Text 12642, 137 rader
Skriven 2006-08-22 20:26:16 av Rich Gauszka (1:379/45)
  Kommentar till text 12640 av /m (1:379/45)
Ärende: Re: Windows Vista Beta 2 Plagued by Bugs
================================================
From: "Rich Gauszka" <gauszka@hotmail.com>

and another

http://www.longhornblogs.com/robert/archive/2006/07/31/Windows_Vista_Needs_a_Be
ta_3.aspx

I've been defending Microsoft's ship schedule for Windows Vista for quite some
time. Up to this point, I've been confident that Vista would be at the quality
level it needs to be by RC1 to make the launch fantastic. Having tested several
builds between Beta 2 and today, I hate to say that I no longer feel that way.

Beta 2 was a disappointment on many levels. It was nowhere near as stable as it
should have been, and was a huge memory hog. Later builds have improved
stability and performance, and have introduced visual tweaks and enhancements
that make Vista feel more like a finished product. But several events are
conspiring to make life a lot more difficult for beta testers, and I forsee
problems if they are not addressed.

...

Observation: Jim & Co have forgotten what "Release Candidate" means. A release
candidate means "Hey, we think we're finished, and this is the build we'd like
to put out there. Is it ready yet?" From there, testers sign off on it and say
yes, or they say "no" and Microsoft does additional work. It should always
follow a stable beta, which Beta 2 was not. It's not another CTP that goes
out... this means that they're finished. Windows Vista is not ready yet, and I
don't think Microsoft will have it ready by the end of the month. So Microsoft
should not call it a "Release Candidate" if it is not seriously up for
consideration as a candidate for release.



"/m" <mike@barkto.com> wrote in message
news:8i6ne21l2chpb98gk6lovlf25ln2ajeekg@4ax.com...
>
> http://www.toptechnews.com/story.xhtml?story_id=1110083YRM69&page=1
>
> ===
> "I have been testing Microsoft operating systems since Windows 95, and
> this is the buggiest OS I've seen this late in development," says Joe
> Wilcox, an analyst with Jupiter Research. "Look at the older operating
> systems, and by Beta 2 there is a stable foundation on which the
> [independent software vendors] can build. Right now, Vista is like a
> ship on stormy seas."
>
> What began as a murmur a few months back is turning into an audible
> grumble, as beta testers and experts question the stability of the
> latest Windows Vista beta and Microsoft itself hints at yet another
> release delay.
>
> Testers and pundits alike say Vista Beta 2, released publicly in June,
> is plagued by bugs and blue screens. Some testers are saying a Beta 3
> cycle, which is not planned, may be needed and that the software isn't
> ready for final testing before shipment, which Microsoft calls Release
> Candidate 1 (RC1).
>
> Microsoft said two weeks ago that RC1 of Vista would ship before the end
> of September.
>
> The final release of Vista for corporate customers now is targeted for
> November. Microsoft's Kevin Johnson, the co-president of the platform
> and services division, told financial analysts in late July, however,
> that while Vista is on schedule the code would not ship until it was
> ready.
>
> With the current timeline, Microsoft would have a bit more than a month
> to collect and incorporate testers' feedback from RC1 and finalize the
> code before shipment.
>
> "I have been testing Microsoft operating systems since Windows 95, and
> this is the buggiest OS I've seen this late in development," says Joe
> Wilcox, an analyst with Jupiter Research. "Look at the older operating
> systems, and by Beta 2 there is a stable foundation on which the
> [independent software vendors] can build. Right now, Vista is like a
> ship on stormy seas."
>
> One ISV that asked not to be named says a private beta it is working
> with that shipped after Vista Beta 2 is more stable but is still a
> memory hog. "The memory consumption has been reduced from a gig to
> 700MB, which is about three times what XP requires. It is probably going
> to come down, but it is a big beast," the ISV says.
>
> The ISV says its customers have said they will wait at least a year to
> adopt the new operating system.
>
> A survey of 207 companies released by Jupiter Research last week shows
> that nearly 50% of these 100-plus-employee outfits will wait at least 13
> months after release to deploy Vista -- or won't deploy it at all.
>
> Microsoft's traditional advocates also are questioning the viability of
> the software and its release schedule. Robert McLaws, a popular blogger
> and a Microsoft MVP (non-employees who offer expert analysis on
> products), said in his blog entry titled "The entry I didn't want to
> write," "Beta 2 was a disappointment on many levels. It was nowhere near
> as stable as it should have been." McLaws says pushing the launch back
> four to six weeks with a release in February, adding another beta cycle
> and coming clean publicly with the new delay may be the best solution
> for producing "the best version of Windows ever."
>
> He wasn't the only one with stern advice for Microsoft. Former Microsoft
> blogger advocate Robert Scoble used his blog to say, "This sucker is
> just not ready It feels like it needs a good six more months, . . .
> which would mean a mid-year release next year."
>
> After five years between major client operating system releases,
> Microsoft needs a home run, experts say.
>
> "It's ready when it's ready, but it better be good when it's ready or
> there'll be hell to pay," says Tom Henderson, principal researcher for
> ExtremeLabs and a member of the Network World Lab Alliance. He says
> there are a lot of issues with the code floating around among testers.
>
> Others see additional red flags.
>
> "Put the testing aside, I can't find a valid antivirus software that
> works with it," says Michael Cherry, an analyst with research firm
> Directions on Microsoft. "That is a key application and runs at a core
> level. If the antivirus vendors, who work closely with Microsoft, can't
> get Vista working, then the core is not stable."
>
> Cherry says it might be time to reset expectations because an operating
> system no longer should be a groundbreaking piece of technology.
>
> "I am impressed with Apple OS and I like the way over the last couple of
> releases they have made a series of incremental improvements. It has not
> been earth-shattering," he says.
> ===
>
>
> As time goes on, Vista is looking more and mor elike a slow motion train
> wreck.
>
> /m

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5
 * Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)