Vista RC1 - Post your thoughts...

[linkboy]

I've been running RC1 for a few days now and I've been totally impressed with it (not enough to get me to change my startup to it though, that's still OS X).

 

Its come a long way since Beta 2 (which I didn't have any problems with, but I hardly booted into either).

 

I do like the new busy cursor (the circle instead of the hourglass).

[JayRx1981]

does anybody tested the usb-audio drivers?

on pre-rc1 there was no go for install... and so the asio drivers will not installed only the wdm drivers.

 

please let me know... because i wanna use vista again... i hate xp

 

I'm currently using a Sonica Theater USB audio card and in RC-1, it's working just fine. So, for this card at least, yes the usb-audio drivers do work.

 

In general, as well, I'm mildly pleased with RC1. Unlike Beta2 (which would only boot on my system in safe mode), RC1 loads without a problem and I have fully functional Aero, etc. The UI isn't anywhere near as polished as Tiger's, but it's certainly nicer than Windows XP or plain-jane Xorg/Gnome (without XGL/Metacity)'s UIs are.

[tripleboot]

The point is:

 

If you disable UAC and your system gets pooched, typically you're not going to know why it got pooched because it was wide open, meaning Vista remains a big bloated pig of code that never gets optimized and working properly because people running the beta version of the OS are failing to submit reports to Microsoft so they can fix those big bloated pig sections of code and make things work right.

 

So, disabling UAC is a bad idea, especially in beta stages because you're just bypassing the entire reaason for UAC in the first place: to keep the system working and reliable and not prone to every little stupid issue that comes along due to user error.

 

bb

 

Will I disagree with your reasoning. Thats the point as a tester at this stage. It will be important for the general public when released. I really want to work through these glitches without having to stop constantly to approve common tasks. I have submitted numerous bug reports to test incompatability. Its a personal preference and disabling this isn't a big deal for me. I've BSOD more times then I can count and I can get back up quickly. I don't need these signs popping up all the time when I have already planned out my attempts to integrate on beta, especially now with RC1 where we need to be more aggressive with testing.

[bwhsh8r]

how does everyone have these bsod horror stories??? i used win 95, no bsod (probly cause it was rarely on the internet) and now i run xp mce and i run no av, no firewall, and i download cracks all the time etc (very highrisk) and i have also collected alot of viri... but none have done that... its odd... but hey, tahts not a bad thing... enjoy rc1 senva and others (OSU)!

 

 

max

[SenVa]

enjoy rc1 senva and others (OSU)!

 

Have been! (U of M)!

[br0adband]

Will I disagree with your reasoning. Thats the point as a tester at this stage. It will be important for the general public when released. I really want to work through these glitches without having to stop constantly to approve common tasks. I have submitted numerous bug reports to test incompatability. Its a personal preference and disabling this isn't a big deal for me. I've BSOD more times then I can count and I can get back up quickly. I don't need these signs popping up all the time when I have already planned out my attempts to integrate on beta, especially now with RC1 where we need to be more aggressive with testing.

 

It's fine that you disagree, but UAC works as it's supposed to work - as long as you leave it the hell alone. Even Microsoft's beta supervisors put out memos and even posted on their own work related blogs telling people:

 

"PLEASE don't disable UAC, if you do most of the bug reports that are going to be sent in are meaningless because with UAC turned off, we really can't say who, what, when, or where the problem happened. With UAC on, at least we have some breadcrumbs to start with. Without it, we're totally lost, so please, even though it's annoying to some degree everytime you have to make a system change or install software, it's there for a reason."

 

So, my advice, as always, is to leave it alone. If you start tweaking the hell out of Vista and disabling stuff left and right, it's not testing, it's messing it up and your bug reports will be useless since you've disabled one of the most important aspects of the entire operating system.

 

Just my $.02...

bb

 

 

how does everyone have these bsod horror stories??? i used win 95, no bsod (probly cause it was rarely on the internet) and now i run xp mce and i run no av, no firewall, and i download cracks all the time etc (very highrisk) and i have also collected alot of viri... but none have done that... its odd... but hey, tahts not a bad thing... enjoy rc1 senva and others (OSU)!

max

 

I think the reason some people have BSODs is because they screw around with the OS too much, like disabling things they shouldn't be disabling which in turn creates an instability since that aspect of the OS was put there for a reason.

 

But hey, that's just me, 20 year beta tester, 25 year computer support professional, 30 years of computer building experience, 5,000 machines built with my bare hands, 150K+ Windows installs, thousands of face-to-face support situations, etc... but what do I know, right?

