I have had it with Vista
-
Vista posts should be moved to the SoapBox, along with politics and religion posts.
----- If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby. -- Unknown God is the only being who, to rule, does not need to exist. -- Charles Baudelaire
Yea, really, there is NO WAY anyone in their right mind would consider Windows Vista "kid sister" safe. X|
:..::. Douglas H. Troy ::..
Bad Astronomy |VCF|wxWidgets|WTL -
I have had it with Vista. Seriously, I cannot even fathom how people can use it at all. Every time I use it I become convinced it should be given out free because it's impossible to use it. I've got too many grudges to list and I'm afraid it will bore you to death so I'll just give the worst offenders. UAC. I don't mind it, in fact I like the idea. Say, system administrator wants to install program while pc-user with limited rights is still logged on. In the old times, that user had to save all his work and log off so that sysadmin could login and install program. Now it's much more convenient, just type admin password in the UAC box and you can install the program. However, why does it have to ask me twice for every action? Say I click on installer, it first warns me that this action will require administrative privileges, after I click "OK" only then it actually asks me to authorize action. Why can't they just ask to authorize action once without useless warning dialog, why do I have to click twice for every action? Reminds me of some coding horror stories, "Are you sure you want to delete this file?" *click*, "Are you really really sure you want to delete this file?" Same thing with everything. Wanted to create new folder for MPC in Program Files, it first warned me that this action will require admin privileges, then it actually asked me to continue. A simple process of creating a new directory under admin account now involves two dialogs besides standard right click -> new directory and typing a name. What should have been just typing up a name becomes a 20 second process. Great. Directory read/write access is a mess. Had a config file for one of the custom apps located in D:\AA\App\BIN\Release\cfg.xml, tried to modify it and save it, got a cryptic error that windows cannot save it because file does not exist. Uhmmmm, what? What am I editing then right now? It then offers option to save as, at which point I try to save it with the same name, it then says file already exists, do you want to overwrite? Uhmmm, didn't you just tell me you couldn't locate this very same file? Oooooook... So I click overwrite, it says it can't do it because file doesn't exist. The circle of life is now complete. Wash, Rinse, Repeat. Network/Program Files access is s mess as well. Was trying to copy file from network resource yesterday. The remote machine was XP and was not on a domain so as usual I just mapped D$ drive using admin password and tried to copy files into Program Files folder. First it said the network drive is in
I checked out some laptops over the weekend, and I checked out a few with much better specs than my current one. The difference was that they were running Vista. I was amazed that my current one (using XP) completely clew away the new laptops running Vista. It seems counter-intuitive that a newer, more powerful machine would make me feel better about my existing one.
-
I have had it with Vista. Seriously, I cannot even fathom how people can use it at all. Every time I use it I become convinced it should be given out free because it's impossible to use it. I've got too many grudges to list and I'm afraid it will bore you to death so I'll just give the worst offenders. UAC. I don't mind it, in fact I like the idea. Say, system administrator wants to install program while pc-user with limited rights is still logged on. In the old times, that user had to save all his work and log off so that sysadmin could login and install program. Now it's much more convenient, just type admin password in the UAC box and you can install the program. However, why does it have to ask me twice for every action? Say I click on installer, it first warns me that this action will require administrative privileges, after I click "OK" only then it actually asks me to authorize action. Why can't they just ask to authorize action once without useless warning dialog, why do I have to click twice for every action? Reminds me of some coding horror stories, "Are you sure you want to delete this file?" *click*, "Are you really really sure you want to delete this file?" Same thing with everything. Wanted to create new folder for MPC in Program Files, it first warned me that this action will require admin privileges, then it actually asked me to continue. A simple process of creating a new directory under admin account now involves two dialogs besides standard right click -> new directory and typing a name. What should have been just typing up a name becomes a 20 second process. Great. Directory read/write access is a mess. Had a config file for one of the custom apps located in D:\AA\App\BIN\Release\cfg.xml, tried to modify it and save it, got a cryptic error that windows cannot save it because file does not exist. Uhmmmm, what? What am I editing then right now? It then offers option to save as, at which point I try to save it with the same name, it then says file already exists, do you want to overwrite? Uhmmm, didn't you just tell me you couldn't locate this very same file? Oooooook... So I click overwrite, it says it can't do it because file doesn't exist. The circle of life is now complete. Wash, Rinse, Repeat. Network/Program Files access is s mess as well. Was trying to copy file from network resource yesterday. The remote machine was XP and was not on a domain so as usual I just mapped D$ drive using admin password and tried to copy files into Program Files folder. First it said the network drive is in
The major adversary of Windows Vista is Windows XP. And the dirty game of MS will take down Windows XP soon... :mad::sigh:
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.(John 3:16) :badger:
-
I have had it with Vista. Seriously, I cannot even fathom how people can use it at all. Every time I use it I become convinced it should be given out free because it's impossible to use it. I've got too many grudges to list and I'm afraid it will bore you to death so I'll just give the worst offenders. UAC. I don't mind it, in fact I like the idea. Say, system administrator wants to install program while pc-user with limited rights is still logged on. In the old times, that user had to save all his work and log off so that sysadmin could login and install program. Now it's much more convenient, just type admin password in the UAC box and you can install the program. However, why does it have to ask me twice for every action? Say I click on installer, it first warns me that this action will require administrative privileges, after I click "OK" only then it actually asks me to authorize action. Why can't they just ask to authorize action once without useless warning dialog, why do I have to click twice for every action? Reminds me of some coding horror stories, "Are you sure you want to delete this file?" *click*, "Are you really really sure you want to delete this file?" Same thing with everything. Wanted to create new folder for MPC in Program Files, it first warned me that this action will require admin privileges, then it actually asked me to continue. A simple process of creating a new directory under admin account now involves two dialogs besides standard right click -> new directory and typing a name. What should have been just typing up a name becomes a 20 second process. Great. Directory read/write access is a mess. Had a config file for one of the custom apps located in D:\AA\App\BIN\Release\cfg.xml, tried to modify it and save it, got a cryptic error that windows cannot save it because file does not exist. Uhmmmm, what? What am I editing then right now? It then offers option to save as, at which point I try to save it with the same name, it then says file already exists, do you want to overwrite? Uhmmm, didn't you just tell me you couldn't locate this very same file? Oooooook... So I click overwrite, it says it can't do it because file doesn't exist. The circle of life is now complete. Wash, Rinse, Repeat. Network/Program Files access is s mess as well. Was trying to copy file from network resource yesterday. The remote machine was XP and was not on a domain so as usual I just mapped D$ drive using admin password and tried to copy files into Program Files folder. First it said the network drive is in
With you totally on this one. All our work PC's are XP Pro, except a couple of older ones for the accounts bunnies which are Home. We have one 95 still running because it has ancient information that no-one wants to be responsible for dumping. All is well, everyone is happy. Sales Director wants a new Laptop. She gets a LapDOG, Welcome to VISTAWORLD! So many problems trying to show her how to use it, move old files in, transfer programs and data etc, she keeps complaining it is slow, and that it keeps asking if she is sure, she wants to do one thing and it assumes she is stupid and wants something else. (She is not computer savvy to be sure, but she not a complete muggle). It is unbecoming of a 42 year old woman to be swearing like a sailor every time she wants to use her Laptop. She wants to Backgrade to XP, and having experienced it, I don't blame her. I might consider Vista in about 10 years when all the problems have been patched!
-
I have had it with Vista. Seriously, I cannot even fathom how people can use it at all. Every time I use it I become convinced it should be given out free because it's impossible to use it. I've got too many grudges to list and I'm afraid it will bore you to death so I'll just give the worst offenders. UAC. I don't mind it, in fact I like the idea. Say, system administrator wants to install program while pc-user with limited rights is still logged on. In the old times, that user had to save all his work and log off so that sysadmin could login and install program. Now it's much more convenient, just type admin password in the UAC box and you can install the program. However, why does it have to ask me twice for every action? Say I click on installer, it first warns me that this action will require administrative privileges, after I click "OK" only then it actually asks me to authorize action. Why can't they just ask to authorize action once without useless warning dialog, why do I have to click twice for every action? Reminds me of some coding horror stories, "Are you sure you want to delete this file?" *click*, "Are you really really sure you want to delete this file?" Same thing with everything. Wanted to create new folder for MPC in Program Files, it first warned me that this action will require admin privileges, then it actually asked me to continue. A simple process of creating a new directory under admin account now involves two dialogs besides standard right click -> new directory and typing a name. What should have been just typing up a name becomes a 20 second process. Great. Directory read/write access is a mess. Had a config file for one of the custom apps located in D:\AA\App\BIN\Release\cfg.xml, tried to modify it and save it, got a cryptic error that windows cannot save it because file does not exist. Uhmmmm, what? What am I editing then right now? It then offers option to save as, at which point I try to save it with the same name, it then says file already exists, do you want to overwrite? Uhmmm, didn't you just tell me you couldn't locate this very same file? Oooooook... So I click overwrite, it says it can't do it because file doesn't exist. The circle of life is now complete. Wash, Rinse, Repeat. Network/Program Files access is s mess as well. Was trying to copy file from network resource yesterday. The remote machine was XP and was not on a domain so as usual I just mapped D$ drive using admin password and tried to copy files into Program Files folder. First it said the network drive is in
Well all I can say is I and many others here have found Vista to be fine without any major issues. I have seen that estimating transfer time thing and it's a general annoyance they are apparently changing or fixing. Aside from that the rest was just learning about security etc. Over the months I've found that it seems that Vista is in general working fine for people with new hardware designed for Vista and a hassle for people with older hardware upgrading to Vista although the odd person has reported that their designed for Vista machine is problematic but in reading between the lines it seems likely the company that built the computer didn't *really* make sure it was ready for Vista. It's all irrelevant to be honest, if you want to continue to be a developer writing software for end users you better get acquainted with Vista and you better get the hardware that will run it properly or time will pass you by.
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
-
I have had it with Vista. Seriously, I cannot even fathom how people can use it at all. Every time I use it I become convinced it should be given out free because it's impossible to use it. I've got too many grudges to list and I'm afraid it will bore you to death so I'll just give the worst offenders. UAC. I don't mind it, in fact I like the idea. Say, system administrator wants to install program while pc-user with limited rights is still logged on. In the old times, that user had to save all his work and log off so that sysadmin could login and install program. Now it's much more convenient, just type admin password in the UAC box and you can install the program. However, why does it have to ask me twice for every action? Say I click on installer, it first warns me that this action will require administrative privileges, after I click "OK" only then it actually asks me to authorize action. Why can't they just ask to authorize action once without useless warning dialog, why do I have to click twice for every action? Reminds me of some coding horror stories, "Are you sure you want to delete this file?" *click*, "Are you really really sure you want to delete this file?" Same thing with everything. Wanted to create new folder for MPC in Program Files, it first warned me that this action will require admin privileges, then it actually asked me to continue. A simple process of creating a new directory under admin account now involves two dialogs besides standard right click -> new directory and typing a name. What should have been just typing up a name becomes a 20 second process. Great. Directory read/write access is a mess. Had a config file for one of the custom apps located in D:\AA\App\BIN\Release\cfg.xml, tried to modify it and save it, got a cryptic error that windows cannot save it because file does not exist. Uhmmmm, what? What am I editing then right now? It then offers option to save as, at which point I try to save it with the same name, it then says file already exists, do you want to overwrite? Uhmmm, didn't you just tell me you couldn't locate this very same file? Oooooook... So I click overwrite, it says it can't do it because file doesn't exist. The circle of life is now complete. Wash, Rinse, Repeat. Network/Program Files access is s mess as well. Was trying to copy file from network resource yesterday. The remote machine was XP and was not on a domain so as usual I just mapped D$ drive using admin password and tried to copy files into Program Files folder. First it said the network drive is in
JazzJackRabbit wrote:
Directory read/write access is a mess.
This was a mess with XP if you had security turned up high. Anyone who has written for a DITSCAP environment knows these problems under XP long before Vista was a pipe dream, it is just you are facing them for the first time under Vista so you are reacting to them as a Vista concern.
JazzJackRabbit wrote:
The remote machine was XP and was not on a domain so as usual I just mapped D$ drive using admin password and tried to copy files into Program Files folder
repeat problems under XP, in similar circumstance. Don't blame Vista for irregular security controls between machines. When you push XP to the limit of security, you will find these exact same problems. The dfference is that XP comes tuned low in security, and you only enable that which you want. The reverse is true of Vista, you have to disable the security you don't want. If you enable everything under XP you will find these same problems.
JazzJackRabbit wrote:
And don't get me started on file transfer times.
We call them Microsoft Minutes, file estimates never match. When ever you have security turned up high (including encrypted transmission), again even with XP pro and server editions, you will slow down your file exchanges, repeat explanation, without Vista, rinse, repeat, etc. What has happened is you have gone from an unsecure network/development environment to a secure one. The same thing happens when you get a DITSCAP certified Red-Hat when you are used to any old Debian Linux you download off the net -- it would make even the happiest Linux user start drinking. The same thing happens when you go from default XP settings to a fully loaded and setup DITSCAP qualified XP system. The bad habits we have developed over the years came to bite us big-time. Sure Vista is a problem, but half the problem is us too, only half remains with Microsoft.
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
JazzJackRabbit wrote:
Directory read/write access is a mess.
This was a mess with XP if you had security turned up high. Anyone who has written for a DITSCAP environment knows these problems under XP long before Vista was a pipe dream, it is just you are facing them for the first time under Vista so you are reacting to them as a Vista concern.
JazzJackRabbit wrote:
The remote machine was XP and was not on a domain so as usual I just mapped D$ drive using admin password and tried to copy files into Program Files folder
repeat problems under XP, in similar circumstance. Don't blame Vista for irregular security controls between machines. When you push XP to the limit of security, you will find these exact same problems. The dfference is that XP comes tuned low in security, and you only enable that which you want. The reverse is true of Vista, you have to disable the security you don't want. If you enable everything under XP you will find these same problems.
