I've been in this business for well over 20 years. Over the years the complaints have always been that although Microsoft's new OS's were more compatible with older hardware, they weren't as secure. I think that I've read enough over the last couple of years to expect that this wasn't just an "upgrade from XP" and that Microsoft was finally going to go the more secure route instead of the compatibility route. I applaude them for that. Has each of my upgrades gone smoothly? No. I've got 2 brand new Dell
745 Optiplex's that arrived the day after my volume licenses and CD for Vista. Neither of them went smoothly. In fact, my personal home computers that are a year old went almost flawless. But, as IT people I think we need to look at the slightly bigger picture here. Do we want flawless upgrades and then deal with all of the security issues everyday thereafter; or do we want a more secure OS and put in a little more time, and sometimes money up front. Just a nickels worth.......
|>> Re: Re: To Vista or not to Vista, that's the question?
I can understand your viewpoint, but so far I haven't really seen anything to prove that Vista is more secure than XP or Win 2K.
In fact, it is probably less secure in some ways because of the new network stack.
I've seen a couple of reports so far that seem to indicate that it's trivial to bypass the new security features in Vista.
Probably the only worthwhile advance is that the normal user account by default is not an admin account. However, you can do that on XP, so it's not a huge innovation or anything (fast user switching on XP makes using an admin account manageable).
I think we will need to wait 6 months to a year before seeing whether Vista is really improved in terms of security. I hope it's better, but I'm not holding my breath.
|>> Re: Re: To Vista or not to Vista, that's the question? from Jon Hamlet
This entire debate about gaming and Vista is really a tempest in a teapot. The vast majority of computers in this world operate for business and home functions. Commerce, Email, IMing, the whole world of photos, etc etc.
I run a small network here of 14 systems which a subset of a larger network. I've been in IT for over 40 years. I also played with Vista betas and was not that impressed with the results. I have not bought the Vista Ultimate and was shocked at the huge number of incompatible programs and drivers! Windows XP Pro is a stable, tested platform, with good updates and with minimal maintenance a fairly good environment for the vast majority of users. If I have to learn a new system, get new drivers, and buy new software, then Apple's OS looks awfully tempting. (Yes, Apple! from an old Microsoft guy). Their OS has been refined without the need to support everybody's hardware and software (no matter if it pretty poorly written and designed.
Seems to me, Microsoft has made a good business decision to cut itself loose from all those thousands of vintage anchors that drag it down and impede its forward progress. They are looking forward given the rapid compression of the technology to market timeframe that is summed up in Moore's Law.. This will also serve to drive new hardware sales, but the hardware guys are going to have to give up some of their cash cows and spend some cash to launch new hardware technologies. The 64 bit world is coming and there is little we can do to stop it. I've always called this the "March of the Bits" and did management seminars for several years with this theme. I remember the 4 bit processors.
Gaming is a great part of the computer world, but it is rapidly becoming a smaller part with the launch of each new gaming system dedicated entirely to games.
My two cents.