The looming SP1 debacle

My personal experience with SP1, which jibes with most objective tests I
have read, is that SP1 is the biggest non-event since Vista itself.
Users are not going to find tangible changes in terms of speed and
usability.
What is wrong with Microsoft?
The comparison is not entirely inapt: Vista is Microsoft's Iraq. They have
the power to keep pushing a misbegotten misconception, and could change
things, but they don't. Even after a year Microsoft still blames peripheral
makers for not coming up with stable or fully functional Vista drivers. This
is like Bush blaming France for his failures in Iraq.
Most people like me who dislike Vista do not hate Microsoft and understand
how difficult it is to create an OS that will work under a wide variety of
uncontrolled and unpredictable hardware and software configurations.
Microsoft was on target with the 9x versions (even ME) and really had
something with XP. We all realize that Microsoft does not enjoy the monopoly
control over hardware and software that Apple does (and somehow escapes
government review).
Despite the marketing and technical success of XP Microsoft released Vista
to universal bad reviews and continues to pretend it is a premier product.
No amount of bluster from Microsoft can hide the fact that Vista is a
significant step backward from XP in terms of speed, compatibility,
usability and stability. Increased use of Vista is simply due to Microsoft
pushing it onto computers purchased at retail. That reflects Microsoft's
clout, and the ongoing expansion/replacement cycle of SOHO computers, but
not the success of Vista.
Vista is still a corporate no show, non-starter. For example, what OS do you
see on the computer screens in the background of all the cable news
networks? Hint: it isn't Vista.
It boggles the mind.
Bill Gates, already a historical figure--the Henry Ford of computing,
retires with an Edsel as his legacy. I would think he would want something
better.

"iacy" <> schreef in bericht
news:8D45ACFC-86FD-4B00-A44A-...
> Despite the marketing and technical success of XP Microsoft released Vista
> to universal bad reviews and continues to pretend it is a premier
> product....

it is, for 95% of the users, sadly you don't belong to them...

"iacy" <> wrote in message
news:8D45ACFC-86FD-4B00-A44A-...
> My personal experience with SP1, which jibes with most objective tests I
> have read, is that SP1 is the biggest non-event ........


The more of an non-event it is, the better. It would mean that they've not
needlessly withheld essential updates from Windows Update.

--
Jon

iacy wrote:

....nothing of any factual truth.
Frank

I disagree. Vista is made to be more stable than XP, as 90% of the blue
screens in XP were due to third party driver issues. So, with Vista, they
elimintated that. Now, it's up to the manufacturers to use the new model.
The first Windows 98 (pre-SE) was dismal, as was pre-SP2 XP. I enjoyed XP
from beta version, and the same with Vista. I really like Vista.

And I know a few corporations that aren't using XP... Well, not yet. They
are just now upgrading from Windows 2000. No need for them to...

--
Dustin Harper

http://www.VistaRIP.com | Vista Resource & Information Page


"iacy" <> wrote in message
news:8D45ACFC-86FD-4B00-A44A-...
> My personal experience with SP1, which jibes with most objective tests I
> have read, is that SP1 is the biggest non-event since Vista itself.
> Users are not going to find tangible changes in terms of speed and
> usability.
> What is wrong with Microsoft?
> The comparison is not entirely inapt: Vista is Microsoft's Iraq. They have
> the power to keep pushing a misbegotten misconception, and could change
> things, but they don't. Even after a year Microsoft still blames
> peripheral makers for not coming up with stable or fully functional Vista
> drivers. This is like Bush blaming France for his failures in Iraq.
> Most people like me who dislike Vista do not hate Microsoft and understand
> how difficult it is to create an OS that will work under a wide variety of
> uncontrolled and unpredictable hardware and software configurations.
> Microsoft was on target with the 9x versions (even ME) and really had
> something with XP. We all realize that Microsoft does not enjoy the
> monopoly control over hardware and software that Apple does (and somehow
> escapes government review).
> Despite the marketing and technical success of XP Microsoft released Vista
> to universal bad reviews and continues to pretend it is a premier product.
> No amount of bluster from Microsoft can hide the fact that Vista is a
> significant step backward from XP in terms of speed, compatibility,
> usability and stability. Increased use of Vista is simply due to Microsoft
> pushing it onto computers purchased at retail. That reflects Microsoft's
> clout, and the ongoing expansion/replacement cycle of SOHO computers, but
> not the success of Vista.
> Vista is still a corporate no show, non-starter. For example, what OS do
> you see on the computer screens in the background of all the cable news
> networks? Hint: it isn't Vista.
> It boggles the mind.
> Bill Gates, already a historical figure--the Henry Ford of computing,
> retires with an Edsel as his legacy. I would think he would want something
> better.
>
>

"iacy" <> wrote in message
news:8D45ACFC-86FD-4B00-A44A-...
> My personal experience with SP1, which jibes with most objective tests I
> have read, is that SP1 is the biggest non-event since Vista itself.
> Users are not going to find tangible changes in terms of speed and
> usability.
> What is wrong with Microsoft?
> The comparison is not entirely inapt: Vista is Microsoft's Iraq. They have
> the power to keep pushing a misbegotten misconception, and could change
> things, but they don't. Even after a year Microsoft still blames
> peripheral makers for not coming up with stable or fully functional Vista
> drivers. This is like Bush blaming France for his failures in Iraq.
> Most people like me who dislike Vista do not hate Microsoft and understand
> how difficult it is to create an OS that will work under a wide variety of
> uncontrolled and unpredictable hardware and software configurations.
> Microsoft was on target with the 9x versions (even ME) and really had
> something with XP. We all realize that Microsoft does not enjoy the
> monopoly control over hardware and software that Apple does (and somehow
> escapes government review).
> Despite the marketing and technical success of XP Microsoft released Vista
> to universal bad reviews and continues to pretend it is a premier product.
> No amount of bluster from Microsoft can hide the fact that Vista is a
> significant step backward from XP in terms of speed, compatibility,
> usability and stability. Increased use of Vista is simply due to Microsoft
> pushing it onto computers purchased at retail. That reflects Microsoft's
> clout, and the ongoing expansion/replacement cycle of SOHO computers, but
> not the success of Vista.
> Vista is still a corporate no show, non-starter. For example, what OS do
> you see on the computer screens in the background of all the cable news
> networks? Hint: it isn't Vista.
> It boggles the mind.
> Bill Gates, already a historical figure--the Henry Ford of computing,
> retires with an Edsel as his legacy. I would think he would want something
> better.
>
>

iacy,

I disagree wholeheartedly with your assumptions. I think it is a great
OS, much better than XP and just as fast. I, and most users of Vista, have
had no problems whatsoever, except for the minor glitches that come with
every new OS.
Have a nice day.

C.B.


--
It is the responsibility and duty of everyone to help the underprivileged
and less fortunate among us.

I'm using the Server 2008 as a workstation right now and it uses the same
code base as Windows Vista SP1 i.e. Build 6001 : Service Pack 1

And it works very well. I had one glitch .. hmm .. but it was very easily
circumvented - although I must admit it was a glitch - but as you say
Microsoft is trying to handle every permutation and combination out there so
I heartily allow them that one without flipping out especially as I must
admit my mobo is a bit of a permutation!

But speed, performance, ease of use and so on is excellent, as in very very
good. I am really enjoying it. I can hardly wait for SP1 to be available to
me so I can get it onto the machines here. It reminds me of Windows 98 SE -
i.e. code you want.

Saucy


"iacy" <> wrote in message
news:8D45ACFC-86FD-4B00-A44A-...
> My personal experience with SP1, which jibes with most objective tests I
> have read, is that SP1 is the biggest non-event since Vista itself.
> Users are not going to find tangible changes in terms of speed and
> usability.
> What is wrong with Microsoft?
> The comparison is not entirely inapt: Vista is Microsoft's Iraq. They have
> the power to keep pushing a misbegotten misconception, and could change
> things, but they don't. Even after a year Microsoft still blames
> peripheral makers for not coming up with stable or fully functional Vista
> drivers. This is like Bush blaming France for his failures in Iraq.
> Most people like me who dislike Vista do not hate Microsoft and understand
> how difficult it is to create an OS that will work under a wide variety of
> uncontrolled and unpredictable hardware and software configurations.
> Microsoft was on target with the 9x versions (even ME) and really had
> something with XP. We all realize that Microsoft does not enjoy the
> monopoly control over hardware and software that Apple does (and somehow
> escapes government review).
> Despite the marketing and technical success of XP Microsoft released Vista
> to universal bad reviews and continues to pretend it is a premier product.
> No amount of bluster from Microsoft can hide the fact that Vista is a
> significant step backward from XP in terms of speed, compatibility,
> usability and stability. Increased use of Vista is simply due to Microsoft
> pushing it onto computers purchased at retail. That reflects Microsoft's
> clout, and the ongoing expansion/replacement cycle of SOHO computers, but
> not the success of Vista.
> Vista is still a corporate no show, non-starter. For example, what OS do
> you see on the computer screens in the background of all the cable news
> networks? Hint: it isn't Vista.
> It boggles the mind.
> Bill Gates, already a historical figure--the Henry Ford of computing,
> retires with an Edsel as his legacy. I would think he would want something
> better.
>
>

"iacy" wrote:

> Users are not going to find tangible changes in terms of speed and
> usability.

Wrong.

My Vista Business installation (on a core2duo at 2.4GHz
with 4GB RAM) is smooth, stable, and far faster than its
XP predecessor, and my drivers and software are all 100%
compatible.

I can't ask for more, so don't have great expectations
regarding SP1. In my case, it doesn't make sense to
install it immediately.

Readers Digest describes "Laughter as the best Medicine" this is no doubt
the biggest dose one can handle in a day.

--
All the best,
SG

"iacy" <> wrote in message
news:8D45ACFC-86FD-4B00-A44A-...
> My personal experience with SP1, which jibes with most objective tests I
> have read, is that SP1 is the biggest non-event since Vista itself.
> Users are not going to find tangible changes in terms of speed and
> usability.
> What is wrong with Microsoft?
> The comparison is not entirely inapt: Vista is Microsoft's Iraq. They have
> the power to keep pushing a misbegotten misconception, and could change
> things, but they don't. Even after a year Microsoft still blames
> peripheral makers for not coming up with stable or fully functional Vista
> drivers. This is like Bush blaming France for his failures in Iraq.
> Most people like me who dislike Vista do not hate Microsoft and understand
> how difficult it is to create an OS that will work under a wide variety of
> uncontrolled and unpredictable hardware and software configurations.
> Microsoft was on target with the 9x versions (even ME) and really had
> something with XP. We all realize that Microsoft does not enjoy the
> monopoly control over hardware and software that Apple does (and somehow
> escapes government review).
> Despite the marketing and technical success of XP Microsoft released Vista
> to universal bad reviews and continues to pretend it is a premier product.
> No amount of bluster from Microsoft can hide the fact that Vista is a
> significant step backward from XP in terms of speed, compatibility,
> usability and stability. Increased use of Vista is simply due to Microsoft
> pushing it onto computers purchased at retail. That reflects Microsoft's
> clout, and the ongoing expansion/replacement cycle of SOHO computers, but
> not the success of Vista.
> Vista is still a corporate no show, non-starter. For example, what OS do
> you see on the computer screens in the background of all the cable news
> networks? Hint: it isn't Vista.
> It boggles the mind.
> Bill Gates, already a historical figure--the Henry Ford of computing,
> retires with an Edsel as his legacy. I would think he would want something
> better.
>
>