Vista just doen't do it

[Papa]

I think Vista is, as they say, "not ready for prime time". I've tried it out
for 2 weeks now, and have encountered way too many problems.

Earlier this month I purchased a new Gateway Notebook with Vista Home
Premium pre-installed. This notebook is for my grandson who is a college
student.

So many functions have been changed. Even the most experienced computer user
is going to be very low (for a long time) on the learning curve. For
example, the Vista Control Panel no longer contains a DISPLAY icon. Instead,
there is another much more vague icon (I can't remember the name) to gain
access to the display properties.

Another familiar Windows XP function that is now much harder to find is the
FILE EDIT function. I still haven't found out how to do a file SELECT
ALL/COPY on Vista. Oh, I'm sure it's there, and I would eventually find it,
but why has Microsoft made general usage so much different? There are
numerous similar sources of unnecessary confusion.

I expected Vista to provide better performance, improved video editing
functions, and the like - BUT I was dismayed to discover that Vista has
accomplished this while also putting every user back to square one
knowledgewise. I hate to think what this will do to office efficiency for
those companies who rush out and buy Vista too soon, and I definitely would
not want to be in charge of their Information Systems departments right now.
What a nightmare that must be!

The worst problem I encountered was trying to get the new laptop to connect
to my home network. There are many technical forums - where multitudes of
users are complaining about Vista wireless connectivity not working. One of
these forums, for example, is at
microsoft.public.windows.vista.networking_sharing. Take a look.

It took an entire day to get the wireless connectivity problem resolved, and
that was on a brand new machine. I hope my grandson will be able to connect
wirelessly at school. If he runs into too many glitches I will probably have
to get rid of Vista, reformat his drive and install Windows XP.

I also purchased an upgrade version of Vista for my own laptop. It installed
OK, but several device drivers were not recognized, and wireless
connectivity was just impossible to achieve. I had Windows XP running on
that machine, and it was connected wirelessly to my home network during the
beginning of the Vista upgrade. The wireless icon on the lower right-hand
edge of my laptop screen showed that it was connected. Unfortunately, after
Vista took over, wireless connectivity was gone, and I have spent days
talking to Vista MVPs about the problem. Their answers, though well
intended, accomplished nothing except to add to my confusion.

When I originally set up my home network, it was a little difficult, but not
like this. I was able to create the network without any help at all, and all
of my computers connected wirelessly or via CAT5 cable without any undue
delays. With Vista, users need help, and lots of it.

From my experience during the last 2 weeks, I have come to the conclusion
that users should avoid buying Vista (or new computers with Vista
pre-installed) for a year or so - until it is more reliable and enough time
has passed so that compatible device drivers are more widely available.

If you are thinking of upgrading your old computer to Vista, it may be too
demanding of your existing hardware. Looks like a minimum of 1GB of memory,
2GHZ of speed, and 100 GB of hard drive space are needed for decent
performance. The display adapter should be much more capable too, if you
wish to take advantage of the Vista video capabilities. With new machines,
hardware limitations should be less of a problem, but I still suggest
waiting for a year or two.

My 50 cents worth.

 

[D. Spencer Hines]

Yes, I decided to do precisely that about three weeks ago -- or at least
until SP1 -- preferably SP2.

What GOOD Things does Vista do for you that XP Pro SP2 could NOT?

Can you come up with TEN of those?

'Nuff Said.

DSH

 

[Jeff]

wow. a book..
I agree the drivers have been slow to be released but the industry is
catching up.

push 'alt' and your menus will appear.

There was a learning curve for DOS,
There was a learning curve for Windows 3.0
There was a learning curve for Windows 98/XP
There will be a learning curve for Vista.

it's all good

 

[Justin]

From this I see three main issues that you had:

1. Driver problems.
2. The UI was changed.
3. Network was hard to configure.

1. Nothing to do about this. You just have to wait.

2. If every new OS had the exact same UI then how would progress ever come
to play? Is there a taskbar on the bottom? Is there a start button? I
would hardly call that square one. In order to learn something new you have
to....well....learn something. It takes a little time to learn. However
Vista should be very familiar to someone that has used XP. You say things
where hard to find. Yet you found them. How hard is it going to be to find
them again? Piece of cake, right?

3. I agree. I don't see the benefit of the changes they made. Does anyone
else?

You mentioned IS and nightmare. Not at all. Of the people we've moved to
Vista, they do NOT want to go back to XP. But then again they don't have to
worry about #1 or #3.

2 years? That's a bit much. 1 year? Drivers will be much more stable.
However I think it it'll happen quicker then that.

 

[Andyistic]

Even the most experienced computer user is going to be very low (for a

long time) on the learning curve.

This just isn't true. Most of what we have in XP is the same with Vista.
What changed the most in Vista is the appearance (and stuff under the hood
which most people wouldn't know about).
What's to stop you, or anyone else, from just getting a book on Vista and
reading the important parts, such as configuration? Anyone can do it!

For example, the Vista Control Panel no longer contains a DISPLAY icon.
Instead, there is another much more vague icon (I can't remember the name)
to gain access to the display properties.

Just right-click on the desktop, and select "Personalize".
A window comes up with all the display-related items, including screen
resolution, etc.
This is pretty much how it is done in XP as well. No change there.

I still haven't found out how to do a file SELECT ALL/COPY on Vista. Oh,
I'm sure it's there, and I would eventually find it, but why has Microsoft
made general usage so much different?

What's wrong with selecting the folder (directory) where these files are,
and just copying the entire folder to wherever you want it to go by dragging
it along? I don't see a problem here.

I expected Vista to provide better performance, improved video editing
functions, and the like - BUT I was dismayed to discover that Vista has
accomplished this while also putting every user back to square one
knowledgewise. I hate to think what this will do to office efficiency for
those companies who rush out and buy Vista too soon, and I definitely
would not want to be in charge of their Information Systems departments
right now. What a nightmare that must be!

We must be using different versions of Vista.
My version allows me to do all the same video stuff (DVD editing mostly)
just the same why I do it with XP.
Granted, I do have a top-of-the-line video card, but there's nothing wrong
with being current in the hardware department, right?

The worst problem I encountered was trying to get the new laptop to
connect to my home network.

Vista had my workstation connected to Windows 2003 in no time.
Since 2003 is a domain controller, it's probably not the same set up as you
would have.

It took an entire day to get the wireless connectivity problem resolved,
and that was on a brand new machine.

My wireless connection using the built-in WiFi adapter on the Asus
motherboard worked without a hitch once the drivers were set up. What are
you not doing right?

I also purchased an upgrade version of Vista for my own laptop.

Well I can't help you on this one.
All my installations are fresh directly from the retail DVD.
I never upgrade a previous operating system because that's always a
headache.
Besides, having the previous operating system around allows something to
fall back to.

From my experience during the last 2 weeks, I have come to the conclusion
that users should avoid buying Vista (or new computers with Vista
pre-installed) for a year or so - until it is more reliable and enough
time has passed so that compatible device drivers are more widely
available.

Instead of that, how about just installing Vista today as a secondary system
so you have something to work with and learn and experiment, but still keep
XP as your primary system?
If anything major comes along in Vistaland, there will be a service pack to
keep you updated.

Bottom line - if you want Vista to work, you need to be willing to put in
the extra effort and fork out for better hardware.
I can't help but put my head down whenever someone complains that they are
unable to get Vista installed on their old 80486 machine:
They're certain that the 16 Megabytes of RAM they have installed must be
enough.
It was fine for Windows 95, so why not Vista?
I won't even mention their state-of-the-art VGA adapter.

.... Time for coffee!

-- Andy

 

[BigJim]

you know it is not the big things, it is the little things, like no updates
to clock up my video card yet.
buying new software, what I have runs perfectly on xp. buying new hardware,
need a new scanner just like when xp came out (no drivers and none coming).

 

[MAP]

Yes, I decided to do precisely that about three weeks ago -- or at
least until SP1 -- preferably SP2.

What GOOD Things does Vista do for you that XP Pro SP2 could NOT?

Can you come up with TEN of those?

'Nuff Said.

DSH

But I hear that it looks sooo good! Does it really matter if it doesn't
work well?

 

[Papa]

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, of course, but as I see it -
Vista is definitely a bear to get operational, a bear to get connected, and
a bear to learn.

I have been with computers since long before most of you were born, have
programmed back in the days when all code was written directly by hand in
binary, octal, or hexadecimal. I have spend years unraveling difficult
computer problems, so don't tell me I am not willing to put forth some
effort to learn something. The point is, a good OS should not require an
extensive effort to learn - especially for those who have worked with
previous versions. It should be a piece of cake, but Vista is anything but.

As everyone knows, Windows evolved into Window95. It was not a smooth
transition. Then Windows 95 evolved into Windows 98, and the transition was
an improvement over the previous transition. Windows 98 evolved into Windows
98SE, and that transition was even better. Finally, Windows 98 and 98SE
evolved into Windows XP, and those transitions were VERY smooth - and people
who made that transition didn't even have to slow down with their routine
day-to-day computer tasks. Everything looked the same. The structure was the
same. There wasn't anything significant that had to be learned from scratch.
The improvements were mostly hidden even as added capability was attained.

Now we have Vista. Despite what some of you are saying, it has (to put it
mildly) confused far too many users. The transition is not smooth, It is not
an evolution, it is a step in a different direction. Program fixes will be
coming for a long time, and I predict that Microsoft will come up with some
serious changes to this OS called Vista.

 

[Jeff]

Just click on the Start Orb and type whatever you are looking for.
Since I have installed Vista, I have been really organized. Images,
music, documents, even this message can be easily found with a few keywords.
Vista Rocks.

 

[Sascha Benjamin Jazbec]

When Windows 95 came out People thought the same..

compare XP to Windows 3.x and vista to 95.

SJ / germany

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Today, D. Spencer Hines made these interesting comments ...

Yes, I decided to do precisely that about three weeks ago --
or at least until SP1 -- preferably SP2.

What GOOD Things does Vista do for you that XP Pro SP2 could
NOT?

Can you come up with TEN of those?

'Nuff Said.

Spence, I dunno if I can think of a specific number of reasons
NOT to go to Vista right now, but I can think of only ONE reason
TO go to Vista - if I needed to buy a PC right now and could not
find one that I wanted without buying it. e.g., I want to buy an
OEM like Dell, Compaq, etc. and the ones in the store that fit my
price point or performance have already required Vista, OR I WANT
to buy a hotter PC and I believe - rightly or wrongly - that it
doesn't make any sense to use a legacy O/S.

Now, some folk who just go down to their local CompUSA, Circuit
City or Best Buy will buy whatever the sales droid tell them they
should, and they will likely hear the droid talking about all the
usual reasons to buy a new MS O/S, principly more robust, more
secure, more modern, more user features, etc. That isn't
necessarily bad for Mr.and Mrs. Newbie.

And, folks like me, MIGHT want to get a really hot PC built from
parts AND get a modern O/S to take advantage of anything the new
motherboard and video HW makers can throw at me. So, I think I
have only ONE reason to buy, but that just ain't enough right now
because as best I can tell, my key apps aren't ready yet and it
is dicey to expect that my still running but quite old HP 1220C
will have a driver nor my old but still running MicroTek
Scanmaker 4, but they might.

So, as this thread and one running on a Vista NG where I am
losing ground to the "surge", I COULD go now, in 6 months, or a
year. Think I'll opt for a year and give them who like to lead
with their chin a chance to be first. As you've seen me say, "if
it ain't broke, don't try to fix it" and "never give Murphy an
even break", both of which I would violate if I buy now.

Have a good Hump Day!

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Today, Justin made these interesting comments ...

From this I see three main issues that you had:

1. Driver problems.
2. The UI was changed.
3. Network was hard to configure.

1. Nothing to do about this. You just have to wait.

But, for someone with a need vs a want, 1. and 3 are fatal. How
does the OP work if he can't get HW to run or connect to other
PCs on his network? I think I understand why he bought the new
laptop and an upgrade for his old one, but if that was a
requirement that could not wait, he is screwed until/unless the
problem(s) are solved and any new ones that crop up are also
solved.

2. If every new OS had the exact same UI then how would
progress ever come to play? Is there a taskbar on the bottom?
Is there a start button? I would hardly call that square
one. In order to learn something new you have
to....well....learn something. It takes a little time to
learn. However Vista should be very familiar to someone that
has used XP. You say things where hard to find. Yet you
found them. How hard is it going to be to find them again?
Piece of cake, right?

3. I agree. I don't see the benefit of the changes they made.
Does anyone else?

You mentioned IS and nightmare. Not at all. Of the people
we've moved to Vista, they do NOT want to go back to XP. But
then again they don't have to worry about #1 or #3.

2 years? That's a bit much. 1 year? Drivers will be much
more stable. However I think it it'll happen quicker then
that.

I would believe one year minimum for the rest of the world to
catch up, perhaps two but that seems a stretch. But the danger
for people like me is their legacy SW apps and legacy HW for
which there may never be an upgrade, as when a developer went out
of business or sold his company and the buyer killed the product
so as to squash a competitor. I have at least 2 or 3 of those.

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Today, Papa made these interesting comments ...

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, of course, but as I
see it - Vista is definitely a bear to get operational, a bear
to get connected, and a bear to learn.

I have been with computers since long before most of you were
born, have programmed back in the days when all code was
written directly by hand in binary, octal, or hexadecimal. I
have spend years unraveling difficult computer problems, so
don't tell me I am not willing to put forth some effort to
learn something. The point is, a good OS should not require an
extensive effort to learn - especially for those who have
worked with previous versions. It should be a piece of cake,
but Vista is anything but.

With a name like yours, you're probably right. You may not have
me beat, but perhaps. I got my first intro to digital computer in
the first class of my freshman year in engineering school in
September, 1965. We were given a 1-hour lecture on the old
FORTRAN II and a 2-week assignment, plus a tech book with the
syntax of the language. One way or another, I have been involved
with computers for the rest of my life, now about 41 1/2 years,
so I get your point.

I won't argue with your basic thesis, but each time I have had to
move to something new, the learning curve was outrageous. College
was one thing, we got a new mainframe my junior year and I had to
hurriedly learn FORTRAN IV. Almost 10 years later, when I became
a programmer after a career change from product engineer into the
IT world previously, I needed to learn CDC lingo vs IBM, then
came the first IBM PCs and I bought an Apple ][ for home, etc.
etc. As I eased out of bleeding edge things at work and
eventually retired, my interests were FAR more into making my
computer du jour do useful work and NOT constantly mopping up the
blood from the edges I was cutting myself on.

As everyone knows, Windows evolved into Window95. It was not a
smooth transition. Then Windows 95 evolved into Windows 98,
and the transition was an improvement over the previous
transition. Windows 98 evolved into Windows 98SE, and that
transition was even better. Finally, Windows 98 and 98SE
evolved into Windows XP, and those transitions were VERY
smooth - and people who made that transition didn't even have
to slow down with their routine day-to-day computer tasks.
Everything looked the same. The structure was the same. There
wasn't anything significant that had to be learned from
scratch. The improvements were mostly hidden even as added
capability was attained.

Now we have Vista. Despite what some of you are saying, it has
(to put it mildly) confused far too many users. The transition
is not smooth, It is not an evolution, it is a step in a
different direction. Program fixes will be coming for a long
time, and I predict that Microsoft will come up with some
serious changes to this OS called Vista.

Many people were thought to be confused with XP's new style so
Classic was added. I have never used XP, always Classic, so I am
in for an even bigger learning curve. Windows changes in FAR more
fundamental ways requiring FAR more of a learning curve than most
consumer products, but NOT more than the accelerating app
industry, who is making change for change sake partially for the
same reasons as MS - to stimulate upgrade sales by making it at
least look like the thing is newer/better by just moving the GUI
around. When eventually I make the jump, I will be ready mentally
and I will wait until Vista is ready technically. Then, I hope I
can make the transition with some interest rather than
trepedation. But, that time is a ways off for me. Good luck with
yours!

 

[Jan Hyde]

I think Vista is, as they say, "not ready for prime time". I've tried it out
for 2 weeks now, and have encountered way too many problems.

I've been using it for 3-4 months (home and work) and have
encountered very few.

Earlier this month I purchased a new Gateway Notebook with Vista Home
Premium pre-installed. This notebook is for my grandson who is a college
student.

So many functions have been changed. Even the most experienced computer user
is going to be very low (for a long time) on the learning curve. For
example, the Vista Control Panel no longer contains a DISPLAY icon. Instead,
there is another much more vague icon (I can't remember the name) to gain
access to the display properties.

Things have changed and that's something you'll need to get
used to, but if I need a feature ASAP and can't find it I
can switch to classic view and find it that way.

Another familiar Windows XP function that is now much harder to find is the
FILE EDIT function. I still haven't found out how to do a file SELECT
ALL/COPY on Vista. Oh, I'm sure it's there, and I would eventually find it,
but why has Microsoft made general usage so much different? There are
numerous similar sources of unnecessary confusion.

Until you mentioned it I hadn't noticed, but then Ctrl+A is
so much easier I can't recall even using the menu to do it.

I expected Vista to provide better performance, improved video editing
functions, and the like - BUT I was dismayed to discover that Vista has
accomplished this while also putting every user back to square one
knowledgewise. I hate to think what this will do to office efficiency for
those companies who rush out and buy Vista too soon, and I definitely would
not want to be in charge of their Information Systems departments right now.
What a nightmare that must be!

There is a learning curve but in many places people can
choose to revert to the old layouts if they want to.

From my experience during the last 2 weeks, I have come to the conclusion
that users should avoid buying Vista (or new computers with Vista
pre-installed) for a year or so - until it is more reliable and enough time
has passed so that compatible device drivers are more widely available.

Early adopters should really be prepared for teething
problems IMO but I can see the other side of the argument.

If you are thinking of upgrading your old computer to Vista, it may be too
demanding of your existing hardware. Looks like a minimum of 1GB of memory,
2GHZ of speed, and 100 GB of hard drive space are needed for decent
performance. The display adapter should be much more capable too, if you
wish to take advantage of the Vista video capabilities. With new machines,
hardware limitations should be less of a problem, but I still suggest
waiting for a year or two.

Anyone upgrading should be aware of the requirements, this
applies to installing anything for that matter.

My 50 cents worth.

Personally I think those that want to wait are doing the
right thing. Those that want to get it now should do so but
should be aware that there is not a huge resource to draw on
when there is a problem - there will be in time, thanks to
early adopters ;-)

As a software developer myself I can you tell you it's a
huge drain on resources to implement new features, and to
take advantage of new technology while still maintaining
'the way things were' and I don't think they've done a bad
job at all on that - something I see as a bonus rather than
a requirement.

 

[ray]

I think Vista is, as they say, "not ready for prime time". I've tried it out
for 2 weeks now, and have encountered way too many problems.

Earlier this month I purchased a new Gateway Notebook with Vista Home
Premium pre-installed. This notebook is for my grandson who is a college
student.

So many functions have been changed. Even the most experienced computer user
is going to be very low (for a long time) on the learning curve. For
example, the Vista Control Panel no longer contains a DISPLAY icon. Instead,
there is another much more vague icon (I can't remember the name) to gain
access to the display properties.

