Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

Windows Vista Bugs

Feb 12, 2007 3:26AM PST

I have been a faithful Windows user since 3.0 and I really though that nothing could be worse than Windows ME. Vista in the early stages is worse. Windows ME had its problems, but you could get support/help from 3rd party vendors. Upgrading to Vista has been a real challenge... and I feel like I'm walking through this maze all alone. So many software and hardware items don't work with Vista and third party vendors have not developed a fix yet. Virus protection... No, AOL security... NO, ATT security suite... No. Problems that were none existent yesterday are here today. The drivers for my video card, cd-rom drive and D-link usb adapter worked yesterday. Now, nothing but problem messages. I've always fought the good PC vs. MAC fight and found the MAC commercials to be amusing. But, I've never given thought to joining the MAC legions until now. If Vista wasn't ready for a release that would be seamless for the upgrade crowd, It should have been noted. And the Vista Advisor is another matter for another conversation. Why give the green light to a system for upgrade and then present you with a different reality post upgrade?

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Mac all the way
Mar 14, 2007 11:46AM PDT

Well. I have to have some access to the windows format because I am an architect and work on architectural desktop.

Other than that ..I'm done with Windows and PC's. Now. as for the CNET editors comments that Microsoft should only be responsible for their OS.. NO. We don't live in a vacuum. Our computers interact with so many things it's like raising your child to function only in a room by themselves... but when they ventured outside...they fell apart... OK?? Got the picture.
I have had hours of my valuable time sucked away because I was working on some kind of PC glitch... Then I got my iMac... Did just what the commercial shows.. opened the box took out the computer - put it on my desk - plugged it in. Within about 15 minutes I even had posted a website with pictures taken at the moment of liberation from my PC and the tons of wires, giant CPU and hastle of configuration....
Happy

- Collapse -
Learned from past experience.
Mar 14, 2007 11:47AM PDT

The same thing happened when Microsoft migrated from Windows ME. There were compatibility issues then. I have found however, that there has been less problems swithching from Windows XP to Windows Vista. I went in with the attitude I knew there were going to be some problems and they would be resolved by the third party software and hardware venders.

So either go in with an open mind about the upgrade or do not do the upgrade.

- Collapse -
Vista
Mar 14, 2007 11:48AM PDT

People we need to stop griping over capatibility issues.There's been plenty info on the internet to inform us on what's capatible and what's not.I had one driver problem only.It was for my Epson printer.Problem solved.i remember Xp had the same problems.It's the vendors job to update they drivers for new operation systems.I think Window's Vista is a good system.And lets not forget that Microsoft do offer many drivers also.Those that upgraded,All you needed to do was go to www.pcpitstop.com and do a Vista readiness test.it was there for XP as well.And Cnet posted a lot of info on it as well.

- Collapse -
compatability
Mar 14, 2007 11:48AM PDT

I think that any programs compatible with windows xp home, pro etc. should have been made compatible with vista. Windows making programs incompatible with the new vista should be resolved by windows instead of requiring the users to purchase new software programs.

- Collapse -
Is it time for government intervention?
Mar 14, 2007 11:48AM PDT

As much as I detest government interference with free enterprise, there are times when the safety and welfare of the population requires that the government establishes certain standards.

The government requires certain safety equipment on cars. The government restricts the public to specific frequencies and subjects power output to limits. The government bans dumping of toxic wastes into the soil and waterways of the nation. These regulations and restrictions have not always been in place, but the world is a much safer and better place because of them.

For the purposes of this discussion, nothing illustrates this point as well as television. When television moved from grainy black & white, to color, to the advanced systems of today, the government mandated that all systems must be compatible with all previous televisions. This was definitely not the most efficient solution for the inventors of new systems, but it was the best solution for the consumers.

This should apply to Vista, and all future operating systems. Any software that a customer purchases to run on any company's computer should run on all subsequent systems that company develops.

Why should the software manufacturers, and ultimately the consumer shell out hard earned money to fix something that wasn't broken in the first place? XP has the ability to operate as Windows 98 or before, in order to run older software... so Vista should have the same ability.

My Office Suite is from 2000, my PhotoSuite is older than that, and other programs are positively ancient. They may not have all of the newest bells and whistles, but they satisfy my needs and I don't want to pay for upgrades that I will never use.

