Slashdot Mirror
Ignore Vista Until 2008
Blakey Rat writes "According to Gartner in a research note entitled 'Ten reasons you should and shouldn't care about Microsoft's Windows Vista', businesses should wait until 2008 before installing Windows Vista, or 'pursue a strategy of managed diversity' by only bringing in new machines with Windows Vista and not upgrading existing computers. Although acknowledging the security benefits of upgrading, they explain in the report that most of the security-related benefits that come with Vista are available today through third-party software products."
if its not broke, don't fix it.
Yay, I have a sig.
But by then it will be Windows 2008, and it will still be a glorified Windows XP!
Of course I did not RTFA, but they must be speaking of "Third Party" Software Products such as, for instance, GNU/Linux or *BSD.
;-)
:%s/Open Source/Free Software/g
YTARY!
I'm still using Windows 98 so I guess I'll be upgrading in 2018 - ?
because the technology to run Vista won't exist until 2008.
Ignore Vista until 2008 or eternity, whatever is farther.
Though this article is pretty lame. First time I've read, "Ten reasons you should and shouldn't care about Microsoft's Windows Vista client," in a summary and the linked article doesn't even bother to list them.
This is news?
Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
...is this more about the quality of Microsoft's current offerings or their inability to make any advances that would provide value to the business customer?
Or...Does a business really need a 3-D desktop?
I think I think, therefore I think I am.
My main problem with the article was the lack of options specified:
Or you could just install Firefox, with the foxie plugin, and get completely secure browsing for all sites, and great Triton/IE support for intranet/extranet legacy webapps.Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
and have nothing to do so why not just make it up. Why not wait until it's released in its final form before deciding whether to ignore it up until exzactly 2008 or not.
I've been totally ignoring Microsoft for about a year now and I must admit it's been quite an easy life.
Why should one care about what Microsoft does, releases or says? Keep ignoring them until they go away.
And they *will* go away.
Won't Microsoft stop providing security patches after 5 years or so?
... because it'll be at least that long before the *average* user has hardware that comes close to meeting the system requirements?
I wish there was an "EgoManiac" mod.
Help Fight SPAM today!
It will be delayed again.
[alk]
Does this mean it will be released before 2008, then?
"Don't install a brand-new software that hasn't yet been thoroughly tested." Of course that's a good advice, but is it really necessary to tell this to people? Well, maybe it'll add some credibility to the IT staff's complaints when someone from middle mismanagement wants to switch the entire infrastructure to Vista or soething...
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
Heck. I can give you ONE reason not to move to Vista, and it's all you need.
Trusted Computing.
'nuff said.
Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
Now that was funny :)
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
How about being modded "Redundant" since someone said the same thing a little ways above you?
Okay, I give you the benefit of the doubt - since it's in the first few posts, the other poster probably hadn't shown up yet.
I'll go find the one-hundred-fiftieth post that will say the same thing...
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
I'd rather have a more secure product out of the box, rather than having to not plug it in without installing a virus scanner, pop-up blocker, spyware blocker, et al. This has always been the evolution of operating systems, rolling in things that only third party applications did before. /me afk, installing Dave.
I hate sigs.
...I'll already have ReactOS installed in my PC. Oh, btw, this week ReactOS reached version 0.2.8.
Of course, ReactOS will be installed in a dual-boot with the latest Linux, which I hope, will be user-and-hardware friendly by then.
... a cheap, free (as in freedom), reliable solution, I will continue to ignore Microsoft products for the forseeable future. Everybody knows MS is dead in the long run.
Meh.
... most of the security-related benefits that come with Vista are available today through third-party software products ...
Besides ruining the entire rational of a Microsoft Solution (i.e., upgrade the sucker and pay the man), why invest in third-party products that you're going to discard when you upgrade to Windows Vista? Just bite the bullet and enjoy the pain. Or wait until the first Service Pack comes out.
Vista ignores you till 2008.
...meet Ass.
So will OS X be at version 10.6, 10.7, or 10.8 by the time Vista is released? Will Duke Nukem Forever be released by then? Will we achive sustained nuclear fusion? Will we have flying cars? Warp drive?
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
OSX.
... i can buy an x86 Mac in 2006
... i can install suse 10 today
or a dual core 64 bit PPC one today
o wait i'm broke
or install ubuntu today
+1 fashionably cynical
Is this the year that Microsoft announces its first Vista service patch?
Where I work we still have more Win2K than XP Pro because the move from NT4 to AD was a long and involved process for 3000+ machines and a team of 3 people to do it. When we got to Win2K AD (we STILL have NT4 domains because of crap legacy software we HAVE to have!) the move to XP was not relished. We've been doing it a building at a time now (60 buildings) and it's going. But this is 2005 going on 2006 and XP came out in 2002. So, you could say we are doing "managed diversity" in a big way. I don't see how this approach to Vista is any different than the way most wise insitutions proceed.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
These guys are like a washed out Hollywood star. They only seem to say and do things to get media attention.
Some exmaples:
Death to IDS! All hail IPS!
Well, duh...
Arrhh, there be Pirates here
To be fair, I guess they got one right The sad part is that I have worked for people who take these announcements as Gospel. "Gartner says..."
Whatever.
Well duh, wut did you think i was going to do? Pay 250 euros for it?
Really, by the time Vista actually sees the light of day, won't there be Intel Powerbooks sitting around soaking up any spare attention I might have ?
Laughing at these articles is as much attention as Vista is likely to get from me ( or the company I work for ) any time soon...
#1 - expected release date is 2008(*)...
* With adjustment for slippages from expected 2006 release date
I intend to ignore it for far longer than that.
Isn't that what /.'ers are already doing?
This is my opinion. To make sure you don't steal it, it's covered by the DMCA.
I hope they didn't forget to include the main reason, or if they did, consider it #11:
Microsoft has never, ever, got anything right on the first try. If you even consider switching a company network to Vista before Service Pack 1 is out, you should be liable for any damages due to gross negliegence.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
So what? Mac users often have to wait 2 years between upgrades. I know a friend who can only afford to upgrade his Mac OS ever other update.
I was planning on ignoring it at least through 2088 anyway.
you had me at #!
Vista, supposedly, fixed the nasty "ALT+F4" bug in XP. The bug, in case anyone wants to check their system, causes a system crash when you press "ALT" and "F4" at the same time. Go on... Try it now...
I would still be using win2000 if it had cleartype and remote desktop. As for search features, I dont think it will help Thunderbird, so no reason to upgrade. And firefox instead of IE and tabs.
Firewall, I have a nat router for that reason and turned off upnp, and avg freeware.
Quicker tcp/ip stack, now if it improves my downloads or ping, maybe we have a winner.
I still haven't tried XP properly, and here I see Win2K running pretty much everywhere. It's stable, well known, and works on fairly old computers. No need to upgrade to something newer.
Linux is different though. Some distributions stay fixed, some like Gentoo are gradually upgraded. But at least they don't suddenly switch to a new interface, start requiring twice the amount of memory and introduce restrictions that are only for Microsoft's benefit.
that the majority of PC's sold in *2006* will come with *Windows 2001* installed.
One important reason *to* upgrade to Vista is its improved Kerberos support - it will finally support AES Kerberos tickets. Not only is this more secure than Microsoft's current RC4-based tickets, but it should make interoperability with other platforms much easier.
That's right, every version afterwards will most likely be rented. Vista is just to get everybody slowly by slowly dependant on DRM for day-to-day activities.
please excuse my apathy
That titile has two words too many. No, wait, actually, the entire article is reduntant.
MOD PARENT FUNNY
lol
> 'pursue a strategy of managed diversity' by only bringing in new machines with Windows Vista and not upgrading existing computers.
Who upgrades Windows on existing machines anyway?
3 years old and they're done as far as Business is concerned.
If you disagree with me on social issues, then it's pretty clear that you are a narrow-minded bigot.
Nope, sorry, that won't make it as the great 'M$' replacement. Thanks for playing.
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
I only need 4 reasons not to upgrade.
1. OS X
2. Ubuntu
3. Win2000
4. $250
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
A big problem with his premise is no companies would be able to purchase a computer from Dell, HP, IBM, etc. until 2008. As soon as Vista is released they will stop offering XP (almost immediately), and start offering only Vista. It's the way of the world. You can erase vista and install XP, but that would be foolish, not to mention they got a license for Vista with the purchase of the machine.
;)
I'm also disagree with his reasons, but I'm not going to take the "flame-bait"
I was planning on ignoring Vista _way_ beyond 2008...
It sounds like vista is to xp, as ME was to win98. I don't see anything revolutionary in it that is worth spending money upgrading. The article hits it right on the spot I think. It doens't seem to improve the core OS, it just seems like they are adding/fixing other software like IE7 and Windows Defender. Most people I know have moved to firefox to fix their browser security issues and have at least a few anti-spyware solutions.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it doesn't seem like they could even break software compatibility with XP users since they are so similar.
I got nothin'
Only until 2008? I was hoping to ignore it for much longer then that :)
The competition to have the longest running Windows 2000 server will start heating up in 2008.
Developers [mirror]
Did you run Windows Vista for real? I did, not just a few hours to write a review. I'm running Windows since the October 1st as my main OS.
:(
- Software development (VS Studio 2003)
- Email / Browsing
- Gaming
First impression, wow this is great.
After 6 weeks, my impression have change, Vista (as of currently is pretty crap). I've got multiple reboot, blue screen, IE 7 is having a lots of issue (page not rendering properly, JavaScript error for example Google Spell checker not working properly on IE 7). The search "engine" is not that great, why we can't keep our old *.exe find?
Over that many application not working at all, some desktop application, other are game that just don't launch. Even stable program like SQL Enterprise Manager crash on Vista...
Vista new graphical engine is deadly slow too, all is on graphic card but this cause issue like to see the backbuffer when switching application and more. Application are not build like game with "Begin drawing" and "End drawing" so that cause to constantly redraw the screen and see flicker everywhere...
Iwill receive my new portable next week and I will definitely not install Vista on it... for me I agree with the report... I stay with Windows XP for a few years.
...could Vista be Microsoft's final blow? I mean a real breakthrough in decreasing MS's marketshare and masses of companies and consumers saying "OK That's it! I'm going Mac or Linux from now on!" Slashdotters perhaps already KNOW it's going to be crap, but will Vista (including delays and flaws it will have) be the eye-opener for less savvy people?
I love how people cry and whine when MS doesn't backport a feature, or stops supporting an OS, but then when the next OS comes out, they whine that there's not enough new features. MAKE UP YOUR MIND.
(The BBC is notorious for destroying original prints, for assorted reasons. First it was that they didn't think anyone wanted to watch black-and-white stuff any more. Later on, they got rid of a lot of stuff they'd converted to digital media, although it is questionable as to whether the technology of the time was capable of digitizing at modern HDTV resolutions. It certainly wasn't capable of the resolutions of modern computers or 60" LCD displays.)
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Big companies re-image every new computer they buy, and have been doing so for years. That's how they kept using W2K even after XP started shipping.
I only need one reason -- IT'S WINDOWS!
There are far better alternatives than using mickeysoft
Like what, exactly? I'd need an OS that runs and runs on lots of generic hardware, and has plenty of robust business apps that I need for my business (specifically accounting, payroll, and point of sale). Oh yeah, and it has to cost less than $200/workstation and be usable with little to no outside assistance.
I don't respond to AC's.
Windows doesn't get nearly as many sales from upgrades than they do on new computers. I'm guessing most XP users would have been fine buying a computer running Win2K, but Microsoft won't license it and/or the new hardware doesn't have drivers for 2K, etc. For a big enough client, Microsoft will sell older versions of the OS, but for the rest of us, we're stuck with the new product.
I'm guessing Trusted Computing is going to be a way of life sooner or later, unfortunately, because most motherboard manufacturers are going to want their product to work with Microsoft.
Seriously, can't Slashdot even try to pretend that it's an objective news outlet? A headline like "Ignore Vista Until 2008", which is just a reference to an opinion piece, speaks volumes about the bias of this website.
Actually, Windows XP was released in 2001 (October 25th - more than 4 years ago).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001
I'm going to ignore it until 2200.
Vista ignore you until 2008!
I read the title quickly and thought I read "Ignore VISA until 2008"
I was smiling until my girlfriend slapped me behind the head with our checkbook.
Damn I was almost ready for a 7800 GTX Nvidia SLI system there.
U-Whish
Well, you just RULED OUT microshaft winblows. Last time I checked, XP was running at $300 JUST FOR THE OS, nevermind the rest of the workstation!
The horror. How could Microsoft not innovate!?!?! Adding features that other people thought of? I'm crushed!!!
-- You can't idiot-proof anything, because they're always coming out with better idiots.
Corollary to Moore's Law: The IQ of new computer owners is declining.
Like what, exactly? I'd need an OS that runs and runs on lots of generic hardware (1), and has plenty of robust business apps that I need for my business (specifically accounting, payroll, and point of sale)(2). Oh yeah, and it has to cost less than $200/workstation (3) and be usable with little to no outside assistance (4).
Requirements analysis.
1) Linux best, Windows maybe depending on what generic HW (XP doesn't handle older stuff well).
2) Windows best, Linux or OSX 2nd. Caveat being that all those apps will break with Vista. Better to use web2.0-type apps so that you are OS agnostic.
3) Only Linux. Win and OSX fail the reqt miserably (SW cost for Windows+Office >$500).
4) Either none or all of the above depending on how you read it and what you define as "outside assistance".
I think 2k is ok as a desktop, in fact I use it myself. It added some explorer weirdness NT4 didn't have but in terms of media handling it beats NT4. However, w2kSp3 came with that eula asking me to give MS the right to exchange software on my system w/o asking me, so I stopped with SP2. XP, which came with a laptop I bought, can be forced to almost resemble the w2k look but it's list of annoyances is longer, like the way it displays samba network drives.
But none of them is suitable for the average computer user who has just one box s/he wants to use for everything, including going online. Win* just doesn't work w/o a linux box controlling the gates to the real world. And MS soft related to the net really never recovered from the initial rush when b. gates realized he had slept over the big thing happening and purchased mosaic to hack it into a killer app.
They succeeded, didn't they? The blue e is a killer. But too many Win* users don't realize this and that's why I recommend macs for standard users, win* is just to hard to configure.
Myself, I haven't had a single virus/trojan event in 20 years of computing, 15 of them with MS OSen. I contribute this on:
- when it was bbs networking, I had more interest in pr0n than in games.
- I stayed with netscape until there was opera, and eudora is the mail app.
- I have that habbit of inverting most of the default settings on a clean MS OS install
- I skipped 98 and ME, using NT4 instead
- instead of c:\Windows it has been e:\WINNT all the time (don't laugh, the closest I ever got to catching an infection failed at that barrier)
- I'm running linux on the gateway/firewall since '97
Hm, maybe I should repeat that last line about 5 times or so...
And Vista? Bringing all the benefits of paying for enhanced DRM and "trusted" stuff? I will have to buy it as soon as customers demand it on their list of supported OSen and if it won't run in a vmware I will have to invest in a new laptop with it preInstalled. But I will have it running in a cage of linux boxen guarding it and it will be safe...
605413? Yes, it's a prime.
Everyone use's the best tool for their job. They will use the tool that they are most familar with and feel most comfortable with. They will continue to do so until circumstances dictate otherwise. Attempting to "convert" or "make others see the light" never works.
I read all threads and discussions on slashdot at -1 uncut and raw. I believe everyone, even anon's and racist idiots are entitled to their say, and their own opinion. That does not mean that i particularly like reading it. Please heed my words and save me the trouble of writing up long winded post's like this in the future.
And before you say it, yes, i know probably no one will pay this any attention. But at least I can say I tried. As for my 2 cents on the subject matter, I think if vista offer's reliability and performance, most will make the switch sooner than they think. World's changed since the 2000-XP move. People are more at ease with their computers, and more people are computer literate. This'll help grease the cogs of the changeover, so to speak.
We're a private firm of only ~750 people, and our machines still come loaded with Win2K. Though the pretty metal stickers say "Designed for Windows XP"
So where's the killer ap? In between the lines. Or rather in between the traces.
I got a copy of OrCAD Schematic Capture and Printed Circuit Board layout software from a job in 1990. Laying out a printed circuit board with 50 ICs waiting long periods of time (several minutes) after every ten minutes of work for the design to 'compile'. That was with a 20MegaHertz 80286 processor.
Now with a 2 GigaHertz system the designs compile in the amount of time that I can move from the Enter key back to the mouse. Same DOS-based software; 100 times the speed.
That's the killer ap for the 3 GigaHertz machines.
Is that terrible a wittle argument between MS and her Girlfriend Gartner. Usually they're joined at the pelvis have their tongues down each other's throat. I hope they don't break up.
n/t
Steve Magruder, Metro Foodist
My ten reason not to use windows vista (ever)
1. You'll have to spend lots of money on new hardware.
2. You'll still have the same operating system, only with a different look.
3. It will cost too much.
4. It will make your hair fall out.
5. Digital Rights Management
6. Bill Gates doesn't like you.
7. Steve Ballmer wants to throw chairs at you, causing you serious injury.
8. If you buy Vista you won't be able to afford birth control for you and
your girlfriend.
9. It's not Linux
10. It's a microsoft product!
API features are implemented linearly. But the number of programs supported by ReactOS will increase exponentially. Perhaps in a year we might have a usable Beta of ReactOS.
"with little to no outside assistance."
That's asking too much - With any OS in mind.
Here's a stretched out XXL black t-shirt with a snide condescending message.
www.thinkgeek.com
Look at how stupid you all are.
> Or you could just install Firefox, with the foxie plugin,
> and get completely secure browsing for all sites
Well, not really. While the number of exploits that are targeted at Firefox is small, it is non-zero and growing.
More ominously, however, are threats that target other applications used with content downloaded through the browser. How often do you update your office suite? WinZip? PDF Reader? etc. Even Symantec in one of their recent reports said that that threats are shifting from being broad-based to being targeted at specific applications, increasingly within specific organizations (to fly under the rader of signature-writers).
In short, while the browser has historically been the attack point, it's now just becoming another stage in the pipe into the enterprise.
The problems descsribed really sound a lot more like Alpha problems than Beta. Problems of this magnitude make you wonder how close to release they really are...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
"Microsoft Vista - nothing to see here."
The new editions:
Foggy Day
Partially Obstructed
Errant Baseball
Eternally Lowered Blinds
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
It has bugs while still in beta?! *Gasp* How could someone release a beta in such a state?!
Come on, what did you think would happen?
-Kruton
Anything specific you would like to refer to?
Otherwise, you sound just as bad as the people you are criticising.
Are they even sure Vista will be out by 2008?
However, w2kSp3 came with that eula asking me to give MS the right to exchange software on my system w/o asking me, so I stopped with SP2
SP4 removed the offensive language from the EULA, as far as I could tell. I also did not install SP3 because of the EULA. I did install SP4.
My home machine also runs Win2K. I don't like XP.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
"...most of the security-related benefits that come with Vista are available today through third-party software products."
Since when did OS X become a 3rd party product?
Care to counter any of the "bad info" with facts?
BTW, you REALLY must be new here.
People don't understand the truth about Windows security. It can be traced to a single fateful decision.
...
In Win32, every module (EXE/DLL) is contiguous in the process virtual address space. The code and data are next to each other in each module, but not between modules. The stack and heap are allocated as blocks at essentially random addresses. The memory layout looks like this:
empty code data empty stack empty code data empty heap
The problem is that there is no single address that you could choose that says "only code is allowed below this address, and no code is allowed above this address".
On the x86, before AMD64, it was impossible to tell the processor that certain memory addresses cannot be executed. Anything that was readable was also executable. This means it is possible to execute from the data areas, a fatal flaw.
However, the x86 *does* have a feature that allows you to say "no code is allowed above this address". This is known as the "CS limit". By setting this, any attempt to execute from a data area would crash the program. Crashing the program is a lot better than taking over your computer.
Win32's memory layout prevents this feature from being used, because if you try to set a limit, either you have data in the code area, allowing exploits, or you have code in the data area, preventing legitimate code from executing.
AMD tried to correct this with the NX bit in the AMD64 chips, but it was too late. Too many Win32 programs rely on the ability to execute from a data section. As a result, in XP SP2 and Vista, the feature is only enabled by default in a few programs. You can turn it on for all, but then a lot of copy-protected games won't run.
Linux usually has the same problem. However, because most Linux programs come with source, it is possible to modify every application in the system to work this way.
Melissa
"Screw Sun, cross-platform will never work. Let's move on and steal the Java language." - Visual J++ Product Manager
MS Vista is mostly about implementing what Apple's Tiger system does right now. By 2008, Leopard (Mac OS 10.5) will be out for almost a year, and MS will still be implementing Tiger's features (will the SQL thing finally be included?).
Indeed, even now there wouldn't be many reasons to get Vista (unless you want a new PC with 4GB memory), but in 2008 there will be even less.
Bah! :P
User Account Protection. Like working without admin-rights and doing it hassle-free. In Windows XP this is practicaly impossible (tried once but it makes you insane).
It's funny. The closer to open source you get the faster the revisions. Windows; 4 years between versions... OS X; one year between versions.. Most Linux stuff; 6-8 months between versions.
I mean it's so fast that in order for Redhat to be 'enterprise' they have to backport changes to earlier versions of software to make everything as backward compatable and forward compatable as possible.
In the time that Windows 2000 has been out Linux has moved from a OS with highly variable hardware support and almost no respectable SMP support to pretty much the standard software platform for hollywood movie production, 3d visualization, scientific computing, mid range enterprise stuff, and even the almost 'standard' OS for supercomputing! Seriously, It runs on 8 of the top 10 most powerfull computers in existance in terms of floating point performance.
It's gained support from the largest enterprise computing companies outside of Microsoft.
Hell you even now have Microsoft releasing open source licenses and trying to compete with Linux on a which OS is better suited for OSS.
Usability has improved drasticly. I/O performance has improved and out of Windows, OS X, Linux, and the BSDs the most efficient/fastest OS for heavy workloads is going to be Linux.
For webhosting Linux not only supports Perl CGI now, but almost any sort of language you could ever think of.. ruby, perl, php, ASP.NET, python, etc etc.
It's also doing something that Microsoft has failed to do for a decade or more now, which is to kill off Unix.
Appart from configuring specific types of hardware (say if you buy Linux pre-configured, pre-installed on your computer) the usability of Gnome and KDE for the average person is as good as anything. With Ubuntu, Suse, Knoppix, and such have people using and installing Linux that have never even used a shell/command line for more then a few minutes in their entire lifetimes.
Linux is also gaining more and more traction in embedded platforms and such. etc etc etc.
It's done a lot of this stuff in the short time since MS released it's last desktop OS.
I don't think the 'running Linux requires tinkering with it every day' is a valid assertion any more. I've been using GNU/Linux at work for the past 6 months and ironically today is the first time I had to recompile my kernel or otherwise dabble into internals. Otherwise it is just emerge -up world every once in a while before going home.
About being late for an important meeting:
I cannot edit Office docs within my linux (screws up the formatting) - so what - we have a dedicated Win. server for that. Rdeskop into it - problem solved.
Fix it until it breaks.
Who knows, at this rate, it might not be out until 2008
No they aren't paying twice. The site licence program credits you for the OEM preinstalls.
It's funny. The closer to open source you get the faster the revisions. Windows; 4 years between versions... OS X; one year between versions.. Most Linux stuff; 6-8 months between versions.
OpenSource is part of this, but not all. Microsoft has years and years of backwards compatility they need to spend time on. Both Linux and MacOS X are based on newer code bases, so don't have as much as they need to support. Both Lunux and Apple aren't as strict about backwards compatibility either, both of them choosing to break compatiblity much more than Microsoft would. ZYou can probably still run some of your 1985 games on WinXP, try doing that with a mac game (this is priobably System 2.0 at this time). Linux didn't exist yet. Both models have their pluses and minuses. Microsoft is now carrying the weight of that, and having the most apps and drivers to test for.
Ok, let's rephrase it :
If it's broken, don't break it further...
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Mac backward compatibility is pretty damned good. I have a copy of the *original* Missle Commander (v2.3 August 18, 1984) which runs just fine -- including playing speed -- on my PBook 17" w/OS X 1.4.3.
That is what they want you to think ...