How Have You Solved Your Vista Laptop Internet Connections Problems?

[Kaylee]

One of the ways that Vista is inferior to XP is that when a laptop comes out of sleep mode, most owners* experience not being able to reconnect to the internet unless they reboot. And as everyone knows, rebooting on Vista takes a very, very long time. It is extremely annoying and a major waste of time. (I don’t know if Vista desktop owners have the same internet connection problem coming out of sleep mode.)

Searching the internet, I see that some people have claimed to solve this problem. I’m still working through the various solutions. Most of them appear to be summarized here:
http://www.vistaforums.com/Forum/Topic13955-45-1.aspx


Additional solutions claimed:
1) Go into the device manager (Start --> Control Panel --> Hardware and Sound --> Device Manager), right click on your network adapter, select properties, click on the power management tab, and then uncheck this box: Allow the computer to turn off this device to save power. (This didn't work for me.)

2) Some have claimed the above solution works if you also give your computer a static IP (IPv4). (This didn’t work for me.)

3) Some claim they can regain the connection to the internet if they disable and reenable the network adapter. You can do this by right clicking on it in the Device Manager screen. Others preferred to do this by writing a small batch file with these devcon commands:

devcon disable “[hardware ID]”
devcon enable “[hardware ID]”

(You have to get the free devcon utility from MS.)

That didn’t work for me. (Are you seeing a pattern here? :( ) I have the Intel PRO/Wireless 3945ABG adapter and it will not disable until you reboot the machine. Which defeats the whole point.

My next attempt will be – to never let my PC go into sleep mode. I went into the menu that lets you change that option. I changed it from when the machine is plugged in go into sleep mode after being idle for one hour to never going into sleep mode. (My PC will still go into sleep mode if I close the lid though – there’s no place for the heat to go if the lid is closed, so I didn’t change that option.)

I expect that will work. Then again, I though that the other options I tried earlier would work also.

Anyway, misery loves company. While waiting to see if this option works, I thought I’d see what the other Vista Laptop owners have done here. Surely I can’t be the only one?

ETA: Poll votes are public.



* Note: I’m speculating that this is the case based on exhaustively searching and reading various tech forums over the past 10 days.

[Kaylee]

Mods, is it too late to add a 5th option to the poll?

"Haven’t solved it yet, but I will never quit trying (post solutions you tried)."


ETA: Thanks mods!

[elgarak]

I didn't even know there was a problem, since I run Vista in a Virtual Machine on my Mac... from a partition called "Niska's Skyplex" (i.e. a dark and disturbing place where you get tortured)...

And the only reason I even did put Vista in there is because my university stopped selling XP volume licenses for staff and faculty. (Well, there's a also a geeky coolness about the whole thing.)

[SphereGuy]

I've always disabled sleep and hibernation an any XP or Vista machine in my network. I've never seen it work right.

[Kaylee]

I've always disabled sleep and hibernation an any XP or Vista machine in my network. I've never seen it work right.

Interesting. I returned an HP laptop because the sleep/hibernate mode was flakey when I first got it. I had to eat the restocking charge. Grrrr! I'll never go back to Best Buy again, but that is another story.

I thought Toshiba was handling it OK, but I didn't make the sleep mode connection to my internet connection problems for a long time. Not until I saw it pointed out on the web in many, many posts to various tech forums. :o

So, I guess I didn't have to return the HP laptop after all, because it looks like I'm not going to be using sleep mode most of the time anyway.

I am wondering if I'm trading one problem for another. If I don't use sleep mode is my laptop going to get worn out faster? I replaced my last laptop after 3 years. I'm wondering if I keep sleep mode disabled, will this laptop last as long? :confused:

ETA: I'm about to derail my own thread :D ... so what other problems can sleep and hibernaton cause on an XP or Vista network?

[Kaylee]

I didn't even know there was a problem, ...

Are you gloating? Well, I guess I can't blame you.

[elgarak]

Are you gloating? Well, I guess I can't blame you.

No gloating at all.

I just never put my MacBook in sleep or hibernate when I boot into Vista or run a virtual machine, so I never noticed any related problems. Though Vista has lots of other problems.

I voted for "Stay with XP/get a Mac/get Linux", and seriously mean this.

Vista is crap, and should have never left the beta stage, which should have been used as a learning stage for the next iteration of Windows.

[bignickel]

My new Vista desktop had an issue that whenever it went into Sleep mode, it locked the machine up but good. Eventually we figured out that that was what was causing my lockups. So, a bit of editing, and no more lockups.

Now, when I intentionally try to induce Sleep mode, it brings itself out of it after only 2 minutes. And I have it configured to not have the mouse bring it out of sleep mode. Can't win for losing.

[Zeno]

I haven't had a single problem with my Internet connection on Windows Vista. Linux on the other hand...

[Yalius]

Haven't seen this problem yet on laptops; we've currently got about 12 Vista notebooks out in the field. I have seen it on a desktop that was upgraded to Vista from XP; the ethernet adapter was unresponsive after coming out of standby. Reinstall of nvidia chipset drivers (nforce 430), including the ethernet driver, fixed that one.

[Kaylee]

I haven't had a single problem with my Internet connection on Windows Vista.

Haven't seen this problem yet on laptops; we've currently got about 12 Vista notebooks out in the field. I have seen it on a desktop that was upgraded to Vista from XP; the ethernet adapter was unresponsive after coming out of standby. Reinstall of nvidia chipset drivers (nforce 430), including the ethernet driver, fixed that one.

Interesting. Maybe it depends on how one connects to the internet? Perhaps this problem is limited to people who connect via DSL?

But in the interest of full disclosure, my:

modem: D-Link DSL-2320B (A ADSL2/2+ Ethernet/USB modem)
router: Linksys Wireless-G Broadband Router with Speed Booster WRT54GS
network adapter: Intel PRO Wireless/3945ABG
O/S: Vista Home Premium 32 bit installation (came installed by manufacturer on machine.)

laptop: Toshiba A205 S4577
ISP: Verizon

Everything has the latest updates, drivers and firmware. Well I didn't check for my d-link modem, but I'm only using it as a bridge anyway. That couldn't be the problem, could it?

I'm not a network maven, but I would think the only variables that matter is the modem, router, network adapter and O/S -- but I mentioned my laptop model and ISP anyway.

In hindsight I realize I had the same problem of having to reboot after my computer entered sleep mode when I had a wired connection via my Westell 2200 ADSL modem (died after 4 years) and Marvell Yukon 88E8039 PCI-E Fast Ethernet Controller.

So far my computer has not entered sleep mode today (I disabled that) and my connection has been strong all day. I think my ISP will only let me keep it for a max of 24 hours though. It will be interesting to see if I'll be able to reconnect to the internet after my ISP boots me off, or if I will have to reboot under those circumstances also.

Another variable may be that many people may think there is no problem because of their working style. Perhaps they just connect briefly to the internet, do what they want to do, and shut down their machine. They never enter sleep mode and they never find out that they would have been able to regain their internet connection in that scenario.

So ... have you or other people whose laptops you support had your machines enter sleep mode? Or did you disable it also, or because of your working style your laptops never go into sleep mode?


Linux on the other hand... I'm surprised. I thought the saving grace of Linux was that this O/S hid nothing from its owner.

I really believe that if I could see ALL the settings or if I could see what all the programs output and inputs are in this particular networking scenario I would have a fighting chance of fixing it. But M$ doesn't let users see all. (Well, OK, maybe not me. I never got to the advanced stages of programming. But somebody could and this wouldn't be a hot topic on the web right now.)

