Sunday, December 28, 2008

Unbelievable Vista

It's really unbelievable that Vista comes with a "complimentary" .Net Framework 1.1 plus SP1 which will cause an "endless" installation of a mysterious patch KB929729, given that actually Vista gives you another .Net Framework 3.5 at the same time!

The problem appears when I got my new laptop, with a pre-installed WindowsVista Business version, which is with this notorious .Net Framework 1.1. This version of .Net Framework was known for its stability on Windows XP before, but when it appeared that it was not compatible with the later .Net Framework 2.0 (or I should say it the other way round?), it turned into a nightmare of many developers and even some casual users. One example is the Paint.Net tool (btw I really love this free and handly tool, as a alternative for the expensive and complicated PhotoShop), which swang between these two versions of .Net Framework for quite a long time, and even gave some releases with a .Net Framework 1.1 embedded. Finally those Paint.Net guys chose to follow the latest one, just as most rational developers will do.

After several unsuccessful tries (I got a lot of help from Peter, but sorry I still could not make it...), I had to remove the whole .Net Framework 1.1, so that the "genius" Windows Update will not prompt me for this patch update any more. And guess what, none of my application SW complained about that! Obviously those latest versions of the tools I use have already tuned themselves to the latest version of .Net Framework, which I assume to be 3.5 on my Vista. So, why bother stick to the troublesome 1.1?

Still in a headache period with my new laptop and this new OS:
  1. I cannot see the defragmentation report before do the actual defragment, nor can I see the progress of it.
  2. I cannot find the plain "Add/Remove SW" button anymore.
  3. The "Windows Live Messenger Installation" always fails. (I had to manually download it and install it to bring back my MSN...)
  4. The Windows Media Player 11 still does not include any meaningful codec. I have to download a free codec package to play a traditional DVD. (Microsoft insists that ppl should "purchase" these codec, but pls tell me, how many ppl really did that?)
  5. ...

No comments: