Windows Vista RC1 Complete 292
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."
Could be worst... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Release Candidate? (Score:1, Interesting)
It is also not bug free because it has not been exposed to general population for testing which always reveals more bugs that simply aren't found during the internal testing process.
It's like saying. "We could release this, but we're sure that there will be something people don't like and we'd rather have people bash away at it so we can fix it before an official launch". Or at least that's how it is at my work.
Re:RC? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Too late (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Too late (Score:3, Interesting)
But my college uses Microsoft. XP / Offce are the basics of what I support / install / repair.
When Vista arrives, it is inevitable that I'll be rolling it out college wide.
And big business? Well, they'll be doing the same. A lot of the functionality we've been seeing plugged into Vista (not this Glass and New Improved Solitaire! rubbish) has been directed towards business.
Vista will not flop. It'll be pre-installed of every new machine come February 2007; the Microsoft Tax ensures a healthy install base. As for business, I think they'll transition mid-2007, at the latest, when we see the first service pack.
I'm holding off as long as I can; the XP migration wasn't a major hassle, but I know from previous experience that major rollouts can be a pain in the backside. But I'll move accross eventually, because the 'powers that be' will request we migrate to Vista and Office 2007.
Where Vista Touched Me. (Score:5, Interesting)
Trackhead, point out on the doll where Vista touched you. . .
In the wallet, of course. M$ is going to waste $6.2 billion promoting what's looking more and more like XP SP3, super digital restriction. While I won't directly pay for that, many will. Schools, government and everyone not bright enough to use free software will pay. They will pass that cost along as taxes and higher prices. As Steve Baller likes to say, the upfront cost of software are just the beginning and all of the tremendous inefficiencies of Windoze will also be passed along in higher prices and poorer service. I don't even want to think of the costs to the economy that comes from Microsoft's inability to design a network safe OS are. All of the above easily adds up to multiples of M$'s annual net revenue.
We installed it today (Score:2, Interesting)
Will Vista run on existing computers? (Score:3, Interesting)
If you recall, it was around this time a couple of years ago that we started hearing about the subscription model and Software Assurance. This was supposed to make life easier for everyone by giving Microsoft a continuous stream of money and receiving from them a continuous stream of the latest and greatest. But Vista, which was promised within the contract period of software assurance, is still months away, and corporations have basically thrown away money for no upgrade. From what I've read, Software Assurance was a bit of a flop because people didn't like the idea of paying money and not necessarily receiving anything in return.
I've started to get a little curious about your other question. Who on earth is going to buy the upgrade when it's painfully expensive (looks like $200-300), and there are darn few computers for sale today that can run it?
if you visit Dell's web site (and if you do you're a major masochist, sadly - it's terrible), the cheapest notebook computer(*) that's "vista capable" is $969 after discounts. They are still selling $499 notebooks, which are obviously badly underspecified for Vista.
What happens when Vista is introduced? Is this the death of the $499 notebook?
Okay, notebooks are expensive. They are selling sub-$300 desktops. What's the cheapest desktop that can run Vista? If you take the 1GB ram requirement seriously, it's the high-end Dimension E310, at $748. They are clearly doing their best to cheap out this system; it includes a 15" flat panel monitor, a species that I thought was virtually obsolete. And yet it's still more than double what their cheapest system costs.
Now, I guess you can run "Vista Basic" on low-end systems, but Microsoft has given me the impression that this is the option for wimps and masochists (those that have not yet been suitably satisfied by Dell's web site).
I remember that when Windows95 came out, all systems available in the stores on introduction night(**) were more or less capable of running it, and had been for some time. this seems to be the first version of Windows that truly requires all-new hardware just to function at a minimal level.
So what's going on here? Does anyone know the reason they decided on a system with such ghastly requirements?
D
(*) If I were a REAL masochist, I would have gone to all the sites (home & home office, small and mid-sized business and large business, and priced every one of them. However, sadly I am not that mean to myself just to make a point on Slashdot. I stuck to Home & Home Office. You know, it's almost worth the extra $100 a Macbook costs to see a clear web page that shows you their only price and makes it dead simple to buy stuff.
(**) Ah, the days when we felt something like enthusiasm for Microsoft's products!
Re:Where Vista Touched Me. (Score:1, Interesting)
I'll pay! I'm quite looking forward to Vista.
and everyone not bright enough to use free software
Yes, there's something just quirky about those of us who like to use software that just works. Linux has made a lot of progress over the years but it's still quite a ways behind Windows.
Beta III (Score:3, Interesting)
The sadness does not hide the truth.
Oh, please Apple execs... Please... (Score:5, Interesting)
Pull your heads out of your asses and sell OS-X for generic PCs. You could clean up at $300/copy. Virtually no marginal cost. It'll replace the iPod revenues you're losing because everyone who wants one, has one. But nooOOOooo. You're so hell bent on emulating the losing business model followed by Sun. Oh, please... what do we have to do? Fly out there, slap you in the face and put smelling salts under your noses? The gorilla has eaten a bad bannanna. He's down. He won't stay down forever. You'll look back on this, and you'll never forgive yourselves for not having kicked him while he's down, cuz you know he's gonna get back up.
Re:Where Vista Touched Me. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Oh, please Apple execs... Please... (Score:2, Interesting)
It's not just motherboard chipsets but also support for things such as sound cards, network cards, IDE controllers, etc that would need to be developed.
Don't get me wrong, OSX is a fantastic OS! But, it has a long ways to go in terms of hardware support and Windows is way ahead on that front. To catch up with Microsoft, would cost Apple a LOT of money and as a matter of fact, the OS would suffer from similar instability issues that have plagued windows for a very long time.
Re:Where Vista Touched Me. (Score:4, Interesting)
Well, technically they would be "new" to Windows Vista, if Vista were new, but since they DID NOT start from scratch, then I sadly have to conclude that the length of that page is nowhere near indicative of the number of features found in Vista. The wiki article is basically fluffed up with explanations, comparisons, explanations of comparisons and old stuff (from WinXP and before). What's more, the article seems to concentrate on Vista from a visual POV, so it lists every little graphical detail of everything ("Other features include check boxes for selecting multiple files. When renaming a file, Explorer only highlights the filename without selecting the extension.", etc.).
All in all, if you take out the fluff, the amount of "new features" shrink drastically. That's for 6 years of work.
Re:Ok well as a counter point (Score:3, Interesting)