system 'Vista'. Must admit I am curious but as I have now cut down the number of my PC's (due mainly to family members destroying theirs and borrowing my 3D redering computer) I have not got an expendable machine to install it apon.

My current machine a Dual 2.8ghz Xeon machine, 2 gig ram, raptor based raid1 primery hard drive, High end Quadra FX graphics card, and all the other bells and whistles. Is used daily for grphics, 3D creation, talking to you lot, and generaly serving my everyday needs, passes the hardware requirements to run the Ultimate edition of the new operating system. While I am very curious I can not afford the down time that a beta version is bound to bring.

So wondered if anyone who has tried it could let me/us know what they think of it. IS it the way to go or just an over elaberate graphical interface sitting on an under achieving base code?

[Evil_Dr_Fish]

Oh bugger is this the hideous Longhorn crap?

Where we no longer own our own files!

Also they were planning on allowing companies an ability to DELETE files from your machine if they are believed to be pirate / unlicensed!

[Evil_Dr_Fish]

From The Register:

While the technologies, once known as Palladium and now called the next-generation secure computing base (NGSCB), will help companies and consumers lock down their computers and networks, concerns remain that the hardware security measures could also be used to lock-in consumers to a single platform and restrict fair uses of content.

With homegrown integrity and security features being added by a variety of devices by companies aiming to lock out competition using the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), the specter of another hardware-based security feature worries some information-system experts.

Innovation could suffer if reverse engineers are locked out from tinkering with devices, said Dan Lockton, a graduate student at the University of Cambridge whose thesis focuses on the effects of technologies created for controlling information.

The fear is that "we're moving to a stage where the customer no longer has control over the product he or she has bought or the products (created) using that device," Lockton said.

Printer maker Lexmark attempted to block generic ink cartridge makers from reverse engineering its simple hardware security scheme for validating legitimate cartridges. A federal appeals court overturned in October an initial win for Lexmark and allowed chip-maker Static Control to continue making the chips that made generic ink cartridges compatible with Lexmark printers.

"It is definitely clear that some of the content owners themselves are trying to use the technology to erode some of the fair use allowances that have historically been granted by the courts," said William Arbaugh, assistant professor of computer science for the University of Maryland at College Park. "We have to be vigilant in order to stop that tactic."

The Electronic Frontier Foundation, an Information Age civil rights group, has also criticized the technology as potentially undermining fair use rights.

However, Microsoft's Wilson stressed that the software giant intends to increase user security, not reduce the control the user has over their computer.

"We have always been very clear that NGSCB was never designed to be a system that would 'lock-in' users or decrease the flexibility of the Windows computing experience," she said. "Our vision has always been to provide benefits in terms of security, privacy, and system integrity while preserving the flexibility of Windows."

If Microsoft - and more importantly, third-party content providers - give consumers full control over how the technology is used in their systems, the security benefits could significantly increase the protection of PC data, the University of Maryland's Arbaugh said.

"This technology could be used for some really heavy handed digital-rights management (DRM) but it can also be used for some great improvements in security," he said. "I think finding that sweet spot will be a technical challenge as well as a policy challenge."

[lotusessex80]

Windows suck really bad with the blue screen of death. I personally use Suse (variation of Linux). It's more stable but it's not user friendly.. what linux version is .

Besides that it is a great OS plus it's free. And I can download Open Office for free and use it with Suse. Why should we pay a rediculious amount for an OS that crashes every 5 minutes with stupid error messages!

I rather have someting stable and free.. Even the Mac. is better the PC's. Mac is stable as all hell. Name a time when you use a Mac and it crashed on you.. NEVER.

Windows is quickly created to make money.. LONG LIVE JAVA..

I love Java! It's so much better then microsoft .NET platform! However, they do make .NET very easy to associate other .NET languages together.. makes web development easier too.. but still, the compilers on .NET sucks ASS.. has a bunch of problems with compilation errors.. especially c++.NET.

