Why Vista Sucks

I could begin by sighting dozens of quotes from forums, but that would be too easy, and possibly miss the point. Instead I propose that the problem with Vista has less to do with the installation nightmares, lack of drivers, constant annoyances posing as security, and ridiculous hardware requirements just to run the base OS.

The problem with Vista is simple, why bother?

The only reason to upgrade software, especially an OS, should be some compelling improvement over what is currently available. Microsoft claims four areas of improvement over XP; security, ease of use, more entertainment, and better connectivity. (No, really, I got this straight from their site).

Security
“New” features were to be introduced resulting in a truly secure system, that is after all one of the most prolific complaints about Microsoft Windows, and purportedly the highest initiative at Microsoft over the last few years. I feel that the biggest gap in security with Windows is IE, and the methods employed by Windows to access the internet. For example you can visit a web site that can run a script that will install software on your system. This is a problem, as anyone who’s had malware or spyware installed on their systems can tell you.

Vista’s new security features have addressed a problem, but not this problem. Microsoft’s security solution is the UAC, or User Access Control. Every operation that should require an Administrator’s control prompts the users to “accept” or “deny” the operation. So when the hackzors try to plant a Trojan on your system the system asks if you want to allow this operation. Unfortunately, by the time the user gets to this point with their system they may have already been conditioned, in the Pavlovian sense, to just click “Allow” inadvertently. The unfortunate implementation of UAC prompts users to allow or deny even common tasks like moving files on your local hard drives conditioning them to click allow on a regular basis. Another flaw with UAC is that once a user allows an installation of software, that software is given Admin rights to the system. Oops. Now hackzor’s app can pretty much do anything it want’s because Microsoft trained it’s users to “just click Allow.” So much for security.

One of the first articles I read was describing why the Vista’s hardware requirements were to be so high. Microsoft really believed that users wanted more safety with their systems, and data. Protect users from themselves by providing safeguards to prevent them from inadvertently deleting their system files. The rollback feature was nice, but they wanted to lock down the system even more to prevent users from hosing their own computers, and in the event of some delete key catastrophe, a really easy way to restore their system back to a pre-oops state of Vista goodness.

The other advertised features are Defender, backup, and parental controls. While these are great features, if they work, they are already available for XP.

Score: Vista 0: XP 1

Ease of Use
Search, Photo Gallery, Flip 3D. Wow. Lets sum this upImproved search, already have a perfectly good gallery, why would I want something fancier than alt-tab??? The real detriment to ease of use is that they changed many of the ways that Windows used to operate to “improve it”. Users now have to relearn how to use the same operating system they’ve been using. Not a step forward, more sideways.

Vista 0: XP 1

More Entertaining

Now the gamer in me comes out. I like to play games on my PC and Microsoft launched a new campaign this last year called “Games for Windows.” Vista was to be the crown jewel in this campaign as DirectX 10 is only available with Vista. New graphics potential unleashed that consoles could only support once the Xbox 720, or PlayStation 4 arrives. But Microsoft tripped as only Microsoft can, ten feet from the finish line. If you consider that neither the drivers nor hardware existed when Vista launched it’s hardly a selling feature. For an OS that was in development for five years, maybe they could have partnered with at least one hardware vendor to get these drivers and hardware released at the same time? Nah, why wait for hardware that functions out of the box.

As it turns out, many of the old games, hardware, and DirectX 9 are suffering problems in Vista. People can’t even continue with the present state of gaming technology while they wait for the next generation to arrive.

Now consider the real motivations for the Vista only DirectX 10 conspiracy. Halo 2 will only be available to Vista users. I would like to play Halo 2 with a keyboard and mouse but would have to upgrade to Vista in order to do this. I have no doubt that Microsoft will do it’s best to boost OS sales by forcing consumers to upgrade to play the new hot games they will be releasing.

Vista 0 : XP 1

Better Connected
This set of features is amazing…Would you believe revolutionary.. How about, of wait we already have two of these, and you have to have another Microsoft product to use the third, an Xbox. The other two fast boot and resume, and network connectivity to your home PC. These aren’t new features.

Vista 0: XP 1

Where does this leave us?

This inspires a string of great questions: Many of the new features are only available in the more expensive versions of Windows, will the people who really need increased security buy the Ultimate or Premium versions? If security was such a primary concern why would you want an OS to allow a browser to install anything? If Vista isn’t anything other than a shell to allow people to buy more Microsoft products, what is it? Lastly, if almost every single feature is already available in XP, or through a third party application, why in the name of all things capatilist would you buy a product that doesn’t offer you anything new other than vapor?

If Microsoft’s goal was to create a more user friendly system why would they rush it to market without complete support for existing hardware? If a device already works in XP why in the world wouldn’t it work with Vista? Heck even Linux does a better job with devices than Vista; usually a base level of operation is available, if not the complete feature set for devices.

Now consider the goal and the requirements together. If the point was to create a more user friendly, “hold the user’s hand” environment, friendlier to grandma, why would you increase the hardware requirements? No grandma the bargain PC that you need to check email and print baby pictures isn’t powerful enough to run the “safe, easy to use” Vista. You need to buy the uber gaming PC with a mondo video card, and enough ram to open a 200Mb Photoshop file. Oh, and you can’t get XP anymore because it’s obsolete… Really?

Final score Vista 0: XP 4

Why Billy, why?
With all these glaring inconsistencies, who in their right mind would have released this software? Vista is the wrong solution to the wrong problem. Computers have matured to the point where no one should release software that isn’t ready to support the current level of technology, and support the established base of hardware. The public should not be beta testers for the final release of software. An Operating System should be intuitive, secure, and operate transparently for the user. And a new version should never package existing features and claime that they are new, or improved, when they are old, and broken in the first place. Unless you wasted a bunch of money developing a product that didn’t result in a product that was actually what everyone hoped it would be.

What other people have to say about the new Vista Sucktastic state of stupidity:

ASP.Net developers and their installation nightmares
More problems
Microsoft incompatibility with itself
A Vista software compatibility list
Games problems from Computerworld
More gaming issues
Gaming issues listed on Slashdot.org
Information weeks 90 report card
Security holes in Networking stack
Ease of use for photographers, and more entertaining…