Discussion in 'Bits & Bytes' started by jimeez, Dec 7, 2006.
I had that same experience a few days ago, couldn't find the stupid network settings! Other than that, seems to be working pretty well. Strangely enough, I'm finding I really like the gadgets bar.
Go to tools thread sticky, and first post in that thread, has tweaks and tips and tools for Vista. Lots of info.
Very cool Pio! Can't wait to see the improvements and it's still a great feeling there's no major security issues with Vista. To me, that is huge. Vista has passed the test of time so far in security.
Finding ones way around an operating system I've used for 14 years, shouldn't be this difficult. Migrating from dos to 3.1 wasn't this difficult. They can stick vista where the sun don't shine.
Gadget bar....what gadget bar? that annoying floating thingy on the desktop?
Yep, that would be it. Like having a wireless network strength meter and battery meter that's easy to see on the sidebar.
Mike, I was so aggravated yesterday I saw it but didn't click. If I had time to play I would have simply tried to find a way to make it disappear. You're talking to someone who hides desktop icons because I find them to be unnecessary clutter.
I think if the school gave me a vista machine I'd probably end up getting rid of all the crap I would never use and make it my lifes work to make it feel and work like XP, On entering the controal panel I groaned "oh God they changed the friggin thing again"
One thing I did like - on first turning the machine on (it was brand new out of the box) - I got to the desktop in no time at all. XP took ages for the initial setup.
I'll also add the minute it setup it connected to the internet with no input from me. Unfortunately it was some unsecured wireless network in the area and not the one it was suppose to connect to. Took me a while to get it to see the 2 cisco access points, but try as I might, couldn't go beyond the access points. Don't get me started on how long it took me to actually delete unwanted connections so it wouldn't attempt to connect to them anymore. Nightmare I tell ya.
You can put Vista into an XP mode so it looks and feels like XP. http://www.dummies.com/WileyCDA/DummiesArticle/id-4708.html
edit: Also by going into control panel>users you can turn off some of the extra security that is probably giving you fits.
Wait until you see how fast it is to install Vista. It's almost as fast as linux. You'll curse XP till the day you die, after installing Vista your first time. It's fast and if you install it from boot, it backs up all files in Windows so once you get inside, you see you didn't need to back up anything you thought you might have lost like music and pictures and stuff. Big time saver.
For me, XP was extremely frustrating going from 98se to XP. I never owned ME so the interface was very confusing.
Well V, ya know, when you have time to get your butt down to NY, feel free to bring a copy of vista and I'll let you loose on my laptop - until then, I'd rather stick pins in my eyes.
Biggest problem with Vista at the moment. The program works like a dream if you take a couple minutes and learn it. Nothing is drastically different, people get put off by the different appearance and shut off their minds to it. They refuse to give it a chance and in doing so sabotage their own ability to use it.
Every once in a while I try to go somewhere and do something the old way and it is not there, so I look and find how it is done now. Mental note to self about the new logic and no problems in the future and I now know how to think when I run into the next item that moved. It now takes me about 10-15 seconds to locate each new function that has moved or changed and each time it gets faster. The OS is logically built, it just isn't the same logic that was used in the previous design.
You'll get used to the new feel. It did suck the first day though. I don't blame you for feeling lost. The new interface made me feel like a total n00b.
You know to this day I still get confused when running things like ipconfig. I constantly forget to run cmd first. Some things take a while to sink in. LOL
I don't blame you one bit. One thing I can tell you -- and if you've upgraded from DOS to Windows 3.1 way back when, you probably know this -- this is not the first time that MS changes its interface and you have to spend ungodly amounts of time trying to find the simplest adjustments you've learned how to do in previous versions. They did this going from Win95 to Win2k, then to WinXP, and now to Vista. And every single time they swear up and down that it's their best design. There's probably tons of reasons why they change things so often. One could be because some of the MS people honestly believe the new interfaces are better. Another one is that they want to invalidate older professional certifications so people who spent the money and time to get themselves certified on something, spend money again to upgrade their certifications.
In any case, if that laptop was handed to you by your workplace, someone should have made all these adjustments for you because as you said, you don't have the time to hunt around for things that used to be simple.
I hate to sound like a broker record, my solution is Linux and it will still require you to put in an initial investment of time and effort, but that initial investment is getting smaller and smaller. If all you need is a way to interface with your school's network and share files, you probably could get away with having a different OS on your own system.
[Yes, MS belongs in a very deep pit.]
hahahahahaha! A couple of minutes? Almost 45 minutes trying to find a place to put in an ip address, and I'm far from being computer illiterate.
lol, whose logic? :banghead: I don't want the computer to think it knows what's best for me. I don't need it to ask me "are you sure you want to do that?" I'm not in kindergarten. Perhaps they should have 3 different profiles one could sign onto at startup - "I'm a complete and utter moron" or "I've had some experience but don't assume anything" and "I can navigate around xp with my eyes closed"
This is why you need to remember why they did these things. Majority of new computer buyers are total n00bs. They did this to protect them by default, but those who know how to tweak, as any os needs tweaking, can turn all that stuff off and still have the security. Read the Vista tweaks and settings thing in the sticky post here. Once you get the feel, it's gonna seem sweet to you. I know with the people I have that I support on Vista, I have yet to get one saying they're infected after my setup. Big difference from the first 6 months with people I supported with xp. Big difference. It'll come to you and fast. Just clear your mind and remember the leap from 98 to XP and think of this as that, just a million times better.
This is what I think is being ignored here:
Sure, anyone with even minimal computer literacy can find their way around the OS and new interfaces, if they put in enough time, patience, learning, and it really won't take long before they can tweak whatever they need to tweak without all the frustration and irritation.
But in the real world, corporations, large and small businesses, and schools (oh, particularly schools, since MS likes to spoil schools and non-profits with lower prices) are pretty much forced to switch to a new version sooner than later, because of the MS End-of-Life support policy. You don't upgrade? Sooner or later their support will disappear, and this can be an issue in any business. You upgrade, but not right away? Not immediately? You snooze a little on the upgrade? Then you're wasting support-time, you're not using the maximum period of support that MS sells you, if you buy support from them. Even if you don't, it's a period of time during which a product and all its features, peripherals on the HCL and so forth, are fully supported, and in terms of ROI you are not taking full advantage of the support period.
And all because they decided it was time to sell the public -- force down their throats, whether they need it or not -- an upgrade, when the majority of the public has not yet scratched 10% of the capabilities of the previous version.
In that context, Lynne is right, making professionals waste 45 minutes looking for a window in which to plug an IP address, is almost criminal.
MS has greatly extended the End of Life for XP to the point where it's a non-issue. Corporate users have been able to continue ordering XP boxes and the most OEM installs I find on a major corporate reseller's site are XP installs. MS has also recently announced that OEMS can offer a downgrade to XP for retail customers. Service Pack 3 for XP will be coming out soon, too.
Frankly, it looks to me like MS is abandoning Vista about as quickly as it bounced ME and for the same reasons: most of their customers think it sucks.
To the thread:
I don't dismiss anyone's opinion who likes Vista. I think it it great if they like it. And my following comment certainly isn't meant as a personal reflection on anyone other than MS--but the fact that so many Vista users have to line up to answer, defend, or explain in response to the constant avalanche of complaints from other Vista users combined with manufacturers continuing to offer XP on even their newest high-end computer tells me all I need to know.
Five years. Five frigging years they worked on Vista and THIS is what they come up with? It is beyond embarrassing.
It's pretty easy to work in Vista but you don't realize how easy it is until you fiddle with it. Just like new cars. Damn they come out every 6 months. Medicine changes as the medical field changes. Well OS's will change too as technology changes. Fight it all you want, it's a fact of life. Just like the damn carburetor pushed aside to fuel injection. It has to happen, and before you know it, everyone is driving a car with fuel injection. Same thing with OS's. They change when needs change. Vista is a needs change OS. It utilizes much faster processing and security that takes advantage of hardware, not simply software. You want to place blame? Turn to the movie industry. The gaming industry. Disney and Pixar. Blame the processor companies like Intel.