JazzJackRabbit wrote:
And don't get me started on file transfer times.
We call them Microsoft Minutes, file estimates never match. When ever you have security turned up high (including encrypted transmission), again even with XP pro and server editions, you will slow down your file exchanges, repeat explanation, without Vista, rinse, repeat, etc. What has happened is you have gone from an unsecure network/development environment to a secure one. The same thing happens when you get a DITSCAP certified Red-Hat when you are used to any old Debian Linux you download off the net -- it would make even the happiest Linux user start drinking. The same thing happens when you go from default XP settings to a fully loaded and setup DITSCAP qualified XP system. The bad habits we have developed over the years came to bite us big-time. Sure Vista is a problem, but half the problem is us too, only half remains with Microsoft.
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
That is fine, but at least give me meaningful error messages. The network transfer to Program Files has absolutely nothing with inaccessible network resource. Why couldn't it just say "cannot copy to Program Files"? I would have accepted it. I think it's stupid that you cannot copy files to Program Files from network but is able so from local drive, but I would have grudgingly accepted it if Vista gave me proper error message. And why does Vista even bother showing window transfer dialog if it does not copy file (at least not to the destination folder I asked). Same with config file problem. The problem was directory access rights, not that the file did not exist. Give me the right warning/error message, such as "you do not have proper permission to modify files in this directory" instead of some bu****ap message that file does not exist and that I have to spend half an hour digging in the wrong direction trying to solve non-existing problem.
-
JazzJackRabbit wrote:
Directory read/write access is a mess.
This was a mess with XP if you had security turned up high. Anyone who has written for a DITSCAP environment knows these problems under XP long before Vista was a pipe dream, it is just you are facing them for the first time under Vista so you are reacting to them as a Vista concern.
JazzJackRabbit wrote:
The remote machine was XP and was not on a domain so as usual I just mapped D$ drive using admin password and tried to copy files into Program Files folder
repeat problems under XP, in similar circumstance. Don't blame Vista for irregular security controls between machines. When you push XP to the limit of security, you will find these exact same problems. The dfference is that XP comes tuned low in security, and you only enable that which you want. The reverse is true of Vista, you have to disable the security you don't want. If you enable everything under XP you will find these same problems.
JazzJackRabbit wrote:
And don't get me started on file transfer times.
We call them Microsoft Minutes, file estimates never match. When ever you have security turned up high (including encrypted transmission), again even with XP pro and server editions, you will slow down your file exchanges, repeat explanation, without Vista, rinse, repeat, etc. What has happened is you have gone from an unsecure network/development environment to a secure one. The same thing happens when you get a DITSCAP certified Red-Hat when you are used to any old Debian Linux you download off the net -- it would make even the happiest Linux user start drinking. The same thing happens when you go from default XP settings to a fully loaded and setup DITSCAP qualified XP system. The bad habits we have developed over the years came to bite us big-time. Sure Vista is a problem, but half the problem is us too, only half remains with Microsoft.
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
Yeah there is this as well (I pity the fool that voted you a 1). But um..what the hell is DITSCAP, sounds like dunce cap? :) I guess I could go look it up, but in context I assume it's some sort of government standard for security or something, so they should be happy about Vista no?
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
-
That is fine, but at least give me meaningful error messages. The network transfer to Program Files has absolutely nothing with inaccessible network resource. Why couldn't it just say "cannot copy to Program Files"? I would have accepted it. I think it's stupid that you cannot copy files to Program Files from network but is able so from local drive, but I would have grudgingly accepted it if Vista gave me proper error message. And why does Vista even bother showing window transfer dialog if it does not copy file (at least not to the destination folder I asked). Same with config file problem. The problem was directory access rights, not that the file did not exist. Give me the right warning/error message, such as "you do not have proper permission to modify files in this directory" instead of some bu****ap message that file does not exist and that I have to spend half an hour digging in the wrong direction trying to solve non-existing problem.
