Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Vista Beta 2 has Major Problems

Posted by CmdrTaco on Wed May 24, 2006 09:55 AM
from the so-does-every-version-of-windows dept.
WebHostingGuy writes "In a review by Gary Krackow from MSNBC who reviewed Vista Beta 2 over the last week he had very disappointing problems. "for me [it] was one of the worst operating system experiences that I've ever encountered." Built-in audio and wireless didn't work on his Levono laptop. It took four days to get the first installation."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Slashback: Kororaa GPL, ICANN .XXX, BellSouth NSA 216 comments
Slashback tonight brings some corrections, clarifications, and updates to previous Slashdot stories including an update to the Kororaa GPL accusations, BellSouth demands a retraction to NSA story, South Korea rejects Microsft antitrust appeal, Tim Berners Lee continues net neutrality fight, ICANN possibly pressured to nix .XXX domain, another side to Vista Beta2 reviews, and the worst tech IPO in 2 years -- Read on for details.
[+] Windows Vista - Not So Bad? 378 comments
Shantyman writes "ZDNet has a counterpoint to the negative impressions of Vista's Beta 2 going around. Entitled Vista Beta 2, up close and personal, Ed Bott writes: 'I've spent the last three months running beta versions of Windows Vista on the PCs I use for everyday work. February and March were exasperating. April's release was noticeably better, and the Beta 2 preview - Build 5381, released to testers in early May - has been running flawlessly on my notebook for nearly three weeks.'"
[+] Details on Refining Vista's User Control 304 comments
borgboy writes "Windows Vista has gotten a lot of negative press recently following the release of the latest beta, especially regarding excessive prompting for privilege escalation for seemingly common activities. On his blog, Steve Hiskey, the Lead Program Manager for User Account Control in the Windows Security Core group, details what the issues with the excessive prompting are, what the design goals of the feature are, and how they plan to achieve them. Briefly - they know the excessive prompting is a royal pain, they know that have to reduce it to an absolute minimum to be both productive AND an effective security risk mitigation measure, and they want as much feedback as they can get on the beta."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Article Summary (Score:5, Insightful)

    by AKAImBatman (238306) * <akaimbatman@NOSPAM.gmail.com> on Wednesday May 24 2006, @09:56AM (#15393634) Homepage Journal
    "I tried to install on a laptop, and it didn't work."

    Am I the only one who's sitting here and wondering, "What was this guy thinking?!" Laptops have so much custom hardware these days that it's a Bad Idea(TM) to attempt an OS installation from anything but restore CDs. This guy not only tried to install from new media, but he tried to install a cutting-edge operating system that isn't even out of beta!

    Desktops are cheap these days. Would it kill him to keep one or two around for "kicking the tires" of new Operating Systems? His install experience probably would have been smoother, and we might have actually been able to hear some real complaints about Windows Vista. ;-)
    • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 24 2006, @10:14AM (#15393806)
      I agree, the article suggests that Vista is crap because his two older laptops had hardware problems and that Lenovo hasn't released Vista-ready drivers yet. Sounds pretty weak to me.

      But get a load of the feature list for Beta 2!!!
      -New version of Solitare
      -Better looking Start menu (wow)
      -Better startup sound and alert chime
      -Search box on every Explorer window hogging screen realestate
    • Re:Article Summary (Score:5, Insightful)

      by chundo (587998) <jeremy@@@jongsma...org> on Wednesday May 24 2006, @10:25AM (#15393914)
      Yeah, I don't really see how that's any different from XP. After a fresh install, I can't even get the network card to work on my Dell without downloading the driver from their web site on a different computer and burning it to a CD.

      On the other hand, Ubuntu and Mandriva have supported everything perfectly on the last 5 computers I've had (3 of them laptops that have tons of unsupported hardware with an XP stock install), so "there's too much custom hardware" is no excuse for a miserable OS installation experience. So he does have a very valid gripe, but it's also nothing new with Vista.
      • Re:Article Summary (Score:5, Informative)

        by happyemoticon (543015) on Wednesday May 24 2006, @11:26AM (#15394504) Homepage
        "there's too much custom hardware" is no excuse for a miserable OS installation experience

        I totally agree with you. However, it is probable that Windows XP doesn't ship with the drivers for all but the most common hardware for a reason. I think that since the drivers are proprietary, they would certainly have to get specific permission to distribute them with Windows. Linux enjoys the advantage of having GPL drivers that it can distribute anywhere.

    • Re:Article Summary (Score:5, Insightful)

      by barawn (25691) on Wednesday May 24 2006, @10:26AM (#15393921) Homepage
      Laptops have so much custom hardware these days that it's a Bad Idea(TM) to attempt an OS installation from anything but restore CDs.

      Er?

      I've installed Windows XP on all of my laptops over the past few years, and everyone else in my office does the same thing, too. Laptops come with too much cruft installed by default, and in general, it's silly for us to pay to upgrade to XP Pro when there's a site license available for next to nothing here. So wipe the drive, in goes a new installation of XP Pro, alongside Linux, typically. I've never run into a problem.

      Jumping to Dell's [dell.com] site for the laptop I'm on now, all of the drivers are right there ready.

      Now, there aren't Vista drivers. But if what he's saying is "driver support for Vista may be lacking, so you might have trouble", I don't really see that as a problem. A lot of people only have laptops nowadays, so not being able to install Vista on a laptop easily means a lot of people aren't buying Vista.
    • Re:Article Summary (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Asphalt (529464) on Wednesday May 24 2006, @10:27AM (#15393930)
      Am I the only one who's sitting here and wondering, "What was this guy thinking?!" Laptops have so much custom hardware these days that it's a Bad Idea(TM) to attempt an OS installation from anything but restore CDs.

      Well, a year or so ago, laptop sales surpassed desktop sales.

      So if you had to test an OS on a machine, statistically you would go with a laptop in 2006.

      The hardware isn't terribly specialized anymore.

      If Vista doesn't run on laptops, then Microsoft will be cut out more than 50% of all new computer sales.

      • Re:Article Summary (Score:5, Informative)

        by AKAImBatman (238306) * <akaimbatman@NOSPAM.gmail.com> on Wednesday May 24 2006, @10:39AM (#15394054) Homepage Journal
        If Vista doesn't run on laptops, then Microsoft will be cut out more than 50% of all new computer sales.

        Vista will run on laptops. But like with most XP machines today, custom drivers will be built to handle all the embedded hardware. The problem here is that Vista is in beta, ergo it has very little driver support. Thus if you want to review a beta (as opposed to doing bug reporting for Microsoft) then you should use a more standardized system. i.e. A Desktop.

        Make no mistake. I am making no assertions about Vista's capabilities. I'm sure that it will follow the tradition of Windows just fine (i.e. Some stuff is good, some stuff is bad.) The only assertion I'm making is that the reviewer's strategy is flawed.
        • Re:Article Summary (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Asphalt (529464) on Wednesday May 24 2006, @11:00AM (#15394233)
          Vista will run on laptops. But like with most XP machines today, custom drivers will be built to handle all the embedded hardware. The problem here is that Vista is in beta, ergo it has very little driver support. Thus if you want to review a beta (as opposed to doing bug reporting for Microsoft) then you should use a more standardized system. i.e. A Desktop.

          Not sure I agree.

          You can put together a desktop computer with 1,000,000 different hardware configurations. Laptops are actually much less configurable ... hardware-wise.

          Desktops need just as many drivers as laptops (if not more), and they are hardly "standardized".

          You can get a generic Dell white box, or an Alienware Gaming Monster. Both desktops, very different computers.

          Laptops are actually more standard these days, IMHO.

          You are unlikely to have dual-7800 Ultra cards running SLI with an AMD X2 with Cool-N-Quiet, and Raid 0 in a laptop.

          Desktops are far from standardized, and I don't see any reason why it would be easier to get Vista running on one.

  • Built-in audio and wireless didn't work on his Levono laptop.

    That's because the audio is reserved for spying on the US military (and wireless to transmit the data back to China!)
  • Grr (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 24 2006, @09:59AM (#15393662)

    You know, if there's one thing I loathe more than intrusive

    CONTINUED ON PAGE 2

  • OS X...? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by metaomni (667105) on Wednesday May 24 2006, @10:01AM (#15393670)
    The article reminds me a lot of this video [google.com] of OS X overlaid on a Gates presentation of Vista.

    I'm no Apple fanboi, but it does seem like Vista isn't really innovating anything that OS X hasn't had since at least 10.4, if not earlier. Feel free to disagree.

  • by Utopia (149375) on Wednesday May 24 2006, @10:02AM (#15393688)
    .. and the new Vista drivers went live on Windows Update yeterday.
    I am not suprised it took him time until the drivers were available.

  • by Se7enLC (714730) on Wednesday May 24 2006, @10:04AM (#15393700) Homepage Journal
    So basically when Microsoft says "beta" they mean:

    it sorta works. ok, there might be a few bugs. ok, so maybe it can't even install itself or use hardware.

    When google says "beta" they mean:

    it's more done than most web services that have been around since the early 90s will ever be, but the moniker "Beta" has a nice ring to it. Plus we like how elitist it is to have to be invited to a webmail service.
  • Hardware problems (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Taimat (944976) on Wednesday May 24 2006, @10:06AM (#15393722)
    From reading TFA, it looks like he had the majority of problems because of his laptops. Hard drive dying, replace batt. Perhaps he should invest in new testing equipment. I thought the article was going to be about vista beta 2, not, why I couldn't get windows installed on my hardware. Yes, vista is supposed to support a ton of hardware, but I feel the article's title was misleading. Yes, I like linux and windows... No, I am not looking foward to Vista. 2000 and XP (and a wide range of linux) is fine for most workstations in the corp world.
  • In other news, the sky is blue, and water is wet.
  • YAY! (Score:5, Funny)

    "for me [it] was one of the worst operating system experiences that I've ever encountered."

