Dec 13, 2006 3:00 PM

Rants: Defending Windows Vista

Here’s what a few of you had to say about some of our recent stories. To post a remark in our feedback forums, enter your comments in the text box at the end of any story (registration required). Additionally, you can jump in on the hottest Wired News blog discussions through the links at the […]

All products featured on WIRED are independently selected by our editors. However, we may receive compensation from retailers and/or from purchases of products through these links.

Here's what a few of you had to say about some of our recent stories. To post a remark in our feedback forums, enter your comments in the text box at the end of any story (registration required). Additionally, you can jump in on the hottest Wired News blog discussions through the links at the bottom of the page.

Re: Why You Don't Need Vista Now
By Bruce Gain
From: Leslie Wong

Regarding your comment about Vista Aero: "A stand-alone graphics card is required to load what Microsoft calls the 'Windows Aero' visual experience." The Intel 945GM chipset and the 965 Express chipset (with graphic chips on the motherboard) support the Windows Vista Aero theme.

I am running Vista RC2 (Build 5744) on my MacBook Core 2 Duo with Boot Camp. Aero works OK. Aero effects do not run in Parallels Desktop for Mac virtualization software. I assume that a PC notebook with the above chipsets would run the Aero effects if it has enough system RAM.

- - -

Re: Why You Don't Need Vista Now
By Bruce Gain
From: Andrew Saturn

Your review wasn't very good. I'm not some anti-Linux or pro-Microsoft person, either. You didn't touch on any of the improvements over Windows XP, only the surface "new features" that Microsoft threw in at the last minute. There are major differences in TCP/IP, for example (it's completely rewritten from scratch).

Also, with your interface review: Turn on Aero Glass (or get a video card that supports DirectX 8 and 9). In your screenshots, you're not using Aero, you're using the "Vista lite" interface (which is just like XP).

- - -

Re: Why You Don't Need Vista Now
By Bruce Gain
From: Aaron M. Verstraete

I, too, am already running Vista and, although I agree that it isn't that different from XP, you seem to be blaming a lot of the installation issues on Microsoft when they are actually the device manufacturers' problem. Vista is not on the market yet and Logitech and HP have yet to provide drivers for their devices.

Yes, Microsoft could work better with partners, but you have to remember that although you have the release version of the operating system, it dynamically looks up drivers. I'm willing to bet that in the month and a half between now and when the OS hits stores/computers, many of those issues will be resolved.

Now, I know you mentioned this in what was basically a footnote in your story. I'm glad you were able to convince your many readers that this will certainly be an issue with the version they get. Why be so blatantly biased? You sum up the article with the bulk of problems being ones you discredited with your footnote.

Is it worth the upgrade? How many people could use the "little things made easier" that seem so insignificant to you? This is a very common issue with folks in the tech industry – they forget that the majority of their customers are not tech-savvy and those little things are what they want fixed most.

- - -

Re: Why You Don't Need Vista Now
By Bruce Gain
From: Chris McCord

I just figured I would let you know that your article is not exactly true. You mention that no DirectX 10 hardware or software exists, but Nvidia released the GeForce 8800 series more than a month ago. That is a DirectX 10 GPU. It was posted on Nvidia's website as of Nov. 13. I don't know when your article was actually written, so it is possible it may have been written before the release of the hardware.

As an IT professional, I've been reading Wired for years because of the content, but I feel this article fell far short of normal. There are many features that you did not mention. I've been using Vista from the first beta and have had mostly success with it (when doing things like installing third-party programs/games). Yes, I did have some problems because third-party drivers/software were not developed yet, but I don't blame that on Microsoft. If you are going to write an article and post it worldwide, you should do more research.

- - -

Re: Why You Don't Need Vista Now
By Bruce Gain
From: Brian

You advised readers to wait a year or so before installing Vista. While I always recommend waiting at least six months to see if there are any patches and so on, your flaw is that you expected Vista to be legacy-friendly. It is clearly stated on Microsoft's site and others that the company is trying not to do that. Microsoft wants everyone to upgrade to get rid of all old equipment. That's why the requirements are so high. Now as for the other issues except for the price, which I think is very ridiculous, if this OS was perfect, there would be very little need to improve or upgrade to the next version, right?

- - -

Have a few words for us? Let us know what you think about some of our most popular blog posts: