Vista Beta 2 has Major Problems 683
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."
Article Summary (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Article Summary (Score:5, Funny)
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, Funny)
No, the nastiest (and funniest criticism) was this;
Bitchslap...Re:Article Summary (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.maclive.net/sid/134 [maclive.net]
http://www.maclive.net/sid/135 [maclive.net]
http://www.maclive.net/sid/136 [maclive.net]
Re:Article Summary (Score:5, Insightful)
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)
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:4, Insightful)
Re:Article Summary (Score:5, Insightful)
Ok, then, Windows XP shipped 5 years ago. Ubuntu ships a new (free) version every six months. Ubuntu has better driver support. It happens to be because it ships more often. Maybe MS could learn something about "release early, release often"?
Happy? Or would you like to claim that there's some reason other than incompetence that Windows ships every 6 or 7 years and Ubuntu ships every half a year?
Re:Article Summary (Score:3)
MS could learn A LOT of things from Linux development.
** n-Step Plan for MS to save themselves: **
o Continue support for Win2k Pro for the next 5 years, and continue selling (licenses + install media) and developing for it. Come out with an update that has all the latest driver support.
o Go back to teh Win2kpro codebase, incorporate all the best kernel features from XP along with faster booting, firewall, etc. Ditch the fancy graphic
Re:Article Summary (Score:4, Insightful)
If you bought a CD of Windows XP 5 years ago, then yes, you can indeed say that it was released 5 years ago and that it is a valid reason for not supporting hardware that was released 3 years ago. However, if you buy a Windows XP CD today, it is a recent version of Windows XP, it even includes SP2, so it no longer is something that was released 5 years ago... at worst, it was released 18 to 24 months ago (I don't even remember when SP2 was).
Still... We installed a very fresh version of WinXP last week at the office, with that SP2 preloaded and all, on a 4 years old computer, and it still couldn't get a network connection without us downloading the drivers from another computer and then burning it to a CD (because network drivers these days don't fit on a floppy).
Microsoft really makes no effort at all in providing even generic drivers for hardware.
Re:Article Summary (Score:5, Informative)
My SUSE installs really aren't all that different, I load up the install CD, since the installer has to be able to connect to the Internet to update itself they've included every network card driver they could find. The update then ensures that all the latest drivers and system packages are installed and the end experience is a stable and fast OS experience.
SP2 is not a new release of XP. It does contain a few new drivers but the base is still the same. That is the big difference between how Microsoft releases software and how most Linux distros do. Microsoft keeps it consistent only adding necessities like drive support beyond 160gigs. They have to for their business customers who really don't handle change very well.So yes, XP was released 5 years ago, it has great hardware support. Dell seems to always put in strange network cards that require additional drivers but they give you a cd with them on it so no big deal. Most everytime I install it the NIC at least is least given a driver that will work. Nforce boards are an exception as they are completely new since the release of XP. Vista hardware support is interest since it appears that the drivers for XP check for XP as the version of the OS rather than specifying it as a minimum. XP drivers should work just fine. Older drivers will not as they need to be signed for the OS to let them in unless you open up the default hardware policy which is fairly easy to do if you know where to look for Windows policy settings.
I think I've said enough, there is a lot of crap floating around, last I checked XP even in safe mode had 256colors and 800x600 res with practically any video card. I'd call that some pretty amazing generic driver support. Now that people can see what they are doing they may shift their focus to making sure people can connect. I don't know but I do know if enough people complain to Microsoft about it then it will happen. That is exactly what happened with the group policy changes to Vista. A lot of changes to SMS and MOM are driven the same way.Yes, you ARE insane! (Score:5, Insightful)
Keep one thing always in mind: Linux ships with all device drivers. And with no BSODs. People blasted 9x because it was so much more unstable than Linux. Now people blast XP because, if we consider only the "certified" drivers, it has worse support for hardware than Linux. How difficult would it be for Microsoft to have a decent set of updated hardware drivers?
We hear all the time from the Microsoft astroturfers that Linux has poor hardware support. XP is much worse. I once mentioned a particular problem I had, with XP bluescreening when a JVC camcorder was plugged into the USB port. They told me "but that model has no certified driver!". Well, then that model of camcorder is *not* supported by XP. And if the hardware is too old, XP has no drivers for it. I know because I have an old Adaptec PCMCIA SCSI card and a Genius scanner for which I could never find XP drivers.
Now you are saying that if the hardware is very new then XP doesn't have the drivers either. I know that too, because I have a Philips wide screen LCD monitor that I could never get working perfectly in XP, the drivers supplied in the CD aren't recognized by XP. The best I could get was a squashed 1600x1024 resolution, instead of 1680x1050. Should I blame Philips for that? In Linux it took me thirty seconds to get that monitor working perfectly, why is it so hard to get it working in XP?
If it's too old it doesn't work, if it's too new it doesn't work, if it isn't certified it doesn't work... I have a Dell desktop at work, a white box desktop at home, a HP laptop. All of them are dual-boot, XP+Ubuntu. In Ubuntu all the hardware I have works perfectly, with only one exception, an HP 3570c scanner which only works in some modes. Everything else, including the Adaptec SCSI card, the Genius scanner, the Philips monitor, and the JVC camcorder work perfectly in Linux, but not at all or with BSODs in XP.
Let me get this straight (Score:3, Informative)
This is a joke, right? So your NIC (the make/model of which you conveniently neglected to mention) doesn't have an inbox driver in XPSp2, and the conclusion is that Microsoft makes no effort to supply inbox drivers?
There are tons of generic class drivers inbox in Windows. In fact, I challenge you to name one that is missing that is available in, say, OS X. I'll be waiting.
Microsoft does not redistribute vendor
Re:Article Summary (Score:5, Funny)
No problem. Simply map a network drive to the.....
Re:Article Summary (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is that Windows XP shipped 5 years ago.
That's the problem, right there. Microsoft's operating system doesn't contain that many drivers, but that's because a new version hasn't come out for five years - but hang on, isn't that Microsoft's fault too?
If you walk to work and arrive two or three hours late, would your boss accept that you can't be bothered to drive a car, or aren't too fond of public transport? No, you'd get in trouble for it, and any excuses you make would be ignored.
Windows Vista is coming out four or five years late, and (to use my awful analogy even more) isn't even trying to run. Linux is throwing stuff at it from the top of the bus.
You can't complain that the rest of the world is moving too fast when you're the one being slow.
Re:Article Summary (Score:3, Informative)
I've had this happen with Linux too involving Osprey 230 cards. 64bit drivers still aren't available. Should I blame Novell for this? I don't think so since that is the vendors fault. Microsoft pretty clearly makes an effort to give you as many drivers needed to get your system up and ru
Re:Article Summary (Score:3, Interesting)
In other words, I don't think you can give the clear advantage to Linux here.
Re:Article Summary (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
No problem here... (Score:3, Interesting)
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!
Funny this should come up at this time.
I was able to get a -great- deal on a ThinkPad just last week (R50e - $600). I took a Knoppix CD with me to the stor
Same Experience with Ubuntu and my Winbook (Score:3, Insightful)
After my first boot, I plugged in my WEP key, and I was off to the races. Seriously, that's all I had to configure - everything other piece of hardware worked right out of the box - off a 750MB CD no less. Vista comes on a DVD, with enough room for ever
Re:No problem here... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Article Summary (Score:5, Interesting)
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)
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)
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.
Re:Article Summary (Score:5, Insightful)
Laptops with their more specialized hardware (albeit there are fewer options to deal with) are mostly reliant on the laptop vendors for driver support, and I can tell you this: the vendors don't much care at this point about the upgrade path when Vista is still in beta. Even when it is released, current laptops may be difficult to install and support due to vendor disinterest. After all, they'd rather sell you a brand new machine with Vista preinstalled.
Still this author tends to echo the senitment of most computer users nowadays. People tend to dislike Linux and think it is hard to use because it is hard to install. Meanwhile, said users have never had to trudge through a Windows install from scratch themselves (Or they have only had to use restore CD's). Whenever they first have to they realize it's not particularly easy either. The only OS that really is easy to install in my experience has been the Mac OS, and the primary reason for this is because the OS vendor is the hardware vendor and they know ahead of the install exactly what hardware is in the machine. I personally think that people trying and failing to upgrade to Vista will switch a lot of people over to macs, but it also will simply cause a lot of people to throw away that $350 computer and just buy a new one instead.
Re:Article Summary (Score:3, Insightful)
You can, but getting a standardized desktop is a lot easier. An Asus NForce board with a NVidia video card, SATA HDDs, and an IDE DVD Writer will pretty much run anything you throw at it. Part of this is because it's a highly common configuration. The other part of it is that nearly all the hardware uses standardized interfaces that will work with most gener
Re:Article Summary (Score:5, Insightful)
Ahhhhh, it's a "business class" computer we should be using now.
Is Vista a business OS?
What I see is a bunch of narrowing down of what the definition of a computer is ... to compensate for a possible lackluster showing of the Beta.
"Oh this isn't a computer, oh that isn't a computer, you'd have to be crazy to run the OS on this or that, etc, etc"
I mean, come on guys. We can redfine what a computer is down to very specific parts and even lot numbers of parts.
If the Beta is meant to run on a very specifically configured machine, then MS should clearly state as much so that people who are reviewing the product don't waste their time.
Your idea of a computer, and someone else's idea of a computer may be completely different.
And since laptop sales are currently outpacing desktop sales, the likelihood of Jane Soccermom considering her computer a "real" computer is more likely then her saying "No! That review is invalid because it wasn't run on a business class computer!!".
If you need a specific test on specific hardware disseminated to the publi as a whole (including almost every AOL users), don't send it to a mainstream outlet like MSNBC to report their findings.
And the reviewer said that Microsoft support helped him. Why didn't Microsoft tell him to abort the installation on a laptop, and obtain a "business class desktop" on which to test the installation?
It's beta, but it's not pre-Alpha.
Beta means that it's almost ready to ship, but that not enough people have had their hands on it to truly iron out all the bugs.
A Beta (or near beta) OS should work on most consumer computer hardware, of which laptops now make up the majority.
Re:Article Summary (Score:3, Informative)
Alpha: Nearly feature complete. Technology preview. Bugs prevelant. Deviations from spec are to be expected.
Beta: Feature complete. All deviations from spec are bugs.
RC: No known bugs. Complete product, may release this build with no changes.
If MS releases a beta, it is to be assumed that this version is *FEATURE COMPLETE*. If it is missing a feature, then that feature will not be in the final product. There may be
Re:Article Summary (Score:5, Funny)
Please don't rub it in.
I've been using this computer without a video card or monitor for a solid year now and I'm a little sensitive about it.
Re:Maybe he should insatall Linux (Score:4, Insightful)
Nothing to see here, move along.
Re:Maybe he should insatall Linux (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Article Summary (Score:3, Interesting)
I am not sure what you are talking about. I am on a Windows XP Pro system right now. It works just fine. "Love" is a strong word, but I like it just fine.
It is not a good way of supporting your system. If there is ONE SYSTEM you should not test a beta operating system is a LAPTOP. Especially new laptops which everything is done via software, e.g. giant drivers.
Then what specific configuration do you thing someone should test a bet
However! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Article Summary (Score:3, Insightful)
Nope, I'm right there with you. See also the silliness of the BusinessWeek article from a few weeks ago where the reviewer chooses a laptop based on its the
Re:Article Summary (Score:3, Interesting)
Slashdot headline: Vista Beta 2 has Major Problems
Slashdot summary: for me [it] was one of the worst operating system experiences that I've ever encountered.
Actual article headline: Windows Vista Beta 2: The key word is 'Beta'
Actual article text taken out of context: Installing Vista Beta 2, for me was one of the worst operating system experiences that I've ever encountered.
P.S. note to "journalis
Re:Article Summary (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually this is a VERY GOOD TEST.
Many people are going to upgrade from XP to Vista and a lot of those people have notebooks.
It is hard to install is a killer and one of the things that is often used to complain about Linux.
Even with a desktop would he find the driver for the NIC? What about the video card? Suppose he got one of the new nVidia all in one motherboards with integrated video, audio, nic, and SATA?
I can tell you that when we installed Vista on our test machine we had a lot driver issues.
