Slashdot Mirror


Vista Service Pack One Almost Here

arogier writes "After numerous delays and an actual release reversal, the official release date for Vista service pack one has been set for Tuesday, March 18th on Windows Update and Microsoft Downloads. It will be released as an automatic update on April 18th. 'It's unclear so far how a February snafu will affect SP1's roll-out. Last month, after Microsoft pushed a pair of prerequisite patches to users, some reported that their machines refused to finish installing one of the fixes, then went into an endless series of reboots. Several days later, Microsoft pulled the update from automatic delivery, said it was working on a solution and promised it would "make the update available again shortly after we address the issue."' It would be a good time for those planning to adopt early to perform requisite backups and locate their restore media."

54 of 286 comments (clear)

  1. I got the, er, "early adopter" version. by arrenlex · · Score: 5, Funny

    Great news, but it doesn't matter to me anymore. I already pirated it from bittorrent. Read that again. I was so desperate to make it work I had to STEAL FIXES for an operating system I LEGALLY BOUGHT. Says a lot about Vista, doesn't it.

    1. Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. by idiotwithastick · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Seriously, they sure took their time didn't they? I might have thought that with the poor reception of Vista they would be quick to push service packs, but apparently something held them up, even some quick fixes would be nice (though at least they still have updates coming through Windows Update). Personally though I'm scared to pirate it from BitTorrent, not because of viruses but I'm afraid it will break compatibility with stuff; one patch earlier this year prevented me from booting into Windows, and it was one of the "Recommended" patches that would automatically update.

    2. Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. by Solra+Bizna · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's more like ordering a meal, then complaining that they DID immediately bring you the uncooked ingredients, hoping that they'll have time to cook it for the people who order later.

      -:sigma.SB

      --
      WARN
      THERE IS ANOTHER SYSTEM
    3. Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. by clang_jangle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If your Vista experience is so trouble-free then why are you even thinking about file transfer speeds (a well-known trouble point for Vista)? I certainly never think about that, haven't needed to in years...

      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    4. Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. by wish+bot · · Score: 2, Informative

      New Vista laptop: let me list the woes...

      1. Adobe Creative Suite install fails. Aparently not an uncommon problem. Finding a fix that works...far too long.
      2. Internet Expoder crashes on start-up. Also not a unique issue. Fixed by full reinstall.
      3. Blue screen of death (yes, it does exist!). Happens randomly while idle (twice so far).
      4. Super slow copy to network folder from optical disk.
      5. Enough random crashes when dealing with large files (no problem with similar hardware and XP, with less memory).
      6. The much vaunted "Areo Glass" interface seems mostly bling and little substance. For example, if there is a single login dialouge box in the middle of the screen and no other windows open, it's REALLY difficult to tell at a glance if it has focus or not!
      7. Too much window border in my windows and not enough window. Unmaximised windows seem to have a really deep top-bar.

      Plenty of other gripes. Enough that the difference between this and XP SP2 is day and night, while OS X 10.4/5 is in a totally different league altogether.

      --
      lemonade was a popular drink and it still is
    5. Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. by sc7 · · Score: 2, Informative

      1. Good luck with CS3 on Leopard or Linux too. 2. Probably rare. I've instaled Vista on tons of machines, never saw it, so your case is very isolated. 3. Again, maybe you, but overall I've yet to BSOD on Vista. 4. Yessir, I'm hoping this is fixed in SP1 5. I deal with large files (well to me, as large as 20GB at a time), and Vista generally handles them better than Xp or any OS X, although about on par with most linux distros I've used. 6. BLING? I think it's just enough ellegance (spelling?), It's not the overkill that was OS X 10.0-10.3, and it sure as hell doesn't have as much useless "for show" garbage as compiz. 7. I'll give you that, although on my new widescreen, it's almost a moot point. Your last sentence proves you're just looking for every little issue, and are really a mac fanboy. I could pull a LONG list of still unfixed issues in leopard, and even tiger, but maybe I'm just able to realize every OS will have it's issues.

    6. Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. by William+Robinson · · Score: 2, Funny

      No....It's more like ordering a uncooked ingredients, then complaining that the waiters were wasting time cooking the food unnecessarily confusing themselves without knowing what exactly customer has been looking for.

    7. Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, it's more like ordering your meal. Then the restaurant takes 5 years to prepare it, all the time exclaiming that it's going to be the best meal ever. Then, when you get it, you find out it's complete crap, and it takes them another year just to get around to fixing it. Even after they fix it, it still isn't as good as the tried and true hamburger, which you could have got without even waiting the intial 5 years.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    8. Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. by CmdrGravy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not quite, a better analogy might be that it's like going to restaurant and recieving a mediocre and unsatisfying starter and main course and when it comes to pudding being told that the pudding isn't ready yet and if they were to serve it to you immediately you might get ill and die. Nevertheless even hearing this advice you then break into the kitchen and gobble down the partially cooked pudding rather than taking the perfectly sensible option of going to the lovely homely Penguin tavern next door where they're serving wholesome, nutritious and filling meals for nothing, and with free beer.

    9. Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. by unbug · · Score: 2, Funny

      the lovely homely Penguin tavern next door where they're serving wholesome, nutritious and filling meals for nothing, and with free beer. I shudder to ask... Exactly what kind of wholesome, nutritious and filling meals are they serving in this Penguin tavern? Please tell me it's not what I think!
    10. Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. by street+struttin' · · Score: 3, Funny

      These analogies are confusing me. Can you explain it again, but use cars this time?

    11. Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. by CmdrGravy · · Score: 4, Funny

      No problem.

      Imagine if a car goes to a restaurant and having waited ages for it's meal is disappointed when the starter and main course arrive and are foul tasting and inadequate for a car of his appetite ...

    12. Re:I got the, er, "early adopter" version. by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sorry to prick your balloon, but you walked right into it. Leopard, in fact, does have file transfer speed issues. Which are often fixed by a simple run into terminal. Which is what I'm finding (relatively) refreshing about OS X. It seems to be easier to fix than Windows. But the issues are, indeed, present.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  2. Awesome!! by moogied · · Score: 2, Funny

    Service Pack One is almost ready for release!! That makes it what, three more packs before its ready for release?? Not sure..

    --
    So basically, -1 troll/offtopic is really slashdots way of saying "I hate that you thought of something before me."
  3. Moment of truth... by FoolsGold · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Now to see how many "I'll wait for SP1 before moving to Vista" people actually follow through.

    1. Re:Moment of truth... by Sheen · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I am probably the only one on slashdot who uses Vista AND likes it. I have had exactly 1 issue with vista since I got it in Jan. 2007, that was a missing driver, which appeared on vendor site Feb. 2007 (webcam). So personally I can't see why everyone is slamming it so much. I will never go back to XP. ( this is not ment as a troll post, im just saying what i think of it.)

    2. Re:Moment of truth... by sunami88 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Now to see how many "I'll wait for SP1 before moving to Vista" people actually follow through.

      That was, they'll wait for SP1 to pass judgment. Not wait for SP1 then blindly buy.

      --
      Sex. Drugs, and Unix.
    3. Re:Moment of truth... by El_Muerte_TDS · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't have any issues with Vista. It and other programs crash just as often in Vista as they did in XP. But my problem with Vista is not that it has issues, its that I have to completely overhaul my workflow which I've been using since Windows 95 (and improved it ever since). A simple example is the new explorer thing. It no longer has a drop down box with all the parent directories, it shows some kind of history. Backspace no longer goes to the parent directory. In fact, there isn't even an "up" button, just a "back" button. It's more like a webbrowser than a file explorer. I never browse backwards, only forwards. Besides that it's much like a webbrowser, it doesn't allow be to customize the layout and remove all useless elements. Like the favorite folders, I don't need it, just show be the directory tree. I also needed to hack the registry just so that explorer will keep using list view for all explorer windows (dumb directory profiles).
      And that's just one of my annoyances with Vista compared to XP, others include: wasting memory using seriously heavy weight services (Mobile Device Center (aka. ActiveSync) uses 50MB in total while idle), windows search (it's not that great unless you index everything), slow file operations, even more useless eye candy (including stuff you can't turn off), ...

      But it all boils down to a single question: why would you exchange your XP for Vista?
      So far I haven't found anything.

    4. Re:Moment of truth... by vux984 · · Score: 4, Informative

      A simple example is the new explorer thing. It no longer has a drop down box with all the parent directories, it shows some kind of history.

      This is one of those things that you really have to spend time with and adust too, because in actual fact, Vista really improved on this.

      If you click on the 'location bar' or whatever its called, it shows you the current path, eg. c:\users\documents\whatver... and has a history drop down of the last several folders. I agree this is sort of lame. There is also a back/forward button which behaves as it would in a browser; and the back/forward buttons aren't all that bad.

      But the real magic is when you have a folder/file in one of the lower panes (left or right) selected, then the location bar displayes a sort of breadcrumb view.
      eg: [myname] > documents > whatever >

      clicking on the myname / documents / whatever will take you directly to that folder. So that's our up button. Not only is there a button that goes 'up one level', but you can also usually go up 2 or 3 or more levels directly.

      On top of that clicking on the '>' bring drop down lists of the folders within that folder... so if I'm in 'whatever', and I click the '>' next to 'myname' I get a list of the subfolders of myname... so without leaving where I am, with 2 clicks I can navigate directly to an 'uncle folder' (alternate child of the parent of the parent). You gotta admit that's pretty slick.

