Vista Death Watch

[xstream]

Looks like Vista may be on it's last legs. Read this (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2209837,00.asp) interesting article by John C. Dvorak from PC Magazine.

[Astroman]

Never really had any problems myself using Vista, I like many of the features on it. I can use all my Astro programs and connections with it without any problems. Only the Toucam had a bit of trouble getting going, but thats fine now.

I agree some things with vista are a bit weird and should be fixed but every OS has it's faults. What are we gonna do? write our own OS?

[Omaroo]

According to who?

Wotalotanonsense. If he reckons that Microsoft are going to dump Vista on his heresay, I think he'd better conduct a reality check. Lesson 1: Take a lot of what JCD says with a huge grain of salt. This is the same journo who canned IBM (at all levels from their mainframe business down) for years during the 80's because he lost his job there. I'm never sure that this guy doesn't write to glorify his "standing" in the tech community rather than be a watchdog for we poor humans who are forced to buy software put out by big nasty corporates.

Did he work for Microsoft too? :lol:

I'm a Mac and Unix/Linux user. I've been lulled back to Microsoft for a while BECAUSE I find Vista OK. XP and everything before it were rubbish operating systems and I've had never-ending failures and instability problems with them since Windows 1.0. At least my Vista desktop has been up and running since the day I bought it without ONCE going down for any reason.
:rofl:
Here I am defending Microsoft... (I thought it'd never happen.....)

[Ric]

A very interesting article, I wonder what path MS choose to take.

I am happy with it, but my only gripe is that I can't use my LPI with it but that is a Meade problem and they are not in any hurry.

Cheers

[Shawn]

I agree with JD in the respect of cost and too many versions, Its a problematical scenario for users at best... Just supply the bees knees and be done with it...

S

[leon]

Not surprised, from all accounts of the people I know that have it on their machines, they hate it, and has caused them much frustration.

Leon

[Nevyn]

I don't have vista on either machine. When I bought my laptop, vista wouldn't run MYOB or work my printer because the drivers hadn't been developed yet. So I'm wondering if this might have something to do with sales. I haven't tried running anything other than windows, and I try to reformat as often as I can. Sadly though I've only just reformatted for the second time this year.
Go windows!! :P

Brad

[Zuts]

Basically Vista needs 2gb to be happy, after that it is fine. Remember that XP has been around for over 5 years and is quite stable. Vista will be the same in a year. I have it on one of my laptops and with the extra memory it is fine.

And 2gb of ram can be had for about 80 bucks so what is the big deal?

Paul

[joe_smith]

Just image if Apple released their OS for the PC they would get a lot of new users and money and give old bill a run for his money.... They already have the hardware covered now don't know why they haven't done it. Linux has come a long way in the desktop and you cant beat the price.

[Omaroo]

Yep - we quickly forget that XP was dubbed "XPerimental" for quite a while until it stabilised. I get the feeling that it's newer users of windows that are making the disparaging remarks because they haven't seen this development/release/stabilisation cycle before.

[wasyoungonce]

MS has too much invested in Vista to dump it. It's not a "quick and dirty" OS like "ME".

Yes, many users don't like it and many businesses haven't taken it up. They wait for the bugs to be ironed out before they commit to new software that may effect their business.

That's why many businesses have stayed with XP. I have and will continue to do so..at least for now.

XP is still offered by Dell

[iceman]

I really haven't followed Vista because I've had no reason to - I'm not getting a new computer and am not upgrading (work is still on XP).

So what exactly is new and great in Vista anyway?

[Omaroo]

If you want a good snapshot of the billion and one upgrades to the core of the operating system - go here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technical_features_new_to_Windows_V ista to get an idea about the scale of this upgrade. If any humans can do all of this and get it right first time they are, well, inhuman.

The amount of effort to have carried this off - at least to a packageable deliverable phase, would have been incredible. I respect the direction and know that the level of investment will see it stabilise.

Just the fact that Vista now supports symbolic links within the file system is tantamount to Windows finally being able to be taken seriously in the networking world because it can natively cooperate with Unix..

For those users who refuse to upgrade their hardware in order to cope (the cheapest it's ever been to do so), and want to judge the OS on hardware it wasn't meant to run on - your argument is properly invalid. The OS was NOT released with a promise that it would work on your typical home PC without compromise - so how can it be held against them if you are having problems with it?

[iceman]

Thanks Chris, looks pretty interesting.

[OneOfOne]

I am experiencing a similar problem. One of our customers want to use a version of our software that was released in 2004 as it has been running in a number of their other stores since then and so want to have them all the same, fair enough I guess. However, the software has a small bug that prevented it from working with their new system. As a result I had to make a new build of the three year old software to release to them (the fix consisted of changing just one character from more than 100,000 lines of code). Of course we need to continue supporting this old version. If they find it has other problems in the future, they need to realise that in 3 years many bugs have been fixed and new features introduced. Fixing them in the 3 year old version is not a good solution.

So if you want to use something old, you can, but don't complain if it doesn't work with stuff that never existed when it was created. Could Holden fit ABS to an FJ?

[Kal]

I only switched from Win2K to XP last year. I guess at this rate I might switch to Vista sometime around 2011!

[Ric]

Hi Chris, I remember being told around that time by various IT people to avoid XP at all costs and that it would never last. :whistle:

What Microsoft should have done was release the code or whatever it is they do to allow the software companies to build the drivers for their software. That way there would have been a lot less confusion and complaints.

Cheers:)

[Tannehill]

It's not surprising that there are growing pains. But then again, some OS in the past were true burdens for users (Windows 98 comes to mind, at least to my memory...). Just because Vista is out now, no one should feel obligated to switch over if they are doing okay with XP. I could not find any feature of Vista which promised dramatic or practice-changing improvement over my current XP, and, furthermore, developers of Astro software - a market sector I'm sure did not appear high on Microsoft's radar of when considering the impact on their market - would need time to adapt and reconfigure their software so users have a painless experience when upgrading. The fact is, I'm hearing all kinds of grumbling from users on various forums, and while you could say it's their fault for not realizing this possibility or for not knowing enough about the software to make it compatible, the point is there IS grumbling. People are not finding life better, but rather worse. It's no slur on Microsoft, I appreciate they have to keep moving forward, and at some point I'll switch over to Vista...when the majority of my software will work out-of-the box on Vista, and when I upgrade to a computer with more memory to accomodate Vista. Then I'll enjoy the purported advantages.

thankfully computer vendors put pressure on Microsoft to still supply and support XP for awhile...My new Dell laptop will come with XP..

Scott

[Omaroo]

The point is Ric - that they most certainly did. Even as a punter, I had a beta copy 18 months before release. It's just pure laziness or bad business that software and hardware vendors whose products RELY on the existence of Windows sit back and think that they can't or wouldn't be bothered to conform to new technology. Late alpha, beta and release candidate versions were offered to developers and software/hardware vendors for ages. If they didn't bother to take te offer up they deserve, quite frankly, to be bearing the brunt of disappointed users today - not Microsoft.

I remember someone here a while back arguing that it was unfair on these busineses for MS to keep marching ahead. What a lot of crock! It's THEIR business to keep up with progress if they want to play the game. That'd be like a backyard fibreglass company complaining that they're going out of business still supplying spoilers for VL Commodores.

Crikey - I've got to stop this. I'm starting to sound like a Microsoft evangelist - and that's coming from a Linux/Unix/Mac user. Sheesh!

[Ric]

No worries Chris, I didn't know that about the beta being out. In that case it's as you say, up to the companies to move forward.

Cheers

[programmer]

And Windows users bow in gratitude
/sarcasm


LOL Don't even know where to begin on this, so I won't.

I'm sure I"ll bite sooner or later though.

[DJDD]

I quite liked Win98 and as long as you accepted a reboot was required twice a day then all was good. :lol: I would argue that very little productivity was lost because of it.

I just bought a new HP laptop running vista for work- i need to test Vista against the applications we run, as well as network policies. I would love to have stayed with XP- I thought XP was great- but DELL and HP will be halting delivery of XP in the new year so i do not want to get caught flat footed.

I quite like the sidebar gadgets and Aero, although these are not earth shattering.

[Omaroo]

1) No need to bow - just acknowledge that people who never thought much of Windows now might. That's a good thing, yeah?

2) OK - I'll rephrase: "inadequate". There - that's better. :whistle: LOL

[programmer]

Of course, cooperative multitasking, which Windows ditched with Windows 95, was not 'inadequate' for Macs up until recently? At least Microsoft can write their own operating systems :) I recently ported a 10 year old piece of commercial 'multithreaded' Mac software to Windows :sadeyes:.

Good on you though for encouraging use of Vista, and not mentioning the words 'WinDoze', 'Micro$oft' or 'Bill' in your posts!

[programmer]

2004, that's almost brand spanking new in my book!

Will the one character change stop it working under XP? Otherwise, surely a conditional build would work, then you still only have one codebase.

[Omaroo]

I've never had a "favourite" OS as such - which is where people get all defensive about their personally-endorsed choice. I believe that each OS is great in its own way - and has strengths and weaknesses just like everything else. I tend to use the best OS for a particular job - and don't make the mistake of shoving round pegs into square holes.

System 9 wasn't brilliant at talking to anything non-Mac, and yes, some aspects were a bit uncooperative with the rest of the world (resource forks for example) - BUT - running on a Mac, Mac-based software has always been very good - especially in the high-end graphics industry and advertising, where Windows is still playing catchup.

I don't think that Vista is a "WinDoze", but rather an evolution - and a really good one. As a development manager I have to ensure that everything my guys write is as cross-compatible as it can be from environment to environment - and finally Microsoft is playing nice by conforming to, and endorsing established standards.

I was one of three blokes working at IBM in 1983 that physically unwrapped the first-ever PC into Australia. I know just how far Microsoft has come.

[programmer]

I did.. Intuition (AmigaOS)

I think you mean the 'high-end graphics industry' software vendors are playing catchup. This has nothing to do with the OS. Anyway this point is oft-touted and debateable IMHO.


Which environments are we talking?


I was an Apple user in 81 and went to the Mac pre-launch at AUSOM in 83 (from memory). Some clown called out 'but can it play games' [laughter]. The answer is still 'no' :P

I also still remember this exchange:

my Dad: 'hey I just read IBM are going to make their own personal computer. That will change everything'
me: (fooling around with 300 baud modem) 'yea right'

[Omaroo]

LOL! Yep - that's what we (at the time) mainframe techs said when we opened the box. I think the line went "Armonk have got to be kidding - this thing will never replace the mainframe!" :lol:

I agree about AmigaOS. I currently have a 500, 1000 and two 1200's (one in a tower).

[programmer]

You left out a zero from the 'one and only' Amiga, the 1000. I still have my 120V American version from before they were released here. Ah, Amiga.. Don't start me :)
Seriously off-topic.

Vista will not die, and Microsoft is getting unfairly bashed over it IMHO. Going back to XP would be a big step backward. I'd suggest anyone getting a new pc to not opt for XP.

[Omaroo]

Whoops - typo.... fixed! Thanks :) Yup - a great box. While the 1000 was the quintessential Amiga, I still think that the 500 was revolutionary though, and brought Amiga computing into more households faster.

I think I'll fire one up this arvo in celebration.... :thumbsup:

[programmer]

I would too except for a missing monitor (1080?) cable. Let me know if you have a spare :)

Or, I'll just go an emulator. Faster too :D

[Glenhuon]

I'm probably typical of most users who have tried Vista and reverted to XP. I installed Premium on my computer here, for about 24hrs. There were so many hardware and software issues that I went back to XP. I've had them all, from MSDos 3 onwards and every one has had issues initially. My copy now resides in a box somewhere in the shed waiting for the service packs (AKA bug fixes) and other software upgrades to come out. Might give it a go again in about 12 months or so. If your system is working OK as is, why change.

[OneOfOne]

Actually the change was made to a branch of the 2004 code, it simply allowed for four decimal places in a field in a delimited text file. Hopefully the 2004a release is dead! Forgive us code jockies for interrupting the flow...

[ballaratdragons]

Why doesn't a competition brand come out?

Why do we HAVE TO use only Microsoft???

Yeah, I've heard of Linux, but does it come in a box, just install, and use?

Surely some other company must be able to produce something like windows!!!!

[snowyskiesau]

Linux is easy to install and use, what puts most people off is that they can't run the Windows programs they already have.
Before someone corrects me on this, it is possible to run some Windows software under linux using a windows emulator but this is not 'out of the box' and does required some technical knowledge to set up.

[I'm a linux only user although I may have to change this if/when I get into astrophotography as all the useful software is windows only :mad2: ]

[programmer]

That's easy: others don't do it because it's hard!

If Microsoft bashers thought about this for a second, they might realise what a great job Bill & Co are doing. Even Apple couldn't write their own from scratch :P

[programmer]

Surely a lot of the astro software will run under emulation? I'd probably run Linux if it weren't for gaming.

[Omaroo]

If you go for a modern (read: current release) Linux distribution such as Fedora Core 8 (http://fedoraproject.org/) then "Wine" windows emulator is so well integrated that you just install Windows applications like you would on a Windows box - and it even builds start menus for you automagically. You need a slightly gruntier box because it is an emulation, but it usually just WORKS. The only reason I don't use Linux 100% of the time is that I need Photoshop to run at lightning speed - which isn't what you get under emulation....which is where the Mac comes in.

