Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 11th Feb 2007 15:51 UTC
Windows Forbes takes a look at Vista, and writes: "More than five years in the making, more than 50 million lines of code. The result? A vista slightly more inspiring than the one over the town dump. The new slogan is: 'The Wow Starts Now', and Microsoft touts new features, many filched shamelessly from Apple's Macintosh. But as with every previous version, there's no wow here, not even in ironic quotes. Vista is at best mildly annoying and at worst makes you want to rush to Redmond, Wash. and rip somebody's liver out." They also look at Office 2007.
Thread beginning with comment 211571
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
That guy
by Nelson on Sun 11th Feb 2007 17:56 UTC
Nelson
Member since:
2005-11-29

has almost no idea what he's talking about.

Mod me down if you want but I had to say it.

"You'll still have to add your own antivirus software, a new Vista-ready version at that."

Well considering that Microsoft stopped the AV companies from running in kernel space, I'd call this a good thing. Why the hell should they need to be in the kernel when Microsoft (will release/released?) the security APIs that they used in Vista.

"Many touted improvements, like the Web browser and media player, have been available for XP for months. One minor winner is Vista-only: file lists that update their contents automatically. You no longer have to hit View and Refresh to see files added since you last opened the list window. Macs, of course, have done this for years."

So if they don't add backwards compatibility it's a crime. If they do it's a crime?

Microsoft doesn't follow the same release cycle as Mac. Get over it.

"Should you upgrade your current machine? Are you nuts? Upgrading is almost always a royal pain."

You know, considering that Upgrading and a Clean install are almost one in the same in Vista now.

"I suggested to one Windows product manager that if the company were truly serious about security, Vista might offer a simple way to delete files securely and eliminate all traces of identity and passwords so you could safely pass the machine on or sell it years from now. His reply: "Does any other operating system do that?" That tells you all you need to know about Microsoft. The real slogan: "No innovation here."

First off, how the hell would that help security? If anything data loss would go up dramatically.

There are plenty of programs that do this for you if you're that worried about it.

In the end, this guy did have some slight truths and points in his article but overall it wasn't a very informed one.

Reply Score: 2

RE: That guy
by Rayz on Mon 12th Feb 2007 11:15 in reply to "That guy"
Rayz Member since:
2006-06-24

You have to remember that online articles are written mainly to attract readers. If they said anything positive, who would read it?

Slam articles are great; they attract fanfolk from all sides.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: That guy
by unoengborg on Mon 12th Feb 2007 12:05 in reply to "RE: That guy"
unoengborg Member since:
2005-07-06

If you are a reputable magazine Forbes, you need to be credible, or you will lose readers. On the other hand I'm not surprised of his view of Vista. Forbes is about business and the "Wow" in Vista is mostly for home users. E.g. better graphics and such while business users just as well can continue using XP.

Sure, there are things like alleged improved security, that would be useful to business, but that is not something you can form an informed opinion on just yet.

Ever since the first NT Microsoft has claimed that their latest OS is their most secure OS ever. Perhaps that is true, but in spite of that, the security of all Microsoft OS up until XP have fallen short of the expectations from their users when exposed to real world computing.

With Vista we still have to wait and see if Microsoft actually have succeeded this time.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: That guy
by angryrobot on Mon 12th Feb 2007 13:52 in reply to "That guy"
angryrobot Member since:
2006-04-26

> First off, how the hell would that help security? If anything data loss would go up dramatically.

> There are plenty of programs that do this for you if you're that worried about it.

I think his point was that MS didn't have the forethought to include such a feature, even though OSX and Linux (Gnome/KDE) all have a "secure delete". Instead they said essentially "nobody else does that so why should we". The irony of course, is that everyone else DOES do that.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: That guy
by baad_to_The_bone on Mon 12th Feb 2007 20:30 in reply to "That guy"
baad_to_The_bone Member since:
2006-02-08

"You'll still have to add your own antivirus software, a new Vista-ready version at that."

Well considering that Microsoft stopped the AV companies from running in kernel space, I'd call this a good thing. Why the hell should they need to be in the kernel when Microsoft (will release/released?) the security APIs that they used in Vista.


This is short-sightedness. It is due to these AV companies innovative real-time kernel mode protection on Windows, that eventually led to Microsoft designing these security APIs.

All these Microsoft restrictions are good for hindering further innovation in the realm of the kernel.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: That guy
by Nelson on Mon 12th Feb 2007 21:11 in reply to "RE: That guy"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

What could they possibly need in kernel mode now that they can't have in User mode? They are just too lazy to upgrade their application with the provided APIs.

Boohoo if their application which relied on hacks doesn't work anymore.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: That guy
by zippercow on Mon 12th Feb 2007 22:13 in reply to "That guy"
zippercow Member since:
2006-09-25

"You know, considering that Upgrading and a Clean install are almost one in the same in Vista now."

Vista has been installed (as an upgrade) on 3 test machines here at work and not a single one has been painless. In addition, one of my co-workers upgraded over a (more or less) clean install of XP and met with complete failure; the system would not boot to Vista at all until he did a clean install.

On the other hand, the couple clean installs of Vista I've seen have worked just fine with the exception of hardware that lacks Vista drivers, but I don't blame MS for that.

All that being said, I will probably keep dual booting PCLOS/XP for the foreseeable future.

Reply Parent Score: 1