[Kaylee]

Hey! I just took a look at the poll. No fair zeno, sharing what you did does not include being just lucky enough to not have any problems in the first place! :D

At least share what modems, routers and adapters you use.

[Damien Evans]

I have no problems at all with mine, and I'm on wireless DSL

[Reality Believer]

I have a Vista laptop and sleep all the time. It reconnects to the wireless with no problem each time.

[69dodge]

I don't have Vista, so this is just a guess. But what if you try disconnecting manually before going to sleep? Can you then reconnect when you wake up?

[Kaylee]

Very interesting RB and DE.

What wireless network cards, routers and modems do you use? RB, do you use DSL also?

I'm also curious how you have your network connection configured. Do you obtain your IP and DNS Server addresses automatically or do you have the addresses typed in?

Have you used more than one internet connection? That is -- have you used your laptop at various wifi hotspots, at work, school, other people’s homes, etc?

Follow-up question for Yalius -- since you say you’ve had no problems with Vista laptops in the field.

Do you happen to know if anyone in your company did any of the following?
* Unchecked TCPIPv6 properties for the laptop’s internet connection
* Disabled the IP Helper Services (as I understand it, it provides IPv6 connectivity over an IPv4 network.)
* Changed the windows registry to:
** Disenable the DHCP Broadcast Flag
** Turn off the “Receive Window Auto-Tuning Feature “

The last two features are new to Vista and apparently older routers can't handle them.

The reason I ask is because if your company has staff going out in the field constantly, they are bound to be encountering network hardware that is old and not compliant with Vista standards.

BTW, I don’t think any of the above are the reasons as to why I’m having trouble establishing an internet connection. As I said, I’m only having problems when my laptop comes out of sleep mode. It seems to me that the other reasons would cause problems to occur at other times as well, but my internet connection is strong and stable at all other times.

For example, after I turned off the laptops sleep mode feature, I’ve not lost the internet connection for over 12 hours so far. And I had left my laptop idling for at least 10 hours. I was able to use my internet browser immediately and had received my e-mail.

I don’t think I’ve found any problems posted the net that would occur because of sleep mode issues only, so I'm still stumped. :(

[Kaylee]

I don't have Vista, so this is just a guess. But what if you try disconnecting manually before going to sleep? Can you then reconnect when you wake up?

That is the first thing I tried 69dodge, I forgot to mention it.

It didn't work. :(

[Kaylee]

Very early this morning I had an odd problem. My connection had degraded to local only. Which I found surprising because when I entered ipconfig/all at the command line, all the parameters were the same as earlier in the day and didn’t indicate that anything was wrong. But while I could ping my gateway (198.162.1.1), I couldn’t ping any web sites.

When I went into my router’s browser, the status window showed that my IP address, subnet makes, Default gateway *, DNS servers were all zero. I still don’t understand why ipconfig/all on my laptop command line didn’t show the same parameters. Anybody have any ideas about that?

Anyway, the problem was quickly debugged to two little furry creatures. My cats! They get into everything and had learned how to shut my modem off.

Anyway, that was a good reminder to always check the LED lights first!




* This usually shows up as 10.32.113.1 instead of 192.168.1.1 on my router. I’m assuming that is my ISP’s gateway?

[Reality Believer]

Very interesting RB and DE.

What wireless network cards, routers and modems do you use? RB, do you use DSL also?

I'm also curious how you have your network connection configured. Do you obtain your IP and DNS Server addresses automatically or do you have the addresses typed in?

Have you used more than one internet connection? That is -- have you used your laptop at various wifi hotspots, at work, school, other people’s homes, etc?
.....
The computer is a Samsung Q1U Ultra portable. The network adapter is Atheros AR5006x. I use a Linksys wireless router as an access point that is tied to another router, that is tied to a Verizon FIOS modem. It is all automatic DNS.

I have used it at airport hot spots with no problem, although I believe they were accessed from a cold boot and not a sleep.

[GreNME]

Very early this morning I had an odd problem. My connection had degraded to local only. Which I found surprising because when I entered ipconfig/all at the command line, all the parameters were the same as earlier in the day and didn’t indicate that anything was wrong. But while I could ping my gateway (198.162.1.1), I couldn’t ping any web sites.

When I went into my router’s browser, the status window showed that my IP address, subnet makes, Default gateway *, DNS servers were all zero. I still don’t understand why ipconfig/all on my laptop command line didn’t show the same parameters. Anybody have any ideas about that?

Because your router is very likely not giving you the same settings it's getting from the ISP. What the router is giving you is a local group of settings that refer back to it (the router), which allows it (the router) to act as DHCP server (giving you a local IP address), DNS server (resolving names to addresses), and local gateway (the "doorway" to the intarwebs) for you. This is what routers do, and what they are for. They basically act as a local version of an ISP if you want to think of it in those terms, which is what allows it to have multiple computers attached to it to surf the web on a single outgoing internet connection.

Does that make sense?

Oh, and two things:I really believe that if I could see ALL the settings or if I could see what all the programs output and inputs are in this particular networking scenario I would have a fighting chance of fixing it. But M$ doesn't let users see all. (Well, OK, maybe not me. I never got to the advanced stages of programming. But somebody could and this wouldn't be a hot topic on the web right now.)

1) It might be a hot topic because loads and loads of people are expecting Vista to be exactly the same as XP in every way, and this just isn't so. Controls and some of the underpinnings are in completely different places now, and all those previous "power users" from XP now have to figure out where the new stuff is and whether it's going to give them exactly the same results (it usually doesn't). It's not that tweaking is less possible with Vista, it's that XP tweaking techniques don't translate on a 1::1 basis to Vista.

2) Every time I see the use of the dollar sign, though especially in tech forums around the net, I am constantly reminded of the following:

http://image.grenme.com/thread/anti-ms.gif
(comic is copyright the guys over at Penny Arcade, the image here is hosted by me so as to not steal bandwidth from the PA guys)

[Jaxo]

Kaylee,

So far so good. All day yesterday my Vista laptop reconnected after coming out of hibernation multiple times, 4 or 5 times. I'll list what I have done to which has hopefully fixed this crazy vista setup.

First, info on system.
DSL Modem: Qwest Modem.. to lazy to get it out of the corner and check.
Router: WRT54GS
OS: Vista Home
NIC: Not sure, wife has laptop right now.

Anyways. Below are the changes I have made.
IPHelper - Turned Off
TCPIPv6 - Unchecked
Dynamic IP

I did disable the DHCP Broadcast Flag via the registry but it only made things worse. Started getting local network connection only after the change. Once I enabled the broadcast flag the wireless connection started working correctly giving me access to the internet. During the rest of the day I continued to hibernate the laptop to make sure the connection would come back when it woke up and it did. Just hope this did fix it and Vista isn't playing with my head.

Just thought I would post my experience.

[Yalius]

Follow-up question for Yalius -- since you say you’ve had no problems with Vista laptops in the field.

Do you happen to know if anyone in your company did any of the following?
* Unchecked TCPIPv6 properties for the laptop’s internet connection
* Disabled the IP Helper Services (as I understand it, it provides IPv6 connectivity over an IPv4 network.)
* Changed the windows registry to:
** Disenable the DHCP Broadcast Flag
** Turn off the “Receive Window Auto-Tuning Feature “


Nope, default installs. I work for a smallish rural telecom / ISP so we try to standardize on what our customers will usually have to make testing easier. If you'll give me some time, I'll check helpdesk tickets and see if anything is listed there.

[Soapy Sam]

I find the cure for virtually all Vista problems is reverting to XP.
That said , this is not one I have experienced.

[Kaylee]

Kaylee,

So far so good. All day yesterday my Vista laptop reconnected after coming out of hibernation multiple times, 4 or 5 times. I'll list what I have done to which has hopefully fixed this crazy vista setup.

First, info on system.
DSL Modem: Qwest Modem.. to lazy to get it out of the corner and check.
Router: WRT54GS
OS: Vista Home
NIC: Not sure, wife has laptop right now.

Anyways. Below are the changes I have made.
IPHelper - Turned Off
TCPIPv6 - Unchecked
Dynamic IP

I did disable the DHCP Broadcast Flag via the registry but it only made things worse. Started getting local network connection only after the change. Once I enabled the broadcast flag the wireless connection started working correctly giving me access to the internet. During the rest of the day I continued to hibernate the laptop to make sure the connection would come back when it woke up and it did.

Great news Jaxo!

Just hope this did fix it and Vista isn't playing with my head.
:D

Just thought I would post my experience.
And I'm very glad you did! Welcome to the forum, BTW! (I see that this was your first post also.)

Later this weekend I will try turning off IPv6 and IP Helper also. It will have to wait until the weekend though as once again real life interferes and I have to catch up on other things.

[Kaylee]

The computer is a Samsung Q1U Ultra portable.[

I just happened to see one over the weekend at a computer store. It looks like it would be a lot of fun to use!

The network adapter is Atheros AR5006x. I use a Linksys wireless router as an access point that is tied to another router, that is tied to a Verizon FIOS modem. It is all automatic DNS.

Thanks for sharing. I like to keep in mind what peripherals people can use easily, without problems.

FWIW, at this point, I don't think the problem lies with my router. I think, despite having installed Vista updates faithfully every week, my O/S just has a few quirks in it.

MS has a hot fix for Vista

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/933872/en-us
When you wake a Windows Vista-based computer from sleep, the default gateway setting is lost. When you run the ipconfig /all command to view the IP configuration, you cannot see the default gateway setting.

It sounded very close to my problem so I downloaded it, but it didn't help. But I'm posting about it in case it helps someone else.

[Kaylee]

Nope, default installs.

That is surprising that the default works with mobile laptops out in the field! Wow.

Hmm, so maybe one of Toshiba's drivers were flakey and is causing the problem. When I have time this week I'll try contacting their IT support.

I work for a smallish rural telecom / ISP so we try to standardize on what our customers will usually have to make testing easier. If you'll give me some time, I'll check helpdesk tickets and see if anything is listed there.
Only if you want to. I appreciate it, but it sounds like a lot of work! And I found a kludge that works, so I won't be spending that much more time on this issue, not this week anyway. Its a very ungraceful kludge and it may end up taking months off the life of my laptop, but I have other mini-emergencies this week. ;)

[Kaylee]

I find the cure for virtually all Vista problems is reverting to XP.:D
That said , this is not one I have experienced.

Yes, SS, I recall that you tried to find XP drivers that would work with your chipset and had no luck. I also tried to do something similar last summer.

I suspect now that more solutions are available and posted on the net -- but I don't have a back up PC right now and can't afford to have any major snafus -- so I'm holding off on doing this also.

[Blue Mountain]

I bought an Acer laptop last month (AMD 64 K2 CPU, NVidia chipset, Atheros 802.11g networking), and it came with Windows Vista Home Premium that it installed from a startup partition. Everything worked very nicely out-out-the-box. Boot times are OK, especially compared to Linux, which prefers to start *everything* prior to letting users log in. (Part of the reason Windows seems to start more quickly is that is presents the user log in as soon as possible, even while it's still starting services in the background.)

I have not seen the issue described in the OP where the wireless fails to re-connect after coming out of sleep mode.

Big beef: I bought a 64-bit CPU but only got a 32 bit version of Windows.

I put a 64-bit version of Linux on it (Fedora 7). It took some work to get the audio working--I had to download and compile ALSA from source. Wireless and IRDA still don't work. My preferred environment is Linux, so that sort of sucks, but on the other hand I currently don't have a need to access the wireless or the IRDA, so it's no great loss. I access the Internet using the wired Ethernet adapter, which works very well under Linux.

[Kaylee]

Because your router is very likely not giving you the same settings it's getting from the ISP. What the router is giving you is a local group of settings that refer back to it (the router), which allows it (the router) to act as DHCP server (giving you a local IP address), DNS server (resolving names to addresses), and local gateway (the "doorway" to the intarwebs) for you. This is what routers do, and what they are for. They basically act as a local version of an ISP if you want to think of it in those terms, which is what allows it to have multiple computers attached to it to surf the web on a single outgoing internet connection.

Does that make sense?
Yes, thanks, but why isn't the command "ipconfig\all" reading the same local group of settings and reporting the same parameters as the one I saw in the router's brower window?

Oh, and two things:

1) It might be a hot topic because loads and loads of people are expecting Vista to be exactly the same as XP in every way, and this just isn't so. Controls and some of the underpinnings are in completely different places now, and all those previous "power users" from XP now have to figure out where the new stuff is and whether it's going to give them exactly the same results (it usually doesn't). It's not that tweaking is less possible with Vista, it's that XP tweaking techniques don't translate on a 1::1 basis to Vista.

Speaking for myself, I don't mind when menus are revised because it reflects an actual improvement that was made in the O/S or even if it reflects a superior way of organizing the O/S functionality. (An example of the former would be when some control panel menu changes refected the new restore feature back in XP. I can't think of an example of the latter at the moment.)

But often it appears that MS menu changes are just made for the sake of changing the menus' appearences and to force people to buy a newer version of the O/S if they want to continue to be familiar with the same layouts that the people they work with (including clients) are using. I can see that some freelancers in some fields might not feel that they have a choice and that just feels like manipulation -- with absolutely no finesse.

Also, my personal opinion is that I don't think Vista has added any new worthwhile features and in fact has became less functional in many ways. (I'm not going to list them -- they've been listed in other threads.)

I realize that Vista has become more secure, but I have always relied on 3rd party software for security and continue to do so. I have disabled many of Vista's security features because they are so slow and consume resources so inefficiently, and continue to rely on 3rd parties for security.

MS really overdid it the last time around in the number of O/S versions released with the various features disabled. Vista Home (not Home Premium) is so eviscerated, there was absolutely no reason to offer that version for sale to anyone. An operating system is after all suppose to be able to operate the computer system. :rolleyes: 9 versions of the same O/S? That is just plain obnoxious.


2) Every time I see the use of the dollar sign, though especially in tech forums around the net, I am constantly reminded of the following:

http://image.grenme.com/thread/anti-ms.gif
(comic is copyright the guys over at Penny Arcade, the image here is hosted by me so as to not steal bandwidth from the PA guys)

Cute picture. But even adults get annoyed with MS business practices sometimes. I happen to be 48 and I know other adults get impatient with MS from time to time also. ;) People use $ymbolism and emoticons in forums -- get over it. :)

[gotroot?]

I gave up and switched to Linux.

[GreNME]

Yes, thanks, but why isn't the command "ipconfig\all" reading the same local group of settings and reporting the same parameters as the one I saw in the router's brower window?

Because "ipconfig /all" is giving you the settings on your local computer that were given to it by the router. The router gets a different set of instructions for its internet-facing connections, and it gets them from the ISP. So, unless you're talking about comparing the internal LAN (as opposed to WAN, which is the internet-facing side) network settings to your local computer, then they will always be different. If you're talking about the internal LAN settings, then they shouldn't be reading all zeros on the router because if that were the case you wouldn't be able to view the settings. Because of this, I concluded you must be talking about the WAN settings-- which depending on the router are usually under the "Status" page-- which connects your router to the modem and thus to the ISP.

Think of it like a daisy-chain: [Your computer] <----> [Router] <----> [ISP (internet)]

That connection that exists between your computer and the router is a separate network from the one between your router and the ISP. Your router keeps a record of (at least) two sets of addess schemes at all times to negotiate the connection between your computer and the internet. That's why your internal (home) network still works just fine even when the internet is down.

Speaking for myself, I don't mind when menus are revised because it reflects an actual improvement that was made in the O/S or even if it reflects a superior way of organizing the O/S functionality. (An example of the former would be when some control panel menu changes refected the new restore feature back in XP. I can't think of an example of the latter at the moment.)

But often it appears that MS menu changes are just made for the sake of changing the menus' appearences and to force people to buy a newer version of the O/S if they want to continue to be familiar with the same layouts that the people they work with (including clients) are using. I can see that some freelancers in some fields might not feel that they have a choice and that just feels like manipulation -- with absolutely no finesse.

I can understand how you feel that way, and since I've had to offer some coaching to a few people at work for the newer Office layout I can see how it's been off-putting to some people. The thing is, I don't think there's much that Microsoft could have done outside of produce an exact copy of their older versions that wouldn't have met with complaints galore-- and even then there would have been complaints. Similar to when Apple went to the newer OS X, Microsoft is going to get a boatload of complaints about how things are almost-the-same-but-not-quite in terms of doing things, and since I seriously doubt MS is going to have anything similar to Mac Classic for Vista (basically a virtual instance of the older OS to run old stuff) there's going to be more pressure on Vista to succeed or fail quickly.

The thing is, though, that from my position-- someone who has had to sit there and teach someone how to use e-mail, open a document, browse the web, and other simple stuff-- I find a lot of stuff in Vista and the newest Office to be great. Vista, for the most part, just has stuff in places that, all else being equal, tend to make more sense; Office, on the other hand, has been awesome and I could kiss whoever finally agreed to lay out the formatting tools like that. Drilling down through sub-menus of sub-menus gets tedious and annoying, and having to show people how to use 'New Feature X' or 'New Tool Y' becomes an order of magnitude difference once you're two or more sub-menus down trying to find it. I don't think that they "nailed it" with everything in Vista (I can think of a few things that could be better), but for me Office was a bulls-eye.

Also, my personal opinion is that I don't think Vista has added any new worthwhile features and in fact has became less functional in many ways. (I'm not going to list them -- they've been listed in other threads.)

I realize that Vista has become more secure, but I have always relied on 3rd party software for security and continue to do so. I have disabled many of Vista's security features because they are so slow and consume resources so inefficiently, and continue to rely on 3rd parties for security.

Well, I can't really speak to that. Someone who's used Norton or McAffee or whatever is going to be partial to continuing to use it unless they have a bad experience with it. That's more a Coke/Pepsi thing if you ask me.

MS really overdid it the last time around in the number of O/S versions released with the various features disabled. Vista Home (not Home Premium) is so eviscerated, there was absolutely no reason to offer that version for sale to anyone. An operating system is after all suppose to be able to operate the computer system. :rolleyes: 9 versions of the same O/S? That is just plain obnoxious.

Where do you get nine versions? Home Basic, Home Premium, Business, and Ultimate. I count four. I agree with the Home Basic/Premium thing, though, and think it was a pretty useless move on their part.

Cute picture. But even adults get annoyed with MS business practices sometimes. I happen to be 48 and I know other adults get impatient with MS from time to time also. ;) People use $ymbolism and emoticons in forums -- get over it. :)

Hey, I totally get annoyed at Microsoft on plenty of occassions, just like I do with a lot of other software (and hardware) companies. I just also tend to think there are some things that get used that are more a bandwagon thing than anything else, and the dollar sign thing is one of the ones I find tiresome. That doesn't mean you have to stop (I ain't yo daddy), but as long as I can comment on it from time to time without it being a huge deal then I'm sure we'll find plenty of other stuff to agree on. :)

ETA: Every OS Sucks (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2514730680283477734) ;)

2514730680283477734

[Yalius]

Only if you want to. I appreciate it, but it sounds like a lot of work! And I found a kludge that works, so I won't be spending that much more time on this issue, not this week anyway. Its a very ungraceful kludge and it may end up taking months off the life of my laptop, but I have other mini-emergencies this week. ;)

Not as much work as you'd think. Just a quick search for OS=Vista and keyword "connectivity."

Not a lot in helpdesk tickets to add to the discussion. One of the standard troubleshooting steps is to reboot, so I'm not seeing any that I can definitively say are the same issue. Not seeing a whole lot of Vista tickets though at all, probably less than 4-5%. Wish I knew what the Vista penetration overall is locally.

[Damien Evans]

Very interesting RB and DE.

What wireless network cards, routers and modems do you use? RB, do you use DSL also?

I'm also curious how you have your network connection configured. Do you obtain your IP and DNS Server addresses automatically or do you have the addresses typed in?

Have you used more than one internet connection? That is -- have you used your laptop at various wifi hotspots, at work, school, other people’s homes, etc?

Follow-up question for Yalius -- since you say you’ve had no problems with Vista laptops in the field.

Do you happen to know if anyone in your company did any of the following?
* Unchecked TCPIPv6 properties for the laptop’s internet connection
* Disabled the IP Helper Services (as I understand it, it provides IPv6 connectivity over an IPv4 network.)
* Changed the windows registry to:
** Disenable the DHCP Broadcast Flag
** Turn off the “Receive Window Auto-Tuning Feature “

The last two features are new to Vista and apparently older routers can't handle them.

The reason I ask is because if your company has staff going out in the field constantly, they are bound to be encountering network hardware that is old and not compliant with Vista standards.

BTW, I don’t think any of the above are the reasons as to why I’m having trouble establishing an internet connection. As I said, I’m only having problems when my laptop comes out of sleep mode. It seems to me that the other reasons would cause problems to occur at other times as well, but my internet connection is strong and stable at all other times.

For example, after I turned off the laptops sleep mode feature, I’ve not lost the internet connection for over 12 hours so far. And I had left my laptop idling for at least 10 hours. I was able to use my internet browser immediately and had received my e-mail.

I don’t think I’ve found any problems posted the net that would occur because of sleep mode issues only, so I'm still stumped. :(

Stuffed if I know, I just click connect and it works. The computer is an Acer Aspire 3682wxmi if that means anything.

[Kaylee]

I bought an Acer laptop last month (AMD 64 K2 CPU, NVidia chipset, Atheros 802.11g networking), and it came with Windows Vista Home Premium that it installed from a startup partition. Everything worked very nicely out-out-the-box. Boot times are OK, especially compared to Linux, which prefers to start *everything* prior to letting users log in. (Part of the reason Windows seems to start more quickly is that is presents the user log in as soon as possible, even while it's still starting services in the background.)

I have not seen the issue described in the OP where the wireless fails to re-connect after coming out of sleep mode. Consider yourself lucky! :)

Big beef: I bought a 64-bit CPU but only got a 32 bit version of Windows. I hear that has happened a lot. Of course some prefer that combination. The 64 bit CPU future proofs the computer but still runs a 32 bit O/S which still has more drivers availble to it than the 64 bit O/S.

I put a 64-bit version of Linux on it (Fedora 7). It took some work to get the audio working--I had to download and compile ALSA from source. Wireless and IRDA still don't work. I guess its hard to find 64 bit drivers in Linux also. My preferred environment is Linux, so that sort of sucks, but on the other hand I currently don't have a need to access the wireless or the IRDA, so it's no great loss. I access the Internet using the wired Ethernet adapter, which works very well under Linux.

Which flavor Linux do you prefer?

Incidentally, I decided to exchange my WRT54GS router for a WRT54GL. The WRT54GL has a Linux O/S and slightly more flash memory which makes it easier to install more 3rd party firmware on it. I want the option to install DD-WRT (all versions, not just the ones that can fit on a router with 2 MBs Flash)and I also want the option to use the same router if I ever go ahead and dual boot my PC with Linux.

Til then the functionality is pretty much the same, although it is a tad slower sometimes (noticeable just a bit on youtube) I was surprised, I didn't think I was getting any of the benefit of the speed booster since my wireless card doesn't have that feature, but apparrently I was. But after I download DD-WRT on it, I'll get the speed booster function back plus more.

[Kaylee]

I gave up and switched to Linux.There you go! Which flavor? I'm collecting an informal poll in case I ever decide to dual boot my laptop.

Welcome to the forum by the way. :)

[Kaylee]

Because "ipconfig /all" is giving you the settings on your local computer that were given to it by the router. The router gets a different set of instructions for its internet-facing connections, and it gets them from the ISP. So, unless you're talking about comparing the internal LAN (as opposed to WAN, which is the internet-facing side) network settings to your local computer, then they will always be different. If you're talking about the internal LAN settings, then they shouldn't be reading all zeros on the router because if that were the case you wouldn't be able to view the settings. Because of this, I concluded you must be talking about the WAN settings-- which depending on the router are usually under the "Status" page-- which connects your router to the modem and thus to the ISP.

Think of it like a daisy-chain: [Your computer] <----> [Router] <----> [ISP (internet)]

That connection that exists between your computer and the router is a separate network from the one between your router and the ISP. Your router keeps a record of (at least) two sets of addess schemes at all times to negotiate the connection between your computer and the internet. That's why your internal (home) network still works just fine even when the internet is down.

That's a great explanation! Thanks! :) And you're right, I got the WAN settings from the router's status page.

I can understand how you feel that way, and since I've had to offer some coaching to a few people at work for the newer Office layout I can see how it's been off-putting to some people. The thing is, I don't think there's much that Microsoft could have done outside of produce an exact copy of their older versions that wouldn't have met with complaints galore-- and even then there would have been complaints. Similar to when Apple went to the newer OS X, Microsoft is going to get a boatload of complaints about how things are almost-the-same-but-not-quite in terms of doing things, and since I seriously doubt MS is going to have anything similar to Mac Classic for Vista (basically a virtual instance of the older OS to run old stuff) there's going to be more pressure on Vista to succeed or fail quickly.

The thing is, though, that from my position-- someone who has had to sit there and teach someone how to use e-mail, open a document, browse the web, and other simple stuff-- I find a lot of stuff in Vista and the newest Office to be great. Vista, for the most part, just has stuff in places that, all else being equal, tend to make more sense; Office, on the other hand, has been awesome and I could kiss whoever finally agreed to lay out the formatting tools like that. Drilling down through sub-menus of sub-menus gets tedious and annoying, and having to show people how to use 'New Feature X' or 'New Tool Y' becomes an order of magnitude difference once you're two or more sub-menus down trying to find it. I don't think that they "nailed it" with everything in Vista (I can think of a few things that could be better), but for me Office was a bulls-eye.

I opted not to purchase Office the last time around, so I have no first hand knowledge about this latest version. However, I won't complain about it if the menu layout changes represents a true improvement in how its organized. Other years though it just seems that MS was making its customers jump through the hoops just to see if they could.

Well, I can't really speak to that. Someone who's used Norton or McAffee or whatever is going to be partial to continuing to use it unless they have a bad experience with it. That's more a Coke/Pepsi thing if you ask me. I use Zone Alarm and IMHO they use resources very efficiently. After I shut off Windows fire alarm and Defender, I thought my computer ran much faster. So I have to disagree with you on that one.



Where do you get nine versions? Home Basic, Home Premium, Business, and Ultimate. I count four. I agree with the Home Basic/Premium thing, though, and think it was a pretty useless move on their part.
Hmm, OK, there's eight. I had forgotten that MS decided not to come out with a small business version. But they also have Enterprise, and for the international market: Starter, Home Basic Version N and Business Version N.


Hey, I totally get annoyed at Microsoft on plenty of occassions, just like I do with a lot of other software (and hardware) companies. I just also tend to think there are some things that get used that are more a bandwagon thing than anything else, and the dollar sign thing is one of the ones I find tiresome. That doesn't mean you have to stop (I ain't yo daddy), but as long as I can comment on it from time to time without it being a huge deal then I'm sure we'll find plenty of other stuff to agree on. :)

ETA: Every OS Sucks (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2514730680283477734) ;)

2514730680283477734

Well, we agree that that video is funny! And I like this one too:

Internet Helpdesk (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2791380657531071711)


:D

[Kaylee]

Not as much work as you'd think. Just a quick search for OS=Vista and keyword "connectivity."

Not a lot in helpdesk tickets to add to the discussion. One of the standard troubleshooting steps is to reboot, so I'm not seeing any that I can definitively say are the same issue.


Well, thanks for looking!

Not seeing a whole lot of Vista tickets though at all, probably less than 4-5%. Wish I knew what the Vista penetration overall is locally.

I agree, that would be interesting to know.

[Kaylee]

Stuffed if I know, I just click connect and it works.

That's nice when that happens! :)

[GreNME]

That's a great explanation! Thanks! :) And you're right, I got the WAN settings from the router's status page.

No problem. I actually continue to be amused at how poorly designed most routers are. One shouldn't have to have a correspondence course just to figure out how to use their appliances. I actually have the same problem with some new cell phones as well

I opted not to purchase Office the last time around, so I have no first hand knowledge about this latest version. However, I won't complain about it if the menu layout changes represents a true improvement in how its organized. Other years though it just seems that MS was making its customers jump through the hoops just to see if they could.

I know the feeling. I think Office XP was like that, though I dug 2003. My biggest complaint about the latest (and something everyone needs to keep in mind when buying it) is that it defaults to new file formats (.docx, .xlsx, etc.) which, regardless of whether they're "better" or not, are not backwards compatible with other versions of Office unless the other systems have installed the newest converter pack. Quite a pain in the bum.

I use Zone Alarm and IMHO they use resources very efficiently. After I shut off Windows fire alarm and Defender, I thought my computer ran much faster. So I have to disagree with you on that one.

Well, I couldn't (and wouldn't) argue with how your system feels to you. All I'd say is that I've had different experiences, but on the other hand it's been with different computers and not yours. What works for you is what's important when you're using it, after all. :)

Hmm, OK, there's eight. I had forgotten that MS decided not to come out with a small business version. But they also have Enterprise, and for the international market: Starter, Home Basic Version N and Business Version N.

Nope, there's still only four. The "starter" is just Home Basic with restrictions put into it, and those N versions are just the respectively-named versions without Media Player installed per an EU requirement. As for Enterprise, well, you aren't going to be able to get that in any store except through specific special licensing through Microsoft that is geared toward businesses. Essentially, for all intents and purposes to the consumer who might hypothetically be looking to buy Vista, there are four versions. There are variations to some of those four core versions, but they are for specific cases and the average person isn't likely to come across them except in rare occassions (with the possible exception of the EU-mandated N variations). The whole "8/9/x number of Vista versions!" thing seems like unnecessary hyperbole to me. Why not go all-out and count the OEM versions as well? We could even double the number we're counting if we count the 64-bit versions as seperate versions. Much like any good political rhetoric, it all depends on how you want the person you're telling to look at it to count.

Besides, there's only one I recommend to people getting a new computer with it installed-- Home Premium-- because otherwise I usually tend to tell people that until they are required to upgrade for some reason there are currently only very few reasons to actually make the switch (outside of "I just wanna").

Well, we agree that that video is funny! And I like this one too:

Internet Helpdesk (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2791380657531071711)

:D

I love that one. It reminds me of my days starting out as tech support. I actually got to the point where I disliked talking to people about computers when they weren't at least as knowledgable as I was-- I knew enough to be dangerous and not enough to be useful beyond tech support. Then I started learning how little I knew about everything else, and started shifting studies to other subjects along with the tech stuff. Now I don't consider people who aren't computer experts to be idiots any more, and I find my job (head of IT Dept.) to be way less stressful than it would be otherwise because of it. :)

Oh, and if you're taking an informal poll on Linux flavors to try, you can mark me down for Ubuntu. I think it's a "jack of all, master of none" as far as special features go, but I tend to prefer that approach.

[Kaylee]

Nope, there's still only four. The "starter" is just Home Basic with restrictions put into it, and those N versions are just the respectively-named versions without Media Player installed per an EU requirement. As for Enterprise, well, you aren't going to be able to get that in any store except through specific special licensing through Microsoft that is geared toward businesses. Essentially, for all intents and purposes to the consumer who might hypothetically be looking to buy Vista, there are four versions. There are variations to some of those four core versions, but they are for specific cases and the average person isn't likely to come across them except in rare occassions (with the possible exception of the EU-mandated N variations). The whole "8/9/x number of Vista versions!" thing seems like unnecessary hyperbole to me. Why not go all-out and count the OEM versions as well? We could even double the number we're counting if we count the 64-bit versions as seperate versions.
That's actually a good idea! So you're right -- there are 16 choices! lol!

Actually, seriously, if I had to think about it -- as far as I'm concerned, it counts as a choice. And that's why I listed eight. Last summer I had to take the time out to find out what my options were and that's how many were listed and so that's how many I had to educate myself about. (Though of course I could obviously eliminate some very quickly -- but I still had to learn about them -- even if it didn't take long to learn about some versions.) And really aren't they all basically one o/s -- with the basic difference being how much code is blocked from being run by the user?


Now I don't consider people who aren't computer experts to be idiots any more, and I find my job (head of IT Dept.) to be way less stressful than it would be otherwise because of it. :)
That is a stressful job! I worked for a large corp and I didn't envy the pressure the IT folks were under. I recall one IT manager saying her team was doing a good job when they got no more thought than the switch for the overhead lights. (Meaning everything should just work smoothly without thinking about it.) I agreed with her, but often I think that means that most IT folks are underappreciated.

Oh, and if you're taking an informal poll on Linux flavors to try, you can mark me down for Ubuntu. I think it's a "jack of all, master of none" as far as special features go, but I tend to prefer that approach.
Sounds perfect for me! Thanks for recommending it.

[Kaylee]

Nope, there's still only four. The "starter" is just Home Basic with restrictions put into it, and those N versions are just the respectively-named versions without Media Player installed per an EU requirement. As for Enterprise, well, you aren't going to be able to get that in any store except through specific special licensing through Microsoft that is geared toward businesses. Essentially, for all intents and purposes to the consumer who might hypothetically be looking to buy Vista, there are four versions. There are variations to some of those four core versions, but they are for specific cases and the average person isn't likely to come across them except in rare occassions (with the possible exception of the EU-mandated N variations). The whole "8/9/x number of Vista versions!" thing seems like unnecessary hyperbole to me. Why not go all-out and count the OEM versions as well? We could even double the number we're counting if we count the 64-bit versions as seperate versions.
That's actually a good point! So you're right -- there are 16 choices! lol!

Actually, seriously, if I had to think about it -- as far as I'm concerned, it counts as a choice. And that's why I listed eight. Last summer I had to take the time out to find out what my options were and that's how many were listed and so that's how many I had to educate myself about. (Though of course I could obviously eliminate some very quickly -- but I still had to learn about them -- even if it didn't take long to learn about some versions.)


Now I don't consider people who aren't computer experts to be idiots any more, and I find my job (head of IT Dept.) to be way less stressful than it would be otherwise because of it. :)
That is a stressful job! I worked for a large corp and I didn't envy the pressure the IT folks were under. I recall one IT manager saying her team was doing a good job when they got no more thought than the switch for the overhead lights. (Meaning everything should just work smoothly without thinking about it.) I agreed with her, but often I think that means that most IT folks are underappreciated.

Oh, and if you're taking an informal poll on Linux flavors to try, you can mark me down for Ubuntu. I think it's a "jack of all, master of none" as far as special features go, but I tend to prefer that approach.
Sounds perfect for me! Thanks for recommending it.

[Bob Blaylock]

One word: Macintosh

[GreNME]

That's actually a good idea! So you're right -- there are 16 choices! lol!

Actually, seriously, if I had to think about it -- as far as I'm concerned, it counts as a choice. And that's why I listed eight. Last summer I had to take the time out to find out what my options were and that's how many were listed and so that's how many I had to educate myself about. (Though of course I could obviously eliminate some very quickly -- but I still had to learn about them -- even if it didn't take long to learn about some versions.) And really aren't they all basically one o/s -- with the basic difference being how much code is blocked from being run by the user?

No, not really. They are basically the same core operating system, but with the exception of the "starter" edition the only difference is what software is installed. Kind of like different packages for a car.

Still, if you were shopping for Vista, you'd be lucky if you found four options, and you would most likely only come across three. Those other versions are specialty builds to either comply with government requirements or to have something available for nations for whom average computing capabilities are greatly decreased. So, unless you live in India or China, or unless you're living in Europe and actually looking for them (the N editions), then your ability to have more than the four options is almost nil. I'm sure you could get Enterprise edition if you knew someone who knew someone who could get you a license on the sly, or if you wanted to talk to a reseller or Microsoft's own sales contacts, buy into the Software Assurance program, and get yourself five licenses of MS software-- the smallest block you can order software in this case is five licenses. So, yeah, it's possible, just not practical or probable for most people, which basically translates to "not really something the consumer has to worry about." There were corp versions and "specialty" versions of previous MS software, too-- XP had a corp license, a 'not for resale' license, OEM licenses, and not one but two kinds of XP 64-bit licenses (one for Itanium and one for x86-64), on top of its Media Center, Tablet Edition, XP Embedded, and so on-- and yet I've heard more belly-aching about this with Vista than I had with previous versions, including Windows XP.

Sorry, I hate coming off so strong on this otherwise small thing, but while I have been as critical of companies and their business practices as anyone else, but this accusation keeps tripping me up in the lists of often-valid complaints about the operating system. As software has permeated the computing market-- as opposed to formerly being whatever was bundled in the expensive computer you bought-- the average consumer is becoming more and more aware that software companies are producing multiple versions of many of their flagship software packages. What's changing is more about perception and foreknowledge, not the actual packaging models (though not absolutely so for either).

That is a stressful job! I worked for a large corp and I didn't envy the pressure the IT folks were under. I recall one IT manager saying her team was doing a good job when they got no more thought than the switch for the overhead lights. (Meaning everything should just work smoothly without thinking about it.) I agreed with her, but often I think that means that most IT folks are underappreciated.

I did the larger corp thing for a while, but I'm currently sticking to small-medium sized businesses (more than 25 but usually less than 100 employees), so it's far less stressful now. IT is underappreciated in the same manner that accounting (AP and AR, mostly) can typically be underappreciated-- you don't really give them much thought until there is a problem. For the average employee, I don't mind so much. It still bugs me when executive staff, however, behave like that. You would think that with the number of MBAs out there that more of them would have at least paid attention somewhat to the classes that earned them that degree. ;)

Oh, and if you're taking an informal poll on Linux flavors to try, you can mark me down for Ubuntu. I think it's a "jack of all, master of none" as far as special features go, but I tend to prefer that approach.
Sounds perfect for me! Thanks for recommending it.

Hope it works out if you try it. Ubuntu is fairly easy to install, it tends to have packages in it that make installing (and finding) new software more simple than things used to be for Linux, and the community of support for it is pretty good. It's not always all roses, but I've seen fewer issues with Ubuntu than I have with other distributions.

[Kaylee]

No, not really. They are basically the same core operating system, but with the exception of the "starter" edition the only difference is what software is installed. Kind of like different packages for a car.

Still, if you were shopping for Vista, you'd be lucky if you found four options, and you would most likely only come across three. Those other versions are specialty builds to either comply with government requirements or to have something available for nations for whom average computing capabilities are greatly decreased. So, unless you live in India or China, or unless you're living in Europe and actually looking for them (the N editions), then your ability to have more than the four options is almost nil. I'm sure you could get Enterprise edition if you knew someone who knew someone who could get you a license on the sly, or if you wanted to talk to a reseller or Microsoft's own sales contacts, buy into the Software Assurance program, and get yourself five licenses of MS software-- the smallest block you can order software in this case is five licenses. So, yeah, it's possible, just not practical or probable for most people which basically translates to "not really something the consumer has to worry about." There were corp versions and "specialty" versions of previous MS software, too-- XP had a corp license, a 'not for resale' license, OEM licenses, and not one but two kinds of XP 64-bit licenses (one for Itanium and one for x86-64), on top of its Media Center, Tablet Edition, XP Embedded, and so on-- and yet I've heard more belly-aching about this with Vista than I had with previous versions, including Windows XP.

Sorry, I hate coming off so strong on this otherwise small thing, but while I have been as critical of companies and their business practices as anyone else, but this accusation keeps tripping me up in the lists of often-valid complaints about the operating system. As software has permeated the computing market-- as opposed to formerly being whatever was bundled in the expensive computer you bought-- the average consumer is becoming more and more aware that software companies are producing multiple versions of many of their flagship software packages. What's changing is more about perception and foreknowledge, not the actual packaging models (though not absolutely so for either).

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I think most people still want to purchase a computer with some thought and knowledge about what they are getting into. For most people buying a Vista latop when it first came out was a radically different experience from buying an XP laptop when it first came out. There were so many more choices. And it was annoying. An O/S is just suppose to operate the d*** thing. (I agree with the creator of Linux on that one.)

Its true that since the time XP first came out, it also got more choices including XP Media Center. But people had a chance to learn about those choices over time, and the average consumer was probably only vaguely aware of some of those choices anyway (eg 64 bit o/s).

When Vista came out, every tech magazine had an article about the many different choices. And for the first time, an average consumer had to decide whether to install a 64 or 32 bit O/S. For the average consumer it didn't matter that it was mostly all the same core operating system anyway. The core operating system was being sold with some of its functions disabled, different ones in different versions. So you still had to be knowledgeable about the different versions because even if the reason for the different amount of functionality was trivial, the effect of that reason was not. It also didn't matter if some choices were irrelevent to them. They still had to take the time out to learn that before they could make any decisions. [ETA maybe the tipping point for me is that MS included Home Basic among its choices for Vista, an O/S that can't do some very basic O/S functions -- like backing up! :mad:]

Afterall, it's not like MS is a vendor that one can trust. :rolleyes: A trustworthy vendor would never have sold the eviscerated version of Home Basic in the first place. Also, before MS, no company had ever sold so many products that weren't actually ready to be sold. And the main reason that MS has the market share they have today is not because of the quality of their product but because of the nefarious business practices that they had engaged in -- such as threatening to withhold their O/S from OEMs unless they only offerred the end client a MS O/S or ... a M/S O/S. Or had their O/S (don't remember if it was 3.1 or Win 95) which issued erroneous messages whenever it detected a non MS application. That is when Word Perfect, Lotus 123, etc. lost their market share to MS Office. I don't know how they managed to break so many laws in the USA and get away with it. The only reason some of their practices have been curtailed is because of the European Union.

Hmm, I appeared to have gone off on a rant. Think its time to walk away from the keyboard again! :)

Dated article, but interesting. (http://www.news.com/Windows-faces-new-competition-Itself/2100-1016_3-997509.html)

Choose a Vista Video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4P1O7fCVf0&feature=related)

[GreNME]

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I think most people still want to purchase a computer with some thought and knowledge about what they are getting into. For most people buying a Vista latop when it first came out was a radically different experience from buying an XP laptop when it first came out. There were so many more choices. And it was annoying. An O/S is just suppose to operate the d*** thing. (I agree with the creator of Linux on that one.)

I completely disagree with Torvalds (the guy who made Linux) on that note. Anyone who has sat someone down in front of a computer for the first time should be able to remember the familiar variation of "okay, what do I do with it?" Apple has answered this by more tightly integrating the software it makes to the hardware, resulting in the Macintosh and its "Mac" way of doing things. Windows is set up to behave more like the middle-man or interpreter between your software and the hardware-- never quite seamless but pretty diverse. Linux has been, for nearly twenty years (~17 years), a "from scratch" architecture that consists of loads of tiny modules that each contribute to do parts of what a user might want. The reality is that each of these things are exactly what an operating system is used for, and as demands increase so do the things required to meet those demands (on all three systems). Linus Torvalds knows this, but just like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs he would rather that more people use the system he brought to the table.

Its true that since the time XP first came out, it also got more choices including XP Media Center. But people had a chance to learn about those choices over time, and the average consumer was probably only vaguely aware of some of those choices anyway (eg 64 bit o/s).

Oh, not just XP, but even its predecessors. You just never heard about them because they weren't germane to the flagship line. Windows 2000 had a few versions (though fewer than XP/2003), and while 95 and 98/Me were out there as the Windows du jour the Windows NT lines were being sold right along with them. What changed? Honestly, XP is what changed everything, because it took the business NT lines and the consumer 9x lines and converged them into a single "product," even though right from the gate there were four versions (Home, Pro, Corp, and 64-Bit/Itanium).

When Vista came out, every tech magazine had an article about the many different choices. And for the first time, an average consumer had to decide whether to install a 64 or 32 bit O/S.

The same thing happened with 95 and 98. We went from 16-bit to 32-bit in those days. The only difference is that the internet hadn't been so fully engulfed with news "sources" yet that "everybody" wasn't being bombarded with the issue and, wonder of wonders, we got over it pretty quick. If you ask me, all the hemming and hawing is making what would have been minor issues fifteen years ago into huge scandalous debates.

[ETA maybe the tipping point for me is that MS included Home Basic among its choices for Vista, an O/S that can't do some very basic O/S functions -- like backing up! :mad:]

Actually, backing up isn't a function of a core operating system. ;) That's one of those add-ons for extra functionality I mentioned earlier.

Afterall, it's not like MS is a vendor that one can trust. :rolleyes: A trustworthy vendor would never have sold the eviscerated version of Home Basic in the first place.

I almost agree with this, except I'd say that a reasonable vendor would not have packaged the eviscerated version as a retail offering. If they want to offer something like that I don't care, but it honestly has no place on store shelves in my opinion.

Also, before MS, no company had ever sold so many products that weren't actually ready to be sold.

No offense, but this sounds an awful lot like the "no steel-framed building ever..." claim I hear from 9/11 conspiracy theorists. If you don't think there haven't been plenty of software packages in the history of personal computing that were of questionable quality that required subsequent "patches" to address, then I kindly submit that perhaps you are simply unaware that software patching is not something Microsoft introduced to the world.

And the main reason that MS has the market share they have today is not because of the quality of their product but because of the nefarious business practices that they had engaged in -- such as threatening to withhold their O/S from OEMs unless they only offerred the end client a MS O/S or ... a M/S O/S.

We're getting a bit into the realm where I think time-lines of activities are becoming conflated, here. Microsoft did bully several OEMs, but this was in the late 1990's-- well after they had achieved market dominance. Perhaps you mean instead Microsoft's deals with IBM and then the clone market that got it its market dominance?

Or had their O/S (don't remember if it was 3.1 or Win 95) which issued erroneous messages whenever it detected a non MS application.

Never seen that. I've seen Windows kick out a boatload of error messages, but I never heard of this claim before? For my edification, you wouldn't happen to know which software it did this with, would you?

Dated article, but interesting. (http://www.news.com/Windows-faces-new-competition-Itself/2100-1016_3-997509.html)

Choose a Vista Video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4P1O7fCVf0&feature=related)

Um, the first one isn't talking about Vista at all, it's talking about XP. And the Apple video: are you serious? You do realize that Apple's "Hi, I'm a Mac" videos are pretty much the same old "we're not going to outright lie but we'll mislead you in every imaginable way possible" kind of marketing?

Respectfully, I think that we're sinking into the realm of hyperbole here and it's probably best that the conversation end with us agreeing to disagree. Good luck with Ubuntu. :)

[Kaylee]

Actually, backing up isn't a function of a core operating system. ;) That's one of those add-ons for extra functionality I mentioned earlier. That ... surprises me.



I almost agree with this, except I'd say that a reasonable vendor would not have packaged the eviscerated version as a retail offering. If they want to offer something like that I don't care, but it honestly has no place on store shelves in my opinion. Another thing we agree on! :)



No offense, but this sounds an awful lot like the "no steel-framed building ever..." claim I hear from 9/11 conspiracy theorists. If you don't think there haven't been plenty of software packages in the history of personal computing that were of questionable quality that required subsequent "patches" to address, then I kindly submit that perhaps you are simply unaware that software patching is not something Microsoft introduced to the world. So ... MS didn't bring this to a whole new level?



We're getting a bit into the realm where I think time-lines of activities are becoming conflated, here. Microsoft did bully several OEMs, but this was in the late 1990's-- well after they had achieved market dominance. Perhaps you mean instead Microsoft's deals with IBM and then the clone market that got it its market dominance? Well they had achieved market dominance to some extent otherwise they never would have been able to bully the OEMs the way they did -- but as a result of these tactics their market share grew even more.



Never seen that. I've seen Windows kick out a boatload of error messages, but I never heard of this claim before? For my edification, you wouldn't happen to know which software it did this with, would you?
I was working for a large corp at the time and it did this with Lotus 123 and Wordperfect. The company I worked for had a new IS director and one of the first things she was responsible for was to install a new O/S in all the PCs. Just about the second thing she did was to replace all of our spreadsheets and word processing applications with MS Office. She did this because of the O/S errors that were generated every time Lotus or WP was initially opened up and used. IIRC, the tech magazines at the time said there was no validity to these O/S error msgs but for the IT director it was a CYA issue and despite many protests we got all of our office application programs replaced. As I understand it, this was a pretty common reaction throughout the country at the time. I just can't remember if it happened when 3.1 or 95 came out. Maybe someone else will remember and post.



Um, the first one isn't talking about Vista at all, it's talking about XP. Hmm, the way I saw it was that the article was talking about MS in general and about its historical trend to fracture its various O/Ss (for its own reasons) despite its claims in various legal courts that it can't do so because it would be harmful to their customers ...

I thought it fit in well with the topic so that's why I linked to it... {shrug}


And the Apple video: are you serious? You do realize that Apple's "Hi, I'm a Mac" videos are pretty much the same old "we're not going to outright lie but we'll mislead you in every imaginable way possible" kind of marketing? I thought the spin the wheel video was funny and I was just trying to end the post on a light note. Hey, there's a reason why I'm not a professional comedian!

Respectfully, I think that we're sinking into the realm of hyperbole here and it's probably best that the conversation end with us agreeing to disagree. Good luck with Ubuntu. :)

Thanks! I don't have time to install it in the near future, but I hope to find time to try it one of these days.

Thanks for posting btw, even though we don't agree on everything -- I got a lot out of your posts and enjoyed reading them. :)

[GreNME]

So ... MS didn't bring this [re: patch releases for software] to a whole new level?

Not in any direct way. The advent of personal computers into a more widespread and common user market did that, and I dare say it would have likely been the same for any other software vendor. Even the Unix companies of old released patches regularly-- maintenance and upkeep has been a high-priced business for more than half a century.

Well they had achieved market dominance to some extent otherwise they never would have been able to bully the OEMs the way they did -- but as a result of these tactics their market share grew even more.

I think the essence of that is basically true. Microsoft is well-known to have an institutional paranoia that tends to be bad for competition and bad for dissemination of new technologies that they aren't involved in.

Hmm, the way I saw it was that the article was talking about MS in general and about its historical trend to fracture its various O/Ss (for its own reasons) despite its claims in various legal courts that it can't do so because it would be harmful to their customers ...

I thought it fit in well with the topic so that's why I linked to it... {shrug}

It fits in well with the claim that the company puts out more product versions than they need to, and I agree on that, but I was mainly pointing out that the practical reality doesn't quite match up to the claims behind a lot of the anti-Vista histrionics.

I thought the spin the wheel video was funny and I was just trying to end the post on a light note. Hey, there's a reason why I'm not a professional comedian!

I thought the first few Mac commercials were cute, but they tended to get worse as Apple became more obviously wild in their presentations. It comes across as petulant and childish to me, even though I really do personally dig the Mac operating system. I think the commercials, much like the "Switch" commercials (with individuals giving personal "testimonies"), are becoming such that they are making the company (Apple) look bad and elitist rather than personable and accessible.

Thanks! I don't have time to install it in the near future, but I hope to find time to try it one of these days.

Thanks for posting btw, even though we don't agree on everything -- I got a lot out of your posts and enjoyed reading them. :)

Here's hoping that whichever flavor you eventually get to try works out for you. Once you give it a try, definitely post here with questions or comments, as I'd be interested to find out how things go. :)