Slashdot Mirror
Survey Finds Few Intend to Upgrade to Vista
thefickler writes "A recent Harris Poll has found that while most online computers users are aware of Microsoft's Windows Vista, few are intending to switch over to the new operating system anytime soon. The Harris Poll of 2223 US online adults in early March found that 87% were aware of Vista. Unfortunately for Microsoft, only 12% of Vista-aware respondents were intending to upgrade to Vista in the next 12 months."
Alas, where I work we will be enthusiastically embracing Vista. My supervisor was very upbeat when she
told me I would be getting a new computer loaded with Vista and that I needed to familiarise myself with it
because everyone else would be getting Vista, too.
I'm an old school computer guy. I don't "upgrade" until I have to or there is sufficient benefit to be
gained. I learned this from a crafty old fellow who felt so, after being burned several times.
As to why, I see Vista as little more than a ploy to hold market share and gain some profits, as the existing
XP profit cycle has likely flattened. There will be a few bells and whistles, but the security aspect tells me they know
less about writing operating systems than their predecessors of 30 years ago. I think they still just don't get it. I also feel it's been rushed.
After all these years Windows is still a big mysterious black box, wherein things happen of which we know little and therefore
have little say in behaviour of or control over.
Besides, I've always been a fan of having the actual code at my finger tips.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Unfortunately for Microsoft, only 12% of Vista-aware respondents were intending to upgrade to Vista in the next 12 months.
fortunately for Microsoft, the OEMs provide good business.
Stop Computers/Cars Analogies on S
I don't imagine microsoft to care too much about these numbers. Eventually everyone will be running vista either because they bought a new machine and that's what it came with OR because microsoft will drop service packs for previous winnt, win2k, winxp.
Of course no-one wants to upgrade. What does Vista actually offer? A new, unfamiliar UI to learn? Annoying "security" warnings? Incompatibility with lots of apps? Most of the cool features, like Avalon and WinFS, were axed and/or promised as updates for XP, anyway. Right now, the only thing Vista offers is new, better DirectX, but there aren't any games that require it yet.
-Aero is a joke. The ~5 mm glassy effect (which does not improve productivity at all) comes at a way too hefty performance-cost.
-Vista dumbs the user way too down.
Example of an everyday-task gone wrong: When using a laptop and traveling much, my ip-adress will often fluctuate. To show my IP-adress under XP, i doubleclick on the connection-icon in the systray and change to the second tab. Under Vista, i doubleclick the connection-icon and end up in the Connection-Center. From there, i have to choose the common Task to manage connections. There i have to rightclick on the connection and click on properties. THERE i have to click on the advanced-button.
- The driver-situation is embarassing.
-SSH dynamic port forwarding does not work under Vista (used putty and plink; neither did work)
What i really liked in Vista was the combined search/run-field in the startmenu. But i can live happily without it when the rest of my system behaves.
So is this where the "Wow" starts? :-)
Only 12% were aware of what DRM is.
It hardly makes any financial sense. Why would you pay three times as much or more for an upgrade than you paid for the original OEM. In the case of Dell boxes you even get a discount for choosing windows, so it would be really foolish to pay far more for an OS that will provides you less performance on the same hardware, as well as restrictions on usage, and a continual risk of reduced functionality, if any software, hardware, or even media, that you install doesn't fully conform to M$ (FU)DRM specs.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
Anecdotally, the two largest obstacles to Vista have been driver issues and the jump in hardware requirements. The jump in the minimum hardware requirements between XP and Vista has been the largest since we switched from Windows 3.11 to Windows 95. Therefore, when faced with the prospect of upgrading multiple components to meet Vista's requirements most people opt to stick with their existing machines and get Vista pre-installed on their next computer.
The other thing is the well publicized driver issues in Vista. When faced with the prospect of their hardware not working, people are ready to forgo the enhancements of Vista until their hardawre *is* supported.
We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it
A similar survey showed that many people have an aversion to swimming in volcanoes. As one respondent said, "I suppose it's just not my thing: I've never really liked high temperatures".
Karma police, arrest this man. He talks in math. He buzzes like a fridge. He's like a detuned radio.
People dont like to spend money on things that are not clearly better. Whats more, they dont want to replace computers they bought a few years ago, to buy something they already have only is more expensive!
News at 11.
Most people buy a PC and run the same OS for its lifetime (which is around 5 years if you want current programs). "How many people are planning to buy a PC with Vista as opposed to any other computing device" survey would likely return 90%.
What I wanted:
A lean and mean OS that ran in 64 bits, had good driver support, could make DVD movies, supported Directx 10, and NO DAMN PRODUCT ACTIVATION!
What it is:
A bloated and ponderous mess that still can't make DVD movies, tries to support more of Microsoft's proprietary formats, focuses more on eye candy than performance, and has even worse DRM and activation rules. Maybe when Halo 2 comes out we'll rush out and buy Vista just so we can play a game that's been on consoles for over a year....or just buy a console.
First, there's the pressure from microsoft, which will lead to things like XP drivers being hard to get, broken, and feature-poor.
Second, there's the fact the IT people with a new OS are comparable to monkeys with a box of razor blades. Everywhere I go people tell me that they have no plans to go to Vista, unless Microsoft is strong-arming them into it... but these same people have it on their own desktops, and are griping about problems and gushing about cool features.
Official policy will have Vista rollout starting in late 2008; actual de facto rollout will be fifty per cent done by that time.
"Nothing was broken, and it's been fixed." -- Jon Carroll
At first, my boss was very excited about Vista (without having tried it on his own skin). I spoke to him about this and asked him to reconsider. Then he went online, googled for reviews and feature listings - and we are now no longer on the road to the DRM-upgrade.
In fact, given the chance, we'll probably start migrating to some form of Linux within 6-9 months. If only we had a well-functioning* alternative for Exchange/Outlook available...
I just heard! There's a new survey out, that says that while 90% of people know it's possible, only 1% of all car owners are planning on replacing their existing engine in their existing car! New car engines are a failure, and nobody's buying them... right?
I don't respond to AC's.
Since we write platform independent software where I work (well try to at least) we had to get at least 1 computer here with Vista on it for testing. After having the machine up and running for 10 minutes we'd basically gotten over every feature that is supposed to make Vista a necessity to upgrade. Being the system admin around these parts I recommended that we not upgrade to vista for a long time just because there was nothing really to be gained from any part of it. I will admit though the drive encryption would be great for our laptops that are constantly out of the office but even the most recent ones (bought about a year ago) don't have the required hardware (TPM) to run it. Sure it is the best version of windows out there, but it's such a small incremental upgrade that it's really not worth it unless you're getting it with a computer pre-installed or you friend gave it to you as a christmas present. That AUD$750 on Vista Ultimate was money well spent to not have to spend $10,000 on upgrading our machines.
The Refined Geek - Technology, Finance, Space and everything in between
That's how Microsoft pushes out the vast majority of licenses. Not through the retail channel.
This is nothing new, except for the constant "Vista is teh sux" drumbeat.
Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
Maybe I'm showing my increasingly distressing age, but did we not hear effectively the same thing when Windows XP came out? "Few users are planning to upgrade from Windows 98!" "My Windows 2000 works just fine!" "They can have my Windows 95 when they pry the drivers from my cold, dead peripherals!" Don't get me wrong -- I have no plans to upgrade either.
...from Win2k to ReactOS.
And this likely does not matter to MS. From some estimates I have seen, MS makes 80% of it's money from license only deals, and most growth comes from OEM sales. Therefore, MS seems to be most concerned with keeping the OEM in line, doing whatever is necessary to keep the desktop monopoly.
In any case,here are the facts as I see them. MS sold millions of copies of MS Vista even before the product was publicly released. Many were already sold through the commercial licensing program. I seem to recall that every one of those contracts were an implicit sale for MS Vista, which is why MS had to get out the OS, at least to corporate, by december. In addition, many machines that have been shipping since December are also an implicit sale of MS Vista, not to mention most machines that are now shipping.
I suspect that the retail software channels are kept awake at night figuring out how to convince the unwitting MS consumer that MS Vista "slim" edition is superior to MS Windows XP, but I doubt seriously many higher ups at MS are.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
What if a monopoly made a product and nobody bought it?
I've been spreading that idea far and wide to many people in many different forums. It's amazing how easy it is to convince people, too. Unlike the jump from Windows 3.1 to 95 or from Win98 to 2000, there's no compelling reason to switch (I actually refuse to say "upgrade"), and a whole bevy of reasons not to. It's a shame Microsoft's monopoly position in the market will force us all to switch sooner or later. I understand you can still get XP from Dell, but that probably won't last long.
The survery says nothing. The question is not what percentage of users plan on upgrading. The question is what percentage of users plan on upgrading AND have ever upgraded their OS before. Joe User won't upgrade to Vista until he buys a new machine.
"Strangers have the best candy" -Me
Users don't choose their OS, they choose the platform. If they chose Microsoft, then they'll get Vista eventually. The only way out is to choose *nix or Mac. And most people aren't ready to make that leap.
A business associate of mine took me with her to buy a new notebook pc. At the store (best buy) there were no recent-model computers that didn't have Vista. She had no choice.
200 million plus new computers will be sold with Vista. So I repeat myself: who cares about the upgraders? In time they will likely have no choice unless they want to move to OS X or linux, both of which I categorize as unlikely.
Many people still use Windows 98. They use their computer for reading and writing e-mail notes and for writing asinine comments on Slashdot. Windows 98 is sufficient for these banal activities.
People like Michael Dell, on the other hand, should be moving full steam ahead with gnu/linux if they want to keep selling computers.
Really? What's going to prevent Michael Dell from selling computers if he doesn't "move full steam ahead" with gnu/linux?
i'd have to say that i cannot see myself upgrading to vista any time soon. i have a pentium 133, 64mb ram, running 98 se...and doing everything i need. yes, i can use macromedia's mx suite, cool edit pro, and tons of other 'holy crap...that machine can do what???' software. i've tried their 'upgrades' ME - sucked worse than the plague XP - not as bad as ME, at least it's useable. Vista - won't touch it with a 99 1/2 foot pole when the day comes that i have the money to upgrade, i'm getting a mac. linux? yeah, i like it better too, but i can run linux on a mac...so it's all good.
http://wstewart.php0h.com - the sugarbuzz project blog
I just switched my Desktop and my Laptop back to 98. XP did not offer much good to me, and there were several annoying UI-things:
-Those ugly Theme things hog way too much CPU.
-XP dumbs the user way too down.
- The driver-situation is embarassing.
What i really liked in Vista was the smart icon arrangement in the startmenu. But i can live happily without it when the rest of my system behaves.
Fixed. It's just like Windows XP all over again.
Another 5 years and everyone will be bitching about the switch to Windows Panorama and asking why anybody would ever want to leave Vista. LOL
the WOW starts now...
WOW nothing works no more!
WOW it wont let me playing this media because of DRM
WOW my entire system has stoped working because it thinks im a pirate
WOW i no longer control my pc it controls me.
WOW i have to pay for this?
Is that a fact or did you imagine it just now? So what you're saying is that you have the pulse of several hundreds of millions of Windows users. Correct? And they don't want Vista. Correct? Can you show us some data to back this up?
How do you figure? I'm a little fuzzy on how this happens... How is this the "likely result"?
Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
Because nearly everything I read at the time told me that it would be great for gaming in general. At that point I knew a lot about Windows 98; I knew how to install it and then strip everything out that I didn't need. I was able to bend it to my will, and my upgrade to XP was sort of a culture shock because I didn't know where everything was or how to tweak it just hte way I wanted. I remembered that I wavered between the two for about a month and then just dove all the way in and made myself use the (then) new OS from Redmond. It turned out to be quite an improvement over the Win98SE2 once I figured my way around.
Nowadays I'm still a heavy gamer, and while the thought of having all of my games organized sounds nice, all of the benchmarks I've seen show an actual reduction in framerates and an increase in overhead from Vista. This is also the reason I won't be using a Linux distro as my main OS--I can get some but not all of my games to run on it. Plus I'm now finally running SLI with two 7900GT's, and I can't and don't want to buy a DX10 card at the moment.
I'm moderately skilled and the problems others have had with Vista's install and driver support don't really faze me all that much; but the bottom line for me is that until my favorite games perform better on Vista, I'll be sticking with XP.
There is simply too much glass..
Funny if nothing else, i swear to god thats the first car analogy i've seen in months that was even CLOSE to a proper parallel, and this is spot on.
Of course this still does not mean that anything will change, nor does it mean future computer purchases and upgrades will guarantee microsoft its current market share in the future.
If anything, I hope this is that 'clue-in' year we've all been waiting for as a turning point. Seems companies are finding it harder and harder to obfuscate their products and services now that people can *gasp* confer with other consumers more and more.
Ice Cream has no bones.
today released a statement that they earned higher this quarter because of high demand for Vista PCs.
In fact Circuit City could not keep up with the demand.
Ask instead, What proportion of Vista-aware users intend to USE Vista in the next 12 months, and you'll get a higher number, simply because instead of UPGRADING, most people expect to get into Vista by buying a new PC with Vista already installed.
This is a great window of opportunity for Ubuntu, assuming 7.04 is as nice as it sounds like, and if they can get the Windows-based installer and data migration tool working well. Make sure to get those networking hardware detection functions working well, Ubuntu devs! More more of those problems with WPA please, and I think you'll do quite well.
Is 7.04 still on track for April 19?
It's all about the spin baby...
"In other news, a recent survey says that over 10% of all adult computer users are intending to switch to the new Microsoft 'Vista' operating system. This is great news for the software giant, as it indicates that Vista is being embraced by more than the 'early adopter' crowd.
Amazing how different that sounds, eh?
Err, forgot where I was, sorry. I mean "M$ sucks. Boo. Boo-urns..."
If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
Not knowing much about your specific situation, all I can say is that it's worth taking a look at Zimbra. It's beginning to get some enterprise adoption, and they have several million mailboxes for an unknown number of customers.
IF they buy a PC from a major manufacturer..
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= - The Celtic - =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Microsoft is cramming vista down everyone's throat.
try buying a new pc without vista right now!
I'd bet anything the poll respondents are those who also aren't intending to purchase a new pc or laptop within the next 12 months also.
Vista is inherently unsafe to put on the internet. where's ralph nader when you need him?
They're using their grammar skills there.
the new Windows ME and Aero is the New MS Bob
Well, I don't know about you, but I'm certainly waiting for DirectX 10 graphics cards.
I'll be playing Crysis and it's going to look amazing.
You can have fun with DirectX 9 though.
These polls are always worth a laugh or two. Let's do some math. Last month Microsoft announced that they had sold about 20 million licenses of Windows Vista in the last month. Here's one press report: http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,130395/article.h tml. I'm sure somebody will say they're lying...well, if they are they'll get sued by shareholders and Microsoft is many things but they have never been accused of funging their financials.
Now clearly that 20 million includes businesses and home users and is worldwide, not US only. So let's break down the US numbers a bit. According to IDC the US PC installed base of home PC's is about 90 million. So of 12% of those people upgraded to Windows Vista then that's about 10 million copies in a year. What's the average cost/copy of Windows Vista? I don't really know but I'd guess it's at least $50 (in the US). If that's the case then Microsoft will generate about $500 million in revenue for Windows Vista in the US this year. Not bad. Let's see...what other software companies generate that much revenue in total in a year? I can think of a few...Adobe, Intuit, a few others.
There's another way to look at this. Windows Vista sales pretty much follow PC sales. In this article Gartner notes that there will be "No Vista Pop" (http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?co mmand=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9013801&intsrc=ar ticle_more_bot). But they also say that there will be about 225 million PC's sold worldwide this year. Assume that only 75% of those include Windows Vista. That's probably a very low-ball estimate. That means Microsoft will sell about 168 million copies of Windows Vista this year. Poor Microsoft. That'll probably only generate about $15 billion in revenue for the year.
Actually - read your EULA.
A Vista license allows you to "downgrade".
I keep getting this picture of Steve Jobs wringing his hands saying "Excellent".
So windows is estimated to have 90% of the desktop market.
12% of 90% is 10.8%.
So more people plan on upgrading to Vista than all other desktop operating systems combined have as users.
Gee I would be concerned with that as well!
You wrote "...but did we not hear effectively the same thing when Windows XP came out? "Few users are planning to upgrade from Windows 98!" "My Windows 2000 works just fine!" "They can have my Windows 95 when they pry the drivers from my cold, dead peripherals!" "
... Windows 2000 woke everyone up to "buy now, and hold on tight before MS screws it all up again". Windows XP was ridiculed as a slightly dumbed-down version of Win2000, but not counting the SP2 fiasco, an hour's work could remove most of the junk and you basically had a Win2000 machine again. Certain Apps relied on some of the new drivers there too. ... and then MS melted.
I do not think this was the prevailing mood at all.
I think Everyone hated Windows 3.11 - way too much "promising but not here". I think everyone stuck with DOS. "Easier to program, blecch to the Windows GUI" etc.
Windows 95 may have been "relative quality" for Microsoft, but it was the OS that sold Corporate America into Windows for 15-ish years. (5 to go on the minimum ROI.) It was quite clearly the direction MS was going, and proved Apple had missed the corporate dealmaking.
It turned out tech types thought it was as stable as an exhausted 3-year-old, but that mattered not to the managers, who, once they had "spent that hard earned money, were done spending for now".
Windows 98 rolled around, and I recalled it basically billed as "Windows 95 was the Beta for this." or "Win95 with 25% fewer BlueScreens". I received a Win98 machine as a gift in 1999, knew what to expect... and did "okay". (Not Great.)
By 2000, it became obvious that the fading powers of DOS-root OS were struggling mightily, and losing. Windows Millenium, or LoseMe (play on WinMe), was this mysterious April Fools joke that was best ignored, but was like an urban legend, only true. But right at that cusp, Microsoft's one & only DreamShot landed
So, no. We WANTED people to pry Win95 out of our clammy hands. If it wasn't violently illegal, I'd die to get my hands on something like a Fork of WinXP, to see what a brutally efficient programmer would do with the design, so that it somehow made all the proprietary apps happy but ran like greased lightning on today's hardware.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
n/t
you had me at #!
Most manufacturers offer their computers with Vista installed, but all it takes is a phone call or email to get them to put XP on it instead. I bought a Dell laptop a few weeks ago with XP & it was very easy to arrange.
For those of you that do not want to read all of the OP's paragraphs, I present the summarised edition:
"Microsoft sucks. I love open source."
This trend has to have held true at a similar point-in-time in XP's launch lifecycle as well. Individual purchasers of Windows OS seldom are the first to show enthusiasm about spending the retail price for a new version. Those who will own it will be the ones who would have had it handed down the OEM path.
The survey should focus on corporate software purchase decision makers at this point in time to get an accurate pulse on the adoption sentiment.
Secondly, this survey should be conducted on these "US adults" (assuming that most were responding from a personal purchase/use context) no earlier than a year from first retail release. So, do this survey around Christmas this year and then see what it says. Not to mention, sentiments should be dull at best considering the product complexity introduced, and the poor marginal benefit perceived of Vista over the incumbent XP.
I was looking to replace my laptop with something that had longer battery life. Unfortunately for me it seems impossible to buy a laptop with XP since "Vista Day". I do know that some of what I want to do will not run on Vista, so there's now no point in buying anything. Ordinarily I'd "upgrade" if a new computer came with, but with that being the only option I'm not even doing that.
And, why exactly is it that when one purchases a product that sucks, that one can not return it? Well, it has a license, that's why.
It's because of people like you, that we have to buy computers with Windows licenses. Well, when I don't buy a Mac, which isn't often.
Sucker.
powerless to get an OEM to sell me an XP system instead of Vista
I presume by OEM system that you mean a big market machine vendor like Dell, HP, Gateway, etc. If you can't get them to sell you the machine you want, then don't go with an OEM system. There are plenty of places in most cities that will build you a (frequently better) machine and will put XP on it if that's what you wish. It may even wind up costing you less money than a big brand machine.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
I bought a Macintosh.
like ever even...
i tch_to_linux_after_microsoft_piracy_case
"Russian schools in the area are so scared about being shipped
off to a Siberian Gulag, that they are buying Linux gear instead."
http://www.secguru.com/link/russian_schools_to_sw
boycott slashdot February 10th - 17th check out: altSlashdot.org
Say I'm a large software company that is pretty much the only game in town. I have a new piece of software, I go to all the retailers and only allow them to sell my latest version. Because my software is a black box, I can EndOfLife the old stuff and make it dangerous to use. Either way, customers eventually have to buy the new software.
Now let's say I'm a large hardware company, not the only game in town, but one of the few. If my competitors and I agree not to release drivers for our old hardware we can EndOfLife our entire line of current models (because customers will have to buy the new OS spoken of above) and force our customers to get new stuff. Of course, we don't trust the other guy, so we develop 100% working drivers, but have no incentive to release them unless the other guy does (or risk losing credibility amongst customers).
So hardware companies play the same game as software companies. They can just pretend that it's the software guy's fault.
They all "work". Most are Win XP. One is Win 2000. Why would I change? They work!
