One more reason to give Windows the flick! The licence limitations of the product you pay heaps for, Had to ring up Customer Service to be 'allowed' to re-install the program I have paid through the nose for as I had to do a re-format due to the problems I have had, no new hardware had been installed!!
Also had to change my Key Number and now I don't know what it is as the girl would not tell me whether I use the one that came with my copy or this new Key and I have no idea what the new one consists of! Big Brother!
Just pedantics!
Now yet another delay in the release of the 'Wonder Version" Vista?
Think I will have a closer look at the alternatives.

Bram Taylor
Australia

...

"Security, compatibility with future software, stability, and non-obsolesence are not enough for ya?"

...

Ha ! That's what we were told when we bought WinXP !

These things are baseline to ~any~ Operating System. It's like General Motors saying we ought buy a new Chevy because it has four wheels and a horn.

Most people aren't going to purchase a new OS, and go through all the hassles of installing it and making hardware upgrades, because it's a little better than the last OS that Microsoft was selling.

[ And, indeed, exactly ~that~ has occurred with WinXP: There's a huge installed base of Win98 because people couldn't find a compelling reason to migrate to XP. ]

The PC Rat predicts fewer users shall switch from XP to Vista than switched from 98 to XP.

Security: Microsoft has less than a commendable track record here. Previous fixes haven't remedied the situation, and users have no reason to believe this will change with Vista.

Compatibility with future software: There isn't any rush by developers to produce 64-bit software. And typical users will notice little or no performance difference in most applications.

Stability: It remains to be seen if Vista is more stable than XP. Only a ~little~ more stable won't justify converting to it.

Non-obsolesence: XP won't be obsolete for a very long time. Look at all the people still using Win98 ! And, Microsoft discontinuing support ain't going to change that ...because nobody has ever had any luck using Microsoft Support anyway.

Conversely, however, things like being able to pre-load programs on a USB memory stick are exciting. Microsoft needs more of ~this~ kind of thing if it wants Vista to be a success.
...

The Computer Rodent

...

>> Security

You know, I think Microsoft has done a phenominal job in this department. No OS of software developer creates an invulnerable product. XP may not be the best, but whenever a vulnerability is discovered, Microsft addresses it and puts out an update / patch. What more do you want???

>> Stability

Sure XP is very stable. I write drivers for a living and have been working with Microsoft's new Kernel Mode Driver Framework lately. It's pretty amazing and does make things like PNP and Power Management (especially the latter) much easier to deal with and, as a result, less error prone... Poorly written drivers are the major cause of blue screens and I think this is a step in the right direction in dealing with that.

>> Upgrading

We'll see. I agree the ramp-up to Vista for pre-existing XP users will be slow. Of course new PC's will ship with Vista and corporations will /eventually/ move to Vista (after some wait and see period), so "Vista everywhere" I think is an inevitability, but it will be slow.

Gunzip

I agree. I don't see many people upgrading WinXP to Vista. They'll just wait for Vista to come pre-installed on their new PC, most likely with other new Vista-ready (64bit) peripherals such as printers/scanners.

Techies who are willing to suffer through upgrade hell are far and in between. Most folks don't even have a clue where to begin backing up their important data or where exactly its stored all over their harddrive.

Not that this is something new. Case was the same with WinXP. People simply waited until it came to them conveniently, trouble-free on a new PC.

>> Upgrading
>
> We'll see. I agree the ramp-up to Vista for pre-existing XP users will be slow. Of course new PC's will ship with Vista and corporations will /eventually/ move to Vista (after some wait and see period), so "Vista everywhere" I think is an inevitability, but it will be slow.

Home users will in general take what they're given (XP for now, Vista in the future), but corporations have IT people who know about alternatives and accountants who can tell you how much more Microsoft costs (the M$ ad campaign "Get the Facts" being taken with a grain of salt ;)

For a lot of companies, migrating to Vista will have to be justified compared to the status quo (XP, 2K and maybe even 98!) and Linux (and/or Apple for certain companies)

...

"So what specific advancements does Vista have over XP? Does anyone know? I want specific examples, not just its supposed to be more stable, faster, and fine tuned."

