Vista Gem #4
Filed under Computers, Software
I was having some problems with Adobe Premiere Pro 2.0 locking up under Windows Vista. I tried reinstalling, but it didn't help. I tried various compatibility modes and that didn't help. After running out of options, I decided to just start over and do a clean install of Vista and then install Premiere Pro.
Unfortunately, that didn't help either. Further investigation revealed that Adobe knows that Premiere Pro 2.0 does not work with Vista and has no plans to fix it. The follow on to 2.0, CS3, will work on Vista. I guess I have to upgrade to CS3. :(
BUT...along the way I noticed something different about installing Windows on top of Windows. Previous to Vista, if you did a clean install on a system that already has Windows installed, you had to pick a different folder name for the OS because "C:\Windows" is already used by your previous install.
Then when you pick your user name, Windows can't create a folder (user profile) with the same name as the user because the old one already exists. So instead of using "C:\Documents and Settings\Dave", behind the scenes, Windows would create "C:\Documents and Settings\Dave.COMPUTERNAME." I *hated* my stuff stored in "Dave.COMPUTERNAME" as opposed to just "Dave."
Vista works differently. When I did my clean install, my Windows directory was moved to Windows.old, so the new install went in "C:\Windows." The user profiles were also moved under Windows.old, so my new user profile is the same as the old one..."Dave." Nice! I like this much better!
Another change related to user profiles is the path. Instead of "C:\Documents and Settings\Dave", Vista uses "C:\Users\Dave". That is much better because...
- More concise
- Less letters to type
- No spaces...so no need to use quotes around a path name if you are accessing files without spaces in them (mainly a command line issue)
Comments (7)
Adobe got on my short list when they introduced Premiere Pro and didn't tell anybody about the incompatibility with AMD CPUs. Ended up replacing so many parts that the upgrade cost me an entirely new machine.
Now I'm in another bind. I'm running Vista 64 bit, and Adobe pulling the same old tricks, stating that PPro CS3 will work under "Vista 32-bit certified" systems. No mention of 64 bit at the moment.
And I can't upgrade if I tried-- I can't load Premiere 5 (my last full install license) on my Vista machine, so now I'm kinda stuck. If I end up having to buy the latest full version to install, then they may have convinced me to buy a Mac Mini and give Final Cut a shot...
Posted by Kelvin | June 16, 2007 2:09 PM
Posted on June 16, 2007 14:09
You are pretty bold Kelvin!
I'm waiting until the next version of Windows before I go to 64-bit. At that point, there won't be a choice and everybody will have to move...which means you will get better support.
Have you seen any positive differences in your switch to 64-bit?
David
Posted by David | June 16, 2007 2:17 PM
Posted on June 16, 2007 14:17
Premiere Pro CS3 also marks Adobe's return to the Mac video editing market.
Curious how that will play out.
Posted by David | June 16, 2007 4:15 PM
Posted on June 16, 2007 16:15
It was a case of being stupid like a fox...
I got my HP dual core Athlon XP64X2 last fall. I was shocked when I discovered that at that late date HP will still shipping Media Center '02, and even more surprised when I was told there was no upgrade path for MC'02. (BTW the box and ad print said Media Center XP, but not the release year). Therefore I was faced with having to wipe the OS anyway. And then I discovered Microsoft's software giveaway, which is similar to the Visual C offer you pointed your loyal blog fans to. I sat through 3 hours of video, and in February was rewarded with Vista Business and Office 2007 for FREE! ( I did have to spend $10 to get the 64 bit version shipped to me because, well, why the heck not?). I like Vista, and really love the Pen features with my Wacom tablet. A tablet running Vista business would be so sweet, it hurts.
I still do most of my video editing on my old XP machine, but since Adobe ties the license to your machine nowadays, I would like to move it to the shiny fast machine so I can retire the XP machine eventually, or donate to our church or a school.
And no, I have not seen any gains to using 64 bit OS. I have been bitten by drivers that do not work under Vista 64, but these were odd Asian OEM devices that were a long shot to work anyway.
I am disappointed in Media Player 11. It streams video out of my dual core Athlon not half as well as my dual 300 Mhz PW6000 running Win2000. Go figure.
And I'm about to install Windows Home Server on my old PC/DVR rig (getting ATT fiber soon, and it comes with its own HD DVR). So I'm knee deep in MS these days. Who'd a thunk it?
Posted by Kelvin | June 16, 2007 6:35 PM
Posted on June 16, 2007 18:35
You inspired me to give it a shot one more time, and I think I've finagled PPro 1.5 to losd on Vista 64. Whether it will work is another matter.
Posted by Kelvin | June 17, 2007 5:51 AM
Posted on June 17, 2007 05:51
From Vista Recovery Command Prompt
As good as the recovery console in is Windows-it really aint that secure at all. Did you know that the Command Prompt tool found in Vista’s System Recovery Options doesn’t require a User Name or Password? And that the Command Prompt provides Administrator level access to the hard drive? For multiple versions of Windows? All you need is a Vista Install DVD and you’re all set to go.
Posted by bubba | June 18, 2007 12:19 PM
Posted on June 18, 2007 12:19
You can do that on Linux, too. Just boot off a Linux CD any you have access to all the data on the drive. Something similar probably exists for the Mac.
If you are worried about this (somebody gaining access to your computer via a Vista Install DVD), you can encrypt your file system via bitlocker.
I'm not worried about this issue, because I keep my computer locked in my apartment. If I used a laptop, I'd look into using bitlocker.
I guess at some point encrypting your file system will become the default...so a stolen laptop/PC is useless for data mining.
Not sure what the performance hit is for the encryption/decryption.
David
Posted by David | June 18, 2007 1:39 PM
Posted on June 18, 2007 13:39