Does Vista remind you of the Mac OS????

[Santilli]

I recently worked on Vista, and, I couldn't help but think Vista=OS X.-10. It seemed to combine the worst features of OS X, the slowness,
weird controls, etc. with the worst of windows.

Haven't worked with it much, but, I really don't even want to consider it...

 

[Chewy509]

Vista isn't all bad..............................................


It's just I've found the bad stuff in it is REALLY bad, and the good stuff they've added doesn't come anywhere near to counter-acting the bad stuff.

But if you want to compare Vista to Mac OS X v10.0.0, then you are pretty right on. Just need a few revisions to get to something worth the $$$ to upgrade.

 

[Fushigi]

Which controls are weird? Vista's UI still has a start button, still has a task bar & system tray, and you can still click the upper left corner of a window for window controls & still have the min/max/close buttons on the upper right. You can still right-click the desktop to configure related settings.

The biggest change is the integrated search and that's hardly 'weird'. It's a huge convenience. And some other things are also more convenient like replacing 'Documents and Settings' with 'Users'.

Less-used features are organized differently, and if you go into Control Panel a lot that's something new to learn, but most users will hit CP rarely if ever. I mostly bypass it via the search feature (Windows key - type 'printer' is faster for me that Windows key - Control Panel - Hardware & Sound - Printers).

What I dislike are that some of the features are less intuitive - the start button is no longer labeled, for instance (ditto the Office 2007 UI's upper left button). This implies existing knowledge of either Windows or another GUI. For new or less experienced users this can easily be confusing. And even though basic GUI controls have been around since '95 on the PC and even longer on other platforms, there are still hundreds of millions of people on earth who've never used a PC. For them this is an even more daunting venture than XP.

Also, for non-standard-location directories Explorer seems to assume a view and makes errors, often using the multimedia template when I would prefer a basic file/documents template. While Vista could do a better job of looking at the file types ahead of time, it's also partly my fault for putting things in non-standard locations.

 

[Howell]

What is the quickest way to get the dialog window open to give a machine a static IP address? If a quick way exists I haven't found it. In fact, the new way is so unintuitive I keep forgetting how to get in there.

 

[Bozo]

What is the quickest way to get the dialog window open to give a machine a static IP address? If a quick way exists I haven't found it. In fact, the new way is so unintuitive I keep forgetting how to get in there.

Same here. Also, you can no longer search for a computer on a network.

I agee with Greg: Vista is the worst of both OSs.

Bozo :joker:

 

[Fushigi]

Also, you can no longer search for a computer on a network.

Windows key - type the UNC (\\pcname\) or in Explorer put the UNC in the address bar.

 

[Fushigi]

What is the quickest way to get the dialog window open to give a machine a static IP address? If a quick way exists I haven't found it. In fact, the new way is so unintuitive I keep forgetting how to get in there.

Control Panel - Network & Internet - Network Sharing Center - Manage network connections. From there it's the same as XP. Two extra clicks.

That is a rarely used administrative task. It has very little to do with how users will use the PC.

 

[Mercutio]

My biggest issues are software incompatibilities, driver issues and odd Explorer crashes. I miss my "Up" button on Explorer Windows, and I don't particularly care for the "Breadcrumbs" now used to navigate the Explorer address bar. The differences in the control panel, particularly "Programs and Features" and "Networking and Sharing Center" annoy me, as does the compromise of using Aero (turned on = better UI performance, turned off = better battery life).

I only have one client out of six who have tried so far to have a clean bill of health for moving to Vista, but since they do everything through custom web apps, Word Document compatibility is really the only thing that keeps them from more seriously looking at Linux.

There are a lot of little database apps that just don't seem to work with Vista, and that's particularly problematic when the software is no longer in development or the developer can no longer be contacted.

For what it's worth, on the machines where I'm typically using Vista, the performance loss normally does not matter to me, but the one game that I play with any regularity, City of Heroes, loses almost 20% of its frames per second and has to be invoked from a special command line in order to function under Vista with a working mouse pointer. This is 18 months after Vista was released to the general public and 21 months after it was released to businesses. Why are we putting up with stuff like that?

