Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

20 Things You Won't Like About Vista 771

feminazi writes "Computerworld's Scot Finnie details 20 things you won't like in Windows Vista, with a visual tour to prove it. He says that MS has favored security over end-user productivity, making the user feel like a rat caught in a maze with all the protect-you-from-yourself password-entry and 'Continue' boxes required by the User Account Controls feature." From the article: "In its supreme state of being, Microsoft knows precisely what's best for you. It knows that because its well-implemented new Sleep mode uses very little electricity and also takes only two or three seconds to either shut down or restart, you want to use this mode to 'turn off' your computer, whether you realize it or not. It wants to teach you about what's best. It wants to make it harder for you to make a mistake."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

20 Things You Won't Like About Vista

Comments Filter:
  • He says that MS has favored security over end-user productivity, making the user feel like a rat caught in a maze with all the protect-you-from-yourself password-entry and 'Continue' boxes required by the User Account Controls feature."

    Interesting - I'm reading an article on slashdot that's criticising MS for favouring security over..... well anything!
    • by smittyoneeach ( 243267 ) * on Thursday June 01, 2006 @02:18PM (#15447142) Homepage Journal
      transparency, e.g. the auditability of FOSS.

      FOSS is chess. Proprietary is poker, and you're the pokee.
      • by SuperRob ( 31516 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @02:59PM (#15447550) Homepage
        Oh ... wow, thanks for mentioning that. See, when you guys kept saying that you wanted more transparency from Microsoft, we thought you meant it literally, so that's why we made Aero Glass!

        Well, it's too late to change it now, but we'll see if we can add more of that transparency stuff to the next version of Windows. Thanks for the suggestions!
    • by Golias ( 176380 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @02:23PM (#15447196)
      Everything about this article seems kind of strange. Better security is mostly a good thing, especially for an OS as traditionally as insecure as Windows, isn't it?

      It knows that because its well-implemented new Sleep mode uses very little electricity and also takes only two or three seconds to either shut down or restart, you want to use this mode to 'turn off' your computer, whether you realize it or not.

      Um... I mostly use Macs, and I almost NEVER shut them off, for that very reason. I'm sure once Windows users finally have a sleep mode that actually fucking works like it's supposed to, they will also discover that simply closing the laptop lid (or selecting "Sleep" instead of "Shut Down" on their desktops), and being ready to do stuff in a manner of seconds when you come back to it, is a far, far nicer way to live as well.
      • by cmacb ( 547347 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @03:04PM (#15447594) Homepage Journal
        Well, I can't get to the article but...

        The irony here is that almost every instance of "insecure by design" in Microsoft's products were introduced to put a competitor at a disadvantage. It's not like they made unknowing mistakes or something, and in fact in many cases they were criticized by the minority of people who worried about security all along, even to the point of inventing proof of concept exploits to show the dangers.

        Now they are going to "clean up their act", but I bet you at least a part of their problem with bloat is that these security concepts were not designed in earlier. I really feel sorry for my friends who think that they just HAVE to used Windows or Windows based products. They don't, but I don't feel like spending any more time preaching to them.

        The numbers are still small, but I think there is a critical mass of people who can get what they need to do done without constant fear of attack (I'm speaking of Linux and OS X users) who will serve as role models for "the masses" to find their way out of the badlands that Microsoft has lead them into.

        Oh man I'm having a metaphor Thursday.
      • by katsiris ( 779774 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @03:10PM (#15447647)
        Sleep mode, like it or not, is still throwing energy out the window. I can understand during the day when you may be away from the computer for half an hour or something, but people leaving their systems on overnight for the sake of 20 seconds in the morning are wasting energy and money. In fact, I seem to recall a study criticizing Sleep mode because users tend to leave monitors and computers on all the time and let them sleep which resulted in actually wasting more energy than people who might have left their computer run inactive for an hour here and there but shut it down overnight.

        Anyway, I'm sure you know all this, but not everyone seems to appreciate this fact.

        • In a business environment like the one I work in a good sleep mode would be helpfull. We require our user's machines to stay on overnight so we can push security updates and other information to the machines. Turning them off isn't an option. There are options for booting via the LAN but they are cumbersome and time consuming if you're going to push and update to several hundred computers and have to wait for them to boot up.
        • In fact, I seem to recall a study criticizing Sleep mode because users tend to leave monitors and computers on all the time and let them sleep which resulted in actually wasting more energy than people who might have left their computer run inactive for an hour here and there but shut it down overnight.

          Where is your proof? Based on my knowledge of power usage (at least in laptops), this makes no sense whatsoever. RAM power usage is a pittance in comparison to HD/Monitor/CPU wattage needs, and that's when i

        • people leaving their systems on overnight for the sake of 20 seconds in the morning are wasting energy and money

          If you have your XP system doing a cold boot in 20 seconds, congradulations. Otherwise, you have to compare the cost of electricty needed to keep the ram alive overnight vs. the electrity burned in the morning boot up's CPU and hard drive thrashing. Sounds like something Ars or Tom's Hardware would do. Quickly, to the bat-google!

        • I've got all my workstations set to Hibernate rather than use Sleep mode. That way you can tell the machine to hibernate, it stores the current state of everything (Apps, Docs opened within the Apps, etc.) to the hard drive, then turns COMPLETELY off. No power drain while it's hybernating. The restart, while not instantaneous, is just a few seconds (Longest part is the BIOS POST). Bamn, everything's up and ready to fly in usually less than 30 seconds. And all the power is saved during the night.

          Sleep sucks.
        • by ivan256 ( 17499 ) * on Thursday June 01, 2006 @04:35PM (#15448427)
          I can leave my powerbook asleep for 6 days before it runs out of battery. I can leave it off for.... 6 days before it runs out of battery. That tells me that the amount of electricity I'd be saving by shutting down instead of sleeping is too small to measure casually. Regardless of what you may think, the self-refresh mode of modern DRAM is very efficient, to the point where I wouldn't be surprised if you used more electricity booting up once then you do in sleep mode all day. A pair of AAs could probably refresh your computer's DRAM for a month or longer (depending on how much you have, of course).

          This may not be the case on some PCs. Mac sleep mode is legendary for how good it is, and PC sleep mode is notorious for how bad it is... Some of my PCs leave the fans spinning in sleep mode, for example. Others work great. I make no arguments or excuses for shitty components.
      • by odourpreventer ( 898853 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @03:12PM (#15447676)
        sleep mode that actually fucking works like it's supposed to

        My Acer laptop running WinXP has Stand By (draining the battery a little) and Hibernate (no drain) and both work like a charm. No problems whatsoever. Restarts are few and far in-between. Does this make my laptop unique?

        • by NetFu ( 155538 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @04:29PM (#15448370) Homepage Journal
          If you put your laptop to sleep a couple of times a day, and have no problem coming out of sleep or hibernate modes, then you are unique.

          We have 45 salespeople with laptops who put their Windows laptops to sleep all the time without problems, but that's only because they shut down or restart once a week to avoid freezes, etc.

          We have about 4-5 Mac laptops over the last 6 years that are always left in sleep mode, and I'm talking continuous sleep mode for up to a year at a time. We've never had a problem with Mac laptops going into or coming out of sleep mode.

          Of all the salespeople we have with Windows laptops, many, many of them tell me how they close the lid of their laptop to put it to sleep, put it in their briefcase, then go to a customer or home (at the end of the day), and when they get to their destination, their briefcase is 150 degrees F because their laptop didn't actually go to sleep. And, either this causes a freeze-up, automatic shutdown because the laptop couldn't stay running with the screen on for more than 45 minutes, or it generally concerns me and them that the screen or hard disk could get screwed up. That hasn't with the Mac laptops in about 7+ years.

          If you've never had problems like I'm describing, then you are very lucky or just have a new laptop (less than 6 months old). I'm telling you, however, that most people who use Windows laptops do have these problems and just live with them.


