Comments on: A bump on the road to Windows Vista

IT managers are saying "not so fast" as they move toward the OS, despite Microsoft's optimism about quick adoption.

[ServedUp]

No thanks on upgrading still..

I'll wait 3 more years when they release their next OS. Hopefully
Vista will be a lesson learned now that Allchin is no longer with
the company. I'm definitely sure WinFS will be revitalized, along
with a more stable UNIX like kernel (not NT) and most
importantly COMPATIBILITY with other devices. Those are the
three things they promised with Vista and obviously haven't
delivered and thats why Vista is such a dud.

But in general the OS so far is such a hassle to upgrade too.
XP SP2 just works and is far more stable running OS than Vista
(that is if your not running Outlook 2007 which only seems to
work excellent in Vista for some reason go figure).

Either way just hope their next OS won't take more than 3 years
to accomplish. We'll let Vista slide.. but with their next OS they'll
be accountable this time for sure.

[open-mind]

Just Finally Moved To XP

The Fortune-100 company I work for just now finally completed an 18 month migration from Win2K to WinXP.

Unless MS pulls the plug on XP support, I don't think we'll be switching to Vista any time soon.

[wolvie3421]

you should tell your cio he sucks

if it was upgrading to xp sp2, i'd say whatever. your company is playing it safe.

but with the past 5 years or so having seen so much growth in consumer pc's which are mostly winxp... why would any cio in their right mind want to subject their thousands of employees to win2000 for this long? that's a total drag on productivity.

[Leria]

They should immediately move to Vista

Businesses should immediately, and post-haste, move to Vista. It has much better security, is (for the most part) backwards compatible with all programs from earlier dating back to Windows 95, except 'real-mode' games and things that have to install drivers that there are no Vista drivers for (a failing of the hardware makers, not Microsoft).

I am exceptionally happy with my father's Toshiba A135 Vista Notebook PC. Has very snappy performance (once I turned off 8.3 filename creation and a few other things were tweaked) to the point where it is faster than a newer model I tested and compared it to at Best Buy.

[The_Decider]

lol

Never mind the extra hardware code, never mind the fact that Vista is NOT more secure then XP.

Leria has to justify her paycheck as a Microsoft astroturfer, so come on everyone, throw your networks into upheaval and blow this years profits on 5 year old tech!

[kgsbca]

I would rather use DOS.

I like W2K. I don't mind XP. I think Vista is a crime.

It consumes way too many uP cycles. It requires a fast uP and lots of DRAM. It is obnoxious with its' security questions, the Mac commercial that has a guy interrupt the PC every time he is asked a question is very appropriate. There is no apparent advantage over XP - if you have to tell me what it is, then it's hidden. I shouldn't have to work extra to appreciate an OS, it's supposed to be there in the background. You don't buy a computer to get an OS, it should just be a characteristic of the system, not the attraction.

So in the two dozen years I have been buying PCs, about 30 of them for personal use (countless more for work), only two of them have been Macs, and none Linux. I'll never buy another Vista machine. It will be Mac or Linux for me, unless it's necessary for a particular application.

The days of the desktop OS are numbered anyway. A large percentage of home PC users only use browser, email, and media apps, and they don't require a desktop OS. And the rest of the consumers who occasionally need to open a word doc or excel spreadsheet will be able to use google docs or some equivalent. It's sad that a PC has to be big just to support the OS, what a waste of all that DRAM and MIPS, not to mention desk space and energy. All that most consumers will need is a small box that connects their monitor, keyboard, and mouse to the Internet. When the U.S. has real broadband (Fios is a good start), they won't even need optical drives, as downloads will be as fast.

Until then, I'll have to keep the old machines running.

[imacpwr]

Highly unlikely my company will ever upgrade to Vista..

The computer I use at my work place is assembled with the bare
minimum components to support XP. It's running most of the time
Internet Explorer and Office. Why would my company pay out more
money to upgrade my computer's components and install Vista
when it's already adequately doing what it was built to do..???
Multiply that by about 5,000 and the costs will be staggering..!!

[Maclover1]

Ever?

So before your PC did you have a paper and a pencil?

What happens in 3 years....you still have the same box and software?

[rdtmk]

Compelling?

Shouldn't the decision to upgrade be based on the answer to this question: What will the new system give me that I don't already have? XP is mature, stable, and enables businesses to do everything they need to do. Being compelled to migrate to a new OS simply because MS support for the previous version will be discontinued in the near future is a ridiculous business model. The money a company will have to spend to migrate to Vista does nothing to increase shareholder value or corporate productivity - it is simply a MS revenue stream.

I am NOT anti-MS. I admire the company and what its done for the industry and, as a capitalist, support their right to revenue. But from a pure dollars-and-cents perspective, I don't know how a company can justify a migration to a new, unproven environment when the current one is more than good enough. Look around - do you see your colleagues floundering because they are using 2000 or XP, do you see the support folks in your space every day because of XP, do you see folks clammering for Vista because it will make their lives better? If you do, you live in a different world than I do.

At 50, I'll admit I'm a bit gray and have seen a lot of IT 'next big things' come and go, but when did the OS become the 'thing'? To me, the OS exists to create an environment in which I can run the programs that actually help me get stuff done. 99% of the time, I expect the OS to be a silent partner that enables me to run the apps that really matter. When did an OS ever directly help me draft a report, create a complex spreadsheet, or develop a database application? Sure, it kept the desktop environment from collapsing around me (most of the time, at least), but the apps and my intelligence did the hard work. Aero or whatever OS graphical beauty do nothing but sit behind my apps, ready to impress if I minimize their windows. I've always assumed that computers exist to run the applications that entertain and enable us, not to showcase the latest OS.

[GGGlen]

Not here, either

My company isn't "sidegrading" to Vista.
We couldn't think a single benefit it provides, it doesn't offer a
single new feature required to get our work done, and it requires
MASSIVE amounts of $$$ spent to upgrade existing hardware which
runs quite well on XP.
Sorry, MS, there's just no reason for Vista's existence.

[Draq Wraith]

What i found wrong while running vista

1 background processes set to run as normal.
2 Virtual Memory manager still screwed up and needs to be set to 200 and 1435 when running on gig of ram.
3 Windows User controls unable to be set to tell it YES I WANT THAT FREAKEN PROGRAM TO RUN NOW GO TO YOUR CORNER indefinitely.
4 Aero crashed 9 times out of 10.
5 System seizes if i leave it alone and let it go into power saver mode
6 Various programs have schedulers enabled that should only run and be set up by the user.
7 too many hidden processes causing system slow downs to the point the system is not responding.
Oh and lack of drivers less than a year old for it too.
so thoas are my gripes about My Dell e521.
you decide!
D~W

[Vegaman_Dan]

People use what works for their needs

If you are a Mac fan, then nothing else but Mac will be good enough for you.

If you are a Linux fan, then nothing else by Linux will be good enough for you.

If you're a Windows fan, then nothinge else but Windows will be good enough for you.


Those are pretty much the sentiments I see day in and day out here at the CNET Talkback threads.

Pick an OS that works for you and go with it. There's no need to tear down everything else because you are unwilling to accept that others don't share your opinion. To each their own.

For those who complain about the thousands of dollars they spent trying to fix this or that issue, or that they had tons of problems with running this or that OS, then I would strongly suggest the problem isn't with the system, but with the person who is trying to run it. Education helps a lot there. Learn about what you're trying to do and it will become easier.

I certainly wouldn't ask someone new to computers to set up a web server and email on a Linux box by handing them only the CD and no documentation. Educate yourself before you jump in and it will go a lot easier.

The only FUD being spread is that of the ignorant from what I can tell.

[Bladewolf]

Schools

I have a sneaking suspicion that my (ex-)school will not be moving to Vista, even after support for XP is dropped.

They're still running rooms for of 98SE boxen, and a couple of tech department rooms are full of NTv4 boxen. The remainder seems to be XP Professional SP2.
Their computer supplier 'recommends Vista Business', but they are still nuke'n'pave-ing from the network, using net installs.

I myself am a GNU/Linux user, and probably will be for life.
Yet, I know that Microsoft is doing what it originally set out to do: "A PC in every home, on every desk, all running Microsoft software."
The Aero/Vista-thingy is just the latest incarnation of that, with lots of shiney to appeal to the kind of people who like shiney.
And there's nothing wrong with that. They are a company who rely on sales of their software to survive, therefore they need victims^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hcustomers. (That was a *joke*, BTW.)

However, I do believe they might have done themselves a mischief with Vista. Yes it's shiney, but at the cost of quite steep hardware requirements, and also at a, frankly, extortionate price.
The Ultimate version requires a fairly high spec PC just to use that flashy interface that they tout so much, and costs £316 (Retail) (Which is roughly USD632, by my reckoning.)
And to get the backup software and bitlocker encryption, both of which would be useful to anyone, you are forced to get the ultimate version (and the high spec PC to run it on.)

I think I'll stick to *nix, and if I have to use Windows, then I'll use XP.
(Yes I have used Vista, looks nice. I think I'll have KDE set up like that. ;) )

[ethana2]

Meh, I got Ubuntu. I'm good.

I got cad software, 3d animation software, vector illustration software, the works. I have no need for Windows.

And maybe instead of pulling the entire "Yeah, but proprietary stuff is better" bit, people could think, "hey, if I find a feature I need that's not here, we have feature requests, don't we?"

See, it's not quite as risky going into business if there's, well, basically no overhead...

[Sinopa]

Ubuntu

I have ubuntu as well. In fact I switched not to very long after vista was released. I tried Vista, didn't like it, and went back to Xp. Xp was an excellent OS. There was alot of buzz about Ubuntu at the time so I downloaded it and made it a dual boot with xp, just to see what it was like. However, I soon found that with my dual boot XP/Ubuntu system I used the Xp less and less. Finally I just dumped it. Their is not one thing that I did in windows that I couldn't do in Ubuntu. Not to mention that all of my hardware and My wifi network 'just worked' from day one. I will be a *nix user from here on out. Some of you other windows users ought to try a dual boot. Just play with it, learn about it and see if there is anything you can't do at least for a home user. For a corporate user I completely understand the standpoint of sticking with xp and microsft, simply because of your custom applications and support needs. Not to mention new IT staff and training all employees to use a new operating system.

[t3st3r`]

I'm like Kubuntu :)

Windows Vista can go to the hell.I'm fine with Kubuntu.It costs nothing, has nice features and does not tries to force me to do what they [Microsoft] wants to see but rather allows me to do what I want and need.

Vista suxx!It f**ks the brain with activations.Specifically, hardware upgrade is pain in the ass - once you bought new HDD, Vista will send you to the hell. *** replacing my HDD with bigger one is counted like a crime? M$ finally got MAD with their restrictions!Well, it needs much more horsepower than any other OS.Let's spend this horsepower to my apps and not to OS myself.And no, I do not need DRM (Digital Restrictions Management), activations, forced reboots, updates offering WGA spyware, browsers like IE7 who spying me by default, etc.Hey, MS, eat your sh*t yourself!I'm not willing to pay for a bunch of technologies intended to F*CK me!DRM do you say?Ok, then come on and buy your f...ng restrictions yourself I'm saying :).I'm want to be "able", "allowed", "you can" for my moneys.Not "forbidden", "you can not", "not implemented" or "restricted" for my own moneys.I will never pay a cent for restricting me, duh.

[Penguinisto]

I'm getting tempted by Ubuntu for home...

@ work, Fedora Core 7 does the job and then some :)

But at home, I'm liking Ubuntu's increased compatibility w/ 3D
goodies... I've got the ISO downloaded, and a spare machine to
test it out on. I may have to play with it a bit...

/P

[Penguinisto]

Want proof that Vista is Crap?

Then look no further than here:

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2171472,00.asp

[i]"Maybe it was something in the water? I've been a big
proponent of the new OS over the past few months, even going
so far as loading it onto most of my computers and spending
hours tweaking and optimizing it. 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."[/i]

...and on page two of the article (after a litany of Vista
problems...)

[i]" 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."[/i]

/P

[Troll Hard]

Is Vista the new OS/2?

http://ask.slashdot.org/askslashdot/06/12/30/0014254.shtml

OS/2 had these issues when OS/2 Warp came out.

[michaelandrewnolan]

pull it off

I'm up to wvhp, and i am ready to pull it off.

if you are contemplating a vista upgrade on

a dell machine, DON'T DO IT...

[dirk goedseels]

here's the opinion of PC Magazine editor-in-chief

Read the defection and loss of faith by a former Vista booster, PC
Magazine editor-in-chief Jim Louderback, as he steps down from
his position.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2171472,00.asp