Finally had a chance to check out Vista

[Markbnj]

I think it's funny when people who use Linux try Vista once, for fifteen minutes, and then feel compelled to post a rant about how they hate it before moving on with their beloved penguin.

If most Windows users felt compelled to do the same thing the forum would be filled with posts like "OMG Ubuntu so sucks!" and "Knoppix: WTF?"

However, for some reason, most Windows users don't care to do that. I have two versions of LiveCD that I use here, and I currently work for a consulting company that is primarily Linux/FOSS oriented. Our infrastructure is cobbled together out of a suite of free tools for email, defect tracking, secure connections, shared documents, etc. Takes forever to get a new person up to speed, and 'advanced' things like web access just aren't done because it will take one or two of our expert open source geeks to set it up, and they are all busy.

I could replicate the whole thing in two hours with Exchange and Sharepoint, and be done.

But you don't see me making rant posts on AT about how bad it all is .

 

[Maximilian]

Originally posted by: Solema
I'm frankly amazed that this topic is even garnering responses.

OP is a Fedora Core user. 95% of Linux users hate Windows in all flavors, regardless of its merits. That's just how most Linux-heads work. Why should we care what their opinions (almost always negative) are about Microsoft OSes?

Yea, its mainly the fanatical linux users, i could name a few, they have 15000+ posts and i firmly believe that a good 90% of those posts are pro-linux/anti-windows. Theyre the ones that give a bad name to linux people, i never tried linux until i met one of the level headed people. It was ubuntu i tried and it worked ok, itll never replace windows because i play games and i like windows but its pretty decent for somthing thats free.

 

[Jose R]

It is because Vista is a Microsoft product and everyone loves to hate on them, just like Wal-Mart. I think it is penis envy.

Honestly if Vista were a Linux distro the fanboys would be on here proclaiming it as the greatest thing since KY Warming Gel(which makes their fantasy of being with a woman seem even more real), but since it is a Microsoft product it of course has to be the work of the Devil.

The problem with Vista is not the pretty interface, it is the underlying aggressive security features and DRM.

This post on Nick White's windowsvistablog.com details the issues involved.* Based on reading the comments to the post and related links; it would appear:

1. You have no absolute administrative rights as an end user. The only individual or entity that has those rights is MS.

2. DRM is "on" all the time, regardless if you insert or attempt to play restricted formats. This is a system drain that injures those who just want a computer to do work on, and not be the entertainment center of the home.

3. MS is always monitoring your use of software and hardware and will shut down/cripple your hardware when your use of said *ware is not authorized by MS. In addition, the government seems to have a backdoor in the OS which will allow them access to your computer.

I am in the process of planning my first build, and have been researching Vista as much as I can. A lot of what Vista offers as enhancements are features I do not want. DreamScene and Sidebar come to mind. The Backup program seems crippled as well. By comparison, Acronis Trueimage is a better solution. Shadow copy is a good feature I would like have, though. Media center is of no interest to me.

I just want a fast 64 bit OS that is not weighed down by unnessary fluff or restrictions. It seems Vista does not and will not offer this.

And I do find it ironic that Bill Gates calls Vista the most secure OS in the world, when it is itself bloated spyware.

__________________________________________

*It seems I can't link to website, so here are the urls:

http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windo...tion-twenty-questions-and-answers.aspx

http://windowsvistablog.com/

 

[Tipsy Turtle]

Originally posted by: Jose R

It is because Vista is a Microsoft product and everyone loves to hate on them, just like Wal-Mart. I think it is penis envy.

Honestly if Vista were a Linux distro the fanboys would be on here proclaiming it as the greatest thing since KY Warming Gel(which makes their fantasy of being with a woman seem even more real), but since it is a Microsoft product it of course has to be the work of the Devil.

The problem with Vista is not the pretty interface, it is the underlying aggressive security features and DRM.

This post on Nick White's windowsvistablog.com details the issues involved.* Based on reading the comments to the post and related links; it would appear:

1. You have no absolute administrative rights as an end user. The only individual or entity that has those rights is MS.

2. DRM is "on" all the time, regardless if you insert or attempt to play restricted formats. This is a system drain that injures those who just want a computer to do work on, and not be the entertainment center of the home.

3. MS is always monitoring your use of software and hardware and will shut down/cripple your hardware when your use of said *ware is not authorized by MS. In addition, the government seems to have a backdoor in the OS which will allow them access to your computer.

I am in the process of planning my first build, and have been researching Vista as much as I can. A lot of what Vista offers as enhancements are features I do not want. DreamScene and Sidebar come to mind. The Backup program seems crippled as well. By comparison, Acronis Trueimage is a better solution. Shadow copy is a good feature I would like have, though. Media center is of no interest to me.

