Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Latest Vista Build Making Real Progress

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the better-build dept.

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."

12 of 263 comments (clear)

  1. PRINT View by in2mind · · Score: 5, Informative

    Printable view here
    http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?com mand=printArticleBasic&articleId=9001888

    --
    Wincopy
  2. Highlights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The server is pretty sluggish right now, so here are some choice tidbits:

    "... 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 ..."

    " ... license verification now involves a latex glove for Microsoft's safety, and astro-glide for customer comfort, a major improvement over ..."

    "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."

  3. Beta Coverage by bano · · Score: 5, Funny

    taco needs to create windersvistabeta.slashdot.org for all this shit.
    Seriously why does a friggin beta need so much coverage here.

    1. Re:Beta Coverage by Tim · · Score: 5, Funny

      taco needs to create windersvistabeta.slashdot.org for all this shit.

      Nah...they just need to give it its own icon. A panoramic view of a landfill seems appropriate....

      --
      Let's try not to let fact interfere with our speculation here, OK?
  4. Deleting Shortcuts with UAC by ben+there... · · Score: 5, Insightful
    FTA:
    One of the most mystifying UAC behaviors in Vista Beta 2 caused a prompt to appear when you tried to delete some desktop program shortcuts. If the program was installed for use by all accounts in Vista, then UAC blocked the deletion of the icon in Beta 2 with a permission prompt. If the program was only installed for the current account, then deletion of the same program shortcut would occur normally. Since there's no way for Windows users to know which way the program was installed, even experienced beta testers were confused. For Build 5472, so long as the running account has administrator privileges, then icons installed "on the public desktop" will be deleted without issue when you drop them into the Recycle Bin.

    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.
  5. Re:In other news... by Surt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's news because when you're dealing with MS software, you can't take forward progress for granted. Compare win98se to winME.

    --
    "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
  6. This seems crazy, but... by ndykman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:This seems crazy, but... by peragrin · · Score: 5, Interesting

      i personally had high hopes for vista. Back when they were talking about how the entire thing was rewritten from the ground up. How features like IE were removed from the Kernel, and turned into ordinary apps. I was looking forward to the fact that MSFT would finally fore users and developers to deal with multiple users per computer in a proper way. That the mess that was win32 would be tossed completely in favor of ONLY Aero's .NET setup. I was hoping beyond hope that MSFT's purchase of VPC was a sign that they were going to do a VPC version of win32 inside of Vista so that Vista code ould be stab le and yet still maintain backward compatibility(ala wine, or Classic mode for OS X)

      Then when in Jan. after the first beta was released and the WMF flaw was found not only in XP but Vista as well, and MSFt's excuse was that they hadn't yet checked that dll I knew MSFt was going down hill. Win32 code is still present and merely thrown on top. no separate layer just direct cross calling. no sand boxing old apps properly just an ugly hack to keep everything working. Then with Beta 2 MSFT has to "fine Tune" UAC means that the system doesn't work right. That security will be to complicated for the average users and weak admins which make up 75% of MSFT's install base. MSFT never learned the KISS principal creates a stronger security layer, and then you add on more complicated layers for fine grained control ala selinux, and the other systems designed for hardening a computer, but aren't needed by say my mother.

      UAC can be tightened up well, and MSFT and real admins will do so for Servers and other important machines. But the home user will only get frustrated at it's complexity and find ways to disable it like they have already begun to do in the betas.

      While I had High hopes for Vista, the above combined with the outrageous hardware requirements to deliver the same features found in OS X running on literally a 1/3 of the hardware has found my hope for vista gone. i have converted my brother to OS X If I can get my mother then all will be good. My brother could switch to linux if he desired, and my mother isn't a tech person.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
  7. Unrealistic expectations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
    We each have our own metric here. I'd say Vista was making real progress when it could fit in the memory footprint of XP -- or better yet, 2K.

    2K?!? For a modern operating system? The average Atari 2600 game is larger than that!
  8. Re:In other news... by fm6 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Graphical User Interfaces are intuitive because you can remember the location of things.
    GUIs were intuitive, back when they were invented. That's no longer considered important. Now, the purpose of GUIs is to look cool.
  9. ABUSE OF MODERATION by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.'"
  10. Re:Improvements vs. limitations by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Where the hell do comments like yours even come from? There is so much negative PR around Vista that I guess people just ignore the reality of the system.

    Download Beta 2 (you can get it for free), install it, use it for 20 minutes, and you'll see just how stupid a lot of the FUD is. Vista is very, very much like XP in terms of DRM, restrictions, and the like. TPM support is minimal (only used for BitLocker), you can still install unsigned drivers, uTorrent and Azureus still run fine, K-Lite Mega Codec Pack still installs fine and XVID movies still work.

    I guess the most annoying thing about posts like yours is that they are so nondescript. Which DRM features are you referring to? What limitations are you referring to? I see an OS that is no more restricted than XP. The new DRM features don't mean a thing to me because I don't buy WMV-DRM movies.

    Vista is making real progress and is shaping up to be a substantial, albeit not revolutionary, upgrade from XP. Slashdot doesn't like that.