Also, people are gonna really be freaked I can tell when MS launches their expiramental new user interface that ditches the task/start bar idea all together...and yes that has been an in the works type thing aimed for 2k8, but will be optional so dont freak out on me :p
And if the Vienna/Fiji versions feature WinFS on top of that it will be freaky for some.
__________________ breley | Aximsite/Mobility Site Review Staff, Administrator | Judge, Smartphone & Pocket PC Best Software Awards 2008 To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
And if the Vienna/Fiji versions feature WinFS on top of that it will be freaky for some.
You know we're used to an interface and we don't want to change. If vista works better then I want to know, it looks different, its made for faster processors, its a band aid like XP whe it came out. make sure windows update is working fine.
@grentz. i know that the box i installed iut on falls short of premium. the only reason i installed it was becouse i wanted to test vista lightly without endangering my desktop which is my main computer. i am well aware that vista is a brand new kernal, however with the defraging statment, i would at least expect the defrager app to have a "details" button.
@w3iner. you are right. more peopel are computer initerate then htey are power users.
I have a feeling that computers will get easier and easier for stupid users as time goes on, while advanced users will get thrown to the wayside.
Back in the day, I used to do telephone support for a consumer computer manufacturer. So I'd sit there at my desk and help people fix there problems, and it was actually an interesting job. It REALLY makes you think fast, especially when you're sitting at a PC running Windows NT 4 and telling a user running Windows95 or WFW3.11 how to go in and perform various tasks purely from memory.
Anyway - when you spend 40 minutes on the phone with someone and the conversation goes like this:
Quote:
"It says Insert Windows 95 Disk 2 - what do I do?"
"Insert Disk 2 and press Enter"
--- 3 minutes ---
"It says Insert Windows 95 Disk 3 - what do I do?"
"Insert Disk 3 and press Enter"
--- 3 minutes ---
"It says Insert Windows 95 Disk 4 - what do I do? And sorry for asking all the time, I'm just so new and nervous with all this stuff..... "
we came up with some interesting theories. One was that all the smart people already had computers by the early 1990s and since then it's been predominantly the
dumb people buying them. :)
Some people will always struggle with the simplest tasks when it comes to computers.
Where I work now we have a LOT of in-house applications that are developed to "help" us do our jobs. It's absolutely amazing how little regard is paid to intuitive application interfaces. But then Microsoft haven't been THAT consistent either.
__________________
Always read stuff that will make you look good if you die in the middle of it.
Every is talking about how good or bad Vista is, but no one has actually discussed the inbuilt syncing, is it easier to use than Active Sync, any problems experienced with an Axim? Isn't that what this site's about?
Yea, I'm waiting for microsoft to come out with service packs before I upgrade, it's too unstable now
In what regard?
This is what bugs me, everyone spreading false info like this. It is not unstable at all.
Currently I have run Vista on a ton of different machines and configurations and have had no instability issues or any issues with the OS itself. Where problems come in is with not so well written software and/or software that is outdated. Even top level editors like the guys at [H]ardforum have helped to spread these rumours because they did not spend the time to actually figure things out or actually see what they are saying, people just keep spreading stuff around.
You cannot seriously be arguing that a brand new Microsoft OS has no bugs. That's just silly.
Even if you were to take such a stance, however, practical issues, such as the lack of compatibility with iTunes make Vista a less-than-appealing prospect for many home users at the moment. This may or may not be Microsoft's fault, but that's really beside the point: if it cannot be guaranteed that all of the core programs that run on my computer with XP will still run once Vista is on there, then I don't want to install it.
__________________
Newest To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Yes, I am not saying there are no bugs, but there are none that are mainstream right now and the bugs are not the reason people are saying they want to wait for a SP. They are just saying it since, "It's a MS product so we must need a SP to make it work well".
But then again, it is a new OS with a new kernel that i have been stressing. So everything cannot work that worked prior.
Think about it this way, you had Mac OS9 all perfect the way you liked it. Then you were debating moving to OSX. But lets see, NOTHING works that worked on OS9 thanks to the new kernel.
Now you expect all your apps to work fine with Vista (OSX) that worked with your XP (OS9) load. MS has been great in letting most of the applications out there work perfectly (heck, only one homebrew type app I use does not work, everything else is working perfectly including itunes for me). See how its a double standard in that sence?
I still am sticking by my word that people are not understanding that this is not XP.5, its a brand new OS with a new kernel. The media and people in general are really beating the incompatibilty and other so called "issues" into the brains of so many that have never even touched Vista and that is what bugs me. You can have your own opinion and thats fine, but base the opinions and statements off your usage, not reinterpreted rumours that most of the time are not even true and in the case of Vista, are based off of the RC builds!
I am not a MS fanboy, I am not sticking up for things that do have problems, I am speaking from my experiences over the last year or so with Vista on many many different machines and with many different programs. Vista has been insane compared to the early versions of XP, 98, 2000, etc. I truely have not found a big problem yet in Vista, many of the bugs I hear people reporting are just application issues with incompatible stuff, or just plane people not knowing how to do things.
I'm with Grentz regarding stability. On all the systems I've tried the various versions over the last year or so, I've had no significant/apparent stability issues. The only issue I have right now is my workstation with its D850MV motherboard doesn't seem to work with Vista if I put an ATI Radeon 9600 XT in...Vista boots up, I see a cursor, and just when the screen should build...my system shuts off. Since ATI claims that video card is Vista-compliant or some such, it must be my motherboard or some other wacky config.
__________________ breley | Aximsite/Mobility Site Review Staff, Administrator | Judge, Smartphone & Pocket PC Best Software Awards 2008 To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
One other neat thing about Vista that I have noticed is that when overclocking my CPU Vista is much more forgiving to nonstable overclocks. XP will BSOD but Vista still boots! It may not boot well and usually services fail to start, but still it boots and does not BSOD!
What you said all sounds very laudable, but the "media and people in general" don't generally get on their high horse without at least a sniff of a reason. I'm not say saying that Vista isn't a whole lot better than XP (and, indeed, is a different OS entirely). But that's no more than we would expect after all these years, billions of dollars spent, and some of the smartest geeks working on it, day in, day out. In fact, what we expect is perfection.
That may not be fair, but MS has put itself in a place where anything less will be criticised and derided. That's just market reality.
__________________
Newest To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
I see what you mean, I just want people to stop spreading these rumors and "bugs" that were in RC releases and have been fixed/are non existent in the final version. I have yet to find a real issue with Vista itself in the final version.
I see what you mean, I just want people to stop spreading these rumors and "bugs" that were in RC releases and have been fixed/are non existent in the final version. I have yet to find a real issue with Vista itself in the final version.
I ran into several issues, particularly with development software. Visual Studio 2005 has a known compatibility problem and some of our custom controls won't even run under it at all. That's OK ... M$ has come out with a service pack for the VS2005 issue and the custom-controls vendors will no doubt patch their issues as well.
My main point about Vista right now is not that there's anything patently wrong with it. I will, however, state that it is not compelling enough of an upgrade to set aside a well-tuned XP Professional (or Home for that matter) system just because it's new. Microsoft will, I'm sure, have good penetration with Vista - but it will not be as deep among those of us who are expert users of the system. When I evaluate a software upgrade (particularly an O/S) it has to have a demonstrated ability to fix problems that I'm having with the current system. Vista has not demonstrated this as yet. I won't "bash" it - but I'm not going to retool to it just because it's "there".
'98 to WinXP was an entirely different situation - that was a retool that was worth the change; going from a DOS-based to an NT-based kernel. The "upgrade" to Vista is not an event that offers that kind of improvement, IMHO.
If you want to go to Vista - that's fine. However XP is not going to be replaced any time soon nor should it be. Even Microsoft recognizes that - there will be mainline support for it through 2011 and plenty of life for it well after that.
Follow Us
RSS Feed
Follow on Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
Addicted Member
