Posted on 08/23/2006 8:36:31 PM PDT by Swordmaker
"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.
This was almost as funny as the idiot with the penis pump at the airport who told security it was a bomb.
That one was less obvious though.
When I upgrade my computers it will likely be to OSX capable machines.
No plans on running Vista.
Shhhhhh!!! You'll spoil everyone's MS-bashing fun. Including those who aren't familiar with the Beta testing concept.
At this stage of its development, it shouldn't have many. They are allegedly getting ready for the release candidate. If this beta is as bad as many are saying, they need another before they release the RC.
You're still missing the point. By Beta phase II the base of the OS HAS to be stable.
It's not. This is the final beta before release and it should not be having these difficulties.
My brother works for them. Will he be purchasing a copy of Vista anytime soon? Nope.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.