and I thought it was hard figuring out the straight quote from my Auto Mechanic... Geez!
Microsoft is now letting the common rabble get its mitts on the latest beta build of Windows Vista Service Pack 1. While the company released the tweak on January 9, it originally restricted the download to approximately 15,000 steely-nerved beta testers. Two days later, the company was feeling more adventurous. Microsoft …
I do wonder if they could make Vista any better ? I had nothing but problems with Vista since its release, with customer after customer coming forward with problems, and my final straw were large file copying over a network, which forced me to force a customer to downgrade all new Dell workstations from Vista to XP just to get them working.
I am no Vista basher, if a product is working, or almost working, I can work with it, but what Vista is doing goes way beyond that point, its almost unworkable in my point of view. If RC1 can improve all the showstoppers, then may be I will give it another try, otherwise, more XP licence will be coming this way.
I have been running a variety of builds of SP1 for over 6 months now and have been *much* heartened by the radical improvements ... particularly to file-copy perf, networking perf, reduced disk t(h)rashing, massively improved sleep/hibernate and many other issues.
Herby: One tests an SP to make damn sure that it doesn't unnecessarily break something in your environment and that if it promises to solve a particuilar problem, then it damn well does so.
Are you serious?
It's bad enough that windows update "sometimes" (ie usually) requires a reboot. Its unacceptable that it "sometimes" (ie frequently) does a reboot, even though you've told it not to reboot and/or that it persistently nags you if you persistently say NO NOT YET and then does it the moment you turn your back, despite the fact there are important jobs running which can't be interrupted.
However, multiple reboots -- that's just plain STUPIDER THAN STUPID and INCOMPETENTER THAN INCOMPENTENT.
I'll say this just once.
BILL GATES, ITS HIGH TIME YOU RESIGNED AND WERE REPLACED BY SOMEBODY THAT UNDERSTANDS HOW TO DESIGN MAINTAINABLE SYSTEMS THAT *D*O*N*T* NEED REBOOTING EVERY FIVE MINUTES, or better still don't require rebooting at all -- and above all, never ever without the user's permission.
Did you hear that ? Well, did you?
And if you don't understand WHY the above is necessary, then its definitely high time you went.
Lets add the mandatoy joke...
Would it work properly before the deadline?
Does it behave like other OSs, and get faster, not fatter with each update (like OSX and Linux)
Does it allow you to use you computer in the way you wish, like playing the "Premium Content" you want on the screen you want. (Like OSX and Linux)
Does it make life simpler, with only one low price, one version, and one method of operation (i.e. Working properly rather than "Dragging it's gonads across a variety of rough surfaces")
I don't think any amount of downloads with overly long names and an even longer installation processes will fix these problems.
For a beta release it's working very well on my work laptop and my home Media Center.
Tried it on the laptop for a few days just to test it but's been so good I went ahead and installed on my media center too
Seems to dramatically speed up my file transfers and system start up is also alot faster.
Have yet to see any bugs or crashes, if you're having any problems with Vista it's well worth installing it.
So what exactly is it doing in that hour? There is only one logical conclusion to take from this recommendation: MS do not fully understand SP1-RC1's install process. There's something happening that they can't predict, and so cannot delay the 'Installation finished' message to account for it.
This means that they've run a few tests, found the longest observed time that it takes for this 'thing' to occur (or at least, for evidence of it to appear), and then, if we're lucky, multiplied it by a random integer. Murphy's Law states that someone somewhere is going to be a statistical improbability. Sorry - correction. Murphy's Law states that *you* are going to be a statistical improbability.
Actually, I can think of one other logical conclusion: that MS is collecting some sort of data, but it absolutely positively cannot be stored on disk (evidence, obviously!), so you have to wait to make sure that it's had a chance of getting through to the MS servers....which surely means you'd need to wait longer than an hour, eh?
PH icon, as surely she's sifting through the data as we speak.
