Talk:Windows Vista

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article Windows Vista was one of the Engineering and technology good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.


Extended Support end date and edit warring.[edit]

There has been a couple of edit wars between a couple of individuals stating that all editions of Windows Vista would be supported until 4 November 2017.

Realistically, that is NOT the case. Mainstream Support for Windows Vista ends on 10 April 2012, in which consumer versions will transition to a non-supported status. Windows Vista Business and Windows Vista Enterprise will be supported until 11 April 2017.

Please consider either editing or commenting out the line that reads "Extended support until 4 November 2017" or have the owners semi-protect this article in question to prevent any further edit warring.

Thank you for your concern. 74.42.191.30 (talk) 23:25, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

--> Microsoft could release a vista SP3 and thus bump the EOL date 2 years further which would give Home Users until 2014 and Business Users until 2019.

It is unbelievable that they support XP for home users 2 years longer then vista. ( xp home/pro/media/tablet = 2014 , vista home,ultimate = 2012 ) - So they have to put out something . Even Microsoft's Vista Information page says that it is no longer sold, but it is STILL SUPPORTED ( seen yesterday ) .

78.50.87.15 (talk) 16:22, 15 February 2012 (UTC) German User

End Support is 4/11/2017 for all versions. - https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle/search/default.aspx?alpha=VistaEaseltine (talk) 18:54, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Merger Proposal[edit]

I propose Merging criticism of windows vista with windows vista to give the article a more NPOV. Bryce Carmony (talk) 20:50, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

  • Oppose - Criticism section is too large to fit in this article. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 22:32, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose - This is a break-out article from the main article, which is already very sizable. The criticism presented here is, by and large, done with neutral presentation of facts based on reliable sources, making it an acceptable article for inclusion on Wikipedia. There's no particularly good reason to throw away all that work. Warren -talk- 01:53, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose per WP:SIZERULE. Consider Wikipedia:Summary style instead. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 06:19, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose. As for similar suggestions at Linux and Windows XP, I suggest this proposal be withdrawn. Tayste (edits) 09:38, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose as per Codename Lisa. (IanWilliam20 (talk) 00:45, 22 April 2015 (UTC))

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Windows Vista. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

YesY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:12, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi. I checked the sources. While both are good archived versions, the IDC document is effectively worthless.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 02:08, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (2)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Windows Vista. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

YesY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:44, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Check. Everything is good.
Actually, both sources are alive. Archiving was not needed. —Codename Lisa (talk) 02:09, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (3)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Windows Vista. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

YesY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:49, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Linked checked. Not okay. Replaced. Cheers. Fleet Command (talk) 00:44, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

DMY format?[edit]

Because Windows Vista originated in America (where MDY format is used) (EDIT: or did it originate there?), would it be better to use Americans' (and my) way of writing down dates? Gamingforfun365 (talk) 00:04, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

It was changed to DMY format with this edit. That edit was unchallenged afaict. Per MOS:STABILITY and MOS:ENGVAR it should not be changed unless there is a compelling reason for it. Although MS is US-based it is a multinational company, many components of Windows are developed outside the U.S., and of course there are users everywhere. If you change it back to MDY now you can expect an, um, "spirited" response, and really, no one wants that. Jeh (talk) 01:13, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
The moment before I read the succeeding comment, I was thinking "Did Windows Vista really originate in America?", so I have edited my above comment.
Anyway, I was more concerned with MOS:TIES (which, prior to this discussion, I ironically have not yet read but figured was there after reading articles whose subjects were mostly based in America, the United Kingdom, etc.), but I guess that the article's subject really is not solely based in America, so anybody (including those from Canada, Great Britain, Australia, etc., and not just Americans) can dispute over this, so it would not guide us anywhere near being constructive. Gamingforfun365 (talk) 01:48, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
MOS:TIES needs very strong national ties, not just some ties. IMHO, it should be something that Americans can claim non-Americans don't understand it. —Codename Lisa (talk) 11:17, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Dead links[edit]

This article suffers from a large number of dead links. I have already found six dead links, and I have already rescued four of them, but, while I am feeling tired of repairing them all by myself, I can very almost promise you that the article might have yet another dead link. I am red-flagging this issue here so that I could show other editors an opportunity to improve this article so that I would not have to do all of that work myself. Gamingforfun365 (talk) 23:54, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

@Gamingforfun365: Link rot is an encyclopedia's never ending problem. You can use WP:Checklinks. Fleet Command (talk) 14:52, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Windows Vista (codenamed Longhorn)[edit]

Longhorn was the predecessor project, which was fully cancelled. Vista is not Longhorn. --2A02:908:EB20:C600:98B0:F322:8F57:E308 (talk) 03:13, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Longhorn is the codename for Windows Vista. pcuser42 (talk) 06:33, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
I would just like to chime in that "fully cancelled" is a terrible misconception; "Longhorn" is the codename of Windows Vista. (IanWilliam20 (talk) 06:54, 3 January 2017 (UTC))

Semi-protected edit request on 1 January 2017[edit]

The http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/ link for the official Vista website is gone. Please add the Wayback Machine link to the article. 75.117.135.225 (talk) 22:28, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Not done: This request does not comply with our WP:EL policy. Official website links are automatically acceptable but their mirrors are not.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 12:05, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Codename Lisa, the Windows XP article has a Wayback Machine link for its official website. Should I remove it as per your advice above?
Additionally, the official website links on the Windows 1.0, Windows 2.1x, Windows 3.0, Windows 3.1x, and Windows ME articles redirect to a Windows 10 help page. If Internet Archive versions of dead pages are not allowed for official website links, how should these links be repaired? 75.117.135.225 (talk) 02:19, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi.
When the official website ceases to exist, its link must be deleted. I don't presume users just want to see the website's pretty face, do they?
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 05:17, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
Very well. Could you also remove the dead official website link for the Windows Vista page? 75.117.135.225 (talk) 07:42, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
Looks good. 75.117.135.225 (talk) 09:06, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Day, month, year?[edit]

Why does the article follow the date, month, year ("dd-mm-yyyy") format (e.g., 8 November 2006) instead of the month, date, year ("mm-dd-yyyy") (e.g., November 8, 2006) that is in use by the other Windows articles? (IanWilliam20 (talk) 01:04, 3 January 2017 (UTC))

One could check the page histories for clues, I guess, but it might be because different Wikipedians wrote the respective articles. People will often use the date format they're personally most familiar with, and there's often no compelling reason to change it. RivertorchFIREWATER 11:07, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
If I recall, all of the Windows articles use the latter format. I am not sure why this one should be the exception. Perhaps that will change with the next contribution? (IanWilliam20 (talk) 19:32, 3 January 2017 (UTC))
Windows NT 4.0 also uses DMY format. Windows 7, 8, and 10 all did but the editor who made the changes reverted themselves and went back to the MDY format. —MRD2014 (talkcontribs) 19:47, 3 January 2017 (UTC)