Slashdot Mirror
Windows Vista Beta 2 Available for Download
prostoalex writes "Microsoft Windows Vista Beta 2 is now available for download from Microsoft's official site. If you remember seeing reviews of it already, Microsoft made downloads available to a limited set of customers last month. For PC users that are already running Windows Vista Beta 2, Microsoft put together a list of additional downloads like product guide and feature lists."
I ran Windows 2000 for years, just because I hated Windows XP for the very same reasons. Now I run Windows XP.
Trust me, you will follow....
if you have to support windows boxes, you will probably have to support vista some day. might as well get a headstart and get your hands dirty (best way to learn) even if you don't plan on rolling it out for a long time (a long time after release).
Hey kid! You wanna taste the new Vista? Come over here and try some sweet Vista. Don't worry about expirations, vendor lock in, security, assimilation or anything else. I'll take care of all of it for you.
Come on, kid. You know you want a taste. Come try this new Vista Beta. It's free! And I know how much you like free...
As an individual, you have the freedom to decide what you put on your website. Aside from a few taboo subjects, you have the freedom to do pretty much whatever you want.
Why should MS be different?
Sure, you can point at artificial market constraints as a reason MS should play nice. But, at the end of the day, you either support freedom in the software marketplace, or you don't.
If you support free software (and individual freedoms), you have to believe that MS should be allowed to publish *their* documentation in whatever format they choose. If the market likes the XPS format, then the market will go that way.
If, however, MS tried to make Acrobat run poorly or not at all, then you'd have a valid complaint.
Remember, by providing documentation in their own format, they are not removing your choice. You are still free to download Acrobat at your leisure.
I'd rather you do it wrong, than for me to have to do it at all.
New games will appear, probably Vista-only, as DirectX won't be released for XP. So it'll be either upgrade or play old games. (Unless the game makers will find a way to avoid OS-dependence).
http://ascending.wordpress.com/
Hell, even IBM doesn't seem to want Vista.
What?! Arguably the single largest corporate sponsor of Linux and assorted OSS projects doesn't seem too interested in Vista?
Say it ain't so!
there's a balance I seek such that my hardware isn't stressed just to open a text editor yet the design is simple & friendly to the eye.
So set the theme to Windows Classic. Sheesh; you make it sound like Aero Glass is the only option...
It's official. Most of you are morons.
No thanks. I'll settle for Windows XP Professional.
Well, while I agree with all your points. The thing is: I said exactly the same a few years ago when I was running Windows 2000. I thought I would never upgrade... Yet, now I run Windows XP Professional. Why? Well, XP had one thing I really liked (and is very useful on a multi-user-home-machine: fast user switching. I only "upgraded" to Windows XP in 2005, so I am "late" to Windows XP. I always end up upgrading late, because I think it's better that other people test the damned thing and find the quirks.
For now, I do not see any reason to upgrade to Windows Vista, but we'll talk again in 2008, when WinXP isn't supported anymore. Currently, I am evaluating FreeBSD as a complete replacement (and I like it...) Perhaps in 2008, I'll be running FreeBSD exclusively. If not, then I'll probably will be running Vista. You'll probably end up in the same boat as me: either a free OS or Windows Vista. Espcially when you buy a new machine and can't get a (legal) copy of XP anymore...
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
You get:
... or you could install an unstable OSS OS and test features not currently available in current stable distributions. Same as what's happening here. Some people will be interested, most people won't.
My business: Farstrider Studios.
For its shortcomings, PDF is an open standard. Can you say that about XPS? Imagine what would have happened if Microsoft tried to force a proprietary networking protocol on you, rather than just complying with TCP/IP?
Palm trees and 8
After Adobe threatened MS with a lawsuit for wanting to allow PDF writing for free in Office 2007 i can see why they'd rather use their own format. Essentially, they weren't pushing their own format, they were going to provide PDF support as well as the XPS format, but Adobe it seems will be suing because they're not charging for the ability to convert to PDF format.
Honestly, the only reason I'm interested in Vista is the Expose-like feature. I use a mac at school and Expose makes working just a little less frustrating.
PDF is an open format? That explains why Adobe doesn't fancy the idea of Microsoft including PDF exporting functionality into Office 12!
As for the openness of the XPS... why don't you hop on into the site linked to above and visit the Licensing Overview page.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
> Of course they're trying to hold onto their monopoly, it's what dying companies that fail to
> innovate do.
You're confusing fantasy with reality, I'm afraid. You mean it's what the world's most successful companies do.
Oh, and PostScript being an established, stable open standard, of course.
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
That's pretty much what they are: People without any kind of moral.
Morals are something we have, because we feel remorse for doing something "bad". We have morals, because our conscience is nagging when we have something to blame on ourselves that we did wrong. It enables us to function in groups.
Corps don't have that kind of mental safeguard against going postal. Corporations don't act by themselves, they use their employees to act for them. Those are, by definition, human beings who WOULD have a conscience. But that conscience doesn't kick in, because they can brush it off on the corp.
You're about to fire someone. You even know him, he's deeply in debt, has a sick child, his wife died half a year ago. You wouldn't fire him, your conscience would nag you for kicking him out. Yeah, his stats don't look good, but hey, considering his situation, that's understandable. You'd normally give him a little time to recover.
