Slashdot Mirror
Is Windows Vista in Trouble?
Ken Erfourth writes "The Inquirer.net is running a story about what they consider two powerful indications that Vista is failing in the marketplace. One, Dell has reintroduced PCs running Windows XP on its website due to customer demand. Two, Microsoft is conducting a worldwide firesale on a bundle of Microsoft Office 2007/WindowsXP Starter Edition. According to Inquirer.net, at least, these are signs of serious problems selling Vista. Are we seeing the stumbling of the Microsoft Juggernaught with the slow adoption of Windows Vista?"
Any others?
This is one going to be funny.
Dell would release PCs running XP without all the other crap it might be worth buying one. Maybe...
"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Drink deeply or not at all."
With XP, there was a compelling reason for a lot of people to upgrade. For the Win2K users, it got you the gaming APIs and other things formerly only good in the Win98 branch. For the Win98 branch users, it was a huge upgrade in stability and robustness.
With Vista, there is no compelling useful feature for users, and much of the content added is particularly ANTI-user. So why upgrade?
Test your net with Netalyzr
when they slipped their release date by 3 years..
they're in even more trouble since they haven't said a word about their next version of windows..
MABASPLOOM!
So can we get the 'yes' and 'hahaha' tags already
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
I don't like Microsoft, and I gleefully read all about Vista's "innovations" and the Zune's "features" and laugh. But this article is just a little too opinionated to make worthwhile.
Did the submitter know this is /.? Plenty of us here think the answer is yes, and have been thinking that for a loooong time. I'm more interested in anone here who thinks Vista will do well, and why. So step right up and change my mind, let me know why you think Vista will eventually dominate. And I need a better argument than "800-pound gorilla".
Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
Don't forget that Michael Dell installed Ubuntu on 1 out of 23 of his personal laptops!
The problem for MS this time around is that everyone was happy with XP. Ok, maybe not everybody was completely happy, but it's pretty stable, and does just about everything most people need it to do. People don't want to go back to having to run something that's buggy, or slows their system down. It's not like with windows 98, where we were still getting frequent BSODs. XP is a pretty good OS, and if people don't want to change, I don't blame them.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
There's this thing called a monopoly that prevents this trouble from occurring.
Windows users will buy new machines, and get Vista "real soon now." The number of users that switch will be nominal. No harm done to Microsoft.
As much as the media may want it to be, there is no competition in a market with a Monopoly.
Got Trader Joe's? friendwich.com RSS feeds work now!
My friends, this is but another clever marketing strategy for M$ to sell more copies of Windows XP!
By now, the PC market is saturated and MS already has 90+ percent of it. Nearly everybody who needs or wants a PC already has one. This means that there will be little growth and the market is really based on replacement of older models with newer ones. MS already has a huge market share, so they can't grow by taking share away from the competition.
This does not mean MS or Vista are washed-up. It just means it is a mature market. MS and Vista are actually sitting pretty. They will continue to see 90+ percent of new computers running their stuff for the foreseeable future. But they simply won't have double-digit growth year over year, just a steady torrent of replacements.
MUAHAHHAHA
Either this is the first sign of the apocalypse or the times they are a changin'
Can't you just see Bill Gates crying, "But I'm the Juggernaught bbbbbbbbiiiiiitttttccccchhhhh!"
funny mental images =)
Future indie game developer of America (and possibly Canada)
Vista is a great OS, it just may be a little too bulky for it's time. It probably needs to wait a little bit for mainstream hardware to catch up to it's outlandish specs (which in all honesty, you don't need if you don't run it in it's Turbo Hyper-Fighting Championship Edition graphics mode).
I do not think Microsoft is really feeling any heat here. They have enough of a user base that will be forced to update at some point or another. People will complain but in the end, when they get a new computer, it will come with Vista.
Now I am talking about normal users, so there is no need to flame. It is easier for most users to use what they are familiar with. They use Windows/Word at work and they will use the same at home.
Microsoft has already won. They might not have the checkmate now, but they will over time.
then I dont care. Apple and Microsoft both suck. It's time for Linux to knock off these two boring operating systems. They had their day in the sun but now it's time for them to go.
Windows ME.
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
Is Vista in trouble? Why wouldn't it be? Even if Microsoft gave the thing away for free, it totally ignores the fact that there's an enormous cost to upgrading. Microsoft doesn't need a fire sale, it needs to be paying people to install this thing.
Let's run down the usual suspects of people who upgrade and see how they feel:
I could go on, but you get the point. Is Vista in trouble? You bet. Add to all of the above the competition that it faces from various Linux distributions that are easier than ever to install and use, products like Mac OS, clever new projects such as ReactOS, and even its own predecessor! and it becomes clear that Microsoft should be praying that people pirate it, because that's the only way it's going to make any kind of splash when all is said and done.
Don't get me wrong, it won't die completely, any more than Windows ME is dead. But in the annals of operating systems, my money is that it will be merely a blip on the screen. If Microsoft is smart, it should be working on adding features to its operating system, making it faster and more powerful and easier to use. It should be fighting with us against DRM, not against us by crippling their software with it.
Personally, I think that Microsoft is not very smart, but who knows, I guess we'll see. At any rate, after giving it a week to try to convince me that it's not as bad as everyone says it is, I was very disappointed in it and won't be running it anytime in the forseeable future.
Microsoft is in control. All they have to do is to discontinue XP OEM licensing, or substantially raise the price. You'll get Vista with your new PC and you'll like it. If you don't like it, See Figure One.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
Nobody touches it, nobody cares. It just sits there, a Dual Processor Dual Core Hyperthreaded monster and nobody thinks its worth the time to even login.
Even I don-t touch it because the fan is noisy, all that eye candy and gloss and the noisy fan outweighs it.
I'm typing this on Feisty Fluffer, no Funky Feaster, no Finkle Fungerstein, oh whatever the latest Ubuntu is called. It's far from perfect, the keyboard layout doesn't know the Spanish keyboard I have (where are those damn brackets_ and why is the question mark an underscore__). The typefaces are not as good as Windows, the status bar is too high and the icons too amateur, but so far 2 people have asked me for a copy of the disk.
