PCMag Editor: "Vista just ain't cutting it."
Snit
-----
I've been a big proponent of the new OS over the past few
months... So why, nine months after launch, am I so
frustrated? The litany of what doesn't work and what still
frustrates me stretches on endlessly.
Take sleep mode, for example. Vista promised a new low-power
sleep mode that would save energy yet enable nearly
instantaneous resume. Poppycock. ...
But it's not just the long sleep. My home notebook ... used
to snooze誼ut now, after a recent Vista update, it never
goes to sleep at all. ...
Networking, too, gives me huge headaches. In XP, a simple
right click on the system tray icon put me one click away
from IP settings and connections status. Now that same icon
brings up a menu of options that ultimately lead to the
Network and Sharing center虐haring in the Sirius
Cybernetics, "Share and Enjoy" obfuscation mode, not any
sort of network sharing I'm familiar with. I've configured
every PC on my home network to share drives and printers,
yet owing to some undiscovered element, there's no guarantee
that any of them will be visible at any given time.
... With XP, wireless network connectivity out of sleep mode
was virtually instantaneous. Now it can take up to 30
seconds to reconnect, even when my systems do wake up. ...
Vista has replaced XP's quick reaction time with molasses.
I'm always wondering if something's wrong.
I could go on and on about the lack of drivers, the bizarre
wake-up rituals, the strange and nonreproducible system
quirks, and more. But I won't bore you with the details. The
upshot is that even after nine months, Vista just ain't
cutting it. I definitely gave Microsoft too much of a free
pass on this operating system: I expected it to get the
kinks worked out more quickly. Boy, was I fooled! If
Microsoft can't get Vista working, I might just do the
unthinkable: I might move to Linux.
-----
Wow... what a success for MS, eh? :)
--
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.
--Albert Einstein
PC Guy
"Snit" <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in message
news:C2ECA7AB.8C4DF%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com...
> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2171472,00.asp>
> -----
> I've been a big proponent of the new OS over the past few
> months... So why, nine months after launch, am I so
> frustrated? The litany of what doesn't work and what still
> frustrates me stretches on endlessly.
>
> Take sleep mode, for example. Vista promised a new low-power
> sleep mode that would save energy yet enable nearly
> instantaneous resume. Poppycock. ...
>
> But it's not just the long sleep. My home notebook ... used
>
> Networking, too, gives me huge headaches. In XP, a simple
> right click on the system tray icon put me one click away
> from IP settings and connections status. Now that same icon
> brings up a menu of options that ultimately lead to the
> sort of network sharing I'm familiar with. I've configured
> every PC on my home network to share drives and printers,
> yet owing to some undiscovered element, there's no guarantee
> that any of them will be visible at any given time.
>
> ... With XP, wireless network connectivity out of sleep mode
> was virtually instantaneous. Now it can take up to 30
> seconds to reconnect, even when my systems do wake up. ...
> Vista has replaced XP's quick reaction time with molasses.
> I'm always wondering if something's wrong.
>
> I could go on and on about the lack of drivers, the bizarre
> wake-up rituals, the strange and nonreproducible system
> quirks, and more. But I won't bore you with the details. The
> upshot is that even after nine months, Vista just ain't
> cutting it. I definitely gave Microsoft too much of a free
> pass on this operating system: I expected it to get the
> kinks worked out more quickly. Boy, was I fooled! If
> Microsoft can't get Vista working, I might just do the
> unthinkable: I might move to Linux.
> -----
>
> Wow... what a success for MS, eh? :)
Microsoft should quit releasing retail versions of Windows and only offer it
through OEM preinstalls. There's obviously too many stupid people who can't
install it and it's giving Windows a bad rep.
Snit
lKOdnaWRjpHg6Vrb...@comcast.com on 8/18/07 3:36 PM:
Ah, the folks at PC Magazine simply installed Vista incorrectly. I should
have guessed. :)
--
If A = B and B = C, then A = C, except where void or prohibited by law.
Roy Santoro, Psycho Proverb Zone (http://snipurl.com/BurdenOfProof)
PC Guy
We don't know what they've done and that's the problem. I've been using
Vista since it's public release and I don't seem to have any of these
problems. Or am I just smarter than these PC Magazine folks?
John C. Randolph
> Wow... what a success for MS, eh? :)
I guess even a professional Microsoft apologist can eventually get fed
up. Let's all wish Mr. Louderback success in his new job.
-jcr
Snit
But we do know we are talking about Jim Louderback who is of has been:
* PC Magazine editor-in-chief
* editorial director for the Consumer/Small Business group
at Ziff Davis Media
* Worked for fortune 500 companies building computer systems
* Lab Director at PC Week
* Editor-in-chief of Windows Sources magazine
* Launched TechTV
* Developed TechLive
* Managed the websites for ExtremeTech, PCMag.com, eWeek
and Microsoft Watch.
* has repeatedly been voted into the top 20 of Technology
Marketing's annual list of most influential technology
journalists.
If someone with those credentials cannot get Vista to work what chance do
most users have?
> I've been using Vista since it's public release and I don't seem to have any
> of these problems. Or am I just smarter than these PC Magazine folks?
