Discussion: Gotta ask

[DJ Bjorklund]

I'm a bit off topic in that I'm looking for input on why, yet again,
there is so much difficulty with installing the current release of the
Windows Family operating system.

Or... is that a false conclusion driven by my reading this group? And
as I think about that, logically it seems that persons who participate
in this, or any other computing news group would be those best
equipped, or more properly, most inclined to have the latest drivers,
have XP the most updated, etc. That is, in the best position to
successfully upgrade to Vista

So given that, out there in the masses, Vista must be a total
disaster(?) I don't seem to see that in the news. I must say that
I've only started using Windows on my own PC with 95 and have used all
versions since, sometimes upgrading the previous version, sometimes
clean installs, and I guess I've never had too much difficulty doing
it.

I consider myself a PC hobbiest, not an expert. I simply know that
you should defrag once in a while, have virus protection, and if
things get screwy, do a cold boot. And don't get me wrong, I'm not
some ultra-Pro MS zombie. I'm just curious about this always repeated
phenomenon: New Windows, it sucks, doesn't work, blah, blah

 

[Tim Fairchild]

Due to the clearing effect of the killfile
I was able to see DJ Bjorklund say:

I'm a bit off topic in that I'm looking for input on why, yet again,
there is so much difficulty with installing the current release of the
Windows Family operating system.

Or... is that a false conclusion driven by my reading this group? And
as I think about that, logically it seems that persons who participate
in this, or any other computing news group would be those best
equipped, or more properly, most inclined to have the latest drivers,
have XP the most updated, etc. That is, in the best position to
successfully upgrade to Vista

So given that, out there in the masses, Vista must be a total
disaster(?) I don't seem to see that in the news. I must say that
I've only started using Windows on my own PC with 95 and have used all
versions since, sometimes upgrading the previous version, sometimes
clean installs, and I guess I've never had too much difficulty doing
it.

I consider myself a PC hobbiest, not an expert. I simply know that
you should defrag once in a while, have virus protection, and if
things get screwy, do a cold boot. And don't get me wrong, I'm not
some ultra-Pro MS zombie. I'm just curious about this always repeated
phenomenon: New Windows, it sucks, doesn't work, blah, blah

There are often a lot of teething problems with a new(ish) OS and MS can
seem worse than most, maybe because of a less techy user base. Plus, they
try to add security (in XP and Vista) with a user base that is used to a
low security model - like users who are accustomed to running as admin,
etc.

Anyway, all OSen have teething troubles at the start. XP, OSX, linux 2.6
(and the difficult days of 2.6.8.1).

Change is always a little painful

 

[Adam Albright]

I'm a bit off topic in that I'm looking for input on why, yet again,
there is so much difficulty with installing the current release of the
Windows Family operating system.

Or... is that a false conclusion driven by my reading this group?

And
as I think about that, logically it seems that persons who participate
in this, or any other computing news group would be those best
equipped, or more properly, most inclined to have the latest drivers,
have XP the most updated, etc. That is, in the best position to
successfully upgrade to Vista

So given that, out there in the masses, Vista must be a total
disaster(?) I don't seem to see that in the news. I must say that
I've only started using Windows on my own PC with 95 and have used all
versions since, sometimes upgrading the previous version, sometimes
clean installs, and I guess I've never had too much difficulty doing
it.

I consider myself a PC hobbiest, not an expert. I simply know that
you should defrag once in a while, have virus protection, and if
things get screwy, do a cold boot. And don't get me wrong, I'm not
some ultra-Pro MS zombie. I'm just curious about this always repeated
phenomenon: New Windows, it sucks, doesn't work, blah, blah

 

[Adam Albright]

I'm a bit off topic in that I'm looking for input on why, yet again,
there is so much difficulty with installing the current release of the
Windows Family operating system.

Or... is that a false conclusion driven by my reading this group?

Look in: microsoft.public.windows.vista.general and you'll see at
least 10,000 posts complaining all about the new version of Windows.

So given that, out there in the masses, Vista must be a total
disaster(?)

No, not at all, but Vista is a disaster for millions or will be when
people try to install it. Of course some people won't have any
problems at all. Its the squeaky wheel that gets the attention.

I don't seem to see that in the news.

I could be cynical and say it isn't news because EVERY new version of
Windows going back to 3.1 had serious problems. So its hardy news that
Vista does too. <wink>

If you read some of my other posts and other people's too you'll see a
lot of anger centers around the Vista Upgrade Advisor. This piece of
Microsoft junk (a free download) sole purpose is to scan your present
system and let you know what if anything needs updating, replacing or
disabling prior to installing Vista. The problem is I and countless
others religiously followed the advise given, had our present system
get a passing grade from the Vista Update Advisor only to have the
actual install crash at some point during the install process. Some
Microsoft boot lickers that hang out in the Microsoft groups such as
this apparently see things differently. I don't suffer from terminal
tunnel vision.

There are ALWAYS driver issues. The other thing I complained about is
obvious bugs and some real goofy ones that I have documented. This too
sadly is par for course for every new release of Windows.

I must say that I've only started using Windows on my own PC with 95 and have used all
versions since, sometimes upgrading the previous version, sometimes
clean installs, and I guess I've never had too much difficulty doing
it.

Performace depends on how hard you push your computer, what your
hardware is, how up to date it is, if or not it has Vista drivers
available, then if they actually work and what software you have
installed. I have some 18 year old software that works fine in Vista
in spite of it being legacy Windows 3.1 era and I have seen endless
horror stories about software that either has a Vista ready sticker or
claims on the vendor's web site it "works" that refuses to work at
all. It at best is a crap shoot. Again, sadly, nothing new here
either.

I consider myself a PC hobbiest, not an expert. I simply know that
you should defrag once in a while, have virus protection, and if
things get screwy, do a cold boot. And don't get me wrong, I'm not
some ultra-Pro MS zombie. I'm just curious about this always repeated
phenomenon: New Windows, it sucks, doesn't work, blah, blah

Because often it doesn't work correctly on many systems until a
Service Pack gets released anywhere from six months to a year or
longer AFTER the initial release of the latest Windows version. Again
the Microsoft apologist crowd will make endless excuses for this lax
and repeatedly sloppy programming Microsoft rushes out the door if you
can call taking five years to develop Vista "rushing". Reagardless how
long it took it obviously still wasn't completely ready for the
public. There are still pleny of rough spots.

Being a seasoned programmer myself and having cut my teeth writing
code in various languages going way back to the early 70's and having
learned much from a senior programmer that had a masters in computer
science and also a PhD in Mathematics who's favorite line was if you
can do it with a pencil and paper, he could do it with programming
(and he could). I'm a hard critic. Sloppy programming and Windows is
overflowing with hit or miss code, is simply sloppy programming.
Period. Again others here for various reason may differ.

 

[Kerry Brown]

Very few people would seek out a help and support group when they don't
have a problem. Vista is very new. Many of the problems are because it is
different and people are slowly learning the new way. There are also many
situations and configurations that simply weren't tested. I have been
supporting computers since before Microsoft existed as a company. Percentage
wise I don't see any more or any less problems with Vista than any other
major OS upgrade. Of course there are many, many more computers now than
when say Windows 95 or 3.1 came out so there are more people having
problems. The percentage of people having problems seems about the same,
maybe even less than with Windows 95.

 

[Rock]

I'm a bit off topic in that I'm looking for input on why, yet again,
there is so much difficulty with installing the current release of the
Windows Family operating system.

Or... is that a false conclusion driven by my reading this group? And
as I think about that, logically it seems that persons who participate
in this, or any other computing news group would be those best
equipped, or more properly, most inclined to have the latest drivers,
have XP the most updated, etc. That is, in the best position to
successfully upgrade to Vista

So given that, out there in the masses, Vista must be a total
disaster(?) I don't seem to see that in the news. I must say that
I've only started using Windows on my own PC with 95 and have used all
versions since, sometimes upgrading the previous version, sometimes
clean installs, and I guess I've never had too much difficulty doing
it.

I consider myself a PC hobbiest, not an expert. I simply know that
you should defrag once in a while, have virus protection, and if
things get screwy, do a cold boot. And don't get me wrong, I'm not
some ultra-Pro MS zombie. I'm just curious about this always repeated
phenomenon: New Windows, it sucks, doesn't work, blah, blah

Folks that come here are those with problems so you're seeing a non
representative sample.

The OS is newly released. Drivers for hardware are lacking, compared to a
mature OS. In some cases even where drivers exist, they are early
releases, not fully ready for prime time.

People are trying to use legacy hardware/software on a new OS, that will
always be problematic.

Significant problems seem to be clustered around certain motherboards,
chipsets and raid controllers, an area of responsibility that falls on the
hardware manufacturer's and their BIOS and driver releases.

Software compatibility is in the same boat.

There are thousands upon thousands of hardware manufacturers and software
vendors. MS is not closed like Apple is with the Mac, hardware and
software.

There is a paradigm shift with Vista, you cannot approach it the same way as
XP, the user needs to adapt.

All these things are common with a newly released OS.

 

[Richard Urban]

logically it seems that persons who participate

in this, or any other computing news group would be those best
equipped, or more properly, most inclined to have the latest drivers,
have XP the most updated, etc. That is, in the best position to
successfully upgrade to Vista

Some assumption!

People who are best equipped with the latest hardware and drivers do not
come to these newsgroups as their computers are functioning without any
troublesome problems.



--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

 

[Adam Albright]

Folks that come here are those with problems so you're seeing a non
representative sample.

The OS is newly released. Drivers for hardware are lacking, compared to a
mature OS. In some cases even where drivers exist, they are early
releases, not fully ready for prime time.

People are trying to use legacy hardware/software on a new OS, that will
always be problematic.

Significant problems seem to be clustered around certain motherboards,
chipsets and raid controllers, an area of responsibility that falls on the
hardware manufacturer's and their BIOS and driver releases.

Software compatibility is in the same boat.

There are thousands upon thousands of hardware manufacturers and software
vendors. MS is not closed like Apple is with the Mac, hardware and
software.

There is a paradigm shift with Vista, you cannot approach it the same way as
XP, the user needs to adapt.

All these things are common with a newly released OS.

Ahh Rock, Windows XP and Windows 98 and Windows 95 before that had
many of the same issues and MVP's were using the same excuses over a
decade ago why none if it is Microsoft's fault back then. <giggle>

 

[Richard Urban]

This from someone who "claims" to have been programming since 1970. Yet he
doesn't know about drivers.

--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

 

[Adam Albright]

This from someone who "claims" to have been programming since 1970. Yet he
doesn't know about drivers.

Do you enjoy making a ass of yourself Richard?

It would appear from reading your posts that is your hobby.

 

[Dale \Mad_Murdock\ White]

I'm going to echo Rock's comments mostly. Though from my person thoughts, I
kinda wish they would not allow upgrading from windows XP. I'm sure it would
hurt sales, but I personally think they could rid themselves of alot of
problem by trying to support upgrades of systems that may or may not be
working correctly. I know everyone says they XP system was perfect before
the upgrade, which I always doubt to some degree and then I always wonder,
why are you upgrading if XP is perfect ?

If you went into a video game support forums, like Far Cry, Doom3, Half-life
2.You would see the exact same thing. It absolutely amazes me the number of
people who come in and rant and rave about how the game is total crap and
the company didn't do any Q&A and that they will never buy a game from that
publisher again. Now I would say that 80% of those people who are willing to
listen and try , get their fix. There is 10-15% who refuse to believe it
could be a problem on their side and so they never get it to work.

You would just be amazed at teh number of problems that are fixed with these
games that were related to firmware of the CD or DVD drive, or just
replacing the drive altogether. Heat issues, people didn't know they had,
People who like to Overclock their system, wgho refuse to take it back to
factory settings. dying motherboards or Network cards. I had a performance
problem with FEAR and it was the Keyboard I was using fault, there is also a
bug with the G5 and G7 mice. Spyware running on the syste. Defragged the
harddrive and everything started working. Missing chipset drivers The just
list goes on and on.

Sure sometimes those games had legit bugs and defects and sure, some games
have poor Q&A process and are rushed out the door. Far Cry sold over 1
million copies it's first year. Yet the support forums only had 50,000
registered users. The Tech Support section would make you think the game was
horrible, but the other 950,000 people apparently didn't have any problems
or were able to find a fix another way.

