People & Vista

[Guest]

I've read about 50 pages of posts, in fact, I've posted looking for answers.
I happen to be a MCSE(Windows 2000\XP) and COMP TIA Certified of course, and
I have had plenty of Loghorn\Vista BETA\RC1\RC2\RTM testing on my
computer\customers computers. I've had many of these problems
installing\configure. Some I can get to work without hardware upgrades, but
of course there are features in Vista that are unuseable\unavailible, ie:
movie maker\aero\media center. I've even got Vista to work on PIII 900
megahertz with 256 RAM.

New means New. If Vista (a new OS) requires new hardware to operate, so be
it. Microsoft does have an Vista Upgrage Advisor program, I suggest users pay
attention to it before they purchase it (it is free). I'm sure if Microsoft
was try to dupe you with add\tv hype, they would not have put out such a
program for us users. If no one is in a position to upgrade there systems to
accommodate Vista, then Vista is not going to be much different\use than XP.
I mean its pretty and all, it is different, but to most users the inner
workings of Vista is not any concern\value to them. If Vist requires a WDDM
video card, more RAM, system board, etc. to use all of its features, then
this is what has to be done. If XP did it all with the exsisting
hardware\system and your not prepared to upgrade hardware\system, then Vista
may not be the answer.

You might be one of those users that buy a new car every year, then you
shouldn't have too much of an issue with Vista. If your a user who is more or
less happy with your old car, but want a change, may I suggest a paint job,
maybe a different color?

If you want pretty\different, then may I suggest Style XP or Windows Blinds,
theres even a Vista Tranfomation Pack availible for XP (do a GOOGLE search),
these program are mostly free and there are tons of theme packs\icon
packs\side bar to pretty up a stable working XP with no hardware\program
compatibility issues.

I'm very much in luv with Vista, as I was with XP, as I was with 2000, as I
was with ME, as I was with 98, and so on. Bugs\Issues have allways be a
factor, but Vista is the most stable release out of the gate I've seen. Way
to go Bill. Enjoy.

 

[Richard Dower]

I've read about 50 pages of posts, in fact, I've posted looking for
answers.
I happen to be a MCSE(Windows 2000\XP) and COMP TIA Certified of course,
and
I have had plenty of Loghorn\Vista BETA\RC1\RC2\RTM testing on my
computer\customers computers. I've had many of these problems
installing\configure. Some I can get to work without hardware upgrades,
but
of course there are features in Vista that are unuseable\unavailible, ie:
movie maker\aero\media center. I've even got Vista to work on PIII 900
megahertz with 256 RAM.

New means New. If Vista (a new OS) requires new hardware to operate, so be
it. Microsoft does have an Vista Upgrage Advisor program, I suggest users
pay
attention to it before they purchase it (it is free). I'm sure if
Microsoft
was try to dupe you with add\tv hype, they would not have put out such a
program for us users. If no one is in a position to upgrade there systems
to
accommodate Vista, then Vista is not going to be much different\use than
XP.
I mean its pretty and all, it is different, but to most users the inner
workings of Vista is not any concern\value to them. If Vist requires a
WDDM
video card, more RAM, system board, etc. to use all of its features, then
this is what has to be done. If XP did it all with the exsisting
hardware\system and your not prepared to upgrade hardware\system, then
Vista
may not be the answer.

You might be one of those users that buy a new car every year, then you
shouldn't have too much of an issue with Vista. If your a user who is more
or
less happy with your old car, but want a change, may I suggest a paint
job,
maybe a different color?

If you want pretty\different, then may I suggest Style XP or Windows
Blinds,
theres even a Vista Tranfomation Pack availible for XP (do a GOOGLE
search),
these program are mostly free and there are tons of theme packs\icon
packs\side bar to pretty up a stable working XP with no hardware\program
compatibility issues.

I'm very much in luv with Vista, as I was with XP, as I was with 2000, as
I
was with ME, as I was with 98, and so on. Bugs\Issues have allways be a
factor, but Vista is the most stable release out of the gate I've seen.
Way
to go Bill. Enjoy.

I think the problem is that driver support is very immature, in addition
software support is also the same. I think MS should have waited longer and
allowed other companies the time to write and test drivers and software, not
allowing access to the Windows kernel was also a big mistake.

 

[Ed Forsythe]

Hi Russ,
I was with you (pretty much) until you threw ME into the mix. How *anyone*
could have *luved* ME escapes me ;-))

 

[Guest]

LOL!! As a tech I had to over come ME quirks, and still today I have
customers that won't change. So you see, I had to luv it to fix it.

 

[Kerry Brown]

I think the problem is that driver support is very immature, in addition
software support is also the same. I think MS should have waited longer
and allowed other companies the time to write and test drivers and
software, not allowing access to the Windows kernel was also a big
mistake.

Driver support is a vicious circle. Many companies have a policy of not
releasing drivers for a beta OS. This saves them considerable cost for
customer support. It is also a problem developing a driver while an OS is in
beta. Every new build may break the driver. Some companies just do not have
the resources to deal with this. At some point the OS vendor has to draw a
line and say this is it, we stop here and release the product. It is only at
this point that some manufacturers start programming drivers. There isn't
really any way around this.

Allowing unrestricted access to the kernel would have negated most of the
security built into Vista.

 

[Alan]

Russ,

Is that like loving the sinner but hating the sin?? :>

Alan

 

[Saucy]

INLINE:

I've read about 50 pages of posts, in fact, I've posted looking for
answers.
I happen to be a MCSE(Windows 2000\XP) and COMP TIA Certified of course,
and
I have had plenty of Loghorn\Vista BETA\RC1\RC2\RTM testing on my

Loghorn

computer\customers computers. I've had many of these problems
installing\configure. Some I can get to work without hardware upgrades,
but
of course there are features in Vista that are unuseable\unavailible, ie:
movie maker\aero\media center. I've even got Vista to work on PIII 900
megahertz with 256 RAM.

'Still trying, my old Thinkpad refuses (PIII 800, 256 RAM) so far. But I'm
yet going to try a different disc and perhaps as an upgrade instead of from
scratch ..

New means New. If Vista (a new OS) requires new hardware to operate, so be
it. Microsoft does have an Vista Upgrage Advisor program, I suggest users
pay
attention to it before they purchase it (it is free).

True. A look before leaping is usually in order. Although I must admit, I
usually grab a computer and leap then look to see how I can get it to work
... but then I can write an occasional simple batch script. Mission critical
stuff has to be checked carefully, 'natch.

I'm sure if Microsoft
was try to dupe you with add\tv hype, they would not have put out such a
program for us users. If no one is in a position to upgrade there systems
to
accommodate Vista, then Vista is not going to be much different\use than
XP.

Things don't seem to much different from when XP was first released. All
sorts of dooms sayers, hold backers, hesitants etc. etc. New OSes go through
a teething stage at first launch.

I mean its pretty and all, it is different, but to most users the inner
workings of Vista is not any concern\value to them. If Vista requires a
WDDM

Actually it doesn't require such a card per se. If one wants all the Aero
effects, then it is required. But the OS will run without such a card.

video card, more RAM, system board, etc. to use all of its features, then
this is what has to be done. If XP did it all with the exsisting
hardware\system and your not prepared to upgrade hardware\system, then
Vista
may not be the answer.

For really old hardware it probably isn't. But the recommended requirements
are often met by computers several years old now. Let me look at the Basic
box .. just sec:

1GHz
512MB RAM
20GB HDD space
DirectX 9 graphics and 32MB graphics memory [so Vista Home Basic can run in
Vista Standard mode rather than Vista Basic mode]
DVD, Audio, Internet

You might be one of those users that buy a new car every year, then you
shouldn't have too much of an issue with Vista. If your a user who is more
or
less happy with your old car, but want a change, may I suggest a paint
job,
maybe a different color?

Hm, yeah, but let's face it if the computer is that slow, one might be
looking at an upgrade just to save time. And as I mentioned, one's computer
could be several years old and [except perhaps the graphics card] be
completely capable of running Vista.

If you want pretty\different, then may I suggest Style XP or Windows
Blinds,

No you may not. Not everyone likes that 3rd party shell stuff .. it can gum
up the works.

theres even a Vista Tranfomation Pack availible for XP (do a GOOGLE
search),
these program are mostly free and there are tons of theme packs\icon
packs\side bar to pretty up a stable working XP with no hardware\program
compatibility issues.

I'm very much in luv with Vista, as I was with XP, as I was with 2000, as
I
was with ME, as I was with 98, and so on. Bugs\Issues have allways be a
factor, but Vista is the most stable release out of the gate I've seen.
Way
to go Bill. Enjoy.

'Enjoy using and working with Microsoft OS and application software too.

 

[Dustin Harper]

You had me until you say you loved Windows ME... You really did. :`)

Although you have a lot of other great points. It's a new OS, and it takes a
few months for the 3rd party manufacturers and software programmers to get
everything working with it. That isn't the fault of MS.

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Richard;
"I think MS should have waited longer"
How long to wait?
Depending on where you place the bar, the wait can be indefinite.
Part of the drive for the hardware manufacturers is the customer demand
which is low until the public release.
Never the less, people with early access to RTM have contacted the
manufacturers with mixed replies and results.
Hardware manufacturers have had years to plan for Vista.
The major manufacturers had Beta code almost as fast as available and in
some cases more frequently than any of the Beta testers.
The manufacturers wait for RTM before they can make their final code since
any changes can have an affect on their drivers.
The manufacturers had about 6 weeks between RTM and public release and that
is sufficient for many when they have already been working on the drivers.
For the most part, the driver issues now are caused by manufacturers waiting
to see customer demand or are just slow at the task and Microsoft can not
and should not be expected to wait until the manufacturers decide to start
supporting their customers...or not.

Many people already had Vista compatible hardware and some would have
resented having Microsoft keep Vista in warehouses while 3rd parties catch
up.

"not allowing access to the Windows kernel was also a big mistake"
It is part of what helps keep Windows secure.
Some AV manufacturers seem to feel it is necessary while the better AV
manufacturers seem to do just fine without the kernel information.
Research these newsgroups and see which AV are the best and worst and which
want the kernel access.