Slashdot Mirror
John Dvorak On Vista's Launch
An anonymous reader writes "John is at it again, this time with his take on the launch of Microsoft's Vista operating system. John covers the reality from a market perspective, looking at whether the release will affect PC sales, peripherals ... or even Microsoft." From the article: "While there is no way that Vista will be a flop, since all new computers will come with Vista pre-installed, there seems to be no excitement level at all. And there does not seem to be any compelling reason for people to upgrade to Vista. In fact, the observers I chat with who follow corporate licensing do not see any large installations of Windows-based computers upgrading anytime soon. The word I keep hearing is 'stagnation.' Industry manufacturers are not too thrilled either. One CEO who supplies a critical component for all computers says he sees a normal fourth quarter then nothing special in the first quarter for the segment. Dullsville."
Is this the same Dvorak we've all come to know and love? Who thinks Microsoft should buy Opera, that CSS doesn't work because he couldn't figure out what "cascading" meant, and admits to trolling Mac users?
Oh, wait, he's making disparaging remarks about Microsoft! I'm sorry I ever doubted you, John!
Blatant Shill. Stop linking him. Stop completely. Please
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
* They just get a new computer
* They just (like me) are willing to upgrade (I'll get Vista the day it gets out)
* They will have the need to upgrade to run new specific stuff
* Or just because.
It's time to realise that Abble's products are the biggest abomination these days. Just say NO to the dumb iAbble way!!
Firefox prevented this site from opening 3 popup windows.
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
When you have an entire industry where pretty much only one company supplies a critical part, the entire industry is dependent on that one company. It would be nice to get away from the single-supplier issue, much like there are two major suppliers for processors, a half-dozen dozen chipset makers and so on.
Windows Vista Premium with a free high-end computer to run it on.
"whether the release will [a]ffect PC sales, peripherals ... or even Microsoft."\
Last week Dvorak was an idiot, but today he's the best tech columnist in the world.
Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
I've seen and worked with vista already. Here were my impressions.
It is really hard to lose your work. It is really easy to find your files.
It is a lot prettier.
The GUI for the system has been re-engineered and it is easier to use. Other applications have been rewritten to have the same look and feel so that the system as a whole will be easier to use.
It was not stable when I used it.
"people aren't interested in vista"
In the words of Carlos Mencia...
THAT'S NOT NEWS!
34486853790
Connection too slow for X forwarding? Try "ssh -CX user@host"
I think Microsoft made a big mistake by releasing Vista to businesses first. I think consumers are somewhat excited about Vista or will be when the majority of them actually see Aero in action. In general, businesses don't need Vista or care about the new thing because however you want to package it, its going to cost them more money. The only thing accurate about this article is that Vista will not be a flop because it won't be long before you can only buy a new computer with Vista on it. As that happens, and as more computers get into the hands of consumers, business will have to catch up.
Seriously Zonk, if you're never going to accept stories from me while you're on duty, at least have the guts to email me and tell me. It will save us both time and effort. This nonsense is just childish.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
In most offices, the OS is just an app loader. It's used to load the accounting system, parts lookup system, word processor, etc. That's it. We don't want photo albums, animated icons, or a mouse pointer that has 3000 add-in widgets. Just load the apps and stay out of the way.
The lack of "buzz" around Vista and apathy towards upgrading - despite its myriad improvements - are a tacit acknowledgement of just how good Windows 2000 and XP were(/are)...
If everyone really knew, you wouldn't have to post that as an AC.
Obligatory Soundbite Catchphrase
All the pointy hair types I meet seem to know all about it. Was there a massive golf and martini day I wasn't told about somewhere in the UK? Has there been one day recently when *all* of your senior management - and everyone else's - went missing?
;)
I'd call it brainwashing but that isn't very plausible considering the target audience
Think of the Children; Sleep with your Sister
A lot of corporate entities didn't upgrade to XP from 200 for a few years either. Some places STILL run a significant number of 2000 workstations and some servers.
Ok They are not hyping the launch They are not trying to stuff it down your throat They are making an OS that takes advantage of next gen hardware to improve performance further Why is all this a bad thing that deserves to be berated like Dvorak does?? I am writing this on Vista, and as far as I have seen and read - this seems like a pretty solid release (where things are done right albeit the microsoft way) with lots and lots of potential.
At the end of the day, the operating system's purpose is really to give me access to my programs. On Windows, that means a lot, but I'm fairly happy with the way XP does it. The people who should care about major OS changes ought to be the developers; a new OS changes the rules of the game they play. In general, I don't want to shell out $200 for another OS, as long as the one I have is doing its job.
I've talked to a couple of my friends, and they are not very impressed by what they see in Vista in terms of new tools for the developers. Major changes, yes, but few of them practically interesting, in the sense that they either serve such a small subset of programs that they won't be used by the average developer or there already exists a perfectly reasonable way to do the job in Windows XP. Just as I don't want to buy a new interface if my current one is acceptable, they don't want to have to re-invent wheels just because all the 'fooX' functions are now 'barX' functions.
GNU/Linux is a little different; since the operating system is available cost-free, there's no disincentive to immediately adopting upgrades (except for instability, which is probably the biggest issue with new developments and is also shared by the must-be-purchased OS's). But with Windows, they need to really convince me that there's some truly profound new way of talking to my applications that I just gotta try.
I feel like we've reached a design plateau with both Windows XP and MacOSX these days. They both do what they do extremely well, and most of the other needs can be satisfied by the applications themselves without changing the OS. Until I'm given a very good reason to pay money to learn a new way of talking to my programs, I'll hold off, thanks.
Take care,
Mark
There is a solution...
Since Windows XP doesn't suck as much as the previous versions of Windows that users were dying to get rid of there will not be that much excitement about it.
Help me out please; I've only been in the software industry 14 years. Who is John Dvorak and why should anyone care what he says?
Crysis. Have you seen the eyecandy in that game?
(Crysis is based on directx 10, and last I heard there wasn't going to be any upgrades to XP - granted if I can get directx 10 Ill stay with XP)
Each version of OS X has shipped with a number of things that were productivity boosters - Spotlight and Dashboard in Tiger, and with Leopard you are going to see things like Time Machine which brings version control to the masses!
Similarily with Linux updates have included ever more useful windowing systems and application software - you could of course have added parts piecemeal but it's pretty handy to load a whole distro.
The problem with Vista is that it doesn't even offer anything as compelling as a new Linux distro would have - basiclly the insides have been re-worked to some extent, and the window manager is improved. But it's not like you need Vista to run the new Office. The only thing you do need Vista for is DirectX 10, and most games are probably going to still support DX9 for some time as it's a huge market.
So what would be the reason to move to Vista over something offering real features like Leopard or even the latest Red Hat?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Dvorak's take on public interest in the Vista release seems about right, but I don't understand why he thinks this is a problem. Does he look forward to OS releases because he enjoys the buzz, talk, and excitement? He seems to be of the opinion that every major OS launch needs the marketing and fanfare of Windows 95.
There have been some major Windows revolutions - new versions that significantly added value since previous versions. Windows 95 was one. Windows 2000 was another, although the excitement of that was split between Windows 2000 and XP - XP wouldn't have been big at all if 2000 had been meant for home users. Windows 98 was not exciting. Windows ME was not exciting.
Perhaps the Vista launch would have been a big deal if the team had accomplished more of their original goals. But as it stands, even though a good deal of it was rewritten, Vista is not that much of a jump from XP. I guess Dvorak is sad that there's no revolution and fanfare. Boo hoo. Every release can't be a major step forward and a huge party.
Why are you guys still using Microsoft stuff? It is out-of-date. Linux is the best way to go! I know my wife still use XP though :(
Um, this would be a nit if Microsoft were not a 900 Gorilla with a brand new t#&d to throw, but if you go to their Vista launch site (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/experiences /default.mspx), select "Get Ready" from the nav menu, then select "Windows Vista Editions", you get a broken link. This does not bode well. ;-)
To err is human. To arr is pirate.
"While there is no way that Vista will be a flop,
since all new computers will come with Vista pre-installed"
Right, I've never bought a New PC and wiped it....never..
EVEN if it came with XP Home and I had three Full XP Pro licenses, I would
STILL use the crappy install that came with the PC as installed by the OEM...
Riiiiiiiiiight !
SO I guess what you are saying is that just because it will be shipped out
with XXX number of PC's, they will be counting those as successes ??!!
Riiiiiiiiiight !
End of Line.
By then the bugs should be resolved.
Looks like MS will have to rely on their monopoly alone to sell Vista. Their marketing can't help them this time.
Corporations don't see any benefit to upgrade either. They've been burned by SA and security issues. They've gotten their Windows environments stable and they are not going to mess with them.
There's not much for them to sell to the consumers either. "Look a new Start menu!" isn't getting much interest.
Simplicity sells better to the average joe. That's why the iPod has the click-wheel. That's why auto makers have only one model in each category.
The public doesn't know (and MS probably does want them to know) that to really see the benefits of Vista, they can't use the basic $500 computer. They need the $2000+ model.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
know our company will not be upgrading soon.
First of all, we wait for at least a year of patching before trusting a MS product. Second, Vista is a huge resource hog. We see no reason to waste that much RAM, CPU cycles for prettier windows that don't do more. Third, price. The costs to upgrade company wide a effing astronomical. For what, a bug-filled (I'll call it a safe assumption) resource hog?
This is also coming from someone who is generally likes Windows XP. XP has become a pretty stable OS that is familiar and works well. So far Vista has offered nothing that makes us want to even know more about it. Heck, you could figure out how to display the desktop in 5D or shut it down 42 different ways for all I care, I want my RAM back!
...nothing to see here. Please move along.
Successfully condensing fact from the vapor of nuance since 1998.
Right here, pardner! http://malfy.org/
http://joelonsoftware.com/items/2006/11/24.html
668: Neighbour of the Beast
Businesses do a lot of word processing and some spreadsheet and DB stuff. From the business point of view windows 3.11 and a WYSIWYG word processor is about all I need. As a business person I haven't been excited about any new features in productivity ware since about 1992.
JACEM
DOC Disinformation Obfuscation and Confusion
The carrot to FUD's stick
Vista, to the average consumer, is just a visual upgrade from XP and with large performance hits to boot.
This is just like Windows ME was comparatively to Windows 98; a few extra features with nothing noteworthy, and performance hits.
If history repeats itself then a new server edition of windows will come out in about 2 years and then 2 years following that we will have another version of Windows whose features and stability will be welcome by all (except the obligatory anti-windows folk)
Most of the new features in Windows Vista that (I would argue) make it worth upgrading to, are not aimed at enterprise users, but at the average home PC user. Although most of the really interesting new stuff in the user interface was ripped straight out of OS X 10.4, these changes alone do mark a major improvement over XP. Quartz's ability to offload to the GPU much of the processing needed for window management was a major factor in my switch to the Mac a few years ago, and it's nice that Windows users will finally have something similar (albeit apparently more resource-hungry) on their machines.
While the new security features of Vista (especially the 64-bit version) are a good thing all-around, they're more of a factor for home users of the operating system than they are for large companies with corresponding IT departments to carefully secure and administer their computers. Microsoft's built-in malware scanner and improved firewall are a big step forward for Mr. PC Owner, but any decent enterprise deployment of Windows should already be behind a firewall and an anti-virus system. And in fact, insofar as most corporate Vista deployments will require a licensing server to keep Microsoft placated (bringing with it the looming possibility of a WGA malfunction), Vista is in some ways a step backward for enterprise users.
I think the general public reception of Vista will be positive - partially due to the "Oh, it's so shiny!" factor, and partially due to some real improvements under the hood - but I agree that enterprise adoption of the operating system will probably start slow.
But considering they've yet again linked to useless Dvorak drivel, I guess I'll comment on the topic.
John is treading in pretty "safe" territory with these comments. Vista really isn't exciting very many people. But at this point in the game, does it make any difference? Microsoft could release practically anything as a new OS update, and within 2-3 years, the majority of computer users will be running it - even if absolutely *none* of them voluntarily purchased it as an upgrade. As long as it comes preloaded on the vast majority of new computers purchased (and it does), they're keeping users on their migration path.
I just got out of a technical meeting at my workplace this morning, and one of our discussions topics was the I.T. budget for 2007. It was universally agreed (with very little debate) that there's nothing compelling about spending money to upgrade our computer hardware (all Pentium 4 class systems with between 512MB and 1GB of RAM). We also agreed that it would be wasteful to spend money upgrading to Vista in 2007, since we're currently on XP Pro and it does everything we need. In the case of Office 2007, the only reason we'd upgrade to it is in response to receiving too many documents from our customers that were created in Office '07. Until that happens, it's a total waste of money for us to move to it.
I can't see how many businesses out there would conclude otherwise? With the migration from Windows 2000 to XP, there were a few "drivers" that compelled people. One big one was better, more user-friendly wireless networking support. That, alone, made my laptop upgrade from 2000 to XP a big improvement. (You still can't even use WPA type wireless encryption in Win2K without 3rd. party software add-ons.)
But with Vista, you've got new toolbars and eye-candy (some of which costs extra in terms of higher-end gaphics hardware to make use of it), and apparently a more complicated and restrictive EULA to boot. The things that would have cost-justified the product, at least in the eyes of corporate customers, were largely canned (such as the initially promised "revolutionary new file system"), and instead, we get things like more restrictive DRM for digital music. This makes it an upgrade you're forced to accept, rather than one you *want*.
I don't say all of this because I'm a lazy person (although that would be a ton of work). I say this because it would be inefficent, and an unnecessary waste of a lot of time and money for something that nobody really needs. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
Until there is software that explicitly requires Vista, which I don't foresee any time in the next 5-10 years, I will continue to use XP in this department. It's tried, it's true, and it works. (Works for the average users... I stick to Kubuntu myself!)
/* No Comment */
How does Dvorak talk when Bill Gates' dick is in his mouth?
I have just bought a new machine and will be buying a couple others in the next month or so - why? Exactly because they *wont* have Vista on them. The sys reqs. for Vista are just daft - if it requires that much (this is without the aero front) then all it is doing is taking resources away from apps. - so for the same dollar I will be a *less* powerful PC in a couple of months time when Vista comes preinstalled on every machine.
That rationale is ignoring the other big time issues on the horizon - the first year of any OS is going to see bugs, incompatibility (some of which will just never be fixed - I have comp. games that just don't work with XP, end of story) and security flaws. The OS is hyped for the extensive beta program and the "impentirable" security layout - but it is crying wolf - "it will be different *this* time" has been said by MS for the last 5 OS's they have released - I see no difference this time (especially when you realise that a shutdown menu containing a couple hundred lines of code suffered from the strains of a bureaucracy almost beyond satire - yeah that is a recipe for a sucsessful and secure product right there).
I work with Vista (and BSD and OS X) and am dreading the day.
The product seems fine. I don't mind that. It's the overly sensitive 'security' features that bother me.
To connect to a wireless network I have to find it. I click either Manage Networks or Connect to Network. Both seem to do the same thing. After typing in the new WEP I am asked if this is a public, home or office connection. Home and Office seem to do the same thing. Their descriptions are the same.
Having been in the SMB market for the past 7 years I find that people are less knowledgeable. I won't say stupid because they run businesses that leave me wondering how they are profitable (all honest folk too. I just don't understand accounting).
I can only imagine that, if I stay in the market, we'll get 30x the calls re: Windows Security.
It SHOULD be seamless. It is not. This saddens me as Vista has proven pretty, updated and except for one NIC driver, stable. I don't know much about programming but UI is what makes or breaks most introductions. I like that I can hit WINDOW KEY, type in MSTSC and bam, control a computer. That's cool. What's NOT cool is being told I need administrative rights to COPY a file from an external HD to a folder. Why? Copy isn't destructive. It wasn't overwriting anything.
This, like the ZUNE, may be an initial nightmare. After the inital testing phase (public release), they'll release SP1 and 'fix' all the crap that people hate, doesn't work and is misunderstood. I hope so.
As I see it now, Vista isn't ready for Christmas. And that's a GOOD thing. Let's say someone buys a $2300 laptop with all the fancies. Sweet. They get Vista and hate it. They return it and buy a Mac. The home user will be much happier because the learning curve will be the same, but without the headaches.
Sorry for being an AC.
Why is it that manufacturing can move heaven and earth to avoid vendor lock in yet process/plant/assets is quite happy to be lead around by the nards year in year out.
I have heard of manufacturing
1) requireing a single source vendor to license IP to a second company. Then purchases were made from both suppliers.
2) going with a less desirable but second sourcable alternative
Veni, Vedi, Vista? I don't think so!
Stock Trading Systems that works.
I work in a school, and as such we have an MS Schools License Agreement, which entitles us to all the latest Microsoft software for a reletively cheap price (I think £30ish a workstation).
We're expecting delivery of our Office 2007 and Vista discs in either the December or January licensing packs. While we may test them around the office, a network-wide deployment (about 350 machines total) of Vista won't even be considered till after SP1 is released. Not to mention all the poorly-written educational software that will need compatability testing on the new OS. Due to the training requirements of Office 2007 I probably can't see that being rolled out till 2008 at the earliest either - especially with the admin staff, since a lot of their applications tie directly into Office and they use it all day, ever day. The training requirements for that alone would cause so many headaches for us to support.
Many people I know who work at other schools in our area aren't even considering an upgrade yet or in the near future. XP works just fine for now and the forseeable future. My school is lucky in that we have a large IT budget and have mostly up-to-date PCs (enough for what they do on them anyway), other schools in my area are still running 333MHz/128MB RAM machines - not exactly the powerhouse needed to run Vista at a reasonable level.
Ya know what? I've been trying to pronounce that word for the past 5 minutes, and the closest thing to a real word is 'sewer'. So,
Windows is the sewer OS.
Yup, couldn't agree more.
And yet, someone mod'ed this redundant.....
Why is it that every time Dvorak writes something someone at Slashdot thinks we need to know about it? There are a lot of idiots out there. Dvorak is one of them. The only reason to why his articles are submitted to Slashdot all the time is, as I see it, because he has the same name as a keyboard layout. But please. Though this maybe is kinda cool but not an excuse to link to his articles all the time. Please stop submitting Dvorak-crap.
thomasdamgaard.dk.
However, I guess we'll all just have to "get used to it". It's like getting Herpes. It's ugly, uncomfortable, and won't go away. I hope it comes with a "classic" option so I can tone down the "we hired our OS designers from AOL" style and get it back to a standard, innocuous, and useful Win95-esque style.
RS
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
The problem? No new releases within that period. Vista's business launch I think is designed to still fall just inside that period so that MS doesn't look like it screwed its customers over, and all those IT heads who bought this software assucrance crap don't look like complete and utter morons.
Note that business as a whole doesn't like to adopt new software, especially MS software, at launch so not many businesses will actually install it. Hell, the birmingham opensource story mentioned windows 3.1, that should give you an idea about how urgent some business places consider upgrading.
But MS meets its promises, even if no company can actually risk making use of it, it makes the headline that Vista is out while in reality it buys another few months of testing before the real launch and the real test.
MS doesn't do the seperated launch for any other reason that they ain't got a choice. A, they need to give their business customers their promised free upgrade and B, Vista just ain't ready for consumers yet. (nor for businesses users either but see point A)
Dear Steve Ballmer,
Do me a version of Vista with all your sh***y apps stripped out (Explorer, Messenger, Media player, etc., ie. a stock GUI OS* with networking enabled), and then sell it for less than the cheapest retail boxed version of Linux.
THEN I might just consider buying a copy!
Yours,
A patent-infringing penguin lover
* Patent pending. Copyright 2006
I think where MS went wrong was with their minimum requirements. Previously, users may have had to upgrade a component here or there to get most of new version. i.e. A Win98 user wanting XP might need more RAM. Vista requires major upgrades to appreciate the new version. A WinXP user might need more RAM, a new video card, and maybe a new HD (preferably SATA), etc. Otherwise, they might as well stick with XP. Where users don't upgrade and buy new computers, they don't the full benefits of Vista until they upgrade to another version (and good luck to them trying to figure which one they need) AND they upgrade hardware from the basic model that the OEMs offer. "Well Mr. Smith the $500 computer you want needs $300 worth of upgrades to fully appreciate Vista Premium. For $100 more you can go with the next model that comes with a camera. So your total with Vista Premium would be $1000 instead of $500. Hello, are you still there?"
