PDA

View Full Version : Vista: ouch & double-ouch



Dr Mordrid
30th January 2007, 10:48
Technology Review (http://www.technologyreview.com/Infotech/17992/page1/)


Uninspiring Vista

How Microsoft's long-awaited operating system disappointed a stubborn fan.

For most of the last two decades, I have been a Microsoft apologist. I mean, not merely a contented user of the company's operating systems and software, not just a fan, but a champion. I have insisted that MS-DOS wasn't hard to use (once you got used to it), that Windows 3.1 was the greatest innovation in desktop operating systems, that Word was in fact superior to WordPerfect, and that Windows XP was, quite simply, "it."
>
So you might think I would be predisposed to love Vista, Microsoft's newest version of Windows, which was scheduled to be released to consumers at the end of January. And indeed, I leaped at the opportunity to review it. I couldn't wait to finally see and use the long-delayed operating system that I had been reading and writing about for more than three years. Regardless of widespread skepticism, I was confident that Vista would dazzle me, and I looked forward to saying so in print.

Ironically, playing around with Vista for more than a month has done what years of experience and exhortations from Mac-loving friends could not: it has converted me into a Mac fan.
>

Computerworld (http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9005873&intsrc=hm_list)


Windows development chief: 'I would buy a Mac if I didn't work for Microsoft'

Microsoft's James Allchin made the comment in a 2004 e-mail to colleagues

December 11, 2006 (Computerworld) -- Longtime Windows development chief James Allchin wrote in a January 2004 e-mail to Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer and company co-founder Bill Gates that the software vendor had "lost sight" of customers' needs and said he would buy a Mac if he wasn't working for Microsoft.

"In my view, we lost our way," Allchin, the co-president of Microsoft's platform and services division, wrote in an e-mail dated Jan. 7, 2004. The e-mail was presented as evidence late last week in the Iowa antitrust trial, Comes v. Microsoft Corp.

"I think our teams lost sight of what bug-free means, what resilience means, what full scenarios mean, what security means, what performance means, how important current applications are, and really understanding what the most important problems our customers face are. I see lots of random features and some great vision, but that does not translate into great products."
>

After this came out Allchin said that he was just trying to shake things up.

IMO that sounds like someone who was candid, took hard shots and is backing down to save his bacon. That he "departed" after Vista was completed ads to that feeling.

schmosef
30th January 2007, 10:59
context for the "I would buy a Mac" email. (http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/operating_systems/allchins_buy_a_mac_email_exposed.html)

Mehen
30th January 2007, 11:04
Did XP really seem that good when it first came out? Just seemed like a bubbly version of 2k. Now I absolutely love XP. Give Vista some time, I'm sure we will get to like it.

Dr Mordrid
30th January 2007, 11:09
context for the "I would buy a Mac" email. (http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/operating_systems/allchins_buy_a_mac_email_exposed.html)
CYA mode fully engaged :p


Now I absolutely love XP. Give Vista some time, I'm sure we will get to like it.
I gave it time during the betas & RC's. Too much of it in fact.

That's why we're migrating our non-editing/non-gaming desktops to Linux, and some of those have editing by way of MainConcept's MainActor 5 (http://www.mainconcept.com/site/?id=954) and Cinelerra.

As for office apps there is OpenOffice 2.1, which far more than meets our needs.

For graphics the list of good to great programs, 2D & 3D, is exhaustingly long.

Nowhere
30th January 2007, 11:21
Did XP really seem that good when it first came out? Just seemed like a bubbly version of 2k. Now I absolutely love XP. Give Vista some time, I'm sure we will get to like it.


Well, I somehow stick to win2k... Win2k3 actually ("forced" upgrade...apps/drivers/etc.), but it's conceptually very similar OS.
And TBH the only thing that really interested me in Vista is using flashdisks to speedup loading times of OS & apps...which wouldn't help me much anyway (I suspect that performance penalty of Vista on my hardware would outweight speedups due to flash caching; and my computer/apps is basically always on anyway...)

Mehen
30th January 2007, 11:28
CYA mode fully engaged :p


I gave it time during the betas & RC's. Too much of it in fact. That's why we're migrating our non-editing/non-gaming desktops to Linux, and some of those have editing by way of MainConcept's MainActor 5 (http://www.mainconcept.com/site/?id=954).


You'll be back - you can't escape M$.

What's that old saying? - don't judge a book by its beta?

Trust me, 2-3 years from now you will all be using Vista, and then when they start promoting the next OS you will all be saying - whats the point?, threatening Linux and Mac all over again. We've seen it happen with every MS release in the last decade+.

edit: which isn't to say you should go and buy Vista now, wait a good solid year at least. edit2: actually I strictly recommend NOT BUYING vista for at least a year or so - drivers suck right now, games are slower, as are apps, but they will speed up in time.

Dr Mordrid
30th January 2007, 12:01
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz........... .......

Yes, there are things we need Windows for. That's what dual/multi-boots are for. With XP now supported until 2014 (even M$ see's the writing on the wall) it'll take a "Vista-Only" tag on something I really need to get me to upgrade.

That's likely to be a single Vista license for beta'ing, period.

As for my wife: she loves the fact that her rig is so fast under Linux and has also transitioned her craft shop system to it. The more she uses Oo2's Paint and GIMP the less she uses Windows. Checking the logs she hasn't booted into XP for 2 weeks, the last time she reports using PhotoImpact-12. PI-12 and PrintMaster-17 are the only things she's using under Windows these days.

Taz
30th January 2007, 12:11
If Vista was sold at a realistic price I think people would move over to it, mainly because support for XP will start to be phased out. As it stands with a retail copy of Vista costing more than a complete PC, which of course comes with XP, I'm expecting the queues of people waiting to buy it to be very short.

Elie
30th January 2007, 12:12
Don't worry, 80% of Microsofts OS revenue will be on pre-installs so they are going to make their money and spread the OS out there like hot cakes soon enough.
But I don't think the enthusiats are dying to upgrade since it effects gaming performance (mainly on Nvidia hardware), and OGL games + ATI won't even run yet.

I have no choice but to upgrade to continute testing to ensure everything is fully functional etc.
We'll see how that goes.

Taz
30th January 2007, 12:17
Maybe, but I'm sure when HP etc. start shipping PC's with Vista on they will give you the option of installing XP instead, much like they did when XP came out.

ZokesPro
30th January 2007, 12:18
@Taz: II agree! 60$ for Vista ultimate would make me switch almost for sure.

Taz
30th January 2007, 12:27
Vista Business (http://uk.insight.com/apps/productpresentation/index.php?product_id=MS66J00000&nbs_search=K%3Dvista%26lang%3Den-gb%26M%3D%26C%3D111%26S%3D101438%26P%3D1) from Insight is £245 (~$480), how can Microsoft justify that price. Sure most people will avoid retail copies and buy it OEM or as an upgrade but it's still overpriced. You also have to factor in the cost of hardware upgrades required to run it, I installed it on an Athlon64 3000+ with 512Mb RAM, which isn't exactly ancient, and it ran like a dog :rolleyes:

Elie
30th January 2007, 12:57
It ran like a dog, because you only have 512MB, and if Microsoft is saying Vista will run on 512, they are smoking some cheap S*&^.

You need a minimum of 1GB ram, just like you needed 512 just to run Windows XP, let alone apps.

I will upgrade my HP workstations to 4GB from 2gigs soon so I should be fine.

Also my laptop has 1gig and it runs VISTA Enterprise nicely with the odd hiccup, but my recommendation will be to upgrage to at least 1gig and you should notice a HUGE difference.

Cheers

Taz
30th January 2007, 13:50
You need a minimum of 1GB ram, just like you needed 512 just to run Windows XP, let alone apps.

Well yes I know that, I was testing it on a system that an average user would have to see how well it coped, the answer was not very.

It seems ludicrous to me that 1Gb of RAM is need for an OS, which is primarily there to allow you to run your applications. Microsoft can go on about added features and eye candy but to me it just shows totally inefficient coding. Maybe they need to be reminded that people manage to write whole chess games that run in 1KB of memory :eek: Atari, Commodore and Acorn managed to fit a GUI operating system in ~192KB. Sure Windows is doing more than they were back then but the extra requirements aren't comparative to the added features.

Technoid
30th January 2007, 15:39
just like you needed 512 just to run Windows XP, let alone apps.


That is not true, I run XP (yeah, I actually do :p ) on my old p3 laltop with only 384mb and it works just fine.

GT98
30th January 2007, 16:35
I'm not planning on getting Vista till the end of the year when a decent $300 DX10 Card is out thats faster or as fast as my Xfire X1950's...otherwise I'll stick with XP.

