Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Hostile ta Vista, Baby

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the title-could-have-been-worse dept.

Windows 663

Frequent Slashdot contributor Bennett Haselton adds his experience to the litany of woes with Microsoft Vista. Unlike most commentators who have a beef with the operating system, Bennett does a bit of surveying to bolster his points. Read his account by clicking on the magic link.

My brand-new-out-of-the-box Windows Vista machine could not access www.facebook.com. A nearby XP machine could, but the Vista machine couldn't. I went back to Circuit City to try out the other Vista demo machines, and they could access other sites but not Facebook, either. And that honeymoon feeling that you get when you buy a new computer and expect it to solve all your problems, was over for me. Having built my latest career on helping people access Facebook where they were blocked from it, by some cosmic joke was Vista now blocking me from getting to Facebook on my own machine?

I know, another article bashing Vista, what could be more banal. (Kids! That word, meaning "trite" or "unoriginal", is pronounced "ba-NAHL". If you say it the wrong way like I did in an interview, it sounds naughty and you sound stupid.) But in my own random survey of 30 Vista users on Amazon's Mechanical Turk service (a handy way to check these things), three quarters (23) said the only reason they were using Vista was that the PC store they went to didn't sell XP machines any more, and about half of all respondents (14) said that they would go back to Windows XP if they could. So I don't want to get a bunch of e-mails with Ron Paul links in the signature saying "Nobody has to use Vista if they don't want to!" (I'm aware that a survey of 30 people is too small to be scientific, but it's enough to get a ballpark figure for about $5 on Mechanical Turk.) Besides, the more people write testimonials to what they found frustrating about Vista, the more likely it is that some future version will keep what is good about the new OS, while providing a less frustrating interface (suggested name: "Vista 98").

It turns out the Facebook issue was not really Microsoft's fault -- www.facebook.com had a broken IPv6 record, and Vista defaults to using IPv6 where XP used IPv4, so that's why the host wasn't working. (In case you run into this with any other Web sites on Vista, I fixed the problem by disabling IPv6 in network settings and rebooting.) But it was one more example of something that used to work pre-Vista and then stopped working, and every case like that adds up to the overall frustration of switching to a new system, regardless of whose fault it is.

I hasten to add that I am not some partisan Microsoft basher. I like XP just fine, never more than when I went back to it after a few days on Vista, and I still think for that matter that Vista would be easier to switch to than Linux. Having been involved for years with free speech activism, I run into a lot of people in the same circles who are strong Linux advocates, apparently because the concept of "freedom of speech" is closely aligned with "making every file search as simple and stress-free as a Hamas hostage negotiation". So every year or two I'll try out the latest version of some Linux distro to see how long it would take to get used to it. In 2005, full of optimism, I cheerfully booted up the latest version of Shrike, then tried to find a directory and discovered I could not right-click on the hard drive root dir and specify the name of a directory I wanted to search for (that only worked for files, not directories). I posted a query to a Linux newsgroup, and a respondent told me that the solution was to open a command prompt and type "man find", which I am aware is a polite way of saying "screw you, newbie", but which I dutifully followed anyway and got an output screen of which the first paragraph was:

find searches the directory tree rooted at each given file name by evaluating the given expression from left to right, according to the rules of precedence (see section OPERATORS), until the outcome is known (the left hand side is false for and operations, true for or), at which point find moves on to the next file name.

and that was all my Linux for that year. Maybe I'm overdue to try it again. (Microsoft gives away their Virtual PC program that makes it easy to try other operating systems; I think it's a ploy to make us appreciate Windows more.) Now, I love the concept of a freely-distributable, freely-modifiable operating system, and I've recommended Linux to people when you need it to do something cool that Windows can't do, like bypassing Windows security by booting a PC from a CD. And it's done a lot of good for organizations like the One Laptop Per Child program, which can keep their costs down by using a free operating system. But to this day I've never heard an answer to one question: Since even Linux advocates admit that it's harder to use, what can you do with Linux that you can't do with Windows, to make it worth switching over to? If I was nervous about Vista because some of the interface had changed and some of my old programs no longer worked, it wasn't helpful to tell me to switch to a system where all of the interface would change and none of my old programs would work.

So, I wanted to like Vista. I knew that eventually everyone would have to upgrade anyway, so, not wanting to be left behind, I wanted to switch to Vista because of the same factor that spammers use to get your attention: "Other guys are improving themselves, why aren't you?" But there were some things I ran into almost immediately:

  • Windows Explorer and Internet Explorer no longer have the "File / Edit / View" menu bars across the top of the window. Was this a big problem under XP? When the menus gave quick, two-click access to most actions that you could take within the application, was there a grassroots movement to have them removed? I did eventually find that you can hit the "Alt" key to bring the menus back, but why put people through that frustration? The most annoying feeling while using a computer is being yanked out of thinking about what you're doing with the computer to having to concentrate on how to use it.

    Perhaps the idea was to steer users towards using the buttons on the toolbar, but there aren't enough buttons to cover all the options located under the menus. If the UI designers wanted to steer users gently towards using the buttons, my suggestion would have been: Whenever the user picks something under a menu that corresponds to something accessible from the toolbar, display a dialog box which says for example, "In the future, you can print faster by clicking the printer button on the toolbar", along with a picture (and a "Do not show this message again" checkbox -- important!).

  • Windows Explorer also did away with the "Up" button that lets you browse from the current directory to the higher-level directory. Again, probably not in response to a groundswell of users demanding for that button to be removed, when it took up about one square centimeter of screen space. Supposedly Windows Explorer makes up for this by displaying the entire path to the current directory in the address bar, so that if the path is "C:\Financial Records\Chris Pirillo\ Pectoral Real Estate\", you can click on "Chris Pirillo" to go one directory higher. The trouble is that I frequently give my directories extremely long and descriptive names like (this is a real example) "Flash-Player-8.5.0.246-beta2.downloaded-2006-03-20-from-labs.macromedia.com" so that I can keep track of where and when I got each piece of downloaded software, in case I ever need to go back to a previous version that the software maker no longer makes available because they're trying to steer me away from it (ironically, "Vista syndrome"). With a directory that has a long name like that, the higher-level directories aren't visible in the address bar, so I had to locate it manually in the left-hand tree view panel. OK, knock off the violins, the point is that I didn't have to do that in XP.
  • I have an older monitor, so I wanted to turn ClearType off. The IE7 help file describes how to do this in IE, but that didn't work for me no matter how many times I tried, and my eyes were aching by the time I found out that in Vista it's a default system-wide setting that overrides IE's setting until you change the system-wide one. I would have suggested putting one line in the IE7 help file: "Note: if your operating system such as Windows Vista is set to use ClearType system-wide, you must disable this as well to disable ClearType in IE."
  • Virtual PC, which worked on all versions of Windows XP, is not supported on Vista Home Premium. I need Virtual PC (for reasons other than Linux-bashing), so this was a deal-breaker.
  • Telnet no longer installed by default. Even though I use a different telnet program for regular use, telnet.exe was handy to test whether a remote machine was reachable on a given port. (For example, in a command prompt, type "telnet www.yahoo.com 80" and when the command prompt screen goes blank, that means the machine www.yahoo.com is accepting responses on port 80, the standard port for Web traffic. Try connecting to port 81 instead, and you get no response on that port. This can be useful when diagnosing problems with Web servers and other programs.) Even though it's not hard to get telnet back, why would they go to the trouble of removing it?
  • The aforementioned Facebook problem. This seemed so startling at the time that I almost stopped everything to write an article just about that, musing on Microsoft having so much power that all PC stores were now exclusively stocking computers running an OS that, at the time anyway, couldn't access Facebook. But then I asked another bunch of users on Mechanical Turk, and all respondents using Vista said they could access Facebook after all. Of course, this wasn't a random sample, since users who bought Vista and couldn't access Facebook, probably would have returned their machines a long time ago, but I'm still not sure what caused it to work on some machines and not others -- all I know is that Facebook was inaccessible until I disabled IPv6.

    I know Facebook is reading these articles, since in November I wrote about how you could circumvent Facebook's system of verifying that users were real high school students, by doing the following: "(1) create a profile of a non-overweight girl and sign up as a member of a high school network, pending confirmation; (2) search for several boys in that network and send them friend requests; and (3) wait for at least one of them to confirm you back". Shortly afterwards, Facebook changed the verification system, so that now, if you're confirming someone who is a pending member of a high school network but no one else has confirmed them yet, Facebook warns you, "Only check this box if you're absolutely sure that you know this person." So, whichever of Mark Zuckerberg's friends is reading my articles: Clever idea, and, keep the IPv6 records working.


That was as far as I got before I stopped trying to get used to Vista and started taking notes for this article (working title: "Vist Vucked"). From the Mechanical Turk users who responded to my survey, the other most common reported problems were: software compatibility, hardware compatibility, difficulty with the UI, and running too slowly. Presumably the first two problems will improve over time, but the UI will always be hard to switch to as long as users can't find functions that were easy locatable in the old interface, and if it runs slower than XP, that will always be a factor no matter how fast your computer is. (However fast it runs Vista, you'd always be able to make it run even faster with XP instead!)

The best things I've heard about Vista have been that (a) it is the most secure Windows ever (which Dave Barry says is like calling asparagus the "most articulate vegetable ever"), and (b) it features better multimedia integration. To which my responses were: (a) the number of incomprehensible warnings that Vista flashes at a user whenever they look at the computer funny, does not make it more secure, because users will condition themselves to just ignore those warnings, and (b) I hate watching TV on my computer anyway.

Since TV/PC integration is a major selling point for Vista, I thought this last issue was worth looking harder at: Do people really want to use their computers to watch TV? My computer monitor is in an office where I sit up close when I'm working; but TV feels more comfortable to watch from several feet away, and in my office I can't even scoot my chair back that far. (And if I lived with family, I doubt they'd want to crowd into my office to watch a movie.) In fact, I like the psychological separation of the TV set in the living room from the distractions of the computer in the office: I go in there when I'm done with everything in here. The only way I'd regularly download and watch movies would be if I had a way to send them wirelessly to my TV, but a wireless PC-to-TV converter and the corresponding receiver together cost about $200.

Seeking more validation of my opinions from strangers, I did another survey of 30 Mechanical Turk users, asking if they would rather drive to a movie rental store or download a movie online for the same price. Almost half (14) said they'd rather drive to the movie store, citing the comfort of watching the movie on their TV as opposed to on the computer. Another fourth of the respondents (8) said they'd download the movie but only if they could send the content to their TV to watch, and only the last fourth (8) said they'd actually watch it on their computer monitor. So the future of convergence between PC and TV will probably be not in all-in-one systems but in devices that link the PC in your study with the TV in your living room, and since there's no household name yet for PC-to-TV linkage, the field is wide open for some lucky company to make a product that becomes synonymous with the concept, the way "TiVo" is easier to say than "Digital Video Recorder". Maybe that will be a boost for systems like Vista. If that happens at about the same time that a Vista successor is released that makes the interface easier to switch to from XP, I'll bet that will be the tipping point that gets people switching voluntarily. (Of course many people will switch by then just because they need a new computer and they couldn't find one with anything but Vista on it.)

Anyway, I was only trying a new Vista machine because the hard drive on my old computer died, but after all the data had been recovered, I just installed a new drive in the old machine and went back to XP, while my Vista machine was returned to its perch, gargoyle-like, on the shelves at Circuit City, waiting to pounce on the next unsuspecting wretch with dreams of self-improvement through newer computer purchases. The only remnant of Vista that I have left is IE7, which was installed by my Windows XP restore disk and can't be removed, and which is incompatible with some sites and programs that I need, so I've been using Firefox more and getting to like it. That's lucky, since I've already offended the loyal software-logo-wearing constituencies of Vista and Linux, and wouldn't want to deal with the Firefox crowd too. As my friend Anne Mitchell says, "Admitting you hate Firefox is almost as bad as admitting to being Republican." (Except that when Firefox screws with a page, the chat logs don't end up on national television. Ba-dump-bump!)

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

This just in... (4, Funny)

kellyb9 (954229) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350082)

Frequent Slashdotter hates Vista

Re:This just in... (5, Funny)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350150)

Frequent Slashdotter hates Vista

Up next, Frequent Slashdotter finally moves to Ubuntu, feels that this is the Year of Linux on the Desktop.

Re:This just in... (5, Insightful)

Erioll (229536) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350506)

Up next, Frequent Slashdotter finally moves to Ubuntu, feels that this is the Year of Linux on the Desktop.
Uh huh. From the article:

But to this day I've never heard an answer to one question: Since even Linux advocates admit that it's harder to use, what can you do with Linux that you can't do with Windows, to make it worth switching over to? If I was nervous about Vista because some of the interface had changed and some of my old programs no longer worked, it wasn't helpful to tell me to switch to a system where all of the interface would change and none of my old programs would work.
This is how at LEAST 95% of computer users feel IMO. And going beyond that to the first half of the statement, people keep talking about the console wars in terms of a "killer app" and how that's what the PS3 needs to break through. Whatever, I don't want to get in to that here, but why isn't the same being said about Linux? For the average user, the best Linux can offer is "mostly as good" and often incompatible (and by that I mean, if even something SLIGHTLY doesn't work, people don't want to care how to fix it. Making it "just work" is everything). Yes you can customize, yes you can add all these different things made by people for free, but quite frankly most people don't care! They just want a computer to work "as they expect" and no more. Once ANY expectation is broken, they rebel against it. The only exception is when something is SO good (and often so easy to use as well) that it invalidates the rest. Linux DOES NOT HAVE THIS right now for most users.

Re:This just in... (5, Funny)

callmetheraven (711291) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350580)

After the break...
Slashdotter discovers after years of XP bashing that he in fact is an avid XP supporter.

Re:This just in... (1)

sundarvenkata (1214396) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350234)

What is the point of the post anyway. Is this sort of aggregation of all the Vista whining since it was released?

Re:This just in... (5, Insightful)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350468)

I'm not sure. I couldn't get past the part where he figured out it wasn't MS' fault facebook didn't work, but still blamed Vista anyway.

I guess MS should have checked every IPv6 site out there and ensured they worked fine, and if they found any that didn't (like facebook, because they are too incompetent to setup IPv6 correctly for their site) then IPv6 should again default to not enabled.

Oh, lets not forget "30 isn't a good scientific sample size, but because I live in my mom's basement and can only spend $5 to get 'statistics, I'll continue to use data I know is not representitive to prove my point. Oh yes, and I understand that such polls regardless of size are worthless, because people happy with Vista won't go out en masse and post praise."

What an ass.

Re:This just in... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22350638)

I guess MS should have checked every IPv6 site out there and ensured they worked fine, and if they found any that didn't (like facebook, because they are too incompetent to setup IPv6 correctly for their site) then IPv6 should again default to not enabled.
Why not??

It is exactly that attitude that they take with IE8 - something about breaking the web.

Re:This just in... (1)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350852)

I guess MS should have checked every IPv6 site out there and ensured they worked fine,
I think it is pretty damning of MS's testing department. I'd have an intern go through, say, the top 500 websites at the very least. At least make sure that they load and seem to display properly. Otherwise you are just asking for support calls that will cost a hell of a lot more than that intern ever did. You could probably automate this in some way - especially if it doesn't load at all!

Most home users are checking email and surfing the web - your modern OS should be checked for those things at a minimum.

Re:This just in... (4, Funny)

fm6 (162816) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350378)

This is why I hate "+1 Funny": people can't resist trolling for it, usually with some lame sarcasm like the above. In this case, you're actually repeating something TFA itself said.

Re:This just in... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22350420)

It's a well written summary of why, exactly, he dislikes Vista. I like the quote from Dave Barry, something like calling Vista the most secure Windows is like calling asparagus the most articulate vegetable. But he also makes some good points about why Linux is not challenging Vista. So, frequent slashdotter dislikes vista for sound reasons, dislikes linux for equally sound reasons. A bit more unique.

Anon because I modded in here already . . .

tl,dr (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22350084)

anyone have a summary

Re:tl,dr (1, Informative)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350216)

Facebook worked with XP but not with Vista.
It wasn't a fault with Vista but facebook.com had a broken IPv6 record

Then a list of stuff vista doesn't have or do, or is otherwise deficient.

In summary, he uninstalled Vista excluding ie7 because that wouldn't uninstall and proclaimed that Vista sucks.

Re:tl,dr (1)

husker shiznit (617970) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350744)

I have been using Facebook with Windows Vista and IPv6 for months now. Not really sure what his problem is.

Re:tl,dr (2, Insightful)

LBArrettAnderson (655246) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350226)

Sure, Vista sucks because Facebook misconfigured their IPv6 stuff.

Re:tl,dr (5, Insightful)

Stanistani (808333) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350306)

See the concept of 'fails gracefully' - where if your software assumes one set of conditions, and has problems, it drops down to the earlier, more commonly used conditions.

Or not.

I suppose one way to get to IPv6 is to have the world's most notorious monopolist promote it.
I'm sure there's a pony in that steaming pile of Vista somewhere... :)

Re:tl,dr (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22350454)

Yeah, that reminds me of the fact that all linux and Mac computers can't access half of the internet from my apartment until I manually change the resolv.conf file, yet all of my windows boxes work perfectly. Sure, my ISP might be having some problems, but I think this is where you're going with "fails gracefully."

Re:tl,dr (1)

jorghis (1000092) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350558)

How often have slashdotters screamed about how IE renders html that doesnt conform to standards? (I do understand the argument here, it creates a situation where broken html will render on IE but not on other browsers thus making it difficult for other browsers to compete) And now they are upset because it doesnt handle this situation when it doesnt conform correctly? Either they are breaking standards or they have crappy software that doesnt "fail gracefully", you cant have it both ways.

Re:tl,dr (5, Informative)

Daniel_Staal (609844) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350736)

Actually, the complaint is about how IE renders HTML that does conform to standards. It renders it in a way that does not conform to the standards of how it is supposed to be rendered.

Therefore, a page in valid HTML who's layout works well in IE is likely to not work well in any browser that actually does what it is supposed to, and vice-versa.

Re:tl,dr (4, Insightful)

Volante3192 (953645) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350792)

HTML is a standard. There are strict guidelines it has to adhere to. There is no standard under HTML that you can fall back on. Hence, if HTML fails, it fails.

IPv6 is a standard. IPv4 is also a standard. In this case, if one standard fails, you can gracefully fall back on another standard and try getting the job done.

Re:tl,dr (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22350482)

No... Vista sucks b/c it defaults to IPv6.

The IP6 problem will break your wireless too (2, Interesting)

GreenSwirl (710439) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350562)

Whenever someone gets a new Vista laptop for home, they bring it to me the next day complaining that it can't connect to their home wireless. I disable IP6 and send them home. Now, they can at least access the web at home, and hopefully they can download drivers to upgrade to XP.

Re:The IP6 problem will break your wireless too (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22350768)

My new laptop with Vista connected to our home network (3com wireless router) without a problem, first time out of the box.

Re:tl,dr (1)

richie2000 (159732) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350258)

Vista and Linux sucks, go back to XP. Also, use sunscreeen and Firefox.

Re:tl,dr (2, Informative)

rucs_hack (784150) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350530)

forget that, boot linux to bash and use links

Re:tl,dr (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22350344)

"Vista's crap because Facebook is broken.

P.S. Change makes me angry"

Summary: (3, Insightful)

oni (41625) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350576)

The article makes 3 points:

Point 1
Facebook (not microsoft) screwed up and as a result, any computer configured to use IPv6 wouldn't be able to access it. If you set up your Mac or Linux box to use IPv6, you wouldn't be able to access facebook.

Somehow, this is evidence of Vista's suckiness.

Point 2
I am proud of myself for knowing the word banal and wish to let you know.

Point 3
Three years ago I found an obscure feature that I happen to like, but since it's obscure my linux distro didn't implement it *exactly* the same way that Microsoft implements it. Mac's don't implement it that way either, but no matter, this is somehow proof of linux's suckiness.

A linux user tried to help me, but he stopped short of driving out to my house and typing the command for me, so I take this as evidence of linux's suckiness.

Re:tl,dr (0, Redundant)

UID30 (176734) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350608)

To steal a quote from kellyb9...

Frequent Slashdotter hates Vista

Most puzzling (3, Informative)

Stanistani (808333) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350128)

>My brand-new-out-of-the-box Windows Vista machine could not access www.facebook.com.

"Where do you want to go today?"

Re:Most puzzling (2, Funny)

corsec67 (627446) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350228)

Maybe they are missing the fine print on that slogan:
"Just because you want something doesn't mean you are going to get it"

YAVWP (-1, Troll)

A little Frenchie (715758) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350168)

Yet Another Vista Whine Post

but I'm in the list of the people who like that

Is anyone really surprised? (1)

arizwebfoot (1228544) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350184)

I'm not. Vista is the Edsel of the computer world.

You can dress it up all you like, but it's still only good for comic relief.

Finally, a reason to buy Vista! (5, Funny)

ettlz (639203) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350240)

My brand-new-out-of-the-box Windows Vista machine could not access www.facebook.com.

Re:Finally, a reason to buy Vista! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22350888)

But we can't give MS credit for that. After two paragraphs of bashing Vista for not being able to reach facebook, he admits that it was facebook's fault in the first place.

banal (5, Funny)

Freeside1 (1140901) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350266)

There is no single correct way to pronounce it. You're just being anal.

Canal with a B (1, Informative)

Kimos (859729) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350356)

It's French.
I've never heard this word used in English before, but he's correct that in French it's pronounced like canal with a B.

Re:Canal with a B (1)

mdielmann (514750) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350522)

It's French.
I've never heard this word used in English before, but he's correct that in French it's pronounced like canal with a B.
There are a lot of French words in the English language, and they usually sound better when they're pronounced correctly. For instance, carafe. Hint: It's a three-syllable word. The first time I heard the Americanized pronunciation, it took me a few seconds to figure out what the waitress was talking about.

Re:banal (5, Informative)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350622)

According to one source [reference.com] :

Usage Note: The pronunciation of banal is not settled among educated speakers of American English. Sixty years ago, H.W. Fowler recommended the pronunciation (bn'l, rhyming with panel), but this pronunciation is now regarded as recondite by most Americans: no member of the Usage Panel prefers this pronunciation. In our 2001 survey, (bnl') is preferred by 58 percent of the Usage Panel, (b'nl) by 28 percent, and (b-näl') by 13 percent (this pronunciation is more common in British English). Some Panelists admit to being so vexed by the problem that they tend to avoid the word in conversation. Speakers can perhaps take comfort in knowing that these three pronunciations each have the support of at least some of the Usage Panel and that none of them is incorrect. When several pronunciations of a word are widely used, there is really no right or wrong one.

There are few things more satisfying than demonstrating that a pedant is wrong.

Re:banal (1)

lancejjj (924211) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350664)

Right on. Mod the parent post up.

The article's author is presenting a pronunciation opinion as a "fact":

(Kids! That word, meaning "trite" or "unoriginal", is pronounced "ba-NAHL". If you say it the wrong way like I did in an interview, it sounds naughty and you sound stupid.)
The fact is that only a mere 46% of a set of experts in American English pronunciation agreed that banal rhymes with "canal". In other words, that set of experts would disagree with his claim.

From American Heritage:

"The pronunciation of banal is not settled among educated speakers of American English. Sixty years ago, H.W. Fowler recommended the pronunciation (rhyming with panel), but this pronunciation is now regarded as recondite by most Americans: it is preferred by only 2 percent of the Usage Panel. Other possibilities are (rhyming with anal), preferred by 38 percent of the Panel; (rhyming with canal), preferred by 46 percent; and (the last syllable rhyming with doll), preferred by 14 percent (this last pronunciation is more common in British English)."
... and this is from an expert panel on the language.

Source: http://www.bartleby.com/61/18/B0051800.html [bartleby.com]

Next thing he'll be telling us is that "Windows Vista" and "Piece of Shit" aren't homonyms. Good luck with that.

Re:banal (2, Funny)

noidentity (188756) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350688)

I know, another article bashing Vista, what could be more banal. (Kids! That word, meaning "trite" or "unoriginal", is pronounced "ba-NAHL". If you say it the wrong way like I did in an interview, it sounds naughty and you sound stupid.)

There is no single correct way to pronounce it. You're just being anal.

Another one for the annals of Slashdot language usage.

Re:banal (1)

n6kuy (172098) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350812)

Would that be A-nal, or a-NAHL?

Re:banal (1)

Pedrito (94783) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350824)

There is no single correct way to pronounce it. You're just being anal.

You are correct. There are, in fact, 3 accepted pronunciations according to Webster, including the one that rhymes with anal!

I have to say, the submitter had more stick-with-it-ness than me. I lasted about 2 hours with Vista before I reverted to XP. I still periodically run Vista in a VM when my work requires it (mainly to fix Vista-specific problems in our app, which have been few, but major), but it drives me nuts whenever I have to use it. It's simply got to be one of the worst OS experiences I've had.

Being a nerd, I'm the person everyone in my family comes to for computer problems and EVERY single one, so far, that has gotten a new machine with Vista calls me to ask me how to get stuff to work with it or how to revert back to XP. So far that list includes an aunt, an uncle, two cousins, my mother, and my step-mother. Nobody else in my family that I'm aware of is running Vista.

Can't access facebook? (4, Funny)

Cro Magnon (467622) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350290)

I know there had to be SOMETHING good about Vista.

You think personal use is bad? (1)

Durrok (912509) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350300)

Try using it in a corporate environment. It's a nightmare to get the hardware independent image working right and let's not even get started on home brew apps.

Re:You think personal use is bad? (4, Funny)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350474)

One of the company's executives wanted us to upgrade to vista. Our solution wa to upgrade him.

None of the vertical apps worked, he was calling tech support constantly. After leaving him that way for 30 days the next tech meeting we had him in, I said, "vista works perfectly on X's machine, do we still want to look at migrating?"

He spoke up and said, "NO! Let's test it for a few more months." after the meeting he asked for a second laptop, with XP on it so he can "compare".

his Vista laptop has not been logged in on for over 45 days now, I wonder why?

Re:You think personal use is bad? (1)

mcsqueak (1043736) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350734)

That reminds me of my work. We have one Vista "test" machine that hardly gets used. The software we've developed in-house to support our products doesn't work on Vista, and our customers aren't upgrading. Because of that we're not wasting our time right now in getting the software to actually work with Vista. I see us skipping Vista entirely and probably looking at Windows 7 eventually.

I do have Vista running on my personal laptop, and so far it's been great. However I'm not trying to run enterprise-level software solutions or small obscure utilities, either.

Nice read (2, Insightful)

lpangelrob (714473) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350302)

Probably won't change anyone's minds, but it's nice to read something with enjoyable, halfway unbiased prose. That's better than most articles I read that are linked from Slashdot.

Let's see if consumers decide that the Apple TV (take 2) is the lucky device to connect the internet and TV.

Re:Nice read (1)

mistert2 (672789) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350696)

Hi, I am a Mac, XP, Linux fanboy who uses his Apple TV for pics, music, and movies. It is not the best for movies, but it is easy. Can anyone tell me where to put the DVD in?

banal (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22350330)

I know, another article bashing Vista, what could be more banal. (Kids! That word, meaning "trite" or "unoriginal", is pronounced "ba-NAHL". If you say it the wrong way like I did in an interview, it sounds naughty and you sound stupid.)

And yet Merriam-Webster's lists FOUR different pronunciations for it. Methinks it was a little more than his pronunciation that made him sound stupid.

Re:banal (0)

wile_e_wonka (934864) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350802)

Methinks it was a little more than his pronunciation that made him sound stupid.
I have to agree. He bothered me right from the beginning:

But in my own random survey of 30 Vista users on Amazon's Mechanical Turk service . . . I'm aware that a survey of 30 people is too small to be scientific
One can hardly call a survey on Amazon's Mechanical Turk " random. First, people who use the turk to make money are not average computer users. Second, people using the turk to make money can choose which task they'd like to address. The fact he thought this was "random" tipped me off to his mental ineptitude.

Further reading of the article, which I did not finish, confirmed this. If there was anything to the contrary later in the article, perhaps someone with some combination of courage, boredom, and masochistic tendencies could finish it and post the good parts.

Circuit City shoppers are the Slashdot standard? (5, Insightful)

rufusdufus (450462) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350350)

This article is ridiculous. Some noob spouting about anecdotal problems he had with a Circuit City computer does not inspire respect. His biggest issue? Facebook doesnt work because facebook's website is broken. But its Vista's fault. Is this some sort of joke?

Has the slashdot demographic decayed this much?

Re:Circuit City shoppers are the Slashdot standard (1)

bleh-of-the-huns (17740) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350534)

Has the slashdot demographic decayed this much?
Yes... I have been here long enough to see the rise and fall of the /. mentality.. but it does make for amusing reading during days at work when I am bored.

Re:Circuit City shoppers are the Slashdot standard (1)

lancesnyder (1099535) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350602)

I agree. This guy is a douche bag

Snobish Much? (3, Insightful)

fm6 (162816) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350726)

The fact that Facebook has broken IPv6 records is noteworthy all by itself. That sort of problem is going to come up a lot, as more and more users make the move to IPv6.

And can we skip all the crap about whose fault it is? Yes, Facebook screwed up. But if a leading OS can't access a leading web site, people need to know about it, and don't really care whose fucking fault it is.

I'm sure a lot of people are tired of hearing about How Vista Sucks. But the issue isn't going to go away. It's getting harder and harder to buy new machines that run XP, and Microsoft wants to make it impossible. This is stuff I want to hear about, especially when the writer covers problems I hadn't heard about before, like this guy did. As it happens, these issues are key for me, because I desperately want to get Vista's improved handwriting engine for my tablet; that makes Vista problems of extreme interest to me.

If you don't share that interest, well, nobody's forcing you to read TFA.

Re:Circuit City shoppers are the Slashdot standard (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22350760)

Facebook works in XP. It works in Linux. It works in Mac OS X. It doesn't work in Vista.

How is that NOT Vista's fault?! If it works in every other OS other than Vista, that would indicate that something is wrong with Vista, case closed.

Re:Circuit City shoppers are the Slashdot standard (1)

Endo13 (1000782) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350766)

You've never worked in tech support, have you?

No, but they are the Windows standard (1)

Radical Moderate (563286) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350774)

I agree the Facebook bit isn't a big deal, but he's spot on about the random changes they've made to the interface. "Hey, we've had File, Edit, and View menus for a couple decades now, let's shake things up and get rid of them! Why, you ask? Because we can!"

Seriously, do these guys do any usability testing? Focus groups? Windows has an installed base of what, billions of people, and most of them aren't IT professionals, they're Circuit City shoppers. And they don't want to spend time relearning in Vista what they already know how to do in XP. Yeah, we'll all get there eventually, but it seems like MS has gone out of their way to make the transition difficult.

Re:Circuit City shoppers are the Slashdot standard (2, Insightful)

KURAAKU Deibiddo (740939) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350826)

Sorry to nitpick, but Facebook's website [wikipedia.org] isn't the problem. It's their IPv6 [wikipedia.org] DNS [wikipedia.org] . They are not the same, and I'd hope that most Slashdotters know the difference.

And it certainly is a failing of Vista's, if it does not gracefully fall back to IPv4 when IPv6 fails. You'd think after this long of "not getting the internet", they'd have at least figured out networking. ;)

My feelings exactly (1)

samael (12612) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350846)

His problems are (a)they moved some stuff about and (b)Facebook has a broken IPv6 record.

Hardly the end of the world.

While I'm not planning to move to Vista in the near future, the daily "Vista is a failure!!!!" posts are getting just a little tiresome.

Circuit City shoppers ARE typical Windows users (2, Insightful)

jmorris42 (1458) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350856)

> Facebook doesnt work because facebook's website is broken.

No, sounds like their DNS was broken. But anyway.....

This guy sounds like a typical above average end user. What is typically referred to as a 'power user' in that he knows the basics and is probably the go to guy for everyone else in his peer group. And all of his complaints about capricious changes in the Vista interface vs XP are valid for bith his group and the induhviduals at the bottom of the user pyramid. Change == bad pretty much sums it up.

Which is why the penguin ain't ever going to capture that set of users through conversions. The only way is through new product niches like the eee pc, handhelds, etc. Get enough penguins out that folks like him slowly become used to linux conventions and thus won't be afraid of them on a desktop anymore.

Oh, and for the guy's complaint about being told to use find... bad advice. That is using a sledgehammer to drive a nail. Locate is what ya need for that. Except because linux distributers (I'm looking at you Fedora/RH) keep wanting to appeal to Windows n00bs who don't want Linux instead of Unix folk who DO.... so they disable locate out of the box requiring new users to become root and edit scary text files to reenable it.

O rly? (4, Funny)

EveryNickIsTaken (1054794) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350358)

So, I wanted to like Vista.
Sorry, but no "Frequent Slashdot contributor" wanted to like Vista. I'm calling bullshit on this one.

Incorrect Summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22350676)

Frequent Slashdot contributor

Frequent Digg contributor

There. I fixed it for you.

Vista's Security.... (5, Interesting)

mpapet (761907) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350394)

Is more accurately described as an elaborate blame shifting mechanism.

From Microsoft's perspective it's worth every man-hour that went into it because they can plausibly say, "But Vista is sooo great, it warned you and YOU ignored it. Sucks to be you." Which papers over the geek-fact that UAC is a permeable barrier to root-ish priviledge, so really nothing technically like sudo despite what Microsoft marketing will tell you.

Answers to Some of the Complaints (4, Informative)

Dr Kool, PhD (173800) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350400)

1) If you press "ALT" the File / Edit / View menus show up in IE and Windows Explorer. It actually works well, hiding the bars when they aren't used gives you more screen space.

2) Up button is gone, but if you have a side button on your mouse that will take you up one level in Windows Explorer.

3) Telnet is dead, long live SSH. Like he said, it's easy to install telnet if you need it.

I run Vista Business x64 and it's far more stable than XP. The biggest improvements for me are the new Windows Update, the new wireless networking connection tool and indexed searching. I have no complaints about speed but I have 2GB of memory. I think those with 1GB or less probably have legitimate complaints.

Re:Answers to Some of the Complaints (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22350684)

> 2) Up button is gone, but if you have a side button on your mouse that will take you up one level in Windows Explorer.

But why?

I remember being similarly annoyed in the 95/98/early-NT timeframe when Windows apps stopped displaying ".." in the directory pane (easy, just PgUp to get to the top of the file listing and hit Enter to go up one) and forced me to switch from keyboard to mouse and click on the up-pointing green arrow.

It's like hiding file extensions. (And hiding some file extensions even when the user displays "No, Really, show me the fucking file extension, HAL!")

Given something like (the PowerPoint blue-sky vaporware vision of) WinFS, you might be able to have a meaningful file browser UI that abstracts away the underlying reality that some\path\to\directory\file.txt has a place in a hierarchical file system. But the magical all-helpful attribute/database-based filesystem isn't there yet, and it's fucking annoying when the rest of the UI stubbornly insists on pretending that it is.

Files have names. Files exist in directories. Stop making me jump through more and more elaborate hoops just because Steve "Monkeyboy" Ballmer says otherwise.

Re:Answers to Some of the Complaints (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350818)

If you press "ALT" the File / Edit / View menus show up in IE and Windows Explorer. It actually works well, hiding the bars when they aren't used gives you more screen space.
That's a lot of hand motion from the mouse to the Alt key and back, especially on a desktop PC.

Up button is gone, but if you have a side button on your mouse that will take you up one level in Windows Explorer.
How many laptop PCs have such a button? How many mice bundled with desktop PCs have such a button? I'd guess not many.

Telnet is dead, long live SSH. Like he said, it's easy to install telnet if you need it.
Unless your dain-bramaged IT department won't install it on your computer despite that you need it to do your job.

I have no complaints about speed but I have 2GB of memory. I think those with 1GB or less probably have legitimate complaints.
So once Windows XP is no longer available, what should schools that routinely get in-kind donations of old hardware use?

weakly done (3, Insightful)

farkus888 (1103903) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350428)

I think this particular vista bashing is very poorly done. I didn't read past "It turns out the Facebook issue was not really Microsoft's fault -- facebook had a broken IPv6 record, and Vista defaults to using IPv6". perhaps a better title would have been "facebook sucks". happy linux user and all those other /. stereotypes, I just think if we are mocking vista we should talk about its weaknesses not blame other mistakes on it. I know if someone posted an article claiming it was firefox's fault it didn't correctly render poorly coded web pages it would be received as blasphemy in this community.

Re:weakly done (1)

andr0meda (167375) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350738)


Lots of capitals, but nevertheless you're right about the mis-bashing.

I think the editors let it post anyway, because of the obvious comments on the bad bashing and then the comments saying "wait a fucking minute, there's a problem with the whole IPv6 idea".

Apart from that I always find it amazing how so many people eagerly "switch" operating systems. I mean, like, I'm doing *everything* to prevent having to switch, after installing all that gear I work with all the time. Some people must like pain much more than I do.

Re:weakly done (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22350748)

I didn't read past "It turns out the Facebook issue was not really Microsoft's fault -- facebook had a broken IPv6 record, and Vista defaults to using IPv6". perhaps a better title would have been "facebook sucks".

It reads like he wrote an article gloating about how broken Vista is that it can't even access Facebook, then somebody proof-read it and told him what really happened. But rather than delete a third of the article and his best example of how broken it is, he decided to leave it in and find a way of pinning it on Vista anyway.

This is a monumentally bad article. At least in the old days, we were only subjected to Taco's and Katz's ill-informed ramblings, these days any old stupid blog post gets on Slashdot.

Where files were downloaded from... (1)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350448)

Regarding the coment about giving files long names to make it clear where they were downloaded from...

AmigaOS used to do something similar, anything you downloaded had a "filenote" that contained the full URL. A filenote is a smal text string associated with the file, a file comment.
I believe OSX Leopard can do something similar, because when you try to run something you downloaded it tells you where you downloaded it from... But i'm not sure how to query this information manually.

The Amiga implementation was incredibly useful tho, and i terribly miss this feature from more modern systems, perhaps something like this should be implemented into linux.

You can thank Bill Gates for killing the Amiga (1)

AppleTwoGuru (830505) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350838)

That was one system he knew had to die a quick death. That machine was ahead of it's time. The Intellectual property for the Amiga is so separated into various pieces, it will NEVER come to market again. Bill Gates could never compete with the Amiga if he didn't own it, and he knew it. Since he couldn't buy it outright, he fostered it's death into computer history.

My favorite Vista rant... (5, Funny)

John Miles (108215) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350458)

... came from another fellow in the office who shall remain nameless:

In XP, I always shut off all the indexing crap because it's slow and
unpredictable. The searches are slower, but at least you know when things
are slow. So, we do the same thing on (other colleague)'s computer, but it is
running Vista.

Now, first thing, in Vista, by default, there is no "Run Program". In
Vista, if you pop open the start menu and start typing, it "searches" for
what you typed. You can turn on searching for favorites, programs, and
finally, search the index, or search the drive. By default, "seach the
drive" is off, and everything else is on. But when you turn off indexing,
it flips the option from search the index to search the drive.

So, now, when you search for something in that window, the drive grinds away
looking for what you searched for. Now, somewhere along the time, the smart
people at Microsoft said, why don't we start searching for what they are
typing, _as they are typing it_, so that by the time they press enter, we
are closer to the results.

That means, when (colleague) was trying to run Zoomin to debug a rendering issue, he typed Z..o... and the
background thread started searching... the entire disc. But now, that's
just the first two letters, so now (colleague) types the second "o" and it starts
another background search... of the entire disk. BUT IT LETS THE ORIGINAL
THREAD continue to run! So, how you have two threads both searching your
entire drive (contents, mind you, not just file names). But let's continue
with "min.exe". Yup, you now have 8 different threads all scanning your
entire fucking drive, and the machine is fucking melting. Thank goodness
(colleague) has an 8-way box and Zoomin.exe is only 8 searches, or this might have
been a bad decision on Microsoft's part.

And now the drive is crying out for mercy, but it's kind of hard to tell,
because drives are so quiet now-a-days, right? So, all (colleague) notices is that
the fan in the computer has sped up. So, he presses enter to execute
Zoomin. BUT EVEN WHEN YOU RUN THE APP AND EXIT THE MENU, they don't shut
down the threads!! They continue running with absolutely no way to show the
user the results anyway because the window is closed!

Now, his rendering code is running like shit, because 99% of the machine is now
searching for "zo", "zoo", "zoom", "zoomi", "zoomin", "zoomin.", "zoomin.e",
"zoomin.ex", and finally"zoomin.exe". And with all of the threads
simulataneously hitting the disc, it takes like 5 minutes for them to exit!

I suggested that they probably cap the max threads to the number of CPUs in
the machine... Ooooooh no!! If you just keeping hitting letters, it just
merrily keeps adding threads. I creamed his machine by typing
"zoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo".

Fucking awesome!

Oh yeah, one other cool thing, if you backspace, it starts a new thread for
the shorter string. WHICH IS ALREADY BEING SEARCHED FOR ON ANOTHER THREAD!
So, Zoom launchs five threads.

Sweet action!


So where does Microsoft even go to find programmers this stupid? Elbonia? How do you screw up an operating system this badly and still make money with it?

Tried Linux? (2)

malfist (1152363) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350462)

So every year or two I'll try out the latest version of some Linux distro to see how long it would take to get used to it. In 2005, full of optimism, I cheerfully booted up the latest version of Shrike

Shrike? Shrike? I've used linux for around 4 years and I have never heard of Shrike, and I play around with all the unkown versions too. If you don't want to like linux, why don't you just try and use a distro that isn't mainstream and won't be nearly as easy/good/fun as something like Fendora or Ubuntu. Oh, wait; he did.

shrike... (2, Informative)

number6x (626555) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350720)

'Shrike' is the development name for Red Hat 9 [distrowatch.com] . Scroll down the distrowatch page to see the columns with release names.

Kind of like calling a Windows release 'Joliet', 'Chicago' or 'Cairo'.

Why all the cities in Illinois?

Re:Tried Linux? (1)

bhtooefr (649901) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350742)

Looks like Shrike is the codename for Red Hat 9.

So, the predecessor of Fedora. (I'll note that I've never heard of Fendora. ;))

Re:Tried Linux? (1)

sammy.lin (930751) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350814)

When I first read it, I automatically assumed he was referring to Red Hat 9 (Shrike).

Don't fix Vista. Swtich them to Linux. (0, Redundant)

AppleTwoGuru (830505) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350480)

"It turns out the Facebook issue was not really Microsoft's fault -- www.facebook.com had a broken IPv6 record, and Vista defaults to using IPv6 where XP used IPv4, so that's why the host wasn't working. (In case you run into this with any other Web sites on Vista, I fixed the problem by disabling IPv6 in network settings and rebooting.)"

I wouldn't be as nice as you were. Because Microsoft bought/brought all this responsibility on themselves over the past 30+ years, the solution I would give the Vista-hurt user is switch to Linux, and I help them get their computer working again by reloading their system with Linux, and running Windows XP in a virtual machine using VirtualBox with seamless desktop integration. (http://www.virtualbox.org)

I would switch the user to Linux even if the fix was a simply as a different setting. All the more to derail Microsoft from their monopoly. (If the DOJ can't do it, I guess I have to do it myself.)

Microsoft would have to pay me RICHLY to fix Vista issues and/or reload PCs with XP.

On second thought, they could never pay me enough to push their crap. I give my friends and customers the best on a PC - LINUX!

Are you serious, Slashdot? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22350498)

He couldn't access Facebook on his computer he bought at Circuit City? *sigh*

Summary doesn't have a link to TFA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22350508)

Grrr... darn Slashdot editors always screwing up TFA

Here's a link to the Article: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?no_d2=1&sid=08/02/08/1627201 [slashdot.org]

Make sure you mod me up for this link!

Linux sucks as a desktop (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22350512)

I've been building and running Linux servers for 10 years. I built and used my first Linux desktop (actually laptop) in 2002, when I needed a way to show demo PHP code to customers without worrying about Internet access. PHP on Windows was then, and I'm told, still is, mostly a stupid computer trick.

Using Linux as a desktop gives you the following "features":

- the inability to run native windows apps such as photoshop and dreamweaver (no, they don't really work with wine or cedega)

- the inability to run apps like TVUnetworks, which is really cool.

- The inability to use suspend/hibernate when you close the lid on the notebook.

- if you want wireless, you better be ready to manually edit the .inf file from a windows driver and load it in ndiswrapper. "native" wireless drivers for linux mostly suck, the howtos for linux wireless usually start by telling you how to blacklist them.

- mediocre video support: if you're lucky, you can view divx files and play MP3s. Maybe you'll have to hunt for ac3 support. But it's not as seamless as on a Windows box.

I just bought a new laptop. It has a dual-core AMD cpu, 2GB RAM, and a 160GB hard drive. I used the Windows Vista that came with it for about 2 weeks, but found it disappointingly mediocre (even loading calculator was slow).

So when I re-formatted the computer I decided to preserve all my options. I partitioned the drive with a Windows partition and a Linux partition. In the Windows partition I installed Windows XP Pro. Under Windows I also installed VMWare and a Linux guest VM (Centos 5.1). In the Linux partition I installed Ubuntu 7.10 (Gutsy Gibbon).

I have a lot of old/junky computers in my house, but my main machines are a Linux server running on an old Celeron 1Ghz (Centos 5.1, I access it via VNC and mostly use it for Azureus downloads, the downloaded files stream beautifully over Samba file sharing to the Windows boxen in the house). I have a Windows XP desktop that is mostly used with Nero for converting divx files to DVD format (I should point out the DeVeDE, a Linux app, is almost as good as Nero, but that's the point, almost as good).

My laptop is how I interact with the world: I use it to manage servers via SSH and VNC. I use OpenOffice and Firefox under Windows, so things don't change much when I use Linux.

The point is, though, that in Linux mode my laptop is hobbled: I can't just close the lid and have things hibernate. I can't really run a scanner properly (my brother just got an HP F4180 that supports hplip under Linux, but barely). I like to use TVUnetworks to watch TV on my laptop.

Contrast that to running in Windows XP Pro mode. The laptop is fast and stable, it provides seamless support for linux in the background via vmware (for working on/demo of LAMP code on the move). It runs native Windows apps like photoshop.

The point I'm making is, if you use Linux as your desktop, it's cause you only use a very limited subset of the functions, or because you're trying to prove a political or philosophical point.

For a kiosk in a mall or a lobby directory in an apartment building, a Linux desktop is a good solutin because its cost and security profiles provide an advantage. If you have a very limited mission, ie the computer at a car rental agency desk, you could probably get away with it as well.

But for regular use by a regular human being, a Linux desktop is a mediocre substitute that provides you with a bare minimum of services, but not the full experience still made possible by Windows XP Pro.

man find (1)

A Name Similar to Di (875837) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350514)

I always had a rough time with find too. If the author happens to be reading the comments, try:


find . -type f -name "file_name_here" -print

It's a complicated command that can do a lot, but that basic example will work for the majority of your simple file searches. From there it might be easier to branch out and fuss with other options (such as -mtime 1 would search for a file modified in the last day) but this should hopefully get you started.

