G
Guest
http://www.manilastandardtoday.com/?page=business5_jan16_2007
Tough day at the office with Vista
ONE of the biggest surprises about working with Windows Vista was the
initial difficulty I experienced connecting to the office network.
Made up of a few aging Windows NT 4.0 servers, a router and switches,
the network is used to share files, printers and Internet access with
desktop computers running Windows 98 and a handful of Windows XP and
Mac OS X notebooks that connect wirelessly.
Into this mix I brought an HP Presario V3000 notebook computer running
Windows Vista Ultimate, a loaner from Microsoft.
I was quickly disabused of the notion that it would be easy to connect
it to the Windows network. Whether I used a network cable or a wireless
link, I was unable to log in to the file server. The name and password
combination that worked on my regular machine was rejected when I used
the Vista PC.
The MIS department offered a theory-later confirmed-that the
problem lay, not with Vista itself, but with the NT server, which had
not been upgraded to Service Pack 6. Upgrading the server solved the
problem.
The next challenge was printing.
When I tried connecting to the network printer, an HP Laserjet 5000,
Vista complained: "Windows cannot connect to the printer. The printer
is not compatible with a policy enabled on your computer that blocks NT
4.0 drivers."
Vista came had its own Laserjet 5000 driver, but would only allow me to
install it as a local printer. I searched Vista Help but the "Best 30
results for network printing in Windows NT" didn't even mention
this problem.
A product expert from Microsoft advised me to install the Vista driver,
right-click on the local printer's icon and call up the properties
window. From there, I was to add a new port then type in the network
path to the printer. Though unwieldy and unintuitive, the solution
worked.
Like the compatibility problems I wrote about last week, this one is
likely to cause a fair amount of frustration because the solution is
far from obvious. Worse, the incompatibility in this case wasn't even
between Vista and third party software, but between different versions
of Windows.
Other irritations got in the way of work, including persistent
reminders to activate Windows Vista.
I've always been against Microsoft's policy of product activation,
which gives customers 30 days to "activate" their software over the
Internet or by phone. Microsoft says this is aimed at stopping piracy,
but I see it as an unnecessary imposition on legitimate customers, akin
to a security guard at a department store chasing after you to demand
proof of purchase after you've left the premises-and indeed, even
reached home.
The biggest irony was that activation got in the way of my finishing
this review, as Vista warned me I had only three days left to activate
it before it would stop functioning. I called Microsoft, and after some
checking, they told me the version I was testing was a demo and that
they didn't have a product key.
"But you're Microsoft!" I protested. "Can't you just give me
a key so I can continue working on this machine?" No. They would have
to reinstall Vista if I wanted to continue testing it.
Instead of doing this, we ended up swapping notebooks. The new one
cheerfully tells me I have 22 days left before Windows will stop
working.
In a perfect world, I or the MIS department would have the product key
handy the moment I needed it. But in the real world, computers crash or
get upgraded, operating systems need to be reinstalled, and product
keys get misplaced-and having to put up with Microsoft's activation
rigmarole all over again is one more process that just gets in the way
of work.
Product activation is great for Microsoft but brings absolutely no
benefit to its customers.
Two other observations, hardly original, bear repeating.
First, the hardware requirements to run Vista well are steep, so
companies are unlikely to upgrade existing computers to run it. Most
Vista installations will come by way of new computers that already ship
with the operating system installed.
Second, expect a period of adjustment. Despite major improvements in
security and usability, the operating system and associated
applications are just different enough from Windows XP that some
retraining may be required.
Internet Explorer 7.0, which comes with Vista, is far better than 6.0,
but its buttons have been moved around and not at all where you'd
expect to find them.
Microsoft Office 2007, not really a part of Vista but designed to work
with it, features a completely reworked menu system that is guaranteed
to throw off old users. The default file formats, too, have been
changed, and users in a heterogeneous computing environment will need
to be reminded to save their files in a format that everyone can read.
As part of better security, workers who are signed in as standard users
will have to get used to the idea that they need an administrator's
permission to install or remove software, much as they would on a Linux
network.
The Windows Start menu has been vastly improved by the simple addition
of a search bar that can be used to quickly find an launch programs.
Mac and Linux users will say this sounds a lot like Spotlight and Desk
Bar, but imitation isn't necessarily a bad thing if it drives
innovation and benefits end-users.
But maybe all this talk about copying from others has sunk into the
psyche of Microsoft developers. Or maybe it's just a marketing
gimmick. It struck me as odd that Microsoft felt the need to attach the
word "Windows" to so many programs. There's Windows Calendar,
Windows Contacts, Windows Defender, Windows DVD Maker, Windows Fax and
Scan, Windows Live Messenger, Windows Mail, Windows Media Center,
Windows Media Player, Windows Meeting Space, Windows Movie Maker,
Windows Photo Gallery, Windows Update and, oh yes, Windows Explorer.
It's almost as if they needed to remind themselves-and their
customers-that, for better or worse, they're still computing in a
Windows world.
Column archives and blog at: http://www.chinwong.com
Back to top
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
Exchange Rate
Closing: Jan. 15, 2007
Phisix
Closing: Jan. 15, 2007
Tough day at the office with Vista
ONE of the biggest surprises about working with Windows Vista was the
initial difficulty I experienced connecting to the office network.
Made up of a few aging Windows NT 4.0 servers, a router and switches,
the network is used to share files, printers and Internet access with
desktop computers running Windows 98 and a handful of Windows XP and
Mac OS X notebooks that connect wirelessly.
Into this mix I brought an HP Presario V3000 notebook computer running
Windows Vista Ultimate, a loaner from Microsoft.
I was quickly disabused of the notion that it would be easy to connect
it to the Windows network. Whether I used a network cable or a wireless
link, I was unable to log in to the file server. The name and password
combination that worked on my regular machine was rejected when I used
the Vista PC.
The MIS department offered a theory-later confirmed-that the
problem lay, not with Vista itself, but with the NT server, which had
not been upgraded to Service Pack 6. Upgrading the server solved the
problem.
The next challenge was printing.
When I tried connecting to the network printer, an HP Laserjet 5000,
Vista complained: "Windows cannot connect to the printer. The printer
is not compatible with a policy enabled on your computer that blocks NT
4.0 drivers."
Vista came had its own Laserjet 5000 driver, but would only allow me to
install it as a local printer. I searched Vista Help but the "Best 30
results for network printing in Windows NT" didn't even mention
this problem.
A product expert from Microsoft advised me to install the Vista driver,
right-click on the local printer's icon and call up the properties
window. From there, I was to add a new port then type in the network
path to the printer. Though unwieldy and unintuitive, the solution
worked.
Like the compatibility problems I wrote about last week, this one is
likely to cause a fair amount of frustration because the solution is
far from obvious. Worse, the incompatibility in this case wasn't even
between Vista and third party software, but between different versions
of Windows.
Other irritations got in the way of work, including persistent
reminders to activate Windows Vista.
I've always been against Microsoft's policy of product activation,
which gives customers 30 days to "activate" their software over the
Internet or by phone. Microsoft says this is aimed at stopping piracy,
but I see it as an unnecessary imposition on legitimate customers, akin
to a security guard at a department store chasing after you to demand
proof of purchase after you've left the premises-and indeed, even
reached home.
The biggest irony was that activation got in the way of my finishing
this review, as Vista warned me I had only three days left to activate
it before it would stop functioning. I called Microsoft, and after some
checking, they told me the version I was testing was a demo and that
they didn't have a product key.
"But you're Microsoft!" I protested. "Can't you just give me
a key so I can continue working on this machine?" No. They would have
to reinstall Vista if I wanted to continue testing it.
Instead of doing this, we ended up swapping notebooks. The new one
cheerfully tells me I have 22 days left before Windows will stop
working.
In a perfect world, I or the MIS department would have the product key
handy the moment I needed it. But in the real world, computers crash or
get upgraded, operating systems need to be reinstalled, and product
keys get misplaced-and having to put up with Microsoft's activation
rigmarole all over again is one more process that just gets in the way
of work.
Product activation is great for Microsoft but brings absolutely no
benefit to its customers.
Two other observations, hardly original, bear repeating.
First, the hardware requirements to run Vista well are steep, so
companies are unlikely to upgrade existing computers to run it. Most
Vista installations will come by way of new computers that already ship
with the operating system installed.
Second, expect a period of adjustment. Despite major improvements in
security and usability, the operating system and associated
applications are just different enough from Windows XP that some
retraining may be required.
Internet Explorer 7.0, which comes with Vista, is far better than 6.0,
but its buttons have been moved around and not at all where you'd
expect to find them.
Microsoft Office 2007, not really a part of Vista but designed to work
with it, features a completely reworked menu system that is guaranteed
to throw off old users. The default file formats, too, have been
changed, and users in a heterogeneous computing environment will need
to be reminded to save their files in a format that everyone can read.
As part of better security, workers who are signed in as standard users
will have to get used to the idea that they need an administrator's
permission to install or remove software, much as they would on a Linux
network.
The Windows Start menu has been vastly improved by the simple addition
of a search bar that can be used to quickly find an launch programs.
Mac and Linux users will say this sounds a lot like Spotlight and Desk
Bar, but imitation isn't necessarily a bad thing if it drives
innovation and benefits end-users.
But maybe all this talk about copying from others has sunk into the
psyche of Microsoft developers. Or maybe it's just a marketing
gimmick. It struck me as odd that Microsoft felt the need to attach the
word "Windows" to so many programs. There's Windows Calendar,
Windows Contacts, Windows Defender, Windows DVD Maker, Windows Fax and
Scan, Windows Live Messenger, Windows Mail, Windows Media Center,
Windows Media Player, Windows Meeting Space, Windows Movie Maker,
Windows Photo Gallery, Windows Update and, oh yes, Windows Explorer.
It's almost as if they needed to remind themselves-and their
customers-that, for better or worse, they're still computing in a
Windows world.
Column archives and blog at: http://www.chinwong.com
Back to top
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
Exchange Rate
Closing: Jan. 15, 2007
Phisix
Closing: Jan. 15, 2007