No plans to release public Vista app-compat checklist

If you were wondering when Microsoft plans to publish an official list of applications that don't work well with Windows Vista, the answer is never. When Microsoft released Windows XP Service Pack 2, the company subsequently published a list of applications that didn't work properly (or at all) with the SP2 update. But with Windows Vista, Microsoft has decided not to issue a public list.

Instead, the company is advising both business and home users with compatibility concerns to get a copy of the Microsoft Application Compatibility Toolkit (ACT), which includes technology that will allow users to log compatibility problems and cross-check (privately, with Microsoft and other customers) compatibility results for selected applications.

Until this month, Microsoft officials had been noncommittal when asked about plans for publishing a full Vista app-compat list, like they did with Windows XP SP 2. But just over a week ago, when I asked Brad Goldberg, Microsoft's general manager for Windows client product management, about Microsoft's plans to make such a list public, I got a more definitive answer.

View: Full Article @ ZDNet Blogs

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Kaspersky predicts Vista security holes

Next Story

Sony Says All PS3 Manufacturing Problems Fixed

38 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

too much incompatibility with vista

This has been my experience I'll wait a while before using it for anything
other then getting familiar with it on a dual boot. XP will remain as my
working OS for a while yet I'm afraid.

too much incompatibility with vista, i cant play my mmo games like silkroad and gunz, it says that it dont have directx9

Anyways most media players breaks vista aero glass, like media player classic, bsplayer, mplayer and vlc.

No agnitum outpost but at least nod32 works, anyways vista its kinda smooth but too incompatible kinda like windows 2000

how can anyone support Microsoft's actions on this subject. just give us a wiki we can add to that microsoft can maintain officially. its not that hard. we will do the work.

Quote - Max™ said @ #7.1

Thank you! Referring to my previous post above......how long would Microsoft take to compile this into a webpage and stick it on Microsoft.com? Not very.

and to quote myself

"As has been said, they can't possibly encompass all apps, this will anger a lot of developers, confuse customers and won't be all that helpfull, and most customers won't even know where to find this list. and what about patches, shoudl they need to keep daily updates on the list whenever a developer releases a patch ?"

a list like this is not reasonable or realistic to maintain or create the peiopel who will need it won't know of it, and the peopel who would need it would find better and more reliable sources (like the creators of the software in question)

Quote - HawkMan said @ #7.2

and to quote myself

"As has been said, they can't possibly encompass all apps, this will anger a lot of developers, confuse customers and won't be all that helpfull, and most customers won't even know where to find this list. and what about patches, shoudl they need to keep daily updates on the list whenever a developer releases a patch ?"

a list like this is not reasonable or realistic to maintain or create the peiopel who will need it won't know of it, and the peopel who would need it would find better and more reliable sources (like the creators of the software in question)


Its such a small list though. I know for a fact that if I come across a product that I want to install on Vista - I'll be checking that list first. Sucks that Wikipedia got there before Microsoft, but nevermind.

You may think that a list is unrealistic - but its going to be there. If someone searches "vista compatibility list" at least they'll be getting something, which will take MS 5 minutes to add, rather than a kick in the nuts.

Instead, the company is advising both business and home users with compatibility concerns to get a copy of the Microsoft Application Compatibility Toolkit (ACT), which includes technology that will allow users to log compatibility problems

That's kinda... stupid ! That means I would have to buy a 500$ application just to realise it's not compatible ? Users would have to waste money to do the testing part and then send their report to Microsoft ?

Quote - xplatinum said @ #6

That's kinda... stupid ! That means I would have to buy a 500$ application just to realise it's not compatible ? Users would have to waste money to do the testing part and then send their report to Microsoft ?

It's not stupid. I wouldn't pay $500 for any application that the producer didn't already say worked with my OS. And I'd expect support to make it work if it's supposed to...

Quote - Jugalator said @ #6.1
Hmm, but do you need to run Vista as the host OS to test your software against it?
I thought that was the intelligence the ACT was supposed to have, but I could be wrong.

The current version (I think not yet updated for Vista) is here btw:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details...;DisplayLang=en

The release candidate for ACT 5.0 (Vista compatible) is on Connect, and I believe it will do Vista compat checks from XP.

Quote - winmoose said @ #5
This is not surprising at all. XP SP2 was an update to an existing OS, Vista is a whole new OS.

Vista was claimed to be backwards compatible.

Also, it's not a whole new OS. It is a revised OS.

Vista was claimed to be backwards compatible.

By who? Microsoft aim for backwards compatibility, never guaranteed it.


Also, it's not a whole new OS. It is a revised OS.

LOL.

Just chalk this up as ANOTHER reason why the guys in our IT division will delay even thinking about Vista. In an attempt to be somewhat optimistic, maybe GoogleOS will be ready before my company is forced to scrap 98/NT/2000/XP.

