MSP* and Vista

Strontium_99 · Post by **Strontium_99** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 4:50 pm

To answer the original post, I¡¦m running a full blown version of Vista ultimate, which was pre-released on the MSDN subscription network, and no MediaStudio Pro does not run on Vista as yet.

Just to defend Microsoft slightly, despite the fact there are some drivers that are not available as yet I find Vista to be a lot more stable then XP or 2000 for that matter. The security take a while to get you head round but beyond that I find it a solid Op system. To be totally honest you do need a powerful machine to get the most out of it which I know will annoy some people, but hey, technology can¡¦t stand still forever. Stop kicking against progress.

sjj1805 · Post by **sjj1805** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:04 pm

To save me a lot of typing please view the following debate in the PhotoImpact Forum
Discuusion about Vista

Devil · Post by **Devil** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:41 pm

Strontium_99 wrote:Stop kicking against progress.

What progress? Having run it now ever since RC1 came out and for a short while on beta before that, I see zero progress, zilch! Only regress. I find it no more stable than XP and it does not even allow me to put in a 2-way firewall, which I consider as a security essential. The most positive thing I can say about it is that it has lost the "Fisher-Price" look of XP.

htchien · Post by **htchien** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 7:57 pm

Strontium_99 wrote:Just to defend Microsoft slightly, despite the fact there are some drivers that are not available as yet I find Vista to be a lot more stable then XP or 2000 for that matter. The security take a while to get you head round but beyond that I find it a solid Op system. To be totally honest you do need a powerful machine to get the most out of it which I know will annoy some people, but hey, technology can¡¦t stand still forever. Stop kicking against progress.

I also use Vista Ultimate for 2 weeks, and I also run Vista Beta and RC builds for months.

There is no need to defend Microsoft. If Vista is good, people will like it and use it. If Vista is not as good as what people think, people will find some other operating system to work with.

Is Vista more stable than XP / 2K? Maybe. But from what I saw in Vista RC and RTM builds, I would doubt on it.

Is Vista more secured than XP / 2K? Maybe. But we can expect more security holes to be found in Vista, even with the new PatchGuard security engine inside. In fact, just days ago the media had reported that the PatchGuard engine is been cracked by hackers. Vista is not as solid as Microsoft claims, and it will never be.

Does Vista perform better than XP / 2K? As you said, we need a much more powerful system to make Vista to run smoothly. But is it really where the technology goes (as you mentioned)?

I really think some features in Vista might annoy people and stop them to use this brand new Windows version. But maybe that will not happen....

If you wish to know, I would tell you a bug of Vista here. If you have Chinese Windows XP installed and then install English edition of Vista in another partition as a dual boot system, the Chinese Windows XP will not boot anymore. But if you install both English and Chinese Windows XP in separate partitions first and then install English Vista in the third partition (or in another hard disk), then all of them can be booted successfully. I found this bug since Vista Beta and it's still not fixed in Vista RTM. I recovered the Chinese Windows XP on my testing system by using the Windows XP CD to replace the boot files, but after that, Vista will not boot.

The so-called technology is not everything. Just like some Taiwanese media wrote in its January release, 75% technologies are just monsters, only 25% are useful to people. Will Vista be one of the 25%? We will see.

H.T.

skier-hughes · Post by **skier-hughes** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 8:19 pm

Everyone keeps saying we need a much more powerful machine to run vista, but much more powerful than what would be a good posting.

I run Vista on my video editing machine, its a good machine, but by no means cutting edge anymore, being 3ghz P4, 2gb ram, 128mb video card. In fact I could do with upgrading the video card to make use of gpu functionality in some of the latest media products, as these tend to need 256mb or more.

So you don't need to be any more powrful than that.

I have just had to rebuild my office pc.
My old one, 750mhz athlon and 284mb ram 64mb video card wouldn't run vista properly, but I will check my new Atholn 1800, 512mb ram video onboard shortly to see how that goes.

From the beta testing of WS3 how mnay of us would say we'd go out and buy the version we tested? I wouldn't, I'd have stuck with WS2.

I remeber all this going on when XP was released, exactly the same things being said, bloatware, needs much more resources, which it did

But I wonder how many of those that complained back tehn are now using it.

How about a poll, who uses which OS?

Graham

heinz-oz · Post by **heinz-oz** » Sun Jan 07, 2007 5:06 am

I wouldn't even consider VISTA unless I was forced to built a new machine, had the money to buy the certified hard- and software as well and MSP, PI and MF were proven to run well on such an OS.

Unless I can see any proof of that, VISTA, together with MS, can stay where they are. If I wanted an OS that maybe one day will be able to have my stuff run on it, I would certainly not chose MS as a vendor.

Strontium_99 · Post by **Strontium_99** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 2:12 pm

I guess everything people are saying is valid, and I also suspect how you feel about Vista depends a lot on your circumstances, usage, current op system and whether you love/like/hate Microsoft. I understand it is early days yet and that time will tell if Vista is a great improvement or not, but to be totally honest with you all I remember this debate going on when the transition was made from MS Dos 6.2 to Windows 3, Window 3 to Windows 3.11, Windows 3.11 to Windows 95...... etc.... Yes, I was there for all of them

And just to make things a little more complex there is talk of the next versions of Windows:
http://jameskyton.wordpress.com/2006/12 ... nd-vienna/

Lots more room for debate.... lol.

richardnau · Post by **richardnau** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 5:33 am

Despite the various rantings, I don't think the original question has been answered!

Each user will make his/her own choice about the OS that runs his/her PC. Some (many?) will choose to stick with XP. Others (many?) will upgrade to Vista. The question for MSP users remains: will Ulead/Corel release an update to make this product compatible with Vista? A subsidiary question is: when?

Background observations:

1) An update has already been released to make VS10 compatible with Vista.
2) The Ulead statement on Vista says: "Ulead is committed to delivering Vista support for all its major products." There is no list of "major products".
3) The ulead.com product pages for MSP8 make no reference to Vista (that I can see).

I'm still interested in the answer to the OP's question. Has anybody seen or elicited a statement from Ulead on MSP/Vista?

Richard.

Strontium_99 · Post by **Strontium_99** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 12:58 pm

I¡¦ve not seen any official response from Ulead ref. MSP, the only stuff I found was general information on how to setup Ulead products to run in compatible mode on Vista, which I should add still doesn¡¦t allow MSP to run successfully. Suspect, like many other companies, there will be an official response to Vista when it is released to the general public at the end of this month.

Here¡¦s hoping anyway.

zook · Post by **zook** » Sat Jan 27, 2007 6:13 am

Ive recently upgraded to x64 Vista retail version ( after seeing the vista ready logos on Ulead site thought MSP would work ok).

Doh!
Please post when the problems fixed.
Thanks

Devil · Post by **Devil** » Sat Jan 27, 2007 7:54 am

5 Good Reasons not to buy Vista

zook · Post by **zook** » Sat Jan 27, 2007 9:48 am

I had a very good reason to choose vista.
As Richard put it:

Despite the various rantings, I don't think the original question has been answered!

Each user will make his/her own choice about the OS that runs his/her PC. Some (many?) will choose to stick with XP. Others (many?) will upgrade to Vista. The question for MSP users remains: will Ulead/Corel release an update to make this product compatible with Vista? A subsidiary question is: when?

sjj1805 · Post by **sjj1805** » Sat Jan 27, 2007 11:46 am

There is an interesting article here by htchien concerning Vista.
http://phpbb.ulead.com.tw/EN/viewtopic. ... 057#101057

I think that over time vista will no doubt prove to have benefits when installed on NEW computer systems that were built with vista in mind.

For many existing machines you will probably be better off sticking with XP.
This is due to the fact that your existing software and hardware was created for a XP system. Changing you operating system on an existing machine for many (not all) users could in fact be counter productive and in fact make your existing system worse rather than better.

skier-hughes · Post by **skier-hughes** » Sat Jan 27, 2007 2:46 pm

15 Good reasons to buy Vista

http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,12865 ... ticle.html

I had to laugh at some of the reasons for not switching, "Asking users what they'd like included in an update of the OS", come on, we have threads on here, wish list for VS 11, wish list for MF6......... are these reasons for not buying VS10? Because it is incomplete????

Of course the main reason for anybody not to update is that drivers for their equipment and updates for their apps may not be ready, in which case they do need to wait.

Let's face it, those of us who like it will like it, those who don't won't

Steve, glad to see your opinion is now much more reasoned and one of the best posts on the subject we've had.

Devil · Post by **Devil** » Sat Jan 27, 2007 4:17 pm

Oh, I have little doubt that sooner or later I'll run Vista, but it most certainly not be in the near future.

Taking HTC's three questions in the context of my video work:

Is Vista more stable than XP / 2K? Maybe. But from what I saw in Vista RC and RTM builds, I would doubt on it.

I agree. I didn't find it any more stable. Sure, I haven't seen a BSOD, but I've had many crashes in various apps.

Is Vista more secured than XP / 2K? Maybe. But we can expect more security holes to be found in Vista, even with the new PatchGuard security engine inside. In fact, just days ago the media had reported that the PatchGuard engine is been cracked by hackers. Vista is not as solid as Microsoft claims, and it will never be.

Security is not an issue on my video computer, because it has no connection to the Internet. In any case, the firewall in the versions I tried were one-way and it prohibited installation of 2-way firewalls, so I can't see how Vista can be secure if it allows Trojans to report back to their authors. Note that the 15 good reasons mentions 2-way, but I doubt it, unless there has been a very recent major change. In any case, I detest the fact that Vista actually prevents one from installing the firewall I prefer.

Does Vista perform better than XP / 2K? As you said, we need a much more powerful system to make Vista to run smoothly. But is it really where the technology goes (as you mentioned)?

Certainly not with my 1 Gb RAM, nearly ¾ of which was hogged by the OS. In fact, on the video apps I did get working, it ran slower than with XP with quite a lot of virtual memory usage. It could barely play a DV AVI file without hesitating.

And then I had a lot of driver problems (graphics, audio, some external peripherals), even though they were all (except my scanner) no more than 8 months old.

There is a lot of work to be done before you can persuade me that there is an advantage to be had by switching.

Alludo USER to USER Web Board

MSP* and Vista

MSP and Vista

Re: MSP and Vista

Re: MSP and Vista

Vista vista vista

Vista

Waiting for update