Our test machine was pretty standard. Gigabyte motherboard with an nVidia chipset and an nVidia graphics card. Your basic build it your self machine and it took days to get it working.
Maybe Microsoft needs to put ISOs of Windows in the internet so you download the latest version and install it with your old product code?
Re:Article Summary (Score:3, Insightful)
WTF? An OS installation from restore CDs? Can you tell me where to get vista restore CDs? (or linux ones for that matter?)
Who said he was supposed to use a restore CD for Vista? I said that laptops have so much custom hardware that it's a Bad Idea to do an OS install from anything but a restore CD. Since there's no install CD for Vista, he probably shouldn't have been trying to install on his laptop. Clear?
The success of a new operating system depends at least in
Re:Article Summary (Score:3, Insightful)
Ha ha.
Re:Article Summary (Score:3, Insightful)
I think that is his point; there ARE none yet, so of course all those custom drivers that the laptop makers put do not yet exist for Vista.
The success of a new operating system depends at least in part on how easy it is to install.
True, but do you really expect MS to make drivers for EVERY device out there, even those that seem to require custom drivers? Some devices you simply MUST get
Re:Security To Sector 7G! (Score:4, Interesting)
Naturally, hardware certification will be available, but at a hefty price.
thus forcing all non-certified hardware ... (Score:3, Funny)
See, Microsoft isn't really evil after all!
Re:Article Summary (Score:3, Informative)
The bigger issue with Vista is that the beta versions I've tried (my Vista Beta 2 file transfer manager has been stuck at 0% for two days now) is that it doesn't allow the installation of unsi
Maybe Not So Fair? (Score:3, Insightful)
Secondly, as Mr. Krakow points out, it's a Beta. Do we all know the concept of that word? It's still being tested. Ironically, he loves the operating system but his main gripe seems to be ill-supported hardware drivers. Laptops are notorious for having odds n' ends hardware in them as everyone thinks their proprietary integrated devices are the best but oddly stop supporting them after that model is done selling.
Ever installed Linux in a laptop? I think you'll find that the scavenger hunt for drivers is similar to what Gary experienced. It's a bit of a pain in the ass but a big payout at the end. Give Vista the year or two and when it's released, I'm pretty certain companies will start updating their drivers to be "Vista ready." Is this Microsoft's fault? Possibly for not making certain the early Beta versions were universal and adaptive to different hardware but I don't know enough about drivers to speculate any further.
The points he makes about the actual Vista operating system sound optimistic. In fact, I didn't hear him complain at all about the functioning aspects and features.
All in all, this review was a waste of my time to read. The man spent all his time bitching about his laptop/driver problems and no time at all on analyzing what the operating system has to offer.
Perhaps the next time he reviews Lenovo Laptops [msn.com] and raves about them, he'll actually check if their drivers are supporting all operating systems. I don't know if you can depend on IBM to support their old laptops or expect the new makers of Lenovo to support the old hardware. Hell, even my Dell laptop has some obscure sound and wireless card models which are painful to find the right drivers for.
I don't want to spout conspiracies but I think that Mr. Krakow favors the "almighty Apple" over "evil Microsoft." You can read his other [msn.com] reviews [msn.com] which may be a bit biased [msn.com]. That last one is really pro-iTunes. I guess what I'm trying to say is that this man may be a tad biased
Re:Maybe Not So Fair? (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Maybe Not So Fair? (Score:5, Informative)
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?
Re:Maybe Not So Fair? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Maybe Not So Fair? (Score:4, Insightful)
Yep!
I think you'll find that the scavenger hunt for drivers is similar to what Gary experienced.
Nope! [ubuntu.com]
As a matter of fact I installed it on two laptops recently. A (now more or less) brandspanking new Samsung X50 and on a fairly ancient Dell C600. Except for a few very minor quirks (specifically suspend to disk) both work like a charm; this includes the widescreen at its designated resolution and WLAN.
As a matter of fact, while I spent an entire afternoon installing W2K on the Dell (drivers, reboot, loads of hotfixes, reboots, newer version of software, reboot, hotfix for the new version, etcetc...), Ubuntu took less then an hour in order to be installed and fully updated.
I'm not claiming that Microsoft sux and Linux rox, but in this specific case installing Windows was definitely a pain in the butt as compared to Ubuntu.
Re:Maybe Not So Fair? I disagree! (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes... yes I have. Quite a few times actually. And you know what? Over the years the install process has gotten easier and easier. On my current laptop I am now running Ubuntu Dapper which is still Beta. Everything just works out of the box, including built-in wireless with WPA. My last laptop ran Fedora then Gentoo, and once again everything just worked.
I do not know of these mythical driver problems you speak of. I think you will find installing Windows these days is more of a pain in the ass than installing Linux. I see our desktop/network guys at work re-install windows from time to time, and I always chuckle about the nastiness of a windows install... and thats with *non* Beta versions. I showed one of the guys a Ubuntu install, and he just about pee'd his pants at how easy it was!
Re:Maybe Not So Fair? (Score:3, Insightful)
I take it that you don't [gmail.com] work [froogle.com] for [google.com] google [google.com]? As far as all the linked services go, I don't ever seem to have your typical "beta problems" like crashing every 10 minutes. My point? Beta depends on who you talk to and the "concept" no longer means what it used to mean. Especially as google extends its grasp on the world.
How much software of today is "beta"? Why spend developer time debugging when you can make your clien
Re:Maybe Not So Fair? (Score:4, Funny)
That's because Gamma [flickr.com] is the new Beta.
Me? I'm hanging on for Vista Omega.
Re:Maybe Not So Fair? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Maybe Not So Fair? (Score:2)
drivers you needed on a laptop weren't stable enough to be included in the official
kernel and so you ended up using experimental patches downloaded from project
websites in order to try to use the weird hardware found in new laptops.
Except for Broadcom wireless chipsets (which I understand will be supported by
a reverse-engineered driver in 2.6.17) it's been 3 or 4 years since I've
had problems with needed drivers not being in t
"But aside from that, Mrs. Lincoln..." (Score:2, Funny)
Re:"But aside from that, Mrs. Lincoln..." (Score:5, Funny)
It took me days to install a working version...
Asking how the rest went is like asking Mrs. Lincoln how she liked the play.
Audio problems on thinkpad? (Score:5, Funny)
That's because the audio is reserved for spying on the US military (and wireless to transmit the data back to China!)
Levono (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Levono (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Levono (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Levono (Score:4, Funny)
http://www.anuslaptops.com/ [anuslaptops.com]
Though I hear actually ordering one can be rather difficult:
http://www.thescambaiter.com/forum/showthread.php? t=109&page=39&pp=25 [thescambaiter.com]
Dumb article (Score:4, Insightful)
Grr (Score:5, Funny)
You know, if there's one thing I loathe more than intrusive
CONTINUED ON PAGE 2
OS X...? (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Re:OS X...? (Score:3, Insightful)
Keep in mind that it is Microsoft that likes to push "innovation" as something unique to Microsoft's environment. They use the term to induce fear of Ope
Re:OS X...? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:OS X...? (Score:3, Informative)
Windows Presentation Foundation
A high level API for managing documents, UI, databases. Appears to be tied together using any
Windows Communication Foundation
Also high level, this time for making services that interact with each other.
Windows Workflow Foundation
Messaging and collaboration API.
3D Video engine
(couldn't find this one easily on ms site)
BitLocker
Hard drive encryption.
SuperFetch
Pre-loading / pre-caching of often use
Worst OS experience ever? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Worst OS experience ever? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Worst OS experience ever? (Score:3, Funny)
You forgot ME (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:You forgot ME (Score:3, Interesting)
Well it IS a beta. (Score:2, Troll)
Beta was released yesterday... (Score:5, Interesting)
I am not suprised it took him time until the drivers were available.
I love the smugness (Score:2, Funny)
Because you bombed three installations previously?
Re:I love the smugness (Score:2)
Beta != Beta (Score:5, Funny)
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.
Definition of "Beta" (Score:3, Interesting)
Here's how I interpret these stages:
Pre-alpha, nightly build, etc: We're not even sure what we're doing.
Alpha: Can be made to run, sometimes, at least enough to demonstrate that the software could concievably work.
Beta: Feature-freeze. Should be feature-complete, should mostly work. Usually, this means, works for the developers.