...

Why, it's NEW and IMPROVED !

Windows Vista is 'All Natural'. Made from 100% organic ingredients.

Fat-free, sugar-free, caffiene free, low carb, low cal, low sodium, 0-gram trans fats, and whole grain.

And it comes with a 100% guarantee that it'll increase your system requirements !
...

The Computer Rodent

...

Not to spoil a joke, but...

"And it comes with a 100% guarantee that it'll increase your system requirements !"

That's false. Not that they've even posted requirements yet, but it runs just fine on my 750Mhz Athlon PoS.

...

" it runs just fine on my 750Mhz Athlon"

...

Sure, the striped-down beta version without any advanced features.

Your favorite rodent was referring the final consumer version of WinVista due out in 2007 or 2008.
...

The Computer Rodent

...

Vista is now feature complete, so you need to get your facts straight...

I'm not sure if that'll stay the same in a few months. If Vista gets pushed to next year, MS has an incentive to push it further to August of next year, which will give it sufficient time to add the amazing WinFS.

"If Vista gets pushed to next year, MS has an incentive to push it further to August of next year, which will give it sufficient time to add the amazing WinFS."

Hardware manufacturers are *howling mad* about the delays as it is. MS stockholders aren't much happier ;) Any further than January will result in heads rolling at MS. WinFS will have to wait for a bit (SP1? :)

I was excited, then I wasn't. Then I saw some cool features, and thought I may want to check it out. But now that the product has been delayed for another year, I am no longer interested.

I don't see the life of this product as being anything to replace XP. It has basically no frill, other than that new File Format, but that will take years to adopt...

I really don't see any new benefits or real features that would make me want to go out and buy it.

I have asked this question before, and evidently, no one else can see any benefit, but the best answer so far is "There are some advancements..."

So what specific advancements does Vista have over XP? Does anyone know? I want specific examples, not just its supposed to be more stable, faster, and fine tuned.

http://www.extremetech.c...2/0,1697,1931914,00.asp

"I don't see the life of this product as being anything to replace XP."

How about the fact that it isn't XP? Not even XP based? Forget all the security issues that are XP centric, this baby is based on Windows 2003 Server SP1.

"I really don't see any new benefits or real features that would make me want to go out and buy it."

Security, compatibility with future software, stability, and non-obsolesence are not enough for ya? (MS has stated that Vista will be their last OS, future advances will be through Service Packs and such - RUMOR ALERT!)

See the post below from Das Mod for the specifics. (Memory heaping, audio subsystem, specific security enhancements, etc)

What is Windows "Vienna" suppose to be then? I was under the impression it was the next OS after Vista, am I mistaken?

Never heard of it.

But I probably should qualify the above statement you are referring to as an unsubstantiated rumor. I read it somewhere. Prolly Ars technica, but I can't find it now.

*shrug*

Found it! (Damn, I'm good)

http://www.detnews.com/a...14/BIZ04/603140305/1013

Aren't unfounded conclusions drawn totally out of context from random articles fun? ;)

(apprently someone from digg.com concluded that since this was an article about MS's future endeavors and mentioned nothing about a post Vista OS that ...no Post Vista OS would be forthcoming.)

Brilliant. I am in awe...

The last sentance of the article says it best: "There's a bit of misdirection going on here." Gotta love it.

Yes, your correct, its supposed to be the next major operating system after Windows Vista.

- How about the fact that it isn't XP? Not even XP based? Forget all the security issues that are XP centric, this baby is based on Windows 2003 Server SP1. -

Lovely. Now I probably won't want it at all now.

-Security, compatibility with future software, stability, and non-obsolesence are not enough for ya? (MS has stated that Vista will be their last OS, future advances will be through Service Packs and such - RUMOR ALERT!)-

Interesting, its not XP, yet everything that's out now is FOR XP. So we will have wait and play catchup with Vista.. XP works with everything PERFECT, so why fix it if its not broke?

