Slashdot Mirror
What Vista SP1 Means To You
An anonymous reader writes "Geek.com has an interview with Nick White, Microsoft's Vista Product Manager, covering the upcoming release of Vista SP1. The interview goes over some of the new features, how the change will affect admins, and how Microsoft decides if a change should be rolled out as an update or as part of the service pack. One of the most interesting questions asks whether people should feel that they have to wait until SP1 to upgrade to the operating system, a common practice with Windows users. White writes off this practice as no longer being necessary and notes how Windows Update has lessened the importance of the release of a service pack. Just the same, a News.com article explores the possibility that this update will finally begin driving users to Vista."
So, with the service pack you're finally getting a stable product? Where's the value for all the money you're laying out? Pay hundreds of dollars, put up with anal probe product activation and wait almost a year for what you should have gotten in the first place.
I'm sure that makes sense on some planet...just not this one.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
Mr. White's assertions aside, IMHO, MS is releasing this service pack as early as possible to entice people into believing Vista is "ready". The practice in the industry to wait for the first few updates is to firmly entrenched for them to simply "write it off".
And in my experience, lest my FOSS bias shine through, the idea of waiting for the first few updates goes for most software, not just Windows or other MS software.
Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
Sorry, but I just don't buy it. People don't switch to Vista because of:
1) hardware compatibility issues,
2) software compatibility issues, and
3) annoyances such as UAC, which negatively impact hinder the user experience (though, I do understand their utility).
In a corporate setting, the first two are, without question, show stoppers, and the last is a burden for support staff. Further, XP *works* for most people, so there's little reason to switch. A service pack for Vista does nothing to address these issues (nor could it).
You know something's wrong when you're talking about driving people to use software rather than attracting them to it.
DNA just wants to be free...
I used to know a guy on a campus social sciences mailing list that could not discuss Islam or Islamic society without using the term "islamofascist". Every single time. And all his references were to blog entries he had written, most of which were plain wrong or simple misrepresented facts. It gets old after a while, but more importantly it's the equivalent to using "poopyhead" when talking about someone you don't like. It's impossible to have conversations of any sort with people like that.
It's funny that you talk about Microsoft's credibility here, given that your slaughter of intelligent discourse also eliminates most of yours.
I like Slashdot but lately it's becoming more and more like Digg.
To speak of Vista's "failure" in the marketplace is desperately premature, if not inane.
A new OS or fork that fails to gain more than 4% of the user base in 9 months could only be considered a success in Redmond. We have already been through a Christmas and back to school sale. Why should next year be any different? M$ still thinks xbox and zune are competitive, so what do I know?
If you want to talk about desperate, think about M$'s position. Release a brand new OS and a brand new Office suit and then see no difference to your bottom line. See banks, airlines, hardware stores and others deploy rival software, "where it counts". See vendors sell the same rival software. Their software is buggy because they opted for the great content lockdown instead of taking care of things that mattered.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
From the comments I would propose that the traditional linux stronghold has been lost. Anyone making negative references to Microsoft products seems to be modded down and 'out yelled', whether the comments are on technical merits, anecdotal or opinionated, or derogatory.
Of course derogatory for its own sake should be modded down. Technical conversations should be directly rebuffed unless they are obvious lies (it goes both ways Twitter...). Anecdotal; ymmv. Opinionated should be reasoned with technical basis in a civil manner. Unfortunately civility is a dying characteristic [that is an unsubstantiated opinion modders] in the world in general following chivalry.
Semi-automatic amateur armchair Australian philosopher; conjecture ready at any moment...
Ick! XP is ugly and feels slow compared to Vista. There are so many little things you pick up, like there is finally an easy way to see the full path to running processes, once you try to support people using XP you just get frustrated! Vista is a huge improvement over XP.
That doesn't mean there aren't bugs. Their new TCP/IP stack has all kinds of bugs. There is a bug (and I'm too lazy to find the KB on it) that fucks up how it sends ACK's to other devices. As it turns out, it will hang the MediaMVP in my bedroom. Some vendors software gets buggy too - Vista changed a lot of the API for explorer (the file one, dammit!) that seems to crash TortiseSVN every now and then (though explorer.exe is the one that does the crashing...)
Given a little more time to mature, I suspect many people will look at this like XP vs 3.1. They really just look and act that much different.