 

I've seen 2 BSODs on all my various Windows installs since 2000, and both were because of driver issues. Windows works out of the box, it's relatively stable comparatively speaking. It's when you start adding third party software that the kinks pop up - and that's Microsoft's fault because Windows is closed-source and third party developers only get opportunities to see parts of the source code and never all of it.

 

So when they write a piece of software or driver for one specific part, they can never be 100% sure it's not going to have some drastically negative side-effect on some other part of the code.

 

That's the world of Windows we all have to deal with, unfortunately.

 

bb

[lord_muad_dib]

uac is "kinda" good only in a multi user context.. where there are clueless users and admins alltogheter.

 

anyway... i know a lot of peops that are comparing uac with sudo or such.. but hey with sudo you have the ability to have root rights and keep 'em on without no blocking messages at all even with multiple actions just using the -s switch.

 

with that stupid uac there's alwais a message an alert even if you log as administrator! they should do something to switch that thing on/off easily like sudo

[domino]

UAC reminds me of sudo passwd root under OS X and Linux. Normal users aren't suppose to do it but try installing drivers and recompiling kernels without enabling root .

[Lkr]

i dled it but dont feel like wiping my hdd for it

[thedguy]

So are there any new features in vista other than the what appears to be a new theme and the extra search bars? Some security features apparently, and not quite feeling the sidebar, but I don't quite get apple's dashboard either.

 

They tweaked on the icons a bit, and mostly re-skinned the UI from XP. I'm struggling to see much of a difference, this coming from someone who's a pure windows (with some linux) usage for over 10 years.

 

I think when vista comes out i'll just keep running xp till I can get comfy with OSX, or linux.

[JayRx1981]

Well, after a few more days use of RC1, I'm less than impressed. If I allow my system to idle to the point that it enters sleep mode or even just logs me off, I find that going back to what I was doing without actually fully rebooting leads to crashes, bsod's, and hard drives refusing to wake from sleep--problems I never encounter in xp, tiger (yes, i own a legal copy of tiger, so I don't feel the least bit guilty using the hacked white-box version), or ubuntu. Sure, it's better than Beta 2, but given that Beta 2 wouldn't even boot for me without being in safe mode, that's not saying much is it.

 

I'm gonna keep using it until I can get my new intel mac (mac pro or 24" imac....oh the choices), then probably wipe this box completely and use it as a unix-based fileserver.

[bptba93]

a lot faster than beta 2 now i can actually watch dvd's on my laptop again using vista..cuz with beta 2 it was a hog and my laptop should run dvd's fine.

[johnniecarcinogen]

I'm a beta tester (for some reason ms sent me 2 reg keys) and I am very disappointed with Vista. Yes RC1 is much faster and stable than the betas but I really don't like it. It really bothers me that most of the world will be using Vista and I will also be forced to use it. I do like the media player integration which is in the 'Ultimate' version (I also don't like the concept of different editions). The side bar is not as usable as OS X's dashboard and aero is kinda ugly IMO. Maybe a hacked streamlined Vista simular to TinyXP or XPGamer will be better.

 

I still wish OS X was developed for non Apple hardware . The world would be a better place. But since it probably won't, I hope more people adopt Linux by being turned off by Vista which in turn will bring more developement for Linux.

[sam_the_killer]

HAS anybody tried installing Windows Vista x64 release of RC-1...it takes a hell lot of space...i installed it on my 32.2GB partition which after the Windows Installation was only 22GB free....

what the hell is wrong with M$...i mean how come only an OS needs 10GB..of installation space..u have no option to customise the installation..

 

is this the same issue with the x86 release...?

[lord_muad_dib]

X64 version has got a lot of programs and libraries compiled in both 32/64 bit that's the reason

[br0adband]

Let's make it nice and clear so anyone that happens upon this thread and at least browses through it can't miss it:

 

IT'S BETA SOFTWARE.

 

There, hope that makes it easier to understand.

 

Right now, when you install it'll automagically install the Ultimate Edition of Vista which means all the bells and whistles, the kitchen sink, Jimmy Hoffa, and all the other {censored} Vista has and is capable of. This is normal for a beta stage release, even a Release Candidate. As time goes by (meaning in the next few weeks), the Vista beta teams will take the reports they're receiving (you are sending them in, right?) and tune and tweak the code to be more efficient while handling as much of the bug fixing as they can.

