P
PTravel
It's been a month since I got my new laptop which came with Vista Business
OEM. Though I don't often find myself in the position of defending
Microsoft, in general I'm finding life under Vista is better than life under
XP Pro. Some observations:
1. Vista was a pain to set up, yes, and a pain to learn. The Vista
interface is differs more from the XP interface than the XP interface
differed from Win2000. There is a learning curve, even for an experienced
computer user like me, and the total absence of documentation, misguided
Help features (Help appears designed for idiots, and does not readily
provide higher-level assistance), and re-organization of menus and utility
programs didn't help.
However . . .
2. Now that I've managed to get everything installed and running, my laptop
not only ticksa like clock but is incredibly fast and stable. I've gotten
all of my software running, and found workarounds for those few exceptions
that wouldn't. This was not unlike my experience of bringing up XP Pro
after running Win2000. Then, as now, there were software compatability
issues, driver update issues, etc. However, unlike then, I have yet to
crash Vista (though I have had some programs lock up until I ironed out
installation issues).
3. I'm usually not big on cosmetic changes to the GUI -- I resisted Windows
3.0 for a long time because I was most comfortable with the command-line
interface of DOS. However, the combination of speed and power (which is the
result of both the OS and the laptop hardware) is sufficient to make the
Vista GUI changes true improvements. There is a smooth flow to working on
the computer that doesn't exist in XP. I still have XP on all of my other
computers, including my primary home desktop. However, I find myself
gravitating towards my Vista-equipped laptop because it just "feels" better
to work on. At one point early on in the process I had turned off the Aero
interface, thinking, "All I care about is power and speed -- who needs the
glitz?" However, I quickly turned it back on. On my T7200 laptop (Core 2
Duo 2 GHz), the added processing overhead needed for Aero is not noticeable
and I found I preferred the smoothness of the GUI "effects."
4. Extra RAM makes a big difference. The final piece of the puzzle for
getting Vista to really fly (at least for me) was adding an extra gigabyte
of RAM to my computer, bringing the total up to 2 gigabytes. Though Vista
was running fine with 1 gig, it really screams with 2.
5. Vista's new security features are, for the most part, a pain in the
butt. One of the first things I did (after getting rid of the crapware
demos Sony had installed) was disable Defender and replace its functions
with Webroot SpySweeper and AVG Antivirus. Unlike Defender, both of these
programs are very "talkative" -- they'll tell you exactly what they're doing
and why, and don't hide critical control functions from the user. As with
the Help systems, Defender seems geared to the naive user. For "power
users" who understand what's going on "under the hood," as well as the risks
attendant to various operations, Defender is intrusive and opaque.
SpySweeper is a great inexpensive alternative for securing against spyware.
AVG is free and extremely effective. Both work perfectly under Vista.
Similarly UAC is annoying as hell. It could be a good feature if it was
configurable, e.g. disabled for specified programs, user inputs, etc.
However, the constant confirmations required, as well as the really annoying
screen blanking, undermine its utility. I've turned it off and, though
inexperienced users would probably be well-advised to leave it on, power
users will probably want to disable it as well. I'd also recommend removing
Norton and Symantec products -- I find them bloated, intrusive and opaque
but, worst of all, they interfere with the OS and with other software.
6. I haven't had the problems with networking that many others seem to. My
home system consists of 6 computers (4 running XP Pro, 1 running Win2000), a
wireless access point, a Tivo, an Onkyo receiver, a VPN router connected to
a DSL modem, and two network printers. My Vista laptop has no trouble
seeing and accessing anything, including such tasks as telnetting in to the
Linux-based Tivo. I've used my laptop with wireless networks in airports,
at home and in my office with no problem at all. I also use it on my firm's
domain-based network and can access everything. The only issue I've had is
occassional slow transfers of very large files. I get around that by using
FTP for those kinds of transfers. I would note that getting my network
running properly was not simply plug-and-play -- I had to manually add user
accounts that were set to the appropriate security levels, manually share
drives and other resources, add NetBios clients, adjust the firewalls, etc.
However, that was a one-time task and now I routinely move from office to
home to airport club room and back with all networking tasks occuring
seamlessly and transparently. My suspicion is that those who are having
trouble are either using XP or Vista Home, which has limited network
configuration capabilities, or simply have misconfigured either user
accounts, their NICs, their routers, their firewalls or the networks
themselves.
7. Originally, I was very angry that Sony did not include system disks with
my new (pretty expensive) laptop. However, I've been using the "whole
computer backup" feature fairly regularly and it is quite painless. Last
night, I back up some 35 gigs of data to my backup external hard drive in
about 20 or 30 minutes. This is comparable to the "old days" under Win95,
when I used to back up my computer to floppy disks in an hour or so. Of
course, now I'm backing up several orders of magnitude more data than before
but, unlike under XP Pro, I'm actually backing up the entire computer, not
just my data files as was my previous practice. With the cost of drives as
low as it is, I'll probably pick up a 500 gigger and use it just for system
backups, which I'll perform on a regular basis. I'll also note that System
Restore worked flawlessly -- I had to use it a number of times while I was
working through software and driver installation issues.
Overall, I expect that the situation with Vista will improve dramatically.
A service pack release will clean up any outstanding major issues (though I
don't expect it to address everything). Software and hardware producers
will release more and more Vista-compatible products, which will also handle
the majority of the issues that I faced. For the time being, though, I'm
very pleased with my new laptop and with Vista and have no desire to install
XP Pro on it. I don't envy inexperienced or naive users who will have to go
through this process -- it's going to be harder than it was for such users
when XP was released -- but for those who take the time to learn what's
going on with their machines, it's difficult but far from impossible.
As I said, I don't often find myself defending Microsoft, but I have to say
that I like the Vista OS that they've produced.