Gurm
30th January 2007, 16:45
I'll switch once there are games that don't run on XP... and aren't cracked the instant they're released. Wondering why Halo2 is delayed? Because the "Vista only" code is too easily circumvented. They're trying to beef it up.

Nowhere
30th January 2007, 16:50
Fellow-up to my previous post...

Just had na idea about a way to "implement" the one feature of Vista I'd really like (using flashdisks to speed up system) on older Windows and/or other operating systems...
Wouldn't putting your swap file on permanently attached flashdisk work similar? (perhaps not as fast...but close)
One problem I see - the feature in Vista is optimised for flash usage, ordinary swap isn't (meaning shorter life of the drive?)
What do you think about it?

DGhost
30th January 2007, 22:00
*shrug* you all know my stance on this...

All I have to say is that when XP came out, everyone was talking about the same issues with it versus Win2k. It was bloated, it had all sorts of extra features, it wasn't a nessicary upgrade, broken application compatability, lack of OpenGL support, etc etc. I was quite amused when I read this line in the [H]ardOCP ramblings...


I have used every version of Windows ever marketed, so I am confident that I know which Windows versions suck and which versions do not suck. Windows 3.1 = not suck. Windows 95 = not suck too much. Every version of Windows between 95 and XP = suck. Windows XP = not suck.

The *only* reason that XP received any positive reviews was the simple fact that 90% of the Wintel market was convinced that Win98 was the best platform on the face of the planet, that Windows ME was a hunk of crap (it was) and that it was nessicary from Microsoft to finally bury the 9x line of code. Coming from 9x XP was quite a huge improvement. For those in the business world, the switch from 2k to XP was... less dramatic.

I remember being shocked when I saw government laptops running XP 2.5 years after it's release. They were new and quite a nice improvement.

That being said... they were also being rolled out with 1GB of ram. Most enterprise level business have been using it as a standard for quite a long time. Hell, I have not had a computer with less than 1GB since 2003. With most modern applications it was almost a nessicary upgrade in order to get decent performance out of a relatively high end machine.

Of course, I could mention running 1GB of ram back in 2001. Not for long, but it was definately nice.

XP was never meant to last 5 years. It did remarkably well considering how much people complained about it's steep hardware requirements at the time. I am willing to bet that in 3 or 4 years, when the next MS operating system is released, people will be saying the same things about it as well.

*shrug*

GT98
31st January 2007, 14:36
I'll switch once there are games that don't run on XP... and aren't cracked the instant they're released. Wondering why Halo2 is delayed? Because the "Vista only" code is too easily circumvented. They're trying to beef it up.

Um that would be pretty easy to do...DX10 is a Vista only program, and I'd assume Halo2 would need that to run

NetSnake
1st February 2007, 06:35
I won't be anywhere around Vista for at least 6-8 months and that is if by that time they'll add OpenGL support and fix the first round of glitches and hardware compatibility issues ....

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/2007/01/30/xp-vs-vista-uk/index.html

Admiral
1st February 2007, 11:30
Tried the RTM for a few days, dual boot, it takes some time to navigate through the options and tweak them to what I have in XP. Only tried a few games, some ran fine, others didn't.
After that I changed hardware (mobo, cpu - AMD to Intel) and only reinstalled XP.

In the future I'll give it another try, also dual boot (to get more used to)... I would like to see:

- the Vista version of Power Toys (if it isn't already out);
- what Creative does with that Alchemist Open AL program of theirs to have EAX under Vista;
- better and wider driver support;
- OpenGL and D3D compatibility and performance in games close to XP level (no more than 5% performance hit);
- all the apps I use in XP to be updated to work under Vista...

I want pretty much to have what I have in XP and I agree that it will take time and I'm willing to wait. And then the DX10 games will come and SP1, maybe it will take a year untill we all get comfy with Vista ?

edit: seems there's already an update out for legacy games compatibility (http://www.joystiq.com/2007/01/31/vista-update-improves-legacy-game-support/)... yeah, I know, most of them are Microsoft games. Some other updates (http://warp2search.net/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=31218) suposedly not on the windows update server.

The PIT
1st February 2007, 12:47
I guess it needs a lot of the eye candy turning off. You'll be forced to upgrade when that app you need or game only runs under Vista.

XP when it came out wasn't that good. It improved a lot after sp1.