Release Candidate: No one who's testing it
A number of "familiar" features... (Score:4, Informative)
Beta 2 is a good looking operating system with a number of new features, which will be familiar to you if you've played with recent versions of Apple's OS X.
Or, in other words, features that were lifted/copied/etc. from OS X. It looks a lot like certain Linux desktops I've seen with all those sidebar applets... can't imagine what kinda hardware spec you'd really need to keep all that crap running. Can you even imagine what "sidebar" spyware will do to systems? Probably inescapable installs of pole dancers and casino crap... I rue the day!
Hardware problems (Score:5, Insightful)
Ballmer expects more Vista delays (Score:4, Insightful)
When the two cheifs can't even agree, at least in PUBLIC, it doesn't bode well for the rest of the project.
Now where did I put that OS X brochure?...
Beta version of software has problems... (Score:5, Funny)
YAY! (Score:5, Funny)
Yay! For the first time Linux is more friendly than Windows! *ducks*
Hardware issue (Score:3, Funny)
There was probably a conflict with the Chinese spying hardware built into the laptop.
Just a site note of Ubuntu user... (Score:3, Insightful)
Anyway, as IT guy I would say that such driver problems gives OS bad name, so it is rather strange that Microsoft have major problems with it. Maybe it was too early to call it beta.
Re:Just a site note of Ubuntu user... (Score:3, Insightful)
Beta (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually i dont think Microsoft will meet the October deadline if they dont let a lot of bugs slip through their fingers. Doing that would really be to shoot themselves in the foot. The last thing Microsoft needs right now is another Windows Millenium that people just ignore. If most people just hold out until the next version of windows instead it could do a serious blow to Microsofts income.
Knowing the meaning of "beta" (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
~Six Months until go time... (Score:5, Insightful)
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?
Re:~Six Months until go time... (Score:4, Informative)
* 64-bit support
* Aero Taskbar and live taskbar thumbnails
* Automatic Backup and hard-disk defrag
* Backup and Recovery Center and image-based backup and recovery
* BitLocker Drive Encryption and Encrypting File System (EFS)
* ClearType
* Games Explorer and new Windows games
* Internet Explorer 7.0 Anti-Phishing, tabs, quick tabs, integrated search, "fix my settings", RSS, protected mode
* Internet Information Server
* Network Center
* Network Projection
* Networking capabilities - new TCP/IP stack, diagnostics & troubleshooting, VPN, peer networking
* Power management
* Remote Desktop
* Service hardening
* Setup and installation improvements
* Subsystem for Unix-based Applications
* Sync Center and PC-to-PC sync
* System Search and file tagging
* Themed slide shows
* User Account Control
* Virtual PC Express
* Windows Anytime Upgrade
* Windows Calendar, Collaboration, DVD Maker, Collaboration, Fax and Scan
* Windows Defender
* Windows Easy Transfer
* Windows Explorer shell
* Windows Firewall
* Windows Flip and Windows Flip 3D
* Windows HotStart
* Windows Mail, and Anti-Phishing support
* Windows Media Center, CableCard support, HD support, XBox360 support
* Windows Media Player 11
* Windows Mobility Center
* Windows Movie Maker, and Movie Maker HD
* Windows Photo Gallery
* Windows ReadyBoost
* Windows Rights Management Services (Windows RMS) client
* Windows Security Center
* Windows ShadowCopy
* Windows Sidebar and Gadgets
* Windows SideShow
* Windows SuperFetch
* Windows Tablet PC functionality and touch screens upport
* Windows Ultimate Extras
* Windows Vista Aero, Basic, and Classic user interfaces
* Windows Vista Fonts, Screensavesrs, Sound Schemes
* WinFX
* Wireless networking capabilities
* XPS document support
And this list doesn't touch on things that are 'internal', like more efficient memory allocation, rewritten kernel, moving of drivers to user level, removal of several required-reboot scenereos, more efficient multi-tasking, etc. You may not care about all of these things, but the sum-total does seem to be a realtively compelling package, providing they don't totally screw it up (and it looks so far like they've totally screwed up the "User Account Control" aspect, but it's possible they'll fix that before release). It's also true that some of these features will be made available to run on existing XP (like IE7, WMP11, and even the Side-bar). But all of those items will have enhanced functionality on Vista. With any luck, the security of the 'default installation' will be significantly better as well, which will also be a good thing. ANY improvement on that will be a good thing.