      So we've got easy navigation up one, two, three, or even more levels, as well as directly into the children of any those levels.

      Backspace no longer goes to the parent directory.

      Its now: alt-uparrow

      That's not so bad.

      Frankly, compared to most file explorers I've used including Mac OSX's finder and Windows XP, Vista's is pretty good - once you take the time to learn its quirks and shortcuts.

      it doesn't allow be to customize the layout and remove all useless elements. Like the favorite folders, I don't need it, just show be the directory tree.

      Under [username]/favorites/links you can easily customize / remove any links you find useless, or replace them with ones you'd find useful (as I've done). Unfortunately if you remove all of them its not smart enough to suppress the section entirely; I imagine there's a registry hack for that, but really, in my case a link to documents, desktop, and a couple project folders is actually pretty useful are actually really useful, so I'm actually glad to have them there. And I got rid of the searches, music, and pictures crud.

      I also needed to hack the registry just so that explorer will keep using list view for all explorer windows (dumb directory profiles).

      Actually, there is a checkbox under Tools -> Folder Options -> Remember Each Folders View Settings

      If you uncheck that, it pretty much disables the 'directory profiles' you are talking about, if I understood you right. You shouldn't need to 'hack the registry'.

      But it all boils down to a single question: why would you exchange your XP for Vista?
      So far I haven't found anything.


      I think for most people that's a fair assessment. But when you buy new hardware, unless there is a specific compatibility reason to get XP I'd recommend vista over xp nearly any day.

    5. Re:Moment of truth... by dreamchaser · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Nope, there are a few more of us. I use various OSes for various things. Vista is not all that bad on a machine with sufficient power.

    6. Re:Moment of truth... by gravis777 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You are not alone. I LOVE Vista. The only machine I have had issues with vista on is my work laptop, and that is due to some crappy Intel graphics driver. However, they released a new version a couple of weeks ago, and I have not had any issues with it since then. Get this, I have had programs that stopped working in XP but work just fine in Vista. Go figure. No, I am triple booting on my home machine (Vista 64 Business, XP 64 Pro, and XP Pro) and dual booting on my work laptop, and pretty much just boot back into XP for those one or two odd programs that do not work right in Vista, and as they are programs I so rarely use in the first place....

      Point is, you are not alone

  4. Backup - but do backups work properly yet? by dbIII · · Score: 4, Informative

    I believe there is/was a shadow volume copy problem with Vista that prevented complete backups. If shadow volume copy does not work you will not be able to back things up like the registry. Either way a complete disk image will work since you do it from outside of the OS. This can be done with "partimage" on knoppix for free or Acronis and various others for a nicer UI.

  5. Somehow... by unbug · · Score: 3, Funny

    ... I can't help but pity those poor Vista users. What should be simply the release of a patch has become a major "event" which people actually have to prepare for and which, from what I hear, is even causing something quite similar to mild panic. But then again, you do get great DRM for your troubles.

    1. Re:Somehow... by FoolsGold · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Like I said elsewhere, SP1 is somewhat significant because a lot of people have stated they will move to Vista once the first service pack arrives. Now we have to see if that will actually happen.

      I won't comment on the DRM because it really isn't as serious as a lot of Slashdotters think.

    2. Re:Somehow... by nixeagle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Random stuff does not break. Look at the emergency patching and releasing of the kernel that all distros had to go through a while back to fix the VM splice bug.

      All those distros managed to push a replacement kernel in a matter of hours/days that did not adversely affect user systems that I could tell.

      Likewise, this patch of an operating system that you pay for ought to work as smoothly as the free one. I'm not really sure how comparable the two are, but it is interesting that the linux distros were able to pull a hot fix like that without too much user consternation.

    3. Re:Somehow... by sunami88 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ... I can't help but pity those poor Vista users. What should be simply the release of a patch has become a major "event" which people actually have to prepare for and which, from what I hear, is even causing something quite similar to mild panic. But then again, you do get great DRM for your troubles.
      I don't have mod points, so bring on the Flame bait mods. What do you call the Mac OS distribution system? Updates or epiphanies.

      I just want an accurate frame for your post, Mac troll or Linux user.
      --
      Sex. Drugs, and Unix.
    4. Re:Somehow... by unbug · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And this is different from a new kernel version how? One big difference is that the Linux kernel (which is the one you mean, I presume) is usually updated in much smaller increments which means that every single update has less chance of breaking things. Another big difference is that kernel updates only update the kernel, not X, KDE/Gnome/whatever and all those programs which your system won't run without. These are updated separately which, again, means that there's less chance of breaking things.
    5. Re:Somehow... by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 2, Informative

      If a kernel upgrade makes your system unstable, rolling back is just a case of selecting the previous kernel from grub.

