Vista less compatible with XP than Linux?
In the last few days I’ve talked with various people who found trouble using software or data created in Windows Vista, which was created by Windows XP software. One incompatibility wasn’t the fault of the Operating System (OS), but was the fault of Microsoft. I was unable to make a Microsoft document reader plug-in (that works for some versions of Microsoft Works) function in Word 2003 so that it could understand Works 2003 document files. There are programs and hardware that don’t work in Vista because of new or different security standards in the OS. Some programs and hardware are intentionally disabled, as a Microsoft sellout to content lobbyists, instead of a bow to demands of consumers who pay for Windows on their new PCs.
Speaking with Eric the other day, I learned about a bug in Vista’s Media Player where if you press X to close a DVD movie and not File > Close, then the next time you go to play the disc, you’re confronted with a Digital Restrictions Management (DRM) bug that thinks you’re a DVD pirate, and it blocks you from watching the movie you’ve bought/rented. Apparently it could happen in XP as well, but I’ve never seen it. I never use Windows Media Player to watch DVDs, because VLC works perfectly, and is free.
Vista is actually less compatible with XP than some versions of Linux which run a Windows emulator. Linux developers have been working for years to integrate data produced in either OS, into the opposite system, so people feel comfortable about switching between the two. The world is largely Windows based, with a growing Mac UNIX population, and growing Linux community as well. Linux has had to focus on finding ways to read otherwise unreadable and locked Windows generated information, so I think they may even have an advantage over the Microsoft Vista developers who’ve put interoperability on the back burner.
Sphere: Related Content![[EFC Blue Ribbon - Free Speech Online]](http://www.efc.ca/images/efcfreet.gif)
February 27th, 2008 at 10:41 pm
[…] Vista be less compatible with Windows XP than Linux? Abandoned Stuff by Saskboy hashes it out. […]
February 28th, 2008 at 12:00 am
You’ve been TAGGEDE !!!!
I have three computers on a network at my house. At one time, only one system was running Vista, and it was almost impossible to get it to communicate with the XPs. Although I got it working “sorta/kinda”, I ended up biting the bullet and putting Vista on all the systems. It’s really quirky, but remember when XP came out, they called it Windows Virus. The one thing that ticks me off, is the constant “right click, Run as Administrator” I have to do for alot of games and applications. I’m already logged in as the Administrator fer krissake !!!
Also, some applications require you to “Run As XP” in the compatability section. It also eats up a TON of memory…..Thank god I’m all upgraded to Dual Cores…..
February 28th, 2008 at 7:15 am
[…] Vista less compatible with XP than Linux? February 27th, 2008 In the last few days I’ve talked with various people who found trouble using software or data created in Windows Vista, which was created by Windows XP software. One incompatibility wasn’t the fault of the Operating System (OS), but was the fault of Microsoft. I was unable to make a Microsoft document reader plug-in (that works for some versions of Microsoft Works) function in Word 2003 so that it could understand Works 2003 docu Read More… […]
February 28th, 2008 at 9:19 am
I’ve had Outlook 2003 fail to install on Vista. It errors out trying to install mapi32.dll, which Vista protects as a system file. Its totally random, doesn’t happen every time, but its a real pain in the ass when it does.
Its stupid that Microsoft’s own currently supported products don’t install or run on Vista.
February 28th, 2008 at 9:31 am
And people wonder why I just said screw it and bought a Mac….I paid a few hundred bucks extra but honestly, it’s like a fantasy, so easy to use, so simple, and all the time I used to spend fiddling with Windows and Norton and other stuff? Now, I can actually use my computer instead…what a concept! And I’ve had no issues with computer compatibility with PCs once I got my data transferred over.
I know you must enjoy the techy stuff Saskboy since you are a computer pro, but for the average person it’s really a waste of productivity. I sort of wonder how much money is being wasted by business and individuals across the country.
February 28th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
I don’t enjoy the fussing Aurelia, really. I just am willing to put up with more of it than the average computer user, and that’s why I get more adventurous than them (while remaining safe enough to not end up with a spyware riddled hulking paperweight). Macs are fine, and use UNIX, which is mostly like Linux.
Businesses that bought into Windows 98 instead of NT ended up losing a lot of productivity simply due to how easily an entire 98 system is brought down by spyware and viruses. At least with NT/2000 there was a way to protect more of the system from tampering. Linux is another step in the secure system direction for a business, it just needs someone to configure the software correctly in the first place, and it just keeps on working.
==
Catelli, I guess Microsoft realized that with all of their programs and all of the patch versions, they couldn’t hope to test if their own software worked on their new OS. Pretty lame, but that’s the wave of the future it seems, getting paying customers to beta or even alpha test a system.
==
Dazzlin, I read yesterday that programs in Vista are finicky about where the program is installed. It can make a difference if it’s on C: or D: for instance.
February 28th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Non sequitur? “It also eats up a TON of memory…..Thank god I’m all upgraded to Dual Cores…..”
February 28th, 2008 at 9:33 pm
Indeed it is. Perhaps Dazzlin’ meant he doubled his RAM to reduce the impact :-) of the Vista hog.