Slashdot Mirror
Ten Reasons to Buy Windows Vista
pennconservative writes "Michael Desmond, writing for PCWorld.com, gives us ten reasons to buy the next version of Microsoft Windows. Some of his reasons sound compelling, and it definitely sounds like Microsoft has found yet another way to ensure market dominance for a few more years. Desmond also gives a few reasons not to buy Vista, but the most compelling of those is the hardware required to run it. Since Vista will likely ship on every new computer anyone buys, I don't see that being a major roadblock."
The article points out that they actually give you two options for the desktop. If your computer can't handle the new, fancy look, you can simply use the Windows Classic look. That way users without the high-end hardware can still run it.
FreePA
DRM. Why would you pay for your own shackles?
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
what feature will I get that I don't already have in Mac OS X 10.4?
I skimmed the list rapidly and I'm already using the equivalents to at least half of them, probably more (I wrote "skimmed"). Some of the features I have even used for several years...
I have a really elegant proof for Fermat's last theorem. If this sig was only a bit longer...
Those are 10 reasons to buy vista IF you are currently running XP. As a Linux user who has always the option to open a maconlinux OSX window, the only reason would be the collaborative environment. All the other reasons were available to me on linux osx or both, since at least two years ago. Heh, the two way firewall :)
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
According to Microsoft, the requirements for Vista are almost as low of Windows XP, you just can't have all the pretty effects and such.
I was reading about Vista last night and it's including features like a revamped sleep mode which is a cross between standby and hibernation. They have have SmartFetch or whatever it's called so it knows what applications you typically use and at what times so it'll preload them into memory making it seem snappier.
All in all, it sounds like Vista will be a pretty good release (at least, in my opinion).
They will if they want to have a "Made for Windows Vista" logo on the outside, which would be all major PC manufacturers. Trust me, most OEMs are already well aware of the Microsoft Logo requirements for Vista. If it's going to ship on your PC (and by ship I don't mean your brother's girlfriend's ex-boyfriend's PC company down the street) it will probably be logo'd. If it has that logo, it will run Vista just fine.
After paying for 3.1, 95, 98, 98SE, ME, 2000, XP I'm really starting to abandon cynicism and derision in favor of good old practical thriftiness. I just can't afford Windows anymore.
Idiot.
Good luck MSFT - you've got a hell of a challenge ahead of you.
The age of the compelling application is mostly over because existing hardware (even systems several years old, and thus dirt cheap) fulfill almost all of the average person's computing needs. I'd wager that 90% (or more) of average household computer usage is spent in two applications: email and internet browser. (the other 10% is word processing, accounting/taxes, etc.)
And no, gamers aren't "average" computer users. They're always looking for state-of-the-art.
Seriously -- other than as a new game platform, why would the average person buy a new computer? Mom & Pop don't understand/care about new video production, DVD ripping, file sharing, etc. They just want to occasionally look something up on the net, buy something off eBay, or get a photo of the grandkids. If they already have a system (and market saturation ##'s suggest that they do) convincing them to shell out a grand for a new box that doesn't offer them anything more than the old one is going to be a tough sell.
Will they get XP if their system does not meet the requirements? Surely Dell will sell a low-end machine that might not have the hardware to run Vista? Or worse yet, they sell a machine that meets the minimal requirements, and performs like a dog. I wouldn't think that they'd want that perception, right?
DT
Is this thing on? Hello?
It could also be called, "10 reasons for buying Mac OS X Tiger"....
Monstar L
I actually read though the list, and other than the last three options. (backups, install times, live shared docs) the other 7 were options I've been using for years on Macs.
Granted, not that I'm not happy that Windows is catching up, but I thought it was funny that to me at least, the only new features were the last three listed. All of which sounded very interesting.
Cupertino, start your copiers!
So the top reason to buy Vista is "you have to".
--
make install -not war
Because you can.
No wait, thats not right.....
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
1. What's good for Microsoft is good for the US economy.
2. Because they have a million tricks up their sleeve to obselete your old software.
3. You're too stupid to use linux.
4. Your new hardware has been sabotaged for any "pirated" software like linux.
5. Because we get kickbacks from Ballmer if you do.
6. As an american, you are culturally programmed to want new toys and to believe what marketing firms tell you.
7. Because it will be secure. *snicker*cough**snort*LOL... damn, I can't keep a straight face.
8. Because we at Microsoft have been busy trying to convince you that cool tricks are only possible on Vista, and considering our other OSs are steaming shitpiles, you just might believe it.
9. Because WE SAY SO.
10. If you haven't bought Vista yet, then the terrorists have already won...
Is there any way to mod this story 'troll'?
Actually there is.
Seems like I've had 8/10 of those for over a year with my Mac. Way to "innovate". As long as you have to buy a whole new computer to run this OS, why not buy a whole new computer and try a better OS than the one you have now. One that has been out for almost a year (10.4). One that isn't a "1.0" like Vista will be.
If you really like MS though, why not wait for Windows Vista "98" when they iron out the kinks. (OS X had 'em too early on).
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
1. new firewall almost as good as ZoneAlarm
2. new IE almost as good as Firefox
3. new eye-candy almost as good as OS X
4. new desktop search almost as good as Google Desktop
5. new update program almost as good as Mac Software Update
6. new media programs almost as good as iLife
7. new parental controls almost as good as proper parenting
8. new backups almost as good as things not breaking in the first place
9. new P2P almost as good as turning off your firewall
10. new quick install almost as good as all the other planned features that don't actually exist yet
So, instead of a wide open door with a 'PLEASE ROB ME!!!" sign taped to it, they've half closed the door and put up a sign that says "ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL, I WOULD PREFER THAT YOU NOT STEAL ALL MY BELONGINGS, IF THAT'S OK WITH YOU."
When your starting from the gutter, the "next level" is only the curb.
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
Well, considering there are more and more new computers being shipped with Linux, and how far away Vista's release is, maybe this isn't 100% accurate.
No matter how many new PCs ship with Vista, there is going to be 3 to 5 years before it dominates the market because that's the approximate time it will take for the existing installed base of PCs to be renewed. Can MS wait that long? Can apps writers? Can the media companies?
There are many more than 10 reasons to NOT BUY ANYTHING from Microsoft.
Developers: We can use your help.
Compared to the XP fisher-price look?
Just be grateful, OK.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
I remember when Microsoft's competitors got a lot of flack for just trailing MS. The times have changed. Most of the listed new features in Vista are MS playing catch-up with the competition:
1. Packet filtering capabilities, per-use administrator rights -- from Linux.
2. Tabs in IE -- from Firefox
3. Eye candy/transparency -- Mac OS X
4. Non-awful search system -- everyone was ahead of MS here
5. Better update system -- still no systemwide yum or apt, but the most abysmal thing about maintaining a Windows box was keeping it up to day, and IE was a piss-poor tool to do so with. See Linux.
6. Looks like MS is bundling the equivalent of rhythmbox/iTunes and gqview into Windows.
7. Parental filtering options -- Okay, I'm not aware of anyone else that bundles this in, so this may be new.
8. Better backups -- Linux's amanda.
9. Peer-to-peer collaboration -- I don't yet know enough about what this actually translates to to be able to comment on it.
10. (apparently a wishlist item, not a real feature?)
Any program relying on (nontrivial) preemptive multithreading will be buggy.
Compatibility with more games.
This may be an argument for XP, but it's not one for Vista. The only game I've heard of so far that will be Vista-only is the next version of Halo and that's strictly for political reasons.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
That's great you're considering switching. There are many non-software related reasons for switching away from Microsoft as well.
Developers: We can use your help.
Oh great, there goes the RIAA and MPAA into meltdown.
1. Security, security, security: Good! Something we can all agree on. This is a great reason to upgrade!
.. This isn't a great reason. I can run IE7 on XP, or I can run Firefox - which is what IE is to be modeled after. Not a reason to upgrade.
.. gets a welcome update that turns the once-bloated player into an effective MP3 library I think it's spelled 'WMA DRM' not MP3. None the less, media is readily available for XP, OSX, and Linux. This is not a valid reason to upgrade.
2. Internet Explorer 7: IE gets a much-needed, Firefox-inspired makeover
3. Righteous eye candy: This could be a good improvement for those who want a showpiece. Your eye candy is hidden when running applications, and I don't see this as a sole reason in and of itself to upgrade.
4. Desktop search: Yeah, this is a very handy feature. See Google Desktop, Beagle etc. This is not a reason to upgrade.
5. Better updates: WinXP home's update service will be provided for 2 years after Vista has been released. WinXP Pro has approximately 5 years. This is a good reason to upgrade when your existing OS isn't supported.
6. More media:
7. Parental controls: From a technical standpoint, allowing you to block games by their rating could be good. The caveat to this is that parental controls should be done at a parental level NOT through technology. Good reason for certain parents to upgrade. Not a parent? Move along, nothing to see here.
8. Better backups: Working as a tech I found system restore to be only somewhat useful and really hidden. Average Joe user will still not know how to use it or be afraid to use it. Savvy users may employ other technologies to backup information such as Ghost. Products exist so you can store your backups in another location, if your HDD dies, this feature won't help. Not a reason to upgrade
9. Peer-to-peer collaboration: Sounds like P2P, I have it and don't use it. Either way, this technology already exists on WinXP. No upgrade required.
10. Quick setup: Beta code alert: Quick setup vaporware. Not a reason unless it is actually released.
In conclusion, Vista will be a great security update. Most other features are already available for XP and are just now being integrated into the OS - could this lead to more anti-trust lawsuits? (IE and MediaPlayer are historical examples)
Proof by very large bribes. QED.
1. you do it because we say so
2. so your lousy software still runs
3. because you are an idiot
4. herding instinct
5. because you need a new mouse
6. so you can play dis new game
7. it's bitchen
8. you want to be like the guy next door with all the viruses
9. because you simply don't know any better
10. can't spell mackintosh
10) Upgrade hell....a new motherboard counts as a "new computer" and thus requires a new Windows license.
9) If you don't have a computer capable of running it to it's full potential...why bother?
8) DRM embedded into the OS. Less control for the user.
7) Viruses
6) Worms
5) Spyware
4) Vista will feature ads.
3) It's still Windows, so it'll still look like something made by Playskool.
2) You're going to have to relearn everything anyway, particularly the Office interface which will be radically different with the new release....might as well switch to something new anyway
1) Gates is evil. What more do you need?
Here's what to be excited about: 1. Security, security, security
Is Ballmer writing his own ad copy now?
Compatibility with more games. Other than WoW, what popular MMORPG runs on Mac OS X?
Compatibility with more vertical-market apps such as the one used by your employer.
Compatibility with more peripherals sold at retail stores.
Compatibility with web sites that are made exclusively for Microsoft Internet Explorer technology and for which there are no close substitutes.
But for the next 3-4 years, you'll get all of those things with Windows XP. So what motivation is there to "upgrade" to Windows Vista? If you wanted the 10 features listed in the article, you could get Mac OS X now. If you want the things you mentioned above, stick with the Windows box you have now and don't waste money on the upgrade.
that's an improvement, how?
:P
Compared to the XP fisher-price look?
Just be grateful, OK.
XP has a classic theme, too.. In fact, I always switch to that on any PC I use that has XP on it.
I am grateful.... for the Linux community
So, you are saying that the main reason for buying Vista is compatibility with a proprietary but otherwise outdated standard.
Well, I'd say those are excellent reasons not to buy Vista, then: while running Windows for compatibility reasons may be be expedient in the short term, we have to pay for it dearly in the long term.
In fact, people have a simple choice: don't upgrade. Windows XP will keep running for many years to come, and in a few years, hopefully, your "compatibility" reasons will have disappeared, as even more apps are available for other platforms.
Why upgrade when you have a robust, secure, beautiful OS in Linux available at an unbeatable price (free)?
Give Linux a try and you will never be disapointed!!
Linux Help
for all things on Linux
The idea that Microsoft would ditch its own OS for Mac OS X came to me from Michael Desmond of PCWorld.com, whose writings convinced me that the process had already begun.
I was amused, but after mulling over various coincidences, I'm convinced he may be right. This would be the most phenomenal turnabout in the history of desktop computing.
Desmond made 10 observations: Microsoft's Vista is all about Mac OS X: Security, a Modern Browser, Eye Candy, Desktop Search, Better Updates, More Media, Parental Controls, Backup, Collaboration, and More.
Though these points aren't a slam-dunk for Desmond's thesis, other observations fully support it. The theory explains several odd occurrences, including Ballmer's freak-out and an insane defense over monopolistic practices. Like, who cares?
Right at the bottom (links stripped):
Hot Products at Yahoo! Shopping:
Apple iBook G4 Laptop Computer
Windows XP
Mac OS
DVDDecrypter, DVDShrink, Quicken.
There are some dvd rip&burn apps for the Mac, but noe that I have tried come close to these two Windows apps. Quicken for the Mac is a waste of good disk space. And neither GnuCash nor Moneydance come close to offerring the full feature set of Quicken for Windows.
I have migrated and consolidated all of my Windows/Linux/Mac stuff onto a new iMac. The aforementioned 3 apps, keep me from shutting off the Windows machine.
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
Windows 2000 - the all-business operating system for the new millenium.
That's intereting......I run XP on a celeron 433Mhz at work with 512MB RAM and a crappy intel video adapter built on to the motherboard. It sounds to me like it runs circles around your newish computer. Either you're a troll or a novice computer user. Apparently you can't be bothered to set any preferences for your applications (or is this something that you think you should only have to do in Linux)? Word and Outlook are customizable and scriptable via VBA, far more than most applications written for either *NIX-like or Windows platforms (Apple has got AppleScript, but it's a mixed bag). Go find a clue before opening your mouth next time.
shouldn't that be Meet the *new* boss, same as the *old* boss
i mean, that's the lyric
Supplies!
From what I've seen so far, it looks as if Vista will automatically go to Aero Basic if the hardware isn't up to snuff for the full DX10 accelerated Aero Glass. And, also from what I've seen, the Aero Basic should be about as processor intensive as XP's Luna.
If we consider that since the dawn of XP, even cheap boxes have upgraded to at least DX9 integrated *cringe* graphics, 256MB RAM and a processor that hovers around 2Ghz; a new commodity grade computer should be able to handle your basic www, e-mail and productivity applications with an interface that resembles XP with WindowBlinds. Albeit, some pagefile thrashing may be in order.
We just need to convince manufacturers to put a sticker on the machine saying "You didn't spend enough to play games on this POS, now go back to checking your email like a good grandma."
As for users that try to put this on a previous generation of commodity box. They're probably seven shades of outtaluck.
My God! It's full of eval()'s.
It seems to me there is a downward trend with MS in every area, marketing, innovation, product design, and security. I think that it has reached a very noticeable level to even those who are die-hard MS fans. Maybe it was the marketing by hype practice that put MS on an inescapable treadmill of eroded credibility. It seems harder these days for tech writers to stick their necks out and jump on the MS bandwagon to fully hype the new products. That was a pretty wimpy review of Vista, and I expected more hype from the writer, otherwise why cover a beta that keeps loosing features just to meet a release date.
/.ers, they are the followers and not the leaders of the "top ten reasons to buy an OS". Of course, in shear volume of sales they beat all other OSs hands down and they are truly the top dog of the desktop computer market. Why, then does MS seem to have to make such an effort to try and steal the "innovation" credit when so many know the truth is far down another road?
;-)
While not seeming to overcome fear of innovating a new OS, MS asks us all to live in their imaginary world and believe that they are the innovators of all things new to desktop computing. This may be the way to go if MS were better at the art of illusion, but they are not that good at it. While David Copperfield can make a live crowd believe he just made an elephant disappear before their eyes, MS can't convince PC prospects that they are not following Mac and Linux in the desktop innovations Vista claims to offer, maybe, at some future date.
Clearly, from the posts here by savvy
Perhaps being on top so long breeds fear of innovating. It may be safer to wait and watch others do the innovating, fumble around at a knock-off and proclaim you have just innovated a whole new set of features that everyone needs, right now. It seems to work to a degree, but is that also failing to keep the giant of desktop OSs on top, as more markets slip away from MS.
I switched from MS Win to Mac and Linux over the last few years. First by getting comfortable with Mac OSX at work and a couple of years ago I discovered Linspire. I still love the Mac, especially for graphics work, but I never got use to seeing MS products for the Mac, like MS Office and IE. So, Firefox and Open Office have been my primary browser and office suit for a while. I tend to rely more on Linux as my primary desktop OS now and have cut all but a couple of old ties to third party Windows software, that I rarely boot into XP to use. One of those is Swish, a light weight flash movie developer package. I tried to get Swish running in Crossover Office, but no go there.
These days, I don't consider myself to be a MS product user to any noticeable degree, and I need not wonder why. MS has performed so poorly as at the corporate level, like a bully loosing his grip on the desktop playground, doing desperate things in response to the slightest threat from any new kid (or those already not cowering in the corner like Mac). I thought I switched primarily for security reasons, and would have said that if surveyed at the time, but now I think it goes further. As MS continues to disappoint me almost daily with their attitude towards their users and others in the market, I realize that this is the real driving force behind my switching from MS products.
So, with regards to Vista, I don't see any thing for me in this OS shell game MS seems to be playing. In fact I think it may be the worst direction MS has ever taken their marketing in. MS seems to be resorting to carny trickery to milk money out of anyone they can. I wonder if this is the big downward spiral of the software giant that has been predicted for several years. It certainly is interesting to watch...
Sorry for the long reply on this one
I lost my sig...
Compatibility with web sites that are made exclusively for Microsoft Internet Explorer technology and for which there are no close substitutes.
;)
And which sites would that be (that people would care about)?
I have an offshore account, with a major bank. They used to only accept Netscape Communicator 4.72 and IE 5/6 as browsers (they'd check User-Agent: w/ JS, and not let you login if you don't match).
They kept on changing the system (HTML, JS, removed all JAVA stuff), and I've been using FireFox (with user-agent extension) for a year.
I've mailed them once telling them that systems works perfectly fine with Firefox.
Then I realized I don't use User-Agent extension at all and I am still able to login into banking system.
Moral of the story - things are changing. If major bank modifies its banking system so that it works with Firefox, I think it says something.
Either they care about users, or they have hired a switched on geek, aware of standards
Security, Security, Security
...need... eye candy.
...just use Google and Yahoo like you do normally anyway since they're already here and better.
yeah, they're so good at this. The world's richest man wants to 'protect' you from people who will give him more money for the opportunity to sell you junk that you don't need, using commercials on your desktop, or 'jump-outs' in your application.
Plus since we're talking security here, what makes you think that you're going to get any from the guys who bend over backwards to put ordinary people in Chinese concentration-camp prisons. You can be assured that anything from Redmond is going to have plenty of backdoors for the Gitmo Gomers to read and monitor everything that you do on your PC. And Linux won't have this.
Internet Explorer 7: IE gets a much-needed, Firefox-inspired makeover...
So use just FireFox. 'nuff said.
Righteous eye candy...
Do like Steve Jobs and just drop some acid if you
Desktop search:
Better updates:
one word...sourceforge....next?
More media
more embedded DRM, you mean.
