Slashdot Mirror
Quirks and Tips For Upgrading To Vista
jcatcw writes "Computerworld's Scot Finnie has some advice for those considering an upgrade to Vista. He praises the work Microsoft has done on the installation program, but thinks it still presents problems for those who wish to upgrade. He recommends the free Windows Vista Upgrade Adviser. Then, be sure to pick the best edition for your use." From the article: "Don't bother wiping your hard disk. Just run the in-place upgrade from your previous installation. You'll be given the option to perform either an Upgrade or Custom (advanced) installation. Opt for the Custom install to clean-install Vista, and Windows Vista Setup does something smart: It creates a folder called Windows.old in your root directory that contains your old Documents and Settings, Program Files and Windows folders. (Note that on my test machine, this added step used an additional 7GB of disk storage.)"
why would anyone disable a perfectly good computer?
The upgrade adviser requires .NET to download both .NET and the upgrade adviser is about 28 MB. Twice the size of a Windows 3.1 install just to scan your hardware and tell you if its up to spec.
Libertarian Leaning Political Discussion Forum.
download.ubuntu.org
Maybe you could get some spare change for that piece of paper with a holy number on it if you sell it on ebay.
This space is intentionally staring blankly at you
Advice for those considering upgrading to Vista: DON'T!
You'll get it soon enough with a new machine. Why put yourself through hell now?
Here's the relatively ad-free all-in-one-page print version.
Some Vista Vs. XP info:a /page11.html#conclusion_ko_for_windows_vista
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/29/xp-vs-vist
"Overall, applications performed as expected, or executed slightly slower than under Windows XP."
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
I have a strong feeling I will never upgrade to windows Vista. Only thing I need windows for is playing Eve-online. If they force me, i will let them know their game is costing me $200+ which will piss me off.
I can't believe 'home' editions can not fax or scan. must be a misprint. Surely since MS is trying to be all 'lifestyles' like everyone else these days. and scan is no different from camera.
"Don't bother
Works for me
Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
buying the most expensive, costliest version there is. In fact, buy 2 or 3. Vista is just that good. Regards, Steve Bal... uh I mean, Eve Kalmer (damn... forgot to log in as AC.)
Tag this 'slownewsday'
What is this pro-Microsoft peice doing on Slashdot?! There's nothing slamming Vista, nothing on DRM, there isn't even a flying chair or mention of upgrading to Ubuntu instead. I'm disgusted!
From the artice:
What?! 'Works fine', isn't this sort of language explicitly disallowed by the Slashdot terms of service? I also did a search of the article and there's not a single instance of the string: 'Linux'.
I'm going to transform myself into a mighty hawk. Either that or I'll just go and work at Dixons, haven't decided yet.
How can I uninstall 80% of Vista after I have installed it on my 128-megabyte Pentium-II system?
I am 63 years young, and I use my computer only for e-mail and Yahoo! chat.
Personally I allocate a partition that's purely dedicated to operating system and software. So in case the OS does a real *uck-up* I won't lose all data and I only have to re-install. The only thing that I'm annoyed with is the "Documents and Settings" directory that is allocated on the OS partition, and I really would like to have the option of reallocating that beast to a different partition.
But of course - you can do it the M$ way and allocate everything in a huge partition and when shit happens you aren't up shit creek, you are up the mother of all shit rivers instead...
A yearly re-installation of Windows seems to be the frequency for me to keep things stable and performing.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
This also happened to me when I went from RC2 to Vista Business Final - it made a backup directory which I found nice and incredibly helpful. It really takes a lot of the worry about reinstalling.
While alot of things get moved to Windows.old, other things don't. Make sure you backup your stuff!
For example, Firefox bookmarks in are stored an application data folder, which doesn't get moved.
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
This seems to be the popular sentiment, but you will have to eventually. The CIO of my company decides to install vista on his machine. I am responsible for backing up, virus scanning, etc. I took a look at vista and was completely lost. At that moment I knew that if I didnt want to play the fool, I'd better learn this shit. Its an alien feeling to me to sit infront of a machine at work and not instantly know how to do everything. I didn't like that feeling.
I didnt do anything crazy like install it at home (2k 4ever), but I did install it on my main work pc. To tell you the truth, aside from the fact that there are no drivers and many programs no longer work, its not that different from xp. You have to turn all the crap off, change the folders back to classic, etc. After that it pretty much operates like winxp and win2k. Is it worth upgrading a working XP copy? Hell no! Is it worth learning about so that your comfortable? Hell yes.
If you had asked me a month ago if I planned to move to vista I would have laughed circles around you. Well m$ wins again i suppose. Its not all bad though. I rather enjoy "windows mail" the OE replacement. They have moved away from database based (pst/dbx) mail stores and now just dump raw EML files in directories (THANK YOU!!). Its also quite a bit faster than oe and sending and recieving mail. Infact if there was a standalone version, I would probably consider running it on my home machine. It even has a calander so I could finaly move people away from outlook. There is no way we would deploy it across the organization, but its nice to know in 5 years we wont have to have outlook on the machines.
If you fix computers, you will have to learn it eventually. Theres no use delaying the inevitable.
I'll just use my special getting high powers one more time...
what the heck are you supposed to do with your system (as mine) when you depend on it, and a complex configuration you've spend a long time building?
Image it first? That's my guess.
Not to slight you but anytime you're doing an operation of this magnitude on a system that you truely value the information on you should take steps to create some type of backup of said system in case of any number of failures. In your case you stepped into an unproven product (and no, I'm not MS bashing by saying that) on what you make seem like a critical system. Anything could have happened, be thankful it went as well as it did. You seriously risked total data loss.
Bad Microsoft. I don't *care* if there was an option for having Windows.old - it's still bad practice to *not* explain and make this obvious.
Again, not to slight you but anyone with any significant time using PCs can tell you that installs of this nature normally aren't very easy to roll back if it's an option at all. Not to say that MS has put out a good product and probably didn't fumble the ball in some aspect (again, not MS bashing, I simply haven't used Vista) but normally MS is fairly good at pointing out to users that OS upgrades and service packs may (as in probably will) cause system changes that simply can not be undone.
OSs aren't meant to do everything except wipe. Users need to be aware of the potential data loss/system failures they face without having their hands held through the process. Unless you're a "n00b" you should have known better than to simply "flick the switch" and hope for the best.
Hopefully making images of such a vital PC will become a practice in your future instead of another hindsight regret.
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
I figured this was just here, because it's been a feature of Mac OS in virtually every version since 10.2, released 2002 IIRC.
It's called "Archive and Install," and it did exactly what's being described. It moved the old system into a folder and then installed a fresh copy on the root level of the HD.
To be honest, I'm rather surprised if this is the first time Windows has offered such a feature. Given the seeming regularity with which Windows seems to like being reinstalled it seems like a no-brainer. How many focus groups did it take them to come up with this?
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
Given the complete and utter riduculousness that is Windows Activation, your best bet is to upgrade to Windows 2000. It seems like Windows downgrades with every release aside from slicker graphics. Windows Activation is also a total insult to the consumer. Think about it - they expect consumers to call in and explain themselves whenever they upgrade or try to (legally!) move their license to another computer. And watch out for the OEM scams where you don't actually get a license to Windows with your new machine, just a license to run Windows on that particular machine and, if it breaks down or whatever, oh well, tough luck for you.
If the software industry goes the Window Activation route, soon, with the same frequency as personal firewall confirm/deny messages, you'll be getting messages on your screen: "This piece of software has detected something anamalous with your usage pattern. Call xxx-xxx-xxxx and explain yourself immediately."
As I was reading TFA I followed this link to an article about the new GUI complete with screenshots.
After viewing the screenshots I've determined that most of the new features in Vista are a rehash of the same graphical tools that sysadmins have been using for years--except now they're brushed up with Apple polish and included on mass market consumer m0dels. The vast majority of the population won't ever care about or use them. The desktop seems to be the MS edition of Sun's Looking Glass whose capabilities have come to fruition in the free software realm through Gnome, Enlightenment, Beryl, and KDE.
The question I have is: what is really new and improved in Vista?
The progression from Win95, through 98, through 2k, through ME, through XP, to Vista is like reading a flame war between two contestants who never give up: each revision expands on the previous base to produce a progressively larger work. To be fair current GNU/Linux offerings seem to be inheriting the same progressive bloat though not to the same extent. Unlike flame war contestants, though, OS designers are supposed to look for ways to streamline the final product and deliver top performance with maximum efficiency. While Vista has (by screenshots) top performance it isn't much further ahead of free software for the millions which MS has spent preparing it.
In conclusion I'll definitely agree: Don't bother.
the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
I'm not going to dig on Vista or MSFT. I don't use their products at home or at work, if I can avoid doing so, but that's not a good reason to rip on them or people wanting to try Vista. I'm guessing that the majority of those attempting a Vista upgrade already are aware they have the option to go with Apple or Linux and have a reason for not going that route.
I'm curious about why those of you doing are putting yourself through the exercise? What's compelling you to try Vista now? As opposed to waiting a few months until the compatibility issues are sorted out or it comes with a new PC? I'm not sure Vista will ever support every video, sound or ethernet card from the beginning of computer time and I'm not sure it's a good use of MSFT's resources to attempt that kind of massive hardware reach back.
So why now? Is there some feature you really want? Are there games that are Vista only? Or is just techno-lust at this stage? Wanting to be technically proficient in MSFT's latest and greatest? There's no right answer here, I'm really wondering.
Or did I miss the big rally where everyone filed by the podium where some guy hit you in the forehead while yelling, "The power of Ballmer compels you!" ;)
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
Do you really expect grannys(or Joe sixpack/whatever we are calling typical users this week) to be able to cope with this. How can they cope with picking from mutiple versions (the comparison grid in the article has 27 rows!), downloading software to check that there hardware is compatible and then the install itself.
After all this (again according to the article), they may find that the Windows XP software they buy (or already have) will not work on it. They just want to be able to go to a shop, buy software, and know it will work.
Windows is find for geeks who know it, but the average users is better off with something that works out of the box like MacOS or Ubuntu.
Specs: Core 2 Duo E6300, 2GB RAM, dual nVidia 8800 GTS 320Mb in SLI config, Seagate 320GB perpendicular storage SATA HD, ASUS P5N32 SLI mobo.
Installation was the best part. It asked a few questions and took off. I came back 30 minutes later to the sign-on screen. It went downhill from there.
I downloaded Vista updates (don't think there were many) which required a reboot. No big deal; reboot is rather quick ( Since I couldn't right click on the desktop to get my display settings, I dug into Control Panel. Looked for Display. Looked for Graphics. Aha, nVidia control panel. Interesting that it installed that. I wanted to extend my desktop to my second monitor. Only the single monitor choice was given. Checked device manager. Both graphics cards detected, but only one monitor. Checked 3D settings. It recognized my PC was SLI capable and recommended enabling it. Sure. "Accept or deny?" Accept. Reboot.
Back into control panel, nVidia panel. Still only one monitor choice even though I see both monitors now listed. I downloaded the 53Mb nVidia driver file. "Accept or deny?" Accept. (Crap, that Mac commercial is 100% true.) I'm on 15Mb fiber. Throughput was only 400KB/s and took this about five minutes. Installed, reboot.
Back into the panels. Still only sees one monitor. THAT'S IT!!! I'm done.
Out comes the XP Pro CD. Wipe the disk. Install.
I downloaded all 67 updates in less than 2 mins. Installed in about 7 mins.
Downloaded nVidia 53Mb driver at 1.7MB/s in less than 30secs. Installed. Reboot.
Right click, properties, settings, extend. Viola! Two 19" LCD monitors working together.
Downloaded Serive Pack 2 in one minute and installed in about 10 minutes.
No mas Vista. Estupido!
Windows Vista Setup does something smart
Do it yourself, because no one else will do it yourself. [beta blockade 10-17 Feb]
GeForce MX 5500, it would crash every 15 minutes with an infinite loop driver
Ok, did you happen to read the drivers? the 100.xx NVidia drivers DO NOT YET have support for any card lower than the 6000 series of Geforce cards.
Use the non-OpenGL ICD MS drivers in the box, or find the 97.xx or 98.xx series of drivers for the 5xxx series of NVidia cards. If not, the drivers usually lock up, just as you describe.