Vista Security Patches Already?

BTW I left a machine here unpatched to see what would happen and guess what nothing happened. Not saying nothing could happen only most of these are not going to automatically cause the end of the world, they have to be exploited and it usually takes six months to a year before they start to on a wide scale basis. Regardless I always patch ASAP except on test machines like this.

You have to give props to anyone who can build a PC out of spare plumbing parts

Yet again you guys are only a hairs breadth apart. The attitude is the problem!!! MS has trained people to expect a PC to lock-up, randomly crash, etc.

You (drew) are right about how XP functions when you take care of it. I run my business off it and (except for problems from my occasional stupidity), think it is very solid. XP functionality is not the problem with MS.

Having trained the general public to accept it as normal when their products don't function right is the problem. Think about it. With OpenSource, or 'nix, or even a smaller company like Trend, would you continue to use a product that didn't work, or worked only 90% of the time?! No. You would get something that did. Yet I bet every week you run into someone who just accepts that their MS product (usually an operating system) doesn't work the way it is supposed to. Why is that?

That is because it is what MS has gotten them accustomed to. How? By releasing products before they are truly debugged and ready. Not once, not twice, but so many times that people have just become accustomed to it and expect it. That is what D was afraid would happen with Vista. I said "let's wait to see if it is fixed by the time they release it." Which gives MS more credit then they deserve, but is the only way to address concerns before software is out of the development stage.

You (drew) are defending the functionality of software that has been out for years and required not only lot's of patches but a service pack that was released without fully testing the installation instructions and caused how many thousands of computers to crash? Yes it is solid software, but MS support has been shoddy. I would hate to see Vista take the same route.

That is not true. People have trained themselves. The large online community of inept "techies" that for years gave people bad advice just furthers the problem. Ever since even DOS, over 90% of the problems had nothing to do with the Operating System but either the user thinking they know or bad or misconfigured hardware. The truth of the matter is people would constantly blame the wrong thing, usually the OS. Lock-ups almost every time are hardware related. Crashes can be anything but are very rarely even in the 9x days directly the fault of the OS. OS design may have led to the crash but it was not directly a fault of the OS. The Win9x OSes did not include design features to prevent people from easily causing problems and included no HAL. Windows XP includes these and more. Vista will include even more. People just want to blame something when they do not understand it and Microsoft is the easy scape goat.

This nonsense about Windows 2000 or especially XP not working how they are supposed to are completely unfounded. They work well beyond how they are supposed to.

I'm defending something that is blamed unfairly. EVERY single time I run into a problem with a clients machine it is due to either a hardware problem or a user induced one. I don't believe you will ever be able to protect some people from themselves on a truely usable PC. We may have to go back to having them use Terminals or glorified Xbox 360s as PCs.

The majority of service pack issues with XP are due to people's systems being infected with Spyware and Viruses (hardly microsofts fault). The rest are hardware related.

Not to burst anyones bubble but the Vista Patch has been available since 1/13/2006.

Official Vista Patch

No Drew, Fridge is right. But it goes even deeper than that. We all know operating systems have a very close relationship with the hardware they run on. Typical "home" operating systems, like Windows or MacOS or Linux, MUST address that fact, and some of them do. Apple addresses it by restricting the type of hardware that is available for MacOS X; there aren't many issues of incompatibility or quality. Linux and Windows can't do that, because they are meant to run on a lot of different hardware configurations. Linux addresses the hardware problem issue with methodologies like CRC checks and block exclusions. Windows just crashes. Windows gives a BSOD, or in the case of XP, just reboots. Windows freaks out if a DRIVER is corrupt, much less bad ram!

That has become acceptable behavior. You accept this behavior as normal. You say "in order to make your computer not crash with Windows, you have to have perfectly functioning hardware and perfectly functioning third party drivers". Well, no. That is not the case. Linux finds a way to handle the problems, and so should Windows.

I've gone off about this before: operating systems (as with ANYTHING) should be designed considering the environment in which they will be used. It is NOT the fault of the user! It is NOT the fault of the hardware! The OS is specifically DESIGNED to operate with this type of abuse! If it can not perform where it is intended, then it is not well designed. End of discussion. I realize OS design not an easy task, but blame needs to be put where it is deserved.

Anyway I'm not making any money talking here.

Absolutely. I believe if the market holds a company accountable through high expectations, the company will be willing to meet the standards.

Automotive example: How much slack will you cut the software in your car's ABS embedded computer? Imagine that conversation! "We're sorry Mr. Smith, your wife died because you didn't install the latest patch for your Volvo. If you read the EULA you signed when you leased the car, it clearly states we are not responsible...."

Windows is the broker for the driver -> hardware interaction. A hardware driver execption should be caught. My machine locked up tight after installing that driver and playing that game.

So you think active memory protection is a bad idea? No wonder you Windows-fanboys won't get anywhere. Just be glad MS isn't making mission-critical systems. Mediocrity should not be considered acceptable nor the norm. We can discuss real Bullet Proof (military grade) systems in another thread if you'd like. I'm talking about systems that really ARE bullet proof and are expected to still work after a hit.

LOL No kidding! I generally hang out here when I'm in long, boring meetings. (like now)

Microsoft does deal with the problem, they list compatible, certified hardware and provided WHQL drivers. Again it is not my fault people who have no business working on computers have hardware and driver issues and want to blame Microsoft for their lack of knowledge.

This is the dumbest argument yet. Any computer needs perfectly working hardware and properly written drivers to function properly. You are blaming Microsoft for people being stupid and unknowledgeable. Oh well.

Right it is not the fault of the user for installing a virus by clicking on the punch the monkey banner. It is not the fault of the hardware when a capacitor blows because the formula used to create them was flawed. No it is ALL Microsoft's fault!!! Man you guys need to learn how to fix PCs.

Consumers always hold the companies responsible. As you can see they are very satisfied with Microsoft since it controls over 90% of the desktop market.

Software designed to do one thing is a different subject. This is just an absurd comparison and Microsoft server software is run in enterprises everywhere on mission critical systems.

Was the driver WHQL? None of this changes the fact that it was not a fault of the OS but YOU for installing the driver.

So mediocre that over 90% of the desktops in the world are Windows.