      Infact there are few systems that would need a full restore, as long as you can get to a tty you can usually rollback any update you don't want (distros vary but it can be done in a debian system)

      --
      IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
    6. Re:Somehow... by clang_jangle · · Score: 2, Informative

      Most people have no trouble with service pack upgrades, as they've been tested a long time before getting released. Actually, I think Vista SP1 seem to have had a longer testing period than usual.


      Ummm, were you off-world last month when enough people had trouble with Vista SP1 MS recalled it?
      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    7. Re:Somehow... by Rary · · Score: 2, Informative

      Um, did you read the content of that link? It says exactly what I said, but with the addition of a poorly worded headline.

      To quote the article (with some of my own emphasis added):

      Microsoft has stopped automatically distributing a prerequisite piece of software for Vista Service Pack 1, following some customer complaints that it had caused system problems.

      And, to quote my previous post (with similar emphasis):

      A handful of people had a problem with a patch that happens to be a prerequisite to SP1, so Microsoft stopped releasing that patch via automatic update...

      Ignore the headline. Read the article. Start with the first paragraph. It explains that, despite what the headline says, SP1 was not recalled. What was removed from automatic update, but still otherwise available, was KB937287. SP1 itself wasn't actually publicly available yet, although it was available to MSDN subscribers, most of whom had no problem at all with either KB937287 or SP1.

      --

      "You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein

  6. Re:Doesn't matter! by FoolsGold · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Download the Vista Loader (also known as a softmod):

    http://www.mydigitallife.info/2007/03/10/vista-loader-20-oem-bios-emu-crack-softmod-update/

    I know it would be the Slashdot way to convince you to move to Linux instead, but fuck that - you wanna use Windows, this will help you continue to do so. :)

  7. funny by joaommp · · Score: 3, Funny

    Gentoo 2008.0 was schedulled to be released on that same day...

    1. Re:funny by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 3, Funny

      unfortunatly nobody will be seen using the new gentoo until 2009, *begins compiling*....

      --
      IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
  8. It's faster by Toreo+asesino · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Having bought a new Dell laptop with Vista on that's lower spec than my work machine (policy is to update desktops later this year), my laptop almost always feels far more responsive.

    Plus, there's other unsung stuff in Vista i've not seen in any OS - the problem solutions centre (not sure exactly how to translate into English); when I got it I had my one and only BSOD in Vista. Shocked, I rebooted and as soon as I was back to the desktop Windows pops up a message saying "I see something real bad happened; do you mind if I see if there's a solution online?". Click Yes, comes back saying "Ah I crashed because of this driver; there's a update to it here which will fix the problem". It's never happened since.

    So yeah, there's reasons Vista is better. UAC is top too; I like to know when a program is gonna try and change my system (some try that you'd never think would - denied).

    It's an upgrade without a doubt. I wouldn't pay specifically to upgrade mind you, but I appreciate the changes as they come anyway.

    --
    throw new NoSignatureException();
    1. Re:It's faster by El_Muerte_TDS · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm using Vista on a brand new Dell XPS. But the problem solution center didn't help me in any case. I had 3 BSODs so far (since mid Januari 2008), and the solution center thingy never gave a usable information. So I've stopped using that thing.

      As for UAC, I've put that into silent mode because it annoyed the hell out of me. I know it's meant to be obstructive. But I need to use a couple of legacy applications. The UAC blackout thingy actually wrecks havoc with multi screen setups and DirectDraw applications. Or at least, it did for me. It would have been nice if it didn't nag me every time I started an application which I pre-configured to be run in administrative mode. That would at least solve some of the problems I have with UAC.

    2. Re:It's faster by totally+bogus+dude · · Score: 2, Informative

      XP has something similar to the "problem solutions centre" as well. Like the other respondent, it usually doesn't have anything relevant, and just gives you a generic message like "such and such a driver crashed, go to the vendor's site and see if there's a newer one". I think it comes up as an option in the error reporting wizard, if you choose to send the error report.

    3. Re:It's faster by plague3106 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      UAC is a stepping stone to least privledge. Technically, it is least privledge. If the user you're running as is a member of Adminstrators, you get the Continue Cancel dialog when an app really needs to run as admin. If you were NOT a member, you'd be prompted for a username / password that is. It looks like an attempt to get people used to doing SOMETHING when they are about to change the whole system. Which is better than doing nothing and continuing as is.

  9. Rock and hard place. by apodyopsis · · Score: 3, Interesting

    One thing is for certain..