Blaming Microsoft for Vista is like blaming a company who could create an alternative fuel for not making sure that fuel can be used in just any car. It's technology and hardware technology and it's needs that make OS's like Vista. And fwiw I still don't see any remote resemblance of Vista to ME. ME looked and felt like a hybrid 98/XP system. More in the way of XP in new features, with one big difference, lack of drivers. XP requirements were insane when I bumped up from 98se. I lost hardware because of it, had to bump memory way up there too, and lost the use of tons of programs that couldn't run in it. I have not found one program yet, that won't run in Vista, that also wouldn't run in XP on the home user end. Even those programs that aren't totally compatible, will install but will bug out. On XP though, you couldn't even get a 95 program and many 98 progs to even install. I hear the comparison to ME and I just don't see it. People hated ME, like me, because of the lack of drivers. The only good thing about it was no boot disc for installs. Whoopie. LOL Get into your install and you're sol on getting the driver you needed for your 3 year old ethernet adapter though, so what good was it? Other than that, it was like XP in many way, but had the appearance of 98. I relate ME to XP for that reason, and the only reason I liked XP compared to ME was because you had more generic drivers for basic components so you could get online to get the rest of the drivers.
One thing though, you got online to get those drivers for sound and video and get updated, in first released XP, you were immediately infected. In fact it was so common that you would be infected at the time you reached the desktop, that when people would buy XP boxes, they were warned about the risk, and told their boxes could be patched properly with no risk at the store, in most computer stores. I know this because I bought an XP box pre sp1, but not that long. Way into XP release though. Was asked if I knew about the worm that default xp gets immediately and if I wanted them to patch me. I knew enough to turn off modem because I already had xp on my old rickety celeron 600, so I refused, but many people didn't, that bought new boxes, well into sp1 release, and were immediately infected with a nasty bugger right out of the box if they didn't shut the modem down. I had it happen to me, my first xp install on my 98se box, that celeron. It wasn't pretty. It sucked.
Install Vista once at home, and imagine being able to do that on multiple computers with no data loss in the upgrade. I'd think that would be a positive for the business end.
I ramble, but if you read that, and think back, and put just a little bit of time into understanding new tech, Vista makes a lot of sense to many people. I hate Microsoft because of their pricing, but this is the best OS they've had yet. It's a shame people aren't getting in on it from the beginning. Like Rav mentioned, there is some loss if you don't even if over the long haul when the next 4 systems are out and they discontinue security updates one day. If that day comes, you'll want to know you got the most of your investment. This is the first OS I got in from the very beginning and the first OS running hardware that is compatible or exceeds. I'm getting the most out of this baby, and she's purring for me. Learning curve yes, but it's gonna look really logical once you relearn things. More logical then before. And bonus, all improvements to performance and little needed for security. Thank XP for that, because it took long enough for MS to learn how to deal with security issues from the over 5 years of dealing with XP's. XP was a security disaster if you ask me. It only became more safe when they dealt with things in IE in sp2. That was way into the game for XP. Too far. If anything, because of that, users who owned XP should have gotten a discount. LOL
That's correct, and it's good news for our corporation, because there are currently no plans to go to Vista. The forced-upgrade and end-of-life situations I described before, I admit, are more applicable to enterprise tools. For instance, a critical application of ours runs just swell on SQL Server 7 on a Win2k box, yet because those two products have reached EOL (or soon will), we need to go into a full-scale SQA and testing cycle just because we are forced to go to SQL 2005 on Advanced Server 2003. We don't need this upgrade, it's a wart, it's a royal pain in the neck, we don't want it, and we are forced to spend the hundreds or even thousands of man-hours on it because management will not -- and with good reason -- allow us to depend on expired products for any application, let alone critical ones.
Granted, this may not apply to XP vs Vista, but it's the same marketing strategy, if anyone could call it that, that drives the process.
If Vista goes the way of ME, that can only be good news. Maybe the best thing that could happen to MS, is a failure, maybe sustained success is their worst enemy at this point.