Vista - History and Where are we Now?

I find it very frustrating when reading this thread that almost every
criticism of Vista is seen as some sort of threat and illicits a quite
often rude thoughtless response from Vista's proponents. So first I
thought I'd recap on the Windows upgrades history then see how Vista
stacks up to it's predecessors and then invite the Vista proponents to
educate me on the benefits of this upgrade.

How can any non-novice user regardless of experience level be satisfied
with Vista and tout it as a major upgrade? The only answers I can come
up with are A) I don't understand the benefits or B) My expectations are
above those of my fellow users.

I have been working with Windows since the first version of Windows 1.0
was released in the mid-eighties and before that on DOS/PCM OS's so I
feel qualified to comment on improvements and upgrade experiences. With
a few notable exceptions each successive incarnation has brought
significant benefits to users and businesses alike.

Windows 1.0
Card file and Calculator

Windows 2.0
Excel, Word and Pagemaker DTP

Windows 3.0
Multi Tasking, Virtual Memory, VGA, Multi Media Extensions Add-On,
SoundBlaster

Windows 3.1
True Type scalable fonts,

Windows for Workgroups 3.11
Integrated Multimedia, peer to peer networking, full support for 386
processors

Windows 95
Consumer Version of NT 3.1, Improved Desktop and Menu System, Win32 API
subset

Windows 95 OSR 2.0-2.5
Full FAT32, Internet Expolorer, USB Support, greater reliability

Windows 98
Better hardware support - HDD's, USB, Internet connection sharing,
greater stability.

Windows 2000 Greater stability, Active Directory Support, directX for NT
Kernal

Windows Millennium Edition (ME)System Restore, Movie Maker

Windows XP (See Win 2000)New User Interface, NTFS, proper 32bit API,
based on Windows NT5, Windows Firewall

Windows Vista Aero Interface

That's my history of Windows upgrades (with a little help from Wiki),
non of the upgrade paths was totally trouble free and there is obviously
a learning curve when desktops and UI's change however I do still
expect some real benefits for my $$$.

Win 1.0 was fun and the move to Win 2.0 allowed me to do some serious
work especially Excel and Pagemaker. Windows 3.0 brought better
resolutions and multitasking painfully slow but it was a benefit. The
Multimedia extensions allowed me to use a CD ROM and Soundblaster that
coupled with a Canon RC-250 to create multimedia apps and presentations.

The step up to Windows for Workgroups 3.11 really launched the peer to
peer small office network and while frustrating and often slow it was a
great affordable alternative to sneaker net.

Windows 95 was buggy and prone to too many BSD's however the new UI was
more logical and a faster to access the applications you required. The
Win32 bit API was a bit of a bodge job(think thunking) but it did feel
faster and slicker than 3.11. The OSR releases were a god send and
addressed many of the stability issues.

Windows 98 in someways mirrored 95 insomuch as the second edition was
the one to get improving stability no end. However USB support,
internet connectivity, support for large hard disks were all real
benefits for this version. This was the Windows version that put DOS
well and truely on the sidelines.

Windows ME was a complete disaster for me and perhaps any others
unfortunate to have to use it. Stability seemed to take a step
backwards which seemed illogical considering it was essentially a tarted
up 98SE.

Windows 2000 a godsend, not to brilliant on the initial driver support
but after 98SE this was a significantly more stable platform. Often
forgotten Windows 2000 in workstation or server versions was Microsoft's
biggest advance in O/S's. Not all was rosy with this product and was
left all but defenseless against all types of virus and malware threats
but robust 3rd party solutions were available to take care of that.

Windows XP was the pretty version of Win 2000 for general consumption
and this was good for users of both versions as drivers were for the
most part interchangable, this motivated consumer device manufacturers
who had not written drivers for 2000 to now do so. To be honest I
preferred 2000 until general machine specs were up to XP's resource
hogging requirements but on the whole a very good release.

Enter Windows Vista
Aero interface and that's about it. In it's current form I do not
perceive UAC as a benefit. Initially I thought Vista would secure my
system and negate the need for 3rd party AV/AS products which would be a
great step forward, that promise was conveniently dropped by release
time. Much of what's good in XP has gone or is broken so can somebody
(preferably a power user or admin)who thinks Vista is a good upgrade
please list out it's benefits which I could use to convince my clients
to move from XP?

One thing, and one thing alone, makes Vista stand out for me.

It is *****FINALLY***** going to force programmers to do their job
correctly. Because of this, we will all see a tremendous benefit in about 2
years, when the older programs - that kinda/sorta work - are finally laid to
rest.

It's about time!

--


Regards,

Richard Urban MVP
Microsoft Windows Shell/User


"SysAdminTH" <notarealaddress@amuro.net> wrote in message
news:OMPsIoIZHHA.3256@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I find it very frustrating when reading this thread that almost every
> criticism of Vista is seen as some sort of threat and illicits a quite
> often rude thoughtless response from Vista's proponents. So first I
> thought I'd recap on the Windows upgrades history then see how Vista
> stacks up to it's predecessors and then invite the Vista proponents to
> educate me on the benefits of this upgrade.
>
> How can any non-novice user regardless of experience level be satisfied
> with Vista and tout it as a major upgrade? The only answers I can come
> up with are A) I don't understand the benefits or B) My expectations are
> above those of my fellow users.
>
> I have been working with Windows since the first version of Windows 1.0
> was released in the mid-eighties and before that on DOS/PCM OS's so I
> feel qualified to comment on improvements and upgrade experiences. With
> a few notable exceptions each successive incarnation has brought
> significant benefits to users and businesses alike.
>
> Windows 1.0
> Card file and Calculator
>
> Windows 2.0
> Excel, Word and Pagemaker DTP
>
> Windows 3.0
> Multi Tasking, Virtual Memory, VGA, Multi Media Extensions Add-On,
> SoundBlaster
>
> Windows 3.1
> True Type scalable fonts,
>
> Windows for Workgroups 3.11
> Integrated Multimedia, peer to peer networking, full support for 386
> processors
>
> Windows 95
> Consumer Version of NT 3.1, Improved Desktop and Menu System, Win32 API
> subset
>
> Windows 95 OSR 2.0-2.5
> Full FAT32, Internet Expolorer, USB Support, greater reliability
>
> Windows 98
> Better hardware support - HDD's, USB, Internet connection sharing,
> greater stability.
>
> Windows 2000 Greater stability, Active Directory Support, directX for NT
> Kernal
>
> Windows Millennium Edition (ME)System Restore, Movie Maker
>
> Windows XP (See Win 2000)New User Interface, NTFS, proper 32bit API,
> based on Windows NT5, Windows Firewall
>
> Windows Vista Aero Interface
>
> That's my history of Windows upgrades (with a little help from Wiki),
> non of the upgrade paths was totally trouble free and there is obviously
> a learning curve when desktops and UI's change however I do still
> expect some real benefits for my $$$.
>
> Win 1.0 was fun and the move to Win 2.0 allowed me to do some serious
> work especially Excel and Pagemaker. Windows 3.0 brought better
> resolutions and multitasking painfully slow but it was a benefit. The
> Multimedia extensions allowed me to use a CD ROM and Soundblaster that
> coupled with a Canon RC-250 to create multimedia apps and presentations.
>
> The step up to Windows for Workgroups 3.11 really launched the peer to
> peer small office network and while frustrating and often slow it was a
> great affordable alternative to sneaker net.
>
> Windows 95 was buggy and prone to too many BSD's however the new UI was
> more logical and a faster to access the applications you required. The
> Win32 bit API was a bit of a bodge job(think thunking) but it did feel
> faster and slicker than 3.11. The OSR releases were a god send and
> addressed many of the stability issues.
>
> Windows 98 in someways mirrored 95 insomuch as the second edition was
> the one to get improving stability no end. However USB support,
> internet connectivity, support for large hard disks were all real
> benefits for this version. This was the Windows version that put DOS
> well and truely on the sidelines.
>
> Windows ME was a complete disaster for me and perhaps any others
> unfortunate to have to use it. Stability seemed to take a step
> backwards which seemed illogical considering it was essentially a tarted
> up 98SE.
>
> Windows 2000 a godsend, not to brilliant on the initial driver support
> but after 98SE this was a significantly more stable platform. Often
> forgotten Windows 2000 in workstation or server versions was Microsoft's
> biggest advance in O/S's. Not all was rosy with this product and was
> left all but defenseless against all types of virus and malware threats
> but robust 3rd party solutions were available to take care of that.
>
> Windows XP was the pretty version of Win 2000 for general consumption
> and this was good for users of both versions as drivers were for the
> most part interchangable, this motivated consumer device manufacturers
> who had not written drivers for 2000 to now do so. To be honest I
> preferred 2000 until general machine specs were up to XP's resource
> hogging requirements but on the whole a very good release.
>
> Enter Windows Vista
> Aero interface and that's about it. In it's current form I do not
> perceive UAC as a benefit. Initially I thought Vista would secure my
> system and negate the need for 3rd party AV/AS products which would be a
> great step forward, that promise was conveniently dropped by release
> time. Much of what's good in XP has gone or is broken so can somebody
> (preferably a power user or admin)who thinks Vista is a good upgrade
> please list out it's benefits which I could use to convince my clients
> to move from XP?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Richard Urban wrote:
> One thing, and one thing alone, makes Vista stand out for me.
>
> It is *****FINALLY***** going to force programmers to do their job
> correctly. Because of this, we will all see a tremendous benefit in
> about 2 years, when the older programs - that kinda/sorta work - are
> finally laid to rest.
>
> It's about time!
>
So a purchase in 2 years time is your recommendation?

