MS Says Vista Selling At Twice XP's Pace

Several readers made us aware that Microsoft said today that it sold more than 20 million Windows Vista licenses in the first month after the OS's general debut on January 30. This compares to 17 million licenses of XP sold in the first two months after its release. (Just a coincidence the announcement came out a day after this community's speculation, surely.) Most of the coverage of this story, picked up from Reuters, looks like it follows an MS press release. The Associated Press dug deeper, noting that since XP's release the overall PC market has grown by almost a factor of 2, so it would be a surprise if Vista didn't do twice as well: "...51 million PCs were sold to consumers worldwide in 2002; this year... 96 million consumers will buy a computer." Also, Microsoft's 20 million figure includes the backlog of upgrade coupons bundled with XP computers sold since last October.

Comments

I thought it was....

[Anonymous Coward]

half or that Microsoft can't do math...

Re:I thought it was....

[HermMunster]

It certainly is exaggerated and is being used for stock speculation. They are telling the world they are selling twice as good to get that stock up. It'll go up and then fall back down as the real numbers rear their heads. I've done my part and continue to do so in telling customers about the spying and the other DRM/CRM implemented into Vista and how Microsoft is now hostile towards its customers. I describe it as an example with Walmart entering your home to search your belongings to ensure that you have not stolen anything from their store. Most people understand that their computer is an extension of their homes and that they certainly would not let the government enter without warrant and when I then tell them that they would certainly not allow a private entity to enter they agree wholeheartedly.

Sheesh, what does it take to understand that Microsoft is doing the equivalent of searching your home when they enter your computer and search. No, they don't have the right to enter my computer or home to search for any reason. If they feel I have stolen from them let them hit the courts and sue/arrest me. They'll find I am above board. But the sentiment stays. Hit the courts and do it legally. Even the police can't keep entering your home over and over to search. If they do it is harassment. The problem is that people don't know that or don't initially understand it as a search and seizure procedure.

Let me repeat. They have no right to enter my home/computer/business to do anything unless I give them permission even if it is to protect their IP. If they think I am stealing they can hit the courts up and to through due process to convict. I say this even though I am 100% legit on all copies of Windows. You would not let Walmart enter your home or business to search for goods that might be stolen and hence you would not let, should not let, Microsoft do the same.

Re:I thought it was....

[westlake]

Most people understand that their computer is an extension of their homes

Perhaps, more mundanely, they just think of it another home appliance like the set-top box or the video game console.

XBox Live! is for the XBox owner.

DRM kicks in only when your rights conflict with the rights of others. No one is forcing you load and run a licensed program or media file. Except perhaps your boss - who has his own interests to protect.

Re:I thought it was....

[ursuspacificus]

That's all well and good... but if you AGREE to the END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT, then that's a BINDING CONTRACT which grants Microsoft certain rights, while taking certain rights away from you.

If you don't want Microsoft to be allowed to do these things, there is a simple solution: DON'T RUN THEIR SOFTWARE.

There are plenty of alternatives out there. Yes, you will have to cope with a paradigm shift, not unlike switching from XP to Vista, or MS Office 2003 to MS Office 2007.

If you give your ascent to a contract without reading it, then get fscked by the provisions of that contract, then you deserve everything you get (and more).

Do you sign loan paperwork without reading it? Do you sign up for the military without reading every last word? Why on Earth would you entrust your digital life to a company without reading the EULA?! ...and if you DID read MS's EULA, why on Earth would you AGREE to it?!

Re:I thought it was....

[PitaBred]

By reading this, you agree that you are my bitch. Bend over.

It's a binding agreement. Do it.

Re:I thought it was....

[HermMunster]

Everything I have been reading about Microsoft in Redmond and about products surrounding them give me the eerie feeling that Microsoft is struggling desperately. Why else would they put out such false number!?! I think they are desperate to get their stock value up. There are a lot of reasons for this, not solely the fact that their employee's equity in the company is declining and there's no bright future there for new top of the line employees. Give them good value in stock incentives and you can keep them, but if your stock is down and dwindling you do everything you can to make it appear high.

The below article describes nicely how Microsoft is fudging the numbers to make it appear that sales were higher than they actually are. Essentially the conclusion is that sales of Vista are weak. It's just sad that a company like Microsoft has to fib in such a way in order to artificially inflate their stock value.

http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/vista/stack ing_vista_licenses_too_high.html

Re:I thought it was....

[Anonymous Coward]

you said "It's just sad that a company like Microsoft has to fib in such a way in order to artificially inflate their stock value." but I think you meant to say "it's just sad that a company like Microsoft has to release junk like Zune, Vista and Xbox Elite in order to artificially inflate their stock value." Can't wait to see how they destroy the cellphone!! Yeah I'd buy a phone with windows on it, the day I'd buy a pacemaker with windows on it. Does anyone see a trend developing in Redmond? Apparently they've fallen and they can't get up. 5 years and billions of dollars for shiny icons and they talked the paperclip from office into hiring his cousin to do security for the o/s - Wait a minute do you really want to do that? Confirm or Deny?
Obviously with such a magnificient product, it sells itself and Microsoft will have to double the price to slow things down a bit, so it can restock inventory in the channel, yeah that's the ticket!!!

Misleading

[rackhamh]

But given that the personal computer market has nearly doubled since XP launched, Vista sales "probably should be more," said Michael Silver, vice president of research at Gartner, a technology research group.

In summary: computer sales up; consumers forced to adopt Vista. Microsoft chuckles gleefully.

Re:Misleading

[QuantumG]

Nah, consumers have already rationalised their purchase of Vista. Even XP-loyal geeks have downgraded their opinion to "I guess it has some features I'd like on XP" and are seriously considering upgrading.

Re:Misleading

[rackhamh]

Consumers don't have to rationalize buying Vista. If they're buying a new computer, they don't have a choice. A telling quote from the article:

Microsoft declined to break out the number of Vista copies sold at retail, though it has said in the past that 80 percent of Windows revenue comes from sales to PC makers.

Eventually we'll all (those of us running Windows) upgrade, but my sense of things right now is that most XP users are waiting until software availability forces the upgrade.

Re:Misleading

[QuantumG]

Yes, my point was simply that there are people out there who are willingly upgrading and some of them are even geeks.

Re:Misleading

[jovetoo]

Not quite... computer sales up, lots of Vista freebie coupons lying around and still only 20 million copies? Vista is not going well and as far as I can tell Microsoft is doing everything it can to prop up the numbers. Two different discount programs, now this misleading press release. I don't think Microsoft has much reason to be chuckling at all...

Re:Misleading

[spisska]

Consumers don't have to rationalize buying Vista. If they're buying a new computer, they don't have a choice. A telling quote from the article:

"Microsoft declined to break out the number of Vista copies sold at retail, though it has said in the past that 80 percent of Windows revenue comes from sales to PC makers."

What's more is that the figures suggest that 20 million copies of Vista are currenty being used, rather than having been shipped to OEMs and sitting on shelves. I would suspect that the actual number of Vista licenses in the wild are substantially lower, to the point of embarassment for Microsoft.

Personally, I've bought my last Microsoft license. At the same time I realize that Business runs on Microsoft, Business accounts for the lion's share of Microsoft licenses, and I've yet to see Business in general, or any single business in particular, leaping towards Vista. Most, including the one I work for, are waiting until it is absolutely necessary (certainly not before SP1) before even contemplating a widespread rollout.

The numbers are nonsense and reflective only of PCs in the pipeline (or whatever other figures can be found in Redmond-area proctological exams), not in deployment. In 12 months, Vista will be unavoidable but for now it is a non factor. As far as Business goes, it's still more important to make sure your widget works with MS Windows 2000 than with Vista.

Re:Misleading

[SpecTheIntro]

In 12 months, Vista will be unavoidable but for now it is a non factor.

I wouldn't even give them that. Personally, I don't plan on upgrading any of the computers I administer until at least 18 months out. I've got a test machine running Vista Ultimate, and while I'm actually a fan of the features Vista introduces, it will be an absolute nightmare to roll this out to my users, especially since (currently) Vista and Server 2003 don't always see eye-to-eye. Microsoft is just trying to convince people that Vista is doing well, and I understand that, but any business that tries to upgrade any time soon is asking for a world of hurt.

Re:Misleading

[uradu]

It's interesting to observe the "brand-name" computer sellers: all the majors suddenly only provide Vista drivers and support for their new machines. Not even a mention of XP (or God forbid, 2000) on Gateway's or HP's websites. Haven't checked Dell, but I wouldn't be surprised to find the same there.

Re:Misleading

[rackhamh]

I don't think Microsoft has much reason to be chuckling at all...

They're increasing their install base for Vista. Eventually that will translate into forced upgrades for everyone else. They have plenty to be happy about -- it's just not as immediate as they might wish for.

Re:Misleading

[Benaiah]

Yes you do have a choice. If you buy a computer which has no option to buy without an O/S. Simply take it home and refuse the licensing agreement. Then install your copy of XP you have from your last computer. The company you bought the computer from is obliged to refund the full amount of buying the O/S OEM.

This is why all games stores allow refunds for 7 days. Because games come with EULA's that you cant read till you open the box. And part of that legal requirement is that the stores offer a refund should you decline the EULA.

Re:Misleading

[nickheart]

It has none of the features i wanted in XP It doesn't know how to open X: when you double click on a network drive in Explorer still! (since XP sp2). It has a new boot configuration that you cannot change from older operating systems. SUCK! I need to switch from different versions on NT (2K, XP, 2K3 Server, vista...) all the time in the lab to test our new builds. I'm almost as unhappy with Vista as i am with IE7 (try loading about:blank and time how long it takes, this is really sad!). anywho, end rant

Re:Misleading

[Ltar]

But I'm not throwing away my XP disk.

Re:Misleading

[Heir Of The Mess]

I've yet to see Business in general, or any single business in particular, leaping towards Vista.

Then maybe you should look. Just quickly I found these:

From http://www.windows-now.com/blogs/robert/archive/20 07/03/07/internal-amd-memo-encourages-rapid-compan y-wide-vista-adoption.aspx/

Vista is being deployed at AMD from the top-down, with about 100 users (most of the AMD executives, plus others) using it right now, with many others coming online soon.

From http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,20 393236%5E16123%5E%5Enbv%5E,00.html/

Westpac bank is rolling out Vista onto 20,000 desktops.

Re:Misleading

[Plutonite]

You're only partially correct. I'm not about to upgrade to Vista unless I absolutely must do so due to hardware/software compatibility - I use windows for convenience, and there is very little that I need to change. Vista will be the new worm/virus target, and XP has matured after years of exploits to a situation where you are reasonably secure with the latest updates. In short, I want peace of mind like many others, and the "hot new interface" is not going to move me very much, no matter how much Microsoft pushes it on us.

Re:Misleading

[saskboy]

I don't even believe Microsoft's numbers. I know very few people who have bought new computers recently, and many who say they are avoiding Vista [and that isn't only the people I've advised against upgrading]. Maybe my region of the country is just not as into new computers as some parts of the world though?

Re:Misleading

[Joe The Dragon]

remember that M$ did use AMD 64 bit code for windows vista x64 so they likely got to do a lot of testing that other Business did not get.

Re:Misleading

[Dan_Bercell]

Yeh.. and it has nothing to do with the fact that MS has 95% of the market share and they havent had a new version in 5-6 years...

Re:Misleading

[Anonymous Coward]

Vista is being deployed at AMD from the top-down, with about 100 users (most of the AMD executives, plus others) using it right now, with many others coming online soon.

So only 19,999,900 more systems to account for (plus many others coming online soon).

I love the smell of astroturf. Mmmmmmmmmm, Nylonilicious(TM).

Re:Misleading

[PopeRatzo]

I agree. I absolutely do not believe Microsoft's numbers. I remember quite clearly the rollout of XP and the major organizations that upgraded pretty quickly, plus the general interest in the enthusiast community. Neither is the case with XP. Maybe a lot of those numbers are like me, who got a copy of Vista Home Premium with a new computer, and after a few hours of frustrated wrestling with it, simply formatted the hard disk and installed my trusty copy of XP Pro SP2. I imagine that since I paid for an OEM copy of Vista, they can count me as a purchaser, although I won't touch it at least until Service Pack 2 AND Microsoft announces they are taking all the DRM out of Vista. Until then, I will not use it or recommend it.

Re:Misleading

[jejones]

>Consumers don't have to rationalize buying Vista. If they're buying a new computer, they don't have a choice.

Well... a week ago, an acquaintance said she was finally upgrading her computer (from one running Windows 98, with 64 Mbytes of RAM!), and wanted some advice, because she'd heard bad things about Vista. She'd heard of Linux, but had bought the line that one had to be a "nerd" to use it, so she was hoping to buy a computer with Windows XP; I didn't try to convince her otherwise. I did tell her that now that Vista has been released for the general public, basically any computer running Windows she buys now will have Vista on it. Based on that, she said a Macintosh was looking better and better, so I expect that's what she'll end up with.

Of course, that's a lousy sample size, but I'm heartened somewhat that an average computer user is leery of moving to Vista.

Re:Misleading

[dexomn]

Yes. Screw the OEMs so they can further pass the savings on to you. Good show.

Re:Misleading

[Anonymous Coward]

Two different discount programs...

Isn't that exactly right? Nobody offers discounts on a product that is selling very well, now, do they?

Re:Misleading

[Teddy Beartuzzi]

And exactly what features would that be? Seriously.

I've been using Vista for a few weeks now, came with my new laptop. There's been a single thing where I've thought "Hey, that's new, and really useful". And that's the search in the start menu. Everything else is just meh, or just a new face on an old item.

The taskbar preview is a perfect example. I move my mouse down to the taskbar to click on a folder, and a little thumbnail appears. A *useless* thumbnail. It doesn't do anything, or provide any more info than the folder icon and it's name did. It's just miscellaneous fluff. Same thing for the flip 3d thing. I don't even use it, just alt-tab the same as I've always done. Oooh, the start menu, that's different, it's now a circle instead of an elongated oval. Woohoo. Except it no longer scrolls in a useful manner. Until I turn off the new appearance, which makes the one useful thing disappear (the search). The sidebar? It's the same old stuff just on the side, instead of down at the bottom in the tray. A couple of new games.

And in exchange for these few new things, I get UAC that harasses me 20 times a day every time I do anything like open a folder or install a program. There's really nothing here, it's the emperors new clothes. The same old XP in a new face to hide it.

Literally, I have *zero* desire to install it on my other computer that came with XP.

Re:Misleading

[nametaken]

I can second that... stressing the "at least".

I'm running one machine on vista business as a test, and it wasn't a new "built for vista" machine, making it a miserable experience all the way around. There are just way too many aggravations with UAC, driver signing, etc. that would make it an absolute nightmare, and we don't even have that many workstations. Have they even fixed the fact that the admin pack doesn't work in vista yet?

I think the numbers probably reflect a lot of uptake on the SA/Vol licensing too, which is much like what you're saying. Lots of people are entitled to Vista, but won't touch it with a ten foot pole.

Re:Misleading

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone verify this?

Re:Misleading

[QuantumG]

Yep, that's why I said they were rationalizing.

Re:Misleading

[Javaman59]

What's more is that the figures suggest that 20 million copies of Vista are currenty being used, rather than having been shipped to OEMs and sitting on shelves.

Correct, and I think the 20 million also includes a few million boxed sets that are sitting on retailers shelves, and are being ignored, and certainly not purchased, by a disinterested public.

Reminds me of how TV programs like Popstars and Idol ship huge volumes of the winners album, so that it goes straight to number 1, and then 6 months later they are being remaindered, or returned to the record company.

Re:Misleading

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice the page you link to ("Windows Now") have the following content, as of march 27, 8:30 GMT:

"Oops something went wrong!"

I think it perfectly undermined your astroturfing...

Re:Misleading

[milo78]

Well, after about 7 years of lurking I've finally become sufficiently enraged by something to post a comment. It was bad enough having to fork out for a copy of XP to replace the enforced copy of Vista on my new HP laptop -- because I *knew* it wasn't going to work with the software I depend upon -- but then to find that this was counted as me voting for a Glorious Vista-based Future is too much! I think this is the cue I needed to dip a toe in Ubuntu waters...

Re:Misleading

[Knuckles]

+2 Informative my ass. Astroturfers in full effect. BOTH links in this posting are dead.

Re:Misleading

[bradavon]

Since when was anyone forced to upgrade? If you look around you can buy a computer without an OS, you can buy an Apple Mac, you can even ask for a full refund of the OS. So yep you're right people are really being forced. As new software comes out that needs Vista, as has happened for XP and even 98 (virtually no software works on 95 anymore) people will upgrade. It's just a new OS not the second coming.

Re:Misleading

[bradavon]

Embarassment? Vista has only been out 2 months that's nothing in the life of an OS. As for business there is no business need to get XP. Windows 2000 is perfectly stable and a viable MS Workstation OS.

Re:Misleading

[Heir Of The Mess]

BOTH links in this posting are dead.

Bugger! Well if you type "westpac vista" into google and hit "I'm feeling lucky" you get the 2nd one. If you type "internal amd memo vista" into google and hit "I'm feeling lucky" you get the first. I was just throwing in some facts refute the grandparent's conjecture that no company is rolling out Vista.

Re:Misleading

[HawkingMattress]

The taskbar preview is a perfect example. I move my mouse down to the taskbar to click on a folder, and a little thumbnail appears. A *useless* thumbnail. It doesn't do anything

I disagree, did you see that it's not just a thumbnail but the actual live window ? (try it with a video...) It can be usefull for those tasks you want to keep an eye on. For example say you're burning a cd and copying some files. With the preview you just need to hover your mouse on the taskbar icon to see how the progress is going, instead of maximizing the window, checking, and reminimize... A little detail yes but vista is full of those little neat things. But i agree about flip3d, they could have make something really more useful if they took the time to.

Re:Misleading

[Maxo-Texas]

The last thing holding me to Windows is Everquest.
And I haven't played it for a few weeks now.
The rest of my software stack I've purposely shifted over to linux/windows software to ease the pain of transition.

Re:Misleading

[a_nonamiss]

I just purchased an Acer laptop, Vista Ready of course, for an employee of my company, and we have a volume license for XP. Of course my first action was to wipe the laptop and install XP, as none of our applications support Vista yet. Well, wouldn't you know, there exist NO drivers for this laptop anywhere on Acer's site. I called tech support to tell them that I want to install XP, and they were like "You want to do what now?" They had apparently never heard of anyone wanting to install XP on a Vista Ready laptop. I tried my best to find drivers for this laptop, but ultimately failed to get a video, sound and a few mainboard drivers. It makes me wonder: Vista was only released a few months ago. Didn't these hardware vendors start designing these components before that? Aren't they concerned with providing support for companies who might not yet be willing to take the leap to Vista? Or is there an unseen hand guiding them towards these actions...