So yes Vista is in trouble, big big trouble. It-s a big yawn, it's late and the stories we hear of privileges being determined by filename etc. mean I just don-t want to waste time with it.
Care to elaborate? Or are you just onboard with the "Hate Microsoft" bandwagon? As someone who works in an environment supporting Microsoft (and other) products, I'm in no immediate hurry to see them tumble down just because I like to watch big things go boom.
What do you mean, slow starter.
They've already sold 244 copies in China!
Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
...run furiously to the people excited about the least useful but most pretty features of your new OS, and get them to buy into it.
-Rob
Biblical fiscal responsibility
I can pretty reliably get a BSOD on my Dell XP laptop. My audio interface seems to think it's all-powerful when I connect it via my PCMCIA card. Then the Dell says, "Like hell you are!" and BSODs. At least it's predictable.
As for actually "upgrading" to Vista, being able to listen to Robert Fripp's boot music is not enough of a reason. I'll wait for the rest of the sheep to beat the bugs out of it first.
[url:http://www.bitworksmusic.com]
BitWorksMusic.com -- odd tunes for odd times
The major thing here is Windows XP is not bad...I have hardly had any crashes on my XP machine and I am using it with more ease (in installation and setup) than my Ubuntu m/c at home.
Theres not much need for people to simply switch to Vista - It will happen over time though as we may like to use the Aero interface or other new features in Vista or even in Visa Sp1!!
Microsoft reports earnings on Thursday and I'm sure they'll provide some details on sales of Vista and Office 2007. From what I've read, sales of Vista seem to be good. Dell's decision to offer XP is a PR thing...they had a few customers who complained.
Does anyone recall a little abonmenation named ME? windows ME Millennium released by windows??? like an actual computer virus in giuse of an Os?!!!! Use Lynx!!!!!
I saw what seemed like plenty of copies of Windows Vista Ultimate Upgrade at my local closing CompUSA marked 30% off, which still made it about $181 + tax. Still too much considering the OEM copies can be had for less, and the real apparent benefits don't outweigh the bugs and incompatibility with my various hardware or software.
Seemed kind of fitting that the "failing OS" was one of the few remaining items on the shelf within a failing computer store.
$ man woman *
-bash:
This article is full of fuming anger and childish insults. This is a poor excuse for journalism. I'll wait until a real reporter, expert, or analyst writes about this to form an opinion.
The world of tech journalism is full of wild fanboys- his "wild march to Linux" is far more underlined by a march to Mac, and moreso even to XP. I question this guy's motives.
I thought about installing on a spare drive just to see what all the non-fuss was about but then I saw that it was going to cost $200+ and said "no thanks".
I've been running Vista for a long while, and retail version since release. It ran alright for a while, but lately has been pretty sluggish with only a gig of ram. I'm really wanting to switch back to 2003, but Media center and the 360 are just too valuable at the moment. (I know.. hook, line, sinker).
Either way.. I can see why it's not going over so hot. Too many changes, too sluggish for most PCs and the differences in change aren't really THAT numerous for people to really want to change. It just wasn't ready for release.
I know it runs well for a lot of people, and it did on mine as well.. though I disabled a lot of the memory hog features. I just can't afford to put more luit into ram, and after that... I hope my luck changes.
"Please, shut up. Just when I think you can't say anything more stupid, you speak again." -Archie Bunker.
If you are a gamer, XP is an upgrade from Vista. Helped one build a new system recently. Of course they they bought a copy of (32bit OEM) Vista. 3D performace (with a 512MB NVidia card running current drivers) was pitiful and the machine only saw 2GB of the 4GB installed. They are in an area with no broadband so PeoplePC being unable to get them connected via dialup was the final insult.
So they bought a copy of XP and reinstalled. 3D looked like what a top of the line card should be able to do and dialup worked. Performance in general was vastly improved. Still had the 2GB memory limit though, probably not much to there except go to a 64bit system and suffer the issues involved with that... not worth it.
Yes most of their problem was probably driver related. Doesn't matter, Vista is now facing the same problem we Linux users deal with every day. Users don't want to hear excuses, if the OS doesn't work with their hardware NOW they don't want to hear "maybe it will work someday". Especially since right now it doesn't appear a Vista user has any good options. NVidia doesn't perform well, ATI doesn't even have a DX10 hard out and Intel only has low end onboard stuff.
Three years late and they still couldn't manage to bully the key hardware players to have proper support available for launch. Doesn't sound like an 800lb gorilla to me. This fiacso is going to be long remembered.
Democrat delenda est
Most vendors I talk to have said that they are being allowed to sell XP until the end of the year. Systems sold in 2008 will have to have Vista.
Part of the problem is that there was not enough support for Vista ( a lot of people ran into problems with drivers ).
Basically MS got some of the pressure off of them to put a new OS out. Early adopters get to be the guinea pigs while the rest of us wait for the major problems to be fixed.
He who said 1,000,000 monkeys on 1,000,000 typewriters would eventually type the great novel, never saw an AOL chat room
It's easy to understand why.
There's no good reason to upgrade. No killer app(s), no great usability improvements, no speed increase.
Just more crap, in different places.
It gets old.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
I've been using Vista since RTM. I generally find it pretty good and certainly superior to XP. The *REAL* problem with Vista is that the pricing is ridiculous. Ultimate is pretty nice, but the price of $400 is simply $250 off from what anyone will pay and Home basic is a joke.
MS will figure this out and find a way to cut prices or they will see a long and slow adoption curve for Vista.
When Windows 95 came out people said the same thing.
When Windows 98 came out people said the same thing.
When Windows 2000 came out people said the same thing.
When Windows Me came out people said the same thing (and were right)
When Windows XP came out people said the same thing.
Rest assured, Microsoft will do all they can to make sure Vista is very much a success. Remember, even with it's supposed bad sales, Windows Vista already has more users than MacOS as a whole...
I keep reading comments by people saying "Everyone said that XP sucked when it came out ...".
The fact is that XP did suck when it came out and was only usable after SP2.
Vista has only just been released. Please don't judge it until Vista SP2 is out.
It will be better than XP by then.
PS: I will laugh my ass off if this DirectX-10 for Windows XP hack pans out.
Don't make your problems my problems!
No, we are seeing consumer backlash to digital rights management. Why is this so difficult to understand? If I can't play what I want, how I want, then your operating system is broken. Products that are not broken do exist. I choose to use those instead.
^..^
That would be the author of the Inquirer "article". He makes no factual assertions beyond what has already been printed in the press for the last week. Then he asserts that this means *DOOOOOM* for Vista. Ah, yes. "*BSD is dying" for the Windows crowd.
/. keeps giving him, and his lame publisher, links and press time and time again.
Allow me to break the bad news: Vista won't go away. Back when XP was released, there was popular demand for Windows 2000 for several years. Where I work (University lab), we *still* get requests for Windows 2000 from time to time. The university will not support Vista for at least a year. And then it will take another good year to deploy. By that time, I expect a service pack will have been released.
Demerjian is a troll with the backing of the worst IT rag in the industry. And
With Microsoft Goal a PC on every desk with Microsoft on it. Coming as close to reality as it is going to get. People are no longer excited by computers as they once were. Back in the 80s and early 90s PC were things for Geeks and Young People and Computers are the future but the presents is fine. So the younger generation started getting computers and such causing the growth in the PC market. Everything was new and exciting. Then the last big hooray was Windows 95 where all computers not just Macs were considered easy enough for everyone to use and with a timely popularity of the internet (in which MS jumped onto late) PCs became technology of NOW where everyone needs it, to function in our society fully. Now computers are way to common and the average person is not excited about the upgrade they have been threw the process and most people today have at least one upgrade under their belt, and that upgrade wasn't as exciting as they expected. So more and more people are not caring about a new flashier version of windows. Now the Geeks are hoarding and around Linux and Apple, so that is where the people who care are giving excitement too, back in 95 a lot of geeks were willing to wait until midnight to be the first for Windows 95 and now many of those people will hit refresh on their browser waiting for the next version of their favorite distribution or go to Apple Update Parties. As for Windows people don't care. Sure they use it but they are not excited on getting a new version just because it looks cooler. If they are going to put money into it it needs to be something much bigger. And the fact they learned that they could keep Windows 98 running for almost a decade afterwards and still run modern stuff. Makes them realize that XP will be around for a while to and no need to upgrade, heck they could probably skip a version if they felt like it.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
This is a problem for a company whose entire business model for the last 20 years has been based on double-digit year growth.
TBH, I think that's part of the reason Vista requires so many people to upgrade their hardware. Not because there's any technical need for it to be such a resource hog, but because Microsoft know full well most of their market will be the OEM market so by making people say "Ooh! Shiny! Must buy a new computer!" they won't have to worry about people being intimidated by the thought of installing an OS themselves.
A bit like how people are buying next-gen consoles even though it's far from clear which will have the strongest games catalogue by this time next year.
A while back, I distinctly remember reading a post on Slashdot predicting that there would be endless Vista articles, as in several on a daily basis from the date it was officially released. Obsession over it, if you will. I remember laughing, and it was modded funny. Looks like it should've been modded informative. :-\
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
I wonder if Vista's adoption will be at all similar to that of OS X. Version 10.0 wasn't all that great and created quite a bit of gnashing of teeth over issues of speed, backward compatibility, missing features, etc. By version 10.3, Apple had a really nice OS. Perhaps Vista will follow a similar path of improving performance and usability over the next few years.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
Let's hope so!
I've been swashdotted -- Elmer Fudd
I'm too lazy to go hunting around, but EXACTLY these sort of comments were being made when XP came out. And it'll be the same story this time around. Once people get used to Vista via new computers purchases, the rest of the computers will follow.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
As if!
The problem m$ is facing right now is that they are competing against themself. Let's face it, xp is good enough for just about everyone and there isn't anything in vista to warrant an upgrade. That was not the case with their previous releases of 95, 98 or xp, when there was a clear technology improvement with each new release.
Eventually m$ will kill off support for xp and lean on the OEMs to push the new OS and that will be the end of it. The migration won't happen on machines that are already out there, it will happen when those machines are replaced.
I imagine that m$ is facing a similar problem with office. There aren't any compelling reasons to upgrade from office97 to anything newer. There's not a lot you can to to tart up a word processor or spreadsheet other than add features that nobody really wants. Sadly, outlook is still outlook and they don't seem to be doing much to improve the one product that needs it the most. I guess that is why they are driving mandatory software upgrades through their enterprise support agreements. If what you have is "good enough" (the standard to which m$ has always aspired to IMHO) there is no reason to upgrade voluntarily.
Therein lies the problem - they only make money on upgrades, and there aren't any reasons for their customers to upgrade anymore, so m$ has to be more creative. I think that is why the are pushing for software as a service. If they can get people to pay an annual fee for windows, they won't have the big upgrade cycle and won't have to invent ways to force us to upgrade.
I don't know if their next OS will be subscription based, but I'd wager the more interesting parts of it will be, just to get us used to the idea, and that will be the end of the upgrade cycle.
I don't know if that is good or bad, but I'm pretty sure that an annual subscription for windows will be more expensive to me as a consumer than their current pricing model is...
*** Where are we going? And what's with this handbasket?
cmdrtaco put it in my end last night
Look, we release in the OSS world when it is ready. Things are routinely "slipped" (as much as they can be in the OSS world). I think that MS was right to hold it back. The real problem is that MS is trying to add security to their system and deal with all the horribly designed add-ons that they had. The security that MS now has it probably the best (or possibly the minimum needed) to accomplish it.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Vista. XP. Who Cares? Does Microsoft really care? As long as you are buying their OS, they are doing fine. No, the threat to Microsoft is not people choosing XP over Vista. It's people choosing OSX. In my little part of the world (education/research institution) OSX has reached about 30-50% penetration in the laptop arena. At least judging by what people actually bring to meetings. That trend will spell real trouble for Microsoft if it continutes.
When OEM's are providing customers an option to stay with XP, there no longer is an automatic 'Vista migration' anymore. The trick just went away. If Dell decides that they can't sell PC's with Vista but they can with XP, then Dell will continue to sell XP and customers will continue to get XP systems.
What's amazing is that the beta community has been loudly warning Microsoft for the imminent failure for more than a year. That's unprecedented as well. All Microsoft beta's are near-adorations of the company. Vista is the first where I saw open revolt against some of the stuff being pulled. And guess what, they did not listen.
To Terminate, or not to Terminate, that's the question - SCSIROB
It's not ready.
There is a lot of software that won't run on it.
It's buggy - feels rushed. There are things in it that are still broken - things that were broken during beta.
Honestly, if Intuit released Quickbooks for Linux (yeah, right) - there are a lot of businesses that would probably switch..
= Grow a brain...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Oppressive computing isn't what early adopters and technology leaders want, the ignorant masses have no one to follow. Far from heralding a new vision of computing, Vista (DRM) is the stuff of dystopian nightmares.
Windows is getting to the point where most of the changes don't mean too much for the average user, and some things have even gotten worse. This happened to Office sometime ago. I don't use Office, but I know many people who do, and many of them had stopped upgrading years ago once it got to the point that it had all the features they needed and the upgrades just cost money with little benefit.
In terms of this causing trouble for Microsoft, however, I don't think the effect will be huge. Despite the Dell thing, this will affect only upgraders. The upgrade market may be soft for Vista, but ultimately the new PC market is bigger, and most new PC's will still come with some version of Windows installed, and MS gets paid for those whether they are XP or Vista.
This is not news, just someone at the Inquirer writing another opinion piece. Nothing to see here.
YES!
My take is that there's no compelling reason to upgrade to Vista. An average IT department would have to be insane to deploy it given the system requirements...They'd probably have to forklift upgrade all of their workstations. And what would they get from Vista that they don't get from XP for the trouble? Nothing. Process protection? It's already been broken. Say hello to super spyware. So all you really get is a bunch of pain in the ass security hurdles and pretty windows. I think home users largely feel the same way.
But I also can't deny reality. If Microsoft wants us to switch to Vista, they're going to make it happen. They'll eventually pull support from XP, stop updates, and nag us to death about upgrading. They'll make their new software work only with Vista. They might even try to force some developers to do the same. Oh they're doing it with games already (think DX10) but can see this happening to regular applications, too.
But for now, what I am telling everyone is to buy their new computers with Windows XP and keep the free upgrade to Vista on standby in case it takes root. As for people running on rigs they've owned for awhile and talk about upgrading, I strongly discourage them from doing so.
-R
1. Most businesses are not "upgrading" because it causes more problems than it solves and doesn't really fix anything that needed fixing - they are either stabilizing on WinXP until 2010 or are jumping ship to Linux (a small fraction).
2. Consumers are not "upgrading" or even buying WinVista because it is a resource hog (memory, graphics, drivers not available), and is unsuitable for laptops especially - consumers are switching to laptops fairly quickly in fact. Some of them (a small fraction, but growing) are switching to Linux, BSD, or MacOS.
3. Educational and non-profit sectors are not getting WinVista for all the above reasons, but most of them are switching to Linux, as they can't afford the cost-per-seat for WinVista, especially when you add the 1-2 GB RAM, video card, and processor requirements.
So, does this mean no one is switching to WinVista? No. It means fewer are doing so, most are delaying, and a few are giving up on MSFT and jumping ship entirely.
Myself included.
Once MSFT revisits its decisions regarding Office and Mac support levels, this may change.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Some people are saying that people said the same things when previous windows versions came up, and they had always been a success later.
this is not the case. things are different this time.
earlier, despite tech savvy people did not like an incompetent windows version when it came out, and shunned, less tech savvy people, hype people, ignorant people were jumping on it, buying them and creating the market and getting on the hype.
truth be told, previous versions of windows were all milestones that were done to adapt to some major hardware/technology changes in the it world - 3.1 brought the graphical ui to mainstream in PC market, 95 brought automation, integrated os/services and user friendliness to the desktop scene, xp brought a much needed thing, a stable, reliable version of windows to the desktop. i am not counting in me, as it was a marketing trick to sell more stuff and also an intermediary makeshift solution to crashy 95 to hold the market in the while more stable versions were developed. im not counting in nt and 2000 either, because they did not go mainstream to the average joe market, and even 2000 was pushed a little, it did not catch up.
and now we have vista. there is NO new thing vista is bringing, there is NO major need that vista is meeting with current technology. it absolutely brings nothing except DRM. and noone was in need of DRM, because it is not a basic necessity of world of information technology/processing. i dont need to say that DRM is not needed in any average joe's home either.
so now we are seeing that even average joe is not jumping in the bandwagon of vista, heck, because they are just HAPPY with what they have now, XP.
hell, im no average joe, i like open source, i work on lamp platform, i dont like microsoft and its evil ways, but, hey, im happy with XP as it is too !
it just works. not gives me any reboots, lockups or hassles like 95 or me had given, or is problematic while installing stuff or trying to make things work like 95, me or nt or 2000 either. it works well.
it scales quite well with hardware too - right now there are 2 different image editors with heckload of memory consuming image data on them - one is Jasc paint shop pro, other is adobe photoshop -, firefox with 6 different sites open in 6 different tabs, i can see a googletalk window open, thunderbird mail client open with thousands of emails in databases going back to 1.5 years in dates, an animation shop applet that is a side feature of jasc paint shop pro, icq, skype, ms messenger, and us robotics skype phone hardware's tray icon loaded.
i can confidently open up Zend IDE, which uses java like hell, to code with php at the same time - oh wait - i just noticed at the same time i was running a Yellow Tip web server, which runs an integrated webserver through xp versions of apache 2+, php 4+, mysql 4+, for local lamp development in the background. also noticed that i have kaspersky anti virus monitor monitoring the hell outta whatever happens in the computer in the task manager there. also can notice ati's drivers to work with sapphire 256 meg radeon pro 1600 card.
and this is with amd 3000, 1 gig ddr 400 ram, 2x serial ata seagate barracuda 80 gigs, and gigabyte mainboard - heck, now talking about it i havent been listening to mp3s in the last 1.5 or so hours since i watched an episode of scrubs locally on winamp - i should launch my winamp to play some 60es songs ( i have been taken quite a liking for them lately) through my sb live xtreme music card, which sounds like hell with my altec lansing fx 6021 speaker set.
Oh, i forgot, i am able to right away jump in and play Star Wars Republic Commando while all this shit waits in the background, with full details on.
ALL AT THE SAME TIME.
see where i am getting at ?
This thing, WORKS. I dont need to go buy Vista for anything.
this is the reason vista sales are, not, and dell is offering xp with new pcs, and more to follow.
Read radical news here
Vista contributes to global warming? We'd better call Al Gore!
Well, it might have to do with the fact that MS has outdone themselves in the pooch-screwing department. Every couple of days it seems there's another report about how a driver won't work in Vista, or how the right (or maybe I should say "wrong") conditions cause constant bluescreens. "Backward compatibility" is apparently two words that should never be seen together in Redmond.
So if you're a company, you have a choice:
1. Stick with XP, which (after a multitude of updates) is relatively stable.
2. Migrate to Vista, which A) will cost a bunch of money and B) leave you with an incredibly unstable OS that may cause massive hardware malfunctions or failures.
It's really not a difficult choice. Microsoft's incompetence has finally reached the point where even their domination of the market won't be able to help them.
Gifts for Geeks - Stuff that really matters!
Microsoft actually weaned me off when they started requiring "activation." So even XP isn't attractive to me — it has the same basic problem as Vista does. I run XP from time to time to verify web pages and test software, but it's in a network-free sandbox when I do. I run win98 the same way - no network - and no activation inside a sandbox (Parallels.) I don't use either one as my main OS, and I certainly have no intention of ever purchasing Vista, just to buy into the same set of risks all over again.
What happens when an XP system needs re-installation and I can't get an activation for any reason? As far as I'm concerned, if I buy it, I expect to install it, perhaps put a registration code in that will work each and every time without ever having to contact the manufacturer, and that's it. I'll grant you that it seems unlikely today that Microsoft won't be there in a few years, but will they activate an XP installation? That's a policy decision, and there's just no telling what that policy will be. I'm not hitching my cart to their policy decisions.
Whatever Vista offers, it isn't enough. I have plenty of functionality between linux and OSX, and I can run both concurrently, as is convenient. If either one ever fails, I'll just grab my install CDs and I'll be up and running in a reasonable amount of time. The rule of thumb here is (a) software on CD or DVD, and (b) registration codes, if any, sealed in the jewel case in a readable fashion.
I remember trying to re-install a screen saver (some very pretty aquarium simulation) and finding out that it wouldn't install, claiming I was trying to install it on multiple machines (I wasn't.) I wrote the company several emails about it (they were still around) and they never replied, nor would the screen saver ever work again. I was annoyed, as you might expect. But if this had been the OS instead of just a $30 screen saver, I'd have been pissed at about the nuclear level. This is exactly the risk everyone faces with XP and Vista.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
If it turns out like Windows ME it will soon be forgotten (as in not used very
much, except in jokes), otherwise it will be used a lot because sooner or later
it will be the only version offered with a new PC.
Either way it just doesn't matter, XP may be viable competition but that is
hardly the sign of a healthy market place. MS are just happy for you to run
what ever you want, as long as it is Windows.
"Why should a company not be allowed to discontinue a product?"
Uhhh...Because they are a monopoly that was convicted of using their monopoly position in an illegal manner. Given that people still want to buy XP, and that they can sell it at a considerable profit, one must then ask why they would not be willing to sell it to an eager public. The answer entail vendor lock in. This is a problem for a monopoly that has been convicted of anti-competitive behavior.
I see so much railing on Vista, but as someone who doesn't use MS Windows, I have no idea of what the problems are with Vista that's getting everyone so bent out of shape. Could someone please provide a link to a reliable list of problems with the new Vista? I've been reading what seems to be a lot of bitterness, but I just don't know what could be all that much worse about Vista than XP. I guess I'm also wondering if Microsoft might have actually made some improvements that maybe people feel uncomfortable with because it's different than what they're used to.
A year from now, every machine will be a 64 bit machine.. and come with 4 gig of ram. People are not going to buy these machines with XP preinstalled.. that would be a waste. They will want a 64 bit operating system. XP64 is a piece of shit. It makes Vista64 look like gold.
This is why Eric. S. Raymond has been saying that Linux has a year to get its shit together and get preinstalled by Dell, et al.
How we know is more important than what we know.
Vista has a bad reputation and lots of people don't want to upgrade to it, but it's selling like crazy on new desktops and laptops. That's enough for it to sell millions of copies and be a huge success.
I'm not one to join bandwagons. But after looking at the lists of positives and negatives concerning MS in the last five years, well, they're not even remotely close to balancing each other. If they went bankrupt tomorrow I definitely wouldn't be mourning their passing.
However about my post you were responding to, it was more of a poor (apparently, since it seems no one found it funny) attempt at humor than anything.
There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
EOL
Microsoft declares XP End of Life and Dell won't be able to choose between XP or Vista.
Companies do it all of the time.
Got Trader Joe's? friendwich.com RSS feeds work now!
I was raised on Macs, when I was 2 I remember my dad had an Apple 512k when I was very, very little. Ah, the good old days of B&W.
Oooh, and then when they brought out the Apple IIx. The idea of having colors, that was exciting. I remember the first time my siblings and I booted that sucker up. We all went "WoW" at the pretty colors. It was amazing.
I'd keep going, but my brain would fry from nostalgia.
There were some Quadras in there, a Centris, a Performa, a straight up Powermac or two, and eventually some iMacs of various generations. I still have a mac, in fact there's never been a period of time since the 512k was handed down to me that I haven't been the proud owner of a Mac. There isn't a memory of mine that predates that 512k.
But wait...
What do Cmd-Shift 1 and 2 do?
What's Clarus?
Thunderclone: ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE! ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE!
That extra three years XP became more entrenched each day. Every time somebody installed a new printer or upgraded their wireless or beat their way through a software install, the compatibility bar for vista got higher. Every time someone new installed XP, the breakthrough point for widespread adoption of Vista got higher too. Each time XP gained share the leverage of having everyone on the same plan became more apparent as the pool of people you could exchange files with grew. Every time somebody bit their lip and bought a hugely expensive new program in the faint hope it would install and run correctly and be compatible with their extant setup and not be lame, the cost of upgrading to vista grew higher again. Even the negatives of some of these things forewarned people that change can be very bad and unnecessary change can be dumb when things go horribly wrong as they sometimes do over the simplest things.
XP isn't perfect and it doesn't have to be. XP works reliably enough for most people to do what they want to do most of the time. They've grown comfortable with their XP setups and invested heavily in padding their XP nests. To abandon that for a whole new Vista that doesn't have any of their expensive software or work with their expensive peripherals or just won't do what they've done each day for years or isn't quite interoperable with their friends' just isn't going to fly unless there is a compelling reason. A new desktop theme is not compelling enough for most people. For that level of sacrifice people want real change.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Dell and other companies tend to sell machines with less than the recommended amount of RAM for Windows Vista. If a computer has less than 1 gigabyte of RAM, you REALLY want to stick with Windows XP. If a computer has Intel video, you will want to avoid the new Aeroglass UI as well.
Those are some of the obvious reasons why a company would WANT to stick with Windows XP. Other reasons, like drivers not being mature at this point would also make some people want to stick with Windows XP.
Now, due to the extra overhead of Vista, if you have a single-core processor, going to Vista may also make your current machine seem sluggish, so that too would be a reason to NOT upgrade.
Over the next 8 months or so, the reasons for avoiding the move to Vista will slowly fade away, and people will make the move. It's fairly simple, and too many people look at the slow sales of Vista without trying to understand the reasons behind it. Vista itself isn't really all that bad, but if you try to run it on a computer that doesn't run Windows XP well, why would ANYONE think that Vista will help? Vista is for dual and quad-core processors, not for single-core processors and with a video card(or GPU) that can handle DirectX 9 in hardware. The upgrade process from XP to Vista also leaves a LOT to be desired for many people as well.
Two words: MSDOS 4.0.
Those of you old enough to remember, and yet who can't even recall MSDOS 4.0, will immediately know what I mean.
For those of you who are too young, MSDOS 4.0 was a tremendous flop. MSDOS 3.3 was used pretty much continuously from its release in 1987 until it MSDOS 5.0 came out in 1991, and even then, I ran into machines running v.3.3 for years afterwards. Version 4.0 was buggy and bloated while adding virtually nothing in the way of useful features, and the market reacted with a resounding yawn.
Microsoft, it should be remembered, was the dominant OS vendor in 1987, but it was not a monopoly yet. There were still plausible alternatives (then as now, technically superior). Microsoft is the dominant OS vendor in 2007, but its monopoly is crumbling, and all it will take is one gigantic screwup for competitors to move in. Vista is a gigantic screwup, just like MSDOS 4.0.
This could be good news for Linux, great news for Apple, and freaking fantastic news for ODF, especially if MS takes as long to recover from Vista as they did from DOS 4.
Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
Coca-cola? New Coke... everyone hates it... in fact, they hate it so much, that everyone buys up Classic Coke even faster?
Vista, XP, worldwide firesale...
Everybody here has a full set of reasons NOT to downgrade to vista.
The ONE reason to install Vista? DX10. as we saw a couple days ago.. this may soon be resolved.
So instead of rechatting the same info on y Vista sux0rs.. why not jump in the Ubuntu forums and help some people get hardware running on there new Vista "compatible" puters. Or switching over clients.
kick em when there down
Kill your TV
My baby sis is an MSCE IT tech with 20 years of experience. This is her take on the whole "vista" fiasco...
Vista was played to close to the vest to allow those who write software for businesses and servers to develop compatable programs. While waiting for the hardware developers to catch up to the new software, they should have released at least beta versions for the developers to use at the same time. now, when most companies are less than ten years past a major technology overhaul due to the whole "Y2K" deal, there is a lack of interst in overhauling servers and software that is working well just for the sake of change.
Many of the proprietary programs her company uses are not vista compatable. Even in compatability mode, the best she can hope for is to install individual proprietary database programs on each unit in house because the new vista PC's are not compatable with the servers. This creates a major issue when trying to syncranize data that is currently held on the servers and accessable at any terminal with appropriate security precautions in place. even in the small company she works for, losing server capabilities for 300 terminals is grosely unacceptable.
As yet there is no server capability for tracking protocals such as USPS or UPS that are compatable with Vista.
In order to continue in bussiness, her company is willing ( and just recently did!) spend an additional $500.00 for eaach new desktop or laptop terminal with a reliable OS that will maintain the productivity currently in place (they bought 10 dells when they set up their new office in another town. for those of you who like me hate math, that was an extra %5000.00 for XP computers!)
Microsoft is fighting agianst an insurmountable foe at this point when it comes to switching the world over to Vista... ITSELF. While XP is not perfect, it is currently keeping the world in business and is working as well or better than other OS's
In the words of my baby sis.....When they offer to switch us over at peak effeciency for free, then we will look at it. untill then.....
its less of an OS, and more of a screensaver. i wouldn't buy a vista copy even if they gave it away for free. ..we have graphics packages for that thank you very much.
can u imagine how much memory those 3D cascading live windows take?
linux is slowly but surely winning hte race and the day is nhot far when microsoft will be a petrified fossil in the software annals of the human race.(or something like that).
Now here's one iPoddy site! iPod Range
That's what makes it a clever new project. ;-)
If it ever gets to a state where it will run most of what Windows XP runs as well as XP will run it, I think that the ant and elephant roles will start changing. Personally, I hope that the developers of ReactOS meet with wild success, and I'll definitely be keeping my eye on this very interesting concept.
No, don't try to convert them to Linux (unless they ask you to) but go help them when their computers fail. When you hear a friend or a relative suggest that they're going to buy a new PC because their old one is getting slow, go and help them out. Tell them it probably just needs a reinstall, maybe a bit more memory, a bigger hard disk... But *STOP* them buying new computers just for the sake of it.
And when you've helped them out, help them to install Firefox and Thunderbird, install OpenOffice for them and set it up.
People need to be educated properly about what it is to own a PC and what they need to do on a regular basis to keep it running relatively fast. We need to take control of our PCs - not buy every Microsoft upgrade, remove the Norton and McAfee Nagware crap that comes installed on every new PC.
That's the *PROPER* way to make Vista fail...
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
I think that Microsoft is the new IBM. For a long time, IBM was the name in computing. They designed the standards, and everyone else followed. For several reasons, IBM lost the position of getting to dictate the computer market. But IBM is still around, and still making 100 billion a year or something like that. But they no longer dictate the market.
I think Microsoft dictated computer trends through most of the 90s and into the early years of this decade, but I think they are no longer dictating, they are just a large, maybe the largest player. They will still be around, making lots of money, but they won't get to decide things.
Microsoft cornered the desktop market at least ten years ago. And since then, they have not managed to repeat their success anywhere else. For the amount of money and brand awareness they have, they have not managed to repeat their success in either the server market or the home electronics market. And their desktop market, although it hasn't been directly affected by Linux, has been indirectly affected to a great degree. As long as there are other options out there, they can't just control the market, they have to make a meaningful product. And Vista just isn't meaningful. It will go over, but it will be a warning to them in the future.
Hopefully I didn't put any [] around my words.
If some OEM forces Vista on you , the License Agreement apparently gives you the right to return it.
http://www.ideastorm.com/article/show/66189
Linux users have used this technique for a while. In some jurisdictions you might have to take the OEM to small claims court if their customer support people are uncooperative -- but since the license is in your favor you'll win a default judgment and they won't even try to fight it.
With that discount you can then install the OS of your choice.
Assuming for a moment that the question posed by TFM is true (and I think it is), then the less than stellar adoption rate of Vista probably signals the beginning of the end for Microsoft.
Previous to Vista, Windows survived because it had no real competition. Vista comes on the scene and has to face nascent (or slightly better) competition in the form of OSX, Linux, and what could be the beginning of an outright OEM revolt (starting with Dell).
Most /.ers know Windows is junk, and as MS products are forced to compete more on merit rather than mindshare, what is the response from Redmond? More process, not more quallity... and don't forget the FUD.
Linux only has a chance in the desktop market if OEM's start shipping systems with it preinstalled, offer some form of support, and contribute back to the FOSS community with drivers, etc.
If (when?) Dell starts shipping Linux desktops, the strongest way they can thumb their nose at MS is to completely ignore any form of SuSE as an option, thereby dismissing the MS/Novell deal. That leaves RedHat as the main contender, but we can hope Michael Dell exerts some executive power and decrees that they use Ubuntu.
Either way, it will take the better part of a decade for MS to collapse. Their future products only have to suck as much as Vista in order to contribute to this process, while everybody else's goods get better.
Just wondering: has someone reverse-engineered the WinXP activation protocol? You could imagine setting up a server that replies "yup, you're okay" to every request. The only thing you need to do it also have a DNS server that points *.microsoft.com to said server for activation time.
The DNS part is easy, the reverse engineering probably very hard.
Of course, there are versions of Windows XP Pro that do not require activation: the Corporate Editions....
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
Why? Because with 64 bit XP you have everything you need to run any CPU available. The only thing XP doesn't do well is multi-processor support, but this is not a big deal with only 2 cores. People don't care about Vista, it doesn't do anything XP can't do.
With quad cores and higher, the OS will have to start carrying some of the freight. Which Vista, as it stands, won't do.
So Bill and company better get beavering away on some super duper multi-threading SMP shit for the Vista Service Pack 2 upgrade in a year or so, or they're going to miss the boat.
Why did they mod me funny_
Maybe Ubuntu guys should....
1. Make the screen 2x the resolution, a high resolution screen would be a real killer app, especially with the fonts would be just perfect at 180dpi!
2. Get a decent graphics man to do the icons (Arvid Axelsson would do nicely).
3. Clean up the status bar and layout, Ubuntu guys, symmetry is attractive! Asymmetric gaps are ugly!
4. Huge text edit fields look like slots made for children to write their names in in stubby crayons. Make it less toy like and more professional, see Firefox for details.
5. Clean up the international keyboard things and other shortcomings.
I might make the switch at this point. I've been unhappy with XP for a while, I don't really see the need to use Vista and I can live with Ubuntu's shortcomings.
As far as I can see, this simply means that Microsoft is having to compete on _price_ instead of features, usability, and quality. I am interpreting this as a tacit acknowledgement by Microsoft that the best desktop Linux distributions are now comparable with Windows XP in terms of looks, features, quality, and usability.
... China third-world ??? ... but you know what I mean) educational market to keep those users from getting used to Linux is probably a very smart move on part of Microsoft.
... dumping Vista for 3$ would really harm Vista's image and potentially put pressure on Microsoft's revenue stream in other markets.
... by dumping the previous WIndows version, Windows XP, Microsoft gets to compete for marketshare with Linux in a third-world market without tarnishing Vista's image, without loss of revenue, and without fuelling large-scale piracy. The price gives you only the license, and that in large volues, so the net cost to Microsoft is about 0$. In addition, the government is to be suckered into subsidising the hardware of the PC by about 50%, so that end-users will have a huge incentive to go with the offer.
Dumping Windows XP in the third-world (well
Why?