Actually, Linux has grown massively since the Good Ol' Days - it used to be several floppies, whereas now most distributions worth downloading are at least two CDs and then need more downloads/RPMs/whatevers to build into a useful system.
There are only three types of people actually downloading this Beta - firstly, the stupidly optimistic who think it will cure the Vista they installed under the delusion of the same stupid optimism; the legal but morally-light consultants that are looking to fleece the stupidly optimistic by learning where the new bugs are in advance and then selling their services under the promise of alleviating the pain of the stupidly optimistic; and lastly, the criminal hackers, whom are looking to thoroughly fleece the stupidly optimistic by finding security holes in the new SP (though it must be pointed out the last group are probably the ones working hardest!).
So now we've beta tested Vista for 12 months (retail) we now get another wee test. Oh joy of joys.
I think'll wait till the official SP1 comes out.
Having said that, it's been fine for me, apart from not liking a BIOS update.. oops!
PS to the first poster - aren't you aware Bill G is leaving Microsoft?
Now, I may not be completely clued in with how Vista works, having only used it a handful of times, but i don't understand this whole multiple reboots and leaving an hour thing.... Surely the reboots are to make sure it hasn't fudged your mbr/boot and the hour is to make sure there are no background processes still running that were started but surely good design concepts mean this is all supposed to be sorted anyway?
Its not like this is an alpha test, for god's sake
I dunno why people who don't OBJECTIVELY try a new OS for more than a few days waste time bashing it. Just stay with XP or OSX or Linux or whatever and be content that you're so much more brilliant than everyone else.
Personally, since I'm a tablet guy (TabletPC, Wacom tablet on the desktop), I've been running Vista since RTM for over a year for the extra inking capabilities. It has been more stable than XP on the same hardware (have run it on 2 tablets and one desktop).
Yes, Vista has some performance issues, and yes there are a couple games that still suck bag, and yes some hardware manufacturers still include better software for XP than Vista... a good example there being my ASUS motherboard includes Vista HD audio drivers, but no software to remap the audio ports for stereo/surround configs... under XP, that little app is there. In my case, several new and very useful features more than make up for that stuff IMHO.
What is definitely missing is some high-end hardware support (e.g. Infiniband), which at least is out there for XP... but I know I'm in the minority there having IB at home ;) That support will come... it only took 4 years or so for XP to get support.
For the record, if not for the tablet thing, FreeBSD is my OS of choice. Booya.
As a "statisticaly improbable" and stupidly optimistic acquaintance of mine said in reply to an email from me about the 130 days file copying ... err FEATURE ...
"verry funny.. you know sp1 is out for vista now.. I'm sure they fixed everything !!"
ya right, maybe I can sell him a bridge....
the stink was/is getting soo bad, that M$ began trying to cover it up with the Windows Vista Service Pack 1 RC Refresh, which provides a thicker chrome plating for the biggest turd ever dropped anywhere period.
Who else is betting that this floater is the better part of a 1GB download? ... wait, its the WORST part .. oh and its 436.5 MB.
Your time and bandwidth would be better spent downloading the Netinstall ISO for Debian 4.0r2, its a lot simpler and easier to deal with, and probably able to run more programs from previous windows versions than Fistya will ever be able to.
Call me a fanboi if you like but at least I have enough brain cells to know that Vindows Wista is more hindrance, hair pulling, wailing, moaning, gnashing of teeth, and embarrassment than it is functional.
Gosh, you're right. After all, reading about embedded DRM, increased nannying and scores of functionality being ripped out is no reason to not want to play with the product, is it ? And 20 different license versions is absolutely not a reason to complain, hmm ?
Because, really, if you're told that a new product will OBJECTIVELY decide that you cannot read a DVD without even asking your opinion, well it's not a problem, now is it ?
Absolutely not. Now why don't you go and play some more with the nice man in the white coat ? He has some ice cream for you and he'll take you to the park, promise.
