“Windows Vista is finally here for everyone and is soon to be made available on store shelves and pre-loaded on new PC’s. Windows Vista has been five years in the making; throughout that time we have witnessed Microsoft reschedule the release of this ‘major upgrade’ over and over and over again. Microsoft, however, throughout that tumultuous time did manage to pick up the pieces and move forward.” Read more of the multi-page review at ActiveWin.
Review: Microsoft Windows Vista Ultimate
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
From the article’s conclusion:
Vista’s greatest competitor is of course its predecessor, Windows XP, a lot of persons will see it more as an evolutionary update and a bit hard to justify the upgrade knowing so many things in Vista could be easily had on XP today with a simple click of the download button or purchase of third party applications. IE 7 will be made available as a free download for XP users, so the RSS and some of the security issue’s are already taken care of. You can run as a limited user if you want to have that “extra” secure experience, Windows Defender will also be free for Windows XP users. Also Windows Desktop Search for XP pretty much takes care of some aspects of the Instant Search capabilities in Vista. I will agree though that Gadgets so far have been uninspiring; the effects such as the Aero Glass theme are stressful on the system, Aero Basic is a dramatic step back from the XP themes and Windows Classic has been sacrificed because of neglect.
This tells me what I need to know: there’s no need to spend the money to upgrade. This conclusion is kind of a surprise from a Windows-centric website.
Almost, but there is no mention in that quote of DirectX 10, which definitely won’t be available for XP. Which, quite frankly, sucks.
Edited 2007-01-29 11:01
What’s the deal with DirectX? Will it rely on some newer API(s)/drivers? Otherwise it could easily be made to run on XP I guess…
I suspect it has more to do with a business than a technical. It’s a restriction to move people onto Vista purely for the games. Business smart? Yep. Consumer smart? Highly debatable.
Yup, rather like never releasing any USB drivers for NT4, which helped move people on to Win2000.
And preventing MSN 7.5/WLM from installing on W2K, though it will with a little twiddling with a hex editor.
grr.
Joh Carmack doesn’t seem to think it’s a problem:
http://www.dailytech.com/John+Carmack+Speaks+on+DX10+Vista+Xbox+360…
The most economic advice seems to be:
– if you’ve got a windows version lower than XP, XP Home or Pro is probably the best value.
– if you have got windows XP Home or Pro, don’t buy anything.
Which is probably NOT what MS intended…
Yeah, it seems like Vista will be an evolutionary OS, marketed as a revolutionary one. Somehow I don’t think it’s gonna fly.
XP SP2 was a better evolution to XP SP1 that Vista to XP SP2…
XP SP2 included a lot of bug and security flaws fixed and some functionality to handling better the system security.
Vista has a very beautiful user interface but its huge memory footprint and almost no inner features do not compensate anything.
http://activewin.com/reviews/software/operating-sys/vista/images/De…
The little previews of the open windows when you hover your mouse over the taskbar button – I have seen this before….Somewhere…I remember using a program for XP and it was freeware. Does anyone remember what was the program called?
Edited 2007-01-29 11:36
I daresay that the program you are referring to is Visual Task Tips …
http://www.visualtasktips.com/
Yes, that’s it! Thanks
According to Computer Sweden only the overwhelming majority of all Vista PC:s sold will be preloaded with some more low end version of Vista than Ultimate, not to mention that XP will remain in the market for a long time. Lenovo expects that it could be as long as mid 2008.
This doesn’t look good for Microsoft. Some of the low end Vistas doesn’t look as good as the offerings from Apple and Novell. If this is the Vista that most people will see and get in contact with , that will reflect badly on Microsoft especially as they have marketed Vista as the most innovative OS ever over several years.
cool box.
Good luck trying to find an XP machine in a retail store now. My in-laws need a new PC and I don’t want to have to service Vista as I have NO experience with it. Turns out the big boys (Best Buy, Circuit City, etc…) liquidated their stock.
Plus they won’t sell a PC without an OS. MS b_stards. I use XP both at home and work, but I am really starting to hate it.
“Plus they won’t sell a PC without an OS. MS b_stards. I use XP both at home and work, but I am really starting to hate it.”
Well, then this might be a good time to try out Mac OSX or Linux (my suggestions: OpenSuSe 10.2 (free), Linux Mint (free) and Xandros (paying)).
I have not tried (nor heard of Linux Mint), but I have tried K/X/Ubuntu and I liked it, but ripping DVD’s alwasy has me coming back to Windows. That and Command and Conquer.
Dell sells machines w/ Freedos only – no Windows. There are other alternatives as well. Of course Linux is free.
http://www1.euro.dell.com/content/products/features.aspx/desktops_g…
Just a quick look. Unless a Microsoft OS is an Added extra not part of the package. Then thats a silly point.
I saw they had freeDOS, but come on. Would it kill them to include Ubuntu, or PCBSD, or heck even Mandriva with a disclaimer that they do not support them? Plus their “open source machines” aren’t even a good deal compared to the Vista machines.
That is something that irks me. MS has to be taking a loss in the beginning to entrench people in Vista.
[edited for spelling]
Edited 2007-01-30 03:21
That’s why you build your own computer
Dave
28 months of development == 5 years of making?
I’ll have to use those algorithms next time I have to calculate my taxes
They scrapped the original Longhorn halfway through, IIRC.
I know that. But it has still been in development for all those years. It cannot be 5 years in the making, but only 28 months in development.
Development == making.
“I’ll have to use those algorithms next time I have to calculate my taxes
”
Or when you want to start your own “get the facts” campaign…
The only upgrade path for the majority of users, is never reviewed…or even compared against.
The PC that the majority of users will buy will have this on.
i thought it was a good review, plus for anyone interested in how OEM vista will be treated (activation wise etc by Microsoft, check this)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/zd/20070126/tc_zd/199653
“A Microsoft representative confirmed that users may buy an OEM copy of Windows Vista at a substantial discount, provided they adhere to the terms of the license – which, incidentally, may mean providing support for family members.
In addition, users should still be subject to the same familiar re-activation restrictions as users of a retail Vista license and
Windows XP, a spokeswoman said. Users can alter the PC’s hardware substantially, but they will be forced to reactivate – not repurchase the OEM software – if they do, she said. “
Given that the Vista incarnation of Interix, re-branded as SUA, is the only real reason to fork over the extra cash for the Ultimate/Enterprise edition versus the lower labelled counterparts, I am amused at the lack of reviews of that feature.
Is it that good that it leaves everyone speechless?
I probably wont install vista until I really have to. But definitly not without using a utility such as vlite to trimm down the installation. I refuse to have my OS with no additional application eat 11GB. That’s nothing but bloat.
One disappointment I had in this review was that it simply ignores new legal issues and requirements of this release.
Matters coming to mind:
* Microsoft now allows buyers more limited access. A buyer may run ‘some’ programs on this OS. All other rights to run software are reserved to the company.
* All systems must constantly ‘call home’ to prove they are still a legitimate system.
* Microsoft reserves the right to disable and remove any software program running on a system they see fit to judge.
Reading through the new EULA is a tortuous chore, but if not done, then one simply waives any right to question it.
This release goes just that much further toward turning a computer into a Microsoft licensed device that a user is ‘allowed’ to make use of until Microsoft says otherwise. The license makes it binding that the user is always agreeing that Microsoft can say otherwise whenever the company wishes.
“* Microsoft now allows buyers more limited access. A buyer may run ‘some’ programs on this OS. All other rights to run software are reserved to the company.”
Ermm..where did you get that idea? Please link to the documentation. It is most certainly not in the EULA, or anything put out by Microsoft.
“* All systems must constantly ‘call home’ to prove they are still a legitimate system.”
This one is true, as it will check in.
“* Microsoft reserves the right to disable and remove any software program running on a system they see fit to judge.”
Again, please point me to the documentation. Microsoft has no right to disable or remove any software running on a system.
http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/1640/159/
“” rel=”nofollow”>http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/1640/159/”
Interesting link, thanks. I have the EULA and no where in it does it say that Microsoft reserves the right to delete programs off your computer. Still looking for that ‘Fine print’ he talks about yet.
http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal/useterms/default.aspx
Quick Link.
Download the EULA and simply look for the quoted text. Really its quite easy.
Oh and don’t do any .NET benchmarking while your at it.
Edited 2007-01-29 21:16
I did what you suggested. I still don’t see, even after searching, where it says Microsoft can disable and remove software. Possibly you are referring to the “Potentially Unwanted Software” section 6? In there it clearly states that can be turned off as well, which it can, with no ill effects. If you notice it is the same with any of the other spyware applications out there, but I guess since they are not Microsoft it is okay?
Edit: Thanks for modding me down btw for having a different opinion then you after reading the EULA.
Edited 2007-01-29 22:23
“Vista also incorporates Windows Defender, an anti-virus program that actively scans computers for “spyware, adware, and other potentially unwanted software.” The agreement does not define any of these terms, leaving it to Microsoft to determine what constitutes unwanted software. Once operational, the agreement warns that Windows Defender will, by default, automatically remove software rated “high” or “severe,”even though that may result in other software ceasing to work or mistakenly result in the removal of software that is not unwanted.”
Read the damn article posted. Its clear.
I read the article. It is clear what his opinion is yes. What he failed to do is read the whole section where that is discussed. He put his own spin on it as lawyers like to do. Like I said, the section he points to ALSO says you can disable windows defender or change it’s actions on what it does. Since I have that choice, Microsoft is not deciding what my software is.
I would appreciate you not swearing at me as well thanks. No need to be rude about it all. We can agree to disagree.
I’ve wasted my time. because you won’t put the effort into making a point unlike the article.
There are many many places that examine the EULA detail.
Its taken 4 posts to reach the stage of *it does say that”, but he’s twisting the words.
The point he makes. The single point he makes! Is that those words *CAN* be twisted. however Microsoft want. That is the point.
I’m getting increasingly frustrated because you seem unable to make a point. Other than lie.
There are only three possibilities.
1) your too lazy to read the post.
2) your being deliberately misleading
3) you don’t understand the post.
I would say that you started with doing 1 and have now moved to 2,3
Edited 2007-01-29 23:31
“The point he makes. The single point he makes! Is that those words *CAN* be twisted. however Microsoft want. That is the point.
I’m getting increasingly frustrated because you seem unable to make a point. Other than lie. “
I don’t know why I am bothering, but here we go.
First, I have not lied, as the EULA does NOT say what I responded to which was your comment that….
“* Microsoft reserves the right to disable and remove any software program running on a system they see fit to judge.”
Your answer was to point me to an article that skips over most of the EULA with a lawyers interpretation of the parts he could twist to try for a sensational story. I have read it, at least 4 times. I have also read the EULA, much more then that as I have been watching it through it’s first phases. The point here is that neither that article, or subsequent posts have proved your statement. If you truly believe that statement then don’t run Windows.
And yes, tired of your personal attacks so I am modding you down for that.
Your repeating yourself. So I’ll try to make it clear. The wording is *deliberately* vague, and up for interpretation.
Is English you first language?
So I’ll explain if you are a lawyer it is very very likely the reason is not nefarious. Its to cover themselves, but the wording *is* so vague that it covers just about anything. Will this *feature* be misused?
An example would be Microsoft disabling Norton with an update. which it *has*. Was it deliberate or incompetence. I don’t care.
Edited 2007-01-30 01:03
“Your repeating yourself. So I’ll try to make it clear. The wording is *deliberately* vague, and up for interpretation.
Is English you first language?
So I’ll explain if you are a lawyer it is very very likely the reason is not nefarious. Its to cover themselves, but the wording *is* so vague that it covers just about anything. Will this *feature* be misused?
An example would be Microsoft disabling Norton with an update. which it *has*. Was it deliberate or incompetence. I don’t care.”
First, yes, English is my first language, and I know it well.
With the Norton reference now I understand what the point you were trying to make is. I will go for incompetence on that one myself, not deliberate. Deliberate however was when Microsoft prevented IE from being able to download Netscape. I truly didn’t mean to repeat myself, frustration got the best of me there.
I do appreciate no attacks this time around as well.
You don’t know English well(sic).
Talking about the EULA is hard, and understanding one requires a skill you lack. I lack that skill as well.
You don’t understand the attacking EULA in Vista is not a reflection of Vista. It is not a Anti-Microsoft rant.
Hell I’m honestly reaching the stage where I wonder how far people are prepared to give up there rights before they have enough. I actually shocked that its got this bad.
The EULA is *part* of that process. Its 3500 words in a click box. Its both hard to understand…and difficult to interpret, and read by one in thousands. Its up for multiple interpretations…Microsoft’s being the only one that matters.
WGA(sic),Trusted(sic) Computing,DR(sic)M. Its about one thing *control*. Microsoft have it and you don’t.
I’m in *awe* of Microsoft for this. What they are doing is remarkable.
“You don’t understand the attacking EULA in Vista is not a reflection of Vista. It is not a Anti-Microsoft rant.
Hell I’m honestly reaching the stage where I wonder how far people are prepared to give up there rights before they have enough. I actually shocked that its got this bad.”
I will give you about the control. I have always read the EULA on any software. Hopefully people do start screaming about it. Put it this way, it is because of the EULA’s that I have 1 machine for gaming and military software which requires Microsoft products. Outside of that I use Linux for everything else. I actually will not be upgrading to Vista.
The review has little to say under advanced features, surely this section should be chock-a-block with novel, inovative and professional aspects of the OS. I see none. Patch-guard, 64bit architecture and a sanity check (eg. “Documents and Settings” to users), hardly what are called advanced features, not in 2007.
The text has not limited itself to the OS but also includes some of the bundled applications. Why is there no mention in the advanced features section for the lack of:
– volume management,
– number of cpus supported,
– dynamic services discovery,
– packet mangling,
– supported authentication and authorisation protocols,
– types of networked filesystems,
– and unified software package management systems
Not really advanced features in today’s day and age. Despite the lack of these ‘advanced features’ in vista, the reviewers should not have failed to mention these shortcommings in the review.
Improved gaming platform (XBL + Windows gamers
. I bit of something for everyone.
This release might catch a lot of Linux users to come back to Windows. Lotsa new goodies for devs to play with.
Now we only need a steady supply of cheap DX10 video cards.
“This release might catch a lot of Linux users to come back to Windows.”
You were kidding, right? I think it’ll be quite the opposite.
Edited 2007-01-29 15:00
I’m sure he were serious since he did provide very reasonable argument why a lot of Linux users would switch to Vista — DX10. I tend to agree with him, since DX10 and new dev tools will result in new amazing games which for many Linux users would be hard to ignore.
I doubt the average (home) user will notice any difference.As if there’s a genuine choice.
And as someone already posted, one of the industry leading developers of games John Carmack himself said that there is not much to gain at all in terms of eye candy to go with DX 10. According to him MS did a great job with DX 9 and that some of the new features in DX 10 are not really worth it as a gamer.
Yes he did. But after seeing Crysis, his comments kinda evaporated in thin air. lol
Also with Vista the XBL bridge and access to XBox360 peripherals. MS said a while ago they’d make Windows a truly gaming platform with Vista.
Now we just need World of Starcraft and the circle will be complete.
>Yes he did. But after seeing Crysis, his comments kinda evaporated in thin air. lol
Is-there such big difference with the game playing in DirectX 9 mode with DirectX 10 mode?
I’m curious (and doubtful).
I don’t know about game playing but there are new shader version in DX10. Must be newer stuff devs asked for.
“Improved gaming platform (XBL + Windows gamers
. I bit of something for everyone.”
http://techgage.com/article/windows_vista_gaming_performance_report…
erm NO!
This release might catch a lot of Linux users to come back to Windows
Did you hit your head somewhere? Because you seem to be dillusional, but some might see you as feeble minded and naive too.
Who in there right mind would trade Linux for a piece of spyware like Vista?!
Once you install Vista, you’re no longer in controll of your computer.
You’re basicaly like a guy, living in a half-way house, who has to report to his paroll officer every 60 days, or his life goes into reduced functionality mode.
Lol, is this for real?! You have to report in every 60 days or they cut you off?!
Am I in some kind of Orwellian nightmare?!
Someone wake me up please!
“Reading through the new EULA is a tortuous chore, but if not done, then one simply waives any right to question it.”
I’ve always considered EULA’s to be in the legal grey zone. My own opinion is that it can’t be enforced because of several technical and practical reasons.
Aside from the question if everything INSIDE the EULA is legal or not, I think the entire concept of the EULA as a legally binding contract, is flawed.
Edited 2007-01-29 14:57
Actually, I agree. A EULA, generally, exists in a grey zone for several reasons. However, technically and legally they do get enforced regularly.
Problems with a EULA:
1) Only a limited number of places fully acknowledge them as binding, Virginia for example. The UCITA laws in place there give a EULA full force of contract law. Even without this, most places will still enforce them.
2) The EULA often asserts rights and abilities contrary to the spirit and letter of the law. For this reason they always include the phrase “any section void by law in a jurisdiction shall not affect any other section” or the like. The moral: Assert everything and mostly people won’t object, giving you powers you have no legal right to.
3) Users are forced to agree to these click-through items to do their job, use their hardware, etc. There is no meeting of minds so the contract is terribly one-sided.
4) There is no control of who or how a click-through is enabled. Minors can do it, software can do it, IT staff do it, all leaving the user of the software accountable through numerous precedents.
Despite the problems. They are quite enforceable, Windows Vista more than usual.
1) Vista actively supports denial of access to programs deemed objectionable by Microsoft. It is a software mechanism supported in the release which the user has no control over.
2) Courts have had many EULA agreements come up as part of the claims in software cases. Sometimes they lose, sometimes they win, but it always costs a ton of cash. Most users will object to losing tons of cash, so they simply accept the abhorrent terms.
Yeah, those are exactly the kinds of reasons I meant. Although I could never have explained it so well. So thanks
Also, the whole “digital on-screen” vs. “written on paper” thing… sometimes it seems kind of the (digital) Wild West out there with all those weird EULAs!
It requires 13.5 GB of disk space?! I just installed BeOS on an old P2 that has a 10 GB disk… I couldn’t even install base Vista Ultimate on it. That’s incredible… BeOS takes up far less than a GB of space… Even Mac OS X with all its fluff only eats a few gigs with a full install.
You are aware what Vista has to support in terms of hardware, right? BeOS has very few drivers. MacOS X mostly only supports it’s own PC line.
MS just doesn’t put randomly big files to get people to buy bigger HDs.
> MS just doesn’t put randomly big files to get people to buy bigger HDs.
They just put on many many more smaller ones…
No need to defend MS with a useless comment like that, there is no way in hell that drivers take up that space. XP_SP2 supports just as much hardware, so your saying Vista has what, 5Gb of drivers?
If I was to put Vista on my hard drive now i’d have about 2Gb of space left, thats with games i’m playing at the moment. Oh just a minute, nvidia Vista drivers of very bad and in beta, I feel sorry for 8800 users.
It would not surprise me to find out they have 5gb of just drivers, Hell if you ever look at a osX install you can remove over 3gb just in print driver. and vista supports allot more of everything then osX
I will say i would like the option of removing unwanted drivers during the install to save space on vista
3gb of printer drivers? Geez…
I will say i would like the option of removing unwanted drivers during the install to save space on vista
Microsoft doesn’t give you options, they only take away options.
The only time Microsoft gives you something new is if it’s good for Microsoft. Like the new activation and WGA Checks.
Don’t forget, you’re not a customer to Microsoft, you’re Microsoft’s slave, therefore the big difference how you get treated.
Aww all we need now is to hear how empowering Linux and apple is and how evil Microsoft is lol
“You are aware what Vista has to support in terms of hardware, right? BeOS has very few drivers. MacOS X mostly only supports it’s own PC line.”
In a sense you are right. The difference being most of my hardware was not supported out of the box, requiring 3rd party drivers. Though with XP they worked. Sound Blaster Audigy 2, HP Scanjet 5400C, Logitech Webcam, HP Color Laserjet 2600n. None of those are supported under Vista without 3rd party drivers. So, what driver support did they add in again?
True. And it is also true that drivers have gotten larger and more complex as well. I suppose this is just all “progress.” I guess my problem is that I remember having a complete operating system, with X Windows and multiple user accounts on two 250 MB disks (one for the system, one for users) when I had my uVAX. And those disks had tons of space to spare. Same goes for RAM too.
So, I know you are right, but it just rankles.
Edited 2007-01-29 17:22
If it were me, I’d like the OS boot from a ROM chip located on the mobo just like in the good old Tandy days. I had a 40megs HD too. Lotsa SimCity classic and Eye of the Beholder. Good times, good times.
Vista 32 bit fits on a 10 gig harddisk (the RTM did about 6,5GB) the 64 bit version doesn’t fit.
BeOS had the advantage that programs used the available API (one) on windows every program comes with it’s own version compiled in… e.g The file import module in excel isn’t the same as the one in access.