(OT) but interesting= Windows Vista Beta 2: Largest software download in history

[REM]

Father Merrin <[email protected]> wrote:

I interpret it like this, people are interested in what OS they are going
to be forced into using for the next 5+ years. And given the fact that
Microsoft deprecates older releases and cuts support, It never hurts to see
what lays ahead.

I worked on a system a few weeks ago. It was Win 95 and the problem
was that the browser no longer rendered web pages correctly. I popped
in Opera and presto! It was done.

I gave it a good once over. Both the hardware and the software were
solid. It was an old Packard Bell. <G>

A freak of nature, sort of.

As consumers, collectively, we cannot be led anywhere that we do not
want to go.

I still see quite a few 98 and 98SE machines too. For what it's
worth..

 

[hummingbird]

Exactly. The advantages of Vista are much more that it's possibly negative
sides. I've been using Vista Beta for some time now, and while it's a Beta
with TONS of debug information, it has been very stable, and from an
usability point of view there are a LOT of welcome changes. Sometimes the
things that people call bells and whistles are very goos usabiliry changes.
Funny enough, people complain about thos changes in Vista but the same
people cheer about bells and whistles in Unbuntu or Osx tiger.

What concerns me with new MS op/systems is that they introduce new
*features* which they don't tell people about ...you just find out
about them after shelling out the cash and start cursing.

One which comes to mind is that in the days of Win98, I could easily
remove a HDD with 98SE installed on it and stick it into a new PC and
boot up. No problem. Under XP this isn't possible because of codes
embedded in the op/syst installation about the MoBo it's installed on.

I hear rumours that Vista will have embedded controls to prevent
certain CD/DVD copying etc. I bet this won't be advertised...

Of course I could just be paranoid and MS are always acting in their
customers best interests!

 

[Luis Cobian]

What concerns me with new MS op/systems is that they introduce new
*features* which they don't tell people about ...you just find out
about them after shelling out the cash and start cursing.

Well, in my experience *almost* everything is documented. Of course it's
impossibly to know *everything* about a system and that's make the whole
thing difficult to handle. Yesterday I learn about a *very* obscure API call
(but perfectly documented) that did the same thing that once took 3 days
for me to implement. And I could have done it with one code line!

One which comes to mind is that in the days of Win98, I could easily
remove a HDD with 98SE installed on it and stick it into a new PC and
boot up. No problem. Under XP this isn't possible because of codes
embedded in the op/syst installation about the MoBo it's installed on.

Well, Apple has been doing the same from day 1. Checking your machine BIOS
before booting. It is not even possible to run intel based MacOS in some
other not-Macintosh machine.

I hear rumours that Vista will have embedded controls to prevent
certain CD/DVD copying etc. I bet this won't be advertised...

Yes, this is advertised in the Vista web site. You are talking about DRM

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/forpros/drm/default.mspx

It's a kind of "encryption" which may or may not become standard (there are
several at this moment). In the university I work for, some kind of DRM is
used to encrypt media material (recorded lectures, etc) and to prevent it
to be played and copied to other machines. It's just a tool. It doesn't mean
that you cannot play unencrypted material if you want, but you will be able
to play such material too.

 

[hummingbird]

Well, in my experience *almost* everything is documented. Of course it's
impossibly to know *everything* about a system and that's make the whole
thing difficult to handle. Yesterday I learn about a *very* obscure API call
(but perfectly documented) that did the same thing that once took 3 days
for me to implement. And I could have done it with one code line!



Well, Apple has been doing the same from day 1. Checking your machine BIOS
before booting. It is not even possible to run intel based MacOS in some
other not-Macintosh machine.


Yes, this is advertised in the Vista web site. You are talking about DRM

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/forpros/drm/default.mspx

It's a kind of "encryption" which may or may not become standard (there are
several at this moment). In the university I work for, some kind of DRM is
used to encrypt media material (recorded lectures, etc) and to prevent it
to be played and copied to other machines. It's just a tool. It doesn't mean
that you cannot play unencrypted material if you want, but you will be able
to play such material too.

