And so it begins....

[Former Member 1]

Oh dear... Why wait a year or two before deciding if it's really a good idea to 'upgrade' to W7?

Windows 7 users facing 'black screens of death' | Mail Online

 

[Gordon N]

Matt, it's Micro$oft - are we really surprised!

 

[Former Member 1]

Not in the least Gordon...

But the number of folk I've spoken to in the past month or so trying to tell me that my reluctance to migrate to the latest and greatest from Kermit and the team rested on unfounded fears... :001_unsure:

As Tommy Cooper would have put it...

Worms... Can...
Can.. worms...
Ah ha ha haaa... Just like that!

Seems like Black is the new Blue! :thumbup:

 

[Lanarkshire IT Services]

Hi All

The black screen of death (KSoD) has been around since Vista so it's not a Windows 7 thing.

Personally I've never experienced it on my own Vista / 7 systems but here are some simple workarounds:

System Restore to a month earlier

Or run Windows 7 in a virtual environment and test new updates on this.

I have written a more detailed guide on the KSoD fix here.

In a business environment Windows Updates should tested BEFORE being applied to live, mission critical machines but that's another matter.

From an SEO point it is one of the best articles I've ever written

Regards

 

[Eagle]

I'll bet that in 99%+ of cases these were upgrades (rather than fresh installs) or installing the OS on cheap and/or low speed hardware. Some people really don't get computing...

 

[Former Member 1]

The black screen of death (KSoD) has been around since Vista so it's not a Windows 7 thing

Seems Microsoft haven't learned their lesson then!

It's happening on W7 so it's a W7 thing... This one's been touted as stable and thoroughly tested. NOT the first time I've heard THAT one from Kermit & Co... It's just the same old same old from Microsoft I'm afraid. Between W98Se and XPsp2 there were HOW many different 'flavours' of windoze?? And the journey from 3.11 to 98SE wasn't a smooth one either...

Based on past evidence the only sensible advice had to be DON'T migrate from XP for at least 18 months to 2 years when it's all been shaken down thoroughly. Let some other mug pay to do their final testing for them...

There's no real advantage to it anyway! It's just another piece of bloatware that will stress your perfectly adequate machine to the point where you need to go out and buy another to do exactly the same job as you were doing before!

If only MS had been forced to give up their monopoly on windows compatability we'd be ten years further forward than we are now..

 

[Lanarkshire IT Services]

Sorry bad grammar on my part.

What I meant was it's NOT strictly a Windows 7 problem although the press would let you believe different - Just Google Vista KSoD or Vista black screen of death and see what happens.

And I'm not pro MS or anything but Windows 7 is anything but "bloatware".

As for "There's no real advantage to it anyway!" that totally a matter of opinion and what you use your PC for.

If I'm working on a W7 machine and want to support a client running XP then W7 XP Mode does the job perfectly. If I have 6 legacy XP line of business applications, I can run each in separate windows as if they were part of the W7 desktop.

Now that might not be your thing but you have to see its uses.

Regards

 

[Former Member 1]

I'm yet to see a version of windows that wasn't bloatware...

I still have one machine left running W98... Its our CCTV server... a Duron 800 running on a 1/2 gig of memory... runs 8 cameras hasn't missed a beat in years. To achieve exactly the same thing in XP, Vista or W7 would require considerably more power. and we're talking here about a machine running a single application....

Windows was, is and always will be bloatware. And the primary function of any new release is to part consumers from their cash for something they don't need, that won't make the most efficient use of their hardware, and, as a result send them chasing after new stuff which again; they don't really need...

In terms of our admin machines there's really nothing of significance we do today that we weren't doing back in 1993 under Windows for Workgroups... In fact many people today routinely achieve almost as much with relatively low powered devices as they can with hgh-powered desktop and laptop machines... But generally NoT under Windows!


Back in 1999 we were editing broadcast video and creating 3d animations under W98... Now I won't deny that our modern HD editing system isn't more advanced, that things are more stable or that applications like Maya or After Effects don't run better today that they've ever done. But that's been the situation for a number of years now since we EVENTUALLY got to XPsp2.... Which, as I say, was a long and painful journey!

I can see the uses for one of those big yellow tracked JCB super-tractors...

But my off-road needs are better, more efficiently met by a conventional 4X4... Not that i'm a 'power user' when it comes to driving through mud mind... But of those who ARE most of the farmers 'round here seem to manage very well with fairly normal John Deere machines and there are even a handful of little grey Fergies put-putting around serving their owners as well as they ever have for the past 50 or so years.... they ain't broke, so they don't need fixed or replaced...

As a video production company we're pushing our machines hard; VERY hard! Far harder than anyone doing day-to-day computing tasks. We're editing 1080HD video, producing 3D animation in Lightwave and Maya, Compositing in after Effects... For Rostrum work we can find ourselves manipulating stills of A3 size@2400 DPI and outputting that as 1080i video....

I can see nothing but heartache, expense and potential losses in moving to W7. Certainly no advantages... Not for me; and certainly not for the average business or personal user....

or installing the OS on cheap and/or low speed hardware.

....Much of which was/is probably perfectly capable of doing what the user needed it to do under XP. :001_rolleyes:

 

[Lanarkshire IT Services]

Wow

Needed a good coffee n smoke after that read!

Hey you don't like Windows 7 and can't see any benefits from it, no problem!

And I'm all for using machines and hardware for dedicated tasks. Even old ones.

But I don't think you can comment for every home or business user.

Obviously hardware is an issue but most decent systems today are more than capable.

If the size of the install files bothers you then something like nLite / vLite or something similar solves that problem. Removing things the user doesn't need.

But you've made your opinion clear

Regards

 

[Former Member 1]

But I don't think you can comment for every home or business user.

I don't claim to... Microsoft take a different tack..

It's not the size of the install, though that's an issue, it's the lack of efficiency... and the fact that despite all the blurb and all the promises it doesn't actually seem to be quite finished yet!...

 

[Lanarkshire IT Services]

I don't claim to...

This was your words

"Certainly no advantages... Not for me; and certainly not for the average business or personal user...."

But hey, you don't like it!

Let's leave it at that, not worth wasting forum space going over the pro's and con's

Regards

 

[Former Member 1]

Yes I know those were my words and I stand by them.

Not every home or business user is average... :001_rolleyes: Some businesses are IT specialists who can make use of some of the tricks. Some home users may have special needs that are met by W7....

But most folk just want to do fairly mundane tasks... And XP is better-than 'just fine' for that.

My point is (and has been all along) that Microsoft have a long history of push marketing un-needed and often not-quite-ready Operating Sytems onto the market. In fact many would argue that for the home/small business market only three versions of Windows ever did what it said on the tin... and then after some fettling!

We've heard all the evangelism about W7; how they're supposed to have learned the lessons of the past etc etc etc ad nauseum...

Whether I happen to like it or not is immaterial. Fact is Microsoft have a long history of releasing 'faulty' products. A long history of misleading the general public. And this latest 'miracle OS' of theirs is now showing signs of not being what it's punted as...

Microsoft just can't be trusted... Very few people actually need W7.... And, despite all the supposed field testing it's supposedly had there is every chance it will be as problematic as the early releases of all their previous material....

As you suggest yourself Windows Updates (and in that I include changing from one version to another) should tested BEFORE being applied to live, mission critical machines... And for many of those specifically targeted by Microsoft's marketing that 'critical mission' may well be be as basic as a spot of email, some typing and maybe the kid's homework... They can no more aford to pay for the dubious pleasure of doing Microsoft's final product testing for them than I can...

 

[Lanarkshire IT Services]

Hi There

A final word

Can you point me to an OS that DOESN'T need updates?

Either for security, performance or just based on customer feedback.

Things like:

Ubuntu Server - now at V 9
Mac OS - now at V 10

I could go on and on.

The truth is that there is flaws, things missed, security issues etc with every OS and keeping them updated requires some work.

Anyway I've said enough here.

Have a great weekend

 

[alanbold]

Matt,
Your constant posts are spoiling this forum for me. They are boring, you act like your always right even though your not as this post clearly shows.
:thumbdown:

 

[Former Member 1]

Matt,
Your constant posts are spoiling this forum for me. They are boring, you act like your always right even though your not as this post clearly shows.
:thumbdown:

Aww didumms...

What Alan? No cogent arguments? No piece by piece counter points? Please explain exactly what, in detail it is my post 'clearly shows'... Exactly which of the facts as I see them and as I've presented them in detail here are incorrect and why?

Just 'Alan says' they're clearly wrong so they must be... Now who's acting as if they're right? :001_rolleyes:

If you think I'm wrong Alan have the basic mallum to argue your case. :001_rolleyes:

I'm a plain speaker and speak the plain truth where necessary. that's WHY I've stayed in the AV business, quite successfully, for over 23 years! And fully intend to stay in it for at least 23 more! If you find that 'spoils' things for you or bores then I suggest that's your problem and not mine; it's certainly not something I'm bothered about. If YOU feel the forum needs improving then why don't YOU actually contribute to it a bit more often?

I do realise I'm raining on a commercial parade for Microsoft and their resellers here... And spoiling the fun for all those 'early adopter' type posers... but hey ho! I'm more interested in the plight of the consumer.

To get back to the point... No I can't point to another O.S. that doesn't need updated from time to time. That's as it should be.

Nor can I really point to another O.S. aimed at largely uninformed home/small business users that costs so much, is so heavily push marketed, rarely delivers as promised and is primarily designed to keep people locked into a buying cycle...

Updates are supposed to improve things...

I'd be fully supportive of Microsoft if they were making worthwhile advances... but they're not! The point I keep coming back to is this seems to be the same old Microsoft up to the same old tricks at the consumer's expense yet again. We've been down this road before; sometime after they stopped promoting W98SE... :001_rolleyes:

And in my opinion anyone sitting with a stable XP system would be well advised to wait and see what transpires over the next 18months to 2 years. Even then have a very good reason such as a piece of mission-critical hardware or software that just won't run in XP as your catalyst...

If only there were a serious alternative OS that could run windows Applications...


...Oh! and BTW Alan it's "you're always right". And your signature line is screwed!

 

[Lanarkshire IT Services]

Hi There

I keep saying I won't reply then you add something else, which is getting further and further from the original topic.

Anyway I can't agree with your term "'early adopter' type posers". In IT Support you have to able to support the latest OS otherwise your business looses that share of the market. It's that simple.

Now whether you agree or not there is a huge demand for Windows 7 and its server related OS 's such as Server 2008 / SBS 2008.

And in any business, to be successful, it is wise to meet that demand.

I cannot afford to play it safe and only support stuff thats been out for years. By nature in these times people want newer, faster etc.

For example a Server 2003 network person calls me and says "I want to upgrade my server technology to Server 2008 because I heard that it provides a less surface attack area via it's core installation technology"

I'm hardly going to say "sorry mate I think you should wait 2 years because I haven't bothered my **se to learn it and it's full of bugs anyway".

No I need to be ready to embrace new customers opportunities.

Anyway I need some clarity here because in one breath you are defending MS and how OS's like 98 can do jobs on minimal hardware and in the next you say "don't trust Microsoft". I'm not really sure what you are saying.

The OP topic was regarding the black screen of death which as I said previously isn't neccessarly a Windows 7 thing. Its obviously an update gone wrong, easily fixed by System Restore.

Now lets not all fall out over this!

Regards

 

[Former Member 1]

I've no intention of falling out over it mate :001_smile: There's an element of 'agent provocateur' in what I write... Something to do with breaking the deafining silence 'round here...

And of course I fully understand the position someone like yourself has to take. I'm not having a pop at the resellers... Microsoft though....:glare:

My point about the old CCTV system running W98 was merely meant to reflect that for that application (which is a fairly demanding one) the desired ends could be achieved with what is now very basic hardware....

To achieve the same thing in one of the 'improved' O.S. means quite a hike in system spec.... It's a bit like swapping your old caravan for a new one. Discovering that (despite being supposedly compatible) your old car won't pull it properly. So you but a new car, and off you go camping only to discover the new caravan doesn't actually sleep any more people or hold any more stuff... And to add insult to injury you find that every now and again the drawbar disappears. The wheels fall off. The brakes slam on when you're rolling along the road and some nights you have to take the beds outside, dismantle them and re-install them before you can get on with having a night's kip!

So you've spent that money and aren't really doing anything you weren't doing, perfectly well, before... That's not a defence of MS; it's a damning indictment!

Now; you mention someone moving from one server version to a newer one. And frankly I'd expect someone in that position to understand the implications of what they were doing. I do realise some don't of course... But in these cases it's caveat emptor... People in that position should be wiser than to fall for the marketing hogwash...

My concern is more with people who are walking into PC world and 'upgrading' perfectly functional machines with what is, and will remain for some time, to some degree, an unknown quantity... I don't trust Microsoft simply because they've lied to the public before...

Demand for W7 may be huge. Amd yes, you'd be a damn fool to ignore it in your position. But it's bourne of a marketing machine that has a track record worthy of PT Barnum himself...

Whether this particular fault is easy to fix both remains to be seen on a large scale and isn't praticularly relevant. You or I might not be phased by such a thing. But right now somewhere in the world a happless W7 owner stands knee-deep in matresses!

..and, as I say, it's a painfully familiar patter we've seen played out over and over again for what's getting close to two decades!

 

[Gordon N]

If only there were a serious alternative OS that could run windows Applications...

What about Mac OSX running VMWare - Windows as an add-on to a fantastic OS thats far more stable and already at the level that MS constantly aspire to! :laugh: My work laptop (a MacBook) will be going back soon unfortunately, but I will be purchasing a new iMac as soon as funds allow for all my design/development work.

For any windows based testing I will use VMWare, and the rest of the time I will drift happily through an intuitive, slick and easy to use interface that I have yet to have any hangs, failures or major problems with - the only glitch of course being the price! The 27" iMac I am after will not come in under £1600 I fear! :001_huh:

 

[Adventurelife]

Points from a IT donkey ( ie one who knows He Haw about operating systems)

My old pc is running xp and it is sound with no issues apart from needing a memory upgrade.

My 2.5 year old laptop has vista and is a pain. My daughters 3 month old laptop has vista and is a real pain.

All works computers are running xp and are fine.

My main work pc is a Apple and although I am really struggling with the change everything just works fast and easy.

I think over time I will migrate everything to apple.

Peter

 

[Former Member 1]

The 27" iMac I am after will not come in under £1600 I fear! :001_huh:

...Quite so. And of course we're all familiar with the old Mac/PC debate. For that money or maybe a tad more; say £2K I'd be putting together a fairly heavy duty video edit machine with two monitors; one of which would be a proper HDTV monitor, SDI inputs/outputs and a decent audio system.....

In my industry Macs have traditionally provided a 'turnkey' solution to running serious (i.e. work) applications that do push machines hard; thus their continued popularity within the design/video/music industry...

And that's primarily down to a very constrained set of hardware running what is undeniably a stable, OS. But that comes at a price. Of course if you just need to get a job done you'll pay that price.

Curiously this has been one of the things that's worked to my advantage over the years. When I started training television cameramen had been primarily engineering staff. So I was lucky enough to land on the cusp of the shift in training from being focused on the engineering side over to production... Best of both worlds!

this meant that when I came to strike out on my own I had the technical knowledge to make the machines work, and could even service them down to board level and design and construst peripherals where necessary... When computers started to appear in the office it was natural enough for me to do as I'd always done and set about repairing and mofifying them as necessary...

THIS in turn took me down a particular path where doing thing like using a computer as an edit controller, or creating gen-locked captions from a computer were concerned. Sadly not a path that was ever really facilitated by Macs... By the time relatively cheap 'turnkey' non-linear systems were coming to the fore we'd already been using hybrid PC-based edit systems for a few years.

And so it's continued; going the PC route has gained us a price advantage; on average I've been able to build edit suites around PCs for around 45% of the cost of a Mac based system that eprforms the same tasks... But that's only possible because we have the engineering skills in-house.

Peter's comments reflect the real-life user experience well. And again this comes back to the key point.

Vista is just the latest in a long line of 'disaster' OSs that Microsoft have trotted out... It took quite a few iterations to get to Win 3.11... a few more to get to W98se ... A few more to XPsp2...

If something is touted as an upgrade it should actually move us forward... not potentially three steps back! Microsoft's marketing is quite frankly the same sort of corporate B.S. we hear from many other corporations we've come to know and have good reason to mistrust...

On the evidence of past performance it's likely that W7 still has quite a few iterations to go before it can be really considered safe and stable... and the only people who really need to 'upgrade' now are Vista victims...

I can really understand why folk like Peter are considering migrating to a Mac. Even here, the 'A' word (Avid) has been mentioned without the room subsequently resounding to the crack of a 12-bore