.. was that service pack 1 did appear to have a beneficial effect. It stopped the PC crashing every 5 minutes, but many many many bugs still remain.

However, last night windows update informed me that there were updates for the X64 version. How foolish of me to install them!

Now "Windows Media Centre" refuses to play back it's own recordings smoothly, the computer will no longer go to sleep (so ofcourse, can no longer wake up to record TV), applications that worked flawlessly now bomb out with either a BSOD or the "Check for Solution" dialogue (which then crashes).

Even after SP1 Vista is still very much a beta, no one in their right minds could use it for anything that needs reliability.

A spokesman at the firm told El Reg: “Microsoft wants to ensure customers have the best possible experience with Windows Vista,"

So when will they start packaging free copies of XP Pro SP2/3 with all new Vista bundles ?

Best Vista experience = scouring it from the harddrive and replacing it with XP ...

"... Vista customers have claimed that their USB mice and keyboards ... refuse to work ..."

Well, looks like this is Microsoft's way of recalling Vista, sort of. Just patch the OS so nobody can actually use it. Or maybe this is supposed to enable the "mental telepathy" device on your computer. Or maybe just make all the users go mental.

Sky up, water wet, fire hot... Where's the news?

Just how does an update to a spyware removal tool affect USB devices? What exactly are Microsoft playing at?

It raises a lot of questions about just how well designed Windows really is, or, if you are paranoid just whether Defender does what it actually claims to do.

Next we'll be hearing about an Office update which breaks the network, or a IE update which interferes with the sound card.

There are a million symptoms, but the disease is Microsoft's underlying premise. If operating systems were tools that enabled people to control their machines, then software would be simple, intuitive, and efficient. When the software is designed to protect the machine from the user, we are bound for more problems.

The latest updates cause my PS2 mouse to fail as well. Only rolling back and refusing the updates solves this problem.

"Microsoft had released the update to plug a security hole ..."

At M$' we often noticed that the main security issue stands in between the chair and the keyboard. No functional keyboard or mouse should thwart many users to browse websites that Vista cannot defend itself against.

Signed B.G.

PS: Holes to be plugged at M$' come in a USB form factor.

PS2: SP2 will patch the BIOS so the ON/OFF switch will be rendered irresponsive to brick secure Vista.

"However, the automatic version of the download remains missing in action. Redmond had chalked mid-April as the date when SP1 would start downloading onto computers across the world."

... but Vista asked me if I wanted to install SP1 earlier this week? It was 69Mb if that sounds about right...

"A spokesman at the firm told El Reg: “Microsoft wants to ensure customers have the best possible experience ..."

Ya know, when an MS spokesperson's sentence contains "wants to ensure" and "best possible experience", you might as well not even print it. It sure doesn't communicate anything useful. About all it tells me is that another Vole's hole is spewing pre-fab words of no substance.

“Microsoft wants to ensure customers have the best possible experience with Windows Vista"

Oh good, so they're making the uninstallation process less painful then are they?

Who in the IT field after having the issues we have had with Vista would be willing to try Windows 7? Personally, if it turns out to be nothing more than Vista with a face lift, I'm not interested.

I am an XP user (preference is win2k) and I have used both Windows and Mac on a regular basis. I think both have there pluses and minuses. I only choose Windows because it has more third party apps. (IMO, Linux still hasn't gotten easy enough for mainstream users yet. The app installers can be a killer.)

When MS goes back to giving people what they ask for and not what they think we want, I'll consider upgrading from XP.

In my state we have a three strikes rule - we try to take trash off the streets permanently. What is it going to take for Washington to stop Vista and put it away permanently?

Disabling keyboards solves the potential problem of keyloggers at a stroke... pure genius!

Windows defender is living up to it's name.

A version of Linux that just works. Install of OS and apps is painless. If Ubuntu and Apple can split the market between them and gub Microsoft I for one would be much happier just leaving my XP box as my games platform:-)

Quote “Micro$haft wants to ensure customers have the best possible experience with Windows Vista,"

Yeah....

Then run wipedisk on thier PC and install a real working operating system called LINUX

they did much the same with the current manual XP SP3 update bricking lots of PC's in the last few weeks.

mines the crinkly foil lined kevlar hoody......[with 'Bring back DOS' on the back ]

illuminatus;p

Just keyboards and mice - nothing too crucial, then...

I hate M$ as much as the rest of us - but my USB devices are still working just fine.

I've about had it with all the fuss is about Vista crashing (or generally sucking) - I've yet to have it crash, and found it super fast. Plus the need to reboot when installing drivers and programs seems to be mostly gone, PLUS it's nice and fast (even with Aero)....I'm coming from W2K, and so far Vista's way better (speed, stabilty, looks).

I did have to remove SP1 though, in order to keep using Google Earth (thanks google, for not making a 64bit version)....But in all honesty, I saw no difference in SP1.

My guess is that people just don't have the hardware to run Vista properly. Get the hardware, and it really is a nice OS.

"Microsoft wants to ensure customers have the best possible experience with Windows Vista"

WTF?

Oh yeah, another lie from Microsoft; the above should read: "Microsoft wants to ensure customers are screwed with Windows Vista, whilst giving us loads more money"

I remember back in the old win 98 days that for a while microsoft were issuing drivers via windows update. One of which was an intel mainboard driver which always bricked any machine that you tried to install on - resulting in having to manually hack back the drivers. I remember getting lots of machines from friends and colleagues who had that exact problem...

This story is pure bullshit. I admin an entire school district network of over 22,100 PC's and NOT ONE SINGLE PC running Vista on our network of 14 schools has had any issue with USB devices. Trust me, with cry baby teachers and staffers that complain about anything with their computers to get out of working (civil servants ya know), we would have heard about it.

Now lets talk about the latest crop of OS X bugs listed on macfixit.com

Whats this I hear about the SP3 **RC2** package for XP bricking computers? Gee I guess I didnt know what the term BETA meant. There is always a risk of something bad happening. I am currently running the RC2 build on a work machine and have had absolutely ZERO problems with it. I also run it at home on my gaming machine. A machine, mind you, which had a TON of stability problems on XP SP2. It would crash out about once every 2-2.5 days on average if not faster. SP3 has, oddly enough, fixed this issue. So far said machine has been running without a hitch for the last month (short of the occasional reboot for patches or new video drivers). Other then making the system more usable I havent noticed anything else with SP3. I will say this, I hate M$ most of the time but this time around thank you for actually making my computer more stable M$.

*why do I feel like washing with sandpaper now?*

WIndows Update installled 938371 onto my Vista box, taking out my Logitech USB mouse. After much torment and fermentation, the following work around brought my mouse back to life.

* Go to device manager -> HID-devices -> Unknown Device and search for drivers.

* When prompted for how to search for driver software, select "Browse my computer for driver software"

* Enter "C:\windows\winsxs" for the driver location and press the "Next" button.

* If you get a popup saying "this is an unsigned driver...", just allow Windows to install the driver.

At this point, Windows should select the appropriate driver and your mouse will start working again.

We had an IDE driver update that stuffed a load of beige PIII Optiplexes that were running 2K as well.

@Eh? It's worth noting that these are the same 'tards that decided to handle comms over USB with their own Mobile OS by (and I still have to suppress a nervous tick and a slightly insane giggle when I think about this) treating it as a virtual network connection and communicating using TCP/IP... Of course, anyone using sensible firewall rules was instantly STUFFED, but someone obviously thought it was a good idea...

Joke alert, because I assumed they were at first...

Hasta la Vista, USB?

*is already wayyyyyyyy heading out the door at a rate of knots*

Matrox Imaging still hasn't delivered Vista drivers for their camera grab boards. They are scheduled for 2008 Q3. And now we will have Windows 7 coming out a year after that! The sound drivers for Creative boards are in a similar state as noted here too. Sounds like M$ is starting to learn some lessons from Linux's driver model. M$ said they were going to be more like open source and I guess that is true now...

How can you say it runs faster than win2k when you have bought a high spec machine to run it? Run win2k on your new all singing dancing machine, then run vista, then tell me that vista is quicker. Or run vista on your old win2k machine. I want an OS to interact between the hardware and my applications, I don't want an OS that uses up all my hardware to run itself.

I dual boot gentoo and XP, given the current outlook XP will be my last M$ OS. After X years XP is now a great OS. Still hate all the silly reboots after installs/removals of software, but as a stable platform its now pretty good. I only boot to it on occasions for gaming now though. Vista will never see my desktop, windows 7, hmm.

you don't pay to suffer !

I can't run my new hardware on Win2k - It's not a 64bit OS (i've got 4gb of ram, win2k would only see 2 of that - plus a 64bit cpu, which w2k wouldn't make full use of either). My reasons for switching to Vista were that simple. I wanted an OS that would let me use my hardware to the fullest. It does that. I use XP at home, but I have to say that I think I prefer Vista. As for being a resource hog, maybe (about 50% of my ram's tied up just with the OS), but I don't notice it....and I've tried disabling Aero, and it doesn't lower the resource usage any (to speak of).

Compared to XP, Vista seems to be just as stable, if not more so (even without SP1)....only it's got lots of little things in it that make day to day usage just a little easier.

OK I don't know why people are having issues with there computers and Vista. I have being running vista since release, the x64 version Ultimate. I haven't had any issues of the likes you guys are talking about. The only problems I have ever had with Vista are waiting for a manufacture to write a driver for something like my webcam. Other then that little things like my icons dissapearing from my systray. Overall though Vista is fine, I play all my games on it, I can do whatever I need to do on it. Overall I like Vista, however SP1 for Vista I haven't installed it, I just haven't had the time, but I do have all the updates installed and no problems with my keyboard's and mice. I will install SP1 and come back with any issues I may or maynot have. As for Windows 7, I have said this before, I believe Windows 7 will be the Windows ME of this generation of OS's, the next version of Windows will be the new XP. Vista I think is the new Windows 2000.

8 hours of torment on my new box (hey, thought i'd at least give it some sort of chance!) lol.

Wiped the bag of shite & put XP pro & Linux (XP pro 'cause it sort of works & I need it for a couple of college related apps).

Vista is the biggest bag of shite I have ever had the misfortune to attempt to run on a machine. M$ should be throughly ashamed.

"(IMO, Linux still hasn't gotten easy enough for mainstream users yet. The app installers can be a killer.)"

Ubuntu = open Add/remove programs

Choose program. Ask it to install it.

It checks dependencies, informs you of any extras that are required, *then* downloads and installs.

I have yet to have that fail on me, really like it.

With Windows, you want to install .Net 3 ?

Download .net installer. "You require Windows Installer 3.1"

Download Windows Installer 3.1 "You require .net 2.0"

Download .Net 2.0....repeat till fade.

OK, that's a slight exaggeration, but you get the idea - I know what system works better for me :-)

As an aside on the SP3-problems thingy: I have put it on about six machines now, and it's worked fine every time.

And as for Vista SP1 - well, I have 50 machines my users use for isolated testing [so no corporate guff required] and Vista is going nowhere near them, after seeing how those 'vista capable' machines run with it.

Sysprepped XP SP3 image distributed over WDS FTW ROFL MOFO!!11!!1!!eleventy

Steven R

... because they don't exist.

You're all just moaning pansies.

Come on, you lot who have "no problems", it doesn't mean its the same for everyone. You are just lucky, or slightly lying about your issues.

What are these people thinking!? Do they want bleeding edge stuff like USB peripherals to be supported just oh so quickly? Nutters! I bet it's the manufacturers' fault in coding crappy drivers, must be...

Nobody should have need for more than a serial port or maybe two anyway.

I can not understand why certain people always slag off Vista. Its a new operating system that requires the latest hardware to run it. If people would stop trying to install it on 2 or 3 year old computers and actually buy compatible hardware perhaps they would see how good it is. I have a quad core 4gb ram vista ultimate 64 bit and it is the fastest and most stable computer i have ever owned.

Perhaps XP users dont realize that XP can only utilize 2 or 3gb or ram so whenever software or games that come out that need 64 bit they will have no option but to upgrade or do without.

Vista is the most wonderful operating system in the world. Just installed it and put on SP1. Not a single problem with it. But then again, I've got a decent spec'd machine from a quality manufacturer and don't have a Linux/Mac (delete as appropriate) broom up my ass!

Try running legit software that you've paid for and maybe Vista will run a bit better. Stop applying cracks and hacks to get your games and apps running, ya cheapskates.

Also ensure you've got the update to date drivers and maybe your hardware won't crap out.

p.s. My keyboard and mouse is still working.

p.p.s. Many of the problems with Vista are down to hardware and software from 3rd class manufacturers who couldn't design their way out of a wet paper bag!

>>I can't run my new hardware on Win2k - It's not a 64bit OS (i've got 4gb of ram, win2k would only see 2 of that - plus a 64bit cpu, which w2k wouldn't make full use of either).

But.... I bet with only 2G RAM and 1 core it will still smoke Vista at practically any task. The point is, that second core is 100% supporting the OS spying on what you are *attempting* to do and probably half the first core as well. And Win2K doesn't *need* 4G to run decently.

Circular logic indeed.

The perfect alternative to productivity, stability, compatibility, sanity and now protecting the user from themselves!

But seriously is anybody besides me slightly curious who the bastard was who shouted "That's a brilliant idea!!!" when the nameless/faceless retarded drone got done pitching the idea of Vista to Bill & Steve?

He, she or they need to be hunted down and at the very least, chemically sterilized, if not summarily executed!

Mine's the straight jacket with Vista logo on the back of it...

mouse works in one usb port, but won't work in any of the 4!

The more I use this god'awful pile of junk the more determined I am to make this my last windows machine.. I'd love to go to linux, but that is just a dogs dinner or a system. Vista is just absolute toss.

Next machine will be OSX compatabile, and if I can afford it, might even be an Apple Mac.

enough said

"...Vista I think is the new Windows 2000..."

Only usable after service pack 4?

Jay

Come on guys, we've been doing this since 9/11, aren't you used to it yet? It's called bad security trade-off and it works like this.

If X poses a security threat, disable the use of X.

Substitute X with: airports, right to protest, presumption of innocence, privacy, etc, etc. How are keyboards and mice such a big deal?

Buddypepper says

[...i've got 4gb of ram, win2k would only see 2 of that...]

then goes on to say

[...about 50% of my ram's tied up just with the OS...]

So the difference between running Win2k and Vista is?... Either way you've only got 2GB to play with.

Saying that, depending on your flavour of Win2k you can access up to 32GB of physical memory. Win2kPro can actually access 4GB of RAM, but the applications only get to play in 2GB of it. I can run with 8GB on this box thanks to Physical Addressing Extensions. Yes, it's a Win2k box. No, I don't have 8GB of RAM installed :o)

I agree that if you have 64bit hardware and 64bit apps then it makes sense to stick a 64bit OS between them.

Funny how you replied to your own post with the title. Send me a postcard in a couple of months.

So you upgrade from a typical Win2k computer to a quad core 64 bit, 4 GB of fast ram, much faster hard drive... and even after installing Vista it's still faster? Amazing! That vista sure is great.

Geeze, its like saying your old Model T with 2 people weighing 50 kilos just doesn't run as fast as your spanking-new Ferrari with 2 people weighing 200 kilos each ... even if the Ferrari's running heavier, the engine more than compensates for the overload!

Ok, bad analogy, I wouldn't tag *any* Intel x86 box as a Ferrari. Maybe more like a Ford Pinto: big, heavy, low fuel efficiency and it might randomly explode ;)

No one does Ferraris now that Cray's dead. :(

<coat>Mine's the one with the supercooled XMP processor.

winxp x64 gets past the 4gb limit. It's also pretty kickass. I've heard of a lot of people whinging and moaning about lack of driver support etc. but I've never run into a device I can't find a driver for.

It's also pretty stable. Not as stable as the slackware boxes i have running fileshares through samba and (for when i'm out and about) webservers, though, but stable enough for a desktop environment.

Of course, this is because I don't use "bloody stupid" practices such as running .exe email attachments, allowing activeX all over the shop, etc. which is half the problem really.

Paris because she's already been "all over the shop"

you don't suffer.

"My guess is that people just don't have the hardware to run Vista properly. Get the hardware, and it really is a nice OS."

So the cost of Vista is software+permission from Microsoft to run it + NEW HARDWARE?

Paris 'cause she's smarter than that.

Get a grip. Get Linux.

"... I believe Windows 7 will be the Windows ME of this generation of OS's.."

No, me thinks Vista has that title.

Take XP from me? Hello Linux!

You didn't get the memo, didn't you?

Creative wants you to shove the X-Fi and get their brand new X-Fi 2 which is launching soon (now with a crappier chip than the X-Fi 1 and is fully DRM enabled!).

will it have the same effect on drivers in question after install ? ( building a image as i type)..

Yep, Vista's a resource hog. However, I've found that the footprint can be substantially reduced by disabling redundant (and in some cases, pointless) services that I don't need.

The worst example is the Tablet Input Service (presumably required if you have a touch screen laptop) which is enabled by default on my desktop PC. How much effort would it have taken to stick in some code to just f*cking CHECK if the system has a touch screen before enabling this service? It's simply bad design.

Other services I disabled are the Diagnostic Policy Service, Distributed Link Tracking Client, IP Helper, Messenger Sharing Folders USN, Journal Reader Service, Network List Service, Offline Files, Readyboost (unless you like slow memory performance), Remote Access Connection, Server, Windows Error Reporting Service (very annoying anyway), Windows Image Acquisition (WIA), Cryptographic Services, IKE and AuthIP, IPsec Keying Modules, IPsec Policy Agent, Network Location Awareness, Program Compatibility Assistant (I can figure it out myself if it didn't install right, thank you!) and Shell Hardware Detection.

The result is that I've freed up memory and CPU and now have more resource to run the things that *I* want to rather than what Microsoft wants me to. And before you ask, everything that I want to use still works fine!

Okay you technically inept dimwits!

When someone says that Vista is using 50%+ of their system memory, that is in fact wrong! Vista knows the applications you tend to use most and will get them loaded up for you ready to rock.That's why your common applications start in no time with Vista. However, this requires a decent amount of installed memory and will result in your system reporting higher memoru usage.

Vista also uses other memory management techniques to improve Vista's performance.

Try this Google to find some educational resource that will actually educate you to the truth! Of course you may not be able to sit in front of your computer screen to see this since you cannot get the Linx/Mac broom out of your ass.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=windows+vista+memory+management

I love the person who's going to try Mac/OSX the next time. If you'd spent half the money this time around on a decent Windows machine then maybe you'd have had a better experience with Vista.

Apart from Windows Server 2003, the 12-18 months of any Windows product has always been a painful experience. The simple thing for people is to avoid this period if you don't want to face the prospect of some bits not working.

Also, Microsoft never truly specify what you need hardware wise to run their operating systems properly. Hardware manufacturers tend to underspec machines for the first year and cause all kinds of issues e.g. loads of them tried to run Vista with only 1GB of memory and wondered why the blue bagel was on the screen more than not! These guys have a lot to answer for I tell ya!

All the people who think Vista sucks or is having a bad experience then go back to 2000 / XP or move over to Linux. If you don't want to play games and only have a need for "graphic designer" level activities then go to the Mac!

OS X on mac fixes this nicelyhttp://www.theregister.co.uk/Design/graphics/icons/comment/jobs_halo_32.png

Have a dell computer which I develop on. Pre sp1 everything works fine after debugging never works since I get "socket operation was attempted to an unreachable network". I uninstalled it and it works again. The really strange thing is that another user which also develops in a similar development does have this troubles.

Does anyone remember back when XP was younger?

'You can take my win2k, as soon as you prise it from my cold, dead harddrive'

'XP is soooooooooo buggy, and eats all my RAM'

'SP1a? why not make sure the service pack works teh first time'

etc,

I have seen the future

'Why should I upgrade from Vista, its m$'s most stable Windows version'

The thing is, noone in their right mind upgrades their PC from WinXP to Vista, as chances are, your PC is more than a few months old. Vista is built to utilise *new* hardware. Aero *does not* slow down your PC unless your GPU is not up to scratch. In 2 years time, the spec of the PCs will easily handle Vista at full pelt. If Vista was built to work on Joe Averages PC (like Linux), then a new version would need to be avaialble every 6 months (like Linux)

How all you Linux Fanbois doin' out there today? Certainly are out in force.

Burnt down any M$$$$$$$$$$$$$(EVIL)LOL$$$$$$ buildings recently?

My mouse pointer vanished last week and at least now I know why!

Luckily I usually use Linux, so I forgot all about it and was going to sort it out when I had nothing better to do with my time than fix this 'pretty but a bit rubbish' operating system which we all love.

Maybe the pest control part of Windows Defender detected my mouse and decided to put some traps down.

What some (and I mean SOME) people seem to be forgetting is that XP was slated as being resource hungry in a similar manner when it first appeared as well. I was heavily involved in LAN gaming at the time, and remember lord knows how many people trying to run XP on older boxes and being horrified at how slow it was compared to 98 (as not many people used 2k for gaming, and ME was a non-event).

I'm not making excuses for all of Vista's ills, but it's been built to cater for the most up-to-date systems, with the ability to disable some of the additional options to make it more bearable on lower end systems.

I also remember all the compatibility issues with drivers while hardware manufacturers try and figure out how to code for the new OS. It was the same with XP, and some older hardware, frankly, may never have compatible drivers because it's simply not worth the company putting money into coding for obselete hardware.

That said, it could become another ME, which was pretty much universally hated.

"My guess is that people just don't have the hardware to run Vista properly. Get the hardware, and it really is a nice OS."

I actually laughed when I read this.

Sorry matey - if you buy an off-the-shelf operating system, then IMHO it's really that operating system's job to operate your system (the secret's in the name, folks) and unfortunately that means it should run any hardware you happen to have. Other operating systems can do it at a fraction of the cost to the end user- why is Vista a special case? Is it acceptable or reasonable that some Maxtor USB HDD don't run under 64-bit Vista because it can't find drivers for the bloody button at the front of the drive? Nah, of course it isn't.

My guess is that some people are used to accepting whatever Microsoft give them.

Steve Ballmer wears really saintly sweaters at those conferences where he wants to appear normal.

I wonder if SP1 will fix the rather minor problem of my display drivers refusing to work on Vista?

"Microsoft wants to ensure the RIAA has the best possible experience with Windows Vista"

Gartner says Windows is collapsing, I agree.

Gartner also pointed out that the iPhone uses OSX but Microsoft requires a different OS for their handhelds. Windows doesn't scale well and Intel's solution is to make a lower power x86 architecture.

If Microsoft can't fix their own product then who can?

QUOTE

p.p.s. Many of the problems with Vista are down to hardware and software from 3rd class manufacturers who couldn't design their way out of a wet paper bag!

END QUOTE

Nice to hear you think that of Xerox. Since "upgrading" to Vista I have had no luck what so ever getting my scanner to work. No sign of new drivers 1 year on either.

I've been a contented MS user for many years, but one of the first things I did having installed Vista was download Ubuntu (7.4 I think it was), and get on the forums to work out how to make it Dual Boot. Have to say as a complete Linux noobie I'm loving Ubuntu, and it is my OS of choice on boot up these days. I have since upgraded to U7.10.

Unfortunately, there are no Linux drivers for my scanner either....! So It's looking like I may have to rearrange some data and put on another partition to put a tri-boot option of XP back on it!

It makes hardware vendors stick in obscene amounts of RAM. Which (once you get rid of the trash on the harddisk), you then get to use for your own applications.

Another thing is that Vista PCs are cheaper than clean ones of similar spec. Yes, with clean ones you avoid the risk that it suddenly starts showing you MS logos, but I find that they respond perfectly well to a boot CD and the standard "Use the entire disk" procedure. So if MS is willing to pay for the illusion that the warez on the harddisk will ever see the light of day, then thank you Bill!

I used to be worried about the statistics, and go all: "Don't register me as a Windows user you bastards!" But MS probably has me listed as a happy Vista user twice over already, so what's the point? It's not like anyone even believes in the numbers coming out of Windows PCs...

"Sorry matey - if you buy an off-the-shelf operating system, then IMHO it's really that operating system's job to operate your system (the secret's in the name, folks) and unfortunately that means it should run any hardware you happen to have."

Please name these other operating systems. OS X? Nope, sorry that only supports a highly controlled range of systems?

Surely the support of peripherals is not solely an MS responsibility, but that of the manufacturer. Go back to the specification on the box of that Maxtor hard drive that you bought - does it say it is compatable with Vista? If it doesn't is it fair to assume that said hardware will be guaranteed to work under Vista? Why isn't is Maxtor's responsibililty to offer this if it is possible?

I run Vista SP1 and have had no problems. I built a carefully thought out system that had modern components and a modern OS. I don't think I would ever have upgraded an older system from XP to Vista because you can never guarantee that they will work and I (personally) wouldn't expect it to (certainly it is not the sole responsibility of MS)

I bought abn HP laptop recently with VIsta pre installed and I must say it works just fine! Only problem is a rather slow boot up.

The desktop appears within less than a minute but doesnt actually respond to any commands for another minute or so.

I must admit though I am not nearly as chuffed with the new machine as I am with the upgrade from an ancient SUSE to the latest UBUNTU on my trusty old thinkpad. Given the old beast a new lease of life and by far the most pleasant desktop I have ever used.

The thing just sits there trying to install 1 of 6 updates .. dont turn off the comp whatever you do .. just sit and watch it indefinitely I guess.

Most USB devices on my machine (vista x64 ultimate) seem to be operating in USB mode with the exception of 1 memory card reader (usb2 speeds) and 2 WD passport portable harddisks (won't work at all)

Worse thing is they all worked perfectly in the beta version of sp1

"Buy up to date hardware"..

Er, my computer was brand new at the time..

"Use decent hardware"

It's also well above the "minimum spec" for Vista.

"Don't use warez".

I don't.

"Use up to date drivers"

And that's when I stopped using Vista. Update #1 killed a game I like. A week or so later, update #2 completely killed the networking. Wireless and wired. When the networking went, that was the final straw in 6 months of vista annoyances. That night I had XP on the machine. Faster, stronger, better.

(But it's still slow and hard to use compared to Linux :) )

.... Microsoft have learned anything from all this? Maybe we'll get a very slick, polished, unbloated, secure Windows 7?

"Microsoft wants to ensure customers have the best possible experience with Windows Vista"

So by disabling the keyboard and mouse, you just look at the pretty desktop - so the best possible experience is to not actually use it !!!

Er, is that why vista takes such a horrendously long time to boot? Because it has decided that I will be running these programs therefore they must be loaded as well?

How about.. *I* decide what *I* want to run, *when* I want to run it, *if* I want to run it, and don't load it until then? I might not want to run the same stuff I ran yesterday, I might instead want to make a quick note about something or download some photos I've just taken.. Only I have to wait 10 mins for the laptop to boot.

(Which was another nail in Vista's coffin, such a long boot time).

Oh, and it didn't speed up the loading times either. A 286 with a dodgy MFM controller could load the programs faster.

Microsoft should *never* have released vista. They should have fired the person who came up with it, and probably sued them for loss of reputation, some sort of corporate terrorism, and any number of other things..

Still, I think vista is the best windows ever... I mean, it is helping me convert so many people to Linux.. A few months with Vista and even the crappiest Linux distro seems like something that God Himself gave us :)

Am I the only one here who wants to call the "XP, too, had problems, when it was first released" crowd on their nonsense?

XP today is responsive, stable, and you would be hard-pressed to find hardware for which native drivers were not available for it. Moreover, any software released in the last five or so years runs under it.

In contrast, Vista today is slow, buggy, and it suffers from a dearth of native hardware drivers. Furthermore, your current favorite programs might not run or run only in "compatibility mode."

In short, in the Windows familty, the choice is not between XP at one year and Vista at one year. Rather, it's between a mature OS and one that, for all practical purposes, is still in beta.

The slickest and most stable OS I've ever used. I don't see what all the fuss is about, I have several colleagues also using it on different hardware without any issues... I too was expecting not to like it but when I tried it, I was pleasantly suprised - contrary to the views of some people on this forum...

I use Vista for music production, gaming and web....

I even use a Creative X-Fi card in it without problems (until I get something more professional - with more outputs+breakout box)

Sorry to hear about people's bad experiences with it...

So going by a number of comments - if I want to use Vista I should be prepared for the additional expense of upgrading my hardware? Isn't that for all practical purposes the Mac business model? Shouldn't I really buy a Mac so that I can be sure all the bits work with the OS?

So that is the real secret to Microsoft vs Mac - Microsoft unloads 80% of the work on to the customer vs Macs supplying the hardware?

So Linux runs on anything, Apple provides a complete package, and Microsoft does neither. Why would/does anyone use it?

Another non-story and all the idiots come out of the woodwork. Out of the people insulting Vista, I'd suggest that they fall into 3 main categories.

1. People who have never tried it and just like bandwaggoning.

2. People who tried it for an hour maybe, and decided that they didn't like it based on things like UAC that can be turned off in 10 seconds or so.

3. People who buy sub-standard hardware and expect it to run.

Stop.

@David

You're really not getting this are you? It loads the address space of programs in a nicely threaded fashion, once the OS has started up. If your PC isn't idle it will stop doing it for a little while. It's REALLY simple, but hey, don't let that get in the way of a Vista bashing. Your laptop starting up slowly is either because you've stuck a load of crap on it and clogged the registry, or because your laptop isn't good enough to run Vista. Your fault.

@Mac users

If you have a Mac, don't even start to complain about system specs of Vista PCs. How can you spend three times as much on a new Mac that's almost as good as a similar PC, and then complain because you can't be arsed to shell out a bit more to get a decent PC, or because you decide to pay stupid amounts for a cheap PC at Mr. Dell's offices?

@*nix

Well done, you have a free OS. It's a trade off, I'd rather play recent games at full speed, but if you don't use it for that, fair deal.

@XP users

XP's pretty good all round. Vista's more secure (it really is), and if you have a decent spec machine it will run faster than XP (memory management, better threading, general tweaks). If you don't, don't go anywhere near it.

@People who buy from PC World and Dell then complain about not being able to handle Vista

It's your own fault. If you're prepared to spend that much money on an underpowered PC and use marketing hype as your guidance you might as well go and buy a Mac now.

"Apart from Windows Server 2003, the 12-18 months of any Windows product has always been a painful experience. The simple thing for people is to avoid this period if you don't want to face the prospect of some bits not working."

And that's OK is it? Normally putting something out that may not work properly is called a beta test. Sure their will be bugs, but no one should have to put up with the first 12-18 months being painful.

Seems that MS are in the enviable position that people will just accept it - although hopefully that's changing with their latest abortion of an OS.

Once this was a technical web site with intelligent readers. These comments read like a /. forum.

Hooray for you if you run Linux/OS10/Win2K/WinXP. Frankly I couldn't give a stuff. If you can't get your box to work with what you choose to use then either the hardware is not up to it or you are not sufficiently competent.

losers

Com'on this is the one reason why I hate MS in the first place and the exact reason I kept stating to the people at my last job to ditch MS. They have a bloated OS, and to maintain thier dominance on the market they are putting other software into the OS itself.

Examples.

IE

Outlook Express/MS Mail

Defender

Firewall

there are more, just to lazy to list

Then when they realize that one of the above options have a security hole they have to patch it. Problem is this will then cause an issue with another as they are so closely tied together. This is seen with the Defender update. I am sooo glad I dumped Vista.

Looks like all unsigned drivers are being rejected all of a sudden whether that is mouse/keyboard drivers from various manufactures (do MS ones work fine? competition law infringement??) or USB hubs that all of a sudden stop working (including on board versions)...

All in all its a classic MS 'customer experience'...

PS: My tip: Learn from your Experience!

PS2: what did you expect?

PS3: Sony are no better!

I have two machines running Vista. One box, an HP machine, running 32bit Vista Business and one, a Home Built box, running Vista Ultimate 64 Bit. Both boxes have been patched, both running without a glitch.

To be honest, the big home built box (8GB RAM, Core Duo etc) runs VMware and XP in a Virtual Machine. I use that for most critical apps but all games and other software I expect to have a problem with is run in Vista with no problems

I did, though, have lots of driver problems (none available) early on when I installed Vista first but this has recitifed itself over the months.

As to Vista being worse than other OS's, not really, I use FreeBSD a lot rather than Linux because why have a Unix-like system when you can have the real deal that is much more stable and user friendly. FreeBSD is great for certain aplications but so is Windows, even Vista. I deal with many Vista boxes during the course of my working week and I honestly do not have much of a problem with it.

Just my tuppeny worth.

Is Vista Bloated? Sure. But it is bloated per user demand... that's why Microsoft rules... bloated almost beta cheap software. Did I mention cheap?

As for dodgy drivers.. please put the blame on manufacturers, not on Microsoft. What they are doing is trying to guarantee at least some quality drivers.. to have stability!!

Nope it's a quad core on an asus PK5SE, 4gb memory and shed loads of SATA disk space.

All the USB devices worked until sometime last week at which point all but one slowed to USB1 speeds and some result in unrecognised device errors.

Basically yet again their automatic updates screwed with the system and broke it.

I was not an early XP adopter so I can't be certain one way or the other RE XP drivers/stability int eh early days. What I do know is that the follow up to XP (Vista) didn't arrive for many years. XP had five or six years to mature as an OS. The follow up to vista is going to arrive long before Vista is a stable OS on "most" hardware. If you need a top of the line PC to run it and the next version comes out, what, pray tell, is going to be required to run it. We all going to be going to IBM?

Vista should be being released right about now. Not a year and a half ago. Right now its in what I would deem a reasonable state for an early adopter. Runs well on top spec hardware, still has driver issues, number of bugs, but thats what you expect from a new system. For a system that is 12 months from being superseded it is not up to standard. If windows 7 was still four years away then fine. It's not, and Vista is a flop.

Paris as nothing flops around here

if this is the problem, then anyone using the 64bit version can be smug in the knowledge that it has never allowed unsigned drivers, and so shouldn't have any issues.

I bought and installed a copy of Vista 64 about a week after it was available here in the UK and a prt from some driver issues with my Canon EOS ( can't really blame MS for that) I've had no problems at all.

Likewise I insatlled SP1 and experienced no problems at all.

I never turn my machine off and use it for serious stuff as well as fun stuff (I'm a software engineer by trade) .

I'm genuinely struggling to find a source for all this vitriol.

Sorry.

BTW I don't work for MS :)

Paris? cos I am as obviously as oblivious as she is ;)

I've been running XP SP3 on my work machine and two home machines since it was released, with zero problems. One annoyance however: Every time I copy files across the LAN at work I'm presented with "This action has a potential security flaw" Of course it doesn't bother to tell you what this may be... Of what possible use is this annoying message? It adds another step and a useless annoyance to a very common task. I can't wait till MS designs the OS for cars... "Turning left may endanger your vehicle or its occupants. Do you wish to continue?"

As for Vista... I tried it when it was in beta, and I've played around with it on a test machine or two at work. Fortunately my company's policy is 'current release -1', so we're not foolish enough to install it company-wide. It seems to me that the general release actually works WORSE than the beta did. It's slower to boot, Media center is still a piece of #$*&, and less stable overall. The windows are pretty, but Beryl anyone? Rather puts anything from Redmond to shame.

I have to say I was an early adopter of XP (as an MSDN subscriber I got a copy 2 months before retail release), and I was also a Vista early adopter (2 months before retail again) and I've got to say Vista was a hell of a lot better on day one than XP was.

It took months for hardware manufacturers to start releasing decent drivers for XP, and even longer for application developers to start porting old Win9x apps over and get them working properly.

The hardware manufacturers are just as much to blame here as microsoft, for example when I moved from Win98 to WinXP I had a parallel port scanner (remember those) that the hardware manufacturer did not write xp drivers for. When I wrote to them and asked if they would give me the protocols so I could write my own, they simply stated that they were private protocols and if I wanted to scan on XP I should buy their shiny new USB model. Creative have now pulled the same stunt with the WebCam Live I've got, no plans to do a Vista driver and when asked about it point you to the new shiny model that they now sell for Vista.

"Just how does an update to a spyware removal tool affect USB devices? What exactly are Microsoft playing at?

It raises a lot of questions about just how well designed Windows really is, or, if you are paranoid just whether Defender does what it actually claims to do.

Next we'll be hearing about an Office update which breaks the network, or a IE update which interferes with the sound card."

Several PC's in my office recently had an issue where outlook wouldn't sort folders in the details view. It would only allow the large icon view. It only affected outlook and not other office apps.

After much searching it turns out that installing Windows Media Player 11 fixed it!

I know now it was a DLL conflict but it makes you wonder.

<full-on flamebait mode>

Vista is very well behaved, usable and friendly, apps seem to work fine....of course, like XP, I run it in a VMWare 6 guest on top of Ubuntu 7.10! I keep my M$ requirements on a very short leash, I can keep them under control. Do yourself a favour put M$ stuff in little sandpits where it can be trusted to behave, give the real hardware to an O/S that can handle it!

</full-on flambait mode>

I've used Vista almost since release (MS were good enough to send me a free copy of Vista Business so hey) and I have not any major issue with it. The desktop is MUCH better than XP, as are most other aspects. Yes I've had some had issues but most of these are par for the course for any upgrade - some programs don't work properly without patches / workarounds, some drivers are missing etc. Overall though Vista has been fine and I think much of the criticism is exaggerated and some obviously comes from people who've never used it at all.

Vista certainly isn't faultless though and I still think after SP1 that it still has too many faults. Some of these are just plain bugs, and some are faults by design. Take for example UAC. UAC nags you when you do anything "dangerous", where "dangerous" appears to be things I need to do 30 or 40 times a day. I know why it is there but its just annoying and trains users to ignore it entirely. I would rather the reverse - the user (admin) should be able to train UAC so it doesn't popup with the same annoying questions all the time. It should be possible for admins to train it even if it is secure by default. I disabled UAC immediately.

Having said that I like Vista, I do not think that if I were running a business that I would be using it any time soon. For all its deficiencies, XP is a known quantity and mature. I don't think there is much in Vista that makes sense in a business setting.

Home machines are another matter entirely - use it. It works and it works well.

I've got Vista here finally, and it's got it's bugs, including this mouse problem which effects my PS2 mouse.

But seriously, does NOBODY remember the whole XP thing? I can't believe nobody remembers the whole "OMG XP STANDS FOR XTRA PROBLEMS" bit, and everyone talking about how this was Linux's chance to get into the mainstream because people would be so fed up with XP, and how people were sticking with 98SE cause it was Microsoft's most stable operating system.

Going a little further back, you got the same thing with the Windows 9x series.

I'm not saying Vista doesn't have issues, I'm just saying it's rather ignorant to suggest that this is indicative of any new trend or shift in the industry. The reality is this is a very old situation that happens every time Microsoft releases a new system.

At worst, it will be another Windows ME, and we'll get Windows 7 shortly here and everyone will be happen.

I would like to point out to anyone raving about how wonderful XP is that it has seven years worth of real world usage and bugfixes applied to it.

Furthermore, anyone here should know that XP didn't get good until SP2.

Shame on all of you.

How come if my device doesn't work on Windows, people are happy to blame MS, yet when the same device doesn't work on Linux then it's something to do with the device manufacturer? Despite the fact that device drivers on Windows are often the worst written bits of software on the planet..

Not saying Windows is perfect (if it was, Microsoft wouldn't release patches that kill devices), but Linux isn't either.

Matrox not issuing drivers for a new Windows OS? Heaven forbid!

[looks over at Matrox Marvel being used as a doorstop]

I installed Vista on my laptop and I haven't had a single problem...oh, except for when I tried to browse the internet...oh and copy some files...oh that's right, I had trouble getting into my mail apart from that...no wait, it wouldn't resume properly and there's no modem driver so I can't use the cool Fax thing (but I'm sure it works great).

So I'd have to say it was a brilliant replacement for XP, yeah! Those new icons have improved my productivity immensely...

I got tired of it refusing to network properly with the XP machines.

So we got a new Dell laptop with XP and it has SP3.

...disabling the mouse & keyboard protect numpties from almost all phishing attacks...

Provided I turn off the crappy visual animations (no, I do *not* want you to slow down the opening of menus on this, or any other OS) Vista is now very fast, except possibly for a slight slowdown when opening up the 'computer' object - but that's ok, as XP is even slower. Aero, and even non aero appears to be faster under Vista on multiple monitors than on XP.

On the other hand, I did have a bit of a sense of humour failure, when the 2GB of RAM got used up in 10 minutes by Oblivion...There are also a number of particularly poor drivers out there, and companies that are to lazy to sign drivers for, or support Vista x64.

Vista works, and it's ok, but like XP it's more 'is that all?' rather than 'wow'.

I have desktop pc running Visa & laptop running Vista.

Use for software development, music production and to organise and file my life.

I have had no significant issues at all. Any of my colleagues who also run Vista on their laptops or desktops, also have had no issues.

I've long envied the Mac's for their hi-res displays, after all it's the bit of the computer I look at all day long. Vista adds that to Windows, as well as some other nice features that make life a little nicer.

I honesty can't see where all the bashing, Vista is broken, stuff comes from. It works perfectly for me and is a nice place to be while I work.

Sure there will be driver issues because there are so many different combinations out there. Maybe Microsoft should create a standard range of PCs & Laptops that is fully controlled like apple and all these issues would go away.

Just my two pennies worth and to balance this argument up a little

"My guess is that people just don't have the hardware to run Vista properly. Get the hardware, and it really is a nice OS"

Maybe i am wrong on this but i want an OS that runs on my hardware and not the other way around.

No i dont want to run Vista on a 486 but specing a system for an OS is retarded you spec you system to run the applications you need it to run. OS should not be the deciding factor here.

By the way can some one tell me, what are the improvements in Vista that make it require 2G+ of memory

I can help but wonder if this is the issue. Can anyone that ran into this problem should try running a packet sniffer on their local network to see what kind of traffic is comming out? If a keylogger were installed on the machiine it would have software "hooks" to the input of the keyboard and mice - if a security program were to update its files these "hooks" could get broken.

I'll bet if you scan the forums, this is not only not happening to everybody, its probably not happening to one specific mouse or keyboard brand either. That really leaves some kind of software to account for the common problem after update. If you can't manage packet sniffing and cleanup I would strongly suggest backing up all data and performing a clean install (or take the plunge and try Linux like Ubuntu, Mandriva etc)

Of course there is always an outside chance this is just crappy M$ programming again, but I'm leaning towards keyloggers infected on the afflicted machines. - Cheers

"Just keyboards and mice - nothing too crucial, then..."

Clearly, they are trying to target the server market.

I have an eee pc bought a week ago. I have spent most of the week trying to install a program, any program! The package manager only works on 2 repositories out of 6 I have tried and I can't install programs I do know about - all after spending hours surfing google for scraps of information!

Don't even think of trying to install something of the net - rpm/tar.gz - wtf! -what version of linux do I have - oh it's a debian/xandross/asus hybrid and nobody really knows what can be installed from where safely!

I can't run nokia pc suite because no version exists for linux - stopping me from using my n95 as a modem and limiting my eee's portability.

Great! - linux may boot in 40 seconds but isn't much use to us normal people without the functionality and ease of use we have come to expect.

Any wonder I'm re-installing xp next week....

