Tech: Tech-Windows Vista

Subject: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: Flash Company
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 10:36 AM

I see the UK launch for the final(?) version of Vista is planned for Jan 2007. Anyone thinking of upgrading?

FC

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: Bill D
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 10:55 AM

I am reading this article and thinking "wait till it's been out a year or two"

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: mack/misophist
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 11:14 AM

It's never been a good idea to get the first version of a windows product. Wait until SP1 at least; that is if you must have it at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: mack/misophist
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 07:32 PM

It's clear that people here are passionate about this.

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: bobad
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 07:36 PM

Will it require upgrading your computer if you're running XP?

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 07:37 PM

Most likely bobad - unless you bought totally new hardware less than 12 months ago.

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: bobad
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 07:41 PM

That's what I figured, Bill Gates' piggy bank must be getting low.

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: BanjoRay
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 07:56 PM

I notice that Dell and others are selling PCs with XP now at pretty low prices. I suppose they think they're going to be left with warehouses full of them soon, when Vista hits the streets.
Ray

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 08:02 PM

I'm sure someone else can give much more specific details, but Vista is INTENDED to use high level graphics hardware (all done in 3D!!!), and DRM crap for sound and video recordings, as well as a few other 'cutting edge' things.

It also needs about a minimum of 2Gb of RAM to load the OS, as well as a processor with lots of grunt to drive all that bloated crap...

Looks like it's Linux for me in the future then...

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: artbrooks
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 08:06 PM

Having bought a PC with Windows ME (from Dell) and then having to upgrade it (at no cost), there is no way I'd buy an XP machine right now, cheap or not. There ware major hassles involved with the original upgrade and, when I killed my hard drive, I had to load ME, then XP, then all of the updates.

BTW, one of the articles I read said that 512mb of memory was only about half of what's required to run the full version of Vista.

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 09:40 PM

Will it require upgrading your computer if you're running XP?

That sorta depends on what kind of computer you've got.

Reports are that Vista will run (or at least limp?) ... on many older computers, but will not be able to use all the "features." On many not very old computers, that it will run is a technicality, or an exaggeration, since it probably won't run as well as the older OS you have now.

Except for fairly recent computers, it's unlikely that it will be feasible or cost-effective to "upgrade" to Vista-grade hardware, at least to where one can use everything. Many pre-WinXP BIOS chips can't address the RAM needed for effective use of Vista, and changing the BIOS chip (not just reprogramming it) probably invalidates your license to use WinXP, since it "makes a new machine."

You can buy a new computer now that will be "Vista ready," and some sellers offer a "free Vista upgrade" if you get WinXP preinstalled now. The official "releases" being raved about now are mainly release-to-OEM makers, so for at least a while buying a new machine (with Vista on it) may be the only way to get it.

Unless you really need a new computer (hardware) I wouldn't recommend rushing out to get it, until you are ready for replacement for other reasons.

There are a couple of programs that they've been pushing as "giving you the look and feel of Vista" that are available for WinXP now.

Internet Explorer 7.0 is one of the programs released "to get people used to the Vista look." I'm using it (it was an accident) and am enthusiastically underwhelmed by it's "new look." Lots of cute but ambiguous icons replacing previous readable ones. Lots of common and simple commands that used to be on the toolbars moved to bizarre locations on "drop downs," etc. It's not exactly a disaster, and some people might even like it better; but I'm having a hard time getting warm and fuzzy with it. It's advertised as "uninstallable" so it's probably safe to give it a try - if you're running WinXP. I think other older OS versions are supposed to be able to run it, but do check the compatibility statements before you download it(?).

Another highly advertised "just like the new Vista will be" is a thing called "Windows Search." It was still in beta the last time I looked. I tried it. One hour to download and install. Seven hours to let it "index" my 2 main hard drives. One search, in which it could not find any of the three files I knew met my search input. One quick look to find that it REMOVED/DISABLED WINDOWS EXPLORER, leaving me no alternative way to actually find anything. Five and one-half minutes to UNINSTALL.

