Slashdot Mirror
Dell To Offer Win XP On Consumer PCs Again
phalse phace writes "With so many consumers still asking for Windows XP to be loaded on Dell's consumer level PCs, the PC maker has finally decided to offer that as an option. 'Like most computer makers, Dell switched nearly entirely to Vista-based systems following Microsoft's mainstream launch of the operating system in January. However, the company said its customers have been asking for XP as part of its IdeaStorm project, which asks customers to help the company come up with product ideas. Starting immediately, Dell said, it is adding XP Home and Professional as options on four Inspiron laptop models and two Dimension desktops.' The Dell models with the Windows XP option are: Dell Inspiron 1405, 1705, 1505, and 1501; and Dell Dimension E520 and E521."
Who wants Vista?
Long live Windows XP
I don't read or respond to AC posts
this means the hating of Vista is stronger then the hating of previos OSs.
Good, Maybe MS will take a hint....
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
...whether we buy VIsta or XP?
How much of a premium would you pay/discount would you demand for XP Pro compared to Vista Business preloaded?
Same question, but your favorite OSS OS/distro compared to Vista Business preloaded?
Same question, but a bare drive compared to Vista Business preloaded?
How many of you would actually pay a premium to not have to take the time to wipe the Micrud$oft off your box?
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
With the last Linux input to Dell and now XP being begged for.. Why doesn't dell have an option on their PC customization site that states,
"Choose an OPERATING SYSTEM:
1. Vista 32 or 64 Home
2. Vista Ultimate
3. Anything But Vista."
"Please, shut up. Just when I think you can't say anything more stupid, you speak again." -Archie Bunker.
Now I can order Crap with oldCrap installed on it! Not that crappy NewCrap! I hate NewCrap!
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
Traditionally each new Microsoft OS has had a certain percentane of gauranteed sales due to computer makers switching. Having fewer copies of Vista sell means Investors could get skittish about the long term and not value the company as highly.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Let's hope Microsoft does the same thing next year when people are still clamoring for XP...
Many people dislike change since they don't like adjusting to new things, even if what they're switching to is many times better.
I haven't tried Vista, but I'm willing to bet that most of these customers want XP since they're used to using it, not because they think Vista is worse.
Suppose MS spent $500,000,000 developing Vista.
If they don't recoup it, heads may roll inside Microsoft.
But the difference between
$600,000,000 in Vista licenses plus $0 in new XP licenses
vs
$400,000,000 in Vista licenses plus $200,000,000 in new XP licenses
is a wash, assuming other things like support costs, long-term customer retention, etc. are all about the same.
The numbers above are 100% made up from thin-air concentrate.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
I'd definitely say that it's welcome news for a lot of people... Vista, as I see it right now, is nothing more than a Beta version, and forcing it down consumers' throats seemed totally insane to me, after having gone through a lot of issues with drivers/compatibility.
1. Sell PCs
2. Offer something other than Microsoft's flagship product preloaded.
3. ???
4. PROFIT!!!
Oh wait, that actually works.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
-
You are moderating this comment -1 "Retarded", Allow or Deny?
It will be interesting to see what happens honestly. Technically the business versions of Vista include a downgrade license (IE you can legally install XP by buying Vista) It would be interesting to see if Dell goes this route. If their XP sales are significantly strong, you might actually see them attempt to do this.
I think Dell is just trying to help MS get their sales numbers up to a par with what they are selling in China :0
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
With new computers and top-end hardware running Vista at a crawl, I can't help but think that the 'Vista Ready!' sticker on many new machines just means it would make a really bitchin' XP box!
Bravo Dell, bravo. Now if you could make just one more leap and offer Linux, we'd be all set.
There is no mod option "-1: Disagree" for a reason. "Overrated" is not an acceptable substitute. Post something instead.
1. introduce inferior OS called Vista 2. wait for Vista to lure people from Mac/Linux 3. people then switch to XP out of hatred for Vista 4. Profit
Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
This raises an important question - who's more important to whom?
1. Is Windows essential to Dell's business model of building and selling PCs?
2. Is Dell essential to Microsoft's business model of establishing a monopoly and locking in customers?
In an ideal world, it's obvious that #2 would be more true than #1, given the huge percentage of the PC market that Dell occupies. However, customers still demand Windows, and while Microsoft has the power to raise the wholesale prices for Dell, and render the latter unable to compete in the low-margin world of hardware sales, Dell is still quite dependent on directives from Redmond.
This latest trend just serves to underline the inherent instability in this partnership. In this context, it is not surprising that Dell is looking into Linux, since proliferation of the latter will benefit Dell in that it will limit the extent to which Dell depends on Microsoft in the long run; in the short run it'll give Dell more bargaining power with regards to wholesale Windows price negotiations.
It's perfectly fine to not want to be an early Vista adopter. But, regardless of one's opinion of Vista's features or initial quality, spending money on old WinXP at this point is like throwing your money away.
Vista is without a doubt the future of the Windows platform; if you don't want to partake just yet, hold off buying a new machine altogether. Demanding a new machine with WinXP is just irrational.
ENDUT! HOCH HECH!
I recall something similar happened with Windows Me where many vendors actually offered machines with Win98SE instead. Is Vista shaping up to be the next Windows Me?
-- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
Indeed, as was posted already, it would be nice if Dell just offered the option of several Operating Systems for every computer purchased. Sure, it would drive Microsoft crazy as they want everyone to switch over to their new OS, and thus dump their old computers for ones that will run Vista, but if a company like Dell has the ability to provide what it's customers demand, why shouldn't they?
From what I've seen from Vista (specifically an install of Vista on a Sony Viao that refused to run the DVD authoring software because the Sony's video wasn't up to snuff), I am not impressed by it. Furthermore, when has Microsoft released an OS that did not need a major overhaul (other than Win2k) soon after it's release?
There is far too much media hype over Vista, this early in it's release. I can't wait until the equivalent of an SP2 to come out for Vista, so I can chuckle like a maniac. I just wish Dell would expand their offer to all their products.
"I love deadlines. I love the whooshing sound they make as they fly by." -D. Adams
As recent as two weeks ago we were able to order Windows XP on Dell machines. A client of mine purchased it right from the web site.
How about Ubuntu pre-installed PCs? Afterall Dell offers already the n-Series without any OS pre-installed which has become a huge success.
Windows ME again?
It's become clear that IdeaStorm isn't about soliciting ideas from users -- it's about using the web to publicly humiliate Microsoft into letting Dell sell to its customers what Dell already knows they want. It should be called PassiveAggressiveStorm.
Well, I'm using Vista, and I have to say, there are various things about it I don't like.
F'rinstance, I just shelled out for a pair of 3D shutter glasses. Now, my graphics card has no drivers for it yet, and I don't blame MS for that, because it's NVidias fault. But it looks like the fancy Aero interface will prevent them from working in a windowed application, which may rule out their use for things like CAD and molecular modelling, which I had an interest in.
My joystick drivers are utterly fubar.
Getting a microphone to work for VOIP games has been a nightmare.
Mind, some of these things will change. The driver model in Vista has changed dramatically, and top that with a graphics card with a brand new driver architecture of its own, and you're bound to have some problems.
So a lot of the problems are teething trouble. But there are still things that will by the looks of it continue to irk and annoy and restrict me. Here's hoping that the productivity applications I want to use get ported to Linux.
I nearly bought XP, for the record, having been on Win2k until it prevented me from running an application. But I thought, why buy an OS that's going out, when there's a new one coming in.....
Just bought a dell laptop yesterday actually. with all the discount specials floating around, some models listed in this article doesn't have the option of XP... Looking at the 1505 model, i was faced with the choice of getting Vista Home and buy a XP Pro OEM license elsewhere, or spend an extra hundred via a different deal to include XP Pro. Former requires much more time from me to d/l and install drivers later... Eventually, the 6400 model came through, which had identical specs as the 1505 and comparable discounts, XP Pro came pre-installed :-D took probably 3 hours of looking around though, but if I had to do all the d/l etc, it'll take 6 hours instead -_-'
In comparison, Lenovo shopping was much more straight-forward, albeit around $200 more expensive...
What about the price? Is the overall cost going to be cheaper?
Not A Troll!
Is Dell becoming brave in the face of MS? First they seem to get serious about putting Linux on non-server systems, and now they're bending to customer demand, putting XP back on some systems.
The rest of the OEM's surely see what a disappointment Vista is, both technically and in terms of sales. If the rest of them joined Dell in standing up to the Redmond behemoth, the result would probably benefit everyone. Except MS. A lower MS tax, and ways to avoid it altogether.
I wouldn't be surprised if the next time Dell renegotiates their OEM contract, the terms are more balanced.
Keep giving out the coupons for Vista upgrades. If MSFT ever manages to get the bugs out of Vista they'll use their coupon. Or they'll buy a Mac. But at least if they have a coupon they'll be tempted to try it first.
Vista reminds me of the dork in college who threw a big party and no one showed up.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
Dell selling XP instead of Vista benefits MS in the long run. They sell an OEM operating system today, and they have one more customer to upgrade to Vista tomorrow (or whenever it is they drop support or introduce some must-have feature in Vista only.)
>
I sincerely hope so. I just can't think of anything I can do to drain the
MSFT cash hoard at a faster rate. But I can dream.
I bought a new machine about 3-4 weeks ago. Vista was the only option. I asked Sales before I bought it if I could get XP. No dice.
So when the machine finally arrived, I declined the licensing terms of Vista (I have my own licensed copy of XP) and I emailed Dell for a refund. Two emails later I got $27. This is about half of what the guy in Germany got from Dell Germany (plus he got $8 USD for Works, which Dell US didn't bother to comment on when I asked for that refund).
Just my $27 worth.
http://www.headsallempty.org/wordpress
The success of Vista is a success for most businesses involved in selling PC Windows-compatible hardware and software. It allows them to sell new products and services, even if these are pretty much the same as those they sold for use with Windows XP. In turn, this is good for the financial economy (if not for the environment).
Windows 2000!
...and any XP driver will work there.
Everything just flies on it...
In other words, Microsoft OS from 1999 is still actual.
It's coke cola all over again.
1) Change your product so everyone hates it (Vista)
2) Bring back the 'classic' version (XP) that everyone is used to
3) ???????
4) Profit!
Desktop-wise M$ is between a rock and a hard place. They're touting an 'advanced' windows-version which incorporates 3d-eye-candy as an integral part of the experience. Enter the average users who go "Booo, it's strange and different compared to XP, I wont switch".
Result : Average windows-users stay with XP, hurt Vistas image, Vista goes down in history as the least adopted windows-version, MS looses an edge in the "Who got the sweetest desktop"-competition and is compelled to stay and support its Fischer-Price themed XP while Linux and Apple are nipping the tentative customers who are scared to switch with wonderful options like a model which are tried and true or a beryl/compiz/XGL-joyride with a bottomline of 0$ respectively.
so MS had to relent and keep XP going...
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
"The fact that customers are pleading with PC suppliers to provide an XP option also hints at the lack of Vista upgrade sales for existing PCs." It hints of lack of faith in Vista. I dont see how you extrapolaite the upgrade numbers are down from new computer sales. Unless you are just guessing that lack of faith equals lack of upgrades.
Many computers that hardware vendors offers today are under the recommendations to run Vista and yet, they come with Vista.
So, you buy a new computer with Vista, and your old computer with XP is faster. You call your vendor and you ask him to explain. The help-desks can testify: the user satisfaction is low and they tend to blame the vendor. So the assistant tells you that you should add more memory to your computer... you have 512Mb? You should have 1Gb, or maybe 2! And then, only then, your Vista may run at the same speed in a brand new computer!
This is hurting everybody's business, and Microsoft asks vendors for patience: "when the modest computer raise to an Intel Core 2 Duo with 2Gb nobody will remember these days... but until then you have to stand by me!"
Donde Ser Geek No Duele
for some reason MS has been trying to outdo Apple on the "pretty" aspect of the desktop... maybe they didnt notice, but Apple only has 10%(?) of the market. People was a windows machine that works... my XP desktop looks identical to my win2k and my old win98 desktops...
Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
There is no contest here: Microsoft runs the show because they are virtually an OS monopoly for the vast majority of customers that Dell has.
Role play it out. If MS refused to let Dell sell Windows, then Dell would die (or shrink significantly). If Dell refused to sell Windows, then Dell would die (or shrink significantly). Microsoft has plenty of other vendors to sell their OS, Dell doesn't have plenty of in-demand OS's to sell (trust me- I wish linux counted, but that is nowhere near the volume business of selling XP/Vista).
For future scenarios, this is the basic rule of supply chain economics. Think of this chart.
Producer -> MiddleMan -> Distributor
As you go towards the right, your power increases in all cases EXCEPT where someone to the left has a monopoloy (or somewhat close to it). Wallmart is all the way to the right and all they sell are commodities, that's why Wall mart can gouge their suppliers. Dell wishes they were in the same boat, but they have a monopoly to the left.
to not have Dell (or Toshiba or HP or whoever) bundle in all the damn crap that comes with a new machine these days. Give me the bare OS, not full of crappy trial apps slowing everything down.
I recently got an HP laptop. After slow startup times, slow drive access, incomplete drivers (nVidia), numerous issues, failed programs, and failing to connect to my Linksys G WAP (had to use my old B WAP), I bought a new hard drive, got a copy of XP, and installed. With Vista, everything I did get working was only through getting patches for this, updates for that, "compatibility mode" for something else. With XP, everything, I mean EVERYTHING, works as designed out of the box. My copy of Vista now sits in a drawer, waiting until everything is fixed, apps that I use are compatible, and is decently faster.
This whole deal really sucks because I had to pay Microshit twice to use my computer... I "officially" told HP of my "Vista experience", and asked HP to get XP on my machine, just to let them know of my dissatisfaction. They pretty much told me "well, buy a copy of XP and install it". So I did.
When I went to HP's support forums, the top theme was "how to I get XP on my new laptop with Vista"... I think anyone else who is dissatisfied with Vista should take the time to drop the hardware man. a note to let them know just what the "Vista experience" (God I hate corporate speak) is like.
Like most computer makers, Dell switched nearly entirely to Vista-based systems following Microsoft's mainstream launch of the operating system in January.
The ones used by the guy who's name is on the side of the building, of course.
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
I love Linux *and* MS basing (fun restarting servers on production every-time MS rolls out a patch). But while Vista may be top heavy, I don't think you do any thing any good by making it out to be worse then it is. There are plenty of good reasons not to jump on Vista, that just doesn't happen to be one of them.
Likewise, we may be ready for Linux everywhere, but a LOT of people wouldn't be. You think Vista is giving people reason to complain? Try being thrust onto Linux unwittingly. Try having to explain to that person why they should be happy with it. (:
Anyway, lets just say top-end hardware can still run Vista fast.
Quack, quack.
Will it cost the same or less to have XP instead of Vista?
First we see Dell talking Linux but don't hold your breath waiting to see Dell spending serious money promoting Dell & Linux = perfect together. Now we have Dell talking about keeping XP if customers want but no real figures who will opt for that because this is all new. What we do have is Dell getting alot of free buzz on places like Slashdot and some saber rattling with Microsoft that may get them more favorable OEM terms. It all creates a nice fuzzy feel for Dell as the champion of the people while doing very little beyond talk at this point.
On the desktop page, there's this link http://www.dell.com/content/topics/segtopic.aspx/w inxp_dimen?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs
that inquires "Still looking for Windows XP?".
Following the link brings you to a lovely chart demonstrating 7 reasons why Vista is superior to XP followed by a link to "Shop Windows Vista PCs".
After that, the 4 Dimension desktop models offered with XP are shown followed by a link to XPS 710 systems. I assume it's the same setup for the laptop side.
I sent Dell a note after I bought my last desktop (last week) basically to inform them that since I *have* to run XP, they missed the opportunity to sell me an Intel E6700 with 4G of RAM along with the remainder of the box.
Looking at the ads for the 520 and 521 lines, they would miss again if I was looking to buy this week.
We all know that Microsoft is going to play games with DirectX. And not the fun kind - the buy vista or go fuck yourself kind, wherein the next Halo and the next everything-not-based-on-an-ID-engine will only run on Vista.
You know how I know this? First, I imagine that I were a huge fucking prick. Then, I ponder how I could screw the world with my massive pricktitude. The logical answer is, make the next DirectX Vista-only. But, in the grand scheme of things, I'm glad that Microsoft will make this move. Windows users obviously need a dick to come out of the screen and smack them in the face daily, or they feel unloved. They are the Mister Garrison of users, I say.
Of course it does. If nobody moves to Vista, Microsoft would have to extend its support for XP. This would cost them huge amount of money.
The only thing I can see Dell using to get the public aware of this would be to have Justin Timberlake singing "We're bringing XP back......."
.. Alesis Multimix Firewire8/12/16, for example. There's no good technical reason, as win2k has a fine ieee1394 driver system, but the Alesis driver authors just didn't take the effort to make them work on Win2k. Alesis refuses to consider support for Win2k, completely ignoring emails on the issue.
Issues like this will be the way MS forces people onto Vista.. new gadgets that just won't work on XP or 2k.
ERROR 144 - REBOOT ?
Just bought a Dell laptop for my father. He was finally comfortable with XP but I couldn't get anything but Vista on it. I wonder if they will let me "upgrade" to XP.
I used his Vista reinstall disc and Installed Vista on my Fastest Comp.,(sh, don't tell anyone) it's an Athlon XP 2500+ 1 gig ram and Geforce 6600 GTOC and it ran sluggishly and I had a lot of errors (I know its not a screaming machine but it's not bad). I reinstalled XP the next day. I see NO reason at all to want to upgrade.
If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
Friend just got one with vista even after asking for XP and being told no, any recourse?
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I know this might sound strange to you, but some people don't have a machine yet. And some of them get their first machine now from Dell. And if me or a friend or family member would be one of those I would make sure to get Windows XP instead of Vista.
But I thought, why buy an OS that's going out, when there's a new one coming in.....
Because the one that's on it's way out will work for you _RIGHT NOW_ and still have at least two or three years of useful service life left, whereas the new one coming in still doesn't work correctly yet and will be at least a year... maybe two before the service packs, patches and drivers will become available to make the new one stable and fully usable
I upgrade primarily for two reasons:
1) compatiblity with other users
2) compatibility with new hardware (computers)
Featurewise, I havent seen huge impriovements sin the mid 90s. Its all fluff that slowsd the computer down.
I dont blame MS, though. The industry has too many economic fronts: hardware upgrades, os upgrades, inter-user compatility, new media compatibility, new technology compatibility. Business users have outdated computers because they really dont need to upgrade if their current hardware and software do the job.
MS needs to give us a reason to upgrade other than more features. This article is about hardware "upgrades."
All they have to do is make sure that wine gets developed more, and they can then have their cake and eat it too.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
I will install a MS OS once they reintroduce Windows 3.1! Death to Clippy and all that is evil!
Vista was the one thing that got a few people to switch to Apple. Long Live XP!
Do you have a reference for that, like a link or something?
Stasis is death. Embrace change.
That was a less than insightful remark to make. Demanding a new computer that actually works seems to be highly rational. XP finally works and Vista doesn't work. In exchange for shiny blue glass accented highlights around your windows you get to lose more control over your computer, you get a Operating System that is a massive resource hog and most of those resources are used to take more rights away from you and the use of your computer. In exchange for losing more control over your computer there is Direct X 10 which promises - in a couple of years to make the the explosions in your games more interesting to look at. To buy a new computer and becoming a beta tester for a program that few people not employed or in the pocket of Microsoft actually dislike intensely is irrational. But you go ahead and be a nice Microsoft beta tester, seems highly irrational.
Enjoy your Karma, after all you earned it. Feel your Karma Joe, feel it burn.
I purchased a Dell laptop with Vista installed about two months ago (have to use windows for certain apps) and it really is horrible. Is it possible to swap your Vista license for an XP license? I don't really like XP that much it's just that it runs the apps I need with fewer headaches.
Look for Msft to rename XP, Vista Classic and count it towards the overwhelming numbers of Vista shipped.
I just bought the E521 today. Damn your timing, Dell.
I dont see how you extrapolaite the upgrade numbers are down from new computer sales. Unless you are just guessing that lack of faith equals lack of upgrades.
I'm saying that it's easier to get consumers to passively accept a new default OS for new computer sales than it is to convince them to actively go out and buy an upgrade for their existing PC, and if they're struggling to do the former then this doesn't look good for upgrade sales.
1) compatiblity with other users
Yet another reason why people being slow to upgrade hurts Microsoft. Insofar as there are any compatibility issues between Vista and XP, people will gravitate towards whichever seems more prevalent. If Microsoft wants anyone to pay for the upgrade, it helps if it seems like "everyone else" is using Vista.
Customers asked for gnu/linux. They got XP because Michael Dell is still afraid of M$. M$'s plan is to eliminate XP by the end of the year, so this move by Dell is little more than a nice talking point: Vista does not meet customer's demands and expectations and was not selling. A stronger violation of M$ will, but something good for customers, would be to discontinue the sales of Vista because it's defective and promote gnu/linux as superior to XP.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Vista is to Windows XP what NEW Coke was to Coke!
And I don't mean "Coke Zero!"
Microsoft has learned that it CAN keep Windows XP sales alive - simply by bringing out a product that everybody seems to hate equally! The only difference is that Vista isn't flavored WITH Equal, like New Coke was!
Dude, the market is speaking.
Vista may be top heavy, I don't think you do any thing any good by making it out to be worse then it is. There are plenty of good reasons not to jump on Vista, that just doesn't happen to be one of them.
Performance is not a good reason to chose an OS? That one is new. Both XP and gnu/Linux run the same hardware better and gnu/Linux offers the user a greater choice of much better software. M$ can't win for losing this.
People are indeed ready for free software. Vendors like Dell need to promote what works best and that's been GNU/Linux for about five years now. With vendor promotion and hardware maker support for free software, M$ would not stand a chance. The only missing piece is accelerated graphics drivers but CPUs are fast enough to just about negate that last non free advantage and only gamers can tell the differnce.
Dell's decision to back off sends a very strong message: Vista is not ready.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Yahoo sued, and now XP available again! For want of a better word, Yahoo! God must know it's my birthday! :-)
It's my Dick^H^H^H^H^H Dell in a box?
Due to high customer demand, Dell has announced plans to start introducing OS/2 and DR-DOS 6 as options on Dimension desktops.
Well, the vicious cycle keeps spinning, thus I'm not so sure whether this will fly.
DX10 is Vista only. Vista in turn is 10% slower than XP for the additional overhead. Drivers in turn are new and by the very definition slower and less optimized (and, let's be honest here, buggy as hell). So you have to turn all those neat new features of DX10 off to have at least the performance of DX9 and play a game in a halfway decent way. Game manufacturers will certainly NOT create "DX10 only" games any time soon as long as Vista's market share is close to the one held by Linux.
So I doubt DX10 and games will play any measurable role any time soon.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
http://download.microsoft.com/download/d/2/3/d23b9 533-169d-4996-b198-7b9d3fe15611/downgrade_chart.do c
Can I downgrade my OEM version of Windows Vista Business to Windows XP Professional?
Yes. OEM downgrade rights for desktop PC operating systems apply to Windows Vista Business and Windows Vista Ultimate as stated in the License Terms. Please note, OEM downgrade versions of Windows Vista Business and Windows Vista Ultimate are limited to Windows XP Professional (including Windows XP Tablet PC Edition and Windows XP x64 Edition). End users can use the following media for their downgrade: Volume Licensing media (provided the end user has a Volume Licensing agreement), retail (FPP), or system builder hologram CD (provided the software is acquired in accordance with the Microsoft OEM System Builder License). Use of the downgraded operating system is governed by the Windows Vista Business License Terms, and the end user cannot use both the downgrade operating system and Windows Vista Business. There are no downgrade rights granted for Windows Vista Home Basic or Windows Vista Home Premium.
with coke, the 'classic' version wasn't the previous version. It had corn syrup instead of sugar.
I can see MS doing the same thing.HA! you thought it would be off topic.
What I mean by that is, when Vista flops, then they will support XP. and each major update it will become more, and more Vista like.
By that I mean, DRM infested pile of crap. But it will happen slowly, so most people won't see the other issues.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
A powerful Sith Dork you will become!
Now it's accurate!
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Ali Baba?
If Vista is anything like the other versions of Windows, then it has downgrade rights. Presumably, the Ultimate and Business editions have downgrade rights that allow you activate an XP Professional, maybe Win2K, maybe even NT4 with the Vista product code. Anyone can get Vista on a new computer from Dell, go get the XP Pro CD sitting on their shelf and install XP. When you need Vista for some reason, you can just go and get the Vista install disk you got with the PC and install it. No problem, and you get what you want either way. Makes way more sense!
today is spelling optional day.
Just chipping in here in my capacity as IT Director for my company. Vista is banned at my company for several reasons:
1) Incompatibility with many programs and home-grown applications, including our corporate anti-spyware/malware/virus solutions.
2) Cost (OS and hardware upgrades/replacement).
3) Performance (sluggish on all but the newest, fastest machines).
4) Bugs (never buy version 1.0 of anything).
We've tested Vista extensively over the past several months, and find little to nothing desirable about it. We've also banned Office 2007 temporarily, due to the long learning curve related to Microsoft's decision to eliminate drop-down menus and go with the Ribbon, moving things all over the place while they're at it. Upgrading Office from 2003 or Vista will require training (cost), lower productivity (like many companies, we have a lot of non-savvy computer users) and increase our help desk time spent telling people where (now) commonly used commands and features are found.
I find both Vista and Office 2007 utterly devoid of added value for my business, and chuckle at Microsoft for releasing either of them in the condition they are in. We will - no doubt - be one of those companies that clings to XP on the desktop as long as possible. Frankly, in my opinion, Microsoft is working as hard as it can to push my company away from using its products. We already utilize a Linux fileserver, FTP server, Web Server, fax server (Hylafax is amazing...) and firewall. It may well be time, very soon, to seriously investigate moving away from Exchange 2003, utilizing an open source replacement for it, and start migrating desktops to Linux.
It's a big job, but perhaps the end result, along with Microsoft's increasing pomposity, is beginning to justify the effort involved in migrating.
Well, if you're not violating your license terms, every time you replace a machine with a new one, you are giving Microsoft a certain amount of cash.
Your VLK doesn't let you put Windows onto bare, unlicensed hardware. Go read the terms if you don't believe me, but this has been beaten to death a lot. MS only sells "upgrade" volume licenses, which let you put your preferred version of Windows onto OEM hardware that's already stickered and has a Windows license. (And lets you do it without ever putting in per-machine serials, at least for XP; I don't understand Vista's authentication and don't care.)
If you go and get a bunch of generic cases, mobos, processors, and other stuff, and start installing your VLK copies of Windows on them, you're in violation, because the hardware doesn't have that "base" license on it already. This is why you don't see big companies just going out and assembling their own PCs: you need to go to an OEM and get machines that have Windows licenses on them, so you can use your VLK upgrade. (Or, I assume, pay some sort of additional per-machine surcharge, or buy retail copies of an older version to get the licenses so you can upgrade.)
There's no such thing as a blanket site-license for Windows. You're always paying per-machine, somehow; it's just usually built in to the cost of the hardware. It's certainly a lot less revenue for MS than if you stayed on the upgrade treadmill and took everyone up to Vista, and then in 5 years rinse and repeat to upgrade to Windows 2012 or whatever, but they're still milking you indirectly.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
whats the 'big' news about this?
Why why why why? I want XP. On any new computer purchased. For at least the next two years.
I hated XP when it came out. I finally get to the point where I can tolerate it and then Microsoft ships Vista. I'm a sysadmin. I want STABLE. XP has plenty of features that users aren't using. We don't need features. A lot of vulnerabilities and bugs were patched. That's a good thing. XP has assumed a status quo kinda status. I can live with it for now.
