Re: CVF and Vista

Jim wrote:
"Paul van Delst" <Paul.vanDelst@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:epqh9e$p53$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Steve Lionel wrote:
On Jan 30, 8:51 pm, sureal <sur...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

According to CNET Vista is just a warmed over XP, so CVF should work
just fine, except for an unknown number of service packs until MS cleans
up the bugs.
Whoever wrote that is clueless.

One significant change in Vista is that the registry is locked down so
that, by default, applications cannot modify most registry entries,
even if the user has administrator privileges. Visual Studio depends
on making such changes and is not happy if it cannot. Apparently, VS6
(used by CVF) simply falls over if it is blocked from the registry.
Even VS2005 will behave in odd ways if it can't write the registry.

I would have expected MS to fix VS 2005 so that it operated within the
limits of Vista but apparently they are saving that for the NEXT VS
(code named Orcas). All they did with their Vista compatibility
update was remove VS2005 from the list of "incompatible" applications
and add a popup warning you to run VS as administrator.
So, if I understand you (which I doubt since I know nothing about Windows at all :o), Vista basically buggers up the system (Visual Studio) upon which apps like CVF and IVF depend?

No, VISTA is the system. Unlike previous versions, VISTA tries very hard to keep applications from writing to the registry. Thus Visual Studio can't bugger up the system, but to change this behavior requires changes to VS.

I didn't mean "system" as in operating system, I meant "system" as in without that particular component working CVF and IVF also won't work. One could haggle over what part is more broken -- the old VS or the new Vista -- but all a user would see is that something that used to work does no longer. Now, that's not peculiar to MS by any means -- my regular various Mac OSX/X11 updates tend to break stuff (like my ifort/icc install! I'm not particularly looking forward to the release of Mac OSX Leopard) -- but one would like the concern addressed relatively quickly, no? That doesn't sound like an option for the current Vista/VS registry headbutting.

It's my experience that admin privileges (on windows, linux or mac) are generally not available to the people that actually use the computer.

You experience with windows is very limited.

I'll go even further than that and say it is nil. :o) The last time I used a Windows machine was 1992.

Perhaps that is correct in an office environment

Yes, that's what I was referring to. I would think the number of folks who have purchased and installed CVF/IVF on their home computers (consultants don't count! :o) would be pretty small compared to the number of folks that use it at work. But I could be wrong.

In some environments, you pretty much have to get approval from the Secretary of DHS to install software that's not on the standard approved list (that's hyperbole of course, but you get the idea. Nevertheless, I feel a disclaimer stating that I do not speak for NOAA or any of its agencies, and am not well versed in their IT security policies, should be made. And there it be.)

cheers,

paulv

--
Paul van Delst Ride lots.
CIMSS @ NOAA/NCEP/EMC Eddy Merckx
.

Quantcast