Buy Vista or Else

theodp writes "Upgrade or keep crashing was the tagline when Windows XP was introduced. So how will Windows Vista be marketed? 'I'd hate to see something bad happen to your PC,' seems to be one pitch. Even if new features won't get you to upgrade to Vista, you should buy Vista for the security, urged Windows Chief Jim Allchin. Are commercials featuring Tony Soprano next? Bada Bing!"

Comments

Security

[Fusen]

Who's to say Vista will be secure? Surely from past experience its safer to use XP which has had numerous security patches then a whole new OS with thousands of vulnerabilities to be found

Re:Security

[CyricZ]

And beyond that it's probably safer to use something like OpenBSD instead of XP. It not only has a far more stable and secure base, but it also has far stricter security-wise development policies, and apparently more thorough code audits.

Re:Security

[LiquidCoooled]

I would say if the codebase is entirely new, the chances of making the same mistakes again would be lower.
What worries me more about rebuilding any codebase is the possibility of introducing whole new categories of bugs.

Re:Security

[bender647]

TFA describes many ways in which Vista will be more secure by design than the security-patched XP. For example, more attention to user privileges, sandboxing IE, a firewall that looks at outgoing traffic, integrated spyware checking.

I could pretty much care less about Vista until the games I want to play won't run on anything else, but you can't doubt that M$ will be paying more attention to security in the fundamental design of Vista than they did in XP.

Re:Security

[advocate_one]

we know the codebase is NOT new... because the first security update for the beta was for the .wmf vulnerability... who knows what other nightmares are still ticking away in it.

Re:Security

[CyricZ]

OpenBSD is a great system for secretaries and people in a finance department, for instance.

I worked at one firm that was having problems with the computer systems their secretaries and finance department were using. Many of the workers would play games, or worse, they'd manage to infect the existing Windows XP systems with spyware.

Considering they were doing basic word processing, spreadsheet and web-based data entry tasks, we decided that Windows XP was excessive. OpenBSD, OpenOffice, and Konqueror would be sufficient.

The main benefit was that the systems just plain didn't get infected with viruses, spyware, and some such software. The price was a big benefit, too. And the ignorance of the general staff towards OpenBSD, and UNIX in general, helped. Instead of playing games and chatting, the employees had little to do but work. Productivity rose significantly within the weeks after switching over to OpenBSD.

Re:Security

[utlemming]

I know that the Slashdot crowd has mixed feelings about VMware, but honestly, I am a huge fan of it. VMware is what allowed me to switch from Windows to Linux, while keeping the programs that I need for school, and keep my wife happy. Further, I can run a different Windows for whatever the different need may be. For example, I have one Windows for personal use, work, school, security/spyware/malware research, Windows Server 2003, Windows 98, an Oracle enviroment, FreeBSD, and several different Linux bases installed. Before I made the leap, I tried VMware in Windows, and decided that it was a viable alternative and then made the conversion to Linux. The great thing about running Windows under Linux is that I have not had any spyware problems since converting, nor virus problems -- probably because I surf the internet and do email under Linux as opposed to Windows. The downside to this approach is that it 1) Expensive, VMware cost $189 for Linux, but they do give you a 30-day license; 2.) You have to have a lot of memory in order to get the full benefit. 3.) You still need a license for Windows. However, I get better performance for my Windows installations under Linux than I did with a native Windows installation. And then you can do snapshots and other features. Even if you manage to hose your Linux installation, short of deleting your virtual machine files, your virtual machines are safe.

Anyhow, the point of the post, is that if you seriously would like to be able to migrate away from Windows, and need to be able to maintain compatablilty, then look at VMware. Unlike some of the other virtualization solutions, VMware is extremely professional, polished, and does a slick job. I am the president of a Linux and Unix User group and we distribute VMware disk images for use in VMPlayer (which is free) to help people get farmiliar with Linux. The quaility of VMware is such that after using a beta release for two months I couldn't help but buy it after the beta expired -- their beta was so professional, I was really impressed.

And no, I don't work for VMware.

quote?

[Prong_Thunder]

"nice computer you got here... be a shame if it crashed...."

People actually pay for articles like this

[heinousjay]

This is all about anti-Microsoft masturbatory geekspasms, right? Let the games begin:

Yeah, Winblows security? They haven't reimplemented enough of Unix to be secure yet.
  - or -
Sure, it's secure - it can't be pwned when the new RSOD feature is active.

