ie8 fix

Microsoft internal memo details Windows 7-Windows Live ties

By | April 28, 2008, 6:11am PDT

In January, I mentioned an internal Microsoft memo I had seen which provided details of how Microsoft plans to more tightly integrate its Windows 7 operating system with Windows Live services. Today, I’m providing the text of that memo in full, as part of the launch of my book Microsoft 2.0: How Microsoft Plans to Stay Relevant in the Post-Gates Era.

The memo — an internal planning document for what Microsoft calls “Windows Live Wave 3″ — dates back to August 2007. In it, Chris Jones, Corporate Vice President of Windows Live Experience; David Treadwell, Corporate Vice President of Live Platform Services; and Brian Arbogast, Corporate Vice President of Mobile Services share their vision for how Windows Live will evolve to be more tightly linked with Windows, Internet Explorer, Office, MSN and Live Search.

The memo outlines some of the possible ties between Windows 7 (which Microsoft has said is due in 2010) and Windows Live Wave 3 services (upgrades of Windows Live Hotmail, Messenger, Writer, Family Safety, etc., due to be rolled out late this year, if the team stays on schedule). These integration points are the potentially most fertile — and controversial — part of the Windows Live team’s vision. As the authors explain:

“We will work with the Windows 7 team and be a first and best developer of solutions on the Windows 7 platform. Our experiences will be designed so when they are connected to Windows 7 they seamlessly extend the Windows experience, and we will work to follow the Windows 7 style guidelines for applications. We will work with the Internet Explorer 8 team to make sure we deliver an experience that seamlessly extends the browser with our toolbar and other offerings.”

More:

“We have an opportunity to make it much easier for customers to ‘get started’ with Windows Live. Our goal should be to have customers log in, type their Live ID, and then they are automatically ’set up’ with Live. For new machines, we want Windows Live to come with the experience and will consider investments to make this experience easy. For customers who are upgrading from Windows Vista to Windows 7, we will explore ways to make it easy for them to get Windows Live – particularly for photos, calendar, and movies where our applications complete the experience.”

The memo authors wondered aloud:

“What is better with Windows 7? What experiences or scenarios are Win7 only? How do we take advantage of or lay the foundation to take advantage of some of the hardware innovations already available or planned for Windows 7?”

How Office 14 (due in 2009 or so) will play with Windows Live is a topic the Windows Live team is mulling, too:

“Many customers will use Office and Office 14, and we will work to connect these customers to our experience. What happens when a customer sets up Windows Live and uses Office? It should be easy to use Windows Live Messenger and our communication services with the Outlook client. It should be easy to publish from Office applications to Live Folders.”

Given that it was written last year, the memo doesn’t call out by name Live Mesh, Microsoft’s platform and service for collaboration and synchronization introduced last week. Microsoft officials said last week they’d share more specifics about how Live Mesh will mesh with Windows Live at the Professional Developers Conference in October. But the mission statement layed out by Jones, Treadwell and Arbogast hinted at it:

“Our mission is to deliver the essential suite of software and services for individuals around the world, designed to help them stay connected (browse, create, manage, and share with the people they choose, on any device) and protected (provide safety and security for their information, their families, and their devices), built on the leading platform for developers, merchants, and advertisers.”

As the memo authors themselves noted, the features and functionality for the next versions of Windows Live services are still not cast in stone.  And that’s not because of any potential impact from Yahoo; any kind of integration between Yahoo and Microsoft services won’t even start for a year or more — when and if Microsoft ever ends up acquiring its hostile-takeover target.

But if there were any remaining illusions that there is a Chinese Wall (or three) separating the Windows, Office and Windows Live units, those should be thrown out the window.

What’s your take on Microsoft’s Windows 7-Windows Live integration plans?

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Mary Jo has covered the tech industry for more than 25 years for a variety of publications and Web sites, and is a frequent guest on radio, TV and podcasts, speaking about all things Microsoft-related. She is the author of Microsoft 2.0: How Microsoft plans to stay relevant in the post-Gates era (John Wiley & Sons, 2008).

Disclosure

Mary-Jo Foley

Freelance journalist/blogger Mary Jo Foley has nothing to disclose. WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get). I do not own Microsoft stock or stock in any of its partners or competitors. I have no business ventures that are sponsored by/funded by Microsoft or any of its partners or competitors.

Biography

Mary-Jo Foley

Mary Jo Foley has covered the tech industry for 25 years for a variety of publications, including ZDNet, eWeek and Baseline. She has kept close tabs on Microsoft strategy, products and technologies for the past 10 years. In the late 1990s, she penned the award-winning "At The Evil Empire" column for ZDNet, and more recently the Microsoft Watch blog for Ziff Davis.

Got a tip? Send her an email with your rants, rumors, tips and tattles. Confidentiality guaranteed.

134
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Microsoft internal memo details Windows 7-Windows Live ties
makrejktt1501-24353656047939533060703815469009 11th Nov
gmpwhp,good post!
0 Votes
+ -
I take it ....
Linux_4u! 28th Apr 2008
?We have an opportunity to make it much easier for customers to ?get started? with Windows Live. Our goal should be to have customers log in, type their Live ID, and then they are automatically ?set up? with Live. For new machines, we want Windows Live to come with the experience and will consider investments to make this experience easy. For customers who are upgrading from Windows Vista to Windows 7, we will explore ways to make it easy for them to get Windows Live ? particularly for photos, calendar, and movies where our applications complete the experience.?

MEANS, what can we do to LOCK the end user in to our services and eventually charge them for it once we they are locked in ...
0 Votes
+ -
Why Windows 7 Will Be DOA
swbobcat 28th Apr 2008
It seem as though Microsoft NEVER LEARNS : Here we go again, they want to integrate even more cr@p into the Operating System, making it even more bloated, more resource wasteful, more buggy. Instead of creating an OS that will play nicely with other OS M$ wants to try to lock everyone and their brother into an inferior system. It seems that all M$ is doing is making itself more and more irrelevant, that is too expensive, too buggy, and too unreliable with an ever increasing narrow application that no one really needs or wants. If M$ makes Windows 7 even more integrated that VISTA, then Windows 7 is already DOA.
0 Votes
+ -
Afraid You're Right
madrucke@... 28th Apr 2008
AMEN!

Looks like waiting for Windows 7 to overcome Vista is a pipe dream...

Time to start loading up on XP Licenses or go to Linux...

Hey I'm willing to pay for a *good* product and support...

Vista and M$ is niether...

And, now it looks as though more force feeeding...

Mike Sr.
0 Votes
+ -
Yeah, we all want less
SnoopDougEDoug 28th Apr 2008
Since when did anyone buy anything because it had LESS FUNCTIONALITY than the previous version?

I keep hearing that Microsoft is leaning toward more of a modular OS. Note that Linux has this battle of monolithic core versus modular core for years (see Linus versus Tanenbaum).

doug
0 Votes
+ -
... Windows is this lovely modular things that give you choice and that Linux is not at all configurable.

Maybe time you went and learnt something ...
0 Votes
+ -
Microsoft Rules
ILoveMicrosoft 29th Apr 2008
Wow, you Linux guys are so boring, always ranting about like my stone old sick granny. What about saying - wow we so much look forward to the new MinWin core, even better modularity of windows and an even more secure OS than its already world leading predecessor Vista. Vista which is a super secure and lightning fast and stable OS outperforms Linux in almost any respect beside memory usage. But hey, if you can?t afford the 25 dollars for an extra 2 gig RAM you better stay with crappy ol? Linux and spend days and night configuring the crap.
0 Votes
+ -
So don't use them
SnoopDougEDoug 28th Apr 2008
So what is your complaint? That Microsoft is a business? That you need not use Microsoft to access your data? There is no impediment to accessing your data from a non-Microsoft OS or platform.

If someone else comes up with a better set of services to access the same data for less $$$, you have the right to use those services.

There is no hidden agenda, data-format lock in.

doug
0 Votes
+ -
What utter rubbish
fr0thy2 28th Apr 2008
"There is no impediment to accessing your data from a non-Microsoft OS or platform."

Wow! They sure got you eating out of their one hand (whilst the other is in your back pocket).
Windows, or at least make sure you get a degraded experience. They will do everything they can to blur the difference between the Internet and Windows proprietary protocols, apis, and file formats.