"SysAdminTH" <notarealaddress@amuro.net> wrote in message
news:%232GeB7IZHHA.2316@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

> Richard Urban wrote:
>> One thing, and one thing alone, makes Vista stand out for me.
>>
>> It is *****FINALLY***** going to force programmers to do their job
>> correctly. Because of this, we will all see a tremendous benefit in about
>> 2 years, when the older programs - that kinda/sorta work - are finally
>> laid to rest.
>>
>> It's about time!
>>
> So a purchase in 2 years time is your recommendation?

I think that by the time we get to Vista SP2, it will be a truly superb
product...

Mark Rae wrote:
> "SysAdminTH" <notarealaddress@amuro.net> wrote in message
> news:%232GeB7IZHHA.2316@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
>> Richard Urban wrote:
>>> One thing, and one thing alone, makes Vista stand out for me.
>>>
>>> It is *****FINALLY***** going to force programmers to do their job
>>> correctly. Because of this, we will all see a tremendous benefit in about
>>> 2 years, when the older programs - that kinda/sorta work - are finally
>>> laid to rest.
>>>
>>> It's about time!
>>>
>> So a purchase in 2 years time is your recommendation?
>
> I think that by the time we get to Vista SP2, it will be a truly superb
> product...
>
>
Mark,
Would you care to elaborate on that statement, I think by SP2 we may
back to XP functionality!

I am using it now and am happy with what I have. I will be more pleased in a
couple of years, as will most people.

--


Regards,

Richard Urban MVP
Microsoft Windows Shell/User


"SysAdminTH" <notarealaddress@amuro.net> wrote in message
news:%232GeB7IZHHA.2316@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Richard Urban wrote:
>> One thing, and one thing alone, makes Vista stand out for me.
>>
>> It is *****FINALLY***** going to force programmers to do their job
>> correctly. Because of this, we will all see a tremendous benefit in about
>> 2 years, when the older programs - that kinda/sorta work - are finally
>> laid to rest.
>>
>> It's about time!
>>
> So a purchase in 2 years time is your recommendation?

"SysAdminTH" <notarealaddress@amuro.net> wrote in message
news:OQuSlDJZHHA.348@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> Would you care to elaborate on that statement, I think by SP2 we may back
> to XP functionality!

Just take a glance at the Vista bashers in here... Their posts are
invariably "Vista is crap but XP is great..."

However, these were the same type of posts when XP was first released: "XP
is crap, but Win2k is great..."

So, what the Vista bashers are really saying is that XP+SP2 is great...

By the time Vienna gets here, there will be countless posts saying "Vienna
is crap but Vista is great..."

And what they will mean is that Vista+SP2 (or whichever number the latest SP
is by then) is great...

This is how it's always been...

Richard Urban wrote:

> One thing, and one thing alone, makes Vista stand out for me.
>
> It is *****FINALLY***** going to force programmers to do their job
> correctly. Because of this, we will all see a tremendous benefit in about
> 2 years, when the older programs - that kinda/sorta work - are finally
> laid to rest.

Would you please elaborate on that and tell me how I am doing my job
incorrectly?

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

������出�日�ん�����
����忘れ�������ら

"SysAdminTH" <notarealaddress@amuro.net> wrote in message
news:OMPsIoIZHHA.3256@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I find it very frustrating when reading this thread that almost every
> criticism of Vista is seen as some sort of threat and illicits a quite
> often rude thoughtless response from Vista's proponents. So first I
> thought I'd recap on the Windows upgrades history then see how Vista
> stacks up to it's predecessors and then invite the Vista proponents to
> educate me on the benefits of this upgrade.
>
> How can any non-novice user regardless of experience level be satisfied
> with Vista and tout it as a major upgrade? The only answers I can come
> up with are A) I don't understand the benefits or B) My expectations are
> above those of my fellow users.
>
> I have been working with Windows since the first version of Windows 1.0
> was released in the mid-eighties and before that on DOS/PCM OS's so I
> feel qualified to comment on improvements and upgrade experiences. With
> a few notable exceptions each successive incarnation has brought
> significant benefits to users and businesses alike.
>
> Windows 1.0
> Card file and Calculator
>
> Windows 2.0
> Excel, Word and Pagemaker DTP
>
> Windows 3.0
> Multi Tasking, Virtual Memory, VGA, Multi Media Extensions Add-On,
> SoundBlaster
>
> Windows 3.1
> True Type scalable fonts,
>
> Windows for Workgroups 3.11
> Integrated Multimedia, peer to peer networking, full support for 386
> processors
>
> Windows 95
> Consumer Version of NT 3.1, Improved Desktop and Menu System, Win32 API
> subset
>
> Windows 95 OSR 2.0-2.5
> Full FAT32, Internet Expolorer, USB Support, greater reliability
>
> Windows 98
> Better hardware support - HDD's, USB, Internet connection sharing,
> greater stability.
>
> Windows 2000 Greater stability, Active Directory Support, directX for NT
> Kernal
>
> Windows Millennium Edition (ME)System Restore, Movie Maker
>
> Windows XP (See Win 2000)New User Interface, NTFS, proper 32bit API,
> based on Windows NT5, Windows Firewall
>
> Windows Vista Aero Interface
>
> That's my history of Windows upgrades (with a little help from Wiki),
> non of the upgrade paths was totally trouble free and there is obviously
> a learning curve when desktops and UI's change however I do still
> expect some real benefits for my $$$.
>
> Win 1.0 was fun and the move to Win 2.0 allowed me to do some serious
> work especially Excel and Pagemaker. Windows 3.0 brought better
> resolutions and multitasking painfully slow but it was a benefit. The
> Multimedia extensions allowed me to use a CD ROM and Soundblaster that
> coupled with a Canon RC-250 to create multimedia apps and presentations.
>
> The step up to Windows for Workgroups 3.11 really launched the peer to
> peer small office network and while frustrating and often slow it was a
> great affordable alternative to sneaker net.
>
> Windows 95 was buggy and prone to too many BSD's however the new UI was
> more logical and a faster to access the applications you required. The
> Win32 bit API was a bit of a bodge job(think thunking) but it did feel
> faster and slicker than 3.11. The OSR releases were a god send and
> addressed many of the stability issues.
>
> Windows 98 in someways mirrored 95 insomuch as the second edition was
> the one to get improving stability no end. However USB support,
> internet connectivity, support for large hard disks were all real
> benefits for this version. This was the Windows version that put DOS
> well and truely on the sidelines.
>
> Windows ME was a complete disaster for me and perhaps any others
> unfortunate to have to use it. Stability seemed to take a step
> backwards which seemed illogical considering it was essentially a tarted
> up 98SE.
>
> Windows 2000 a godsend, not to brilliant on the initial driver support
> but after 98SE this was a significantly more stable platform. Often
> forgotten Windows 2000 in workstation or server versions was Microsoft's
> biggest advance in O/S's. Not all was rosy with this product and was
> left all but defenseless against all types of virus and malware threats
> but robust 3rd party solutions were available to take care of that.
>
> Windows XP was the pretty version of Win 2000 for general consumption
> and this was good for users of both versions as drivers were for the
> most part interchangable, this motivated consumer device manufacturers
> who had not written drivers for 2000 to now do so. To be honest I
> preferred 2000 until general machine specs were up to XP's resource
> hogging requirements but on the whole a very good release.
>
> Enter Windows Vista
> Aero interface and that's about it. In it's current form I do not
> perceive UAC as a benefit. Initially I thought Vista would secure my
> system and negate the need for 3rd party AV/AS products which would be a
> great step forward, that promise was conveniently dropped by release
> time. Much of what's good in XP has gone or is broken so can somebody
> (preferably a power user or admin)who thinks Vista is a good upgrade
> please list out it's benefits which I could use to convince my clients
> to move from XP?
>
>
Just one other for you (which I discovered today), from the many:

If you put a DVD-RAM disk into your DVD-RAM drive you can access it
instantly in UDF format, without having to first format it as FAT 32. This
not only saves the time of formatting, it seems to me to be faster to access
the drive also.

- incidentally there are "many". Some of them take a little time to
discover. I suspect MS has been a bit slow in advertising some of the more
subtle advantages, such as this one. It could be that many of the advantages
are not "big impact".

John.

"Stephan Rose" <kermos@nospam.somrek.net> wrote in message
news:nfGdnTaBrtD6o2jYnZ2dnUVZ8vSdnZ2d@giganews.com...
> Richard Urban wrote:
>
>> One thing, and one thing alone, makes Vista stand out for me.
>>
>> It is *****FINALLY***** going to force programmers to do their job
>> correctly. Because of this, we will all see a tremendous benefit in about
>> 2 years, when the older programs - that kinda/sorta work - are finally
>> laid to rest.
>
> Would you please elaborate on that and tell me how I am doing my job
> incorrectly?
>

You may not be. Most Windows programmers are not doing their job correctly.
They assume users have administrator privileges. They assume they have write
access to system wide registry settings and files. They store user data in
system locations. They assume their program can talk directly to system
services and even alter the way they work. The list goes on and on.

--
Kerry Brown
Microsoft MVP - Shell/User
http://www.vistahelp.ca