Vista SP1 Released to Manufacturing 397
Reverend Ninja writes "According to the Windows Vista team blog, Windows Vista SP1 has been released to manufacturing. It appears we'll have to wait until mid-March to play with it though, as the team cites that they want everyone to have a 'great install experience'. 'Service Pack 1 brings new improvements that are based on feedback we heard from our customers. It further improves the reliability and performance of Windows Vista. The information we collect thanks to tools like the Customer Experience Improvement Program, Online Crash Analysis, and Windows Error Reporting help us learn about where and when customers are having issues with Windows Vista and the applications that run on it. Since these issues have a direct impact on our customers' experiences, we've invested time and energy to make this better. While Windows Vista Service Pack 1 is an important milestone, we will continue to invest in the continuous improvement process.'"
I'm tired of the euphemisms (Score:3, Insightful)
Come off it already. "great install experience" ... hey, its not a f*cking condo timeshare!
And just to show that I'm not reserving my spleen for venting on Microsoft, This is as stupid as the naming conventions that have taken over in the open-source world, calling different versions by weird names,, like 'Gutsy Gibbon'.
Hard Evidence Of Vista Poor Sales and Performance? (Score:3, Insightful)
Sales are actually worse than previous Windows versions?
Actual poor performance on systems that actually meet the minimum requirements?
Problems with apps or games that weren't fixed with updates?
Security or virus problems?
Or any of the seemingly million other problems the operating system is claimed to have?
Re:I'm tired of the euphemisms (Score:5, Insightful)
So how many 5 year old bugs fixed in SP1? (Score:3, Insightful)
A sprig of parsely on a steaming turd (Score:3, Insightful)
It's common for people to wait for the first service pack before moving to a new software platform (not just Microsoft's), and I've seen in their marketing they've been attempting to address the "myth" (http://www.microsoft.com/australia/vistafacts/fact.aspx [microsoft.com]) that Vista won't be ready until SP1.
I'm predicting that SP1 will just be a bunch of already released hotfixes bundled together and won't do much to cover up the stench of excrement the product exudes.
I'm sorry that this is slightly flamebait, but I don't like Microsoft's products that much and I'm still bitter that my employer forced me to install Vista on my work laptop.
Re:I'm tired of the euphemisms (Score:5, Insightful)
Now can we all please just shut up about it? (Score:5, Insightful)
Vista's maturing, and as it does it'll become a better operating system, and everyone will benefit, even if they don't use Vista. Microsoft still competes largely on the basis of being a de facto standard. Vista's release has caused them to lose this edge somewhat, and the window has opened for their competition, who compete mostly on features, to get a little lazy (Leopard, anyone?). Microsoft competing more vigorously on their stale plank, assuming they don't magically find traction they've been unable to find for years, can't do anything but help the products on the market.
Okay, now it's time to cue the million responses calling me a Microsoft shill. Suggested topics: "There really was no reason to upgrade from 2k to XP, I still use 2k just fine," "Vista is beyond repair because of DRM," and "Vista is way more broken than Leopard, how dare you rip on OS X."
Re:Question for dev team (Score:5, Insightful)
3 different programs for analyzing crashes? (Score:5, Insightful)
For a company so adept at spinning information into pro-MS propaganda (much like any big company, mind you), you would think that they would do a better job of obfuscating the fact that they have at least 3 different channels for collecting program crash information!
Re:Now can we all please just shut up about it? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Removed the DRM? (Score:3, Insightful)
All DRM tries to do is prevent the user from doing stuff, but can't possibly be successful due to the analog hole [wikipedia.org].
Re:Now can we all please just shut up about it? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:It's out. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:3 different programs for analyzing crashes? (Score:3, Insightful)
Online Crash Analysis takes you to the crash analysis site on reboot - and a plain English explanation of the problem and any known fixes. It is one reason why the BSOD jokes on Slashdot have gone stale.
Re:Now can we all please just shut up about it? (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm no software multi-billionaire but I don't really see an excuse for Vista having so many warts and rough edges, especially considering that it brings little new to the table. Microsoft has billions of dollars, they're not really beholden to anyone. If Vista really needed another year or two of polishing, why did they release early? Why couldn't they have brought a finished product to the market?
If a job's worth doing, it's worth doing right. If it's not worth doing right, it's probably a Microsoft product.
Re:I'm tired of the euphemisms (Score:3, Insightful)
Also agreed that theres no particular purpose for such strange naming notions beyond baring ones excessive elitism to the wide world.
Re:Now can we all please just shut up about it? (Score:5, Insightful)
Before I reinstalled XP, I installed Ubuntu to try to run Linux on the desktop again. After I got my video cards and monitors working, and finally got Compiz to function properly, I was quite impressed by the performance. Even with the effects enabled, the system was functional and responsive under load. I suspect this can be attributed to a properly designed kernel. Additionally, the Ubuntu people get a lot right, like the installation procedure (done from the Live CD, I browsed the internet while it installed), non-free driver installation and package management. Multiple monitor support was a total PITA to set up, but worked as I would have expected once configured. Unfortunately, Compiz doesn't work properly with xinerama so I reluctantly switched back to XP.
Vista isn't like the early days of XP at all. I switched to XP before SP1 from 2k, and while the performance was slightly lower, I thought that the additional application compatibility was worth it. In other words, where XP ran the software I was used to using on 95 and 98 better than 2k, Vista doesn't seem to run anything better than XP. Indeed, at this point I think it would be considerably easier to transition to Ubuntu than to Vista, so long as the majority of the desktop applications you use regularly are free software, and you don't have a nonstandard (more than 1 graphics card) monitor configuration.
Re:I'm tired of the euphemisms (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:3 different programs for analyzing crashes? (Score:3, Insightful)
WER handles the reporting of the errors (formerly called Dr. Watson)
OCA handles the analysis of the reports, and informs the user of the results (Vista integrated this into the WER interface)
CEIP reports usability data from certain applications, such as Windows Live Messenger, and doesn't collect program crash info.
You talk about "pro-MS" propaganda, but you're the one desperately searching for things to shit on.
no euphemism.. an Experience. (Score:3, Insightful)
watch http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/persuaders/view/ [pbs.org] for a fairly interesting docu PBS did on it (warning: the fact that the people that are being interviewed take their jobs seriously is unnerving as well as a partial explanation of why and how they can keep coming up with stuff like it.)
Re:Now can we all please just shut up about it? (Score:4, Insightful)
That's appropriate praise for an experimental operating system that a few grad students have been hacking on for the last year or so.
What would it say about Toyota if its fans were reduced to saying things like "that new Camry runs pretty good now!"
Re:Performance. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:50% Faster? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Now can we all please just shut up about it? (Score:5, Insightful)
XP was originally bashed for it's horrible color schemes. Vista is bashed because it has across the board decrease in performance. Game framerates are ~10-20% slower, file operations can be ridiculously slower, the system takes longer to boot compared to XP, vista can take as long to come out of sleep as it takes to boot up, and the worthless and annoying UAC, which is a poor copy of what is done so much better and with more logic on Kubuntu or OSX.
I tried Vista for 6 weeks, found that it didn't offer anything much better than what was in XP, was frustrated with it's performance hit, so I got rid of it. I don't think it is terribly horrible OS, but really, what does it offer?
Ok, so here is a question for Vista fans: What do you find good in Vista, and what do you like about Vista? I'm not trolling, but I never found anything of value in it, so I am just curious what is in Vista that you like better than in XP?
Re:Now can we all please just shut up about it? (Score:2, Insightful)
Every time Microsoft releases a "Service Pack", tech support employess
from almost every software and hardware vendor in the industry die a little
inside. For they know the coming days could hold many problematic calls
they can do anothing about. Because it was a Windows patch that broke
whatever it is the poor tech support guy supports.
This is especially prevalent with calls to anti-virus companies from people
who think they are infected, or who have completely hosed computers and
want someone to blame. I cannot count how many times I have heard, "but it
was an update from Microsoft, how could it have done this?"..."No, it must be a virus".
At which point, I just direct them to the MSKB article that describes their exact
symptoms and how, if possible, to fix it.
IT was the same way when I worked in support at a medical facility. Users would complain that
they couldn'y use some of their fonts. And that their computer must be broken. These are just two of MANY examples of how MS's crappy update system is a giant headache for sysadmins, support techies, and users everywhere.
Hey MS, how about opening some of that code so we can look at it and decide if it's going to break our computers before you call it critical, and force it onto everyone's PC.
RAnt OVer
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:50% Faster? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I'm tired of the euphemisms (Score:1, Insightful)
And that would be different then XP not playing DVDs normally how? Playing HD content should not require DRM and if MS had opposed I am sure that it would be dropped or downplayed in the way CSS was. Including DRM is a huge flaw when it is embedded in the OS because it adds an extra layer of failure much as WGA does. In an OS that is to be used by governments as well as the home user, adding DRM adds numerous flaws that can be security risks. http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,135814-c,windowsbugs/article.html [pcworld.com] not to mention that different hardware changes can cause WGA or DRM failures. Remember the Sony Rootkit? That is more or less the level of insecurity you get when you build an OS around DRM because DRM by nature must be secret and closed. If MS really wants to be evil and include DRM the least they could do is embed it in an application rather then the entire OS (IE: having Windows Explorer not being able to copy DRMed files and WMP not being able to play them) it would be more secure and the OS might not break (as much). As for Vista being a media center, I really don't see how that works, when you have to pay $700+ for a computer that runs Vista and it isn't as sluggish along with silent that's a large amount of money for a computer when you can get a $300 rig for XP/Linux to do the exact same thing, not to mention due to DRM you need a better video card to play "protected content". XP or Linux can do the same job with less resources and with Linux can be controlled remotely (XP/Vista probably can too with an addon). The only thing about Linux is having to installed "restricted" packages which if you choose your distro carefully, many of them can already be enabled with the company paying for them all for a price cheaper then XP. As for the DOS problem, if you can just not run them in full-screen I don't see how security comes into play with this, that would be a reason if they wouldn't play but just not enabling full screen, that's just a flaw.
Re:I'm tired of the euphemisms (Score:5, Insightful)
Simple fix - MS puts up a dialog box that says, "The manufacturer of this disk has denied permission for this disk to be played on your system. Please contact the disk's manufacturer for more information." and points the finger of responsibility for this crap right back at the studios. MS is already taking heat for the new DRM as it is - I for one won't be running Vista as long as it has that infernal DRM functionality on it, and I certainly am not the only one. It's the operating system's job to manage and abstract the hardware for use by the programs the user chooses to run on the system, not pass moral judgement on said user or his system on behalf of some other business entity. I refuse to accommodate one that does. Besides, upgrading from XP to Vista would require me to shell out several hundred dollars in unnecessary hardware just to be able watch HD content in its native resolution on my current system, on top of the purchase price of the OS itself. No thanks.
Re:I'm tired of the euphemisms (Score:4, Insightful)
The only slow parts so far have been installing it (the better part of an hour) and using the archive manager packaged with it (It would estimate the remaining time for extracting a 200MB archive to be several hours. Installing 7-zip got around that.)
Re:I'm tired of the euphemisms (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Removed the DRM? (Score:2, Insightful)
You've either swallowed the line bait, hook and sinker, or you're an astroturfer. I'm going to apply Hanlon's razor and go with the former, assuming stupidity rather than malice, but still... sheesh. Lay of the crack, man, it's not good for your brain.