My dad still runs Windows ME on one of his boxes, and, oddly enough, even that POS works for what he needs. I tell him to get rid of it when he asks me a question about it, but somehow the 80 year old man muddles thru and gets things working again (usually after I google-up the solution for him). Even with Win ME, he comes back at me with "if it ain't broke, don't fix it!".
He doesn't want to pay $129 (or whatever) for Win XP, and he won't take a bootleg, because, like most folks, he is an honest and upstanding guy.
OT: Don't even get me started about why I would want to point him at a totally OSS solution. Ain't gonna happen - if it ain't broke, don't Fix it! (especially if I have to support it!)
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
There isn't a single compelling reason for "regular" users to upgrade from XP to Vista. None. And there are several reasons -- system performance and older applications being two -- not to upgrade.
That said, I have upgraded one of my workstaations to Vista, and find it to be very stable -- more stable than XP was on this machine. I upgraded because of client requests that I include Vista compatibility in the code I write. The logic is that all new machines will come with Vista, so any new software needs to work on that platform and XP.
I don't think Microsoft expects peopel to upgrade immediately. New machines will have Vista automatically, and gradually, DirextX 10 and other features will move people to Vista. But nothing will compell peopel to move to Vista from and XP system that works. Much as I like Vista (yes, some of us do), I'm not upgrading any other machines, even thoguh I have Vista upgrades available for a couple fo the HP laptops.Meanwhile, the two Linux boxes won't be getting upgraded to Vista, ever. :)
All about me
If I'm going to change, it's gonna be for Linux. Vista offers no significant innovation and u need like 5TB ram to open notepad. I am only using XP right now because the games I was playing didn't run on Linux (w/Cedega). But in the near future I'll be changing to Linux. So long Vista, will not miss you.
On first glance, I read the story as :
"87% of people are aware of Vista, and 12% of people plan to upgrade to Vista."
Now, since 87% + 12% = 99% (approx 100%), my brain parsed that statement above to deduce that the only people planning to upgrade to Vista this year are those who are not fully aware of Vista. Which is quite a fair conclusion to draw.
But thats not the case, the 12% figure quoted is merely coincidental that it fills in the gap left by the 87% aware figure. The article is stating that 12% OF the set of 87% people who are aware of Vista, plan on upgrading.
The article could have stated this much more elegantly as :
"10% of people interviewed plan on Upgrading to Vista this year, whilst 13% just shrugged and said 'Vista Who ?' "
On the other hand, results of my own quick poll of people in the lunchroom actually confirms my earlier mis-reading of the statement - people who have no clue about computers, and havent even seen Vista are the only ones expressing an interest in buying it later this year. The desire to use Vista seems to be based on TV ads featuring deers running wild through snow covered streets, and frustrated secretaries faking orgasms whenever a spreadsheet appears in their outlook folders. The other techs and developers just laughed at the thought of running Vista, and make 'Over my dead body' sort of remarks.
What is even more remarkable is that we dont even have snow covered streets or deers running wild in Australia. Just lots of blow flies, skin cancer, drought, and dead roos all over the road - but no snow and deers.
Id much rather see some hard peer-reviewed figures drawing coorelations between a person's level of gormlessness vs their desire to use Vista.
Please release an operating system, I am sick of this shit.
"Wow" is what you say when you're just flaggerblasted at the incredible speed at which Vista manage to crash/BSOD/reboot silently/eat your work/explode in your face.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Cue in all those "quake is too difficult to install on Linux" trolls.
Specially given the fact that, on linux, great efforts have been put since the early days of slackware/debian 1.0, and now most of the package managing, configuring or even games installing (using the game producer's installer) are graphical and simplier.
Whereas, Windows seems to have managed to be actually worse in vista than in previous versions and burries the usefull stuff deeper.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Thank goodness all this negative press that we put on the front page of Slashdot is actually doing something! Take that Microsoft! EAT IT CAPITALISM!!
Step out-of-line comrade, and we'll ship you to Moscow!
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
The amount of unsubstantiated negative hype going around about vista is apalling.
Let's look at the facts:
1. For all intents and purposes it's a Windows XP + stuff. aka a glorified service pack.
2. Quite obviously it will displace XP in corporations, educational institutions and home with time.
3. Unless you're using domain logons, It is MUCH MUCH MUCH MORE SECURE than XP because UAC is on by default, palatable to power users (I've been working with it for several weeks now, it's ok) and teachable to non-tech users. Overall, it's worked out much better than you could have done on XP. It is not OpenBSD and shouldn't be compared to it, it is probably less secure than Gentoo with KDE. Nevertheless, compared with XP's work-as-root model, it's worlds apart. I'm not suggesting it's either bulletproof, bugless, unexploitable or mature. But A security model, ANY security model, is better than XP's *NO* security model.
4. Laugh at UI all you like, but a good UI is something everyone can use to get more done. Both joe averages and powerusers alike. Vista's UI serves as a welcome improvement over XP IMHO. I'm talking about useability improvements ala sidebar, "open containing folder" stuff etc, not eye-candy a-la aero which I frankly couldn't less.
5. It guzzles 700MB RAM on neutral right after loading. Who gives a flying fuck? My kde desktop at work eats 200MB. the number is *meaningless* unless it indicates, say, an excessive overpricing of the machine. is 200MB a lot? 10 years ago, we'd have all said it was. Does that make my gentoo/KDE desktop bloated crap today? no. On the same coin, when 1GB of RAM is next to free, 700MB is just another meaningless number.
1GB of DDR2 lappie ram costs 70US$ on ebay. Sure, if you have a P3, run XP. But if you run any form of hardware bought anywhere in the last 5 years, plug some RAM and you're good to go.
6. Microsoft will stop selling and supporting XP at some point anyway. So it's not like Vista will be some doomed stop-gap measure until something significantly better comes along, like Windows ME was. Vista is here to stay for the next 5 or so years until another "service pack" along the same lines appears.
7. If whatever DRM is built into the system prevents you from doing what you're used to do with a computer, use Linux.
Case in point:
If you're screaming "Vista's shit!" and have an old computer with XP you don't want to spend more money on, you're likely making the right call, but are an idiot for screaming out the shit bit. I have a 2005 Toyota echo and screaming how the 2007 model is shit because I don't need it (having the 2005 one) would make me the same kind of idiot.
If you're screaming "Vista's shit!" and you're using Linux/MacOS, you're either a clueless fanboy or someone who's tested both ends and can draw up pros and cons of each and stake a legitimate fact-based preference.
If you're screaming "Vista's shit!" and thinking you'd rather be getting XP with a new computer, you're a total clueless idiot. Especially if your spiel contains the word "security" in it.
Vista is a welcome improvement on XP. Give it some time to mature, give IT departments time to evaluate and learn to work it, it'll be ok.
Is it worth upgrading from XP? depends. Depends if you value a better security model (and eye candy). I've serviced many people with many malware computer problems who paid me lots of good money to fix said problems. Wild guess says a security model for them will pay for itself, from the money it costs them to periodically fix their shit. Locks tend to be cheaper than periodically re-outfitting a robbed house, and people tend to be able to do math when it's their money.
