Manage updates with the Download App
Time to delay Vista again?
August 2, 2006 11:25 AM PST
A lot is riding on the release of Windows Vista. It's been nearly five years since Windows XP debuted, and the new version still isn't soup yet. Microsoft has already scaled back its plans for the operating system significantly, following several hold-ups. Even with the big cuts, the company still missed this year's holiday season.
Under the latest plan, big businesses should have Vista by November, and the consumer delivery of Vista is set for January. But that's dependent on the operating system sticking to a tight schedule, with a near-final version needing to be ready this quarter.
There is still plenty of open speculation about whether it is really ready to take that step. Even Microsoft is hedging. Last month, Chairman Bill Gates revived doubts about the timing of the release, reportedly saying there was a 20 percent chance of another Vista delay.
Some prominent bloggers are calling on the company to reschedule the release and to send out a Beta 3 version instead. They say that Beta 2, out right now, suggests that the code isn't anywhere ready yet. While another postponement would derail partner plans, the bloggers argue that that's a lesser evil than annoying millions of Windows users.
To find out what people on the street make of it, we asked our Vista Views panel, made up of ordinary readers, this question: Do you agree that delaying Vista again and putting out a third beta is the way to go for Microsoft?
Barb Bowman
I'd have to mostly agree, based on the builds I've seen, that Vista is a much longer distance from RC1 (release candidate 1) than it should be. Unless a lot of bugs are squashed and functionality perfected in the next few weeks, I don't see January being a realistic target.Whether this means a third official beta or more interim builds before the official RC1 release does not matter, as long as the work is done before designating a build RC1.
Barb Bowman is a product development manager for Comcast high-speed Internet who also writes about technology for the Microsoft Windows XP Expert Zone and the Microsoft Vista community.
Mark Casazza
I wasn't planning to be an early adopter, so I don't have my heart set on a January release. But from what I've read, Vista isn't going to provide any "must have" functionality for business users, which means that most of the early adopters are going to be consumers. And if Microsoft delivers a buggy product to the consumers, they'll spend the next several years explaining why they did so.
Since Microsoft isn't going to make the holiday season anyway, I think they'd be a lot better off if they took the extra time and delivered a 100 percent polished product.
Mark Casazza is the director of academic information for the City University of New York.
David Price
Another round of beta testing is always needed, but seldom done. MS should do the right thing and not release the new OS until it has had serious stress testing. There will still be tons of bugs and security holes for discovery after the public release (the REAL beta test).David Price is a senior accident analyst at one of the U.S.'s top research and development national laboratories and an award-winning nature photographer.
Wallace Wang
We've been waiting over five years already for the successor to Windows XP, so we might as well wait a few more months for Microsoft to ship a secure, reliable operating system. The problem isn't trying to meet the January 2007 release date. The problem is that after such a long delay, Microsoft must absolutely make sure Vista works. There's nothing worse than taking five years, only to release a buggy operating system that just offers marginal improvements over Windows XP.Rather than try to yank out more features to insure Vista ships on time, Microsoft should work on optimizing Vista. Every new release of Mac OS X from version 10.1 to 10.2 to 10.3 to 10.4 actually added new features while making my ancient G3 iBook faster at the same time. With Mac OS X, it's a no-brainer to upgrade the operating system since you speed up an old computer while getting new features at the same time.
With Windows, the opposite is true. Each succeeding version of Windows needs more hardware and still runs sluggishly. Don't even think about running Vista on a machine originally designed for Windows 98 or even one designed for Windows XP. Ultimately, no matter how long Microsoft takes to ship Vista, the fact that it won't run on existing machines already means Vista is a failure.
Wallace Wang is a freelance computer journalist and author whose books include "Microsoft Office for Dummies" and "Steal This Computer Book."
Josh Phillips
I agree. The current builds are not leaving me very confident that Microsoft will meet its currently planned dates. I think they should just annouce the delay as early as possible and factor in some fudge room. To me, putting out a build that isn't at least as reliable as Windows XP is unacceptable, no matter how much more secure it is supposed to be.
Josh Phillips is an IT professional based in California.
Brian Lambert
Microsoft should not release an operating system that is still rough around the edges. Vista has been delayed so much and is well overdue, but waiting a little longer to perfect it and get out most the bugs would be appreciated.This should be Microsoft's magnum opus. There's a lot of competition surfacing in the operating system market with Ubuntu and OS X gaining some popularity. Vista should meet or exceed all the great qualities of these systems. If that means they need to put out a third beta to work out the kinks and make Vista sparkle, then so be it.
I don't want to get Vista when it comes out and have to apply a hundred patches just to fix problems that should have been resolved in development. Microsoft should work swiftly to meet their goals, but if the product needs work, they should realize they may have to sacrifice timeliness for quality.
Brian Lambert is a law student at Southern Illinois University.
Jason Klomps
Unfortunately, I think they may be right. Based on the number of still remaining bugs and user issues, and when RC 1 is scheduled to be released later on this quarter, it is hard to say that Vista will be ready.
Honestly, I believe there should be a beta 3 prior to RC1. I feel that a month or two delay would be in the best interests of Microsoft and the public, but nothing more then that.
Jason Klomps of Tucson, Ariz., works in IT support for a call center.
Chris Hacking
In the end, people aren't going to care too much about how long Vista takes to ship. Sure, it will live on in certain memories, and immediately after any announcement like this, there will be uproar?but it won't last too long.What will last is the stigma of a broken OS. Almost nobody uses WinME today, despite the fact that it was supposed to be a better single-user, home system choice than Win2K. In fact, those who didn't want to upgrade to 2K stuck with 98, now over eight years old, if XP was out of their computer's capabilities.
That is the kind of stigma that Vista absolutely, unquestionably cannot afford. Release a good OS, something that can stand up to OSX in appearance, Linux in security, and beat XP in usability and compatibility, and it will be considered a golden-age product, much the way that 98 itself was. What average user cares how long it took, or how many codenames/betas/RCs?
If the current builds aren't up to stuff, give developers and testers a bit more time and make sure they do it right, then dazzle us all. Release dates are NOT more important than quality.
Chris Hacking is a computer engineering student at the University of Washington, Seattle who has worked in Web development and freelance software development.
John Kneeland
Since they're already going to miss the crucial holiday season, they may as well delay it again. After all, when you've delayed a product for years and years, what's another few months?
John Kneeland is an undergraduate at the University of Pennsylvania, where he is majoring in international relations and East Asian studies.
The Vista Views panel is being brought together by CNET News.com to discover what people on the street think about Microsoft's new operating system.
We're looking for a range of perspectives--from beta testers to business buyers to home PC owners.
Interested in joining the panel pool? Here's how it works:
Whenever key Vista news breaks, we'll e-mail a question to contributors. Sometimes, we'll ask a yes/no question and use the answers for a simple poll. Other times, we'll look for more in-depth feedback on Vista events. It doesn't matter whether you send us two pages or two sentences--we value your comments. And if you don't have an opinion on a particular story, or you don't have time to respond, that's fine too.
The feedback will often reach our readers. Our writers may quote panel remarks in stories. Or we may pull together comments--your two cents--in an article of their own. Occasionally, we'll ask contributors to take part in a weekly podcast to discuss their views with News.com editors and industry experts.
We want to know what our readers think, as Microsoft gets ready for one of its most important launches in years. If you haven't signed up yet, send an e-mail to us at vista-views@cnet.com.
Reader comment from Brian Clarke:
"Symantec needs to find a better business model than fear-mongering and profiting off of insecure operating systems from Microsoft."
Read more Vista panel comments on this topic here.
Story: Gates: 20 percent chance of Vista delay
Reader comment from Robert McLaws:
"Everyone has complained for years that Microsoft doesn?t listen to its customers. So why now is everyone complaining when they finally DO start listening?"
Read more Vista panel comments on this topic here.
Story: Gates to bow out at Microsoft
Reader comment from John Kneeland:
"Ideally, it would mean that Microsoft will focus less on adding new junk and instead focus on making the existing junk work well."
Read more Vista panel comments on this topic here.
Piecing together Vista
Videos
Peek at Vista
New features are designed to appeal to nonbusiness users. February 22, 2006
Windows' chief answers questions from News.com readers. January 27, 2006
Blog
The latest Windows blog postings on News.com.
