Windows Vista - From Whiny 2-year-old to Snotty Teenager

[Mangetout]

So your ‘Wow’ hasn’t started yet? Or was it ‘Wow, this sucks!’?

[JRDelirious]

I’m with Seven; all signs are that the latest XP I should be able to hold on a couple of years until decent SPs for Vista are out.

And in any case, Guttman’s article is something all right… makes me feel kinda wise that I wasn’t buying into the whole “use the PC as your home’s single unified media/information center” business. I am a believer in dedicated appliances, hell, my cell phone doesn’t even have a camera.

[Testy]

So what do I need Vista for? I’m running XP on one system and Fedora Core on another and haven’t found anything yet that I can’t get done on one or the other of those.
Is there something specific that Vista does that can’t be done on an XP or UNIX/LINUX system? The Aero I/F looks nice but I’m not willing to shell out the bucks for a new OS just because it “looks really cool.” As far as the enhanced security goes, I seem to be doing OK with a router, Norton, and common sense.

Maybe I’m missing something but there seem to be very few advantages to Vista and they are outweighed by the thought of ceding control of my PC to Bill Gates, Sony, and the RIAA/MPAA. The thought of an OS that is deliberately designed to resist me doing anything I want to do drives me into an absolute rage. It seems that Gates & Co. have forgotten who their customers are.

Regards

Testy

[bdgr]

@Testy

So what do I need Vista for? I’m running XP on one system and Fedora Core on another and haven’t found anything yet that I can’t get done on one or the other of those.
Is there something specific that Vista does that can’t be done on an XP or UNIX/LINUX system? The Aero I/F looks nice but I’m not willing to shell out the bucks for a new OS just because it “looks really cool.” As far as the enhanced security goes, I seem to be doing OK with a router, Norton, and common sense.

Maybe I’m missing something but there seem to be very few advantages to Vista and they are outweighed by the thought of ceding control of my PC to Bill Gates, Sony, and the RIAA/MPAA. The thought of an OS that is deliberately designed to resist me doing anything I want to do drives me into an absolute rage. It seems that Gates & Co. have forgotten who their customers are.

Regards

Testy

Well, for the first part, no you dont need vista for anything. It’s kinda nice, I like the way it handles but XP works fine for most people.

Even though I make my living with a coffee house I still do contract work in IT and I build custom notebook PC’s for people so I need to know Vista and need to know it works on my computers. (it does, except for the built in web cam).

But I just dont see the ceding control of the OS, nor do I see that is deliberatley designed to resist me doing anything at all.

If some App I have trys to access the internet or modify the registry I want to know it. and I want the chance to tell it no. To me it’s giving me more control not less.

[Testy]

@bdgr

Well, for the first part, no you dont need vista for anything. It’s kinda nice, I like the way it handles but XP works fine for most people.

Even though I make my living with a coffee house I still do contract work in IT and I build custom notebook PC’s for people so I need to know Vista and need to know it works on my computers. (it does, except for the built in web cam).

But I just dont see the ceding control of the OS, nor do I see that is deliberatley designed to resist me doing anything at all.

If some App I have trys to access the internet or modify the registry I want to know it. and I want the chance to tell it no. To me it’s giving me more control not less.

bdgr
Thanks for this. Since I made this post I’ve been browsing around a little. I don’t know how reliable some of the sites were but the more I look into it the less I like Vista.
Several items bother me:

a) The requirement to repeatedlyverify I have a legal OS.

b) The whole DRM thing. I rarely watch movies but I’d really resent being told I couldn’t or having the system sneakily de-rez something because I hadn’t invested in a new graphics/sound card/monitor. (This is where the “actively resist me” part of my previous post comes in.)

Right now I’m running an Nvidia Geoforce and displaying on an old 28" monitor made for professional photogrammetry use. It’s a beautiful setup and I don’t see what Vista delivers that makes it worth my while to scrap all this and replace it.

c) The whole “tilt-bits” idea bothers me as well. These seem to be a deliberately introduced flaws waiting to happen.

You mention having the opportunity to stop things accessing the 'net or modifying the registry. I’m in complete agreement with that but as far as the 'net access goes, I already have that with Norton and it seems to work well. The registry access can also be stopped using various 3rd-party applications.

Regards

Testy

[Mangetout]

@Testy

So what do I need Vista for? I’m running XP on one system and Fedora Core on another and haven’t found anything yet that I can’t get done on one or the other of those.
Is there something specific that Vista does that can’t be done on an XP or UNIX/LINUX system? The Aero I/F looks nice but I’m not willing to shell out the bucks for a new OS just because it “looks really cool.” As far as the enhanced security goes, I seem to be doing OK with a router, Norton, and common sense.

As I expect you probably already know, if you want ‘looks really cool’, Linux can do that with Beryl, and ‘looks really cool’ is almost passé on the Apple platform, it’s been there so long.

MS is really late to market with their implementation of a flashy graphical interface and as I understand it, theirs is a bit… well… limp compared to the competition.

[bdgr]

@Testy

bdgr
Thanks for this. Since I made this post I’ve been browsing around a little. I don’t know how reliable some of the sites were but the more I look into it the less I like Vista.
Several items bother me:

a) The requirement to repeatedlyverify I have a legal OS.

I agree. It’s damned annoying. When I was running XP generally avoided activation. It still can be done with Vista, but you miss out on a bunch of stuff…especially with ultimate. I can live with it, I can understand why they do it, but I don’t like it.

b) The whole DRM thing. I rarely watch movies but I’d really resent being told I couldn’t or having the system sneakily de-rez something because I hadn’t invested in a new graphics/sound card/monitor. (This is where the “actively resist me” part of my previous post comes in.)
Right now I’m running an Nvidia Geoforce and displaying on an old 28" monitor made for professional photogrammetry use. It’s a beautiful setup and I don’t see what Vista delivers that makes it worth my while to scrap all this and replace it.

You wouldn’t have to. the derez thing only effects high def signals going to TV’s and such. Your monitor wont be effected.

c) The whole “tilt-bits” idea bothers me as well. These seem to be a deliberately introduced flaws waiting to happen.

Honestly, thats the one area mentioned here that I haven’t really read up on. Don’t really have an opinion on it, but I will research it.

You mention having the opportunity to stop things accessing the 'net or modifying the registry. I’m in complete agreement with that but as far as the 'net access goes, I already have that with Norton and it seems to work well. The registry access can also be stopped using various 3rd-party applications.

Regards

Testy

Sure, and you can still turn off those built in checks and use third party applications. I cant stand norton, and I would rather not bother with 3rd party stuff. I like the OS to work with as little add in crap as possible because in my experiance the more third party stuff that is hacked in to do this sort of thing the less stable the system is. YMMV.

[Testy]

@Mangetout

As I expect you probably already know, if you want ‘looks really cool’, Linux can do that with Beryl, and ‘looks really cool’ is almost passé on the Apple platform, it’s been there so long.

MS is really late to market with their implementation of a flashy graphical interface and as I understand it, theirs is a bit… well… limp compared to the competition.

Mangetout

Thanks for the info. I run Fedora Core but haven’t used Beryl. I just use the standard I/F and that’s been OK so far. I’ll have to take a look at Beryl today. As you say, cool I/Fs on the Apple have been around for a while. If they were a little less proprietary, I’d buy one. Right now though, I enjoy building my own systems too much.

Regards and thanks again

Testy

[Testy]

@bdgr

I agree. It’s damned annoying. When I was running XP generally avoided activation. It still can be done with Vista, but you miss out on a bunch of stuff…especially with ultimate. I can live with it, I can understand why they do it, but I don’t like it.

Agreed. After I buy an OS or a PC or whatever, I want the manufacturer to leave me alone to get on with things.

You wouldn’t have to. the derez thing only effects high def signals going to TV’s and such. Your monitor wont be effected.

Sorry, maybe I’m missing out on something here. The new video standard is 1080i? Is that right? Now, why couldn’t I view that on my monitor? The resolution and refresh speeds are more than adequate. If this is the case and I can view the high-res video on my monitor, then doesn’t this make a mockery of the whole DRM concept of Vista? I could surely access the inside of the monitor and copy any signals I liked.

<SNIP>

Sure, and you can still turn off those built in checks and use third party applications. I cant stand norton, and I would rather not bother with 3rd party stuff. I like the OS to work with as little add in crap as possible because in my experiance the more third party stuff that is hacked in to do this sort of thing the less stable the system is. YMMV.

Well, I have to reluctantly agree with you on this. I like to keep a system as “plain vanilla” as possible. To be fair though, I tend to have a few teething troubles when I install something and after that things are fine. The only real objection I have to Norton is trying to get the damn thing back off the system. The only reliable way I’ve found to do this is to format and re-load everything. There has to be something wrong with that.

Regards

Testy

[Mangetout]

@Testy

Mangetout

Thanks for the info. I run Fedora Core but haven’t used Beryl. I just use the standard I/F and that’s been OK so far. I’ll have to take a look at Beryl today. As you say, cool I/Fs on the Apple have been around for a while. If they were a little less proprietary, I’d buy one. Right now though, I enjoy building my own systems too much.

Regards and thanks again

Testy

Beryl has so many different flashy graphical features, it’s almost annoying, but it’s highly configurable and I think the idea is that any one user would only ever switch on a subset of them. For me, transparency was useful (especially for the terminal window), being able to ‘fling’ a window onto an adjacent desktop was nice, docking was nice. Wobbly elastic windows that teleport into place and explode in flames when closed were fun, but ultimately pointless.

[Capt.Ridley_s_Shooting_Party]

@Liberal

And here’s another, much more thorough, review.

I think it’s important to keep in mind the source of reviews like this and the reviewer’s motives (look at the licence that the document was released under, this may give you a clue). Whilst there’s a few sources peppered throughout the text, many of the more substantial claims are presented without cite.

Dominic Mulligan
Linux and Windows user

[Testy]

@Mangetout

Beryl has so many different flashy graphical features, it’s almost annoying, but it’s highly configurable and I think the idea is that any one user would only ever switch on a subset of them. For me, transparency was useful (especially for the terminal window), being able to ‘fling’ a window onto an adjacent desktop was nice, docking was nice. Wobbly elastic windows that teleport into place and explode in flames when closed were fun, but ultimately pointless.

Mangetout

The thing sounds fascinating. As you say though, I doubt I’ll use the flaming windows more than a day or so. The transparency does sound useful though.

Thanks again

Testy

[Testy]

@Dominic Mulligan

I think it’s important to keep in mind the source of reviews like this and the reviewer’s motives (look at the licence that the document was released under, this may give you a clue). Whilst there’s a few sources peppered throughout the text, many of the more substantial claims are presented without cite.

Dominic Mulligan
Linux and Windows user

Dominic

I certainly take your point about the author’s possible motives. OTOH, the man has raised what seem to be serious issues and I don’t see MS responding to them in a substantive manner.
Just to be clear, I don’t think MS is satanic or anything. They have various corporate strategies that they pursue which is certainly as it should be. Right now, I’m trying to determine whether the strategies of MS line-up with my own. In the case of Vista, it seems more and more like they do not and that I need to be looking at alternative solutions.

Regards

Testy

[E-Sabbath]

DirectX 10, the latest and shinest version of DirectX is currently only available under Vista. Certain games may someday require it.
Admittedly, Vista is, in my opinion, a really good way to kill off non-console games permanently, according to what I’ve read, but DirectX 10 appears to be the only advantage it has over XP.

[Liberal]

@Dominic Mulligan

I think it’s important to keep in mind the source of reviews like this and the reviewer’s motives (look at the licence that the document was released under, this may give you a clue). Whilst there’s a few sources peppered throughout the text, many of the more substantial claims are presented without cite.

Dominic Mulligan
Linux and Windows user

Well, that’s fair to say. And I certainly have nearly zero expertise in any of it. I’d be glad to hear any rebuttal of the guy’s claims.

[Alien]

@Dominic Mulligan

I think it’s important to keep in mind the source of reviews like this and the reviewer’s motives (look at the licence that the document was released under, this may give you a clue). Whilst there’s a few sources peppered throughout the text, many of the more substantial claims are presented without cite.

Dominic Mulligan
Linux and Windows user

Gutman’s paper is discussed at Wikipedia.

Great rant, btw.

[slaphead]

@ParentalAdvisory

blame the fucking idiots that have open attachtments all these years from those whom they don’t know. Blame the same fucking morons for downloading programs from weird 3rd party sources that ends up crashing their PC. The only fault that MS deserves IN THIS respect, like everything else that’s big in this world, MS simply folded to the majority of minority complaints and put this bullshit in.

So now they have changed the default action for install to include one extra mouseclick. What’s that supposed to achieve? All the chumps who clicked ‘OK’ when asked if they want to install “Free Download Accellerator w/arserape-wrm.exe” will still click OK, and they’ll happily click “Allow” when asked again, because they have no clue what they are doing. What a huge leap forward for security. It’s not as if it would have been THAT hard to add a new step to the setup wizard, offering a choice of:
[ul]
[li]Annoying MS-style authorization popups, [/li][li]Annoying Mac-style authentication popups[/li][li]Nothing, because the user either knows what they’re playing at or has no clue at all - either way any programme that starts installing will finish installing as Admin[/li][/ul]

And operating systems are nothing like Mushroom soup. They’re more like underpants, in that they’re not really that exciting, but anyone who feels theirs is unduly restrictive can’t help bitching about it endlessly despite the chorus of “We don’t CARE!!!” arising all around them.

[Alien]

@slaphead

So now they have changed the default action for install to include one extra mouseclick. What’s that supposed to achieve? All the chumps who clicked ‘OK’ when asked if they want to install “Free Download Accellerator w/arserape-wrm.exe” will still click OK, and they’ll happily click “Allow” when asked again, because they have no clue what they are doing.

Not exactly. Most spyware installs silently, without the user’s knowledge. In Vista users are warned when that happens. It wont save the dumbasses who wants their free porn, but it should make a difference for the rest of us.

[bdgr]

@Alien

Gutman’s paper is discussed at Wikipedia.

Great rant, btw.

Thanks for the link.

I especially like this part:

Microsoft has published a blog entry with “Twenty Questions (and Answers)” on Windows Vista Content Protection, intending to refute some of Gutmann’s arguments[16].

Paul Smith, a Microsoft MVP and beta-tester, has written a response to Gutmann’s paper in which he counters some of his arguments[17]. Specifically, he says:

* Microsoft is not to blame for these measures, they have been forced to do this by the movie studios.

* The Protected Video Path will not actually be used for quite a while. There is said to be an agreement between Microsoft and Sony that Blu-Ray discs will not actually mandate protection until at least 2010, possibly even 2012.[18]

* Vista does not degrade or refuse to play any existing media, CDs or DVDs. The protected data paths are only activated if protected content requires it.

* Users of other operating systems such as GNU/Linux or Mac OS X will not have legal access to this kind of premium content at all, however it is likely that software will be eventually engineered to facilitate viewing without restrictions and without asking permission from the movie industry.

So basically, the video degrade thing will only happen down the line, and only with stuff you wont be able to watch at all in XP. Non-issue.

[Little_Plastic_Ninja]

I have to wonder quite seriously how the movie studios forced Microsoft into ANYTHING.

Microsoft is freaking huge and incredibly profitable. What can the movie studios do against them? Refuse to make their DVDs playable on computers? That’s going to go over like a ton of bricks with their customers. Sue them because they aren’t properly protecting the studios’ copyrights? That’s not Microsoft’s lookout, it’s the studios’. It should not be the responsibility of Microsoft to create security for Disney et al.

If Microsoft can’t keep their own operating system proof against worms and backdoors specifically geared toward them, I see no reason that they should be considered liable for the security of completely separate companies.