Overall Vista Impression

[William McIlroy]

I've got some decades of computer experience behind me. That is either good
or bad, depending on how you view experience. Anyhow, I've been using Vista
since about a year before RTM and regular for about a year on my primary
computer. Rock solid is not the term that I would apply to Vista. On
several occasions I have installed commercial applications on Vista only have
them operate normally for a few weeks and then, unaccountably, start issuing
incomprehensible messages. One of them complains that it was improperly
installed, even though it functioned normally until one bright morning. This
behavior seems more or less epidemic among 3rd party software products of a
certain age. Next, with Vista, one still awaits the arrival of
Vista-compatible drivers for commercial hardware products. My Xerox 6400
scanner will not run under Vista because there is no Vista-compatible driver.
Finally, the gadget strip is a really good idea. I find it very handy.
But, gadgets malfunction like 3rd party commercial software. They simply
stop working properly without provocation or explanation. A big offender in
this regard is the calendar gadget that is supposed to display today's date
in an orange spiral-bound notebook graphic. Right now on my computer it
launches, stays blank, and never updates. I've tried removing it from the
strip and reinstalling it to the strip without any change. Vista will
someday be the stable workhorse that XP is today. But that is a long effort
for Microsoft to execute. We, out here in the world, await improvements.
The mysterious upcoming (who knows when) Service Pack 1, should address some
significant percentage of these anomalies.

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

I've got some decades of computer experience behind me. That is either good
or bad, depending on how you view experience.

With regard to your message below, I think it's neither good nor bad.
The points you make stand or fall on their own merit, without regard
to how much experience you have.

Anyhow, I've been using Vista
since about a year before RTM and regular for about a year on my primary
computer. Rock solid is not the term that I would apply to Vista.

For a large variety of reasons, different people experience varying
degrees of solidity with Vista, just as they do with other operating
systems. Those reasons include the stability of the hardware they run
it on, the applications they run, how clean the computer is with
regard to malware, etc.

My personal experience is very much the opposite of yours. It has been
completely stable here. I've been running Vista RTM for just over a
year, and it has not crashed or caused a significant problem in all
that time.

On
several occasions I have installed commercial applications on Vista only have
them operate normally for a few weeks and then, unaccountably, start issuing
incomprehensible messages. One of them complains that it was improperly
installed, even though it functioned normally until one bright morning. This
behavior seems more or less epidemic among 3rd party software products of a
certain age.

Sorry, but I don't at all understand what that paragraph as to do with
a message entitled "Overall Vista Impression." Yes, some applications
are less stable than others. And yes, some applications, particularly
older ones, are more likely to cause problems in a newer operating
system. But application problems are not Vista problems.

Next, with Vista, one still awaits the arrival of
Vista-compatible drivers for commercial hardware products.

Certainly true. It's true every time a new operating system comes out.
And in some cases those drivers will never become available, because
the hardware manufacturer will decide that it's not worth the time and
effort to produce a new driver for an older piece of hardware.

But again, this is not a Vista issue, but one with the manufacturers
of the hardware.

My Xerox 6400
scanner will not run under Vista because there is no Vista-compatible driver.

That scanner, and many other pieces of hardware. But again, blame
Xerox for that, not Microsoft and Vista.

Finally, the gadget strip is a really good idea.

The "gadget strip"? Do you mean the "sidebar"?

I find it very handy.

Yes, I like it too.

But, gadgets malfunction like 3rd party commercial software. They simply
stop working properly without provocation or explanation. A big offender in
this regard is the calendar gadget that is supposed to display today's date
in an orange spiral-bound notebook graphic. Right now on my computer it
launches, stays blank, and never updates. I've tried removing it from the
strip and reinstalling it to the strip without any change.

Most gadgets *are* third-party, and like any other group of
third-party software, some of it is better written and more stable
than the rest. I don't run the calendar gadget that you do, but I have
seven gadgets running all the time, and each of them is completely
stable, presenting me with no problems at all. If one of them did
present a problem, I would stop using it.

Vista will
someday be the stable workhorse that XP is today.

It already is, as far as I'm concerned. Almost all of your complaints
above have nothing to do with Vista itself, but with third-party
hardware and software.