Re:Misleading

[GabboFlabbo]

My Dad's company is switching their OS from Win2k to Vista for ALL their corporate computers and servers. They have 66,000 employees.

I asked him why he's doing this, since after every major release of windows it's been nothing but bugs and security holes for 6+ months. His comments "ya, it'll be buggy and a security risk, but they'll eventually get it fixed."

I also asked who's bright idea this was. Apparently the CTO who's going to be retiring in 5 years.

The numbers for Vista are probably higher than you'd think.

Re:Misleading

[Lumpy]

Yup and I know they are counting my brand new Latitude 131L that will never get Vista installed on it. (waiting for the FC6 install to finish right now) Just because it came with a copy. I even peeled the sticker off (fresh dells can get the sticker off easily without damage.) that I stuck to a tape release strip and will be selling to a friend for $50.00 who has a dell that for some reason wants vista.

Getting record sales because they shove the thing down your throat is not real sales. and No, the dell option without windows is not an option, it costs MORE to get it without Vista as they removed the $295.00 instant rebate when I looked at their open source line of the same hardware configuration.

Re:Misleading

[Z0mb1eman]

Oooh, the start menu, that's different, it's now a circle instead of an elongated oval.

My start menu is still a rectangle, you insensitive clod!

Re:Misleading

[Anonymous Coward]

Remember this is licenses, which means all the licenses given out as free upgrade from dell, ibm etc. Perhaps they should post the number of retail licenses purchased over the counters online NOT including the ones given free with manufacturers.

Re:Misleading

[Overly Critical Guy]

What's more is that the figures suggest that 20 million copies of Vista are currenty being used, rather than having been shipped to OEMs and sitting on shelves. I would suspect that the actual number of Vista licenses in the wild are substantially lower, to the point of embarassment for Microsoft.

Yes, these are license sales to manufacturers, not consumer purchases. Those of you who were following XP's launch may remember that Microsoft did the same thing, only giving out OEM license sales numbers while refusing to divulge actual consumer purchases.

They're doing it again because Vista is a flop. You can't even move/copy files without it freezing up.

Re:Misleading

[drinkypoo]

The top link in a google search for "AMD Vista Deployment" is a document on Microsoft's site providing a case study: Vista and AMD.

"Pushing the boundaries of PC management by using new capabilities of Windows Vista should enable AMD to gain incremental value and lower not only our TCO per PC but also our overall PC budget." Michael Winslett, Desktop Architect, Advanced Micro Devices

I agree that Vista is a big pile of shit and basically all claims about it being wonderful by Microsoft are bullshit. But please, if you're going to talk shit, try to be right.

Re:Misleading

[Talian]

Task Switch Powertoy has provided nearly this same functionality to XP for ages.

Re:Misleading

[uradu]

> It's called (s)elective amnesia. Windows what? XP?! Never heard of it. You must mean Vista. Reminds me a bit of the .NET craze, where a few months after .NET 1.0 went Gold all of a sudden everybody wanted developers with 3 years of C# experience.

Re:Misleading

[Anonymous Coward]

How many people asked for their money back?

Re:Misleading

[Knuckles]

I certainly won't even spend a single second for a google search on this. If I post I check my links and so should have the OP and especially anyone moderating it. Blindly modding up a pro-Vista link is probably astroturfing.\

Anyway, AMD migrating to Vista certainly is not a guideline for the majority of businesses that are not, you know, producers of CPUs and GPUs that are needed by Vista. For one, they AMD is certainly not impartial. Second, I am sure they get a tiny bit of support from MS whenever the cough, something I cannot say for our (not entirely irrelevant) organization. Third, I guess that AMD knows a bit about computers. The leading business consultancy I work for (> 10,000 users) will not migrate for the foreseeable future, and 99% of businesses are in the same boat, AMD migrating or not.

Re:Misleading

[grant420]

You just haven't delved deep enough to find what's new. The Meeting Center (or whatever it's called), the IPv6 support, the much enhanced firewall are just a few I can think of after using Vista for a few weeks that you don't even mention. All you are doing is describing the look & feel changes, which you shouldn't bitch about being not-that-different as that would just lead to confusion amongst XP-users who decide to upgrade to Vista.

Re:Misleading

[drinkypoo]

Anyway, AMD migrating to Vista certainly is not a guideline for the majority of businesses that are not, you know, producers of CPUs and GPUs that are needed by Vista. For one, they AMD is certainly not impartial. Second, I am sure they get a tiny bit of support from MS whenever the cough, something I cannot say for our (not entirely irrelevant) organization.

I agree that this is why AMD is going Vista. I'm sure that they were convinced by the fact that if they do not make Microsoft happy, Microsoft will not make AMD happy - specifically by lagging on support for AMD/ATI products in Vista.

Third, I guess that AMD knows a bit about computers. The leading business consultancy I work for (> 10,000 users) will not migrate for the foreseeable future, and 99% of businesses are in the same boat, AMD migrating or not.

These sentences make it look like AMD knows something about computers, and the company you work for does not.

As such, I am completely confused as to what you were trying to say here.

Could you please clarify what "AMD knows a bit about computers" means in your third point?

Re:Misleading

[PitaBred]

I'd wager to say that AMD is in the business of computers and peripherals, whereas his business just uses computers. Big difference between developing the technology and just having to use it.

Re:Misleading

[PitaBred]

Not only leery of Vista, but actively moving to a competitor. Anything to break MS's stranglehold on the web and networking. I don't give two shits what systems people use, as long as I can communicate with them while using what I want to use, which just isn't possible with the current dictatorial monoculture built on the back of Windows/Internet Explorer/Office.

Re:Misleading

[drinkypoo]

I'd wager to say that AMD is in the business of computers and peripherals, whereas his business just uses computers. Big difference between developing the technology and just having to use it.

That is an irrelevant argument because the whole company does not need to use it in order for products to be made for it. Only those making and testing the products do.

Of course, there is something to be said for the dog food principle, but then, they're not going to make products ONLY for Vista, so it would be a stupid argument to use for converting the entire corporation's desktops to Vista.

Re:Misleading

[davotoula]

Spot on! My wife is getting a new office PC. Their "IT guy" recommended Vista because "it is the latest". When my wife asked whether it would run all of her applications, some of which are bit old, he was not sure. I strongly advised her to go for XP. I don't expect software manufacturers to abandon XP support for a while and she can always upgrade (downgrade?) to Vista later! Tssk, tssk

Re:Misleading

[Ubergrendle]

So she opted for a closed, proprietary OS with poor backwards compatibility bundled with expensive hardware, instead of the closed, expensive, proprietary OS with security holes bundled with cheap hardware? I think this would be the classic definition of a Pyrrhic victory...

Re:Misleading

[Knuckles]

Exactly, thanks.

Re:Misleading

[Knuckles]

PitaBread explained it. We have a good IT that does its best in a very difficult environment, but I will eat my shoe if AMD is not in a better position:

• They definitely know more about computers than we do. They build them. As such they can deal with issues better than we can.
• As I said, if AMD has an issue with Vista, MS will jump to support them. If we have an issue, they don't jump so much
• I am certain that the percentage of knowledgeable users at AMD is higher than at our organization
• I doubt that > 50% of users at AMD are out in the field at any given time, being cut off from easy helpdesk reachability, interacting with unknown IT environments (logging into clients' networks, attaching to random printers at hotels, etc.) "Out in the field" can mean "at a Polish coal mine" and worse

Re:Misleading

[drinkypoo]

They definitely know more about computers than we do. They build them. As such they can deal with issues better than we can. As I said, if AMD has an issue with Vista, MS will jump to support them. If we have an issue, they don't jump so much

The latter issue is more compelling than the former. For one thing, AMD and ATI each undoubtedly had major portions of Windows source code, if not the entire kit and boodle. An individual with more knowledge than everyone at AMD put together would still be fucked sideways without access to the Windows source.

I am certain that the percentage of knowledgeable users at AMD is higher than at our organization

Knowledgeable about what? I used to work for a company that designed computer chips. Most of the users there frankly knew very little about how to actually use their computers beyond what they needed to do their job, just as I don't know shit about designing ICs. I suspect the same is true at AMD.

Even if they are quite broadly knowledgeable, Vista is a new product. It's going to involve a substantial amount of retraining etc. And lots of things simply will not work.

I doubt that > 50% of users at AMD are out in the field at any given time, being cut off from easy helpdesk reachability, interacting with unknown IT environments (logging into clients' networks, attaching to random printers at hotels, etc.) "Out in the field" can mean "at a Polish coal mine" and worse

So? If Vista isn't a good solution for the field, it's not a good solution at the home office; the cost of failure is less, but there is still a cost, and Vista provides little to no benefit to the average user as compared to Windows XP, with the sole exception of the fact that soon software that requires Vista will start coming out. And that's not so much an advantage of Vista as a disadvantage of XP and older Windows versions.

AMD is not in a better position, they are in a less bad position. A transition to Vista at this point is a liability no matter what way you slice it.

Re:Misleading

[Knuckles]

I used to work for a company that designed computer chips. Most of the users there frankly knew very little about how to actually use their computers beyond what they needed to do their job

I don't have first-hand knowledge with them, but I'd guess that "very little" is defined differently for a computer chip designer than it is for a secretary or for a Harvard Business School graduate.

Even if they are quite broadly knowledgeable, Vista is a new product. It's going to involve a substantial amount of retraining etc. And lots of things simply will not work.

I am not sure why you argue with me, I think we agree. I just say that the substantial amount of retraining is, if anything, worse for us than what is needed at AMD. And if things don't work they are in a better position to fix them.

So? If Vista isn't a good solution for the field, it's not a good solution at the home office

We are not discussing home office, but AMD. And if a printer cannot be installed at AMD's location, it is easier to fix than in many cases we have to support.

AMD is not in a better position, they are in a less bad position. A transition to Vista at this point is a liability no matter what way you slice it.

If you rather phrase it as "less bad position", I am ok with it. I am just saying that even if AMD makes the switch now, it does not mean that other companies do the same, and even less that they should, as the OP astroturfer alleged. Go argue with him instead of with me :)

Re:Misleading

[drinkypoo]

If you rather phrase it as "less bad position", I am ok with it. I am just saying that even if AMD makes the switch now, it does not mean that other companies do the same, and even less that they should, as the OP astroturfer alleged. Go argue with him instead of with me :)

Ah, the joys of textual, non-realtime communications.

I never wanted to claim that anyone should go to Vista. NO ONE should go to Vista. If Vista is the answer, it must have been a singularly stupid question.

I only wanted to point out (originally) that it was trivial to verify that AMD is going to Vista... And then the rest of this conversation kind of spontaneously happened :)

Re:Misleading

[Knuckles]

I never wanted to claim that anyone should go to Vista. NO ONE should go to Vista.

Me neither, and I agree :)

Re:Misleading

[jdcope]

I just built a new box. And I bought an OEM copy of XP Home that came with a Vista "Upgrade" coupon. I shredded it. They wanted $79 plus shipping for Vista Premium.

Re:Misleading

[Adambomb]

my trusty copy of XP Pro SP2 Ah relativity, you can make anything worthy of trust =)

Re:Misleading

[Teddy Beartuzzi]

Wow. Folks actually switch windows to see if something is done? I don't think I've done a "click the window, ooh it's not done yet, click the old window" in my life.

If I'm burning a cd, I know how long it takes, so I won't come back to it until I know when it's done. If I'm scanning, I again know how long it takes. Regardless, they'll make a noise when they're done, or the taskbar will flash if something needs attention. If it's a video, then obviously it's paused until I come back to it.

Ok, I can see how some of you could use that. But it seems like impatience to me. You end up wasting time checking if things are done. So this helps you waste less time. Personally, I'd rather keep working, than spend my time checking.

Re:Misleading

[fwarren]

and many who say they are avoiding Vista

My wife is a non techie. Her new laptop came with Vista. She tried it for 2 weeks. After that, it was back to the good ol' days. Linux for day to day stuff and Windows XP for her games.

I think Microsoft is going to find it harder to push Vista on the masses. The average user hates the LUA in Vista, and turning it off leaves you with a computer that runs slower than XP but has that "glass look to it". Hardly a reason to upgrade from XP.

Once again, Microsoft competes against itself.

Re:Misleading

[geekoid]

"...No, the dell option without windows is not an option, it costs MORE to get it without Vista ..."

Incorrect, it is an option you are too cheap to take.
There is a difference.
You did completely forget that you are NOT THE CUSTOMER for MS sales, Dell was.
So it is perfectly valid reasoning that the unit sold to you counts. Espcially since you are ging to violate your contract agreement and resell vista.

Your 'logic' is weak at best. Youa re claiming it is misleading, but you say someone else WILL be using the copy of Vista.

Re:Misleading

[Anonymous Coward]

I recently had to purchase a copy of XP retail (didn't have time to wait for shipping on an OEM key), and when I went to Circuit City and took the empty display box to the register, I was told that they could not sell me XP. They had them, but could not sell them, and that if I wanted a copy of Windows my only option was to buy Vista.

Ditto Target and Best Buy.

I had to wheedle an Office Depot employee to get it.

Re:Misleading

[revengebomber]

Oooh, the start menu, that's different, it's now a circle instead of an elongated oval.

Phhhht! Aero 3D gives me a Rhombic triacontahedron!

Re:Misleading

[Teddy Beartuzzi]

I haven't delved deeper into those things because I *don't need* those things. I'm just your average ordinary user. Well, I'm more than that actually, but I still don't need those things, so Joe Six Pack is almost surely not going to need them either. Which was the entire point.

Meeting Centre? I'm not collaborating with anyone.
IPv6? I just get a plain old IP address from my router. And from the looks of it, that was available for XP anyway.
Firewall? After spending some time with that thing last night, it's sure hard to see it's improved. And the only reason I needed to do that is that Vista has busted most firewalls, and a huge chunk of them haven't yet got themselves working under Vista. This article details some of the madness involved in simply getting one program blocked from calling home. Check out the screen gallery page by page, it's really a hoot. (They never did manage to block it.)

To a huge chunk of the population, all Vista will end up being is a new face. I'm not bitching about the appearance changes, I'm just pointing out that without those, a ton of users wouldn't even know they weren't using XP any more.

sounds about right

[User 956]

MS Says Vista Selling At Twice XP's Pace ... The Associated Press dug deeper, noting that since XP's release the overall PC market has grown by almost a factor of 2, so it would be a surprise if Vista didn't do twice as well

Well, then surprise! There's no surprise!

Re:Market share

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm surprised this was modded "interesting", given that the answer is in the freaking article summary.

Spelling..

[Anonymous Coward]

MS Says Vista Selling At Twice XP's Price

There. Fixed that for you.

Re:Spelling..

[CmdrPorno]

That's what I thought it said at first glance, too... Is there such a thing as selective, wishful dyslexia?

Re:Spelling..

[Anonymous Coward]

> MS Says Vista Selling At Twice XP's Price

Actually it is _not_ selling because it is twice the price.

I note that:

Vista has actually been available (business editions) since late last year.

The '20 million' is really only OEMs, retailers and Vouchers and not actual enduser sales.

Remember 'WFW 3.11' - called Windows for Warehouses.

Re:Spelling..

[physicsnick]

Hardly. I reinstalled XP Pro last week and (of course) failed a genuine check; Microsoft asked me for $300 bucks to pay for a new XP Pro license. This when Vista has already been out for months.

Re:Spelling..

[skeeterbug]

funny! i also noticed that msft has chosen to compare one month of vista to two months of xp. my guess is they know the 2nd month is much slower than the first month, so they thought they'd manipulate the numbers a bit. if vista comes in at 25 million after two months, for example, vista will have don MUCH WORSE than xp, given the market has doubled.

i'm 100% (u/k/x/edu)buntu right now - and i'm liking it. yeah, i use xp at work and some of my older h/w still dual boots into it, but i just don't go there much anymore.

Re:Spelling..

[mwvdlee]

The only reason I haven't switched to Mac before was the price. Now with current Vista pricing, buying a new Mac or buying a new PC with Vista are more equal. I'll probably buy a Mac for my next machine (and run WinXP using Bootcamp or Parallelz; dunno which is better).

The PC market is larger now

[techmuse]

The PC market is considerably larger than it was when XP started shipping, so you would expect more sales. The question is what percentage of the market has purchased a vista upgrade or a new machine with vista compared to the same for XP? Note that nearly all consumer machines are now offered only with Vista. So given the choice between Vista and Vista, people who want a new machine are oddly choosing...Vista.

Re:Quit trolling

[HomelessInLaJolla]

Coming from anyone else it would've been funny.

Huh? Of course they are!

[Runefox]

this year... 96 million consumers will buy a computer.

Of course they are! People are fed up with cleaning spyware off their machines, to the point of buying a new one when the old one crashes. It's only in the very recent past (actually, mostly within XP's lifetime) that spyware's become such a menace, after all.

Re:Huh? Of course they are!

[lcohiomatty86]

there should be more information out there pertaining to how to do accurate data backups and hard drive imaging, where a customer can easily revert their hard drive back to a "clean" state within minutes if somehting goes wrong, and being able to restore their my documents folder as well, making getting a clean fast computer easy again, instead of having to give microsoft MORE MONEY for a CRAPPY PRODUCT!

Re:Huh? Of course they are!

[jellomizer]

Well a lot of people don't even know they have spyware they just think it is running slow. So when their computer starts running slow it must mean that it is time for a new system. Not a reinstall of the OS and about a half a day of running updates.

Re:Huh? Of course they are!

[tepples]

Well a lot of people don't even know they have spyware they just think it is running slow. So when their computer starts running slow it must mean that it is time for a new system. Not a reinstall of the OS and about a half a day of running updates. New PCs tend not to come with an operating system that can be reinstalled so easily. They come with a "restore" CD that puts back all the spyware that came with the machine.

Re:Huh? Of course they are!

[westlake]

Of course they are! People are fed up with cleaning spyware off their machines, to the point of buying a new one when the old one crashes.

This has become the new Slashdot mantra.

But I have to tell that in this upscale suburb the last Windows PC I saw at the curb for pick-up was a crapped-out Packard Bell 486.

Re:Huh? Of course they are!

[HomelessInLaJolla]

Considering the price of a new PC, compared with the average expendable income of the average segment of the population from which the media derives its content for this topic, are you surprised?

Re:Huh? Of course they are!

[Anonymous Coward]

My neighbor told me he has thown out 3 computers in the last year because of spyware.
It costs $250 to have it repaired or $300 for a new one.
People that don't know how to fix it, or prevent it find themselves in this situation.

I gave him a couple linux live CDs and told him he can stop thowing them away. The least he can do is his kids browse the web with them when windows is trashed.

Re:Huh? Of course they are!

[Runefox]

$250 to repair it? Geez, wherever you live, PC techs are making a fortune. We charge $38.00+tax to clear spyware.

I'd like to see how they arrive at that number.

[Chas]

I'm willing to bet that they're counting all the upgrade coupons as "sales" as well.

Like how they count their MS CRM software.

Basically anyone who has an Action Pack is counted as an MS CRM user.

Re:I'd like to see how they arrive at that number.

[Pikoro]

Um... didn't the article say 20 million copies _SHIPPED_, not sold?

Re:I'd like to see how they arrive at that number.

[Chas]

A couple I've seen say "shipped". Some say "sold".

And again, how are the numbers arrived at for "shipped"?

10 licenses with every Action Pack x How many Action Packs?

Re:I'd like to see how they arrive at that number.

[nametaken]

To be fair, most of us are... for about 30 minutes.

Well Long Upgrade Cycle.

[jellomizer]

Well we Had 95, 98 (in 1995, 1998 respectfully) 2000 / ME in 1999,2000 or so. Then XP in 2001, Then Vista in 2007. Well I would expect that people would be wanting a new version. People with 2000 or ME are at a point now they really need an upgrade. With 95 and 98 no longer supported people may be looking for a new version now.

When XP was released People had Windows 2000 and to a lesser extent ME that is good enough. So no need to upgrade. But with the long time for upgrades people with XP when they got a system in 2001 are now due for an upgrade.

Re:Well Long Upgrade Cycle.

[kextyn]

Wait a minute. Did you just say Me was "good enough"?! Are you nuts?

XP was a pretty big improvement over what was available prior to it. Most home users were running 98 or Me. The jump from 98/Me to XP was much greater than XP to Vista in my mind.

Re:Well Long Upgrade Cycle.

[Anonymous Coward]

But with the long time for upgrades people with XP when they got a system in 2001 are now due for an upgrade.
NO, we are NOT!

Well, to be fair, I guess we are due for one, we're just still waiting for microsoft to release it. XP is a step back as far as I'm concerned, and vista is doubly so. (I am not an idiot and I do not want an OS that assumes I am. Win2k has enough of that crap in it as it is.)

My next laptop will be a mac, and I find that very depressing. Unless I get lucky and linux comes preinstalled (and thus with full hardware support) on laptops once 2009 rolls around.

Re:Well Long Upgrade Cycle.

[turing_m]

Maybe the jump is the same magnitude, but at least the jump from 98/ME to XP was in the positive direction.

Re:Well Long Upgrade Cycle.

[Anonymous Coward]

It was a long upgrade cycle but.... the difference this time is that the majority of computers being sold with vista are built on cheapo boards with onboard everything. I can see that the Microsoft hardware cartel has geared up to put companies like Creative and M-Audio out of business. Lets face it if you buy a computer for 500 bucks it will most likely only have only one extra pci slot and a super cheap AC97 chip onboard. If the computer comes with an onboard 8x agp then the board will most likely have no extra agp slot, but might have a single pci express...just so you will have to only use a pciX video and not an agp. From what I have seen the push is on to peddle cheapo vista loaded crap to the masses.

Things were slightly different when XP came out, the average board had 2-3 pci slots and an extra agp even if it had onboard audio, video and net. In short the newer PC are cheaper for a reason ...the boards they come with are garbage. What really irqs me is the fact that even the more expensive boards do not even have 24-96 recording capable AC97 audio chips like a Mac! Even the cheapest Mac mini is 24-96 capable out of the box. The real reason that high definition audio recording is useless on a stock pc is that Microsoft with the urging of the recording industry is making the home PC into vacuum cleaner based Video player with shitty low end audio specs. Looking at all the specs for 99% of all the new Asus boards not one of them comes with a high end RealTek AC97 or Analogue Devices/Via chipset. Even the most expensive boards have onboard cheapo crap.

Re:Well Long Upgrade Cycle.

[dw604]

I just went out and spent $250 (CDN) on the Windows XP Professional CD. I looked at Vista and wanted it, if only to be "ahead of the curve", but was afraid of compatibility issues - the XP upgrade promised to work flawlessly and I would not have to reinstall my applications. Well upgrading failed (no doubt due to the 6 yrs of crap I had un/installed) and after much mucking around with the install process, .sys files, service disabling, and downloadable boot disks moved my entire former drive into a subfolder and did a clean install. I restored my application data and away I went - no more crap!

I was awake for 32 hours that day (my work couldn't stay down for long). Later I realized my whole reason for upgrading (reported IE7 javascript error) was due to a simple typo... So I could have used Win 2000 until what, 2010 was it? Oh well, XP is nice too. Win2k doesn't have things like MSN Live (with multiple account memory), etc. My friend even claims MSN audio connections are better (Another M$ trick?). I'll get Vista in 7 years when support for XP pro expires or, I suppose, when I buy a new computer.

Re:Well Long Upgrade Cycle.

[Technician]

People with 2000 or ME are at a point now they really need an upgrade. With 95 and 98 no longer supported people may be looking for a new version now.

And I'm really glad someone showed me Ubuntu. 2 Windows 98 machines and 1 Windows 2000 machine are now running Ubuntu. It's a major upgrade. No more hunting for drivers to make a thumb drive work. Power Point presentations display properly. There is lots of neat desktop toys. DVD support is better. CD ripping and burning is better. Photo editing and video editing is easy without buying any new software. The SIP phone which will also work with MS Netmeeting is a nice touch. The chat program which can use several services without an ad window is great.

Since I've found the new upgrade, I've been sharing it and showing it off. The new 3d desktop toys are lots of fun. Some people assumed I was running Vista, and wanted to see the new OS, so I let them.. Lots of fun.

In short, It's the applications stupid. A general lack of malware goes a long way.

Re:Well Long Upgrade Cycle.

[Anonymous Coward]

I couldn't agree more with Technician, Ubuntu is all I've been using for the last year and a half now. There is no need to use Windows anymore, Ubuntu does everything I need/want and more! It's truly an amazing (and very stable) OS. In fact it's easier to use than Windows.

I'm now in the process of upgrading my non-tech savy friends and family to Ubuntu, since my tech savy friends are already upgrading to Ubuntu themselves ;-)

----
Haha ... I just noticed Slashdot labels me an "anonymous coward" since I don't want yet ANOTHER username/password - that's cute.

Re:Well Long Upgrade Cycle.

[idugcoal]

Creative will probably continue to destroy itself by writing crap drivers to control their crap hardware. Seriously, have you ever opened up an Audigy and seen the cheap-ass components? Those capacitors are made by whom?
  However, M-Audio is not going anywhere, after their acquisition by Avid. I'm no fan of Avid, Digidesign or Pro Tools (actually, quite the opposite, but I'll spare you the rest of the rant), but M-Audio's gear has always been faithful to me, considering its reasonable price. Unless Digi makes a mess of them like they make a mess of everything they do, I'd say M-Audio will be with us for a while.

Re:Well Long Upgrade Cycle.

[Technician]

There is no need to use Windows anymore, Ubuntu does everything I need/want and more! It's truly an amazing (and very stable) OS. In fact it's easier to use than Windows.

Unfortunately I have some hardware where the application is Windows only. It isn't worth trying to get working in WINE for as little as I use it. There just isn't a replacement for the map uploading program for my portable GPS nav unit and a couple of my other toys. It is why one machine is still dual boot (Windows 98 SE not alowed online).

Since VMware player is now free, I may finaly ditch dual boot and run Windows 98 in a VMware window just for those applications.

Re:Well Long Upgrade Cycle.

[richlv]

i hope you have taken time to complain to the vendor ;)

even if that's an old device, even if it is obscure - that is the only way to get a sane support in future...

Re:Well Long Upgrade Cycle.

[jellomizer]

Well I don't think that will ever happen. WINDOWS NEXT VERSION! NOW WITH LESS FEATURES!!!! people want more out of every version. They have faster computers and they normally want to take advantage of the extra power. Macs wont remedy your problem, while I prefer them over windows myself every version gets more features and if you use all the features it gets more and more boggy. Spotlight took a good hit on my PowerBook, in 10.4. I know you want to sound like a good geek an tout the values of saving CPU. But in reality most of the time if it is not being waisted on eye-candy the computer will just be idle. And still with all the eye-candy it is still idle. Oddly enough most OS's if the program is doing heavy calculation the eye-candy gets less priority.

Re:Well Long Upgrade Cycle.

[bint]

Same here. I installed Ubuntu for my parents when their XP machine crashed (and they couldn't find the disk) and they were happy with it except for one thing - their canon printer lacked drivers. Too bad about that, I prefered installing Ubuntu to reinstalling XP which was a mess.

I mean, still using SATA drivers floppy!?

Re:Well Long Upgrade Cycle.

[Anonymous Coward]

I ran ME on a work computer well into 2006. A MBR issue led me into the hands of FC4 (on the old ME box). I had very few problems with ME and the biggest issue was MSFT messing up ActiveX which messed up my scanning software. That was a MSFT/patent issue not an ME thing. Why was I the lucky one? Who knows - could be the same reason viruses, spyware, and trojans stay far, far away.

Re:Well Long Upgrade Cycle.

[Technician]

even if that's an old device, even if it is obscure - that is the only way to get a sane support in future.

I visited the sane website. They now support the scanner. I was in a hurry and had another scanner at hand. I plugged it in and it worked and didn't bother looking further. It was simpler to tag one as plug and play on linux than to update 3 installations to support the hardware. Due to desk space, the scanner lives in a drawer and is used by any one of the PC's as needed.

Re:Well Long Upgrade Cycle.

[geekoid]

What about 2000? I'm still using it, as are many people I know.

I would buy vista if...

[Lord Bitman]

if it came with XP, so I could run all the software I want to use.

Re:I would buy vista if...

[Taimat]

If you buy Vista Business, or Ultimate - you have downgrade rights to install XP Pro... This is what I am doing at my office. Every new PC that comes in with Vista - wiped and XP installed. Call up MS licensing, and they generate a key for you when you tell them you are downgrading. Perfectly legal and in the eula. This way, when we finally HAVE to go to vista, the licenses are ready and waiting, since the PCs came with them.

Re:I would buy vista if...

[initialE]

To add to that, many PCs and notebooks sold at the end of '06 came with Vista upgrade coupons. That would expire end march. Basically your computer would come with XP and you fork over the cost of shipping when Vista is made available. Even if you weren't planning to buy Vista, it wouldn't hurt to purchase the media and sit on it. And it is effectively downgrade rights on Vista Home too.

MS has to show good sales figures to shareholders

[EmbeddedJanitor]

Anybody that didn't buy a Vista license would, most likely, have bought an XP license if Vista dis not exist. In other words, Vista has not really increased MS revenues.

The big sell is to MS shareholders. Somehow MS must convince the shareholders that the $5bn spent on Vista is going to be a worthwhile investment.

A more interesting question...

[rtechie]

How many copies of Vista have sold at retail? I have seen relatively few problems with OEM installs of Vista on new desktops, but lots of little compatibility problems upgrading a system from XP to Vista (even if doing a clean install). I'd say that isn't roughly comparable to the 98 to 2000 transition.

In other news...

[HungWeiLo]

The 2007 Toyota Camry is outselling the 2001 Toyota Camry. Film at 11.

Re:In other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but is the 2007 Camry selling at the same rate as the 2001 Camry was in 2001? That's the crux of this article, not current XP sales.

Re:In other news...

[AusIV]

No, other news would be 2007 Toyota Camry is selling better than the 2001 Toyota Camry did. The point here is that Vista is selling better than XP did when it came out. That's an interesting spin though, since sales are 15% higher in a market that has nearly doubled in size.

Microsoft's spokesman

[andy314159pi]

The Microsoft corporation has been kind enough to employ Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf as their spokesman after his gig in Iraq fell through.

well

[mastershake_phd]

If Windows sales have doubled because the PC market has doubled. Should Linux and Mac sales have also doubled?

Re:well

[Anonymous Coward]

That might be the dumbest thing I've read in a long time.
The short answer is NO.
The logic that led to you think that Mac & Linux sales should have doubled due to doubling PC market will likely inhibit you from understanding this...but here it goes anyway.
The only (legitimate) way to get windows is to buy it - so sales == (legitimate) distribution.
Linux, on the other hand is freely available, download from anywhere -- there are no sales figures!! ...or were you thinking of support contracts?

Disclaimer: I use Linux. I would be a Mac fanboy - in fact I want to be - except that I can't afford one, or ideally three.

Re:well

[mastershake_phd]

That might be the dumbest thing I've read in a long time. The short answer is NO. The logic that led to you think that Mac & Linux sales should have doubled due to doubling PC market will likely inhibit you from understanding this...but here it goes anyway. The only (legitimate) way to get windows is to buy it - so sales == (legitimate) distribution. Linux, on the other hand is freely available, download from anywhere -- there are no sales figures!! ...or were you thinking of support contracts? Disclaimer: I use Linux. I would be a Mac fanboy - in fact I want to be - except that I can't afford one, or ideally three.

Well I guess I should have said "Should Linux and Mac use have also doubled?" Not all Linux is freely available, see RedHat Enterprise Linux.

Re:well

[Anonymous Coward]

Regardless. The answer is still no.
PCs don't come pre-installed with Linux.
PCs come pre-installed with Windows.

Every new PC sold is a sale for Windows.
Every copy of Linux installed on a new PC is still a sale for Windows.

That said, if the PC market doubles in volume, meaning there are 100% more NEW PCs out there, all of which count as Windows sales, the number of windows sales raises in paralell with the amount of new PCs on the market.

As much as the Linux community wants to believe it, has the amount of Linux installs really doubled as well? I wouldn't think so.

Re:well

[Technician]

Should Linux and Mac sales have also doubled?

Um they have, but in the last couple months, not over 6 years ago sales figures..

Mac sales... From the financual page..
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=AAPL&annual

Income Sept 30 2006 19,315,000 All numbers in thousands.
Income Sept 24 2005 13,931,000
Income Sept 25 2004 8,279,000

In two years from 2004 to 2006 the income went from 8 Billion to 19 Billion. It's not all iPod and iTunes sales.

Picking just one Lunux distro which is popular..
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=2276320

Since there isn't any real sales figures, I thought I would go to see if the online chatter is increasing. The Ubuntu forum is growing rapidly. "We register over 14,000 new accounts each month"

If you want a pretty graph of Linux installed base from 2000-2006, take a look here.
http://linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/reports/6065/1/ screenshot3524/

A casual glance seems to indicate more than a doubling of the 2000 installed base figure.

Here is what a market analist has to say;
http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS2014 7206

"IDC offers the following recommendations for services providers:

Open source will become business as usual in two to three years, so act today and create direct open source services offerings and embed open source in your solutions where you can"

and

"The study also reveals that open source is moving up on the investment agenda of companies worldwide, as services providers (mostly services arms of technology companies) have formalized support, training, and certification services to encourage adoption of open source (principally Linux) on their products. As open source software goes mainstream, IDC finds that services vendors must further develop open source capabilities in order to meet their clients' needs and attract new customers."

Re:well

[blackest_k]

As much as the Linux community wants to believe it, has the amount of Linux installs really doubled as well? I wouldn't think so. I think it is possible 18 months ago i knew one person who ran linux, Now amongst computer geek friends it is close to 100% mostly ubuntu. Ordinary users not so much.

when you talk about the amount of linux installs doubling your not doubling a huge number so doubling is entirely possible. what may be more significant is the people who are converting are not average windows users, they are tending to be the people ordinary windows users turn to... I don't know about you but I positively enjoy solving issues with ubuntu, I am sick to death of windows malware and virus's.

Linux is fun for geeks windows is a chore. For ordinary users linux needs more work (or they do) maybe 3 or 4 years ordinary pc users will see ubuntu as a perfect solution for them, maybe sooner as their "windows support" takes longer and longer to respond to yet another request to fix thier windows pc

Re:well

[textureglitch]

Linux sale? What's a Linux sale? If you're talking about Linux adoption, then yes that number has exploded recently. Mostly thanks to the crappiness of Vista, the increased user-friendliness of Ubuntu, and all the planets being aligned.

Re:well

[Anonymous Coward]

No, because the Mac Market stayed roughly the same size with the same growth during the exponential growth of the PC market. If you will remember during this time news sources kept going on about how Mac's market share was dwindling and obviously Apple will be out of business in 6 months. As usual with news organizations they didn't understand what was going on.

If a market is growing quickly it doesn't mean that a single companies market share will grow. Even if your market share dwindles your sales could be up.

Re:well

[ceeam]

I believe Mac sales much more than doubled, and as for Linux... sales?!

Re:well

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple's income include their ipod sales. Even the mac sales have ipod dollars in them. When Apple's income is over 80% ipod related, macs take a back seat.

nice trolling though

I wonder...

[Wicked Zen]

Do these numbers include "free upgrades" to Vista? I bought a PC late last year, which shipped with XP Media Center, but included a free upgrade to Vista upon release. I didn't actually buy Vista (I'm not planning to upgrade any time soon, even) but maybe my license is counted among those "sold."

Re:I wonder...

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's your answer. Took me a while to find it, but it answers your insightful question perfectly: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/03/27/001120 7
You'll find it right near the top of the page:
"Also, Microsoft's 20 million figure includes the backlog of upgrade coupons bundled with XP computers sold since last October."

20 million - 2

[NullProg]

Two brand new Dell Dimension Workstations ($1200 each) came into our office last week. One remimaged to XP (SP2) because office user said Vista (Pro) was slower than crap. The other was regulated to the lab for dual-boot Redhat/SuSE client testing. Vista wiped clean off it.

What Microsofts Marketing Machine states and what users do are two different things.

Enjoy,

Re:20 million - 2

[loftwyr]

Add to that all of the upgrade coupons gleefully thrown away on receipt plus those who were scrubbed and replaced with Linux like my laptop.

Hopefully they've sold enough to pay for Bill Gates retirement party.

Re:20 million - 2

[eebra82]

What Microsofts Marketing Machine states and what users do are two different things.

Not really. The announcement Microsoft sent out regards to sales, not the amount of users compared to XP to a given date.

While I'm sure a lot of people remove Vista, a lot of people did when they first got hold of XP too.

Re:20 million - 2

[karlto]

Microsoft doesn't care whether you keep it or not, they still got their cut of that transaction.

Re:20 million - 2

[Strudelkugel]

One remimaged to XP (SP2) because office user said Vista (Pro) was slower than crap.

Interesting. I installed Vista Business on box with a 1.5Ghz P4 and 768M RAM. The MB is about six years old. It runs just fine. If your user says Vista is slow on a $1200 new Dell, something must be wrong with the hardware, or maybe the user just decided he or she didn't like it for some reason.

Re:20 million - 2

[sponga]

Vista(Pro)?
You mean Vista Premium

Also why would you guys get the premium version of Vista if you work at an office, last I check the premium version only added Windows Media Center and the DVD authoring tools unless you are a media company; unless they don't give you the choice of the Vista Business version or Home.

To each their own I guess.
I recently knew about 20 students/buddies who got fresh new laptops to show up in class and they all continue to doodle away like they did on XP and still turn in all their papers with Vista working perfectly for them like XP.
Laptops are selling like hotcakes around here in Southern California and the nation, even my local Fry's has not really had massive returns of Vista laptops from talking to the workers there and they have one of the easiest return policies ever.

Re:20 million - 2

[edwardpickman]

It's reminding me of the AOL trial disk carpet bombing. I guess by the same standard AOL could claim 25 billion AOL customers.

Re:20 million - 2

[westlake]

Add to that all of the upgrade coupons gleefully thrown away on receipt plus those who were scrubbed and replaced with Linux like my laptop.

give me a break.

in a market that is 95% Windows the guy who does his Christmas shopping at Dell doesn't toss the coupon worth a $150 software upgrade for his new Vista-rated system.

Re:20 million - 2

[yagu]

One remimaged to XP (SP2) because office user said Vista (Pro) was slower than crap. The other was regulated to the lab for dual-boot Redhat/SuSE client testing.

Shoulda relegated the one to the lab for dual-boot.

Re:20 million - 2

[Heir Of The Mess]

Add to that all of the upgrade coupons gleefully thrown away on receipt plus those who were scrubbed and replaced with Linux like my laptop.

So that's -3 then.

Re:20 million - 2

[moochfish]

I have a similar story:

My friend's parents bought a brand new computer. At first they liked the new graphics. But a day later, my friend had to go over and put XP on it because the machine was just *too slow*. It was funny because the first day, my friend was explains how "Vista is kinda cool," and the next day, he says, "Vista is retarded. I'm sticking with XP as long as I can."

As a side note, it took him most of two days to wipe the machine. I didn't ask for details, but apparently Vista is not as cut-and-dry as XP in terms of removing.

The industry isn't the same as it was in 2001. Bloat will be Microsoft's down fall this time around.

Re:20 million - 2

[nine-times]

Poor Microsoft. Lots of people bought new PCs that came with Vista and aren't using it. Poor, poor Microsoft. All that money without having even provided anyone with anything of value. And you know what really sucks for them? A whole lot of those people who bought their computer with Vista and installed XP instead? They'll probably end up buying another copy of Vista in a couple years because they don't realize or remember that they have the right to a license of Vista.

Poor, poor Microsoft.

Re:20 million - 2

[shoolz]

Instead of gleefully throwing them away, could you please send them to me so I can sell them on eBay?

Thanks.

Re:20 million - 2

[Anonymous Coward]

As a side note, it took him most of two days to wipe the machine.

I'm wondering why they didn't buy a Mac, it's designed for people who can't figure out basic things.

And YES, I've moved from Vista to XP and back to Vista several times during beta testing, XP & Vista setup can remove partitions. (Hint: read what it says on the screen)

Re:20 million - 2

[Jeff DeMaagd]

A sale is a sale, whether or not the product is used isn't the concern here. Microsoft got their money and that's probably enough for them.

Re:20 million - 2

[asninn]

That's a very strange argument, to say the least - you're trying to use your anecdotal story to prove that his anectodal story can't be true. A perfect example of a non sequitur if I've ever seen one.

Here's a hint: anecdotal evidence is always just that - anecdotal. While it can be interesting, it doesn't prove any general statements.

Therefore, you failed twice: you not only failed to understand that you can't prove the GP wrong by saying "my anecdotal evidence doesn't match yours, therefore yours must be wrong", you also failed to understand that the GP wasn't even trying to make any general claims about anything; unlike you, HE simply relayed an interesting anecdote because it was, well, an interesting anecdote.

Re:20 million - 2

[shutdown -p now]

It's all about RAM. After some experimenting, I've found that Vista runs fine even on 1Ghz CPUs (quite likely even slower ones, just didn't have one to check) as long as you have more than 512Mb RAM.

Re:20 million - 2

[spyrochaete]

My dad's doing the same thing. He just ordered a couple of desktops and a laptop for work and Dell provided no alternative to Vista - no XP, no Linux, no clean hard drive. His IT department will be wiping all the disks and installing XP the moment they come through the door.

He'll also be very pleased when I forward a Digg article (can I say the D word on /.?) to him recanting the easy time a German fellow had in acquiring a refund when he told their support department that he'd declined the EULA and promptly formatted his drive. Dell was very forthcoming and earnest and tendered him a refund of (the equivalent of) nearly $120 USD a mere 2 days after his initial call.

Re:20 million - 2

[drinkypoo]

While I'm sure a lot of people remove Vista, a lot of people did when they first got hold of XP too.

I think more people dual-booted XP and 98 than removed XP and installed 98 or even 2000. I'd say that Windows 2000 and Windows XP are the only Microsoft operating systems that have ever launched and immediately been worth using, besides maybe MS-DOS, and that only because of its simplicity and the fact that they didn't actually write the whole thing over there.

XP was SUCH a gigantic improvement over 98 that (although the plural of anecdote is not data) I didn't know ANYONE who had an XP license who didn't choose it over Windows 98.

Re:20 million - 2

[Strudelkugel]

anecdotal evidence is always just that - anecdotal

I discuss my hardware, the poster describes his hardware. I describe my definitive experience, he states a user experience w/o any detailed description, and concludes that the problem is Vista. If Vista was as bad a many posters here claim, my experience would no doubt be vastly different than it is, and certainly we would hear more about such problems given the number of units that have shipped so far. In fact, I have noticed Vista comments on /. are generally negative and anecdotal, which is disappointing since no valuable information is exchanged as a result. The file copy post today might be the exception, as some details are provided.

In general, however, I have found most /. Vista stories to be negative FUD.

Re:MS has to show good sales figures to shareholde

[rackhamh]

I'm not an expert on OS adoption, but I imagine it working out something like this:

1) Microsoft pushes Vista onto all new machines sold, creating an install base
2) Developers start creating applications targeted at the install base. Some of these applications are Vista-only. Some of these applications are also created by Microsoft themselves, such as new versions of Office, etc.
3) Motivated by a desire to run the Vista-only applications, users upgrade from XP to Vista.

It seems that simply replacing XP with Vista in new PCs will eventually generate demand for upgrades. It hasn't really happened yet, but I'd expect it to go that way before long. Just because people aren't rushing out to buy Vista doesn't mean it won't be successful in the long run.

Been shopping for a PC recently...

[backbyter]

I've been looking to buy a desktop with an AMD Athlon X2 5000+ and 2 gigs or RAM. It seems I can buy one with Vista much cheaper than I can (still) find one with XP Pro.

Re:Been shopping for a PC recently...

[Shados]

Careful to compare apples with apples though. Most computers loaded with Vista are loaded with Vista Home Premium: Vista Business is the equivalent of Pro, and is the price Win XP Pro was. Home Premium is cheaper.

Re:Been shopping for a PC recently...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. Be careful how you compare the different levels of Windows. The only proper choice for XP is Pro (possibly media center if you want that for a HTPC). The only proper choice (and comparable to XP Pro) is Vista Business. Calculate the price difference again and you will start to see why XP is ultimately the cheaper option, and will be the only cost effect option until at least 2013 when the support runs out. (and by then DX10 will be ported over in one way shape or form to XP so gaming for this so called "Vista Only" will be non-existant)

On the other hand, Ubuntu 7.04 is due out within the month and IS a more then viable alternative to Joe Sixpack. Not to mention CrossOver/Wine are doing pretty good with their respective emulation. (I think the only thing that was pulled from 7.04 was the streamlined Active Directory integration, which is what I was actually wanting the most out of feisty)

Or on the third breast (Total Recall anyone? ;) ), by the time Vista is actually ready for business (post SP1), ReactOS (might be) another viable alternative. Now, ReactOS has had a very slow development progression, but in the last few months alone I have seen great strides in making it a "direct" Windows replacement (the audit put a large hamper on forward development). I am not holding my breath on the claim of Vista only functionality however.

Re:Been shopping for a PC recently...

[Anonymous Coward]

It seems I can buy one with Vista much cheaper than I can (still) find one with XP Pro.

Vista? Which version? I, for one, can't make any sense at all out of all the different versions of Vista, let alone which one might be equivalent to XP Pro!

Re:Been shopping for a PC recently...

[nametaken]

As someone stated earlier, buy a machine with Vista Business on it, then you can call MS licensing and get a key from them for XP Pro, legally. You'll need media though. They might even get you a media kit for XP Pro... don't know that for sure though.

Tag: Bullshit

[ewhac]

The telling comment is here:

20 million figure includes the backlog of upgrade coupons bundled with XP computers sold since last October.

So Microsoft isn't quoting figures for sales spanning two months, but rather for more than five months, including at least three months of "pre-sales" in the form of coupons which likely may never be redeemed. If the coupon is never redeemed, then it can't be counted as a Vista sale, since Vista was never installed.

More FUD from the masters. Which frankly doesn't surprise me. Without apps irrevocably tied to Vista, there's no impetus to "upgrade," and people will stay with XP. Microsoft is clearly desperate to make Vista appear to have a larger installed base than it does so that ISVs will commit to it.

Schwab

Re:Tag: Bullshit

[Anonymous Coward]

More FUD from the masters.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Re:Tag: Bullshit

[ewhac]

I do not think what I think it means is what you think I think it means.

I actually considered momentarily before using the term. Microsoft is trying to make Vista appear more popular than it is. In other words, they are trying to spread uncertainty and doubt about Vista's installed base. And they are also trying to spread fear in the ISVs that they may be "betting the wrong way" by holding back on Vista support.

So, yes, I think this announcement qualifies as FUD.

Schwab

Re:Tag: Bullshit

[Anonymous Coward]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and _doubt

Fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD) is a sales or marketing strategy of disseminating negative (and vague) information on a competitor's product. This press release does nothing to disparage any competitor's product. What you're referring to is simply misinformation and fabricated market pressure.

Re:Tag: Bullshit

[Anonymous Coward]

So Microsoft isn't quoting figures for sales spanning two months, but rather for more than five months, including at least three months of "pre-sales" in the form of coupons which likely may never be redeemed.

Good point.

If the coupon is never redeemed, then it can't be counted as a Vista sale, since Vista was never installed.

Nah, it makes sense to count it as a sale as long as they got paid for it. The end-user got XP and Vista, and you could argue that Vista was free, or you could argue that XP was free, or some split. I think it is fair to count it as a Vista sale, even if it never gets installed.

Re:Tag: Bullshit

[Not_Wiggins]

Also, they may be inflating the licensing numbers like they did with the release of XP.

Don't know if anyone recalls, but at the time XP came out, all licensing was switched to XP, no matter what version of OS you purchased.

So, at that time, if one purchased a copy of Windows 2000, what they got was a license for XP and a key for 2000. In this way, when MS reports numbers of *licenses* sold, they can include those people purchasing copies of any MS OS, no matter if it was 95, 98, etc.

I haven't read for sure that this is the case for Vista, but I wouldn't be surprised; why change a "winning formula?" 8/

$79 more for XP with a new system, VISTA = FREE

[Proudrooster]

Of course they are selling more. If you want XP with a new system from one of the PC manufacturers like DELL, it will cost you $79 for XP or you can have VISTA for FREE!

I don't know anyone in my circle that has purchased VISTA. Personally, I am holding off for about (3) years until all the DRM and hardware issues are all worked out. I can't see any compelling reason to move to VISTA and if I do buy a new system with it pre-loaded for FREE, I will move that system to dual boot Linux/XP.

Forcing vendors to stock up on Vista?

[walterbyrd]

I have read that msft is forcing vendors to buy lots of licenses in advance.

Exactly!

[Anonymous Coward]

> In summary: computer sales up; consumers forced to adopt Vista. Microsoft chuckles gleefully.

[RANT SIZE="VERY LONG"]
Well, at least one of the people I know was actually waiting for Vista to come out (against my advice... but his old computer was Windows ME, so he may be a Microsoft masochist). Of course, he promptly had me out there attempting to fix it because, although it was brand new, it didn't work very well. A few things were just a matter of moving things around: the start menu search is nice, mostly because everything in it was shuffled around for the sake of change--MS Word's "that logo in the upper left is your new File menu" was the stupidest and most confusing change, though. Given that the logo used to be a menu with options like restore, minimize, and close it's not the first place you'd expect to find things like save or open; I finally found it only by process of elimination after looking through most of the other tabs.

And a helpful bit of advice: do NOT use Vista if you want to use a TV tuner. They don't seem to work. DRM? Drivers? I'm not totally sure, but I am convinced that it's an utter waste of time to talk with Bangalore about it (all of Dell's Vista support seems to be in India, the reps transfer you to India immediately, we were unable to get a rep who could speak intelligible English, but worked with them reinstalling useless drivers for a couple of hours, anyhow).

Thus far, I know of no one who has gotten a TV tuner working properly under Vista, so I'm inclined to blame the DRM given that these are brand new Dells and the recordings seem to have the audio downsampled to painful-to-listen-to bitrates (it sounded like they were talking over SSB radio, if that helps any, maybe it just puts the audio through a tight bandpass filter?). Whatever it was doing, we were told a few weeks ago that they'd "contact us if they found a solution." I'm not holding my breath.

Oh, and if you're wondering where the obligatory UAC Allow/Cancel joke is, they're not funny after you've used the stupid thing for 10 minutes. They really, really piss you off in no time flat.

Free bit of advice, if anyone asks you to fix their Vista system: echo y | format c:
Trust me, you're doing them a favor. It's that painful to use.
[/RANT]

- A Very, Very Bitter Techie

Re:Exactly!

[Whiteox]

FYI
Current Dell machines that use Sigmatel sound chips have a known problem that India knows but Dell doesn't, namely that the Sigmatel driver is not fully implemented by Dell.
There are workarounds by installing 3rd party Sigmatel drivers. I think LG have them as they also use the same chip.

Yes, pre-installed.

[General Wesc]

Sure it's selling like hotcakes, pre-installed. People buy new computers and then pay me to uninstall Vista and replace it with XP. I wasn't working in the industry when XP came out, but I don't think this was occurring so much back then. I'm sure someone here hasbeen paid to downgrade to 98, but was this the norm in the early days of XP?

Re:Yes, pre-installed.

[Shados]

Oh hell yes it was. Actualy, I bet you it was -worse-. Win2k and WinXP didn't play DOS games, and at the time XP came out, a LOT of games still required 98. I had to do it soooooooooooooo many times, it wasn't funny @.@

Re:Yes, pre-installed.

[I'm Don Giovanni]

"People buy new computers and then pay me to uninstall Vista and replace it with XP."

Sounds like BS.
Just where are these people getting these many many XP licenses for you to replace Vista with?

Re:Yes, pre-installed.

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, you charge the person for XP. You pop in your slipstreamed SP2 disk and install. You then have to call microsoft, say yes twice, punch in the long number (quicker than reading it), this is the only computer it's installed on, I reformatted my hard drive, it's a retail version I bought at ###, then punch in the number they read back... Then spend 8 hours updating. Then reboot, update the updates, reboot, update the update to the updates (Can you say .NET Service Pack 1 Update 1 Update to the Update 1?) You then try your best to LOCK them down (Because vista sucks, or the XP they were running was hosed with spy/adware and they are idiots anyway) I create limited accounts and 'force' them to use them for day to day shit. Change the hosts file to block every known 'bad' site so even if they are looking into getting themselves infested. I refuse to help them unless they get a linksys router as a hardware firewall since once XP gets a 'little cold' it aims to shut the crap XP software firewall off and this will infest you quicker than shit attracts flies on a hot summer day, and this also allows me NOT to use the crap "spyware" software the ISP's give you (Ohh we're just monitoring your connection for any problems....Yeah OK, say Verizon "IP Insight"). Shut off UPnP in the router and set up a dyndns account for them (So I can find them if they have problems) and 'take them over' to fix whatever.... Slap in spybot for them,ect .ect.....

That's where are those 'licenses' go.... Am I in violation of the EULA? Umm, their computers had Windows on it at one point so what diff does it make.

XP... Make an operating system for idiots and only idiots will use it.

I've been recently been switching people over to Kubuntu (my fav) which is alot easier. I can cookie cut an install with all the kool things and vmware player all set up. Use a USB drive to move it over. I also have a cookie cutter vmware XP image with all the updates and Office, ect.... It runs on any computer without tossing up re-activation. Then I keep beryl on the side for those with compat hardware. I show then all the cool things they can do and their eyes light up...... Then when they pop that question of "Their favorite Windows Program they can't live without" I show them XP in a window in linux and they almost shit themselves.... Of course I then show them the linux equiv of their favorite program if possible. Checking back in on them a few months later they don't even use the XP..... They usually make contact back to me with more work because their friends saw their setup and now they want it... I feel like Johnny Appleseed. With this method I can usually get the install in less than an hour and a various amount of tweak time. Alot faster than screwing with Windows and taking activation crap with some Indian dude that I can't understand.

I'm looking for an XP computer

[EmbeddedJanitor]

I am looking to buy a MS-based computer for development (I normally use Linux). I'm looking for an XP computer, not a Vista one. The reason: The Microsoft software I want to run does not run on Vista, only on XP!

Re:I'm looking for an XP computer

[Dan_Bercell]

not hard to get. XP will be available on most business computers till the end of summer if not till the end of the year.

Re:I'm looking for an XP computer

[gdrumm0356]

As mentioned in other posts, you may still be able to find them at retailers, keeping in mind that like MCE, you have to use newsgroups or internet posts for support since M$ will not accept bug reports. Retail vendors like HP and Dell do their own support because they are the OEM. Several Internet vendors sell packaged and custom systems with your choice of OS. www.directron.com has provide me with great service for the last 5/6 years, and still offers XP Pro SP2 as an OS. You could also buy a disk, CPU upgrade, new MB, or any of those to upgrade an existing system and add the XP OEM for $139 (Current price). Very good company, and lots of good FAQs/Info for builders and general users. They are available through email and phone for questions and support.
There are several other vendors who offer the same, and like directron, will add additional value for a price. Building is an option, with the advantage of part warranties at OEM/Retail, which range from 1yr to 3yrs or more depending on the manufacturer and part. Intel offers a 3 yr CPU warranty for retail boxed CPUs, which I have, also a lifetime on my crutial memory. My disks vary from 1 yr to 5 years depending on the model and vendor at the time I purchased them (15-16). Personally, I've had more problems with my HP and Dell than all of my home-built systems combined, with possibly the DRM crap forced-loaded on my XP!

Want to know how they are doing this??

