I've spent the weekend playing with Vista after hearing all the perks and the like from those touting it at the Microsoft meeting here in KC on Thursday.
The fundamental problem with Vista is one that I don't think is addressed by Microsoft's continual talk of "new features being added". That isn't the problem. The problem is that for power users, so many of the common tasks are made cumbersome to impossible that it defeats a big part of the purpose of upgrading. I know of numerous users who keep the base icons out on the desktop (my computer, my network, etc.) along with whatever they most frequent. That's a staple within older versions of windows, so the fact that they are there makes it handy. The display properties tool within Windows Vista is garbage. Theme management and creation, as well as icon assignment is virtually non-existant, it simply cannot be done. So, instead, users find themselves dragging icons out of the menus onto a desktop. Yes, I get it, Microsoft has so greatly improved the tools that you don't need them. But what Microsoft forgets is that familiarity is part of it's advantage. While it is great that they move toward an entirely new lookout, the ability to "roll back" for those who are very familiar with current environments will be a major perk. The failure to provide for it- which so far is exactly where it is going, creates a distance between the user and the OS. Admittedly, I'm someone who likes to pop open a CMD prompt every now and again to fish things out. I grew up on DOS and I still find it at times to be incredibly easier and more efficient to do what I want to do. Vista takes some of that frustration to all new levels. Because of the way in which the management interface and updates are handled, the user is provided minimal information about what kind of updates are being downloaded and what the purpose of them are. To get that kind of information requires a user to manually do so, click INFORMATION and then MORE. Is Aero Cool? Yes, and there are many things that I find interesting about Vista that I think are the right directions. But fundamentally, outside of a change in interface, has Microsoft really altered anything so groundshaking that I say "wow" ? No, not really. In fact, many of the base components remain completely untouched which makes Vista a Microsoft-Bob like Shell on top of Traditional XP. Yes, I realize there is more to it then that, but let's cover what is not, and will not change: * File System remains NTFS. Yes, there are new options for Disk Encryption - but be prepared, as MS explained to us in a tech meeting, if you use it and your motherboard or another device fails, your data is WORTHLESS. They will never issue a recovery or backdoor because doing so would make the entire technology a joke, so if you use it, be prepared, you better be backing up. This makes it not nearly as convenient, safe or movable as current drive encryption which can allow for a drive to move to a different PC, etc. provided the right codes. * Drive management (WDM) while changed does not provide a more open or user-oriented standard, rather, it further closes the driver standard with regards to authorized drivers, which puts smaller firms innovation in the realm of hardware on the real backburner. * Widgets. Be prepared, Widgets are cool, and there will be tons of them, but as a matter of seriousness, does an analog clock on your desktop really help you that much? Poker? Sodoku? Yeah, maybe not. Microsoft's guide toward widgets and RSS is a neat throw out toward Apple's similar technology within MacOS. In fact, a lot of Vista seems to really work hard to BE MacOS. The problem is, it isn't a very good MacOS, and the interface things we loved about XP are sadly missing. * Management and control functionality are scattered and poorly organized. Within Windows XP, a right click on your desktop puts all options for desktop properties in one application. Within Vista, it brings up a "personalize" menu featuring five different programs you can chose from, each of which handling one specific function (resolution/theme/screen saver) This turns a function that took one click within Windows XP into a minimum of three clicks in order to view desktop properties. Does this really simplify things? * Speaking of that, even within the current beta we received (5348, there may be a newer one, I'm sure there is, this is what they were handing out however) the device manager is still almost entirely worthless. Even within Windows XP 64, unknown devices are at least labeled somewhat (Epson; FDC-GOLD; etc.) for you to find drivers. Within Vista, it all still remains "unknown USB" real helpful that is. I'm sure this part will change. * Vista's shutdown/reset routine is laughable. By maximizing the start menu real estate the "hibernate" button takes, and having a swing out present reset/shutdown, it is just confusing. The swing out menu is started by a small sliver - less then 1/4 the size of the large "hibernate" button, which, as a nice touch, looks exactly like the "shutdown" button from WindowsXP. * DRM. Enough said. I'm glad that Microsoft danced us up and talked to us about how great Vista would be, and how it would really drive the market. Right now, based on what I have in front of me, I don't see it. With Windows XP betas, Win2k, even Windows 95, you walked out of it saying "There are at least 5-10 features that are fundamental OS changes that significantly impact work". Vista isn't any of those. Unlike XP which really changed the way for USB connectivity, brought NTFS home, as well as significant improvements in networking and drive management.. Vista just doesn't seem to bring a single "functionality" change to Windows that makes you say "this is a must have". I keep getting email from MS that intones that hey, it's not functionally complete. Ok, fine. But unless the functionality is a total scrap of the UI as well as a change in the file structure, mapping and networking functionality which right now seem like a throwback in usability, I don't know how adding more things helps this frankenstein. CW
