One of the biggest surprises about working with Windows Vista was the first mystery I experienced connecting to the office network.
Made up of a few aging Windows Nt 4.0 servers, a router and switches, the network is used to share files, printers and Internet entrance with desktop computers running Windows 98 and a handful of Windows Xp and Mac Os X notebooks that associate wirelessly.
Into this mix I brought an Hp Presario V3000 notebook computer running Windows Vista Ultimate, a loaner from Microsoft.
I was fast disabused of the understanding that it would be easy to associate it to the Windows network. Either I used a network cable or a wireless link, I was unable to log in to the file server. The name and password blend that worked on my regular motor was rejected when I used the Vista Pc.
The Mis group offered a theory--later confirmed--that the question lay, not with Vista itself, but with the Nt server, which had not been upgraded to service Pack 6. Upgrading the server solved the problem.
The next challenge was printing.
When I tried connecting to the network printer, an Hp Laserjet 5000, Vista complained: "Windows cannot associate to the printer. The printer is not compatible with a course enabled on your computer that blocks Nt 4.0 drivers."
Vista came had its own Laserjet 5000 driver, but would only allow me to install it as a local printer. I searched Vista Help but the "Best 30 results for network printing in Windows Nt" didn't even mention this problem.
A stock scholar from Microsoft advised me to install the Vista driver, right-click on the local printer's icon and call up the properties window. From there, I was to add a new port then type in the network path to the printer. Though unwieldy and unintuitive, the explication worked.
Like the compatibility problems I wrote about last week, this one is likely to cause a fair estimate of discontentment because the explication is far from obvious. Worse, the inequity in this case wasn't even in the middle of Vista and third party software, but in the middle of separate versions of Windows.
Other irritations got in the way of work, along with persistent reminders to commence Windows Vista.
I've always been against Microsoft's course of stock activation, which gives customers 30 days to "activate" their software over the Internet or by phone. Microsoft says this is aimed at stopping piracy, but I see it as an unnecessary imposition on legitimate customers, akin to a security guard at a group store chasing after you to request proof of purchase after you've left the premises--and indeed, even reached home.
The biggest irony was that activation got in the way of my finishing this review, as Vista warned me I had only three days left to commence it before it would stop functioning. I called Microsoft, and after some checking, they told me the version I was testing was a demo and that they didn't have a stock key.
"But you're Microsoft!" I protested. "Can't you just give me a key so I can continue working on this machine?" No. They would have to reinstall Vista if I wanted to continue testing it.
Instead of doing this, we ended up swapping notebooks. The new one cheerfully tells me I have 22 days left before Windows will stop working.
In a perfect world, I or the Mis group would have the stock key handy the occasion I needed it. But in the real world, computers crash or get upgraded, operating systems need to be reinstalled, and stock keys get misplaced--and having to put up with Microsoft's activation rigmarole all over again is one more process that just gets in the way of work.
Product activation is great for Microsoft but brings admittedly no advantage to its customers.
Two other observations, hardly original, bear repeating.
First, the hardware requirements to run Vista well are steep, so fellowships are unlikely to upgrade existing computers to run it. Most Vista installations will come by way of new computers that already ship with the operating principles installed.
Second, expect a period of adjustment. Despite major improvements in security and usability, the operating principles and related applications are just separate sufficient from Windows Xp that some retraining may be required.
Internet Explorer 7.0, which comes with Vista, is far better than 6.0, but its buttons have been moved nearby and not at all where you'd expect to find them.
Microsoft Office 2007, not admittedly a part of Vista but designed to work with it, features a wholly reworked menu principles that is guaranteed to throw off old users. The default file formats, too, have been changed, and users in a heterogeneous computing environment will need to be reminded to save their files in a format that everyone can read.
As part of better security, workers who are signed in as acceptable users will have to get used to the idea that they need an administrator's permission to install or take off software, much as they would on a Linux network.
The Windows Start menu has been vastly improved by the easy expanding of a search bar that can be used to fast find an commence programs. Mac and Linux users will say this sounds a lot like Spotlight and Desk Bar, but imitation isn't necessarily a bad thing if it drives innovation and benefits end-users.
But maybe all this talk about copying from others has sunk into the psyche of Microsoft developers. Or maybe it's just a marketing gimmick. It struck me as odd that Microsoft felt the need to attach the word "Windows" to so many programs. There's Windows Calendar, Windows Contacts, Windows Defender, Windows Dvd Maker, Windows Fax and Scan, Windows Live Messenger, Windows Mail, Windows Media Center, Windows Media Player, Windows Meeting Space, Windows Movie Maker, Windows Photo Gallery, Windows modernize and, oh yes, Windows Explorer.
It's almost as if they needed to remind themselves--and their customers--that, for better or worse, they're still computing in a Windows world.
Tough Day at the Office with VistaForex Handel Devisenhand Tottenham Hotspur News Sprint HTC Evo 4G Phone