What you're describing is a technical level of understanding which
most people will not get involved in through choice or lack of skill.

A new buyer of Vista has to wade through a tonnage of MS website bloat
and read all the small print in everything that's published elsewhere
about its limitations *before* buying it or installing it just to make
sure that what he already does on his existing XP system isn't blocked
under Vista because MS have got into bed with the entertainment
industry or submitted to its pressure.

When I bought XP-SP1 OEM all I got was a scraggy A5 dumb user guide
- nothing in it whatsoever about not being able to move my HDD onto a
new system when I replaced my hardware (because it went bang), which
I had previously done under Win98.

If MS were honest and decent to their client base, they would publish
conspicuously the limitations of Vista which are significant to some.

 

[Al Klein]

Well, Apple has been doing the same from day 1. Checking your machine BIOS
before booting. It is not even possible to run intel based MacOS in some
other not-Macintosh machine.

Mac, almost. Apple, no.

 

[Al Klein]

If MS were honest and decent to their client base, they would publish
conspicuously the limitations of Vista which are significant to some.

One of which being that if you don't like it, or if it performs poorly
(or not at all) with your hardware, you'll have to do a clean install
of your older system, and then reinstall all your apps. There's no
method to roll the installation back.

 

[Lou]

If MS were honest and decent to their client base, they would publish
conspicuously the limitations of Vista which are significant to some.

When pigs fly.
MS is in business to make money, period end of statement.
Many think Bill and Melinda Gates have set up a very good charitable foundation
in part to overcome the terrible image of M$.

Here is a good oxymoron Microsoft Ethics.

Lou

 

[hummingbird]

One of which being that if you don't like it, or if it performs poorly
(or not at all) with your hardware, you'll have to do a clean install
of your older system, and then reinstall all your apps. There's no
method to roll the installation back.

Fortunately, I only change op/sys when I build myself a new PC, so
that particular problem won't arise. But I think there's enough
restrictions in Vista to encourage me to stay with XP for quite some
while. When I saw a pic of Vista the other day with MS's continued
use of 'My this' folder and 'My that' folder - that was enough for me!

 

[Al Klein]

Fortunately, I only change op/sys when I build myself a new PC, so
that particular problem won't arise. But I think there's enough
restrictions in Vista to encourage me to stay with XP for quite some
while. When I saw a pic of Vista the other day with MS's continued
use of 'My this' folder and 'My that' folder - that was enough for me!

I come at it from the other side - XP does what I need, so there's no
reason to change. We come from different directions, but we arrive at
the same destination.

 

[hummingbird]

I come at it from the other side - XP does what I need, so there's no
reason to change. We come from different directions, but we arrive at
the same destination.

I think the next PC I build will have XP-Pro on it again from new but
I'll probably use something like XPLite to strip it down from day 1;
doing it later on is less easy.
However, I do have a concern that some later hardware - processors
etc or even some misc drivers might actually require Vista to run.
eg - I don't want to find myself in a situation where I've got a spare
brand new P4 socket 478 but can't buy a MoBo to install it in!

 

[Al Klein]

However, I do have a concern that some later hardware - processors
etc or even some misc drivers might actually require Vista to run.
eg - I don't want to find myself in a situation where I've got a spare
brand new P4 socket 478 but can't buy a MoBo to install it in!

I doubt that'll ever happen. I can still run DOS 2.1 on my dual core
64 bit mb. It runs a bit too fast, but ...

 

[hummingbird]

I doubt that'll ever happen. I can still run DOS 2.1 on my dual core
64 bit mb. It runs a bit too fast, but ...

Yeahbut you're describing using old s/w on later machines.
I was alluding to using later s/w & h/w on older machines.
There might not be a significant difference?

We've already seen mobos designed to accomodate new processor and
new HDD/graphics technologies.