Windows Vista: Windows Vista Bugs
upgrade advisor
by lylatwars19 - 3/14/07 11:05 PM In reply to: Windows Vista Bugs by photohami do feel your pain photoham, obviously your very frustrated so what i am about to say may sound somewhat harsh, microsoft released an upgrade advisor program while vista was still in early beta testing that lets you know if your computer meets the requirements for vista it tells you if required what software and hardware will not work once vista is installed, also from what i remember of the vista installer when i installed an early beta of it like xp it tells you during the initial settings stage of the installation what software and hardware will and will not work with vista, now if you did not use the upgrade advisor to check things out before buying the software than thats your own stupid fault, if you didnt read the report vista gave you during initial install stage about compatability then its still your fault, you had 2 chances to identify incompatabilities before letting vista overwrite your operating system and you chose to ignore them so you cant blame microsoft or anyone else for your stupidity, all new operating systems dont instantly work with everything in the beginning and you as an experienced user should have no this and done the appropriate research.
Vista is Just a way for Microsoft to make more $
by edington - 3/14/07 11:10 PM In reply to: Windows Vista Bugs by photohamWhy is it that our programs and drivers that work in XP are suddenly defunct after "upgrading" to Vista? Shouldn't software that was working fine continue to work fine, isn't making things easier and more streamlined the goal for a new OS platform? Oh, I see, I'm supposed to track down a bunch of updates for my peripherals and programs, that's so much fun to do and not very time consuming (sarcasm, yes). Maybe it's because Microsoft is funneling us into using their software and recommended extras. If find it quite convenient that my Creative MP3 player's software doens't work in Vista, even with the patch...maybe Microsoft want me to buy one of their brand MP3 players, ah ha! At least my Microsoft brand hotmail account is compatible with the included "Windows Mail" (which replaced Outlook Express), NOT!!!
It's the same old story...
by badpennywebsolutions - 3/14/07 11:15 PM In reply to: Windows Vista Bugs by photohamEvery time Windows gets upgraded, the old stuff doesn't work any more. I have countless cd-roms for games that worked fine for 95 or 98 or ME, but don't work on XP. I have no plans to start over with Vista for this very reason. I can't afford to upgrade my hardware to work with Vista, and I don't want to start over with new software.
It's the same thing with Office. If you upgrade to Office 2007, you have to have a converter to send to recipients that don't have it. Office 2003, etc can't read it. It's just part of progress, I guess. that's why I use very little Microsoft products. I use Firefox and Thunderbird for browsing and Email, and that works fine for me. I probably won't get a Mac, at least until nothing works for XP anymore.
Office 2007 File Types
by rellefn - 3/14/07 11:21 PM In reply to: It's the same old story... by badpennywebsolutionsIf you have Office 2007, you can set each of the programs to, by default, save the files in the Office 2003 format. Strongly advise this until most people have Office 2007. Which will probably be at least a couple of years. Only down side to that setting is the file sizes are larger, but no larger than what you're already used to. By doing this, anyone with the older versions can read it. And those with Office 2007 can still read it as well.
That's all fine and good, but I like Open Office better
by badpennywebsolutions - 3/14/07 11:41 PM In reply to: Office 2007 File Types by rellefnIt does all that and more, and besides, it is FREE. I doesn't take as long to download as Microsoft office, either.
Interesting ... Open Office
by rellefn - 3/15/07 12:09 AM In reply to: That's all fine and good, but I like Open Office better by badpennywebsolutionsI have never really looked at Open Office. Since much of my work, both at Gateway and in my own computer support business, involves supporting MS environment and most people who have an Office program have MS Office, I have tended to stay with that.
Although, I don't like most of the layout changes in Office 2007. But I have it on my PC at work and loaded it on my daughter's laptop, she's in college so she's into getting the latest stuff. That way I have a platform to test and t/s from.
Is Vista Windows compatible?
by Gerdd - 3/14/07 11:19 PM In reply to: Windows Vista Bugs by photohamIf Microsoft decides to publish an operating system that is no longer compatible with all the Windows applications out there, then I feel they shoudln't call it Windows. Only a 900 poung Gorilla with the mentality of a bulldozer can expect everyone - software vendors and customers - to upgrade their complete software suite to a new level, just because he has decided to stop being compatible with himself.
No, seriously, I put the blame here firmly in Microsoft's lap. As usual, we have to wonder if this was an oversight (incompetence?) or if there is some plan behind this ...
(Only IBM, in the dark days of the PS/2 with microbus technology, did a similar thing - they stopped being IBM compatible. They learned their lesson and eventually returned to the industry standard, which was by then driven by Intel themselves. Meanwhile, of course, the creators of the "IBM PC" have abandoned the consumer PC market altogether; their intel based servers, however, continue the tradition - on a higher level, so to speak.)
6 of one, half a dozen of the other
by Robert_H - 3/14/07 11:29 PM In reply to: Windows Vista Bugs by photohamNo third-party vendors have the almost limitless funds available to Microsoft for research & development of Vista-compatible software and hardware drivers. Without any real effort, MS could have known in advance of Vista's release date which software and hardware would not be compatible. They should have published two lists: one of known software and hardware driver compatibility, and the other of all third-party vendors who have failed or are unable to go back to the drawing board to make their stuff work with Vista. But there are other larger issues at play here. MS keeps its cards so close to the vest that even other Microsoft software and hardware won't work with their new operating systems, be they Windows 3.x, 95, 98, ME, XP, and now Vista. In other words, with Microsoft one hand does not wash the other -- they don't even communicate with other Microsoft employees across their cavernous halls about compatibility issues. The perfect example is that until extremely recently, MS Fingerprint Readers would not work with Vista. And many of the software programs that don't work with Vista are published by MS itself!
Because of the extreme imbalance of resources between MS and ALL third party vendors, MS is often, perhaps even usually, in an excellent position to help those overwhelmed vendors with revisions for software, firmware and hardware drivers. MS is and has been for many years penny wise and pound foolish. Eradicating conflicts between Vista is in MS's best interest. How many more copies of Vista would have sold if there were not these compatibility issues? Or conversely, if there weren't any of these compatibility issues upon release of Vista, how much more could have MS gouged mostly repeat customers of its operating systems?
Sometimes the vendors themselves are over-joyed at incompatibilities! Two examples: Norton has been around longer than dirt. When they introduced their earliest copies of SystemWorks and AntiVirus software (called simply Norton Utilities), they did not have the foresight to restrict their anti-virus definition downloads to one year only. Those who had bought their first antivirus programs were not forced to buy a new version of Norton every year in order to get updated virus definitions. But when MS XP came out they were delighted because the older versions of their antivirus program could NOT be updated and so Norton's previously lucky and loyal customers would have to buy Norton's new antivirus or a competitor's antivirus software. Norton shot themselves in the foot because they no longer have the monopoly on antivirus programs that they once enjoyed but that's another topic for another day.
Another example of short-sightedness is Hewlett-Packard. They refuse to write hardware driver updates for hardware sold about 5 years or longer ago. They make no bones about it. When I wrote them about my perfectly functioning HP scanner not working with Vista, they flatly stated that they would NEVER update their drivers for older HP hardware products. With not one lick of embarrassment or shame, they simply told me to junk my old HP hardware that worked fine with XP and buy expensive replacement HP hardware manufactured more recently. HP has lost my business for life because of this shameless attitude and callous indifference. I'm not a big fish. But I have bought no less than 3 dozen HP hardware products before Vista's release. And I'm not alone in this misplaced loyalty. But HP -- like MS -- are short-sighted. Why should anyone buy HP products once it gets out that they have no intention of writing new drivers for dated hardware?
In the cases of Norton and HP, they've drooled at the mouth because of operating system incompatibilities forcing unnecessary software and hardware purchases. If MS really wanted to take over the world (which I'm sure they are not adverse to!), they would share their source codes long in advance of new operating system releases with ALL vendors including themselves but especially the smallest and poorest vendors. Small vendors have written thousands of shareware and even freeware programs, programs that will no longer function and for which there are not -- nor will there be in the foreseeable future -- substitutes available. Many if not most previous small vendors have just given up and gotten off the sinking boat of selfless and generous software programming. As should be painfully obvious, the greater the number of hardware and software incompatibilities that remain unresolved and perhaps unresolvable, the more resistant computer users will have to buy the newest and greatest version of MS's operating systems. And the more other platforms like Unix and Mac will threaten MS's profits and bottom-line in the future. I have some invaluable software written by programmers who died or got out of the business a decade or more ago. In fact, those programs are so valuable to me that I either will not upgrade to Vista or I'll have to maintain a second computer just to work those orphaned programs.
MS should be aware that potential Vista customers who have been driven to distraction by these problems will not stop at their reticence to adopt and install Vista. As long as MS and Bill Gates live, there will be some old-timers who have never gotten over nor forgiven MS for their Vista problems. They will campaign against future MS software and hardware purchases and discourage or deter many youngsters who have not even been born from blind loyalty to MS.
But MS has gotten over bigger sins and survived. Done very well in fact. What a shame...
Norton (Symantec) are such crooks
by rellefn - 3/14/07 11:58 PM In reply to: 6 of one, half a dozen of the other by Robert_HBesides all you mention, they are even worse. What kind of company provides absolutely no free tech support.
I have had people who just purchased a version of Norton Security or Antivirus tell me they could not get support with installation issues or virus definition issues or configuration issues, without using their pay for support line. This is within a week of purchasing their "product". Thank God for freeware such as AVG and Zone Alarm!
A very basic concept
by l5n25 - 3/14/07 11:32 PM In reply to: Windows Vista Bugs by photohamThe main problem with Microsoft operating systems are they are overly complex and overly simplistic at the same time.
An operating system should provide basic operational access to the computer hardware for application programs. Application programs should do the major work that we as users require.
Unfortunately long ago Microsoft chose a driver and system API model that was not properly compartmentalized or isolated from underlying system functionality. They broke a major tenant of robust software -- expose only a small, well formed API to the application layer and require ALL system access through that well defined layer.
For the sake of expediency, performance, and a culture that promotes hackery, Microsoft decided to expose vastly complex system operations to the application developers. This resulted in extremely flexible and well empowered applications and drivers by third parties but instantly made those third party applications and drivers obsolete the moment Microsoft decides to change just about anything in their OS.
In truth, both Microsoft and the third party vendors are: lazy, imprudent, brilliant, and addicted to this way of coding.
And we, as consumers, enable them to continue down the path.
Even Apple is not immune to this as anyone who has tried to run something recently developed on OS X 10.2. Sure there are older programs that are compatible with that OS. But when you consider it is only a few years old and based on a Unix kernel it's remarkable how much doesn't work on it any longer.
The truth is that there are limited resources in all these third party vendor shops and until someone is willing to say I'm willing to pay a premium to have my favorite application be upward compatible with any possible upgrade Microsoft may deal my way on new machines or upgrading my old... will one get their favorite app or driver almost instantly on new OS releases.
Adobe tends to provide applications that run relatively well on many different OS platforms and can turn out upgrades in relatively short order. But you pay about 10 times more for their software than you do for remotely similar applications to support the infrastructure that allows them to continue doing this.
On the other end of the scale you have video driver developers that have been struggling for the past 20 years to "keep up" with the hardware advances and expectations... count your blessing when you run Half Life 2 on Windows XP. That's a lot of power... it comes with a cost... your next game will require quad processors and 512MB graphics cards... that will need spiffy new drivers on Vista.
Who's responsible?
by lloko - 3/14/07 11:34 PM In reply to: Windows Vista Bugs by photohamMicrosoft certainly is atleast 95% responsible for driver upgrade issues for ONE overwhelming issue. MS holds Computer Vendors feet to the fire to sell the damn vista or else. Just try to buy the latest and greatest with the option for 95, 98SE, ME, 2000, or XP. Ms promised to fix 95A version with the"B" version. When that didn't work, they forced us to buy the Ultimate fix.. 98, then came 98SE. Well, you get the idea.
Congress should not allow MS to sell anything until they fix what they've already sold.
How would it sit if Ford or GM said they would no longer support autos made before 2000. How would it sound if you were not allowed to purchase, transfer, or buy a used car without paying a product activation fee to the manufacturer.
If MS wants to force all new Computers buyers into Vista they damn well should provide backwards compatibility.
MS must think we all have Gates's wealth. Go ahead Bill and send your $billions to third world countries while forgetting those in the US who gave you your wealth and success.
MS tech support sucks as it is with XP and now we must deal with marble mouth support tics (yea tics, not techs) who can't speak the language?
They fixed XP already
by Frodo420024 - 3/15/07 4:21 AM In reply to: Who's responsible? by lloko"Congress should not allow MS to sell anything until they fix what they've already sold."
Actually, they did. XP is mature and works great. That's why MS wants us to change to something else...
Really?
by snerk - 3/14/07 11:39 PM In reply to: Windows Vista Bugs by photohamMicrosoft is only responsible for communicating the minimum requirements to install and run the program. If you cannot run Vista with nothing else installed, then MS is to blame. It is primarily the other software companies responsibility to provide the fixes to accomodate Vista. It is also MS's responsibility to make it easy for this to happen.
Quit bitchin about MS and go after the individual software companies to fix your problems.
Vista is Great..
by metsfan421 - 3/14/07 11:57 PM In reply to: Really? by snerkI have an HP laser printer that works fine with Vista. As it has been stated earlier, you don't have to upgrade to Vista if your computer can't handle it. Keep XP, and stop complaining. Vista runs fine for me and is great. There are software issues for a few programs, but who cares, this is the problem for the EU because of the hardware and software developers that weren't prepared for the release. It's their fault, not Microsoft's... They had plenty of time to prepare. And they didn't. All this talk will be put to sleep in a matter of a few months.
Lets Make This Simple
by instantfly - 3/14/07 11:58 PM In reply to: Really? by snerkHowdy All !!
I am a senior hardware tech for IBM/Lenovo. We have been doing Vista since the first Beta releases, and now, the releases.
This operating system sux. Period, end of story. if you know anything about ASCII or any types of coding and you get into the dissasembly, you will see why aftermarket product manufacturors have no interest at this point in making their products compatible. Vista is a multi-clone O/S with legal theft of everything possible and Mr Bates, I mean Gates, was relying on other hardware producers being happy about people having to buy new products and upgrade. Advanced Micro ( AMD ) has become compat. but laughing at the same time knowing their 64 bit processors will sell themselves.
Vista is a joke for now. I am sure it will be rectified in the next 12-18 months or be scrapped like Millenium and a new O/S on the NT platform designed. I am sure they wish to salvage the name, hence a mass reproduction of the O/S itself.
If you buy anything Vista related at this point, you are buying air. All the apps are free elsewhere with either Mac or Open Source or just stick with your XP Pro SP2 with the zillion hotfixes.
" If it ain't broke, don't fix it "
XP Compat Tech at large.
L8trz.
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