OEM. Though I don't often find myself in the position of defending
Microsoft, in general I'm finding life under Vista is better than life under
XP Pro. Some observations:
1. Vista was a pain to set up, yes, and a pain to learn. The Vista
interface is differs more from the XP interface than the XP interface
differed from Win2000. There is a learning curve, even for an experienced
computer user like me, and the total absence of documentation, misguided
Help features (Help appears designed for idiots, and does not readily
provide higher-level assistance), and re-organization of menus and utility
programs didn't help.
However . . .
2. Now that I've managed to get everything installed and running, my laptop
not only ticksa like clock but is incredibly fast and stable. I've gotten
all of my software running, and found workarounds for those few exceptions
that wouldn't. This was not unlike my experience of bringing up XP Pro
after running Win2000. Then, as now, there were software compatability
issues, driver update issues, etc. However, unlike then, I have yet to
crash Vista (though I have had some programs lock up until I ironed out
installation issues).
3. I'm usually not big on cosmetic changes to the GUI -- I resisted Windows
3.0 for a long time because I was most comfortable with the command-line
interface of DOS. However, the combination of speed and power (which is the
result of both the OS and the laptop hardware) is sufficient to make the
Vista GUI changes true improvements. There is a smooth flow to working on
the computer that doesn't exist in XP. I still have XP on all of my other
computers, including my primary home desktop. However, I find myself
gravitating towards my Vista-equipped laptop because it just "feels" better
to work on. At one point early on in the process I had turned off the Aero
interface, thinking, "All I care about is power and speed -- who needs the
glitz?" However, I quickly turned it back on. On my T7200 laptop (Core 2
Duo 2 GHz), the added processing overhead needed for Aero is not noticeable
and I found I preferred the smoothness of the GUI "effects."
4. Extra RAM makes a big difference. The final piece of the puzzle for
getting Vista to really fly (at least for me) was adding an extra gigabyte
of RAM to my computer, bringing the total up to 2 gigabytes. Though Vista
was running fine with 1 gig, it really screams with 2.
5. Vista's new security features are, for the most part, a pain in the
butt. One of the first things I did (after getting rid of the crapware
demos Sony had installed) was disable Defender and replace its functions
with Webroot SpySweeper and AVG Antivirus. Unlike Defender, both of these
programs are very "talkative" -- they'll tell you exactly what they're doing
and why, and don't hide critical control functions from the user. As with
the Help systems, Defender seems geared to the naive user. For "power
users" who understand what's going on "under the hood," as well as the risks
attendant to various operations, Defender is intrusive and opaque.
SpySweeper is a great inexpensive alternative for securing against spyware.
AVG is free and extremely effective. Both work perfectly under Vista.
Similarly UAC is annoying as hell. It could be a good feature if it was
configurable, e.g. disabled for specified programs, user inputs, etc.
However, the constant confirmations required, as well as the really annoying
screen blanking, undermine its utility. I've turned it off and, though
inexperienced users would probably be well-advised to leave it on, power
users will probably want to disable it as well. I'd also recommend removing
Norton and Symantec products -- I find them bloated, intrusive and opaque
but, worst of all, they interfere with the OS and with other software.
6. I haven't had the problems with networking that many others seem to. My
home system consists of 6 computers (4 running XP Pro, 1 running Win2000), a
wireless access point, a Tivo, an Onkyo receiver, a VPN router connected to
a DSL modem, and two network printers. My Vista laptop has no trouble
seeing and accessing anything, including such tasks as telnetting in to the
Linux-based Tivo. I've used my laptop with wireless networks in airports,
at home and in my office with no problem at all. I also use it on my firm's
domain-based network and can access everything. The only issue I've had is
occassional slow transfers of very large files. I get around that by using
FTP for those kinds of transfers. I would note that getting my network
running properly was not simply plug-and-play -- I had to manually add user
accounts that were set to the appropriate security levels, manually share
drives and other resources, add NetBios clients, adjust the firewalls, etc.
However, that was a one-time task and now I routinely move from office to
home to airport club room and back with all networking tasks occuring
seamlessly and transparently. My suspicion is that those who are having
trouble are either using XP or Vista Home, which has limited network
configuration capabilities, or simply have misconfigured either user
accounts, their NICs, their routers, their firewalls or the networks
themselves.
7. Originally, I was very angry that Sony did not include system disks with
my new (pretty expensive) laptop. However, I've been using the "whole
computer backup" feature fairly regularly and it is quite painless. Last
night, I back up some 35 gigs of data to my backup external hard drive in
about 20 or 30 minutes. This is comparable to the "old days" under Win95,
when I used to back up my computer to floppy disks in an hour or so. Of
course, now I'm backing up several orders of magnitude more data than before
but, unlike under XP Pro, I'm actually backing up the entire computer, not
just my data files as was my previous practice. With the cost of drives as
low as it is, I'll probably pick up a 500 gigger and use it just for system
backups, which I'll perform on a regular basis. I'll also note that System
Restore worked flawlessly -- I had to use it a number of times while I was
working through software and driver installation issues.
Overall, I expect that the situation with Vista will improve dramatically.
A service pack release will clean up any outstanding major issues (though I
don't expect it to address everything). Software and hardware producers
will release more and more Vista-compatible products, which will also handle
the majority of the issues that I faced. For the time being, though, I'm
very pleased with my new laptop and with Vista and have no desire to install
XP Pro on it. I don't envy inexperienced or naive users who will have to go
through this process -- it's going to be harder than it was for such users
when XP was released -- but for those who take the time to learn what's
going on with their machines, it's difficult but far from impossible.
As I said, I don't often find myself defending Microsoft, but I have to say
that I like the Vista OS that they've produced.