Why spend hundreds of dollars when you can get everything for free and it WORKS the RIGHT WAY!

Edited June 15, 2006 by lotusessex80

[Guest Troy Halliday]

Looked at Linux a few times but it gets all to confusing when trying to get it al running. Had a friend come round and try to install it and he couldn't do it either.

Wouldn't mind giving it a try but it is much harder to get hold of mainstream software ahem if you know what I mean.

I used Macs for years they are not all they are cracked up to be and the price is bloody redicules.

[lotusessex80]

With Windows also comes the Java and .NET wars.. reminds me of G-cars vs S-cars!

I have met some very stubborn .NET programmers and they totally dish out Java (majority that I have met), but most Java programmers I met aren't anal about .NET programmers.. its just shows that going out of the box people are more conciderate.. <---- just my opinion

[tinywillyuk]

Interesting topic. We've been running the Ultimate edition beta to assess the platform suitability of the equipment we integrate and sell.

What I can tell you is that we're hoping the code is better optimised for the RC and final RTM versions.

In summary the beta is sluggish on platforms that are comfortably shipping running Win XP. Some have proven unproductively slow. The interface is fairly pretty (the tonka toy green button by default is dead!) and a bit Mac-esque, the security and hand-holding in its default post-install mode is irritating and intrusive and battery usage on laptops is brutal (this is well documented and expected to improve). It also swallows 3.5GB basic on the default installation parameters.

On the upside, for a beta its fairly stable and the driver support is extensive, slick and reliable already. Performance can be made much better by removing things like shadowing, turning Windows Defender off and disabling ClearType. For OEMs like us, unattended setup processes and tools appear to be quicker and easier.

We're waiting for the RC stage and then a more final evaluation can take part and hopefully the OEM DSP delivery schedule will be made public.

We've also plopped Office 2007 betas on top. The Office story is better. It appears a little leaner, the interface is different but well thought out with tabbed menus for example, with criticisms and compliments being equal in quantity.

Not sure that was the best analysis, but hey, PM me if you need me to go and get something more scientific!

[Evil_Dr_Fish]

I rather have someting stable and free.. Even the Mac. is better the PC's.  Mac is stable as all hell.  Name a time when you use a Mac and it crashed on you.. NEVER.

Easy - When programming for a producer on a project for Sony International. The producer had a couple of macs and they were JUST as unreliable as an average PC.

My PC which I took was more stable than his macs it was as simple as that.

Was it because they were Macs or PC's? No. It was because ANY poorly maintained computer is shite. Any well set up and well maintained machine will be stable and reliable (pc or mac)

Any computer is only as reliable as:

1) the install

2) the maintenance (ie usually how LITTLE you do to it rather than dicking with it all the time! (That does not mean use, it means messing with it and adding unnecessary crap))

3) The user's competence to stick to 2!

That axiom applies to no specific platform.

[lrg_machine]

Easy - When programming for a producer on a project for Sony International. The producer had a couple of macs and they were JUST as unreliable as an average PC.

My PC which I took was more stable than his macs it was as simple as that.

Was it because they were Macs or PC's? No. It was because ANY poorly maintained computer is shite. Any well set up and well maintained machine will be stable and reliable (pc or mac)

Any computer is only as reliable as:

1) the install

2) the maintenance (ie usually how LITTLE you do to it rather than dicking with it all the time! (That does not mean use, it means messing with it and adding unnecessary crap))

3) The user's competence to stick to 2!

That axiom applies to no specific platform.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'd agree with that totally Fishy.

I'm a .NET developer and have NEVER had my Windows PC's / servers do the BS of Death in 2 years of development on the platform. I've had the od crash where things slow down a bit but that's usually due to some dodgy code...

People who say that windows is unstable, either don't know how to maintain it or take it upon themselves to muck about with settings and features they should not be let loose on.

[Dan]

Windows is fine, but I don't know how much more I need than Windows 2000 - it's very robust, reasonably efficient, and limits its patronising to a minimum. XP's cosmetic tweaks are irrelevant to me (I switch back to Classic view), the 'usability improvements' tend to obfuscate simple configuration settings in a patronising manner, and its security features are no better than Win2000 plus the best freeware tools. I use XP, in a Windows 2000 style, since it's preloaded on current hardware.

I've had a read through the Vista features, and whilst I'm interested in the flash-backed hard drive support, it appears to rely more on hardware than software to improve performance, supend/resume times, etc. Many of the other improvements are of a cosmetic or usability slant, mostly protecting clueless users from themselves, so there's little overall that appeals.

Of late I've been playing with Linux - specifically Red Hat's Fedora Core v5 - after having shelved it as immature some years ago. I'm impressed. The installer - Anaconda - is very sophisticated, the package-managed software installation is straightforward, the Gnome desktop and associated tools are good, and there's even a handy auto-update tool that goes off and downloads the latest software updates for any packaged apps that you have installed. OK, so there's a lot of differences in the detail, and you'll have to migrate to different applications for the same functionality (meaning re-learning interfaces) but there's a lot of functionality there. I already use Firefox as my browser, and Thunderbird as my mail client, so the most often used tools are staying the same!

One of the big plusses for me was that I spent a month tinkering with Fedora 5 in VMware, working out various installs and configurations, binning them or rolling back changes when I got things wrong, and learning all the time. I even replicated the situation of XP on first hard disk, installing Linux to second hard disk, and boot managing via the Windows boot manager (minimal disruption, preferred route). This is possible because Linux OSes generally have a much lower overhead on system resources than modern Windows incarnations - I can only imagine how sluggish Vista will be under VMware on my Hyperthreaded 3Ghz P4. Anyhow, I bought a second hard disk once I was confident with the Fedora installation, and repeated my practiced installations on real hardware.

Microsoft's minimum hardware specs have always been optimistic, verging on dangerous, a bit like trying to fly a plane a fraction above its stalling speed. NT4 was supposed to run in 16MB, but install networking support and it'd be up at 20MB at next reboot; put on a decent service pack, IE version, and Office version, add it to a domain and add some simple software distibution / system management tools (i.e. the basics!) and you'd be looking at 96MB as your minimum... If they're saying 512MB for Vista, figure on 1-2GB to get it booted up with an active network connection and browser & mail client running - note that one of the touted features of Vista is the support for hardware that'll allow users to add memory "for improved performance" "without opening their PC"...

I must say that I'm enjoying being outside of my comfort zone, and learning familiarity again from a different perspective, but with the reassurance that the system appears complete, competent and forgiving to a degree - perhaps like explaining to a stereotypical American that you can derive pleasure from driving a manual gearbox rather than an automatic, even though there's more to do.

I think most people have moved on from the near-religious zealotry that surrounded operating system choices in the 1990's; I worked with OS/2 when it put nails in DOS/Windows' coffin, and I realised it was time to move on when I could see NT4 doing the same thing to OS/2. I'm going to see now if Linux, in one distribution flavour or another, is ready to oust Windows in my little world

Having worked as a technology architect in some big UK businesses, the reason they don't snap up Linux in a flash are, to a lesser degree, the retraining costs for moving staff who aren't interested in computers across from Windows-land to Linux-land, and to a greater degree the often overlooked but huge investment made over many years in Word and Excel macros/formulae/automation. Much of this automation is done 'skunkworks' style by end user departments getting their local IT people or bright spark to script this, automate that, etc., and is of course embedded into subsequent business processes without any formal requirements specification, coding standards, support, or documentation If/when a non-Windows based 'office' suite can offer 99%+ compatibility with Office automation, Microsoft will be rightly worried about the desktop estate, but just being able to view and edit a .DOC or .XLS file isn't enough...

