Ask Your Vista Questions Here.

Windows XP vs. Vista: The Benchmark Rundown

Patrick Schmid, Achim Roos

January 29, 2007 09:16
Is Windows Vista Faster Than XP?

Our Windows Vista coverage began with a hands-on diary by MobilityGuru's Barry Gerber, followed by an assessment of gameplay under Windows Vista by graphics presidente Darren Polkowski, as well as a complete feature rundown of Vista. Barry took the new operating system and its look & feel with a grain of salt, while Darren was disappointed because OpenGL support was dropped along the way, meaning that Windows Vista currently offers horrible performance for graphics applications utilizing the Open Graphics Library.

We are sure that mainstream users will appreciate the improved usability of Windows Vista, and the average office/multimedia user will likely never notice the lack of OpenGL. However, a chapter on the overall performance of Windows Vista requires more dedication. In particular, two things require an in-depth analysis:

* Basic Windows Vista Performance
How does Windows Vista perform compared to Windows XP? Will applications execute equally quickly, or will they even run slower due to the new features and the AeroGlass interface?
* Windows Vista Performance Enhancements
With SuperFetch and ReadyBoost, Windows Vista introduces two features to make use of today's technology in order to improve the user experience. This means that more application data should be actively cached into all available memory (SuperFetch), whether that is physical RAM or a USB Flash memory device (ReadyBoost). Microsoft's goal was to create balanced performance by removing delays in everyday work.

This article deals with basic application execution under Windows Vista Enterprise, which is representative of the other editions. We put together a high-end test system and performed a comprehensive benchmark session both with Windows XP Professional and with Windows Vista Enterprise to see if there are differences. And indeed, we found that there are some...
Software And Vista

Although the main Windows Vista core has undergone lot of modifications, many of your applications will work with Vista. There is, however, no guarantee. You should definitely try any essential software on Windows before you upgrade.

Process scheduling and thread pooling have been improved in Vista; a deadlock protection mechanism and hardware partitioning for virtualization support were added, together with many more features.

We tried lots of different programs under Windows Vista Enterprise, and came up with a list of software that definitely works.
Games

* Call of Duty 2
* Far Cry
* F.E.A.R.
* Unreal Tournament 2004

Applications

* Adobe Acrobat 8
* Adobe Photoshop CS2
* Autodesk 3DSMax 8.0
* AutoGK 2.4
* Hamachi
* KeePass 1.06
* LAME MP3 Encoder
* MainConcept H.264 Encoder
* Miranda Messager 0.5.1
* Microsoft Office 2003
* Microsoft Office System 2007
* Mozilla Firefox 2.0.0.1
* Mozilla Thunderbird 1.5.0.9
* Nokia PC Suite 6.82.22.0
* Ogg Vorbis 1.1.2
* OpenOffice 2.1
* Picasa 2
* Putty
* Skype 2.5.x and 3.0
* SmartFTP 2.0
* Sungard Adaptive Credit Risk Calculation 3.0
* SonyEricsson PC Suite 1.30.82
* SQLyog 5.22
* Symantec AntiVirus 10.2.0.224
* UltraEdit 32 12.10
* WinRAR 3.70
* XviD 1.2.0

Benchmarks

* 3DMark 06
* Cinebench
* PCMark05 Pro
* SiSoft Sandra 2007
* SPECviewperf 9.03

In other cases there were some issues.

We found Vista updates for the Futuremark benchmark programs 3DMark and PCMark, as well as the popular data compression tool WinRAR. Lots of video-related software such as DivX could no longer be installed; new versions are required. The popular audio player WinAMP 5.32 throws up an error at startup, yet it works properly. Quake IV can still be executed, but the installation program did not work. Applications that run their own memory management won't benefit from Vista's SuperFetch function. For example, Adobe Photoshop takes care of creating a temporary work file every time it launches - Vista has no access to this process and cannot speed it up.

There are some types of software that you should only use if they have been specifically designed for Windows Vista: firewalls, anti-spyware and anti-virus software needs to be Vista-Ready.

this is a 11 page article
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/29/xp-vs-vista/




What You Should Know About Benchmarking

Knowing that Windows Vista has its SuperFetch feature, it is important to set up your test system to receive maximum performance that is reproducible. This means that you should either make sure SuperFetch works as efficiently as possible, or that it doesn't have a varying impact on your benchmarking. The latter is only possible by returning to a cold memory state before commencing the benchmarking. Cold memory means that SuperFetch doesn't know about applications that it wants to buffer into the main memory. You can accomplish this by reinstalling Vista, or by restoring a system image that you created earlier.

The opposite of a cold memory state is a highly populated main memory. SuperFetch will adapt to usage patterns, proactively putting applications into the main memory, and keeping them there unless the memory is needed by other applications. Please note that this is different from conventional application caching, which leaves application data in the main memory after it is terminated.

In order to make Vista/SuperFetch aware of a popular application, it makes a lot of sense to train the system. This training is important for benchmarking purposes - which we'll talk more about in an upcoming article - but also is appealing to enthusiasts, who would like their systems to run as smoothly and quickly as possible. To train the system, make sure you execute your applications and workload several times before you start measuring performance. This might not have much of an impact on single applications, but benchmarking suites such as SYSmark can show significant differences between the first runs and later repetitions with SuperFetch flexing its muscles.

Our everyday work with Vista became more pleasant as Vista learned about our preferred applications: Microsoft Office Outlook launched noticeably faster, and Skype launched almost instantly. This smoothness, however, doesn't mean that applications run faster. It simply means that they are available much more quickly by relocating frequently accessed files from the slow hard drive into the quicker main memory.
Benchmarking Checklist

* Tweak the OS: turn off animations and AeroGlass for maximum system performance.
* Disable User Access Control to prevent it from interrupting certain benchmarks.
* Have the OS process pending idle tasks
* Turn off system restore
* Install all applications, and execute them several times (with restarts in between) to make SuperFetch aware that you want them to be available.
* Don't use the system after reboots during your SuperFetch training period: this way, Vista gets sufficient idle time to "superfetch" applications.


Test Setup
System Hardware
Processor Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800 (Conroe 65 nm, 2.93 GHz, 4 MB L2 Cache)
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-965P-DQ6
Chipset: Intel P965, 82801HR (ICH8), BIOS: F8
Common Hardware
RAM 2x 1024 MB DDR2-800 (CL 3.0-4-3-9)
Corsair CM2X1024-6400C3 XMS6403v1.1
Graphics Card HIS Radeon X1900XTX IceQ3
GPU: ATI X1900XTX (650 MHz)
RAM: 512 MB GDDR3 (1550 MHz)
System Hard Drive 1x 150 GB 10,000 RPM, 8 MB Cache, SATA/150
Western Digital WD1500ADFD
Data Hard Drive 1x 150 GB 10.000 RPM, 8 MB Cache, SATA/150
Western Digital WD1500ADFD
DVD-ROM Teac DV-W50D
Software
Vista ATI Graphic Catalyst Suite 8.31.100.3.2.1
XP ATI Graphic Catalyst Suite 7.1.40211
Intel Chipset 8.1.1.1010
DirectX Vista Version: 10.0c (4.09.0000.0904)
DirectX XP Version: 9.0c (4.09.0000.0904)
OS Windows Vista Enterprise, Build 6000.16386.061101-2205
Benchmarks And Settings
Benchmarks and Settings
3D-Games
Call Of Duty 2 Version: 1.3 Retail
Video Mode: 1280x960
Anti Aliasing: 4x
Graphics Card: medium
Timedemo demo2
FarCry Version 1.33 build 1395
1280x1024 - 32 Bit
quality options = High
F.E.A.R Version: 1.0 Retail
Video Mode: 1280x920
Computer: High
Graphics Card: High
Options/Performance/Test settings
Unreal Tournament 2004 Version: 3204
1280x1024, 32 Bit, Audio = off
THG8-assault-single
3DMark06 Version 1.1.0
1280 x 1024 - 32 bit
Graphics and CPU Default Benchmark
Video
AutoGK Version: 2.4
182 MB VOB MPEG2-source (704x576) 16:9
XviD Version: 1.2.0 SMP Beta 08/12/06
Encoding type: Twopass
Target size (mbytes): 100
MainConcept H.264 Encoder v2 Version: 2.1
2:19 min MPEG2-source 1920x1080 to H.264
Profile: High
Audio: AAC
Stream: Program
Audio
Lame MP3 Version 3.97 Beta 2 (11-29-2005)
Audio CD "Terminator II SE", 74 min
wave to mp3
160 kbps
OGG Version 1.1.2 (Intel P4 MOD)
Version 1.1.2 (Intel AMD MOD)
Audio CD "Terminator II SE", 74 min
wave to ogg
Quality: 5
Applications
SPECviewperf 9 Version: 9.03
All Tests
Winrar Version 3.70 Beta 1 (Multi-Core)
(303 MB, 47 Files, 2 Folders)
Compression = Best
Dictionary = 4096 kB
Autodesk 3D Studio Max Version: 8.0
Characters "Dragon_Charater_rig"
rendering HTDV 1920x1080
Adobe Photoshop CS 2 Version: 9.0.1
VT-Runtime Script
Rendering from 5 Pictures (66 MB, 7 Filters)
Cinebench Version 9.5
64 Bit
nCPU, 1 CPU
SunGard Adaptiv Credit Risk Calculation
Version 3.0
Synthetic
Everest Version 3.5.761
Cache & Memory Benchmark
PCMark05 Pro Version: 1.2.0
CPU and Memory Tests
Windows Media Player 10.00.00.3646
Windows Media Encoder 9.00.00.2980
SiSoftware Sandra 2007 Version 2007.5.11.17
CPU Test = CPU Arithmetic / MultiMedia
Memory Test = Bandwidth Benchmark
Memory Latency Test = ns

this is a 11 page article
GO HERE TO READ THE TOTAL ARTICLE

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/29/xp-vs-vista/

 

Vista Worse For User Efficiency Than XP
Posted by kdawson on Tuesday February 27, @01:27PM
from the two-steps-back dept.
Windows GUI
erikvlie writes "Pfeiffer Consulting released a report on User Interface Friction, comparing Windows Vista/Aero with Windows XP and Mac OS X. The report concludes that Vista/Aero is worse in terms of desktop operations, menu latency, and mouse precision than XP — which was and still is said to be a lot worse on those measures than Mac OS X. The report was independently financed. The IT-Enquirer editor has read the report and summarized the most important findings."


Windows Vista Hinders Creative Users’ Efficiency Even More than Windows XP Did
Created: February 26, 2007

By:
Erik Vlietinck

Guess what? Despite Microsoft’s efforts to provide for a more fluid and agreeable interface with Vista’s Aero, Pfeiffer Consulting found Vista to be even worse than Windows XP (SP2) --and of course Mac OS X. Their conclusion is backed with cold, hard research. Pfeiffer Consulting conducted the research based on an independently financed series of benchmarks that establish how Vista impacts User Interface Friction (UIF) and user efficiency.

Pfeiffer Consulting, a Paris/France based international research and consulting operation specialised in technology and media, just recently released a report on Windows Vista User Interface Friction (UIF). UIF is a Pfeiffer concept, which describes and quantifies the perceived differences in efficiency and user experience between operating system, applications, and digital devices. UIF defines the fluidity and productivity that can be observed when performing the same operation on different computer systems, programs or devices.

Pfeiffer Consulting looked for a specific number of issues that it knew under-performed in previous versions of Windows. With Windows Vista, Microsoft claims to have re-invented the Windows interface, making it simpler and more efficient to use. Some Mac users pointed out from the beginning that Aero looked suspiciously close to what Tiger has to offer. With Pfeiffer’s report in mind, their observations seem to miss the point. Even if Microsoft has been playing copycat all over, the results are simply lousy --there’s no other word for it.

The benchmarks run on Vista’s performance were a selection of what Pfeiffer can measure. The results of this new report are therefore nowhere near a complete assessment of the Windows Vista environment where it matters for creative professionals. The first benchmark Pfeiffer measured is Mouse Precision Mouse precision is essential for those who use the mouse to accurately position elements: CAD, graphic design, page layout, web design, etc.
Lack of Precision, Slow Menus and Desktop Operations Rule in Vista/Aero

The lack of precision is detrimental to such work, but can also affect daily tasks on a subliminal level. Pfeiffer says it may go unnoticed for many users, but can have a significant ripple effect in terms of efficiency and computer-related stress. In the area of Mouse Precision, Windows Vista scored worse than Windows XP. Where Mac OS X scored 0.08, Windows XP scored 0.40 and Vista/Aero 0.52. The lack of precision has worsened, but perhaps not by much.

However, other User Interface Friction has worsened by a substantial amount, even when compared to Windows XP. Pfeiffer’s report also covers Menu Latency --the slight lag that Windows imposes when displaying menus and submenus. Here, the report concludes Vista/Aero has worsened by no less than 20% compared to Windows XP.

Finally, Desktop Operations --such as opening folders, deleting elements, etc) also show Vista/Aero has become worse than Windows XP. The lag has increased by 16%.

Pfeiffer Consulting advises to think very carefully before migrating or upgrading to Windows Vista in the creative department. Their benchmarks show that creative professionals will actually become less productive than they would be when using Windows XP. Of course, Mac OS X remains a clear winner in this area. The reasons why that is so is explained in Pfeiffer’s full report on the matter.
http://www.it-enquirer.com/main/ite/more/pfeiffer_vista/

 

Microsoft can activate Vista even if it doesn't need to

It's blinking amazing

By INQUIRER staff: Wednesday 28 February 2007, 19:54
SOMETIMES, it appears, that you might be asked to activate Windows Vista on a computer on which activation wasn't required before.

The problem "rarely occurs" says the Vole, but might happen if you install a device driver, install a program, run a new program or remove a program.

So far the problem seems to be confined to Vista machines, but if it starts happening to XP machines because of the WGA, be sure to let us know.

Here is the Volish note.below

It is like walking through narrow corridors in Byzantium we are given to understand. But luckily we've never walked through narrow corridors in Byzantium. In the meantime, here's a pic of Al Gore a reader mocked up for a us a year or two back while you contemplate your Vista perambulation. µ
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37917

You may be prompted to activate Windows Vista on a computer on which Windows Vista activation was not previously required
View products that this article applies to.
Article ID : 931573
Last Review : February 15, 2007
Revision : 2.1
On This Page
SYMPTOMS
CAUSE
RESOLUTION
To resolve this problem if it has already occurred
To prevent this problem
Windows Vista
Windows Vista for 64-bit Systems
STATUS
MORE INFORMATION
SYMPTOMS
You may be prompted to activate Windows Vista on a computer on which Windows Vista activation was not previously required. Although this problem rarely occurs, it may occur during typical use of a Windows Vista-based computer. For example, this problem may occur under one or more of the following conditions:
• You install a device driver.
• You install a program.
• You run a new program.
• You remove a program.

Back to the top
CAUSE
This problem may occur because a specific system setting is removed when a program runs with administrative credentials. The removal of this system setting may cause a BIOS validation check to fail. The BIOS validation check is part of the system activation process. Therefore, you may be prompted to activate Windows Vista, even though the system did not previously require activation. For example, this problem is known to occur when you use Intuit QuickBooks 2007. However, this problem may also infrequently occur when you install other programs or device drivers.

Note This problem does not occur because of an issue in the installed program or device driver. This problem is caused by a system problem in Windows Vista.

Back to the top
RESOLUTION
To resolve this problem if it has already occurred
To resolve this problem if it has already occurred, use one of the following methods:
• If you have been prompted to activate Windows Vista, and you have not used the product key to manually activate Windows Vista, install update 931573, and then restart the computer.
• If you have been prompted to activate Windows Vista, and you have used the product key to manually activate Windows Vista, install update 931573, and then activate Windows Vista by telephone. For more information about how to activate Windows Vista, click the following article number to view the article in the Microsoft Knowledge Base:
925616 (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/925616/) Error message when you start Windows Vista: "Your activation period has expired"

Back to the top
To prevent this problem
To prevent this problem, install update 931573. To do this, visit the following Microsoft Web site:
http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com (http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com)
The following files are available for download from the Microsoft Download Center:
Windows Vista
DownloadDownload the Update for Windows Vista (KB931573) package now. (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=5549C98D-421A-4F77-97F3-4E82A4D6471B)
Windows Vista for 64-bit Systems
DownloadDownload the Update for Windows Vista for 64-bit Systems (KB931573) package now. (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=C4BC5D31-3CEA-4992-84D7-334D29580EF1)

Release Date: January 30, 2007

For more information about how to download Microsoft support files, click the following article number to view the article in the Microsoft Knowledge Base:
119591 (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/119591/) How to obtain Microsoft support files from online services
Microsoft scanned this file for viruses. Microsoft used the most current virus-detection software that was available on the date that the file was posted. The file is stored on security-enhanced servers that help prevent any unauthorized changes to the file.

Back to the top
STATUS
Microsoft has confirmed that this is a problem in the Microsoft products that are listed in the "Applies to" section.

Back to the top
MORE INFORMATION
For more information about how hotfix packages are named, click the following article number to view the article in the Microsoft Knowledge Base:
816915 (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/816915/) New file naming schema for Microsoft Windows software update packages
For more information, click the following article number to view the article in the Microsoft Knowledge Base:
824684 (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/824684/) Description of the standard terminology that is used to describe Microsoft software updates
The third-party products that this article discusses are manufactured by companies that are independent of Microsoft. Microsoft makes no warranty, implied or otherwise, about the performance or reliability of these products.

Back to the top
APPLIES TO
• Windows Vista Ultimate
• Windows Vista Starter
• Windows Vista Home Premium
• Windows Vista Home Basic
• Windows Vista Enterprise
• Windows Vista Business 64-bit EN
• Windows Vista Business
• Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit edition
• Windows Vista Home Premium 64-bit edition
• Windows Vista Home Basic 64-bit edition
• Windows Vista Enterprise 64-bit edition
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/931573/en-us

 

PLEASE GO HERE TO READ THE TOTAL ARTICLE...ALSO THERE SOME PRETTY PIXS THERE
http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000688.html
CLICK HERE

 

Nice 1000 reasons to not buy or install vista there.

 

Vista Download Disaster
02.28.07

Is there a fundamental flaw in Microsoft's Vista download program?


By Lance Ulanoff

In the world of operating systems, Microsoft Windows Vista is just a baby. It's just now toddling along on new systems being sold throughout the U.S. And, like a small child being dropped by the stork to new parents, it's available to older desktop PCs via Microsoft's download-to-buy program.

Giving early adopters such easy, unfettered access to the somewhat untested OS was a bold move by Microsoft. The company had to know that people like those who work at PC Magazine would be among the first to test-drive this new installation option. Many of us have two- to three-year-old machines that meet or beat the minimum specs for running Windows Vista (with Aero). Why shell out another $1,000 to $2,000 for a new system when we can simply download the OS for $159 and get the "Wow!"? That was, to some extent, what was on PC Magazine publisher and tech-savvy computer user Jim McCabe's mind when he decided to upgrade his laptop with the latest OS.

I ran into Jim early one morning after he had installed Windows Vista Home Premium. He wasn't smiling, and the tale he told me made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. It left me worried and wondering about how many other Vista download customers are currently thisclose to smashing their PCs with the nearest heavy object.

McCabe's been at the magazine long enough to know to ask the right questions before embarking on a technology quest. He had read our stories and talked to editors about the Vista experience. His Averatec 3300 laptop PC was no powerhouse, but its 1.6-GHz processor, 1GB of RAM, and 80GB hard drive were all ready to handle Vista's basic requirements. Downloading the software seemed like a great option. He found you could even do it from one of Microsoft's retail partners. McCabe chose Circuit City, and soon he was ready to install the OS.

Because it's getting harder and harder for Microsoft to support the millions of different system configurations out there, the Redmond software giant will always recommend a clean install. It's a nice thought—not particularly realistic, but a very quaint one. For me, though, and I assume for Jim, the real "Wow!" would happen when your old PC, with all its hardware and software, becomes your new PC. It's like taking the motor out of your beloved 1956 Chevy Bel Air and putting in a new engine. You still have that great body, but the inside is humming like never before.

Installation took an hour and went off without a hitch. During the process, Windows Vista asked Jim if he wanted to have all updates installed automatically, to have only the critical ones installed, or to handle updates manually. McCabe chose the first option because, as he put it, "You editors told me to." I'm sure we did, Jim, and I would do the same thing.

At first glance, McCabe's PC looked great. All the settings were maintained—right down to his screen saver. The Averatec and Vista did as Jim had instructed during installation and immediately connected to the Internet and downloaded the Vista updates. Within minutes, he saw a message telling him that all of the updates were successful, and then the laptop began a necessary reboot.

At this point, the story sounded pretty commonplace, but the look on McCabe's face told me a different story. He continued on and arrived at the tale's turning point.

McCabe's Averatec began its reboot and within seconds lapsed into a horrifying blue screen of death. Jim's a wily guy, so he quickly disabled Vista's automatic restart and captured the on-screen info. Then he tried all the strategies Windows Vista recommended to untangle his system mess: Safe mode, Disabling the Network, and so on.

Vista also asked him to place the Windows Vista DVD in the system, restart, and then choose "Repair." Great idea, except McCabe didn't have an install DVD.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2098770,00.asp
It was time to call in an expert.—next: Microsoft Customer Service >

The Microsoft customer service rep was nice enough and walked McCabe through every step he had already tried on his own. Obviously stumped, the tech asked Jim to use his Windows Vista DVD and choose the "Repair" option.

"But I don't have a DVD," said McCabe, explaining he had downloaded the OS from Circuit City. The tech seemed unaware that Microsoft is offering the OS as a download. "He seemed kind of baffled by it," McCabe told me.

The tech recovered with a brilliant idea: "Can you borrow it from a friend?"

"He wanted me to walk next door and ask my neighbor if he had a Windows Vista installation DVD," explained an exasperated McCabe.

I could barely believe what I was hearing. If this were a Windows XP install, I'd almost understand. Heck, virtually everyone is running Win XP. I could probably find five install discs on my own block. But Windows Vista is not yet a month old. Hardly anyone has it. Sales of the OS are, for the moment, a bit slow. This will change, but for a support tech to recommend that a customer try to find an install disc to recover his PC is, well, beyond the pale. It's the kind of dead-end solution you offer when you no longer care or are simply too ignorant to have a reasonable answer.

Jim's an enterprising sort, and though he too was appalled by the support tech's suggestion, he wanted "to see this thing through." This time, his journey took him back to the local Circuit City store. McCabe figured that since he had purchased the download from them, perhaps they'd give him a DVD.

No dice. McCabe eventually bought a new Windows Vista DVD (he figured he'd stop payment on the download).

This time McCabe did a clean install, which meant that all of his software and hardware would be shoved into a Windows Old folder (a resting place for things you'd likely never see or use again). Windows Vista now worked flawlessly—even with the updates—but McCabe did not have his old system. Yes, it looked like the old Averatec, but everything else—all the settings, all the apps, and his trusty hardware—had been pushed out of reach.

You know what comes next. Jim took a recent backup image of his Averatec hard drive and reverted to Windows XP.

Where did Jim go wrong? Apparently, it was when he took a risk on the downloadable version of Windows Vista.

Microsoft has made a number of small missteps here, but the biggie is that it won't send out a Windows DVD to download customers. If the only way to "repair" Vista is to use that DVD, Microsoft must send them one. To say no is inexcusable.

Jim McCabe's experience may not be the same as everyone who goes this route, but if it can happen to a tech-savvy user like him, it could happen to you. I will say this: Hearing this Microsoft Windows Vista story did make me say "Wow."
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2098778,00.asp

 

Symantec Vista White Paper Links to PatchGuard Crack
By Scott M. Fulton, III, BetaNews
February 28, 2007, 5:08 PM

In a curious decision on the part of a security software company, a white paper released today on the Web site of Symantec - whose opinions of Microsoft's implementation of PatchGuard protection on 64-bit Windows Vista are well known - contains the address of an independent research paper which includes a demonstration of defeating PatchGuard, complete with source code, in an early Vista beta.

The address of the PDF white paper entitled "Bypassing PatchGuard on Windows x64" -- which was released in December 2005 and has since acquired a modicum of fame and respect -- is located in Symantec's 16-page analysis of Microsoft's security technologies, in a footnote to this sentence: "As demonstrated during the development process of Windows Vista and during its release, hackers can and will subvert PatchGuard."

One of the linked paper's authors, however - a professional developer and Microsoft MVP named Ken Johnson, using the handle Skywing - is certainly no "hacker" by the more negative connotation, working for a company that produces virtual private network software for Windows, and performing legitimate reverse engineering as a hobby. Johnson originally co-authored the thoughtful and well-researched paper as a wake-up call for Microsoft well prior to Vista's release.

"In the interest of not identifying a problem without also proposing a solution," Johnson and his co-author wrote in the paper's conclusion, "each bypass technique [presented here] has an associated list of ways in which the technique could be mitigated by Microsoft in the future."

Symantec's reference to Johnson's work comes by way of a newly refreshed indictment of Microsoft's PatchGuard technology, whose intention in 64-bit Vista is to disable unauthenticated programs from direct access to the system kernel. While such technology was designed to disable rootkits, it also prevents anti-virus programs including Symantec's and McAfee's from being able to detect when other unauthorized programs are attempting to bypass the system, whether or not such attempts would be successful if left unmonitored.

In its white paper, Symantec lumped PatchGuard together with two other Microsoft technologies formally adopted by Vista: code integrity for ensuring the legitimacy of installed executables by means of hash signatures of their binary contents, and driver signing for verifying the authenticity of low-level programs written by third parties.

"The kernel integrity protection mechanisms that are present on 64-bit Windows Vista can only be described as a bump in the road," Symantec's paper suggests. "That is, while these technologies may slow down an attacker, they may not provide a meaningful defense against a determined one."

Researchers for Symantec's paper analyzed all three 64-bit Vista security innovations, and came to a dire conclusion: "Results have shown that all three technologies can be permanently disabled and removed from Windows Vista after approximately one man-week of effort. A potential victim need make only one mistake to become infected by a threat that does the same."

But as if that didn't say enough, the paper then makes a very sweeping and potentially unsubstantiated claim: that all three technologies are left capable of being "stripped from Windows Vista in their entirety." Later in the paper, Symantec did demonstrate how a group policy object editor can be used (by design) to turn off a different Vista security feature, User Account Control - which stops the system and notifies users whenever a system-changing event is about to occur. Many security firms, among others, have touted UAC as more likely to be seen as an annoyance than a feature by users, probably likely to be turned off anyway.

Symantec advises against doing so, however, and in its paper's conclusion gently admonishes users at large for even thinking about such things - even when someone else puts the idea in their heads. "Symantec continues to see the user as the weakest link," the paper concludes, "as social engineering attacks become more elaborate in order to undermine the security technologies within Windows Vista."

But in the conclusion to Johnson's 2005 treatise, ironically, he just as gently chastises large security companies - Symantec being named among them later - for paying less attention to the details and engineering of PatchGuard bypasses than even Microsoft.

"While security software vendors may not make use of techniques used to bypass PatchGuard due to marketing and security concerns," Johnson wrote, "it can certainly be said that malicious code will. As such, malicious code actually gains an upper-hand in the competition since security vendors end up with their hands tied behind their back. In order to address this concern, Microsoft appears to be willing to work actively with vendors to ensure that they are still able to accomplish their goals through more acceptable and documented approaches."

Since Johnson's writing, Microsoft has pledged to open up avenues for legitimate kernel access to security companies, in a technology update the company says will be part of Vista Service Pack 1.

But Johnson went on: "Another important question to consider is whether or not Microsoft will really break a vendor that has deployed a solution to millions of systems that happens to disable PatchGuard through a bypass technique. One could feasibly see a McAfee or Symantec doing something like this, although Microsoft would hope to leverage their business ties to ensure that McAfee and Symantec did not have to resort to such a technique. The fact that McAfee and Symantec are such large companies lends them a certain amount of leverage when negotiating with Microsoft, but the smaller companies are most likely going to not be subject to the same level of respect and consideration."

Maybe...maybe not. While it's a noteworthy company in its own right, Sophos is indeed smaller than McAfee or Symantec, and yet it states Microsoft's partnership on security issues has been most forthcoming.

In a post last month to his personal blog, Ken Johnson predicted that Microsoft is indeed learning significant lessons from its deployment of PatchGuard - lessons that company may very well put to use in its next operating system revision. There, Johnson believes, Microsoft will pair PatchGuard with virtualization technology to produce a patch-proof system that Symantec and others will truly have to reckon with, by means other than open complaints.

Johnson writes: "When PatchGuard is hypervisor-backed, it won't be feasible to simply patch it out of existence, which means that ISVs will either have to comply with Microsoft's requirements or find a way to evade PatchGuard entirely."
http://www.betanews.com/article/Symantec_Vista_White_Paper_Links_to_PatchGuard_Crack/1172700498

 

Post by Mark Hachman
Just 104 applications have been certified to run under Windows Vista, according to an update published on Microsoft's Web site.

Version 1.2 of Microsoft's list, dated Thursday, lists 104 apps that have earned the "Certified for Windows Vista" logo. Of those, 23 are Microsoft applications, meaning just 81 third-party apps have earned the Vista logo.

Those numbers are slightly misleading, however; another 682 applications have been certified to "Work With Windows Vista" which means, I assume, that they, well, work. Of these, 80 are Microsoft applications.

The difference between the two lists seems to be the large number of older products that have been tested against Vista; for example, one of Microsoft's self-published games, Dungeon Siege 2, carries the "Works With Vista" logo but not the "Certified" logo— probably because the game was released in 2006, before Vista was launched.

Just a few popular apps carry the Vista certification: Cyberlink's PowerDVD, Nero 7 Premium, Raxco's PerfectDisk disk optimization tool, Trend Micro's PC-cillin, and Ulead's VideoStudio 10.

Slightly more worrying, though, is the relative unimportance of a vast majority of the applications carrying the "Works With" logo. Here's a quick rundown of the apps I think most users would find significant:

•ALWIL's avast! antivirus
•AOL 9.0
•Autodesk's suite of apps
•Corel's WordPerfect, Painter, and Snapfire
•Google's Desktop
•Intuit's QuickBooks suite
•Laplink's PCmover
•Magix's Foto suite
•Software from Mamut
•Pinnacle Systems' Mobile Media Converter
•ScanSoft's NatuallySpeaking and PDF Converter
•Ulead Systems' Intervideo and TrustView apps

That's about it. There are other minor pieces of software that you may use, such as SpectraSoft's AppointmentsPRO; but honestly, for every Stamps.com application, there's Absolute Entertainment's Absolute Poker.

According to Microsoft, "there are many applications that are compatible and work well with Windows Vista but that are not listed in this article. This is because such applications have not yet gone through the Windows Vista logo program or are still going though this program."

While certainly true, it also means that validating whether a particular application works on Vista means either quite a bit of experimentation, or poring through a number of support forums. While it's quite clear that over time, the vast majority of recent software will be certified for Vista, the number of current apps that play nice with Vista leaves something to be desired.




From a reply by lloyd.


No, the problem here is DEFINITELY Microsoft. The DRM (Digital Rights Management) that Microsoft built into Vista makes 1984's "Big Brother is Watching You" seem rather tame by comparison. It has so much security built in (it actually encrypts data that travels in the busses inside your computer) that it's amazing any audio or video application can be made to work at all.

And if you are running "premium content", any hardware output that might "leak" that content outside the computer is either disabled entirely, or its output is intentionally degraded.

There's even more than one documented case of people that can't play content that they themselves created, because the stupid DRM somehow thinks they are violating copyright.

Add to that that drivers MUST be certified by Microsoft, or OS won't allow the associated hardware to run at all (no more accepting uncertified drivers. You have NO CHOICE in the matter).

No, you can't blame the software developers for this one. Microsoft has chosen to develop this monstrosity and try to foist it off on us.

If you think that I'm exaggerating, or even making this up, have a look at http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html It's all there, chapter and verse with direct quotes, hyperlinks, cross references and footnotes.

I for one will NEVER, EVER install Vista on any machine I own, or buy a computer with Vista on it (I'm glad we dodged that bullet by buying my son's laptop late last year, because I didn't know what I know now about Vista). And to the extent that I can, I will encourage other people to shun Vista as well. This is not inconsiderable, because a number of people rely on my advice in such matters.

If you gave me a computer with Vista on it, I'd install a different OS. If there comes a time that Microsoft is only supporting Vista, I will simply switch to a different OS, and never look back.

http://www.appscout.com/2007/02/where_are_all_the_vista_apps_.php#comments


And from experience keeping notes in the shop since vista released..

Total pc's repaired... 72
Vista upgrades........ 8
XP kept............... 59
Vista downgrade to XP. 6 (some of these were the ones "upgraded")
Other OS.............. 2
Other OS installed.... 1 (from Vista to other, one customer was very dissatisfied with vista)

We don't do macs, there is another shop which specialises. Tomorrow we have a NEW pc world machine arriving for vista replacement.. The owner can't use it to convert his home movies to dvd which he has happliy been doing with XP for the last 4 years. I advised him to demand a full refund of the cost of vista from pc world as it is not suitable for purpose. Instead we have decided to return the (unopened) vista package (disk/certificate and the rest of the crap) to M$ for a refund, with our complaints included... DRM strikes again...

 

FOR THOSE THAT WANT TO KNOW HOW MICROSOFT VISTA WORKS AND NOW IT HAS NO BLUE SCREEN OF DEATH,

IT NOW HAS THE BLUE BALLS OF DEATH...

 

Vista activation cracked by brute force

Sledgehammered

By Charlie Demerjian: Thursday 01 March 2007, 17:15
IT LOOKS LIKE Microsoft's unhackable OS activation malware has been hacked.

There is an active thread at the Keznews forums (account needed), and a summary on its main page about the crack.

It is a simple brute force attack, dumb as a rock that just tries keys. If it gets one, you manually have to check it and try activation. Is is ugly, takes hours, is far from point and click, but it is said to work. I don't have any Vista installs because of the anti-user licensing so I have not tested it personally.

The method of attack has got to be quite troubling for MS on many grounds. The crack is a glorified guesser, and with the speed of modern PCs and the number of outstanding keys, the 25-digit serials are within range. The biggest problem for MS? If this gets widespread, and I hope it will, people will start activating legit keys that are owned by other people

It won't take long for boxes bought at retail to be activated before they are bought, and the people who plunk down money for the mal^h^h^hsoftware for real get 'you are a filthy pirate' messages. Won't that be a laugh riot at the MS phone banks in Bangalore.

So, what do you do? There is really no differentiating between a legit copy with a manually typed in wrong key and a hack attempt. Sure MS can throttle this by limiting key attempts to one a minute or so on new software, but the older variants are already burnt to disk. The cat is out of the bag.

The code is floating, the method is known, and there is nothing MS can do at this point other than suck it down and prepare for the problems this causes. To make matters worse, MS will have to decide if it is worth it to allow people to take back legit keys that have been hijacked, or tell customers to go away, we have your money already, read your license agreement and get bent, we owe you nothing.

This is ugly for MS, and if it allows you to take back your legit keys, how long do you think it will take before people catch on to the fact that you can call in and hijack already purchased keys once you generate one that someone else activated?

No, this is a mess, and the problem is the very malware activation and anti-consumer licensing that MS built into Vista. Then again, it is kind of hard to feel sorry for them the way they screw their paying customers. We'll give it three days before there is a slick GUI version with all the bells and whistles. µ

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37941

 

Is Vista a Trap?
Posted by Zonk on Friday March 02, @12:43PM
from the please-keep-ackbar-quotes-to-a-minimum dept.
Microsoft Windows IT
logube writes "BBC has up an article about the trap of installing Vista in your existing desktop. Written by Tim Weber, a self-confessed 'sucker for technology', this article is a good introduction to the pain and extra money required to get going with the newest version of Windows. See how you can spend an extra 130 british pounds, and still have no working webcam! Says Weber, 'It took me one day to get online. The detail is tedious and highly technical: reinstalling drivers and router firmware didn't work, but after many trial and error tweaks to Vista's TCP/IP settings, I had internet access. Once online, Creative's website told me that my sound card was a write-off. No Vista support would be forthcoming.'"


Falling into the Vista trap
By Tim Weber
Business editor, BBC News website


Microsoft promises to wow people who are upgrading from Windows XP to its new operating system, but with the joys of Windows Vista comes plenty of pain.

I know, I know, I'm a sucker for technology.

The shiny new Vista disk was sitting on my desk, and I just couldn't resist giving it a try.

Even though I fell for Vista's promise - more security and certainly much more fun than tired old Windows XP - I tried not to be stupid.

I knew my four-year-old PC might have trouble coping with Vista, not least because of its wheezing graphics card.

When I bought it, my Dell Dimension 8200 was fairly state-of-the-art (a few stats for the experts: Pentium 4 processor running at 2GHz, 384MB of RAM, a 64MB graphics card, and a Creative SB Live audio card).

Since then I had added memory (to 768MB), a second hard disk, extra USB ports and a Wifi card.

A blunt message

But this was probably not enough, so I downloaded Microsoft's Vista Upgrade Advisor.

Microsoft's message was blunt but useful: Yes, my computer could happily run Vista, but it would need a few crutches and new body parts. Step-by-step instructions told me how to avoid problems:

* Get a new graphics card with at least 128MB memory;
* download new software for the Linksys Wifi network card, to sync my PDA with Outlook and to make good use of my multimedia keyboard;
* download the latest version of my Kaspersky Antivirus software.
* With a few minor exceptions, the rest of my set-up was given a clean bill of health, including my webcam and printer.

It turned out to be tricky to find the right graphics card. Most shopping websites were useless in providing information on Vista compatibility.

At least a dozen times, I discovered in the small print on manufacturers' websites that there were no Vista drivers for that particular piece of hardware. I finally settled on a Nvidia GeForce 6200 with 256MB memory.

Now here is the dirty little secret of all the expensive PC helpers out there. Upgrading hardware is really easy.

As long as you make sure the new hardware fits into the slots that come with your computer and does not overburden its power supply, it's usually just a case of carefully lifting out the old and slotting in the new piece of kit.

Do check the manual, though, to see whether you need to install the driver software for your new equipment before or after putting it in.

If you are still worried, go online. You can find plenty of videos and manuals providing step-by-step guides on how to do it.

Then I followed the task list drawn up by Microsoft. The Upgrade Advisor even provided direct links for downloading new drivers and other software.

Taking one more precaution, I made a full back-up of all my documents to an external hard drive.

A good start

Finally I was ready to go.

I had read somewhere that a Vista installation would take 20 minutes. Not if you upgrade from XP.

After three-and-a-half hours of churning, at long last the Vista logo filled my screen.

It was the beginning of a day of anguish.

At first sight, everything had worked fine: All user accounts, complete with documents and software, were present and accounted for.

Vista looked slick. Its user interface was clear and set-up seemingly easy. The XP gobbledegook had disappeared from dialogue boxes.

Installing the new wifi driver and anti-virus software was a cinch.

Software worked straight away - whether it was Microsoft Office, Firefox or my very old copy of Photoshop Elements.

Feel the pain

But soon the problems began to mount:

* Where was the internet? I could see my router, but nothing beyond - even after a full day of tinkering with various network wizards. My BBC laptop proved that this was not a problem with my router or ISP.
* Why did my Philips webcam refuse to work? The Upgrade Advisor had explicitly said it would.
* What hardware was responsible for the three driver errors flagged up by Vista? One seemed to be the sound card - oh yes, why did I have no sound? But which mysterious "PCI input device" was lacking a driver? And what was the "unknown device" flagged up by Vista?
* Why did I get a "disk is full" error message every time I tried to install my keyboard's new Intellitype software? Why did Vista refuse to uninstall the XP-version of Intellitype?
* I knew that Apple had failed to make iTunes Vista-ready, so I didn't even try.
* But why did Microsoft's successor of Activesync, called Windows Mobile Device Center, refuse to hook up Outlook to my trusty old Pocket PC?

Fiddling around with Vista's settings, I soon found myself deep below its slick interface.

And the deeper I got, the more the look and jargon of dialogue boxes took me back into the world of XP.
It took me one day to get online. The detail is tedious and highly technical: reinstalling drivers and router firmware didn't work, but after many trial and error tweaks to Vista's TCP/IP settings, I had internet access.

Once online, Creative's website told me that my sound card was a write-off. No Vista support would be forthcoming.

Grudgingly I ordered a new one. After installing it, the hardware error messages disappeared; the three different errors flagged up by Vista were all triggered by my old sound card.

I also realised that my computer really needed more memory. Annoyingly, my Dell uses an unusual flavour of memory, called RDRAM, which is rare nowadays.

Two lost and one successful eBay auctions later, I installed one extra gigabyte of memory.

So far the upgrade to Vista had cost me about £130.

Not cheap, but probably fair value, as it will have extended the life-cycle of my PC by about two years.

Bearing a grudge against Philips, Dell and Microsoft

But a few problems refuse to go away and are both expensive and aggravating.

My Philips ToUCam still doesn't work, and plenty of angry forum debates are testament to the distinct lack of Vista support provided by Philips.

Even worse, Vista still refuses to talk to my Dell Axim X5 Pocket PC, which is a mere three-and-a-half years old.

I like my PDA. It saved my bacon when my laptop died on a reporting trip. Over five days, I filed 14 stories using the Axim and its foldable keyboard.

I don't want to buy a new one - at least, not until I find an affordable smart phone that is both slim and has a slide-out keyboard (what's on the market right now is too bulky for my taste).

But my Axim uses the Pocket PC 2002 operating system, and Microsoft has decided that Vista will work only with Pocket PC 2003 and higher.

A top Microsoft executive, who does not want to be quoted by name, tells me that "the refresh rate on [mobile] devices is typically 18 months, from our research - hence the view that most Pocket PC 2002 devices would no longer be in use.

"Our view (which may be incorrect) is that those people using the latest Desktop [operating system] would potentially also be using later devices as well."

Well, I have a surprise for Microsoft: They are wrong, not least judging from the discussions on various forums I've been to while hunting for a solution.

While Microsoft leaves me out in the cold, Dell is no help either.

Delving into a Dell support forum, I realise the company practises tough love. Very briefly, a couple of years ago, Dell offered X5 customers an upgrade to Pocket PC 2003. Not anymore.

So I can either throw away my Axim and invest another £200 or £300 (for a PDA and webcam), or roll back to XP and wave Vista goodbye.

To Vista or not to Vista

I find myself caught in the Vista trap. Quite apart from the pain of having to reinstall XP, I do like Vista.

It's slick, it's fast, it is very user-friendly. I like its applications - for example, Windows Picture Gallery, which could become a serious competitor to my favourite image browser, Faststone.

However, there are still plenty of wrinkles. The Windows "sidebar" may look nicer than Google desktop, but it crashes regularly and infuriates me because its "gadgets" can not be customised.

I've had two Vista crashes so far - not a blue but a black screen - and that really shouldn't happen. I can't even remember my last XP crash.

And everywhere I look, there are blogs and forums full of people who have problems with software drivers and suffer the poor customer support of the hundreds of hardware and software vendors that make up the Windows ecosystem.

So would I do it again?

The answer is no. Do what I originally had planned to do. Wait for half a year until the driver issues are settled and then buy a new PC.

Once that's in place, you can upgrade and tinker with your old machine, to give to your parents or children.

You will probably enjoy Vista, but there's little reason to do it the hard way.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6407419.stm

 

Microsoft Vista, IE7 Banned By U.S. DOT

Microsoft Hit By U.S. DOT Ban On Windows Vista, Explorer 7, and Office 2007


Tens of thousands of federal workers are prohibited from upgrading to the latest versions, according to memos seen by InformationWeek.


By Paul McDougall
InformationWeek

March 2, 2007 12:00 PM

Citing concerns over cost and compatibility, the top technology official at the federal Department of Transportation has placed a moratorium on all in-house computer upgrades to Microsoft's new Windows Vista operating system, as well as Internet Explorer 7 and Office 2007, according to a memo obtained Friday by InformationWeek.

In a memo to his staff, the DOT's CIO Daniel Mintz says he has placed "an indefinite moratorium" on the upgrades as "there appears to be no compelling technical or business case for upgrading to these new Microsoft software products. Furthermore, there appears to be specific reasons not to upgrade."

Among the concerns cited by Mintz are compatibility with software applications currently in use at the department, the cost of an upgrade, and DOT's move to a new headquarters in Washington later this year. "Microsoft Vista, Office 2007, and Internet Explorer [7] may be acquired for testing purposes only, though only on approval by the DOT chief information officer," Mintz writes.

The memo is dated Jan. 19. In an interview Friday, DOT chief technology officer Tim Schmidt confirmed that the ban is still in effect. "We're analyzing different client software options and also integration issues," says Schmidt. Among the options the Transportation Department is weighing as a possible alternative or complement to Windows Vista are Novell's Suse Linux and, for a limited group of users, Apple's Macintosh hardware and software, he says.

Schmidt says the Transportation Department hasn't ruled out upgrading its computers to Windows Vista if all of its concerns about the new operating system -- the business version of which was launched late last year -- can be resolved. "We have more confidence in Microsoft than we would have 10 years ago," says Schmidt. "But it always makes sense to look at the security implications, the value back to the customer, and those kind of issues."

The DOT's ban on Vista, Internet Explorer 7, and Office 2007 applies to 15,000 computer users at DOT proper who are currently running the Windows XP Professional operating system. The memo indicates that a similar ban is in effect at the Federal Aviation Administration, which has 45,000 desktop users.

Compatibility with existing applications appears to be the Transportation Department's major concern. According to a separate memo, a number of key software applications and utilities in use in various branches of the department aren't Vista compatible. Among them are Aspen 2.8.1, ISS 2.11, ProVu 3.1.1, and Capri 6.5, according to a memo issued by staffers at the DOT's Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.

Any prolonged ban on new Microsoft technologies by the federal government could have a significant impact on the software maker's bottom line, as Microsoft sells millions of dollars in software to the feds annually.

http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=197700789

 

Survey: Vista Used Less than 1 percent of PCs


Windows Vista may yet prove to be an unstoppable juggernaut, but statistics released Thursday by a market research firm show that the new operating system hasn't even licked its nine-year old ancestor.
Eric Lai, Computerworld
Friday, March 02, 2007 02:00 AM PST

Windows Vista may yet prove to be an unstoppable juggernaut, but statistics released Thursday by a market research firm show that the new operating system hasn't even licked its nine-year old ancestor.

Vista was being used on less than 1 percent of PCs tracked in February by Aliso Viejo-based Net Applications Inc., making it the sixth most-popular operating system. That puts it behind Windows 98, which is still used on 1.5 percent of computers.

Vista's exact share was 0.93 percent. Windows XP continued to lead, with 84.3 percent, followed by Windows 2000, with 4.8 percent. Mac OS X on PowerPC machines had 4.3 percent, while newer Intel-based PCs running OS X had 2.1 percent.

Net Applications collects its data from the browsers of visitors to its network of more than 40,000 Web sites.

Vista's February share of PCs connected to the Internet -- a month after its consumer release and three months after its release to businesses -- represents a big leap over January, when it was used by just 0.2 percent of PCs. At the time, it lagged behind Windows ME, the 13-year-old Windows NT and various flavors of Linux.

"The big question is if and when are the masses going to switch?" Net Applications analyst Vince Vizzacarro said in a newsletter accompanying the statistics. "While Microsoft was late to market with Vista, Apple's taken advantage and is now up to a combined 6.38 percent market share. It looks like the market is buying Vista on new PC purchases, but there isn't a significant percentage of people upgrading existing PCs. I expect this trend to continue through the rest of 2007."

Some analysts have predicted that despite Microsoft's intention to spend half a billion dollars marketing Vista, conversions from XP won't be the norm until 2009.

Statistics for the first week of February -- Vista officially launched Jan. 30 -- were mixed. Current Analysis found sales of PCs -- with Vista preinstalled -- were up 173 percent from the week before. PC sales were also up 67 percent from the same time frame in 2006. But Current Analysis itself pointed out that the sales leaps were exaggerated partly by slowing sales as retailers and OEMs wound down their XP-based inventory.

By comparison, NPD Group Inc. found that first-week sales of boxed copies of Vista were down 60 percent compared with first-week boxed copies of Windows XP five years earlier.

Neither group has released statistics of Vista sales in subsequent weeks, though NPD analyst Chris Swenson is expected to release first-month retail sales of the new OS soon.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,129525-page,1/article.html

 

It shows that windows xp still owns. The best os i ever used from Microsoft(it crash at least 3 to 5 times a week and have to format once a year). If people are not buying windows vista i'm not going to upgrade it. This is why I'm waiting cause if people say screw vista, microsoft will get a better os within two years or something. Even with windows xp been out for 6 years, It's still buggy. Where is that SP3!!!!! vista is just like windows xp except new theme and more buggy. I still feel like vista is not complete yet. The reason they don't want to fix xp is cause they want more money from people.

I got a question, I got microsoft office 2007. I figure it's what everyone is going to use soon. So how long does it take before people will start using microsoft office 2007? cause if it takes more than a year than i'm going back to 2003. Please let me know whoever is expert on software.

 

Unfortunately Microsoft will force Vista on the majority of people whether they like it or not. All new PC's are now packaged with Vista and the rest who don't have a clue will upgrade.

I will not be upgrading unless it comes to the point Windows XP or Linux will not do what I need. Linux is becoming my main OS of choice and will only get better.

This is probably the only thing me and The_Fiend will ever agree on.

What is it you need slysoft for that you can not do in Linux, I may be able to help!

 

XP needs to be reisnalled every few months I hate that ><
by otherwise works nice *L*

 

I very much doubt that you can help me on linux Ozzymarry *did i spell that right?*, it's not that i don't know how to work with ripit4me or similar stuff, i just want something that has the full functionality of AnyDVD without using WINE or other tricks.

Btw, i read your reply on how i told off your kids, how was i to know who i was talking to ?
one of your kids was posing to be you most of the time, and not to mention they broke the forum rules to the extent of 2 bans due to bad behaviour, *on account of insulting other members, asking for invites, etc.*

But i digress...

Anyone else tried that new authentication hack yet?
Worked fine on my testing beast X)

I think it's exceptionally amusing that MS's usual lack of support gets made up for by an abundance of support for OEM, even to the extent of creating an exploitable flaw that will enable millions of pirated installs *though those million of installs are a sad thing, i encourage piracy in this case, as i wouldn't REALLY run Vista unless they payed me for it*.

In so many words : Abso-F***ing-lutely Hilarious.

 

Now I'm LMFAO you would never do any these things not to mention Rule#6 which you seem to break on a regular basis.

Have a nice day!

 

Hey, back then i WAS behaved...
It's just that dealing with too many moronic brats like those kids of yours drove me to insanity... X)