PC_LOAD_LETTER

Vista Incompatibilities

51 posts in this topic

I have seen many post on various tech sites (usually on the Windows XP end of sales articles) that allege that Windows Vista is 'incompatible' with hardware/software.

Ive been running Vista since shortly after RTM and havent seen anything id classify as an 'incompatibility' in a long time. which left me wondering, what software is actually incompatible with Vista?

Ok first some ground rules:

  1. If you want to list an incompatibility, you must have been the person who witnessed it. (no friend of a friend told me program X doesn't work)
  2. It must have worked with XP.
  3. Must have been tested with the most recent version of the software.
  4. If the Hardware/Software was not 'on the shelf' at the time Vista RTMed, then Im not counting it (the only exception is if its a Microsoft Hardware/Software Product -Example: Win2k cant share files with Vista -of course it can thats just an example)
    Use some common sense. -if you are attempting to connect Vista via ICS to share a HP deskjet 540c printer via a 50 foot adhoc wireless connection to a 10 year old win2k machine, Vista isnt the weak link there.

__Incompatible:__

  1. mmm+ by hace
  2. Nero 6 - last version released 03-21-2007 (2 months after Vista Launch) Vista compatibility was NOT advertised as a feature but according to the incompatibility ground rules i set initially, im adding to to the list

__Minor issues, or specific features not working:__

  1. Cisco VPN Client: Smartcard support is broken
  2. Some VNC versions (i.e. TightVNC): won't run in service mode Ultra VNC reported as working with no issues.

__Works, but with problems:__

  1. HDTach - only in compatibility mode -GrofLuigi pointed out that compatibility mode is not ideal for a benchmarking program
  2. modifyPE - only in compatibility mode

Edited by geek
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only incompatibility that I have witnessed is Cisco VPN with smartcard authentication. Cisco still hasn't put out a compatible VPN client that will work with smartcards. Every release they have lists that as a problem in the release notes. They obviously know it's a problem, but haven't done anything about it. So, I can't blame this on Vista, but it is an issue on Vista because it works just fine on XP.

Other than that, I don't really understand what the haters are bitching about. I bought a laptop like a week after vista went RTM and have been running the x64 version ever since. It runs great.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mmm+ by hace really f's Vista up.

Well, considering the menu system in Vista is different than previous OSes, and that mmm+ is XP only, not surprising :).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I got it to work on 2000 (With a little bit of work) and server 2003.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually I got it to work on 2000 (With a little bit of work) and server 2003.

Also not surprising.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't find Vista to have many compatibility issues & have been testing it for quite some time. I just don't think its an easy OS to upgrade to atm. There's still many driver issues, not so many software problems. It will be some time yet afore it becomes my daily drive here I'm afraid.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like this is gonna be a very short list as I expected :D

Where's the Vista bashers and their constant FUD now? :whistle:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its a very much take or leave it OS no real great gains for me with this soft.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far, off the top of my head, I've encountered no less than three completely incompatible pieces of day-to-day software that I've used on XP:

- Nero 6. I will not use anything after Nero 6 because it's utter bullcrap. But Nero 6 just locks up when it tries to access the burner, although you can get it back by waiting a while for the access to time out and hammer "cancel" repeatedly.

- TightVNC. It won't operate in service mode because of the way Vista restructured the service/user interface interactions; it can no longer access the user-mode desktop and therefore can only be used in "application" mode.

- HDTach. It plain refuses to start, probably because it relies on a driver that's not Vista compatible.

Fud?

edit: I have UAC disabled and removed, so everything is already running with administrator privileges anyway.

Edited by Volatus
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
- Nero 6. I will not use anything after Nero 6 because it's utter bullcrap. But Nero 6 just locks up when it tries to access the burner, although you can get it back by waiting a while for the access to time out and hammer "cancel" repeatedly.

ok first off,

3. Must have been tested with the most recent version of the software.

secondly, every version after Nero 3 is crap.

- TightVNC. It won't operate in service mode because of the way Vista restructured the service/user interface interactions; it can no longer access the user-mode desktop and therefore can only be used in "application" mode.

ok ill add it to the top post.