(One reviewer raved: "Vista will change filers to pilers" - like that's a good thing?.)

Vista has been through much more intensive beta testing than any prior Windows OS, but with 80 million code lines, it's doubtful they've found everything yet. IF I REALLY NEEDED a new machine, I would consider getting one with Vista, since technically it's probably been sufficiently wrung out.

I'm waiting for the user comments to filter in before deciding if any of the "great new things" it does are anything I want it to do.

And there's also the consideration that the new Office likely won't be along for about two years, and I'd rather get the set... (?).

John

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: jeffp
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 09:45 PM

I don't expect to upgrade unless and until I need to run software that has that as a minimum requirement. As long as what I have works well enough, why bother?

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 10:17 PM

For under 200pounds - buy the cheap hardware and use virus free Lynix

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: jeffp
Date: 03 Dec 06 - 10:25 PM

And replace all of your applications with LINUX-compatible versions........if they are available. If not, learn to do without.

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 04 Dec 06 - 12:00 AM

I'm not planning to upgrade any time soon, though it should become available for a very low price on the university campus where I work. I'd like someone else to work out the bugs.

That said, I was it demonstrated at a recent Technology Fair on campus and it really did look wonderful. Many computer manufacturers have been putting out machines that are "Vista Ready" or something along those lines, meaning that the upgrade is entirely supported. I know my daughter's dual core Dell (XP Pro) is Vista ready. We bought it in July. My computer, on the other hand, is 18 months old, but I upgraded the RAM to at least a gig when I got it. I'll have to look to see what it is, but I'm ready. I just don't think I'll do it right away.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: eddie1
Date: 04 Dec 06 - 12:25 AM

Don't know about Vista but I was stupid enough to download IE7 about 10 days ago. When I try to close it, it freezes up then I get a message saying "Internet Explorer has had to close!" I then get the option of sending a message to Microsoft, which I do, then when I click "Close" to close the message window, it thanks me for sending the message then IE closes down.
I tried going to the Microsoft Website to reload IE7 but it tells me I have it already.
If only an abacus could reach Mudcat!

Eddie

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 04 Dec 06 - 12:34 AM

If you like upgrading, switch to Ubuntu. They issue a new release every 6 months and it's free.

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 04 Dec 06 - 12:56 AM

eddie1 -

Go to Start|Settings|Control Panel, click "Add or Remove Programs," scroll down to Internet Explorer 7, click on it and Remove.

Then you won't have IE7 anymore, and if you wish to, you can go reinstall it.

The instructions you get when you load it does say that you can uninstall it. They don't say so, but the presumption would be that it will just go back to the last previous version you had.

You can get either IE6 SP1 or IE7 at IE6 Downloads.

If you go back to IE6 you should check there to see if you need any updates, since there have been a couple.

John

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 04 Dec 06 - 02:55 AM

1. There haven't been many reports as yet on installation of Vista, but eWeek - a usually reliable source - has strongly recommended - a full installation on a clean machine, as opposed to an "upgrade" installation with WinXP already installed. They report problems in their labs with attempts to "upgrade to Vista."

That was the recommended method for all Win versions, at least when first released, from Win98 and after. Later (more mature?) versions were more successful at upgrade as opposed to clean install. With Vista, this may be less a problem since fewer old machines will have all the hardware resources you'll want for Vista(?).

2. The practice of licensing OEM products to the machine on which they're first installed will probably continue with Vista. It's unclear whether purchase of an "over-the-counter" Vista will allow you to transfer it to a different machine (it did through WinXP) or whether some other EULA conditions will apply. It likely will be several months before you can buy the FRP (full retail package) from a store, as the present release appears to be to OEM builders only.

3. There are several versions of Vista, and at present it's very difficult to tell which one you might really want to have. There are "descriptions" but they tend to be something like "this one's magic," and "this one's magic too but it's different." Not really too helpful. Caution is advised to be sure you're looking at the same version that the reviewer described when you were convinced it's what you want. Reviewers often don't mention which one they're talking about - and the are different.

4. Expect MUCH STRICTER registration and "licensed copy" checking than was the case even for WinXP. Microsoft has stated that they intend to DISABLE unlicensed copies of Vista when they find them, which is a change from prior practice. (Not all threats/bluffs get carried out, but ...)

John

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: Flash Company
Date: 04 Dec 06 - 10:16 AM

Thanks for all the above feed back.
Yes, John, I read the same thing about a full install on a clean machine in a UK mag, so I'm keeping an open mind until Big Brother Bill gives out a little more info.
The Vista upgrade advisor tells me that all my kit is OK with the exception of a Flatbed Scanner (confirmed by Canon) and an Alcatel Modem (waiting confirmation).
My Graphics card is borderline OK, but as I don't watch TV on my computer this might not be critical.
Watch this space

FC

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: Bill D
Date: 04 Dec 06 - 11:17 AM

*IF* I ever use Vista...*grrr...grumble*, I would use it ONLY already installed on a new machine set up and built for it. This overwriting/replacing operating systems just has too many pitfalls.

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: eddie1
Date: 04 Dec 06 - 01:35 PM

Thanks John - I'll go try it.

Eddie

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: EBarnacle
Date: 04 Dec 06 - 02:01 PM

Ubuntu seems interesting. I have been saving an old laptop for Linux based experimentation and have nothing to lose [the computer cost $2 because the owner got it for free.]. I have wanted to try Linux for a while.

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: Bill D
Date: 04 Dec 06 - 04:26 PM

from my favorite newsgroup about Linux...and Ubuntu in particular.

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 04 Dec 06 - 07:00 PM

Just had a quick look Bill. There seem to be a couple of differences of opinions, etc. in the couple of threads I've looked at. I've installed Suse and Ubuntu in recent times. Here are my experiences.

Providing you have the hardware support, installing both of these is much easier than an any version of Windows I've used. One CD or DVD can provide all you need to be running complete with programs like Open Office, Firefox, etc. It can do all this without the need to keep inserting driver disks, other software disks, reboots at every turn, etc.

When using software supported by the distribution, maintanence is much easier too. You can install 100s of packages either from CD/ download. Also any software installed using thier packaging systems is included in their online update, eg. if you have Firefox installed and their is a security update for that, you could be notified of that together with perhaps one for the kernal (about the only thing btw that does need a reboot to install) and download and update the software together. Windows (at least up to 2K) doesn't come close.

Oh and stability - lets just say the box I use to serve folkifo went 12 months 24/7 without need for an unplanned (I did reboot for a kernel patch for example - planned) or forced reboot.

On to hardware support. Linux does get better all the time but whereas practically every manufacturer provides Windows drivers, this is not the case with Linux and I believe the open source community has had to resort even to reverse engineering to provide support for some hardware. The end result is that the latest and greatest devices may take time to be supported but at least in my experience, what does work, works well - I can't imagine MS providing close to the same level of H/W support if they were in the same position as Linux. A live Linux CD is possibly a good plan to assess whether there are likely to be any problems before going ahead with a Linux install.

I saw one post mentioning problems with disk partitions. The biggest problem I have encountered there has been using a disk that has had Linux for Windows. While Linux is quite smart and can handle (at a minumum read), Win (at least upto and including 2K) is dumb. You can find for example that MS fdisk will not work because it can't cope with a Linux partition but instead keeps you in a loop of trying to delete a partition is shows and then refuse to delete it becuase "it doesn't exist".

Of course Linux isn't the be all and end all to everyone. I can't pretend that Open Office (yet) is as slick as MS word, or that say The Gimp is Adobe Photoshop, etc. Other needs can of course need to be assessed and it can be that Windows is the best choice for someone (and there are always dual boot possibilities, plus Wine - though I've never had much joy with that).

What I will say though is IMO with the current state of affairs, the easier to use (Suse, Ubunto, Fedora, etc.) Linuxes are a viable and perhaps better alternative for a number of users and are well worth at least a look (perhaps even another look for some).

