From technology to politics to video games; these are the random thoughts of a geek with too much time on his hands
Perhaps one of the biggest online sites in direct support of all things Windows, and a long-time champion of Windows Longhorn (now Vista), Paul Thurrott's SuperSite for Windows has come out with a scathing article on the inadequacies of Windows Vista as it currently stands in beta.  While Paul picks apart others who have complained about the beta thus far, mostly for being less than intelligent in his eyes, he does agree with their end-assessment, if not with the reasoning they used to reach it.

Many of the points he complains about are how Windows has regressed in terms of application compatibility, from Adobe issues to ActiveX controls on web pages.  Probably the best though are the cut and paste COM errors he gets with the Office 2007 beta (since the two are supposedly "Better Together" according to Microsoft).  Then there's any number of usability complaints over how it seems to defy common logic, or previous versions of Windows.

In short, not only is his answer to "Is Vista ready?" a solid "No", it's a resounding "No.  God, no"

Be sure to check out the rant, in all of it's glory, in the link below.


Comments (Page 1)
2 Pages1 2 
on Aug 03, 2006

Good article, IMO.

I can certainly live with improved hardware, Windows XP, and Object Desktop for quite some time. So, I agree, who cares when they release the thing as long as it is actually ready.

on Aug 03, 2006
Vista is an Operating System….not just a program….I don’t know much….but I’m sure that Microsoft is the Industries leading edge in the things that make computing possible in the first place. Just imagine no Microsoft…no windows no programs no stardock. I trust Microsoft to release Vista when the time is right.
on Aug 03, 2006
I'm really past caring about Vista, they should just move on to the next OS which should be wothy of upgrading from XP. Now before everyone starts bey-atching on the "new features" list their is ab-so-lut-ely NOTHING on it that would warrant me throwing over the buckazoids!
on Aug 03, 2006
Just imagine no Microsoft…no windows no programs no stardock.


Then we'd be talking about Sun's next system or IBM's next system. The "Information Age" came about WITH Microsoft not because of Microsoft. Microsoft has NEVER met an initial publicized deadline and has NEVER released a bug-free Operating System. I can say this because I've owned just about every OS they've produced.

on Aug 03, 2006
I'd prefer to wait a while for an OS that is ready, not one that is shipped out too early because of "demand".
on Aug 03, 2006
Just as a note....last November I think it was....I predicted a March-May 2007 release date for Vista. I still think I'm right.
on Aug 03, 2006
"The "Information Age" came about WITH Microsoft not because of Microsoft."

I won’t argue with that statement…..but you have to admit that Microsoft has delivered…..just as much as Apple………and more so then all the others…besides Stardock programs are made for Windows
on Aug 03, 2006

The reason you are using Windows today is because of shrewd licensing, not "because it was the best".

Stardock's programs started out on IBM's OS/2 operating system which was far superior to Windows at the time. Microsoft was able to get PC makers to preload Windows instead of OS/2 and hence we use Windows today.

Windows didn't make Stardock's software possible.

on Aug 03, 2006
"Windows didn't make Stardock's software possible."


Yea…that’s not what I said
on Aug 03, 2006
besides Stardock programs are made for Windows


Yeah but if Sun's RISC or IBM's OS2 had won out. All the vendors like Stardock would be making software for that OS.

OS2....they would have done better if we all didn't realize that they (Big Blue) had been sitting on their asses for years because of their Monopoly on the market, but I have to agree it was better than MS at the time. Personally I thought (at the time) the reduced instruction set coding would win out, but hardware advances made that moot.

on Aug 03, 2006

"Windows didn't make Stardock's software possible."


Yea…that’s not what I said

With no Windows Stardock would have thrived quite well with its original involvement with OS2.

Nothing would be different except 'detail'....

on Aug 03, 2006
Yeah but if Sun's RISC or IBM's OS2 had won out. All the vendors like Stardock would be making software for that OS.


I’m sure that every program around to day would still be around no matter who’s OS would have come out on top. I like windows. I like Vista Beta. I thought Stardock liked Microsoft, being “ Gold Certified Partners” and all. Maybe I’ve just gotten the wrong impression. And in another post about the beginning of Stardock, it never mentioned that the programs started out running on another OS. I did'nt know that  
on Aug 03, 2006
Windows didn't make Stardock's software possible.


That’s really not what I was trying to say….what I was trying to say is that Stardocks programs ARE made to run on windows and from everything I am reading on the new posts all Stardocks new programs are being made to run on Vista…..That’s all that I was saying.
on Aug 03, 2006
I'm sure Stardock like being "Gold Certified" by MS. That's the goal of any vendor working in the sfotware business.

I personally believe whatever the dominant OS became it would greatly resemble what we have. The product is "molded" by user requests and "wish" lists. Vista will be the next OS but I'm sure when it's released it won't be ready for prime-time any more than 95 or XP were. (SP1 & SP2 are hints of things to come)
on Aug 03, 2006
Vista will be the next OS but I'm sure when it's released it won't be ready for prime-time any more than 95 or XP were. (SP1 & SP2 are hints of things to come)


Yes, I must agree with you  
2 Pages1 2