What "tricks" did you need to do... where do you think they went wrong?
--
God made me an atheist - who are you to question his authority?
PC Guy
Apparently very good chances as I have been using Vista flawlessly since
it's release on January and I don't have those credentials. Perhaps it's
inversly proportional?
>> I've been using Vista since it's public release and I don't seem to have
>> any
>> of these problems. Or am I just smarter than these PC Magazine folks?
>
> What "tricks" did you need to do... where do you think they went wrong?
I'm thinking they're using Vista with hardware not specifically certified
for Vista.
Megadave
"PC Guy" <pc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Or am I just smarter than these PC Magazine folks?
Actually.. that's probably it... No insult or cheapshot intended.
Vista is not an OS for the stupid to try installing.
--
The System Has Failed
Tim Murray
>> What "tricks" did you need to do... where do you think they went wrong?
>
> I'm thinking they're using Vista with hardware not specifically certified
> for Vista.
Which means ... what? It's been demonstrated, with support from MS, that the
Vista sticker pretty much means it's suitable for the lowest form of Vista.
Jim Lee Jr.
"PC Guy" <pc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Microsoft should quit releasing retail versions of Windows and only offer it
> through OEM preinstalls. There's obviously too many stupid people who can't
> install it and it's giving Windows a bad rep.
Why are you saying Windoze users are stupid? Finally admitting the truth?
As for Micro$lut releasing only OEMs, call up your buddy Ballmer and
demand OEM versions of Windoze.
--
Posted from my 1999 Apple G4 Sawtooth
A 450 MHz G4 running OS X 10.4.8
Jim Lee Jr.
"PC Guy" <pc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> We don't know what they've done and that's the problem. I've been using
> Vista since it's public release and I don't seem to have any of these
> problems. Or am I just smarter than these PC Magazine folks?
You misspelled "its."
Learn the difference between "its" and "it's."
Jim Lee Jr.
"PC Guy" <pc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Apparently very good chances as I have been using Vista flawlessly since
> it's release on January and I don't have those credentials. Perhaps it's
> inversly proportional?
Again, you misspelled "its." Take a remedial English course.
PC Guy
"Tim Murray" <no-...@thankyou.com> wrote in message
news:0yLxi.17021$Lu....@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
Does it have a sticker?
Snit
if someone who built computer systems for Fortune 500 companies, as well as
having all the other things in his background, cannot figure that out then
what chance do most users have?
PC Guy
It doesn't matter what his experience is if the computer in question isn't
supported by Vista.
Tim Murray
>>> for Vista.
>>
>> if someone who built computer systems for Fortune 500 companies, as well
>> as having all the other things in his background, cannot figure that out
>> then what chance do most users have?
>
> It doesn't matter what his experience is if the computer in question isn't
> supported by Vista.
>
That was my point about the sticker: Even machines with stickers may have
significant problems on anything but base Vista.
Snit
That does not answer the question. Oh, and it was not *a* computer but
multiple that he was in reference to.
--
One who makes no mistakes, never makes anything.
Jim
"PC Guy" <pc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
So, you're saying Vista is too complex for the average Mr. Consumer to
install, so complex they can't be trusted.
That's sure *user friendly* at the most basic level. Not!
--
Jim
Snit
jim-0A4AF2.0...@netnews.comcast.net on 8/18/07 10:31 PM:
>> Microsoft should quit releasing retail versions of Windows and only offer it
>> through OEM preinstalls. There's obviously too many stupid people who can't
>> install it and it's giving Windows a bad rep.
>
> So, you're saying Vista is too complex for the average Mr. Consumer to
> install, so complex they can't be trusted.
>
> That's sure *user friendly* at the most basic level. Not!
Not just for the *average* user, but a user with the following credentials:
* PC Magazine editor-in-chief
* Editorial director for the Consumer/Small Business group
at Ziff Davis Media
* Worked for fortune 500 companies building computer systems
* Lab Director at PC Week
* Editor-in-chief of Windows Sources magazine
* Launched TechTV
* Developed TechLive
* Managed the websites for ExtremeTech, PCMag.com, eWeek
and Microsoft Watch.
* has repeatedly been voted into the top 20 of Technology
Marketing's annual list of most influential technology
journalists.
But your stereotypical Grandma should figure out how to use Vista in a snap.
:)
--
Dear Aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1123221217782777472
C Lund
> Microsoft should quit releasing retail versions of Windows and only offer it
> through OEM preinstalls. There's obviously too many stupid people who can't
> install it and it's giving Windows a bad rep.
If even the editor of PC Mag can't get Vista to work properly, then
it's safe to assume the problem isn't the lack of competence at the
user's end.
Face it: MS screwed up worse than usual. This could be the end of
Windows' dominance.
--
C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund
C Lund
"PC Guy" <pc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> We don't know what they've done and that's the problem. I've been using
> Vista since it's public release and I don't seem to have any of these
> problems. Or am I just smarter than these PC Magazine folks?
Maybe you just got lucky. Or maybe your standards aren't that high.
Meanwhile, why don't you contact PC Magazine and tell them how to get
Vista up and running?
--
C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund
C Lund
"PC Guy" <pc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> It doesn't matter what his experience is if the computer in question isn't
> supported by Vista.
