October 1, 2007 2:15 PM PDT

Putting Windows Vista on trial

In the September 25th issue of the WXPnews newsletter, the editor, Deb Schinder wrote an article (Don't Find Vista Guilty Until Proven Innocent) in which she attacked the people attacking Windows Vista. "In way too many cases, people condemn operating systems or applications that they've never even used..." she says.

That's me. Here in this blog, I recently advised that anyone buying a new Windows based computer, should opt for XP as opposed to Vista.

Certainly, Deb's point sounds reasonable, but, if a tree falls in the woods, no one has to have been there to attest to the fact that it made a noise. Even without hands-on Vista experience, it is still fair to say that:

  1. Vist is less debugged than Windows XP
  2. Vista is less compatible with hardware than Windows XP
  3. Vista is less compatible with software than Windows XP

In addition to bug fixes, Windows XP's maturity includes changes to the inevitable design mistakes Microsoft always makes with a new version of Windows. For example, the initial version of XP had the firewall and the installation of bug fixes both turned off by default. Now, the XP firewall has been improved, it's on by default and so too are automatic updates.

Did Microsoft make a design mistake with Vista's UACC? While reasonable people may disagree over this, there is no doubt that there are design mistakes in Vista. I don't need to have used Vista and make my own list of design problems to know they exist and that frustration awaits for many. With Windows XP most of us have gotten used to it's quirks.

Regarding hardware compatibility, Deb says "...don't blame Vista when peripheral makers fail to provide drivers for their hardware components." While some may frame the fact that Vista is less compatible with hardware as an attack on Vista, it isn't. Nonetheless, it argues in favor of choosing Windows XP. To someone buying a new computer, where the fault lies is irrelevant.

Even while defending Vista, Deb points out "... there are some good reasons not to upgrade to Vista. If you have older hardware that's not supported and you don't want to buy new peripherals or a new machine, or if you have applications that won't run on Vista, that's a perfectly good reason to stick with XP."

Which leads to point three, software incompatibility. Here too, no hands-on Vista experience is needed to know that after six years on the market, all Windows software is compatible with XP, while some is not yet Vista compatible (and some will never be). Even if all the software you need to run now is Vista compatible, you may want or need a program in the future that's not supported on Vista. And people who are not "techies" may have other things to do with their time than research the dozens of applications on their computers for Vista compatibility.

Is the new Vista user interface better? Easier? That's a matter of opinion. Certainly everyone agrees it's pretty. But the user interface change means that time needs to be invested in learning it. At this point, people have to ask themselves whether going with a Mac might be a better choice for a new computer. If you're going to learn a different way of working, why not opt for an operating system with few malware problems?

And here too, non-techies may not have the time or inclination to deal with a new interface. So even without criticizing Vista, the familiarity of XP argues in its favor for many.

Finally, Deb says to "... remember that XP went through its growing pains, too." It certainly did. But, whereas she sees this as defending Vista, I see it as an argument in favor of the now mature XP.

While Deb might condemn me for writing about Vista with little hands-on experience under my belt, I don't think that issues such as startup times, UACC, notebook battery life or the Aero interface should be the only factors in judging Vista. I'm trying to look at the bigger picture. As it stands, Vista is too new to recommend, especially for a computer you depend on.

Like the original Saturday Night Live cast, it's not ready for prime time.

advertisement
 
Discover unlimited music for the price of one CD a month
Recent posts from Defensive Computing
A word of warning about 'free' public Wi-Fi
Organizing the Start button
A Linux ThinkPad
Beware the innocent web site
The Foxit PDF Reader - fast, free, portable and new
Add a Comment (Log in or register) 6 comments (Page 1 of 1)
Not so fast.....
by dylanvw October 1, 2007 3:00 PM PDT
I find it ironic that a blog about digital safety can completely miss the mark about one of Vista?s best security features. Anyone who understands the potential pitfalls of using XP with a local administrator account all of the time should understand the benefit of not only UAC, but also the fact that *all* applications run under limited user permissions in Vista unless specifically told otherwise. Sure, XP is fairly stable after six years and most applications work well on it. But one can?t ignore the sheer number of users worldwide that have been hit with malware, viruses, and spyware that have been using Windows XP and earlier versions. For this fact alone, I will not be going be downgrading from Vista to XP.
Reply to this comment View reply
DropMyRights
by mhinnewyork October 1, 2007 5:05 PM PDT
dylanvw has a point. To address this, I wrote extensively about the free DropMyRights program. http://blogs.cnet.com/8301-13554_1-9756656-33.html Michael Horowitz
Reply to this comment
Your subject needs to be at least 10 characters
by mjm01010101 October 2, 2007 3:02 PM PDT
So you upgrade to Vista and have to put up with UAC hell? Your choices are: 1. Disable UAC because it's gratingly annoying. 2. Keep UAC enabled and click furiously away. 3. Stay on XP and deal with malware (or just practice safe computing) 4. Go to OSX/Linux which have little/no malware but still provide great security/features.
Reply to this comment
As unbelievable as the Mets
by tenc21 October 5, 2007 11:45 PM PDT
It is unbelievable that a professional baseball team could blow a 7 game lead with 17 games left to play. It is even more unbelievable that a self-proclaimed "techie" could or would even dare to lambast a product with which he has had no direct experience, and to top it off, CNET allows it. It has already been quite clear that this blog lacks any professionalism; this latest admission just compounds it with a violation of a fundamental ethical principle of journalistic criticism. To make matters worse, the illogical and feeble attempts to justify not having personally tested the critiqued product simply makes a mockery of scholarly review. It is like Roger Ebert proclaiming "Million Dollar Baby" a mediocre movie without seeing it, merely because he felt all of the previous Clint Eastwood directed movies were mediocre. It is bad enough that this blogger thinks he's a Potter Stewart who "knows bad software when he sees it" without having at least tried it, but the far more deadly sin is committed by CNET in permitting this blogger to post with no basis in personal experience. Vista is not on trial; CNET is. This blogger?s arrogant admission makes it easy for any jury to find him guilty of intellectual dishonesty and CNET guilty of promoting it..
Reply to this comment
It's okay to stop bashing Vista now
by kevnology November 15, 2007 9:03 PM PST
I expect far better reporting from CNET than this guy. This so-called reporter says in paraphrase "I don't need to try a product in order to bash it." Why the smear campaign against Vista? I've been using Vista ever since it was released and I love it. It's FAR MORE secure than XP and the graphics capabilities are much nicer. Not only that, but I've not had any trouble running any pre-vista software ever since I discovered the compatability tab in an apps properties menu. All the people who don't like Vista are either those who can't handle any change or just idiots.
Reply to this comment
Powered by Jive Software
  • About Defensive Computing

  • Michael Horowitz is an independent computer consultant and the author of several classes on Defensive Computing. He views Defensive Computing as taking steps, when things are running well, to avoid or minimize the inevitable problems down the road. It's about educating yourself to the level where you can make your own intelligent decisions about keeping your computers and data happy and healthy. If you depend on computers, yet are on your own, without an IT department or nearby nerd, this blog's for you. His personal web site is michaelhorowitz.com.

    He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET.

    Disclosure.

Add this feed to your online news reader
Google
Yahoo
MSN
advertisement
Click Here.
On MovieTome: RIGHTEOUS KILL gets a trailer
Visit other CNET Networks sites: