Vista and Business

[jdhurst]

Like others in here, I use my ThinkPad for work, and like some others (not necessarily a lot), I turn off all the eye candy in XP Pro and set the machine up as purely business. It works well and all the (copius) software I need works well also.

Along comes Vista. I have Beta 2 installed and RC1 on order (I know RC2 is out for download only).

I tried the Vista interface, and after a day or two, gave it up and went back to Windows Classic. I got the UltraNav driver installed and wireless working, and set about to install software.

The Juniper Netscreen Remote ipSec client does not work. This is a known issue and Juniper has no ETA on a Vista upgrade for the software. A quick Google search says SafeNet (of course) and several other VPN / ipSec remote clients do not work with Vista.

Symantec Client Security needs an upgrade to work with Vista. Symantec have said they will be ready by the end of 2006.

UltraEdit works, but not properly. Windows Explorer has been butchered. Networking (properties, setup and editing) has been made obscure (in my opinion). Security is overbearing (I have disabled that.

Then, stripped of the eye candy, Vista looks and feels like XP except that it is a bit harder to use (more keystrokes and mouse clicks to do a task in Vista than the same task in XP).

The inability to do remote access is a knockout factor for me, meaning Vista will have to wait until third party software catches up. Any other business people or professionals in the same boat?

Does anyone have an ipSec client that does work with Vista?

... JD Hurst

[arni]

You said it right. There are still some gotchas with Vista and compatibility.

I personally think that businesses don't have to make the switch to Vista yet, since XP is still more compatible and overall tested. But when you think of early adopters and developers, i would say that you have to be prepared for vista. It will be the business desktop in about 1 or 2 years.

For me Vista is working fine on my T60 for Development. I'm using it as my primary OS. And for the VPN stuff you can use the Cisco Beta Client.

[jdhurst]

<snip>And for the VPN stuff you can use the Cisco Beta Client.

Thank you. I have been searching for information on ipSec and surmised the Cisco client was one of the workable Vista clients.

At the time I put Netscreens into my business clients, the boxes were substantially cheaper than Cisco and have proven to be as effective in a small business environment. Cisco prices have come down, so I am starting to wonder if a switch to Cisco to be in the mainstream might be a good idea. ... JD Hurst

[Buccaneerfan]

jdhurst, you do realize that we're still talking about the Beta of an OS here hat still has some weeks if not even months before it hits the market?
I am quite sure that most software vendors will have their apps ready as soon as Vista officially hits the market so i wouldn't worry or even condemn MS for the current lack of running apps for Vista...

[jdhurst]

jdhurst, you do realize that we're still talking about the Beta of an OS here that still has some weeks if not even months before it hits the market?
I am quite sure that most software vendors will have their apps ready as soon as Vista officially hits the market so i wouldn't worry or even condemn MS for the current lack of running apps for Vista...

Yes I do realize that. I just got RC 1 today and loaded it. Nothing fixed in my list of business complaints. One thing that did work (RC 1 but not the Beta) was Feedback, so I sent Microsoft all my complaints.

I am not condeming Microsoft, but I am critical of them positioning Vista as a play toy and time waster rather than a business system. They are far enough away from a working business system that it will be at least a year or two before there is any perceptible business penetration. Arni noted just that.

I can see it now: "But Boss, I *need* Vista" . "Why?" "It's really cool".

... JD Hurst

[carbon_unit]

It was the same way back when XP was about to release.
Many businesses waited a year or so before they took the plunge into XP.

[Buccaneerfan]

jdhurst, you do realize that we're still talking about the Beta of an OS here that still has some weeks if not even months before it hits the market?
I am quite sure that most software vendors will have their apps ready as soon as Vista officially hits the market so i wouldn't worry or even condemn MS for the current lack of running apps for Vista...

Yes I do realize that. I just got RC 1 today and loaded it. Nothing fixed in my list of business complaints. One thing that did work (RC 1 but not the Beta) was Feedback, so I sent Microsoft all my complaints.

I am not condeming Microsoft, but I am critical of them positioning Vista as a play toy and time waster rather than a business system. They are far enough away from a working business system that it will be at least a year or two before there is any perceptible business penetration. Arni noted just that.

I can see it now: "But Boss, I *need* Vista" . "Why?" "It's really cool".

... JD Hurst

I don't see MS positioning Vista as a time waster, it's quite simply a case of it being a Beta and loads of people are toying with it out of curiosity, early adopters'n'all....
I'm quite sure that you wouldn't need to waste so much time and can concentrate on really working with Vista as soon as it has really been released.

So for me, i do see that there are still bugs but i consider this just as a nice way of using a rainy weekend to toy around with this new OS.

[jdhurst]

<snip>
I don't see MS positioning Vista as a time waster, it's quite simply a case of it being a Beta and loads of people are toying with it out of curiosity, early adopters'n'all....
I'm quite sure that you wouldn't need to waste so much time and can concentrate on really working with Vista as soon as it has really been released.

So for me, i do see that there are still bugs but i consider this just as a nice way of using a rainy weekend to toy around with this new OS.

Please do not consider my reply as argumentative or a flame. I have used Vista enough now to know the following (on top of bugs):

1. Most of the time, a responsive dialogue box comes up behind the box I am working from (Explorer or Control Panel). I have to find the box and click it to the front. Not true in Windows 3.1, 95, 98, NT4, 2000 or XP.
2. Explorer.scf has been removed. That means Explorer opens in a view of somebody's pictures and music - nothing that interests me. I must manually minimize the Favorites frame, close down all the open trees, open the Computer tree, then the volume tree, then widen the frame and then start to work. This is all done automagically in Explorer.scf.
3. Explorer settings are not saved anymore. It reverts to its defaults each time.
4. Map Network drive loses its list of most recently used drives. I have 26 last used drives in my XP machine that I do not have to write down or remember.

There are a LOT of extra steps there in Vista that do not exist in all earlier versions of Windows. These are the time wasters. I do not object to time I spend on a rainy day working with Vista, and I agree with you on that point.

To run Windows 2000 out of the box was to be greeted with a business system. To run XP out of the box was to be greeted with music and pictures, but it could be tamed in about 10 settings. To run Vista out of the box is to be greeted with music and pictures and no way (that I can see) to permanently get rid of stuff. Vista is not being built for business (and I am not the only business person I know coming to that conclusion). The trick will be to see if Vista can be tamed and corrected to start up as a business-only operating system.

... JD Hurst

[GomJabbar]

The trick will be to see if Vista can be tamed and corrected to start up as a business-only operating system.

I have a feeling that Microsoft has this taken care of this. I was reading an Australian news artcle (Builders not expecting inflated OEM pricing for Vista) the other day about Vista pricing in Australia. Note the following:

Microsoft prices full versions of Windows Vista Home Basic at $385 and a Home Premium version of the software at $455. It is also launching a Business version at $565 and an Ultimate version which blends the consumer aspects of Home Premium with the Business edition for $751.

This suggests to me that the Business version at $565 (Australian price) is the version that the majority of us will really want. It will probably be more administrator friendly than the other versions. Of course, this is just speculation on my part. When the various flavors of Vista are actually released, then we will know for sure....

[arni]

After working with Vista for abount 2 month, testing it in a business environment, developing for .net and using it as multimedia hub at home here's my litte conclusion and some musings about Vista and XP.

I admit that MS had put a lot of work in Vista to make the user experience very well. But is it worth for Businesses to make the switch right now? Let's compare some of the features MS provided with Vista to XP.

1. Aero - Do your users at work really need a sophisticated UI? I think that most of the business users will turn off Aero and revert back to the Win standard theme like in XP. It's just about the old habit to work in a known environment. And than all thouse fancy effects like Flip-3D. You can have it for XP with TopDesk. Alt-Tab preview of windows - TaskSwitchXP, here you go.

2. Security
Let's face UAC. What's the benefit for prompting the user to allow elevation of user rights on a pc? Hey, you could have "UAC" since Win2K and work as a limited user. And in business every admin would be a fool to let his users run as administrator on their machines. So is it better to prompt for elevation or just right click on a exe and select "Run as..."? I would argue no.

What about spyware and viruses. Hey you can get well tested AV progs for both platforms. And Windows Defender? It runs on XP, too.

3. Search
This indeed makes most of the users very productive since all your information stored on your PC and in your Mailbox is "at your fingertip". Secondly you can make much more faster searches that with the standard search tool in Windows before Vista. But does everbody like to stick with WDS? And you can get that benefit on Win2K and XP with WDS and GDS, too. And i think that especially GDS is a bummer with it's double strg-button quick launch search box.

4. Network Stack
It was really improved in Vista. But many laptop vendors put much effort to pack XP with extra tools to make nearly the same things possible like in Vista. Hey you Thinkpad guys. Don't we had Access Connections since... i actually don't remember since.

5. Faster Deployment
Vista can be installed in under 20 min. But what business installs it's PC manually. At our office we are using Acronis to depoly ready images of our PC and Laptops. An average Development Laptop is deploy in under 30 min. And not only with the core OS. All Office and Development Apps are deployed with it, too.

6. Multimedia
For those who care about multimedia. In Vista we have WM11, Windows Photo Gallery, Windows DVD Creator. Let's see what we have got from Lenovo. Photos Picassa. DVD watching Intervideo. DVD authoring, Intervideo. WM11 will be availabe for XP. So no need here, too.

7. .NET Framework 3.0 (NetFX)
It's availabe for XP, too. So if you are a developer and want do make apps with WWF, WCF and WPF you can get everything you need for your current OS.

There are sill many more points to mention. But that's only litte covered area of things that i was thinking abount to compare Vista and XP. So in the end i think it will be really hard for MS to push Vista to the businesses like they are marketing. Personally i don't see any area where Vista would be better for business than XP. Hey XP is very reliable, fast and overall tested. Furthermore you have nearly all compatibility with current hardware and software. So why take the plunge right now for losing this. Maybe when businesses and people will think buying new PCs and Laptops which came preloaded with Vista. That's indeed ok.

My biggest concern as a developer actually is that Vista not for us. Heck, VS.NET 2003 is not supported on Vista. VS.NET 2005 has compatibility problems with Vista which will be resolved with SP1, planned in 3 - 4 month! SQL-Server 2000 not supported! SQL-Server 2005 SP1, compatibility issues. Will be resolved with SP2 somewhere in mid 2007 - Bummer! SQL-Server Express, severe compatibility problems, too. What the heck!

So the only path MS is provinding. Use VPC2007 (Beta!) and make your development in virtual machines. This can't be true and it's not working for me. I want all my development stuff on my Thinkpad and using VPC only for testing.

IMHO only Office 2007 is worth updating since it's really a step forward in technology and user experience. But more on that at a later time.

Just my 2 cents.

Artur

[jdhurst]

With respect to arni's post (long, but many thanks):

1. I agree. The first thing I do is turn off the Fisher-Price interfaces. Some people think they are cool and I leave others to do as they wish, but I have not seen anyone, ever, move faster with the cool interfaces than I do with the basic working interfaces.

2. I turned off that infernal control feature. What doofus ever dreamed up that screwed up thing. And yes, what I have already secures me very well.

3. Search: I hope it turns out better. I find what I want now but faster would be an improvement. I haven't done much searching with Vista yet.

4. Network stack: How was this improved in Vista? There is nothing wrong that I can see in XP. They certainly screwed up the interface and made it more time consuming to use. And they certainly screwed up the VPN and Security Vendors. I see no benefit for the aggravation. If you can explain, that would help.

5. Faster deployment: I use models too and Ghost. I can have a complete working machine with all apps in fairly short order (and do something else while the image is loading).

6. Not interested.

7. Can't yet comment.

I agree with your assertion that there is nothing yet to push us out of XP. If someone is still using Windows 2000, maybe.

Thanks again, ... JD Hurst

[arni]

And yes, what I have already secures me very well.

I agree. Everything to be and stay secure is already availabe for both platforms. There are plenty of paid and free av-suites available such as Norton, McAfee, TrendMicro, Avast, AVG, Avira and more.

Secondly for Spyware and that stuff you can go with Win-Defender, Spybot S+D (which is my favorite) and adaware, just to mention some.

3. Search: I hope it turns out better. I find what I want now but faster would be an improvement. I haven't done much searching with Vista yet.

Yeah this is almost the most annoying stuff in vista. I love my GDS which is much more faster and brings integration with firefox and ie. Especially that the integrated search is also dependent on the windows indexing service, which is really troublesome in all release vista buids. On indexing large files it slows down the hole machine to an state where you are not able to do serious work. I hope this gets improved for the final bits. If not, i would be wise just to disable the underlying services.

4. Network stack: How was this improved in Vista? There is nothing wrong that I can see in XP. They certainly screwed up the interface and made it more time consuming to use. And they certainly screwed up the VPN and Security Vendors. I see no benefit for the aggravation. If you can explain, that would help.

I can feel your pain. The problems with VPN are a real concern and are holding me back to use vista as the only OS on my Thinkpad. Since i need Ciscos VPN-Client for connecting to my work and campus network i can't go without. There is a beta client availabe but it's still too buggy. It works but you have to really srew up the hole OS to make it function.

There are some areas which are more different that on XP. The obvious is that IP6 is integrated and on by default on all vista systems. Then there seems to be some improvements in the hole network stack just to speed up network connections. Most of the functionality which was missing on XP and had to be extended with 3rd party software like AC is now inclueded with the new network center. You can define network locations. Have wizards for almost every connection type you need to setup. One nice feature is the new network map which visualizes your network and connections. I have to admit that i didn't dig into all that stuff to deeply because lack of time. Maybe more information for you can be found here:
http://www.istartedsomething.com/200609 ... /#more-692, here: http://vista.beyondthemanual.com/2006/0 ... n_tcp.html and here: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/window ... fault.mspx.

Personally i'm still not sure if an upgrad from xp would be a good advise for an average business. Especially if they are not thinking about using any of the new features (which really are becomming fewer and fewer when i continue to compare the both platforms). I agree that it makes sense when migrating from Win2K i would be a better deal moving on to vista.

But when businesses are planning to buy hardware it's not advisable to wait until the release of vista. Just go with XP and migrate when vista sp1 will be available. This would be are greater advise since there has been some rumores around that MS would not be able to fix some things until release. And i can't imagine that MS will pull back the release as anounced in mid or end of november. Last year when MS was about to release vs.net 2005 and sqlserver 2005 they also rtm'd on schedule.

The main problem for me taking a final switch is that my Thinkpad is not supposed to work like i'm used to under XP (Thinkvantage, Drivers, etc.). Especially since i'm in contact with Lenovos support and they told me that they are currently in the process making all that software and drivers to work in vista but can't say anything when it will be released. You can go with the released beta drivers but heck, i want to control my Thinkpad like it's under XP (Hotkeys, Access Conn, etc.). Finally i noticed that going from one build of vista to another there are bugs creeping in which had been fixed in older versions. The biggest no-go actually with RC2 is that i'm still not able to hibernate the machine without a BSOD. And this is new to this build and worked in 5728 and RC1.

Artur

[jdhurst]

Something for the Vista users to consider and possibly try (I will as well). The following programs alter the network settings in XP (alter as in position themselves directly in the network stack):

Juniper Netscreen: Deterministic Network Enhancer - Already known not working.
CommView: CommView Network Monitor
iPASS Dialer: iPass Protocol (IEEE802.1x)v2.3.1.9
VMWare: VMWare Bridge Protocol - I haven't tried, but Vista is not listed as a supported host.

That is a lot of stuff to disable and I wonder how quickly these vendors will respond.
... JD Hurst