Windows

Vista is not ready for the corporate world


The honeymoon is over.

Reality has set in since I upgraded to Windows Vista last month; the jubilation I first felt running Windows Vista has gradually come to a frustrating halt.

Oh, VENDORS.

Yes, third party Vendors are ruining my Windows Vista experience. I can’t even begin to tell you how many beta vista drivers I am currently running and the vast number of vendors that are not ready for Windows Vista -even though the Release to Manufacturing (RTM)  launch happened last month. Windows Vista has had multiple betas and release candidates; it is unacceptable for vendors not to have drivers when they have had 5 years to prepare.

Let me give you an example of my travails: I have a Sprint Wirless card that allows me to connect to the Internet wirelessly anywhere in the United States. These plans are pricey but well worth the money if you need constant access to the Internet as a road warrior.

After loading Vista last month, I went to Sprint’s web site to download their Windows Vista driver and their connection manager software that allows you to dial access to the Internet. There is no driver on the website for Vista (and the Windows XP software absolutely doesn’t work) so I called support. When I finally got to a manager after 35 minutes, I was told that they do not have compatible software for Windows Vista nor do they plan to for 3 months.
 
I politely reminded the manager that Windows Vista was released in November, that the general release was slated for the end of January, and that it is totally unacceptable to not provide a driver.  5 years in the making and no beta driver.  Mind boggling.

Well I did get this to work without the proper driver. I had to create a virtual machine of Windows XP and that allowed me to have Sprint Internet access. If you are determined to run Windows Vista as I am, then you will have to become quite creative to have the operating system meet your needs.

Is Windows Vista cool? Absolutely. But unless vendors either supply drivers in a reasonable time or inform consumers of delays in providing drivers, upgrading to it is a waste of time (unless you are a glutton for punishment like myself).

Many vendors just aren’t ready for Windows Vista and I believe it has something to do with the tight security Windows Vista is implementing. Prior to Vista, the default in Windows was to run as administrator. So vendors just programmed their software to work as a computer administrator with full user rights. The door was open; Microsoft’s lax security made writing code relatively simple for vendors.  In fact, if you try to run as a limited user in Windows XP, for example, a lot of software will not work properly as Windows XP wasn’t truly designed to work this way.

But the most talked about, under-the-hood change with the release of Windows Vista is its incredible improvement in security.  And this has caused a challenge for vendors; they now have to rewrite their software to work as a user as opposed to an administrator.

The feature that is causing so much trouble for vendors is called User Account control (UAC) . UAC’s main function is to protect users. In previous versions of the windows operating system, all users were administrators by default. And an administrator could make any change to system files they wanted.

With UAC, administrators will see an approval, dialog. This dialog requires the user to click a Continue button in order to resume the task at hand. Standard users, meanwhile, will receive a credentials dialog that forces them to enter the Administrator password.

Standard Windows users are so used to the administrator level of control that most of them don't even understand that it is unsafe. UAC is introduced in Windows Vista to secure the user. Unfortunately, vendors were snared in the same loophole as users in that they wrote their software with the administrator level of control and it is now biting them.

In all fairness, though, it is not just the vendors’ fault that they are unprepared. Microsoft also had five years to campaign to get vendors to get in line with the security changes in Windows Vista, and had opportunity to offer incentives to vendors to be ready when Vista came out of the chute. Regardless of who should have reached out to whom, the alignment between Vista and the vendors is not there.  And I can’t imagine that I’m the only user out there who’s frustrated by it.

Whether or not I like Windows Vista is not the issue at hand. The question you need to ask yourself is Windows Vista ready for business? I have to say no and I do not see it being ready until vendors are ready with drivers and the kinks are worked out.

Take our poll and let us know.

96 comments
MrjKong
MrjKong

about 3rd party software and drivers. How long have you been in this game? All of this song and dance is the same Mickey Mouse I went through with Windows 95, Windows 98, NT4, Windows 2000 Pro, Windows ME, Windows XP Pro. I lost track of the number of devices I bought which were certified or ready for W2k Pro when it was released, almost all of which were returned to the store when they did not work. Morale of the story?....I will wait for SP1 for Vista before considering it for production use. anyone who wants to use a new O/S as a primary or production system does not have much experience or does not know what they are doing. IMHO

TCDood
TCDood

Microsoft has had it so easy for so long, that they are now feeling the pain. Microsoft OS Products from Windows 3.1/95/98/ME??/Win2K and XP all worked, and people made money creating software, and hardware. We all ran in Administrator mode, and everything (almost) worked. Now Microsoft Locks Down the O.S.? and then cries foul that vendors aren't scrambling to write drivers for this new O.S. Did Microsoft create a development kit for vendors, to assist them in rewriting driver code? and give it away? NO, they simply expected the marketplace to adapt to their line of thinking. If MS needed to have these vendors on board, they should have been openly giving them the tools to work within the Vista Framework. The only reason someone would rewrite drivers is if they think they are losing marketshare with their products. Because so many people are waiting to adopt Vista until the first Service Pack, or upgrading their hardware, I don't see the incentive to have these designers create new drivers. It is not the third party people's problem, it is Microsoft for not shielding the user's from this harsh reality. Since we are already being forced to get more memory, faster systems, and expensive Video, to really "ENJOY" the Vista experience, MS should reimburse manufacturers for the time and expense of rewriting new drivers. Or Microsoft should REQUIRE all vista users to buy new hardware, that is only "VISTA CERTIFIED" It is Microsoft and not the vendors who is at fault here!

mypl8s4u2
mypl8s4u2

I manage a few companies as an IT outsider source and one company bought new laptops which only come with VISTA. The printers are not compatible so those who purchased have no choice but to do ?without? printing. Also, this is a real estate company so the program WINFORMS will not work either. Connecting it and keeping it connected to a wireless access point is proving to be a real pain in the @$$. I warn people not to get VISTA now as it?s not ready for prime time. We are not upgrading our hardware for the sake of VISTA users, but they don?t have a choice in OS when purchasing new notebooks. Our only recourse is to reload XP, scratch our VISTA license and eat a cost which is not right in the first place. Windows is again using it?s strong @#$@# arm to force the world to work the way they want. Get off your butt MS and make sure before you do anything that it is widely compatible you bunch of morons.

karlg
karlg

We're an ISV, but we don't get special consideration from MS - we downloaded a beta-RC1 in November and did what we could to try the software out. We got no documentation on how the final would differ from RC1. We got no documentation telling us how to transition software. I had staff waste 3 days trying to work out how to setup the new IIS with our web software for review. There are no comparison guides to say do it this way. Our beta-copies died the day that Vista was released. I don't have any budget to rush out and get a copy of Vista, so customers will have to wait until there are a few of them to justify the expense.

Randy in Chicago
Randy in Chicago

I can understand your frustration, but in all honesty I do not blame MS hardly at all! You know, the Internet has been around for years, and ever since the dawn of Windows 2000 the Internet has been main stream (almost) and then with XP (and subsequently 2003) there have been PLAINLY OBVIOUS security risks. Did normal users know or act on them? Some do, with a bit of experience and know how. But, I find the vendors lack of support for higher security logons (any normal user account, not an Admin) absolutely complete negligence! I cannot tell you how many apps I have to run using the Run As command or hack the registry to get to run, and then it is pure luck if it works. It is absolutely unacceptable that vendors have not been writing code (apps and drivers) to run under normal user accounts for the past 2-3 years, I mean...you'd think that the first hackers came about just after XP or something!!! No...I don't blame MS, in fact I think that MS has been making huge strides at making their OS (and other apps) more secure. In fact, what other company has such a vast support infrastructure as MS does? TechNet, MSDN, Support.MS.Com, etc...??? I mean, come on, they do TRY to get people to see the err of their ways in not running in insecure configs. Everyone is always looking to jump on the BIG guy on the block...but not me. Wake up....it is the software COMMUNITY that needs to come around and do their part...not simply prey on the weakness of the OS. Just because the default account that happens to run is an Admin account (which is what happens when you install XP) doesn?t mean that a software/hardware vendor should discount normal user accounts and say "We don't support that config, you will have to run that as Admin to get it to work". Garmin, Live365, Anapod, and Nero (some times) are a few that I have had "quirks" with getting to run (let's not even try to make a complete list, these are the ones that I remember...there are surely more!). In fact, I have an email from Garmin saying they don't support normal users!!!!! Ok...dismount soap box...get on with life! :-)

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

so of course all your in house software is fully compliant with the XP onwards security model. Isn't it? In case you've been asleep behind your wide screen monitor, the software boys are not in charge. Rightly so based on my experience, but there's a price for sound business thinking. If it ain't broke yet, don't spend a couple of million fixing it yet. If you are using up all our resources for something that may come in to play in two years time, what about the things our customers want now? We need to do a total rewrite for XP/2000/2003/Vista, it will take a year, if we don't do anything else. And we'll have to upgrade everybody's PC and re-license and get all the new versions of office and retrain, then you'll be able to do your photo album and play DRM content at work. You can see the business types queueing up to sign off that requisition! Don't forget almost the entire MS ad campaign out of technical circles for vista was home user eye candy. You should know better in your position.

mypl8s4u2
mypl8s4u2

True, vista came out years ago and true vendors had a chance, but what you don?t understand is that when beta1 rolled out, it is no where near final. And beta drivers that worked on beta1 won?t work on the final. Also, MS is reluctant to release any information or source code on vista to vendors, but have no problem sharing that code with china, the largest copy infringing country in the world. Now you do the math. You may think I?m talking out of my @$$ so here is documented proof that MS is backstabbing the county that gave it, it?s start. http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-990526.html , http://news.com.com/Governments+to+see+Windows+code/2100-1001_3-980666.html , http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200303/04/eng20030304_112657.shtml , http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/33504.html . So before you talk, research first.

kattoon
kattoon

These articles you cited were from 2003 and 2004, and you only listed one part of the story. China is NOT the ONLY recipient of the MS source code. I found several articles talking about how Microsoft has released the source code to any company that complains. (not just CHINA)(1996 - article)http://www.betanews.com/article/Microsoft_Opens_Windows_Source_Code/1138205929 (2004-articles) http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1647564,00.asp http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/33537.html I agree that you should research before you talk. Just be sure to find the ENTIRE story instead of posting one side or one single piece of information.

jbaker
jbaker

Considering that most corporations do not jump on the bleeding edge bandwagon, it will be many months, and probably a year or more until we start seeing Vista in the workplace. And considering that some of the applications that many companies run still runs in NT4 or DOS-space, there will be major growing pains when attempting to implement and rollout the upgrade. I say let someone else workout Microsoft's bugs for us.

darrell
darrell

#1 rule of OS deployment; Test, Test, and test again, and then wait for SP1. We have to remember that the PC is a tool. And when the tool is working, you don't replace it with one that has not been tested. And of course you will have beta drivers at this stage. Developers can't release a production driver from a beta OS. We need to do a much better job of planning solutions deployment. If you want to increase your user?s frustration level, go ahead and release a new OS before you have trained yourself on the OS. I see enough of that on some of the hot fixes and services packs.

marbing
marbing

Rather than arguing that Vista isn't ready for the corproate world, I would argue that the Corporate world is not ready for Vista...Hey, the corporate world isn't ready for XP! XP is only now begining to make its appearance on corporate desktops. At my last job, workstations were still running Windows 2000Pro and that was a relatively new rollout. The Corporate world is very timid. IT managers don't want to jeopardize their positions by pushing for the latest technology and so they stick to known quantities which are safe but hardly cutting edge. Steve Balmer has said that XP is the main competitor to Vista and I think that, now that Vista has stepped into the spotlight, we will start to see XP start replacing Win2000Pro on Corporate desktops. Is this because XP is 'better' or 'more stable'...no. It is because IT managers and corproate VPs are too timid to take a chance.

danl
danl

Experience proves that once we get our windows apps running fine, we have to adapt thm to a new version of windows. Why? We have not recouped our costs for hardware, programming, and the rest and the "technology" keeps advancing faster than we can keep apace. The developer and IS/IT guy is running a losing race and Microsfot is to blame. MS has trying to keep up with the competition since the Altair, let _them_ run. I need systems and apps that work together for more than 5-6 months. Oh, and eye-candy only slows my people down.

Jim_MacLachlan
Jim_MacLachlan

While there may be some timidity among IT Mangers, there are a lot of compelling reasons not to upgrade to the latest & greatest technology. - if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Most users don't take enough advantage of new software or operating systems to make it worth the hassle. There's enough daily stuff to do without creating work. - cost: even if the upgrade is 'free' through software protection, the time & resources needed to do the upgrade, configure & train the users is often prohibitive. - 'proven' is relative. We often get stuck with legacy programs that unprove other new programs & OS's pretty quickly. Usually it's some kind of accounting program, but we're still suffering from a couple of HR programs, too. We'd love to upgrade, but have to stay with old, compatible crap or a critical application won't run properly. Sometimes its just the cost of an upgrade isn't in the budget or worth it since we'll be changing vendors. - Phased in as hardware is upgraded - we usually don't upgrade the OS of a PC, but wait until we replace the PC unless there is a compelling reason.

admin
admin

Would creating a virtual machine solve my problem with syncing me Moto Q with Vista and if so how do you create a virtual machine? If you know please e-mail me at admin@calvarycs.com

TCDood
TCDood

I have had similar problems, and have resorted to Running Window XP as a Virtual Machine. As long as there are XP drivers for your Moto-Q, then you can run a XP. There are two ways to build a VM. One is using Virtual PC form Microsoft. This free download http://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtualpc/downloads/sp1.mspx will let you build a VM. Basically, you download the Virutal PC Manager. It then gives you an option to create a NEW VM, or use an existing VM. You then will need a Windows XP disk (or a .ISO). You then allocate Memory, Disk Space, Network Card (Basically, take the defaults), Bridge the Network Card to your physical Network Card (Again default), and when you are done, you put the CD in the drive, and it will "LAUNCH" the install process. You would then install the XP system just like you would a new system...but the system is in memory. After you are done, you can hook your Moto-Q up, install the software, and run it. The next way is using VMPLAYER. This is available at www.VMWARE.com. The player can only play images. there is a nother product called VMSWIZARD, which will help you create a XP VM (Virtual MAchine). You can also download the VMSERVER, that allows you to create you own Virtual Machines. I am at present taking online classes, that is using the VMWARE product. We have created both a Windows XP, and a Windows 2003 Server, both running simultaneously with a Windows XP "HOST"...So in effectt, you have three machines running simultaneiously. You have separate IP addresses, for all three systems, and can each access the internet, and each other. Hope this helps. It is really great technology. Until Microsoft makes drivers, you may have to use this method.

Richard Noel
Richard Noel

Thank you for this post. Mr. Warren it would be helpful if you would please describe how you resolved your issue.

Steven S. Warren
Steven S. Warren

Are you asking me how I resolved my issue with the Sprint Drivers? Can you be more specific so that I may answer your question?

Steven S. Warren
Steven S. Warren

I created a virtual machine using vmware but to answer your question specifically. After you load the Sprint connection software, simply right-click on the shortcut and choose properties. Next, click the compatibility tab and select the checkbox RUN THIS PROGRAM IN COMPATIBILITY MODE FOR: Click the dropdown and choose one of the following: XP SP2 or the other options. BINGO!

Richard Noel
Richard Noel

Mr. Warren, I was specifically referring to the following passage from your article... "Well I did get this to work without the proper driver. I had to create a virtual machine of Windows XP and that allowed me to have Sprint Internet access" Can you outline the steps you took to finally get your Internet Access application working? It's my understanding that there is a way to install drivers and applications that are compatable with previous versions of Windows (XP SP2 for example). My recolection from what I've read is that if you use the add/remove programs application in Vista, there will be an option to run that application in a compatability mode. It allows you to choose from a drop-down list the last operating system the program worked under. Is that how you got the Sprint app working again? Thank you in advance for your reply RN

Jim_MacLachlan
Jim_MacLachlan

When Microsoft did their last major security update early in 2005, they broke a lot of their partners' software. Our Symantec SSL VPN had a terrible time - it took them 5 or 6 months to fix all the fall out. As others have mentioned, Microsoft doesn't release a lot of information, changes it's mind as it runs into internal issues & may very well lie about critical items. They've been sued more than once for breaking competitor's software out of sheer malice. Using new software & hardware is living on the bleeding edge - so called for a good reason - it never all works right out of the gate, never has & likely never will. While I'm happy there are people out there who like to live on it, I'm quite happy to wait until well after SP1 is released to push it out to my users or put it on my primary machine. So thank you very much for working the kinks out. I beta tested Chicago starting in the fall of 1993, formatting my hard drive several times. I knew the ins & outs of Windows 95 pretty well by the time it was released, but that was a personal PC for fun. I now have responsibilities to my users & can't waste time when work needs to be done. Vista will shortly go on secondary & test PCs here, but I wouldn't think of making anyone actually rely on it yet - it's irresponsible.

jfuller52402
jfuller52402

After I upgraded I was shocked to find out that HP will NOT provide a driver for my HP ScanJet 2200c which worked great under XP. Also I need to wait a few months to get drivers for my HP Color LaserJet 2600n. I managed to get the printer to work, the scanner will need to be replaced (with a non-HP product!)

dawgit
dawgit

The firm DID provide MS capable drivers to MS, if MS then made the Hardware inoperatable it's not the hardware firms fault. And You were the one who decided to change to an un-proven, as yet un-stable OS NOT supported by anyone. (even at this point MS) -d

zyphlar
zyphlar

As an administrator, I can't pass up the opportunity to (eventually) know that I can force my users to have no privileges and not hear constant whining about it. Who at Microsoft thought it'd be a good idea to keep people from clicking on the clock to view the calendar, or clicking "Repair" on a network card when disable/enable works just fine? These and other user quirks make me search out other options, from mac to linux and vista. I'll just wait until it's ready, I guess.

Ian Thurston
Ian Thurston

...actually, if you think about it, this whole thread is constant whining, and we're all the whiners, me included. There's nothing new here (including Vista).

lmartorell
lmartorell

Hi Steven, u tell vendors didn't develop drivers for Vista, I have experience about that and the reality is Microsoft is not compromised with vendors. MS develops alfas betas... and many times they change the especifications, a good strategy for vendors or 3rd party is waiting for the realy final release. Another example about that is Internet Explorer 7, if develop some application thats uses ie6 when the user installs ie7 in 70% of cases u will have problems because MS didn't make the both versions compatible. And this is the MS reality.

brucewebs
brucewebs

You power ON, and the disk drive light flashes for a second, THEN the monitor displays your favorite desktop. Now a message pops up and reads: You have successfully booted the ___ operating system and are viewing this message which will display for 10 seconds then disappear. After viewing your desktop wallpaper for another 50 seconds, the computer will be shut down to prevent the installation of any applications, or use by any virus you may have picked up. Thanks for your cooperation, the ___ Corporation. After 5 years, Windows XP has (successfully?) plugged a number of holes in the operating system. That leaves the question is an upgrade necessary? After another 5 years, how many holes will appear and have to be patched in Windows Vista? single digit number? double digit number? triple digit number? Oh my God, that many!!!!

jmgarvin
jmgarvin

I've got a good friend working home support for Dell. His tech calls are up about 200% and almost all of those are Vista induced problems. The funniest part is that people can play games are various gaming portals or install some of their apps that they use at home. It also seems to be pretty hit or miss with tax software in Vista, so buyer beware.

Mr L
Mr L

You're kidding, of course. Any MS OS below SP1 is not corporate-ready...period. Any expectation otherwise isn't stupidity (so please don't be insulted), it's just a sign of lack of experience. As you said yourself, you are a glutton for punishment; the business world, when it comes to technology, is not. Cheers :)

lmartorell
lmartorell

MS spend a lot of money on vista, (moer in marketing than in technology). My technical expectation is Microsoft said this is the best OS!!!! WoW !!!! U could tell us u want, but the reality is FOR CORPORATE VISTA IS NOT A GOOD OS FOR THE MOMENT. MS please tell in your marketing campaigns. Thats all.

Mr L
Mr L

...see post title.

DonSMau
DonSMau

The key words in your article were "determined to run Windows Vista". Despite all the info on the web that tells you that it breaks almost everything you like to use, you still had to go an upgrade didn't you? And now you pay the price. I, too, would have loved to upgrade to Vista but experience (and everyone else on the web) tells me to wait until at least SP1. Either upgrading was to be an experiment, or you are simply foolish. Personally, I'm not waiting until SP1. I'm just moving to Kubuntu. Its really a strong desktop (with a little patience) and, with Wine, I think its going to cover most of what I need (except maybe games and iTunes). Now /thats/ an experiment I'd be interested in.

hillman.d
hillman.d

I guess the Vista folks will now know what it's like to be in the linux camp. It's almost the same, except that linux is held back by hardware manufacturers refusing to provide specs. I've already switched to Kubuntu and the free VMware. I'll pay for software when I truly like using it and on my own terms.

lastchip
lastchip

While I have little time for vendors in general, particularly when they are profiteering, they haven't had five years to prepare. How can you write drivers, when Microsoft was offering a constantly moving goal post? It is only at the time Vista went gold, that some sort of stability in terms of build could be guaranteed. The only thing that surprises me, is that it has taken this long for you to come to this decision. Why any corporate user would contemplate migrating to Vista at this early stage, is beyond my comprehension. They must be mad!

TCDood
TCDood

Like you said above, all this discussion has led me to believe that we have been sold out, as users (and tech professionals) on Vista. Our company uses Legacy Novell Products (That Just Work), Linux Products (That just work), and a Windows 2003 Server, used as a storage server, anti-virus, and overall MS collection box. At this rate (Novell not producing Vista Novell Login Services), we will NEVER upgrade. I have purchased 5 computers that are "technicallY" Vista capable in the last two months. Each time, I must refuse the Upgrade, and go with Windows XP pro. That is potentially 5 Vista Sales that Microsoft has lost, due to their short-sidedness as to their domination of the world. Funny, Dell allows me to upgrade the system to Vista for $10.00 (LOL), so will probably buy a copy to have it sit in a drawer, or mount it for posterity sake. Too bad, that we as corporate users, are unable to upgrade to the latest O/S, unless we totally upgrade our CPU,Memory,Video (and souls, apparently) to adopt this new OS. BTW, I am MS certified, so I have drank the kool-aid, and still pissed that Vista is so restrictive. I don't need EYE CANDY to make my corporate users work, I need a stable OS, that will use my existing APPS.

drdoolittle2800
drdoolittle2800

Thanks for an easy-to-read perspective on this important topic. From a layman's viewpoint, I understand fully how some of you IT experts see vendors as slow to respond. On the other hand, where is this famous strangle-hold control Gates, Inc is famous for? I have been using WinXP Pro (stand alone) for years and still have drivers that have not been updated for older applications and utilities. It seems to me that Wild Bill should be held more accountable (yeah, sure) for ensuring supporting vendors are lined up and ready to go at the RTM date. As has been the pattern since the release of Windows 3.0 (I used task switchers and DOS menus before that!), lots of promises of new stuff (where's Vista's new file system?), but in real life it's hard to find tested and signed device drivers for anything. Does Gates even test any drivers for their "certification program?" Do these vendors have any clout in getting code earlier so they can roll out drivers WITH a new OS? Or are they just lazy and don't care? Thanks, it's snowing out and I'm hiding from the boss... Tom

tony
tony

One might expect Apple to lag behind the others because it competes directly with Vista, but most other vendors don't have that excuse -- it's the complexity of Windows security that costs these vendors delays. They would surely rather be making money selling products than spending money to make them work with new systems.

carlsf
carlsf

I tried on a new system that was touted Windows Vista capable ha ha... Look at the offering by the major HW vendors they will only run Vista Home, and require a upgrade to run in the Premium version. Sorry MS but you have maade a tragic mistake I will NOT be buying VISTA with any new system I purchase for my company, I will be demanding XP PRO, and OFFICE 2003.

justinsvalois
justinsvalois

Microsoft doesnt need to worry about you sticking with Win XP pro, They still make money either way..... Actually, they will make more money, cause you buy another license for XP pro... then when SP 1 or 2 comes out (whenever you upgrade) you buy yet ANOTHER license.... which BTW will cost what it does now, through the next 5 years... so BANG Microshaft just made MORE money by you buying their old OS... my 2cents

AU-man
AU-man

As with all MS OS's I will not implement a new OS until SP1 comes out in any of my working systems. I will have a test system or two yes but I have enough on my plate without dealing with endless errors and incompatible drivers. Binksie Computers make it easier to do a lot of things, but most of the things they make it easier to do don't need to be done. - Andy Rooney

CharlesMllr
CharlesMllr

I was able to get my Sprint card working without any software from Sprint. The drivers are actually included in Vista, however the Sprint connection software does not recognize them. I created a dialup connection without username and password and my card works perfect. This is better anyhow because less bloatware to polute my system. Now if I could only get Cisco VPN to work...

pmcgrath
pmcgrath

Charles, I was able to get a beta Cisco VPN client from Cisco's web site. You will need to have a CCO log on to get it. It works ok over normal wired and 802.11 wireless. I don't know if it will work over the Sprint connecton. My past experiance with vpn over cell internet has been unuseable slow since the vpn encription breaks the compression used to speed up web surfing. We don't have the high speed stuff out here.

CharlesMllr
CharlesMllr

I have tried the latest beta which blue screens my laptop. I did find a previous version that I was able to get "working" minus the integrated firewall. Not the best solution in my opinion.

Steven S. Warren
Steven S. Warren

I found a working beta of Cisco for Vista. Do a search for VPN client 4.8.01.0590. This is working for me like a charm. Thanks for the Sprint Tip! I am working on getting the connection software up and running as well.

CharlesMllr
CharlesMllr

Good luck with your Sprint connection. I got the VPN software to "work" last week, however I had to disable the integrated firewall on our concentrator. This is not a solution I want to push out to our remote users who have personal laptops. Or our execs. I just wonder when Cisco is going to get its act together and produce a final version.

belyache
belyache

http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html This is a very eye opening article about Vista. Microsoft is getting too pushy. Let us have what we want, OS's that work "out - of - the - box", and won't interfere with what we want to do with them. Linux looks better everyday..... well maybe not.

danl
danl

I have been pushing Mac OS since IBM told me to buy one. It is one of the choices that does what you want "out of the box." The other options are really for bigger iron. AND let's not forget that it is the inspiration for Redmond.

Ian Thurston
Ian Thurston

...that's the position the author takes, and while it's humourous, the truth is that it's OUR suicide note. As long as we allow Microsoft and other companies to shove unfinished work at us without cost to them, we are in trouble. Here's a thought: payment for new releases should go into escrow. When and if the software performs as promised, the money clears escrow.

mcarr
mcarr

Great idea about escrow! As an IT consultant, you can apply the same model to your clients. When your advice proves fruitful, your customer can arrange for payment to be released to you. Matter of fact, I think I'm going to try that at the supermarket this week. I'll put my grocery bill in escrow and when the food proves itself to be tasty in accordance with my expectation, I'll release the funds... It must be cold in Barrie.

Editor's Picks