Not in a corp. You fire him. Because if you don't do it, you're fired as well and someone else does it. Same jusification that fascist regimes (and the people serving in them) used to squelch any kind of remorse. You can't help it. You gotta do it. Or someone else does it.
The difference is that the ultimately "guilty" person is no real person. It's the corp. And corps have no conscience.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Show me where in the license it says "unrevocable", then you can talk about openness. It's not a standard if it comes with strings attached.
"If you don't want to run the Beta, fine, don't run it. However, to my mind you lose all rights to complain about misfeatures and bugs if you had an opportunity to find and report them, and didn't." This seems to me to be total crap. It is not my job (nor the job of most reading this) to test Microsoft's products for them for free. This is a commercial product, and it is Microsoft's responsibility to ship a good working product to PAYING customers. If it were an OSS project, your statement would be valid, but this is certainly not OSS. Since when did quality assurance for commercial software become the sole responsibility of the customers???
So, it's ok for Adobe to push their proprietary protocol, but not MS. Admittedly, I don't know a lot about print spooling, etc., but isn't PostScript a decidedly Adobe created format.
If you don't want to run the Beta, fine, don't run it. However, to my mind you lose all rights to complain about misfeatures and bugs if you had an opportunity to find and report them, and didn't.
You're kidding right? If I was to pay for Vista (ha ha) and found bugs or misfeatures, I would have no right to complain about them?! You expect me to beta test commercial software on my own time and money before I have the right to complain about bugs in software that I paid for?!
-Eric
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Apparently not.
-Eric
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
No it doesn't, because it's impossible to explain something that never happened. MS only took PDF out of Office because they suspected that Adobe might threaten them with a lawsuit. They don't even know, this is just speculation, and so far nothing has happened. It's just MS inventing an excuse to justify not using PDF. Come on, if you were on the verge of releasing a completely redundant format that was supposed to overtake one you were constantly using, and you needed your format to look more important, what would you do?
Twinstiq, game news
You'd think they'd release a torrent, but that's Microsoft for you. In their corporate mindset, to release a torrent probably makes them feel dirty. It's conceding BT (a defacto standard) has legitimate uses and that their servers can't cope with the demand. Oh well, I guess MS can explain tomorrow on CNet, ZD etc. why their servers crashed under the load.
Why exactly would Apple give any money to Adobe to use PDF? Your believe that Apple paid off Adobe is totally without merit or evidence. Apple are simply using an open format, as is allowed by the licensing.
Of course Microsoft want to to, and personally I don't think Adobe have a leg to stand on in complaining about it. The only worry with Microsoft as always is that "their" PDF won't be quite compatible with everyone elses.
and of course you have a language that printers have been speaking for quite a long time. You could even "send a document in PS format directly to a printer..."
Remarkable. MS once again on the bleeding edge of technology.
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
Where the hell is the PDF? Aside from the fact that this is really fucking annoying it has some really worrying implications. They're trying to boot out the PDF format, which is nice, open and ubiquitous with their own format - and they're using their monopoly on the desktop operating system market to achieve this.
Not to be a pro-MS shill, but supporting PDF over XPS is kind of like appls vs. apples. XPS is a totally open standard, its XML based. SUre, it's "controlled" by Microsoft, but PDF is "controlled" by Adobe. One is really no better than the other. PDF is just more popular right now.
Slashcode bug # 497457 - unfixed since December 2001 - Go look it up!
o/~ Join us now and share the software
It seems that Vista is going to be a decent piece of software, if even on Slashdot you can read people make positive comments. As I'm probably going to buy a Macbook, I'm really interested whether Vista is going to run on that. Has anybody tried?
I'm not questioning the legitimacy of Adobes possible lawsuit, but I'm saying that while Adobe is considering suing MS for having PDF support in Office 2007, they have a reason for not wanting to use Adobes PDF format and rather use their own...
Actually, you're still wrong. By implementing both PDF and XPS they can move people to their toolset and away from Adobe's before they have the format switch bump in the road. Adobe is making sure that bump is right away and thus making it harder for people to transition slowly.
I fail to see how MS allowing support for their own format in their software package is a violation of the law. By following your logic and interpritation[sic] of the law, basicly[sic] anybody could make a calculator for Windows, try to sell it and then file a lawsuit against MS for incorporating a calculator in Windows by default as a part of the price for the OS and thereby pushing their own software.
Have you ever purchased a calculator application, or downloaded one that was ad supported or while looking at ads on the page? If so, did it pre-date Windows inclusion of a calculator? If so, then yes that company can take MS to court and MS will probably lose.
The thing about antitrust law is markets not products. There is an existing market for PDF creation tools, thus if MS enters that market (either with PDF or XPS) they must not, in any way, gain an advantage from the fact that they have a monopoly on Windows. If they do, they are breaking the law. This includes a specific prohibition on tying products to one another (like with shared, proprietary file formats they both use but that others cannot freely use) and in particular they are prohibited from the form of tying called "bundling" where products are put in the same package and sold together for one price.
While I'm no expert in US law...
That is an understatement. I'm no expert either, but I've at least read the US antitrust laws and some expert summations of them. It is not all that complex. If I create a calculator program for Windows, but MS already has an existing one, they're not entering into the market, I'm trying to create one. That is not the case for portable document formats, for which there is an existing, healthy market. If you want to argue this stuff, at least educate yourself.