Parental controls
we are already grown-up, and we don't need any more excuses for library restrictions on web access. Like prohibiting 17-year-olds from getting information on effective birth control, just cause 'Jesus or Allah says no'.
Better backups
the application programmer's responsibility, not the OS.
Peer-to-peer collaboration
they seem to want to make that quite illegal if I recall correctly.
So how much money or honey did they give this guy for writing such a transparent puff-piece about an operation system that doesn't even exist yet?
Not running everyone as admin does NOT constitute security. In fact, I would have no reason to switch from my *nix systems for this security. Gonna have to try harder then that.
2. IE 7
I've gone of the "upgrade" list of IE 7 quite closely to find... nothing new. Everything they "add" is already in another major browser. As for that anti-phishing feature, as a student in IUs Applied Cryptography:Phishing course, I can tell you it's worthless. Because it relies on a file on disc, probably built into IE, this can be easily circumvented by malware. Sorry, I don't trust IE at all, just from the track record. Need a better reason? It's still built into the OS. Not... smart... at... all...
3. Eye Candy
Granted, I only have a Windows box for my gaming pleasures, but still it is stupid to require a high-end system for the desktop. Most users will not be playing games on it, so most won't automatically have the hardware to run this. What I'd like to know is if it comes on by default? I'll bet it does, which means that it'll run very slow before users realize to turn it off. Plus, why is this necessary? I realize I'm a little bit of a purist, and prefer a command line, but even when I use a desktop, this seems like overkill. Has anyone ever desired to see what's on a window without actually opening the window? Does it really save that much time?
4. Desktop Search
Ok, again this is a good thing to have, and one of my main beefs with Windows is the slow search feature (hard to find the virii on friend's coimputers). Now, my *nix box is damn quick thanks to how they do searches. I wonder if Microsoft has gone to that model. Also, will it search hidden and system files by default? Something it *needs* to do, and doesn't by default.
5. Better Updates
Nice to see them getting away from using IE for everything, but again, this is a feature in Mac OS, and *nix already. Not exactly a reason to "upgrade".
6. Media
Ok, I'll give 'em more media is gonna be a selling point for the average user. Good smart marketing *clap*. But my question is this. Are these going to be strand alone programs? Or Microsoft's usual anti-monopoly move, and built into the OS. If built in, as the DVD Maker sound like, why? All this is is a new way to add vulnerabilities. I think as little as possible should be "OS", and the rest offered as downloads that don't have root permissions in the OS.
7. Parental Controls
Now, this argument is personal, but hear me out. I don't like cencorship, and I think that a better parenting method is to teach kids how to use the computer correctly and trust them not to be going against your will. Locking it while you're at work, kinda petty. Some parents might agree with this, and I'm not a parent, but I definately don't like this practice or some of the stuff AOL is doing. I also think this could be a fun attack vector. Imagine blocking file downloads for the update client? Or locking out the admin account, then un-priviledged virii can have all day to scan the hard drive for information.
8. Backups
They tout the fact that the backup client is upgraded for the first time in years? Not a selling point.
9. Peer to Peer
I am willing to place $1000 on the fact that within a year of Vista going public, this feature is exploited in at least 5 virii. More than that, it will be used by Phishers to get people to join false workgroups, and steal information. Perhaps a SEPERATE program would be a better idea here? Something that doesn't come on, right out of the box?
10. Quick Setup
If it comes with this, awesome. No OS has quick setup right now, and even *nix is plauged by bloat (FC4 takes over an hour, 6.5 GB). However, I don't believe this number, "15 minutes". Is that like Windows 95 will run on 4 MB RAM? (For the record, it DOES, just barely... the mouse lags). Perhaps on a high end system.
But, this article is not about getting other OS users to switch, it's about getting XP users to upgrade
Want to find other gamers to play board and role playing game
Jumping Jesus man. OS X has had better drivers for all that stuff than windows for a long time. Most of the time you can just plug it in without installing anything.
1) Help microsoft pay for ongoing anti-trust legal battles
2) help those who have stock in MS to see a growth in their stock value
3) Help homeland security worm its way into your personal affairs, thru windows back doors.
4) help those who have stock in MS to see a growth in their stock value
5) help suppress open source software.
6) help those who have stock in MS to see a growth in their stock value
7) help the economy by requiring more people to be hired to handle windows IT issues.
8) help those who have stock in MS to see a growth in their stock value
9) help MS to buy out and shut down better products.
10 help those who have stock in MS to see a growth in their stock value.
I said HONEST..... I didn't say anything about Ethical.
There was a time when investing in stock was based upon believing in a company's products and services.
Today that doesn't matter, so long as you have a positive return (do a google for "trillion dollar bet" for the extreamly unethical side of this.
Because the app writers will force you to.
:)
It's that plain and simple. Companies writing applications for Windows will enjoy the new DRM features. Not to mention that everyone will HAVE to buy the new DRMed version or their system will refuse to run the DRMed apps they have at the same time as the non-DRMed.
So companies will jump onto the DRM bandwagon for the simple reason that you can't pirate their stuff anymore. Well... let's just assume you can't, just for the sake of not starting an argument about whether it's vaporware again or not.
They'll THINK it does prevent pirating. And that's what matters.
Joe Shmoe Average will not know how to circumvent it, so he'll buy all the new shiny apps. And new apps will not work on "legacy" (read: current) systems. Especially game companies will jump onto it like blowflys swarm a piece of turd.
So no matter what "wonderful" features the new piece of tur... software from Redmond offers, people will buy it for the simple reason that their new apps will not run on anything else.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
The real reason not to buy Windows Vista is that Microsoft has a history of abusing its customers. This version will be secure?
Remember that Windows XP had many problems, besides being extremely vulnerable, until Service Pack 2. I suggest everyone wait until Vista SP2 to evaluate Vista. That would save a lot of time.
Remember the last Microsoft encryption scheme, that is built into Windows XP? No? If you have never heard of EFS, I can tell you why. Many, many people lost all their files because of the bugginess and poor documentation of EFS. EFS doesn't work at all on stand alone computers, unless you think that not being able to have a valid backup is "working". (If you argue with this, you will be arguing with Microsoft technical support, who has verified this more than once. On stand alone computers, EFS encryption is tied to the SID of the OS installation. If you change stand alone computers, you cannot decrypt your files.)
Will you trust your files to encryption by a company whose last version was buggy and poorly documented and lost customer files? (Try TrueCrypt instead.)
Remember that Windows NT, Windows 2000, Windows XP, and Windows Vista are ALL the same operating system, but just new versions. Microsoft renames their products and takes advantage of people with little technical knowledge, who think that they are buying a new product.
Remember that Bill Gates is the Dr. Death of software. HE decides when Microsoft's software is no longer usable, not the customers.
When someone abuses you, never forget. Try not to be involved with habitual abusers.
--
Before, Saddam got Iraq oil profits & paid part to kill Iraqis. Now a few Americans share Iraq oil profits, & U.S. citizens pay to kill Iraqis. Improvement?
I didn't see anything on that list that Mac OS X or your favorite Linux distro doesn't already have. I looked, point by point, and could think of a comparable feature on either Mac OS X or Linux or, usually, both. That's what I wish Windows users would understand, particularly home users. Microsoft, despite their dominance of the OS market, sells, by far, the least advanced operating system of the big three. Linux gets features as soon as someone contributes code, which happens all the time. And, if you're impatient like me, you can install Debian testing/unstable and always have the latest features as they come down the pike.
Let's review:
Security Every Linux distro I know of forces you to make a non-privileged user account. There are plenty of features built into GNOME and KDE now that let you do a graphical 'sudo' to do administrative tasks. On the Mac, this is the default. They have their own graphical 'sudo', which works incredibly well. And, aside from the occasional exploit, neither OS has the same kind of inherent security problems that Windows does. IE 7 One word: Firefox. OK, two: Safari. Both great browsers that already offer all the same featuers. Righteous Eye Candy The GNOME and KDE themes have improved dramatically over the past few years and they look pretty good. Maybe not "Aero Glass" good, but then again they don't require an outrageous graphics card to use. Mac OS X has Aqua. Very pretty indeed, and far less distracting than Aero Glass. Desktop Search On Linux, locate. On the Mac, Spotlight. And developers can write Spotlight importers that give those apps better control over how their files are indexed. Windows has nothing like this. Oh, and if you are using Windows, use Google Desktop Search. It works well. I like it. Better updates On Linux, set up a cron job to do an apt-get update && apt-get upgrade every now-and-then and you're set. On Mac OS X, Software Update already updates every piece of software Apple sells with about one or two clicks. And, it runs automatically. Done. More Media iTunes, QuickTime. And with Flip4Mac, you can play un-DRMed WMV files right in QuickTime. On Linux, there are too many media players to name. No, they won't work with Windows Media, usually, but there's definitely no lack of MP3 library apps. Parental Controls Now here, I don't know about Linux, but I'd find it hard to believe there isn't some way a person couldn't use PAM to control when and where his/her kids use the computer. On the Mac, parental controls are already built in, system-wide. Better Backups Sure, it costs $99/year, butGranted, Linux still has to do some catching up in terms of user-friendliness, but like all UNIX, all the pieces are there if you know how to assemble them. There are more and more graphical tools appearing everyday to put those pieces together for you. Mac OS X already has just about every feature the article describes and they're planning a new release about the same time as Vista appears.
And Microsoft would do well to drop certain features. The Windows Registry, I think, is one of the worst-conceived ideas ever. If Microsof
If it's not one thing it's your mother.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
1) You can't avoid it because the hardware you'd like to buy happens to be pre-loaded with it, and the company will not dare to displease big Bill.
2) Because the content providers are so caught up in their own paranoid customer hating trip that they prefer to give full control to Mr Bill rather than authorize an open source compatible player for their content.
3) Because Vista is fully compatible with buying Outsourced products at WallMart, eating Genemodified food, wearing overpriced Nike shoes while watching spectator sports that have strictly no relationship with you but give you a fake feeling of "bellonging".
a lot) Because counting up to 10 is actually hard work.
Let's see. IE 7 will be more like Firefox and Vista will be more like OS X and Linux. So much for original thinking.
1. Security, security, security: Windows XP Service Pack 2 patched a lot of holes, but Vista takes security to the next level.
One of the beta's for Vista already had a security patch issued. So yeah. Okay. They're ahead already!
There are literally too many changes to list here,
We would have to use a bunch of security lingo that you would not understand.
from the bidirectional software firewall that monitors inbound and outbound traffic to Windows Services Hardening, which prevents obscure background processes from being hijacked and changing your system.
Obscure processes will have to be signed by Microsoft. If this signing is forged somehow or there's a hole, yeah, goodbye Windows Services Hardening.
There's also full-disk encryption, which prevents thieves from accessing your data, even if they steal the PC out from under your nose.
JOE USER DOESN'T USE A PASSWORD WHEN HE BOOTS UP HIS COMPUTER. See a problem?
Perhaps most crucial (and least sexy) is the long-overdue User Account Protection, which invokes administrator privileges as needed, such as during driver updates or software installations. UAP makes it much more convenient for users to operate Vista with limited rights (meaning the system won't let them do certain things, like load software, without clearance from an administrator). This in turn limits the ability of malware to hose your system.
Okay, after laughing at the "and least sexy" comment for a bit and forgetting about the fact that Unix has been doing something similar for years with things like sudo, su, etc, let's take this apart:
This will have no bennefit for home users. Guess who has the root account? The owner of the machine! This is the same thing with OS X. A home user, when installing an application, has been trained to enter in the admin password when they want to install something. So if weatherbug prompts them, they'll do it. Once a program has admin access, of course it can do all sorts of things, rendering this UAP protection moot. The game is over.
Try again Microsoft...
Linux is more than ready for any use whatsoever. It can do anything Windows can and then some.
About DRM, have you really grasped the difference between XP's activation system and a real hard wired DRM solution? The thing is that parts of the OS lies encrypted and with the new DRM supporting CPU's you cant get to it. This DRM is noting like software copy protection that can be hacked in a heartbeat.
HTTP/1.1 400
... I wish these features would make it into Vista.
.exe self-extractors. Software should come in a standard package format like MSI or be denied installation.
1. I'd like to update all my software in one place - even third-party applications.
2. I'd like hardware drivers to be present at such a place - even third party drivers. You know that cheap TV-tuner I bought? I'd like those drivers to be available there too. Before I buy new hardware I would like to be able to see if the drivers are available.
3. I'd like to adjust the deadzone of all my analogue input devices, including my Logitech joystick and my XBOX 360 controller for PC. It should be part of the calibration-process.
4. I'd like games to adhere to a common standard so that I don't have to reconfigure my joypad for every new game I buy.
5. I wish headsets would work better out of the box. For some reason using a microphone is always preceeded by an hour of troubleshooting.
6. I'd like chess to be one of the bundled games.
7. I'd like improved Bluetooth support. Support should be built-in for headsets, mice, joypads, keyboards joysticks and speakers. Without any need for third-party drivers.
8. I'd like the Device Manager to get its' own icon in the Control Panel.
9. I'd like to subscribe to NHL-games and watch them on my laptop/tablet on my way to work.
10. I'd like a search tool similar to Beagle with open APIs so third-party developers could define how data from their applications should be processed.
11. Just say no to
Damnit! That's eleven! If one has to go you can leave out chess.
1. Security, security, security: New holes, new holes, new holes.
2. Internet Explorer 7: GetFirefox.
3. Righteous eye candy: Ooohhh shiny...
4. Desktop search: Learn to organize.
5. Better updates: Why update? Because it was broken in the first place!
6. More media: More DRM!
7. Parental controls: Real parents don't need an OS to babysit their kids.
8. Better backups: Already have that.
9. Peer-to-peer collaboration: ???
10. Quick setup: Why am I running setup more than once anyways?
In short, 10 compelling reasons why you don't need to upgrade to Vista.
Does it strike anybody else as odd that all the features (maybe minus the eyecandy, although probably not) are not actual parts of the OS, but applications that should be completely separate from the OS. Doesn't microsoft have enough monopoly troubles without tieing more crap into the OS?
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
I was thinking much the same. For example, when I read this...
...I thought most usability research had pretty much thrown out this sort of visual jiggery-pokery some time ago now, having discovered that since monitors are basically flat, 2D surfaces, trying to project things in funky 3D or to impose layers through transparency just disorientates users. It's always possible that Microsoft have come up with a new and qualitatively different approach to that of the research labs at other big software places like Sun or IBM, of course, but I'm betting heavily on "gimmick" until I see any evidence to the contrary.
It seems to me that the vast majority of the 10 "reasons to buy" have already been more than adequately addressed on Windows platforms by third party software, some of which will presumably still be necessary since it sounds like MS isn't going to include any anti-virus software unless you pay for it. On other platforms, it either was never an issue, or is likewise addressed by third party add-ons. Putting it into the OS may or may not be an advantage relative to starting with nothing, but relative to where we are, who cares?
Of the remainder, if they're genuinely getting serious about security, that's great, but on the flip-side, we all know about the Trusted Computing rubbish, DRM, and all that jazz. On top of that, we have the recent stories about national governments wanting backdoors and entering talks with Microsoft to ensure they get them. If a government cracker can break my system, so can a script kiddie with the right friends, and that's game over for Microsoft's security drive. It's not secure if it has deliberate backdoors!
The more I read about Vista, the less I care, and I'm someone who (at present) does run XP both at home and at work, and uses some OSS for practical rather than philosophical reasons. I've been looking seriously at shifting to an alternative platform for a while, and with all the security and DRM badness going around lately, the obvious commercial alternative -- Apple -- is pretty much ruled out of the game by its own actions. This could be the best thing to happen to open source software since forever.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Remember that Bill Gates is the Dr. Death of software. HE decides when Microsoft's software is no longer usable, not the customers.
I decided their software wasn't usable a long time ago. Bill Gates didn't have to tell me that.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
2. I like freedom
3. I like freedom
4. I like freedom
5. I like freedom
6. I like freedom
7. I like freedom
8. I like freedom
9. I like freedom
10. I like freedom
Hence, I use a few different variations of Linux on my boxes. No MS. No Apple. Just open-source and freedom. I don't give a shit that I can't play the newest games. I don't give a shit that I can't run the latest and greatest commercial apps. I don't give a shit that I can't use every cheap off-the-shelf piece of hardware. I don't give a shit that I don't belong to a an elitist club with a superior GUI. I value freedom over all. Am I an idealist? You bet.
Meh.
.....Just because you can run XP on a minimum of 256MB of RAM doesn't mean you should.....
XP run just fine on 256M and likely so will Vista. Just don't try to run any of the Applications you bought the computer for in the first place.
What will Vista bring to the art of computing, that OSX has not had for about a year now already? OSX 10.4 runs faster on our old G4 laptop than the OS 10.2 it came with. With MS, the new OS software generally runs slower on the same hardware or misses out on most of the improvements. One big pain with Windows has always been the difficulty of upgrading from an old to a new computer. When I bought a new G5 iMac for my wife for Christmas, getting all her stuff and settings from the old G4 to the new one was almost automatic. Boot the old one in disk mode, connect them with a cable (firewire) and click the mouse to automatically transfer all data, internet settings, account passwords, preferences and applications and all their settings and more to the new G5. I wonder if Vista will make it easy to upgrade from an older machine to that shiny new one.
If Vista users are no longer running as administrators (a good thing) how many of their current apps will cease functioning? If users have to re-purchase or upgrade much of, or most of their software, that will be a big disincentive to upgrade to a new computer or upgrade to the new OS on the old one.
All theory is gray
Would I rather use OS X on the desktop and Linux or BSD on a server? Yes of course, but I do think Win 2K pro was the best version of Windows Microsoft ever issued if one is forced to use Windows for games or work
K ernel/default.aspx
r nel.mspx
Do you really not understand technology, or just pretending you don't?
WindowsXP has a massive scale of compatibilty, security, application stability and even tons of kernel enhancements over Win2k. People that see WindowsXP as Win2k with prettier graphics must also see a porshe as just a VW Bug with prettier paint.
Add in SP2 that forks off after the Windows 2003 server security and optimizations. (remmeber the reports that when Windows 2003 was first released it was faster on the desktop than XP? Well that code was pushed into WindowsXP in SP2.)
WindowsXP is not only safer, more compatible, has a ton more features, a more robust kernel, but is actually faster than Windows2K, even with the 'pretty' themes turned on. Average tests in our labs show XP consistently 10% faster than Win2k.
Here are some 'real' tech points, and these are just the changes in XP prior to SP2.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/01/12/XP
Here is the MS version of some of the same topics:
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/driver/kernel/xp_ke
Happy reading and please for the love of God people stop believing that Win2k is A) Faster or B) more solid than XP. Both are false and just lead users to staying with an older OS and avoid XP when they could be benefiting from it.
Take Care,
TheNetAvenger
...obviously written under the influence of at least two of them....
This is exactly why I've always said that we should promote Free Software for its ethics rather than any particular feature that it happens to have at a particular moment. The technical advantages (such as security) that products like Firefox might have over other products will always come and go, but the ethics of Free Software will only cease to matter when if all software eventually guarantees users' freedom.