Well, I've shot my wad.

Secure?

[SpasticWeasel]

From TFA: "People Near Me" feature, which searches over a Wi-Fi connection for other Vista users nearby and then sets up a peer-to-peer network with them. Yeah, that sounds pretty secure. Same old Microsoft.

Or we will shoot this dog

[HeavyMS]

The link to rule them all :
http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Image:Windowsvistamar keting.jpg

It could get worse?

[kamikaze2112]

'I'd hate to see something bad happen to your PC'

Jeez, if it's alredy got windows on it, how much worse can it possibly get?? *ducks*

Its your choice

[gsfprez]

no one on earth is forcing an IT, CIO, homemaker, graphic artist, gamer or anyone else to HAVE TO BUY Micro Soft's shit.

I have for the last two years officially told people - i cannot and will not help you if you are running Windows. I am too busy accomplishing things (photography, videographic analysis) to be bothered with tools that do not just work. I don't care that there are millions of Windows viruses, i don't care if your webpage doens't work with anything but IE and Active X, i just have stopped caring.

I am getting older - i have a family, and i want to create and do things which are special, and i no longer have the time nor the incination to either myself, or have to deal with others who's job it is to spend all day and night defending computers from themselves. I am the architect who doesn't want to deal with the knock-off cheap Chinese crap powertools and hear all the workers bitch about them, or hear about the foreman that tells me i have to keep taking apart all the power tools and putting them back together again... build the fscking house - go get the tools that WORK - and pay more for them if you have to.

The simple fact is - its totally irrelevant to me if a Mac costs $1000 or $3000. If it does what i need - and prevents me from having to fix my tool all day long - the $3000 tool will be far more vaulable in just a week or two. Theoretical, imaginary, or otherwise fantasmic notions that Macs are just as insecure as Windows are irrelevant to me - i work today, and i work now. (well, its saturday, i'm only working a few hours today).

But the flip side of that is - i no longer give a shit what anyone uses. I don't care. Do not bother me or hassle me or get in my way if you can't keep up with me. My friends and family no longer bother me - i bought my family Mac minis, and my friends are all switching.

The world uses Windows?? I'm fscking George Bush of the Mac - i don't give a shit if every person on earth said "jump off this cliff, its the industry standard"

i'm not a lemming - i have things to get done. Whatever you want to do is fine with me, you're out of my "circle of give a shit".

You run Windows. I'm getting things done.

Re:Its your choice

[Anonymous Poodle]

You should trademark "circle of give a shit" and "You run Windows--I'm getting things done." and sell them back to Apple. Seriously.

I'm in the same boat--After spending 20+years eating, sleeping and breathing computers, and acting as the reisident expert in my family/circle of friends/global village/whatever, I no longer support/advise/provide a shoulder to cry on for any one I know who uses a PC. I switched as many family members as possible over to iMacs, and so I now no longer get those late night calls (my screen is blue, what do I do?).

I now claim total ignorance of all things PC, so when someone asks me "is this $399 laptop from Costco a good computer?", I tell them to buy a Mac, 'cause it's all I know. I also tell them to make sure they buy an extended warranty , because they will Sure Need It.

I view the legions of unofficial Windows Support Staff--your Brother-in -law, neighbor, whoever--as part of the hidden cost of running crappy software.

Re:The jokes keep on coming.

[jcupitt65]

Upgrade to Windows Vista because, thanks to XP product activation, we know where you live.

Re:linux? OS X?

[DaHat]

Vista seems to be offering very little in terms of features

Lemme guess... you are basing that solely on what you've read on /.?

Allow me to list a few features coming in Vista that I am looking forward to:

• Application level audio control
• Application specific remoting
• Vastly improved networking stack (apparently superior to any other OS's)
• Support for user mode drivers
• New printer technology (way beyond postscript)
• Pluggable crypto system

Take a look at this MSN Spaces post which has some links to some videos on some of these improvements and more on Channel 9.

Upgrade or keep crashing

[Stan Vassilev]

Microsoft designed the 9x with the clear conscience that it's not as stable as its NT platform.

Why was it developed? Compatibility. People wouldn't really drop all their DOS and Windows 3.11 programs, so 9x was the bridge that allowed the smooth transition that ultimately brought the consumer to the NT platform.

The plain logic basically was "we have the better platform, but you want compatibility, so here's a compromise".

Now that 16-bit is a thing of the past, the DOS layer could be removed ultimately resulting in a fully 32-bit protected environment that is Win 2000 and XP. Is Microsoft to blame they sell XP as more stable OS?

Could they have success with any other strategy? I'd say unlikely.

Vista is the next step in improving security and it took a lot of effort to develop this OS, the entire submission is a flamebait: if you were Microsoft, would you work 6 years on a new product and give it for free? Yes, imagine, you have to pay for the updates, and yes the purpose of updating is improved security, new features and modern hardware support.

Microsoft isn't forcing anyone to upgrade. It just does its best to demonstrate the benefits of its latest offering, because this is what software companies do with new releases.

Now get over it, and stop ranting.

Market Opportunity for Macs and Linux

[kai.chan]

With the advent of the iPod, I already know of a few people who are considering a Mac as their next purchase -- the everyday Joe who would have never considered a Mac before. With more game and application developer support on the Macs, I think Apple has the ability to eat a large chunk of the Desktop OS market during the switch from XP to Vista. If Guild Wars, Counter Strike Source, and Spore get a Mac release, I'd certainly be one to get a Mac. It would also make my decision between Linux or Mac a bit easier.

Also comes to mind is...

[Vorondil28]

...Ballmer.

"Fucking XP users are fucking pussies. I'm going to fucking bury them, I have done it before, and I will do it again...I'm going to fucking kill anybody that doesn't upgrade."

Read this or the terrorists have already won . . .

[pariahdecss]

This is nothing new . . . we live in an society (post 9-11) where everything is predicated on fear. "Buy our anti-bacterial hand soap or your kids may die!!" , "Buy this ADT security system or you are a failure as a parent" . . . marketers and the government have embraced the ubiquitous power of fear and uncertainty to sell everything from tampons to troop deployments . . .ad nausea infinitum

Personally I am more afraid of deploying Windows Vista than not, and Microsoft can stick the DRM in the orifice of their choice.

Trying to be fair about it

[TheReaperD]

Of what I have read, there will be, at least, one thing that could improve Vista's security. Also, several people have commented on it without having read anything about Vista. Users will login to a limited access user account, rather then an administrator account as the default.

Unfortunately, there are several bad points with Vista that will make me hesitate on upgrading:

1. DRM This is a big one, for me.
2. Requires a P3 800 or higher, just to run the operating system with no tangible benefit to the user.
3. Visual enhancements require Direct X 9c compatible hardware.
4. No compelling features.

Re:The problem is implementation rather than desig

[ajs318]

..... And by requiring all that, you immediately nullify one of the chief "advantages" of Windows. That is, the ability just to turn on a computer and start using it, without identifying yourself or otherwise taking notice of it. You don't get a screenful of diagnostic messages ending with a bunch of green [OK]s while Windows is booting up, "in case that might confuse the poor user". {As a full-time Linux user who has had to attempt to fix a Windows box, I can say that not having those messages is way more inconvenient for the technician than having them is inconvenient for the user. Users can just ignore them, after all. On that logic, maybe we should start building cars where the oil pressure and alternator warning lights don't come on when you first turn on the ignition.} The default privilege level is administrator; but unlike root on a unix system, there are certain actions that are blocked from even an administrator on a Windows system.

I think Windows with passwords is going to be a bit like a pale imitation of KDE.

Re:Seamless switch?

[CyricZ]

KDE can be easily configured to be quite Windows-like. Many people didn't even notice, to be quite honest. We did our best to make the transition as seamless as possible, and we managed to do that well.

We labelled the OpenOffice Writer icon as "Microsoft Word", for instance, and people didn't know the difference.

We imported the Word templates and Excel spreadsheets they were using, tested them out with the OpenOffice equivalents, and for the most part they worked. The one problem we ran into was the font on the standard company letterhead was a bit too large under OpenOffice. That took about a second or so to remedy, of course.

When they asked about the games and MSN, they were simply told that they were deleted.

A little bit of preparation, forethought, and the use of quality software lead to a transition that went very well.

Re:Seamless switch?

[sd_diamond]

We labelled the OpenOffice Writer icon as "Microsoft Word", for instance, and people didn't know the difference.

We need to talk.

--Sincerely,
Microsoft Legal Dept.