A Clearer View of Vista

These are all things that I miss when I run XP (which is most of the time; The Post, like many companies, takes its time upgrading).

In other respects, though, Vista represents missed opportunities.

Some can't be blamed on Microsoft. A disturbingly high number of programs took a long time to work right in Vista -- some still don't -- but compatibility complaints about that should be directed to an address outside of Redmond, Wash. After all of Vista's delays and advance publicity, no professional software developer could have been surprised by its arrival.

But other Vista vexations come from Microsoft's own choices.

A puzzling mix of different Vista editions -- from $100 Home Basic to $400 Ultimate -- serves few people other than Microsoft's sales staff.

And Vista's stringent anti-piracy system, which tries to detect when people use a copy they haven't paid for, has been a PR disaster for Microsoft, locking a small but justifiably angry minority of Vista users out of their own computers.

Vista has also failed to make a meaningful dent in the ongoing pain of Windows maintenance-- policing all the stuff that runs when the computer starts, getting rid of unwanted programs, keeping the machine from slowing down over time, and so on. Those everyday tasks are still a drag in Vista.

Then there's security. Vista includes many deep-rooted improvements to its anti-virus defenses. But its obvious change -- the User Account Control dialog that pops up if you install a program or change key system settings, is more annoying than helpful.

A UAC warning could alert you that a picture you thought you were opening is actually live code. But most of the time, these confirm-or-cancel alerts are just another bureaucratic obstacle.

The root of the problem seems to be that Vista, like every other Windows release, doesn't provide a barrier between itself and other software. You can't keep a copy of Vista clean when new programs insert bits of code into the plumbing of the system, in the form of shared libraries and Registry entries. The accumulation can still clog up the pipes over time.

Vista does more than XP to protect itself from intrusions by developers, but it doesn't go far enough. And yet Microsoft's attempts to keep tens of thousands of existing Windows titles running in Vista did not prevent widespread compatibility issues while also inflating Vista's appetite for memory.

Some level of pain can't be helped when you switch operating systems, but you should see some payoff afterward. Vista could have done a better job of holding up its end of the deal.

Living with technology, or trying to? E-mail Rob Pegoraro atrobp@washpost.com. Read more athttp://blog.washingtonpost.com/fasterforward.