Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Windows Vista RC1 Complete 292

Posted by Zonk
from the inching-ever-closer dept.
alienfluid writes to mention that RC1 of Windows Vista is now complete. This 'nearly complete' version of the operating system is already available to beta testers, and will be available to everyone else soon. From the article: "You'll notice a lot of improvements since Beta 2. We've made some UI adjustments, added more device drivers, and enhanced performance. We're not done yet, however -- quality will continue to improve. We'll keep plugging away on application compatibility, as well as fit and finish, until RTM. If you are an ISV, RC1 is the build you should use for certifying your application."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Windows Vista RC1 Complete

Comments Filter:
  • Release Candidate? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by xazeru (671933) on Friday September 01, 2006 @04:50PM (#16027181)
    If Microsoft knows that there is more work to do, why call it a release candidate?
  • Freeware? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) on Friday September 01, 2006 @04:51PM (#16027185)

    This 'nearly complete' version of the operating system is already available to beta testers, and will be available to everyone else soon.

    They're making a release candidate available to everyone, or was this just the submitter being imprecise?

  • RC? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by dustball23 (309393) on Friday September 01, 2006 @04:53PM (#16027193)
    How can something "nearly complete" be a candidate for release? Unless they are considering releasing THAT BUILD, it's not a true RC.
  • Re:Too late (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Stormwatch (703920) <rodrigogirao@hotmai[ ]om ['l.c' in gap]> on Friday September 01, 2006 @04:59PM (#16027217) Homepage
    As much as I'm rooting for that, I doubt it'll flop as bad as Windows Me.
  • Re:Too late (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mrbcs (737902) on Friday September 01, 2006 @05:08PM (#16027267)
    We can always hope! Windows Mistake Edition at least would sort of run on existing computers. Seen the specs for this? In this day and age? I think this one is going to tank big time and they don't have another Win2k to bail them out.

    So what do you think of the subscription model now?

  • Re:Too late (Score:3, Insightful)

    by lawpoop (604919) on Friday September 01, 2006 @05:13PM (#16027286) Homepage Journal
    No, I don't think so. There's no way it can surpass the unheralded failure of Windows ME.

    Mom and Pop User will continue to buy generic PCs because of the cost, and because that's what they know. Come November or December, you won't be able to find a PC that doesn't have Vista on it. It will be a smashing success, just because it will be on 90% of the computers sold. It's called a monopoly. Even if techies and columnists say it's not worth the upgrade, people won't care. They got used to an underperforming OS with Win98. Soon, upgrading to Vista will be the path of least resistance.

    Apple couldn't produce enough Macs even if they wanted to cause Vista to flop.
  • by BlahMatt (931052) on Friday September 01, 2006 @05:14PM (#16027289)
    That is the 'practical' definition, but I've had many release candidates where new functionality has been added either as a result of sheer customer demand, or if it was just too complicated. There are lots of reasons one would have to add functionality to an RC.

    You are correct though, RCs do turn into General Releases, just usually not the first one and the content does not necessarily stay the same between RCs
  • translation (Score:3, Insightful)

    by MarsDude (74832) on Friday September 01, 2006 @05:24PM (#16027335) Homepage
    "We'll keep plugging away on application compatibility"

    Read: We're constructing dirty hacks into our newly written clean code so we don't upset our partners. This of course will cause the same side effects as with our previous versions, but hey... it looks better !!!!
  • Re:Too late (Score:5, Insightful)

    by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) on Friday September 01, 2006 @05:29PM (#16027362)

    Considering that it's mandatory to have Vista to take advantage of DX10, and considering that DX has become a de facto standard in the gaming industry, lots of people are going to eventually be forced to port over to Vista.

    I suspect there will be a lot of developers targeting DirectX 9 for many years to come, since the number of Vista machines will be so much lower than the number of Vista+XP+Me+2K machines. In any case, hopefully some of the developers wise up and move to OpenGL where they don't have to worry about MS refusing to support their graphics API improvements. OpenGL 2.0 will work on all of the above plus the PS2 and PS3 and OS X and Linux.

  • by jb.hl.com (782137) <joe@joe-baldwi[ ]et ['n.n' in gap]> on Friday September 01, 2006 @05:38PM (#16027413) Homepage Journal
    In the wallet, of course. M$ is going to waste $6.2 billion promoting what's looking more and more like XP SP3, super digital restriction.

    Three things:

    1) If Microsoft didn't promote their flagship product, they would be fucking cretins of the first degree. You seem to think that just because you say so, they should just give up, if not actively say "Don't use Windows".
    2) MS' operating profit is about 12.6 billion dollars. They're not going to spend almost half of their operating profit on promoting Vista.
    3) I would like you to pay close attention to this page [wikipedia.org]. Special attention should be paid to what a long page it is, and the number of notes at the bottom confirming it all.

    While I won't directly pay for that, many will. Schools, government and everyone not bright enough to use free software will pay.

    Or, alternatively, schools and governments will pay because Windows is a de-facto standard on the desktop, and is what just about everyone uses just about everywhere?

    All of the above easily adds up to multiples of M$'s annual net revenue.

    $44billion? Cite your references please.
  • by corychristison (951993) on Friday September 01, 2006 @05:48PM (#16027463)
    I didn't say anything about it being better.

    But since you brought it up, I'd like to say that YES, it is much better. Why? Because we have a strong community that cares about the direction the product goes, not just PUSH IT ON EVERYONE.
    P.S. - I'm not a fanboy. I'm just happy I don't have to go down the MS road anymore. Apple/Mac can kiss my ass, as well.
  • P.R. Terminology (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Detritus (11846) on Friday September 01, 2006 @05:49PM (#16027467) Homepage
    Where I've worked, what Microsoft is calling a "beta" or "release candidate" would be considered an alpha release. Beta releases are supposed to be feature complete, but in need of testing and debugging.
  • by nine-times (778537) <nine.times@gmail.com> on Friday September 01, 2006 @05:50PM (#16027475) Homepage

    Well, you could have lots of changes and fixes after RC1, but if you shouldn't have any changes and bug fixes *planned* for after RC1. When you label a build as a "release candidate", you're saying it's a candidate for release. If there's no possibility that you'll release that version as "final", then it's not a release candidate.

    You might expect that you'll find some bugs in the release candidate, and that, if none of them are show-stoppers, you'll patch them after release. However, if there are known bug fixes or changes that must be completed before release, then there is no chance you'll actually release that build. therefore, it isn't a candidate for release, and hence it isn't a "release candidate".

    I don't know why people don't understand what the term means. It seems self-explanatory to me. I guess Microsoft just doesn't want to admit that they're still in the beta stage.

  • by CaymanIslandCarpedie (868408) on Friday September 01, 2006 @06:11PM (#16027570) Journal
    $44billion? Cite your references please.

    Not my reference, but it is correct. Here [yahoo.com] is there last annual report. Right at the top is thier fiscal year 2006 revenue is 44,282 (in millions) so over 44 billion.
  • by MooUK (905450) on Friday September 01, 2006 @06:26PM (#16027621)
    You're installing an unfinished, unsupported OS on your security systems?

    This doesn't sound like an amazing idea to me.
  • by Freed (2178) on Friday September 01, 2006 @08:20PM (#16028093)
    Excerpt from running "dict vista":

    In the groves of their academy, at the end of every
    vista, you see nothing but the gallows. --Burke.
    [1913 Webster]

    The shattered tower which now forms a vista from his
    window. --Sir W. Scott.
    [1913 Webster]

    Rather fitting images for something screwing its users with WGA, DRM, etc.
  • by MmmmAqua (613624) on Friday September 01, 2006 @08:24PM (#16028105)
    I've been using the "Pre-RC1" build since the invites went out last week. I'm typing this post on a Vaio VGN-SZ220/B which is running Vista. The build is immensely improved since beta 2; performance and compatibility are leaps ahead of B2, the taskbar actually works, bundled drivers and DX10 are usable out of the box for playing WoW and HL2. So... nicer looking than XP, better out of box compatibility, significant UI improvements, even a better (flatter) filesystem layout. Web browser, mail, media, simple word processing, simple games, calendaring, etc. etc. are included. Except for the office applications, Vista (as shipped in sort-of-almost-RC1) does everything that Ubuntu does with the default install, and is coming closer to OS X. Why is it that if Microsoft ships anything but a bare OS, they're ridiculed for shipping bloatware, while Apple and every Linux distro on the planet can get away with bundling out the wazoo?

    I'm far from a MS fanboy, as the mini and Slackware boxes on my desk attest to, but if they make a significant improvement to their OS, I think the last thing they deserve is ridicule and derision. I also think statements like "I for one don't plan on giving Microsoft more money for their software until they release an OS that is totally useful and original." are just a reflection of the blind anti-MS zealotry that's too common here. You've just asked for a software panacea, and one that uses none of the metaphors and conventions that make desktop operating systems accessible to average users. Why not just ask them to prove the existence of God while you're at it? Sorry about the rant, but, Jesus, sometimes this place is like Michael Moore making a film about Bill Gates.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 01, 2006 @08:44PM (#16028174)

    Why is it that if Microsoft ships anything but a bare OS, they're ridiculed for shipping bloatware, while Apple and every Linux distro on the planet can get away with bundling out the wazoo?


    You must be new here. Repeat after me: "Microsoft is different because Microsoft is a convicted monopolist"


  • by pario (675744) on Friday September 01, 2006 @09:17PM (#16028275)

    The last time I installed Ubuntsu on my Vaio Type U, suspend to RAM did not work at all. Furthermore, I found out that in order to use hibernation, I have to download the source code of Software Suspend 2, apply patches to the kernel source and recompile the kernel, which is quite ridiculous to demand from a user of a desktop OS. After the installation of the software, I found out that the performance of it is not as good as the hibernation function of Windows XP. Suspend to ram/disk is such a basic functionality, and I just could not believe that nobody figured out how to make it work without problems. Moreover, I had to struggle with configuration files for two days to make my Bluetooth adapter work. I was sick of XP and almost ready to switch to Linux, but these experiences really turned me off.