Not sure I see what you mean... The new Microsoft Application Compatibility Toolkit will help Microsoft's customers in detecting compatibility issues in even small-scale tools they'd never cover in an official "list". I think it's much better to let a software detect known incompatibilities in applications than try to compile a list that will never be complete.

I mean that our IT division is already so disenchanted with Vista (DRM, licensing issues, pulled features, bloated price, hardware requirements, bugs/security problems, etc, etc) that this news will not do anything other than delay their decision to upgrade.

MS has created these lists in the past and the they do test applications against their OS. They just choose not to give out the list this time in favor of making their customers do the work (and MS gets the results for free). MS is becoming increasingly anti-consumer.

Quote - lbmouse said @ #4.2
I mean that our IT division is already so disenchanted with Vista (DRM, licensing issues, pulled features, bloated price, hardware requirements, bugs/security problems, etc, etc) that this news will not do anything other than delay their decision to upgrade.

MS has created these lists in the past and the they do test applications against their OS. They just choose not to give out the list this time in favor of making their customers do the work (and MS gets the results for free). MS is becoming increasingly anti-consumer.

How does DRM affect them ? It allows users to play legal media ? I didn't think playing music and videos was a work activity anyway

As for licensing... yeah that Licensing server is a real bitch, setting up a simple validation server service on yoru server park wich validates windows copies once every 6 months... yeha I can see how that will affetc your business' use of illegal windows copies, but hardly legal ones.

I don't see any pulled features that would cause you not to upgrade, bloated price ? really and whats' the comparable price between XP and Vista business editions then ? The HW requirements aren't really that bad, if you can run XP you can run Vista just fine.

and pelase enlighten me (as a Vista user) abotu all these bugs and security issues you seem concerned about...

And perhaps the experiences form past lists is why they don't do it.

As has been said, they can't possibly encompass all apps, this will anger a lot of developers, confuse customers and won't be all that helpfull, and most customers won't even know where to find this list. and what about patches, shoudl they need to keep daily updates on the list whenever a developer releases a patch ?

I think you need a cup of reality

Quote - HawkMan said @ #4.3

How does DRM affect them ? It allows users to play legal media ? I didn't think playing music and videos was a work activity anyway

As for licensing... yeah that Licensing server is a real bitch, setting up a simple validation server service on yoru server park wich validates windows copies once every 6 months... yeha I can see how that will affetc your business' use of illegal windows copies, but hardly legal ones.

I don't see any pulled features that would cause you not to upgrade, bloated price ? really and whats' the comparable price between XP and Vista business editions then ? The HW requirements aren't really that bad, if you can run XP you can run Vista just fine.

and pelase enlighten me (as a Vista user) abotu all these bugs and security issues you seem concerned about...

And perhaps the experiences form past lists is why they don't do it.

As has been said, they can't possibly encompass all apps, this will anger a lot of developers, confuse customers and won't be all that helpfull, and most customers won't even know where to find this list. and what about patches, shoudl they need to keep daily updates on the list whenever a developer releases a patch ?

I think you need a cup of reality

More like you need a cup of something else. You have no clue how large an enviroment he has. Our RMI dept will have to spend craploads of time R&D'ing different apps to make sure what we have that is still needed for legacy will work with Vista. Top it off, microsoft is taking a standard shrug approach just like they do with all thier large exchange customers. Its one of those "prove its broke" Let us see your "fix" so we can copy it and say we found the solution.

Frankly, I'm suprised at the compatibility level of Vitsa. I only have RC1 to go by, but, all my old software that I wrote back in 1995 still work just fine under RC1. Which is completely shocking since they all install to the root C: drive, read/write ini files in the windows folder, are 16 bit softwares(can run on Windows 3), and have no clue as to security. When I read about admins no longer being admins and all the new translation layers, I was sure they'd all be toast(heck, the IDE I used to write them with is highly unstable under XP, to the point where I have to use notepad to edit the source code and just use the IDE to compile with)

One one of them it actually runs faster than it did under XP(may be the new networking stack, we still use it for maintaining one of the owners other businesses).

Of course, they are all dead weight under the 64 bit version, but we can't have everything.

I would think that the compatibility would only improve with the final release over RC1.

Quote - Yogurth said @ #2
I guess the list would be too big and too embarassing for MS.

Exactly what I'm thinking. It doesn't take long to write a list huh? Especially if its Microsoft.

Do either of you even consider how many windows applications there are, the work behidn actually testign every damn app to check if it's compatible and how compatible it is ?

and that despite how many apps aren't compatible Widnows is still the most cross version compatible OS around

oh well Guess trolling never gets boring.

Quote - Yogurth said @ #2
I guess the list would be too big and too embarassing for MS.

Yeah... I mean I have............................ no programs that don't work on Vista.

Quote - mrmckeb said @ #2.3

Yeah... I mean I have............................ no programs that don't work on Vista.

I can come up with two.... or well at least one... and that one supposedly works, I suspect it's a Vista+64 bit combination that breaks it, since it supposedly works on Vista and I know it works on XP 64.... so ...umm yeah... one program(game techncially) doesn't work...

how embarrasing.

Quote - HawkMan said @ #2.2
Do either of you even consider how many windows applications there are, the work behidn actually testign every damn app to check if it's compatible and how compatible it is ?

and that despite how many apps aren't compatible Widnows is still the most cross version compatible OS around

oh well Guess trolling never gets boring.


It doesn't really take long to compile a list of the top 200 programs that actually won't work in Vista. Lets take, ohh Nero 5 and below for example. They can just stick in the list: Incompatible - Nero 5. Easy. People will know it doesn't work. It would be extremely handy, but no - With Microsoft and its 25,000 employees - I'm sure they can't seem to handle such a list - especially with all the rrror and bug reporting systems they have.

If I really wanted to, I can go to all the tech bulletin boards and shout: "Anyone know of stuffed programs in Vista?" and people would've done the research for me.

So quit calling people trolls. Normal users don't have a reference so they know which products/versions of products to buy for their new OS.

Quote - Max™ said @ #2.5

So quit calling people trolls. Normal users don't have a reference so they know which products/versions of products to buy for their new OS.

Yes they do, it's that litle "Vista comptabile" or "Made for Windows Vista" sticker on the software package.

it's not MS job to say what applications work, it's the job of the application develeopers to say that their programs works on this OS.

What would be the point of the top 200 doesn't work list ?that would just be negative, and the application dev's woudl complain that they're being picked out. and if you used the top 200 most popular, then you end up with the opposite problem. and if you do both... again same problem. it's all or nothgin pretty much.

Quote - HawkMan said @ #2.6
it's not MS job to say what applications work, it's the job of the application develeopers to say that their programs works on this OS.
No. It is not their job. But they do have a responsibility to the consumer. They obviously do tests in-house for compatibility of software with their OS, and they have made exactly these kinds of lists in the past.

They just choose to not perform this customer service any more.

Quote - Max™ said @ #2.5
It doesn't really take long to compile a list of the top 200 programs that actually won't work in Vista. Lets take, ohh Nero 5 and below for example. They can just stick in the list: Incompatible - Nero 5. Easy.

So who determines what the top programs that won't work are? And why 200? Why not 50 or 1000? And seeing as how Nero is up to version 7 it would be no surprise something two full versions behind wouldn't work. Although I haven't tried it, I wouldn't expect (or complain when) AIM 1.0 doesn't run on Vista.

If you want to run the latest OS, it stands to reason you'll need to be up to date on your apps as well.

I guess the list would be too big and too embarassing for MS.

I think the real problem is that any list will be incomplete due to the massive amounts of software for Windows. And if a list is incomplete, it would simply only give the user a false sense of safety. Imagine a user getting Vista and installing his/her favorite toy and it wouldn't work, and wouldn't be covered in the list either? I think giving the tool (ACT) to the users to let them test themselves is a better solution because it gives a better compatibility coverage. Sure, it's more work for the user, but otherwise there are big benefits compared to trusting a static and highly incomplete list, no matter how hard MS tried.

Quote - MadDog said @ #2.8

So who determines what the top programs that won't work are? And why 200? Why not 50 or 1000? And seeing as how Nero is up to version 7 it would be no surprise something two full versions behind wouldn't work. Although I haven't tried it, I wouldn't expect (or complain when) AIM 1.0 doesn't run on Vista.

If you want to run the latest OS, it stands to reason you'll need to be up to date on your apps as well.


Microsoft do. They're a big company, not just a couple of people sitting in an office all day...

And you are thinking in the context of an above-board PC user. A completely illiterate PC user, that hasn't got a lot of money, may go into a shop, see an older, cheaper, copy of software on the shelves alongside basic Vista, and mistakenly buy it. This can somewhat be avoided, or at least helped by a suitable compatibility list.

(Max� said @ #2.5)
It doesn't really take long to compile a list
And you are thinking in the context of an above-board PC user. A completely illiterate PC user, that hasn't got a lot of money, may go into a shop, see an older, cheaper, copy of software on the shelves alongside basic Vista, and mistakenly buy it. This can somewhat be avoided, or at least helped by a suitable compatibility list.

And you think such a user will read (or even know about) this list?

(MadDog said @ #2.8)

And you think such a user will read (or even know about) this list?


People should be made aware of it...which is the point in advertising. Microsoft could issue companies such as PC World to put stickers on products that advertise the compatibility program and list. It can also go on the KB pages of MS, so people can search it up if they want to.

Like I said below, I'd rather some sort of page comes up rather than "oh no, sorry no page cannot be found at microsoft"