 |
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|
I'm an absolute freak when it comes to .NET technologies. My blog is called the ".NET Addict", so it should be pretty obvious that the day Vista's RTM build came out, I downloaded it and installed it on every Vista-capable machine I had in my possession. I've been using Vista for several weeks now and I've come to a couple of conclusions that I think might startle and shock some of you.
Vista itself, and by that I mean the core activities of sitting your machine idle while you browse websites or watch news feeds scroll by below your analog clock in the sidebar - runs remarkably well and the user experience is far superior to that of Windows XP. Its not because of glass, its just because things seem to flow a little more smoothly and seem to be placed a little more logically. The Vista design rule of "progressive revalation" where tedious information is hidden unless you ask for it makes for a cleaner UX any day of the week.
That said, here's the bad news. Vista seems to be optimized really well (at this point, I don't know about the manufacturer-specific builds coming out in January) for doing nothing more than web surfing and playing with sidebar gadgets and doing multimedia stuff with media center and the new media player. If you're looking to use existing applications, you may run into hideous, workflow-breaking compatibility issues. If you're looking to game, check with the game manufacturer and make sure they specifically, explicitly, undoubtedly support Windows Vista on towers and laptops before you blow away that XP gaming rig of yours.
There's nothing wrong with optimizing an OS for presentation value - there is an entire demographic of people out there who do nothing but surf, check mail, play solitaire, etc. The ultra-casual users of computers like my mother, grandmother, and people who generally have little interest in technology (like my father). Here's the rub - that demographic of people is NOT the demographic of people who want to spend money to upgrade their hardware so they can run Vista with Glass. For them, on their casual-user hardware, Vista will look like crap - and if they are looking to upgrade, they can get a Mac mini or iMac cheaper than they can get Vista-ready hardware from Dell.
Bottom line is that, in my opinion, unless you are planning on doing serious .NET Framework 3.0 (WPF, WCF, WF) programming then there is no compelling reason to upgrade to Vista. Put Vista on a Virtual machine and forget about it or wait until the compatiiblity issues are a thing of the past. For me, I'm actually at the point where I'm trying to figure out how to put XP back on the hardware I've already upgraded to Vista in a dual-boot scenario. Thats a first for me. I've never before felt compelled to dual-boot the previous version of a Microsoft OS, except for when I used to keep DOS 6.22 floppies around in case I needed to boot into DPMI out of Windows 95 to play Doom or run some memory-sucking Borland apps I was coding. How sad is that?
Ya agreed, I still cannot believe VS2005 doesn't work and what worries me
is the SP1 Beta doesn't fix the Vista/VS problems either .... go Microsoft
-
I tried the second beta and was let down with the games that wouldn't work
on it. I need to try the latest version of Vista soon but it sounds like
those issues still haven't been correct. I'll wait for 6 months or so to
get Vista. Hopefully by then they'll have a lot of the issues corrected.
Now..........if you used Linux, you'd already be using a full Glass window
(for the past year anyway), and it's free, and comes complete with all the
software, no blue screens of death, firewalls built in, no need for extra
antiviral software, the ability to run (if you absolutely MUST) WindowsXP
in a VM setup, full driver compatability, easy installation, 64 bit coding
etc. etc....and, wait for it, Beagle.........the search files software that
Microsoft has already deleted from Vista........Sure, games might be a
problem too, but then I guess Windows has to be better in some areas, even
if it IS playing games. But don't take my word for it. Try Linux
yourselves.
Well, no wonder, that Texas Instruments pushed back the upgrade for another
two years.
Any business that upgrades to Vista now is run by a pack of PHB idiots.
Wait, that's redundant.
"Put Vista on a Virtual machine..."
Actually, you can run anything above Vista Home regular edition in a VM.
The license only prohibits you running the "cheap" commodity version of
Vista in a VM. You can run Vista Ultimate within a VM just fine...and if
you're a developer with an MSDN subscription and you're writing .NET 3.0
code - that may be the way to go since Vista Ultimate is so hideously
overpriced.
can I just say I HATE VISTA right now, I FREAKING HATE IT - I keep loosing
PART of my network connection ... yes part, everything still works - chat -
mail but not browsing, in either IE or Firefox ... just get connection
reset crap. Its just started this BS in the last week and requires constant
rebooting. and STILL no feedback links from MS to report BUGS .. great
I actually find Vista's wireless networking infrastructure to be more
informative than XPs. When my ISP's DNS becomes unavailable, I get an
indication that I am still connected to my WiFi router (which I am), but I
also see that the connection is "local only", meaning that it can't go
beyond the local subnet - which I find quite handy information.
If Tony Young can leave linux fanboy-isms, then I can tell you all to ditch
Windows and get a Mac.
Totally agree. It makes no difference how good Vista is... I'll be
preparing to spend the next couple of years developing in a Vista
environment because thats just the way its going to be. Vista is here to
stay for better or worse. Come January 1st, all new PCs are coming with
Vista preloaded anyway, so a year from now Vista will be ubiquitous in the
home consumer market.