But that is a long effort
for Microsoft to execute. We, out here in the world, await improvements.

Although I think Vista is pretty good right now, neither it, nor
anything else, is perfect, and improvements are always welcomed.

The mysterious upcoming (who knows when) Service Pack 1,

There's nothing "mysterious" about it. It's targeted (not promised)
for the first quarter of next year.

should address some
significant percentage of these anomalies.

Again, the "anomalies" you mention are largely third-party anomalies,
not Vista ones. No Vista Service Pack will fix a poorly-written driver
written by a hardware manufacturer or a poorly-written gadget provided
by a third-party.

 

[Jack Mehoff]

On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 08:55:55 -0700, "Ken Blake, MVP"

Pretty defensive, huh Ken? Blame all problems on everything but the actual cause
(Vista). But wait. There will be a service pack? Sounds like a plan. My plan was to
'upgrade' to XP. That plan worked.

 

[Mike Hall - MVP]

There are two types of problems. Problems directly in Vista which are
getting worked out in stages, and problems affecting Vista, which may or
may not get worked out depending upon the 3rd party responsible.

Nobody is suggesting that Vista doesn't have some issues, but not all issues
can be pinned directly on Vista.

 

[William McIlroy]

It isn't Vista at fault if some application, that works perfectly under XP,
fails to work properly under Vista? I don't believe Microsoft touted Vista
as an opportunity for all their customers to go out and purchase upgrades to
the third-party software that customers depend on daily to do business. If
you consider Vista in the light of the unfactual pretext that Microsoft is a
start-up company newly marketing its very first operating system, then Vista
looks quite ordinary. How many times has IE, the face of the desktop crashed
and restarted during the normal course of operations? How often has Vista
gotten the two optical drives in my computer confused? Vestiges of the
postponed File System as Database for Enhanced Search capability leave Vista
with a confusing user interface as regards Search. I'm not buying the rah
rah party line attitude that Vista is great if only you wouldn't criticize
it. My overall impression is that Vista, without fixes, is rather inferior
to XP. Buyers of new computers are voting with their feet and pocketbooks.
They insist something other than Vista be installed on their hardware
platforms. And for good reason.

 

[Bruce Chambers]

It isn't Vista at fault if some application, that works perfectly under XP,
fails to work properly under Vista?

No, of course not! Anyone who thinks this clearly knows nothing about
the relationship between an operating system and the applications.




--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:



They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell

The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot

 

[William McIlroy]

I propose that the reason people who market devices that hook to computers
are unwilling to write drivers for Vista because it is very expensive to find
someone who is expert at Vista's newly revised device driver model.
Microsoft, despite protestations to the contrary, is unwilling and/or unable
to teach people, except (possibly) employees, how to use their products.
(Red meat for Microsoft's defenders, but true, nonetheless.) That would
include the publicly hidden environment in which device drivers operate. So,
blame the hardware manufacturers, if you must, for not producing Vista
drivers. But Microsoft may well have made it unnecessarily difficult for
manufacturers to do the right thing.

If my computer ran the Vista AERO version of the animated fish tank all day,
and nothing else, I'd say Vista is terrific!

Norton A-V says my Vista computer is absolutely clean of all malware. Yet,
it still malfunctions. And, I've installed all Microsoft patches to date.
It is a Dell: manufacturers of some of the most reliable computers in the
world.

If Vista was supposed to be an XP better than XP, then application
transparency should be paramount. You cannot get an informative and complete
statement as to the negative effects Vista may have on legacy application
performance.

As a writer of commercial software that sells, I expect to be told what
changes I must make in my products in order that they will run perfectly on
Vista as well as XP. I guess my name dropped off that mailing list.

Fortunately, I am not emotionally tied to Microsoft or Vista. I'm just
reporting my experience with Vista. And it isn't just me. Others have tales
to tell as well. Meanwhile, we all await improvements, which merely gild the
lily to hear some defend the indefensible. I'd be willing to bet Microsoft
executives are well aware of the product's shortcomings, surprised that what
got pushed out the door is performing so poorly, and are having trouble
coordinating the effort to regain face. Meanwhile, publicly, the corporate
entity denies, denies, denies.

 

[Mike Hall - MVP]

Read what I said. Vista does have issues, but they are not ALL the fault of
Vista.

Some programs are expressly written such that they will not run on the next
OS by virtue of having code in them which detects a specific OS. The 3rd
party vendors want you to go out and buy, taking full advantage of the fact
that they can blame it all on Microsoft.

Some programs are written to take advantage of loopholes which existed in XP
but don't exist in Vista. There are many reasons why something will not run.

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

It isn't Vista at fault if some application, that works perfectly under XP,
fails to work properly under Vista?

No, it is not. *Every* time any new operating system comes out, some
applications that worked under its predecessor will not work under it.

That's for two reasons:

1. Although backwards compatibility is clearly desirable, in some
respects, it always interferes with improvements in the operating
system. You can not always add a particular new feature without
rendering something that used to work obsolete. It is always a
difficult tradeoff, balancing innovation with backwards compatibility,
but some compatibility is always lost.

This is true, not only of operating systems, but of many other
products as well. The wheels that were used on my great-grandfather's
covered wagon won't work on my 21st century automobile, either.

2. In many cases, third-party software vendors take advantage of
loopholes in the current operating and design their products in a
non-standard way. They do this in spite of Microsoft's warning not to
do so. The result, when those loopholes are closed in a newer
operating system, is that those products no longer work. The blame for
this lies squarely on the part of the vendors who chose not to follow
the rules.

I don't believe Microsoft touted Vista
as an opportunity for all their customers to go out and purchase upgrades to
the third-party software that customers depend on daily to do business.

Of course they didn't. Microsoft obviously tried to maintain as much
compatibility with existing applications as possible, while still
introducing improvements. But perfection in this regard, as I said
above, is not possible.

By the way, my personal experience is that except for a couple of
minor utilities, *all* the applications that I ran under XP also run
under Vista without a problem. I'm aware, of course, that not everyone
has had the same experience, but those who haven't have mostly been
running older applications, which are much more likely to generate
compatibility problems.

If
you consider Vista in the light of the unfactual pretext that Microsoft is a
start-up company newly marketing its very first operating system, then Vista
looks quite ordinary. How many times has IE, the face of the desktop crashed
and restarted during the normal course of operations?

Not a single time here.

How often has Vista
gotten the two optical drives in my computer confused?

I don't know what's happened in your computer. I have a single optical
drive here, and haven't seen that issue.

Vestiges of the
postponed File System as Database for Enhanced Search capability leave Vista
with a confusing user interface as regards Search. I'm not buying the rah
rah party line attitude that Vista is great if only you wouldn't criticize
it. My overall impression is that Vista, without fixes, is rather inferior
to XP.

That's fine. You are welcome to that opinion. I know that you are not
alone in it. My opinion happens to be the contrary, and I also know
that I am not alone in it.

That's what makes horse races. We don't all have the same opinions.

 

[William McIlroy]

Well, the fact that full backwards compatibility is impossible has been
dragged a bit too soon into this argument. It does NOT explain the
phenomenon of products that work for a while and then fail under Vista. Or
maybe it does. If 3rd party software purveyors depend on planned
obsolescence for a continued revenue stream, with the connivance of
Microsoft, that is a kind of fraud. In my case the software product, which
is excellent by the way, is no longer manufactured. So, I'm stuck running XP
forever. This is contrary to the wishes of Microsoft whose business plan is
to pull the plug on XP ASAP. Anyway, Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays to
everyone in the Microsoft Family. It is much too nice a day to bicker.

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

Well, the fact that full backwards compatibility is impossible has been
dragged a bit too soon into this argument. It does NOT explain the
phenomenon of products that work for a while and then fail under Vista.

I have *never* seen that phenomenon. What products are you referring
to?

 

[Ronc]

Perhaps you should check out Chris Pirillo's 1-1/2 minute review:
http://chris.pirillo.com/2007/11/10/theres-nothing-wrong-with-windows-vista/

 

[Homer S.]

On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 17:48:58 -0700, "Ken Blake, MVP"

The following is a slightly edited email message from one of my oldest and most
computer savvy customers. She purchased a high-end laptop with Vista pre-installed.
Additionally, she is the president of the local Senior Citizens Computer club with
approx. 125 members. Read on:


Homer,

Following is the 'Vista' review we spoke about yesterday. I want to send it out to
all club members but would like your opinion before doing so. Here goes:

IMHO, Vista has few redeeming values. It may be more secure, but it gets in the way
at every second mouse-click.

I can't readily organize my files the way I want.
Every time I try to install a program or do much of anything, I get this "Are you
sure?" thing I have to click off.
I can't use my keyboard shortcut to turn the damned machine off -- I have to click a
tiny little button that isn't labeled, and is about this 0 big.
I thought I fixed this, but once again it's telling me I have to log onto Windows
Live Messenger to use Shared Folders. NOT!

In general, managing security settings to reflect my relatively relaxed outlook is
virtually impossible.

Vista is S ........... L ........... O ............ W! With all the advances in
processor power, and 2 gb of memory, it's less than half the speed of XP on my
clunky four-year-old Compaq with the overloaded hard drive. I feel like I've stepped
back at least 10 years speed wise.
This is just the tip of the ice berg. It's too depressing to list all the
grievances. The bells and whistles are cute, but add zero value. Aero is interesting
for about an hour - exactly the time it takes to realize that the system is running
as fast as molasses does in January!

In about two more days, despite the time I've spent loading software, this machine
will be "upgraded" to Windows XP! Especially for someone with my understanding and
experience, a new version of a standard program should not be this annoying!!! I
cannot imagine teaching a novice to use this -- although a novice wouldn't have the
preconceptions I do, and may more readily adapt to the draconian limitations.

My husband hasn't even touched it, and I'll recommend that he doesn't. He'd go
postal in less than three minutes. It's taken me nearly two weeks.
....
....
Thanks for listening,
XXXXXXXX

Homer, please add my ire to your recommendations not to go here.



This is just one example of the sort of feedback I've been hearing from customers
who have experienced the 'wonders' of Vista first-hand.

Another customer, who runs an auto insurance agency, purchased seven new laptops for
his agents last month. Vista almost put him out of business. The apps he needed to
run his business worked fine for the first few weeks, but then the fun began. Almost
at once, all seven laptops started getting BSD's out the ass, allegedly right after
a Vista update. He was able to remove the suspected update, but the BSD's continued.
By the time I got out to see them, the laptops were an utter mess and my customer
was ballistic. He had been communicating with Dell's tech support for several days
and followed all their recommendations - BIG MISTAKE! His apps were corrupted, along
with all new customer data from the previous three weeks. It was a disaster.

After calming him down, I was able to recover a partial chunk of his lost data. I
then asked if he wanted me to reload Vista - he turned red and almost hit the
ceiling. Initially, before he purchased the machines, Dell's support had insured him
that the apps he needed to run his business (a custom quoting program and an app
used to check customers' credit and access insurance databases) would work
flawlessly with Vista. He even sent them the actual programs to test before he made
the decision to purchase the units. The only mistake he made though, was to not ask
for my opinion. I don't actually sell laptops but I could've at least helped him to
avoid the Vista debacle and the extra cost for me to 'upgrade' all seven systems to
XP....

Yesterday, I deposited a check into my account, from his agency, for $2351.86....
the cost for my labor and seven XP Home Edition Upgrade Packages - yes, I used the
upgrade edition along with an old '98 CD to save him a few bucks. If M$ doesn't like
that, screw them.

Now, I'm not saying that I don't like Vista.... In fact, I LOVE VISTA!!! The more my
customers put it on, the more $$$$$ I'll make taking it off.

Keep up the shoddy work MS!

Thanx,
Homer

 

[Jack Mehoff]

There are two types of problems. Problems directly in Vista which are
getting worked out in stages, and problems affecting Vista, which may or
may not get worked out depending upon the 3rd party responsible.

You mean the types of problems that should've been worked out in Beta test?

 

[Jack Mehoff]

No, of course not! Anyone who thinks this clearly knows nothing about
the relationship between an operating system and the applications.