    Yay! For the first time Linux is more friendly than Windows! *ducks*
  • by Jugalator (259273) on Wednesday May 24 2006, @10:21AM (#15393871) Journal
    I think this article is spot on the issues coming from an as imprecise term as "beta". On Google services, Beta often doesn't end up meaning anything more than "new" to end users because they're usually very solid, and can also remain in beta for years without anything even happening to them. In computer software, the same can sometimes apply, but others use "beta" with the older definition at least when developing large applications, like Microsoft. A "beta" that means "don't run this in anything like production systems".

    He has these things to say when excluding his whining:

    - I was given a pre-beta 2 release but will call it "Beta 2" in this article.
    - I can't install this "Beta 2" on my Lenovo ThinkPad X60 laptop.
    - I know beta software can be quirky.
    - I couldn't run an automated upgrade from XP.
    - I could run a clean install, but not all drivers are available yet, like that to my wireless card.
    - A clean install will not let you keep old drivers.
    - Install on Computer #2 failed because my clock battery was too old.
    - Install on Computer #3 failed because my hard drive crashed early on.
    - With Microsoft support help, I now have Vista running to some extent on my laptop.

    Now, is this in any possible way a surprising turn of events for beta software with about a half a year left for bug fixing, polish, and catch-ups from driver developers? I really have to defend MS a bit when clueless people like him are given enough attention to appear on Slashdot.
  • by duffolonious (956722) on Wednesday May 24 2006, @10:23AM (#15393887)
    The clock is ticking.

    Nonetheless, did anyone think the highlights weren't that high?

            * A streamlined Start menu.
            * Instant Search in every Explorer window.
            * Search Pane lets you organize information by author, date, or type of document.
            * Windows Sidebar puts frequently used information and tasks right on the desktop. This feature will remind OS X users of that system's Dashboard feature.
            * Network Explorer puts all network connections -- like printers, other computers, and devices - into one centralized location.
            * Sync Center helps users manage all their devices from one place.
            * Tablet PC functionality is integrated into most versions of Windows Vista.
            * Windows Media Center 11, also standard in Vista, includes live and recorded television, music, photos and videos.
            * Improved Windows Media Player.
            * New power management features for mobile computers to optimize battery performance.
            * Windows Defender regularly scans and removes spyware and other unwanted software.
            * Classic Windows games, as well as several new ones.

    None of these are compelling reasons to upgrade from XP. I see minor features and re-organizations. Power management? Hmmmm... not enough. Windows Defender? Not doing it for me. I thought there were a lot of other more compelling reasons?
  • by Spackler (223562) on Wednesday May 24 2006, @10:26AM (#15393925) Journal
    "for me [it] was one of the worst operating system experiences that I've ever encountered."

    Which means you are a young pup. Coherrent on a 286? How about OS/2 on a Tandy 1000? DSM on an 11/44? Windows 1 (with the coolest font management that only took a week to get stuff working)? You do remember when the line printer would get stuck on the feeder and it would wear a line of text right through the paper, don't you?

    Man, back in my day
    • by Fhqwhgadss (905393) on Wednesday May 24 2006, @10:07AM (#15393727)
      Not only is it beta, but by the time it ships, users won't have to look for drivers, Lenovo will have it preconfigured already. So his biggest gripe is a complete non-issue for the overwhelming majority of computer users. Sounds like a thumbs-up to me.

      BTW, isn't the Slashdot mentality great? Poor driver support for Linux: "Broadcom/ATI/whoever Is The Devil." Poor driver support for Windows: "Vista Beta 2 has Major Problems." Go Figure.

    • by thebdj (768618) on Wednesday May 24 2006, @10:11AM (#15393778) Journal
      Ever installed Linux in a laptop? I think you'll find that the scavenger hunt for drivers is similar to what Gary experienced.

      I have installed Linux on my Dell Latitude 8600 twice once with Mandriva '06 and the other time Fedora Core 3. I never had this mystical hunt for drivers you speak of. My laptop actually worked right out of the install. I had to do more drivers work on it the one time I installed Windows.

      While I will admit, using a laptop for a test install of a beta is a bad idea it isn't the worst thing ever. Windows is notoriously bad for driver support and I have had to install drivers for an FA311 after installing Windows (I think it was 2k) and the FA311 by Netgear has to be one of the most common Network cards ever.

      Of course, default video card drivers in Windows also suck. So even if there is a driver installed you still need to go get the "real" ones from ATI or nVidia. So, please do not attribute this problem to simply a beta install or a problem common with Linux and laptops.

      He might be a bit biased, but the last article you link he does complain about the sound quality, so it is not like he is a mac fan boy who will sing their praises even when something is wrong. Also, he works for MSNBC...you do remember what the MS in that stands for right? I mean if he leaned anyway you'd think it would at least be to the M$ side. By god, can't someone just have opinions anymore without being f#cking biased one way or another?
    • Not offtopic. After these phrases about the installation from TFA:

      ..one of the worst operating system experiences that I've ever encountered

      It took me days to install a working version...

      ...after four hours of churning away the laptop shut down and wouldn't reboot


      Asking how the rest went is like asking Mrs. Lincoln how she liked the play.