Windows Vista Thoughts @ [H] Consumer

[Unknown-One]

The only put off I have is the interface, its more confusing, harder to navigate, less functional, more rigid then Windows XP's interface.

I mean come on! Once I add the <User Name> folder (what used to be "My Documents") to the desktop, I cant even rename it back to My Documents. I'm stuck with it being my user name. WTF?

 

[nigerian_businessman]

Ok, you don't like it because you have to scroll to the right, and I like it because of OCUR support, accessibility improvements like Movies on TV, and the ability to finally clone your desktop at different resolutions (for use in Origen ae x15e chassis.)

All those things are a step in the right direction but overall are uninteresting to me. Until I can get PPV content over a cable-card, the set-top box stays, and the TV viewing features of MCE go un-used.

 

[Chris_Morley]

All those things are a step in the right direction but overall are uninteresting to me. Until I can get PPV content over a cable-card, the set-top box stays, and the TV viewing features of MCE go un-used.

Sounds like you're looking forward to CableCard 2.0 - which should be incorporated into future OCUR products. Also, if that's holding you up, then you'll never use MCE 2005...cuz it ain't going to get it.

 

[Strikemaster]

It's funny how it's been getting a brush-off by IT people...I guess I'm just looking at it from a consumer's perspective. Sorry you had so many problems getting your computers to run it...our two little 'ole eMachines in the office ran both the 32-bit and 64-bit versions without any problems or searching for drivers...

The Gigabyte machine's problems startled me. Not recognizing a bootable XP SCSI-based disk, when you can boot the same machine with a 98SE floppy, or any Linux distro, and easily see the drive? I want a front-row seat when someone tries an upgrade attempt with a SATA RAID in place.

IT departments are definitely not gamer's lairs. I know I'd love to get hold of one of our new dual-CPU AutoCAD stations and see what it could do with a 7950GTX. The head of IT would have my scalp for a throwrug. They don't care for change, especially unnecessary change on a massive scale like Vista is going to bring. XP, for all of the hype it brought in, still hasn't lived up to the stability it was touted to have. The "freedom from update reboots" issue, remember that? Ever sat through a Norton Internet Security Suite install, and the interminable reboots as the updates roll in? Well, Vista did that to me today with it's updates, and so did XP with what appeared to be an out-of-schedule update.

XP-64. Who actually runs it? I can't think of a soul, and I've been in 3,000 households installing broadband. Vista looks like it will be pushed heavily as the transition to 64-bit, but what's going to run on it? Have any major games houses committed to 64-bit and the new D10 video standard?

Vista *might* be a gamer's paradise. No proof yet. Will it be a IT dept.savior? Not this forum's reason for existence . I was a second-wave adopter of XP, and I hated it for the backwards incompatibilities with nearly every game I owned. Today, I can't imagine using anything before it in the Microsoft line. Still, I can't shake the foreboding that Vista is rapidly becoming the "Windows XP Millenium" version; a forced upgrade for filling Microsoft's coffers, not for any intangible innovations it might possess.

 

[nigerian_businessman]

Sounds like you're looking forward to CableCard 2.0 - which should be incorporated into future OCUR products. Also, if that's holding you up, then you'll never use MCE 2005...cuz it ain't going to get it.

Quite to the contrary. I'll continue to use MCE 2005 and Windows XP on my media center box for movies and music, and continue using my set top box for TV and PPV content.

Most likely, the only box that will ever get upgraded to Vista will be my main gaming rig, and only for DX10. That is, unless Microsoft has an ace up its sleeve or I start seeing some other reasons to upgrade beyond planned obsolesence.

 

[AreEss]

It's funny how it's been getting a brush-off by IT people...I guess I'm just looking at it from a consumer's perspective. Sorry you had so many problems getting your computers to run it...our two little 'ole eMachines in the office ran both the 32-bit and 64-bit versions without any problems or searching for drivers...

Chris, frankly, I find this utterly impossible to believe for even an instant.
You're a consumer. I'm a Microsoft reseller.
You: "I want to upgrade to Vista."
Me: "Okay, does your system support it?"
You: "I think so. I have 2GB, a GeForce 7900GTX 512MB, and an Athlon64 4000."
Me: "Well, you'll need a new monitor..."
You: "What?"
Me: "... if you want to watch any DVDs. Then you'll need a new video card..."
You: "WHAT?!"
Me: "... if you want the pretty GUI features. And you'll need more memory..."
You: "I HAVE TWO GIGS!!"
Me: "... if you want to play games. Oh, and how much free space on your hard drive?"
You: "Uhm, 10 gigs I think."
Me: "Better just buy a whole new system."

You're telling me that as a consumer you find this appealing? Without all those specific components, it's XP Service Pack 3. You get none of the eye candy from Aero. You can't watch your Blu-Ray movies unless you want them downsampled to blurs. Your framerates will be abysmal. I cannot for an instant believe that any consumer realistically wants to have to buy a brand new computer less than a year after they bought the one they have, just to run a new OS. No matter what that OS offers, and so far, Vista has not shown that it offers anything which cannot be achieved with XP - with greater stability on XP, I'll note.
We won't mention the fact that many of these components are not even out yet, and there is not even an ETA on real commercial availability for monitors which will support Vista.

Now, you try telling this to a company that just invested $15,000+ into a workstation - they now need another $4,800 in video cards, another $2000 in memory, and another $1500+ in processors less than 12 months after they bought a machine intended to last 36-48 months by overbuilding. It's not a brushoff, it's intelligent business desicions. Why on earth would anyone in their right mind spend another $8,000 just for eye candy that has a demonstrable negative impact on overall performance? Sorry, but facts are facts. Aero eats GPU memory and processor to make the pretty. Which means you're now getting less out of the machine period.

I'm sorry, but I just do not see how anyone could look forwards to having to replace everything to be saddled with cumbersome DRM and performance impacting pretty just for things that can already be done with what's out there now. The only reason I can see to upgrade to Vista is the fact that eventually, Microsoft will pull the plug on the XP users when they stop issuing security updates, forcing the issue. And until that day comes, there really is no compelling reason, or even valid reason in my mind, to recommend anyone upgrade today, tomorrow, or at release.

 

[Hurdler]

So has anyone tried to end a task in Vista? I tried to end aim.exe in Vista, and it told me that I didn't have appropriate privlages for that task. I checked to make sure, but I had an admin account. WTF can't I end something as trivial as aim?!

 

[Chris_Morley]

Chris, frankly, I find this utterly impossible to believe for even an instant.
You're a consumer. I'm a Microsoft reseller.
You: "I want to upgrade to Vista."
Me: "Okay, does your system support it?"
You: "I think so. I have 2GB, a GeForce 7900GTX 512MB, and an Athlon64 4000."
Me: "Well, you'll need a new monitor..."
You: "What?"
Me: "... if you want to watch any DVDs. Then you'll need a new video card..."
You: "WHAT?!"
Me: "... if you want the pretty GUI features. And you'll need more memory..."
You: "I HAVE TWO GIGS!!"
Me: "... if you want to play games. Oh, and how much free space on your hard drive?"
You: "Uhm, 10 gigs I think."
Me: "Better just buy a whole new system."

You're telling me that as a consumer you find this appealing? Without all those specific components, it's XP Service Pack 3. You get none of the eye candy from Aero. You can't watch your Blu-Ray movies unless you want them downsampled to blurs. Your framerates will be abysmal. I cannot for an instant believe that any consumer realistically wants to have to buy a brand new computer less than a year after they bought the one they have, just to run a new OS. No matter what that OS offers, and so far, Vista has not shown that it offers anything which cannot be achieved with XP - with greater stability on XP, I'll note.
We won't mention the fact that many of these components are not even out yet, and there is not even an ETA on real commercial availability for monitors which will support Vista.

Now, you try telling this to a company that just invested $15,000+ into a workstation - they now need another $4,800 in video cards, another $2000 in memory, and another $1500+ in processors less than 12 months after they bought a machine intended to last 36-48 months by overbuilding. It's not a brushoff, it's intelligent business desicions. Why on earth would anyone in their right mind spend another $8,000 just for eye candy that has a demonstrable negative impact on overall performance? Sorry, but facts are facts. Aero eats GPU memory and processor to make the pretty. Which means you're now getting less out of the machine period.

I'm sorry, but I just do not see how anyone could look forwards to having to replace everything to be saddled with cumbersome DRM and performance impacting pretty just for things that can already be done with what's out there now. The only reason I can see to upgrade to Vista is the fact that eventually, Microsoft will pull the plug on the XP users when they stop issuing security updates, forcing the issue. And until that day comes, there really is no compelling reason, or even valid reason in my mind, to recommend anyone upgrade today, tomorrow, or at release.

The fact is that at some point next year the only operating system you will find on systems being sold to consumers will be Vista. I am communicating my experience using that operating system.

Also, I think you're a bit fuzzy on Aero - I'm able to run int on a Sempron 3400+ with 512MB of RAM and a GeForce 6100 integrated solution - a $400 eMachines.

Finally, you can watch DVDs in full resolution (all of 480i/p) without having to even worry about HDCP (in fact, I just did, Black Hawk Down - trying to test out AVIVO). And the jury's out as to if hi-def's really going to be a problem - Toshiba's HD-A1 HD-DVD player does just fine @ 720p/1080i over component. It's all going to come down the CONTENT. If the content that studios release requires AACS DRM, then yes, it will down-rez. Vista merely supports it. Please tell me which HD-DVD title uses it, because it'd be news to me.

 

[Mike90]

The fact is that at some point next year the only operating system you will find on systems being sold to consumers will be Vista. I am communicating my experience using that operating system.

I really have my doubts about that. XP is just too good and MANY are going to be very reluctant to leave it. I think Microsoft may have difficulty convincing people and selling this new OS. I'm just not impressed right now.

 

[Chris_Morley]

I really have my doubts about that. XP is just too good and MANY are going to be very reluctant to leave it. I think Microsoft may have difficulty convincing people and selling this new OS. I'm just not impressed right now.

They don't have to convince you. They just have to get Dell, Gateway, and HP on board. It's quite simple. If the massive amount of people out there who have no interest in building their own system (you know, the majority) want to buy a new machine then they will be buying systems from these companies that will have Vista on it. Period.

 

[AreEss]

The fact is that at some point next year the only operating system you will find on systems being sold to consumers will be Vista. I am communicating my experience using that operating system.

To be entirely honest, I don't think Microsoft is going to get the uptake they're looking for. I've discussed this with quite a few folks previously about this, and the push-back from consumers - to say nothing of businesses - initially surprised even me. When you tell a consumer that they have to 'upgrade' their monitor, or buy a different one out of the box, they get very, very unhappy.

Also, I think you're a bit fuzzy on Aero - I'm able to run int on a Sempron 3400+ with 512MB of RAM and a GeForce 6100 integrated solution - a $400 eMachines.

Truth told, I rarely think of 1280x1024 and lower resolutions. I've only been looking at 1600x1200 and higher (sometimes MUCH higher.) Which requires minimum 512MB per card per Microsoft, in many instances. When you get into multihead workstations, you're talking about upwards of 2GB of memory on your video cards.
The other thing is that I have not had opportunity to properly test just how badly they broke OpenGL. The noises I have heard regarding it have been mixed - 'none,' '1.0 only,' '1.1 only,' and '1.0 to 1.2 only.' Now granted, that doesn't seem to be a huge consumer thing, but when you tell a consumer that they now have to play their favorite game at a much lower framerate or can't play it at all, they tend to get rather angry.

Finally, you can watch DVDs in full resolution (all of 480i/p) without having to even worry about HDCP (in fact, I just did, Black Hawk Down - trying to test out AVIVO). And the jury's out as to if hi-def's really going to be a problem - Toshiba's HD-A1 HD-DVD player does just fine @ 720p/1080i over component. It's all going to come down the CONTENT. If the content that studios release requires AACS DRM, then yes, it will down-rez. Vista merely supports it. Please tell me which HD-DVD title uses it, because it'd be news to me.

Okay, I definitely should have been clearer; apologies. I'm not talking primarily AACS, but rather HDCP which requires support by software and hardware in the form of OS, video card and monitor. HDCP isn't a Microsoft thing either; Intel developed it, and everyone's adopted it. HDCP will force downsampling of any format over 480i. AACS DRM by my understanding is a different and separate system.
Now, while the format wars are far from decided (I say we throw 'em in a ring, last man standing wins,) this doesn't affect Vista or it's DRM system in the least. Part of the point of HDCP DRM and similar was to be able to implement rather strict DRM regardless of the physical format or media it's delivered on.
Coupling this with the effectively mandatory WGA+WindowsUpdate, this also gives Microsoft the option of unilaterally applying DRM to any format they desire. Meaning they can downsample audio CDs for example, or trip up your line-in on your soundcard perhaps. People seem to forget that part of Vista's 'beauty' is the 'flexibility' of it's DRM system to be expanded as Microsoft sees fit.

 

[Nasty_Savage]

Other then for testing and eval purposes, no sane IT department would even THINK of deploying Vista until at least service pack 1. The [H] is looking at it from a pure gaming, stand alone perspective at BETA stage. That's what they are here for after all. I am building a new rig with Vista in mind, finally settling on a Conroe setup with Corsair 1066 Ram, just trying to decide on a Mobo. Everyone is decrying the joy and love of Windows XP, but lets not forget history. Windows 2000 out of the box and hot off the presses had LOTS of issues. XP's initial launch had a plague of problems too. Lots of older games required special compatability downloads, even games that ran ok on Windows 2000. Things sort of stabelized with SP1. But Win XP offered little to a SP3 based Win2k for a long time for a pure game rig. SP1 for XP started to turn the tide, but it took awhile to get that out.

If I were to predict what will happen for Vista after its release based on past events, it will go like this:

IT departments will deploy things sparingly, maybe giving the system to the execs who need the latest toys:

Box sales off the shelf will be less then a sweeping phenomina, though impressive. Many will say "WinXP does everything I need, I don't need Vista" and hold off. The sales will be primarily early adopters and enthusiasts and your run of the mill "i got to have it first' crowd.

Companies like Dell will offer choice deals for awhile with XP or Vista, especially for IT departments that do not have a deployment procedure or desire for that matter in place.

Eventually, XP will be obsolete as newer technology will not have drivers written for them. Case in point, as DX10 games come into prominence, the Direct X9 offerings will be few and far between within a year or two, there will be no point in releasing Directx9 cards anymore and the latest and greatest will have no choice but to upgrade.

It took almost a year and a half to two years for XP to mature to be what it is today. It will take probably at least that long for Vista to stabelize as well.

IF there's anything to gripe about, its how many issues that people are experiencing NOW in the Beta that get fixed or addressed at the time of launch. There are probably too many to list and probably it will follow suit (which as gamers, you should be used to by now). The product will be initially released UNPOLISHED. MMORPGS get released this way, off the shelf FPS games get released this way. All of it is the same. Its the software industry....this has been going on for years and will continue to be the case. Unless of course, we're talking Duke Nukem Forever where it will be forever for it to be released

Edit:// Final note: there are enough security and operating enhancements included in Vista that will not make this the Millenium Edition of the NT kernal.

 

[Strikemaster]

IF there's anything to gripe about, its how many issues that people are experiencing NOW in the Beta that get fixed or addressed at the time of launch. There are probably too many to list and probably it will follow suit (which as gamers, you should be used to by now). The product will be initially released UNPOLISHED. MMORPGS get released this way, off the shelf FPS games get released this way. All of it is the same. Its the software industry....this has been going on for years and will continue to be the case.

Edit:// Final note: there are enough security and operating enhancements included in Vista that will not make this the Millenium Edition of the NT kernal.

XP was released in 2001, a "consumer-friendly" OS based on the NT5 components of Windows 2000. At the time of release, "Longhorn" was already in development, and would be available by 2004. Uh huh. 6 years now, and I'll grant you the rough edges of a beta release, but this still stinks of a Millenium Edition. Take a stable release, add a whole ass-ton of barely functional "new and improved" and ship it. Vista has been pushed back again, and I'll bet dollars to donuts you won't see it until summer 2007. They need to gut it a few more times.

 

[UncaMilty]

To be entirely honest, I don't think Microsoft is going to get the uptake they're looking for. I've discussed this with quite a few folks previously about this, and the push-back from consumers - to say nothing of businesses - initially surprised even me. When you tell a consumer that they have to 'upgrade' their monitor, or buy a different one out of the box, they get very, very unhappy.

Your average home consumer will rarely look to upgrade their OS because it's a major hassle. Many of them don't want to bother with relatively straightforward upgrades like more memory or an additional hard drive/optical drive. And in my experience in IT, most corporate consumers are pretty much the same. They hate to tinker with a computer, they'd just as soon replace one as try and upgrade it (unless they did a lousy job of speccing them out in the first place, in which case they will ask the NEW IT director for recommendations).

Vista will primarily sell in new computers, much as any new version of Windows. Support hassles will thus be on the OEM's shoulders, as it usually is. In other words, unless the first shipping version is a major catastrophe, this'll be business as usual for Microsoft. Heck, some might argue that if it's a major catastrophe, it would be business as usual. MS has had some pretty dismal product rollouts after all.

Microsoft OSes are not really aimed at the techie. The typical audience either doesn't care or doesn't know much about technical aspects such as DRM. OEMs will put Vista on computers, and consumers will buy it and use it. Business as usual.

 

[Chris_Morley]

To be entirely honest, I don't think Microsoft is going to get the uptake they're looking for. I've discussed this with quite a few folks previously about this, and the push-back from consumers - to say nothing of businesses - initially surprised even me. When you tell a consumer that they have to 'upgrade' their monitor, or buy a different one out of the box, they get very, very unhappy.



Truth told, I rarely think of 1280x1024 and lower resolutions. I've only been looking at 1600x1200 and higher (sometimes MUCH higher.) Which requires minimum 512MB per card per Microsoft, in many instances. When you get into multihead workstations, you're talking about upwards of 2GB of memory on your video cards.
The other thing is that I have not had opportunity to properly test just how badly they broke OpenGL. The noises I have heard regarding it have been mixed - 'none,' '1.0 only,' '1.1 only,' and '1.0 to 1.2 only.' Now granted, that doesn't seem to be a huge consumer thing, but when you tell a consumer that they now have to play their favorite game at a much lower framerate or can't play it at all, they tend to get rather angry.



Okay, I definitely should have been clearer; apologies. I'm not talking primarily AACS, but rather HDCP which requires support by software and hardware in the form of OS, video card and monitor. HDCP isn't a Microsoft thing either; Intel developed it, and everyone's adopted it. HDCP will force downsampling of any format over 480i. AACS DRM by my understanding is a different and separate system.
Now, while the format wars are far from decided (I say we throw 'em in a ring, last man standing wins,) this doesn't affect Vista or it's DRM system in the least. Part of the point of HDCP DRM and similar was to be able to implement rather strict DRM regardless of the physical format or media it's delivered on.
Coupling this with the effectively mandatory WGA+WindowsUpdate, this also gives Microsoft the option of unilaterally applying DRM to any format they desire. Meaning they can downsample audio CDs for example, or trip up your line-in on your soundcard perhaps. People seem to forget that part of Vista's 'beauty' is the 'flexibility' of it's DRM system to be expanded as Microsoft sees fit.

I know you're looking at it from a high end workstation market, but I be realistic, you KNOW that has nothing to do with the consumer market.

HDCP will only force down-rez if the media has ICT (image constraint token). Major studios have agreed not to support this until AT LEAST 2010. This is not an out of the gate thing.

 

[jebo_4jc]

To be entirely honest, I don't think Microsoft is going to get the uptake they're looking for. I've discussed this with quite a few folks previously about this, and the push-back from consumers - to say nothing of businesses - initially surprised even me. When you tell a consumer that they have to 'upgrade' their monitor, or buy a different one out of the box, they get very, very unhappy.

Truth told, I rarely think of 1280x1024 and lower resolutions. I've only been looking at 1600x1200 and higher (sometimes MUCH higher.) Which requires minimum 512MB per card per Microsoft, in many instances. When you get into multihead workstations, you're talking about upwards of 2GB of memory on your video cards.
The other thing is that I have not had opportunity to properly test just how badly they broke OpenGL. The noises I have heard regarding it have been mixed - 'none,' '1.0 only,' '1.1 only,' and '1.0 to 1.2 only.' Now granted, that doesn't seem to be a huge consumer thing, but when you tell a consumer that they now have to play their favorite game at a much lower framerate or can't play it at all, they tend to get rather angry.

Okay, I definitely should have been clearer; apologies. I'm not talking primarily AACS, but rather HDCP which requires support by software and hardware in the form of OS, video card and monitor. HDCP isn't a Microsoft thing either; Intel developed it, and everyone's adopted it. HDCP will force downsampling of any format over 480i. AACS DRM by my understanding is a different and separate system.
Now, while the format wars are far from decided (I say we throw 'em in a ring, last man standing wins,) this doesn't affect Vista or it's DRM system in the least. Part of the point of HDCP DRM and similar was to be able to implement rather strict DRM regardless of the physical format or media it's delivered on.
Coupling this with the effectively mandatory WGA+WindowsUpdate, this also gives Microsoft the option of unilaterally applying DRM to any format they desire. Meaning they can downsample audio CDs for example, or trip up your line-in on your soundcard perhaps. People seem to forget that part of Vista's 'beauty' is the 'flexibility' of it's DRM system to be expanded as Microsoft sees fit.

This is a perfect example of somebody who has made up their mind to hate a certain product/company, and will find whatever arguments they can find to complain.
Let me address a couple of the chief complaints I hear about vista:

Aero takes too many system resources

The solution to this is so easy it's laughable: turn aero off. If you don't like it, or don't have enough PC muscle to run it, then your solution is obvious. Me personally, I'm excited about how it looks. I haven't installed the beta yet, so maybe it will run on my machine, and maybe it won't, but I'm excited that the GUI is getting a face lift. It's time for the GUI to take advantage of some of the processing power our CPUs, RAM, and video cards have at their disposal.

DRM will make you buy a new monitor

This restriction is a feature of the content studios, not Microsoft. You can complain about HDCP all you want, but what happens when you try to play HDCP enabled HD-DVDs on a Linux box? Apple has been silent about the subject, but you will likely need HDCP compliant monitors and video cards to play the Hi Def DVD formats on OSX as well. Trust me, I'm not happy about HDCP either, but I'm not going to complain to Microsoft about it....I'm going to complain to Sony, and the other studios. Microsoft decided that they want to enable the consumer to watch DRMed content on our PCs, and in order to do that, they have to adhere to the HDCP guidelines. The alternative is a complete lack of DRMed content on PCs. I'll take option #1, because if I want to watch DRMed content, I have no other choice, due to the decisions Sony and the other studios have made.

 

[Master [H]]

I'm working on a more indepth article, and Kyle asked for my thoughts. I gave them. If I had to buy a new OS when Vista comes out, I'd buy Vista. If I were looking at replacing XP on my desktop...I'd probably hold off. Frankly, I'm more into the Media Center improvements, so in fact I'll be replacing MCE 2005 immediately on my HTPC box. I'm already tweaking out the beta on it right now.

Hey, that's good to hear. I just got a little worried with the article being unusually short for the [H]. I don't think I'm interested in jumping to Vista either, but clearing up the misconceptions and such about Vista (like the six bazillion versions) would be great to have some thoughts on.

 

[TheDude05]

The solution to this is so easy it's laughable: turn aero off. If you don't like it, or don't have enough PC muscle to run it, then your solution is obvious. Me personally, I'm excited about how it looks. I haven't installed the beta yet, so maybe it will run on my machine, and maybe it won't, but I'm excited that the GUI is getting a face lift. It's time for the GUI to take advantage of some of the processing power our CPUs, RAM, and video cards have at their disposal.

That in itself is an awful arguement. Given time with qualified programmers Areo could run fairly efficiently, but M$ doesn't care and doesn't spend the time to actually code efficiently. I've said it once it and i'll say it again. Novell's XGL system, which is in alpha, eats between 85-100megs of memory. It does everything Areo does and more and is STILL more efficient. Couple that with Gnome that only uses roughly 100-150megs of memory and you have a fairly lightweight modern GUI. Just turning Areo off is ignoring a much bigger problem.

 

[beanman101283]

Wow, i don't think i've seen a thread with such long responses before.

This restriction is a feature of the content studios, not Microsoft. You can complain about HDCP all you want, but what happens when you try to play HDCP enabled HD-DVDs on a Linux box? Apple has been silent about the subject, but you will likely need HDCP compliant monitors and video cards to play the Hi Def DVD formats on OSX as well. Trust me, I'm not happy about HDCP either, but I'm not going to complain to Microsoft about it....I'm going to complain to Sony, and the other studios. Microsoft decided that they want to enable the consumer to watch DRMed content on our PCs, and in order to do that, they have to adhere to the HDCP guidelines. The alternative is a complete lack of DRMed content on PCs. I'll take option #1, because if I want to watch DRMed content, I have no other choice, due to the decisions Sony and the other studios have made.

Amen. I don't know why people blame Microsoft for this HDCP debacle. It's the content creators. And like Chris said, the CONTENT (meaning, the Blu Ray or HD DVD) has to have the Image Constraint Token in order for images to be shown at a lesser resolution and that's not going to happen right away. If somebody who has been using the betas has run into DRM issues with Vista, please speak up and explain what happened. So far all i've heard is a lot of FUD on this issue.

Keep in mind that the vast majority of consumers don't go out and upgrade their operating systems. Most people don't even know what an operating system is. The computer is a magic box that they use to do stuff. They get new versions of Windows when they buy a new computer. To be honest, i'd hate to have to be part of the marketing team at MS who has to convince normal people that their life would be so much better with Vista.

Things i like about Vista:

• Integrated desktop search. This will come in handy at work more than at home
• The tweaked explorer windows. I like being able to click the folder names in the address bar to go directly to them.
• Per program volume control
• Aero. I like eye candy, so sue me. And there's nothing wrong with utilizing the hardware i bought. If you can't run it, turn it off. I turn off XP's eye candy for people all the time to give them a small performance boost if they need it.
• Games explorer. Sounds like a good idea in theory. We'll see how it works out in reality
• Full GUI install
• The ability to use CDs, DVDs, or USB drives for RAID drivers!

Things i don't like:

• Removing "Start" from the Start button. I still have to explain to people what the Start button is.
• No more flyout menus in the Start menu. I don't like scrolling, so i can't stand having all the program folders appear integrated in the Start menu like that. If someone has found a way to change that, let me know
• Network explorer. I've played around with it quite a bit and can't figure it out yet.
• It sounds like the Program Files folder is going to be a lot more restricted than it is now. I have a feeling this will cause problems with older games that save screenshots to that folder, but we'll see
• UAP is annoying as hell but the 5465 beta that was just released is supposed to have tweaked this quite a bit. I haven't played with that yet.

I'm probably going to buy Vista when i build my next machine. So it'll really be a matter of how fast i can save up for all the parts in addition to Windows. I agree that it's disappointing that Vista isn't turning out to be the revolutionary upgrade that was originally promised, but i still think it's shaping up to be pretty solid.

 

[Optimus]

The reason the biggest features have been forgotten is that they do not outweigh the biggest losses.

Gains:
-DirectX 10 (Arguably faster than DX9, however, not proven better than that or OGL2)
-Extremely restrictive kernel level access
-Aerograss (Yes, I am comparing this feature to being on drugs, because that's about how helpful it is to accomplishing daily tasks. Think "Winblows tripping on LSD and thinking it's Mac OS.")
-Non "Widget^TM" widgets

Losses:
-OpenGL High Level Shaders (OpenGL 2.0, i.e., Doom 3, Quake 4, Enemy Territory: Quake Wars)
-DX8 and lower
-Ability to write kernel level programs without paying Microshaft to sign your code
-Privacy (Thanks to Palladium)
-Ability to rip MP3s without Microshaft receiving a report of that activity (Also, thanks to Palladium)
-Ability to use the internet without you PC constantly updating Microshaft with your Winblows Piracy Status (which is unlikely to change regardless)

The worst part is that most of the features of Microshaft Winblows Vis-blah are already available through free 3rd-party modifications. The only improvements not found elsewhere are DX10 (if you ignore the existence of OpenGL 2) and the restrictions to kernel level access (which can be bypassed by any spyware/"added value" company that can afford to buy a signature from Microshaft).

 

[Optimus]

I forgot about a loss

Losses:
-high resolution video (Thanks to HDCP)

 

[Chris_Morley]

I forgot about a loss

Losses:
-high resolution video (Thanks to HDCP)

You have media with ICT that you have personally seen down-rez? It bears repeating: thank Hollywood for this (if and when it actually happens) - if Vista didn't support these DRM methods you wouldn't be able to view HD protected content AT ALL.

 

[jebo_4jc]

I forgot about a loss

Losses:
-high resolution video (Thanks to HDCP)

For the love of Pete how are we "losing" high resolution video?

 

[TechLarry]

""It's Windows XP with a push-up bra, lip gloss and PMS.""

I don't care who ya are, that there's funny....

-Larry

 

[AreEss]

This is a perfect example of somebody who has made up their mind to hate a certain product/company, and will find whatever arguments they can find to complain.

Yes. Nevermind that these are the reactions I'm getting from others, universally. Mostly people who went to XP64 the day it came out, or rely on Exchange for their email despite constant problems.

The solution to this is so easy it's laughable: turn aero off. If you don't like it, or don't have enough PC muscle to run it, then your solution is obvious.

Ah, yes, another annoying multi-reboot step in the setup process. Which eliminates what's continually being cited as one of the "best" reasons to upgrade to Vista. Now there's a great idea - not. Especially since large portions of the affected users don't even know how to avoid being infected by spyware, much less change a complex option like that.

This restriction is a feature of the content studios, not Microsoft. You can complain about HDCP all you want, but what happens when you try to play HDCP enabled HD-DVDs on a Linux box? Apple has been silent about the subject, but you will likely need HDCP compliant monitors and video cards to play the Hi Def DVD formats on OSX as well.

At no point did I blame Microsoft for HDCP, and if you actually read what I said, you might actually understand that. Unfortunately, you seem hellbent on defending points you think you can address rather than points which were made. Shame, really, because this is something that needs to be discussed.
The fact remains that with HDCP, you have to buy a new monitor. A much more expensive monitor, in all likelihood. Now do you think Dell is going to include HDCP monitors with their systems? Of course not. Costs too much for a $500 system. Instead they keep shipping the same monitors as they are now. End result? Customer goes home, drops in the DVD from their HD Camcorder, and is left wondering why it looks like ass.
So what about Apple? Of course they're going to include the HDCP monitors on the iMacs and MacBooks. Suicidal not to. Besides, can't upgrade the monitor anyways. Might be an option, sure, but folks don't buy Apples like they buy PCs.
From the software side; nope, OSX isn't free of DRM, and I never said it was. However, I'm not familiar enough with OSX's setup to get into that particular area. As far as Vista goes, for all you know one day you'll wake up, and an auto update will have downsampled all your MP3s to 64Kbit. Which is the point I made; Vista's combination of confusing new hardware requirements, coupled with mandatory "WGA" and auto-updates, allows them to unilaterally apply DRM above and beyond HDCP including AACS, or whatever else they feel like.
The package just does not present a compelling case whatsoever for the consumer to switch. Most of the people that are going to push back are people who bought a Dell because they don't know how to do things themselves. Do you think these people know how to turn off Aero? Get real. These people are still mastering how to double-click. And you know what? They'll have every right to bitch about it, too. The eye-candy was intended for these exact same people. And they'll be told by retailers and support to upgrade to Vista. And then when performance sucks, they'll be told to upgrade their system, which they take to mean 'replace it.' They don't know how to install a video card and memory, much less the drivers to go with it.

The argument was made that it's great for HTPCs and people with HTPCs should get it right away. Okay, why? Let's say I get a brand new HTPC in 6 months with a Blu-ray drive and an ATI Radeon X1900 All-In-Wonder, and hook it up to a brand new bigscreen LCD. What does Vista offer me that XP does not? HDCP support? Been there since the X850's, and it's a driver function - I could do it in 2K if I wanted, just need player software to do it. Improved GUI? Yeah, I guess Aero's pretty. Improved performance? Nope, same hardware now does less. Easier to copy things around on the network? Nope - especially not if Microsoft decides to jump on the Broadcast Flag bandwagon.
So where is the genuinely compelling reason to shell out for Vista? I don't get the eye candy or improved functions with Basic, I have to get Home Premium or Ultimate Edition, which look like they're going to be about $280 and unobtainable by consumers, respectively. Before I have to get all the CableCard fun and games.

What about laptops? WHQL logo has a little secret; 16MB volatile cache? Not acceptable. Got to have 50MB non-volatile. Meaning a battery on the drive or slower NVRAM. Slower NVRAM appears to be the choice, since the throughput requirements are so low (16MB/s and 8MB/s.) Which means there's going to be serious issues with current hard drives and laptops, there. Can you see end-users upgrading the hard drives in their laptops? I certainly can't.
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=32404

Am I saying that Vista sucks? No. I'm saying that there is no compelling reason to upgrade to Vista yet, and that many customers are refusing to touch it in it's current planned state. That doesn't mean they won't later, only that they have no intention or interest in buying it at release. The advantages it offers over current releases (XP, XP64, S2K3) are long gone (WinFS is frequently cited versus S2K3) or simply nonexistant. So should everyone stay on 2K and XP? Can't - Microsoft will pull the plug on these OSes sooner rather than later. As soon as they possibly can, in fact. It costs a lot of money to keep releasing patches for them. But the average consumer would still be far better off waiting till at least SP1 to upgrade to Vista, if not longer.

 

[nigerian_businessman]

What about laptops? WHQL logo has a little secret; 16MB volatile cache? Not acceptable. Got to have 50MB non-volatile. Meaning a battery on the drive or slower NVRAM. Slower NVRAM appears to be the choice, since the throughput requirements are so low (16MB/s and 8MB/s.) Which means there's going to be serious issues with current hard drives and laptops, there. Can you see end-users upgrading the hard drives in their laptops? I certainly can't.
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=32404

Nothing wrong with the rest of your post, but I wouldn't take anything the Inquirer says as truth. They've proven time and time again to value sensationalism over fact checking. Besides, theres enough other stuff wrong with Vista, there's no need to quote a site that will make up stuff for hits.

 

[seanbear]

That's what they said about XP...

Its ALSO what they said about Millennium Edition and they were right. We'll see.

 

[Chris_Morley]

Yes. Nevermind that these are the reactions I'm getting from others, universally. Mostly people who went to XP64 the day it came out, or rely on Exchange for their email despite constant problems.



Ah, yes, another annoying multi-reboot step in the setup process. Which eliminates what's continually being cited as one of the "best" reasons to upgrade to Vista. Now there's a great idea - not. Especially since large portions of the affected users don't even know how to avoid being infected by spyware, much less change a complex option like that.



At no point did I blame Microsoft for HDCP, and if you actually read what I said, you might actually understand that. Unfortunately, you seem hellbent on defending points you think you can address rather than points which were made. Shame, really, because this is something that needs to be discussed.
The fact remains that with HDCP, you have to buy a new monitor. A much more expensive monitor, in all likelihood. Now do you think Dell is going to include HDCP monitors with their systems? Of course not. Costs too much for a $500 system. Instead they keep shipping the same monitors as they are now. End result? Customer goes home, drops in the DVD from their HD Camcorder, and is left wondering why it looks like ass.
So what about Apple? Of course they're going to include the HDCP monitors on the iMacs and MacBooks. Suicidal not to. Besides, can't upgrade the monitor anyways. Might be an option, sure, but folks don't buy Apples like they buy PCs.
From the software side; nope, OSX isn't free of DRM, and I never said it was. However, I'm not familiar enough with OSX's setup to get into that particular area. As far as Vista goes, for all you know one day you'll wake up, and an auto update will have downsampled all your MP3s to 64Kbit. Which is the point I made; Vista's combination of confusing new hardware requirements, coupled with mandatory "WGA" and auto-updates, allows them to unilaterally apply DRM above and beyond HDCP including AACS, or whatever else they feel like.
The package just does not present a compelling case whatsoever for the consumer to switch. Most of the people that are going to push back are people who bought a Dell because they don't know how to do things themselves. Do you think these people know how to turn off Aero? Get real. These people are still mastering how to double-click. And you know what? They'll have every right to bitch about it, too. The eye-candy was intended for these exact same people. And they'll be told by retailers and support to upgrade to Vista. And then when performance sucks, they'll be told to upgrade their system, which they take to mean 'replace it.' They don't know how to install a video card and memory, much less the drivers to go with it.

The argument was made that it's great for HTPCs and people with HTPCs should get it right away. Okay, why? Let's say I get a brand new HTPC in 6 months with a Blu-ray drive and an ATI Radeon X1900 All-In-Wonder, and hook it up to a brand new bigscreen LCD. What does Vista offer me that XP does not? HDCP support? Been there since the X850's, and it's a driver function - I could do it in 2K if I wanted, just need player software to do it. Improved GUI? Yeah, I guess Aero's pretty. Improved performance? Nope, same hardware now does less. Easier to copy things around on the network? Nope - especially not if Microsoft decides to jump on the Broadcast Flag bandwagon.
So where is the genuinely compelling reason to shell out for Vista? I don't get the eye candy or improved functions with Basic, I have to get Home Premium or Ultimate Edition, which look like they're going to be about $280 and unobtainable by consumers, respectively. Before I have to get all the CableCard fun and games.

What about laptops? WHQL logo has a little secret; 16MB volatile cache? Not acceptable. Got to have 50MB non-volatile. Meaning a battery on the drive or slower NVRAM. Slower NVRAM appears to be the choice, since the throughput requirements are so low (16MB/s and 8MB/s.) Which means there's going to be serious issues with current hard drives and laptops, there. Can you see end-users upgrading the hard drives in their laptops? I certainly can't.
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=32404

Am I saying that Vista sucks? No. I'm saying that there is no compelling reason to upgrade to Vista yet, and that many customers are refusing to touch it in it's current planned state. That doesn't mean they won't later, only that they have no intention or interest in buying it at release. The advantages it offers over current releases (XP, XP64, S2K3) are long gone (WinFS is frequently cited versus S2K3) or simply nonexistant. So should everyone stay on 2K and XP? Can't - Microsoft will pull the plug on these OSes sooner rather than later. As soon as they possibly can, in fact. It costs a lot of money to keep releasing patches for them. But the average consumer would still be far better off waiting till at least SP1 to upgrade to Vista, if not longer.

There are several misconceptions in your post, allow me to point out a few: HDCP may be in today's GPUs, but it requires the board manufacturersto include a hardware key to make it work.

Also, unless your HDV camera has integrated DRM functionality (how many times do I have to repeat ICT?), you will not see HD content you created down-rez'd. (Non of Sony's HDV solutions do that I'm aware of.)

Furthermore, Vista's Media Center will be much more versatile in several ways, OCUR support and cloning monitors at different resolutions (for Origen ae's x15e chassis with 7" touchscreen) are just two simple examples.

Also, I think your perception of the consumer market is skewed. Of course most end users are not going to upgrade their hard drives. Hell, most of them aren't even going to upgrade their OS! But what they will do is purchase a new system every couple of years. It's the way it works. An expected 234 million desktops will ship this year. The growth rate is 10-15% a year. Next year, when Vista comes out, those systems will carry it, and life will go on.

 

[Chris_Morley]

Its ALSO what they said about Millennium Edition and they were right. We'll see.

ME was a facelift for 98, not the best OS to begin with. Even if you think Vista is nothing but Aero, it still comes from the XP family tree, an arguably robust and stable platform.

 

[seanbear]

ME was a facelift for 98, not the best OS to begin with. Even if you think Vista is nothing but Aero, it still comes from the XP family tree, an arguably robust and stable platform.

Easy there, trigger! I was just saying there is a case for reserving judgement.I'm not hatin' on windows. Don't get your undies in a bundle.

 

[Josh_B]

Don't get your undies in a bundle.

I think it'd be worse if he got a bundle in his undies... who knows, it could happen.

 

[MagnusDredd]

I think my biggest concern however is this trend with each OS release to simplify things for the basic computer user. I feel like someday down the road that the ability of enthusiasts to do our tweaking will be removed and we'll all be stuck with some sort of "dumb terminal" or sophisticated console.

This has been something I have noticed for a while.

Why is it so prevalent in M$ culture to force wizards down our throats. There are things that could very easily be done with a control panel, but instead don't have the option for quick setup. With XP this is to the point where it begins to make me nauseous.

I use multiple other OSes, and while there are wizards that are available for Linux (CLI-based Slackware mostly), FreeBSD, and OSX; there is always the option not to have to page through annoyingly simplified descriptions on screen after screen and simply modify a setting somewhere or another. And it's generally very easy to find the control panel or config file to edit.

This is 1/2 of my complaint about the direction Windows has been moving in. It's getting dumber.

The other half is the part about DRM and the "trusted path" BS. In other words, I (the owner of the computer), is not "trusted" by the computer and must be kept from accessing the video signal, the audio signal, etc, etc

Today I was telling a friend about the fact that Trillian makes an amusing noise when you type "LOL". I set Sound Recorder to pull input from the audio output, and recorded the sound as it played. I converted it to MP3 and then sent it to my friend who listened, laughed, and suggested he might try Trillian out. I understand that this will not work under Vista, as the information posted by Microsoft has suggested that it won't.

If so this is exactly the kind of thing that makes Vista an absolute last resort OS for me.

 

[MagnusDredd]

ME was a facelift for 98, not the best OS to begin with. Even if you think Vista is nothing but Aero, it still comes from the XP family tree, an arguably robust and stable platform.

Vista was supposed to be an upgrade similar to the one from 2000 to XP, but simply incorporating a larger amount of feature-set additions.

This is in fact not what actually happened.

Echoing my earlier comments about Windows Vista being a train wreck, Microsoft group vice president Jim Allchin walked into chairman Bill Gates' office in July 2004 and told him that the software project was horribly behind schedule and would never get caught up. "It's not going to work," he said, according to a report in "The Wall Street Journal." The problem was that Vista was too complicated, and Microsoft's age-old methods for developing software just weren't going to be good enough.

Despite my repeated efforts at getting Microsoft to speak on record about the events of last year, when the company halted development of Windows Vista--then codenamed Longhorn--so it could completely start over, from scratch, the software giant and its PR firm has consistently railroaded me and prevented me from sitting down with people who are knowledgeable about what happened. However, I had been briefed informally about these events, referred to internally as "the reset."

So here's the good part folks. Vista does not in fact rely on a large codebase of highly tested code. And to think that the IT people in corporate america freaked because XP was basically the Win2k codebase with another 10 or 11 million lines of code added to it. So given that WinXP is comprised of about 40 million lines of programming, it was over 25% new code.

So, say that Vista weighs in at 50 million lines of code. How much of that is new? Certainly not all of it. But perhaps a larger percentage given the comments by Gates and Co., 50%, 60%, more? I have no idea. But it'll be interesting to see how it all works out.

However I will not be one of those people who jump in first. If in fact Vista does not turn out to "take over" my machine and my ability to do what I want is not limited, contrary to articles that quote Microsoft, I may move to it at some point. The other thing is that it cannot replace functional control panels and utilities with wizards, and stupify the user experience (I mean my God, the standard user is lame enough, must they make it worse).

If it's one of those things where it seriously inhibits things I use a computer for, doesn't accept non-signed drivers (I will use whatever hardware I want to in my machines), generally annoys the hell out of me, and Microsoft abuses their position again with regards to Direct X and basically makes it so that the Wintendo won't play the new games, I'll figure out a way to get ahold of it without them making money. This includes buying a used machine, or used copy of the OS.

 

[sparks]

Come on get over it...
Vista is a joke....rip off...nothing new
EVERYTHING that it was supposed to have has been taken out.
You have to pay a BIG chunk of money to get DX10 if you want to play games.
Thats the bottom line BIG MONEY for nothing.
Complete rewrite might have justified some of the cost.
NO WAY they are going to redo it all...patches and hacks to get it to work thats it.
to do what?
Whoooooooo fancy desktop...whoooooooooo call your mac friend and say yep I am gay too.

Restrictive access to protect us?
that was in 2000 beta but was taken out because of software companies complaining that they could not protect themselves by writing stuff all over the registry and in hidden files and folders on your drives...MS removed it and you system was f'd because of it....thanks MS go big business....you control my machine not me...

Any statements to what it has over XP, well if you look they are simple patches to xp but instead of a free service pack its time for more money.
$250 rip off for nothing.

advertise everything deliver nothing SOUNDS LIKE EA

well its just like almost all software companies today, big bucks so we can beta their product and when its final (IF its ever final we don't even have what we purchased) vista is a joke
like a lot of people say windows XP ME

wonder if it will ever be that good.

I hate microsoft, I really think I just hate the software industy as a whole and MS is at the top of the barrel. YEP IT FLOATS

sparks

 

[Lamont Cranston]

Come on get over it...
Vista is a joke....rip off...nothing new

I hate microsoft, I really think I just hate the software industy as a whole and MS is at the top of the barrel. YEP IT FLOATS

sparks

Im willing to bet if RedHat or some other company had been making the most common desktop OS for the past 20 years that you would hate them too......

Its funny how people gripe about about the price of things but still pay it....a good example is the price of gasoline...if you dont like it, dont buy it......eventually if enough people dont then the price goes down.......additionally give it time and the price of the OS will go down too...

People need to stop being so negative, embrace what is good and enjoy it rather than brood about the bad....sheesh

 

[Gatticus]

People need cars to go to work so they have to pay the gas prices. And when has Microsoft ever lowered the price on an OS? It won't happen, ever. The only reason I will get Vista is if there are some compelling DX10 games. I've already got a 3D desktop in Ubuntu with XGL.

 

[CyclopsSlayer]

I have had some hands on with Vista, and while it is pretty I was left feeling very Ho Hum.
People used to complain that XP was a Bloatware, a Resource Hog, just wait until they get a look at Vista. They go so far to make it user friendly that it actually becomes unfriendly as it tries to drag you where it thinks you want to go.

How they can justify an OS that basically cleaves off your first gig of ram and the first 128Mb of your video ram and then try and declare this the gaming friendly OS?
And then demands a hardware specific upgrade if you want DX10 features?

Nothing I have so far seen justifies the 'upgrade'. Improved 64bit is nice but I don't render video anywhere near enough for that to even figure in any decisions, are there any other improvemnets from the 64bit enhancements?
Maybe somewhere down the road it will become vital, especially if DX10 becomes dominant, but until then why pay for this, and maybe also for the larger system and video ram/GPU this will want?

For now I am just saying No. But will wait and see...

 

[-(Xyphox)-]

Its ALSO what they said about Millennium Edition and they were right. We'll see.

ME *shivers*
Worst OS ever made

 

[Chris_Morley]

I have had some hands on with Vista, and while it is pretty I was left feeling very Ho Hum.
People used to complain that XP was a Bloatware, a Resource Hog, just wait until they get a look at Vista. They go so far to make it user friendly that it actually becomes unfriendly as it tries to drag you where it thinks you want to go.

How they can justify an OS that basically cleaves off your first gig of ram and the first 128Mb of your video ram and then try and declare this the gaming friendly OS?
And then demands a hardware specific upgrade if you want DX10 features?

Nothing I have so far seen justifies the 'upgrade'. Improved 64bit is nice but I don't render video anywhere near enough for that to even figure in any decisions, are there any other improvemnets from the 64bit enhancements?
Maybe somewhere down the road it will become vital, especially if DX10 becomes dominant, but until then why pay for this, and maybe also for the larger system and video ram/GPU this will want?

For now I am just saying No. But will wait and see...

Easy - it's called SuperFetch, and it uses the RAM you have available. If Windows is able to intelligently preload files that you may need (and indeed, it's been talked about widely), and is able to quickly clear the ones you don't need to make room for more, the net result should be a faster experience. It's not bloat in that case.

http://www.windowsitpro.com/Article/ArticleID/48085/48085.html?Ad=1

 

[Josh_B]

Easy - it's called SuperFetch, and it uses the RAM you have available. If Windows is able to intelligently preload files that you may need (and indeed, it's been talked about widely), and is able to quickly clear the ones you don't need to make room for more, the net result should be a faster experience. It's not bloat in that case.

http://www.windowsitpro.com/Article/ArticleID/48085/48085.html?Ad=1

The same behaviour is part of the Linux kernel... it caches stuff intelligently although to those who don't know, it looks like a major memory leak!