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: Amos
Date: 26 Dec 06 - 08:00 PM

From a techie list:



            A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection
            ===================================================

                Peter Gutmann, [e-mail]
         http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.txt
                      Last updated 27 December 2006


Executive Summary
-----------------

Windows Vista includes an extensive reworking of core OS elements in
order to provide content protection for so-called "premium content", typically
HD data from Blu-Ray and HD-DVD sources. Providing this protection incurs
considerable costs in terms of system performance, system stability,
technical support overhead, and hardware and software cost. These issues
affect not only users of Vista but the entire PC industry, since the effects of the
protection measures extend to cover all hardware and software that
will ever come into contact with Vista, even if it's not used directly with
Vista (for example hardware in a Macintosh computer or on a Linux server). This
document
analyses the cost involved in Vista's content protection, and the
collateral damage that this incurs throughout the computer industry.

Executive Executive Summary
---------------------------

The Vista Content Protection specification could very well constitute
the longest suicide note in history.

[...]

Disabling of Functionality
--------------------------

Vista's content protection mechanism only allows protected content to
be sent over interfaces that also have content-protection facilities built in.
Currently the most common high-end audio output interface is S/PDIF
(Sony/Philips Digital Interface Format). Most newer audio cards, for
example, feature TOSlink digital optical output for high-quality sound
reproduction, and even the latest crop of motherboards with integrated audio
provide at least coax (and often optical) digital output. Since S/PDIF doesn't
provide any content protection, Vista requires that it be disabled when playing
protected content. In other words if you've invested a pile of money
into a high-end audio setup fed from a digital output, you won't be able to
use it with protected content. Similarly, component (YPbPr) video will be
disabled by Vista's content protection, so the same applies to a high-end
video setup fed from component video.

[...]

Elimination of Open-source Hardware Support
-------------------------------------------

In order to prevent the creation of hardware emulators of protected
output devices, Vista requires a Hardware Functionality Scan (HFS) that can
be used to uniquely fingerprint a hardware device to ensure that it's (probably)
genuine. In order to do this, the driver on the host PC performs an
operation in the hardware (for example rendering 3D content in a graphics card)
that produces a result that's unique to that device type.

In order for this to work, the spec requires that the operational
details of the device be kept confidential. Obviously anyone who knows enough
about the workings of a device to operate it and to write a third-party driver
for it (for example one for an open-source OS, or in general just any non-
Windows OS) will also know enough to fake the HFS process. The only way to
protect the HFS process therefore is to not release any technical details on the
device beyond a minimum required for web site reviews and comparison with other
products.

Subject: RE: BS: Tech-Windows Vista
From: robomatic
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 05:15 PM

It should be no surprise that a lot of the 'look' of Vista in the long delayed issuance of this new operating system is based on the proven OS X system. Check out the David Pogue article that came out mid December in the NYT. He broke concerns down to "looks locks and lacks".

I bought my second laptop in June, an ACER brand unit which came with a line-in interface as well as the usual microphone input and line-out. (There are fewer brands of laptops coming with line-ins these days). The unit came with XP for Home and I have used it on a daily basis and traveled with it often and I've been very satisfied. I checked out the laptop Macs at the same time and concluded they looked pretty good but were more expensive for the same level of use, moreover the laptop Mac didn't have a delete forward key, the lack of which drives me nuts.

I would NOT upgrade my laptop PC without a clear idea of why I was doing so. The operating system is too much a part of the unit.

As far as my desktop PCs go, I'm more open-minded. I've got several of them on different older Win and Linux systems.

I would not go into the process thinking of it as an upgrade. I would take it as a totally new system, I'd remove all my data files and folders, and reformat my HD if I could do it and still get the cheapest version of the new system. Short of that, I'd remove everything but the existing system and reinstall everything else under Vista.

On the other hand, I would take advantage of the proximity of a CompUSA and a Best Buy to visit those stores and look at new units being offered with the Vista operating system. Play around with them first. And then wait for a sale.