This bothers me.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

I am just a regular guy so therfor I can only get the public beta's. My
problem is I sure wish I could get the new build. 5384 sux sooooo bad on my
computer. As stated before It hangs constantly. I still cant install an audio
driver b/c then it hangs for 30 minutes at start-up. But right now it hangs
when I do any kind of operation other than just open windows. I have
downloaded every update microsoft has thrown at me but still NO change. It is
the worst version of a beta I have ever tested. I have pretty much just given
up trying to test anything out on it b/c I can not do any kind of operation
without it hangging for 15 minutes everytime. Just the other day I decided to
run vista for the first time in a month maybe thinking there would be some
updates... there was 1 and that was windows defender.... What the hell they
arent fixing anything else in the public build? So basically I have to wait
for RC1... how can I give them any kind of true testing when I cant do
anyting with it?!?! This just really pisses me off that they have a new build
out and I can not upgrade to it. Cant even see if they fixed the problems in
that one. Should I email microsoft vista support and tell them my problem?
Maybe they will supply me with the new build? I need some feedbacks guys...
maybe somone can hook me up and share? Thanx guys and gals! -Craig
 
I'd e-mail MS, hell I think we should flood them. From what I know, there
really isn't much difference between 5384 and 5487. You mentioned that you
tried installing updates, but nothing happened? By this logic, would you be
able to fix issues with a shipped version, when it is also buggy? So you see
why some people are really ticked at MS.

I for one will stay with XP till 'Vienna' is shipped, in 2012. Windows Vista
is a horror to behold. And a broke retail version will stay borke throughout
it's life cycle.
 
I don't know what everyone is saying but i haven't have many problems with
vista.
I was very buggy when i first installed it over a month ago, but the bugs
have slowed down alot and latly vista ON MY MACHINE i really stable on my
with the exseption with games and programs that don't work with vista. but
over all it has been stable for me. if you are wondering what machine i have
it is quite basic.

home built
athlon 3000+
512 megs ram
nvidia 5200+
dvd/cd
Motherboard is an Asus A7V8X-X

The only problem i really am trying to get used to is the new security in
vista like the UAC.

thanks.
mike
 
M@dhat3rr said:
From what I know, there
really isn't much difference between 5384 and 5487.
Click to expand...

Please, don't say stupidities!!!! Because there's a huge performance
improvements from beta2 (5384) to 5472.
 
Microsoft is busy working on fixing all the bugs that everyone has reported
from beta 2, but the newer builds may or may not be as stable as beta 2 is
for most people because beta 2 was put through more rigorous testing than
the latest build. I know people are getting frustrated with some of the
compatibility issues, but just keep filing bug reports and the dev team at
MS will look at it.
 
I am acquainted with Windows XP and afIk it's launch was October 25, 2001
and I recently loaded its Betas of RC1 and RC2 to get some persepective on
Vista, and much has not been fixed in it and short of a delay of 3-6
months, Vista is going to ship broken.

SFC always has had the glitch acknowledged in several of the MSKBs on it
that it asks for a CD often unless you regedit and sometimes 3 regedits and
an I386 paste are required. The Recovery Console was a train wreck, menus
have been non-intuitive to an unbelievable degree, the shell often tends to
crash, IE is often unstable and much of it is like the Mac commercials
portray. It's been a Beta for 6 years.

The discontent over Vista is legitimate. Most of us know what Betas are,
and have Beta tested for years and well over a 150 or more MSFT Beta
products.

We know that Betas are a snapshot, and often a half step forward and a half
step back. Some code mods for new features work, others won't.

I'm not just reading posts that dog MSFT for dogging MSFT's sake, I'm
reading MSFT MVP blogs and I've documented them in numerous places (MSFT
keeps deleting the criticism because they are paranoid, and controlling as
long as they can do it in secret because they often have the spinal
composition of a jelly fish. I'm reading blogs from the authors of the best
selling books on Vista (one had presold 900,000 plus copies and the book is
not due until Dec. or later in the very probably event that MSFT finally
realizes it does not have enough time to put out a capable OS.
I've been able to run Vista to get my work done for many months--actually
from the start. Some of the features are poorly conceived--the organization
of Explorer folders could be so much better and the XP options should have
been retained and easily could have but this is falling on tin ears.