Peace.

Software adoption cycle (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22350520)

Vista contains a number of quality enhancements, but most of them are under the hood. For a comprehensive list, see:

Windows Vista [chrisblanc.org]

The GUI, some of its information architecture (specifically, screen transitions in widgets) need work. So do some of the internals.

Vista is released now to see how the world reacts to it, so it will be tried and true tested in 2010. As another article here pointed out, the codebase is now standardized with Server 2008 and Windows 7 will be built on a modified version of it.

Windows XP was released in 2001, and it took a couple years to be usable, also.

To use a historical metaphor, Windows Vista is Windows 95 for the millennial generation. It will be replaced by Windows 7, which is the equivalent of Windows 98: same idea, much more refined implementation.

Bennett's article is consumer research gold for Microsoft, if they choose to use it. It's the small daily frustrations that make users go mad, because as weird as it sounds, gigantic fundamental problems are obvious and all planning starts with workarounds.

2009 will be the year of Vista, and almost immediately, Windows 7 will be out, and we can go through this battle again!

This is an IPv6 conversion headache (1)

Animats (122034) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350536)

His main complaint is really an IPv6 conversion problem. Facebook probably works on Vista from network connections that can't get an IPv6 connection at all, because the client presumably tries IPv4. But he was apparently testing from some connection that could pass IPv6 packets to Facebook, and Vista properly tried to use IPv6. It's a legitimate complaint if this problem isn't properly reported to the user.

We're going to be seeing more of this. Rollout of IPv6 to consumers only started a few weeks ago.

Can we leave Vista alone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22350556)


I have not used it, nor do I know anyone that has done more than preliminary testing of it, but it just seems as though Vista is another ME, although ME tried to do more new things than Vista tried to do, to the end user, they both seem to be less than desireable experiences than other versions of Windows.

I don't get that excited over new Linux releases or OS X releases either. Its more like, "Hmm, thats new/different", or "neet, I've been waiting for that to finally work like it should".

Windows has one big thing against it in that it does not really have a target audience, its a jack of all trades and a master of none. Linux fits well with developers, geeks, researchers, and is nice in the server room. OS X has general users, some developers and geeks and researchers as a desktop environment and the multimedia crowd to boot.

Windows is "targeted" for joe sixpack, corporate desktops, gamers, its just what comes with a computer through OEM deals. Windows is very complicated, intrusive, is becoming more fragmented in its "look and feel". I mean, I wouldn't even know which of the 5 or so versions of Vista I would pick if I was tasked with suck a thing.

I have no real point, besides that the daily to semi-daily /. headlines on how bad Vista sucks is getting a little old.

Yeah, this coming from someone... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22350578)

...who can help you break the law. Hate to say it, but your idea that "helping" people access facebook and myspace where they can't and shouldn't be accessing it, is not supporting freedom of speech and anti-censorship. You should try petitioning lawmakers to change the laws instead of providing the tools for others to break them.

Doesn't It Strike You As Funny... (1)

pandrijeczko (588093) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350618)

...that a regular contributor on SLASHDOT would have to be pretty stupid to go and buy a PC with Vista on it?

Nearly useless article (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22350624)

Much of this article is a perfect example of the "Vista sux lol" mentality that seems to linger here at Slashdot.

Explorer menus - It's very simple to re-enable them. Also, the only time I find myself using them in the first place is when I need to show hidden files. Sure I could just leave them hidden, but seeing all of the little desktop.ini files gets annoying.

ClearType conundrum - There has been a systemwide option for ClearType since XP was released. The only difference here is that it now defaults to on. Why would you even bother changing the IE7 setting if your entire OS has it enabled? Granted, this doesn't explain the stupidity of IE7 having its own option in the first place.

Facebook failure - This shouldn't have even been mentioned. Ok so Vista defaults to IPv6 where available. It's still Facebook's fault for having a broken IPv6 record. Personally, I'd like to know what ISP these mentioned people actually use. I haven't seen one yet that uses IPv6 without tunneling, including the one I work for.

Sure I can appreciate some of the points in this article as I run Vista Ultimate x64 at home (by choice, no less), but this is getting ridiculous.

Virtual PC does work on Home Premium... (1)

majorgoodvibes (1228026) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350636)

...they say it doesn't but it does - I've been using it for weeks to test web sites in IE6.

This article says absolutely zilch that's new or interesting.

"ba-NAHL" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22350670)

I've always pronounced this one as, roughly, /beinl/. So I just looked it up in a few dictionaries, and they agree with both of us. I wonder if it's a UK/US distinction.

I'm tired of people bashing Vista (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22350686)

I mean is xp really better. I have been using Vista for 6 months now and I love it. For one thing I could get on Facebook as soon as I installed vista so you are obviously wrong about that. Secondly the messages are quite nice to let you know what is actually going on on your computer. They actually let you know what is being installed and let you know what programs are actually trying to access the registry. OS X has been asking you for your admin name and password for years so I know they can't be talking bad about Vista. Vista in my opinion is a great OS with a good security level. It has all the good things that XP had and looks better with a few added features. They fixed the folder locations. Gave you a better home directory and gave you roaming profiles. I am a Systems Admin and use XP, OS X, and Vista at work and on my home computer I run Vista.

What the..? (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350700)

I know, another article bashing Vista, what could be more banal. (Kids! That word, meaning "trite" or "unoriginal", is pronounced "ba-NAHL". If you say it the wrong way like I did in an interview, it sounds naughty and you sound stupid.)
Where on earth did this come from? Did your ADD suddenly kick in?

You what makes you sound stupid - it's throwing random sophomoric crap non-sequitirs like this into your harangue (BTW that's pronounced as if it rhymes with "meringue", which is a type of dessert).

I'm a Mac user, and I like puppies.

Hiding menus (1)

zakezuke (229119) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350712)

Windows Explorer and Internet Explorer no longer have the "File / Edit / View" menu bars across the top of the window. Was this a big problem under XP? When the menus gave quick, two-click access to most actions that you could take within the application, was there a grassroots movement to have them removed?
While I am somewhat critical of how Microsoft elected to implement this feature, I like the fact that they are offering a hide menu bar feature. My opinion is based on how Amiga software was designed, which in all fairness was designed to accommodate a 12-13 inch monitor. The file bar employed auto hiding and most applications supported a full screen mode. In the microsoft world, it's rare to find software that uses full screen mode, something that is mega handy for desktop publishing/word processing now one can mount their LCD vertically.

It is easy way to gain more desktop realestate, more handy these days with the wide aspect ratio. One doesn't actually "need" the file bar on screen at all times, and getting a bigger monitor costs money as isn't an option on a portable. I disagree with the choice that it's hidden by default, and would think it would be nice for it to behave like the start bar, if not always at least in maximize mode.

PEBCAK (1)

Fishbulb (32296) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350732)

Sounds like this guy is just the worst kind of user. Knows just enough to be dangerous.

yet another OS that will be bashed until accepted (1)

Signeous (1235740) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350758)

However fast it runs XP, you'd always be able to make it run even faster with windows 95 instead!

kdawson: Did you even read this submission? (5, Interesting)

lenova (919266) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350780)

I can't believe this poorly written post was posted to the front page. C'mon, this is a journal entry at best!

- The writer spends majority of his 'review' on the fact that he couldn't access Facebook, despite the fact that he admits this was an issue with Facebook's website itself, not Vista.

- And an embedded link to rentmychest.com? C'mon kdawson, did you even read this submission?

- He gives his directories names like "Flash-Player-8.5.0.246-beta2.downloaded-2006-03-20-from-labs.macromedia.com"? Is this a joke?

- He complains about telnet.exe not being available, despite the fact that he doesn't use it normally in the first place?

- Is this a review of Vista, or an ad for Mechanical Turk?

I see it differently... (1)

CFBMoo1 (157453) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350782)

So, I wanted to like Vista. I knew that eventually everyone would have to upgrade anyway, so, not wanting to be left behind, I wanted to switch to Vista because of the same factor that spammers use to get your attention: "Other guys are improving themselves, why aren't you?" But there were some things I ran into almost immediately:

Using Vista I get the feeling I've been left ahead and that isn't a good feeling in my case.

It's not terrible. (1)

kevinaswell (1140515) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350790)

Is everyone just really lazy?

Do people not ENJOY learning new things?

I use Vista. I'm not stupid. I'm not lazy either, especially when it comes to my PC.

I really enjoy figuring things out, and Vista has a lot.

Sure that's not good for the average I-don't-know-what-the-hell-I'm-doing user, but that's not me. And that's all I care about.

Vista provides possible ways to turn off EVERY single annoying thing, as well as running ANY program in XP compatability mode, and it works. UAC? Turned off. ReadyBoost? Turned off. All that junk no one needs? Turned off.

And now, with a little work and adjustment, Vista has completely replaced XP for me. I am hindered in no possible ways, and my overall usability of my PC has increased.

It's not even slow. Vista runs much more processes than XP, but if you get them down to a controlled necessary number, it does a good job. I can't remember the last time I had to wait for any of my programs to open. The only slow thing is file transfers, which isn't a big deal. If you need to move 1gb files around your hard drive all the time, you have problems. And if it's a flashdrive you're moving it to, then stop storing your porn on your keychain.

And a big bonus? Through downloaded Dock programs, the sidebar, and other things I've added, my Vista literally feels like I'm running a computer from the future, but it's sweet because It's definitely happening today.

in summary, (1)

stillb4llin (1232934) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350794)

Why the heck does anyone want to use the mouse that much? I understand that the desktop is dying.. so that means most people are using their laptops.. I would think that the backspace key would be much of an easier choice then running to the toolbar to hit the [up] button.. granted, this is just a back button and not an actucal up button.. run - yes it's not there in vista, but, windows R - brings up run, as D shows desktop, E for explorer, and there are more than that.. why would someone want to click on print, or file print, when they can alt-f, p or save alt-f, s -- i'm running 2gig ram on my vista.. 64 bit - one problem i have.. which anyone with 64, is no flash.. thats not vista fault, plus i can use a 32 bit browser and that is solved -- some menus changed, office 2007 has such a crazy interface, well, i'm using openoffice anyways... unless I need to do some mailmerge or some text to columns in excel -- my streets and trips gps didn't work when i got my machine, but now it does.. my one complaint - file copying is slow.. my one complaint running ubuntu on my slower computer, that I use my other laptop for work, and can't run our imaging software on ubuntu, and don't want to lose time trying to setup and make sure everything works right with wine... otherwise I would have ubuntu on here (i've had ubuntu installed for over a month now on a dell laptop, because one day it died, and the orignal drivers wouldn't work for the video card or my internal wireless) my solution - linux.. and after reading the ease of instalation - was surprised how easy to update, use..does everything i need to and runs some programs as fast as vista machine (and the dell laptop has 768 mb of ram) i'm loosing sight of my original post

I'll be fair (0)

The MAZZTer (911996) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350850)

I hate Vista too, but some of this review's points need a bit of correction (in Vista's favor, even) although I also have some things to say too.

  • Vista really shouldn't have IPv6 enabled by default. I encountered massive network slowdown because of it. If you use an IPv4 only network, save yourself some grief and disable IPv6 support now. What happens when it's enabled is Vista tries using IPv6 for every network connection. If a connection fails in IPv6, it tries again in IPv4. This is why Vista takes so long to connect to anything. Disable IPv6 and it speeds up to be in line with XP. Vista should ship with IPv6 disabled out of the box since I don't believe network support for it is quite ubiquitous yet. If you set up a network to use IPv6, chances are you know enough to install IPv6 drivers too. Of course I'm assuming it's impossible to automatically detect whether a network supports IPv6 or not and enable or disable protocols accordingly, which is probably isn't.
  • I've tried to use find too. It's a bit too complicated for a simple file name search. I find using "where" easier. Anyone on Slashdot will tell you that right now, Ubuntu is the closest thing to a practical Linux on the desktop, although in my personal experience I've had to do some console voodoo including editing config files to get everything working quite right (example: mice with more than three buttons require xorg.conf editing to get the extra buttons working).
  • I personally like the lack of a menu bar since most of the functions I need are on the toolbar anyways, which is the whole point as I understand it. However I can see where less experienced users could become confused, especially users not comfortable with poking around UIs like I am. New versions of Windows should come with tutorials, like 3.1 did, which would explain new features in the Windows UI and allow users to interact with them in a sandbox to learn them. I should also mention there's a right click option on the explorer toolbars which allows you to show the menu bar permanently like in XP. Also an extra dialog when you click a menu item is a bad idea... you said the whole point is to have any function two clicks away, and you added an extra click.
  • If I wanted to name folders like you, I'd do away with the date. All file system objects (ie files and folders) have a "created time" and "last modified time" property. Also there is an overflow button on the breadcrumb bar that does the same thing as overflow buttons on toolbars... shows you what is hidden. Also for the more keyboard-oriented, backspace always takes you a level up.
  • ClearType settings haven't changed form XP to Vista, unless you count MS ripping apart the Display control panel. The setting is in the same place in Vista as in XP. It actually makes sense that, since the ClearType OS setting affects EVERY PROGRAM it would also affect IE7. Although they really shouldn't have had a program-specific setting since that IS confusing.
  • With regards to Virtual PC, "not supported" and "won't install/run" are two different things. Virtual PC 2004 and 2007 final install on any XP and Vista edition. I can verify they both work fine in XP Home. The only time I couldn't get Virtual PC to install was with the 2007 RC... in which "not supported" and "won't install/run" were the same thing. Even still I found a blog post with a workaround (basically you edit the installer or skip the part that checks the OS).
  • Given the link you provide, it's pretty clear that telnet isn't installed because most people simply aren't going to need it... although the problem with this is that it's a 206kb EXE, and you could easily find more useless, bigger things to remove that the average user wouldn't care about.
  • I can watch TV just fine in XP, although it's half-broken, and the client that works for me in XP is broken in Vista, and visa versa. I should mention the process was actually far more pleasant and works 100% in Ubuntu.
  • I've heard lots of people complain that Firefox leaks memory, but they cannot prove to me that all the memory they see it using is truly a leak, and they can't prove that their memory would be more useful blank instead of storing web pages in cache. I just fired up IE and went to Google and then to Slashdot, and the memory usage is similar to Firefox 3b2, only a bit lower (except Firefox has been open longer, has two tabs open as opposed to one, and has more extensions/addons/plugins loaded). If I open another tab in IE, it's memory usage slips about Firefox's.

My Vista experience... (4, Funny)

cgreuter (82182) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350882)

was extremely satisfying:
  1. Bought a new PC from $BIG_BOX_RETAILER, took it home and plugged it in.
  2. Turned it on.
  3. Clicked the "Okay" button until I got to the screen where I had to read a novel-length license agreement through a 3-by-4 inch scroll window.
  4. Said "bugger this for a lark" in my best fake British accent, inserted my freshly-burned Fedora 8 DVD and power-cycled the machine.
  5. Gleefully formatted the entire disk as ext3 (plus a swap partition, natch) and imagined Vista screaming as I plowed its broken bits under my mighty array of disk heads.

The whole thing was very satisfying and I can type "find . -type f -exec grep some-string {} \; -print" whenever I want and it'll work.

(I'm not trying to bash Windows here--I just like Linux better. I bought the computer as a Linux machine and wanted to see what all the fuss was about and if it was worth keeping a small Vista partition around for a bit. Vista showed me it wasn't pretty quickly but I still have the install CD and license sticker in case I change my mind.)

Dear Bennett... (1)

pandrijeczko (588093) | more than 6 years ago | (#22350898)

How about a little less of the boring, pompous verbosity and get straight to the point?

Vista has an IPV6 problem, you're sticking with XP and you don't like Linux.

I got 20 lines into your boring monologue and lost the will to live.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?