Will there be anything left when Vista finally ships? Microsoft seems to be cutting 'features' from Vista left and right. Would you rather wait longer and have a full featured OS, or would you rather have Microsoft cut features to bring you Vista earlier? Leave your comments and tell us what you think.
Microsoft has cut PC-to-PC synchronization from Vista. Vista Beta 2, which is slated to go to as many as two million testers, does not include the P2P synchronization technology. Quality is the reason for the latest cut, Microsoft officials said.
Microsoft officials decided the week of June 5 to cut another feature from Windows Vista: PC-to-PC synchronization.
Microsoft officials said they cut the feature due to quality concerns, but the functionality is still "something we plan to deliver to our customers in the future," according to a company spokeswoman.
PC-to-PC synchronization was set to allow Vista users to synchronize files between machines running the Vista operating system.
While PC-to-PC synchronization is out, other P2P synchronization technologies will still ship with Vista, including Meeting Space, an ad-hoc P2P connectivity feature, company officials said.
"From the beginning, we have made it clear that the top priority for Windows Vista is quality," the company spokeswoman said in an e-mailed statement. "While PC to PC synch is a great feature that improves productivity and collaboration we don't have it at the quality level our customers demand. As a result the decision was made to remove it from Windows Vista. This is part of the normal beta process as we constantly evaluate, improve and fine tune the features of Windows Vista.
"At this point in the development cycle we do not expect to make any major feature additions or subtractions, but will continue to listen to customer feedback as we begin to prepare for final availability," the spokeswoman continued. "That said, it is always possible to see tweaks with the features, and revisions made to the fit and finish and design work. Work on PC to PC Synchronization continues and is something we plan to deliver to our customers in the future."
News source: Microsoft Watch
Microsoft has cut PC-to-PC synchronization from Vista. Vista Beta 2, which is slated to go to as many as two million testers, does not include the P2P synchronization technology. Quality is the reason for the latest cut, Microsoft officials said.
Microsoft officials decided the week of June 5 to cut another feature from Windows Vista: PC-to-PC synchronization.
Microsoft officials said they cut the feature due to quality concerns, but the functionality is still "something we plan to deliver to our customers in the future," according to a company spokeswoman.
PC-to-PC synchronization was set to allow Vista users to synchronize files between machines running the Vista operating system.
While PC-to-PC synchronization is out, other P2P synchronization technologies will still ship with Vista, including Meeting Space, an ad-hoc P2P connectivity feature, company officials said.
"From the beginning, we have made it clear that the top priority for Windows Vista is quality," the company spokeswoman said in an e-mailed statement. "While PC to PC synch is a great feature that improves productivity and collaboration we don't have it at the quality level our customers demand. As a result the decision was made to remove it from Windows Vista. This is part of the normal beta process as we constantly evaluate, improve and fine tune the features of Windows Vista.
"At this point in the development cycle we do not expect to make any major feature additions or subtractions, but will continue to listen to customer feedback as we begin to prepare for final availability," the spokeswoman continued. "That said, it is always possible to see tweaks with the features, and revisions made to the fit and finish and design work. Work on PC to PC Synchronization continues and is something we plan to deliver to our customers in the future."
News source: Microsoft Watch
There's way more features than what you've mentioned: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_new_to_Windows_Vista
ITS HAWT
I am still planning on replacing my desktop early next year and I'll be happy to have it run Vista.
Well they haven't got media centre up to a decent quality either, I suppose that will be cut next.
I think the biggest failing in the Vista project isn't Vista at all. It is the fact that MS should have released another point release after XP (5.3 I guess). I think they could have easily added the accelerated desktop, instant search and a few other nice things on the XP core in the late 03 to early 04 time frame. Then a late 07 or early 08 release of Vista wouldn’t have seemed late at all.
another useful feature bites the dust, but we get "useful" things like sidebar...big freakin deal.
Yes, I am a tester and I think Microsoft is messing up big time here.
No problem for me =]
WGA and Activation, of course
Then I guess this article is someone's pipe dream: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_new_to_Windows_Vista
Not just useless, but many of those who aren't are backported or even have equivalents in other MS products.
You forgot DRM
You obviously are talking out of your ass. Oh yes, an entirely new communications API is so useless. Or I guess you enjoy having your music quality go down the toilet whenever a low frequency rate sound plays. At the very least, I supposed you don't want an improved kernel.
Next time, don't present what you don't want as something no one wants.
It's seems like nothing in Vista is any kind of quality. I test it officially and aside from very few things, it's not all that they claim it is. IMO, it's going to be a worthless upgrade. Most everyone (gamer wise) will be forced to upgrade just for the DX10 games.
you keep linking to that website but anybody can write something about it... not everybody is credible, and not everybody will delete a comment or feature mentioned that has been removed so far cut the crap with that link and post a real one
you keep linking to that website but anybody can write something about it... not everybody is credible, and not everybody will delete a comment or feature mentioned that has been removed so far cut the crap with that link and post a real one
Actually, all information posted on Wikipedia must be verifiable. And did you miss this article Neowin posted where Encyclopedia Brittanica had almost as many mistakes as Wikipedia? http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2147647/...s-encyclopaedia
Im on MS with this one as well...Some of you complain way too much
Some of you Microsoft apologists defend too much.
Eh.. They're doing that now too. The only way they wouldn't underdeliver would be to take their time to add the expected and demo'ed features.
Lad, you are the poster-child for fanboys. You should pull your hand out from under Bill Gate's skirt and go to bed.
Joe Average, MS' target market, won't know any better. They use something called "Windows" on their computers at work, and they know they have a version of "Windows" (and AOL) at home. So they'll merrily go out and buy the next version of "Windows." Whatever it has or doesn't have is really beyond them. They'll simply accept it and just run software without thinking about it. Then when a problem occurs they'll either get someone "who knows about computers" to fix it, or just download antivirus/spyware software without really knowing how to use that, either.
I for one am happy to be using OS X Tiger on an Intel iMac. The upcoming Leopard will boot Windows, so that problem is solved, but I haven't had to boot into Windows for months now. And OS X releases usually set the standard of excellence, so I have no worries.
I hope no one spins that BS about "quality control" in light of Vista's dropped features. Check out OS X and the better Linux distros out there. These entities are looking to consistently (and they do) *add* features and slick enhancements to *increase* quality.
That's not to say Vista won't be good. It'll be decent. Nearly every Windows release is. It just won't be as good as what it could have been. The market demands of MS' target market just aren't that high. Too bad the average PC user doesn't expect as much out of their computing experience as do Mac users.
Set the bar low, and you'll get the same.
Does average joe user buy Windows? I think statistics would show they dont but rather your average joe will get it OEM with their next PC purchase.
I think MSFT should really think about where they are going as a company and consider transitioning towards a services and application software company.
That's a pretty bold statement. I'm sure you can provide tons of support of that though.
Tiger isn't that much far ahead of XP in a lot of areas: www.xvsxp.com
Tiger isn't that much far ahead of XP in a lot of areas
Just try using it for a week and i'm sure you'd change your opinion on that... most people who go over to using OSX really don't feel short changed.
How so, when OS/2 did pretty much everything that 95 did (and did it better) before 95 came out? True, MS was working with IBM on that (and created NT from the result), but it was IBM's baby. Too bad MS had to run around screwing them over about it. Then again, that was when most of us started to see MS as they truly are back then.
Please don't tell me what you're sure I'll do. It only makes you look like a (I hate this word but it's appropriate here) fanboy. I've used OS X quite extensively, I've also helped write some of the comparisons on that website, and I can knowingly stand by my statement; overall I think it depends on the user, but there are still a lot of areas where XP is still ahead of Tiger. Or are you going to tell me that Tiger is better than XP in every single way?
Seriously, if there are ANY Vista supporters left, I lay down this simple challenge:
**I currently have Windows XP Pro SP2 running my main box. I'm behind a router with a hardware based firewall, and I have Norton Antivirus 2006 and Norton Personal Firewall 2006 both running. Every week I also run an ad-aware scan. I use Firefox to access the web and Outlook 2003 for my e-mails. I consider myself an advanced user, and my computer is fast, secure and does everything I need. I have also never had a "positive" on any of the security scans that i've EVER run.**
The Challenge? Why should I shell out hundreds of pounds for Windows Vista? What will Vista allow me to do, and better, than I can currently do?
IMHO, after 5 years of development Microsoft MUST have done something to give me a reason to upgrade? Haven't they?
The majority of Microsoft's revenue from Vista will be from OEMs installing it on new computers. I doubt many people who have Windows XP will spend the money to upgrade to Vista (unless they're the type of people who absolutely need to have the "latest and greatest" in terms of software - like me). Sure, Vista has some nice under-the-hood and visual enhancements, but I think the regular Joe (or Jane) running Windows XP on his home computer will have no reason at all to upgrade.
lol
This all you are going to get when you open vista's box now.
(This is meant to show a blank disc -- not a pirate copy)
-----------------------------------
Seriously though, I'd rather wait for an OS that is feature complete than an OS that has everything cut and just looks a little different.
I know my next major investment into computer hardware will be a Mac. At least I can keep Windows XP/Vista on as a secondary OS in case I need it to run the odd program.
- The new WDM display driver, including the 3D desktop
- The new sound/volume manager
- And I like them to add a download manager built into Explorer. One that can queue list of operations and has some advance features such as always overwrite or ignore Read-Only messages.
These are the things that hinders me daily in XP. Otherwise XP is just fine with me. How many times explorer stalls and you move a window around and the GDI draws repeated patterns? Or you move a bunch of files and walked away for 15 minutes, comeback and find a message saying you need press "Yes to All" to move read-only files? Or crank up the music in your WMP and then get startled by the dings and dangs of windows sounds? Its 2006, we should have an OS with these basic features.
OSX is not better, it still has the same limitations I mentioned. OSX has some effects with the quartz extreme/core image thing, but I think the Vista WDM driver should be better. There's no audio manager in OSX and the download manager it has is too basic.
Things like: WinFS, PC-to-PC Sync, EFI, more Vista Ultimate extras, etc... should be put back in so that people will actually WANT to pay $450 for a quality OS instead of Windows XP R2.
And at this point, the new security features in Vista are more of a hassle than good protection. Any self-respecting geek should be able to keep viruses off their PC if they don't visit "funny" websites, use a VM to surf for "visual stimulation", and use anti-virus software. It's just that simple.
Its only hype if you pay attention to it. Ubuntu released a few days back a new version of it; Yes there was hype but did I care? No.
Yeah, just because the most powerful and influential software manufacturer has been working on their flagship product for 5+ years now, has pushed back the release date several times, and is dropping features like there's no tomorrow, why complain?
Some of you Microsoft apologists defend too much.
They are a software manufacturer. Doesnt matter if they are rich, powerful or anything. You think you can do it better?
Its only hype if you pay attention to it. Ubuntu released a few days back a new version of it; Yes there was hype but did I care? No.
Yeah, just because the most powerful and influential software manufacturer has been working on their flagship product for 5+ years now, has pushed back the release date several times, and is dropping features like there's no tomorrow, why complain?
Some of you Microsoft apologists defend too much.
They are a software manufacturer. Doesnt matter if they are rich, powerful or anything. You think you can do it better?
Yeah, because *I* am comparable to Microsoft as a whole. Do they pay you guys to post this crap?
But damm i would use a 6 to 8gig windows vista... then a copy of windows xp that's on crack (meaning by what they got left in windows vista now)
Sure.
Lol
Norton Antivirus 2006 is actually a great piece of kit IMHO. Hard to believe it was made by Symantec tbh.....