 

For now, you're limited to many things, including picking and choosing which particular options of Vista you may or may not want to install; this is a fact of life, so deal with it. When Vista is GOLD (meaning RTM, if you don't know what it means, Google it), that'll be the final working release and it'll be truly feature complete - that means it'll have all the goodies you're wanting:

 

- customized install

- upgrade capability

- etc

 

If you want to play around with the other versions of Vista, they're on the RC1 DVD you should have burned off (or run from Daemon Tools, whatever). When it comes to ask you for a key, just click Next and bypass it. Vista will complain about no key, but the next screen gives you the option to install one of the other editions instead of Ultimate - the Beta 2 key is locked to the Ultimate Edition, as all editions will be upon RTM/retail release. You can't activate any of the other editions because you'll be installing them without a key, but at least you can play around with them for a week or so before needing to start over again.

 

Just my $.02...

bb

[erbic]

My thoughts on Vista RC1:

 

Fast. Very fast. Boots in under ten seconds. Although it takes a lot longer to actually log in than Beta 2.

Improved GUI over Beta2. (shiny... )

FINALLY the ability to shut off those damn administrative UAC alerts.

Widgets are better, but there still aren't enough. This should change.

 

Still beta. --> Still buggy. I still have some programs which don't run properly, namely some older games like Warcraft III. But this is the reason I keep my XP-Vista-Hackintosh triple boot.

 

And, for absolutely NO reason at all, I add this: Hope that doesn't happen to my computer.

[RobNyc]

Its smooth, its fast. but a lot of things dont work. being an asus mobo user. asus users stay away from vista for now.

[macprodan]

x64 Vista dont seem fast to me, OS X feels alot faster even with one core enabled. What versions you lot using. 32bit or 64bit.

[bluedragon1971]

Let's make it nice and clear so anyone that happens upon this thread and at least browses through it can't miss it:

 

IT'S BETA SOFTWARE.

 

There, hope that makes it easier to understand.

 

No, it's NOT. It is now RELEASE CANDIDATE software, which means that very little other than major showstopper bugs will be fixed/changed before release.

 

That being said, the biggest problem I have (using the x64 version) is that every time I install a 32-bit program, I have to manually edit the shortcut to change the target from "Program Files" to "Program Files (x86)". If I don't, all of these programs get a generic program icon. Considering that MOST programs in existance are 32-bit, you would think that Microsoft would have thought this problem through a little more. It's worth noting that I don't get this kind of problem on XP x64, which has the same dual-Program Files sturcture.

[KJY9]

uac is "kinda" good only in a multi user context.. where there are clueless users and admins alltogheter.

 

anyway... i know a lot of peops that are comparing uac with sudo or such.. but hey with sudo you have the ability to have root rights and keep 'em on without no blocking messages at all even with multiple actions just using the -s switch.

 

with that stupid uac there's alwais a message an alert even if you log as administrator! they should do something to switch that thing on/off easily like sudo

 

 

And that's why you go into User accounts and turn it off.

I've been Beta since the first release, with UAC off...I have no problems submitting bug reports as was suggested having turned off UAC.

UAC is for your average Joe that knows little to nothing about the OS.

I'm not going to get into my years experience building, supporting, etc. PCs and Macs, because years mean absolutle nothing. i've run into guys that have been in the buisiness for 25+ yrs, and then had to go back and clean up their messes that they've made. So, yrs experience doesn't necessarily mean squat!

 

That being said, I find RC1 to be the biggest improvement on the OS to date.

Performance is almost there (will be upon final release), GUI is sweet, and I have yet to have a BSOD since Win ME, so there's no reason to even go there.

 

For all you Win bashers, there's a reason why over 97% of the world is on a PC and not a Mac, and if you believe it's because they're all ignorant, I'll ask you to take a long hard look in the mirror.

 

BTW, i'm posting from my Dell Inspiron running OSX. :angry2:

 

Peace Out

[lord_muad_dib]

And that's why you go into User accounts and turn it off.

ok tell this thing to system administrators .. that need to work remotely on several pcs every day.. on/off/on/off/on/off....pretty annoying

[KJY9]

ok tell this thing to system administrators .. that need to work remotely on several pcs every day.. on/off/on/off/on/off....pretty annoying

 

 

I wasn't talking about an office/networked environment...if an office or business is using RC1 right now their sys admin should be shot on sight!

 

You complained about having to always obtain permissions...easy fix..turn off UAC...done!

[RobNyc]

32bit .. Is in the garbage now

[Justin R.]

It was useable for the time I had it on this laptop. It didn't have WDDM drivers for the Intel 915.... so no glass.

 

I'm going to install it on my Media Center later and maybe it'll work better.