Simplify your laptop buying
Windows Vista: Windows Vista Bugs
Vista Premium Upgrade download
by mwlewis - 3/15/07 6:23 AM In reply to: Windows Vista Bugs by photohamI have a four month old PC with an Intel D dual core processor and 2 MB of RAM. After downloading from Circuit City and upgrading from Windows XP Home to Vista Premium, the Intel onboard sound would not work and nor would my HP Laserjet 1600 printer. The Intel onboard sound needed a Sigmatel Vista driver. This driver is not on the Sigmatel web site. The correct WHQL SigMatel driver for the Intel DP965LT board is Ver. 6.10.5274_V3 dated 12/5/2006. I found this after a lot of searching on the Intel site under 'downloads'. This WHQL driver did not automatically install during the upgrade from Windows XP to Vista and left SigMatel version 5.10.4991.0000 (which XP uses) on the machine. Nor does it upgrade through the Device Manager. It has to be manually downloaded and then installed. I have no idea why Microsoft and Intel can't get their ducks in a row on something basic like this, but it sure doesn't make life easy for Vista upgraders. HP still has no Vista driver for their Laserjet. I would strongly advise anybody thinking of upgrading to wait a few months. These were not my only problems, by far!
Windows vista
by john cunningham - 3/15/07 6:25 AM In reply to: Windows Vista Bugs by photohamit is sure that MSFT to blame,and is waste lots of money too
From a developer's PoV
by zachm90 - 3/15/07 6:31 AM In reply to: Windows Vista Bugs by photohamThis may have already been stated, but I cannot be bothered to read 500+ posts. This is similar to Microsofts attitude, it cannot be bothered to help developers migrate successfully, or indeed keep up to date old standards. There are some things that Microsoft is guilty for, an example is Vista's horrible networking support, crashes in Explorer, UAC Desktop issues; yet there are other things that are developers fault.
A primary example of this is the WinHelp system; this has been discontinued in Vista; yet developers still develop on it because its a platform that works on most Windows OSs. Whilst I can understand Microsoft's prespective that we need to move on, you can't just say, ok, we have this new standard/new API that doesnt work with any other version of software we've released, upto and including XP; and expect everyone to jump on the bandwagon. Certainly we've had the Vista BETA for a while, but that's preview technology, and in the world of software development, it can sometimes take that long to get out of the planning sessions.
It's actually to early to be assigning ANY blame. Vista is 1st gen technology, and the industry has not had time to go through the gigabytes of API/Documentation for vista; and then completly rewrite their applications. If you dont believe me when I say this is a difficult task, just look at MSDN (msdn2.microsoft.com). Give it a year, wait for the first service packs, and dont upgrade unless you have specific reason yet. It's important to remember that not only is Vista a new OS, its an entirly new codebase. Old things wont work correctly, or not at all. Ill bring in the Linux angle now; that world is always updating, I run Gentoo and run the updater weekly. The difference being is that the *nix community is used to continuous changes, the Windows community isnt.
IT mans PoV
by soilwork99 - 3/15/07 7:01 AM In reply to: From a developer's PoV by zachm90I agree with what matthewofak said. That is the biggest problem to me, Windows users can't handle change, at least the majority of them. Looking at Vista, from my PoV, I see an OS that has a lot of promise, but it is just a baby right now. Even though the Beta has been out for some time and the official release has been out for almost a month and a half, that doesn't mean that everything will work perfectly, nor should it. When you consider that Microsoft has billions of dollars invested into this OS, you have to wonder if they could have possibly done a bit more to prepare it for release, such as helping some major vendors be completely ready for the release, yet, it is not Microsofts job to baby-sit every other company and make sure they are updating their software for the new OS. Ultimately, Microsoft probably won't be bothered by the slow start of Vista. Most users won't really notice the hardware problems. Take most of my family, when XP doesn't work right they automatically assume the program they are using is to blame. Very rarely does XP itself get any blame, and many times it is the OS itself causing the program to crash or error out. Most users will be wowed by Vistas new taskbar and fancy features (assuming they don't get crappy Home Basic, that is a stupid mistake Microsoft), and they will be happy with their Word Processing and ability to access their Hotmail or Gmail.
Now, in terms of big business, most places of business that decide to begin using Vista will have the time and money invested so that they can purchase the new systems and new software that are necessary to make the change work. Yes, there are still going to be issues, but IT professionals, such as myself, should have the resources and the time to invest in dealing with the issues that arise, if we are required to use the new OS. My personal choice would be to stick with XP for about a year before switching over to Vista. That will give most vendors the opportunity to adapt to the new coding and layout that Vista has imposed on us and should give everything a chance to sync together. Will Vista work out? Yes, most likely it will be fine, but until it is, people are going to have to make a decision: Deal with the bugs and missing drivers for now, or stick with XP for awhile yet.
PS - As far as buying a new computer, you can tell Best Buy that you don't want Vista and most Best Buy stores have computers with XP on them that they want to get rid of (still new computers but have XP on them). This is a good way to get a solid computer that someday can be upgraded to Vista but at a cheaper price with working XP on it.
If Software and Hardware want business, they need to adapt
by Wolfspawn - 3/15/07 6:32 AM In reply to: Windows Vista Bugs by photohamLet Microsoft be responsible for Microsoft and the other businesses be responsible for them selves. Why should Microsoft have to worry about every one else’s drivers, etc.
There are several companies that got drives out on time, why could the others not??
I think it's the vendor's fault
by Pattie - 3/15/07 6:38 AM In reply to: Windows Vista Bugs by photohamI just got a new computer and went from Windows 98SE to Vista so other than minor problems attaching all my peripherals and installing new software I really like the Vista OS. It's a huge difference for me from 98SE...it's like night and day.
But I do feel the vendors should have been more ready for when Vista was released because the beta version was out there for quite some time so they could have started making their equipment or software compatible.
I have a small business so for me this upgrade was important because I wanted the newest version of Word Office and the like because Microsoft's programs are usually very costly if you buy them outside of them being installed on a new computer. But my biggest problem is with Symantec. I use pcAnywhere to remotely get into my client's computers (they also have to have it but they are all XP users) and unfortunately version 12 won't work with Vista. All their other programs were upgraded to work with Vista but not pcAnywhere and when I called they didn't know when it might be available (if at all). They hoped it didn't cause me any problems and appreciate my patience. Well, I think it's ridiculous that they were able to upgrade all their other products and not that one. It's a very costly and necessary program for me and now I have to use two computers to get my work done because of this. I wish there was some other way but I'll just have to wait because I don't want to have to tell my clients to purchase another software that I'm not sure will work. If anyone knows of another way to remotely go from one computer to another to transfer work back and forth please let me know so I can look into it. Thanks.
Otherwise I do really like Vista. I don't always agree with Microsoft and have had to stay with Microsoft because I need to be compatible with all my clients and their computers but I do think the beta version was out long enough for the vendors to get their drivers and updates ready and they just chose not to. I will say that Epson was right on target but Brother and Canon weren't so I can't use their printers as well as the Epson...they are recognized but all the "extras" won't work because they haven't upgraded the software and probably won't. Also some of my other software did install okay and I'm able to use it, just not pcAnywhere.
Thanks for listening...I've wanted to get that frustration out of me for awhile now and I probably won't use Symantec anymore because of their attitude.
Pattie C.
VISTA and 3d part software
by jblackfish - 3/15/07 6:39 AM In reply to: Windows Vista Bugs by photohamI guess it's really not the responsibility of MS to make sure that 3d party software functions under it's operating system. It should be, at least, their responsibility to provide the information necessary for 3d party companies to get their programs "in shape" to run under the largest operating system in the market place.
What is the responsibity of MS is the make THEIR operating system run properly, securely and (most importantly) with out the bug and annoyances that have plagued MS for years. XP is a pretty good system but it, in its most current version, has problems that are annoying to say the least and infuriating at times. (Ever seen "Windows Explorer has a problem and has to close. We're sorry for the inconvenience, blah, blah, blah...." a thousand times like I have? I got it almost every time I double-clicked on My Documents on my desktop to open a file.) I recently restored my C drive and spent the better part of 2 weeks carefully getting my system back together to get rid of the problem.
When I now read reviews of the (brave? daring? adventurous?) people who are "pioneering" VISTA and I see the annoying little bugs creeping in to their reviews, I am convinced that my resolve to stay with XP for a while is a good decision.
I spent my career in software development. One of my company's standards was that the software had to work well and be secure - another was that it should be easy for the user to use. I wish MS would incorporate those as standards and stop trying to conquer the world. They've already conquered the majority of it and I'm not convinced that it works that well.
Cannot afford to switch
by DHMonroe - 3/15/07 6:40 AM In reply to: Windows Vista Bugs by photohamI don't really care who is responsible for software compatibility. The bottom line is if I go to Vista, I may no longer be able to do my job. Am I supposed to then complain to the third party vendors? Maybe so but then how long will I have to wait until they get me whatever patches, etc., I might need. Who is going to pay for all of my down time? I cannot afford to go to Vista until everything is known to be pretty much bug free. I use both 2000 Pro and Xp Pro and I will stay right where I am.
vista vs suppliers
by le rebel - 3/15/07 6:40 AM In reply to: Windows Vista Bugs by photohamthe reason is,in my view, quite simple:the time is comed for the crowd to bring in money to the supplier voult.
in non supporting old suppli to vista and making new ones for it they oblige you to get new material and new pc all togeter.
in that way, both microsoft and supplier are hiting the goal.
it is a ground point of view but could'n be the reason?....why not!
VISTA compatibility and working programs/applications
by johnsanders - 3/15/07 6:40 AM In reply to: Windows Vista Bugs by photohamThe decision by Microsoft to improve/introduce a more sophisticated and security enhanced system is, in my opinion an absolute necessity, given the amount of vulnerabilities sustained by previous systems.
The 'by-products' of third party vendors is a secondary consideration by Microsoft, their opinion is - It is "Shipped as a complete working system"
Therefore, bolt-ons are an additional factor not the primary, plus the cost to make the products compatible, that is why the third party vendors are slow to respond.
There will always be an intervening period, whereby catchup is called into play, Microsoft have improved the firewall to stealth their system and it is now two-way instead of the one way traffic of XP etc.
Windows defender is part of the package and Microsoft have their OneCare application available to "test drive" - So their question must be what else is necessary at this point?
Sure, we want choice as to which third party we use, but Kaspersky have a Suite all ready and operational, as do Trend Micro. Defragmentation is also ready via Perfect Disk 8.0 (should you not choose to utilise Microsoft's built in defragger)
Microsoft is mostly self-sufficient, so they cannot possibly be too bothered about any competition to their product and its in-built applications!
Its all there for the asking.
Cheers, that is my take on the subject.
I am currently running with Vista Home Premium and it is a "gem" of a system and all my app's are working sweetly and with no compatibility issues whatsoever: Here is my list :- 7 Zip - Foxit PDF Reader - HP Printer photosmart C3180 - Mozilla Firefox 2.0.0.2 - NTI CD/DVD Maker - Kaspersky Security Suite 6.0.2.614 - Raxco Perfect Disk 8.0 - VSO ConvertXtoDVD 2.1.12.214
All recommended for their seamless integration.
VISTA and Third Party Software
by elhalcon - 3/15/07 6:40 AM In reply to: Windows Vista Bugs by photohamI think it is problems with the Software companies, VISTA Beta was out for many months before being available to the public. Roxio is one of the vendors that has a problem, even with their version 9 suite
Unreliable
by rescuefire - 3/15/07 6:52 AM In reply to: VISTA and Third Party Software by elhalconAlthough Vista had been under development for a long time it doesn't mean that vendors had access to it. Especially when Microsoft changes things constantly, security updates etc. How is a company supposed to keep up with the glitches Microsoft finds and supposedly fixes? In other words you build something to fit the current product.....then the current product changes, over and over and over and over again.
Microsoft products just seem to be glitchy and unreliable from start to finish. WinXP still has problems. It amazes me that this company can't get a product right to begin with and then move on to another "version". Versions are usually updated, better, quality type products. Not just another "look" with all the same glitches and problems.
If I were a vendor I'd be developing my product to work with a Mac. Mac's will take over eventually. Microsoft is making it easier and easier to go Mac.
Can`t stand it - Moved to Mac!
by lheard - 3/15/07 6:44 AM In reply to: Windows Vista Bugs by photohamGuys,
I really moved to Mac Much time before the Vista release, Microsoft is known by it`s unconsistent software packages since they`re born. Vista is not only more complicated but also so "inspired" in many aspects on Mac OS X and really is not up to OS 10.5 and it`s major inovations. I`m a ex-windows-user that`s not turning back.
MAC`s ARE BETTER! GO BUY ONE!
who is to blame
by brickm - 3/15/07 6:45 AM In reply to: Windows Vista Bugs by photohamSoftware incompatability issues have plagued Windows AND Mac users from the beginning and assigning blame is human nature. But the blame really belongs to all those who indulge themselves by buying into newly released technology. As you probably don't want to be the first on the block to test out that new heart valve stent you might be well-advised to adopt the same approach to computer tech, unless, of course, you have unlimited amounts of money and time to pour into solving problems. It all boils down to how tech problems are discovered and who is going to pay to discover them. The smart money says "let the other guy pay for it!"
Let the other guy pay
by patruga - 3/15/07 2:39 PM In reply to: who is to blame by brickmWhile I agree with the notion "let the other guy pay" that is, let somebody else have the headache of debugging the OS, it is hardly fair. MS or anyone else ought to be putting out software that works for all but the most ancient application; endusers should not have to caught in what seems like an endless cycle of fixes and finger pointing.
To all you brave leading edge souls, my thanks for working to perfect Vista through your trials and tribulations. I just upgraded to XP Pro (could not get Zune to work with 2K Pro), so my plans are to upgrade to Vista only when I MUST e.g. XP support is being discontinued, a killer app requires Vista or some other arm twisting reason.
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
