Upgrade XP to Vista?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bobby
  • Start date Start date
Not at all. A Release Candidate is STILL out for bug correction.

All software is "out for bug correction".

The focus of a RC release is *not* bug correction.
 
Bobby said:
Comp. Sci. 101, day 1, lesson 2: "All software is unfinished."
Click to expand...


Are you purposely being obtuse? In the sense that all software but the
trivial always has bugs in it, of course that's right. But posting truisms
doesn't add anything to the discussion here.

There is still a difference between software that the manufacturer deems
good enough to release and that which it doesn't. Both beta versions and
release candidates fall into that latter category. The only difference
between them is the manufacturer's nomenclature, and that is largely
arbitrary and probably driven more by marketing forces than anything else.
 
Bobby said:
No, it's not. See above.




That stage is passed. You are still confusing beta with release candidate
versions.




You got that right.




Comp. Sci. 101, day 1, class 1 states: "No non-trivial software is bug free
nor can be proven to be such."
Click to expand...

Just because a definition on the web says one thing doesn't mean that in
the real world. The emphasis now _is_ on bug fixing. RC1 has some ways
to go to be at a release level. If you would have perused the vista
newsgroup you would understand that. Go ahead and put in on your, day
to day, the whole family enjoys it, system.
 
The only difference between them is the manufacturer's nomenclature.

Ken - That is nonsense and you know it. There are fundamental technical
differences between beta releases and release candidates. Go and ask a
software developer.
 
Bobby said:
Ken - That is nonsense and you know it. There are fundamental
technical differences between beta releases and release candidates.
Go and ask a software developer.
Click to expand...



Have it your way. I have nothing further to add to the discussion, and am
not interested in pursuing a "yes it is" -: "no itsn't" argument with you.
You may believe whatever you want.
 
Have it your way.

Ken - It is not my way. It is the correct way.
not interested in pursuing a "yes it is" -: "no itsn't" argument with you.
Click to expand...

I thought that it was an interesting conversation about the differences
between the different stages in the software development lifecycle.
You may believe whatever you want.
Click to expand...

Belief doesn't come into it. I was simply correcting some misconceptions
about software versions.
 
Ken was right, you are being obtuse. Have fun.

I think that you may mean I am being *pedantic* about making such a strong
distinction between beta and RC software.

Obtuse is being corrected about a misconception (your misunderstanding about
different software versions) and refusing to accept the error and move on.
 
Bobby said:
I think that you may mean I am being *pedantic* about making such a strong
distinction between beta and RC software.

Obtuse is being corrected about a misconception (your misunderstanding about
different software versions) and refusing to accept the error and move on.
Click to expand...

That's you exactly. By the way what has been your experience with the
Vista Beta program? Are you / have you been in the Technical Beta? the
TAP, the CPP? Have you had any practical experience with any of these
program to develop knowledge about it? Have you read any of MS's
documents or seen their communications in the Beta program about it's
status? Do you have access to MS Connect and receive emails from the
program? Since you seem to be so informed about it, I'd be interested
in how you acquired that knowledge base.
 
Rock - Calm down. I was only pointing out that a RC program is not the same
as a beta program. And that was relevant to my original post.

I wasn't asking: "Should I install Vista beta?" - although the responses
suggested I was. I was asking should I install a release candidate version
of Vista - a crucial difference if you understand the difference between the
two types of releases.

And all I have been doing in this thread is to emphasise the difference
between the two versions since some contributors stated that they were
effectively the same thing - and they are not.

Now, I think we have bottomed this out and should move on.
 
Bobby said:
Rock - Calm down. I was only pointing out that a RC program is not the same
as a beta program. And that was relevant to my original post.

I wasn't asking: "Should I install Vista beta?" - although the responses
suggested I was. I was asking should I install a release candidate version
of Vista - a crucial difference if you understand the difference between the
two types of releases.

And all I have been doing in this thread is to emphasise the difference
between the two versions since some contributors stated that they were
effectively the same thing - and they are not.

Now, I think we have bottomed this out and should move on.
Click to expand...

Why didn't you answer my questions? They are relevant to this issue.
The issue is where RC1 exists. You make statements and draw conclusions
based on what specific knowledge of this program?

The answer is simple...you don't have any understanding of where RC1 is
or what it means. Yes this thread is finished. You made clear your
lack of credibility. Have fun with RC1. Remember the Vista newsgroups.
 
Bobby said:
Comp. Sci. 101, day 1, lesson 2: "All software is unfinished."
Click to expand...

"Every program contains at least 1 bug and can be reduced by one
instruction. The logical conlusion is that all programs can be reduced
to one line of code that doesn't work."
 
Rock - Don't take things so personally. It's been an interesting discussion
on beta and release candidates - and one that I'm sure many people have
followed and learnt from (yourself included I suspect). Isn't that the
purpose of newsgroups? (That was a rhetorical question - please don't
respond since the educational value of this thread is now approaching zero)
 
Bobby said:
Ken - It is not my way. It is the correct way.




I thought that it was an interesting conversation about the differences
between the different stages in the software development lifecycle.




Belief doesn't come into it. I was simply correcting some misconceptions
about software versions.
Click to expand...
Office 2007 is still unfinished, unreleased software and I wouldn't want
to install it on my main computer. I have put Office 2007 on my laptop
machine and it disabled Office 2000. That's not a problem as I have
Office 2003 on my desktop and just wanted to try out Office 2007.

Hey, Windows itself wasn't much good before version 3.1...

Bill
 
Bobby said:
Ken - It is not my way. It is the correct way.


I thought that it was an interesting conversation about the differences
between the different stages in the software development lifecycle.


Belief doesn't come into it. I was simply correcting some misconceptions
about software versions.
Click to expand...


So you know everything that the combined resources of this group do NOT
know?(Including MVPs and Systems Accountants?)

Go away you arrogant little man.
 
So you know everything that the combined resources of this group do NOT
know?
Click to expand...

Did I claim to know everything? I was simply correcting a misunderstanding.
Including MVPs and <snip silly title>?
Click to expand...

Titles don't impress me - although I was surprised that MVPs didn't
appreciate the technical differences between software versions. If there is
a test for MVP status, at least two candidates appear to have failed.
Go away you arrogant little man.
Click to expand...

Now, personal insults just make you look small.
 
I hope it works for you. Upgrading 64 bit XP Pro to 64 bit Vista didn't
happen for me. I had planned to convert my test machines over the weekend.
 
But this web definition just happens to be real-world correct.
Click to expand...

Wiki is by no mean authoritative.

I've been in the software development game for longer than I care to
remember. And the stages of software generally are:

Alpha: Developper makes sure that the code compiles and that a careful
run through (Good Code Path) does not blow up.

Beta: While features are still beiong worked on, the software is released
to a larger group of testers to run on a larger set of configuration

RC1 to RCn: No new features are being worked on. This is the software as
the developper will release it. A large group of testers are asked to use
it to discover as many remaining bugs as possible.

RTM: The developper has deemed that the point of dimishing return with
regards to fixing bugs has been reached. The software will be released as
a supported entity.

SP1 to SPn: Additional bugs are fixed and additional features may be
introduced.



RC software is still under development. Use at your own risk.
 
Back
Top