Any company (Microsoft) that changes the rules in mid-stream and dictates to its'
customers the products they will have shoved down their throats clearly knows
nothing about competition in a free market..... what? Monopoly? Oh, never mind...

 

[Jack Mehoff]

I have *never* seen that phenomenon. What products are you referring
to?

All this says is that YOU don't get out much. I have *never* seen France, but I
believe that France exists.

Could you possibly be any more general in your comments?

 

[Brian]

When it comes to a fine-tuned and trouble-free PC, you can't have your cake
and eat it, too.

Which is more important to you -- an operating system, or applications?

If your priority is to use a particular OS, then use only software and
devices that are designed for it or work well on it.

If your priority is certain applications or devices, then use an operating
system that they run best on.

It's impossible to design an OS to be 100% compatible with all the software
that came before it.

I need to use a certain set of applications on my work PC. I have to use
"Operating System A" to do so.

But I want to use Operating System B on my home PC just so I can enjoy the
features that it offers. So I had to make some changes to the apps and
peripherals I use with it.

Designers of applicatons and devices have varying committments to ensuring
that their product will run perfectly on the OS you choose. A company that
sells software for $9.99 ("My Super-Dooper Registry Cleaner," "My Perfect
DVD Suite," "My Internet Optimizer Buddy") have little incentive to make
sure it doesn't create conflicts -- they just want to sell lots and lots of
copies at $9.99 each. The hazards and travails of free software are
multiplied, with the exception of a few respected and well-document examples
that we're all familiar with. PC games -- especially inexpensive games --
are notorious for creating problems with the A/V subsystems. Sometimes even
large and/or well-respected companies release software that doesn't live up
to their reputation.

Never knowingly install incompatble or poorly designed software or hardware.
If you unknowingly install software or hardware that doesn't work well,
uninstall it at the first signs of trouble, and find something that does
what you need and works well. Or do without it and wait for a patch or
update.

If you bought a PC and it didn't work well, return it.
If you bought a PC and it worked until you installed software, uninstall
that software, and restore your system.
If you changed your OS and it doesn't work well with your current software
or devices, go back to your previous OS, or get software and devices that
will work with your OS.

To help your PC run optimally, you must find the right combination of
hardware, OS and software that work together.

Notice that I didn't mention XP or Vista. That's becuase the above applies
to ANY OS, current or retired, Microsoft or Mac or public domain.



---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 071125-0, 11/25/2007
Tested on: 11/27/2007 1:20:48 AM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2007 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Drivers are the responsibility of the hardware manufacturer.
The fact something works in one operating system has never been a
guarantee that it will or even should be expected to work in the next.
If the hardware manufacturers determine their customers do not need
drivers, that is between them and their customers.
Windows Vista has been released, do not expect changes that make older
hardware or software more compatible.
Once the operating system is released, that responsibility is almost
entirely with the manufacturers.

Backwards compatibility is nice and a great deal of older hardware and
software works directly or with Compatibility Mode.
There are some that feel nearly 100% should have been the standard.
The more backwards compatibility, the more there need to be in the
operating system to deal thus making it larger.
Others felt Microsoft should ignore backwards compatibility all
together.
This would allow Microsoft to make a leaner and probably more
efficient operating system.
But it would also force almost everything, hardware and software, to
be replaced since old would be incompatible.
Where to draw the line, that is the real question.
You seem to want more compatibility, but to please you would drive
more against since their desires would be further ignored.
To displease you pleases others.
The line had to be drawn somewhere knowing someone will always get
less than they want.

"operate normally for a few weeks"
Have you verified with the manufacturers they are Windows Vista
compatible?
Do you have the latest version, updates, patches etc. for this
software?
Can you tell if anything happens to Windows about the time the
programs stop working?

"seems more or less epidemic among 3rd party software products of a
certain age"
what if anything do these programs have in common?
What is the "certain age"

What have the manufacturers of your incompatible hardware and software
said when you asked them about Windows vista support?

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

"Norton A-V"
For years, Norton products have earned a bad reputation with Windows
of most versions and the trend seems to be worse with windows Vista.
Try something else, almost anything else is better.
Nod32, AVG, Kaspersky and Avast to name a few.