Rather ironic. I've heard several people, when asked about Linux, reply
that they don't have time to learn a new system. So every few years they
have to learn the newest MS release.

 

[Adam Albright]

Rather ironic. I've heard several people, when asked about Linux, reply
that they don't have time to learn a new system. So every few years they
have to learn the newest MS release.

Yep, seems silly don't it. I've tried Linux. So far seven different
flavors. While I DO like it in general the main problem for me and I
suspect many others is the lack of support not only with current
hardware drivers, but mostly little top of the line software.

I would switch in a heartbeat IF there was any decent and I mean
PROFESSIONAL grade video editing applications than run on Linux. I've
looked. There aren't any.

 

[Alias]

Yep, seems silly don't it. I've tried Linux. So far seven different
flavors. While I DO like it in general the main problem for me and I
suspect many others is the lack of support not only with current
hardware drivers, but mostly little top of the line software.

I would switch in a heartbeat IF there was any decent and I mean
PROFESSIONAL grade video editing applications than run on Linux. I've
looked. There aren't any.

So, do like I do and have Windows on one hard drive and Ubuntu on the
other. Best of both worlds.

Alias

 

[Justin]

But, for someone with a need vs a want, 1. and 3 are fatal.

Nah. 1 is fatal. 3 is not. Being "hard" to do something doesn't mean it
wont get done. For the average person, the default DHCP will give them
everything they need. Only someone with very specific requirement will need
to dig further. Odds are, those special requirements come with experience.
For me, it just wasn't straight forward. It was annoying at best. I simply
found no sense in the design. But I still found everything I needed within
10 minutes.

"It took an entire day to get the wireless connectivity problem resolved"

Wow! I can see how that would tick someone off. But it did get connected.
I see no reason for this to have taken an entire day (14 hours?). I would
need to know more to comment further.

How
does the OP work if he can't get HW to run or connect to other
PCs on his network? I think I understand why he bought the new
laptop and an upgrade for his old one, but if that was a
requirement that could not wait, he is screwed until/unless the
problem(s) are solved and any new ones that crop up are also
solved.

He can get a refund from MS for the upgrade. If it didn't work out then it
didn't work out. The new laptop's drivers should be fine. If not then call
Gateway and SCREAM at them as there's no excuse for that.

 

[Stephan Rose]

Rather ironic. I've heard several people, when asked about Linux, reply
that they don't have time to learn a new system. So every few years they
have to learn the newest MS release.

And you get to run the user interface you like the way you like it, not the
user interface Microsoft tells you that you are supposed to like.

--
Stephan Rose
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™ã²ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸæ™‚ãŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[Justin]

Now we have Vista. Despite what some of you are saying, it has (to put it
mildly) confused far too many users.

Please point us in the direction of this statistic. How many users are we
talking about? Thousands? Can we guesstimate 20,000? With nearly 1
million copies sold that would be 2% of all Vista users. Let's not forget
those that pirate which are probably having no problems at all. For the
sake of moving forward (break a few eggs) I think 2% is nothing when it
comes to progress.

Let them be confused. It will go away. The change from Win98 to XP was
much more confusing.

So how much of a change was it from:

0101000001110101011000100110110001101001011000110010000001010011011101010110001000100000010011110110111001001110011001010110010101100100010100100110010101100010011010010110111001100100001010000100001001111001010101100110000101101100001000000111001101100101011011100110010001100101011100100010000001000001011100110010000001001111011000100110101001100101011000110111010000101100001000000100001001111001010101100110000101101100001000000110111101000001011100100110011101110011001000000100000101110011001000000100010101110110011001010110111001110100010000010111001001100111011100110010100100100000010010000110000101101110011001000110110001100101011100110010000001000111011100100110100101100100001100010010111001001110011001010110010101100100010100100110010101100010011010010110111001100100

To:

Public Sub OnNeedRebind(ByVal sender As Object, ByVal oArgs As EventArgs)
Handles Grid1.NeedRebind