I'm running XP SP3 RC on my laptop. First thing I notice is it suspends and resumes MUCH faster. I haven't noticed much more speed elsewhere, really, but so far everything is ok. Second major thing I've noticed is not once have I had to power-off my laptop because Explorer (the desktop) hung on me. Maybe better drivers, who knows, but I don't care as it just seems to work better.
On my desktop system I have installed XP x64 Edition and I absolutely love it. Fast, stable, full 4GB of memory available and I can go to 8GB if I want or need, which I may for running several Virtual PC instances.
I've noticed that there's not much mention of pros or cons of Vista x64 specifically. As Vista and XP x64 are cousins, I would like to assume that Vista x64 runs much better than its x86 sibling. Anyone??
Paris icon because I fell in love with a Paris Hilton look-alike last Halloween.
Several reboots for a service pack? An aopparently it doesn't even solve the major issues? MS engineers must be out of their minds to expect it's customer to go for this (and call this a RC).
Despite being a microsoft person, for my last computer I made the jump to Ubuntu in order to avoid Vista until the bugs were fixed. I don't think I'l come back to vista for anything except maybe my game machine. Ubuntu has it's own share of user unfriendly features (such as having to download some restricted driver and the componant to read commercial DVDs) but:
- When I see the issues the people with vista (the few that didn't downgrade to XP yet) have, I think I made the good choice
- Once you have configured everything it works fast and reliable
- At least Ubuntu is free, you don't have to shell out 200€ for something that works badly.
- I have yet to see an update that requires a reboot (but I didn't upgrade the kernel yet).
I won't "upgrade" my XP machines to Ubuntu because they work fine with XP, but for the time being no: Vista installs in my home. For now MS definitely lost a customer with me.
Im trying to install the current updates on Vista Ultimate 64bit and its gone wrong,
it keeps sticking on 1 out of 6. (after leaving it on ALL night and next day)
ive tried to install the updates seperately and it always says (after log out / on / turn off etc) that there is an install in progress.
(basically its locked, and wont unlock the update it thinks its doing.)
i played for about an hour last night and still no joy.
im hopeing there are some none criptic solutions out there to unlock a windows vista auto update (insert yeah !right here)..
if this is anything to go by people may mever even get SP1 installed and hence have no choice to start again.
now i do like (well some of the time) Vista, but if i had to reinstall and start again, i have to admit XP+SP3 would be where i went.
The article says things like it needs to reboot
"Two to three updates are also required before RC Refresh can be installed — with a restart required after each one. Users then move on to Windows Update readying the prerequisites for the pack "over the next several days."
Are we talking about Vista or SP1. You need to download something to then update on Vista and that requires multiple reboots half the time.
But I think
"Microsoft instructs users to wait one hour after uninstalling so Windows can "clean up and complete the uninstall" prior to installing RC Refresh. "
Says it all. They can't even run an uninstall properly. Even a beta can have a reg edit tool written to remove correctly.
Think I will skip it.
...knowing that there are VMS machines out there with uptimes longer than any given M$ Windoze release lifetime.
I can't imagine owning a computer, only to turn its operation over to a company that thinks it knows your needs and desires better than you do. Everything I hear about Vista has been bad from the get-go; why on Earth would anyone subject themselves to such torture?
Thankfully I dumped M$ for Linux on my home PC several years ago.
I don't think Bill actually does the low-level design of every product Microsoft produces any more.
But I could be wrong - he could be a multiple-brained cyborg alien with an IQ of 10,000 and a perception of time about 200 times slower than us mortals, allowing him to do the hundreds of thousands of manhours of work per year that it would require.
In which case, he definitely should *not* resign :)
All I can say is I installed Vista on my desktop and it has worked perfectly since it was installed. The install asked just two questions and went about it’s business. No problems, automatic updates work fine and I have not had a single crash, I even feel slightly left out since I have not seen any evidence of any of the bugs (file copy times etc) that so many people report.
I use Ubuntu on my Laptop and this has worked perfectly since it was installed. The install was just as simple as the Vista install (apart from having a visit to the forums to find out how to set everything up so that the MASSIVE text that appeared on screen, meaning I couldn’t log-in to the graphic environment), the updates work fine and I have not had a single crash.
Personally (being VERY lazy) I think Windows is easier to use and also to find solutions for questions you may have since there are so many sources of information, I found the Ubuntu forums rather intimidating since, when you asked a simple question, you would invariably be greeted with either withering scorn that you probably shouldn’t be using Ubuntu because your clearly not intelligent enough or a (perfectly Valid) very, very, very obscure command line string to type in to the terminal without really understanding what the command was going to do.
Now if they could only make Ubuntu as useable as Windows (i.e. no command line stuff at all, unless you really, really want to) then "they" could be on to a winner.
Oh, and as for Bill, no matter what you think of him or his company they don’t call it Micro$oft for nothing, after all he's the one in the solid gold mansion driving to work each day in his rocket car (Slight paraphrase from Chester Lampwick there) :-)
As for Beta testing service packs, I’ll leave that to others, as I said I am a lazy, lazy man.
The DRM will go the way of all DRM, it will be canned within another year, the increased nannying can be turned off in 2 minutes, and where is the functionality that is being ripped out, are you talking about the (terrible) GDI being deprecated? Or MS actually following up on threats they've been making for the last six years to make their best programming practises compulsory? Everything I need I have, network performance is fixed in the SP for me, when I suspend my USB soundcard is now fixed on waking up, leaving my one gripe, which is that I can't easily edit files in the Program Files dir.
I am REALLY excited about this service pack! I bet it fixes all the problems i've ever had with Vista! I love microsoft!
.......and now i've spent all the money i was paid to say that on beer, so i can come back to reality. I will never, and i mean NEVER, put vista on a machine. Not even as part of my job. We are currently re-imaging any new laptop/desktop that comes in, replacing vista with xp.
"Uptime.... <drone, drone>.... " Oh, so it must be running old VMS like 7.x? Yeah, so much use that you have to use Linux for your home PC. If VMS was so good you'd have a DS10 or 15 at home and wouldn't need a PC and Linux, or could it be that the application set is so tiny it makes zero sense to have VMS as a PC replacement?
And if I wanted an antiquated batch OS I'd choose MPE over VMS any day of the week, at least MPE was POSIX compliant for years, so you could do simple stuff like "cd" rather than the horrors of "$set def $<hostname>$<drive>:".
No, I don't have Vista on any of my systems (do I sound that crazy!?!?! - OK, don't answer that one!), BUT this is a BETA of an SP so I am not surprised it needs several reboots. It is only after the bugs have been ironed out that the M$ team will then work on making it a single-reboot install when it goes GOLD. I have done work with Linux updates (and VMS patches) where there was a reboot after every patch..... This whole process is just like XP - lots of bad noise followed by gradual acceptance followed by resistance to upgrade. Just like XP, I will let some other mugs find the bugs, then in a year's time I'll get my finally tested and capable Vista, but not before then.
Paris Hilton 'cos I'm being steretypically sexist and assuming your post was due to blondeness! :P
The previous one had problems with suspending, and turning monitors off and on - not so with this release.
Vista x64 so far is fast, stable, and I quite like the Unix subsystem. Given some interface and UAC tweaks, it might even be better than XP.
I need to bash it a bit more to see if there's any showstoppers, but so far I've seen zero problems with this beta (more than could be said for previous ones).
Now all Microsoft need to do is kick driver writers up the arse to improve the quality of their work..
Please tell us what Ubuntu forum you found that is friendly and helpful.
Seriously, I use Ubuntu in a VM as I need to write software that works under Linux, but I avoid it as much as possible because I frequently find I have small problems and when I drop into a forum to ask for help I invariably get some form of "If you don't understand that then you are to stupid to use a real OS so f**k off back to Bill and s**k his ****" or "If you had any sense you would have Googled that before asking here so wouldn't need to ask - so we're not going to tell you"
If I ever have a Windows problem that needs to be asked in a forum I get tons of helpful and friendly advice.
I really want to break free from M$, but it seems that I still don't qualify to be let into the "Real Geeks Club" which would allow me to get things running properly.
Seriously guys, the whole Windows management is easier than Unix/Linux is overrated. It all depends which solution you chose/implemented. I don't find one harder than the other.
That being said, to the man cursing after Bill Gates (who stepped off long time ago), use something else, make your heart happy.
"Were in the process of installing this on all our desktops at the bank (to fix the file transfer issue) and haven't had any problems with it. It's a lot easier than doing Unix."
Hopefully, you are joking. If not, hopefully you are well paid by Bill. If not, then hopefully your bank is not one that i use.........
My guess would be that the files being replaced are system files that can't be replaced easily when the machine is running (due to security settings) and, also, may reside in memory that is not addressable once the system is running (again, for security reasons). However, that's just a guess based upon some of Vista's features I've seen mentioned -- so it's probably wrong.
On the same subject, am I the only one who found that "restart now" when installing Windows programs and updates has always actually meant "reboot twice", in order to remove run-once registry keys and the like?
Anyhow, I don't know what the fuss is about here -- at least you don't have to recompile the kernel to upgrade. ;~)
"the stink was/is getting soo bad, that M$ began trying to cover it up with the Windows Vista Service Pack 1 RC Refresh, which provides a thicker chrome plating for the biggest turd ever dropped anywhere period."
Ask permission to use it as a quote for my (private) email... Your are poetry man!
Paris because it's far more interesting than a SP.
permission granted :)
Also I've been meaning to mention that I have recently checked out Ubuntu, actually Kubuntu, coz I like KDE. Its smooth sailing, the control panel is lots simpler than even XP, well at least the classic view, then again the default view isn't very functional. And it works well.
Also its noticeably faster than XP on the same machine. I've worked on machines considerably more capable than my own running Vista, and in all honesty it was just as fast as a P100 running windows 95, except for the constant nagging ... so I'm not letting that crap anywher near my personal computer(s).
I bought a laptop with Vista home premium installed, had so much bother with it I wiped it off and went to XP on the laptop (plus it certainly didnt have enough ram to run vista, 1gb). I vowed never to return again, but I bought a geforce 8800gt and decided to "upgrade" my main machine to Vista Ultimate X64 and chuck another 2gb memory in it (4gb now). I have to say it has never once crashed and has behaved impeccably, older hardware drivers are obviously a problem but apart from that, dare I say it, it has behaved even better than XP.
Sure I turned off the fast search and modded it a little for quicker system performance, but it has honestly been stable as a rock. Am surprised myself, but am gutted I fell into the hype (which is unlike me, cynical bas*tard!) of DX10 which was my main reason for switching. But it has been solid must say.
been running vista at home, and testing for use here in a production environment, and I have to say it won me over. Yeah, I know, theres still a lot of bugs and glitches to iron out, many of them I suspect more due to user error than anything else. Most of the problems I've had has been either driver-related (in the early days) or having to upgrade hardware to get the best out of it.
I can understand everyones comments regarding this new SP release, but lets be realistic, its public beta testing. The SP is an RC, not a final release, and the whole point is to get it ready for release. Kudos to M$ for fleecing us and using us for free testing, but remember, before you install the final release you WILL HAVE TO UNINSTALL the beta. If you don't like it then wait.
I also find it quite telling that there are two camps here: The "oh no I never will" camp, and the "actually we have and its been fine, really" camp.
For everyone thats bashing vista (for whatever reason) why oh why don't you evaluate it before you write it off? a lot of guys here are IT pro's, yet throwing away a lot of good features by not even bothering to evaluate it...the changes to group policy alone are enough to make me think about introducing to my LAN environment.
:) Flame away.
mines the silver all-in-one asbestos suit btw
OK. so the biggest gripe about Microsoft is that they don't release patches as fast as linux people do, cause they wait for a certain day for a release day. Another issue is that they don't listen to bugs immediately and send out a new fix.
So now they send out a SP1 because they have it, and all the linux guys start ranting because they released a patch early and expect you to report bugs so they can fix it for other people...I'm kinda curious what would have happened if they'd called it a release candidate, would that have appeased everyone?
Seriously people, did Microsoft punch you in the testicles or something as children? Maybe vista runs a little slower than XP, but you know what else it does? It's more stable, I think I've had to restart it cause it's hung itself twice in the last 5 months. I think I was lucky to go 2 weeks with a record like that. When a program crashes (yes it does happen, but you should see how badly I treat these things), you can shut it down and start it up again, no problem.
Hands up everyone who tried vista the week it was released and decided it was crap and never touched it again, yeah, you know who you are. I've had people ask me why their stuff isn't working, I ask them when they last updated...they say June...and then I laugh. Would you run Ubuntu without updates? hell no, so why is it so bad that Vista needs them too.
I run VIsta because I don't care that other things are X more protected against things. I run Vista because I want everything I have to run perfectly. And so far I've had 3 things not work. Tribes 2, and I'm not positive I installed perfectly in the first place. My favourite IDE didn't work properly when compiling .c files, worked just fine if I called them .cpp though, might have been because they haven't released an update in 3 years. Finally, I had to mess around with some properties to get Nintendo DS compiler to work with the library I use because they haven't updated it yet to the base library that does work with Vista.
"Now if they could only make Ubuntu as useable as Windows (i.e. no command line stuff at all, unless you really, really want to) then 'they' could be on to a winner."
One word. Registry.
A longer sentence.... Doing some fixes and tweaks under Windows won't involve the command line, but involves doing equally cryptic stuff involving the registry and the like. Just saying...
And I have to pitch in with the others saying it's daft for a service pack to need 3 reboots to install 8-).
nor any business need that I can see. I've had Vista for two days now. I'm in a government office and the Boss wants us support dweebs to get a handle on Vista before it gets deployed sometime in the future.
None of our infrastructure seems ready for this. Group policy settings that made sure Win2K and XP systems checked our approved server for "Windows Updates" means Vista boxes can't get updates from MS. It gives me nothing but DNS errors. Same for trying to "authenticate" the site-licensed OS. Security settings of antivirus and spyware enterprise solutions fail as well and require upgrading the entire business just to support even a single Vista box.
Fortunately the Microsoft SMS stuff seems to work okay. Tho msi packages created and tested on w2K and XP fail 2/3 of the time.
Plus, even with everything (widgets, transparencies, UAC) turned off, I still lose over a third of my RAM even while having no apps open or in the background, and no non-Vista processes running.
So even if we have our entire software infrastructure (security, installation packages, AV, updates, firewall configuration, technician training) done to support Vista, what do we gain? Not speed, since there's the 30-34% RAM hit. Not security, since we control that pretty well through group policy, on site controlled servers for updates, reasonably effective managed enterprise AV and a nice set of dedicated Unix based firewalls already. Plus the need for machines to contact MS to "verify" that they're still "genuine". Ease of use? Nothing looks easier than XP, plus has a learning curve. Multimedia and DX10 isn't a concern for work related use. Cost savings? HA! Cost of new license, user and tech training, new applications since stuff that worked in W2K and XP doesn't always work in Vista, cost in administrators' time to reconfigure and test enterprise control and security settings, and then having SMS guys rework all the packaging for the apps that will still work on Vista.
Why did I volunteer to install it, you may ask...so when i tell people the truth of Vista they can't say I didn't use it, or try to use it. They can't truthfully claim I'm just a M$ Hater and going off blog propaganda.