"I expect to be told..."
I do not write software, but this does not sound correct.
Do you check the development information on MSDN etc?
Has Microsoft told you in the past?
If so, contact Microsoft at the same source to ask why you were
missed.

 

[William McIlroy]

In my case, a certain age would be seven years old. Cool Edit 2000 does not
work properly on Windows Vista 64-bit, altho my copy did work for a while.
(Why it stopped working is a mystery for the ages and of no interest at all,
apparently, to Microsoft.) Now, Cool Edit 2000 (out of print) reports that
it has been improperly installed and it requests that I reinstall it. When I
do, it reports that it has been improperly installed. Such detail! The
advent of COM, which has its own internal beauty, made the Registry a central
repository for leftover junk that interferes with the proper operation of
everything that runs on the computer. De-installation of software usually
leaves vestiges behind in Registry entries and file folders. This makes
reinstallation not occur into a pristine environment. Wiping out the OS with
a fresh copy means wiping out all installed software. This is time consuming
and often painful. The Sperry Rand Univac 1108 operating system has survived
through many decades of advancement without ever making it impossible to run
binary decks from 1965. Unisys still manufactures and markets computers that
run the very same operating system with thousands of improvements and none
that affect compatibility. Microsoft went to town on Vista, hellbent to make
it secure, blocking areas of the file system that were previously open, and
making changes that remain undocumented. This does not affect their business
model, which is to sell operating systems that run on the latest hardware.
All users are hobbyists or dabblers to Microsoft. We are not fit to consult
when Microsoft anticipates making changes. I hear tell Microsoft has put
many a "shim" into the operating system to accomodate widely sold software
applications whose compatibility could not otherwise be guaranteed. So,
Microsoft wants to be free to "innovate" by making the operating system
incompatibile. That would be okay if Microsoft were to document the changes
that make programs no longer run. However, Microsoft itself does not know
how changes it makes will cause grief. So documentation of changes is
impractical. From my point of view, there is no reason a really good audio
file editor should experience problems on any version of Windows. It
interfaces with any generic sound card. It draws graphs on the screen. The
GUI is most ordinary. The Unix-standard error message simultaneously informs
the user that something's wrong, and it'll be damned if it will reveal what,
leaves us scratching our head. Finally, Microsoft publishes an API that
programmers are supposed to use properly. What is proper changes from time
to time. Restrictions are imposed. What used to work no longer does. This
speaks to a helter-skelter design methodology more attuned to getting
software on store shelves than putting long-term reliability and
compatibility in the hands of end users. It is against Microsoft policy to
confide in users how what they are doing will impact users. And by users I
mean people like me who have designed and written operating system code
extensively.
--
William McIlroy

Drivers are the responsibility of the hardware manufacturer.
The fact something works in one operating system has never been a
guarantee that it will or even should be expected to work in the next.
If the hardware manufacturers determine their customers do not need
drivers, that is between them and their customers.
Windows Vista has been released, do not expect changes that make older
hardware or software more compatible.
Once the operating system is released, that responsibility is almost
entirely with the manufacturers.

Backwards compatibility is nice and a great deal of older hardware and
software works directly or with Compatibility Mode.
There are some that feel nearly 100% should have been the standard.
The more backwards compatibility, the more there need to be in the
operating system to deal thus making it larger.
Others felt Microsoft should ignore backwards compatibility all
together.
This would allow Microsoft to make a leaner and probably more
efficient operating system.
But it would also force almost everything, hardware and software, to
be replaced since old would be incompatible.
Where to draw the line, that is the real question.
You seem to want more compatibility, but to please you would drive
more against since their desires would be further ignored.
To displease you pleases others.
The line had to be drawn somewhere knowing someone will always get
less than they want.

"operate normally for a few weeks"
Have you verified with the manufacturers they are Windows Vista
compatible?
Do you have the latest version, updates, patches etc. for this
software?
Can you tell if anything happens to Windows about the time the
programs stop working?

"seems more or less epidemic among 3rd party software products of a
certain age"
what if anything do these programs have in common?
What is the "certain age"

What have the manufacturers of your incompatible hardware and software
said when you asked them about Windows vista support?