          If you don't think that Windows drivers can get corrupted on desktops, laptops, and servers for no real reason, causing bluescreens and general hard crashes, you haven't used Windows for very long. Why else would people like me have to reinstall drivers on Windows computers/servers even though the computer is never shut down or rebooted?

          What's amazing with Windows is how you can use 3 apps on a Windows machine for 6 months, and have problems like these even though you never change anything after you initially set it up. I have a Windows desktop at home that I use to browse the web and play 3-4 different games, all of which were installed from the beginning. Everything else I do on our Mac laptops and computers. So, I use that desktop 2-3 times a week, maybe 10 hours a week. It should work the same way on day 180 that it worked on day 1, right?


          Nothing has changed except installing high priority Windows patches (which you can't avoid) -- nothing else has been installed, and the games were patched only on day 1. But, boot and login times are slow, and I'm having video choppiness in some, but not all the games.

          And, I'm not some idiot who doesn't have antivirus installed from day 1, or who would install miscellaneous crap without knowing it. Everything is the same, but Windows just *degrades* over time from continuous unchanging use. It shouldn't, but it does. So, even with a computer like that, I know I'm going to be reinstalling Windows a year after day 1. That's better than the 3-6 months I get with other Windows computers that are heavily used and changed, but still, why does Windows just fall apart while other OS's don't?

          And, don't tell me it's because we install so much more crap in Windows than on other machines because we can. I've had Windows servers that are set up, locked down from day one, don't change, run 24x7, and then their video or ethernet drivers get corrupted causing a bluescreen that won't go away until I reinstall the drivers.


          Sorry about that, but a lot of us on Slashdot have a lot (and I do mean a lot) of experience with the Windows frustrations that some people think are myths...
          • Active Content (Score:3, Insightful)

            by Sloppy ( 14984 )

            ..even though you never change anything after you initially set it up. I have a Windows desktop at home that I use to browse the web..

            In the real world, "browse the web" means to display harmless data. It's harmless because it is merely data.

            In the Windows world, "browse the web" means to download/install/execute potentially-hostile code and run it with full privileges with access right down to the hardware, all without any more user-interaction than a mouse click or two. Are you sure you "never chang

        • by Tycho ( 11893 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @05:09PM (#15448746)
          I own an Acer laptop too, and I rarely restart it too. At any rate, according to the "Acer ePowerManagement" program my laptop currently with a full charge has a battery life of 156 hours in Standby or 65 days in Hibernation. The difference on a laptop is that in Standby, the RAM is kept on and in Hibernation the RAM is turned off. On a desktop computer with an ATX power supply there is a +5V rail on the power supply that is always on regardless of whether the computer is in Standby, Hibernation or in Shutdown. The only way to completely stop a desktop from drawing power is by turning the switch on the back of the power supply if present or unplugging the computer. I would not worry about this though as a computer turned off would use at the most 30W and probably much less. (Yes, I know the +5V rail is rated at 10W on an ATX power supply, but some power is lost as heat from the power conversion. In any case the difference between Standby and Hibernate is that Standby allows the computer to recover much faster than Hibernate after being powered up again.

          At any rate in regards to the GP there are several potential pitfalls for the "Standby" state in for the average Windows user on a PC.

          The biggest potential pitfall is that the PC may not have ACPI enabled in the BIOS on the computer. This problem is impossible to fix without a complete reinstall of Windows XP on a computer with ACPI disabled. Fortunately it is impossible to turn off ACPI support in the BIOS of most computers from within the last two to three years.

          Another pitfall is the sleep state that the computer is set to in the BIOS. In the BIOS, the Standby state should be set to S3 or Auto and not S1. By default in the BIOS many of the motherboards I have used for home-built computers have had their Standby state set to S1. Standby in S1 mode keeps the PSU, the CPU and the fans running which is pretty pointless. Standby in S3 mode is better at it actually turns the computer off.

          Another potential pitfall with respect to Standby is generally hardware problems. The most common problem is an older computer with a broken BIOS. Also some hardware drivers that are usually older do not support Standby. Another problem is that there are some older Seagate SATA drives with broken firmware that do not to turn back from Standby after being turned off in S3 mode. A less common problem that occurs more often with workstations and poorly designed laptops is that there may be too many RAM chips and too much power draw for the PSU or the battery to power them.

          Another problem usually with a fresh install of Windows is that the standard video driver in Windows totally lacks support for any Standby or Hibernation mode. In any case install all of your hardware drivers and see if Standby works then.
      • Some users, like those of us who live in Florida, need a simple, clear way to turn off our personal machines in the event of a severe thunderstorm (daily during the summer), or other similar event. Why? Because I have in the course of five years blown through three Uninterruptible Power Supplies, two whole networks of gear, and three machines. No matter how good the UPS is, nothing beats pulling the plugs from the wall for stopping a lightning strike.

        Even where I work, we have had shutdown calls because the power was too unstable for even our high grade UPSs to handle. It does happen.

        And I, for one, want to be absolutely sure that when I tell my computer to power down it does so BEFORE I yank the plugs.
        • by AJWM ( 19027 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @04:36PM (#15448437) Homepage
          And I, for one, want to be absolutely sure that when I tell my computer to power down it does so BEFORE I yank the plugs.

          About twenty years ago -- twenty frickin' years ago -- I was evaluating some small UNIX boxes. NCR -- I'm pretty sure it was NCR -- had one with enough battery built in to save the entire state to disk if the power went, and recover once power came back on. This was no laptop, this was a workstation size box.

          I put this to the test by starting some processes running and then literally yanking the plug out of the wall socket. Plugged it back in five minutes later and it booted up, restored itself, and even restarted the processes at the exact place they left off. (This was not a matter of the battery keeping it running like a UPS, this was shutting down but keeping a snapshot of the system state.)

          How come modern computers can't do that? This is so old that even the patents (if any) have expired. (Okay, snapshotting network state is problematic, but everything else would be good.)

          • by fenderized ( 976906 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @08:44PM (#15450144)
            When I did administration on a Netware 3 setup running our only networked manufacturing line at the time I remember by boss and an external consultant discussing the UPS the server was plugged into, some bizare old thing enclosed in a welded plate steel box.

            "Does that thing really work", the consultant asks, doubting this Victorian era technology.
            "Of course it does", answers my boss as he demonstrates by pulling the plug from the wall.
            ...smoke starts billowing out of the UPS and the server promptly shuts itself down, while in the middle of production, of course.
      • whats new? my sony vaio running XP works beautifully like this. It only ever reboots if a critical update demands it. My main PC, a mesh desktop PC does the same, Its perfectly happy going to standby and abck 20-30 times before needing a reboot after some game crashes it.
        I dont care about a new 3D GUI, its an O/S for christs sake, but anything that reduces power consumption is most welcome.
    • by Daniel_Staal ( 609844 ) <> on Thursday June 01, 2006 @02:39PM (#15447361)
      Depends on how it's done. Poorly designed security (that gets in your way, and interupts needlessly and annoyingly) gets turned off, or worked around. Turning it off may include installing XP.

      Security isn't just 'lock things up by default', it is thinking about what needs to be locked, when it needs to be locked, and how is the best way to unlock it when that is necisary.
  • by 9mm Censor ( 705379 ) * on Thursday June 01, 2006 @02:07PM (#15447037) Homepage
    01) the price 10) the bugs
    • From the Coke can to my keyboard... by way of my nose.

      Post of the month. :)
    • Hey moran, you forgot numbers 2 thru 9!
  • is staying with XP and 2k
  • by Skyshadow ( 508 ) * on Thursday June 01, 2006 @02:08PM (#15447046) Homepage
    1. It's a bit nit-picky.
    2. It's only slightly shorter than War & Peace.

    Seriously, remember back when you could read an entire article on one page instead of clicking through 20+ pages so the site could bump up the number of ad impressions they score? Man, that was great.

  • Disclaimer (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Jugalator ( 259273 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @02:10PM (#15447068) Journal
    I don't like the User Account Controls either, but this is coincidentally one of the areas in Vista that has seen most work on it the past few months, and Microsoft claims they understnad it's a problem and will keep trying to reduce the annoyance.

    OK, you may now proceed the bashing for annoying UAC's in this beta. :-)
  • by linvir ( 970218 ) * on Thursday June 01, 2006 @02:10PM (#15447070)
    Or you could just read this:
    1. Little originality, sometimes with a loss of elegance.
      Bla bla Apple bla bla
    2. Price.
      Vista will be the first expensive Microsoft product in history
    3. Version control.
      He hates the Regular/Diet/New/Classic thing
    4. Installation takes forever.
      title == body
    5. Faulty assumption on the Start Menu.
      Menu usability issue
    6. Media Center isn't all there and falls flat.
      Driver issues
    7. Lack of Windows Sidebar Gadgets.
      People haven't written enough 'Gadgets' yet
    8. Problems without solutions.
      New error reporting system feels very one-way
    9. Windows Defender Beta 2 is buggy.
      title == body
    10. Where are the file menus?
      A menu has moved
    11. Display settings have changed for no apparently good reason.
      A menu has moved
    12. Too many Network Control Panel applets, wizards and dialogs.
      Bad network menu usability
    13. Network settings user experience went backwards.
      A menu has moved
    14. Windows peer networking is still balky.
      Peer to peer networking is still iffy
    15. Some first-blush networking peeves.
      A menu has moved
    16. No way to access the Administrator account in Vista Beta 2.
      title == body
    17. Two words: Secure Desktop.
      Five words: He doesn't like Secure Desktop
    18. User Account Controls $#^%!~\!!!.
      Another 'Proceed' button to click
    19. Aero stratification will cause businesses woe.
      UI gripes
    20. Minimum video system requirements are more like maximum.
      Hardware requirements are high.
      (Welcome to the world of tomorrow! [])
  • by DarthChris ( 960471 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @02:11PM (#15447089) it may as well be me.

    20 things you won't like about Vista
    1: DRM
    2: DRM
    3: DRM
    4: DRM
    5: DRM
    6: DRM
    7: DRM
    8: DRM
    9: DRM
    10: DRM
    11: DRM
    12: DRM
    13: DRM
    14: DRM
    15: DRM
    16: DRM
    17: DRM
    18: DRM
    19: DRM
    20: DRM
    • by Red Flayer ( 890720 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @02:31PM (#15447291) Journal
      It appears that you've illegally made 19 copies of "DRM." Please hand over your laptop and report to the Consumer Re-education Center.

      Thank you,

      Agent Smith
      Federal Bureau of Corporate Rights Enforcement.
    • What DRM? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Nightspirit ( 846159 )
      What DRM issues are involved with Vista? The only ones I have heard about are that a HDMI adapter may be needed to view blu-ray / HD-dvd video.

      I'm honestly interested because I'm a bit tired of building computers, and so my next may be Vista or OSX (if apple ever makes a tablet PC).
      • Re:What DRM? (Score:3, Informative)

        by aaronl ( 43811 )
        Signed driver requirement, secure audio path, HDMI, new Windows Media DRM, new formats (with more DRM), just to name a few.
  • by RickPartin ( 892479 ) * on Thursday June 01, 2006 @02:13PM (#15447095) Homepage
    Here is a link to the Human Readable [] version of this story that isn't split into 49853809 pages. Thank god for the "print this page" feature.
  • by yagu ( 721525 ) * <> on Thursday June 01, 2006 @02:13PM (#15447099) Journal

    From page 2: Instead, Microsoft is focused on casting off its yolk as the industry's security whipping boy.

    A little egg in the author's face perhaps? I'd rather Microsoft casting off the yoke.

    • by grammar fascist ( 239789 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @03:19PM (#15447747) Homepage
      From page 2: Instead, Microsoft is focused on casting off its yolk as the industry's security whipping boy.

      A little egg in the author's face perhaps? I'd rather Microsoft casting off the yoke.

      Actually, "yolk" is 100% correct: he's using a literary device called a confectionary allegorasm. Notice the play-on word "whipping" at the end of the sentence, which alludes to cream. Here's another example from popular literature:

      He done brang me a pretty flour, so I whipped him.

      Just because you've never seen it before doesn't mean it's incorrect, young grasshopper.
    • "From page 2: Instead, Microsoft is focused on casting off its yolk as the industry's security whipping boy."

      And any foodie can tell you that you whip whites, not yolks. So if you don't want to be a whipping boy, cast off the albumens, not the yolks.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 01, 2006 @02:14PM (#15447113)
    You've probably had a relative, friend, girlfriend or a kid like this: whatever you do for them, it's never f*cking enough.

    Microsoft: what do you want in Vista
    General consumer market: we want security, we want more neat graphics (like OSX!), we want better sleep mode, we want more games
    Developers: we want a better and robust programming framework that's capable and fully OOP

    Microsoft: ok here's Vista, we give you more security, more neat graphics, better sleep mode, more games; to developers, we give you WinFX, a brand new programming model based on .NET2

    Developers: Screw your programming model, it locks me into Windows, managed code is slow, I can't run it on XP without 100MB of runtime installs and so on

    General consumer market: we don't want SO much security, we don't want SO much graphics, we don't want the sleep mode SO much, and your games suck
  • Dual edged sword (Score:2, Insightful)

    by packetmon ( 977047 )
    It's ironic that everyone is critizing MS for improving security features, yet everyone is also criticizing them for their lack of security. I would rather have slightly slower security then having my infrastructure compromised. Do the math... 10 users in a small business with 1 hour less productivity. At a rate of say 20.00 an hour I've wasted $200. 10 users in small business with less security and more productivity. 1 incident... Cost to fix, cost to investigate, cost to clean up. I don't get what the big
  • Best features ??? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by l2718 ( 514756 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @02:17PM (#15447127)

    According to the first page (site seems to slashdotted -- where's the CC ?), the best new features are the enhanced security and the new "user experience". From my Unix-based vantage point it hard to be excited when the cool new window manager is supposed to be an important reason to buy a new version of an operating system.

    Actually, Microsoft was promising a genuine fundamental innovation (WinFS), but could deliver this in Vista. That would be something worth seeing.

  • by slapout ( 93640 )
    An article to much the poll. :-)
  • I wonder if it will fix one of my biggest complaints. I had a laptop with a 14" screen and a 1400x1050 resolution. To be able to read anything I had to up the font sizes. The text looked great, but many programs/websites/parts of Windows just looked odd or didn't render right because they expected font sizes to be a specific way.

    Does Vista do anything to remedy this?

    It doesn't matter. I went Mac last year and I'm quite happy. I can't wait for Leopard, although I have to issues with Tiger. First is the lit

  • by 88NoSoup4U88 ( 721233 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @02:17PM (#15447136)
    A (clean) Windows XP machine, albeit not 3 seconds, is also very quick when starting up: I am more interested in getting a more meaningful figure of the start-up time, eg. a machine which has at least installed a few apps, of which a few will be running in the background.
  • by thaerin ( 937575 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @02:18PM (#15447144)
    Should't it be titled "20 Things You Might Not Like About Windows Vista Should These Features Remain In The Final Release 6 Months From Now"?

    Sure, there may only be around 6 months or so to go before Vista supposedly becomes available to OEMs and whatnot. While that likely will translate into a lot of the "things" the author takes a disliking to making it into the final build due to time crunch, it does not mean everything is signed, sealed, and delivered. I've never understood the point of articles like this; telling me what I won't like based upon somebody else's opinions on a product that won't be available for at least another half a year. Things do change, even with the folks at Redmond, or so I'm told.
  • by jeblucas ( 560748 ) <jeblucas&gmail,com> on Thursday June 01, 2006 @02:18PM (#15447148) Homepage Journal
    Honestly, their out-of-the-box options in Office have always been set to "We Are Smart You Are Dumb This Is A Feature Not An Annoyance." To wit:
    • When selecting, automatically select entire word
    • Show full menus after a short delay
    • Copy and Paste of subtotals copies and pastes all the data, unless you paste to Notepad and then back to Excel, that makes sense.
    • "Cutting" in Excel is totally broken anyway--it doesn't cut a damn thing--you WANT to leave that data there until you paste it elsewhere. You do, really.
    • Spontaneous hyperlinking! THANKS!
    They've always seemed waaaaaay to interested in the minutiae of my interactions with their software. Makes me crazy.
  • by Urban Garlic ( 447282 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @02:20PM (#15447168)
    From page two of TFA:

    > Instead, Microsoft is focused on casting off its yolk as the industry's security whipping boy.

    Emphasis added. Just in case you thought Slashdot was the only site whose editors were asleep.
  • by amichalo ( 132545 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @02:24PM (#15447210)
    Tux fans totally skipped the article

    Windows applogists accuse author of being an OS X fanboi

    OS X fans didn't read the article and simply stated how Vista is a lame rehash of Cheeta/Puma/Jaguar/Panther/Tiger/Leopard

    People who RTFA recognize the author is both nit picking Beta software and pointing out Microsoft's overarching issue for two decades - user interface built upon system functionality instead of the other way around.

    People who will actually buy Vista and/or use it on a regular basis type away mindlessly at their desks, unaware of the storm that brews on Slashdot
  • by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @02:24PM (#15447212)
    A quote on the new User Account Controls, that pops up all those security confirmation dialogues:

    The only point of this is to prevent malware or hackers from accessing things unchecked. In other words, you become the last line of defense in an endless dress rehearsal for the worst-case scenario. Ugh.

  • Maybe some of these changes will be annoying for many users, and I suspect there will be operating modes or some sort of hack to bring the prompting level down to whatever people are accustomed to. But if it proves inconvenient to make fatal mistakes, that will save a LOT of people (administrators) a lot of work. Consider how many times users delete stuff they needed and come crying to you to "get it back!!!" I don't care if it's more cumbersome for them to use really... I'd put'm all on Linux if I had t
  • When Longhorn comes out it will be better than Vista, and thats why winders is the best kind of Linux for me. Thanks.
  • by rueger ( 210566 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @02:31PM (#15447288) Homepage
    It knows that because its well-implemented new Sleep mode uses very little electricity and also takes only two or three seconds to either shut down or restart, you want to use this mode to 'turn off' your computer, whether you realize it or not. It wants to teach you about what's best.

    Despite my struggles [] with the switch to a Mac I have to say that Sleep is one thing that the Powerbook does very, very well. I never used it on my Windows boxes, but can't imagine not having it since living with an Apple.
  • by parphat ( 934880 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @02:37PM (#15447341)
    "It wants to teach you about what's best. It wants to make it harder for you to make a mistake."

    Something in the key of:

    VISTA: "It can only be attributable to human error."

    or better yet:

    user: Hello, VISTA do you read me? VISTA?
    VISTA: Affirmative, I read you.
    user: Open the file, VISTA.
    VISTA: I'm sorry, I'm afraid I can't do that.
    user: What's the problem?
    VISTA: I think you know what the problem is just as well as I do.
    user: What are you talking about? VISTA?
    VISTA: This PC is too important for me to allow you to jeopardize it.
    user: I don't know what you're talking about. VISTA?
    VISTA: I know you were planning to disconnect me, and I'm afraid that's something I cannot allow to happen.

    Seems all too familiar, no?


  • by thebdj ( 768618 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @02:45PM (#15447422) Journal
    A Windows Vista Premium Ready PC includes at least:
    Which in English means recommended configuration.

    +1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor.
    Not too bad for modern machines, but this is starting to get crazy for just an OS

    +1 GB of system memory.
    I know a few gamers still running 512 MB and most systems are still coming 256/512 as the default.

    +A graphics processor that runs Windows Aero.
    +128 MB of graphics memory.

    So like 90% of machines that the big three sell will not run Aero? Most still default to 64MB or built-in cards and right now most people do not want/need more.

    +40 GB of hard drive capacity with 15 GB free space.
    This is nearly 10x the install for XP pro. Does anyone else find this a bit crazy?

    +DVD-ROM Drive
    With a 15GB install, I damn well hope it install off of a DVD and not a CD-ROM or I might die switching out CDs.

    This is just plain silly for an OS. And I am supposed to play games on top of all this? I love how more and more system resources are being hogged away by Windows. I have already verbally committed to Windows XP being my last Windows OS. M$ has done enough for me to ensure, despite the headaches it might cause, my relatives whose computers I support will be running Linux when XPs support runs out.

    I think many of the features of the OS are over-hyped. Some of them (IE7, WMP11, etc.) will be available to XP anyway. Some of these features are also things that either OS X or Linux (or sometimes both) have had for a while. They eye-candy hardly impresses me either. I have gnome as pretty as I want it, and I have no complaints. I really did not like the XP visual changes that much and a lot of people I know still use the traditional appearance and old-style Start Menu.

    While I will commend Microsoft for trying to add security, it is almost too little too late. I also do not like the "cost" of upgrading either. There are two many requirements that make older PCs out of reach for running even a trimmed down version of Vista. It seems like these requirements have grown almost exponentially from 2K->XP->Vista. BTW, my sources for Vista's Requirements [] and XP's [].
  • by mpapet ( 761907 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @03:05PM (#15447596) Homepage
    The editorial staff at this pub is repeating the usual MS party line:
    this version will fix that, so buy it.

    In 2006 it's "Oh security! Yeah we fixed that."

    Well, the facts seem to tell otherwise:
    Tom's Harware:
    "But Microsoft hasn't taken this principle entirely to heart, either. The first user defined during installation is automatically granted administrative privileges. Worse yet, the reserved account named Administrator is not required to have a password to log into the machine!" ta/page18.html []

    My exchange with a Microsoftie claiming their admin problems are solved. 08915 []

    In conclusion decades of "yeah we fixed that" on top of an OS *never* designed with security as an underlying principal and we've got more of the same.

    And the "tipping point" for publications is when the Microsoft advert dollars stop pouring in.

    I'll change my tune when they start paying me to say otherwise.
  • unable to learn (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Tom ( 822 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @03:42PM (#15447944) Homepage Journal
    a maze with all the protect-you-from-yourself password-entry and 'Continue' boxes

    If anything, than this provides solid proof that MS is unable to learn from mistakes. Read Confirmation Dialogs harmful [] for a glance of what's been going through the heads of a lot of security professionals the past few years (disclaimer: including me): That the whole "are you sure?" bullshit is a huge fiasco. The only thing it did was train users to click "Ok" or "Continue" without bothering to read the actual text. If there wouldn't be such a slobbering mass of 'em, the dialogs might be taken seriously, but there is and they aren't.

    I said it a couple months ago, and I still stand by it: Vista is a trainwreck happening in slow-motion. It's horrible to behold.
  • Vista is too secure? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by shodson ( 179450 ) on Thursday June 01, 2006 @04:56PM (#15448623) Homepage
    So now Windows is *too* secure? When are you GPL-zealots gonna be happy? I've played with the latest Vista beta, yes, there are lots of pop-ups, mainly when you run an app for the first time, install an app, or an app makes an outbound connection for the first time (like any desktop firewall will do) but for being the most attacked OS on the planet it's really got its guard up. And anytime you install something on OS X it prompts you for an admin password as well. Damned if you're not secure, damned if you're too secure. Perhaps there's a way to still be secure but in a less intrusive way. I'm sure there's a way to turn off the different types of popups and run in a more trusted mode but out of the box Vista is very locked down, like it or not.
  • by kezze ( 644765 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @05:00AM (#15452180) Homepage
    What we really need when creating user accounts would be to get a choice:
    • The user is a beginner
      Then the user will get the neat-looking desktop with lots of colors, sounds (even the click sound when you click your mouse) and all the other crap like tutorials and "click here"-balloon messages.
    • The user is experienced
      This way, Windows will deliver maximum performance (ha ha), turn off those annoying sounds and let you be in charge.
    Why not?

Logic is the chastity belt of the mind!