    ..after the initial release then pull, the bricked PCs, the host of security issues and the whole general fuck up that MS have done over vista so far I predict a cautious, "if I must", approach from sys admins with every possible protection and back-up in place. This is not going to be a stampede for the latest secure patches. Truly MS has been a shot in the foot release for them.

    Second the poster higher up: it will sure be interested to see how many of the wait for SP1 adopters now follow through and adopt.

    Given the general widely held feeling about the the superiority of XP over Vista I cannot see many people clamoring to do so. But on the flip argument MS will withdraw XP soon to try and force adoption of Vista - this would leave many potential customers between a brick and a hard place.

    No bother to me - I've been linux only at home for ~8 years (so I guess I'm biased) - but we sure live in interesting times.

  10. No there's plenty by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I've been using Vista 64-bit since not long after it was released and I'm quite satisfied (I'd have moved back to XP if I wasn't).

    The reason people slam it so much here is because they badly want it to fail. It is predominantly FUD.

    The echo chamber effect is a big reason you hear so much. Someone has a bad experience with Vista, or perhaps just makes one up, and writes/talks about it. Thsi then gets repeated by people who hate MS and want to see Vista do poorly. You discover that these people have never actually used Vista, they are just repeating something they heard somewhere. So it sounds like there are more people having problems than there is.

    Of the people I know that have mostly bad things to say about Vista, I'd say at least 90% have never actually used it. They "Read about it somewhere," or "Some guy they know told them," and so on. They have no experience with it, other than perhaps having seen it on a computer. They are simply repeating stories. Of those that have used it and dislike it, almost all of them actually have an issue with something else, that they are blaming on Vista. For example a coworker was pissed because his DJ hardware/software combo didn't work. Ok, well check compatibility first, and that isn't a Vista issue. It doesn't support Linux either.

    Another problem is people who try to run it on insufficient hardware. This happens with basically every Windows release that I can remember. I remember all the complaints that Windows 95 didn't run well on 4MB of RAM, even though that was the minimum. The response was, of course, yes that's the MINIMUM, not the "gets good performance" amount. Same deal with Vista, people have old systems with insufficient hardware, particularly RAM (since not that long ago RAM was real pricey). They install Vista and find it doesn't perform well, and thus get angry.

    All in all, you can just expect to see continued Vista hate on /. and other sites like it for some time. I also expect that it won't matter. Most people will get Vista as they get new computers, and it'll slowly become the dominant Windows since it'll work just fine for those that get it.

    1. Re:No there's plenty by penix1 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Of the people I know that have mostly bad things to say about Vista, I'd say at least 90% have never actually used it. They "Read about it somewhere," or "Some guy they know told them," and so on. They have no experience with it, other than perhaps having seen it on a computer. They are simply repeating stories. Of those that have used it and dislike it, almost all of them actually have an issue with something else, that they are blaming on Vista. For example a coworker was pissed because his DJ hardware/software combo didn't work. Ok, well check compatibility first, and that isn't a Vista issue. It doesn't support Linux either.


      I'll ignore the fact that you are doing exactly what you accuse others by repeating hearsay and address the "it doesn't work on Linux either" remark. That would be valid if it ever did in the first place which it didn't. Let's compare apples to apples here. Vista's main competition isn't Linux or OS X even. It is XP. In that context, the program does work in XP and not in vista. It sure is a Vista issue. Say what you like, but that sounds like a Vista sale lost if that is the driving factor for switching for that user.

      Another problem is people who try to run it on insufficient hardware. This happens with basically every Windows release that I can remember. I remember all the complaints that Windows 95 didn't run well on 4MB of RAM, even though that was the minimum. The response was, of course, yes that's the MINIMUM, not the "gets good performance" amount. Same deal with Vista, people have old systems with insufficient hardware, particularly RAM (since not that long ago RAM was real pricey). They install Vista and find it doesn't perform well, and thus get angry.


      Umm....No! They were SOLD on the fact that the NEW machine they bought was "Vista capable" from the get-go when it wasn't. Hence the class action lawsuit. Bait and switch is still illegal in the US at least until the Microsoft lobbyists pay off, er, "contribute to" Congress to change it. There is a big difference between buying a new machine based on the word of the supplier that it will work fine with the new OS and buying an upgrade where it is anybody's guess. That is the difference here.
      --
      This is a sig. This is only a sig. Had this been an actual sig you would have been informed where to tune for more sigs.
    2. Re:No there's plenty by Linker3000 · · Score: 5, Informative

      "The reason people slam it so much here is because they badly want it to fail. It is predominantly FUD."