The jury is still out on whether or not it will work. With the increased Firefox, Mac and Linux usage, they will have an increasingly hard time. Oh, let us also not forget mobile devices running Linux and OSX.
0 Votes
+ -
Live Mesh uses open protocols
SnoopDougEDoug 28th Apr 2008
You might try reading about Live Mesh. It uses off-the-shelf feeds (APP). I saw a recent video on channel 9 where one of their guys fired up IronPython and wandered around their data.


doug
0 Votes
+ -
WOW how clever
fr0thy2 28th Apr 2008
pretend to be open in the inter-communication, but fling chairs around if you can't own all of the servers, courtesy of patents, because Penelope and Rupert need your money.
0 Votes
+ -
Remember GPL?
peter_erskine@... 28th Apr 2008
If Microsoft use code from the Free Software world, then their work cannot be sold, only given away.
0 Votes
+ -
Not quite.
rtk 28th Apr 2008
There's many open source commercial projects. They are required to offer the source code, not prevented from selling the compiled product.
If it's a case of internal divisions sharing what's cooking and
mutually authoring good ideas, I have no problem with that.

The real question is will Office 14 allow unfettered access to all
clouds or will the apis be partially interlocked and exclusive to
Windows 7, other Microsoft products, and dues-paying ISVs?

While one may debate the ethics and legality of that choice,
were it to happen, I suspect that into the future customers (and
maybe even ISVs) are going to be increasingly indifferent to
products and platforms which reduce their options, so I think it
would be a poor business choice. Again, were it to happen that
way.
0 Votes
+ -
Unlikely
Anton Philidor 28th Apr 2008
Microsoft recognizes that other devices and software exist in the company's new markets. Just as there's a penalty for purchasing a Mac when one has invested in Windows-only software, so Microsoft would aggravate people who could not use products already purchased.

Of course, when older devices/software are replaced Microsoft will have an opportunity to show that its products work better and have more features. The advantages to all-Microsoft should be easy to indicate.

Behavior required for a new market is different from behavior possible in an older market. Microsoft has the advantage of being predominant in the two largest markets of all, operating systems and office productivity, and there are no substantial threats to that dominance. So the company can advance with sufficient patience that anti-trust restrictions can't be instigated, but the new markets are eventually absorbed.
0 Votes
+ -
"Our experiences will be designed so when they are connected
to Windows 7 they seamlessly extend the Windows experience."

Does this include rampant viruses, spyware, nagware,
bloatware, lack of drivers, premature printer and scanner end-
of-life routines and other customer outrages?

This is an example of how far away from real life the Microsoft
crowd is. After the CFO said (last week) that there is no Vista
problem, perhaps a large segment of MSFT needs some serious
reality training, as in, why don't you try to use this junk without
the usual fleet of IT, tech and other (completely artificial)
support?

Just keep it up. Would the last MSFT user please close out the
lights quietly?
0 Votes
+ -
sorry
Khyron 28th Apr 2008
using Vista and having no problems. Works great. try it yourself, before listening to silly wack job MAC commercials or biased blogs. MAC gave up the OS fight when it decided to run on top of linux. As far I'm concerned the only fight is between Linux and MS now. MAC copped out.

MAC today is like me writing a GUI to run on top of Windows and calling it a compettive OS to Linux and Windows. /boggle
Just like with Linux, if you get Vista pre-installed, or installed on known compatible hardware, it works fine. The big problem with Vista is it takes more hardware resources to run, and thus requires an expensive hardware upgrade, or in any case more expensive hardware.

But, Mac is doing great right now . . . .
0 Votes
+ -
Oh really
Khyron 28th Apr 2008
"Darwin 7.0.x (corresponding to Mac OS X 10.3.x) consists of over 250 packages. Many of these are Apple packages (including the Mac OS X kernel and various drivers), while the others originate from *BSD, GNU, etc. Apple has leveraged a lot of existing open source software by integrating it well (usually) with their system: apache, bind, binutils, cvs, gcc, gdb, gimp_print, kerberos, mysql, openssh, openssl, pam, perl, postfix, ppp, python, rsync, samba, and many more BSD/GNU/other packages ... are all part of Darwin. In many cases, Apple has made important modifications to open source code to optimize/adapt it to their platform (consider gcc and gdb). Moreover, even though one can always configure and control such software "as usual" (editing their configuration file in vi or emacs, say), Apple provides simplified user interfaces that work well for at least the not-so-contrived cases. "
0 Votes
+ -
Unix, not Linux
TeoMcDohl 28th Apr 2008
From my understanding, OS X was built using a Unix kernel, not a Linux kernel.
0 Votes
+ -
and the difference is?
Khyron 28th Apr 2008
really, MAC is still based off many Applications from another OS so the argument that I made still stands. It may be a MAC kernel, but MAC is still running off applications from another operating system with a pretty GUI to make it look good.

So if I piece-meal an OS together using parts from Windows and linux, did I really make a new operating system or just frankenstien one together? hmm?
0 Votes
+ -
"Mac" is not an acronym...
olePigeon 28th Apr 2008
"Mac" is not an acronym, it's just short for Macintosh; nor
is Mac the name of the company, the company is called
Apple; nor is Mac the name of the OS, the OS is called Mac
OS X.

The kernel is XNU, with the Mach microkernel. BSD UNIX is
the underlying OS. Most of OS X is based off the NeXT
operating system developed by NeXT which was founded
by Steve Jobs and acquired by Apple.

Windows is piece mail as well.
0 Votes
+ -
Oversimplifying
TeoMcDohl 28th Apr 2008
I believe your concept of an OS is skewed. I would not call OS X the same as Unix. I believe you are oversimplifying what you consider OS X to be. It is not simply window dressing for Unix. The NeXT OS was the grandfather of OS X.
of the Minix(?) project, not Unix (Same sons of different mothers), from what I understand.
0 Votes
+ -
compatible hardware
coffeeshark 28th Apr 2008
If MS only sold their OS on "known compatible hardware", they'd be Apple. Nothing wrong with it, just a different business model.
0 Votes
+ -
It is not more expensive hardware...
rkostynu@... 28th Apr 2008
Do you realize the PC hardware a person can buy for the price of a Mac?

Mac:
20 inch 2.4 Ghz
* 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
* 1GB memory
* 250GB hard drive1
* 8x double-layer SuperDrive
* ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory
$1,299.00

Acer
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 VIIV
Quad Core 2.4 GHz
6GB DDR2 PC5300 (667Mhz)
750GB SATA 7200 RPM
Blu-ray/HD DVD Read+ Supermulti DVD
ATI HD2400 256MB card
Windows Vista Home Premium 64-Bit
24" WideScreen 5ms 3000:1
$1299.00

With the Acer system Vista will operate with no speed or performance issues, so hardware is not an issue when you compare apples to apples (price for price)....if a person upgraded from an old system then I agree... hardware could be an issue...but then how would OSx run on a 3 year-old Mac (if it even could)?
0 Votes
+ -
Just a quick little bit of info for you. I have an iBook G4
with a 1.25 GHz Processor, 768MB RAM, and an integrated
video card with no dedicated memory. Not only does it
run the OS with out issue, it runs it with full graphics and
animations. And just for fun I run WOW on it. I admit that
it does not handle the graphics of WOW as well as my
Older PowerMac G4 with the 64 MB ATI Video card but it
can hold its own.

One of the beautiful things about Apple software is that it
is not bloated and does not require that you have a dual
Xeon with a gig of video memory to get the start menu to
animate.
0 Votes
+ -
Uh... Put the crack pipe down..
Wolfie2K3 28th Apr 2008
One of the beautiful things about Apple software is that it is not bloated and does not require that you have a dual Xeon with a gig of video memory to get the start menu to animate.

Vista doesn't require a dual Xeon chip with a gig of VIDEO memory to animate anything.

Vista's requirement for Aero to run nicely would be any modern processor made in the last 3 - 4 years and 128 MB of video memory. Vista runs better with a GB of regular SYSTEM memory.
0 Votes
+ -
Wow
rtk 28th Apr 2008
if it runs so incredibly well with 4 year old hardware, why do you think they keep "engineering" new models with faster hardware?

Seem like a waste, since it's "beautiful" on 4 year old hardware.

/sarcasm

The system requirements for 10.5, Hardy Heron, and Vista are remarkably similar.
0 Votes
+ -
Uhh . . .
JLHenry 28th Apr 2008
'Cause they want to sell new hardware??? Seriously, though, most Mac sales aren't upgrades, but sales to new Mac users.
0 Votes
+ -
yeah, probably not.
rtk 28th Apr 2008
'Cause they want to sell new hardware??? Seriously, though, most Mac sales aren't upgrades, but sales to new Mac users.

No, because 4 year old hardware is slow as molasses compared to today's, whether the OS will install and crawl or not.

As for the "most sales aren't upgrades" theory, I call huge BS. It's a statement created by Apple marketing, and nothing more. There's not a shred of proof outside of apple's claims, and the numbers just don't ever add up for them.

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=11

Seems Vista is replacing XP, and Mac intel is replacing old mac hardware.

Eventually we will see an actual rise in OS X usage, right? Quarter after quarter Apple claims to be growing far faster than the overall market, yet they've barely managed to gain a single percentage point in a year.
0 Votes
+ -
Runs Fantastic!
middle of nowhere 28th Apr 2008
"but then how would OSx run on a 3 year-old Mac (if it even could)?"

Well, I'm running OS X 10.4.11 on a 1999 PowerMac G4 Dual 450MHz
machine.

It's 9 YEARS OLD and running the last (not latest) release of OS X.

Never a problem with the OS, has not crashed once. I can do
everything I need on it, albeit, a bit more slowly than modern
machines. The only thing I wish it did faster would be rendering
DVDs.

The only upgrades I've done is to add larger / faster drives and put in
a Radeon 9800.

With those upgrades I get all of the eye candy the OS has to offer.

Since XP has nothing to compare with OS X as far as eye candy goes,
try running Vista on a 9 year old machine and turn on all the gui
goodness, if it will even install.
0 Votes
+ -
system requirements
rtk 28th Apr 2008
10.5

* Processor must be any Intel, PowerPC G5 or G4 (at least 867 MHz or faster)
* At least 512 MB of RAM
* 9 GB of disk space

Looks like your machine can't run 10.5, so I guess you should "try running OS X 10.5 on a 9 year old machine, if it will even install"

By comparision:

Vista:

* Processor must be 800 Mhz or faster
* At least 512 MB of RAM
* 15GB of disk space

Ubuntu 8.04 (desktop)

* Processor must be 700 MHz or faster
* at least 384 MB of RAM
* 8 GB of disk space.

Yeah, Vista's requirements are insane! /sarcasm
0 Votes
+ -
Vista runs better with 2GB..
rkostynu@... 28th Apr 2008
"but then how would OSx run on a 3 year-old Mac (if it even could)?"

I asked the question (I wasn't being sarcastic because I don't know Macs) I'm not bashing, thats good that you can do that without upgrading.

I know one thing about Vista and Aero, if you have a 64MB video it runs OK, 128 MB is better but the big difference is the RAM, going to 2GB from 1GB sees a pretty performance bump. Its not the processor as most processor made within the last 5 years sit around waiting for other devices 95% of the time anyways (unless your doing video editing/converting which will pin the best of them anyways)

My main point is price for hardware is comparable for new machines and yes with Vista on something 3 years old will require some cash outlay for video card and RAM.

wink
0 Votes
+ -
Hmmmm....
cashaww 28th Apr 2008
So what seems to be happening here on the planet Earth
means nothing? The Mac environment does not exist? Also
Mac sits on top of BSD, not Linux, while Windows, if I am
correct, sits on top of DOS. But who cares how the systems
run, as long as they do what is asked of them in the manner
that does not annoy the hell out of people. Which seems to
be what I hear from most Windows Vista users I know.
Granted, I do not know many, but many of the ones I do
know are IT people.
0 Votes
+ -
Not any more...
swattz101 28th Apr 2008
Just an FYI, Windows has not sit on top of DOS since Windows 98 (unless you count WinMe). Windows NT has always been based on an NT kernal, and consumer windows started using the NT kernal with Windows XP. (I consider Windows 2000 a business OS.)
0 Votes
+ -
Thunking layers
fr0thy2 28th Apr 2008
There were various thunking layers in NT which is proof that it was not a rewrite, as MS would have had people believe.

It was around that time that a lot of people were waking up and realising that Microsoft would simply say whatever the hell they wanted, that the truth was far less important than their world domination plan.
I already utilize Windows Live email client and it works great, better than shelling out $$ for Outlook/Office. For the rest of my application needs I utiliza OpenOffice which is free and does just as good a job at word processing and spreadsheet and presentation (PowerPoint) as Office 2007.
0 Votes
+ -
Vista is fine
davidhayes 28th Apr 2008
I'm running Vista on the cheapest hardware I could buy. It's mainly used as a Media Centre (running at Full HD, 1920*1080 IIRC) and I have no problems with performance at all. It's possible XP may be a few % faster but who really cares
0 Votes
+ -
In the minority
TeoMcDohl 28th Apr 2008
Sir, you are in the minority, and very lucky. Of all the Vista machines I've dealt with, I've yet to have a pleasant experience. Crashes and performance issues galore, even after SP1.
0 Votes
+ -
he's in the mass majority
rtk 28th Apr 2008
You are in the infinitely small minority.

Of all the Vista machines I've dealt with, I've yet to have an unpleasant experience. Anyone I've moved onto Vista would slit my throat if I tried to move them back to XP.

Sounds like you've got hardware issues, since Vista is remarkably more stable than XP.

Or maybe it's your setup, if you've experienced issues on multiple machines. Installing a favorite legacy app or consistently using similar video drivers, etc?
0 Votes
+ -
Curious
TeoMcDohl 28th Apr 2008
Then this whole "Save XP" movement seems rather silly, don't you think? I suppose the articles that continue to harp on Vista and claim XP as the choice of enterprise is all bogus.
0 Votes
+ -
yup,
rtk 28th Apr 2008
The "Save XP" movement does seem rather silly, probably because it is.

Once again, this is the exact same response MS got with XP, and 2k before that. We'll see it repeat with Windows 7 in the coming months.
0 Votes
+ -
Not entirely right...
Wolfie2K3 28th Apr 2008
Once again, this is the exact same response MS got with XP, and 2k before that. We'll see it repeat with Windows 7 in the coming months.

The reaction for Windows 2000 was a LOT more positive. Win 2K was a lot more user-friendly than NT4.

However, your assessment of XP is pretty much on the money. There was a lot of resistance at first to XP. Activation was supposed to be the thing that caused an asteroid to crash to earth or some such drivel. Funny thing - 7 years down the road, and still no doom.

XP SP2 likewise got a lot of resistance. WGA, program incompatibilities, etc... were likewise to cause devastation of biblical proportions. And yet, we're all still here. Once the moaning and groaning was over, apps got fixed, life moved on. Still no doom.

It'll probably happen the same way with Vista. It will just take a bit longer.
0 Votes
+ -
I would have to disagree, based...
brendthess 28th Apr 2008
... on the experiences of our IT team at work.

Over the last year or so, we have attempted to integrate several different Vista machines (mostly laptops and Vaio hiptops, but a couple of desktops as well) into our workflow. Even the people using only Microsoft apps (mostly Office apps) have noted the sluggishness of the machines, although about half appreciated the new interface.

(Note: No one with permissions to install new software on their own work machines has had much kind to say about Vista other than about the interface.)

At this point, the majority (85+% according to the person who is responsible for this task) of the machines where rollback to XP is possible, have been rolled back to XP, mostly due to user request / complaints of sluggishness (at least two incompatable app rollbacks as well). Of these, none have subsequently been rolled forward to Vista again.

Our Network, Hardware & O/S chief cook, a vociferous Microsoft supporter, has no plans (and no intentions at this point) for moving the enterprise to Vista. He currently intends to wait for Win7 before evaluating a move off of XP.

At least from the perspective of our company, Vista is sluggish and unnecessary. Others also obviously hold the same opinion. YMMV
0 Votes
+ -
I would consider
rtk 28th Apr 2008
replacing your IT team at work with qualified people.

Vista's issues should not be a stumbling block for trained IT professionals, more like a minor hiccup.

Least privilege getting in the way? Install the app to a user location. incompatible hardware and software aren't an excuse, they should have bought compatible hardware when they bought the Vista machines.

As for software, there's enough ways to run in compatibility mode, etc that a trained person shouldn't have too much trouble.

From the perspective of our company, Vista is fast, stable and reliable, others also obviously hold the same opinion. YMMV.
0 Votes
+ -
Heh.
brendthess 28th Apr 2008
I feel like I'm in a political debate, or on a carnival ride - Everything was suddenly all about spin!

Least privilege getting in the way? Install the app to a user location.

Nope, that was never the issue. You simply assumed it was.

The issue was the mass of annoying verifications and security upgrades / checks required when installing. That's what annoyed the users, not the installation location issues.

incompatible hardware and software aren't an excuse, they should have bought compatible hardware when they bought the Vista machines.

Where did hardware come into this? I never said anything about incompatible hardware (and, checking with the h/w guys, the only hardware incompatibility we experienced was with some bizarre, off-brand rf scanner thingie [technical term here] used in the warehouse). Hardware incompatibility had nothing to do with the issues.

(And, after all, all of the PCs were certified as Vista Capable at least, and since MS is approving those certs, well, it *must* be true... mustn't it? )

As for software, there's enough ways to run in compatibility mode, etc that a trained person shouldn't have too much trouble.

Except, of course, where it won't. And with small vertical market software suppliers, updating the software is likely to take years, if it is done at all.

Quick survey: How many business do you know still running MS-DOS applications? I know of two (neither the company I work for). Reason? Their business critical niche software has never been moved to Windows. The same statement probably applies to different pieces of software running on old Win3.x, Win9x, WinNT, Novell, or other O/S boxes.

Not all software is upgraded. In some cases, not all software *can* be upgraded without more resources than the companies involved can dedicate to the upgrade.

I don't know if you hold this opinion, but it seems like your response to them is along the lines of "To heck with them! Upgrade or piss off!" It's certainly been the MS position for years.
0 Votes
+ -
re: Heh
rtk 29th Apr 2008
Least privilege getting in the way? Install the app to a user location.

Nope, that was never the issue. You simply assumed it was.[b/]

Nope, it was a question, not an assumption. That's what that little curly thing over the period is, a question mark.

The issue was the mass of annoying verifications and security upgrades / checks required when installing. That's what annoyed the users, not the installation location issues.

Your users are installing and configuring their own OS and software? What's your IT department for again?
0 Votes
+ -
re: Heh
rtk 28th Apr 2008
Least privilege getting in the way? Install the app to a user location.

Nope, that was never the issue. You simply assumed it was.

Nope, it was a question, not an assumption. That's what that little curly thing over the period is, a question mark.

The issue was the mass of annoying verifications and security upgrades / checks required when installing. That's what annoyed the users, not the installation location issues.

Your users are installing and configuring their own OS and software? What's your IT department for again?
0 Votes
+ -
Vista OK, but not so good with network shares etc
ThePrairiePrankster 28th Apr 2008
I think Vista will be fine, in time. XP had many problems until SP2. I can not say my experience with Vista Ultimate on a brand new Dell E5250 Dimension, dual core, 2GB RAM and an Nvidia card that worked once I acquired drivers from a non-Nvidia source has trouble-free.

1) When a network share is unavailable, try to open My Computer when you have a permanent share set-up. It can take up to 1/2 hour.

2)The Vista PC crashes intermittently after being up for a few days. Quite often, it is idle and nothing is being run except for email. Outlook. The only I find in the system log is "Fatal error, system shutdown" but nothing that illuminates a process or service that contributes to the error.

3) Copying multi-gigabyte files to/from external USB drives is inconsistent.

I moved 60 customers off of Vista back to XP and they were quite happy.

Your experience is no more or less valid than mine.

Have a great day.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Microsoft internal memo details Windows 7-Windows Live ties
makrejktt1501-24353656047939533060703815469009 11th Nov
gmpwhp,good post!

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix