Slashdot Mirror
TechNet Users Revolt Over Vista SP1 Unavailability
I Don't Believe in
Imaginary Property writes "There's a growing revolt among Microsoft TechNet & MSDN subscribers
who are frustrated that they can't yet get Vista SP1 and test their software on
it. This can't be good news for anyone hoping that SP1 will have better
compatibility. While SP1 has been released to manufacturing, and pirate copies are easy to
find, Microsoft is withholding it from subscribers until early March.
According to the article, some frustrated users are upset enough that they plan
to abandon TechNet entirely and turn to piracy." Update: 02/12 17:37
GMT by KD : Sean0michael
writes, "Aaccording to the Technet blog, they have pushed up the date to before the end
of February, though no exact date is mentioned."
How is Microsoft abusing its users still news?
I don't know if I'm just special or not, but if you go to Connect(.microsoft.com) and download the enabler for Service Pack 1 Refresh 2 and, well, enable it, you can get Windows Vista Service Pack 1 RTM. Microsoft has confirmed (I am pretty sure) that Refresh 2 == RTM: http://www.mydigitallife.info/2008/02/07/microsoft-confirms-vista-sp1-rc-refresh-2-rcr2-is-rtm-release/.
:)
I'm not even a technet subscriber or anything... just a beta tester.
MS doesn't want people giving SP1 bad reviews before it is released to the general public. That would damage Vista's reputation even more, and Microsoft most certainly doesn't want that.
Don't mind the extra X. Alex
My company is most likely in our last year of MSDN participation, but it has nothing to do with SP1.
The relationship between devs and MS has been deteriorating for some time. Off the top of my head I might point to the closing off of the IE development team from communication w/independents that occurred some time ago.
I am too jaded to sit here and detail all the problems that have been developing, so I will leave that to others. Needless to say it took quite some time before my partners were willing to consider looking away from MS as they have been developing with the Windows product line since 3.1.
Given Apple's history of poor Windows software and the convoluted implementation of iTunes on Windows, I'd say its the other way around.
MSDN subscribers, please remember that MSFT really cares about you:
...
developers, developers, developers,
developers, developers, developers,
developers, developers, developers,
I love this company!
Steve
Why bother?
Didn't you read the summary? Nobody's talking about switching to a better OS. They're switching to pirated Windows. That means they'll still be writing software that draws people to Windows, and they'll be opening themselves up to lawsuits.
It's sheer genius on Microsoft's part. They save money by not packaging the SP with MSDN, they have developers wooing users to their OS, and they get to sue the developers for way more than a regular license fee or MSDN price.
Maybe not
Last Friday, the company released Vista SP1 for download by both individuals and companies who previously beta tested the service pack. This week, the company went further. "At the end of this week we will be making the English version of Windows Vista SP1 available to volume licensing customers ... Other languages will follow soon ... [and] later this month, SP1 will be available to MSDN and TechNet Plus subscribers," Mike Nash, corporate vice president of Windows product management, said in a posting on the Windows Vista Team Blog today. The primary hold up for broadly releasing SP1 has been minor glitches involving device driver installation, basically requiring that some device drivers will need to be reinstalled after installing SP1. Volume Buyers to Get Vista SP1 Early [February 11]
This definitely seems like molehill territory if SP1R2 is the same as the SP1 RTM. The developers themselves do seem to have one legitimate greivance amongst the whole thing: If they received the details at exactly the same time as the populace, what value does their TechNet or MSDN subscriptions truely have in the long run?
I'm not saying NONE i'm just saying less than they expected.
Not that big a deal though, cancel your technet or msdn if this really sets your face on fire.
Ice Cream has no bones.
I saved that file to a CD and all that happens when I load it up is that explorer comes up with 1 file on the CD.
I am d3matt
The bad reviews are already out so what is left to gain? Distributing SP1 to developers will confirm the reviews but they are the type that has read about it anyway. Keeping it will not prove the reviews wrong but it will irritate developers who expect things to be bad and expect that much more work before the public gets it.
Business plan:
1. Make a new version that developers will have to support.
2. Send factory-cracked copies to all the pirates.
3. Wait for developers to resort to using the pirated copies.
4. Sue them!
5. Profit!
He means this Windows Vista SP1 instead
This is a great example of a trend that has been building steam for several years now. The fact that pirate networks are more often than not, the easiest way to get what you need, whether you are a paying customer or not. Who cares if its a minor update. The fact is, the distribution chains of the data thieves, the pirates, the "underground", are more complete than legitimate commercial enterprises. Pirate networks can provide the product you want, when the company you PAY cannot.
SP1 caused numerous stability problems on my laptop and I prefer to skip this service pack. The drivers do not like the changes and yes they are compatibility problems. sp1 is not a magic bullet to fix Vista's i/o problems either unfortunately.
http://saveie6.com/
The disk i/o is teh worst part of Vista more than anything.
:-)
Not only is free being a rip off but customers are actually paying more to upgrade to XP. I would do so if I could get drivers for my notebook.
It works and I suppose thats the most important thing. The new GUI can also be fustrating too until a month or so to get used to it.
The new sp1 caused numerous blue screens on my notebook when I tried a rc so I think I will skip this sp out and wait for sp1.1.
http://saveie6.com/
I'm greatly amused by this.
Another example of Microsoft Genuine Advantage in action.
Remember, pirate software and get the latest support now, pay through the nose and get what you want much much later...
Maybe this is just a biased view(I certainly haven't seen it all); but it seems like the techies responsible for field work on MS stuff just have more pain and less fun than the *nix techies do. These guys are drinking, and paying for, the kool-aid and they can't even get a RTM copy ahead of the press flacks and pirates. Over in *nix land, you can play with pre-alpha or later any time you want. These are the people who advocate for, plan, install, and support MS's stuff on the corporate level. They are the people whose fairly cheap labor helps prop up all the TCO "get the facts" and MS won't even give them the release in time to help them do their jobs. This is not exactly "catch the devs on IRC channel foo on bar.org" territory.
I can understand why MS plays hard and mean on licensing, format lock-in, and the like. That is just good(if unpleasant) business. I don't understand this, though. It would cost them basically nothing to throw the people who eat their shit 9 to 5 a bone. And they don't. Why?
There always can be incompatibility problems. So you release it in the order of people who are most able to find and deal with those. The people who did beta testing should have no problem. If they were willing to run beta code, they are willing to deal with what comes with it. Volume customers are a next logical step. They presumably manage their updates and have a competent systems person so they can test and decide if a rollout is appropriate or if they need to wait for drivers/software to by updated. Then once they are sorted, you look at a public release.
Of course none of that really matters. A sizable crowd at Slashdot has just decided they'll do whatever they can to badmouth Vista, I guess in some hope all their FUD will keep it from succeeding.
Wow Apple software not running properly on a Windows OS, say it isn't so...
Apple's software development for Windows is like a Toyota dealer fixing your Ferrari. It took Apple 10 years to get a QuickTime installer for WIndows that didn't try to lock the UI, because that is how they always did it on Macs, even though Windows users hadn't seen it since the Win3.1 days.
At least when MS develops Apple software, they get real Mac user and real developers and products like Office are some of the most polished applications for Macs. Apple could at least hire a team of 10 people that use or 'get' Windows at the very least, instead of this cross platform inferior designed crap that barely runs.
Well since it seems to have support for about 5% of my apps and about 75% of my hardware, I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree.
Please cut the crap with the "Just replace Windows with Linux it's better!" thing. This kind of crap will actually hurt Linux adoption overall. Linux is an alternative to Windows that is viable for some people, however it isn't a drop in replacement. If you market it as such, people are going to be pissed when they find out you are lying. Using Linux involves tradeoffs. Now that can be ok for many people, however you need to be up front about them and let people make their own choice. To try and pretend that it is just like Windows but better is rather dishonest, and counterproductive.
Patience grasshopper!
Iraq billions
Those of us who have TechNet Plus subscriptions also get lots of licenses (i.e. install keys) to run the various Microsoft products, not just download the software. Also, I have been running SP1 RTM since last week, and I downloaded it from Windows Update. Those who participate in the Betas (the connect site) get the ability to test SP1 RTM early. If you want that ability, then participate in the Betas.
Using Microsoft software has always been somewhat of an abusive relationship, we're all used to that.
However, this time around with Vista, it just seems like they just don't give a shit anymore. Really slow, incompatible stuff this time. They've always been really good about backwards compatibility (Sure we can all find half a million examples of stuff that didn't work with each new OS release), but this time I just look at the whole thing with a boggled "What are they doing and why?" expression.
And now this stuff with Vista SP1. I was really shocked when I logged into my MSDN account and SP1 wasn't there.
It's like they don't want Vista to actually be successful. Like they are actively trying to fail this time. And their numbers about 100 million sold are really a smoke and mirrors tactic. Yes, I've bought a copy of Vista, as it came with my newest computer. Stayed on for about an hour and then I went down the challenging, but more rewarding path of the XP x64 edition, Vista just seemed to crawl. (Plus all the BestBuy crapware pre-installed made the decision pretty easy)
So, anyone have a good tinfoil hat theory about what the hell they are up to this time? This is probably the most crucial time in nearly 2 decades for them to release a near-perfect OS - They are getting percentage points eaten by Linux and OSX constantly. People are sick of their shit, and this time they screw the pooch, TWICE. I don't get it. Is it just Bill Gates leaving the ship, or has Google sucked up all the good developers, or something else? Do they want it to fail, and fail soon, so that they can back out of their *IAA DRM agreements?
This is almost seeming too well planned for mere incompetence. Which leaves actual maliciousness. But then, why??
I'm frustrated that XP SP3 hasn't been released yet. That's what we really need.
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
Seriously, I downloaded the Safari for Windows beta thing to use as a KHTML test platform for web development but was immediately turned off by the OS X window stylings and behaviors, as well as the extra font smoothing that went beyond the built in smoothing to make everything look really blurry and ugly. From what I've seen, iTunes on Windows is the same way although I have never installed that piece of junk on my computer. In contrast, whenever I've used Office for Mac at school it acts just like any other Mac application, and sometimes I even preferred it over the Windows version. Now, I'm going to conjecture wildly and say it's Apple's arrogance that causes it to completely disregard all Windows GUI conventions. Most of my dislike of Apple stems from this arrogant vibe that everything should be done either their way or not at all.
All your base are belong to Wii.
Yes folks, only on Slashdots are anti-Microsoft trolls given "interesting" ratings...
You know, I generally enjoy /. However, every so often one of these stories comes up (it seems to be more frequently these days) that is just complete bullshit (Disclosure: I've been an MSDN subscriber for years). I don't know anyone who is complaining about SP availability. There will always be some who complain, but that's more than likely a very small minority. For those testing compatibility, the betas and RCs have been out for quite a while for the sole purpose of testing applications. I haven't worked with them personally, but a conservative guess would be 95% of functionality can be testing on the RCs.
What gets me though is that over the weekend a much more impactful event occurred: the Windows 2008 RTM. Not only that, but Windows 2008 IS available on MSDN (all English flavors at least, and most likely TechNet as well, but I don't know for sure). Windows 2008 is a much more important release than SP 1, but, alas, that gets no coverage on /.
This claim always kills me...
How many of those 100 million users are part of that statistic because they were forced to be (i.e. could not get XP), and how many of those 100 million have wiped Vista off their machines and reverted back to XP?
That number really just tells you how many copies were sold, I'm sure it would be much less if MS didn't force people to get it on new machines.
They claim that it's as successful as the launch of XP, well no shit! I think they sell more computers now days than they did when XP came out, so take that into consideration.
100 million copies,
75 million disapointed customers
+++ATH0 NO CARRIER
How are they revolting? Are they heading over to the Apple Store and buying MacBooks? If they really wanted to revolt, they would install Linux or FreeBSD or buy a Macintosh and never look back. TechNet users are particularly hard core Windows lovers, masochistic, really. I bet they tough this one out. They are not revolting. They are reveling in their delicious pain.
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
Most Windows uses I know are quite revolting, actually. (someone had to say it, if it hasn't already)
Most of the stuff on
MSDN and Technet should also have access to it now as well today
"Should" being the operative word, which is what people are complaining about. It isn't there. I checked both MSDN and Technet today just in case. Apparently, you didn't.
Good job supporting the opinion you intended to criticize. I honestly couldn't have done better.
In the Action Pack, we only received Vista Business, but we could upgrade it to Ultimate for $150.
Now to obtain (or retain) the Action Pack you have to take online assessments. I have had my Action Pack for several years now, and I felt rather insulted.
You see, Microsoft is fighting terror^H^H^H^H^H^H piracy by forcing these assessments on Action Pack subscribers. This move is intended to "keep the Action Pack out of the hands of people who shouldn't have it." In other words, people who pay $300 per year and let their friends use five licenses of Office and Windows XP. But what Microsoft does not understand is that making MAPS more difficult to obtain just increases the likelihood that the software will be pirated.
I am really too busy installing its software in Virtual PC or on a real workstation, testing, and learning how to use the software so I can sell to and support my customers. Too busy to read all the marketing horse shit they shove down my throat. Let me tell you how sick and damned tired I was of reading their Truth About Linux (or whatever the hell it was called) materials. I was done with that after the first brochure.
But overall, Microsoft is just pushing us away: the system builders, the techs, the developers. We all slaved away to get Microsoft where it is today, and it needs us no more.
Wanna hear something really stupid? How about that a system builder is not allowed to give a customer a copy of the OEM installation CD of Office 2007. Nope. We are supposed to provide the customer with a way of restoring the installation. Microsoft's recommendation: Ghost, or something similar. What? So if my customer's Office 2007 installation blows up and has to be reinstalled, they get to lose ALL of their data in favor of a Ghost restore.
More hoops. Maybe this is what they want all along, but with the exception of Windows XP and Vista, I no longer sell OEM software with my machines. Server 2003? Retail. Office 2007? Retail. Why? Because it is less of a heartache and wallet-ache when the times comes.
Need to upgrade your server hardware? Copy the installation to a new machine? Bzzzt! Nope, technically the SBS 2003 install and 75 CALs are locked to the original hardware.
Bought Office 2003 Basic Edition and want to upgrade to Professional? Just install the Professional upgrade? Bzzzt! Sorry, this just isn't your day. Basic Edition, as an OEM only edition, does not qualify for the upgrade to Office Professional. However, every version of Office back to 95, even the Works Suites, DO qualify.
Wowsers. Really, Microsoft does not need us anymore. Really. If I wanted to screw your sister I would become your best pal. But now I am screwing your sister I no longer need you as a friend, so piss off.
Interesting that this post showed up on /. after Microsoft news that Windows Vista SP1 is now avaialble to beta testers, volume license users and will be available mid-February to MSDN and Technet subscribers. More information here.
FUD.
Looks like microsoft changed their mind after all the feedback:
http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/02/11/windows-vista-sp1-availability-for-technical-customers.aspx
2K and XP were better in this respect too. Anyway, since you mentioned "laptop" I suspect this is a new dual-core laptop you bought which came with Vista installed - so the improved responsiveness is going to be partly, if not totally, down to the second processor. Unless you haven't got a dual-core machine in which case I'll look like an ass.
The reason people make it sound so bad is because it should be an improvement. The problems it has are pretty unacceptable for a product that represents years (they had what, 5 years?) of development and 'improvement' over XP. If you look at it by itself, it may not be so bad. But compared to its predecessor and competition... well you have to ask some questions.
Daring ploy on MS part now that the competition is getting to be just as good or better than MS.
any brand of *nix doesn't give you MS nagware head aches and Blue screen of death that bring the system to halt.
Nothing like DRM, bad drivers because MS updated something the driver relied on, Bad OS components that purposely disable features in others software make the competitions software dysfunctional (Like the open office on vista using the CONVERT function fails if you downloaded the version with java in it.), and not caring what the home user wants to use but laden them down with BS features they do not want to use.
MS need to evaluate what a customer needs and wants and sell it that way!
No more BS OSes XP is good. AERO sucks it crashes my video card driver just about every time. Back ground processes should not be given normal processing time. windows update should not dominate my network connection if i am on line.
there are other nags i have about Vista but these are my top peeves.
Good luck to anyone still making themselves an MS only house. because your building a house of cards and there is a big gust of wind coming to take them away and that is a bad economy.
They can take their jobs overseas but i guarantee the same results over time will happen to them that has happened to the US auto industry.
no one here will be able to afford you!
keep going ms you will be as well remembered as the auto maker maxwell yet.
tss
Well ehhrmmm actually I'm migrating my customers to Ubuntu. Guess what. Most of them are even happy with it. The first and most important feedback being 'My machine is much more responsive and faster now'. Of cause no big deal once you loose the virus scanner/personal firewall and the adware/spyware scanners running in the background. Now I believe I might be a trend setter, but whats important here is the acceptability by my customers. Clearly they are fed up to take such a step. Some one tell the Gates boy.
I've yet to see Vista come up as a net negative for me, after install. Copying files is an atrocity, there's no doubt about it, but the minor upgrades to damn near everything else means Vista is a definite improvement over XP, at least for the ways in which I use it. I can understand other people have different problems. I also understand and accept that people like to bitch about things for twice the amount of time it would take to find their workarounds. Yes, this is a new OS, and yes, you will have to learn how to do things differently. Anyone expecting otherwise is a fool or a moron. And compared to its competition, the question is simple: can you be a hardcore gamer on any other OS than Windows? Not unless you want to spend half your time configuring Cedega or Wine to do your bidding. And as far as I'm concerned, that's the only question that needs answered. Other people, however, are different, and want different things. They prioritize things differently, and I can accept that. To some, the change in work flow and the requirement on a decent video card and processor may seem like something that should be prosecuted by the World Court as a Crime against Humanity. To me, I expected the former and my computer always has a decent video card and processor, so the bumped up graphics doesn't show any noticeable signs of slowdown at all over XP. After a certain tipping point, you just can't tell which one is faster, though you know it has to be XP as it doesn't have nearly the eye candy or nearly the bloat. There may be a few operations Vista does faster, but again, after a certain point, you don't even notice. Unless you're trying to copy files across your network. In that case, make your time. All your base are belong to slow copy speeds.
Copying files is an atrocity
In 2008, that's enough for me to call it a lemon. Without caveats. Say what you want about all the other fantastic crap and I'd still say it's a lemon if the OS can't copy files correctly or efficiently.
I can't believe there are apologists for this problem. Copying files is pretty fundamental to how computers work. Why on earth would anyone give any company a free pass for getting it wrong? Hell, anything less than 100% perfection is a failure in my book.
I am stupified that we are discussing whether this is "acceptable" or not. It's not. And it hasn't been since, well....around 1985 or so.