I have had it with Vista
-
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!
Nickolay Karnaukhov wrote:
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
In other words, you've turned Vista into XP... :rolleyes:
-
Nickolay Karnaukhov wrote:
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
In other words, you've turned Vista into XP... :rolleyes:
Exactly...
------------------------------------------------------------ Want to be happy - do what you like!
-
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:
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.
If you're pointing at RD the vista situation is if anything a step backwards. With XP unless you were on a budget you'd get XPpro and have RD at home. With vista for home use you want home premium which doesn't come with RD, business has RD and is priced similar to XPpro but is missing a lot of the stuff that you'd want for a home system and ultimate is much more expensive. Potentially setting up a domain to manage things on a larger home network has also gotten alot more expensive for the same reason.
-- If you view money as inherently evil, I view it as my duty to assist in making you more virtuous.
-
Christopher Duncan wrote:
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.
If you're pointing at RD the vista situation is if anything a step backwards. With XP unless you were on a budget you'd get XPpro and have RD at home. With vista for home use you want home premium which doesn't come with RD, business has RD and is priced similar to XPpro but is missing a lot of the stuff that you'd want for a home system and ultimate is much more expensive. Potentially setting up a domain to manage things on a larger home network has also gotten alot more expensive for the same reason.
-- If you view money as inherently evil, I view it as my duty to assist in making you more virtuous.
I have half a dozen or so machines between my home office & recording studio, and all the XP boxes are running Pro, but since it's just me there's no need for a domain server. It's been a pretty nice setup overall once I got used to how much slower XP was than W2K.
dan neely wrote:
If you view money as inherently evil, I view it as my duty to assist in making you more virtuous.
Love the sig. If you need any help on that project, I have a few bank acoounts standing by. :-D
Christopher Duncan Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes www.PracticalUSA.com
-
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)
El Corazon wrote:
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.
Very well said. The UAC pains are a great example.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Roman Catholic Relevance? The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
-
John Cardinal wrote:
I've found in life that there is a finite amount of energy and wasting it bitching about the inevitable is not very practical or productiv
Are we really that far gone that we have to accept with a smile whatever crap Microsoft squeezes out? Surely the "success" of MS Bob or Windows ME indicates otherwise?
Surely you're not comparing MS Bob or ME to Vista? :doh: It's apparent Vista was rushed out, leaving some gaping problems, and the new security lockdown degrades performance and frustrates those used to admin rights, but to compare it to ME is to downplay the horrific nature of Millenium Edition.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Roman Catholic Relevance? The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
-
Surely you're not comparing MS Bob or ME to Vista? :doh: It's apparent Vista was rushed out, leaving some gaping problems, and the new security lockdown degrades performance and frustrates those used to admin rights, but to compare it to ME is to downplay the horrific nature of Millenium Edition.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Roman Catholic Relevance? The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
Judah Himango wrote:
Surely you're not comparing MS Bob or ME to Vista?
Only in that they provide evidence that Microsoft is fallible. If people don't let them know about their products deficiencies they will not be fixed. It's particularly important given their market-share.
-
I have half a dozen or so machines between my home office & recording studio, and all the XP boxes are running Pro, but since it's just me there's no need for a domain server. It's been a pretty nice setup overall once I got used to how much slower XP was than W2K.
dan neely wrote:
If you view money as inherently evil, I view it as my duty to assist in making you more virtuous.
Love the sig. If you need any help on that project, I have a few bank acoounts standing by. :-D
Christopher Duncan Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes www.PracticalUSA.com
Christopher Duncan wrote:
I have half a dozen or so machines between my home office & recording studio, and all the XP boxes are running Pro, but since it's just me there's no need for a domain server.
Neither have I so far but given the move towards having as many PCs as there are family members I could see a real value in storing all the logons in a single place if you have several kids at home. Edit: I'm single which makes PC logon practices trivial. My laptop requires a password since it leaves on a regular basis, if someone breaks in my PCs having automatic login/blank passwords is the least of my concerns.
-- If you view money as inherently evil, I view it as my duty to assist in making you more virtuous.
-
Judah Himango wrote:
Surely you're not comparing MS Bob or ME to Vista?
Only in that they provide evidence that Microsoft is fallible. If people don't let them know about their products deficiencies they will not be fixed. It's particularly important given their market-share.
Sure, they should absolutely know that Vista has problems and needs fixing and we need to let them know about that. I suspect they already know about some that will be addressed in SP1, as John mentioned. One thing that I don't think is helpful is this kind of whining. Instead of whining here, talk to MS about the problems; post on MS blogs, give some feedback to them directly. (Not saying you're whining, Mike, but there are several posts here that sure sound like it.)
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Roman Catholic Relevance? The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
-
Sure, they should absolutely know that Vista has problems and needs fixing and we need to let them know about that. I suspect they already know about some that will be addressed in SP1, as John mentioned. One thing that I don't think is helpful is this kind of whining. Instead of whining here, talk to MS about the problems; post on MS blogs, give some feedback to them directly. (Not saying you're whining, Mike, but there are several posts here that sure sound like it.)
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Roman Catholic Relevance? The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
-
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
Got my 5! [Note: This is in response to John Cardinal post, CP arranged it under the message root.....]
Rocky <>< Blog Post: Windows Live Authentication - Easy Stuff! Tech Blog Post: Vista ReadyBoost! Tech Sites: SilverlightCity.com ~ TheSilverlightDirectory.com ~ TheWPFDirectory.com
-
Sure, they should absolutely know that Vista has problems and needs fixing and we need to let them know about that. I suspect they already know about some that will be addressed in SP1, as John mentioned. One thing that I don't think is helpful is this kind of whining. Instead of whining here, talk to MS about the problems; post on MS blogs, give some feedback to them directly. (Not saying you're whining, Mike, but there are several posts here that sure sound like it.)
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Roman Catholic Relevance? The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
Judah Himango wrote:
Sure, we should absolutely know that Vista has problems and needs fixing. I suspect they already know about some that will be addressed in SP1, as John mentioned. One thing that I don't think is helpful is this kind of whining. Instead of whining here, talk to MS about the problems; post on MS blogs, give some feedback to them directly. (Not saying you're whining, Mike, but there are several posts here that sure sound like it.)
yeah, from what I understand they fixed a huge number of multiple UAC prompts during the betas. The problem I assume being making sure than in making sure that only the highest level prompt needed for the operation is always the only one shown without leaving a potential route through multiple layers that could be used for an elevation exploit.
-- If you view money as inherently evil, I view it as my duty to assist in making you more virtuous.
-
Judah Himango wrote:
One thing that I don't think is helpful is this kind of whining
Whining... venting... looking for some sympathy from your peers... it's all good.
Heh. Perhaps you're right. :)
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Roman Catholic Relevance? The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
-
Judah Himango wrote:
Sure, we should absolutely know that Vista has problems and needs fixing. I suspect they already know about some that will be addressed in SP1, as John mentioned. One thing that I don't think is helpful is this kind of whining. Instead of whining here, talk to MS about the problems; post on MS blogs, give some feedback to them directly. (Not saying you're whining, Mike, but there are several posts here that sure sound like it.)
yeah, from what I understand they fixed a huge number of multiple UAC prompts during the betas. The problem I assume being making sure than in making sure that only the highest level prompt needed for the operation is always the only one shown without leaving a potential route through multiple layers that could be used for an elevation exploit.
-- If you view money as inherently evil, I view it as my duty to assist in making you more virtuous.
dan neely wrote:
from what I understand they fixed a huge number of multiple UAC prompts during the betas.
they did a large number just in the beta alone all the way up to RC2, not sure what made it in the final. I pointed out some, others here did some, and I am sure others in other places here did many others. One of the comments that gets my goat is that some of the people who were actually telling people who wanted to "try" Vista to avoid it like the plague until SP1. And some of them are the same people complaining because Vista doesn't work on their hardware or for their methods. My hardware crashed on the first Beta I got my hands on (not yet public), I sent in the specs and the vendors and MS were notified. Not surprisingly, my hardware was working fine by release candidates. To find a problem you first must see the problem. If you never see the problem until SP1, it surprisingly will still not be fixed in SP1. :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)
-
Christopher Duncan wrote:
I have half a dozen or so machines between my home office & recording studio, and all the XP boxes are running Pro, but since it's just me there's no need for a domain server.
Neither have I so far but given the move towards having as many PCs as there are family members I could see a real value in storing all the logons in a single place if you have several kids at home. Edit: I'm single which makes PC logon practices trivial. My laptop requires a password since it leaves on a regular basis, if someone breaks in my PCs having automatic login/blank passwords is the least of my concerns.
-- If you view money as inherently evil, I view it as my duty to assist in making you more virtuous.
Absolutely. If I didn't live by myself, I'm pretty sure I'd have a domain setup and some dedicated boxes for file storage, etc.
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
Don't do this on a work computer, but take ownership of the Program Files folder away from TrustedInstaller. Or, go whole hog and take ownership of the entire drive. Give ownership of the drive to the local Administrators group. Problem solved, heh. :) Flynn
If we can't corrupt the youth of today,
the adults of tomorrow will be no fun...