[tgatliff]

I guarantee you that this was planned, and they are stuffing their product chain to provide these numbers. Basically for anyone who does not understand the process, it simply means that when they stock vendors, they are counting these items as "sold". This is a very common tactic, and was exactly what they did with the Zune... Meaning they have a history of using this manipulation tactic...

Seeing as they did not say they were NOT doing this, I can assure you that they are. Dont believe me? Well, lets see when their quarterly report comes out... I will bet almost anything that it will be uneventful... :-)

Re:Want to know how they are doing this??

[shoolz]

I agree with your sentiment, but I assure you that the message-makers at MS are not going to go to so much trouble as to actually stuff the supply-chain with unused copies of Vista so they can make their outlandish claims. We are geeks... we work with facts... marketers are marketers... they work with perceived facts.

A VP of Marketing I used to work with used to routinely falsify the number of users of our software in order to appear more attractive to potential customers and potential investors.

A sit down in a year-end sales & marketing meeting would typically sound like this:

[VP of Marketing] : Ok, we've got 48,000 paid users right now, but if we look at how many potential renewals we have in the queue right now, we are looking at over 63,000 users. And if you consider the fact that each of those users is eligible for our referral program, then we are talking about over 89,000 potential users. Our sales goals for this year indicate that we are going to get an additional 20,000 users, so we can go forward and tell people that we currently have 109,000 users. Wait... 109,000 sounds too low... make that 119,000.

I feel like carrying on, but I think my point is made.

Re:Want to know how they are doing this??

[Jeff DeMaagd]

Is there a source for this?

20 million - 2 + 2

[Hektor_Troy]

You were obviously dumb enough not to get a refund on Vista (or exchange its license for XP), so to the bean counters, they've made two sales on you. And it gets better, because they will save on the support costs for your Redhat machine.

How many were cancelled, returned, unfulfilled?

[Foofoobar]

Of those people ordering the upgrade, alot are still waiting for it and don't actually have their upgrade yet. Does that really count as a sale? Also, I have to wonder how many returns have actually been subtracted from those numbers and pre-sales figures to pump up those numbers... especially when they are having to discount VISTA to get people to buy it when driver support isn't there, software support isn't there and VISTA still has mysterious stalls, crashes and slow downs.

Microsoft's Marketing Engine

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course they have recorded large numbers of sales for Vista. If you attempt to order license packs from any reseller, they no longer offer XP. You are forced to purchase the Vista license for approximately 80$ more. Of course, you can still legally run XP with that license, but you are not given the choice of XP vs. Vista. It's a clever scheme to artificially inflate their numbers.

Try it - call up CDW/PC Connection/ etc and attempt to buy a 50 pack of XP for your business. They get to record Vista sales whether you actually intend to run it or not.

good times. I heart those guys. Thanks for adding even more to my TCO.

Re:Microsoft's Marketing Engine

[ericrost]

Hate to tell you guys this, but this is OEM's screwing you, not M$. My dad's a reseller, and the independent resellers can still sell 2000 licenses if need be. The OEM's are pocketing more cash by forcing the Vista upgrade. They DO have the option. Don't believe the FUD.

MS sucks, don't worry about my opinion on that one, but its the large OEM's (who by the way forced my dad out of a successful business supporting small to medium businesses who didn't want an in house IT department, now he works as a one-man show out of his basement, but he had to put 5 or 6 good people out of work to make it viable)who are screwing us.

Why Upgrade when you can take the Souped-Up XP?

[Rachel Lucid]

My Dad's new 'Vista-Ready' machine came with XP, and we're KEEPING it on XP precisely because this this thing is a graphical dream on it. It's got an nVidia card, sweet processors, ability to support two 22" widescreen monitors... all for under $1000, because it's 'merely' an XP machine, albeit a Vista-capable one.

If this is their idea of 'Vista-Capable', why would I want to go to an operating system where these awesome specs are merely ADEQUATE?

Re:Why Upgrade when you can take the Souped-Up XP?

[donaldm]

My nephew was in the market for a laptop and I offered him mine at a very good price with 9 months warranty however he did not want Fedora Core 6 (fully updated) even though it would do nearly (could have difficulty playing some Microsoft Games) everything he wanted so I put back the Win XP pro OS. I was not overly surprised since most people (even my relatives) don't know anything but Microsoft so I was not going to argue and this is the reason why I don't get a refund on any MS licenses. Anyway I will use the Fedora Core updates on my new laptop which I hope to get soon.

I made enquiries with regard getting the Vista upgrade (just in case) and while the upgrade CD was free the post and packaging was AU$29. This would not be too bad but the laptop has an AMD dual core 64 bit processor and the MS Vista Business OS was 32 bit, which meant I would have to get the 32 bit OS and then apply to Microsoft for the 64 bit one and most likely pay post and packaging (a possible double hit). What is more annoying is the fact the registered mailing of the laptop cost AU$17. To me it seems that the vendors (including Microsoft) are ripping you off big time. Needless to say I am going to suggest to my nephew that he forgets about MS Vista (he already has heard some horror stories from friends) unless he upgrades his laptop ram from 512MB to at least 1GB and even then if he wants MS Vista he will have to pay for it. I don't think he is going to be disappointed with Win XP Pro though and he will have the recovery DVD's in case his hard disk fails and he has to replace it (type "R" and wait about one hour and forty minutes).

Re:Why Upgrade when you can take the Souped-Up XP?

[danpsmith]

My Dad's new 'Vista-Ready' machine came with XP, and we're KEEPING it on XP precisely because this this thing is a graphical dream on it. It's got an nVidia card, sweet processors, ability to support two 22" widescreen monitors... all for under $1000, because it's 'merely' an XP machine, albeit a Vista-capable one. If this is their idea of 'Vista-Capable', why would I want to go to an operating system where these awesome specs are merely ADEQUATE?

That's what I never understood. I was running XP Media Center and my computer was an absolute dream to run. I installed Vista and it began to run slow as molasses, I guess mostly due to the video card. But I have a computer with 2gb of ram, a GeForce 6600GT, 4200+ X2 processor and a 320gb HDD. If my computer runs Vista just okay for my liking, why would anyone who is satisfied with their computer now want to tax their resources to run the bloated new, non-existant features? Also, if my computer only runs "okay" I can't imagine what half of these "vista ready" PCs with lesser specs will run like. What the hell are the pluses to even upgrading from media center? Because I certainly haven't found any.

C'mon now

[The Bungi]

(Just a coincidence the announcement came out a day after this community's speculation, surely.)

I realize that "this community" like any other has a need for self-worth, but was this petty, self-important comment necessary at all?

If 96 million PCs are going to be sold in 2007, I'm pretty sure 95 million of them (or thereabouts) will have Vista installed. It's called inertia (if nothing else), and it's very difficult to stop. Ina few years, maybe. Not today though.

Re:C'mon now

[Macthorpe]

It wasn't just that comment for me - the entire summary was insultingly patronising.

Don't worry about interpreting this story, everyone - your helpful editors have already told you exactly what to think, so you can save your brains for later.

And?

[no-body]

doesn't change that Vista sucks!

I haven't tweaked it, and I refuse to, voluntarily - so that's mostly out of the box:

• Up error in file browser to move one directory level up is missing. Only previous arrow seems to work.
• Accessing network shares takes ages, if they come up at all - probably needs to read every file encountered on the way to display it's content on mouseover.
• Opening muliple tabs in IE _forces_ you to open another window, if it comes from another domain = counterproductive to tabbing.
• Apparently still no desktop pager for multiple desktops (virtual dimension is obligatory to get anything done).
• Attaches gazillion of hidden attributes to files so they still think they are on my desktop even if they are on a network share.
• Defragging a drive tells you it can take hours and has not progress bar.
• Not even starting about the admin permission crap - that's deeply abusive!

I hate having to work this monster!

Re:And?

[The MAZZTer]

• Use the breadcrumb bar (IE the address bar). Click on the folder name you want to go to, usually the one to the left of the current one. It's more useful than just a simple up button.
• Doesn't for me... you might want to look at your network settings or the settings of the remote computer. Make sure that it's isn't slow in XP or Linux either!
• Not for me, check the Internet Options dialog carefully. My only problem is every time I enter a new URL, it opens it in a NEW tab. What if I want it in the current tab? Too bad.
• There are dozens of third-party tools to do this, and some are Vista-compatible. MS simply doesn't consider it a feature they should implement, but there's nothing preventing you from looking for a third-party solution. Granted MS knows their own OS inside and out thus an official one would be better quality, but still there are plenty of choices, an adequate one must exist.
• It's called NTFS, and some of these attributes, such as file access permissions, are quite useful. There are copy options for stripping attributes on file copy or move (though you must use robocopy on the command line, which beats drag and drop for copy speed any day). I have no clue what your problem is here but it probably isn't related to attributes on files...
• Defragging a NTFS drive is done automatically while your computer idles. It has been since NT or 2000. There is no reason to really run a manual defrag tool anymore unless you're preparing to shrink or move a partition. Which the built-in tool isn't really good for anymore anyways.
• It is annoying, but it is also disable-able if you think you can do without it. After a few tweaks--modifiying the All Users Start Menu to full control for Users, turning off the hidden desktop for UAC prompts, giving my specific user account full control access to all files everywhere--it is quite bearable now for me.

My personal annoyances are mostly due to slowness of games and program incompatibilities.

While big corporates like Shell....

[jkrise]

have just started migrating their NT4.0 servers to Win2K.... thousands of them. One of my nephews is doing the troublesome mailbox migration, sitting in Bangalore.

I think MS counts corporate adoption through their so-called "Enterprise Service Agreements" as fresh sales... unless Corporates decide to junk all their existing hardware and invest in huge bloated pigs, Vista will not tak off. The barriers for Linux in the enterprise are crumbling day by day....

I say Linux adoption is happening at much more than twice the pace compared to the XP launch. And the pace is increasing day by day.

Re:While big corporates like Shell....

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny, I'm at ExxonMobil and they just moved to XP last year.

That's about 100k desktops.

I've also heard...

[Anonymous Coward]

...that they're offering $1200 for any copy you can find on store shelves.

Misread:

[313373_bot]

MS Says Vista Selling At Twice XP's Price

Of course that is not true, but Windows surely feels more expensive (but not necessarily a better value) each new version. I know people will point out that each new version includes more "free" stuff - browser, media player, cd-burning, DRM infection... - and also that hardware is proportionally cheaper nowadays, so the so called Windows tax is a bigger chunk of your new PC's price. What I would really like to see is a good economic analysis taking into account the factors above, inflation, OEM price vs. consumer price, etc, and answering once and for all, how much should Windows really cost? I do feel it is a ripoff but, how much?

Bundling Vista with ALL new PCs is ridiculous

[GFree]

Not all new PCs are capable of running Vista with anything even remotely close to decent performance.

A couple of weeks ago I got my mum a fairly low-end notebook (1.73GHz, 512MB RAM, 40GB HD). Since she's not exactly much of a power user and only wanted to browse the web, extract pics from her camera and occasionally check her email, her needs were easy to satisfy with a cheaper computer. Only problem was, this notebook (like EVERY SINGLE ONE in the store) was pre-installed with Vista. I figured, hey, if they're running Vista on a brand-new PC then surely the manufacturer had chosen a decent configuration to ensure decent performance. Damn I was so naive.

It was slow to boot, slow to shutdown/hibernate, slow to run programs on, full of useless pre-installed crap (e.g. Norton with 30-day subscription). After Vista did some weird shit that caused this new PC to hang with massive non-stop disk accessing, I decided to blow Vista entirely away and stick an old copy of XP with Service Pack 2 on instead. Now, the system is faster to start, faster to shutdown/hibernate, faster to launch software, it has only the software it needs with no crap lying around after an uninstall, much more responsive, plus I freed about 8 GB of a hidden recovery partition. All in all, it was a win for us with absolutely no disadvantages and a shitload of positives. In the future I might even be tempted to install Ubuntu instead, but I won't push my luck just yet. :)

This shouldn't be particularly surprising I suppose, but I mention it because I was totally shocked how quickly and ruthlessly the manufacturers were in totally abandoning a perfectly-working OS like XP, and sticking Vista as their default setup on hardware that shouldn't have been running it to begin with. It really astounded me just how useful the system was... *without* Vista.

Re:Bundling Vista with ALL new PCs is ridiculous

[jocknerd]

You must not like your mom. Why didn't you just get her a MacBook? Show her some love.

Re:Bundling Vista with ALL new PCs is ridiculous

[Anonymous Coward]

Not to knock you or anything, but this is the same story I hear with EVERY upgrade of Windows. I heard it when people went from Win3.1 to Win95, then 98, then ME, and XP. Win2k seems to be the only one people liked at first use.

We'll all get forced into Vista and eventually it'll be good (after a service pack or 2...)

Re:Bundling Vista with ALL new PCs is ridiculous

[c.r.o.c.o]

This shouldn't be particularly surprising I suppose, but I mention it because I was totally shocked how quickly and ruthlessly the manufacturers were in totally abandoning a perfectly-working OS like XP, and sticking Vista as their default setup on hardware that shouldn't have been running it to begin with. It really astounded me just how useful the system was... *without* Vista

I wouldn't be that quick in blaming the manufacturers. One reason is that they need to be competitive, and shipping a 6 year old OS when everybody else is shipping Vista would be suicide. It doesn't matter that XP performs better and is more stable, or that more software works on it. When a customer walks into a store what do you think most will ask for?

But Microsoft is the main reason. Once Vista shipped, they stopped selling XP to the OEMs. So even if a manufacturer wanted to keep XP on their system, they couldn't.

Re:Bundling Vista with ALL new PCs is ridiculous

[GFree]

When a customer walks into a store what do you think most will ask for?

If there there for a laptop, they'll ask for a laptop. I'd like to think people care more about the laptop itself than what OS is running on it. I could be wrong; it'd be nice to have the choice however.

But Microsoft is the main reason. Once Vista shipped, they stopped selling XP to the OEMs. So even if a manufacturer wanted to keep XP on their system, they couldn't.

Makes sense I suppose. Doncha just love the way MS does business?

Re:Bundling Vista with ALL new PCs is ridiculous

[Teddy Beartuzzi]

I checked it out, I really did. My brother has been crowing Mac for years, so when it came time for a new laptop, it was at least on the list.

The lack of a decent screen size at the low end really hurts. I was looking at a $1200 CDN Dell, or a $2200 Macbook Pro to get the same 15.4 screen. At the same price, the Macbook delivered 37% the hard drive space (60 vs 160 gigs), 512 megs instead of 2 gigs, and a 13 inch screen instead of 15.4.

So it pretty much turned into an instant pass. No way I'm going to spend at least $1000, maybe as high as $2000 to get roughly an equivalent machine.

Re:Bundling Vista with ALL new PCs is ridiculous

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm.. you think those problems you were experiencing have more to do with the "useless pre-installed crap" and less to do with the OS you were running?

Re:Bundling Vista with ALL new PCs is ridiculous

[Anonymous Coward]

Once Vista shipped, they stopped selling XP to the OEMs.

I searched the HP site, and you can still purchase a computer with Windows XP, but they only list it with their business-class PCs. I'm sure if you really wanted to, you could have HP put Windows XP on your computer if you preferred to purchase one of "their home/home" office computers.

Re:Bundling Vista with ALL new PCs is ridiculous

[Cro Magnon]

I wouldn't be that quick in blaming the manufacturers. One reason is that they need to be competitive, and shipping a 6 year old OS when everybody else is shipping Vista would be suicide. It doesn't matter that XP performs better and is more stable, or that more software works on it. When a customer walks into a store what do you think most will ask for?

Personally, I'd ask for the laptop that was faster than a snail running through molasses. The average non-tech customer might not know that their brand new underpowered craptop was slow because it was too wimpy for Vista, but they would know that it WAS slow.

My GF's sister recently asked me about a craptop that she was thinking about getting. IIRC, it had 512M RAM with Vista, and she heard that Vista would run with that. I warned her that that was the bare minimum for Vista, that it would run like crap, and expressed my opinion that any store that loaded Vista on such a machine should be shot.

Re:Bundling Vista with ALL new PCs is ridiculous

[Rachel Lucid]

Every New OS consumes about half the resources of the old one. The difference this time around is that Vista is not necessarily an improvement over XP enough to justify the extra gobbling.

So, yeah, anything that runs Vista should be 'that much better off' running XP, because unless and until new apps come around that take advantage of Vista enough, there's no reason to make the leap.

Re:Bundling Vista with ALL new PCs is ridiculous

[Rachel Lucid]

Er, typo - Every OLD OS consumes half the resources that a NEW OS needs.

Sorry!

Re:MS has to show good sales figures to shareholde

[CastrTroy]

The point is, is that they could have just continued to sell XP for the next 5 years, and not wasted 5 billion on the development of Vista. They would still be selling just as many computers, and they would have a much easier time on maintenance because a lot of the bugs have been worked out of XP.

Of course because you can't hardly buy XP!

[Anonymous Coward]

So as a Microsoft partner I couldn't sell XP starting in December. By January the big box retail places like Offce Depot took XP off the shelves. If you wanted to buy a new laptop retail the only choice was HP and Toshiba. Sony and everyone else pulled the XP machines. Online retailers are the only places to get XP now.

It's mighty inconvenient actually.

yeah, but at what cost?

[itsmilesdavis]

How many of those new licenses came from the sale of a new computer? People buy a new dell/hp/etc. computer and why wouldn't they spend the extra $$ dollars to upgrade to a newer, and therefore, 'better' OS. One that will last longer than an outdated model?

Umm...

[Viceroy Potatohead]

This really seems like a fine example of Chocolate Rations are Up... (more to the point: see chocorat.)

Okay, since XP sold 17M in the first two months, I'll assume (maybe not accurately) that the Jan sales were roughly 8M.

FROM TFA:

Silver estimates PC makers sold between 12 million and 15 million PCs with Windows XP Home Edition over the holidays -- a significant chunk of the 20 million total, depending on how many included Vista coupons.

While Microsoft wouldn't say how many Vista upgrades were ordered in that time frame, Dell Inc. spokesman Bob Kaufman said about two-thirds of its holiday PC shoppers registered for the upgrade.

Assuming that estimate is remotely accurate, take the most optimistic number (we don't know what the sales before the holiday season were, but to be especially fair, I'll assume 0): 12M Jan sales of Vista.

So, since the market was roughly half the size in 2001, this translates, in equal market size, to Vista selling only three-quarters as well in Jan as XP did six years ago (less actually, since there are many more PCs in homes available to upgrade (2x,3x,4x... as many???)).

It's sad to think

[th3rmite]

It's sad to think that I'm included in one of thosee numbers even though my copy of Vista will never be installed. The upgrade came with a Toshiba notebook I bought just to wipe of Media Center and install Ubuntu. With the newest version of Flash for *nix (yes, sad to say my killer app was Flash) I have absolutely no reason to ever touch a MS OS again. Anyone want to buy a Vista Upgrade?

Re:It's sad to think

[asayuu]

agreed

Re:MS has to show good sales figures to shareholde

[rackhamh]

Yes, but the people currently using XP wouldn't ever upgrade. They also couldn't sell all their enterprise applications that will inevitably based on Vista. Microsoft's business is far broader than just Windows, but Windows provides leverage for many of their other products. Sales for one means sales for the other.

In Related News...

[craznar]

Scientists Create Humans That Are 15 Percent Sheep

Re:In Related News...

[Vexorian]

hmmm. I think you meant Scientists Create Humans that are only 85% percent sheep

My VISTA capable desktop runs Linux/Gnome/Beryl

[earthforce_1]

And the eye candy utterly blows Vista or the Mac OSX out of the water! My stepson has a Vista laptop and he was most impressed by the translucent desktop cube with 3D windows. It isn't just pretty, it is quite practical as well, as you can actually see what is happening on the other desktops at a glance. The price was certainly right, and there is DRM or restrictive EULAs to boot!

sales hype of course.

[3seas]

Vista sales are clearly not doing so well.

But its no supprise that the MS marking is trying to generate a bandwagon trend.

Seriously, with more and more large government organization picking up linux and other things advancing with linux, there is a market loss for MS. Apple moved with the flow to go with intel based CPUs and a change in its OS at the core towards a unix base.

MS days are numbered and they know it. But they don't really know how to deal with it as their business methodology that made MS successful is now not working and they are to big and had worked to hard for their reputation to change it.

Today Linux is plenty capable of doing most of what most consumers want. And the drive is heading towards business.
Its really a matter of key applications being made available on linux or mac.

Hate it more!

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate it more.

See, Virtualized Registry. Any small application that edits registry taking into effect failures when run in non-Admin accounts, (eg. open HKEY_LOCAL_COMPUTER/Software/). But with great virtualization, LOCAL_COMPUTER/Software/ key will open for writing under unprivileged user! But it is not a real key so you are fsked.

Adding a manifest to the .exe (what a great idea with manifests!) doesn't seem to fix it either, even though MSDN states otherwise.

And cygwin doesn't work at all for the similar reasons (virtualized file system!! FSCK!!! FSCK**100**100!!)

And even the great Microsoft Visual Studio 2005 DOES NOT work properly either and not recommended to use it under Vista! MS recommends it only be run with elevated privileges, if at all!!!!

See, I hate it more. SO much more! So much in fact that now I'm going to be using QEMU+KVM in Linux to run all versions of Windows, even Vista. I'll only keep a native copy of Vista installed to test user interfaces.

Vista is just currently unusable for development.

What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

[hacker]

Can it open ODF, Lotus, WordPerfect, etc. formats natively within its own OS or office applications?

No

Does it support writing to PDF natively?

No

Can it natively play all of my media audio and video formats, including FLAC, Ogg Vorbis, Theora and others?

No

Does it support onboard IM clients using standards-compliant protocols (Jabber? irc? Others?)

No

Can I use freely available tools to build software on it, and do those tools come with the OS itself?

No

Can I read multiple filesystems at the same time on multiple different external and internal media? Linux, Solaris, Mac OS X and other filesystems?

No

Can I mount NFS shares to other non-Vista resources with existing, included applications/tools?

No

Remind me again what Vista does that my Linux box can't? Oh wait... purty jellybean graphics and melted-crayon menus and icons. Right.

No thanks, Linux does more, on less resources, at less cost, and is more extensible, secure and updates are MUCH easier to manage.. oh, and I KNOW what's running under the covers, and if I don't, I can go look and see for myself.

Re:What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

[craznar]

"Remind me again what Vista does that my Linux box can't?"

Well, I can't speak for Vista, but Windows XP runs on my box without me having to know how to use VI, GCC, Make, Yum, C, C++ and write down IRQs, ports, numbers from the inside of my computer first.

Having said that - and being able to do that, Linux does indeed have a place in my home/business :)

Linux will not be a desktop OS for the masses, until ... well ... never.

Waiting for the OSX release which will natively support Win32 ... then we are rockin'

Re:What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

[Yosho]

Well, I can't speak for Vista, but Windows XP runs on my box without me having to know how to use VI, GCC, Make, Yum, C, C++ and write down IRQs, ports, numbers from the inside of my computer first.

Uh, you can also use Linux without needing to know how to use those things. In fact, out of the programs you've listed, the only one I'm aware of that's present in a default Ubuntu install is Vi. (and even then, only a minimal version of Vim) I can't even recall the last time I needed to know the IRQ number for anything.

Out of curiosity, how much of your hardware does Windows XP recognize and use perfectly on a fresh install?

Re:What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

[craznar]

"Uh, you can also use Linux without needing to know how to use those things"

Well lets see - I had to:
1. Compile my LAN card driver
2. VI my X11Config settings to get my monitor to work properly
3. Manually RPM remove some packages in a circular version loop
4. Yum update my Printer stuff
5. Manually set up my network cards using vi /etc/sysconfig/networking

All this because:
1. I have a combo printer/fax/scanner
2. On board lan
3. Dual DVD monitors of differing resolutions

So - no, none of the machines I've used linux on in the last 5 years have ever been install and use.

80% of the universe wants install and use... Linux doesn't provide that.

Re:What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

[Anonymous Coward]

For one slightly important thing, it can (or will soon be able to after the industry catches up) run mainstream software that is available to the average user. Can Linux do that? No. Keep in mind that not everybody does all that bullshit that you listed. Most people like to play games and other mainstream shit on their computer. They have no fukin clue what a pdf is, or a what irc is. FLAC...Ogg...Vorbis...uhhh.... what? Build software? Are you fucking kidding me? How many folks can or care to do that? Multiple file systems? Who the hell needs that? 99% of the people will never encounter anything but FAT or NTFS anyway. You are just jealous that Bill Gates has the ability to generate tremendous amounts of wealth and you're a bed wetting liberal who wants to see him brought down to your level. Microsoft is NOT going anywhere until the day that Dell, Gateway, HP and the rest decide to stop forcing it upon the consumer.

Re:What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, I haven't had to compile a LAN driver.. well, ever. I did it once though on RH 5.2 before I found out which module I needed to load way back before PNP actually worked properly. I've been on Debian/Linux for a while now and I haven't had to do what you're describing in years. Out of curiosity, what on-board NIC chipset do you have? Also, the nVidia drivers let me configure displays with independent resolutions. What graphics card do you have? Oh, and you don't need to learn Vi. Use nano instead. There's Vi for Windows too. It's not mandatory to use that to edit your text files there either. It's funny though. The same arguments apply on both sides. On Windows - I had to: 1. Install my a. LAN card driver b. Video card driver c. Motherboard chipset driver d. On-board audio driver 2. Reinstall the video card drivers multiple times to actually get it to stop locking up my PC 3. Manually edit the registry to get rid of some software that failed to uninstall, reinstall the Windows installer, etc. 4. Install and update my Printer stuff (not really sure what your point about yum update was... Windows update?) Edit the registry because the f'n printer/fax/scanner drivers caused Word to lock up when using the open file dialog. 5. Edit the registry when the group policies wouldn't load because the Gb NIC wouldn't negotiate quickly enough. It's just a matter of doing what you're familiar with. I wouldn't recommend doing what you or I have done in either Windows or Linux to average users. One thing that I like about installing Linux is that over the past several years (for me at least) is that it's been install, update, reboot. With Windows (unless I make a custom CD pre-loaded with drivers and patches first), it's install Windows, install drivers & reboot, install updates & reboot, install more updates & reboot, install software & reboot, install updates for software & reboot. Oh, and 80% wants it pre-installed. They don't want to install it. If they did, I wouldn't have a job.

Re:What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

[Yosho]

In other words, it basically sounds like you're using a distribution that has poor hardware detection and package management.

You also ignored my last question -- are you sure you never had to install drivers for that onboard NIC in Windows? How about video drivers? Did you have to configure those drivers to use both monitors properly after they were installed? How about printer/scanner/copier drivers?

Besides that, the discussion is going off topic. First, normal users never install their own operating systems; they come pre-installed, so installation issues are moot. Second, even if installing an operating system takes some technical knowledge, that doesn't mean you need the same knowledge in order to use it, which is what this thread was originally about.

Re:What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

[craznar]

"In other words, it basically sounds like you're using a distribution that has poor hardware detection and package management."

Yes... of course I am, I said I was using Linux didn't I.

"are you sure you never had to install drivers for that onboard NIC in Windows? "

Yes... insert CD, press 'YES' ... driver worked.

The simple fact is, that the average person doesn't want Linux, because Linux is not for average people.

If (like Big Brother TV Reality), Linux was made for the average person, then Linux would be Windows.

Like it or lump it, the stuff that makes Linux great is also the stuff that makes it (like Firefly the TV show) open only to a small market.

Re:What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

[AJWM]

So - no, none of the machines I've used linux on in the last 5 years have ever been install and use.

Well, geez, stop messing around with Gentoo and get something like Suse or Ubuntu.

I haven't had to do any of the crap you mention since about 1997, and I've done dozens of different setups, from old Dell and Compaq desktops to white boxes to servers. (Okay, the servers I had to make some manual changes for interface bonding for NIC failover, not exactly something your average user worries about.)

Re:What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why the fuck do newbies try to install shit like Gentoo or Slackware, and then blame Linux for being too difficult?

Quit fucking trolling. None of that is necessary on a user-friendly distribution; you can even set up dual-monitors on an NVidia card without even cracking open a console, let alone compiling anything. If you still have to compile anything on Ubuntu (hell, if you even need to open a console), THEN you can complain.

Re:What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

[Technician]

run mainstream software that is available to the average user.... Can Linux do that? No.

Mainstream software like MS Office? Runs in WINE.
http://www.pclinuxonline.com/wiki/InstallingOffice Wine

World of Warcraft?
run mainstream software that is available to the average user.

Or even running Windows XP and applications that run on XP?
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=183209

Re:What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

[Anonymous Coward]

you are a bloody bafoon.that's the point of plugins.
including everything in the distro is IDIOTIC.that's why most linux distros are IDIOTIC flawed and have security flaws.2 much software for one person to fix alone.
MONKEY.
you think they're gonna support stuff that their competition makes.
BAFOON.
As for the rest of the things you wannabe dork.NOBODY ACTUALLY NEEDS THAT.Microsofts target is 99% of users not the 1% of dorks you're refering 2.

Re:What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

[Anonymous Coward]

First, normal users never install their own operating systems; they come pre-installed, so installation issues are moot.

It is interesting how the earlier very commonly accepted mantra around here about how most Windows users reinstalled Windows all the time (because they had to) has changed to the complete opposite being the most frequently claimed truth.

Re:What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

[KiloByte]

Remind me again what Vista does that my Linux box can't? Oh wait... purty jellybean graphics and melted-crayon menus and icons. Right.

Uhm, Beryl and co? And even many regular non-XCOMPOSITE Gnome/KDE themes are capable of pwning Vista eyecandy-wise.

Except, you see, the transparency on Beryl is actually useful. For example, try a translucent gnome-terminal -- text's foreground will be fully opaque, with just the empty areas translucent. On Windows, both have the same alpha, making the text hard to read if you want to see anything behind the window (like, a reference sheet/etc).

And if you want Vista melted-crayon theme... LinSta anyone?

Re:What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

[Ash-Fox]

Yes... insert CD, press 'YES' ... driver worked.

On a old Acer laptop: Gigabit ethernet card didn't work on a XP SP2 install, driver only worked upto service pack 1... Searched for driver updates, found none. Inserted Kubuntu live cd -- all the hardware worked immediately no problems in Linux.

These problems go either way. They aren't unique to Linux or Windows.

Re:What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

[miro f]

until l7.04 you needed to open a console and manually edit xorg.conf in order to set up nvidia/ati graphics cards. (the new restricted driver manager should fix that). However, it often doesn't detect resolutions properly and a manual edit is needed anyway.

still you need to open a console and manually edit /etc/fstab in order to re-configure mount points (and allow for read/write access to ntfs drives.

Also, for some reason, nvidia-xconfig isn't installed in the menus and terminal is the only way to access them.

I don't understand why there isn't a gui to do either of these (well, xorg 7.3 should FINALLY fix the damn xorg issues, but where's our gui mount point editor? it surely can't be too hard to add this.

Having said that, install openSUSE and you'll never have to drop to a console, YaST is fantastic (although slow)

Re:What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

[Yosho]

Yes... of course I am, I said I was using Linux didn't I.

Ha ha! Funny. It sounds like you're using Red Hat in particular, which has a reputation for poor support for newer hardware -- as recent as about a year ago, for example, I know first-hand that their Enterprise distribution simply did not officially support firewire -- as well as package manager dependency hell. Seriously. Try something else.

If (like Big Brother TV Reality), Linux was made for the average person, then Linux would be Windows.

Ok, I give up. I'm amazed at how you keep brushing aside the topic at hand with hyperbole and you keep getting modded up for it.

Re:What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

[ursuspacificus]

I'm not entirely sure what hardware you're running on... you have DVD Monitors?

I administer around a hundred Linux boxen (desktops, servers and VMs) professionally and have ten at home. Install-and-go is not a problem in at least as healthy a percentage as Microsoft's desktop market share.

Compiling drivers... well, yes... these are the occasional lengths we have to go to because hardware vendors can often be prickish, at least you CAN do that.

For instance, I have a stubborn machine with a RocketRaid 2220 card. The vendor does provide kernel-module sources, which compile, but seeing the disks is proving challenging. I mention this only to demonstrate that I'm not so giddy about Linux as to say there are NO PROBLEMS. In my experience, tho, "Install-and-Go" is not nearly as far from reality as the image you paint.

The Linux community (and vendors) could do a better job of issuing Hardware Compatibility Lists (HCLs), granted, but for the majority of hardware out there (at least at the general consumer level) is covered (at least in a "basic functionality" way) by native Linux drivers.

As far as Hardware Manufacturer support goes, I have an Intel ipw3945 WLAN card in my work laptop (Dell Latitude D620, running Debian Etch). I downloaded the driver source from Intel, ran module-assistant, and I was WLANning happily in minutes. Pretty much the same story for the nVidia graphics adapter... now running 1440x900 gleefully. Install was a piece of cake. Far easier (and faster) than MSWXP on bare hardware.

Hardware Makers (both components and finished goods) COULD (and SHOULD) be more friendly to the F/OSS community, to be sure, but the current situation is nowhere near as bad as you paint it. My policy is to check out hardware for compatibility BEFORE I buy it. I think that's a healthy thing to do irrespective of what OS you run. If it don't run with Linux, I don't need it.

It'll tell you something Vista can't do out of the box: ssh.. in or out. It's 2007, people. There's a network out there with computers connected to it.

I don't run MS Windows (any flavor) on my home net... don't allow others to either. If you like it, well, good for you. Keep it. I'll take the freedom , flexibility and power afforded me by Free and Open-Source Software, as well as the occasional inconveniences that come with it.

Peace.

Re:What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

[Cro Magnon]

are you sure you never had to install drivers for that onboard NIC in Windows? How about video drivers? Did you have to configure those drivers to use both monitors properly after they were installed? How about printer/scanner/copier drivers?

Nope, nope, and nope. I did have problems with my printer under Windows, but also under Linux. Worked perfectly on my iBook, though.

And, if you use Linux, you can't use it until you've installed it, so the other poster's points are valid.

Re:What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

[shutdown -p now]

Can I mount NFS shares to other non-Vista resources with existing, included applications/tools?

Actually, yes, you can. Vista (Enterprise and Ultimate editions) includes a native NFS client as an optional feature (meaning that you need to go to Control Panel and enable it there - but it comes in the "distro").

Otherwise, your list is pretty moronic. Yes, it all doesn't come out of the box (but neither do most Linux distro come with WMA/WMV out of the box), but otherwise all items you've listed are available on Vista. It's also not worth repeating "Free blah blah blah" on every point - if you just wouldn't use anything but Free Software, say so, and don't waste your breath - it's clear that any proprietary OS is not for you already.

Re:What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

[Yosho]

And, if you use Linux, you can't use it until you've installed it, so the other poster's points are valid.

Unless it's installed for you. Please pay attention to the rest of the thread.

Re:What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

[nicklott]

Remind me again what Vista does that my Linux box can't?

Play games. And I don't mean Sudoku.

Re:What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

[geekoid]

Thats funny, becasue it's been years since I had to compile a NIC driver.

OTOH, I ahve to reinstall an updated driver whenever i install 2000.

As for your combo machine, it's not the fault of Linux that the company doesn't provide drivers.

"
Like it or lump it, the stuff that makes Linux great is also the stuff that makes it (like Firefly the TV show) open only to a small market."

no. Lack of install drivers and a common GUI and marketing is what holds it back. You can ahve all the great stuff AND easy of use.

Re:What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

[Anonymous Coward]

80% of the universe wants install and use...

Utter, utter rubbish. 80% of the universe will never, ever install an operating system. The majority of computer buyers purchase a new PC with whatever flavour of MS Windows is pre-installed, and they will never change it. Ever. Problem with the PC? Take it to a computer "specialist" or their local neighbourhood geek. Most people don't give toss about how easy an OS is to install as they will never have to do it.

"Uh, you can also use Linux without needing to know how to use those things"

Notice how he said use and not install? If a PC came from the manufacturer with Linux pre-installed, all the driver set-up you seemed to have a problem with would already have been done. Hell, I recently re-installed WinXP, and had to install/faff with DX9c, Mobo drivers, Display drivers, IDE card drivers, video players, video codecs, (decent) IM clients, (decent) browser, FTP clients, etc etc. None of which came as standard. Not to mention the countless security patches. Do you really think Joe Average User would find installing Linux significantly harder than installing WinXP? Seriously?

Vista Buying Suckers!

[Anonymous Coward]

Before Vista's release, I bought my Athlon 64 X2 PC with XP Pro X64. I don't plan to upgrade my OS for another 4 years or at least until my games start sucking wind. Maybe by then the game developers will get their sh*t together and start offering more games on Mac and Linux so I can cut the cord for good.

Re:Vista Buying Suckers!

[empaler]

Wow... You actually have hardware with proper XP x64 driver support? You lucky bastard. I always felt like a fireman on my installation until I gave up. I kept going from problem to problem...
Would probably have helped if I'd researched the HW before I purchased it, but damnit, I just expect stuff to work. How hard can it be recompiling drivers for 64 bit?
(Note: If you can tell me empaler you fcuktard, it can be very hard, you can at least tell me why as well)

Re:Vista Buying Suckers!

[Ollierose]

I'm a XP x64 user, and I'll say one thing - XP x64 seems to have been a testbed for the Vista x64 driver model. Even the least friendly company on my hardware list (Logitech) has released an updated QuickCam driver for Vista, which I've been able to successfully install on XP x64.

Canon get good marks in my book - their current printers are all x64 out of the box, and the scanner drivers have been updated within the last month.

All Sales "Count" Regardless of Channel

[iq-9]

I'm amused by all this discussion surrounding whether the sales "count". If you have a commercial software product to sell and you have the drive, tenacity, aptitude, and wherewithal to get it bundled with every PC in the world, then you are a more effective marketer than your competition and you absolutely deserve those sales. This is called "Capitalism". It makes the world go 'round. It's the reason we have these wonderful things called PC's sitting in front of us. It's the reason you have the music you love, your favorite foods, your house, your car/motorcycle/skateboard, and a global internet. It's the reason you have a paycheck every week so you can provide for your family and lead a positive and productive life. In the free-market democracies of the world, everyone has the same opportunities as everyone else. If you want to smash Microsoft to bits, write a business plan, pitch it to the bank, borrow money, form a company, make it the most kick-ass software company in the world, and smash Mr. Softee to smithereens. Put a suit on and go pitch your fancy new Linux dist to the CEO of HP. Stop complaining and get off your ass. A lot of sales and marketing legwork, i.e., cost, goes into selling your product through these channels: building trust, forming relationships over the course of many years, and setting up partnerships. It's not as if MS waves a wand and their new OS appears at the Dell factory. I am not saying that MS isn't now a monopolistic, bully of a company with some questionable business habits, but the fact remains that Microsoft worked hard to be number one. It took decades of work from countless bright and dedicated individuals. Lil' Billy had a vision and ran with it. You can do the same.

Bose doesn't get robbed of sales numbers for all of the speakers they have bundled in Acura's. They still count toward their sales. Bose worked hard and incurred cost to secure those relationships.

The grocery store down the street isn't denied income because he gave a bushel of apples to the corner store to unload for him. After 10 years of being neighbors, the corner store guy trusts the grocer. He has a partnership with him. They are capitalizing together - because they are free to do so.

All sales "count" regardless of the channel by which they arrive.

Re:All Sales "Count" Regardless of Channel

[willisbueller]

seconded. The zealotry on slashdot pisses even me off. And I'm the guy who pisses my friends off with "switch to Linux" non-stop.

Re:All Sales "Count" Regardless of Channel

[iq-9]

Yes, zealotry and fanaticism - two very dangerous and destructive things, as history has shown.

Just to put my post in perspective... I'm a platform-agnostic software engineer. I was born and raised Windows, but now embrace all operating systems. I'm typing this on my freshly-built XP machine, but my Kubuntu machine sits next to me for Ruby on Rails, PHP, and Python development. The Vista machine is in the sunroom. I've was a C# developer for 5 years, but I now code PHP & PostgreSQL on FreeBSD and OSX every day at work. I was a designer for another 5 years prior to development, so I love the Adobe suite of apps and the Macintosh platform. Each technology has its place. I can't live without my Windows machine for gaming, .NET development, design and 3D modeling. Kubuntu is a fantastic development and server platform [and close to desktop-ready]. Ruby on Rails is the most groundbreaking advancement in web engineering since .NET 1.0. I've been thrilled with how far Linux has come in the last couple years. It is finally viable and people are noticing [myself included]. Maybe there's hope for a more level playing field soon. A competitive market drives innovation -- which we clearly aren't seeing from MS lately [except for the new Office GUI -- very well done] because they're fat and happy. It would be an exciting time if a few new players gave MS a good scare. Here's hopin'.

Re:All Sales "Count" Regardless of Channel

[skeeterbug]

All sales "count" regardless of the channel by which they arrive.

i don't think anybody said they didn't. however, your view is myopic. i'll keep it simple. let's say msft sells 20 million copied into the "channel and not a single end user has bought a copy. now, let's say msft sold 20 million copies into the channel and 20 million copies were purchased by end users. accordign to you, both scenarios appear equal - after all 20 million is 20 million and they both "count." for the rest of us, though, we see a difference. of course, i exaggerated for effect - hopefully you can get the concept based on this exaggerated illustration.

This may be a shock, but...

[Kozz]

There are some of us who can count on one hand the number of hours we've operated any kind of Apple/Mac. I've spent nearly all my days in environments EXCEPT Mac. DOS, Windows in all its forms, *nix, *bsd. Could I support my mom at ALL if she got a Mac? Nope. Not a whit. Of course, I wouldn't want to support any kind of *nix, despite my familiarity. Just sayin'.

Re:This may be a shock, but...

[Jimithing DMB]

You really ought to get a Mac. Get yourself a mini or a MacBook or something. Give it a good solid try and be open-minded about the differences between it and most other GUIs.

I did this back in early 2002 at work because I needed to port a GUI photo-enhancing package from Windows to Mac. I was still working on the Windows version when my company bought the Mac so I made a point to play with it a couple of hours each day. When the time came to do the port I had a pretty good idea of what was going on with it.

It did help that I had a few books I could thumb through to learn it. There's also a lot of Mac and even NeXT philosophy you may want to learn. For example, it helps to understand how Library exists in both "/" as well as in your home dir (/Users/yourname) as well as in /System and that each one has a purpose. Sort of similar to how some good NIX software has a default config setup (/usr/share maybe) and a system-customized config (/etc) and a user-specific config (~/.something).

If you like the ideals behind UNIX but don't care for GUIs that look like Windows bolted on top of UNIX then you really need to check out a Mac. Apple finally got the UNIX desktop right.

I am one of those

[kbahey]

I bought a Toshiba laptop late November, which came with XP on it, with a free upgrade to Vista (with $25 for shipping).

The disk was immediately resized, and Kubuntu 6.10 Edgy Eft was installed on it. Windows XP was never even booted, but kept there "just in case it is needed".

For the free upgrade, I did all the paperwork for it, paid the shipping fee, and have not received it yet. I don't intend to boot it either, but I ordered it "just in case".

So, I am counted as an XP user and a Vista user, while I am neither.

Goody, more "obsolete" systems to install Linux on

[christian.einfeldt]

Regardless of how well Vista is selling, every new box purchased with Vista pre-installed means the potential for GNUsters and Penguinistas to pick up a box from their neighbor and install GNU Linux on it and give it so someone who has never tried Free Open Source Software. How cool would it be if we could match FOSS installs one-for-one with XP cast-off boxes. Look for gifting opportunities through Craigslist, Freecycle, and DIYparts.org. I'm sure that there are about 300 sites that I have forgotten there, but you get the picture.

YeeeHawwwww! Ride 'em Cowboy !!

[Anonymous Coward]

YeeeHawwwww! Ride 'em Cowboy !! That's what I call MOVINNNNNNNNNNNNNNN'

The days linux SELLS anything are days to celebrate !! 20 MILLION ? MWWWAAAAAAHHHH!!!!

uh duh george?

[oh_the_humanity]

Dontcha think thats because its now being shipped on 90% of windows boxes now instead of XP ? And that you cant really buy XP off the shelf anymore ? Gee got to love the spin doctors. Comeon everybody lets jump on the bandwagon and all go buy vista !!!

it's worse than mislead

[Anonymous Coward]

MSFT used 4 months of sales of XP with promises of upgrades and included them as Vista sales recording them as sales in one month, and that they were Vista sales rather than what they really are which was XP sales with coupons, MSFT has gone to new lows of integrity when fibbing on record.

The biggest consumers of Vista

[twitter]

Nah, consumers have already rationalised their purchase of Vista. Even XP-loyal geeks have downgraded their opinion to "I guess it has some features I'd like on XP" and are seriously considering upgrading.

If by "consumer" you mean big box store shelf, you are correct. I'm not sure anyone with an IQ better than a shelf is really thinking like M$ wishes they were thinking, especially when they can't rationally name any real features. As people also noted M$ is stuffing the channels to make it look like anyone is buying Vista. They are not, any more than they are buying Zune.

Hasta la Vista M$!

no, it doesn't sound right, MSFT forged the numbe

[Anonymous Coward]

double XP sales, yet they failed to mention that XP was rolled out in 2 waves, XP wasn't even available as a boxed set until a month later, so the only real comparison is two months of XP sales to when VISTA rolled out, which was all in the same month, so the comparison is 20 million to 17 million, which is not double,

worse, the 20 million includes sales for 4 months, (the upgrade of XP coupons) MSFT actually recorded all the upgrades of 4 months and called it all as one month....

worse, those sales were for XP, with vista coupons, yet MSFT is calling them all Vista sales... where most of them were XP sales...

in otherwords, Vista sales are HORRIBLE..... compared to anything, including XP.....

Ballmer wrong again

[Nico3d3]

This come after the declaration of Ballmer when he said that pirated copy of Windows was to blame for the poor performance of Windows Vista in the market.

vista wellness vs reality

[icepick72]

The Associated Press dug deeper, noting that since XP's release the overall PC market has grown by almost a factor of 2, so it would be a surprise if Vista didn't do twice as well:

Why split hairs about comparative "wellness". Regardless, Microsoft is making a financial killing. If they've sold twice as much Vista then they've sold twice as much Vista no matter what's happening with the PC market. The money is in their pockets and they will continue to be the largest software company because they can keep doing that.

Re:MS has to show good sales figures to shareholde

[yuna49]

Aside from games, what applications do you think will be "Vista-only?" Are there many "XP-only" applications, or will most of them also run on Windows 2000? What features in Vista make for a better word processor, spreadsheet, browser, or email client?

My bet is that many developers will avoid making anything Vista-only for a long time to come, since that would just reduce the potential market for their software.

People are replacing infected computers

[Marrow]

How many of those new computer sales are being done because the existing computers are so choked with spyware, nagware, and malware and botched A/V that they seem broken?

A computer thats only a few years old is already way more powerfull than most people need...until it gets hijacked. Then the apparent power goes to the floor.

Of course the pretty computer with 2gigs of ram and a core2 duo looks great in the store. It looks great compared to the perfectly operational hardware at home thats been rendered useless by someone in seattle.

Hummm... (wait for it)

[Anonymous Coward]

... does it still stand that a licensee is automatically granted the right to use any previous Windows version? (like XP, I mean)

Wow. MSFT is REALLY hurting!

[notaprguy]

I read 3-4 of the great wisdom of the unwashed masses on /. and it's quite clear that Microsoft is doomed. Doomed, I say! A piddling 20 million copies of an operating system in a month! Give me a break! Why, I bet Firfox alone had that many downloads. Well, maybe last year but still!. Ok, maybe Firefox is free...but still! It's only 20 million!

I see dead dollar signs

[Anonymous Coward]

If by "con$umer" you mean big box $tore $helf, you are correct. I'm not $ure anyone with an IQ better than a $helf i$ really thinking like M$ wi$he$ they were thinking, e$pecially when they can't rationally name any real feature$. A$ people al$o noted M$ i$ $tuffing the channel$ to make it look like anyone i$ buying Vi$ta. They are not, any more than they are buying $une.

I know why..

[paynesmanor]

Because all the people that buy it are reselling it.. LOL...

Re:ATTN: SWITCHEURS!

[Anonymous Coward]

Still looking for the "maximize" button when your Mac has "zoom" instead? Here's a hint: If you can't deal with multiple windows at once, you don't belong on our platform. The Mac wasn't designed for one-track minds. That's exactly why the mouse has one button and not two. Wait...

Dogma

[Anonymous Coward]

I read this today, I thought you could benefit from it:

Run away from any kind of dogma. Dogma is the product of a closed mind. It's an idea with a threat attached. If you suffer from dogma, get it out of your life. Let it go. Kick it out. Try thinking the opposite. Treat it like a crazy joke. Do anything you can to get rid of it. It's the greatest source of barriers to breakthrough.

Good advice.

Look at the browser stats, wow!

[nbritton]

Vista release date Nov 8, 2006:    XP release date Oct 25, 2001:
Vista at < 0.5% Dec 2006           XP at 4%, Nov 2001
Vista at 0.6% Jan 2007             XP at 6.5%, Dec 2001
Vista at 1.2% Feb 2007             XP at 9%, Jan 2002

Can't wait till the Q1 SEC reports come out, ouch!

sources:
Google zeitgeist, w3schools, wikipedia

Re:Look at the browser stats, wow!

[friedman101]

Yes but Vista wasn't available under non-enterprise license until February or so. While the majority of future licenses will be from large businesses early adopters are going to be home users.

Citing irrelevant statistics isn't going to put Microsoft in the poor house or make them go away. Frankly I'm more worried with the direction mainstream linux is going in than what Microsoft is doing. I can hardly jump over all the useless clutter and pointless eye candy in a modern mainstream distribution (OpenSuse 10.2 has 2 different package managers). On the contrary I find Vista to be streamlined and speedy. Turn off Aero Glass if you don't like it, I prefer it to "wobbly windows" or whatever else beryl is offering these days (and don't get me started on the muck of making my laptop hibernate on linux).

Re:Look at the browser stats, wow!

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody forces you to install that useless clutter and pointless eye candy. Usually, "mainstream Linux" only means the default install, but you can do a custom install and install the distribution as fat and as lean as you want (at least on most distributions, but not with *buntu which drops all that crap on the disk without asking, forcing one to manually remove it afterwards).

Delusions of Grandeur

[kamapuaa]

(Just a coincidence the announcement came out a day after this community's speculation, surely.)

Is kdawson suggesting Microsoft times their announcements to deflect criticisms from slashdot.org? The idea is ludicrous on about every possible level.

Re:MS has to show good sales figures to shareholde

[westlake]

Anybody that didn't buy a Vista license would, most likely, have bought an XP license if Vista did not exist.

In other words, they would not be in the market for OSX or Linux.

Vista has not really increased MS revenues. MS must convince the shareholders that the $5bn spent on Vista is going to be a worthwhile investment

Microsoft, debt-free, and with quarterly revenues of $14 billion dollars can afford to take the long view - and the short-term hit from the free upgrade coupons still around for Vista.

"What's important to us from an investment standpoint is that Microsoft has entrenched one of its most important businesses for an additional few years, and that virtually every new computer sold on the planet going forward will have Vista pre-installed on it." Finding Value In Microsoft

Re:ATTN: SWITCHEURS!

[Divebus]

I switched from CP/M 2.2 to MacOS 6.0.4 and never looked back!

Inflated Numbers, options.

[crhylove]

I've been on every version of Windows from 3.11 to Vista. It's not a great OS, never was, but it "got the job done". However, after installing Vista, I mysteriously couldn't play movies, which is a significant part of why I even own a computer.

This is a tremendous oppurtunity for all consumers to experiment with alternatives, and frankly, Ubuntu/Beryl/3dworld/Firefox/OpenOffice/Thunderbir d/Zsnes/Gaim/Gimp/Totem/Rhythmbox is more than what 99.9% of the market really needs anyway. It's free, it runs on just about anything (unlike Vista), and looks prettier too.

THE ONLY reason anyone is buying Vista, is because MS is still a monopoly that basically owns all the OEMs to some extent.

They'll never get ME back now, I'm a bleeding edge guy, and they are WAY too far behind as of right now to EVER catch up, FOSS has too many intrinsic advantages over private software development models.

It was a good run, Ta ta Billy and Balmer....

rhY

Re:I had the oposite results...

[Technician]

So - no, none of the machines I've used linux on in the last 5 years have ever been install and use.


I threw Ubuntu on 2 Windows 98 machines and one Windows 2000 laptop. They are all install and use. Even the extra buttons on the HP keyboard works automatically. In Windows I had to install a keyboard driver. In Ubuntu, it worked out of the box. Volume up/down, Mute, Internet, Email buttons all work. The internal card reader works, the CD and DVD burners worked, Onboard video, sound, network all worked. USB thumb drives work without installing drivers unlike Windows.

My aftermarket wireless lan card for the laptop didn't work, but it didn't work in Windows 2000 without loading a driver either.

The only thing that didn't work out of the box was a HP Scanjet 3300. The Cannon scanner on the other hand worked without installing anything. It was true plug and play. Even "Found new Hardware" wasn't used. It was literaly plug it in, fire up Gimp, use acquire, and use the Sane scanner dialog box. New scanners plugged into a Windows machine are not that easy to plug and play. Windows almost always takes time to try to find a driver and add the new hardware.

Bought HP/Vista Downgraded back to XP Pro

[norm1153]

I wanted a small tiny desktop; HP has the right package, but with Vista Home Premium. Bought it, but also bought XP Pro from Newegg, installed it dual-boot (Acronis). Don't know if I'll ever boot up to Vista again.

Vista does not run some ham radio software right now. I think it's due to the DRM changes to sound processing.

Vista does not currently support OpenGL. That's a big letdown for 3D/CAD users out there; some of the big names in software use OpenGL. Don't know if that will change in the future, though.

Re:MS has to show good sales figures to shareholde

[Divebus]

Yes, that's exactly how it works. Fact is the eventual Microsoft sales are classically manufactured out of forced obsolescence, but those future sales need to be reported in this quarter, not next year, to make things SEEM better than they are to shareholders. I always say "never total the sum of your juvenile poultry until the usual period of incubation has elapsed". Lets wait until the paper vouchers are cashed in and the shelf-worn OEM software comes into the wild before declaring those sales.

There's very little new to offer in Vista over XP except a more colorful clown suit - well, maybe a few eye candy "features" and a clunky idea of how you want to see "your" media (now owned by Microsoft with their electronic proctoscope up your hard drive). However, Microsoft needs to create obsolescence to further their stale product because sales aren't being driven by compelling upgrades. Well, every manufacturer has to do that, except a 1998 Ford doesn't quit running [perhaps] because the 2007 models are out. Windows of that era or younger is about to artificially meet its maker.

Microsoft hasn't had an original idea in decades, so why would they expect a rapid adoption now? They don't, but they need to make it look that way. Apple could ship 20 million copies of Leopard to all the Apple stores, CDW, PC Connection, MacMall, MicroCenter and everyone else claiming 20 million sales in one day. Difference is they'd probably sell that many to end users lined up out the door in one day. Has anyone seen any Vista lines? The Apple lines have made the news every time so far (we'll see how good or bad that goes shortly).

This whole Vista thing has been a train wreck in slow motion starting years ago, like watching an instant replay you can see the entire house of cards collapse. Their own numbers indicate about zero growth in OS sales. There must be double the number of computers out there since XP was released and they're crowing about a barely above par increase in deployment in the same time period? Pleeeez.

While you're at it, quit counting gas pumps, cash registers, truck scales, dry cleaner retrieval systems, toll booth RFI readers and passenger car engine computers amongst PC sales and we'll see some really different deployment ratios of PC/Mac/Linux.

How many Black Russians was that anyway?

No wonder

[trawg]

... I've been trying to buy a copy of Windows XP here [Brisbane, Australia] for weeks now. Pretty much every single software retail vendor that I've been to just tells me its not possible to buy it any more - they just try to foist a copy of Vista on to me.

There's a few places I can still get OEM (and a few places that seem to have old copies lying around here and there), but if you're Random McRandalot and listen to what sales people are pitching, you can't get XP any more - so why not try Vista?

They Have

[WaZiX]

For Linux, its impossible to know, of course... but for mac: http://www.systemshootouts.org/mac_sales.html.

From 800k to 1.6 million.

Reminds me

[sdack]

Reminds me of how people thought about how well XP would sell. So lets be honest: it supports 64bit and your expensive 3D hardware! Who would have wanted that over Windows NT/2000 and compared to an XP + SP2 breaking all your internet apps?

Re:MS has to show good sales figures to shareholde

[Technician]

While you're at it, quit counting gas pumps, cash registers, truck scales, dry cleaner retrieval systems, toll booth RFI readers and passenger car engine computers amongst PC sales and we'll see some really different deployment ratios of PC/Mac/Linux.

I don't mind as long as they count the number of Linux deployments in the same way. You will need to count my Linksys router, 3 Hawking Technologies print servers, 2 SimpleTech SimpleShare NAS drives, and one GPS Nav unit in addition to my 3 Ubuntu installations.

Re:Bought HP/Vista Downgraded back to XP Pro

[Hanners1979]

OpenGL is supported in Windows Vista in exactly the same way as it is in Windows XP - With basic support within the OS, and a full ICD made available via the graphics board manufacturers drivers. Nothing has changed here, despite many incorrect reports to the contrary.

XP is still better than Vista, imho

[Anonymous Coward]

I had the chance to help a Friend out who just got stuck with vista on a Gateway MT6451 laptop, it ran so slow it was a pita. So I gave him a choice between buying new ram and increase to 2gb (roughly $300+) or buying an XP home upgrade disc ($99). With the understanding that the ram may or may not make vista run any better. So we downgraded it to XP, the laptop ran 5x faster...

So my question would be, I wonder how many copies of XP have been sold during the time Vista has been available for retail? That would be an interesting number imho.

Access logs

[BigBadBus]

Perhaps those who have viewed their website access logs can dispute MS's story. From my own stats, in the last month, the people using Vista is only a few % - far less than even Linux!

Re:Access logs

[ibbo]

I agree. Last week I had about 30 distinct hits reporting "Windows NT 6.0" out of an average of around 7000 hits. NOt many realy compared to searching for "Windows NT 5.1" which yeilds more than i care to count.

So I too can smell that figure from here.

Ibbo

Re:ATTN: SWITCHEURS!

[earthbound kid]

Macs for Mac Users!

Did anyone else read it....

[cralewyth]

....Vista selling at twice XP's price?

No really, Am I alone?

Microsoft has also found:

[Lost Penguin]

Tooth Fairy
Santa Claus
Loch Ness Monster
Atlantis

So what?

[argent]

So lets be honest: it supports 64bit and your expensive 3D hardware!

I've been running 64-bit since 1994, and unless you actually *need* 64-bit (and if you do you're already doing it, because you're writing heavy-duty simulation software or you're Oracle) the only time 64-bit is faster than 32-bit is when there's something actually broken about the 32-bit hardware. So apart from the folks who are already using Windows XP Pro 64-bit (hey, it's already out there!) or some kind of UNIX, WHO CARES?

And what do you need that expensive 3d hardware for? Running the software that doesn't work on Vista? Check out the various game forums, where the people who've been trying Vista are still dead in the water. Drivers for Vista cost more to develop than drivers for XP because of Microsoft's aggressive signing requirements, and the manufacturers are simply not bothering to upgrade existing drivers for Vista. This is particularly problematical for the 64-bit edition. So... WHO CARES?

Re:So what?

[sdack]

Well, for one it's you who does not care. Yeah!! So what? ;) Take it easy.

approx 100% of are cannibalized from XP sales

[argent]

I would say that almost all of those sales are to people who would have bought XP if it was available to them. To create the illusion of demand for Vista Microsoft's had to use their pricing agreements with manufacturers to cut off XP as nearly as completely as possible. If I was buying a new computer running Windows today, a hard requirement for it would be that it include XP rather than Vista, and I'm not confident that I could find one.

By comparison, we were able to buy laptops running 2000 Pro rather than XP for years after XP came out, and XP was still selling better, percentage-wise, than 2000. That's because XP had a reason for existing... it was the retail release of NT5 and replaced the appalling Windows 9x-based Windows Me. People were going out in large numbers and buying XP for computers they already had... not simply getting it as "whatever came with my new computer".

So, no, Microsoft isn't "making a financial killing". They're selling almost the same number of copies of Windows as they would have if Vista had never shipped.

Re:approx 100% of are cannibalized from XP sales

[icepick72]

They're selling almost the same number of copies of Windows as they would have if Vista had never shipped.

Indeed, which in and of itself constitutes making a killing because a lot of Windows is still being sold, making Microsoft the largest software company, because they know how to keep doing this. If they had left XP alone too long, there would not have been much remaining to cannibalize because a product can only be hyped and marketed for so long before it starts losing ground to the competition, like to Linux. Microsoft needed to replace XP with Vista to keep the cash cow going. The new Vista can be hyped to oblivion now but someday they will need to replace it too. XP ran its time, even if it would have been sold anyway because it would have started losing ground. Regardless of what product Microsoft is replacing with a successor, they are going to ensure they keep making a killing in the software business and therefore ensure they will be around for a long time.

Re:approx 100% of are cannibalized from XP sales

[argent]

If they had left XP alone too long, there would not have been much remaining to cannibalize because a product can only be hyped and marketed for so long before it starts losing ground to the competition, like to Linux.

I'm sorry, but people don't buy Windows XP because it's "hyped and marketed", they buy it because it runs the applications they want to run, and developers don't develop for Windows XP because it's "hyped and marketed", they do it because that's what their customers are running. That's what the people who go on about Linux on the desktop don't understand... people don't buy a computer to run an operating system, they buy it to run applications, and developers don't write applications to run on an operating system, they write them to sell to customers.

The only Vista sales that represent sales to people who might even have potentially switched to Linux are sales to people who are already running XP and who don't need to switch to Vista. If almost all the Vista sales are sales that Microsoft would have made anyway, then that means Microsoft didn't actually need to release a new operating system.

XP ran its time, even if it would have been sold anyway because it would have started losing ground.

On the contrary, Vista has the potential of costing Microsoft a lot of ground in the long run. The reason XP sold to existing Windows users was because XP was more responsive and reliable than what most of them were currently running. Vista is slower and less reliable than XP, and it can not even in theory ever change that without Microsoft backing out the changes that make Vista a different operating system than XP, because the whole point to the DRM components in Vista is to reduce the reliability of the operating system.

Bruce Schnier says: don't upgrade to Vista.

Peter Gutmann says: Vista will inevitably cost you more and run slower.

These guys are not "free software whackos", they're professional computer security researchers, top names in the field. This is just the start of the backlash against Vista. Far from being necessary to "keep linux from the door", Vista is a tremendous risk for Microsoft... and no matter what they say in public they have to be worried about the low uptake.

Re:approx 100% of are cannibalized from XP sales

[icepick72]

I'm sorry, but people don't buy Windows XP because it's "hyped and marketed",

Try to tell that to the common person like my parents and many others who have questioned whether they should upgrade to Vista, because they've seen the advertising and are convinced by it. The common person does not know of Peter Gutmann or Bruce Schnier let alone put any weight to their words. The common person is who Microsoft is going after with advertising and it's working effectively.

The only Vista sales that represent sales to people who might even have potentially switched to Linux are sales to people who are already running XP and who don't need to switch to Vista.

And that would have been even more the case if Vista had not come to market. You are correct, and as more time passed, there would have been more potential of this happening, which is one of my original arguments.

because the whole point to the DRM components in Vista is to reduce the reliability of the operating system

I'm unsure how focus switched over to an unusual claim about DRM that would have made it into XP too, even to the same degree (through software updates) had XP not been succeeded by Vista. When Microsoft wants to do something they go ahead using what they have. It's soup du jour to rag on DRM here on Slashdot which lends an air of interest to that statement in this context.

This is just the start of the backlash against Vista. Far from being necessary to "keep linux from the door", Vista is a tremendous risk for Microsoft... and no matter what they say in public they have to be worried about the low uptake.

Consider this simple point: When Microsoft drops support for XP, then Vista will indeed become the most secure and reliable. Microsoft is not stupid. They have already taken the steps to ensure Vista will have nothing to worry about, either low uptake- or reputation-wise. Everyone has their plunder on Vista now but the arguments are reminiscent of when Windows 95 (the next big step at the time) supplanted Windows 3.x. Just by looking at history repeating itself, we can see these arguments will fade into the same places as time wears on and then be brushed off and offered again in the future when Microsoft makes another large change.

Re:approx 100% of are cannibalized from XP sales

[argent]

Try to tell that to the common person like my parents and many others who have questioned whether they should upgrade to Vista, because they've seen the advertising and are convinced by it.

And yet they're *not* converting in droves. It doesn't matter how many people are asking whether they should upgrade, it's how many people do... and they're not doing it.

I'm unsure how focus switched over to an unusual claim about DRM

Because without the DRM components there's no Vista. That's what Vista's all about.

that would have made it into XP too

But doing it over a longer period would have produced less pushback.

even to the same degree

Unlikely.

When Microsoft drops support for XP, then Vista will indeed become the most secure and reliable.

Microsoft *just* dropped support for Windows 2000, after 5 years, just before the release of Vista... and Windows 2000 never had the installed base of XP because (a) it wasn't on the market for long, and (b) it wasn't targeted for consumers. If Microsoft drops support for XP any sooner then that the backlash will just get worse.

Everyone has their plunder on Vista now but the arguments are reminiscent of when Windows 95 (the next big step at the time) supplanted Windows 3.x.

Vista's not a "big step". It's more like Windows Me.

Re:approx 100% of are cannibalized from XP sales

[icepick72]

And yet they're *not* converting in droves. It doesn't matter how many people are asking whether they should upgrade, it's how many people do... and they're not doing it.

Not according to the Vista numbers. In fact many of your arguments about Vista numbers resonate with this April Fools article released on Slashdot. It couldn't have been more timely.

Because without the DRM components there's no Vista. That's what Vista's all about.

Without DRM, Vista is Vista without DRM. Too much emphasis on a single DRM aspect for that argument to make sense.

But doing it [including DRM in XP] over a longer period would have produced less pushback.

People expect more change in a newer OS (Vista) creating less pushback compared to incorporating DRM into XP technology which people are more accustomed to and therefore more sensitive to change.

Microsoft *just* dropped support for Windows 2000, after 5 years, just before the release of Vista... and Windows 2000 never had the installed base of XP because (a) it wasn't on the market for long, and (b) it wasn't targeted for consumers. If Microsoft drops support for XP any sooner then that the backlash will just get worse.

That doesn't argue against the fact that Vista will become the most secure and reliable OS. I hadn't given a timeline to XP support so the argument still stands.

Vista's not a "big step". It's more like Windows Me.

That argument is very wrong for so many reasons. If you truly believe that single piece of information then I'm not surprised at some of your other lines of reasoning.

Of course Vista is selling X2

[ITman75]

Because you can't buy any pc right now in stores, or on the web with xp. Microsoft is already phasing out XP. We are being forced to switch to Vista...Luckly I switched to a Mac

try buying XP if you can

[joneil]

I just bought two new desktops from a small computer store for my work, to replace two 4 year old desktops. I found that all the large chain stores are selling *all* of thier machines on the floor - desktop and laptop - preloaded with Vista. Just try buying a new computer with XP in a major chain store and see what happens. The only ones I saw with XP were "open box" machines in the clearance section.

      To get XP on my machines was a "special order". XP is supposed to be supported until January 2008, but the reality is if you want a new machine with XP, it is becomming harder and harder to do so. So when microsoft claims Vista is outselling XP - is that really a surprize when you have a very hard time buying XP brand new to begin with?

        I did notice that at some of the major chain stores, Macs - desktop and notebook - are now stocked and appear to be selling very nicely. I have to admit, I was sorely tempted by one. But it was cheaper to load up Ubuntu on my older laptop. :)

        Four years from now when I upgrade again - it will be Mac or Linux, or maybe even both. Vista will be a far, third distant choice.

      I will not go into the detials, but from a business point of view, Microsoft has "jumped the shark" with Vista. If it was impossible for me to buy new machines with XP installed, I would of bought two new Macs.

Re:MS has to show good sales figures to shareholde

[thePowerOfGrayskull]

It seems that the better comparison would be to Windows XP licenses sold in the year-ago quarter, not at the release of the XP product...

Not really

[Grashnak]

The taskbar preview is a perfect example. I move my mouse down to the taskbar to click on a folder, and a little thumbnail appears. A *useless* thumbnail. It doesn't do anything, or provide any more info than the folder icon and it's name did. I also don't find my new Vista install to be all that revolutionary, but on the taskbar preview, you couldn't be more wrong. They aren't just thumbnails, they are live windows - great for taking a quick peek to see if your install is done, or if someone has replied to you IM, or if your auction house scan is done in WOW, without having to actually change windows. Also, if you're someone like my wife who refuses to use a tabbed browers (don't ask), and who likes having 15 IE windows open at once, you get no useful info at all from the tiny name icon on the taskbar (cause of the crowding) but you can see at a glance which window is which via the thumbnails. I actual find that a tremendous improvement.

Are you Kidding me? this is a statistical Joke!

[Anonymous Coward]

This statement is a joke only used to help boost Microsoft's stock value.

The article does not take into count a comparison of computers in the world today, versus back when XP was released. While 3 million more copies is nice, I imagine the total population of windows computers exceeds that porportional increase, which does not keep them on track with XP.

While yes most computers are now coming with it standard, those who are looking to upgrade are waiting because there are still gaping holes in third party support. If the third party support was more solid, sales would be higher than they are.

Yeah

[CrimsonScythe]

...some of them are even geeks.

In the same way that Vanilla Ice was a gangsta rapper?

upgrading XP to SP2 gave me a VISTA ad!!

[SUSE_RULES]

now they (micro$ponge) is advertising in it's patches. upgraded an XP pc to SP2 and up pops a VISTA ad with a discount.
there is no end to micro$ucks desperation and i truly believe that they are beginning to feel the eventual demise of their empire.

did i tell you that i am running ubuntu and have in my company for over six months with no issues whatsoever?

i have installed two suse file servers and four ipcop firewalls and an SME mail server? all for a great price.
i work for a non-profit and in order to survive i had to experiment with Linux and i absolutely love it.
it is fun and rewarding to be a network administrator again.......

Re:That doesn't quite cut it

[Lord Bitman]

I mean actually coming /with/ XP, not "You can install XP, which you probably already have, and then later you can install Vista", I mean "I'm running Vista, and I'm running XP", either through virtualization or, preferably*, a dual-boot situation- just like I did from 3.1 to 95, 95 to 98, 98 to 2000, and [of course] 2000 to Debian.

(*preferable would be perfect virtualization, but dual boot is much easier to imagine)

Though no, I don't already have XP. When I install Vista, though, I don't want to do it by a non-reversible ha-ha-now-nothing-works process that I need to re-stage the system to get back.
And I want that by paying one price.

Well let's see -- Howabout new computer "upgrades"

[Biff98]

All those computers that shipped with "Free Vista Upgrades", I'm guessing they counted. Whenever I buy my batch of Hells (er Dells), I ensure they come with FreeDOS, or some other innocuous OS so Microsoft doesn't get to count "Sold OS's" due to my purchase. Microsoft sucks.

Re:20 million - 2 + 2

[drinkypoo]

You were obviously dumb enough not to get a refund on Vista (or exchange its license for XP), so to the bean counters, they've made two sales on you. And it gets better, because they will save on the support costs for your Redhat machine.

On one hand, that is kind of lame. On the other hand, it probably makes no difference to the stats. Do you really think they're going to take returned licenses out of the total number of licenses issued?

Landfills

[plopez]

96 million computers will be bought, close to 96 million will end up in lanfills polluting the ground. This has got to stop.

Re:Landfills

[zakeria]

or better 96 million Vista CD's ... the Vista layer!!

Re:Landfills

[geekoid]

pfft. If you dug a hole 3 miles squares, we could put our trash in it for hundreds of years.

Looks like MSS found another hard story to tell

[gd23ka]

We now join Information Minister Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf for a news update
from Microsoft: Vista is selling!

I loved the guy when he still worked for Saddam, telling one preposterous
lie after another when you could look out of the window and see that it
simply wasn't true. Looks like he found another difficult story to tell.

Choice?

[DarthVain]

I agree with everyone elses objections etc... about OEM's, market doubling, etc... however when XP came out there was also other Windows compitition, in Windowns 2000 and Windows ME. ME certainly sucked, but it did come on a lot of OEM computers (including my last OEM bought DELL, yuck), which in conjunction with 2000, would take away from the XP numbers, further dimishing them, at least initally. Now you have 5 choices: Vista, Vista, Vista, Vista, or Vista! However when you add them up as one, well you can do the math. Basically this is Microsoft playing with numbers, and being misleading in an attempt (probably a successful one) to convince stupid shareholds and the public about how great they are. Wee.

In other news...

[darkvizier]

The Redmond Tea Party is off to an amazing start this year. Ballmer is quoted shouting, "Yaaaar!" in the midst of the festivities. So far, nearly half the boxed copies of Vista have been 'sold' to the Pacific Ocean, and user satisfaction has reached an all time high.

They still need to look good

[EmbeddedJanitor]

Sure $5bn is only 1 month of revenue, but it is still a lot of money. It is 2% of market capitalisation which people don't want spent for no reasons.

This also comes at the same time as Zune. The next shareholder's meeting needs a lot of cheerful news to offset Zune. For many years now, Visa has been hyped, and now has had a less-than-stellar delivery. That can make shareholders pissy!

Microsoft lies again!

[Master of Transhuman]

Big surprise.

Microsoft does not sell software - it sells LIES.

If Microsoft were Pinnochio, the nose would stretch to Pluto's orbit...

Re:20 million - 2 + 2

[Hektor_Troy]

For their PR? Probably not.
For their accounting? Yes, they have to.

Sure, 1 or 2 licenses doesn't count for much. But if it's 5% of everything they sell, it'll hurt somewhere in the chain.

Beta testing

[Oshkoshjohn]

I have faithfully upgraded and used Windows, from Version 3.0 through XP Professional w/SP2. No more. I presently own an Athlon 64 3200, which works fine with IE 7 and Firefox 2.0.0.3, and I refuse to buy a new computer with Windows Vista installed or upgrade my present machine to Vista until at least the release of SP1. Based on previous experience, this should not be too long in coming down the line!