Apple have, for years, flogged the Macintosh based on it being 'different' to PCs. Now with their switches to a Unixy OS and Intel hardware, how different can they be? Sony in particular have a strong reputation for stylish kit, and Toshiba don't do a bad job - can Apple really play profitably in that cost/performance space when all they have is a more "Macintoshy" styling? How much will aesthetic brand loyalty count when it's all the same stuff so close to the visible surface, for such a price differential?

So, er, in short, Vista will be a resource hog for mostly cosmetic benefits, but if you're fancying a change and have previously been put off Linux because it felt like you had to build a kit car when all you wanted to do was go out for a hoon, try one of the more modern distributions.

[Evil_Dr_Fish]

YUK!!!!

New Micro$oft Office

Designed for the truly moronic, "as thick as a flipper" types... should be perfect for their target audience! Once again, those who know have to deal with an increasing 'toybox-isation' of computers

"introducing Microsoft Pen and paper v1.0"

the revolutionary human interfacing of the "Personal Expression Notemaker" (P.E.N for short)... makes the taking of impromptu notes, designs, even sketches and line art easy, in conjunction with Microsoft "Paper " and the new development, provisionally titled "Beermat 0.6 beta"

[lotusessex80]

I agree .. I am also a .NET programmer and a Java programmer. I like 2000 better then any other OS that Mircrosoft ever produce thus far. I also like the MAC as well; howerver, I hate the STUPID one button mouse!

Well with all BETAs I will just wait until most of the kinks are out.

[Tentenths]

Anyone been brave enough to upgrade to Vista yet? If so, any thoughts/comments thus far?

James

[Glyn Harper]

Well, I run an IT company and I've used it for about 3 months in release client version.

Firstly, it's really hungry on memory. You need minimum 1gig of ram for it to work, but in reality I would say 2 gig of ram is a minimum for it to work efficiently.

you also need a decent video card to get the full 'aero' experience.

The 'my documents' folders has all changed, and does take a little time to get used to. Also, some of the security things are a lot different. You occasionally get the screen pop up windows asking you to approve stuff.

The Aero interface is great though. (it only works if you have a decent graphics card.. Radeon 9600 or higher really).

It allows you to cascade your open windows on top of each other, and all the windows have transparent backgrounds like frosted glass. Very pretty. The animations of opening and closing windows looks pretty too.

It's the way forward whether you like it or not though!

For the first few months, expect a few issues and service packs to come out for it. also, if you may find it's not compatible with all your hardware and software, so run the upgrade advisor first off the Microsoft website. If that's the case, you may find you can't get updated drivers just yet, until everyone gets into gear.

Most hardware will work using older XP drivers though.

If you love gadgets, you'll love Vista. If you're a bit of a technophobe, stick to XP for now!

I'm also running Office 2007, which has a totally different menu system using icons. I've not got used to it properly yet and it's quite annoying at first. The new version of Outlook 2007 is good though. The spam filter actually works quite well for once!

Edited February 6, 2007 by Glyn Harper

[esprits4de]

The best VISTA is the "Hasta la vista!Baby!"

I am a Microsoft Partner, and I will definately wait until SP1 comes out.

( should be out in 2-3 weeks, judging by the rate of system blow ups..:-) )

[russellbosier]

Heres a nice little voice recognition security loop hole in it.

news

[jimmybondi]

Does not support AC97 audio standard - only HD Audio, also for the front connectors. Virtually all front connectors on pc chassis are AC97...

[wiseraven]

I haven't tried it, but I've been watching its gestation closely. It was reported that Microsoft started testing service pack 1 before Vista was released to the non-corporate masses. This means they've found a CD full of problems already. Unless you're desperate to try it, I'd wait until at least SP2 is out. That is traditionally the first stable version.

Also, before upgrading, you should read the EULA very carefully. You can only "transfer it to another PC" once. The reason that's in quotes is because the MS idea of another PC also includes major component upgrades. If you buy a PC with the OEM version installed, you can't transfer it at all.

