Don't wait for Vista SP1, pleads Microsoft

I'm not waiting for Vista SP1, it won't install on Sidux....

Quoting: "To help partners and customers get the real story, Microsoft has created a comprehensive set of fact-rich materials illustrating how Windows Vista is ready today and tomorrow."

Despite the "fact-rich" materials being designed for both "partners and customers", the link supplied by Microsoft goes to a website which is available only to computer makers who are prepared to sign up to a non-disclosure agreement.

ROFL "It really does work properly right now! We just can't tell you how publicly! And you can't tell anyone else once you know!"

I think the NDA sums up Microsoft's problems nicely. I never thought I'd be surprised with anything that comes out of that institution, but I guess I was wrong.

I also thought the story linked on the page about virtualization was interesting. They won't let you use Vista Home in VMWare because it would be insecure. Apparently you have to pay $200 extra for security. I was wrong about Linux needing to market itself. Microsoft is doing a pretty good job of marketing Linux. This has to be worth at least $100 million.

FACT RICH...FACT RICH...FACT RICH...FACT RICH...FACT RICH...FACT RICH...FACT RICH...FACT RICH...FACT RICH...FACT RICH...

your all forgetting the best part.

in march MSFT was the hottest selling item on the market and their 2007 first quarter results proved it.

Then Every hardware manufactor turned in their Q1 results only to have every single one of them show a decrease in sales.

But if Vista is so good why isn't it selling?

FACT RICH...FACT RICH...FACT RICH...FACT RICH...

Mushroom... Mushroom...

Fact Rich End-to-End Framework with lower TCO and an MBA......

I'm wondering if the need to state the article is "fact rich" means that other articles, by Microsoft, are not "fact rich"

I think all of Microsoft's material is full of facts. However, they use those facts in creative ways to ensure users fully understand the benefits of Microsoft's robust, secure end-to-end framework that lowers TCO with your MBA.

...and MCSE!!

Quoting:The final challenge I gave to my son - I asked him to try and crash the system. He was able to achieve it in about seven minutes.

http://www.itwire.com.au/content/view/13114/1090/1/0/

Quoting:This is one for all of you readers who’ve had trouble installing Windows Vista. Don’t feel bad. Even some Microsoft developers — who have the Vista team on premise — can’t manage to upgrade to Vista.

Microsoft developer Andy Pennell wanted to install Vista at home. (Pennell is a developer on HDi, the interactivity layer for HD DVD.)

He bought a copy of Vista Ultimate. And then all hell broke loose —

http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=531

;-P

Pretty sad. He even had trouble just getting the box open. Isn't that sort of thing what beta testing's for? Microsoft can't even design usable packaging, much less software.

I'm surprised they don't get a copy free as a job perq. I'd have thought a 'Softie employee would make the ultimate, frontline beta tester.

Maybe he's new.

OK, who wants to email him the link to get a free Ubuntu CD mailed to him? :)

tqk -

Maybe the package is one of those new Vista security features. You can't attack what you can't install.

Quoting:I'm surprised they don't get a copy free as a job perq.

Nope, but they do get a significant discount. Microsoft has stores just for their employees, and each employee can purchase up to a certain amount at those stores. (No, I'm not, nor have I ever been a Microsoft employee. Yes, I've been to one of their stores.)

The new EULA probably states that even attempting to open this package implies acceptance of all terms of the EULA.

> Maybe the package is one of those new Vista security features. You can't attack what you can't install.

Hey, that kind of makes sense. Security is the reason they don't want you to install inside of VMWare. They're just admitting the obvious, that it's too insecure to install on any machine, virtual or otherwise.

Interestingly, I had one IT guy at work inform me about an article he'd seen claiming Vista was more secure than GNU/Linux or Mac. Not 2 seconds later, another guy came out and informed me of their Vista upgrade woes. No wonder Vista is so secure - it can't be upgraded.

Reads like a lego manual. With linux you can decipher kernel messages up to the panic. It sounds as if at least part of the problem was bad 64bit driver support under Vista. I read somewhere that this is a potential big advantage for linux since there many 64bit drivers are already up to scratch. Interesting...

Quoting:I read somewhere that this is a potential big advantage for linux since there many 64bit drivers are already up to scratch.

What do you think ESR's World Domination 201 is all about (http://catb.org/~esr/writings/world-domination/world-dominat...). You may or may not agree with the way ESR hopes to achieve world domination, but it is without question that the 32bit to 64bit changeover is a grand opportunity for Linux to make huge inroads and maybe even come out at #1. It's mainly a matter of waiting for that 64bit killer application that makes everyone switch from 32bit to 64bit.

One of the things that has been holding 64bit back is the lack of some of those proprietary blobs such as Flash. As much as I despise it, not having it can be even more annoying. I have encountered a few other rough edges over the years when I've decided to give 64bit a go, but the hassle involved with getting things like Flash to work always bring me back to 32bit. If one had been available 2 years ago I think many more people would be using the 64bit version of their distro of choice today.

I installed Debian Etch-64 on a machine for my Mom a month ago, but finally went back to Etch-32 and finally Unstable-32, because of Google Earth.

It's just such a wonderfully useful program, I decided it was worth the minor performance hit.

That's another one that may come in useful and one that fits the mould of 'programmes holding back 64bit' . Perhaps I should have been more explicit in my previous post: the #1 reason 64bit isn't more popular is that the proprietary companies that 'talk the talk' when it comes to linux are really a bunch of knuckle draggers.

Even on 32bit it's not all rosy coloured, Flash still regularly crashes my browser or hangs Alsa, nvidia at times seem to take forever to catch up to Xorg, for years Javas 'do you reagree to this license' nag screen gave me fits when updating gentoo (I now simply refuse to use it) etc etc.

I appreciate their interest in providing software for Linux, perhaps they may have some difficulties compiling for 64bit. But it has to be said that if these programmes were community maintained we would have seen 64bit versions a long long time ago.

Quoting:Here is a plausible explanation that admittedly is heresay.

If you call XYZ Computer needing to upgrade hardware and say you need Windows and functionality is your main concern you may be steered back to XP at an added cost.

Now there is some justification for a special order costing more except that loading XP is apparently pretty common.

What the speculation is that Microsoft is actually selling two licenses, one for Vista and an upgrade to XP.

If true, that yields a couple of bucks to Microsoft but more importantly for marketing it yields another Vista sale to be tallied for the record.

Can anyone in a position to know verify or refute that claim?

The story is believeable because of the deception Microsoft has already used to Market Vista.

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_(A_to_Z)/Stocks_M/t...

henke -

I know nothing about Microsoft's machinations. They could well be doing double sales. Heck, they could kidnapping children and turning them into lizards.

If nothing else, maybe it's because XP is now a premium product.

I know a Dell reseller who, when pitching to local businesses, assures them that they will never see the Vista that comes pre-loaded from Dell. He wipes the machines and delivers them with XP instead.

It's awfully hard to get a high price for something nobody wants.

Quoting:I know a Dell reseller who, when pitching to local businesses, assures them that they will never see the Vista that comes pre-loaded from Dell. He wipes the machines and delivers them with XP instead.

He doesn't have to. I have a Dell corporate rep for my computer orders. All I have to do is specify XP Pro and they come pre-installed that way. The business systems aren't even loaded down with crapware.

However, they no longer offer Office 2003. We are avoiding Office 2007 because of the massive interface changes. This company's employees flip out at the smallest change, so re-training for the new Office interface is unacceptable.

We are considering migrating to OpenOffice instead. Less re-training required and (guessing) only three or four spreadsheets will need special attention. I would love to see us make this move. The owners of this company are good people and will not blink at paying for support, or even contributing some of the savings to the project.

However, as always, patience is a virtue.

NoDough -

In all honesty, OpenOffice still has some rough edges, but, the latest versions have come a long way, especially WRT Office compatibility.

Avoiding Office 2007 may make as much sense as avoiding Vista, and that makes as much sense as breathing.

When I was researching prices for my "Linux making small business possible" article (http://www.jejik.com/articles/2007/06/apache_and_subversion_...) I found that virtually all XP licenses (OEM or boxed) included an upgrade to Vista of some kind. I had a hard time figuring out the cost of just XP after Vista was released

henke54, in a similar vein: The purchase of a MS license allows you to backrev the software to a previous version. This may require a call to MS to activate said software with the key from the new product. This has been mentioned to me many times in the past for both single licenses and software assurance type licenses. Thus, they could charge for a Vista license and backrev to XP; but it still counts as a Vista license. Why there is a price differential, I do not know.

Quoting:Avoiding Office 2007 may make as much sense as avoiding Vista, and that makes as much sense as breathing.

Actually avoiding both makes a great deal of sense. On the other hand, it may not be possible.

tracyanne, there are times when a person would not want to avoid them. Like when they're crossing the street and you're driving the beater pickup...

Quoting:Avoiding Office 2007 may make as much sense as avoiding Vista, and that makes as much sense as breathing.

Quoting:Actually avoiding both makes a great deal of sense. On the other hand, it may not be possible.

Tracy, unless I am mistaken, you and Dino are agreeing. I would hate to stop breathing. But, inevitably, I will someday.

>I would hate to stop breathing.

Yes.

I must admit, though, that my grammatical construction was confusing.

I go from avoid-avoid to do.

Not conducive to a quick skim.

dino: I read your post 3 times and still came up with the opposite - apparently - from what you meant, hence my post.

I skim until I find something interesting, then go back and read it properly.

> I read your post 3 times

OK, not conducive to multiple careful reads!!!!!!!