You can really tell when there is blood in the water and the sharks want a taste.

Some consider this last weekend the time when Microsoft admitted there was problems in some cases with Sleep, Hibernate or call it what you will. In short it saves the amount of time you need to boot your computer up. The point being that there is always some problems with the way various devices get shut down and how that affects your kernel as it cleans up.

I remember reading this way back, then trying the different modes of sleep on my PC (AMD64, Nforce4). I had no such problems, in fact, I could do it even when I was playing games and the game would wake back up too.

Then I read notes like this about the state of the repair of the sleep process for Vista and take it to heart, knowing for sure that Microsoft is going to issue patches for things that might be better off fixed in vendor code.

This skidmark over here starts complaining about how horrible Vista is, but he really likes black boxes. You cannot see inside black boxes, you don’t know what’s going on inside of them and you don’t know why they crash. He’s ignorant, and doesn’t even know how to interpret the blue screen beyond the color and throwing google the text he sees. At least some person with moderate sense starts to wonder if it’s drivers and not the hardware causing the problem.

One does have to start wondering why so many people blame Microsoft and not the company who made the laptop. They don’t question the chipsets, or any circuitry that might be inside, trying to do it’s own power saving. Let’s not mention that the same people expect Microsoft to buy every notebook on the planet and make sure Vista works on it. Only one company makes sure their product works on every notebook it’s designed for: Apple.

I take heart when someone posts what their system is and how well it works with Vista sleep, and while granted it would have been better to have a Detailed entry a model number is good enough. (Hey, the chipsets make a good indicator if it’ll support ACPI)

I’ve seen a Dell and an HP so far that work just fine with Vista. But I digress, I do not have the model numbers in my head. I can tell you however that the Dell only had 512mb of ram, so you know how that is going to turn out…. or do we?
As always, you can consider my opinion to be that Microsoft is not the only one to blame here, and we are operating off of insufficient information. There is no non-biased repository of information that talks about the amount of systems sleep -does- work on.

The only conclusion I can reliably draw at this moment is that no company has any business releasing a product or feature that works less than 50% of the time. Saying they would do this only infers that the Titanic didn’t sink because of an Iceberg, it sank because the designers knew 50% of the rivets would come out when it turned left.