Microsoft and the future of Vista

Just finished upgrading Xp Pro to Vista Business.
The upgrade included migrate some 30 programs to vista,
including Dragon dictation, Adobe Acrobat Professional,
and a host of business specific software, all without
incident, although some tweaking.

All hardware was recognized and transition from XP was
relatively uneventful, until I came to 2 programs
specific to the medical profession. Both are radiology
imaging programs which use Active X connections into
Internet Explorer. Both programs fail under Vista, but
interestingly work under Internet Explorer 7 on XP.

I was told by the vendors (indirectly, though the
hospital IS service), that Vista will not be supported
as it is intrinsically flawed. I have not run into any
issue with other programs, and am wondering why
Diagnostic imaging software, which requires intense
streaming of imaging, does not work in Vista.
Interestingly neither of these programs have ever worked
on the Mac.

What are the issues with streaming images in vista?

> What are the issues with streaming images in vista?

perhaps you meant "Steaming"?

As used in this phrase: Vista is a pile of steaming...............

enter bad word where dots are




"GeraldF" <> wrote in message
news: ...
> Just finished upgrading Xp Pro to Vista Business.
> The upgrade included migrate some 30 programs to vista,
> including Dragon dictation, Adobe Acrobat Professional,
> and a host of business specific software, all without
> incident, although some tweaking.
>
> All hardware was recognized and transition from XP was
> relatively uneventful, until I came to 2 programs
> specific to the medical profession. Both are radiology
> imaging programs which use Active X connections into
> Internet Explorer. Both programs fail under Vista, but
> interestingly work under Internet Explorer 7 on XP.
>
> I was told by the vendors (indirectly, though the
> hospital IS service), that Vista will not be supported
> as it is intrinsically flawed. I have not run into any
> issue with other programs, and am wondering why
> Diagnostic imaging software, which requires intense
> streaming of imaging, does not work in Vista.
> Interestingly neither of these programs have ever worked
> on the Mac.
>
> What are the issues with streaming images in vista?
>
>
>
>

A couple things to try with those programs that 'may' get them running.
I created a folder on my C drive (C:\old programs) and install programs into
that instead of the default C:\Program Files.
Vista won't allow a program to write it's dynamic data to Program Files.
Security they say...my HumBug says otherwise...
The other thing is to install in XP compatibility mode.
Most of my older programs function that way. (Even DOOM, LOL)
I would agree Vista is intrinsically flawed, but I can make it work.
I just don't like the way it works, feels or looks.
I built a new Q6600/4GB/512MB PCIe Video/2x500GB SATA2 and dual boot
Vista/XP Pro.
XP runs like a new XLR-V, Vista slogs along like a 4 cylinder Accord...

"GeraldF" <> wrote in message
news: ...
> Just finished upgrading Xp Pro to Vista Business.
> The upgrade included migrate some 30 programs to vista,
> including Dragon dictation, Adobe Acrobat Professional,
> and a host of business specific software, all without
> incident, although some tweaking.
>
> All hardware was recognized and transition from XP was
> relatively uneventful, until I came to 2 programs
> specific to the medical profession. Both are radiology
> imaging programs which use Active X connections into
> Internet Explorer. Both programs fail under Vista, but
> interestingly work under Internet Explorer 7 on XP.
>
> I was told by the vendors (indirectly, though the
> hospital IS service), that Vista will not be supported
> as it is intrinsically flawed. I have not run into any
> issue with other programs, and am wondering why
> Diagnostic imaging software, which requires intense
> streaming of imaging, does not work in Vista.
> Interestingly neither of these programs have ever worked
> on the Mac.
>
> What are the issues with streaming images in vista?
>
>
>
>

"GeraldF" <> wrote in message
news: ...


> All hardware was recognized and transition from XP was
> relatively uneventful, until I came to 2 programs
> specific to the medical profession. Both are radiology
> imaging programs which use Active X connections into
> Internet Explorer. Both programs fail under Vista, but
> interestingly work under Internet Explorer 7 on XP.
>
> I was told by the vendors (indirectly, though the
> hospital IS service), that Vista will not be supported
> as it is intrinsically flawed. I have not run into any
> issue with other programs, and am wondering why
> Diagnostic imaging software, which requires intense
> streaming of imaging, does not work in Vista.
> Interestingly neither of these programs have ever worked
> on the Mac.

Those are legacy solutions that the software developers chose not to make
them work on Vista via a rewrite for whatever reasons.

>
> What are the issues with streaming images in vista?

You need legacy applications to run, then you have this option.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/pro...c/default.mspx

"GeraldF" <> wrote in message
news: ...
> Just finished upgrading Xp Pro to Vista Business.
> The upgrade included migrate some 30 programs to vista,
> including Dragon dictation, Adobe Acrobat Professional,
> and a host of business specific software, all without
> incident, although some tweaking.
>
> All hardware was recognized and transition from XP was
> relatively uneventful, until I came to 2 programs
> specific to the medical profession. Both are radiology
> imaging programs which use Active X connections into
> Internet Explorer. Both programs fail under Vista, but
> interestingly work under Internet Explorer 7 on XP.
>
> I was told by the vendors (indirectly, though the
> hospital IS service), that Vista will not be supported
> as it is intrinsically flawed. I have not run into any
> issue with other programs, and am wondering why
> Diagnostic imaging software, which requires intense
> streaming of imaging, does not work in Vista.
> Interestingly neither of these programs have ever worked
> on the Mac.
>
> What are the issues with streaming images in vista?

It is quite involved, but may be worth it, if you want to try to get your
professional application running in Vista: The Application Compatibility
Toolkit.
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...displaylang=en
I successfully used it to get an old CAD program running (for another
office, I don't bother with Vista for my own work).

ss.

> I was told by the vendors (indirectly, though the
> hospital IS service), that Vista will not be supported
> as it is intrinsically flawed.

Nonsense. In fact, out of the two operating systems, XP is "intrinsically
flawed" because it has a number of security vulnerabilities in it that Vista
plugs. In particular, Vista won't run some programs which ignore the XP
Programming Guidelines (yes, XP, not Vista).

I would have thought that the compatibility options (right click |
Properties | Compatibility) in Vista would most likely let those programs
run, but if not you can always run them in a virtual machine, as Mr Arnold
says.

SteveT

"Steve Thackery" <> wrote in message
news:...
>
> I would have thought that the compatibility options (right click |
> Properties | Compatibility) in Vista would most likely let those programs
> run, but if not you can always run them in a virtual machine, as Mr Arnold
> says.

Erm, do you really think that the virtual hardware of VirtualPC is really
going to cut it when hardware such as this is used in medical imaging?

http://www.matrox.com/graphics/en/so...dical_imaging/

Some 'tard suggested I used VirtualPC for CAD as well. Heh.

ss.

"Steve Thackery" <> wrote in message
news:...
>> I was told by the vendors (indirectly, though the
>> hospital IS service), that Vista will not be supported
>> as it is intrinsically flawed.
>
> Nonsense. In fact, out of the two operating systems, XP is "intrinsically
> flawed" because it has a number of security vulnerabilities in it that
> Vista plugs. In particular, Vista won't run some programs which ignore
> the XP Programming Guidelines (yes, XP, not Vista).
>
> I would have thought that the compatibility options (right click |
> Properties | Compatibility) in Vista would most likely let those programs
> run, but if not you can always run them in a virtual machine, as Mr Arnold
> says.
>
> SteveT

You are most likely correct.

My daughter also had some medical programs that would not under vista and
running them in compatibility mode for XP solved the problem.

It just amuses me that vendors blame vista for their laziness and
shortcomings to update their software. They all probably live in bedrock

Bill
>

> It just amuses me that vendors blame vista for their laziness and
> shortcomings to update their software. They all probably live in bedrock

IT Support people are just as bad. They've done the lazy thing and jumped
on the "Vista-is-useless" bandwagon so they don't have to bother learning
the new OS and getting badly written old software to run on it.

SteveT

On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 14:18:43 +0100, "Steve Thackery"
<> wrote:

>> It just amuses me that vendors blame vista for their laziness and
>> shortcomings to update their software. They all probably live in bedrock
>
>IT Support people are just as bad. They've done the lazy thing and jumped
>on the "Vista-is-useless" bandwagon so they don't have to bother learning
>the new OS and getting badly written old software to run on it.
>
>SteveT


If you want to complain about badly written software, you need look no
further than Vista. It is excessively bloated, problem prone and
sluggish. Worse, it often requires hardware updates to do things XP
use to do with ease. If that isn't bad enough it made Digital Rights
Management worse, added UAC which is only a nag and often is horrible
with common file handling tasks then for no reason totally mixed up
the interface everyone was used to changing the placement/function
simply to change.

The bottom line is the deeper you look at Vista the more you got to
wonder why you upgraded from XP.