I don't think I've read an article more annoying than this before. Usually I lap up anything negative about MS or Windows, but this article is plain stupid.
Made all the worse by the authors need to talk up the quality of his opinion for the first 8 paragraphs.
It's a beta. Of course it has annoying bugs. The final betas for 2000 and XP had annoying bugs - many in Explorer. I remember a lot of pain and suffering using the betas. It's something you put up with to be able to use the software before it's final release. An "expert" should know this.
"So you open Network from the Start Menu and wait... and wait... and wait... while the damn thing finds all your networked PCs and servers. In XP, this process is instantaneous."
It's a beta and a new OS. And there's any number of reasons for that sort of behaviour. It's hardly a reason to suggest it's not ready to shit.
"Here's a more insidious one. In Windows Vista Beta 2, Adobe Photoshop Elements 4 would install but issue a warning when you ran it, noting that it was incompatible with Vista."
Is he seriously suggesting that because an app, not made by MS, that was released for XP, that reports that it is not compatible with Vista is becoming increasingly less compatible with Vista with each new beta, even though it has never been compatible with Vista is a reason for Vista not to be ready to ship?
What complete nonsense. If there are issues with the product, Adobe will release a new version. They may charge for it. Good on them. That's what happens when you upgrade apps.
"Or take IE 7. Please. I use IE for one thing and one thing only: The magazine's Web portal requires IE to post articles, and because I post WinInfo articles every day, I need to use IE. Every day. In IE 7, the rich edit control that forms the basis of the third party ActiveX control we used to post article bodies not only doesn't work, it is actually deprecated in Vista so that it will never work, even if you manually install it. That means I will have to use an older version of IE, in a virtual machine, to post WinInfo articles for the foreseeable future. Stupid."
Thew only thing stupid here is the above comment. Use a proprietary ActiveX control and you expose yourself to compatiblity problems. That sort of stuff should be considered when making the decision to use the control.
Somebody who had been working with Windows Betas for, heck, over 12 years, should know better.
"And then there's that wonderful "Recent Items" entry on the Start Menu."
Typical sort of problem you get in betas. It will work in the final release.
"And why does the screen have to "pop" so violently when it switches between Aero and Windows Standard...(That application, by the way, is Virtual PC, which is required because of the IE issue mentioned previously. Auuuuugghhhhhh! It's a re-entrant annoyance!)"
Because you are using a proprietary activex control. It happens. Get over it.
"Why did I just waste four years making nice album art for music folders and custom folder art for photos? Microsoft changed folders completely in Windows Vista, and all that work just got flushed down the virtual toilet. (Microsoft calls this toilet the "Recycle Bin " as opposed to Apple's toilet, which was called "Mac OS 9.")"
Don't know, but I agree you did waste your time. I don't recall a time when vista wasn't going to change the file system and potentially affect things like that. MS have been quite open about it. Somebody who had been working with Windows Vista for a long, long time should know that.
The rest of the article are typical beta style bugs. They'll be fixed in a future release. You get that when you use betas.
"Users are going to freak when their hardware and software doesn't work right. They're going to lose it when they can't do things that were easy in XP but impossible in Vista."
The same was true moving from NT 3.51 to NT 4. And from NT 4 to Windows 2000. And from Windows 2000 to XP
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think I've read an article more annoying than this before. Usually I lap up anything negative about MS or Windows, but this article is plain stupid.
... and wait... and wait... while the damn thing finds all your networked PCs and servers. In XP, this process is instantaneous."
Made all the worse by the authors need to talk up the quality of his opinion for the first 8 paragraphs.
It's a beta. Of course it has annoying bugs. The final betas for 2000 and XP had annoying bugs - many in Explorer. I remember a lot of pain and suffering using the betas. It's something you put up with to be able to use the software before it's final release. An "expert" should know this.
"So you open Network from the Start Menu and wait
It's a beta and a new OS. And there's any number of reasons for that sort of behaviour. It's hardly a reason to suggest it's not ready to shit.
"Here's a more insidious one. In Windows Vista Beta 2, Adobe Photoshop Elements 4 would install but issue a warning when you ran it, noting that it was incompatible with Vista."
Is he seriously suggesting that because an app, not made by MS, that was released for XP, that reports that it is not compatible with Vista is becoming increasingly less compatible with Vista with each new beta, even though it has never been compatible with Vista is a reason for Vista not to be ready to ship?
What complete nonsense. If there are issues with the product, Adobe will release a new version. They may charge for it. Good on them. That's what happens when you upgrade apps.
"Or take IE 7. Please. I use IE for one thing and one thing only: The magazine's Web portal requires IE to post articles, and because I post WinInfo articles every day, I need to use IE. Every day. In IE 7, the rich edit control that forms the basis of the third party ActiveX control we used to post article bodies not only doesn't work, it is actually deprecated in Vista so that it will never work, even if you manually install it. That means I will have to use an older version of IE, in a virtual machine, to post WinInfo articles for the foreseeable future. Stupid."
Thew only thing stupid here is the above comment. Use a proprietary ActiveX control and you expose yourself to compatiblity problems. That sort of stuff should be considered when making the decision to use the control.
Somebody who had been working with Windows Betas for, heck, over 12 years, should know better.
"And then there's that wonderful "Recent Items" entry on the Start Menu."
Typical sort of problem you get in betas. It will work in the final release.
"And why does the screen have to "pop" so violently when it switches between Aero and Windows Standard...(That application, by the way, is Virtual PC, which is required because of the IE issue mentioned previously. Auuuuugghhhhhh! It's a re-entrant annoyance!)"
Because you are using a proprietary activex control. It happens. Get over it.
"Why did I just waste four years making nice album art for music folders and custom folder art for photos? Microsoft changed folders completely in Windows Vista, and all that work just got flushed down the virtual toilet. (Microsoft calls this toilet the "Recycle Bin " as opposed to Apple's toilet, which was called "Mac OS 9.")"
Don't know, but I agree you did waste your time.
I don't recall a time when vista wasn't going to change the file system and potentially affect things like that. MS have been quite open about it. Somebody who had been working with Windows Vista for a long, long time should know that.
The rest of the article are typical beta style bugs. They'll be fixed in a future release. You get that when you use betas.
"Users are going to freak when their hardware and software doesn't work right. They're going to lose it when they can't do things that were easy in XP but impossible in Vista."
The same was true moving from NT 3.51 to NT 4. And from NT 4 to Windows 2000. And from Windows 2000 to XP