“The first service pack for Windows Vista is slated for release to manufacturing in the first quarter of 2008. The announcement was made via Microsoft’s Windows Window Vista Blog by Nick White, a product manager at Microsoft. We got a chance to sit down with White to talk about SP1.”
Absolutely nothing, I wouldn’t even use “Vista” at gun point..
Oh, you would so use Vista at gunpoint. Trust me. >:)
Perhaps Microsoft will consider that at some point in the future, so be prepared.
What is your system configuration? Which Linux do you use?
I use Nlited and highly modified server 2003 that takes up 300 mb hdspace removed stuff are IE, a bunch of useless services and no Updates, DEP or WMP i use VLC and media player classic , i dont use IE or firefox i use k-meleon ver 09
.
Since i removed malicious services and bad files i havn’t encountered problems with my OS.
So Im boycotting vista, i would rather get reactos when its beta than fooling around with that DRM infested overbloated system software no matter what sp i wont even touch it, not even with Vlite because playing media slows down network is considered a feature not a bug and MMCSS service cant be disable without loosing audio/video support.
Wait for SP2.
Better yet, wait for Windows 7.
Better stop waiting! You don’t have to fall asleep, there are other modern OS’s out.
Heh. Even older OSes are arguably a better choice, at least for some tasks.
Edited 2007-08-30 21:29
Wait for SP2.
Hmmmno. Not gonna touch Vista even with a long stick even when it reaches SP2
Win2k or XP are more than enough for my gaming needs, and they do run well even on a bit aging system..I don’t wanna upgrade my hardware just to run an OS, I will rather upgrade my hardware when it’s not anymore sufficient to run the apps and games I want.
Though, I use Linux for almost everything.. The only gripe I have with Linux is that it sucks BAD for gaming
I heard people saying the exactly same thing about XP – “I’m not going to touch Windows XP with a 40′ pole until SP2” “I shouldn’t have to buy new hardware to run this new XP crap””Windows ’98 runs my games just fine” etc., etc., etc. They caved as soon as their was some software or game they liked that required XP however, and now they are the same people who are fretting over Vista.
If you are a gamer, you will doubtless come across a new game that requires something more than your old obsolete hardware, and you might as well upgrade your os when you upgrade your hardware. Linux, as you correctly point out, has some deficiencies when it comes to running commercial games (this is not to suggest that it doesn’t excel in other areas, however). Like it or not, Windows is the Os for Gaming.
Windows should be put inside a ROM, with a “explorer” interface only for games and some read only browser.
Ops.. maybe that XBOX
(well..kind of) 
If you game on your computer, (Games advanced enough that some don’t work perfectly under wine), chances are your hardware is more than enough for Vista.
Nothing terribly impressive, mostly performance optimization and bug fixes, but that is what everyone thought it would be.
What I find funny is that the jaw dropping improvement to defrag is that it lets you choose which drive to work on. Some other nice features would be for it not to be the slowest, least efficient, least configurable on the market, or maybe to give a better indication of whats going on.
Or better yet, buy out raxco, and don’t force your customers to shell out 40$ for a pretty essential maintenance tool.
Or better yet, buy out raxco, and don’t force your customers to shell out 40$ for a pretty essential maintenance tool.
..and have another anti-trust lawsuit?
Don’t think that’ll happen.
Heh. Being Microsoft nowadays is an exercise in damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
That makes no sense to me… unless, for some reason, they took out the ability to choose one particular drive between XP and Vista?
its more or less the same thing in vista. You right click on a drive, choose properties, click on the tools tab, then click the defragment button.
So no, release of a service pack is no longer the milestone event that it used to be–users looking to deploy Windows Vista are best served by not making their deployment schedules contingent upon SP1 availability.
Did anyone expect this guy to say otherwise? He works for MS. He’s not going to say “Yes, of course that makes better sense to wait for SP1, especially for enterprise customers”.
@WereCatf, How exactly can you blame an OS for that? it makes more sense to blame the mindless troglodytes who design games using DirectX instead of OpenGL.
@wirespot, You sir, are incorrect.. I wouldn’t use Vista or any Microsoft product – even at gun point, I don’t fear death… endless voids sounds quite appealing actually
Edited 2007-08-30 23:26
This sort of statement gives you no credibility whatsoever. Either you are lying, and would in fact be quite compliant in using Vista or another Microsoft product if your life was at stake (which I suspect), or you are so ideologically driven that you are not able to think or act rationally.
OK, so you claim you are prepared to die in order to evade the use of Microsoft products (which seems a little extreme if you ask me). What if the life at stake was a loved one, a close family member or your pet? What if an escaped mental patient threatened to blow up a school full of children if you refused to use Vista?
I shall trust you were being facetious in your post, otherwise I can only assume you are the sort of ideologue who takes their views so seriously they will do things like fly a plane into a building to satisfy their self-perceived righteousness.
I don’t use Windows or Linux, and I don’t play video games either..
Windows… Games.. what’s the difference? They’re both toys.
…eventually. If you want to play games, anyway.
Fortunately, by the time that becomes necessary vista will be fairly stable and the sillier performance issues resolved. MSFT is pushing vista pretty hard, and that means encouraging hardware providers not to make XP-compatable drivers once vista is working well enough for mass adoption*.
I was forced to move to XP a few months ago because the audio drivers for my new machine didn’t work properly under 2k. XP actually does work okay (though whether this would hold true if I actually used it as my primary OS is a mystery). Unfortunately, unless there’s a highly improbable number of normal users who refuse to upgrade next time they get a new machine, the upgrade cycle for vista will be rather shorter.
*Well, they’ll drop legacy support eventually anyway, of course. I mean, nobody complains if they don’t make drivers for win 98, and there’s at least one person still using that.
“..eventually. If you want to play games, anyway.”
I’m fairly sure that there are many other platforms than Vista for playing games. Heck, MS even make one themselves.
Maybe you ment “if you want to play Vista games” but that’s just obvious. If you want to play PS3 games you need a PS3, to play WII games you need a WII.
The interesting question is if the Vista-only games will be worth upgrading for. Time will tell.
Yes, indeed. Windows games, on a computer, without using wine or parallels or whatever. My actual point was that sooner or later, hardware which can run new games will not be compatible with XP (and that new games will eventually be vista-only, I guess; let’s pretend I didn’t forget to mention that).
I do tend to discount consoles because I never use them. This may have something to do with the controllers sucking, or with not wanting to spend hundreds of dollars on a machine that does nothing (except graphics and whatever the wii does) that a computer can’t do better.
Or maybe I didn’t take them into account because this topic is about vista and upgrading to vista, and because the only reason most people here would use any version of windows is for games.
hmm, are they going to let me choose not to install MSIE, DRM, Media Player, TCP/IP, the new GUI if I don’t want them *installed*?
if you don’t want the media stuff, checkout the N Editions
(http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_editions_final.asp)
“Finally, I should note that Microsoft is planning to offer so-called N Editions of Windows Vista for the European market, in order to meet the requirements of an antitrust ruling there. Windows Vista N Editions–Vista Home Basic N and Vista Business N–will mirror the Vista Home Basic and Vista Business versions, respectively, but will not include Windows Media Player and other media-related functionality.”
The new Gui (aero) can be disabled easily,
cheers
anyweb
And you can also strip out a lot of stuff with vlite, should you so desire.
talk about a filesystem that dont want to die (in the usage sense, its the most error sensitive that i know off).
i just wonder when/if we will see linux support off it.
Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux armv5tejl; no-NO; rv:1.9a6pre) Gecko/20070810 Firefox/3.0a1 Maemo browser 0.4.34 N770/SU-18
I’m getting a bit tired of people who bash Vista. I hope no one gets offended by what I want to say. I haven’t tried Vista because I don’t use windows but unless you don’t have the hardware to run Vista, don’t go around saying bad things about it.
I’m not a fan of MS, but I doubt they would have released Vista if it were inferior to XP. Howerver buggy it might be, Vista *IS* definitely better than XP, period. As for bug fixes, isn’t that what service releases are for?
If you expect a zero bugs product, then don’t expect more than one release every 20 years.
Both windows and Linux are as buggy as hell. Just check what laptop users are saying about Linux 2.6.22!
Also for people who keep whining how they are forced to dual boot Linux and windows because of ‘gaming’ needs, that’s not an argument. If you need windows, stick to windows. If you like Linux, stick to Linux. Unless your job requires that you run both operating systems, stop whining. The reason why new windows games aren’t ported to Linux is that you’re not willing to pay for the Linux versions of them.
uut unless you don’t have the hardware to run Vista, don’t go around saying bad things about it.
That’s exactly the problem many are complaining about. Not everyone is willing to shell out cash for a new computer just in order to run a new OS. Besides, I don’t have hands-on experience with Vista but I very much dislike things like reducing audio/video quality unless your hardware meets Microsoft’s strict requirements..
Vista *IS* definitely better than XP
That’s subjective. It depends on your point of view. From where I stand XP is the better one. Don’t force your view on to others.
The reason why new windows games aren’t ported to Linux is that you’re not willing to pay for the Linux versions of them.
Umm…I would be willing to pay but there’s no games around to buy! You know..it’s kinda difficult to buy something that doesn’t exist.
Umm…I would be willing to pay but there’s no games around to buy! You know..it’s kinda difficult to buy something that doesn’t exist.
I see your point but not any company is going make a product when they know only a few people will buy it.
That’s subjective. It depends on your point of view. From where I stand XP is the better one. Don’t force your view on to others.
Apart from Vista requiring faster/newer hardware (for performance/drivers), exactly why do you find XP better?
Keep in mind, I’m not defending MS here. I’ve been using only Linux for years now and I hopefully will never have to run anything compiled by MS anymore. Also my old AMD 2300+ probably can’t run Vista.
It’s just that most people just say XP is better than Vista without actually giving reasons other than drivers causing poor performance in hardware which shouldn’t be a problem with new hardware. I’m not saying that people should buy new computers just for Vista but I don’t believe hardware is a valid argument.
Edited 2007-08-31 09:20
Apart from Vista requiring faster/newer hardware (for performance/drivers), exactly why do you find XP better?
Hmm, well, XP is stable and mature, and more or less any piece of hardware nowadays has drivers for XP. And in my particular case I just use Windows for gaming and very occasionally to surf the web for a moment when I don’t bother to reboot to Linux. So I don’t have any use whatsoever for all the bells and whistles Vista comes with. XP does even take less space than Vista. And then for example my laptop…It runs XP just fine but wouldn’t run Vista. And it’s not possible to upgrade a laptop, so.. But as I said, it’s all subjective and in my case XP just is better.
Again, I know your concern is hardware related and I know that good drivers mean well tested hardware. I agree with you because you make a valid argument.
But as I mentioned in my original post, my complaint was towards people who never mentioned hardware/driver problems (and probably didn’t have any) but still went “I don’t like Vista”.
Edited 2007-08-31 09:44
Like I said on my blog, people bash it because that is what all the ‘cool kids’ are doing. If you like Windows Vista, apparently ther eis something wrong with you – according to the ‘cool kids’.
My laptop came preloaded with Windows Vista, and yes, I want to have choice; but given that my MiniDisc isn’t supported, nor is my webcam, or my wireless card properly supported (along with plenty of other devices) I am stuck using Windows Vista.
Edited 2007-08-31 10:46
“Howerver buggy it might be, Vista *IS* definitely better than XP,”
Since you just proclaimed you don’t use Windows this statement does not carry any weight coming from you.
“The reason why new windows games aren’t ported to Linux is that you’re not willing to pay for the Linux versions of them.”
Where’s the evidence for this statement?
OT:
Who buy games anyway? With game piracy presumably rampant (or so we’re told) how is the huge gaming industry staying afloat?
Edited 2007-08-31 10:54 UTC
Well that’s not entirely true. I just shelled out ^Alb200 for a hardware upgrade to get a computer with a WEI of 4.9.
I installed Vista on the 23rd August, and, after an embarrasing meeting today where a client was treated to an array of program crashes, popups and bad performance, by tomorrow, XP will be running on it again, I want to reclaim my computer from Microsoft.
Software that I have had problems with in Vista x64:
Windows Licence Activation (Took 4 goes to work, gave useless errors)
Adobe Reader 8
Microsoft Silverlight (Failed install)
Microsoft Virtual Server
Microsoft Exchange (We tried to install this as part of a test)
Microsoft Visual Studio 2005
Microsoft Explorer
Sibelius
VMWare Server.
Oh, and did I mention performance?
p.s. 7-zip can uncompress a highly-compressed RAR file to the TEMP folder about 3x quicker than it takes Vista to just copy the uncompressed data from the TEMP folder to the destination.
Ste
Edited 2007-08-31 17:35 UTC
vista sp1 will give the vista users more calmness and satisfaction. so as the people are happy, i think it have to be something good.
I work at a ISV, we develop for TabletPC/Healthcare using .NET
When our customers upgraded they TabletPCs (or brought new ones that came with Vista), they felt everything (including the OS itself) notably “slower”. We’re stuck because it’s practically impossible to find a new TabletPC without vista. Not to mention that the version of Crystal Reports that comes with Visual Studio 2005 does *NOT* work with Windows Vista and you’re forced to upgrade to the latest Crystal Reports XI Developer Edition.
That CR issue aside, I felt Vista to be *slower* than XP, that is probably because there’s more complexity involved in the core of the OS and that requires more “power”, but seriously, buying a new notebook today with vista is a PITA. You get dozen of crap utilities and you’re forced to perform a clean install (of vista) in order to *at least* enjoy your computing experience.
I’m talking about ACER, IBM and LG TabletPCs. Sony notebooks (not TPCs) also suffer the same problem. You might want to blame the manufacturer, but the user experience is that. You cannot have a “fast, slim, portable” TPC these days. Part of that problem is that not matter what number of “cores” you have (two on those boxes) the performance -compared to XP- is bad. Another core doesn’t mean things will happen in /2 time. On the contrary, the 2nd core is busy doing stuff…
And this happens on “new hardware” with the VistaTM Sticker. So unless you buy a more powerful computer (non-existant in the portable market), you’ll feel disappointed with Vista.
Sad, but true.
Edited 2007-08-31 15:40