    Linux seems to be an excellent server OS and the dedication of volunteers working on it is quite admirable, but, as a desktop OS, it is simply not in the same league as Windows XP and Mac OS X.

  • by Sycraft-fu (314770) on Friday September 01, 2006 @09:21PM (#16028290)
    When Vista releases I'll be putting it on my computer at work. Might even stick the RC on there, we'll see. After I've validated all our apps, and had sufficient time I feel it's ready (month or two probably) I'll roll it out to the first of our labs. The rest will follow in a couple months. I expect to have Vista on 200 or so lab machines fairly soon after it's release.

    I realise that you may think you and 6 friends are a statistically significant sample, but you actually aren't.

    My prediction on Vista is let's wait and see. Seems ot me most of those predicting it'll flop are doing so because they WANT it to flop, not because they've any real valid reason to believe it will.

    Despite your perception, it does have many things going for it. One is simply that OEMs are going to switch and start shipping it. However these is legit reasons for people to be excited. Game devs are just going bonkers over DX10. Epic has already declared that while UT2007 will run just fine on DX9, you'll need 10 for all the features to work.

    So ask yourself: Are your predicting failure because you have a real reason, or because you hate MS?
  • by twitter (104583) on Friday September 01, 2006 @11:01PM (#16028490) Homepage Journal

    The last time I installed Ubuntsu on my Vaio Type U, suspend to RAM did not work at all. ... Suspend to ram/disk is such a basic functionality, and I just could not believe that nobody figured out how to make it work without problems. Moreover, I had to struggle with configuration files for two days to make my Bluetooth adapter work.

    Those are not Linux problems, they are Sony problems. Sony, obviously, knows how to make their hardware work which is why those things sort of work under Windoze. I say sort of because XP is neither stable nor network safe, so nothing Sony does for it will last long. It would be nice of Sony to put their effort where the market is moving or at least to give out the information needed for others to make drivers. What you really should ask is why it's possible to buy that computer with Windoze but not with any of the much less expensive alternatives. That's right, the anti-trust violations M$ was busted for years ago.

    The best way to move the market and please yourself is to buy stuff that works. It takes research effort up front but you will recoup that many times over the life of the machine. More importantly, you send the only message markets understand: money. I'll research the specific model before I buy. The easiest research is to take a live CD to the store. If it runs and things work, I might buy the machine. Anything else is a gamble.

    I've been happy with used thinkpads. I've gotten them from Certified Used and Local Stores. Power management works well with all of them with nothing more than Debian right out of the box. The machine I'm writing this on has a good 66 days of uptime under Etch and I booted it last only because I wanted to use it's optical drive to install to another hard drive. Sarge just never goes down. Anything from a PII with 256 MB and better is usable for normal everyday use, though I've migrated to 1 GHz class processors. All I miss are software related to video editing and accelerated graphics which are all patented and NDA'd to hell.

  • by jb.hl.com (782137) <joe@joe-baldwi[ ]et ['n.n' in gap]> on Saturday September 02, 2006 @05:02AM (#16029041) Homepage Journal
    Even if all of those features aren't precisely "new", Microsoft has however improved and upgraded a lot of the auxiliary programs (with some either replaced or completely rewritten) which come with Windows and also done a fair bit of work under the hood. Nobody said everything had to be completely new to qualify as an improvement on an existing product.
  • by BigFootApe (264256) on Saturday September 02, 2006 @08:25PM (#16031356)
    Sorry, I took exception to the general ignorance in your post, as well as the way you describe (with bated breath) features common in Windows releases all the way back to Win98. Anyway, retarted comments. Such winners as:

    Except for the office applications, Vista (as shipped in sort-of-almost-RC1) does everything that Ubuntu does with the default install, and is coming closer to OS X.


    Methinks such comparisons are not so black and white.

    How about this one:

    "I for one don't plan on giving Microsoft more money for their software until they release an OS that is totally useful and original." are just a reflection of the blind anti-MS zealotry that's too common here. You've just asked for a software panacea, and one that uses none of the metaphors and conventions that make desktop operating systems accessible to average users.


    Most of the complaints against Vista that I've seen were along the lines of:
    1) Vista doesn't appear to do much more than XP. Why should I buy it?
    2) I'm worried Vista will run slower on my existing computer.
    3) Why can't I just skip a cycle, and get Windows 2010 when it comes out?

    An OS is not like a car. It doesn't wear out. You don't have to replace the brakes after 60,000 kilometers. If a new iteration of operating system does not improve on the old in the eyes of Joe User, why shouldn't (s)he have the option of sticking with what (s)he is already using?

    I was unsure at the time whethor you were astroturfing or just whoring. I took a stab in the dark. I guess I was wrong, and it's the latter. Then again, maybe you're just a moron.

Chemist who falls in acid is absorbed in work.

Working...