The new version of Outlook 2007 is good though

Does this mean that it understands mailing lists? I.e. does it support threading, replying to the list instead of the poster, not top-posting, configurable attributions, removing sigs from replies etc. etc.? If it does, then I'd upgrade.

Phil

[esprit350]

I have only just gone to XP last year, I used to like 3.1 what was wrong with that?

[lemoncurd]

At the risk of this turning into a geek fest... I can't really see why anyone would need to upgrade to Vista. putting aside the interesting Digital Rights Management copyright type questions that Vista brings up, what does Vista do that I couldn't do in XP (and to be honest win98sp2)?

2Gb RAM?!?! It is an Operating System... it schedules stuff and provides an abstraction layer... that is 2Gb used before you have actually done anything productive!

* Note I am *totally* biased as I run Linux at home and work and the next home machine will be a Mac.

[Vulcan Grey]

Ugh, Vista looks like a worthless piece from my perspective.

My computer would run it just fine

4GB Ram

Core 2 Duo E6600 overclocked to 3.1GHz

Brand new ASUS P5W DH Deluxe motherboard

Nvidia Quadro FX 1300 (Professional CAD video card)

Only problem...

Vista is 89% slower than XP at all CAD and 3D animation software (SolidWorks, Maya, ProEngineer, 3DSMAX)

useless.

Since MS changed the way that the software can speak to hardware, and pretty much diabled OpenGL, until new drivers are completely rewritten... I can't see upgrading to it at all.

Nvidia says their driver for the 8800 series graphics cards is 22million lines of code! It'll take them a while to rewrite.

[Jussi]

I have also quite fast PC with XP but I'm not going to upgrade for some time. Why...Vista is a much slower in same Pc where's XP runs fine. And all driver problems it have...so no thanks.

And we're almost have upgraded (by march it's done) all our computers at work to XP although we have over 10 000computers

But after some time there's going to be some pressures for upgrading, all new software and periprerals are designed for Vista...that really sucks

I have tested Vista some 3months ago with new laptop, it was quite slow on that machine. That laptop was with Vista logo and it was just coming to market. Vista looked nice but still there was nothing special that I have to upgrade to it.

[Glyn Harper]

I'm not letting it near my work computers until at least summer, and I won't let my customers use it until at least next year

The only major technical thing it does over XP is support IPv6.. but I think you can get XP to do that anyway to be honest.

As for speed, the 64bit version should be faster than the 32bit version. We'll have to see though I suppose.

I just love the new pretty graphics, but once that wears thin it is a lot slower.

In my opinion, XP pro SP2 and Office 2003 is about as good as it can get. I think Vista and Office 2007 are being launched just because they haven't launched anything for ages that's new!!

Perhaps in the future we will see the extra benefits Vista will bring.. but for the time being, stick to XP when you actually need to be sure something will more or less work.

Did someone mention Linux? groan.....

Edited February 7, 2007 by Glyn Harper

[Bibs]

I've been using Office 2007 for a couple of months now (it's, erm, an eval copy) and it's ace. Once you get the hang of all the stuff being in different places there is so much more functionality and it's soooo much quicker, plus although docx files don't seem to be backwards compatible, they are a lot small than their doc equivalents.

[mr50bmg]

Most of the reviews of Vista focus on the superficial aspects of the OS, such as transparent window edges; if there are any fundamental architectural improvements, I haven't heard anything other than the promise of better security.

However, I'm not looking all that hard to find the differences. I grew up on System V and BSD Unix, so to me Windows is a morbidly obese hack job. On my laptop with XP, I am tired of all its popup distractions, nagging, and constant updates. If I can get Linux running on it instead, that will be the end of XP for me. Regardless, I won't be buying Vista.

Fortunately, at work, we develop our code on Linux based workstations.