I just want a fast 64 bit OS that is not weighed down by unnessary fluff or restrictions. It seems Vista does not and will not offer this.

And I do find it ironic that Bill Gates calls Vista the most secure OS in the world, when it is itself bloated spyware.

Said the guy with the penguin avatar.

 

[gerwen]

Originally posted by: Jose R
[
The problem with Vista is not the pretty interface, it is the underlying aggressive security features and DRM.

This post on Nick White's windowsvistablog.com details the issues involved.* Based on reading the comments to the post and related links; it would appear:

1. You have no absolute administrative rights as an end user. The only individual or entity that has those rights is MS.

I'm not sure what this means. Afaik you have complete administrative control of your machine. It doesn't tell you 'sorry dave, you can't do that'.
At worst it asks you to confirm administrative tasks, which many linux users will recognize as being analogous to sudo.

Originally posted by: Jose R
2. DRM is "on" all the time, regardless if you insert or attempt to play restricted formats. This is a system drain that injures those who just want a computer to do work on, and not be the entertainment center of the home.

My processor sits at 0% usage when idle. Perhaps there's a memory hit. I imagine the service or whatever that is responsible DRM can be disabled, which would in turn disable viewing of protected content, which is exactly what you require.

Originally posted by: Jose R
3. MS is always monitoring your use of software and hardware and will shut down/cripple your hardware when your use of said *ware is not authorized by MS. In addition, the government seems to have a backdoor in the OS which will allow them access to your computer.

Doubtful. Any monitoring would likely have been discovered by now, as it would require network communication that would have been spotted easily by packet sniffers, just like the original discovery of other spyware and its ilk. Backdoors will be found and exploited by hackers. Backdoor for one is a backdoor for all. Point 3 is pure FUD. You don't actually believe this do you?

Originally posted by: Jose R
I am in the process of planning my first build, and have been researching Vista as much as I can. A lot of what Vista offers as enhancements are features I do not want. DreamScene and Sidebar come to mind. The Backup program seems crippled as well. By comparison, Acronis Trueimage is a better solution. Shadow copy is a good feature I would like have, though. Media center is of no interest to me.

I just want a fast 64 bit OS that is not weighed down by unnessary fluff or restrictions. It seems Vista does not and will not offer this.

Vista discussion aside, it sounds like linux is best suited to you. You can strip it down to the bare minimum that will run your apps as fast as they possibly can be run, with absolutely no eye candy or 'nifty' things. You're lucky though, linux isn't the best fit for most desktop users.

Originally posted by: Jose R
And I do find it ironic that Bill Gates calls Vista the most secure OS in the world, when it is itself bloated spyware.

It may be bloated, but something can be bloated and secure. Spyware? That remains to be proven.

 

[Jose R]

Originally posted by: gerwen
I'm not sure what this means. Afaik you have complete administrative control of your machine. It doesn't tell you 'sorry dave, you can't do that'.
At worst it asks you to confirm administrative tasks, which many linux users will recognize as being analogous to sudo.

My processor sits at 0% usage when idle. Perhaps there's a memory hit. I imagine the service or whatever that is responsible DRM can be disabled, which would in turn disable viewing of protected content, which is exactly what you require.

I don't have a problem with the UAC, because its similar to sudo. And both OSX and *nux prompts for passwords when installing sw.

But, in Linux I can strip out features I don't use; and have full access to all my system and file folders (although care must be taken). In Vista, I can't strip out DRM, and I believe, some folders are locked and inaccessible even in admin mode. This is what concerns me.

Although, MS Defender can be disabled, but, I think you lose Aero.

Originally posted by: gerwen
Doubtful. Any monitoring would likely have been discovered by now, as it would require network communication that would have been spotted easily by packet sniffers, just like the original discovery of other spyware and its ilk. Backdoors will be found and exploited by hackers. Backdoor for one is a backdoor for all. Point 3 is pure FUD. You don't actually believe this do you?

From http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/423/1:

You see, even after you activate the software it will, according to the EULA, ?from time to time validate the software, update or require download of the validation feature of the software.? It will once again ?send information about the . . . version and product key of the software, and the Internet protocol address of the device.?

Here?s where it gets hairy again. If for some reason the software ?phones home? back to Redmond, Washington, and gets or gives the wrong answer - irrespective of the reason - it will automatically disable itself. That's like saying definitively, ?I?m sorry Dave, I?m afraid I can?t do that...? Unless you can prove to the satisfaction of some automoton that the software is ?Genuine,? or more accurately, that under the relevant copyright laws that you have satisfied the requirements of the copyright laws and all of the terms of the End User License Agreement, the software will, on its own, go into a ?protect Microsoft? mode.

And from http://msn.pcworld.com/article/id,128483-page,1/article.html:

Microsoft has confirmed that the U.S. government agency best known for eavesdropping on telephone calls had a hand in the development of the Windows Vista operating system.