But if he couldn't get it right, what chance does the average user
have?
--
C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund
C Lund
wrote:
> On 2007-08-18 13:42:03 -0700, Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> said:
>
> > <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2171472,00.asp>
> > -----
> > Boy, was I fooled! If
> > Microsoft can't get Vista working, I might just do the
> > unthinkable: I might move to Linux.
> > -----
> >
> > Wow... what a success for MS, eh? :)
>
> The guy MUST be a Mactard, right scum-sucking trolls?
Well, he might become one if he decides Linux isn't any better... The
guys at Apple must LOVE Vista. ;)
--
C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund
John C. Randolph
> The guys at Apple must LOVE Vista. ;)
You have no idea how much Apple employees and shareholders love Vista.
It's the best thing Microsoft could possibly have done for Apple.
-jcr
Daniel Johnson
"Snit" <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in message
news:C2ECA7AB.8C4DF%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com...
> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2171472,00.asp>
[snip- quotes from article]
>
> Wow... what a success for MS, eh? :)
It's fairly obvious that most of his problems are bad drivers.
If he is such an expert he should know that; maybe he does,
but thinks bashing Vista is good copy.
Still, it's plain that OEM computer vendors have been slapping
the "Vista ready" sticker on their boxes without testing that all
the components actually work acceptably with Vista in real life.
My experience has been that some things work better in Vista,
and others worse. It depends on the drivers.
When I upgraded my Toshiba lappie, I also had problems
with some components- video and sleep were the problems
for me, which I eventually fixed by hunting down more recent
drivers for them.
Other things worked better though: the audio and fingerprint
reader were rather more reliable in Vista than they had been
in XP. So it is not like it was all bad, even if I did have to
downgrade my video to XP drivers for awhile.
Of course, this kind of thing does highlight an advantage of
the Mac: since Apple sells both the Mac and its OS, they
have an incentive to make upgrading the OS as easy as
it can be. As long as you stick to Apple hardware, they
put in the effort to make it work with the new OS (more
or less).
But in the big picture, it doesn't matter much. Few people
do upgrade their OS, and most of them are sophisticated
enough to hunt down the drivers and such. Everyone else
just gets the new OS with a new PC, and the OEMs do
test those.
Tim Murray
> But in the big picture, it doesn't matter much. Few people
> do upgrade their OS, and most of them are sophisticated
>
That past sentence contains two clauses. For both to be true does not make
sense; further, the latter phrase I cannot disagree with more.
I've been the office and neighborhood geek since Windows 2, and of all those
I encounter up and down the hallways of the office or up and down the streets
of the neighborhood, there are but a few who can deal with drivers.
PC Guy
Please provide some support for this point.
PC Guy
That's because your question is irrelevant. Unsupport hardware is
unsupported hardware regardless of the end users knowledge.
> Oh, and it was not *a* computer but multiple that he was in reference to.
So? He's attempted to use it on multiple unsupported computers. Doesn't
change anything.
PC Guy
"Jim" <j...@NOwwa.net> wrote in message
news:jim-0A4AF2.0...@netnews.comcast.net...
No, what I am saying is there are too many people attempting to install
Vista on unsupported hardware and when it fails to function as expected they
blame the OS. As such it might be better for Microsoft to forego the retail
version in order to avoid the resulting negative publicity. I have an older
system on which I installed Vista. The system contains a unique audio card
which is unsupported in Vista. Should I be blaming Vista for this "failure"?
Or should I recognize the card was designed and supported on Windows XP? And
will Vista suddenly become "fixed" once the manufacturer releases Vista
drivers for this card?
PC Guy
"Daniel Johnson" <daniel...@vzavenue.net> wrote in message
news:13cge5c...@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Snit" <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in message
> news:C2ECA7AB.8C4DF%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com...
>> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2171472,00.asp>
>
> [snip- quotes from article]
>>
>> Wow... what a success for MS, eh? :)
>
> It's fairly obvious that most of his problems are bad drivers.
> If he is such an expert he should know that; maybe he does,
> but thinks bashing Vista is good copy.
Exactly. I've been using Vista on my Vista certified (i.e. it came
pre-loaded) PC since I bought it at the end of January. Use
supported/certified hardware/software and you should be fine.
... snip ...
Tim Murray
Bwahahah! Read the news. Or listen to Tom Merritt of CNet's Buzz Out Loud
podcast talk about how his "Vista Capable" Lenova was incapable and his phone
call with MS support saying well, we really didn't mean you can do
EVERYTHING. Or Google the string '"Vista Capable" suit'. But I know you
won't, so you can once again deny any evidence was given.
Tim Murray
> Vista on unsupported hardware and when it fails to function as expected
> they blame the OS. As such it might be better for Microsoft to forego the
> retail version in order to avoid the resulting negative publicity. I have
> an older system on which I installed Vista. The system contains a unique
> audio card which is unsupported in Vista. Should I be blaming Vista for
> this "failure"? Or should I recognize the card was designed and supported
> on Windows XP? And will Vista suddenly become "fixed" once the
> manufacturer releases Vista drivers for this card?
>
I agree that oddball hardware is not the fault of Microsoft. So you want to
harken to the ancient days of Windows XP Media Center Edition, which was such
a convoluted setup and was always so close to the edge of collapse that
Microsoft allowed only the sale of hardware with preinstalled software -- in
other words you could not buy it in a retail box?
PC Guy
> On Aug 19, 2007, PC Guy wrote:
>>
>> "Tim Murray" <no-...@thankyou.com> wrote in message
>> news:KhNxi.17097$Lu.1...@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
>>> On Aug 18, 2007, PC Guy wrote:
>>>>>> I'm thinking they're using Vista with hardware not specifically
>>>>>> certified
>>>>>> for Vista.
>>>>>
>>>>> if someone who built computer systems for Fortune 500 companies, as
>>>>> well
>>>>> as having all the other things in his background, cannot figure that
>>>>> out
>>>>> then what chance do most users have?
>>>>
>>>> It doesn't matter what his experience is if the computer in question
>>>> isn't
>>>> supported by Vista.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That was my point about the sticker: Even machines with stickers may
>>> have
>>> significant problems on anything but base Vista.
>>
>> Please provide some support for this point.
>>
>
> Bwahahah! Read the news.
No surprise you are unable to support your point.
> Or listen to Tom Merritt of CNet's Buzz Out Loud podcast talk about how
> his
> "Vista Capable" Lenova was incapable and his phone call with MS support
> saying
> well, we really didn't mean you can do EVERYTHING. Or Google the string
> '"Vista Capable" suit'. But I know you won't, so you can once again deny
> any
> evidence was given.
This is a completely different topic.
Tim Murray
>> Bwahahah! Read the news.
>
> No surprise you are unable to support your point.
The trial on MS's deceptive practices and those stickers ... I said, TRIAL,
asshole ... begins October 8 in the U.S. District Court for the Western
District of Washington in Seattle.
Tim Murray
It is exactly the topic: A computer with a sticker might run only the base
Vista.
Walter Bushell
> Microsoft should quit releasing retail versions of Windows and only offer it
> through OEM preinstalls. There's obviously too many stupid people who can't
> install it and it's giving Windows a bad rep.
This can't be a genuine Windows advocate, can it?
Walter Bushell
Tim Murray <no-...@thankyou.com> wrote:
So if you have a pre Vista Machine don't install Vista on it?
Snit
clund-AD8F5E....@84.sub-97-20-208.myvzw.com on 8/19/07 12:00 AM:
If he can and if it is as easy as he says I imagine it would be a pretty
cushy job... :)
--
Never stand between a dog and the hydrant. - John Peers
Peter Hayes
> I have an older
> system on which I installed Vista. The system contains a unique audio card
> which is unsupported in Vista. Should I be blaming Vista for this "failure"?
> Or should I recognize the card was designed and supported on Windows XP? And
> will Vista suddenly become "fixed" once the manufacturer releases Vista
> drivers for this card?
Errr.... Shouldn't that read "And will Vista suddenly become "fixed"
***if*** the manufacturer releases Vista drivers for this card?
--
Immunity is better than innoculation.
Peter
PC Guy
Which is completely irrelevant to the topic being discussed.
PC Guy
Completely irrelevant and outside the scope of what you originally wrote.
PC Guy
"Walter Bushell" <pr...@oanix.com> wrote in message
news:proto-3D0E16....@032-325-625.area1.spcsdns.net...
Just make sure it's supported before installing Vista on it.
Walter Bushell
Tim Murray <no-...@thankyou.com> wrote:
> Bwahahah! Read the news. Or listen to Tom Merritt of CNet's Buzz Out Loud
> podcast talk about how his "Vista Capable" Lenova was incapable and his phone
> call with MS support saying well, we really didn't mean you can do
> EVERYTHING. Or Google the string '"Vista Capable" suit'. But I know you
> won't, so you can once again deny any evidence was given.
Is M$ the company that couldn't think straight?
PC Guy
It's seems that may be a reasonable thing to do given how many people are
attempting to install Vista on unsupported hardware.
PC Guy
"Peter Hayes" <noti...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:1i33r88.ckycd01dznsc6N%noti...@btinternet.com...
Drivers for this card are currently in beta.
PC Guy
Have I claimed to be a Windows advocate?
Walter Bushell
John C. Randolph <jcr.n...@nospam.mac.com> wrote:
> On 2007-08-19 00:05:07 -0700, C Lund <cl...@notam02SPAMBLOCK.no> said:
>
> > The guys at Apple must LOVE Vista. ;)
>
> You have no idea how much Apple employees and shareholders love Vista.
> It's the best thing Microsoft could possibly have done for Apple.
>
> -jcr
What M$ needs to do is go back and rewrite Windows to run over Darwin.
I'm sure that would be easier than trying to fix Windows as it is.
Walter Bushell
wrote:
> Very true. Just using the word "drivers" in the presence of most of my
> clients leaves them with a blank stare on their faces. This includes
> business people as well as home users.
A good percentage of home users are business people, most of whom
specialize in human interaction anyway. Why an optician or optometrist
or a brain surgeon should have special competence in M$ software, I
don't know.
Snit
proto-AFB7BA....@032-325-625.area1.spcsdns.net on 8/19/07 9:23
AM:
Darwin is open source. Maybe MS will use it as the core of their next OS.
:)
--
Look, this is silly. It's not an argument, it's an armor plated walrus with
walnut paneling and an all leather interior.
Snit
Have you read the name you use? :)
--
Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and
conscientious stupidity. -- Martin Luther King, Jr.
Snit
Bear in mind that this is merely an assumption in this case.
--
If A = B and B = C, then A = C, except where void or prohibited by law.
Roy Santoro, Psycho Proverb Zone (http://snipurl.com/BurdenOfProof)
Jim Lee Jr.
"PC Guy" <pc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Have I claimed to be a Windows advocate?
Yes, by posting pro Windoze and pro Micro$lut drivel. Any other
questions?
--
Posted from my 1999 Apple G4 Sawtooth
A 450 MHz G4 running OS X 10.4.8
PC Guy
Yes. But I think a reasonable one.
PC Guy
> "PC Guy" <pc...@hotmail.com> stated in post
> l_udnW4y5pS681Xb...@comcast.com on 8/19/07 9:21 AM:
>
>>
>> "Walter Bushell" <pr...@oanix.com> wrote in message
>> news:proto-DF171F....@032-325-625.area1.spcsdns.net...
>>> In article <lKOdnaWRjpHg6Vrb...@comcast.com>,
>>> "PC Guy" <pc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Microsoft should quit releasing retail versions of Windows and only
>>>> offer
>>>> it
>>>> through OEM preinstalls. There's obviously too many stupid people who
>>>> can't
>>>> install it and it's giving Windows a bad rep.
>>>
>>> This can't be a genuine Windows advocate, can it?
>>
>> Have I claimed to be a Windows advocate?
>>
> Have you read the name you use? :)
Have you read the name I use? Here, let me post it for you:
PC Guy
PC Guy
They shouldn't. That's why they should be paying someone to manage that
aspect of their business for them.
Peter Hayes
Peter Hayes
But the Editor of PCMag doesn't fall into that category.
So if he's having endless trouble with Vista heaven help the rest of the
Windows user community.
Walter Bushell
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> "Walter Bushell" <pr...@oanix.com> stated in post
> proto-AFB7BA....@032-325-625.area1.spcsdns.net on 8/19/07 9:23
> AM:
>
> > In article <2007081905133916807-jcrnospam@nospammaccom>,
> > John C. Randolph <jcr.n...@nospam.mac.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2007-08-19 00:05:07 -0700, C Lund <cl...@notam02SPAMBLOCK.no> said:
> >>
> >>> The guys at Apple must LOVE Vista. ;)
> >>
> >> You have no idea how much Apple employees and shareholders love Vista.
> >> It's the best thing Microsoft could possibly have done for Apple.
> >>
> >> -jcr
> >
> > What M$ needs to do is go back and rewrite Windows to run over Darwin.
> > I'm sure that would be easier than trying to fix Windows as it is.
>
> Darwin is open source. Maybe MS will use it as the core of their next OS.
> :)
that would be too sensible.
PC Guy
Why?
Peter Hayes
Indeed. A long time ago I was advocating Microsoft use Linix as the
basis for Vista, or Longhorn as it was then, before the name change
designed to reset the development clock.
They then create an emulator for "legacy" apps - ie everything written
since the DOS 1 days. Apple managed a similar scenario with far fewer
resources than Microsoft.
PC Guy
How many times must it be said before you Mactards will understand?
Unsupported hardware isn't going to magically work because the end user has
a high level of technical knowledge.
Peter Hayes
> "Peter Hayes" <noti...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:1i33tmt.mm6eui6jnmx0N%noti...@btinternet.com...
> > PC Guy <pc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> "Peter Hayes" <noti...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1i33r88.ckycd01dznsc6N%noti...@btinternet.com...
> >> > PC Guy <pc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I have an older
> >> >> system on which I installed Vista. The system contains a unique audio
> >> >> card
> >> >> which is unsupported in Vista. Should I be blaming Vista for this
> >> >> "failure"?
> >> >> Or should I recognize the card was designed and supported on Windows
> >> >> XP?
> >> >> And
> >> >> will Vista suddenly become "fixed" once the manufacturer releases
> >> >> Vista
> >> >> drivers for this card?
> >> >
> >> > Errr.... Shouldn't that read "And will Vista suddenly become "fixed"
> >> > ***if*** the manufacturer releases Vista drivers for this card?
> >>
> >> Drivers for this card are currently in beta.
> >
> > You're one of the lucky ones then.
>
> Why?
Because landfills are full of products made obsolete by a Windows
upgrade.
PC Guy
Yeah, that would be a good idea. NOT! I can just envision the howles we'd
have from the Mactards about how the new version of Windows broke so many
things. It would put the Vista bashing to shame.
PC Guy
That didn't answer the question.
Tim Murray
>> I'm sure that would be easier than trying to fix Windows as it is.
>
> Yeah, that would be a good idea. NOT! I can just envision the howles we'd
> have from the Mactards about how the new version of Windows broke so many
> things. It would put the Vista bashing to shame.
>
So, right off the bat, you can assume that the new Windows would be so
horribly broken it would eclipse Vista in that regard.
Tim Murray
> Unsupported hardware isn't going to magically work because the end user has
> a high level of technical knowledge.
>
When will you understand: He probably already knows that. That is the point.
Peter Hayes
That misses the point. The PCMag contributer had difficulty getting
networking to work,
"Networking, too, gives me huge headaches. In XP, a simple
right click on the system tray icon put me one click away
from IP settings and connections status. Now that same icon
brings up a menu of options that ultimately lead to the
Network and Sharing center - sharing in the Sirius
Cybernetics, "Share and Enjoy" obfuscation mode, not any
sort of network sharing I'm familiar with. I've configured
every PC on my home network to share drives and printers,
yet owing to some undiscovered element, there's no guarantee
that any of them will be visible at any given time."
Note the killer phrase, "there's no guarantee
that any of them will be visible at any given time."
Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Nothing to do with your
"unsupported hardware" red herring.
In any event it's hardly a recipe for the "rich user experience" Gates
keeps promising his followers.
Peter Hayes
If Apple can rewrite an OS from the ground up AND maintain backwards
compatability why can't Microsoft with their massive resources? Or are
you agreeing Microsoft is hopeless at organising the talents that are
undoubtedly at their disposal (or should be - if not there's a few
recruitment managers needing fired)?
Peter Hayes
PC Guy
They didn't maintain backwards compatibility. They virtualized their
previous OS. That's not the same thing.
PC Guy
LOL. Vista's not broken. Normal folks are using it troublefree everyday
unlike you Mactards. No surprise there.
PC Guy
I get the impression he's complaining that it doesn't work like XP, not that
sharing doesn't work. Of course with what he's written I could be wrong
because it's a bunch of gibberish.
> Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Nothing to do with your
> "unsupported hardware" red herring.
No red herring. Just your delusions. How come it's working find for me?
> In any event it's hardly a recipe for the "rich user experience" Gates
> keeps promising his followers.
I and everyone I know aren't having problems with it. Perhaps we're just
smarter than this fellow?
PC Guy
No. What you did was respond to the question. But you didn't answer the
question.
gimme_this...@yahoo.com
running Vista supported hardware purchased in January 2007!
What's the big deal?
...snip...
> Exactly. I've been using Vista on my Vista certified (i.e. it came
> pre-loaded) PC since I bought it at the end of January. Use
> supported/certified hardware/software and you should be fine.
>
> ... snip ...
Tim Murray
>> compatability why can't Microsoft with their massive resources? Or are
>> you agreeing Microsoft is hopeless at organising the talents that are
>> undoubtedly at their disposal (or should be - if not there's a few
>> recruitment managers needing fired)?
>
> They didn't maintain backwards compatibility. They virtualized their
> previous OS. That's not the same thing.
>
So let me rewrite it: If Apple can rewrite an OS from the ground up AND
maintain the ability to use older applications, why can't Microsoft with
their massive resources? Or are you agreeing Microsoft is hopeless at
organising the talents that are undoubtedly at their disposal (or should be
-if not there's a few recruitment managers needing fired)?
Clear?
PC Guy
> On Aug 19, 2007, PC Guy wrote:
>>> If Apple can rewrite an OS from the ground up AND maintain backwards
>>> compatability why can't Microsoft with their massive resources? Or are
>>> you agreeing Microsoft is hopeless at organising the talents that are
>>> undoubtedly at their disposal (or should be - if not there's a few
>>> recruitment managers needing fired)?
>>
>> They didn't maintain backwards compatibility. They virtualized their
>> previous OS. That's not the same thing.
>>
>
> So let me rewrite it: If Apple can rewrite an OS from the ground up AND
> maintain the ability to use older applications, why can't Microsoft with
> their massive resources?
They have. That's the fact you keep overlooking.
Tim Murray
>> So let me rewrite it: If Apple can rewrite an OS from the ground up AND
>> maintain the ability to use older applications, why can't Microsoft with
>> their massive resources?
>
> They have. That's the fact you keep overlooking.
>
Really? And the complaints are coming from where? Space?
PC Guy
Was Apple's solution was 100% backward compatible? There's your answer.
Peter Hayes
You're confusing result - backwards compatibility - with method -
virtualisation. I prefer to call it emulation since virtualisation
technology as we understand it today wasn't in the mainstream in 2001.
In any event, it doesn't matter what you call the technology, the end
result as far as the user is concerned is backwards compatibility.
It's irrelevent to the discussion anyway. Apple succeeded where
Microsoft feared to tread.
Peter Hayes
It's normal that something continues to work once it's set up, hardware
problems excepted. This chap finds his network connections erratic. When
something becomes erratic, look to any additions to the system. Vista is
an addition. Ergo, there's something amiss with Vista.
> > Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Nothing to do with your
> > "unsupported hardware" red herring.
>
> No red herring. Just your delusions. How come it's working find for me?
We're not discussing your setup, we're discussing PCMag's contributor's
setup.
> > In any event it's hardly a recipe for the "rich user experience" Gates
> > keeps promising his followers.
>
> I and everyone I know aren't having problems with it.
You have problems, an as yet unsupported audio card.
> Perhaps we're just smarter than this fellow?
I'm sure there's hundreds, maybe even thousands of perfectly good Vista
setups, and yours is nearly one of them. Others aren't so lucky.
Peter Hayes
Yes, I did - you're one of the lucky ones because your supplier intends
releasing a Vista driver. For many others, there were no such drivers.
Ever.
So perfectly good hardware was consigned to the scrapheap, or some
recycling sweatshop in China.
Jim Lee Jr.
"PC Guy" <pc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I can just envision the howles we'd have from the Mactards about how the new version of Windows broke so many
> things.
You misspelled "howls."
--
Posted from my 1999 Apple G4 Sawtooth
A 450 MHz G4 running OS X 10.4.8
PC Guy
Apple had nothing compared to Microsoft when it comes to backwards
compatibility. Microsoft has done an excellent job with backwards
compatibility. It's not perfect but it's damn good.
Jim Lee Jr.
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> Darwin is open source. Maybe MS will use it as the core of their next OS.
> :)
Especially when Darwin is free, so Micro$lut would not have to pay a
cent for it.
Walter Bushell
noti...@btinternet.com (Peter Hayes) wrote:
Apple doen't go as far back. OTOH, from what I hear and have experienced
they do a far better job of keeping the legacy apps they do support
working. For example, I had no trouble running any PowerPC app under
Classic.
Walter Bushell
Tim Murray <no-...@thankyou.com> wrote:
That's rewrite an OS from the ground up and change CPU's and maintain
compatibility. But Apple started from higher ground, that is to say from
a unix- like base.
PC Guy
So? I bought the card knowing it would be supported under XP. And it is. So
why am I lucky?
> For many others, there were no such drivers.
>
> Ever.
So?
> So perfectly good hardware was consigned to the scrapheap, or some
> recycling sweatshop in China.
And Apple has never dropped support for their hardware? So I can run OS X on
a Mac 128?
PC Guy
Does he? That's not clear. Like I said what he wrote is gibberish.
> When something becomes erratic, look to any additions to the system. Vista
> is
> an addition. Ergo, there's something amiss with Vista.
If there's something amiss with Vista then how come I nor my SO are having
problems with it?
>> > Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Nothing to do with your
>> > "unsupported hardware" red herring.
>>
>> No red herring. Just your delusions. How come it's working find for me?
>
> We're not discussing your setup, we're discussing PCMag's contributor's
> setup.
But if there's a fundamental problem with Vista it stands to reason I would
be experiencing it too. Right?
>> > In any event it's hardly a recipe for the "rich user experience" Gates
>> > keeps promising his followers.
>>
>> I and everyone I know aren't having problems with it.
>
> You have problems, an as yet unsupported audio card.
>
>> Perhaps we're just smarter than this fellow?
>
> I'm sure there's hundreds, maybe even thousands of perfectly good Vista
> setups, and yours is nearly one of them. Others aren't so lucky.
Others who use unsupported hardware. No surprise there.
Peter Hayes
> "Tim Murray" <no-...@thankyou.com> wrote in message
> news:y40yi.19820$aa7....@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
> > On Aug 19, 2007, PC Guy wrote:
> >>> If Apple can rewrite an OS from the ground up AND maintain backwards
> >>> compatability why can't Microsoft with their massive resources? Or are
> >>> you agreeing Microsoft is hopeless at organising the talents that are
> >>> undoubtedly at their disposal (or should be - if not there's a few
> >>> recruitment managers needing fired)?
> >>
> >> They didn't maintain backwards compatibility. They virtualized their
> >> previous OS. That's not the same thing.
> >>
> >
> > So let me rewrite it: If Apple can rewrite an OS from the ground up AND
> > maintain the ability to use older applications, why can't Microsoft with
> > their massive resources?
>
> They have. That's the fact you keep overlooking.
Have they? There's an awful lot of recycled code in Vista. That's the
fact you keep overlooking.
We're suggesting an alternative and better approach, which would have
been for MS to ditch all their spaghetti code, grab a Linux distro and
an emulator/virtualiser/whatever and begin again.
PC Guy
> PC Guy <pc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "Tim Murray" <no-...@thankyou.com> wrote in message
>> news:y40yi.19820$aa7....@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>> > On Aug 19, 2007, PC Guy wrote:
>> >>> If Apple can rewrite an OS from the ground up AND maintain backwards
>> >>> compatability why can't Microsoft with their massive resources? Or
>> >>> are
>> >>> you agreeing Microsoft is hopeless at organising the talents that are
>> >>> undoubtedly at their disposal (or should be - if not there's a few
>> >>> recruitment managers needing fired)?
>> >>
>> >> They didn't maintain backwards compatibility. They virtualized their
>> >> previous OS. That's not the same thing.
>> >>
>> >
>> > So let me rewrite it: If Apple can rewrite an OS from the ground up AND
>> > maintain the ability to use older applications, why can't Microsoft
>> > with
>> > their massive resources?
>>
>> They have. That's the fact you keep overlooking.
>
> Have they? There's an awful lot of recycled code in Vista. That's the
> fact you keep overlooking.
A good thing.