 

[Bozo]

Windows key - type the UNC (\\pcname\) or in Explorer put the UNC in the address bar.

When I press the Windows key, the Start menu pops up?
Using Explorer on computers that are not connected to the Internet yeilds nothing. Using Windows Explorer yields nothing.

In XP, right click on Network Neiborhood, click on Search for Computers and it works. Even Search for Files and Folders from the Start menu you can search for computers.

Bozo

 

[Fushigi]

When I press the Windows key, the Start menu pops up?
Using Explorer on computers that are not connected to the Internet yeilds nothing. Using Windows Explorer yields nothing.

In XP, right click on Network Neiborhood, click on Search for Computers and it works. Even Search for Files and Folders from the Start menu you can search for computers.

Bozo

Yes, when you hit the Windows key the start menu comes up. The text cursor is automatically placed in the search field at the bottom so you can start typing immediately. You can search for anything from PCs to filenames to contents of files or email messages or anything you've got indexed. Or enter a URL & it'll launch in the default browser. It takes few clicks/key combos than XP.

Explorer = Windows Explorer, not Internet Explorer. In Explorer the top-left field, where the breadcrumbs are, can be used to search for other PCs & directories.

 

[Bozo]

Yes, when you hit the Windows key the start menu comes up. The text cursor is automatically placed in the search field at the bottom so you can start typing immediately. You can search for anything from PCs to filenames to contents of files or email messages or anything you've got indexed. Or enter a URL & it'll launch in the default browser. It takes few clicks/key combos than XP.

Explorer = Windows Explorer, not Internet Explorer. In Explorer the top-left field, where the breadcrumbs are, can be used to search for other PCs & directories.

You must be using the AERO desktop which I disable almost imediately. I still prefer the Classic desktop.

Bozo :joker:

 

[ddrueding]

You must be using the AERO desktop which I disable almost imediately. I still prefer the Classic desktop.

Bozo :joker:

Well, if you use a new OS and turn off the new features, you end up with...not much.

 

[Santilli]

"What is the quickest way to get the dialog window open to give a machine a static IP address? If a quick way exists I haven't found it. In fact, the new way is so unintuitive I keep forgetting how to get in there."

EXACTLY!
That's what I was trying to do, actually turned out I was deleting some router settings, and tuning DCHP back on.WHAT a pain...

I was pretty much reminded of OS X, which, after working with OS 9, and the other mac guis, found a royal pain as well. My opinion of both is about the same: Changes made to make changes, not for a better system...

 

[Will Rickards]

<tongue in cheek>
Have you seen microsoft's super secret mojave OS? From what I hear it's awesome.
<tongue in cheek>

 

[ddrueding]

<tongue in cheek>
Have you seen microsoft's super secret mojave OS? From what I hear it's awesome.
<tongue in cheek>

For anyone who missed the joke...

 

[Santilli]

Somehow not all that funny....;-)

 

[Fushigi]

The Mojave thing says a lot about the critics.

As for MS already working on Windows 7, well, duh. Any OS vendor starts work on a new version right away if not before the current release is shipped. For midrange, for instance, IBM supports the current release while working on the next two releases simultaneously. As features are added or problems identified, they are back/fore-cast to the other releases as appropriate. All this while fixes and sometime new functionality are rolled out for the prior two release levels. So there are actually developers working on five different releases, n-2 through n+2.

 

[Mercutio]

The Mojave thing says a lot about the critics.

Ignorant critics, maybe.

I've been teaching Vista certification classes, which means I've been using Vista a lot more than I really want to. I'm well aware of the feature set as well as Microsoft's take on reality.

I'm still not impressed or happy with it.

 

[Bozo]

Well, if you use a new OS and turn off the new features, you end up with...not much.

I don't move to a new OS for a new GUI and bells and whistles and bloat.
I want an OS that has performance and does what I want, not some programers idea of what they think I want.
Right now I am testing Server 2008 as a desktop OS. It's okay, but it still has a lot of bloat and there are things that are "cute" for the Mac crowd. Like Windows Explorer.
If I was any good at the command line, I would probably be running Linux.

Bozo :joker:

 

[ddrueding]

I don't move to a new OS for a new GUI and bells and whistles and bloat.
I want an OS that has performance and does what I want, not some programers idea of what they think I want.
Right now I am testing Server 2008 as a desktop OS. It's okay, but it still has a lot of bloat and there are things that are "cute" for the Mac crowd. Like Windows Explorer.
If I was any good at the command line, I would probably be running Linux.

Bozo :joker:

Sounds like XP is the OS for you.

 

[Bozo]

Sounds like XP is the OS for you.

Actually, Win95 frontend on a Server 2003 backend. :thumbleft:

Bozo :joker:

 

[Santilli]

Server 2003 is fine with me, most of the time.

When I thought about it, the feeling, and lack of intuitive interface to get to the TCP/IP settings reminded me a LOT of doing the same thing with OS X.
Anybody have both to compare the same steps?

 

[Mercutio]

Seriously, how often are you changing IP settings? You're either DHCP or you've got a box with some ports on a firewall mapped to a static IP.

The only time in the last year or so that I've had to change IP settings manually, except to statically assign addresses on a server, was the very brief time I was trying to play with IPv6.

 

[Fushigi]

That underscores my main point about the reviewers who have complained about Vista's changes. The things that were moved aren't likely to negatively impact users in any meaningful way. But, since the reviewers tend to be techies (wannabe or legit), the changes frustrate them so they knock the product.

Of course, darn near all Windows releases have mucked with Control Panel's organization so I don't really know why Vista gets slammed more than past releases. Or maybe everyone did complain on prior releases but now that they're actually used to XP's interface they don't want the change. People often forget about how much complaining there was when XP was first released.

XP has been out since 2001. Considering the time between releases for 95-98, 98-ME/2K, and ME/2K-XP, the times are minor compared to the almost 6 years between XP & Vista. People have developed habits & expectations. Vista's changes require admins to learn different ways to do the same thing. And admins tend to be fussy and don't like change, even if it is sometimes for the better (not saying Vista's changes are all for the better, but some are). Honestly, I think admins are pickier about this stuff than the end users are.

To the average end user, the changes boil down to Aero-specific stuff and the integrated search. The need to administer Vista is not something they will do with any regularity.

Personally, I'm far more frustrated with the changes to Office 2007 than I am with Vista. The ribbon interface is decent enough in theory but the options I use frequently, which aren't all that advanced, are never where I want or expect them.

 

[Mercutio]

Control Panel has been essentially unchanged in terms of icons and functions since Windows 95. NT4 followed the Windows 3.1 scheme, but Windows 98 and 2000 are practically identical to Win95.

OK. Windows 2000 rearranged the Network applet. Fine.

Windows ME introduced Category View, which no one is forced to use. XP introduced some new applets (Security Center, Windows Firewall), but didn't remove anything or rename anything. On the whole, someone who was familiar with Win95 would have zero difficulty navigating XP's version.

Vista wholesale changed and moved functionality, and not for any good reason that I can see.

 

[Howell]

Personally, I'm far more frustrated with the changes to Office 2007 than I am with Vista. The ribbon interface is decent enough in theory but the options I use frequently, which aren't all that advanced, are never where I want or expect them.

And that is really what it boils down to isn't it, what you use. FWIW, I'm much more an engineer and less an admin. I also don't play on my computer; I work on it. I don't often change my IP on a day to day basis but when I'm doing an installation I can be in there every 5 minutes for an hour(DHCP, External IP, trusted, dmz). I wouldn't mind if there was a command that would pop open the window I need, I could learn that. I don't use my machine for video editing or even very much word processing (maybe once a week) but it is a PITA for the work on my projects to be slowed down unnecessarily.

ps. If you set up the control panel to expand out from the start button the properties of a NIC are 1 right-click and 1 left-click away.

 

[Howell]

Well, if you use a new OS and turn off the new features, you end up with...not much.

If that is the result then it is not a very good move to offer it as an option is it.

 

[sechs]

The MacOS reminds me that it is really stupid to have the icons left-justify and the task bar default to the bottom.