You'd be surprised what works under Wine these days. http://www.winehq.org/

[joe_smith]

yes it is, thats why apple and Microsoft got the original code from xerox. Apple had the better product but Microsoft had a better marking department. Linux is 100% better than Microsoft and apple because it uses open source is free and is built for the love of the Operating system and not driven by money or power trips. The only reason why windows has more compatible hardware for it is because the vender's support it and not Linux. Its not a Linux problem but a vendor problem. If all vendors released Linux drivers with their hardware Linux would be #1 even Apple knows how good it has come along :thumbsup:

[netwolf]

I must admit i am yet to actually load vista, but from what I have read and studied its not all that different. The shells may change but under the hood much is the same and there is even similarity to Unix, Linux and due to the BSD base it is also similar to the current MAC OS. I have always run every MS os release from beta, to rtm to final. But this time I just skipped it. To busy still supporting Win2k and WinXP. I like WinXP, I liked Win2k i find nothing really to bad with it. You must think not from an expert level but from a user perspective and useablity. My mates started to move to Vista and as I am there call for help guy i have had to troubleshoot blind (not knowing the screens and menus etc). This is why i like to always run from beta to final, so i can guide people over the phone and know exactly what button press leads to what. But even blind i have managed the toughest of questions without much hassle, largely due to expected similarity to XP Google is my friend. In the next week or so I am going to upgrade my work laptop to Vista and run the work SOE in vmware, that way I can work and test. I only need the work SOE for remote access and email and few business apps so a vm will do for that.

All systems have bugs, and all system become stable over time. The market today demands deadlines with bugs included. If I was pessimistic i would say that commercial apps live of the the bugs so they can provision maintaince dollars. But i know better. In all lines of work I have seen people are pushed to meet deadlines, and of course that just facilitates bugs. No system is void of these. Thats just a commercial reality, making a system perfect is not commercially viable. It would never get released.

I like Linux, I like Mac OS but Windows earns me my bread and butter, because it has market share. Thats reality. Vista is out there, it will get better as time goes by, its the way it is.

Regards
Fahim

[Gargoyle_Steve]

This is a bit off the main topic but I disagree with that statement. I was building a LOT of PC systems back in the Win 95/95b/95c/98/98 2nd Ed days .. my old Toshiba laptop today still runs 98 (1st Ed) and is quite stable - except for when I used to try to run ICQ, for some reason it hated that!
:lol:

In terms of Win 98 2nd Ed I had a network of 3 desktops running that OS for ages with no problems at all, in fact my network monitoring application used to run a clock that showed how long each unit (PC) had been continuously operational, ie not powered down or rebooted, and it was very rare that the day count didn't reach triple digits, ie more than 100 days, before the clock was interrupted by any kind of restart or power down.

I have always contributed this operational stability to good quality hardware components, and of course not loading evry bit of "junk" software that comes along as a freeby ownload. My PC systems had a great reputation with my customers for the same kind of long term stability and to this day I still get positive comments from many of these old customers who still have these sytems running in one role or another to this day, mainly because they do still run and still are as stable as heck.
:thumbsup:


Back on topic - I run XP now and it seems plenty stable, ie never needs rebooting and I don't get hangups, etc, but I do find that I tend to end up closing my pc down once every 2-3 weeks or so for various other reasons so the 100+ day session are long gone now.

I'm considering buying a new laptop but have to say that I REALLY would prefer to be able to get one running XP instead of Vista. ;)

[Straylight]

I have yet to install Vista on any of my PCs. Why? Because I can't see what extra it does that XP doesn't do.

Now, I have no need for all the administrative security functions and policies etc. that a company would need, so who cares about that. Aero-whatsit - who gives a stuff! It makes your windows look pretty, and chews up a hell of a lot more resources. Wow, what a waste of time that is.

I read an article talking about the ergonomics of Vista. Apparently people have to do almost 2-2.5x as many mouse clicks using the default settings, because Vista asks you to confirm EVERYTHING once or even twice that XP just goes ahead and does. This is a significant issue that forces a lot of people back to XP.

Lack of drivers is always an issue which will slowly resolve. DX10 is a waste of time atm. Even Crysis doesn't look that much better.

Basically, the only reason I have for going to Vista at the moment is if I am forced to. When Vista eventually becomes dominant, or Vista does something XP doesn't, I will switch over, probably dual-booting for 12 months in the process.

[vash]

I went shopping around because I want a new laptop with xp I managed to find a couple all costing around 1200 which have a decent cpu and all plus can run vista if needed

[Glenhuon]

I've built a few systems over the last few months and all have had XP as the OS. Most of the new ones I've worked on from customers have had Vista Basic installed and agree with "confirm everything at least twice" statement. It gets right up my nose, if I tell the darn machine to do something, it should do it immediately, unless its something really stupid that going to do harm. Its not only our education system thats getting dumbed down. :rolleyes:

Bill

[Omaroo]

Bill - here's the funny proof: http://movies.apple.com/movies/us/apple/getamac/apple-getamac-security_480x376.mov

[programmer]

There sure is a lot of misinformation about user account control. You guys aren't helping by spreading this kind of Mac fodder. :P I would've expected more especially from someone who builds systems.

[snowyskiesau]

I run Linux but I like to stir the pot when I can :)

http://it.slashdot.org/it/07/11/26/0643230.shtml

[sailormoon]

Vista is good....i think becos i use it on my laptop which is bascially my prime pc. The only bad thing is that it consumes alot of memeory and power which is abd for my laptop..only ha 2 hr battery life!!

[bloodhound31]

So now for the questions that really count.

What is going to change by converting from XP to Vista when....

You do astrophotography using standard supplied Canon software?

You use programs like:

Photoshop

Deep Sky Stacker

Registax

You use a modified ToUCam?

Baz.:D

[edwardsdj]

I agree Baz :)

Why is it that there is always so much excitment whenever Bill Gates decides to turn the handle of his money making machine again?

[Starkler]

Ken there are heaps of linux flavours out in the form of a "live cd", which allows you to load and try it running from the cd drive before committing to installing to your hard drive.

I have ubuntu linux as well as winXP on my home pc. The ubuntu cd comes with the OS, web browser, open office (MS Office clone), heaps of applications already there and ready to use.

Which linux distro is suitable for me? (http://www.zegeniestudios.net/ldc/)

[Glenhuon]

This ain't misinformation, this is hands-on, playing with the thing. MS will probaly sort out the bugs eventually, just like they did with XP. But untill they do, it stays in the box and I'll stick to XP. :)

Bill

[RB]

XP for me all the way thanks, I have no need to upgrade.
In fact I'm so disappointed that most if not all new Windows laptops are only available with Vista pre-installed.
I'm in the process of re-installing XP on my trusty 'old' lappy and upgrading it's ram and HD.

BTW XP SP3 is in the late beta stages but probably won't be released before the Vista SP I'm told. :shrug:

EDIT: oh and The Amiga Rocks !!! :cool:

[bloodhound31]

These are actually legitemate questions I need answered and soon. I am about to buy my new lappy in the next couple of days and I need to make the decision as astrophotography and running gear is it's main task.

anyone?:shrug:

Baz.

[edwardsdj]

Hey Baz,

Sorry to have misunderstood :(

If you have a system with everything you need working under XP then the main question I'd be asking myself is: do I really need a new system?

Personally I'd always get the latest version of Windows if buying a new system.

You may have to wrestle with it for a few nights to get everything going and there may be some hardware driver you need that's not available under Vista but that is the price you pay for moving to a new system.

In 12 months the majority of people will be using Vista (it ships on practically all new systems) so I'd definately get Vista with the new laptop.

Have fun,
Doug

[bloodhound31]

Thanks Doug,
yes, Ii am forced into buying a new lappy as I fried mine just before Christmas:sadeyes:

I guess we will have to change to vista eventually anyway..

[jay019]

I surely hope that was a joke! Or do people really forget that DOS was originaly written by Tim Patterson, which in itself was a reimplementation of CP/M. As for windows, thats just ms "borrowing" ideas from XEROX Parc/Star and Apple LISA.

Or maybe I'm just a misinformed ranter?

[Zuts]

I hope you are joking :). Those ideas are over twenty years old, or are you trying to say that operating system design and development stopped over twenty years ago?

Paul

[jay019]

No, I am saying that ms did not write their own OS. They may have added to the Patterson DOS, but realisticaly, they did not write an operating system, just extended one. DOS was still a base up till XP, and from what I hear Vista is built ontop of a FreeBSD base, so explain how they wrote their own OS, I dont understand.

Jay

[Omaroo]

Vista is not a massive port of FreeBSD - MacOSX is. Vista is totally, utterly and unquestionably native MS code.

[Zuts]

XP, Win2K, NT are pre-emptive 32 bit multitasking OS, explain to me please how they built them on top of DOS a sixteen bit real mode OS with a few hooks to the interupt table (int 21h). Go and look at the source for Kernel.exe and then tell me how much DOS code you can find in that!

Paul

[edwardsdj]

The Windows NT line of operating systems was a completely new line of operating systems developed by Microsoft in parallel with the MS-DOS/Windows 95/98/ME line. Windows NT was for business; Windows 95 for home users.

They hired a group of developers from Digital Equipment Corporation who developed the VMS operating system. Consequently there are many similarities between VMS and Windows NT.

Windows 2000 (Windows NT 5) was the first version where MS ceased to market the two separate product lines and release a single operating system for both home and business users.

Windows XP (Windows NT 5.1) was a minor evolution of Windows 2000. The main difference was the change away from the serious business-looking interface to a more game system/toy feel which appealed to a wider user base.

Windows Vista (Windows NT 6) is the latest evolution of the Windows NT line.

Windows NT has nothing to do with DOS or FreeBSD. It has more in common with VMS as Microsoft poached the VMS development team from DEC to develop it.

The history of Windows NT is well documented on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT

[Sonia]

I do not like Vista one bit, MSN don't like it, uploading photos on facebook is a no no on Firefox have to use IE and IE sometimes is a no no for internet so have to use firefox. aaaaargh!

[Omaroo]

You might have done something dodgy to your own computer Sonia. I use two Vista desktops at home, with both running Firefox 2.0.0.11 and both have no problem with either FaceBook or DogBook.

"MSN" don't like it? May I ask what that means? They likely have to update some code to fall in line with everyone else... Poor souls....

[Sonia]

Its a dell laptop i got free from AOL, when tony signed up and he gave me the laptop and i havnt installed anything except firefox and the things you have to use.

Regarding MSN, if someone sends me a piccy, when its uploaded, i try to upload the piccie and it crashes. So i have to go into my recieved files to open it to stop it from doing that.

[jay019]

Yeah, cause being open source anyone can go and take a peek.

Although looking at the OpenVMS source would suffice, seeing as NT is a clone of that.

[Zuts]

I guess you misunderstand the term open source. Open source means you are free to look, (sometimes change) and use for your own purpose code published under an open source license. Microsoft is not open source so you cant rip off the code and sell your own version of windows. You can however view the source. This is usually done to debug your application against the various windows API's and virtual machines.

The fact that VMS has the word open in it does not imply that it is open source. Of course this will mean little to you as you seem to like spamming this thread with half baked untrue suppositions. Compaq would of course sue anyone who used VMS source in an open source manner.

Windows is no more a clone of VMS than it is a clone of the original MAC Os. It contains some ideas not 'cloned lines of code'. Anyway i compliment you on your trolling style, yesterday windows was built on DOS, today it is a clone of VMS. Why dont you actually go and do some reading on the subject before enlightening us with your next wild suggestion.

Paul

[jay019]

So how does one get access to the source code? Got a link?

[Zuts]

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/sharedsource/licensing/default.mspx

[jay019]

But in order to even look at the source code you have to sign up which I doubt is free. So for a student to look at the source code is basically impossible unless said student has a heap of money to throw away.

Nevermind, doesnt change the fact that I was wrong about the DOS base.
But in a few years time when windows 7 is released vista will still be rembered as the failure that it is.

[Omaroo]

Your lack of experience and bumbling of your facts might preclude you somewhat from making sensible and informed calls that this sort of statement demands. Don't take this personally - but statements like that might serve to label you. Vista will succeed. XP did. You have the biggest software giant in the world behind it and you will be absolutely sure that they wont let it fail because of misinformation that you seem to like spreading. Your personal experience with it may have been a negative one, but there are millions of people out there using it who will disagree. When all the hardware and software vendors who have been too lazy to ensure that their own offerings are compatible come to the party for YOU, not Microsoft, then you might enjoy the fruits of their labour a little more.

To me, an IT professional, (I.T. Manager of Development Services) Vista has been the main catalyst in getting me to put MS gear into our organisation. Finally, and I mean finally, Vista's networking attributes have been standardised and now these desktop units can happily co-exist within our Unix, Linux and Mac graphical environment. Under XP they were a complete pain. Stable? I haven't restarted a Vista box (we have 19 of them) in nearly 3 months. Pretty bloody good in my book.