There was a time in the industry when the rule was to avoid Microsoft operating systems with even-numbered version numbers (remembering MS-DOS 2, 4 and 6). If the next Windows to come is version 7, Vista must be 6 and apparently the rule still holds.

is that they won't get many emails complaining !

Fortunately you can still sign the petition to keep XP alive until a better OS from MS comes out

http://weblog.infoworld.com/save-xp/

All that is necessary for the triumph of Vista is that good IT men do nothing

"Please name these other operating systems."

I can name at least one: Linux. (many flavours)

My 4-5 years old home machine (1.2 GHz, 1 GB RAM) runs the latest Kubuntu without any problem, USB even works, mind you! (I guess the manufacturers are all making Linux drivers now instead of working on the ones for Vista, eh?) Some heavier apps are a bit slower, of course, but the OS by itself (eye candy turned off) is snappy and nice. As an OS should be. Firefox running alongside MP3s playing on XMMS, and file manager and OpenOffice open... easy enough. They are not forcing me to buy a new computer, because they are not artificially creating the need. So I'm not buying a new computer unless this one breaks down (some fans are starting to make funny noises...). And that's the way I prefer.

My 3-year old work machine (2.4 GHz, 4 GB RAM), no comments. It's a rocket with Ubuntu, no matter what I throw at it.

And my work can't be done on Windows anyway, so I don't even have a reason to be bothered... :-D

"Sorry matey - if you buy an off-the-shelf operating system, then IMHO it's really that operating system's job to operate your system (the secret's in the name, folks) and unfortunately that means it should run any hardware you happen to have. "

Gee, I wish someone had told me this when I was attempting to upgrade my brother-in-law's computer from a formerly loved but now admitted to be buggy OS to the new "I see God" version. I had so much trouble sorting out the truth from the fanfic I almost gave up. The computer itself was little help and crashed repeatedly when I tried to download updates for it.

Oh wait. You only meant that to apply to Microsoft OS's didn't you? I'm sorry. Trying to fit a version of OSX on a OS9 infested G4 which crashed every time it got near the WWW obviously would come under a different set of rules. After all, macs "just work", don't they?

Without question, Linux will run on anything, anywhere, anytime. Providing you don't mind the odd Kernel rebuild or two of course. I myself am running Suse Enterprise 10 on my car's electronic lock key fob "clicker". I've been locked out of my car for weeks because of some petty driver issue, but the OS is running just fine.

Sorry, but your post makes no sense at all. I'm not sure how long you've been using a computer with XP, but you seem to state facts that prove nothing.

"XP today is responsive, stable, and you would be hard-pressed to find hardware for which native drivers were not available for it. Moreover, any software released in the last five or so years runs under it."

Well duh, most hardware AND software in use today has been developed SINCE the release of XP. As XP was released in late 2001, it would have been pretty stupid for any developer to write software for windows platforms (in the last 5 years) without including XP compatibility.

"In contrast, Vista today is slow, buggy, and it suffers from a dearth of native hardware drivers. Furthermore, your current favorite programs might not run or run only in "compatibility mode."

And the "Application Compatibility Toolkit" for XP was designed for what exactly? I remember many a "happy" time trying to get old legacy Win98 apps running on XP at first. As for drivers, sorry to tell you that XP was exactly the same to begin with, with plenty of fun testing which 98/2000 drivers would work properly (not many) or waiting for either manufacturers or third-parties to release compatible drivers.

"In short, in the Windows familty, the choice is not between XP at one year and Vista at one year. Rather, it's between a mature OS and one that, for all practical purposes, is still in beta."

Take that sentence, change "XP" for either Win 98 or Win 2k (98 more for gamers, 2k more for corporates) and then swap "Vista" for XP and I've heard it all before.

I will agree that by the time SP1 was released for XP, it was already a much more functional OS, but then it was much more popular than Vista at the time. This gave the people writing the drivers and applications more of an incentive to make their apps/devices compatible with the OS.

Vista is like the unloved, unwashed child sitting in the corner with no friends. It could grow up to be something amazing, but the likelihood is that it'll always be the one sitting in the corner examining its own bogeys.

"1. People who have never tried it and just like bandwaggoning.

2. People who tried it for an hour maybe, and decided that they didn't like it based on things like UAC that can be turned off in 10 seconds or so.

3. People who buy sub-standard hardware and expect it to run."

I've been running it for 6 months on a Core2Duo with 4Gb of RAM and a XT2600 HD video card, with UAC turned off - as a media centre, under my HDTV - and it sucks balls.

Media Centre is an unresponsive piece of crap (what, you want to see a list of files in "My Videos", instead of thumbnails? Tough!), my Xbox 360 won't read the music from Vista unless I hack the registry (convergence, we've heard of it), the fonts are all over the place at 1920x1080, the hard drive is constantly thrashing even when I'm watching a film over LAN (yes, indexing service and every other service is turned off - Resource Monitor or whatever helpfully reports that "System32.dll" [iirc] is using all the HDD bandwidth)

Etc

Etc

Etc

Really, you can't look at Vista and say "yup, a lot of thought went into this". I'm pretty far from a usability expert but even I come up with 15 ways to make common tasks more obvious every time I use it.

Looking at how much I spent on my hardware, and how much better it is than my last PC purchase (PIII 1Ghz with 512Mb!!!) I can't see where my money went, and am considering sticking Mythbuntu or OSX or even XP on it, just so I can enjoy my expenditure.

"Ubuntu = open Add/remove programs

Choose program. Ask it to install it.

It checks dependencies, informs you of any extras that are required, *then* downloads and installs.

I have yet to have that fail on me, really like it."

While I will agree that Ubuntu works well installing some applications, there are still some that do not install easily or well. For example, WinRAR, Flash (for firefox), and VMware. All require command line installs (app-get) plus tweaks to the install directories. In VMware's case, it required a patch on the kernel. After fighting with all that, windows installs are as smooth as glass.

Mac installs are even easier. If apple can come up with a standard installer that works so smoothly with a linux core OS then what is stopping the Linux community from adopting it? Most of the people I have talked who refuse to use linux it has been about the application installs. It used to be the OS installs, but they have become easier over the years. If we can get all application installs for linux to be just as easy, then it will actually be a threat to MS. Until then, it is only the diehards that will use it.

Well I did till the updates came along.

Running Remote Assistance through Windows Live Messenger out of Vista to XP machines was running fine, day in, day out. Along come major updates. Bang. Invitations to provide assistance are accepted, then we wait...............and wait..............No sign anywhere of settings changed at either end.

XP to XP works fine still, so the finger of suspicion points firmly at Vista.

Anybody suggest next step??

Come on, guys. Windows is better than OS X because Windows runs on a wide variety of hardware.

Erm... um... yeah, so much better that Vista will run on anything, as long as it's the right hardware!

Isn't it?

... Not a fanboi, but I do note a slight inconsistency in the messages coming from the Vista Apologists Group.

USB always causes problems. Always has. Took years to get it going at all. (Same on Linux).

Don't give me that garbage "USB works for me & my 10,000 users". It doesn't work for me, lots of other people, and the gov. dept I work with has disabled USB access for non-admin.

Sure, most of the problems are in the dynamic driver model, and the rest of the problems are in the hardware. Sure, it works a lot better now that it did in it's first 10 years, but where does that get you? It's just not reliable and dependable on a range of machines with a range of devices.

Scrap the dynamic device recognition and just expose the hardware (and the hardware-level packet counts and packet errors). Let the device recognition happen at the application level, as it does with legacy serial ports and network cards.

Quote"Just wondering...

By Norman WanzerPosted Wednesday 16th April 2008 16:49 GMT Who in the IT field after having the issues we have had with Vista would be willing to try Windows 7? Personally, if it turns out to be nothing more than Vista with a face lift, I'm not interested.

I am an XP user (preference is win2k) and I have used both Windows and Mac on a regular basis. I think both have there pluses and minuses. I only choose Windows because it has more third party apps. (IMO, Linux still hasn't gotten easy enough for mainstream users yet. The app installers can be a killer.)

When MS goes back to giving people what they ask for and not what they think we want, I'll consider upgrading from XP." End quote.

I still use Win2k on all of 5 desktops, never had an unfixable problem. When however I bought my notebook it had Vista pre installed on it. And lookee Windows Update had SP1 on there update site, being the good girl I am, I foolishly let Vista do it's thing, namely install SP1. Then wham bam thank you maam, I was looking at a BSOD. Nothing would work except a rollback.

My question to microflacid is why fix something (Win2k) which aint broken??

And for the record I HATE VISTA! XP had too much eye candy for my liking, but Vista is a bloody joke!!

Personally, as a Windows administrator, I think disabling the keyboard and mouse so the lusers can't screw up their computers is a great idea. So perhaps we should call this Windows SAD? Windows Sys Admin Defender version.

@Norman Wanzer, um, Macs are built on FreeBSD, not Linux. There are two main flavours of Linux installer, apt and rpm. How that's more horribly difficult to learn - it's still only one package manager on your specific OS - is beyond me.

And for all those claiming there is no proper GUI interface to apt on Ubuntu, you might want to look at those menus a bit more closely - Kubuntu has Adept while Ubuntu Gnome uses Synaptic. Search, click, install.

>So Linux runs on anything, Apple provides a complete package, and Microsoft does neither. Why would/does anyone use it?<

To run games (less true these days with the proliferation of consoles), and heritage: Clueless customer (my personal bread & butter, so I love these guys) goes into PC World (the clue is in the name), get a PC which hearkens back to IBM PC with history - IBM PC & Microsoft DOS, which runs any number of cheap 'n cheerful software all the way up to Adobe stuff, or be tied into a closed operating system (Apple Mac). Linux is just beardy - no offense, until it can run windows software seamlessly it will always be an also ran.

Personally I hate Apple, I hate Macs, Itunes, Iphone, Ipod, Itouch, quicktime (I use quicktime alternative), and I tolerate Adobe Reader. Like it or not, the Apple still has this image of a computer for the elite who don't like computers.

Installed SP1, mucked up the machine.

Uninstalled... Vista.

Installed XP.

Winnar.

"SP1" used to be "when MS has finally made it usable", but if you think that everyone is going to lord on the SP1 update, that MS are going to actually hold it off until they ACTUALLY have fixed everything* ?

(*well not everything, but along the lines of XP SP1 etc)

After following all the advice on the MS site (it's a 'known feature') and elsewhere, I rolled back (painlessly).

My speakers plug into a USB port (Realtek HD on-board sound on an Acer Aspire PC)

I won't install SP1 now until they have fixed this.

This sounds like the salesmen demanding the release of yet another untested "update" against the wishes of their techies simply for the sake of some marketing "advantage" !!

Truly the Chinese, with their thousands of years of collected wisdom, are right to rank salesmen below that of prostitutes in their social hierarchy !! At least prostitutes give honest value for money !! Techies (scholars) are very highly regarded !!

I had the same problem with Vista. First it ran sooo slowly I thought I was running a 486 (on a recent HP Turion dual-core laptop). Then something killed the USB mouse (SP1 patch?). So I called up HP, and they would not give me XP, but they did give me some great advice which fixed the problem completely.

They told me to install Kubuntu Linux (actually I asked about this, as it is rumoured to work well, and they said go for it, as it would not affect my hardware warranty coverage).

So I installed the free Kubuntu 7.10, and it fixed the problem. I elected to purge Vista, as it never really worked anyway. Now I have lots of room that was previously used up by the nonfunctional vista bloatware, and the whole laptop runs very, very fast and well. HP gave me the best information to fix the problem, and now I have a brand-new machine that I love working on, as well as unlimited free software. And, the USB mouse even works!

>>Vista knows the applications you tend to use most and will get them loaded up for you ready to rock....

If their past behaviour is any indicator, it is far more likely that the OS loads up the applications that microsoft WANTS you to be using most.

For any microsoft product to be in any way concerned with what the user wants would be entirely uncharacteristic.

For some reason I decided to waste some time replying to good old Tel. Here goes:

>"Please name these other operating systems. OS X? Nope, sorry that only supports a highly controlled range of systems?"

Actually I was thinking of Linux, which I use for my day-to-day stuff. It doesn't do the games I like, but it actually supports all of my hardware (because, as any fule kno, the drivers on Linux give support by chipset, not by manufacturer, which is one of the reasons why there are so many driver problems under Vista).

>"Surely the support of peripherals is not solely an MS responsibility, but that of the manufacturer."

Not actually relevant to my argument - I was expressing the point that existing hardware should be supported by an operating system. For instance, with Vista 64 bit I had to remove my sound card because there were no drivers for it (it's a Soundblaster 64 Live Value about 3 years old). Because it wasn't brand new it seems that Creative Labs decided that they would rather I threw away a perfectly good piece of kit and maybe buy a new sound card from them). I eventually decided to use the one built into the motherboard instead.

>" Go back to the specification on the box of that Maxtor hard drive that you bought - does it say it is compatable with Vista? If it doesn't is it fair to assume that said hardware will be guaranteed to work under Vista? Why isn't is Maxtor's responsibililty to offer this if it is possible?"

I'm not sure whether you are deliberately missing the point, or just being obtuse here. It never occurred to me that a removable hard drive wouldn't be compatible with an operating system which is supposed to be as good as the promises made about Vista- it's a USB hard drive for God's sake - that means it's a common, standard piece of equipment, not some exotic electrical speculum. Linux is OK with it, and so is Vista 32 bit (so I am told). XP quite likes it, too. It shouldn't need manufacturer's drivers. But I'll be a bit more careful in future (if my mouse pointer ever reappears and I start using Vista again).

>"I run Vista SP1 and have had no problems. I built a carefully thought out system that had modern components and a modern OS."

Good for you. I'm really happy for you. My PC is pretty modern, too. And really well thought out as well. Unfortunately I'm not psychic, so when I built the thing a couple of years ago I didn't sit down and think "I wonder if Longhorn will support this?"

>"I don't think I would ever have upgraded an older system from XP to Vista because you can never guarantee that they will work and I (personally) wouldn't expect it to (certainly it is not the sole responsibility of MS)"

And that's your problem - you are one of those people who just throw away perfectly good kit. That's your choice I suppose. Me - I like to keep perfectly servicable stuff for as long as it is working properly and does what I need it to. That seems like common sense to me. And better for the environment, too. I mean, does it really matter whether you have 800Mhz DDR or 1050Mhz? I'm not trying to calculate Pi to a grazillion decimal places.

I suppose I'm not persuaded really. My view though is that Microsoft do have a duty to support existing hardware. Then again, there ain't no money in that, is there?

Now I'm off to get a life. Byeee!