• After witnessing the continued decrease of involvement in the SpotterNetwork staff in serving SN members with troubleshooting issues recently, I have unilaterally decided to terminate the relationship between SpotterNetwork's support and Stormtrack. I have witnessed multiple users unable to receive support weeks after initiating help threads on the forum. I find this lack of response from SpotterNetwork officials disappointing and a failure to hold up their end of the agreement that was made years ago, before I took over management of this site. In my opinion, having Stormtrack users sit and wait for so long to receive help on SpotterNetwork issues on the Stormtrack forums reflects poorly not only on SpotterNetwork, but on Stormtrack and (by association) me as well. Since the issue has not been satisfactorily addressed, I no longer wish for the Stormtrack forum to be associated with SpotterNetwork.

    I apologize to those who continue to have issues with the service and continue to see their issues left unaddressed. Please understand that the connection between ST and SN was put in place long before I had any say over it. But now that I am the "captain of this ship," it is within my right (nay, duty) to make adjustments as I see necessary. Ending this relationship is such an adjustment.

    For those who continue to need help, I recommend navigating a web browswer to SpotterNetwork's About page, and seeking the individuals listed on that page for all further inquiries about SpotterNetwork.

    From this moment forward, the SpotterNetwork sub-forum has been hidden/deleted and there will be no assurance that any SpotterNetwork issues brought up in any of Stormtrack's other sub-forums will be addressed. Do not rely on Stormtrack for help with SpotterNetwork issues.

    Sincerely, Jeff D.

Vista considered harmful to photographers

Darren Addy

Darren Addy

EF5
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
1,191
Location
Kearney, NE
Vista considered harmful to photographers.

This is an example of why only fools jump on the bleeding edge. I highly recommend waiting at_least until Service Pack 1 (and there is really no reason at all to upgrade, unless you have an application that requires Vista). If you are buying a new computer that comes with Vista, that is one thing, but paying for the privilege of being a MS beta tester is just silly (IMHO).

We are upgrading most our university I.T. Services personnel workstations to Vista so that we can begin identifying "issues" for campus users, and there are a bunch. I've got it on a Dell Optiplex SX280 but haven't used it for much, yet. (It's hard to pull me away from my Macs). :)
 
Also, a Vista upgrade INVALIDATES your XP key. That means that if you were trying to set up a dual-boot machine (giving you your choice of XP or Vista at startup) or you were hoping to install your previous version of XP on another machine — YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO. This is a change from how MS previously handled Windows upgrades.

I'm assuming that this is not true if you buy the full version (rather than upgrade). It's one of those things that people never read in the EULA (PDF EULA for Vista).
 
Darren Addy said:
Also, a Vista upgrade INVALIDATES your XP key. That means that if you were trying to set up a dual-boot machine (giving you your choice of XP or Vista at startup) or you were hoping to install your previous version of XP on another machine — YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO. This is a change from how MS previously handled Windows upgrades.

I'm assuming that this is not true if you buy the full version (rather than upgrade). It's one of those things that people never read in the EULA (PDF EULA for Vista).
Click to expand...

That's not accurate, my brother has his computer setup for dual boot and upgraded to Vista and he's never had a problem with it. He's done it 6 times now and always worked for him.
 
Did he purchase an upgrade version Windows Vista or did he buy the full package? As I understand it, that is the difference.
 
The upgrade of Vista just requires you to put your original install disc in... And it looks like the "fix" to this problem is to simply not tag the photo's metadata from within Vista.
 
Strike one. I'm telling you - there's no way on this earth that anybody could get me to upgrade to Vista..........not for maaaaany years - if then. To be honest - I see Vista going the way of Windows ME..........and I see Microsoft reverting back in about 3-5 years time to another new OS that is......strangely.......similar to XP. LMAO.

I'll just rest on my laurels looking smug here, thanks. We just purchased a used laptop for this VERY reason. We were prepared to buy a new one........that was until we discovered that all OS were now Vista. We did a complete 180 and bought a used IBM Thinkpad with lashings of RAM, a solid processor and Win. XP for half of the price. Should be a chase-brick for years to come, I hope..........

KL
 
Karen Leszke said:
Strike one. I'm telling you - there's no way on this earth that anybody could get me to upgrade to Vista..........not for maaaaany years - if then. To be honest - I see Vista going the way of Windows ME..........and I see Microsoft reverting back in about 3-5 years time to another new OS that is......strangely.......similar to XP. LMAO.

KL
Click to expand...

I also feel the same way about this; now that Vista has made the transition from Vaporware to the store shelf, I'll let the early adopters be the bug hunters for Microsoft, and continue with an OS that has served me very well for the last two years.

If it ain't broke, I'm not going to break it.

John
VE4 JTH
www.skywatch7.com
 
I doubt you'll find anyone that has upgraded to Vista who would be interested in reverting... This is not a bug. Those of us who used it for the last 6 months in beta were the bug-testers. I've had a grand total of zero problems with Vista since installing the final edition. This is not Windows ME.
 
I have been using it for a little while now and it has been very good to me. I have heard that there were alot of bugs with Vista, even before I read this thread, but to be honest I'm starting to like it better than XP.
 
As someone who manages software development for a living, all I can say is wait. The stablest Windows based platforms that we support are NT 4.0 service pack 6. Count them six major service pack to get it right. XP is also relatively stable. Microsoft has a deplorable track record on operating system releases.

Back in the day, the joke was “Windows isn’t done till service pack one.”

It is still true.
 
I was sick of my laptop having issues so I bought a new one with Vista pre-installed, did'nt even think about it, I was mostly thing (okay firewire port, 4 usb ports, sd card slot, built in wi-fi). My GPS, cell, and rebel xt works, having difficulties getting a couple other cameras working, and the SD port won't install either even though the OS came pre-installed! Some of the Canon updates won't install either (or run).

Anyway if I had a 'do-over' I would have avoided vista at all costs, I was pretty happy with XPSP2. I am sure most of the issues will be resolved (in the next year or two). XP pre SP1 worked better than this does.



(running the 32 bit version)
 
As one big negative aspect for mobile use there's absolutely insane amount of "DRM" (=use limiting) crap embedded into it consuming system resources which means shorter operating time without "hose feeding" of power...
Not forgetting how much there's other bloated stuff in it.
 
Its just like the commercial with Pc in a hospital gown and Mac asks him whats going on and Pc says he is upgrading to Vista.

This may be off topic, But "Windows Defender" (anti spyware, etc) used to run for WinMe and Win2k, By 2007 they Ended all support for Winme and Win2k for Windows Defender and now only WinXp can use the software. Sadly I think by 2008 XP will be outdated since most Support will be for vista, therefore Microsoft ending Support for XP to better suit the Vista customers.

Is XP even stable currently? No Blue screens, hold ups, etc?

-gerrit
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top