...

Still, the NSA's involvement in Vista raises red flags for some. "There could be some good reason for concern," says Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC). "Some bells are going to go off when the government's spy agency is working with the private sector's top developer of operating systems."

Part of this concern may stem from the NSA's reported historical interest in gaining "back-door" access to encrypted data produced by products from U.S. computer companies such as Microsoft.

In 1999, U.S. Congressman Curt Weldon said that "high-level deal-making on access to encrypted data had taken place between the NSA and IBM and Microsoft," according to EPIC's Web site.

With Vista expected to eventually power the majority of the world's personal computers, it would be tempting for the government agency to push for a way to gain access to data on these systems, privacy advocates say.

Originally posted by: gerwen
Vista discussion aside, it sounds like linux is best suited to you. You can strip it down to the bare minimum that will run your apps as fast as they possibly can be run, with absolutely no eye candy or 'nifty' things. You're lucky though, linux isn't the best fit for most desktop users.

My problem though, is I need a windows OS since I will be using apps not ported to either mac or linux. So, my choices are xp pro, vista business or vista ultimate.

 

[nweaver]

do not compare UAC to sudo...they are not even close. One is highly usable, configurable, the other is annoying an nearly worthless.

 

[stash]

The blurb about NSA working with Microsoft is a bunch of crap. It's actually kind of funny.

NSA works with many different groups on projects. They'll do red team exercises, help to write documentation for securing products (which they did on previous versions of Windows), etc.

Where do you think SELinux came from?

 

[Jose R]

Originally posted by: nweaver
do not compare UAC to sudo...they are not even close.

yes, my bad. UAC seems to be a more layered system like the OSX and linux prompts for authentication.

But, isn't there a terminal like command line interface in windows?

Originally posted by: stash
Where do you think SELinux came from?

yes, but from reading some of these articles, the NSA's involvment in Vista was more far reaching than its participation with SEL.

 

[Bateluer]

Originally posted by: Piuc2020
I still wonder why people are so negative about everything... seriously, life is not THAT bitter as to hate an OS that deeply... a very good OS for that matter, it might be hard to use at first but once you get used to it, its definitely a notch above XP.

Hehe, its funny that those same people were also the ones who railed against XP at its release, and swore to stick with Win2k.

In a few years, we'll all be using Vista and railing against Vienna.

 

[stash]

yes, but from reading some of these articles, the NSA's involvment in Vista was more far reaching than its participation with SEL.

Are you kidding me? Let's see, for one project, they wrote large amounts of code to release their own Linux distro. For another project, they did some testing and documentation. Hmmm.

 

[Nothinman]

yes, but from reading some of these articles, the NSA's involvment in Vista was more far reaching than its participation with SEL.

Wow, you didn't actually read anything did you?

 

[Noema]

Originally posted by: Sunner
Figured maybe I'd get a look at it myself, but...
Holy crap Vista is friggin' expensive around here.
Almost 3k SKR for Home Premium, that's over $400, and Ultimate is damn near $700.
I wonder if Microsoft expects anyone to buy it at those prices...

Even the OEM Home Basic version is $170.

Same here. In Mexico Ultimate costs near US$800. Particularly steep if you consider salaries down here are around 1/10th of what they are in the US. I don't know who their target consumer is...most people either don't know / don't care, and the ones who do will pirate it (as it is pretty rampant down here; to be fair I am sure they'd pirate it regardless of how much it costed), or will eventually get it when they buy their Dell laptops. Punishing potential consumers with those outrageous prices seems illogical...I wonder what the reason is for selling it at 2x the price as in the states. Sometimes I wonder why they bother to even release retail versions in markets like this.

I want to go legit with Vista when I buy it, but those prices will force me to import it from the States if possible.

 

[Hyperblaze]

Originally posted by: Bateluer

Originally posted by: Piuc2020
I still wonder why people are so negative about everything... seriously, life is not THAT bitter as to hate an OS that deeply... a very good OS for that matter, it might be hard to use at first but once you get used to it, its definitely a notch above XP.

Hehe, its funny that those same people were also the ones who railed against XP at its release, and swore to stick with Win2k.

In a few years, we'll all be using Vista and railing against Vienna.

sure, make those bullsh!t generalizations as if they were fact.

Your post voted as the most ignorant of the whole bunch.

 

[stockriderman]

Originally posted by: Piuc2020
I still wonder why people are so negative about everything... seriously, life is not THAT bitter as to hate an OS that deeply... a very good OS for that matter, it might be hard to use at first but once you get used to it, its definitely a notch above XP.

It's 20% slower than my XP. If you are using your pc to work,then that's extra 1.5 hours a day you are loosing on an average of 8 hours. I do hope it's all because it's new.