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/
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.
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?
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.
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?
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
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?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
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.
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.