Hasta La Vista, Vista

Text Book definition of an operating system? What is that, exactly?

No, the windows vista KERNEL is 100 million lines of code.

The latest Linux Kernel is, if I recall, around 30 million.

Not pretty, is it?

 

I am not fully satisfied-- even disatisfied-- with Vista. I think the OP's comments were out of left field, and were inappropriate...

Yeah, I think that the benefits of Vista are minor, but the implementation of an OS that can utilize TPM, of BitLocker, of actually implementing a reasonable Security Abstraction policy (Click to continue, click to continue, click to continue) which annoys the heck out of people-- but is perfectly normal for those used to nix...

I think that the pretty interface, the the slightly better organized menus (but not contorl panel, that annoys the heck out of me)....

DRM is an entirely different issue altogether, because DRM is only a component of what's actually going on... Vista implemented Trusted Hardware/Software policies. This is good. That it's used for evil does not mean it itself is evil

But yeah, having played awhile in Linux Land (and I Do enjoy it), I don't see what makes to.. better.. than Windows. Just different.

I haven't played with Mac, but the little bit I have annoys me. I enjoy right clicks and context menus :-\ So it goes...

In the end, though, Vista WILL offer more than XP. It's just that right now.. It doesn't offer that much more.. Other than, of course, the security benefits.

Which, for some reasn, people ignore...

And more than that, more ironically than that, Windows has been attacked (justly!) for being insecure for years.. and yet... ::Gesture:: the moment they take a step in the right direction, people come out and say the sky is falling.

 

A good definition of an OS (not sure about "text book")" Software controlling the overall operation of a multipurpose computer system, including such tasks as memory allocation, input and output distribution, interrupt processing, and job scheduling.

The best estimates I can find of Vista's kernel is 50 million lines of code (compared to XP's 40 million). So, not as unpretty as one might think.

 

All good points. I can work with the Mac OS, but am really slowed down by unfamiliarity.

I would honestly enjoy trying Linux. It's still too geeky and not streamlined enough for me, though. That's not meant as a slap. It's definitely come a long way. And while I can rummage around Windows OS and get it to do what I want (or don't want), I need my OS to be up, stable, and usable right out of the box. It's too time consuming to figure out the lingo, find the drivers, do the troubleshooting, etc. I may try it as a "hobby" one of these days on my Compaq, but just not motivated enough yet.

 

I absolutely agree with you that linux does have 30 million SLOC (source lines of code), but windows does have 50 million SLOCs as per the below article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/27/technology/27soft.html?ex=1183003200&en=86126bbc99f70e5c&ei=5070

These figures around the web are probably educated guesses, and the actual figure is most likely a Redmond secret.

I will take retract this statement as it is a very open ended statement. The definition unfortunately keeps evolving. Tenenbaum wrote his definition in the ubiquitous Operating System Principles book many years ago, and since then things may have changed Especially if Microsoft insists on calling Vista an Operating System, then Tenenbaum must be a caveman in their opinion.

 

The article has couple pretty interesting accusations:

1) Vista disk access is slow because of DRM checks

This simply isn't true. DRM checks don't do anything unless you happen to play DRM media. Your DVD rips don't have any form of DRM left, there's nothing to check.

2) Microsoft axed EAX

Microsoft removed audio stack from kernel mode, EAX could not live without direct access to hardware. Removing audio stack from kernel was absolutely the right move, anyone who claims otherwise probably doesn't know what they are talking about.

And anyway, if you cannot live without EAX, you can always use ALchemy.

 

All I can say is that I've used all the flavors of Windows since it's beginning. The most problematic Windows I've used is 2000. I've tried Vista Ultimate and actually liked it but the thing that made me go back to XP for now is the software compatability. Most of my programs doesn't play well with it. Even the ones that say it will I find a pain when all of the sudden an important feature isn't available and sometimes also messes up other programs. Iolo, Roxio, nVidia to name a few. When things improve I will be going back to Vista but for now XP suffices.

 

This article is complete crap, with a serious lack of evidence. The whole bit about DRM is a 100% fabrication. The parts regarding 64-bit, DirectX and sound reek of pure ignorance (moving sound out of kernel was a GREAT move).

I guess I won't bother to read here anymore. Shame, I loved your hardware reviews, but if you just make up crap like this, I can't really trust them anymore.

 

Thanks, Dustin - I totally agree - and I have a simple answer to all your problems, folks.

~ RUN LINUX ~

 

Good point but the question is what OS being BMW?

 

I'd like to make a kind of Off-Topic aside here.

People are welcome to say the article is sensationalist, disagree, etc. That's fine, that's what the forums are here for, and by having intelligent discussions we all improve our understanding and we're all better off for it.

But more than a few people here have just plain outright flamed me and the article, and while my feelings aren't exactly hurt, I do think it's not conducive to keeping these boards and this site as constructive and helpful as they usually are. The site is fortunate to have a very mature community, vastly more mature than most other forums I've ever encountered. If you think I'm full of crap and just have to spit some rancor, please do me a favor and just ship it straight to my inbox so other people don't have to filter through it to get to the meat of your argument.

And to keep my post at least semi-on-topic, abstracting the sound layer out of the kernel is technobabble that isn't going to affect end users, who are wondering why their SoundBlaster X-Fi isn't sporting its spiffy new features in Vista. Calling Vista a gamers operating system at the same time you cut hardware sound is ridiculous.

 

If these are not enhancements then what are?
I mean, what enhancements does Leopard have over Tiger- new desktop? stacks? new finder?

It's the same with Vista.

What enhancements did xp have over 2000?

Also add the sidebar to the list of Vista goodies. That's a pretty nice thing to have with lots of cute applications running there.

The initial results show that Vista is a much more secure OS than xp. Isn't that itself a big enhancement?

http://www.macnn.com/articles/07/06/22/vista.most.secure.os/

 

You didn't send the Vista-bashing article to anybody's inbox, did you?
In fact it's splashed right on the homepage of the site.
So why should the backlash be kept under the wraps and sent to your inbox?

 

You can't remember people complaining too much about xp simply because the internet wasn't as widespread in those days.

For instance, did we have this site back then?

 

C'mon Pulp.
Just go to the Apple section here and see the number of people who made the transition to Mac simply because it can now run Windows.

If the sole purpose of buying a Mac is to use OS X, then why are Mac sales now rising after bootcamp and virtualization were introduced?

People are fascinated by the idea of running 2 or 3 OSes on one system..so that they get the best of all worlds. If it was OS X alone, then this surge in interest wouldn't have happened.

 

Well, because his critique wasn't insulting (except maybe to MS Programmers). some of the posts shot back at him have been.

It's a very well put out article. A Vista bashing rant would not generally include suggestions for improvements. Pulp wants to see Windows improved (don't we all?).

 

How many people use Adobe After Effects?
I don't. My close associates don't.

Like most people, I use Adobe Photoshop, Imageready, Illustrator etc and they all work well in Vista.

You can't expect each and every program written for xp to work in Vista. The operating systems are not the same.

It's upto Adobe to rectify the issue and make sure all their products are Vista compatible. It's not Microsoft's problem.

I feel you are generalising a bit too much.
Just because one or two programs that you use aren't compatible, you decided that nothing is compatible with Vista and it's crap.

 

That article will surely discourage anyone who's about to make the transition to Vista.

Everyone agrees that Vista isn't perfect and there are issues to be resolved. Fine. But to dismiss it off as total trash is unfair and too harsh.

Vista isn't as bad as he is picturising it to be. That's the naked fact.

 

Vista isn't going anywhere.. adopt it now, or adopt it later, you're going to sooner or later

 

Make XP look like Vista without it being Vista!!! yeaaa

 

While I think the points are valid to an extent, I just don't think this kind of editorial has any bearing on the pc market at large. Pointing out issues like .x% increase in file copy times is relevant only to obsessive compulsive geeks who like staring at their status bars as they copy small files and large files, just to benchmark.

We're not in the stone age technology wise. You CAN do other things while copying files w/o a major hit in performance (unless maybe you're running fraps, hl2 source, performing a virus scan and adding 20 filters to a RAW image in Photoshop--then again you would have the same problem in OSX or XP).

This kind of thing does not affect 99.9% of people who use computers for normal tasks. Vista, as a standalone product, works well enough in terms of file copy times. Games similarly take a minor hit in performance -- but is it noticeable by anyone other than overclockers? Yeah, they "drive the industry" but at the end of the day their view is tossed out the window because OCers don't represent profitability to big business. They don't represent the majority, who can care less about losing 2FPS in Lost Planet.

Everything else, I would say, is easily explained by understanding that this OS hasn't gone through a SP update yet. I think the OP's being a little harsh on an OS that hasn't yet gone through the same fire XP has, no?

"Bottom line", as the OP likes to put it -- it's an opinion piece with valid, albeit somewhat irrelevant arguments that will be solved with driver optimization and improved compatibility.

 

so can someone tell me...why is it that vista is being smacked down so harshly? it seems like every article out there is all about how bad it is, how microsoft is like big brother, and how vista is out to get us. don't get me wrong, that article was well written and well founded, but if you don't like vista, don't buy it. if you want to steal the oppertunity to put vista down just because you're a die hard apple fan, go ahead. but if you didn't like coke, would you try to convince everyone else that coke is terrible and that the new coke zero is disgusting? or would you just buy something else.

everyone loves xp so much, and how many service pacs does it have? 2. and vista has vet to have any released, so we have to give it time.

i completely agree with drewn

 

There's a cartoon strip with 2 pictures that sums it up perfectly. In the first frame is an old chair, worn out, sagging, has the word XP above it. The chair may be old, but it's comfy and what you expect. In the next frame is a concrete chair with razor spikes. Someone is sitting in the chair, they're cut, blood flowing to the ground, that's Vista.

 

Chair with razor spikes!? So you have to be a faqir to use Vista!

 

but vista doesnt cut people with spikes.

 

It has cut a few members of this site.

 

~Run Ubuntu Linux~ to be exact.

 

Which makes me wonder, what OS are the new features being touted under???

 

I simply don't agree with anything written on this article. Yes some things are not right but the tone of the article is such it makes me wonder if is written by a professional. And for that matter it requires some degree of maturity (I mean professional maturity in the field of IT).

I've been using Vista for 12 hours a day, running from MS Office to SQL Server Databases, IIS etc etc. I mean, professionally. I almost don't play games, and yes I agree that the video card drivers are coming late. Is that the fault of Microsoft also? Maybe but not enterely. It is the responsibility of the hardware makers to get the customer the best HW driver they can build while supporting the HW for more then 1.5 years (something that neither ATI or NVIDIA do when it comes to laptops).

Vista has made me more productive, especially the search feature (amazing) and how is intertwined with the UI.

Granted some XP software does not run yet on Vista but this has happened with any major OS revision and platform (Apple, IBM, Microsoft, SUN etc etc). If you need Vista to plan for it, including listing the software that you use and check if works in Vista or there is an upgrade,

Most companies are waiting for SP1 or SP2 to come out before they role out an enterprisewide upgrade. This has happened with any major platform revision (it does not matter how good or bad is the new revision, it is standard practice). Only desperate geeks like myself likes to try new things. The good thing is that for most non professional people Vista is quite fine. On the other side people like me who likes to push things to the limit do face some hurdles, but that comes with the territory.

It is always a mix of excitement and frustration when something new comes in. This is just the start, in an year no one will remember this article, but Vista definitly yes.

There is no doupt that XP is more mature, that is quite natural, but the benefits of Vista IMHO outwights its comparable imaturity. Yet I agree that Vista it is still not quite a gamers dream when it comes to performance, but that is not due to the OS but to video card drivers, and those are developed by HW companies, so go and shout with them.

What you have done dear writer is make them look like victims in your article, that is far away from the truth. NVIDIA, ATI, INTEL, AMD also monopolists, glad there is some company that pushes them further.

Stay cool,

Trance

 

I have two machines around here that I tried Vista on. One is a Sony SZ notebook. The first couple of times I installed Vista it was problematic and came off in about 2 days. The last install was a month ago and I have used XP about once since then. If anything the networking in Vista is a major improvement over XP, not a problem, especially for portable computers the ability to choose public or private network is really nice.

The other box is a Nfoce 4 AMD desktop. S3 sleep will not wok on it, so I consider it to not be a Vista candidate.

My point is peoples opinions on Vista are based on how well id does on their hardware. Not all old hardware works great with Vista.

As for the 64 bit argument, it is specious. I cant find 64 bit XP drivers for my notebook, so why should I fault Vista for not having 64 bit notebook drivers.

A lot of the program incompatibility issues are rooted in the sloppy programing from the Win9X era. Vista requires that programs play in a restricted space. If it does not work on Vista, it probably caused problems on XP, if you ran as a limited rights user. Believe me, the world will be better off for theses changes.

 

Just cause you got XP doesnt mean you have to bash Vista. I can bash XP with one sentence;

Vista is stealing all of your updates.
MUAHAHAHAHA!

 

When it comes to gamming A bad move from Microsoft when it comes to Vista is to try and push DX10, when DX9 was fine. They simply thought that the video card manufacturers would come with mature drivers much sooner for DX10. This was an error. Early adopter of any new technology are usually gamers and developers. The ones that push machines to the limit.

The reality is that the video card manufacturers came with DX10 video cards late for potential early adopters of Vista, moreover the drivers are not still prime. They did not believe how aware would be consumers regarding Vista and so soon. In less then a year this will be passed waters IMHO.

Trance

 

On this same subject, check out Ed Bott's latest blog, " Vista isn't Me2, it's Win95 + 12 years"

 

I have tried Vista on multiple pc's/laptops. I mostly don't like it. I try to like it. The updated Media Center is about the only thing I like, and will use in a dedicated tv pc. Going back to XP from Vista is like breathing fresh air again. Feels good. Fast. Got it all figured out already. Why didn't they make an XP theme available in Vista? Maybe that would have let (tricked) our minds adjust to it more easily.

 

It's the evolution of Windows, except that Vista is far better than 95 but falls behind on XP.

 

DX10 is completely backwards compatable with DX 9. So anything written with DX9 or lower will run just as well on a DX10 card, and probably better because the DX10 cards are faster to be able to run DX10.

 

just wanted to throw it out there in this properly titled thread that i just ditched Vista and upgraded to WindowsXP Pro.

Definitely a big improvement over Vista and makes me feel that my purchasing a c2d t7200 processor laptop w/2gb ram is well worth it!

 

Due to customer pressure, Microsoft is making it easier for OEMs to downgade to XP:

http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/06/29/1657256&from=rss

Vista is sure the best thing since sliced bread.

 

I've recently gone back to xp pro after using vista for about 5 months on an HP Dv6000 notebook and while I dont completely agree with the opinion that vista is Sh**, I do agree that its not better than XP by enough of a margin right now to warrant a move to vista with all its application and hardware incompatibilities..

I was using Vista Home Premium, and I wasnt very satisfied, as someone said here, MS is trying to sell Vista on the basis of the way it looks better than XP but from a user's standpoint, there is not much better.

I dont agree that people are buying Macs right now because they want to dual boot windows and osx on their computers, I think that once they go through the learning curve of using an apple computer, they wont come back to windows. I dont think most windows geeks (excuse the term) will shift to mac, we like the logic that windows systems operate on too much but for the average user, macs do provide a more stable and satisfying user experience. Macs are also fast becoming industry standard for media interms of music and video production and editing. I personally would never (thats my opinion right now) move to OSX but have any of you heard of the OSx86 project thats currently trying to port OS onto PC hardware??

Eventually, apple's move onto the intel platform, if it lasts, is going to result hopefully in apple making OS availible as a standalone operating system that we can install on any hardware and have drivers being developed by our hardware companies for. It will probably do MS and apple some good to actually compete on equal terms for market share, currently, apple is crippled by the high cost of their hardware (there are too many people who enjoy buying whatever hardware configuration they want to and to have the flexibility to put various different components of their computer themselves) and microsoft is crippled by the fact that their OSes just dont work as well as OSX, I'm sorry to say this, being a historically hardcore mac flamer, but Osx is just not plagued with the day to day issues that we windows users are more than used to. plus it still looks prettier than vista, even if they are copying vista's glass look on leopard.

At the end of the day, the fact remains, that as far as functionality goes, Vista just doesnt offer enough to users that goes beyond how it looks and the search feature and some better file and folder management (windows desktop search 3.01 seems to work better on xp for me than windows search does on vista on the same hardware anyone else have similar experience?) Its probably going to get much more stable and the driver issues and the compatibility issues will also get resolved, but ask yourself, even after that, do you really think Vista offers enough to warrant the doubling in price over Xp and how much higher they've pushed hardware requirements?

My home premium was just not satisfactory on 1gig of Ram and when i ran it with 2gigs, just with windows running with sidebar and windows live messenger, the itunes helper service and not any other applications and no other Non Windows services running, my machine shows that about 700 to 750 mb of ram is being used.

I'm happy running xp with the same hardware, using stardock's free object dock as a program launcher and using Yahoo's widget engine (which i've been using since it was konfabulator 1.0)

Yes I'll probably make the move to Vista once Xp support is withdrawn or if it is but only if at the time its a little less buggy and doesnt resemble a beta release.

 

Vista is running okay on my dv6400, but I have 28 issues according to the Problem Reports & Solutions application. This is only after three days of use....................

 

Patience is a virtue.

Give it some time, people. Jeeze, what did you expect? It's brand new, there's going to be problems. Now, maybe next year if everything is still as bad as you say it is than I'll agree with you.

Oh, really? I wasn't aware that me and 99% of my friends were running Macs just because we're attending a college (Because we're not). How many do you think are running a Mac because of its ease of use and other features OR running a Mac because it's cool and sleek? Methinks more people get Macs for their cool factor than anything else the Mac has to offer...

 

Nice article.
I've been running vista since release. Now I run vista64 at home on my desktop. Runs great. Games, well not as fast as what I would see in XP. I am considering running XP64. Not sure how much of a difference I will see though.
The desktop and apps I run on Vista 64, no problems. Creative XFI, that is on the shelf as the drivers are terrible (static).

Would be curious to see what people say switching from Vista64 to XP64.

 

VERY informative argument, thank you very much... but i always gotta add my two cents :-D
as it is now, i use XP on my desktop i had ZERO problems EVER with it lol, so hearing all these problems with Vista does make me weary. However, i must say with many others that Vista is NEW, its going to have bugs but it does have some ups, probably mentioned (couldnt read all 15 pages >_<, its late).
For ppl using their new laptops in the next 4 years for college, and game, DX10 is gonna be needed by the end of the next two years the latest, and even tho XP will possibly have an update for it, it will be a poorly made update made just because of demand, thus probably not even worth it.
The 4 Gigs of Ram issue is, as mentioned, mostly showy, "i wanna see it say 4gb" but its true that 4 gigs will be standard as rapid as this market is, so Vista appeals for that, even tho XP did come out as 64bit, its just another update to an already made system. The 4gig/64Bit/Dx10 abilities are hard coded into wat Vista is, not updates on a dying OS.
and as far as macbooks go, dont even get me started, not to be a hater, but i am. I remember wen macs used to be shunned lol, however do agree they are now Amazing systems, they did their job well. But, ive been using it alot lately, considering my school only uses them, as well as alotta friends, and im just not a big fan of the system especially if your one who likes to tweak. the Macbooks are big Ipods, thats it, a Fad, Ipods were big by apple, and LOOK they make computers, and Apple is Cool now! again, not to say they're bad cuz they're absolutely not, but have u noticed how many of these College kids just want it to have it and dont even care about upgrades and system tweaking, such as the registry, etc... so yea, i just realized how much of an extanded rant that was on Mac OS ... sorry... lol
IM an XP user ready to switch to Vista... and i hope you could possibly write some good things about it, and dont retort saying "THERE ISNT" cause there is... wow.. 1 a.m.... ill check this baby lata