-
I have had it with Vista. Seriously, I cannot even fathom how people can use it at all. Every time I use it I become convinced it should be given out free because it's impossible to use it. I've got too many grudges to list and I'm afraid it will bore you to death so I'll just give the worst offenders. UAC. I don't mind it, in fact I like the idea. Say, system administrator wants to install program while pc-user with limited rights is still logged on. In the old times, that user had to save all his work and log off so that sysadmin could login and install program. Now it's much more convenient, just type admin password in the UAC box and you can install the program. However, why does it have to ask me twice for every action? Say I click on installer, it first warns me that this action will require administrative privileges, after I click "OK" only then it actually asks me to authorize action. Why can't they just ask to authorize action once without useless warning dialog, why do I have to click twice for every action? Reminds me of some coding horror stories, "Are you sure you want to delete this file?" *click*, "Are you really really sure you want to delete this file?" Same thing with everything. Wanted to create new folder for MPC in Program Files, it first warned me that this action will require admin privileges, then it actually asked me to continue. A simple process of creating a new directory under admin account now involves two dialogs besides standard right click -> new directory and typing a name. What should have been just typing up a name becomes a 20 second process. Great. Directory read/write access is a mess. Had a config file for one of the custom apps located in D:\AA\App\BIN\Release\cfg.xml, tried to modify it and save it, got a cryptic error that windows cannot save it because file does not exist. Uhmmmm, what? What am I editing then right now? It then offers option to save as, at which point I try to save it with the same name, it then says file already exists, do you want to overwrite? Uhmmm, didn't you just tell me you couldn't locate this very same file? Oooooook... So I click overwrite, it says it can't do it because file doesn't exist. The circle of life is now complete. Wash, Rinse, Repeat. Network/Program Files access is s mess as well. Was trying to copy file from network resource yesterday. The remote machine was XP and was not on a domain so as usual I just mapped D$ drive using admin password and tried to copy files into Program Files folder. First it said the network drive is in
I'm not going to rehash anything anyone else has said, but I had to move my School laptop back to XP because of some terrible drivers (its at least 3 years old) and I can't stand XP. I like the locked down nature of Vista on campus because... well I don't trust 99% of the other people (or the malware nestled on their machines) on campus. And its nice not having to configure for security. I'd rather open holes as needed than close them. I miss alot of the new features!
-Matt Newman
-
Yeah there is this as well (I pity the fool that voted you a 1). But um..what the hell is DITSCAP, sounds like dunce cap? :) I guess I could go look it up, but in context I assume it's some sort of government standard for security or something, so they should be happy about Vista no?
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
John Cardinal wrote:
But um..what the hell is DITSCAP
Dunce Cap?[^] that ain't far from the truth!
John Cardinal wrote:
so they should be happy about Vista no?
Actually they are not. I would go into the reasons, but primarily some things have to be secured an some things have to be "watched" they do not appreciate being shut out of the "watched" areas too. :doh:
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
I have had it with Vista. Seriously, I cannot even fathom how people can use it at all. Every time I use it I become convinced it should be given out free because it's impossible to use it. I've got too many grudges to list and I'm afraid it will bore you to death so I'll just give the worst offenders. UAC. I don't mind it, in fact I like the idea. Say, system administrator wants to install program while pc-user with limited rights is still logged on. In the old times, that user had to save all his work and log off so that sysadmin could login and install program. Now it's much more convenient, just type admin password in the UAC box and you can install the program. However, why does it have to ask me twice for every action? Say I click on installer, it first warns me that this action will require administrative privileges, after I click "OK" only then it actually asks me to authorize action. Why can't they just ask to authorize action once without useless warning dialog, why do I have to click twice for every action? Reminds me of some coding horror stories, "Are you sure you want to delete this file?" *click*, "Are you really really sure you want to delete this file?" Same thing with everything. Wanted to create new folder for MPC in Program Files, it first warned me that this action will require admin privileges, then it actually asked me to continue. A simple process of creating a new directory under admin account now involves two dialogs besides standard right click -> new directory and typing a name. What should have been just typing up a name becomes a 20 second process. Great. Directory read/write access is a mess. Had a config file for one of the custom apps located in D:\AA\App\BIN\Release\cfg.xml, tried to modify it and save it, got a cryptic error that windows cannot save it because file does not exist. Uhmmmm, what? What am I editing then right now? It then offers option to save as, at which point I try to save it with the same name, it then says file already exists, do you want to overwrite? Uhmmm, didn't you just tell me you couldn't locate this very same file? Oooooook... So I click overwrite, it says it can't do it because file doesn't exist. The circle of life is now complete. Wash, Rinse, Repeat. Network/Program Files access is s mess as well. Was trying to copy file from network resource yesterday. The remote machine was XP and was not on a domain so as usual I just mapped D$ drive using admin password and tried to copy files into Program Files folder. First it said the network drive is in
My wife has Vista on a laptop. Now all I wanted to do was set it up to print to my printer installed on my XP machine on our wireless network. It took me 2 hours to set it up. TWO friggen hours. Granted once I found the correct website on microsoft.com with all the instructions for networking to an XP machine I was able to set it up in 15 minutes. But... I'm a computer programmer for crying out loud. There is no way a non-techinal person could add a vista computer to an xp network. It is a pain in the butt. My guess is MS just wants people to uprgrade their XP machines rather then dealing with all the hassel.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
-
I have had it with Vista. Seriously, I cannot even fathom how people can use it at all. Every time I use it I become convinced it should be given out free because it's impossible to use it. I've got too many grudges to list and I'm afraid it will bore you to death so I'll just give the worst offenders. UAC. I don't mind it, in fact I like the idea. Say, system administrator wants to install program while pc-user with limited rights is still logged on. In the old times, that user had to save all his work and log off so that sysadmin could login and install program. Now it's much more convenient, just type admin password in the UAC box and you can install the program. However, why does it have to ask me twice for every action? Say I click on installer, it first warns me that this action will require administrative privileges, after I click "OK" only then it actually asks me to authorize action. Why can't they just ask to authorize action once without useless warning dialog, why do I have to click twice for every action? Reminds me of some coding horror stories, "Are you sure you want to delete this file?" *click*, "Are you really really sure you want to delete this file?" Same thing with everything. Wanted to create new folder for MPC in Program Files, it first warned me that this action will require admin privileges, then it actually asked me to continue. A simple process of creating a new directory under admin account now involves two dialogs besides standard right click -> new directory and typing a name. What should have been just typing up a name becomes a 20 second process. Great. Directory read/write access is a mess. Had a config file for one of the custom apps located in D:\AA\App\BIN\Release\cfg.xml, tried to modify it and save it, got a cryptic error that windows cannot save it because file does not exist. Uhmmmm, what? What am I editing then right now? It then offers option to save as, at which point I try to save it with the same name, it then says file already exists, do you want to overwrite? Uhmmm, didn't you just tell me you couldn't locate this very same file? Oooooook... So I click overwrite, it says it can't do it because file doesn't exist. The circle of life is now complete. Wash, Rinse, Repeat. Network/Program Files access is s mess as well. Was trying to copy file from network resource yesterday. The remote machine was XP and was not on a domain so as usual I just mapped D$ drive using admin password and tried to copy files into Program Files folder. First it said the network drive is in
*Hugs and taps on shoulder* Thank you my friend. Thank you. Thank you for making this post instead of me. But let me vent out a little... You forgot that the "Check online for a solution" button will NEVER WORK (The submit "error report" button of XP has been renamed so... :rolleyes:) I am yet to find a driver for the bluetooth device that was shipped with my tablet pc that was preloaded with vista. I select a bunch of files and press delete. A confirmation, followed by UAC prompt, followed by a very noticeable delay. It would then tell that Visual Studio is using those files. Can't it just fucking say it to me at the beginning? :mad: The new Start Menu. Wow! They've put in a lot of efforts so that it would cram all the sub-menus within the start menu window. Talk about user friendliness. Talk about my dog. Aero glass. Candy ass. Enough said. Network profiles. Gone are the days. I am running vista on a a dual core amd athalon x2 64 bit 2GB DDR2 RAM. I won't say it is way too slow, but XP is screaming fast. I don't find a reason why with increasing hardware capabilities, software should become slower and more demanding. :(( Vista. My arse. *Sorry I added up to the rant* :sigh:
Nobody can give you wiser advice than yourself. - Cicero .·´¯`·->ßRÅhmmÃ<-·´¯`·.
-
My wife has Vista on a laptop. Now all I wanted to do was set it up to print to my printer installed on my XP machine on our wireless network. It took me 2 hours to set it up. TWO friggen hours. Granted once I found the correct website on microsoft.com with all the instructions for networking to an XP machine I was able to set it up in 15 minutes. But... I'm a computer programmer for crying out loud. There is no way a non-techinal person could add a vista computer to an xp network. It is a pain in the butt. My guess is MS just wants people to uprgrade their XP machines rather then dealing with all the hassel.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
ToddHileHoffer wrote:
Now all I wanted to do was set it up to print to my printer installed on my XP machine on our wireless network. It took me 2 hours to set it up.
Just in 2 hours? You lucky bastard. How did you do that?
Nobody can give you wiser advice than yourself. - Cicero .·´¯`·->ßRÅhmmÃ<-·´¯`·.
-
I have had it with Vista. Seriously, I cannot even fathom how people can use it at all. Every time I use it I become convinced it should be given out free because it's impossible to use it. I've got too many grudges to list and I'm afraid it will bore you to death so I'll just give the worst offenders. UAC. I don't mind it, in fact I like the idea. Say, system administrator wants to install program while pc-user with limited rights is still logged on. In the old times, that user had to save all his work and log off so that sysadmin could login and install program. Now it's much more convenient, just type admin password in the UAC box and you can install the program. However, why does it have to ask me twice for every action? Say I click on installer, it first warns me that this action will require administrative privileges, after I click "OK" only then it actually asks me to authorize action. Why can't they just ask to authorize action once without useless warning dialog, why do I have to click twice for every action? Reminds me of some coding horror stories, "Are you sure you want to delete this file?" *click*, "Are you really really sure you want to delete this file?" Same thing with everything. Wanted to create new folder for MPC in Program Files, it first warned me that this action will require admin privileges, then it actually asked me to continue. A simple process of creating a new directory under admin account now involves two dialogs besides standard right click -> new directory and typing a name. What should have been just typing up a name becomes a 20 second process. Great. Directory read/write access is a mess. Had a config file for one of the custom apps located in D:\AA\App\BIN\Release\cfg.xml, tried to modify it and save it, got a cryptic error that windows cannot save it because file does not exist. Uhmmmm, what? What am I editing then right now? It then offers option to save as, at which point I try to save it with the same name, it then says file already exists, do you want to overwrite? Uhmmm, didn't you just tell me you couldn't locate this very same file? Oooooook... So I click overwrite, it says it can't do it because file doesn't exist. The circle of life is now complete. Wash, Rinse, Repeat. Network/Program Files access is s mess as well. Was trying to copy file from network resource yesterday. The remote machine was XP and was not on a domain so as usual I just mapped D$ drive using admin password and tried to copy files into Program Files folder. First it said the network drive is in
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiG7KFDYkLI[^] Vista voice recognition.
Nobody can give you wiser advice than yourself. - Cicero .·´¯`·->ßRÅhmmÃ<-·´¯`·.
-
Well all I can say is I and many others here have found Vista to be fine without any major issues. I have seen that estimating transfer time thing and it's a general annoyance they are apparently changing or fixing. Aside from that the rest was just learning about security etc. Over the months I've found that it seems that Vista is in general working fine for people with new hardware designed for Vista and a hassle for people with older hardware upgrading to Vista although the odd person has reported that their designed for Vista machine is problematic but in reading between the lines it seems likely the company that built the computer didn't *really* make sure it was ready for Vista. It's all irrelevant to be honest, if you want to continue to be a developer writing software for end users you better get acquainted with Vista and you better get the hardware that will run it properly or time will pass you by.
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
John Cardinal wrote:
It's all irrelevant to be honest, if you want to continue to be a developer writing software for end users you better get acquainted with Vista and you better get the hardware that will run it properly or time will pass you by.
That's the real bottom line. It was with a general sense of resignation that I bought a desktop for Vista development. I didn't really need another computer, but I didn't want to dual boot and have things on my primary XP box unavailable when running Vista. So, I bought (yet another) dev box because I'm working on projects that need to play nice with the latest & greatest from MS. Of course, the first thing I did was turn off the UAC crap on my primary login and set up a separate UAC controlled user for testing and debugging. Surprisingly, there were very few casualties in terms of hardware or software not playing nice. So, I'm now using the Vista box as my primary to get used to it, in all its Aero glass glory. :zzz: As you said, if you're a developer, you need to keep up with the tools of your trade, and the OS is one of them. The only reason beyond that for upgrading my other boxes to XP at the time was Remote Desktop, and it was worth it - even if each new version of Windows does run pathetically slower than its predecessor. Vista doesn't have even one such Killer App to justify its existence. Developers simply upgrade at gunpoint, because we have to. It is what it is.
Christopher Duncan Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes www.PracticalUSA.com
-
I have had it with Vista. Seriously, I cannot even fathom how people can use it at all. Every time I use it I become convinced it should be given out free because it's impossible to use it. I've got too many grudges to list and I'm afraid it will bore you to death so I'll just give the worst offenders. UAC. I don't mind it, in fact I like the idea. Say, system administrator wants to install program while pc-user with limited rights is still logged on. In the old times, that user had to save all his work and log off so that sysadmin could login and install program. Now it's much more convenient, just type admin password in the UAC box and you can install the program. However, why does it have to ask me twice for every action? Say I click on installer, it first warns me that this action will require administrative privileges, after I click "OK" only then it actually asks me to authorize action. Why can't they just ask to authorize action once without useless warning dialog, why do I have to click twice for every action? Reminds me of some coding horror stories, "Are you sure you want to delete this file?" *click*, "Are you really really sure you want to delete this file?" Same thing with everything. Wanted to create new folder for MPC in Program Files, it first warned me that this action will require admin privileges, then it actually asked me to continue. A simple process of creating a new directory under admin account now involves two dialogs besides standard right click -> new directory and typing a name. What should have been just typing up a name becomes a 20 second process. Great. Directory read/write access is a mess. Had a config file for one of the custom apps located in D:\AA\App\BIN\Release\cfg.xml, tried to modify it and save it, got a cryptic error that windows cannot save it because file does not exist. Uhmmmm, what? What am I editing then right now? It then offers option to save as, at which point I try to save it with the same name, it then says file already exists, do you want to overwrite? Uhmmm, didn't you just tell me you couldn't locate this very same file? Oooooook... So I click overwrite, it says it can't do it because file doesn't exist. The circle of life is now complete. Wash, Rinse, Repeat. Network/Program Files access is s mess as well. Was trying to copy file from network resource yesterday. The remote machine was XP and was not on a domain so as usual I just mapped D$ drive using admin password and tried to copy files into Program Files folder. First it said the network drive is in
-
John Cardinal wrote:
It's all irrelevant to be honest, if you want to continue to be a developer writing software for end users you better get acquainted with Vista and you better get the hardware that will run it properly or time will pass you by.
That's the real bottom line. It was with a general sense of resignation that I bought a desktop for Vista development. I didn't really need another computer, but I didn't want to dual boot and have things on my primary XP box unavailable when running Vista. So, I bought (yet another) dev box because I'm working on projects that need to play nice with the latest & greatest from MS. Of course, the first thing I did was turn off the UAC crap on my primary login and set up a separate UAC controlled user for testing and debugging. Surprisingly, there were very few casualties in terms of hardware or software not playing nice. So, I'm now using the Vista box as my primary to get used to it, in all its Aero glass glory. :zzz: As you said, if you're a developer, you need to keep up with the tools of your trade, and the OS is one of them. The only reason beyond that for upgrading my other boxes to XP at the time was Remote Desktop, and it was worth it - even if each new version of Windows does run pathetically slower than its predecessor. Vista doesn't have even one such Killer App to justify its existence. Developers simply upgrade at gunpoint, because we have to. It is what it is.
Christopher Duncan Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes www.PracticalUSA.com
-
Christopher Duncan wrote:
Developers simply upgrade at gunpoint, because we have to. It is what it is.
Doesn't mean we have to bend over and take it silently... :-O
Nope. Just means you have to take it.
Christopher Duncan Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes www.PracticalUSA.com
-
I have had it with Vista. Seriously, I cannot even fathom how people can use it at all. Every time I use it I become convinced it should be given out free because it's impossible to use it. I've got too many grudges to list and I'm afraid it will bore you to death so I'll just give the worst offenders. UAC. I don't mind it, in fact I like the idea. Say, system administrator wants to install program while pc-user with limited rights is still logged on. In the old times, that user had to save all his work and log off so that sysadmin could login and install program. Now it's much more convenient, just type admin password in the UAC box and you can install the program. However, why does it have to ask me twice for every action? Say I click on installer, it first warns me that this action will require administrative privileges, after I click "OK" only then it actually asks me to authorize action. Why can't they just ask to authorize action once without useless warning dialog, why do I have to click twice for every action? Reminds me of some coding horror stories, "Are you sure you want to delete this file?" *click*, "Are you really really sure you want to delete this file?" Same thing with everything. Wanted to create new folder for MPC in Program Files, it first warned me that this action will require admin privileges, then it actually asked me to continue. A simple process of creating a new directory under admin account now involves two dialogs besides standard right click -> new directory and typing a name. What should have been just typing up a name becomes a 20 second process. Great. Directory read/write access is a mess. Had a config file for one of the custom apps located in D:\AA\App\BIN\Release\cfg.xml, tried to modify it and save it, got a cryptic error that windows cannot save it because file does not exist. Uhmmmm, what? What am I editing then right now? It then offers option to save as, at which point I try to save it with the same name, it then says file already exists, do you want to overwrite? Uhmmm, didn't you just tell me you couldn't locate this very same file? Oooooook... So I click overwrite, it says it can't do it because file doesn't exist. The circle of life is now complete. Wash, Rinse, Repeat. Network/Program Files access is s mess as well. Was trying to copy file from network resource yesterday. The remote machine was XP and was not on a domain so as usual I just mapped D$ drive using admin password and tried to copy files into Program Files folder. First it said the network drive is in
Heh... I'm using Vista Business for 4 month. I've installed folowing stuff without problems: MySQL 5 PHP 5 ICQ 2003b uTorrent Firefox TheBat TotalCommander Notepad++ + alot of small things I use on my regular Windows 2003 machine I had problems with installing folowing: Microsoft Office 2003 :-) Microsoft Sql Server 2005 :-) Microsoft Visual Studio 2005 :-) Microsoft Visual Studio 2003 :-) All problems are solved right now. First of all I've turned off everything related to AERO. Second I've turned off UAC. Third I've turned off any possible feature that I thought can make my work harder. One thing I left is a Vista Basic interface with font-smoothing turned off and all fonts replaced on Tahoma. Thanks for listening.
------------------------------------------------------------ Want to be happy - do what you like!