Why is everyone so excited about Vista?

[chrisbliss18]

I was really excited when I read the initial press releases about Vista. It was going to patch some of the glaring flaws in XP, add some great new features and functionality, include new scripting abilities, and simplify making advanced configuration changes. It was to be to XP what Windows 95 was to Windows 3.11, a huge leap forward.

However, each successive press release made me more and more dismayed with Vista. It seemed that each press release told the disappointing news of how Microsoft had decided to push some feature or function from Vista back to Longhorn. Over the past few months, I have gone from being excited about the new version to being completely apathetic. I can't stand the idea of needing to upgrade my hardware (which runs XP extremely well) just to be able to qualify for the minimum requirements of Vista.

From all the documents and press releases that I have read, it seems that the only major noticable difference between XP and Vista is the fact that Vista has an extremely bloated "shiny" new interface. This doesn't impress me very much because I really don't care at all about what the interface looks like. Actually, I always try to minmize the interface because I find space used for appearance and not for functionality is a waste.

That's my rant and my feelings about Vista so far. I'd love for someone to provide some examples of how Vista is different than I perceive it to be.

Please feel free to put your feelings about Vista here as well.

[iamthwee]

vista FAQ

http://www.winsupersite.com/faq/vista.asp

Tis a good read.

The boyz at microsoft sum vista up in three words:

Connected. Windows Vista will include pervasive device synchronization features that will let users keep their information synchronized across multiple PCs, network servers, and other devices, including cell phones and PDAs. Windows Vista will also include numerous enhancements for portable computers, including better power management, support for external displays, and better wireless networking functionality.

Clear. Windows Vista will include system-level instant desktop search functionality that will help users find information on their PCs and organize them with virtual folders that work the way they want them to and don't conform to the rigid structure of the underlying file system. Windows Vista will also make it easier to identify documents from their icons: Instead of using static icons like previous Windows versions, Windows Vista features Live Icons that display the first page of the document right in its icon. Finally, Windows Vista will include an advanced printer and document framework codenamed Metro (see below) that makes it easier to use and share documents between a wide variety of devices.

Confidence. Windows Vista will include integrated antimalware defenses that will shield users from spyware, adware, phishing attacks, and other electronic threats. The system will also feature a Secure Startup feature to ensure that the data on PCs stays confidential, even if the machine is lost or stolen. Full volume encryption, using a hardware component to store encryption keys, will keep user data inaccessible to thieves as well. Finally, and perhaps most important, Windows Vista will feature User Account Protection (UAP, formerly called Limited User Account), a reduced privileges mode that will prevent even admins from running in administrative mode normally, giving you better defense against electronic attacks. With UAP enabled--the default--you will need to supply an admin password any time you make a change that could affect the system. This is similar the way Mac OS X and Linux already work

Personally, neither of these points stand out as being revolutionary or amazing.Connected I find xp to be reasonably good with connection. It is easy to set up an internet connection and even a wireless network. Not much stands out here.

Clear

Well yes, that's just making everything look more pretty isn't it. An opinion which is subjective to the user?

Better organisation and retrieval of data.

Well most people use google desktop with xp, which I've heard good things about. Personally, I like xp's filing system. If you organise all your software programs and documents in the first place, I don't see the problem?

Confidence

Again, if you use xp with common sense you can overcome most security problems. Make sure you have a good anti-virus software which is kept constantly updated. Make sure you run a spyware removal program on a regular basis. Back up your data on a regualar basis. Ensure you have SP2 installed. Keep your downloads to a minimum and ensure all downloads are from approved sources.

Account Protection (UAP, formerly called Limited User Account), a reduced privileges mode that will prevent even admins from running in administrative mode normally, giving you better defense against electronic attacks.

Well, if you're using xp, make sure you are not in administrative mode when you're using the internet if it's that vulnerable? And make sure you use a different internet browser other than internet explorer.

...to supply an admin password any time you make a change that could affect the system. This is similar the way Mac OS X and Linux already work

Well, finally the boyz at microsoft are wising up to the antics of the Mac and *nix OS. This should have been the obvious thing to do anyway, but microsoft have always chosen usability over security?

So no, I won't be rushing out to buy it. I like xp however, I said exactly the same when I was using win2000. I wouldn't dream of using anything other than xp now.

Well I tell a lie, I have a dual boot of both xp and linux! Rock on.

[nizzy1115]

I am excited because of direct x 10 and the standards it will force graphics card designers to comply with. It will give a bump in gaming performance overall and it will be vista only (cant get it for xp).

[markdean]

"And make sure you use a different internet browser other than internet explorer."

I agree in principle, but this is impractical since so many developers are developing for IE. Also, I'm starting to see Firefox get hit with popup and popovers events-even with them blocked. As Firefox becomes more standardized and used, we will see more exploits on that browser.

I also agree the best defense is running it with standard user rights. Two utilities that I have evaluated and use are dropmyrights.exe and psexec.exe.

The best thing that Vista *should* do, as you point out, is will have the user logon with standard credentials and not administrator rights. That being said, if a user clicks on a link and it prompts to install some sort of code, even on Vista, which will then prompt the user for the administrator password, the software, which may be malware, will be installed. There is no accounting for users who will blindly install or click on things they shouldn't and no OS will help them unless it is tagged as a virus or adware-and the anti-virus/anti-spyware/anti-root kit software is installed and active.

-MD

[BILL S]

I am going to build my next full PC for PCI Express, and hopefully, God willing, 64bit CPU as well, a dual core would be even better. I read the single core CPU may be a thing of the past as well. To utilize SLI and 64 bit, Windows Vista will be much better positioned then the current OS platforms, from my recent readings, it should bring the software and hardware gap much closer, as of yet the hardware is now coming out, but the software to exploit it fully is somewhere still down the road. I have high hopes Win Vista can be everything it NEEDS to be, XP has been very useful, but of course, there are flaws in virtually any OS.
I doubt I'll be using anything other then Windows

BILL

[EriCartman13]

Wow! I am so excited that just becuase my computer runs xp well that it isn't going to be able to run vista! I have to upgrade! I love you guys at microsoft!

[BILL S]

Depends on if you want next-gen support, if you don't need it, there's no reason to jump at Vista right away, but the big press appears to be improvements to it's Internet Explorer, arrising from the competitions' successes. In that regard it may be of interest, or it may fail to improve in areas users are interested in. That's pretty hard to predict ahead of time
BILL

[goldeagle2005]

I tried the Vista build 5308, and I found the interface kinda confusing. Sure it was pretty, animated and all out eye candy, but that isn't the primary goal of an OS, is it? Infact, I found the transparencies to be more of an irritant than beneficial. In terms of performance, I found it a bit sluggish (though it is a beta, so I can ignore that). What I really find exasperating is the very fact that if you want to use Vista in all it's glory, you need to have a graphics card with DX9 support inbuilt. Lots of people, however, run with IGPs, so they won't be able to see the "clearer" view of Vista. Let's wait for the final release and see what useful feature MS throws at us.

[TheNSS]

You guys are just mac lovers. Vista rocks

[nizzy1115]

Please explain how were mac lovers and how vista truely rocks. I for one love microsoft. However, i was really excited about vista, but there are many things i would change with it. I realized this after using public beta on my main rig and having it f* everything up (due to vista's new'ish file system, and system rights), i will not be upgrading next year when it comes out. Maybe a year later, but deffinatly not next year.

[TheNSS]

Well for one thing it looks a lot better than xp. Vista has a more secure kernel and in my opinion the file system is better. I was kidding about you being mac lovers. And I agree with you, i'm not upgrading to vista for a couple years.

[goldeagle2005]

For all it's merits, Vista's main USP still remains its eye candy, which really eats up system resources. Don't get me wrong. I love the eye candy. But if you ask me, a new OS release should also bring in some new/enhanced features, the way XP did. It was much secure compared to Win9x and Win2k. I may be speculating here, but Vista doesn't have much to merit an immediate migration from XP.

[Scottg1989]

with a new operating system comes a new generation of software that should use the new updates fully.
^ ^

[TheNSS]

Yeah, that's true. I think microsoft is just trying to just get more users with vista. And i mean regular users, that just want to type a document, check their email and whatever, looking at a pretty interface while they're at it.

[Scottg1989]

yeah but i doubt that will happen. Thats why so many businesses still use older versions of windows - they simply dont need these newer ones.

[TheNSS]

Let's start an anti microsoft website where we talk about how much it sucks.

[Scottg1989]

hehe i dont really mind windows.. its the best operating system out there (possibly just because of its convenience), but microsoft just have some wierd concepts sometimes...

[TheNSS]

Well, windows is only good for businesses. It would be a perfect world if it was setup like this:

windows = businesses, software developers, programmers, etc.
mac = home users, video editors, web page designers.
linux and unix = really big nerds, mail servers, webserver, servers in general.

the world we live in today:

windows = home users, businesses, nerds, geeks, video editors, media people, and everyone else.
mac = only a few loyal mac witnesses who take mac as a religion, steve jobs as a prophet and bill gates as the devil.
linux and unix = whoever the heck wants to use it.

[markdean]

Well, windows is only good for businesses. It would be a perfect world if it was setup like this:

windows = businesses, software developers, programmers, etc. mac = home users, video editors, web page designers. linux and unix = really big nerds, mail servers, webserver, servers in general.

the world we live in today:

windows = home users, businesses, nerds, geeks, video editors, media people, and everyone else. mac = only a few loyal mac witnesses who take mac as a religion, steve jobs as a prophet and bill gates as the devil. linux and unix = whoever the heck wants to use it.

That is such a ridiculous post that it must be a tongue-in-cheek post. Anyone who makes blanket statements like this and believes them should not work in IT for sure and shows a severe lack of knowledge and experience in computing. And where do AS/400s and Z/OS (S/390, etc) and their equivalents fit in this “perfect” world? They still handle workloads that simply can not be run on anything else. In this “perfect” world, why is Windows the only OS that is the “perfect” fit for businesses, software developers and programmers? That’s just silly. The richest cache of programming languages and environments are found on Unix and its derivatives. It used to be that Mac and Unix (especially SGI) where the only game in movie editing particularly at the professional level. That is no longer true as much of it has been moved to Windows and Linux. Also keep in mind that Mac is now just another Unix derivative which moves it up quite a bit in my mind. Also remember that just about every operating environment has pretty much the same stuff so it really doesn’t matter anymore unless you have a preference for an application that is only ported to one specific platform which is also getting less common.

If you work in IT and are not just an end user, I hope that you don’t take this philosophy into your clients. Each technology, application, operating environment needs to be chosen so that the solution is a perfect fit for the customer and not some arbitrary matrix based on some warped view of the computing world. I’ve been in systems engineering for over 16 years and I’ve seen my share of Windows-only, or Mac-only, or -only “engineers”. They do a disservice to the industry and the company they work for.

That’s why it is still amazing to me that people are so quick to embrace what amounts to vaporware. And Vista isn’t even released and folks are lining up. It may well be Microsoft’s best, but until we see what is “actually” released, and then it is evaluated, we really won’t know.

I saw the same thing in the late 80s and early 90s as people were willing to put up with multiple crashes a day just to run Windows 2.x and 3.x (I still have Windows 1-3 in VMware disk files just for grins if anyone wants to go back in time). Then NT 3.1 (which was really NT 1.0) came out (and it was painful all the way until 3.51 was released) and you would have thought the computer was just invented so this “excitement” over a Microsoft OS is nothing new.

So let’s get real.

[markdean]

its the best operating system out there

Can you qualify this? Best how? What metrics or decision matrix did you use to determine this? Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-Microsoft, just anti-intellectually dishonest.