Slashdot Mirror
Software Missing From Vista's "Official Apps"
PetManimal writes "Microsoft has just released a list of 800 applications it says are 'officially supported' on Windows Vista. What's special about this list, however, are the programs that are not included: 'Popular Windows software that is conspicuously missing from Microsoft's list includes Adobe Systems Inc.'s entire line of graphics and multimedia software, Symantec Corp.'s security products, as well as the Mozilla Foundation's open-source Firefox Web browser, Skype Ltd.'s free voice-over-IP software and the OpenOffice.org alternative to Microsoft Office.' Another area in which Vista has found to be lacking is gaming, as discussed earlier on Slashdot."
...then don't use it.
Has the Mozilla Foundation or OO.org submitted an application to undergo the testing program? Probably not.
This list is just the programs that are allowed to put that official Microsoft logo on the box that says the program will work with Windows. It doesn't mean that programs whose developers haven't bothered to go through the testing program aren't going to work in Vista.
Doesn't this just mean that if you can't get an Adobe product to work on Vista you need to go to Adobe as you would under any other OS? Why should MS need to help you make an Adobe product work on their OS, Adobe should be the ones making it work. I use Adobe as my example so the Open Source fans don't get in an uproar about MS keeping the competition down (not that they aren't, but I don't feel they are here).
This is a non-story, sensational only in its attempt to stir up a hornet's nest. (But this is Slashdot, so why am I surprised?)
There's no story here. There is some vague hint in the summary that Microsoft is purposefully not certifying software, but this is a vague and unsupported claim at best. The only real claim that can be made is that some software is not on the list... and so what? There are dozens of reasons. The software could A) not work with Vista, b) not have been submitted for testing, C) be in the process of going through the process...
What's the point? As another poster said, if it doesn't work, don't use it.
"It is possible to commit no errors and still lose. That is not a weakness. That is life." -Peak Performance
Oh course Vista is a turd now, like every other Microsoft release. Which is why anyone with a lick of sense waits until the first service pack before deploying. Then it will only suck, but that is about as good as Microsoft knows how to make a product so those stuck on Windows have learned to live with that level of pain.
Of course ya just gotta feel sorry for the poor schmucks who buy a new namebrand PC between the release of Vista and SP1 since they don't get a choice. Which is just one more reason why only the uneducated masses buy a namebrand PC.
Democrat delenda est
From TFA:
Adobe, which will face competition from Microsoft this year when Microsoft releases its Expression suite of graphics and multimedia design tools, did not immediately return a request to comment.
"He may be mad, but there's method in his madness. [...] It's what drives men mad, being methodical." G.K.Chesterton
Wel from MS's perspective anyway. The main purpose of Vista is to generate huge piles of income and revitalising interest to keep MS "fresh" in the eyes of the investors.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Another area in which Vista has found to be lacking is gaming...
And people still claim Vista's not an OS X ripoff. What more proof do you need?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Hell, they all probably work. Firefox sure does. They just haven't been certified. The certification process takes a while and you have to pay for it. Microsoft sets the requirements and some 3rd party company administers it. After the 3rd party company has certified your product, then you can put the Vista (or XP) logo on your product. You also get listed on Microsoft's web site as having a certified product. Not being on the list means you either 1) haven't bothered to be certified, or 2) you failed certification. It doesn't mean the software doesn't run on that platform.
Microsoft isn't certifying the most popular competitors to it's own software. Pardon me if I don't appear shocked. I was a bit suprised to see Google's desktop search made the list though.
I don't think that's it - I think it's just a rubber-stamp list of whoever signed up, paid their fee, and jumped through the hoops. If they were excluding competitors, I really don't think Google Toolbar would have made the list.
What does Microsoft have? They have market share (ie. a customer base). They don't have particularly innovative or high quality software products/services and their revenues are largely independent of their offerings. They have you (*). They just have to keep finding ways to repackage you (*) to keep generating income. If MS didn't make Vista, they'd keep selling XP. However, it is very hard to keep dishing up left overs and still keep a straight face. Vista is a statement more than a product.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Certifying Firefox would be pointless anyway, a certificate would be good only for a specific build and one patch would mess that up again.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
these poor third-party vendors would be ready.