      Sorry, that's not quite right. I have a negative view about Vista because, having had to install it on a laptop so I can support some of my user base that have Vista, I have had:

      1) The laptop screen saver not waking up *sometimes* and so I have to toggle the laptop in and out of standby to carry on working.
      2) A wifi driver that blue screens *sometimes* on resuming from standby so if 1) happens I may lose my work in progress.
      3) A damn stupid box that pops up every time I run notepad++ warning me about the program.
      4) Mysterious periods of disk thrashing.
      5) Mysterious periods of wifi not connecting.
      6) A need to buy 1GB more RAM to make the thing stop plodding.
      7) RDP sessions mysteriously failing and needing a registry key deleted to get things going again

      Now, I am sure some of these things are fixable with some tweaking or with some patching, and perhaps the wifi issue is down to the chipset company, but the number of hoops my users I have had to go through to make simple things work is extraordinary and timewasting. Unlike XP (or 2000 or NT), rarely has Vista been an 'out of the box' solution to a new install.

      I am very pragmatic when it comes to Vista, but quite simply if you put identical machines running Vista and XP side by side (OK, let's give Vista some more RAM to start) and use them both for a short while, my money's on Vista being more of a PITA to use and less easy to navigate: things that took a few clicks to get to are now buried and we have had to wait for revised or new beta versions of some apps just to get some things going. Some users were on Office 2002 - but Outlook has problems with that so we have had to pay to upgrade some, while others have been moved to a Scalix pilot system.

      Sure, Vista is not a train wreck, but it's a bloody big detour on the road to efficient computing with many rough edges and a cost loading. I know it will get better over time, but when it hit the ground running it was still getting dressed and keeps tripping over its pants.

      --
      AT&ROFLMAO
    3. Re:No there's plenty by harry666t · · Score: 2, Interesting

      OK, I recently decided not to bash Vista until I see it doing something wrong "in action". I do not own a computer that is powerful enough to run Vista so I had to wait until I can play around with it on someone else's machine.

      Then, one of my friends had Vista on her laptop, and she said she was satisfied with it. I thought, OK, let's see how good it really is.

      The very first thing she was trying to do with her laptop that afternoon: playing a movie. She fired up Explorer, browsed to the right directory, tried to open the file, and... Vista simply pretended that no icon was clicked. My friend explained to me: "oh, it's always like that when there's no internet connection..."...

      Are people getting used to such things in the same way they got used to crashes, unreliability and restarts?... Do they consider it "normal"?... If yes, then we're doomed.

      ---

      A year ago it used to be cool and pr0 and so on to have Linux running Beryl with some Aero theme. I do not know how much these Aero themes resemble the "real" Aero thing, but they were all shitty. I've found translucent borders very distracting, often I stared at them instead of doing work, and it was so until I've switched to something Mac-like (OTOH Mac themes are great). The less transparency you use, the better (but *some* transparency is ok). Look at the Mac, with every major revision of their OS there's a little less transparency here and there...

      ---

      My other friend is a microsoftie :< He's a great guy but he has sold his soul, and became a MS Student Partner (or whatever they call them). He always hyped MS products, etc. He also used to have Vista on his laptop. =)

      Until he himself switched back to XP :P I'm not surprised - as of what I've heard from him, he had to reinstall the Vista thing almost weekly.

      By contrast, my Debian box is withstanding all my experiments since December 2006 without trouble (ok, without REAL trouble until *I* make some real trouble, but then, I'm always able to recover without reinstalling).

      ---

      I've recently had an argument with yet another friend, about OS design and stuff. He also was a microsoftie :> and defended Vista with his teeth and claws, but finally admitted that MS screwed up Vista's internals totally, and that they've lost a great opportunity to evolve the system and make it a Great Thing (tm). He's a Windows 2003 user :P

      ---

      Summing all that up, no, I'm not downgrading to Vista anytime soon.

  11. Vista slipstreamed with SP1 by DigiShaman · · Score: 3, Informative

    If your interested in downloading and installing a fresh copy of Vista with SP1 integrated, be sure to hunt down the ISO (provided by MSDN).

    File Name: en_windows_vista_with_service_pack_1_x86_dvd_x14-29594.iso
    File Size: 2943MB
    MD5: b09267740ddd1a08d80b04ec6bbc232a
    SHA1: bcd715a02739809e477c726ae4b5caa914156429

    So far, I've noticed a fast improvement with Disk IO performance with SP1. I think I'm going to take Vista for another spin now that it feels "faster". It's still a memory hog however. I'd recommend 2GB or 1GB at the very least.