- HDTach. It plain refuses to start, probably because it relies on a driver that's not Vista compatible.

will run in compatibility mode.

post-158212-1214183646_thumb.jpg

however i will add it to the list in a separate category.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coupla points to counter:

First, people use old versions for a reason - they work, and they do their job better than the new version most of the time. How come Nero 6 suddenly stopped working with Vista, but it would work with everything else? I think it should be added, because there are a lot of people that use Nero 6 because there's nothing better...

Second, I haven't touched "compatibility mode" in, well, ever... it's pretty much never fixed anything until Vista came along and broke everything. So I don't think that just because it runs in "compatibility mode" that it's just automatically considered "compatible". You had to "hack" it to get it to work... otherwise, no, it just doesn't work. =P

edit: Ah, an edit. That fixes #2.

edit edit: According to TightVNC's site, that incompatibility applies to any variation of VNC (RealVNC, etc), not just TightVNC. Source: http://www.tightvnc.com/faq.html#vista

Edited by Volatus
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
secondly, every version after Nero 3 is crap.

Pfffft! Everybody knows v2 is where it's at! 3 was bloated! And there's no new features added since then, and if there ever were, well, uh... I wouldn't use them anyways! :P

First, people use old versions for a reason - they work, and they do their job better than the new version most of the time.

I disagree. Most new versions are better (just not Win ME I guess). Nero included -- to quote one of my posts from like an hour ago, some newer features: "DVD DL support, improved UDF support, LightScribe, support for BluRay (the burners are becoming cheaper already -- I've seen the LG GGW-H20L for $270 before), etc". And that's just for the burning data discs part. I don't care for the other stuff either, but there are some people who just love it, and use it almost everyday, I think they'd disagree with your "utter bullcrap" assessment.

Second, I haven't touched "compatibility mode" in, well, ever...

And I have. A lot. On DOS, we had to use SetVer for various apps. On WFW fancy pif files were often required. Same story for Windows 95. Win2k and XP needed lots of compat mode changes for older apps back then too (mainly dos and win9x ones), sometimes faking windows version wasn't enough, you even had to force video to 640x480/256 colours, and some other apps just have to be ran under dosbox even. I had to resort to them tricks a lot when I tried win 2003 as a desktop as well.

With Vista, HDTach 3 is the only app I had to do this for so far. And not because the features are broken or anything, but because it checks for the version of windows and plain out refuses to run on Vista or Win 2008, and the author has been too lazy to update it in over a year, even though it's well known to work just fine. It's DESIGNED not to run so having to use compatibility is hardly surprising there. You HAVE to fool the initial GetVersionExA check (MUST be NT 5.x) -- a 1 byte patch works fine. I'll post a screenshot (and a patch, if they want), if the mods give me the go ahead (not illegal: it does NOT bypass any protection code/licensing/serial checks or such, it's merely for interoperability/to circumvent restrictions for use, which is deemed as acceptable by US Judges)

As for TightVNC, I dunno. UltraVNC is working 100% fine here (server running as a service and all)

So far, it looks like this to me:

Actually not working:

1. mmm+ by hace

Minor issues, or specific features not working:

1. Cisco VPN Client: Smartcard support is broken

2. Some VNC versions (i.e. TightVNC): won't run in service mode

Works only in compatibility mode:

1. HDTach 3 (designed not to run, patching also works)

Still a very short list.

Edited by crahak
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've gotten Nero 6 (portable version) to work in Vista in compatibility mode. And yes, newer versions support HD DVD burning. So unless you plan to live in the past, you can find satisfaction with standard DVD's.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't even burn DVDs with Nero. I burn audio and data CDs with Nero and that's pretty much it. There is no way in hell I'm paying 30 bucks for a single freaking HD disc... o_O

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't even burn DVDs with Nero. I burn audio and data CDs with Nero and that's pretty much it.

That pretty much makes you a minority. I mainly burn data DVDs myself. Blank CDs are no cheaper then DVDs anymore anyways.

There is no way in hell I'm paying 30 bucks for a single freaking HD disc... o_O

Actually, they're already down to ~$15 (Verbatims can be had for $13 by the unit, including shipping). Give it a couple years and they'll likely be about 5$, which is not bad considering the capacity: about 6 or so single layer DVDs, which is already worth a couple bucks, or about 3 or so of the pricier double layer DVDs. Drives by then will likely be under 100$ too. I'm definitely looking forward to it.

It doesn't make Nero any less compatible anyways. Actually, I'd like to see if a nero 3 or 4 versions out of date (at the time) would have ran on XP when it came out too (that would be Nero v2).

Edited by crahak
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Looks like this is gonna be a very short list as I expected :D

Where's the Vista bashers and their constant FUD now? :whistle:

Appears you may be right.

:blink:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only because the list is being restricted to an unnecessarily small number of programs by overzealous rule-setting...

Seriously, the rules for this list basically say "Only list programs that are compatible with Vista, that aren't". Programs that just worked fine in XP but don't work in Vista can't be "mentioned", or at least aren't "eligible" for the list... yet would probably make up a much longer list.

Not everyone buys the latest and "greatest", but still expect it to work with an operating system whose job is to "run programs". Stuff that works with XP often works fine in 2000 as well, and that's a version back. So if you want an honest compatibility list, you shouldn't be limiting it to the latest version of programs (especially when "newer versions", like Nero, are whole separate products), and "on the shelf" programs. Just work on listing programs that, simply, aren't compatible. What's so damning about that?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Seriously, the rules for this list basically say "Only list programs that are compatible with Vista, that aren't". ..

You said it buddy!

I think people are running into problems when they upgrade and find their old programs incompatible in Vista rather than fresh new Vista installs. Thus, those who upgrade are the ones creating all this uproar.

So, it wouldn't be reasonable to restrict programs to those after Vista RTM'd. Of course, those programs written prior to Vista would most likely work in XP only and per chance in Vista under compatibility mode.

Edited by spacesurfer
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Only because the list is being restricted to an unnecessarily small number of programs by overzealous rule-setting...

Seriously, the rules for this list basically say "Only list programs that are compatible with Vista, that aren't". Programs that just worked fine in XP but don't work in Vista can't be "mentioned", or at least aren't "eligible" for the list... yet would probably make up a much longer list.

Not everyone buys the latest and "greatest", but still expect it to work with an operating system whose job is to "run programs". Stuff that works with XP often works fine in 2000 as well, and that's a version back. So if you want an honest compatibility list, you shouldn't be limiting it to the latest version of programs (especially when "newer versions", like Nero, are whole separate products), and "on the shelf" programs. Just work on listing programs that, simply, aren't compatible. What's so damning about that?

Why are you using vista them? :blink:

FYI there are tons of programs in both 2000 & xp which require compatability mode to be run, this isn't just a vista thing.

and why b***h about anything newer than nero 6 working when nero has been a coaster burner for sometime compared to free cd/dvd burners around which do a much much better job.

if your going to complain about older software not working on newer software, stop upgrading windows!

in my experiance, epson's print cd is a pain to get working in vista, but once your used to having to set the tray to manual and click some extra things its no biggie, ... oh Sonic R doesn't work in vista (but it doesn't work in XP either)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Only because the list is being restricted to an unnecessarily small number of programs by overzealous rule-setting...

Not at all.

You try to run programs 3 or 4 versions out of date, and are surprised they don't run (actually, spacesurfer got it to work). That's EXACTLY the same as saying Nero 2 doesn't work on XP (3 versions out of date at the time of release) and such. Over 99% of apps that run on XP also work on Vista as-is. Besides, CD burning apps have been notorious to need upgrades to work with almost any OS (early Roxio versions were real bad for that). In fact, most apps even used to require upgrades to work with newer burners! And nevermind all the technology changes that happened in the underlying tech (different ASPI layers, ASAPI, SPTI, and various proprietary methods).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What you Vi$ta lovers forget is that it costs good money. For that money, a normal user would expect everything to work right out of the box, not to bring more restrictions and bloat. So when you try to push Vi$ta onto us, you'd better donate us a free copy, or else you're just Micro$oft's pimp$ (I say this out of general principle).

Since this topic is about incompatibilities, just ask anyone who works with audio production what has Vi$ta brought to him (with moving the audio drivers out of kernel mode). Yeah, even the regular sound card drivers have enormous problems. It would be OK if this was justified by... what was the reason, you say? To satisfy Hollywood companies? Common...

Every Windows NT version promised taking drivers out of user mode (and managed to do that, but not fully) with promises of stability, but brought only inconvenience.

Another thing. If learning the user interface from start isn't an incompatibility, I don't know what is.

Security? That was Micro$oft's fault in the first place, with every Window$ version full of holes like a Swiss cheese. And they try to remedy that how? By restricting user's access to everything? Viruses will find another way in, but the user will remain $crewed.

And blaming incompatibilities on driver's manufacturers isn't helping either, because with that you're just blowing wind in Micro$oft's sails who want to extort money from signing every 64-bit driver.

And if Nero has gone the bloat way, there's no reason others (Micro$oft) to follow it.

I'll stop now, because this post has gone into the not-desired direction (and I have lots more to say), but it was intended as a response to the "Vi$ta-pushers" (I can understand when someone works for M$ and feels as his duty to defend his job and I respect that, but when someone wants to pursuade others to part with their good money for some not-so-obvious benefits, it's suspicious - at least for me, I can not see any benefits that Vi$ta brings that are worth the money).

And I hope no harm will be done to this innocent post of mine 'cause I think it's valid response to the issues raised above. :D

GL

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
in my experiance, epson's print cd is a pain to get working in vista, but once your used to having to set the tray to manual and click some extra things its no biggie, ... oh Sonic R doesn't work in vista (but it doesn't work in XP either)

Great, that's one more program I haven't yet even tried in Vista yet that's required by my day to day "life". Epson Print CD doesn't work right? UGH! I sure hope there's an update for that. Of course, first I hope I can find my driver CD that even has Epson Print CD on it...

And by the way, no, I absolutely NEVER touched the compatibility settings in XP, in all the years I'd been using it. It never fixed anything, mainly because almost nothing (except ancient Win3.x programs I wouldn't've expected to work anyway) was broken.

(edit: Epson Print CD is a program that comes with Epson printers, allowing you to, well, do what I bought the printer for - print directly onto CDs. And yeah, the printer is "Vista era")

Edited by Volatus
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What you Vi$ta lovers forget is that it costs good money. For that money, a normal user would expect everything to work right out of the box, not to bring more restrictions and bloat. So when you try to push Vi$ta onto us, you'd better donate us a free copy, or else you're just Micro$oft's pimp$ (I say this out of general principle).

That doesn't make sense. We like an OS, and it works just fine for most people. Similarly, you like XP, and XP did cost money too, and you didn't give people copies, but that doesn't make you a "Micro$oft's pimp$". C'mon now... That's a double standard if I've ever seen one. Besides, we're not pushing Vista on anyone here, just debunking the common myth that basically nothing works.

If learning the user interface from start isn't an incompatibility, I don't know what is.

Hardly anything changed. The start menu is shown differently (just like going from 9x or 2k to XP did). And the control panel stuff is shuffled around (ditto). By that standard, XP is incompatible. You make it sound like people have to learn to double click all over again. It's not nearly as drastic as say, the windows Win 3.11 to Win 95 change was, and people adapted to that just fine.

And blaming incompatibilities on driver's manufacturers isn't helping either

It's THEIR OWN FAULT. Who else are we supposed to blame for it? Some kind of universal scapegoat that we should blame should anything go wrong for any reason? Like when a computer BSODs because of buggy drivers, who do people blame? Yep, "teh evil evil M$!" Exactly the inverse than what you say -- hardware makers had a free ride for far too long, they can BSOD your box every 5 minutes, and all people will say is "Windows sucks! *#$#@$%$ Microsoft!"

because with that you're just blowing wind in Micro$oft's sails who want to extort money from signing every 64-bit driver.

But, their x86 drivers suck just as much so there's truly no excuse. And Comodo will sell them a signing certificate for $80/year, I hope Epson can afford that! Besides, NONE of the signing money goes to Microsoft, no matter who you get your cert from, so how's that extortion? The certs have a purpose: so you can tell for sure who made that driver/binary (you'll have to prove your identity before they issue you a cert).

On a side note, the latest Epson print CD works with Vista, and older versions can be made to work (pick tray 2 manually, you might have to use XP's drivers - thank Epson for that!)

Edited by crahak
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of software incompatibilities that I've dealt with comes from software that's coded poorly - writing files to places where a program has no business being (Filezilla and XML settings comes to mind). Microsoft has been telling devs for years - put your configuration files in Application Data where they belong, not in the program's directory.

The only other problem I have is with Notebook Hardware Control. That program seems to lock up my whole system from time to time (can't pinpoint why), but the developer hasn't made any attempt to make the software Vista compatible, nor has he updated it in over a year.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.