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
windows vista's site uses shanghai skyline as backdrop: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/ love that city!!
Apple's business model doesn't depend on tricking people into superfluous upgrades, interfering with the market or taking technical measures - wait for your XP to DeActivate in favour of Vista! - to force people to upgrade. If you weren't paying attention for the past 25 years, Apple is a hardware company (like Sun) that just happens to bundle a kick-ass O/S.
And Linux's business model... uh wait.
you had me at #!
Just EOL sales and support for Windows XP once the last OEM copy ships.
IIRC Windows 98 support was supposed to end in a few months from some announcement. A while later they re-announced the date for oh, "next Thursday".
I have to imagine that once they figured out that killing support for all previous versions would rip the last barnacle of Win98 from the hull of the SS Microsoft, someone in marketing did his best Daffy Duck imitation yelling "Shoot'em now! Shoot'em now!!!"
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
Why not have ubuntu 6.10 and Qemu to take care of the WIndows iffy programs ?
Even if with kqemu the performance if almost native you still need probably 1Gb of ram, but if you buy a new machine this is almost the norm now.
You can get uset to Ubuntu and all the programs and have the windows confined to the cellar :-)
Do not forget to install VLC (videolan) to enjoy videos
So the new Vista looks flashy. But why would anyone buy it?
From Microsoft's website:
The Start menu features integrated desktop search through a new feature called Instant Search which can help you find and launch almost anything on your PC
Um, excuse me, but KDE has had this feature for the last, I don't know, maybe, FIVE YEARS! Alt-F2 strikes again.
I recently moved from a Linux based organization to a Windows based one. Two things have struck me:
Granted, the eye candy Vista provides is nice. But then, KDE and gnome have offered fully customizable, useful UIs for the past half-decade. And having grown accustomed to Linux, I'm used to getting things done with a computer, rather than just seeing it as some kind of flashy toy.
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
How does Dvorak talk when Bill Gates' dick is in his mouth?
Because Dvorak has a very big mouth, and Bill has a very small dick.
Yes, it's the most "serure" OS. No wonder it suffers so many security problems...
There was no compelling reason to switch from NT 4.0 to Windows 2000. There was no reason to switch from Windows 2000 to XP.... and now there is no reason to switch from XP to Vista. The computers tend to run their life and just get recycled everywhere I've been. Home users might switch for some specific game or something... or because they want a new computer, etc... but really, no ones interested in wiping out a workstation that probably isn't even worth the cost of the OS anymore just to get a new version of the same os. Can you imagine the headaches if you supported 200+ machines? What a bunch of idiots... Dvorak included.
Computer sales will pick up.
My dad told me he is waiting for Vista to release before he buys a new computer. He uses dial-up AOL, and he loves sports on his big HD TV.
Slashdotters may not care, but I don't think my dad is the only one that falls in to that group of people eagerly waiting to give more money to Microsoft.
Even a broken clock is correct two times a day. This is one time I have to aggree with Dvorak.
Nobody can come up with one compelling reason to downgrade to Vista. Not One!
Athiesm is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.
Does this mean we'll finally get one of those nifty GUIs where the fonts are fixed at 36-point and above, all text appears one letter at a time, applications are always maximized, and the search function flashes thumbnails of every file that doesn't match as it goes through the index?
I'm expecting a lot from Vista, but not for another 12 to 18 months. All of those features that MS cut from the initial release will start popping up as Vista-only addons. This isn't bad. Early adopters can focus on a relatively minor change. There will be fewer bugs initially, but HOPEFULLY more focus on them.
Could MS do better... absolutely... but I'm not complaining about a slow rollout for Vista.
Office is different... I WANT MY NEW VERSION NOW!!
I'm primarily a linux user as well, but there are reasons to use windows. Switching to Linux is not trivial, but it certainly has its benefits. And calling an operating system that hasn't yet been released "out-of-date" seems a tad silly.
Actually, Thurott is pretty clueless too. Most of his criticisms of Vista have been the result of him not understanding core computing concepts.
I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
I went years being a retarded wannabe-troll, until I started studying Dvorak. He taught me how to truly be the greatest troll I can be, and I am eternally grateful. Now if you'll excuse me, I have trolls to do, such as calling YouTube personalities on Skype and getting them to make videos about how much they hate me and are calling the police on me. I'm doing it for you, Johnny D!
Dvorak claimed that the GPL somehow made it so that "one false move would make a Microsoft product public domain". If Thurott is clueless, we need a new word for Dvorak.
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
"... all new computers will come with Vista pre-installed"
Without a site license for the previous operating system, buying a new computer means getting a forced upgrade. Microsoft forces all computer makers to stop shipping the "old" operating system when they come out with a new version.
I had the misfortune to order a new computer from Dell just after XP came out. I had an all Win2K shop. Dell would not and could sell me Win2K. I got the same treatment from every other PC seller. They could only sell Win2K as a retail copy, not an installed operating system. I ended up buying a Win2K as a retail copy and installing it over the XP system that Dell installed. I hated doing that.
Qemu and native performance in the same sentence with no negative qualifiers?
Something's wrong.
Fair enough, but that entire list sounds more like a single OS X upgrade - something OS X users only pay around $100 for. With Vista, the first "real" option you can buy is more like $300! Basically, you are buying Vista Tiger Edition.
Also most of it is things OS X users have had for several versions now, like Bitlocker or the Sidebar. Aqua was always there of course.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
While I definitely agree /. needs to stop posting Dvorak's crap, this does bring up a good point.
The summary says "there seems to be no excitement level at all" - I think that for the average Joe, its not so much that they aren't looking forward to Vista as they don't even have a clue it's out there. Although MS has Vista allover there website(s) (and others - example, nVidia) and even looks like they are redesigning almost all of their sites to have the Vista styling - they haven't marketed it for dog-crap to the average Joe (as in on TV, magazines, website ads, etc)...
Personally, I hate what Vista looks like it will be released as - but I would prefer responses not be about "OSX is better", "Linux is better", or "XP is crap and needs replaced" - I want to examine the marketing/PR aspect of Vista here and just how little of MS's marketing war-machine they have(n't) put behind getting the average Joe to realize what his PC is likely to run in the next year or 2...
Micro$oft did not want to steal the thunder away from Zune's debut with an OS release.
an ill wind that blows no good
What is there to be proud of in this case? This is like saying "haven't tasted fish in 10 years and proud of it".
I wouldn't be surprised if the upcoming introduction of Vista next year led to a small bump in 4th-quarter sales this year. My sister was recently talking about replacing their old clunker, and wanted to get one with Win XP (which she at leaast knows and tolerates) instead of having to learn how to use a computer all over again with Vista and Office 2007.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
That's a nice list, but really when you look at the feature list for a single OS X upgrade like Tiger it ends up looking about the same. Especially so when you take away from the Vista list things that OS X has had from the start or since 10.1 - Like Aqua and color management and security features and PDF support (Microsoft of course cannot resist ignoring PDF and instead replicating the features of PDF with Metro).
I don't think it's so much that I am unfamiliar with new features in Vista (I have been studying them for some time as part of my job involves dealing with Windows workstations) as that many people underestimate how many changes there really are in a single OS X release - especially framework wise as was the case with Tiger.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Please allow me to introduce you to our good friend Mr. Period. He lets us know when it's okay to breathe.
He couldn't be 37. He was on TV in the Fifties. Just ask Ralph Kramden.
He means that it's designed to be really hard to lose your work - but it'll be great when it stops crashing and is ready for release!
No, really! I honestly think that's what he means.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
Um, Um, Um (there, there, I pi$$ed you off). I didn't obfuscate that language for the benfit of the /. crowd. I did it to get by the company censorwall (you @$$#@+).
To err is human. To arr is pirate.
The M$ site looking like an ad for a laxative. Couldn't put it better myself. Windoze always gives me gas....
I'm a long-time Windows fan (cue flames) but it's the honest truth. I get older and busier and have long-since dropped computers as a hobby, and use them exclusively to "get the job done" which means watching TV on my media center, burning CDs for use in my car, Word documents, and Internet browsing. I've never needed anything more than that.
I don't plan to upgrade to Windows Vista for a year or so, most likely...if ever. I'm gradually letting my "hobbiest" knowledge lapse since I am getting out of tech as a job in the near future, but remain computer literate. And my plan is: when I get a new PC, I'm going to (gasp) load a Linux distribution onto it.
People have convinced me that Linux is, at this point, reasonable enough to configure to work on common hardware without a lot of fuss. I'll dual-boot Windows XP, or use Wine, or something -- but Vista's DRM scares me just a little bit, and I am a historic *supporter* of DRM (cue flames again) for a variety of reasons.
I imagine that Vista may prompt Linux desktop adoption to a bit of a degree, as corporations and "power-users" (somewhere between Joe User and Joe Admin) decide "hey, I've heard this Linux thing works and is free" and go for it.
That's my plan, anyway.
funniest post all day
-- @rjamestaylor on Ello
It could be concern over how the more-restrictive EULA for Vista affects the value of upgrading.
We are the 198 proof..
Ok let's say the average user gets some premium Vista machine, the will also get a Core2, a harddrive with built in flash, and a real NVDA video card inside. This machine will seem light years ahead of a P3 or P4 with Intel integrated graphics and they will think Vista is full of awesome power...
Onward to the Aether Sphere!
Quoth TFA: "All new computers will come with Vista pre-installed"
Wow. No wonder it took so long to get Vista out the door. It must have taken forever to port it to everything from Apple Minis to Cray XMTs
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
If the system does the job that it was designed to do, namely manage access to hardware resources and provide services to programs, then the operating system, whether it be Linux, Unix, Windows, or something else entirely has done its job. In fact the only time that people should really be concerned or hear about it, unless of course they are interested in the technical details on their own merits, is when something goes wrong. The OS may not be glamorous and it may not be sexy, but who cares as long as it just works? The problem is less a technical one than it is a marketing driven society that judges a piece of technology on whether it looks "cool" or is "sexy". I for one would prefer the reliable old beige box thank you very much if that meant 20+ years of reliable operation running the programs of my choice in the way that I want.
Companies do.
People have never bought Windows.
They bought Dell.
They bought Sony.
They bought any cheap box that was compatible with the box at the office.
The real decision makers are the corporate buyers who buy units by the tens of thousands (and just updated off of Windows NT 4.x to Win2K because they HAD to.)
The multimedia capabilities in Windows cut absolutely no ice when you're buying TOOLS (not toys.)
That's why Windows is a big fucking yawn and always will be.
The fancier features detract from their true use.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
By ensuring that DirectX 10 (ie. next generation graphics) is only available for Vista, Microsoft have guaranteed themselves a market for it - the gaming market. It makes the OS a lot more serious a proposition than Win ME - esque skin jobs.
I don't know what Dvorak's been smoking, and don't want to help bump up his salary by following the link to read his fluff online, but so far everyone I've talked to is severely underwhelmed by Vista and can't see spending all that cash for graphics and memory hardware they don't need.
...
There's a reason why Microsoft's revenues have been softening lately
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
The previous story seems to suggest the industry has not stagnated at all, just Microsoft who seems to be making them more irrelevant with every passing day.
The fix for Microsoft? Get rid of half your employees, ask the consumer what they want and give it to them. Easy isn't it? Worked for Warren Buffet.
I don't make predictions, and I never will.
I for one welcome our slashdot-enhancing checkbox-adding Dvorak-spew-ignoring overlords and wish they'd get to work replacing my Jon Katz checkbox-ignoring ability with a Dvorak-ignoring checkbox posthaste!
... what's the point of killing off my three and four digit slashdot user ids to get a five digit one if it can't moderate?
Either that or let me mod some posts instead of this incessant metamod cycle they have me in
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
> because you have a safe little niche of like minded zealots that will agree with you unconditionally
Lets not start throwing generalized bricks fanboi. Over the past dozen years Ive had countless discussions with sheeple trying to justify their expenses at the House of Jobs.
I have no probs with any system, I use Win at home and work, Mac at work and Linux at home and work. I dont have viruses or any of the problems newbies have on Win machines but I prefer Linux for ethical and practical reasons as someone who has built everyone one of his computers since my father bought his first 286.
No one....NO ONE is more annoying than Mac zealots who try so hard to convince people that those who dont join them are miserable and the same people who a few years ago were promoting the virtues of PowerPC have now switched to the dual core mantra because they have to.
I would never buy a mac since I dont believe in being told what to do or even what to buy when it comes to hardware and even less for software. Does that make the Mac inferior? No. It is what it is, a simple, elegant, expensive toy for those who love to be part of a select group...like Saturn tried to do with their cars and if people get personal satisfaction from that....good for them.
But if youre going to talk sheep, then NO ONE beats the Mac crowd.
So far, the discussion has missed an important point. One of the "features" of Vista will be DirectX 10. Microsoft aren't going to port DX10 to XP. So, if you want to play the latest games, you'll have to upgrade. Oh yeah, and there's only 1 video card on the market that currently supports DX10, and it costs upwards of $600.
Buh bye PC gaming. It's been more frustrating than fun most of the time anyway. Hello Nintendo Wii!
Acts 17:28, "For in Him we live, and move, and have our being."
Put it this way. I believe that most estimates are that Windows Vista will sell in the neighborhood of 150-200 million copies in the first year compared to about 75 million for the first year of Windows 95. That doesn't sound too bad. Even with all the "excitement" for Windows 95, corporate customers were slow to upgrade - and that was with huge amounts of press and a big improvement in hardware (Pentiums arriving on the scene). I'd bet that Vista will do well from the get-go with consumers. I personally know of several people who haven't seen a need to upgrade thier old PC's who are waiting until Vista is available to buy a new machine. That's a sample size of...maybe 10 which isn't projectable but I'd bet a few bucks that it'll prove accurate. Dvorak is kind of an idiot anyway.
Although I do agree with you, that being the only real reason to upgrade off of 2k, you "forgot" to mention that every single wireless card comes with some sort of "3rd party" software suite. I haven't seen one, even the cheap $20 ones, that don't have some sort of software bundled.
I'll just use my special getting high powers one more time...
I think Microsoft made a big mistake by releasing Vista to businesses first. I think consumers are somewhat excited about Vista or will be when the majority of them actually see Aero in action.
I think this was as a result of focus groups and feedback that indicated that consumers generally didn't care much about Vista, whereas it would be easier to sell corporate accounts on Vista, based upon the premise that they were concerned about security and that shiny toys (Aero) would distract them from the fact there was no killer app.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
I liked it, alot. I'm a hardcore KDE user. It seemed to be ripped in MAJOR ways from KDE as opposed to OS X ...
... at the same time, it is beautiful, has AWESOME software with it (gallery! amazing. mediaplayer does its job FINALLY (for syncing, not for playing.) and once you make it look like Windows 2000 it looks great = ) hah.
... overall ... still a bit much for my 2003-era (though top of the line) PC ... no m-audio drivers yet, and it caused hard-boots and major system errors that resulted in ninja-foo (corrupted system files) at least 6 times in under 12 hours. We're talking NT4.0 kind of stuff.
... it can't be release to manufacturer quality stuff, right?
... just having really nice apps and really nice integrated OS.. I will definitely need to patch out the popups though.
... I managed to get a trojan despite OneCare and the security and all the f*cking popups within 6 minutes of installing the software (installing Alcohol20% off torrent.) ... But hey ... thats what you get for piracy.
My hardware wasn't enough, and it lagged up my games.
It also crashed. Alot.
Install was thankfully handsfree... but took forever.
Many, many popups.
Doing major deletes and copies failed miserably. Security system is way too intense for most users - even me, with 9 years of IT consulting experience found it way too labour intensive to set permissions and whatnot with 3+ vista installs on top of each other, 2 XP installs and 4 drives worth of torrent dirs created with different users.
But
But
But hey... its RTM
I don't usually run an OS until SP1 or so, but I had to try it. I liked it, I really really liked it. I ran KDE for a long time on my laptop (until I broke it.) and I loved it too
Oh about security
OneCare seems like a neat idea... but it doesn't get much and it has ALOT of bugs.
--- ask me about nihilism, I will have nothing to tell you.
I spend all day at work developing software, when I get home I want to play computer games. I HATE the fact that I have to load an OS filled with bloat in order to play games, and the fact that I have to use incredibly overspecd hardware to support this OS layer, Vista will be worse, I will be forced to upgrade due to Lack of DX10 support on XP, more expense, more bloat. I just hope the Vista release will help push more game developers to support open source platforms.
God was my co-pilot, but then we crashed and I was forced to eat him.
I love Dvorak. He's so delightfully curmudgeonly. He was even curmudgeonly when he was writing for PC Computing all those years ago, back before it started to suck balls and then turned into "Smart Business."
+++ATH0
I thought 640KB was enough for anyone?
Stagflation
"I his bow, and spun and wove, likes you." Vere de Vere out of my mould's mouth dragged me of the voluntary apes.
I seem to remember there was uproar when MacDonalds wanted to run school canteens etc, and that's not all down to "healthy eating" concerns.
Schools are not there to commercially indoctrinate future consumers.
Something to considerDude, look.
/lot/ about Linux. But putting that on our desktops? Not a chance.
I run Linux at home on two desktop machines, I run it on my work laptop, it's also on three of our backend servers. While I don't consider myself a Linux guru, I know a
I love alternative operating systems as much as the next geek, but I can't even being to suggest that we move our desktops to Linux (and OSX/Apple hardware *is* beyond our budget, discount or not). 95% of Educational software will only run on Windows (and maybe OSX if you're lucky) - and poorly at best. Since most of it is written crappy, I doubt it would work through Wine, and quite frankly, I don't want to be supporting educational software that runs thru Wine. I have enough headaches to deal with as it is.
I'm a firm believer in using the right tool for the job. And as far as I'm concerned, the right tool for the job in this case is Windows on a Windows Domain Controller. We run misc services on Linux servers (email, proxying/filtering, some file shares, etc). I *want* these kids to have Linux experience, I want them to know there are alternatives, I want them to see outside of the Windows box, but there is no way I can justify replacing Windows on our PCs. I'm looking into dual-booting, but it's a lot of extra work and right now I've got more pressing things to worry about.
Shame no one will read this comment now. Pfft.
Also, there is the question of whether you are using the computers to teach, or teaching the use of computers. With only a single OS involved, you can only really be doing the former. It's a variation of the "teach a man to fish" meme.
I guess I'm just pissed off with TV adverts offering publications that teach you "how to use your PC" when all they are doing is showing you how to accomplish certain tasks within Windows.
Those adverts piss me off too.
The teaching side of things has nothing to do with me. I just keep things running. While I know that one of our teachers did show the learners a Knoppix bootable CD once, he's never done it again and none of the other teachers have requested anything like it. (Tho I may make that suggestion when I get time.) I could roll out VMWare player, but if no one is going to include it in the curriculum then there is nothing I can do about it.
The kids here, btw, are 11-16 (UK High School).
Computers are used in nearly every classroom for the interactive whiteboards that we have, so in that regard they are used for teaching. The IT lessons are pretty much Office-centric though, despite them having access to OpenOffice on all machines.
Hardware-wise, dual-core is pretty compelling. We're replacing everything 1GHz and lower (some of which are 1999-era machines still running Win98) with dual-core. The newer stuff from 2002 onward won't get upgraded until after 2007 (maybe 2008). So it depends on when you bought all those P4s...
2003 onward? They're probably good for a 6 year lifespan as long as you beef the memory up.
2002? Those are due for a replacement (my laptop is early-2002 and is starting to feel creaky). You might get another 12-18 months out of them (5-6 years total).
2001 or earlier? Definitely past their prime and worth upgrading.
The big reason we're going dual-core for everything is that for a mere 15% more in costs (if that) the machine lifespan goes from ~5 years up to 8-10 years. Well worth it in our book. It's definitely overkill today for most of our users, but a dual-core machine will age better (remain responsive) then a single-core unit did.
Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
And also sounds a lot less that upgrading to Mandriva 2007, which I did for exactly $ 0 and has far better 3D eyecandy out of the box.
Not to mention thousands and thousands of software packages.
That is very true, it's actually pretty sad that there is not mkore trumpting of the totality of improvements you net with each new Linux distro!
I think what would be good there is to whittle out some of the truly geeky aspects, or at least wrap them in terminology like CoreImage. Because each of the pieces is created by seperate people there is never really a good description of just how much progress is made from release to release - I still use Linux at work and the advances are coming.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley