Beta 2 Impressions

As a memeber of the general public just dying for the general release of
Beta 2, I'm a little concerned that the well respected Paul Thurrott isn't
too impressed with the current build of Beta 2. As most of you guys are
priviliged to be using it now I'd be interested to see if you agree with his
latest comments.

Marco wrote:
> As a memeber of the general public just dying for the general release of
> Beta 2, I'm a little concerned that the well respected Paul Thurrott isn't
> too impressed with the current build of Beta 2. As most of you guys are
> priviliged to be using it now I'd be interested to see if you agree with his
> latest comments.
>
>
Well...it's like this. What exactly are the goals of Vista? I suppose if
one could be privy to that answer, one could then understand what has
been achieved toward that goal. But not knowing the goals....
However most of us, no matter how important we think we are and where we
are placed in the great food chain that is MS, don't really have a clear
idea or understanding of exactly what it is that Vista is trying to be.
Therein lies the problem. Those of us who where in on the development of
95-98, 2k-XP, could clearly see certain final goals that we wanted to
achieve and that made them achievable. Vista on the other hand,
sometimes seems to be a ship without a captain and no port in sight.
Trying to look good, yet only skin deep.
It seems as if something that had become simpler to use over the years,
as in 95 to xp, is now more complex and far less satisfying. It's been
years in the making, yet works like it's only months old. The 'insiders"
all say, "it'll be much better when it's RTM", but those of us with a
lot of beta experience know the foundation and fundamentals are already
in stone and will not change that much, if at all.
In the end, I suppose we will accept it as usable, if not likable. Then
again, we always have xp, which just might turn out to be the "great one".
Just my thoughts and experience.
Frank

Well, yeah, I agree, its slow, a little bit buggy, UAC is annoying, I was
hoping for a wow factor on Install Time. I wish there was better hardware
support, Explorer layout still needs improvements, Networking is a mind
maze, a lot of the networking windows could definitely do with some
consolidation. But, its a major step up from BETA 1, if the Windows Team
never bothered with interim builds, 5384/BETA 2 would seem more favorable
journalist and testers eyes, but the interim releases have made it seem
incremental.

I am hoping to changes in interim builds and RC1 going forward, I want to
see more of my bugs fixed.
--
--
Andre
Windows Connected | http://www.windowsconnected.com
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta

"Marco" <mac@iinetdotnetdot.au> wrote in message
news:OX$l3LHhGHA.4708@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> As a memeber of the general public just dying for the general release of
> Beta 2, I'm a little concerned that the well respected Paul Thurrott isn't
> too impressed with the current build of Beta 2. As most of you guys are
> priviliged to be using it now I'd be interested to see if you agree with
> his latest comments.
>

Well I guess I"ll just have to wait till it's available then make up my own
mind. It doesn't sound like I"m going to be able to say "WOW" but it's going
to be the "standard" OS for millions of people around the world within a
couple of years and whether we like it or not we're going to have to live
with it. I remember the public XP Beta and at the time being impressed. XP
has come a long way since then so I guess Vista will develop and mature as
well in time.

So although my enthusiasm has has been tempered by people's comments...I
still can't wait. Come on Microsoft we're dying out here!

"Andre Da Costa [Extended64]" <andred25@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uHISuiHhGHA.3296@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Well, yeah, I agree, its slow, a little bit buggy, UAC is annoying, I was
> hoping for a wow factor on Install Time. I wish there was better hardware
> support, Explorer layout still needs improvements, Networking is a mind
> maze, a lot of the networking windows could definitely do with some
> consolidation. But, its a major step up from BETA 1, if the Windows Team
> never bothered with interim builds, 5384/BETA 2 would seem more favorable
> journalist and testers eyes, but the interim releases have made it seem
> incremental.
>
> I am hoping to changes in interim builds and RC1 going forward, I want to
> see more of my bugs fixed.
> --
> --
> Andre
> Windows Connected | http://www.windowsconnected.com
> Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
> Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
> http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
>
> "Marco" <mac@iinetdotnetdot.au> wrote in message
> news:OX$l3LHhGHA.4708@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> As a memeber of the general public just dying for the general release of
>> Beta 2, I'm a little concerned that the well respected Paul Thurrott
>> isn't too impressed with the current build of Beta 2. As most of you guys
>> are priviliged to be using it now I'd be interested to see if you agree
>> with his latest comments.
>>
>
>

"Marco" <mac@iinetdotnetdot.au> wrote in message
news:OX$l3LHhGHA.4708@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> As a memeber of the general public just dying for the general release of
> Beta 2, I'm a little concerned that the well respected Paul Thurrott isn't
> too impressed with the current build of Beta 2. As most of you guys are
> priviliged to be using it now I'd be interested to see if you agree with
> his latest comments.
>


The more I read his Vista artices he's a major DORK!!

Most of the comments and views about Vista fall into a few categories:



1.. Things that don't work right
2.. Overall look and feel
3.. Things that have changed
4.. New features
Category 1 is expected since it's still in Beta. As an example, in beta
5308 selecting a different icon for desktop icons did not work correctly.
That is fixed in 5384. The list here is long.