Win RE does not work (that's the startup repair feature and others) way too
high a percentage of the time compared with a Repair Install working nearly
100% of time unless special conditions are in play like trashed partitions
or Lilo and Grub bootloaders.

SFC does not yet work.

CH
 
I don't believe MSFT looks at anything filed by public. And they have know
way of knowing. As long as MSFT resists posting all categories of bug fix
and their disposition on Connect which could easily be done *for the public
they are disingenuous and hiding period. There are no excuses for this.
They have SQL and Cluster servers to organize this info. They have been
asked to do this repeatedly via direct emails and they have refused.

The Connect developer who coordinates Connect Corey Snow has been repeatedly
asked to do this and he has remained silent. The Technet blogger who calls
his blog the Vista team blog from MSFT Nicholas White has been asked to do
this and Nick remained silent on this.

(e-mail address removed)
(e-mail address removed)

CH


Tom Ziegmann said:
Microsoft is busy working on fixing all the bugs that everyone has
reported from beta 2, but the newer builds may or may not be as stable as
beta 2 is for most people because beta 2 was put through more rigorous
testing than the latest build. I know people are getting frustrated with
some of the compatibility issues, but just keep filing bug reports and the
dev team at MS will look at it.
Click to expand...
 
I agree that the MS folks scan through these posts. I have gotten some help
on audio issues using this forum.

However, I cannot easily find a way to provide feedback (where do we post
Beta testing issues?), as a regular home user, I will post here a run down of
the bugs I have so far, for one of those smart people to look at. I'm going
to restore my XP OS as I can't take the current Beta's problems any more.
I've run out of patience and will wait until the final version gets out there
since I'm seeing no benefits from using Vista.

Here's what I've seen so far on an upgrade to Vista from XP on a home laptop:

* System is miserably slow, and Task Mgr is not accessbile to "kill" the
problem processes -- and why is the "run" command not readily available from
the Start button menu? I have a registry command I usually run to get back
the task mgr after the group policies lock it up on reboot but it's a big
hassle and I'm really sick of getting locked up in all these system hang-ups.

* I have been in the group policy MSC (gpedit.msc) and solved audio
streaming security issues by restoring my Internet Options tabs that were
removed by the Cox Security Suite, but each reboot keeps keeps overriding the
customized policies. I never had this problem with Cox and IE until I
installed IE 7.

* Internet Connection -- Can't seem to find a way to "default" it to my
wireless home network. Have to reset it each time I reboot or come back
after a prolonged absence. Really annoying.

* IE 7.0 keeps opening itself after reboot with to a Google search on a
"monitor" search of some sort. This is bizarre ...

* Document navigation stinks with many hidden files; if you rename a file,
it disappears and isn't available to view unless you close the file browser
and reopen (f5 refresh didn't work for me and I thought I had lost an
important file). I hate the dumbed-down navigation. It doesn't seem easier
to me and I want options to see everything, including "hidden" file types.
Even the "traditional" view which gives a folder view closer to the original
file manager is not satisfactory.

* I can no longer use my Canon EXBrowser software since it connects to my
default camera icon, which is no longer associated with my actual camera. I
have not yett tried to uninstall and re-install that app and its driver. I
can only access my camera through the systems default download interface and
it has to be configured quite a bit to put the pictures in the place I want
them, with a compatable folder naming convention, etc. Lots of lost time
there trying to figure that one out.

* I can no longer restore my laptop from "sleep" mode -- and have to turn it
off and reboot -- sigh

So, overall, it's more buggy than I anticipated and more trouble than it's
worth right now. I have not seen anything that I can't live without and
little incentive to upgrade at this point. No double there's benefits in
regards to security and other "under the covers" changes. However, from an
end-use perspective -- I'm not seeing anything that really jazzes me about
this new OS. I can't find anything, and it's just been a pain to use.

Let's hope the finished version is MUCH improved ...
 
Microsoft is looking at bugs filed by the public...I filed some bugs using a
different passport than the one used by my techbeta passport and got
responses to each bug that I have filed. I have also had many 1 on 1 email
conversations with some developers and the test team on some of the bugs I
filed.
 
Not as a member of the CPP you didn't Tom. And why are they resisting to
point of no discussion at all and stone walling on categorizing all the Beta
fixes to date and putting them on a public Connect site??????

They also don't want to talk about a number of issues.