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
  12. Early Adopters Suffer. by headkase · · Score: 2

    Be glad you didn't buy Vista on day 1. The first six months sucked royally I've read and it's only recently become better. For myself, I bought Vista the day that Service Pack 1 was announced so I missed most of the ... joy ... I got on ship when it was reasonably nice. And about 3 weeks ago ZDNet was kind enough to publish MD5's of the final release MS sent them to evangalize about so I was able to acquire a copy, the MD5's matched so the worst it could be was a key collision and the installer wasn't corrupted so it was legit. It even shows the correct build number in System Information. Now since I didn't jump on ship until after they bailed some of the water out its been a fairly smooth ride for me. And since I installed SP1 I guess it's better - some things like alt-tabbing out of games don't wonk (thats a technical term) the system anymore so all in all its an incremental improvement. And it's definitely a lot less of a shock transitioning from XP to Vista than it was from 98 to XP headache wise.

    --
    Shh.
    1. Re:Early Adopters Suffer. by Ahrel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Was only the first 2 months for me. After Creative released the driver for my soundcard, all was and has remained well since then. I did buy a 2nd GB of RAM though, because I noticed that things opened slower than in XP, but mainly because I was utilizing over 70% of my RAM with Firefox and Foobar open. The biggest problem I experienced with Vista post the good, strike that, working Creative drivers was getting Star Wars KotOR II and Grim Fandango to run.

      Continually, I find myself defending Vista in my circle of peers in class (ironically we use MS Virtual Machine through Vista for our various OS and Network learning needs). In my opinion it's the best OS MS has released yet; and more people I meet seem to dislike it because it's interface is more different than MS has done since the move to 95 from 3.11. XP and Vista do everything pretty much identically, Vista does it more intuitively though, and it does it looking good (which was my primary reason for upgrading, I began using Linux when I learned about Compiz/Beryl and it became commonly stable because I like eye candy).

      There are indeed many horror stories on the net but I've got 3 machines in this house that have been running more stable than XP did for either me or my roommate. And all of the machines in the labs at school have never had a problem yet either. So I continue to wonder what exactly is causing these problems for people. Obviously all the machines at school are identical, but the 2 desktops and single laptop at home all have different hardware and software configurations. *shrug* Guess I'm a lucky one, but I'm glad to read that it's been smooth for you too. Hopefully this will become common as people give it another shot with SP1 coming.

  13. Vista is much slower by Per+Abrahamsen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Having bought a new Dell laptop with Vista on that's lower spec than my work machine (policy is to update desktops later this year), my laptop almost always feels far more responsive. Most likely, your old machine had accumulated crap over time, and resinstalling XP would have given an even larger speedup. Vista is far less responsive on my Thinkpad X61s than XP was on my Thinkpad X40, comparing them side by side. Only the cpu bound tasks like compiling are faster, due to the faster hardware.

    "I see something real bad happened; do you mind if I see if there's a solution online?". Yeah, whenever my own programs crash I get that one. It doesn't find any solutions though, I still have to debug my own code.

    It did once claim to have found a solution to system crash, pointing to a Lenovo page that did not exists.

    UAC is top too; I like to know when a program is gonna try and change my system (some try that you'd never think would - denied). That is the one thing I like about Vista. I think of it as the Microsoft answer to "sudo". It was annoying at the beginning, where you had to press yes so many times. Makes me worry about whether it will have the intended affect, or simply teach people to press "yes" whenever they see a pop-up.

    It's an upgrade without a doubt. Most people at my work who have "accidentally" ordered new PC's with Vista have ended up asking the it support guys "downgrade" them to XP. I have been stubborn though, waiting to see if it gets better with time. It does, but nowhere near enough to compensate for the initial drop in productivity.
    1. Re:Vista is much slower by Toreo+asesino · · Score: 4, Informative

      Most likely, your old machine had accumulated crap over time, and resinstalling XP would have given an even larger speedup. Most likely it's stuff like SuperFetch in Vista doing what it's designed to do in fact. For once I've got an OS that's gonna use the memory i bought with the machine. That's what it's designed for, and it does it very well. FireFox opens faster than IE6 does in any XP machine; fresh or otherwise. Believe me, Vista is faster if you have the memory.
      And all the palava about Areo grinding systems down is rubbish too; it's all 3d accelerated (read: using hardware features otherwise doing nowt), so that too has no effect of performance. Feels very snappy in fact, especially with SP1 which i've been running for a couple of weeks now - it's the Vista that should've shipped.
      There are some things i don't like about Vista of course; the dumbed down explorer for one, and the higher memory requirements for another, but it does load stuff faster than XP, no doubt.
      --
      throw new NoSignatureException();
  14. No comment. by WK2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I won't comment on the DRM because it really isn't as serious as a lot of Slashdotters think.

    I won't respond to your comment, but DRM is BUILT-IN to the Operating System. How much more serious can it get?

    --
    Write your own Choose Your Own Adventure. http://www.freegameengines.org/gamebook-engine/
  15. Updates? Ha! by camperdave · · Score: 3, Informative

    though at least they still have updates coming through Windows Update

    I applied one of the updates (KB944533) and it killed http. Internet explorer would not open up web pages, but would give the "server could not be reached" error. I was able to ping just fine, and I could reach the page from another computer on the same network. The kicker was that the patch not only knocked out IE, but Firefox as well. Things worked fine after uninstalling the patch. Of course, the patch got re-installed the very next day.

    Yesterday I decided to install some more patches, hoping that they would remedy the bug in KB944533. Nope! In fact, the DHCP client stopped working. I could no longer get anything but APIPA addresses. I uninstalled those patches, hoping to recover, but no dice. I decided to roll back the machine about two weeks, and now it blue screens.

    Now Microsoft isn't the only culprit. A language pack update in Ubuntu is killing a number of my KDE apps (k3b in particular). So I have two machines that I have to run unpatched operating systems on, because patching them causes them to not work. At least I have a choice to ignore the patch with Ubuntu. Windows applies the patches without asking.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    1. Re:Updates? Ha! by plague3106 · · Score: 5, Funny

      The common component to all those failures is you.

    2. Re:Updates? Ha! by Blkdeath · · Score: 3, Informative

      I applied one of the updates (KB944533) and it killed http. Internet explorer would not open up web pages, but would give the "server could not be reached" error. I was able to ping just fine, and I could reach the page from another computer on the same network. The kicker was that the patch not only knocked out IE, but Firefox as well. Things worked fine after uninstalling the patch. Of course, the patch got re-installed the very next day.

      On our small company LAN I encountered a similar problem but with a stock install of Vista on about 3 newly purchased laptops. The problem turned out to be the fact that our LAN uses a firewall/router and connects to ADSL which requires a lower MTU, and Vista has the MTU fixed at 1500. Lowering it to 1492 (manually - via the command line no less!) on the laptops made the difference.

      Now, we could browse some sites but not others. The amazing thing was most of the Microsoft sites (like msn.com, Hotmail, etc.) wouldn't work but competing services would. Strange brew. :)

      --
      BD Phone Home!

      Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.

  16. Vista failage by Brian+Kendig · · Score: 2, Informative

    My favorite Vista travesty is that it takes several minutes to move a folder containing several gigabytes of files.

    Let me reiterate: I'm dragging one folder icon into a different folder. An operation which, for Mac or Linux, merely involves rewriting an inode. But for Windows Vista, a dialog box comes up which shows the computer recursively going through every file and directory in the folder I'm moving, as if a file or folder somehow needs its location updated independently of the folder it's in. Several minutes later, my drag has finished being processed.

    I've heard that Vista SP1 improves file handling, so two weeks ago I obtained Vista Service Pack 1 through the MSDN membership at my workplace. But a few minutes into the install, it fails with error 0x8007000d and points me to a tech note which advises me to turn off antivirus (done), run a disk check (done), and then run 'sfc /scannow' which tells me there's some sort of corruption in a system file and that I should look at cbs.log, which I do, and it contains several thousands of lines of messages I can't understand, much less figure out whether they're errors. Near as I can figure, the culprit is that the SP1 installer can't delete a file named windir\ehome\ehres.dll, so I try moving that out of the way by hand, but no combination of things I try can get it to move - Windows keeps telling me I don't have permission to move it, even if I try renaming it from a command shell run as administrator, even if I boot into safe mode.

    I have a feeling, come tomorrow when Vista SP1 is released to the masses, there's going to be more headscratching than celebrating.

  17. "...and locate their restore media." by More_Cowbell · · Score: 2, Informative
    Except I don't HAVE any restore media. Brand new Vaio and they refused to provide or sell me a backup copy of Vista like you used to get with XP. Instead they now have an integrated 'backup/restore' partition that supposedly you can use to recover to a particular saved point and time with. Oh, and it reduced my HD space by almost half. Fresh out of the box I have 46GB available on a 100GB drive.

    Granted it does seem somewhat useful; I was able to roll back an instillation when a vpn client gave me a BSOD. However, what am I supposed to do if I CAN'T BOOT TO WINDOWS?

    --
    Experience teaches only the teachable. -AH
  18. Re:First by sg_oneill · · Score: 2, Informative

    Yeah. Sometimes you just luck out. I've had the reverse problems before. Machines that XP throws a hissy fit at, but linux works great on.

    Maybe you need to try a more conventional debian, and manually configure it. Its possible the autodetection just isn't having a fun time.

    Conversely , kick back a bit and try it later. It could be a driver situation thats just-not-there-yet. Sometimes linux just takes a bit longer.

    Good luck tho. Linux is worth it.

    Now, as for vista. I'm *DAMN* hoping this service pack makes my laptop more same because god damn it this things got some unpleasant quirks sometimes. 1-2 minute epileptic fits when I plug in a monitor? XP never did THAT.

    --
    Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.