Design: Gautama Swamy
Production: Kristina Wood
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Y_Jp6PxsSQ&%20eurl=" target="_newWindow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Y_Jp6PxsSQ&%20eurl=</a>
would have to delay onto 2008. Microsoft can't afford such a big
delay so jan 2007 it will be with loads of updates afterwards.
If Vista is a bugfest then i really hope Apple will bring osX to the
other side and go for the kill, XP and osX on one machine is a much
better solution then Vista will ever be. Be it a Dell or a Mac.
for Apple - let go of their entire legacy codebase. Seriously.
My advice to Microsoft is to buy or develop a new operating
system with a provision for Windows compatibility, but that
compatibility layer should be partitioned from the new OS and
deprecated quickly.
Sure - put a few people on a team to make sure that legacy
codebae will run in the new OS, but kill that insanely complex
and increasingly bloated monster now, so we can all move
forward. Win32 and the NT Kernel are suffocating security,
innovation, and style on the Wintel platform - which could
develop into the MacTel platform more easily than I think people
can admit at this point.
are already sold by Apple.
They can boot directly into Windows...
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/" target="_newWindow">http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/</a>
They support Windows/Linux virtualization...
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.parallels.com/en/products/workstation/mac/" target="_newWindow">http://www.parallels.com/en/products/workstation/mac/</a>
They even run Windows apps without Windows...
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.codeweavers.com/products/cxmac/" target="_newWindow">http://www.codeweavers.com/products/cxmac/</a>
Now, someone will probably say "Macs cost more." That's true,
unless you compare equivalent quality/features/software. Macs
include lots of extras that are often ignored in such
comparisons.
Björn Lundahl,
Göteborg Sweden
I think such a move would please PC companies allowing them to capitalize on the holiday season.
Intel just released the Core 2 and AMD will undoubtedly release a competitor, waiting to next Xmas will be pleny of time for PC companies to adopt either of these newer processors and build machines better suited to handle Vista.
That should also be plenty of time to finish the OS, i think everyone agrees that it needs more work. And maybe even let Microsoft put some things back in that they took out to speed it along. More features would give consumers more of an incentive to upgrade.
Personally, i need a bit more time and money to upgrade my own PC.
Best Buy Inn
Dr BLT
words and music by Dr BLT c 2006, 2007
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.drblt.net/music/BestBI.mp3" target="_newWindow">http://www.drblt.net/music/BestBI.mp3</a>
-Mark Casazza
Since when has MS ever released a "100 percent polished product"? Even Apple, praised for their sucurity and clean UI, just released 26 new updates for OSX. The best we can hope for from Redmond is an OS that will run long enough to download the updates without crashing. I've always been Windows person, but Macs are looking more and more appealing.
-Mark Casazza
You can't polish a t*rd.
Microsoft should, for the interim fine tune it as much as
possible. If that means delaying it a third or fourth time, then so
be it.
If there is one thing about Microsoft, they were smart on
monopolizing Windows earlier in the game when they could,
cause its buying them time with releasing Vista. Obviously all
this time their spending, working on it, it will be a great product.
They've bought their get out of jail card and their using it to
thier advantage. Thats the mastery of Microsoft PR.
And as such..
they are such a goliath in the industry, no one can take them
down. How do I know this? Despite fierce competition from its
competitors and despite their competitors clearly having better
products, they have such a strangle-hold on this industry that I
can only conclude that this industry is Microsoft.
Useless Software: I have a lot of software that I cannot use on any x64 platform. Realplayer, Nero, PowerDVD, and many other software programs aren't supported. I don't see how Vista x64 is of much use until more software support is available. Only a computer wizard can install and make these software programs work, but this is of no use for the average consumer who would never figure out how to install them.
Hardware Support: It's almost 2 years since the promise of a x64 OS, yet good luck in finding hardware support. I still have not found any support for Intel Viiv, on either Vista x64 or 32 bit.
Windows XP has 100% support. Most manufactures like Dell and HP aren't interested in any x64 OS. After a year and a half I gave up....for now.
In the meantime I am runnig Windows XP Media Center with Intel Viiv.
It is based on a flawed foundation, and many of the security "improvements" are half-baked, at best.
The worst thing is that whenever it is released, it will still be years, and in a few cases decades behind other OS's.
Vista may not nail the coffin shut on MS, but it will surely slam the lid on it.
Tons of people will be getting computers for xmas. Most of these have never bought a retail box OS, and will be shocked at the size of the MS tax when they decide to upgrade.
Regardless of the quality waiting till september 2007 to release this POS, will make it easier for MS to keep people fooled into believing that wondows is cheap, just because it comes on the crappy Dell or HP they just bought.
as i put them on i put them back off, lol. I have read some of the
features and it sounds like it's going to be great but reading
something on paper and seeing it live is two different things. I
use both Mac OS X (Tiger) and Win XP on my laptop. And found
that the great amount of power that would be required to just
run Vista never mind apps, I'm sure they have to change this
because in all fairness who would really waste 300 and then buy
a new machine just to run it. Or buy the whole kit in one go. I
know Im not I'm happy with XP at this time, but i would like
another beta because friends the Vista is not no where even
close to being released and if they do release it they'll just drive
that last spike into Microsoft driving a few more people away.
So Microsoft can you send yet another Beta please. I really don't
think anyone would care it's not ready for January if it's stable
thats worth the wait.
Garret
were talking about when it first came out. Weren't devices
SUPPOSED to work when you plugged them in? They did on my
Mac IIci, which was 6 years old and still running current software
in 1995. How was Plug-n-Play considered a feature in Windows?
I do agree with much of what you're saying about the bloatware
though. Most (all?) of the upgrades since OS 10.0 have made the
Macs running them faster, not slower.
First a much improved GUI. It has a much sleeker design, and I love the new start menu. I liek the Ctrl-alt-del features and how when I roll my mouse over taskbar itmes it shows me a preview. I think the Areo glass feature is great. there is much more I like too, just don't want this to get to long. Also the new file menu system is awesome, took a litle getting use to, but now that I am I love it.
Second, Stability....I have not had the OS crash on me once. NOT ONCE, been using this current build for 2 weeks now and have installed everything I can. No OS crashes. Yes, some apps wont install and work, but thats not MS's problem, thats the app companies issues.
Third, Performance. I get the same performance if not better on my machine then I did with Win XP. I have a Dell 8200 with a 2 Ghz chip and a gig of RAM with a ATI Radeon Video Card and a Audigy 2 sound card. Also with build 5472, installation time was the fasest of any MS OS I have ever installed.
Does MS still have work to do, yes. But overall, Vista a great improvement over XP. I use XP at work and really love using vista at home. Now I havent used Linux, or Mac OSX, but what MS has over all the other is that it is easy to use, and very intutitive. I play with a mac or linux and I am lost. I know if I used it for a few hours, I would be fine, but why, MS has the most supported apps and I can do everything I need to.
- Mike roth
- Mike roth
It is extremely bloated. Look at the system requirements. Other OS's have better looking and more features available on far less resources.
It will be extremely expensive.
"Now I havent used Linux, or Mac OSX, but what MS has over all the other is that it is easy to use, and very intutitive."
Re-read that and see if it sounds as stupid to you as to me. It has ease of use over OSX and Linux, yet you haven't used them?? Nice. Use either of them and you will see where the MS "innovations" came from.
Vista is a bad copy of OSX and Linux, with security and performance issues added in, and some very nice and important features added in.
Vista is garbage and already a huge failure. End of story.
write in complete sentences, with correct spelling an
punctuation. I thought Word had a grammar checker built-in.
Have you turned it off?
Some of your mistakes, with corrections in brackets [] follow:
I am [a] computer power users [user]
that knows how to do more then [than] the average just [don't
use 'just'] web surfer
'the public release of Beta 2 was bad[,] nothing worked, but with
the [use as of, or starting with, but not with the!] build 5473, I
have now started running it as my only [primary] OS.'
'Most software companys are not releasing Vista Compliant
versions and have not had any problems running core
apps.' [This sentence makes no sense. I think you're trying to say
that most applications run, but I'm not sure if you are saying
that developers are writing code for Vista or not.]
'I liek [like] the Ctrl-alt-del features and how when I roll my
mouse over taskbar itmes [items] it shows me a preview.'
'there [There] is much more I like too, just don't want this to get
to [too] long.'
I've corrected only a portion of your 'review' so that you
understand what I have to say about this next piece:
'Now I havent [haven't] used Linux, or Mac OSX, but what MS has
over all the other [others] is that it is easy to use, and very
intutitive [intuitive].'
When you have this much trouble putting your thoughts into
coherent arguments on paper, you should question the origin of
those thoughts. You claim Windows is easiest to use and most
intuitive, but your writing indicates that you have spent a great
deal of time and effort learning to use Windows. You now find
anything else difficult by comparison, because you really don't
understand how to use Windows so much as you've memorized
how to navigate through it. The clincher: 'I play with a mac or
linux and I am lost.' pretty much sums up your abilities. When it
comes to ease of use, the Macintosh is the standard by which all
things are measured. That you could get 'lost' using it means
that you are not qualified to review any user interface, including
Windows.
IMO, Vista is simply an attempt to get a classy Mac-like interface, not to improve on OS efficiency. I doubt if Vista was *completly* reworked from the ground up, which means plenty of "bolt-ons" to accomplish the changes, which just add to the hardware requirements.
You gotta admit that the Mac inteface has always shown what a really class-act GUI should be.
Go ahead, admit it.
1. Most software developers will allow you to 'upgrade' from
their Windows software to the Mac version at either no cost or
the cost of a normal upgrade.
2. You can take it with you. Using Boot Camp or Parallels, you
can always boot back into Windows if you really need to.
3. Your experience will help you on the Mac. Think of Windows
like basic training in the military. It's hard, dirty work, and you
feel like your feet are dragging, but it makes you stronger. When
you finally leave basic training, everything else feels so much
easier by comparison. Like most switchers, you'll feel the weight
lift off of you when you finally rid yourself of Windows.
The only thing we'll need is a *PC* with a web-browser.
- Bryan
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.BryanCFleming.com" target="_newWindow">http://www.BryanCFleming.com</a>
There is the Game market (billion dollar market), which requires a fast computer, and graphics cards to be able to display the complex 3D worlds and textures.
Then there are database and graphics programs that also require a good computer with a good OS to run them. OS X is my Operating System of choice, sorry MS, you lost out, time = life, I don't have time to wait for over 10 years for you to come out with a good Operating System, OS X has been here for a good number of years and it's a Gem, I been running it for over a year, and not a single freaking problem or crash or freeze.
Vista Beta don't impress me, if anything they makes me more angry and your Office Beta is a total crap, why did you screw up all the Menus like that, there better be a classic File menu option, I hate your new design and I bet a lot of people do as well.
If I was an investor or a stock holder, I would be worry, nothing lasts for ever, and as a matter of fact, the word always should be removed from the dicionary, because nothing is always.
photos, or take/edit video, or record/watch TV, or watch DVD's,
or author DVD's, or compose music, or create presentations/
spreadsheets/newletters, or develop software, or create web
sites, or play video games?
I do.
But I agree Vista doesn't really matter, mainly because it doesn't
really help that much with any of the above. Sure, they've copied
several OS X features:
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://video.google.com/videoplay?" target="_newWindow">http://video.google.com/videoplay?</a>
docid=2674791799339834706
But probably not enough to make people want it. So I also agree
that Vista upgrades will come slow.
"All we'll need is a PC and a browser?"
A browser has to run on an operating system. A browser will never *be* an operating system, and you're fooling yourself if you think it will be.
XP won't cut it forever. Vista was developed for a reason. XP is a security nightmare. Vista's been developed from the ground up to be a security strongbox. That alone makes it worth the investment. If you haven't used it and investigated the security features, perhaps you should refrain from saying things like "Vista doesn't matter" until you have enough information to form an educated opinion.
About 60-65% of my x86 (32 Bit) software is working, where many were not before (on the Public Beta released recently).
On my System, I have:
HDD 0 - Windows XP Pro
HDD 1 - Partition 1 / Vista Beta 2 Build 5472 x86
HDD 2 - Partition 1 / Vista Beta 2 Build 5472 x64
OSL2000 Bootloader
About 60-65% of my x86 (32 Bit) software is working, where many were not before (on the Public Beta released recently).
On my System, I have:
HDD 0 - Windows XP Pro
HDD 1 - Partition 1 / Vista Beta 2 Build 5472 x86
HDD 2 - Partition 1 / Vista Beta 2 Build 5472 x64
OSL2000 Bootloader