Much Ado about Vista – is it perception, marketing, support, or the software itself that’s broken?

This week, it seems like I’ve seen more than the usual number of articles about Windows Vista – not to mention a new “country western song” variation of the MAC vs. PC commercial.  An article in the May 14th edition of Knowledge@Wharton has the provocative title: “Microsoft’s Vista: New Horizon or End of the Road for PC Operating Systems?”  This article mentions issues I’ve read in several other articles this week, raising questions about whether Vista is really just too complicated or whether the problem is more of perception (fixed with marketing rather than software upgrades).  It also talks about whether the fundamental problem dogging Microsoft isn’t Vista itself but the future of the operating system in general.

I’ve got my own issues with Vista this week.  As an early adopter, I really didn’t have many problems with my shiny new Vista laptop when I first got it.  Most of my peripherals worked out of the box, including my HP printers.  I had to upgrade some software – Quicken, SnagIt – but these were upgrades that were long overdue.  I had a major issue installing Office 2007 at the same time, but that problem turned out to be because of some incompatible software that Dell pre-installed on my new machine (without my asking, I should add).  The issue took forever to resolve because the offshore tech support personnel from Dell and Microsoft were completely unprepared for the new software and operating system.   After 12 hours on three-way calls with both companies on a Saturday and Sunday, a quick follow up call to Microsoft on a Monday resulted in an immediate resolution.  Go figure.  In general, however, most things have been OK – until this week, when I decided to upgrade my RAM from 2GB to 4GB

Apparently, Windows Vista doesn’t like machines with more than 3GB of RAM and an automated Windows update (KB929777) failed to install on my machine.  There is a hotfix from Microsoft referenced in a knowledge base support article but the instructions did not work for me.  The “work around,” so to speak, is to remove 2GB of memory, run the update again, and then re-install the memory.  I tried that too and while it cleared the message telling me to install an update, as soon as Windows Update ran again on the 4GB machine, it identified that I needed the hotfix and once again, the installation failed. 

It finally occurred to me to try Microsoft tech support via e-mail.  In less than a day, I got a very detailed message back explaining that the likely reason that my second, third, fourth, and fifth attempt to install the update failed was because the update was probably partially installed and needed to be removed before following the instructions in the knowledge base hotfix.  Turns out, that was exactly the problem and after uninstalling the partially installed update, I was able to get the hotfix to install successfully.  So, here’s my concern:

• Since this is a known issue, why hasn’t the update been re-written so that it works the first time and doesn’t require a hotfix?
• Since my tech support problem solver was able to describe a solution on the first try, why weren’t these instructions in the knowledge base article in the first place?

I recognize that perhaps there are legitimate technical issues with Vista, but none of these seems to be as big of a barrier as the “non-technical” issues that continue to plague it, such as preparing the help desk to answer support calls and making sure that all resolutions are fed back to the knowledge base on a timely basis, ensuring that known issues are clearly documented, working with partners to make sure that peripherals would all work with the new operating system, testing with “real” end users, providing clear self-service support information, and remembering the importance of ongoing, persistent communications.  These are all important issues for SharePoint deployments but I guess it would be good for Microsoft to remember that they apply to operating systems as well.