* YKhan:

Yes, things are usually removed from final versions that were in beta
versions. But that usually refers to debugging code, such as
breakpoints, triggers, dumps, etc. It doesn't usually refer to removal
of functionality.

It does. It happened on Vista, it happened on Windowsxp, it happened on
Windows2000 and on every release before...

Functionality might be removed if a particular feature is so buggy
that it doesn't work, and there's no time to fix it. For example, MS
quite publically removed their new WinFS filesystem from the feature
list because it didn't work, and they couldn't fix it quickly enough
for release. Removal of that kind of functionality is quite related to
beta-testing and debugging problems. However, this is a first I've
heard of a feature being removed that was working perfectly.

ACPI 1.0 working perfectly? Yeah, right. It works so perfectly that AMD
and MS had to provide kernel patches for several CPUs with power
management like Athlon64/Opteron or Pentium-M/Core just to have
powermanagement working correctly. ACPI 1.0 is very old (probably around
a decade now), and just lacks functionality for modern hardware...

Actually it isn't the first I've heard of Microsoft removing perfectly
working functionality without informing anybody.

That's simply not true. Every developer who was part of MSDN should know
for over a year now that ACPI 1.0 is a dead end on Vista.

My brother does tech
support for HP, and he tells me that a program used to help sync iPaq
PDAs to PCs was mysteriously deleted from Vista, which used to be in
XP. So it's now upto HP to come up with a replacement for it. Even big
companies have to put up with Microsoft's arrogance.

What for? It would be enough for your brother just to stay current on
the facts. The program you mention is called Mobile Device Center and is
the replacement for ActiveSync in Vista. Yes, it has been removed from
the final version. Now you have to download it separately:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/devicecenter.mspx

Nope. The manufacturers of these mobos were sitting on their arses for
over a year while the rest of the world was already aware that ACPI 1.0
is a dead horse. Still they didn't fix their crap.

There are cases where there is not likely going to be any further BIOS
upgrades, such as older P3 or Athlon XP systems.

Which are probably the best systems for running Vista ;-)

They may have been
part of the original beta test of Vista and they worked fine (even
with Aero, with a sufficiently powerful video card). The people who
beta-tested Vista may have been confident enough in Vista that they
decided to buy the final version, based on their good beta experience.
Little did they know that they were beta testing some other OS.

Then these peoples should have used their brains. Someone who tests a
beta version and believes the final product will work exactly the same
is a moron.

Benjamin