If it wasn't for DX10 and gaming, Vista would be absolutely USELESS. Even then, I am seriously doubting I'll install it on my game machine anytime soon. Deploying Vista in a preexisting corporate environment, dangerous. Almost criminally so. Government agencies should be discouraged legally from using it.
In 26 days this Vista install will fail because I can't even activate it in a proper (and I use that term very loosely) secured business environment. Nor can I experiment with the service packs (or even download the previous SP!) because of Vista's demand for a completely separate setup in the background.
Much has been griped about here regarding the installation of SP1 and I wanted to share a little rationale for the 3-reboot dance.
A couple of words to the wise - don't underestimate the depth and breadth of the fixes implemented in SP1. As C commented on above, the full installation pack is in the order of 450MB. But what he didn't note was that this full installer includes the localized binaries for some 20+ languages and some of those asian languages really eat up space. If you're just updating your westernized instance of Vista (e.g. US, UK, FR, DE, etc), your machine will only actually need around 95MB of binaries.
Here's (roughly) why Vista needs three reboots:
1) Copy updates to the File & Network IO stacks that solve several reliability & perf issues.
2) Reboot #1 to ensure those updates complete. Reboot since you can't "stop" the file system mid-operation (on practically any OS let alone Windows).
3) Now copy the new kernel and system updates that fix issues relating to hard-core stuff like CPU scheduling, memory management, various HW, ACPI, etc.
4) Reboot #2 because you can't restart your kernel without rebooting the machine (on any OS, let alone Windows)
5) Run post-patch updates, fixing up configuration & registry, run diagnostics and installation validation to ensure that everything went okay.
6) Reboot #3 so that the OS starts up in post-update goodness, running the latest binaries, accessing the correspondingly scrubbed & updated configuration and data.
Could this all have been done with fewer reboots? Perhaps, but in order to do so, you'd be locked out of your machine anyway to make sure that the updater could patch whatever it needed being interrupted by the apps that you happen to be using at that moment. So it doesn't really matter how many reboots you need for a major SP installation, of any OS, it's best to start it off and go grab a coffee or lunch and then come back to your updated machine.
Having done the install-uninstall-reinstall dance with 14 successive builds of SP1 now with not one crash or issue, I can certainly attest to the quality of this release (except on my old machine at home which ended up being motherboard issues). Of course, YMMV depending on the apps that you're using and the hardware you've installed, but the thousands of others I know who've installed SP1 and are loving it gives me confidence that your experience will most likely be a positive one.
Finally a wise word from someone who went through the same train of thought than our IT dept here.
If you leave emotions and harsh feelings aside, and just rationally analayze what you could do with Vista
that you really couldn't get done with XP (in a professional environment) and then subsequently sum up the
resources required to roll this out on a large scale, it simply isn't worth the bother.
No yelling, no bashing, no Linux motivated anti M$ propaganda:
Just plain and simply not worth the bother.
"For everyone thats bashing vista (for whatever reason) why oh why don't you evaluate it before you write it off? a lot of guys here are IT pro's, yet throwing away a lot of good features by not even bothering to evaluate it"
That was a quote from stalker.
Now, i am an IT guy. I've been in two different companies since Vista was released. Both companies evaluated Vista and both said "no way". I'm not just bashing Vista because it's popular, i'm bashing Vista because in a secure proffesional environment it just isn't useable. The two companies i cannot name, but i can say that one was a top level University and the other is a large government run organisation. Both are wiping any new computer they buy because both realise that it is unrealistic to run this dog turd of an OS.
From the WINSTA fanboy next door. when asked whether he installed said service pack: "I did. Did you? No? Well don't. It's not working, and impossible to remove cleanly, fucked up my system completely."
And he's got pre-release versions of VISTA installed for almost 2 years now. He also owns (and proudly wears) Windows T-shirts and cap. He used to say that VISTA is the best thing ever... till now.
We all knew that MS actually sells beta versions of all their stuff, now they're releasing pre-alpha stuff. Maybe the first step towards open source?