Now with Vista I gotta deal with new bugs, new vulnerabilities, new user training issues. ( Don't get me started on Office 2007 and the fun new lock-in tool they call MSXML. ) And Vista looks like Linux in 1999 ( at least to me, since I have no computers on my network with a gig of RAM and a recent video card. )
Bah.
All of the systems listed for Windows XP are the base model Dell systems. The only really common thing about the base model is that they have the least amount of "dollars off retail price." You won't get 25% off or $400 dollars off or any of the good deals for dell found all over the web. In many cases when you build up a nicer system, it would be cheaper to just buy a normal Vista highly discounted machine and a box copy of XP. Yet most people don't get this (Dell makes its deals confusing on purpose) so people will go to that part of the website, see they are "cheap" and proceed to fleece themselves as they add upgrades.
I guess if you need XP you have to have it and would be willing to pay a premium....
Open Source Sushi
No way. Vista costs more than XP. If they buy XP licenses, and not Vista, guess what? They lose!
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
does it take an ideastorm to come up with this.. hmm lets see give user the option of which os they have installed when they buy our computers, and hardware.. oh thats damn a brain teaser, who ever came up with that must be some kind of genious, here take my wallet, credit card and housekeys!!!
on a lighter note, good dell is staying "hip" and listening to their customers!
I do not use MS products, but given my encounters with MS documentation packaged with new products, I would be extremely surprised if anywhere it is mentioned what you helpfuly are recommending.
Users of WIndows systems have a very low expectation of how the machine ought to behave, this includes some degree of meddling to make it work.
And as for applications, well, if the underneath OS was fair to all, then applications would just need to follow published APIs and work with the OS manufacturer to make them better. BUt as we know, if you are in direct copetition with MS products, your are at a disadvantage because MS products will share lots of different resources with applications, to the point that it makes them appear faster.
Application designers then have to come around with the kind of tricks you mention in order to boost their performance in an environment that is at best uncooperative and at worst plain hostile.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Who is imposing contractual restrictions on who when doing deals?
That should give you an idea of where the balance of power is.
It is MS saying to PC makers you can't do this or you can't do that.
PC makers obidiently follow as they are told.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
People working in big corporations are beginning to do their homework.
I have seen several projects in the last couple of years stopped on their tracks because they were intending to use Windows (in a situation in which it was not the best choice).
Many IT people have gotten away with being lazy for far too long by using WIndows without thinking and evaluating alternatives.
As for desktop users, it is time they start doing the same, your wife is extremely lucky, in my also anecdotal experience people are struggling against their WIndows computers, once they are introduced to the latest Linux or Apple machines, they realize there is another way of doing things, and some people are finding that way is better fo them.
A big manufacturer like Dell throwing their Linux Hat in the ring for real would be great for the industry as a whole (including MS, who could benefit from some healty competition, before they go down the suing your competition way of no return).
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
vista = "new coke"
I wouldn't go so far as to say that PC gaming is dying, far from it - I just think a lot more people are playing online games like World Of Warcraft and there are a huge number of freely available mods for games that just extend the lives of the games that they have bought.
I also don't think that since about late 2003 and early 2004, there really hasn't been that great an improvement in PC game graphics - get a half-decent video card and you have almost perfect photorealism. Are people *really* clamouring for even better graphics?
I personally believe that games will not sell Vista. If you look at the price of buying a Vista upgrade, you can almost buy a games console like a low-end X-Box or a Wii for the same money. And if you're looking to buy a new PC with Vista OEM on it and you're a gamer, then surely a console *MUST* look more attractive for the money.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
I advised my wife to get a refurb Thinkpad with XP Pro Saturday. The 3 cheap laptops at our neighborhood store all had half a gig of memory and Vista Really, Really Unusable Basic Version. How can a store even sell that to the unsuspecting consumer and not expect the user experience to reflect back badly upon them?
We build computers and so far we have also started to go back to adding just XP home and pro on to our systems, all the custom when Vista came out wanted Vista-based systems but then they found that they were having to get patches all the time for there software. Vista is to new at the moment, but there will come a time when it will be ok.
Webmaster SEO Forum
Vista, the new ME
"Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much." - Oscar Wilde
The last time I checked Ideastorm, XP wasn't the most desired operating system...
We recently purchased a Sony Vaio for a customer of ours. It came preloaded with Vista (so it counts towards the Vista total sales). But the first thing we did was "downgrade" to XP Pro.
So, do the investors know about this?
I upgraded to Feisty last night. There were a few hickups, but I endured and got it running. Its a pretty snappy and streamlined OS. I'm running it on a 2 year old HP ZD7000 laptop (1GB) and its downright snappy.
I totally understand why people don't want Vista.
I've always noticed that when Microsoft is tagged in articles like this, the number one tag seems to be "haha".
I found it entertaining...
The price is always right if someone else is paying.
I thought the same thing about Windows 2000 when WinXP came out. I kept waiting for the "next DirectX version will be XP-only" shoe to drop. And it never did. In fact DirectX still works on Win2K, Windows ME and even Windows 98, despite many other MS products being XP/Vista-only at this point (like Internet Explorer).
Not to say they won't try it this time, but so far they've been very conservative about removing DirectX support for older Windows versions, which is why my games partition still runs Windows 2000...
Read my blog.
Although Dell may be offering Windows XP as an option, I highly doubt the large majority of Dell's customers would explicitly choose XP over Vista. Most don't even know the difference. Of the ones that do, they would need to be savvy enough to have specific reasons to choose XP over Vista.
The type of people who are submitting and voting on ideas on the IdeaStorm website are generally not your typical Dell customers. Many of these ideas were submitted to tech sites such as Slashdot and then voted on by the technical community. If you look at the most popular ideas on their site, it's all about Linux and open source - not the kind of things Joe Consumer cares about.
That said, I do think it's a good thing that they're offering XP as an option. Just don't fool yourself into thinking that this is what the majority of people are wanting.
Assuming you have a copy of XP that you can legally install.
this is nonsense. The value of a piece of software is not attached to the date the software was built (in case when this is existing software and not a new product anyway.) Actually it is. Or are you saying that you'd still pay full retail price for a copy of Windows 95? The value of Windows 95 is either 0 or close to it. Likewise, the value of XP goes down each day. Each day XP gets closer to its end of life. When that comes about, XP will also be worth near 0.Actually, the value of a piece of software is attached to its usability. Win95 is not capable of doing what I need it to do, so its value to me is 0. If Win95 did what I need it to do, and I already owned it, then its value to me would be nearly as high as it ever was.
Awhile back, I saw someone who needed to buy a copy of MS-DOS 6.x, because whatever specialized, and very expensive, piece of equipment they owned would not run under Windows. That equipment was worth enough to them that they would have paid full retail price for a piece of software that's been obsolete for a decade. The market value of MS-DOS may have been quite low, but the business value for them was substantial.
That one sentence right there tells me everything I need to know. I'm not a Microsoft apologist. I'm a systems admin and my primary focus is RHEL(4). Linux servers are a pleasure to use. I've run Linux on my primary workstation for the past 7 or 8 years.
That said your statement regarding the market is a dead giveaway: you haven't use Vista yourself and you're parroting what you hear the market saying. I've done the same thing. It can be amusing. But being wrong for the sake of amusement can make you look bad (or unprofessional). So after I finished I installed Vista on some hardware myself. Now I have an opinion of my own based solely on first hand experience.
It's different and that itself is a little off-putting. I'm running it at work and supporting it now (its running on another employees system). XP is easier because I know it so well and when problems pop up they are the same problems I'm already familiar with. Vista is also a little less mature with some of the new features feeling like features that were added as somewhat unpolished ideas and I suspect SP1 will be a step toward maturing.
But if you are going to listen to the hysteria and formulate (and repeat) your opinions based solely on that of course your going to have an opinion based on the lowest common denominator. At this point the trash I hear people repeating is becoming so far removed for the actual experience that it's starting to sound like Vista folklore. Vista isn't perfect, not by a stretch. But knocking it for things that aren't particularly accurate doesn't help anyone by any means. No Linux users, not Vista users.
Quack, quack.
D-:
You insensitive clod, I've been a slith lord since you were in diapers!
--- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
I'll keep XP because of several reasons :
. aspx6 /772250.aspxs ta-en-visual-studio-zorgen-voor-onrust.html
. aspx
1) Nobody mentions this but Vista is incompatible with Visual Studio 2002/2003.
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/vstudio/aa948853
http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2006/09/2
http://www.techworld.nl/article/2436/problemen-vi
Also, VS 2005SP1 doesn't seem to play nicely as it does on XP when you look at this laundry list of issues
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/vstudio/aa964140
2) XP just plain works! I develop on a latitude 810 and it would crawl under Vista.
3) i'd like to install windows XP on my Intel iMac under Bootcamp. Vista is too unstable for that and as i'm only running it as a secondary OS along OS X i won't make the extra investment.
there's probably loads of other things to consider but these were mine;)
DirectX 10.0: Windows Vista exclusive.
It's going to be an interesting fight.
Game publishers want to maximize sales. By only allowing their products to run on DX10, they're cutting their own throats. At least for the next 2-4 years until Vista finally has 80-90% market penetration. They may even be able to exert enough pressure on Microsoft to add DX10 to Windows XP (it's technically feasible if I've heard the rumors correctly - there are already hacks to do so).
I'm pretty sure that I won't be required to upgrade my gaming box to Vista much before mid-late 2008. And I have good odds that I'll be able to push that upgrade off until mid-2009.
(Which is fine, because hopefully the price on the GeForce 8800's will drop enough that I can put a pair in SLI mode without ransoming a princess.)
Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?