Posted by
ryuzaki0
on from the oh-yeah-remember-that dept.
ruszka writes "CNN has a good article on the release of Windows XP in London and NYC.. The BBC has their own article." I find it amusing that I didn't really even notice until I saw this submission. I know this affects a fair number of users but for the life of me I just don't know why ;)
Surprisingly, a lot of negative press
by
Masem
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Sure, I'm going out tonight to buy XP, but only because my gaming machine is 98, and I'd like a bit more stability in it.
But I've been listening to reports and reading articles, and while the industry seems hyped up about it, most pundents (that are not typical MS fanboys) appear to be believe that for most businesses, already in the Win2000 migration, XP is not a good choice, and for those on home machines, you have to have some oomph in your box to be able to take advantage of it.
Most of these critics think that the stability is a great point, but other aspects, including look, integration of WMP and other programs, and the *amount* of blatent advertizing for MS on the default install is put-offs for them. They definitely feel that the engine behind XP is worthwhile being built on 2000, but they could do without all the glitz.
And many people expect very slow sales of XP. There's no lines-around-the-corner as with 95, but they do expect a modest amount of sales today. But they don't believe that XP is going to be a big economic burst into the market as Microsoft tried to make it out as; again, since most seats of the OS are sold to business, and most appear to be sticking to 2000 until necessary, there's going to be very few sales from that market.
The short story from what I've read: it's great that MS finally has a NT-based, stable OS for the home user, as it's been 5 years that it's been needed, but it appears to carry a lot of extra weight that is unnecessary and possible questionable in light of several legal cases.
--
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
Slashdot Mirror
But I've been listening to reports and reading articles, and while the industry seems hyped up about it, most pundents (that are not typical MS fanboys) appear to be believe that for most businesses, already in the Win2000 migration, XP is not a good choice, and for those on home machines, you have to have some oomph in your box to be able to take advantage of it.
Most of these critics think that the stability is a great point, but other aspects, including look, integration of WMP and other programs, and the *amount* of blatent advertizing for MS on the default install is put-offs for them. They definitely feel that the engine behind XP is worthwhile being built on 2000, but they could do without all the glitz.
And many people expect very slow sales of XP. There's no lines-around-the-corner as with 95, but they do expect a modest amount of sales today. But they don't believe that XP is going to be a big economic burst into the market as Microsoft tried to make it out as; again, since most seats of the OS are sold to business, and most appear to be sticking to 2000 until necessary, there's going to be very few sales from that market.
The short story from what I've read: it's great that MS finally has a NT-based, stable OS for the home user, as it's been 5 years that it's been needed, but it appears to carry a lot of extra weight that is unnecessary and possible questionable in light of several legal cases.
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST: