vista beta 2

qdewolf · Post by **qdewolf** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 4:34 pm

has anybody had any success getting mediastudio pro 8 to run on vista beta 2?

Georg · Post by **Georg** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 4:40 pm

I wait for the download, but the server of microsoft are down.

qdewolf · Post by **qdewolf** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 5:40 pm

I got it installed but the video editor crashes as soon as i run it

skier-hughes · Post by **skier-hughes** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 9:12 pm

I hope you have reported it to MS.

qdewolf · Post by **qdewolf** » Tue Jun 13, 2006 4:11 pm

sjj1805 · Post by **sjj1805** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 1:03 am

I hope you had more success with Vista Beta 2 than I did.
I downloaded Beta 2 yesterday and it took 4 hours to do an upgrade install on one of my hard drives and I still can't get the belkin wireless network to work with it.

It did open VS9 and also VS10 but thats about as far as I got having spent about 6 hours with it. (4 installing and 2 trying to get the network working)
fortunately it let me connect with my good old modem.

qdewolf · Post by **qdewolf** » Tue Jun 20, 2006 4:16 pm

the os installed correctly and smoothly. My tabletPC actually runs better. But MSP8 video editor and video lab crash. the video editor will not run at all and the video lab applications all fail after drawing the interface with an error about a .cg file.

Devil · Post by **Devil** » Wed Jun 21, 2006 9:38 am

I certainly ain't going to ##### up any of my computers as MS says there is no hope of reversion if something goes wrong, short of a clean re-install. They also imply that you can't dual-boot, either. I've been successfully using Office 2k7 beta but I draw the line at anything as dangerous as Vista sounds.

wh5916 · Post by **wh5916** » Wed Jun 21, 2006 9:47 am

Devil wrote:I certainly ain't going to ##### up any of my computers as MS says there is no hope of reversion if something goes wrong, short of a clean re-install. They also imply that you can't dual-boot, either. I've been successfully using Office 2k7 beta but I draw the line at anything as dangerous as Vista sounds.

Dual booting is possible. I have the newest beta of Vista and my main install of Windows XP on the same hard drive. Choices on the boot select menu generated by Vista are "Windows" and "Earlier Versions of Windows."

sjj1805 · Post by **sjj1805** » Wed Jun 21, 2006 10:26 am

I obtained a copy of the Beta Version because I have removeable hard drives and so for me it is safe. I slipped out my normal Hard Drive and placed a spare one in that I would be happy to reformat if necessary.

I don't know how a clean install of Vista would perform but the upgrade from XP certainly leaves a lot to be desired. I also noticed that the computer runs a lot slower and even with nothing running other that whatever I have as normal background stuff - anti-virus, internet connection etc. Vista gobbled some 500MB of memory - thats more than a lot of our forum members appear to have installed.

Still couldn't get the Belkin wireless Network to work with Vista and upon looking on the Vista User forums I am not the only one.

From my brief look so far, I dont think it will be hitting the supermarket shelves for some several months yet.

Devil · Post by **Devil** » Wed Jun 21, 2006 10:51 am

What is sure is that Vista and Office 2k7 are both bloatware, roughly twice the size and requiring twice the memory resources of their predecessors. They are therefore BOUND to be slower, all other things being equal.

A couple of years ago, I installed DOS 6.2 on a P4 1.6 GHz machine and a couple of DOS apps. I was astonished how fast these apps were (one was WordPerfect 5.2, the last DOS version). However I also installed a pre-Windows version of an ECAD application: autorouting was THREE TIMES faster than under Windows W2k, despite all the graphics advances of WIN.

My guess is that the driving force for increasingly faster hardware with greater memory is not because it improves the applications but simply to compensate for the increasing bloatiness of operating systems. My first Intel PC (I used other makes before that) ran with a CPU at 4.77 MHz, had 640 kb RAM and a HDD of 10 Mb, and that was barely more than 20 years ago. My latest one has a CPU 629 times faster, has 1,600 times as much RAM and 12,000 times as much HDD space - and was a fraction of the price. My first one could run WordPerfect 2 faster than I could type, with many bells and whistles. Today's can run WP9 or Word 2k7 faster than I can type, with a few more bells and whistles, many of which I never use. Where is the progress?

sjj1805 · Post by **sjj1805** » Wed Jun 21, 2006 11:47 am

My biggest concern about VISTA is how the software companies will continue to support XP. For me XP does everything I ask of it and it is stable.

Too often when a new operating system comes along users of existing operating systems have suddenly found themselves left out in the cold when it comes to new versions, updates and the like.

OK perhaps VISTA will do more but at what expense. I forsee many users having to go out and completely change their computer systems for faster processors, memory chips and gawd knows what else.

My workplace employs some 10-12,000 employees. It is heavily computerised and I myself sit at a desk with a minimum 3 computers, some of my workstations have 5.

My organisastion still uses NT4. Now I wonder what the cost would be to my organisation if it upgraded its thousands of computers to VISTA plus the training costs of the users and the I.T. maintenance staff.

Post by **Ron P.** » Wed Jun 21, 2006 3:22 pm

I think Steve's concern echoes around the world. I currently just have 2 personal computers. My old computer is still running Win98se. I've thought long and hard about upgrading the OS to WinXP, however even with the system maxed out, it would not run WinXP very well. Now that M$ haulted the patches, updates for that version, it becomes somewhat risky when my wife(she uses it) uses the internet. Now the computer that I use I don't think would fair well with Vista. I have enough real-estate, but the RAM is the issue. From what I've read, 1gig doesn't seem to be enough umph for it and my editing. My system will not allow for any more RAM.

Now where I used to work, they are also still using Win 2000 Pro. They don't have nearly the computers that Steve is talking about, however the agency is quite small. With small agencies come small budgets. This is a government agency, and when more money is needed they just raise taxes. This can be a real burden on small communites, thus the citizens fight things like upgrading computer systems tooth and nail. The commissioners (they hold the purse strings) are somewhat old time farmer types, so you can guess what their opinion is on things like computers.

Now if M$ and software companies in general continue to provide support for older versions then I see no problem with the continued advance. However I think at some point they need to stop and consider what they are costing people. Their demise will be when people get tired of having to update, upgrade quarterly or else loose the ability to use their products. I think that road is being approached. They would do much better if they would just fix their stuff that was broken to start with, and quit charging everyone for their mistakes. I mean if you bought a car, then 3 months later they said Oh the engine doesn't run quite right, so you are going to have to replace it with this newer one, which will only cost you another $3,000 dollars, how soon would they go bankrupt? Most people could not and would not succum to such tactics. Most would take the car back and demand refunds...

Sorry... stepping down off my soapbox...

Ron P.

maddrummer3301 · Post by **maddrummer3301** » Wed Jun 21, 2006 3:59 pm

It's all about starting a new software market and making money.
And when Vista is ready it will be shipped as OEM versions already
installed on machines such as Dell's etc.
Software companies will create a new version of their software and
market the new version compatible for Vista.

History repeats itself following the MS trend.

troppo · Post by **troppo** » Thu Jun 22, 2006 1:15 am

I believe this is Vista's biggest hurdle. The many thousands of XP PCs in operation right now in coorporations and businesses are mainly used for word processing and information sharing. There is no cost advantage to upgrading to Vista. And because we have had XP now for so long, the IT managers are familiar with it's workings, and shortcomings.
The same reason many people are still running win2000 will be the same reason I'm still going to run XP.
Now to petition for a DOS6.2 version of MSP8!