I'm definitely a dinosaur. My first (home) computer was a Commador Pet, with no floppy drive, no hard drive, and a modified tape recorder for storing programs. Its RAM was a mind boggling 8K. I lived through the days when Apple, TRS80, and Commador battled to see which system would prevail... only to see IBM turn the computer world up-side-down, and make all of the rest obsolete. (Atari dropped out of the computer world and concentrated on games)

I don't want to go through that cycle of forced obsolescence again, so perhaps it's time for the FCC or some other agency to step in an force manufacturers to support their products and let them push all of their fancy new innovations onto the ever-expanding market of toys for those who want the latest and greatest.

- Collapse -
dinosaur indeed
Mar 14, 2007 11:56AM PDT

I'm probably as old as you, and you're old enough to know better.

Government regs that all software must be compatible with every new product. What would Linux do?

Just like dinosaurs, that would mean: there are no new releases.

- Collapse -
You missed the point...
Mar 14, 2007 1:12PM PDT

""Any software that a customer purchases to run on any company's computer should run on all subsequent systems that company develops.""

How would this apply to Linux?...we are talking about Microslut....

- Collapse -
It would apply to Linux, Apple, or any other system.
Mar 14, 2007 5:15PM PDT

If you purchase software for ANY system... all future upgrades of THAT system should run that software. No one is suggesting that the copy of "Step by Step guide to scratching your fanny" that you purchased to run on your Windows 95 machine must run on the new Mac you bought... but it should run on every computer with a Microsoft operating system.

- Collapse -
Vista UGH
Mar 14, 2007 11:50AM PDT

The only way I would install Vista would be to purchase a new computor Period !!!

- Collapse -
Windows Vista Bugs
Mar 14, 2007 11:52AM PDT

Look, would you buy a new printer, scanner, etc. that wouldn't work with your current operating system? Of course not! Why, then, would anyone buy Vista and render their software packages and peripherals inoperable? Why not just stick with what you've got, and let Microsoft come to you with fixes to allow you to use the expensive stuff you've already purchased and installed. Sheesh! Do we always have to buy Microsoft's latest products, or can we just agree that they aren't worth having and live with what we've been enjoying for the past many moons? Just my opinion, but I wouldn't consider feeding the coffers of Microsoft for Vista in any case, but especially not to have it cost me a bundle to buy new stuff.

- Collapse -
Vista peer-to-peer networking => Microsoft's problem
Mar 14, 2007 11:55AM PDT

The major incompatibility I've run across is that Vista will NOT do peer-to-peer (home) networking with either XP/2000 machines or Linux Samba servers without major retuning, which is *totally* undocumented in the Vista help files or (that I've found) in the MS forums.

By default, Vista uses a different version of the networking protocol (NTVLM2) that the other operating systems (NTVLM1), and requires that the Link-Layer Topology Discover Protocol (LLTD) be installed on *every* non-Vista machine. Additionally, there is some evidence that suggests that one must turn the Guest account and UPNP both ON, which is the exact opposite of what is recommended to secure XP/2000 machines.

So we have an undocumented Vista incompatibility which is Microsoft's sole responsibility. While NTVLM2 is more secure, the lack of a transition mode for Vista (where Vista would network like XP, until all the XP machines are phased out) and any automated conversion wizard is simply inexcusable.

- Collapse -
Who's at fault? Microsoft or software manufacturers.
Mar 14, 2007 11:55AM PDT

Just my personal opinion, but I wouldn't invest in a new operating system for at least 6 to 12 months after it's release. It's usually been the case that between all the patches and fixes that occur during that time, you're too busy downloading them to worry about any existing software anyway. I don't understand why people are complaining about their software not being compatible with Vista. I downloaded the Vista Advisor at the onset, and discovered that at least a third of the software I have was not compatible, including my Norton Internet Security program! In other words, no thanks, I'm not up to fighting with a new OS until the bugs get worked out.

- Collapse -
Beyond blame to dilemma
Mar 14, 2007 11:58AM PDT

Regardless of who is culpable, software developers have software that does not work with Vista, and some have indicated that it will be 6 months to a year before they release working software.
Those who want to buy a new computer now - such as their current one has died, and they need a new one for their business - are in a dilemma. Companies such as Dell will not sell you a new computer with XP. It's Vista or nothing.

- Collapse -
The hardware vendors are to blame also (maybe)
Mar 14, 2007 11:59AM PDT

I notice that the day after Vista announced, every bundle advertised has some form of Vista pre-installed (often the apparently unusable basic version). No obvious option to have XP instead. Maybe MS has them tied up with some kind of distribution contract and there is no choice, but I sure would like to be able to upgrade from an older machine to last week's state of the art, and get XP on it - which at least I know how to drive and that it works.

Perry B

- Collapse -
Real facts
Mar 14, 2007 12:01PM PDT

VISTA is not ready for PRIME TIME> There are so may problems n ot only with drivers but with the operating sysytem. I'm tired of the blue screens, lack of drivers, lack of software companies being ill prepared. I spend more time fixing my computer than using it.

I made the switch to an iMAC. I've had a Mac Mini for awhile and that worked better than any pc I've had. Enough is enough. Quality is important and Micro0soft does not understand the word.

- Collapse -
Vista
Mar 14, 2007 12:02PM PDT

Not only is there compatibility issues this OS is a total memory hog...my old 600 megahertz computer with 256 of memory on XP is only a little slower with my 3.2ghz with 1gb of memory with Vista...I hate Vista right now...oh yeah a lot of my apps show compatibility issues when I load them up.Yeah....Vista pretty much sucks.

- Collapse -
Vista Abandons Historic Legacy Compatibility
Mar 14, 2007 12:03PM PDT

3d-party vendors will have to address Vista compatiblity issues themselves, if they want to place their product on Vista platforms. That's their responsibilty.

However, MS clearly could have done a better job of providing backward compatibility. In the past, new DOS and Win-OS did a good job of running software and equipment written for earlier versions. I personally know of a corporate WinX-based LAN that still uses DOS financial software.

Vista's compatibilty failures can only generate reluctance to upgrade among those of us who have been into computing for more than the last six months. Of course, in three to five years, no one is likely to remember this debate, as a new generation of software and hardware will renger our angst a moot point.

- Collapse -
You guys don't get it do you?
Mar 14, 2007 12:05PM PDT

OK, it's real simple, but I'll try to keep it as plain as possible. Windows is Microsoft's product.

There, got it?

NO?!?!? Gees! It's not Symantec's, it's not Intuit's, it's not anyone's OS but Microsoft's. DUH!

MS has been warning software vendors since 2001, and go figure, very few of them listened. If they had followed the rules MS put in place for Windows development, then 99% of all the problems seen would not be seen at all. Sure there had to be problems, they were forced by virus writers and us, the general public to make a safer Windows. So what would you prefer? A few problems, or an unsafe Windows?

Please for goodness sakes, get a clue before you start pointing fingers. OK? Get pissed all you want, it's still MS's OS, and not yours or anyone elses. Their OS, their rules. And don't even begin to tell me you would not do the same.

- Collapse -
Warned? did you say warned? LMAO
Mar 14, 2007 12:40PM PDT

Ok, they warned and warned and release beta after beta. For those of you who don't understand what it takes for 3rd party software to run with an OS, it takes time with THAT OS not beta rc 1 or rc 2 or rc 13.....the only build that matters is the final one, sure the beta's will get them some sort of idea where to start. Software companies had about 2 or 3 months working with the Final Build and some of them less than that.

Micro$oft understands their responsiblity that this will be the OS that 80% of the population will use, but they choose the typical corporate, back to the wall, with shoulders shrugged, spewing it's not my fault. I know it's mine and i'm responsible for it, but I'm not accountable for it, NOW PAY ME.....attitude...

It sickens me when I think of how the public has been raped by M$'s greed. It's a sad little company with no heart or soul....

- Collapse -
Ok for those that stil don't understand
Mar 14, 2007 5:55PM PDT

OK, it's real simple, but I'll try to keep it as plain as possible. Windows is Microsoft's product.

So Micro$oft's problem


There, got it?

NO?!?!? Gees! It's not Symantec's, it's not Intuit's, it's not anyone's OS but Microsoft's. DUH!

EXACTLY! - So Micro$oft's problem

MS has been warning software vendors since 2001, and go figure, very few of them listened.

Many of them listened! THEY know from experience that THEY CANNOT issue new drivers OR new software until the RTM Release To Manufacture occurs, there are WAAAAYYYY too many changes until then.

If they had followed the rules MS put in place for Windows development, then 99% of all the problems seen would not be seen at all.

That's pure BS

Sure there had to be problems, they were forced by virus writers and us, the general public to make a safer Windows. So what would you prefer? A few problems, or an unsafe Windows?

YES, A few problems, and a SAFE Windows?

What have we GOT? - MANY, MANY problems and STILL an UNSAFE windows!!! To add insult to injury, M$ are now SELLING their OWN antivirus software! Why don't they FIX the PROBLEM instead - so we don't NEED AV software!!


Please for goodness sakes, get a clue before you start pointing fingers.

I have had my clues since 1975 before windows. I know what a good OS can and should do. Windows knocked out all the competition

it's still MS's OS, and not yours or anyone elses. Their OS, their rules.

BUT THEY KEEP CHANGING THE RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Regards

Peter

- Collapse -
Windows Vista - What a mistake!
Mar 14, 2007 12:07PM PDT

I have been waiting for Vista to come out for several months. With all the new security, drivers and features Vista offered, it seemed like a good choice to upgrade. I bought a brand new Toshiba laptop with vista installed and discovered that my engineering software (Mentor Graphics schematic drawing, PCB layout and HyperLynx signal integrity program) would not even load on Vista. Then, the Trans-Digital PCMCIA Parallel port I use to program FPGAs no longer works. Windows Xp supports this device, but Vista does not.

Lastly, the new security features on Vista are a joke! Every time you start up a program, a pop-up box appears that asks if you sure you want to run the program. Are you kidding? I just clicked on the desktop icon, and the OS can't figure this out? That's pathetic! Also, this dialog box sometimes pops up when a program is running - Very annoying.

Since I can't run much of the software I use for work every day, Vista makes my new laptop is practically useless! What a mistake it was to move to Vista - it's a piece of crap!

- Collapse -
MS responsibility for hardware and software bugs
Mar 14, 2007 12:07PM PDT

My response is from a different, brand-related, non-technical perspective.

It is very simple. If MS wants to position itself as the leader, and I underscore "the," then it should have taken these things into consideration. Instead it has given an opening to the compeption and indicated it has little or no repsect for its customers/subscribers. This is a sad day, especially for those of us who have respected MS for its leadership and are dismayed by its turning it back on us for the sole (and short range)sake of profits when many of us supported MS for its progressive and forward-looking thinking.

- Collapse -
History repeats itself
Mar 14, 2007 12:10PM PDT

folks, I have been working with PCs since DOS 2.0. It really isn't a cliche to say that those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

Back in the early days of DOS, Microsoft published the entry points into the operating system for performing tasks. These entry points were not the routines, rather they were simply pointers to the current location of the routines.

Many programmers took great pride in knowing where the actual operating system routines were located and accessing them directly instead of using the published pointers. After all, their code ran leaner and faster.

Along came a new version of DOS with native support for newer hardware and better features. Microsoft dutifully supported all their published entry points, but many of the actual routines were relocated or simply coded differently.

Those programs that followed Microsoft's programming guides made the transistion without problems. Those that didn't suddenly stopped working after an upgrade.

Spin forward a couple decades.

When you deliberately bypass published programming guidelines, as Intuit has done for one example, it isn't Microsoft's fault.

As for peripheral support... I had equipment that stopped working after a Windows 98 upgrade. I had lots of equipment fail after upgrading to Windows XP. In both upgrade situations, the manufacturers declined to write new device drivers for old equipment. The attitude I heard then was 'too bad...you want the newer OS, cough up the cash for newer devices'. Why do people think this is any different under Vista?

What I do find objectionable is that many publishers/manufacturers waited until the commercial release of Vista to decide that they wanted a piece of the computer spending. These organizations have had an opportunity to work with the final programming requirements for Vista for at least a year. Of course many of these same organizations have been bashed soundly in user forums for their lousy tech support under Windows XP's reign, so I guess we shouldn't be surprised at the corporate attitudes regarding a new OS.

I'm just as frustrated with the whole Vista situation are everyone else - but I am not blaming Microsoft.

- Collapse -
Windows Vista Bugs
Mar 14, 2007 12:10PM PDT

I think Microsoft released Vista too soon because of the bad publicity about the release date slippage. When you add the 64 bit version incompatibilities it get worse. It was a planned Microsoft strategy to release the product too soon with OEM arm-twisting to promote 32 bit version of Vista without informing the unsuspecting consumers. It is a typical finger-pointing response "Not-Me" the "Other-Guys" for dragging their feet in providing drivers. I think Microsoft and the OEM vendors are fully responsible for this deception

- Collapse -
my 2 cents worth
Mar 14, 2007 12:12PM PDT

for what it's worth, in my opinion, if i (or you) purchased software that worked on a previous version of windows, it should work on vista with ABSOLOUTLY NO PROBLEMS! it does not matter who made the software, if it worked on windows 95,98,98se, nt, 2000, me, xp, xp professoinnal etc., etc. it should still work on vista. i have a heap of old stuff that has been sitting around since i bought my new computer (which was because i needed to replace a DEAD computer). i am waiting for microsoft to come up with a BACKWARDS COMPATIBILITY PATCH or program, or what ever. should they be responsible for my other periferials, well, probably not, that is hardware. the manufacturer of the hardware should be responsible for making it work with vista. but on the otherhand, if vista was backwards compatible, they wouldnt have to. i guess i could see vista only being backward compatible for so many years, after all, if your software is from 1995, it is so far out of date that it needs to be replaced anyway. dave s.

- Collapse -
It's just the MAN trying to take advantage.
Mar 14, 2007 12:12PM PDT

OK, maybe that was heavy handed. The problem I see is that Windows/Microsoft does have somewhat of a monopoly on the PC market. When you buy printers etc. you expect to be able to still use them when you upgrade OS or get a new computer. Now if your printer is so old, it only prints on parchment scrolls in cuneiform, that's one thing. But to have a printer that worked with XP not work with Vista is a shame. It makes people like me for one, not upgrade to the new OS until they figure things out. Mac's don't seem to have problems with compatability like PC OS's do. With the new MAC ads on TV exploiting this fact, it makes me wonder about the future of windows. The public will only put up with so much.

- Collapse -
It's just the MAN trying to take advantage
Mar 14, 2007 1:12PM PDT

Just how far into the future should your OS and equipment be compatible. People do not realize how major an upgrade VISTA is.

The MAC ads are a joke! MACS don't have compatiblity issues, primarily due to the fact that most of their 'stuff' is proprietary. MACs only have to satisfy themselves...and that, my friend, is a very limited world.

Same ole...same ole. Same story 95 to 98 to ME to XP. Seems you guys are like the liberals...threatened to leave the country but just didn't happen! You'll all be here next upgrade with the same crying story because you didn't do your homework beforehand and want to point the finger elsewhere. I am not aware of a computer you can buy today that doesn't give you a choice of OS's. MS website has very good diagnostics available to determine if both your computer AND your software is compatible. You don't do your homework, you don't get the grades...don't blame anyone else!

- Collapse -
Bottom Line
Mar 14, 2007 12:17PM PDT

The bottom line no matter who is at fault when I pay good money for an OS I expect it to work right out of the box. Guess what, Vista don't even work in the box much less out of it. Period.

- Collapse -
Is it a bug or a feature?
Mar 14, 2007 12:17PM PDT

If the incompatibilities are a result of the fundamental change in how Windows handles security, then it's a burden we have to put up with for the longer term good. It still sucks, but it feels better if there's a reason.

- Collapse -
What a thought .... crappy upgrade is a feature!!
Mar 14, 2007 12:57PM PDT

Why not hit your hand with a hammer and wonder whether it is an injury or a new, effective way to create a flipper!

Fact: 3rd party developers general try to keep customers and usually aren't lazy about getting ready for an upgrade that was FIVE YEARS LATE!!! If they screw up they lose customers.

Fact; Microsoft rarely loses customers when a driver from a 3rd party developer doesn't work, because Windows users are mostly cheap, lazy or corporations.

So: Does it make more sense that developers were negligent and desired to commit economic suicide or that MS was negligent or so full of bloatware that they couldn't plug all of the leaks in their billion dollar dike?

Gosh, what do you think?????