Vista - Discussion: Gotta ask

I'm a bit off topic in that I'm looking for input on why, yet again,
there is so much difficulty with installing the current release of the
Windows Family operating system.

Or... is that a false conclusion driven by my reading this group? And
as I think about that, logically it seems that persons who participate
in this, or any other computing news group would be those best
equipped, or more properly, most inclined to have the latest drivers,
have XP the most updated, etc. That is, in the best position to
successfully upgrade to Vista

So given that, out there in the masses, Vista must be a total
disaster(?) I don't seem to see that in the news. I must say that
I've only started using Windows on my own PC with 95 and have used all
versions since, sometimes upgrading the previous version, sometimes
clean installs, and I guess I've never had too much difficulty doing
it.

I consider myself a PC hobbiest, not an expert. I simply know that
you should defrag once in a while, have virus protection, and if
things get screwy, do a cold boot. And don't get me wrong, I'm not
some ultra-Pro MS zombie. I'm just curious about this always repeated
phenomenon: New Windows, it sucks, doesn't work, blah, blah

Due to the clearing effect of the killfile
I was able to see DJ Bjorklund say:

> I'm a bit off topic in that I'm looking for input on why, yet again,
> there is so much difficulty with installing the current release of the
> Windows Family operating system.
>
> Or... is that a false conclusion driven by my reading this group? And
> as I think about that, logically it seems that persons who participate
> in this, or any other computing news group would be those best
> equipped, or more properly, most inclined to have the latest drivers,
> have XP the most updated, etc. That is, in the best position to
> successfully upgrade to Vista
>
> So given that, out there in the masses, Vista must be a total
> disaster(?) I don't seem to see that in the news. I must say that
> I've only started using Windows on my own PC with 95 and have used all
> versions since, sometimes upgrading the previous version, sometimes
> clean installs, and I guess I've never had too much difficulty doing
> it.
>
> I consider myself a PC hobbiest, not an expert. I simply know that
> you should defrag once in a while, have virus protection, and if
> things get screwy, do a cold boot. And don't get me wrong, I'm not
> some ultra-Pro MS zombie. I'm just curious about this always repeated
> phenomenon: New Windows, it sucks, doesn't work, blah, blah

There are often a lot of teething problems with a new(ish) OS and MS can
seem worse than most, maybe because of a less techy user base. Plus, they
try to add security (in XP and Vista) with a user base that is used to a
low security model - like users who are accustomed to running as admin,
etc.

Anyway, all OSen have teething troubles at the start. XP, OSX, linux 2.6
(and the difficult days of 2.6.8.1).

Change is always a little painful

--
Tim Fairchild - Queensland Australia
Mandriva Linux release 2007.0 (Official) for x86_64
Linux 2.6.20 x86_64 AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 2800+

On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 16:59:50 -0600, DJ Bjorklund
<bjork57@hickorytech.net> wrote:

>I'm a bit off topic in that I'm looking for input on why, yet again,
>there is so much difficulty with installing the current release of the
>Windows Family operating system.
>
>Or... is that a false conclusion driven by my reading this group?


And
>as I think about that, logically it seems that persons who participate
>in this, or any other computing news group would be those best
>equipped, or more properly, most inclined to have the latest drivers,
>have XP the most updated, etc. That is, in the best position to
>successfully upgrade to Vista
>
>So given that, out there in the masses, Vista must be a total
>disaster(?) I don't seem to see that in the news. I must say that
>I've only started using Windows on my own PC with 95 and have used all
>versions since, sometimes upgrading the previous version, sometimes
>clean installs, and I guess I've never had too much difficulty doing
>it.
>
>I consider myself a PC hobbiest, not an expert. I simply know that
>you should defrag once in a while, have virus protection, and if
>things get screwy, do a cold boot. And don't get me wrong, I'm not
>some ultra-Pro MS zombie. I'm just curious about this always repeated
>phenomenon: New Windows, it sucks, doesn't work, blah, blah

On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 16:59:50 -0600, DJ Bjorklund
<bjork57@hickorytech.net> wrote:

>I'm a bit off topic in that I'm looking for input on why, yet again,
>there is so much difficulty with installing the current release of the
>Windows Family operating system.
>
>Or... is that a false conclusion driven by my reading this group?

Look in: microsoft.public.windows.vista.general and you'll see at
least 10,000 posts complaining all about the new version of Windows.

>So given that, out there in the masses, Vista must be a total
>disaster(?)

No, not at all, but Vista is a disaster for millions or will be when
people try to install it. Of course some people won't have any
problems at all. Its the squeaky wheel that gets the attention.

>I don't seem to see that in the news.

I could be cynical and say it isn't news because EVERY new version of
Windows going back to 3.1 had serious problems. So its hardy news that
Vista does too. <wink>

If you read some of my other posts and other people's too you'll see a
lot of anger centers around the Vista Upgrade Advisor. This piece of
Microsoft junk (a free download) sole purpose is to scan your present
system and let you know what if anything needs updating, replacing or
disabling prior to installing Vista. The problem is I and countless
others religiously followed the advise given, had our present system
get a passing grade from the Vista Update Advisor only to have the
actual install crash at some point during the install process. Some
Microsoft boot lickers that hang out in the Microsoft groups such as
this apparently see things differently. I don't suffer from terminal
tunnel vision.

There are ALWAYS driver issues. The other thing I complained about is
obvious bugs and some real goofy ones that I have documented. This too
sadly is par for course for every new release of Windows.

>I must say that I've only started using Windows on my own PC with 95 and have used all
>versions since, sometimes upgrading the previous version, sometimes
>clean installs, and I guess I've never had too much difficulty doing
>it.

Performace depends on how hard you push your computer, what your
hardware is, how up to date it is, if or not it has Vista drivers
available, then if they actually work and what software you have
installed. I have some 18 year old software that works fine in Vista
in spite of it being legacy Windows 3.1 era and I have seen endless
horror stories about software that either has a Vista ready sticker or
claims on the vendor's web site it "works" that refuses to work at
all. It at best is a crap shoot. Again, sadly, nothing new here
either.

>I consider myself a PC hobbiest, not an expert. I simply know that
>you should defrag once in a while, have virus protection, and if
>things get screwy, do a cold boot. And don't get me wrong, I'm not
>some ultra-Pro MS zombie. I'm just curious about this always repeated
>phenomenon: New Windows, it sucks, doesn't work, blah, blah

Because often it doesn't work correctly on many systems until a
Service Pack gets released anywhere from six months to a year or
longer AFTER the initial release of the latest Windows version. Again
the Microsoft apologist crowd will make endless excuses for this lax
and repeatedly sloppy programming Microsoft rushes out the door if you
can call taking five years to develop Vista "rushing". Reagardless how
long it took it obviously still wasn't completely ready for the
public. There are still pleny of rough spots.

Being a seasoned programmer myself and having cut my teeth writing
code in various languages going way back to the early 70's and having
learned much from a senior programmer that had a masters in computer
science and also a PhD in Mathematics who's favorite line was if you
can do it with a pencil and paper, he could do it with programming
(and he could). I'm a hard critic. Sloppy programming and Windows is
overflowing with hit or miss code, is simply sloppy programming.
Period. Again others here for various reason may differ.

Very few people would seek out a help and support group when they don't
have a problem. Vista is very new. Many of the problems are because it is
different and people are slowly learning the new way. There are also many
situations and configurations that simply weren't tested. I have been
supporting computers since before Microsoft existed as a company. Percentage
wise I don't see any more or any less problems with Vista than any other
major OS upgrade. Of course there are many, many more computers now than
when say Windows 95 or 3.1 came out so there are more people having
problems. The percentage of people having problems seems about the same,
maybe even less than with Windows 95.

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


"DJ Bjorklund" <bjork57@hickorytech.net> wrote in message
news:kbf4t29q0r2nnb1285fsjqvjegsmr856bc@4ax.com...
> I'm a bit off topic in that I'm looking for input on why, yet again,
> there is so much difficulty with installing the current release of the
> Windows Family operating system.
>
> Or... is that a false conclusion driven by my reading this group? And
> as I think about that, logically it seems that persons who participate
> in this, or any other computing news group would be those best
> equipped, or more properly, most inclined to have the latest drivers,
> have XP the most updated, etc. That is, in the best position to
> successfully upgrade to Vista
>
> So given that, out there in the masses, Vista must be a total
> disaster(?) I don't seem to see that in the news. I must say that
> I've only started using Windows on my own PC with 95 and have used all
> versions since, sometimes upgrading the previous version, sometimes
> clean installs, and I guess I've never had too much difficulty doing
> it.
>
> I consider myself a PC hobbiest, not an expert. I simply know that
> you should defrag once in a while, have virus protection, and if
> things get screwy, do a cold boot. And don't get me wrong, I'm not
> some ultra-Pro MS zombie. I'm just curious about this always repeated
> phenomenon: New Windows, it sucks, doesn't work, blah, blah

"DJ Bjorklund" <bjork57@hickorytech.net> wrote in message
news:kbf4t29q0r2nnb1285fsjqvjegsmr856bc@4ax.com...
> I'm a bit off topic in that I'm looking for input on why, yet again,
> there is so much difficulty with installing the current release of the
> Windows Family operating system.
>
> Or... is that a false conclusion driven by my reading this group? And
> as I think about that, logically it seems that persons who participate
> in this, or any other computing news group would be those best
> equipped, or more properly, most inclined to have the latest drivers,
> have XP the most updated, etc. That is, in the best position to
> successfully upgrade to Vista
>
> So given that, out there in the masses, Vista must be a total
> disaster(?) I don't seem to see that in the news. I must say that
> I've only started using Windows on my own PC with 95 and have used all
> versions since, sometimes upgrading the previous version, sometimes
> clean installs, and I guess I've never had too much difficulty doing
> it.
>
> I consider myself a PC hobbiest, not an expert. I simply know that
> you should defrag once in a while, have virus protection, and if
> things get screwy, do a cold boot. And don't get me wrong, I'm not
> some ultra-Pro MS zombie. I'm just curious about this always repeated
> phenomenon: New Windows, it sucks, doesn't work, blah, blah


Folks that come here are those with problems so you're seeing a non
representative sample.

The OS is newly released. Drivers for hardware are lacking, compared to a
mature OS. In some cases even where drivers exist, they are early
releases, not fully ready for prime time.

People are trying to use legacy hardware/software on a new OS, that will
always be problematic.

Significant problems seem to be clustered around certain motherboards,
chipsets and raid controllers, an area of responsibility that falls on the
hardware manufacturer's and their BIOS and driver releases.

Software compatibility is in the same boat.

There are thousands upon thousands of hardware manufacturers and software
vendors. MS is not closed like Apple is with the Mac, hardware and
software.

There is a paradigm shift with Vista, you cannot approach it the same way as
XP, the user needs to adapt.

All these things are common with a newly released OS.

--
Rock [MS-MVP User/Shell]

"DJ Bjorklund" <bjork57@hickorytech.net> wrote in message
news:kbf4t29q0r2nnb1285fsjqvjegsmr856bc@4ax.com...

logically it seems that persons who participate
> in this, or any other computing news group would be those best
> equipped, or more properly, most inclined to have the latest drivers,
> have XP the most updated, etc. That is, in the best position to
> successfully upgrade to Vista

Some assumption!

People who are best equipped with the latest hardware and drivers do not
come to these newsgroups as their computers are functioning without any
troublesome problems.



--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 18:48:45 -0800, "Rock" <Rock@nospam.net> wrote:

>"DJ Bjorklund" <bjork57@hickorytech.net> wrote in message
>news:kbf4t29q0r2nnb1285fsjqvjegsmr856bc@4ax.com...
>> I'm a bit off topic in that I'm looking for input on why, yet again,
>> there is so much difficulty with installing the current release of the
>> Windows Family operating system.
>>
>> Or... is that a false conclusion driven by my reading this group? And
>> as I think about that, logically it seems that persons who participate
>> in this, or any other computing news group would be those best
>> equipped, or more properly, most inclined to have the latest drivers,
>> have XP the most updated, etc. That is, in the best position to
>> successfully upgrade to Vista
>>
>> So given that, out there in the masses, Vista must be a total
>> disaster(?) I don't seem to see that in the news. I must say that
>> I've only started using Windows on my own PC with 95 and have used all
>> versions since, sometimes upgrading the previous version, sometimes
>> clean installs, and I guess I've never had too much difficulty doing
>> it.
>>
>> I consider myself a PC hobbiest, not an expert. I simply know that
>> you should defrag once in a while, have virus protection, and if
>> things get screwy, do a cold boot. And don't get me wrong, I'm not
>> some ultra-Pro MS zombie. I'm just curious about this always repeated
>> phenomenon: New Windows, it sucks, doesn't work, blah, blah
>
>
>Folks that come here are those with problems so you're seeing a non
>representative sample.
>
>The OS is newly released. Drivers for hardware are lacking, compared to a
>mature OS. In some cases even where drivers exist, they are early
>releases, not fully ready for prime time.
>
>People are trying to use legacy hardware/software on a new OS, that will
>always be problematic.
>
>Significant problems seem to be clustered around certain motherboards,
>chipsets and raid controllers, an area of responsibility that falls on the
>hardware manufacturer's and their BIOS and driver releases.
>
>Software compatibility is in the same boat.
>
>There are thousands upon thousands of hardware manufacturers and software
>vendors. MS is not closed like Apple is with the Mac, hardware and
>software.
>
>There is a paradigm shift with Vista, you cannot approach it the same way as
>XP, the user needs to adapt.
>
>All these things are common with a newly released OS.