Is Vista perfect, Nope. Do I wish they had done things different, better. I
could write a whole book on what I would prefer they had done. But I'm up
and running and I haven't run into a major problem yet and I'm expecting
some of my minor problems with be resolved with better drivers

Go to the support forums when games like Stalker, Crysis, Bioshock are
released and watch the tech support forums light up. But watch the number of
units sold, versus the number of people who actually come for support and it
will probably be in the 1-2% range

 

[Kerry Brown]

I don't follow your logic. Why is this specifically a Microsoft problem? It
is a problem for any OS that goes through a major upgrade. Let us know which
company didn't have these problems when coming out with a major OS upgrade.

 

[Richard Urban]

You could go back to the news groups for the operating system of your
choice. Be happy.

As usual, only a tiny percentage of the number of people who are using Vista
are complaining. Most of those are the people who have sub capable
equipment, hardware errors, driver errors etc. Of course there are those who
just won't take advice, even when they ask for it.

I have now installed Vista on over 50 computers and have had no problems -
as opposed to your rants.

So, maybe a hands on technician beats out a programmer type person (you have
said you are) when it comes to doing things right.

You rant - I respond!

--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

 

[Sinner]

I know everyone says they XP system was perfect before the upgrade, which
I always doubt to some degree and then I always wonder, why are you
upgrading if XP is perfect ?

For the same reason some people buy new cars every couple of years, or new
furniture, they get tired of the everyday and want to try something new. If
your 12 year old 486 is still running, why get a new computer?

 

[Dale \Mad_Murdock\ White]

For the same reason some people buy new cars every couple of years, or new
furniture, they get tired of the everyday and want to try something new.
If your 12 year old 486 is still running, why get a new computer?

I understand your point about wanting to do something new every so often.
But your analogy isn't quite right. There is plenty of good reason to
upgrade a 486 and it would be near child abuse to make a 12 year old use one
as an every day device..

Would you buy that new couch, if it meant you had to re-do you whole living
room in order to have it ? Would you buy that new car, if it meant you had
to add on to your garage in order to park it ? Plus Couches and cars get old
and start wearing out. If you have a perfectly fine running OS, there is
nothing wearing out about it. If anything, OSes get better with time.

Vista is not just a dot upgrade with a fresh coat of paint put on. If you
have something that is working and working well, going to Vista, just for an
update sake is going to lead to headaches and heartaches.

 

[Adam Albright]

I don't follow your logic. Why is this specifically a Microsoft problem? It
is a problem for any OS that goes through a major upgrade. Let us know which
company didn't have these problems when coming out with a major OS upgrade.

I don't follow the typical MVP excuse making for Microsoft. In case
you haven't noticed it totally blows any creditability you might
otherwise have.

Your answer seems to be stop "picking" on Microsoft, everybody else
screws up too. That's hardly a technical reason or justification for
the world's largest software developer to constantly keep dumping
buggy versions of Windows on the public. It has been 20 years since
Windows has been around, Vista has been in development for at least 5
years and STILL there are major problems. If you call that acceptable
business practice or need to use the feeble and childish excuse so
what, all new versions of operating systems are like that (they're
not) you have my sympathy.

I don't consider Vista a major upgrade. Its just another version of
Windows with a new prettier face. Under to hood, same old clunky
Windows. For example the issue I detailed yesterday in another thread.

Vista has a audio driver already installed, yet attempts to play a
multimedia file, says it can't, it suggests I let it go out to the web
to find another copy of the same thing that's already on my system,
that Windows itself installed and is part of the Vista DVD. Then
Windows as dumb as it has always been still refuses to play the file
while every other player I have on the system is able to use the same
driver to successfully play the file. The irony is I'm talking about a
Microsoft produced driver. Now I ask you, how dumb is it for other
software on my system to use a Microsoft driver to play a file that
Windows itself can't?

If such things still are part of Windows (they are) and this problem
isn't new, and there are many, many problems like this still
unresolved, then you got to wonder who at Microsoft is watching the
store and spending hundreds of millions of dollars to develop a "new"
Windows when still there are so many still unfixed and broken issues
that keep getting carried forward to each new Windows version.

Care to explain or make up another excuse why we should accept this?

 

[Adam Albright]

You could go back to the news groups for the operating system of your
choice. Be happy.

As usual, only a tiny percentage of the number of people who are using Vista
are complaining. Most of those are the people who have sub capable
equipment, hardware errors, driver errors etc. Of course there are those who
just won't take advice, even when they ask for it.

Stop trying to spread bullshit. You have no idea how many people have
problems with Vista. Visiting the general Vista newsgroup I see
thousands of posts detailing all kinds of problems. That isn't a
"tiny" percentage. For every person that takes the time to post a
newsgroup article there are probably a hundred other people at least
with the same problem.

I have now installed Vista on over 50 computers and have had no problems -
as opposed to your rants.

How is that self-serving boast suppose to address issues other people
have? Lets see, you "installed" Vista on 50 other computers and you'd
have us belive you had no issues at all. Either you simply installed
Vista on 50 identical or nearly identical computers or you haven't yet
installed it on a more complex system or my guess, you really know
know how to test Windows or any of your software or hardwarfe and your
idea of a complex program is Notepad.

So, maybe a hands on technician beats out a programmer type person (you have
said you are) when it comes to doing things right.

You rant - I respond!

So you're saying a grease monkey that changes the oil in a car is
smarter then the person that had a hand in engineering the car.
Thanks, for sharing kid.

 

[Richard Urban]

Hey, programmer.

You don't use a driver to play a file. A driver interfaces between hardware
and the operating system. If WMP 11 can play a standard DVD OK (it can)
there are no issues other than you are missing something for YOUR particular
video.

You need a CODEC. Got it programmer.

--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

 

[Sinner]

Vista is not just a dot upgrade with a fresh coat of paint put on. If you
have something that is working and working well, going to Vista, just for
an update sake is going to lead to headaches and heartaches.

If, you are updating to Vista, not just buying a Vista installed computer,
you already know why you're upgrading. You relish the challenge. For you,
the computer isn't just a tool for balancing a checkbook, writing letters
and working with pics, vids and music. If I don't do at least a dozen clean
installs/year on my machine, I'm not using the computer.

And, some people just aren't capable of maintaining a computer. For them
any upgrade is beyond rocket science.

 

[Adam Albright]

Hey, programmer.

You don't use a driver to play a file. A driver interfaces between hardware
and the operating system. If WMP 11 can play a standard DVD OK (it can)
there are no issues other than you are missing something for YOUR particular
video.

You need a CODEC. Got it programmer.

Your simplistic and limited knowledge on the topic is duly noted.

The terms CODEC and driver are interchangeable, depending on what the
specifics of the topic are. A "driver" as you suggested is often
described as a interface between some hardware device and the OS. In a
similar vain a CODEC is a "driver" between some multimedia player and
the file it is attempting to play, since without the proper codec
there is nothing to "drive" the media player. Both drivers and codecs
are software used to control either some hardware or other software.

A CODEC's purpose is to uncompress a file in order to play it or
encode a file to compress it to make it smaller in size. Both
processes are transparent and happen without the intervention of the
user.

And Bubba, you're dead wrong in thinking if WMP 11 can play a
"standard" DVD ok there aren't any issues. Again, your simplistic
knowledge on the topic is revealing. There is no such thing as a
"standard" DVD. There are many formats, many encoding schemes,
multiple standards depending on where you live, hundreds of different
codecs, varations in media, varations in encoding bitrates,
differences in frame size, frames encoded per second, formats; NTSC or
PAL, etc..

You further demonstrated your ignorance in incorrectly assuming I was
talking about a DVD. I was not. I was referring to a file sent to me
via the Internet that has a AVI wrapper that's actually in DivX
format. Actually quite common.

What you missed and tried to apologize for Microsoft was I have at
least 6 multimedia players on my system that all can use A Microsoft
codec to play a file that Media Player is too dumb to in spite of
there being no less than 3 capable audio codecs on my system, all of
which were easily found by other software in Windows' own System 32
DRIVER folder but Microsoft's own Media Player was too dumb to use any
in spite of the fact two were actually authored by and copyrighted by
Microsoft.

Being a Microsoft apologist does have its embarrassing moments, don't
it.