Slashdot Mirror
Latest Vista Build Making Real Progress
feminazi writes "Computerworld's Scot Finnie has reviewed the newest Vista build and found some significant improvements over Beta 2, which he had previously criticized in pretty strong terms. There's improved performance, greatly reduced installation time, four network control panels and some wizards have all been combined into one nicely organized Network and Sharing Center. Microsoft is also reducing the number of annoying User Access Control (UAC) prompts. There are some minor improvements in the way Media Center handles windows, but it's still buggy."
The sun is HOT!
Seriously, New Beta is more stable then Old Beta. A company takes the advice from beta testers and fixes issues the everyone complaines about.
Congratulations M$, you have amazed us all again!
-EL
Printable view herem mand=printArticleBasic&articleId=9001888
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?co
Wincopy
I wonder how much time is really spent on fixing bugs and improving the system overall, as opposed to putting in various limitations and DRM compliance. Maybe I'm going on a limb out here, but I've lost trust in Windows platform ever since the WGA hit the news. Most likely XP is going to be the last MS-based _personal_ use OS I will ever use (hopefully).
The server is pretty sluggish right now, so here are some choice tidbits:
..."
... license verification now involves a latex glove for Microsoft's safety, and astro-glide for customer comfort, a major improvement over ..."
"... when powering up the hardware required by Vista, we had a brownout affecting neighboring homes -- a massive improvement over the four-city-block blackout resulting from the prior build. This is likely because I was able to pull several pre-release Xeon 5100 boards out of the render farm for Aero
"
"While it was annoying to have to confirm my Firefox download 18 times, Microsoft graciously refrained from sending another squad of Khazak mercenaries to 'verify safe uninstall of hacker tools.'"
"Vist has not yet drowned the remaining kitten."
taco needs to create windersvistabeta.slashdot.org for all this shit.
Seriously why does a friggin beta need so much coverage here.
Some goofs may be obvious to us because they were seen with fresh eyes. When you work with something long enough you tend to forget that bad things are there.
"Go into the hall of mirrors and have a bloody hard look at yourself" - HG Nelson
I wonder if this build was delivered wrapped in hundred dollar bills.
> Duke Nuken Forever?
Yes, and the TV ads will be done by the Prophet Zarquon.
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
That's an odd criticism of UAC. With XP, if you run as a limited-access user, it simply prevents you from deleting the All Users shortcuts at all. Of course Vista's UAC would require a password for that. You don't have permission to modify that folder.
Apparently the criticism must be coming from people who never ran XP securely. That said, it's probably more convenient now. No right-clicking Windows Explorer and having to hit Run As like you do in XP to delete All Users shortcuts.
I find it interesting that Bill Gates at a recent symposium told Microsoft affiliates that there is a 20% chance that Vista would slip again. Since I live in Seattle, I have friends who are developers over there who swear it will never make the January deadline.
I love it when they are already talking about the new release slipping when they have already made promises through their teeth for the last 3 years.
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
It is kind of bizarre to read the reactions to Vista's progress towards release from Linux and OS X fans.
It's like there is an underlying bitterness that Vista is coming together that is attempted to be covered up with sarcasm directed at Microsoft.
I guess it is dawning on people who hoped that Vista would crash and burn and Microsoft customers would come fleeing to their favorite niche OS that that simply won't be happening.
Regardless, golf clap for Microsoft for taking so fucking long just to get a system that for the most part should have been released at least five years ago. Linux will continue to make incremental gains mostly outside the US, OS X will continue to fade into market-share irrelevance, and the rest of the world will upgrade to the latest version of Windows.
Same old, same old.
Dear Internet,
Serve the interests of your users, or DIAF. I don't really care which.
Sincerely,
The User
Am I the only one that is hoping that Microsoft can deliver a better OS? Like it or not (or for most ./ers), it's widely used, it will be in use at some point, and frankly, if it is an improvement, then doesn't that help everybody out. Less windows problems and better windows software seems to mean less headaches for everybody all round. Wouldn't three major (okay, 3.5 Sorry BSD folks 8-) great OS choices be better than two? Personally I don't think XP/2003 is all that bad, I use them everyday.
I just don't buy the whole Microsoft is hurting Linux/Apple/BSD etc. because all of those systems are growing and getting better all the time. Linux is getting better and better, OS X is super cool, and so on.
Sure, I think some people would hope that a awful Vista will sink MS. Well, it won't. because if ME didn't, I can't see Vista doing it. So, maybe it's best to hope for a good OS from MS, more secure, less bugs, less @#$@#$@#%%^ spyware/adware infections for us to all fix, etc. etc, and then just focus on using what we like.
2K?!? For a modern operating system? The average Atari 2600 game is larger than that!
Sure, I care about the next release of OpenOffice or Firefox because it's the features in these applications that interest me in my day-to-day usage but the core OS is pretty much transparent to me.
I also use XP (to a lesser extent). It seems pretty stable and once I got rid of the appalling "nursery school" default GUI and got it looking like Windows 2000 again, I'm pretty content using it. Yep, it's got big security holes but I avoid Outlook and IE, run the occasional virus check/anti-spyware application and avoid installing and uninstalling too much software - as a result, it stays pretty clean and works well. I've got drivers for all my hardware, stick all my important files on a Linux SAMBA share and I can search and index every file I have with Linux command-line tools.
If you're an application developer, it's pretty important to know what the next version of your OS will have in terms of libraries, APIs, etc. But why do the 99% of *mere desktop users* care about the OS? Isn't it better to stick with an OS that's a few years old, has been patched and service packed to run much better than when it first came out rather than trade it all in for a new OS that will have new bugs and problems?
I don't use Apple machines and think much about being an Apple user is about image - but to give them their credit, they do seem to care less about the OS and more about the applications they can run on their machines which, to me, is the only thing a normal desktop user should care about.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
It never ceases to amaze me the predictablility of Slashdot replies to any article about Vista. Much of the comments are either people complaining about slips, complaining about having to read Microsoft articles, or making generalizations about the bugginess of MS. You don't have to read these, you choose to read it, so don't complain. It's news because it is going to be the dominant OS in the world when it's released, like it or not. Yes, it's slipped a lot and will in all likelihood slip again. So what? Nobody I've heard or read that talked about the slips did it because they were disappointed and wanted to get on the Vista train, it's always point out that it somehow makes Microsoft stupid. I for one would rather they take their time and come out with a polished end product. And yes, as it has been pointed out umpteen-million times, Linux is more stable/more secure/humanities hope for the future, but point that out to people who mostly all agree with you is pointless. I sometimes think that if MS disbanded and donated all their money and technology to open source developers, the comments to the slashdot report would read like a bad eBay seller. "OMG TOOK FOREVER F--!"
How is this a troll? WinME was a horrible crashfest that was actually less reliable than Windows 98, and ran less software. It's pretty hilarious to me that they eliminated the 16 bit system in an effort to make it more reliable, and failed completely, only accomplishing a dramatic reduction of backwards compatibility.
If you were going to give the parent comment a negative mod, it would be flamebait. The difference between a troll and flamebait is that you believe your flamebait, but trolling by definition means you are expressing a view that you yourself do not believe in order to elicit a desired response. However, I consider it to be a salient point given Microsoft's track record. WinME isn't the only example, either, I can remember a service pack for NT4 and another one for Win2k that both screwed things ALL up.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I knew it! Vista's going to open a portal to hell.