Ahh Rock, Windows XP and Windows 98 and Windows 95 before that had
many of the same issues and MVP's were using the same excuses over a
decade ago why none if it is Microsoft's fault back then. <giggle>

This from someone who "claims" to have been programming since 1970. Yet he
doesn't know about drivers.

--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!



"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message
news:lsv4t297r6snsobg37hklnefqcogb1od04@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 18:48:45 -0800, "Rock" <Rock@nospam.net> wrote:
>
>>"DJ Bjorklund" <bjork57@hickorytech.net> wrote in message
>>news:kbf4t29q0r2nnb1285fsjqvjegsmr856bc@4ax.com...
>>> I'm a bit off topic in that I'm looking for input on why, yet again,
>>> there is so much difficulty with installing the current release of the
>>> Windows Family operating system.
>>>
>>> Or... is that a false conclusion driven by my reading this group? And
>>> as I think about that, logically it seems that persons who participate
>>> in this, or any other computing news group would be those best
>>> equipped, or more properly, most inclined to have the latest drivers,
>>> have XP the most updated, etc. That is, in the best position to
>>> successfully upgrade to Vista
>>>
>>> So given that, out there in the masses, Vista must be a total
>>> disaster(?) I don't seem to see that in the news. I must say that
>>> I've only started using Windows on my own PC with 95 and have used all
>>> versions since, sometimes upgrading the previous version, sometimes
>>> clean installs, and I guess I've never had too much difficulty doing
>>> it.
>>>
>>> I consider myself a PC hobbiest, not an expert. I simply know that
>>> you should defrag once in a while, have virus protection, and if
>>> things get screwy, do a cold boot. And don't get me wrong, I'm not
>>> some ultra-Pro MS zombie. I'm just curious about this always repeated
>>> phenomenon: New Windows, it sucks, doesn't work, blah, blah
>>
>>
>>Folks that come here are those with problems so you're seeing a non
>>representative sample.
>>
>>The OS is newly released. Drivers for hardware are lacking, compared to a
>>mature OS. In some cases even where drivers exist, they are early
>>releases, not fully ready for prime time.
>>
>>People are trying to use legacy hardware/software on a new OS, that will
>>always be problematic.
>>
>>Significant problems seem to be clustered around certain motherboards,
>>chipsets and raid controllers, an area of responsibility that falls on the
>>hardware manufacturer's and their BIOS and driver releases.
>>
>>Software compatibility is in the same boat.
>>
>>There are thousands upon thousands of hardware manufacturers and software
>>vendors. MS is not closed like Apple is with the Mac, hardware and
>>software.
>>
>>There is a paradigm shift with Vista, you cannot approach it the same way
>>as
>>XP, the user needs to adapt.
>>
>>All these things are common with a newly released OS.
>
> Ahh Rock, Windows XP and Windows 98 and Windows 95 before that had
> many of the same issues and MVP's were using the same excuses over a
> decade ago why none if it is Microsoft's fault back then. <giggle>
>
>

On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 22:40:45 -0500, "Richard Urban"
<richardurbanREMOVETHIS@hotmail.com> wrote:

>This from someone who "claims" to have been programming since 1970. Yet he
>doesn't know about drivers.

Do you enjoy making a ass of yourself Richard?

It would appear from reading your posts that is your hobby.