One of them that freaks them out is that their projected 500,000, 000 Vista
pre-installed desktop adoption in 24 months (it will be way short) will not
have access to Win RE and recovery functions through worthless OEM recovery
CDs or partitions.

There is a dearth of documentaiton on Vista features. You're a TBT and if
you can serve me up an intelligent discussion of the differential features
of Win RE--have at it.

Have you realized that Startup Repair works a percent of times it's tried,
but Repair Install in XP works virtually 100% of time if partitions are
intact and Lilo or Grub isn't on a dual or multi-boot blocking repair
install setup?

Also they are censoring and blocking my posts.

CH
 
Where is the public access to bug reports on Connect and if it isn't in
existence why?

Where is a list of Bug reports and their contexted dispositions for the
future that has been much requested by direct emails to MFST Beta
organizers?

I don't see them.

CH
 
I installed a clean install on a separate HDD of vista. It runs today as it
did when it was installed back when it was released to the public. The only
thing I can figure out is it has issues with the MOBO. It has to be the drive
controllers or something.
 
I don't understand Pimp. Is it running better or worse? What are the
specific issues you have?

CH
 
Chad,
Just as a note; I'm not in a private beta; and did report a bug
utilizing the MBC that can be found in the feedback icon
And MSFT did respond to me. Sent me an e-mail from Connect;in fact. The
e-mail had the bug feedback i.d(same as when I was in a private beta);the
results;btw(closed/resolved?????);and the direct link to view it. Ahh; but
here's where your point becomes valid.
When I tried to go to that link; it sent me to a "You are not authorized
to access this page" screen.
Which I then said; WTF??? I reported it; so why don't I have access to see
it?
So I e-mailed Connect; and received this response,
"It seems that you used the MBC to report this through the CPP; at this
time; there is NO way for you to access this information. We are aware of
the situation;and a team is looking at the possibility of providing that
information; in the future. Thank You."
Well, that was weeks ago; and still no access.
Jeff
 
You're spot on Jeff as all your posts. When people tell me they're looking
into something for 14 months, I know that metaphorically they are taking a
whiz on my request. If they wanted public access to bugs on connect they
could do it a lot faster than they cross that I-90 bridge to the campus in
the morning. If they wanted to educate the public also on the bug
categories fixed and disposition they could. They don't want to. They have
plenty to hide and they are hiding it.

This is not a transparent company. Its an often furtive scheming company
that perceives itself as ruthless--but often gets it "azz backed up." It
lies to the public about tunning over customer info to the US gov. It got
caught doing that with MSN Search, and on June 1 and June 2 they met with
the government to set that up again.

They only fight with the government when the government threatens to start
cutting into the revenue. None of the security mavens will respond to what
they agreed to do at the June 1 and June 2 meeting in Washington with DOJ.

CH
 
Umm;
Spot on??? meaning; spat on;as are all your posts?
i'm confused; but you are correct;in alot of things;about MSFT.

P.S. Been following that whole ISP DOJ deal;
Doesn't really matter now;anyhow.
Damage has been done already; same as the NSA wiretaps; doesn't matter
now;
they've already got the info they want.

Jeff
 
I disagree. There is plenty of substantive backlash for the meglomaniacs
like Gonzales who has no substantive federal trial or litigation experience
and never spent anytime in a federa courtroom. As long as your
representatives and Senators are whussies then the Executive Branch is going
to stomp your rights, and there is plenty of future data to be vacuumed up.
Also those data bases can be destroyed.

Spot on meant I agree with your points.

CH
 
Chad,
Thanks for the spot on bit.
And that does prove your point;about msft;in respect to the way they are
handling CPP bug reports.
The fact is;at least from my own experience with this issue;
They may well actually be looking at those reports; but very
"conveniently" denying access to the actual report.
Weird; one would think;that if you posted a bug;and there was resolution(one
way or another);that MSFT would at least let you see what the resolution
was.
And to say;oh post bugs;we look at them;and then not grant access to the
resolutions; is strange;to say the least.
To get that sort of response;" oh we're aware of this;and may;at
some point;consider access in the future"; will be a moot point.
Seeing as the future isn't that far off to begin with. And; just like the
courts; oh we'll tie them up in mumbo jumbo so long; they'll go away.(or
die)

Jeff
 
Back
Top