> We're suggesting an alternative and better approach, which would have
> been for MS to ditch all their spaghetti code, grab a Linux distro and
> an emulator/virtualiser/whatever and begin again.
You're suggesting an approach based on nothing more than the FUD you
believe.
Tim Murray
>
> "Tim Murray" <no-...@thankyou.com> wrote in message
> news:z90yi.19826$aa7....@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>> On Aug 19, 2007, PC Guy wrote:
>>>> So let me rewrite it: If Apple can rewrite an OS from the ground up AND
>>>> maintain the ability to use older applications, why can't Microsoft with
>>>> their massive resources?
>>>
>>> They have. That's the fact you keep overlooking.
>>>
>>
>> Really? And the complaints are coming from where? Space?
>
> Was Apple's solution was 100% backward compatible? There's your answer.
>
Don't know; probably not. But to compare the effort of working up a Classic
platform on a Unix foundation is orders of magnitude ... excuse me, I'm
laughing so hard I can hardly type ... greater than a upgrade of Windows to
[snicker] Windows.
Tim Murray
>> releasing a Vista driver.
>
> So? I bought the card knowing it would be supported under XP. And it is. So
> why am I lucky?
>
Cuz' you don't have to toss it. Duh.
How would you feel if it were not going to be supported in Vista? No, wait, I
know your answer: "I bought it for XP, so it did what it was supposed to do.
I'm not upset in the least, as I did not expect it to work in Vista."
Peter Hayes
> "Peter Hayes" <noti...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:1i33yq0.3wsue41fglj59N%noti...@btinternet.com...
>
> So? I bought the card knowing it would be supported under XP. And it is. So
> why am I lucky?
XP isn't Vista.
> > For many others, there were no such drivers.
> >
> > Ever.
>
> So?
Their kit becomes junk. Geez,
>
> > So perfectly good hardware was consigned to the scrapheap, or some
> > recycling sweatshop in China.
>
> And Apple has never dropped support for their hardware? So I can run OS X on
> a Mac 128?
We're discussing "Vista just ain't cutting it".
Peter Hayes
I'm glad you're now calling it backwards compatibility...
But it seems to have gone pear shaped with Vista.
It's not helped by making \program files writeable only by administrator
[1], so user installs an app into \program files, then it falls over
when the user runs it and it can't write.
[1] a sensible move, in my opinion.
Peter Hayes
> "Peter Hayes" <noti...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:1i33zuu.9rcjnf1jtwz8lN%noti...@btinternet.com...
> > PC Guy <pc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> "Tim Murray" <no-...@thankyou.com> wrote in message
> >> news:y40yi.19820$aa7....@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
> >> > On Aug 19, 2007, PC Guy wrote:
> >> >>> If Apple can rewrite an OS from the ground up AND maintain backwards
> >> >>> compatability why can't Microsoft with their massive resources? Or
> >> >>> are
> >> >>> you agreeing Microsoft is hopeless at organising the talents that are
> >> >>> undoubtedly at their disposal (or should be - if not there's a few
> >> >>> recruitment managers needing fired)?
> >> >>
> >> >> They didn't maintain backwards compatibility. They virtualized their
> >> >> previous OS. That's not the same thing.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > So let me rewrite it: If Apple can rewrite an OS from the ground up AND
> >> > maintain the ability to use older applications, why can't Microsoft
> >> > with
> >> > their massive resources?
> >>
> >> They have. That's the fact you keep overlooking.
> >
> > Have they? There's an awful lot of recycled code in Vista. That's the
> > fact you keep overlooking.
>
> A good thing.
Eh? You believe leaving in all that leaky spaghetti code is a good
thing?
> > We're suggesting an alternative and better approach, which would have
> > been for MS to ditch all their spaghetti code, grab a Linux distro and
> > an emulator/virtualiser/whatever and begin again.
>
> You're suggesting an approach based on nothing more than the FUD you
> believe.
Oh it's not FUD, it would be a lot better than the current offering. All
those security holes, buffer overruns, &c, &c, swept away in one move.
OK, there'd be some new ones, but the Unix model is inherently secure,
unlike seive Windows designed as a tool to assimilate 99% of the desktop
market with security coming a poor second.
PC Guy
> On Aug 19, 2007, PC Guy wrote:
>>
>> "Tim Murray" <no-...@thankyou.com> wrote in message
>> news:z90yi.19826$aa7....@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>>> On Aug 19, 2007, PC Guy wrote:
>>>>> So let me rewrite it: If Apple can rewrite an OS from the ground up
>>>>> AND
>>>>> maintain the ability to use older applications, why can't Microsoft
>>>>> with
>>>>> their massive resources?
>>>>
>>>> They have. That's the fact you keep overlooking.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Really? And the complaints are coming from where? Space?
>>
>> Was Apple's solution was 100% backward compatible? There's your answer.
>>
>
> Don't know; probably not.
Then why do you fault Microsoft for the same?
> But to compare the effort of working up a Classic
> platform on a Unix foundation is orders of magnitude ... excuse me, I'm
> laughing so hard I can hardly type ... greater than a upgrade of Windows
> to
> [snicker] Windows.
More FUD. No surprise there.