The decision for some individuals and small businesses to upgrade to Microsoft Windows Vista once it becomes available in early 2007 will depend largely on what the new operating system can do for you and what hardware you have to run it on. Microsoft has prepared a Get Ready page listing the hardware required to run Windows Vista, and for Windows Vista beta 2 there's a public download available now.
It's still early, and Microsoft could easily change aspects of individual features between now and the final release. But based on what I've seen after living with Windows Vista beta 2 for a while, here are five things I think you'll like about the new operating system -- some of which might persuade certain fence-sitters to upgrade -- and five things that may convince others to stick with Windows XP for a few more years.
Talkback
Frankly, I find many of the pro's and con's to be a complete waste of time.
All I want from my system is to be able to perform the immediate tasks required, without losing stability and security.
I am constantly having to take action due to either virii, firewall, or some form of corruption. Thankfully, blue screens are far less prevalent than they have been, but I cant help but think a flavour of Linux would be less trouble ( and this is coming from someone who makes a living in the MS world ).
Vista doesn't have a lot going for it. Although I will probably get it with a new computer in the next couple of years (my rig is 6 years old now), I wouldn't buy for what it delivers, that's for sure.
Desktop search (that's old now), 3d interface, auto defrag and nagging security features ? Hardly a compelling proposition.
I am in general agreement with Roberto. Here's why.
In general, I found this article somewhat weak, and lacking in knowledge about what constitutes a significant and tangible improvement over prior
Windows versions...sufficient to warrant the costs of upgrading to Vista.
In addition, I really question the priority assigned to some of the items in the article. There are fare more serious potential issues than most of those in the article.
But, remember that when I say that, it's because I'm thinking of the computer user population as a whole.
Certainly, some segments, such as notebook users, will have greater concerns with some issues than others. But in terms of populating "top 5" lists, I think that is generally more applicable to desktop and tower user and server installations.
Here are my observations regarding the "What I love" and "What I hate" segments in the article.
"What I Love"
1. "Search or Create Virtual Files"
WinXP (and prior versions) can ALREADY save the search profile. That is not big deal. There are also several utility add-ons that can provide the
'virtual folder' type of found-file data and interface. There is no reason to upgrade for this capability, and because of that, it should not be in a "top
5" list of this type.
2. "Gadgets"
Again, multiple utilities provide the same functionality in existing and earlier Windows. There is no reason to purchase a multi-hundred dollar "OS" just to add glitzy "gadgets" such as these. That is also an incredibly lame use of Microsoft programming talent and testing resources when they should have been focusing on TRUE operating system functionality and reliability issues.
3. "Built-in diagnostics"
The author noted that "Vista will listen to your hard drive and report pending problems, giving you ample warning to back up your data."
This is NOT Vista-specific. It is simply using the S.M.A.R.T. feature of newer hard drives. Again, free utility programs provide enhanced disk
S.M.A.R.T. analyses, and may in fact provide superior detail and up-to-date interpretations.
He also said, "And have you ever noticed how Windows computers get slower with age? That's because files get separated from each other on your hard drive and require occasional defragmentation. Most of us never do it -- in part because it uses too many system resources. In Vista, the process is automatic and runs in the background, so you won't even notice it."
YET AGAIN...this is something that prior versions of Windows can ALREADY do...and they can ALREADY do it in the background as a low-priority
process, and/or scheduled for off-peak usage times.
4. "Need more Oomph?"
Please. AGAIN these are not Vista-only "new" features and capabilities. The user can already control process priority, assigning higher priority based on user requirements. It's done through the Task Manager or numerous available free third party utility programs.
As for using FLASH memory in USB devices to improve performance? FLASH memory is relatively slow. In addition, EVERY current FLASH memory technology (of the type we're talking about) has a finite number of times it can be written. Using it extensively will cause premature device failure.
Some FLASH memory devices "wear out" in as
few as 10,000 write cycles. Others are much higher, ranging from 100,000 to 1,000,000 write cycles before they start to fail....but they DO wear out.
Any system that starts vigorously using FLASH memory for general I/O enhancment is going to do a lot of writing...perhaps thousands, or tens-of or
hundreds-of-thousands of write cycles per week. I don't know the details of the algorithms being used, so failure rates can't be accurately projected, but this is a cause for tremendous concern...not a
"What I Love" candidate.
Windows also has a history of questionably effective memory management. This adds yet another new layer to the environment Will Windows do it right this time?
Microso
Continuing my post:
Microsoft could have probably provided superior and more reliable performance gains by trimming program fat.
5. "Enhanced help"
Remote help is ALREADY available. Remote access is built-in to Windows,XP and even older versions have limited capabilities, which can become fully
functional by adding a third party utility.
As for 'expanded' help? I hope it's better than the Office "Paper-clip". Will it actually end up being useful? Maybe. Hundreds of dollars worth of
useful? I doubt it. And, in a business environement, the cost of upgrading to Vista is going to be significant.
Upgrade costs are not limited to the
cost of the license(s). There are literally dozens of added costs whenever a business implements such a major OS upgrade, and the cost of the actual
OS license is probably one of the lowest costs in that list.
In short, it appears that most of the "What I Love" top 5 items are either already available in earlier Windows versions, can be easily added with
little or no cost at all, or have questionable actual value to the user.
------------------------
Moving on to the "What I Hate" list...
1. Current hardware won't cut it. Thanks for the warning...But, it certainly didn't cover everything. As another item of interest however, what the
heck does adding resource hogging glitzy non-functional graphics have to do with an Operating System?
WHY is an OS forcing a user to go to a high-performance video adapter when
most motherboards already contain integrated video chipset suitable for most business applications? Technical users will understand that
non-functional glitz adds very little if any value, and certainly doesn't increase productivity.
An OS is supposed to make the computer function...not pretty it up. All else is applications, add-ons, or glitz. Glitz is a marketing feature...not an OS
functional requirement.
2. 'Aero Graphics eating battery power'. Again, thanks for the warning on this one. Good to know. But in terms of actual consequences for most
users??? Not really high up there. There will be a fair-sized subset of users that this affects, but it highly likely there is some other negative change
that is more important to the user community as a whole.
What Vista SHOULD have, is a power-management option that disables all power-hungry OS additions anyway. And, since that problem CAN be
addressed by a power-managment option (such as turning Aero Graphics off)...it should NOT be one of the top 5 "What I Hate" issues.
3. User Account Protection.
This is one where the priority should probably be bumped up. From what I have heard from some beta users, this element of Vista is far more than
inconvenient than simply requiring more user interaction with pop-ups.
Some users report completely uninstallable devices and software...not because of driver issues, but because Vista REFUSED to allow the perfectly
valid install to occur. That is a much more important event than simply noting the inconvenience of pop-up button-clicking.
4. Missing drivers and applications. Another something that shouldn't be on a "important" list. As the author said, this will probably continue to be
addressed, and drivers will likely be available from third parties. Not that big a problem. It's not a daily occurence for most people, and it will likely
be signficantly improved by the time the product is released. However, if Microsoft does NOT plan to address the issue, then it is a big concern.
5. "Troubled Sleep". Again, this is not a high-priority issue. It will likely be fixed, and even if it remains a problem, it's not only a new feature for
which
there is no known user-base so far, but similar functionality DOES work, and saves the current session to disk...albeit a bit more slowly.
Also, it remains an issue mostly for notebook users, and I believe the vast majority of Vista installs won't be on notebooks (for
Hey, thanks 4 dat, i neva knew USB Devices could wear out, thanx
You say:
"Some users report completely uninstallable devices and software...not because of driver issues, but because Vista REFUSED to allow the perfectly valid install to occur. That is a much more important event than simply noting the inconvenience of pop-up button-clicking. "
This sounds like a two-edged sword. Now, I don't know the *reason* why Vista would refuse to install a particular driver, but if the driver is buggy and/or unsafe and could lead to system crashes and/or data loss, then how is it in the user's interest to install it?
Put it this way: suppose an installation stopped with a message box that said (e.g.) "Install printer driver and join botnet? (Y/N)". Would you click "Yes"? Not that any OS could ever give you such an informative message, mind. But judging by most EULAs, users would almost universally click "Yes" simply because they would need to use the printer. And coincidentally, the Windows world is also rife with criminal botnets...