-
I'll be really excited when I get slashdot back. I mean, I know linux is great, and MS products don't exactly have a clean bill of health, but Slashdot becoming the official Vista hate channel has made it really fucking boring.
What used to be a reliable source of tech news has become nothing but an anti Gates drum roll.
You know what really gets me? I mean, Linux (especially as Ubuntu), Vista, and OSX all have their advantages. And I'd recommend each to different people. But people who think that Steve Jobs isn't as much of a duplicitous shit as Bill Gates are kidding themselves.
Anyway, please let me know when Slashdot becomes relevant again.
no message cause it's a waste of time discussing something history has already shown to be true.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
Yeah, Microsoft needs to make like a pencil and get the lead out!
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
Where I work CISCO VPN is a critical part of our infrastructure. Without a decent CISCO VPN client no one will be adopting Vista where I work.
Then there's the problems of IE7 in "managed desktop" mode and Intranet applications. D'OH.
Good thing my Non-Apple Intel Desktop runs JaS OS X so freakin' well...
-- @rjamestaylor on Ello
Back in the Elder Days, when my company was writing DOS-based programs, this system called Windows 3.0 came out, and some of our customers were using it. The owner decided to go ahead and start writing stuff for it, using this Visual Basic instead of the QuickBasic that had been working just fine. Of course, he wasn't stupid about it, by declaring our DOS code obsolete.
When Windows 3.1 and VB 3.0 came out, it was a lot more stable. We started the migration in earnest. We soon had a halfway-decent system developed on Windows 3.1. Of course, that's when Windows 95 arrived, and I wondered what would possess anyone to switch to that, because Windows 3.1 (Sorry, now 3.11 for Workgroups) seemed to do everything that we could think of.
After a couple of service packs had been made available, the owner had us start building for Windows 95. I griped, moaned, and complained - why bother? What did Windows 95 offer that was any better?
We repeated the process for Windows 98 and XP. I didn't want to migrate - it was going to be a pain in the backside, the benefits were not apparent compared to the effort, and we waited until a couple of service packs came out and the bugs got shaken out.
Now, had it not been for the early adopters who voted with their cash for the new systems, and then beefed unceasingly until the first bugs did get remedied, we wouldn't have been able to do this. Still and all, most businesses are not known for being early adopters if they have an existing investment in their code base to try to wring more money out of.
This is not a blast at Microsoft. This happens with all operating systems, even Linux. I have a dual-boot laptop that I will upgrade to Vista only when the proverbial gun is at my head, but that isn't because I loathe Microsoft (I don't); it's because I don't see how the changes in the OS will benefit me.
Of course, after Vista has had a year or two to get some of these early issues resolved, it may be less painful than it seems to be now. But this isn't meant as MS-bashing - just as an indictment of the "jump on the brand new system NOW" syndrome that marketers encourage.
Strike while the irony is hot! -- The Freethinker
Your history is little off. Corporate America went from WFW 3.11 (to NT 3.51) to NT 4 to 2K and basically stayed there. XP is the April Fools joke that was best ignored, but unfortunately extended 2K support will probably run out before anyone is entirely comfortable doing large scale Vista deployments.
Well, I won't pay Microsoft any money until they stop treating their customers like criminals
I am a Windows user however for this reason, Microsoft treating it's customers like criminals, I am switching. For my desktop I got a PC with Linux preinstalled and for a laptop I plan on getting a Macbook Pro. Not unless and until MS gets rid of Activation and WGA/WPA will I willingly buy either a PC with Windows installed or Windows on disk in a box. I see no reason I should even need Windows again, other than what I am already using, but if there's any software I need but for which there are not versions for Linux and/or Macs, I looked and found none that does not run on either, then I will use Crossover/WINE to run them in.
FalconShould there be a Law?
The reason I don't even consider switching my primary machine to any flavor of Linux or OSX is the same reason I'm not in a hurry to move to Vista. I have a lot of software that I depend on, and the software is either unavailable or unsupported on Vista, OSX, or any flavor of Linux. Eventually, I will move on to Vista, not because Linux/OSX sucks, but because, like I said, I depend on software to just work. Yea, I;m sure I can find a Mac version of Linux replacement, but I don't have the time to learn everything from the ground up again. Just like a console, the supported software available for an OS is what I ultimately use to decide whether or not I should switch or stay. Right now, its WIndows XP Pro, soon enough, it will be Vista. Maybe someday, it will be Linux. Oh, and before yall say "how about apple?!" that is where I started off, from the early Performa, to early OSX.
The "wow" ends now.
they don't want Vista. Correct? Can you show us some data to back this up?
"Unfortunately for Microsoft, only 12% of Vista-aware respondents were intending to upgrade to Vista in the next 12 months."
FalconShould there be a Law?
This really doesn't come as a surprise. The mass consumer market is getting more knowledgeable by the day about the products they use. There's no point in getting Vista when it doesn't really offer anything groundbreaking, and is very buggy at the moment. I've seen it at a friend's place and he complained about the compatibility and some stability issues. Until Vista becomes more standard, and more programs release Vista friendly versions, as well as a few updates from Microsoft, there's no real reason to use it.
Personally, I'm a big gamer and I am very interested in the capabalities of DX10. I'll be building a new PC soon, but I'll wait until Vista becomes more of a standard than a useless novelty before taking the next step.
One of the reasons Microsoft is stagnating is that it can. Microsoft, through years and years of delays with Vista, has determined that it really doesn't have to do *anything* to own the market. Should Apple or a Linux begin to see significant sales in the Average Joe space, MS Vista+1 will see serious improvement.
Which is why I'm glad to see Apple gain some market share but would love for both Linux and Macs to gain a lot more market share, say maybe 20%. With the increase in competition MS will actually have to make improvements in it's products, and get rid of annoyances like Activation and WGA/WPA.
FalconShould there be a Law?
In Soviet Russia, Linux Gear Buys YOU
Hopefully I didn't put any [] around my words.
Would a normal user know or even care what an IP address is, much less how or why to change it?
I needed it, ipconfig, when I got my router and was setting it up. While not every has or needs one more and more people are setting up networks at home. Even those who don't have one it's a good idea to have a router with NAT if they have an always on broadband connection, again which more and more have.
FalconShould there be a Law?
There was a dramatic improvement in switching from NT 4.0 to W2K.
With the exception of 2003 and now Vista I have used MS Windows since 3.X and the only version I have not had trouble with was NT 4.0 Heck even XP froze on me the first tyme I booted it up. It took a few weeks of use before W2K crashed but NT 4 never did on me.
NT 4.0 is still a pretty good platform for plain-vanilla Win32 without all the song-n-dance bullshit
My copy is installed on a 64 bit DEC Alpha. Thinking about though I don't know if my NT 4.0 is 32 or 64 bits.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Just stop. Seriously. There have been articles about Vista's poor prospects almost twice weekly. It's hard to imagine that many readers still care. We don't need a new post every time another pundit decides to chime in with the same information.
Finally if Grandma can't figure out how to email pictures, she's too damn old anyway and needs to be sent to the Soylent Green factory for processing. ;)
Green chips anyone? As my mom hates computers and the only tyme she uses them is in the lab where she works, she's a lab tech in a hospital, I seriously doubt she can use email on any platform. And not only is she a grandmother but she's also a great grandmother.
FalconShould there be a Law?
All these people may *say* they wont upgrade to vista but what they mean is that they wont go to the store and buy vista. That's not a big surprise, I'm betting most users *never* buy an OS at the store, they use what comes on their computer. By the time the OS that comes with their computer is no longer supported by MS it's time for them to buy a new computer anyways. For the people that just bought a computer they probably wont get Vista because they wont need something new for years, for those that are still sporting Win2k or an XP system that's years old they will be getting Vista pretty soon. Surveys like this don't reflect how many people will be using Vista at all, it doesn't really reflect much of anything, kinda pointless.
Any chance you, or some Anonymous Coward, would like to provide a link or other information about that? I'm really curious since I've never heard of a crack being open-sourced before.
Cracking groups always seemed very -- at some points almost comically -- secretive about their source code and method of exploits; I'd sooner expect a crack dealer to give you the name of his wholesaler than for a cracker to distribute source.
Kinda makes me wonder if perhaps the number of trojans disguised as cracks have been the push necessary even to push the 'black' areas of coding into open source.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
There are two very good reasons I'm switching, from Windows to Linux on my desk and a Macbook Pro for my laptop. They are Activation and WGA!!!
FalconShould there be a Law?
Unfortunately for Microsoft (in many ways thanks to the efforts and success of their own company) people have become computer literate and are not so easily fooled any more. People know the fundamental rule of computer science: If it ain't broken, don't fix it! (Unless you know what you're doing, you make backups and you have a lot of time to "re-fix" it.)
Of course they will upgrade once they buy a new computer in the store because then it will be preinstalled and "Vista Ready" etc. They will get their money eventually. Power users will switch because of DX10-games. Or at least that looks to be the plan.
They all "work". Most are Win XP. One is Win 2000. Why would I change? They work!
Do your Linux boxes "work" ? Will you ever be upgrading them ? Did they "work" before the last time you upgraded them ?
If it works, it's obsolete.
Marketing firms live and die by it.
In software, the term is "bit decay" -- the principle whereby a perfectly functioning and stable piece of software will, over the course of time, eventually cease to work. It's not a matter of the code itself, it's the travelling context that makes it so.
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
Try Launchy.
It's a combined search/run app for all versions of Windows. You tell it where to look and what file types to index. When you need to find something, you call it using a hotkey and type away.
You can also use it to search google etc, see the tips & tricks section on its website. I use it all the time and it is very stable and handy.
You can find it at http://www.launchy.net/.
In comparison, when I was installing Windows Vista, I could not find a forum to address and when I did, I am still waiting for any of my Vista issues to be discussed by anyone but me.
Installation of ubuntu including settling issues 75 minutes. Installation of Vista . . . 4 hours and still some issues were outstanding when I decided to "can" Vista and install Ubuntu.
AND by the way, all my clients run Windows of some flavor. I create and share documents with them with the greatest of ease . . . it is called Google Documents. My clients can copy Google Documents into Windows Office and vice versa. Most of my clients have stopped copying the documents into Windows. They are happy to work with documents in Google Documents itself. Great collaboration tool.
There are serious alternatives to Windows.
Thanks for the tip.
Like this comment? I accept Bitcoin! - 153sc8UUBXyp12ofQqfAWDmJrzyiKCYC1x
The Edsel was a make of automobile manufactured by the Ford Motor Company during the 1958, 1959, and 1960 model years. The car brand is best known as one of the most spectacular failures in the history of the United States automobile industry.
"Microsloth Edsel" - Remind me; what did P.T.Barnum say was born every minute ...
the WOW starts now...
WOW nothing works no more!
WOW it wont let me playing this media because of DRM
WOW my entire system has stopped working because it thinks im a pirate
WOW i no longer control my pc it controls me.
WOW i have to pay for this?
there was much bitching about broken apps, no one wanting to switch, etc.
linux was and is an o/s that has no "forced upgrade" situation.
every linux now runs glibc...
same thing will happen with vista no doubt.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
ISTR Vista is not ready for systems based on 64 bit Intel/AMD processors. They still come with XP.
You may have to shop around to find one.
The upgrade from XP to Feisty Fawn was easier. It's more stable (already). It has beryl. It looks prettier than Mac. It's super fast and supports all my hardware. Why exactly would I even BOTHER giving an improved Vista a second chance? Looks like I'm an Ubuntu man for life, and I just started. Feisty Fawn is > any other distro I've tried yet, give it a fair shake.
rhY
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
So why OS/2 and not Linux or similar, this seems like a very odd choice to me, OS/2 being less well supported thesedays while still being a closed and commercial venture. It sounds like the OS/2 community are getting excited at the prospect of a WINE port at the moment, I wonder what that says about the state of things...
Software Freedom Day!.
Lots of useful information there for the people who HAVE "up"graded to Vista. :)
For the independent worker or small offices there are many solutions that work great outside of the MS family, unfortunately the realities of big companies/groups is that it's much easier and more profitable to stick with what everyone has/knows even if it is not necessarily the best option out there. Which is exactly why Windows is going to stay dominent until someone can come up with an OS that is widely used and is easily adaptive(as in self configuring) to what ever software/hardware gene pool you chuck it into.
I think this says it all: http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/comic.php?d=20070 331/
Most computer users do not upgrade the operating system or applications voluntarily, EVER.
They do eventually feel the need for new hardware, because the old system becomes too slow. (It's the same speed it always was, but expectations for its performance change, websites and games demand more, et cetera. And sometimes various dragging influences reduce the available resources, most notably IM and similar apps that run in the background all the time even when not in use. And malware.) But if the new hardware comes with a significantly different OS, they typically put it off until they absolutely can't stand the old system any longer, or it breaks.
My family has a PC in the living room that has Windows 98 SE, which of course is EOL now. And they've been feeling the limits of the hardware, most notably that it's maxed out at $notreallyenough RAM. I've been dropping hints here and there that it'll be time to get a new computer soon, and that the new computer will not run Windows 98. None of them are pleased about this, and mom is particularly apprehensive. (And the fan is making funny noises...) Now that she finally has some idea how to use the computer, she does *not* want it changed. It's tempting to just *add* a new computer and leave the old one in place until it breaks, but that means buying a second monitor, not to mention finding space for a second PC. It's also tempting to switch them over to something easier to service (Debian perhaps). With KDE, it would scarcely be more different from Windows 98, in terms of user-noticeable surface UI things, than Vista will be. I was going to keep them on Windows so they could keep using Pegasus Mail, but since that has been discontinued, perhaps it's time to move them over.
The only people who upgrade the OS and apps voluntarily are people who want more features. Power users. Heck, *I* don't even usually want the hassle of a full OS upgrade except when I'm doing a fresh install on new hardware.
Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
Yes, it is a huge undertaking to make change away from Microsoft Products. In the end, we need to smell the money; if it is cheaper to operate with something like Ubuntu, it will happen. But unfortunately while Ubuntu may be cheaper to buy (i.e., nothing) the cost of re-tooling is the problem. Change and change management is not cheap.
I agree, it is going to be sometime yet before we see large organizations take the plunge. In the meantime, small organizations can gain the benefit with a few enlightened managers around. In the course of this year, I am seeing more and more businesses under 20 employees making a change to less expensive IT. And Red Hat or Ubuntu are the options they are seeking.
I don't understand the defenders here who point out that it's a 1.0-ish product. It's more than 5 YEARS in the making. It's YEARS LATE. It's radically stripped down from its original promises. In any other venue that would be called
FAILURE
Sorry, fanboys but that's what it would be called if it were anything else by any other company.
Imagine if you will that Gigantic Car Company announces they will have a hydrogen fuel cell car in late 2008. But they don't actually get it out the door until 2013. And it's only a hybrid that gets 20% of its power from hydrogen. And it costs $50,000 and seats 2. And sales projections are off by 85%. That is what we call FAILURE.
Now you are certainly free to embrace it and chat up it's virtues and go to club meetings and go online and tell everyone how great it is, will be. But it's still a FAILURE.
OK I've found the WOW, its people on slashdot "I didn't even load vista before wipping it and putting X on" or "I have to buy my son a laptop so I'll be paying for Vista and XP" and my personal favorite "I told my boss about the DRM and now we are no longer considering.
Now I don't know about you but trying a product and actually reading the real technical information to me is the way to base an opinion. Not even looking at Vista before putting XP on is just plain retarded, put a few of your games/applications on, if it doesn't work or isn't working very fast then sure put XP on. My laptop (£320 as cheap as they come) can run Vista Home basic, but not well so I XP'd it. My main desktop runs Vista extremly well and the minor alterations they've made are enough for me to have wanted to upgrade to it.
My university doesn't *support* Vista like it doesn't *support* Windows Mobile 5 on its network. Yet if I go to the huge open access computer room and explain I'm having problems connecting they will set it up for me while I'm there. The only application which doesn't work is Adobe Acrobat read 8 which breaks one of the library's ereading programs. All other products work fine, they do it because it costs money to alter the existing infrastructure and for the most part the existing infrastructure works fine, when people (which are far between) have a problem they can solve it quickly.
DRM only exists to the level you want it to, repeat after me "If I don't use a program which requests DRM then I won't suffer from DRM".
I haven't liked Linux so far because over the years I've run into problem after problem, I didn't like Red Hat 7 because it was insanely hard to set up a network connection, I just didn't like fedora 3, Debian was incredibly unstable for me and the latest version of Ubuntu proved impossible to set up without losing major functionality and learning how to mess with Config files. However when Fiesty Fawn comes out I'll still download it and place it on a PC just to get an opinion on how good it is and if I could move over to it because you never know I may love Fiesty.
Microsoft Vista bringing the WOW factor as you are amazed by all the poor FUD
I had to buy a new laptop when mine was stolen a few months ago. It was a Dell with one of those free Vista upgrades, but XP installed.
1) There is not reason for me to upgrade. The only thing Vista can possibly do right now is break apps.
2) As the child (I'm 28) of a systems administrator and sometime IT guy, I know it isn't even worth trying to upgrade until at least the first Service Pack, possibly the second.
I know I can't be the only person my age taking computer advice from my mother.
I run XP at home. I game on the system and run basic stuff like spreadsheets and e-mail. Nothing all that fancy. XP runs fine and does the job it needs to.
Vista looks pretty, but I figure at some point down the road I'll buy a system with it already on it. Unless I keep hombrewing my systems, at which point I will move XP from computer to computer.
Microsoft seems fine with this, and they seem to be warming up to the homebrew crowd as I have now seen retailers who are openly able to sell the Vista Ultimate OEM version for substantially under the $400 or whatever they were originally posting it for.
There's just no compelling reason whatsoever other then "look.. shiny!!" And even that I worry about as I have met people and seen systems that took a 50% hit in FPS in games from going to Vista. Of course Microsoft is somewhat handcuffed in this regard. They can either lose by coming out with an OS which is an incremental improvement over older code with no compelling reasons to upgrade and seem like losers, or they can integrate some great new features and get their tailed sued into the next decade.
I'm a fiscal conservative, it's a pity we don't have a political party anymore
I guess you last tried Linux in 2000 or so. Things have changed quite a bit since then.
On my system, I don't have to compile anything to install a web server or SQL server. In fact, having done it both on Windows and Linux, I can tell you that it is currently easier and faster to do on Linux (not that the time it takes to perform a one-time task like installation matters much in the big picture).
Hmmm, on my system I just type aptitude install foo. I don't even have to scour the web -looking- for the app in the first place, it's all there in a central repository. Oh yeah, updates come to me, I don't have to look for them either.
It will be a learning experience, and it will make him more independent. He can then install whatever OS he wants too - XP or Linux or BSD, etc. Usually many places sell barebones systems, and all he'd have to do would be to get a sound card (maybe - many motherboards have pretty good sound now), a monitor, and maybe a video card.
..........FULL STOP.
-- tmk
I must be one of the few people that acctually intentionally took the leap of faith to Windows Vista. Granted, I did set my computer up as a duel boot with XP but I wanted to try out Vista. More than anything because I wanted to see how the new TV tuner software worked (I was tired of using the pirated software I already had that was pretty buggy) and I just wanted to see for myself what new bells and wistles were with the new OS. It's prettier than XP but I haven't seen anything that really makes me think it was something I needed. And one of my primary reasons to upgrade, the tv tuner, doesn't have Vista drivers so it is totally useless. I also found that when sharing files with my XP Home laptop, Vista is almost always guarneteed to lock up when I go "File->Open" and browse to the shared files on my laptop. Finally my screen resolution should go up to 1600x1200 but I can only get it to go to some weird 1384x1148 number (something like that), and that's with the newest drivers for my Radeon 9700 that are supposidly Vista complient. Other than the problems, it works great. I really can't honestly see anything in Vista now that makes me think I needed to upgrade.
So if you buy a product from someone and it sucks, you're more likely to buy the next product they release? Something doesn't seem right in that.
I guess it only works if that someone's product line is pretty much the only one available.
There is an article on www.infoworld.com with BestBuy reporting strong demand for Vista. The article also mentions how Circuit City made the error of not keeping enough in stock. So let me see, an opinion poll vs. actual sales data. Which one do you think is accurate?
I got a copy of XP ($20) and Office 2003 ($30) to install on my mac (to run pSPice, games, and open assignments in office format) from the computer store at the student union. I'd expect this is commonly available for university students.
I used the office 2004 test drive, but it is slow in rosetta, so I am holding out for office 2008.
I wish that neooffice could handle mathtype/equation editor stuff in word documents.
In any case, I hope you are able to use this info to save a few bucks.
Buy the parts, build it yourself, instead of craptastic Vista, get reliable XP Pro. Load that baby up with Open Office free software which is compatible with Word and call it a day. A happy day. And don't forget to yell at the vendors, enough people yell at them and they'll listen eventually. If not, you've vented and told them off.
Enjoy your Karma, after all you earned it. Feel your Karma Joe, feel it burn.
I recently upgraded my desktop system while XP Pro was still available specifically to avoid getting a new PC with Vista on it.
The release of Vista accelerated my purchase by at least a couple of months.
Not sure the link works, but the IBM Thinkpad T series has XP option. That, and thinkpads are the best freaking laptops you can purchase hardware-wise. I'm sure you can get recertified or clearance models as well.
As a technician, I have only seen one thinkpad die, and it was after extraordinary abuse and being 10 years old. If you're not going to pay for a $300 throw-me-off-a-building warranty, you should get a thinkpad.
Or a MacBook, and he can run windows in parallels.
Please stop stalking me, bro.
I used Vista Beta 2 and the RC1 for a while on my newly built PC. I enjoyed it for the most part... only because it was something different. I ended up buying an OEM copy of XP Media Center just so I could actually play some games with my powerhouse PC. The copy of media center offered a free vista upgrade rebate which I sent in and finally received the disk last week. The sad thing for microsoft is... I don't know that I'll ever install that upgrade. Not for a while at least. I've already got an OS installed that I'm familiar with and that works just fine for everything I want to do. Why would I go through the trouble to upgrade now? From my experience with the Beta 2 and RC1... I can't find any real advantage in doing this.
And why should this be surprising to anyone? For some years now, Microsoft's biggest competition for new versions of their products (at least for Windows and Office) is the previous version of that product.
And, as other posters have pointed out, upgrading Windows is much more painful than upgrading an application, even an app as big and monolithic as MS Office.
But don't cry for MS just yet: there will be lots of new computers sold in the next year, and a huge fraction of those will have Vista on them.
1. Backup your client's XP
2. Install Vista
3. Let the client use Vista for as long as they can stand it.
4. Restore XP from backup
5. Profit!!!
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Why OS/2? Because that user account exists solely to plug ecom station at every conceivable opportunity. Look at the post history for that user. Literally nothing else.
Redundancy is good And also good.
Thirty years ago computer security was not leaving the phone receiver plugged into the modem (literally having the entire handset plugged in, not just a cord) and making sure the door to the computer room was locked.
Actually, it was far more sophisticated than your simplified example. As a DEC RSTS admin I had to contend with people using TECO (which was used as a text editor, but was also a runtime environment which had some unique abilities to explore other's directories, including those of admins) to explore a RSTS system, finding applications which could run with with the privileged (near equivilent to root) bit set and seeing what havoc they could wreak. We also had Phishing, of a sort, which were fake login programs. I even wrote a honey-pot to trap those looking around for things and did catch one and did log every keystroke so I could demonstrate malicious intent.
As an admin I had to keep periodic watch on what was running and what some very clever people were up to. Clever coders and devious minds existed well before Microsoft and the internet. I'm not really seeing anything I didn't when I first began as a lowly student programmer. What I am disappointed in is the dominant operating system in the world still relies upon rudimentary security or very, very complex security.
I attended a seminar on DotNet security and my eyes fairly glased over as the presenter went on for about 90 minutes without once covering the same item twice. I can plainly say simply specialising in the complex security of DotNet could be a career in itself. Small wonder most coders do not master this aspect and elect default security instead, which is where many vulnerabilities are exposed.
I wonder if you are still using wood #2 pencils since there is no "real benefit" to those new fangled plastic and metal mechanical pencils.
In fact I do have a couple #2 pencils on my desk. Things which require ink for formal paperwork, signatures, faxing I use my pen. For notes I like to use a pencil.
What's the relevance of this or are you generalising in some juvenile matter than I'm some kind of luddite?
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Just find a vendor that actually supports your needs. Buying PCs with XP when Vista is still available will make for some nice statistics, too.
I have an open mind to upgrading. I am not scared of change, and I am not scared of bugs. Yet, I am scared of geeks who think there should only be one OS to rule them all. This includes zealots and tribalists who choose to run only one platform for whatever their reasons. The vista license allows me to still use my powerbook, my linux , and my pretend amiga box.
Get used to it - PCs are now like Cadillacs - buy the one you want for now, weld the hood shut, drive it for 100K and trade it in when you want another function. Don't even think about modding it to meet your needs.
What more do you need to know? With this sort of publicity - and the high cost of switching in hardware and OS price - it's no surprise.
Tough shit, Bill.
You fucked up.
With luck, your company will lose billions.
Have a nice day, asshole.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Oh, I'm sorry. Maybe we have a context problem here. The person I was replying to is extrapolating a dinky poll into "the vast majority" of the half a billion+ Windows users in the world. I think perspectives change when you think about it that way.
Now, that only 12% of current Windows users will be using Vista in 5 years might be indeed the case, and we will eventually find if that's the case in a more realistic manner. But I'm pretty sure anyone intelligent enough can avoid making that extrapolation solely on the basis of this particular sample size and distribution given the sheer size of the statistical universe. On the other hand, the GP is implying things he can't possibly prove, but are convenient to his little jihad nonetheless. Which was the real reason for my reply to begin with.
Now, if you'd like to prove to me that the sky is blue, go right ahead. With that awkward grammar it should be amusing, if nothing else.
Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
"1GB of DDR2 lappie ram costs 70US$ on ebay. Sure, if you have a P3, run XP. But if you run any form of hardware bought anywhere in the last 5 years, plug some RAM and you're good to go."
RAM isn't like hard drive space... you can't just plug it into the USB port when you need more. Most machines sold in the past five years cannot take more than 4 GB under any circumstances. Many recent laptops can't take more than 2 GB. Even getting to the max ram for these machines means throwing out all the RAM already in them, which is why you see a lot of 1GB sticks up cheap on e-bay.
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
Heh, thanks for pointing that one out, i didn't think to look.
Software Freedom Day!.
The InformationWeek article you cite, If You're Going To Steal Software, Steal From Us: Microsoft Exec, is from this year, 2007. However, it's been about a decade since Chairman Gates admitted encouraging piracy to gain market share. Hey, it works. Spread their proprietary file formats, protocols and digital restrictions technology. That's where the real lock is.
Whatever. I guess someone will have to update this image to reflect the look of the new desktop and his physical decline.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
Yeah. It's easy. Just start here or here.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
The problem is that ignoring simple market inertia makes for a very narrow and naive point of view, independently of any techno-religious considerations or the popular "consensus" that everyone "hates" Microsoft or that Vista is "unusable". Why don't you sit around and wait maybe a few years to see if your doom and gloom comes true instead of trying to be clever and predicting the end of times on teh interwebs with trite phrases like "enjoy the fall".
Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
Hell, I'm still waiting for a version of Vista Upgrade Advisor that doesn't immediately suck down 1GB of swap space then hang indefinitely...
Slashdot quality declines as the number of hot grits posts decreases. - Provolt's Law, Apr-09-2005
Polls are a sampling and a good poll can be a perfect representation within an acceptable margin of error of 1-3 percentage points. You may THINK that there is market inertia regardless of the fact that government agencies, corporations, schools and consumeres have all but boycotted the product and Microsoft has had to release inflated sales figures that include PRE-SALES number, upgrades and neglect to take into consideration return and cancellations.
Aside from that, this isn't the only report saying something similar to this. So this isn't that unlikely. The fact remains that you just would prefer to put on 'rose colored glasses' with a Microsoft logo emblem embossed on them.
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.