Slashdot Mirror
Why Vista Won't Suck
creativity writes "ExtremeTech is running an article on the new features of Windows Vista and why it is a must upgrade for all Windows users. They take apart the marketing hype and tell you what exactly to expect in Windows Vista. They specifically pick out less-hyped features like a kernel which has new Heap Management and details on SuperFetch, which is Vista's application cache."
If it's true, great, bully for them and well done, but I'll believe it when I see it. My hopes aren't too high for all these cool fixes/features to actually function as advertised. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised, who knows?
1. DRM is good for you. It builds strong bones and healthy muscles.
2. Using half your memory for your windowing tool will impress all your friends.
3. Now you can set the color of your blue screen of death to mauve or taupe.
4. You know the customer support is only going to be better.
5. Collectable virus game built in! Better than Pokemon on crack.
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
From TFA:
Aside from the fact that modern hard discs are supposedly faster than USB 2.0, isn't paging out part of the VM to a hot swappable device just dope-assed? Shurley shome mishtake!
Why limit yourself to Windows Vista!?
Windows Me
"Windows Me: PC Health Features Keep PCs Stable, Secure and Reliable -- and Take the Frustration Out of Computing for Home Users" (source)
Windows 2000
"Our primary goal is to improve security and safety for all our customers -- consumers and businesses, regardless of size -- through a balance of technology innovation, guidance and industry leadership," Gates said. "We're committed to continued innovation that addresses the threats of today and anticipates those that will undoubtedly emerge in the future." (source)
Windows XP
"Windows XP is the most secure and dependable operating system we have ever produced." (source)
Windows Vista
"In Vista, it should be much more difficult for unauthorized programs (like Viruses and Trojans) to affect the core of the OS and secretly harm your system." (source)
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
What he means is that if you want to watch HD-DVD or Blu-Ray media that is protected by HDCP(which practically all retail movies probably will be) at a resolution higher than what's possible with a regular old DVD under Vista, you'll need to buy a monitor that also supports HDCP. But this is also the case for your TV and other equipment and in no way impairs other functionality of Vista.
Why must I upgrade, though? What will I gain that I want in the first place? Better game performance? Not needed, since I don't do games. The ability to run the latest Microsoft Office at speeds approaching what you could do 5 years ago? Sorry, I already jumped ship to other options. Stronger DRM so that I'll be able to play Sony's next CD/DVD/WhateverD? I'll pass...
What I'd like is some tuning on the current operating system, so that it doesn't need more CPU cycles to do simple tasks, like display directories. And how about fewer holes for virii and worms, without introducing a whole new layer of software to protect the last new layer of software, which was to protect me from bugs in the previous new layer...
Oh, wait... that's Linux.
Looks like a forced upgrade for US gov users; if AES-256 and "SHA-2" hashs are really going to be US gov security requirements, the only way Microsoft will support them is by upgrading EVERY windows desktop and server to Vista. (For some reason Microsoft has refused to put AES-256 support into any non-Vista version of its SSL stack even though the rest of the industry has been doing so for almost five years now.)
I've been beta testing Vista for a while now. After installing Vista, I swear to God - the OS cached every single EXE file on my computer in a folder in the root of Vista's installation drive. Each EXE file is given its own subfolder in this folder, with the same name as the file followed by a unique hash. Each subfolder contains the EXE file and several accompanying files, at least two of which are XML documents.
When all was said and done, this folder took up nearly 5GB on disk. I can't even open this drive in Explorer. I let it sit for about 20 minutes once and my PC slowed to a crawl
Whatever this godawful "feature" is, I hope it is removed for the final version.
I am scientifically inaccurate.
As opposed to authorized programs, like the Sony backdoor, which used Microsoft-supplied methods to create the program to hide from the users.
Great, the new OS is going to be bigger and bloated just from the OS, and now SuperFetch is going to suck up even more free memory with programs that I may or may not load, but that my computer thinks I'd like to be able to access quickly. Like Windows Media Player, and MSN, and Internet Explorer. And Kazaa. Sorry, was that my outside voice?
Oh, so we won't use Outlook any more, that's a plus at least.
Great. Now when your parents get the popup that some application wants to access the network, and are presented with all these options for "finer granularity of which applications can use network resources", they'll just turn them all on and go instead of actually learning the ins and outs of TCP security. That's much more secure.
With the kernel sucking up all my memory by preloading applications, a brand new networking stack, and all these operations going on in the background to maximize my heap, I'll not be holding my breath.
More, more, more, and more performance-sucking and hardware-gobbling "features". I don't know anyone outside of hardcore gamers that currently has a DX9-compliant, 128MB video card - my parents surely don't. I just last month bought one so that I could play Fable on my comp while I'm away from home for a few months. And I guess I better get that double-500G hard drive option in my new computer so that all my SafeDoc backups don't make all my disk space go the way of my free memory used by SuperFetch.
And "noobs" who do know just a little better will give themselves administrator accounts so that they can install software whenever they want without changing roles, completely mooting any "default user level access" security changes being made.
Why do we need virus softwar
This space for rent. Call 1-800-STEAK4U
Reason #1 doesn't apply, it costs 250$ to submit a driver for signing : https://winqual.microsoft.com/download/WHQLPOLICY. doc
Reason #2 doesn't apply for the same reason
Reason #3 Eh, simply play non-DRMed content then, playing it at low-quality is better than not being able to play it on your Linux box or other
Reason #4 I call that jaleousy
No, there's a fair chance he's correct. The issue is that if DRM is being performed at kernel level, all kernel-level code must also be signed or it can bypass the DRM. Someone will probably find a way around it, but it's not as silly as you'd think.
// Dumps core here