Category 2, look and feel is somewhat subjective. Vista is clearly
different. Some like it, some hate it. Opinions here are like that body
part, everybody's got one.



For many of the common things I do, Vista requires more keystrokes or mouse
clicks than previous versions of Windows. Windows Explorer is still a mess
and will probably change.



Category 3, the things that have changed may be a problem area. The new UAC
is a pain for most experienced users and most of these folks will
immediately look for the way to turn it completely off.



Some features common to XP are either gone, not available, or reduced in
options. Backup is one example. In XP you had many choices. In Vista,
very few.



Category 4 is where MS will likely focus for sales. For me, this area is
very weak as it includes many things I neither need, want, or things I
already have.



The current betas are very large installs taking 7 GB or more of disk space.
This will go down in the final, but we really don't know how much.



Once we get to RTM will see how the above list shapes up.



Ed





"Marco" <mac@iinetdotnetdot.au> wrote in message
news:OX$l3LHhGHA.4708@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> As a memeber of the general public just dying for the general release of
> Beta 2, I'm a little concerned that the well respected Paul Thurrott isn't
> too impressed with the current build of Beta 2. As most of you guys are
> priviliged to be using it now I'd be interested to see if you agree with
> his latest comments.
>

> the well respected Paul Thurrott

Wow, it's been a while I've seen that in a sentence... :-/

The goal to me is clear... get a fresh start and try to do it right.

The graphic architecture in windows is designed for non HW accelerated 2d processing.
the 3d driver model is slapped on top and can barely take any regular use in desktop mode.
The driver model in XP is also weak and inefficient, and the multimedia API is laughable.
Vista is supposed to fix that so the other team have solid ground to build on.
For example the desktop team can get a look an feel that can match OSX, where windows dont tear when moving
and the mouse got smooth motion... Little cosmetic details, that deliver a huge perception diference.
(Anyone using an Amiga with its 60hz mouse sync refresh was laughting hard, or sobbing, when ever they saw a windows cursor in
motion)
In a way Vista is very inspired by existing and past technology and design,
so you could measure Vista on how it made windows catch-up/surpase OSX technology.

The way its been layed out, Vista is really a long list of Fix and changes to finaly unlock and maximize the existing
PC HW potential and open it up for the future.

Stephan



"Frank" <fb@nospamm.cmm> wrote in message news:Ov3TceHhGHA.1612@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Marco wrote:
>> As a memeber of the general public just dying for the general release of Beta 2, I'm a little concerned that the well respected
>> Paul Thurrott isn't too impressed with the current build of Beta 2. As most of you guys are priviliged to be using it now I'd be
>> interested to see if you agree with his latest comments.
> Well...it's like this. What exactly are the goals of Vista? I suppose if one could be privy to that answer, one could then
> understand what has been achieved toward that goal. But not knowing the goals....
> However most of us, no matter how important we think we are and where we are placed in the great food chain that is MS, don't
> really have a clear idea or understanding of exactly what it is that Vista is trying to be.
> Therein lies the problem. Those of us who where in on the development of 95-98, 2k-XP, could clearly see certain final goals that
> we wanted to achieve and that made them achievable. Vista on the other hand, sometimes seems to be a ship without a captain and no
> port in sight. Trying to look good, yet only skin deep.
> It seems as if something that had become simpler to use over the years, as in 95 to xp, is now more complex and far less
> satisfying. It's been years in the making, yet works like it's only months old. The 'insiders" all say, "it'll be much better when
> it's RTM", but those of us with a lot of beta experience know the foundation and fundamentals are already in stone and will not
> change that much, if at all.
> In the end, I suppose we will accept it as usable, if not likable. Then again, we always have xp, which just might turn out to be
> the "great one".
> Just my thoughts and experience.
> Frank

Hi Stephan,

Stephan Schaem wrote:
> The goal to me is clear... get a fresh start and try to do it right.

I wish!

> The graphic architecture in windows is designed for non HW accelerated 2d processing.

Yes, but the graphics are just surface tinsel to try and impress home
users; this isn't a fresh start, it's just NT/2000/XP with a silly front
end and a slew of annoying background processes - most of which are a
complete waste of time. The IPv6 is a true step forward. The setup
program is also a step forward (although most people will never see
it!), hardware support looks good too, but it's not "fresh start" not by
a long way.

--
Gerry Hickman (London UK)

Hi Frank,

> However most of us, no matter how important we think we are and where we
> are placed in the great food chain that is MS, don't really have a clear
> idea or understanding of exactly what it is that Vista is trying to be.

Nor do Microsoft! (but see below)

The way I see it is that computers and Windows have become a bit like
mobile phones, cars and TVs. No one outside the big corporate IT
departments care about the technical details anymore, it's all about
what color it is, and whether it has an "elegant sliding action". The
selling points are all about lifestyles and HDTV.

But in a way Microsoft are right; they've seen the commodity market and
are addressing it.

--
Gerry Hickman (London UK)