Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 30th Nov 2006 17:14 UTC, submitted by Weevle
Windows "Microsoft finally launches the long-awaited Windows Vista today, promising better security and improved search and claiming it will be the fastest ever adopted operating system it has released. But some users have already questioned the business benefits of upgrading to Vista, citing the relative stability and security of Windows XP and a lack of compelling features in Vista. Based on using the second beta version of Vista here are the five things to get excited about Vista for - and the five things you'll hate it for."
Thread beginning with comment 186762
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
ParanoidAndroid
Member since:
2006-03-26

Of course the hardware drivers will be updated in time.
What bothers me more is the user account protection window popping up constantly when doing (adminstrative) work.
I can imagine that a lot of people click "yes" to make sure it just works. And that defeats the basic concept of the whole system no matter how safe you "think" you are

Reply Score: 2

cyclops Member since:
2006-03-12

"Of course the hardware drivers will be updated in time."

Thats not true, lots of hardware will *never* work with Vista.

I see no reason at all why anyone who bought something to work on XP should expect it to work on Vista

Reply Parent Score: 3

DrillSgt Member since:
2005-12-02

"I see no reason at all why anyone who bought something to work on XP should expect it to work on Vista"

Well, that depends on how long ago the hardware was purchased actually. If the hardware is recent, then there is every right to expect the manufacturer to continue to support it. See my example in my other post. That camera has only been on the market less then 2 years, so it is not even as old as it's warranty yet. On the other hand, if I have hardware that is 3 or more years old, then no, I would not expect it to work with Vista.

Reply Parent Score: 1

UAC is necessary
by tomcat on Thu 30th Nov 2006 20:34 in reply to "User account protection is the worst"
tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

UAC, itself, isn't the problem. Many Windows programs were written to ignore security. UAC is merely pointing out those problems. As for people clicking "yes" to bypass the security notifications, what would you propose as an alternative to what Microsoft did? The UAC prompts are essentially the same as root password prompts under 'nix, except slightly less annoying.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: UAC is necessary
by mono on Thu 30th Nov 2006 22:49 in reply to "UAC is necessary"
mono Member since:
2005-10-19

I agree. But don't forget that UAC is not just about the "annoying" popups which seems useless because they are only prompting for 'Continue' or 'Cancel'.

If you create a limited user account then UAC will prompt for the admin password - just like Mac OS X. They made a good work.

I think the only problem with Vista is the performance. But anyway... Mac OS X was a real pain in the ass until 10.3 and imho Tiger 10.4 is only a little faster than Vista. Well, in the end we all install SP1 for Vista and most of us will be happy.

Reply Parent Score: 1