Re:~Six Months until go time... (Score:3, Funny)
Thank god it's only half an hour of those and you don't have to see them again...
3 Year old Dell laptop (Score:3, Informative)
Awww, look at the youngster (Score:5, Funny)
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
Re:Awww, look at the youngster (Score:4, Informative)
Yes, that lp package error message "printer on fire" esixts because that actually used to happen.
Proof Positive... (Score:3, Insightful)
OMFG (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:OMFG (Score:3, Interesting)
For me as IT guy seeing that Microsoft newest operational system beta can't handle such things is nor surprise, nor also any indication that Vista will be "final solution" for Microsoft
Microsoft Lingo (Score:4, Funny)
The problem is "beta" (Score:4, Funny)
This summary and selective quoting (Score:4, Informative)
He wasn't.
The FULL sentence from whence this quote was lifted reads (with my added emphasis):
"Installing Vista Beta 2, for me was one of the worst operating system experiences that I've ever encountered."
Awkward grammar aside, the author is talking about the installation and configuration experience, NOT Windows Vista as an overall OS experience.
I like to bash M$ as much as the next guy, have a mixed network of Windows and non-Windows systems at home, yadda yadda yadda,
The real reason for the story (Score:4, Interesting)
Microsoft was interested in releasing this pre-Beta 2 (call it Beta 1.5) to this particular writer because doing so hypes the product and starts geting people talking about it 6 to 9 months before the OS is released. This is typical of the Microsoft PR Engine.
Additionally, the writer's comment that Vista "... is a good looking operating system with a number of new features, which will be familiar to you if you've played with recent versions of Apple's OS X." is designed to try to stop Windows users from switching to Apple's hardware and operating system due to Mac-Envy. Read it like this: "Just wait until Vista comes out and you'll get all of the things the Mac Fanboys have been chortling about on their operating system."
The instalation headaches are a pretty good way of decreasing expectations; it's kind of like how the US government will lower expectations for a conference by saying things like "the two sides are nowhere near an agreement." Read this like: "You'll get close to 60% of the ease of use and function the Mac Fanboys have been chortling about on their operating system."
The author works for MSNBC and you'd better believe that the cable channel will present a report from him as if it were "news" and it will show lots of images of the operating system running correctly on his computer (or on a specially-provided one from Microsoft). This should be seen as: "Just look at all of the coolness of Vista, like the Mac Fanboys have been chortling about on their operating system."
I should mention that I did a lot of work for Microsoft in years past and was involved in the promotion of the release of a not-very insignificant operating system release, called "Windows 95" (some here are young enough to remember back then). Microsoft released hundreds of tapes (or edited promo packages via satellite) to "news" outfits to run on their "news" programs. These consisted of video news releases (promotion masquerading as a real news story), clip reels that show everything from manufacturing to how it works (to provide the stations with something to air while they talk about it so that they'd run stories -- or free advertising -- about the new exciting Microsoft product) and answers to "interview" questions from Microsoft executives and project leaders so that they could be used as soundbites within station "news" stories. Microsoft is presently preparing to flood the airways and the press with information about their new operating system in a campaign to get users to not switch to other operating systems and to prepare to buy the Vista upgrade.
Executives are, even now, sallying forth from Microsoft to "do the circuit" of Technology talk shows as the hype engine prepares to swing into gear. I would imagine that Vista will get the same treatment in "roll out" hype as did Windows 95.
I should also mention that the release version of Microsoft Windows 95 convinced me that I ought to switch to Apple's operating system. I installed it on my personal computer and it proceeded to wipe out all data on two 512M hard drives (that would be the one it was being installed on as well as the other one on which it was not being installed. I reasoned, at the time, that if I was going to need to completely upgrade my way of working with an operating system, I ought to switch to something that did not tend to destroy data. Thankfully, I did have a tape backup of both drives.
Windows just not "there" yet (Score:5, Funny)
BWAHAHAHAHA! I've been waiting for a chance to use that line for years. ;)