And no non-obsolescence isn't enough for me.. Remember everything that's out now is *STILL* compatible and written for Win9X platform, most aren't even optimized for XP/2000 even. They may have specific updates, but I would venture 95% of ALL software in existence still basis the technology on Windows 98 platform... so we might be 10 years before we see ANY significant updates. Lets not forget, there is another one on the horizon they have not even touched..

64-bit.. I am still waiting to see anything written for that, other than office... Certainly no games support 64-bit yet...

- Found it! (Damn, I'm good)-

And modest too!!

"Lovely. Now I probably won't want it at all now."

Ahh.... Funny stuff.

"64-bit.. I am still waiting to see anything written for that, other than office... Certainly no games support 64-bit yet..."

Don't expect it. Not until Vista arrives, anywho. Dev houses are not going to make any major changes until the adoption rate demands it, and that won't be unitl x64 Vista has hit the market running. (I give it 6 months, though...not 10 years)

Nope. Never made *that* claim. :)

You can't be serious about the Windows 98 bit.

The NT platform is what made Windows a REAL operating system (even the bas**** child, ME, runs over DOS). The API improvements are HUGE. From a programming standpoint, a LOT more is possible on an NT system. From the wealth of security and monitoring functionality, native NTFS support (which alone is worth more than Windows 98), complete UNICODE support, to eye-candy like drop-shadows and layered windows, the NT 5.x line blows 9x right out of the water.

But I guess, since the main form of interaction with it (explorer) hasn't changed much since 95, it's all the same to you. ::rollseyes::

As to 64-bit support... it isn't needed, although XP already provides it. It's good because native integers are bigger (and yes, that's the main difference; amazing, huh?), but there is very little benefit for daily applications. Office certainly isn't going to be noticeably faster in 64 bits. A 3D modelling application on the other hand certainly will.

"Certainly no games support 64-bit yet... "

Again, your talking cr@p. I have been playing HalfLife 2, and Counterstrike Source, in 64bit for 4 1/2 months now. Unreal have a 64bit engine for Unreal Tournement 2004, and I believe there is a patch to get a 64bit quake engine. (the last i cannot verify, as I don't have the game).

So, the 3 big engines, from which pretty much all other games are based upon, all have 64bit versions...

I thought it was Blackcomb.. After Vista (Longhorn)

Regarding features, check out this page and read a litte:

http://www.microsoft.com...a/features/default.mspx

If you think Microsoft is the devil or something, I'm sure you can find the same info on some other web-sites...

Gunzip

well. i think it was availabe to everyone in the beta. i got from the ms website

Maybe if you are an MSDN subscriber or your company has it, that's maybe how you got it.

I could not find it on MS site.

alt.binaries.warez.ibm-pc.ms-beta as long as both of the following apply:

1.) If you have usenet access to binaries.

2.) If you have an MSDN or TAP subscription.

The MS servers have been crap lately for these things and it is sometimes much easier to get them by these means.

If you are not a member of TAP or MSDN, just wait...it ain't that grand, really.

Im an MSDN subscriber, its not up there.

Also i agree this is an interim release, no big woop.

nope. connect.microsoft.com

this is the version that i got from them Vista_5342_32bit_Main_Staged_DVD_EN

Yeah, usually takes a few hours, but as bad as the Office downloads have been lately, I'd amost wait for them to hit the usenet anyway.

But hey, if it's working now, it's working. Can't complain about that.

I know *where* I can get it, I don't *want* it.

You will never be able to get anything, I can't get.. just FYI.

You may be good, but I am the teacher, when it comes to technology.

I have access to more software then you can probably dream of... But its good that you keep up with newsgroups..young padawan.

Heh...

Okay. We'll just leave it at that, then, shall we?

Teach me of the Force.

LOL

By rijp

posted Mar 27, 2006 - 1:43 PM

- Found it! (Damn, I'm good)-

And modest too!!

The teacher. Interesting/Amusing. How so? Can you beat 12 years at about 200 hours a month on average (that's Internet usage)? That's about 29K hours. IRC, Bittorrent, Usenet, FTP, websites, email, instant messengers, filesharing, BBSes, shared folders over the Internet, you name it.