Windows still has the advantage in terms of third-party software and market share but Vista cannot compete for market-share with Linux in third-world countries at first-world prices, and it has become a bit too hard to make and sell illegal copies for comfort so that avenue is closed too. Market-share is important because that's all that keeps people choosing MS Windows instead of something else. In addition it keeps Linux from becoming so ubiquitous that it becomes really lucrative to develop commercial software for it.
Now
So
By the time the net disposable income in China has reached levels where people will pay first-world prices, there will be this huge reservoir of people who are beautifully conditioned to MS Windows and who will have invested too much time and effort in Windows-only software to easily switch to Linux.
Is there a downside for Microsoft? I don't see it.
Gotta love conspiracies (and Futurama).
No, but average consumers don't know that. The "Cost of Vista" article points out some fantastic ways in which functionality is effectively being taken away from consumers. Here's an excerpt close to the front of the article:
In other words, a consumer who has high-end audio setup thinking that they're going to be able to listen to the latest and greatest in A/V home theater technology will be sadly disappointed. The discs aren't broken, the hardware isn't broken, and no AVI files have been infected, but the end result is the same: Functionality that the user has paid for and reasonably expects to work doesn't. It's been taken away.
You are just wrong. There are plenty of examples businesses that are required to offer services if they want to keep doing business. One very obvious example is anything covered by the Americans with Disability Act. If you don't want to offer wheelchair access, which is definitly a service to those individuals, you don't get to do business. Phone companies are required to offer lifeline service. They are also required to offer 911 service. Car manufacturers are required to offer for sale, replacement parts for a number of years. Restaurants are requried to offer bathrooms if they want to sell food.
The slavery line is simply BS. Slavery is the ownership of one human by another. You might be able to say that requiring one individual to perform work for another is slavery, but requiring a convict to perform some action if they want to take part in another action, certainly is not slavery.
There are plenty of other requirements that have been placed on illegal monopolies other than requiring them to shut down parts of their business. Your statement just doesn't make sense.
Plus, with Windows the underserved will now be disserved.
Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power. -- Mussolini
Slashdot makes a killing in ad-click throughs and impression views by posting "Vista problem" articles at least every 8 hours.
Now, if they could just figure out a way to autogenerate tie-in stories to how the RIAA is responsible for Vista, and finish up with a mention of Google, China, and/or sci-fi, they could COMPLETELY retire, rather than coming in one day a week to casually peruse the submission queue.
Dell making the call may be a telling point. If HP or another first tier vendor were to follow, all vendors would likely be doing themselves a huge favor. You'd see it in stock prices, too. Remember when MS missed XMAS, and hardware company stocks suffered more than MS?
That may have been the actual turning point, assuming there's actually been one.
I doubt the hardware vendors appreciated that *at all*. If one or two follow Dell's lead, and spark a revolt, they can insulate themselves from that sort of thing in the future. They would definitely gain a negotiating advantage. I'd love to be a fly on the wall in a couple of boardrooms.
I've not believed in 'this is the year of the Linux desktop' since, well, forever. Heard it too many times, when it was said for no good reason. But a Microsoft stumble, rather than a Linux advance, could be the tipping point.
Interesting times may lie ahead. Or not. The MS war chest is immense, after all. For that kind of money, you can buy all the DoJ officials, Congress critters, etc., that you need. If there is a sea change, it will be interesting to see whether it's really due to DRM, or file/protocol standards.
What you do with a computer does not constitute the whole of computing.
If Vista wasn't pre-loaded with a zillion machines, there wouldn't be any question but that Vista was a massive failure. It's *only* because Vista is being preloaded on so many machines that there is any real sales for the thing at all. And if Vista was so great, there wouldn't be anywhere near this level of anticipation for the new releases of Mac OS X and Ubuntu.
... isn't quite there yet, (though it's obviously better than Vista in many respects already). It *may* be where it needs to be with the October release if they can polish up the last bits, such as more reliable auto-configuration of video drivers and wifi cards (certainly Feisty got better in these two regards, but I'm still seeing several reports of problems on these fronts).
The people want a change, and the first viable one to come along will win big. Ubuntu
Sadly for OS X, it requires new hardware for most people (and from a single vendor, another bad thing), so that's right out, no matter how good it is.
IP addresses of some Microsoft sites are hardcoded into the protocol driver. Your idea would not work.
For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
What happens when an XP system needs re-installation and I can't get an activation for any reason?
You call the 1-800 number on the popup window, and if your serial number isn't on the "blacklist" (unless you pulled your serial number off the internet, this shouldn't be a problem) then a nice Indian woman named "Susan" gives you an activation code. Yeah, it's kind of a pain in the ass, but it's not the end of the world.
This is an easy one. MS's success relied on some two hard facts - the fact that their software was buggy and required upgrades, and the fact that no competition meant they could strongarm OEM's.
Well, well, here it is 2007, the market's way bigger and the universe of user applications is more established. Unless Vista is less buggy than XP by a magnitude (doubtful), or Vista enables a new-breed of must-have application (again doubtful), then WTF is it good for? Sure, it'll creep in through the OEM's, but the buckets of cash MS expected to make, let alone the buckets of cash MS spent building Vista, aren't going to recovered as soon as they like. Heh, nothing succeeds like success, eh?
Everywhere by the US has sugar, NOT corn syrup. However, because of high tariffs on sugar, and heavy corn subsidies in the US, high fructose corn syrup is cheaper than sugar in the US, so most products use it. In the rest of the world, importing sugar is cheaper than corn syrup, better for the customers, and tastier, so nobody else using all the corn syrup products that are used in the US.
Every Jew gets to realize this during Passover, as all our corn syrup products are unavailable to us for a week. In fact, it's the ONLY time you can reliably get Coke/Pepsi with sugar instead of corn syrup and is tastier.
It's a shame, a short-sited policy, but benefits a few (I think two) wealthy families that own the US sugar production and benefit from high prices.
This is only, what, the 100th article since Vista was released that's completely devoid of content? Who here hasn't posted some kind of opinion about Vista?
"Please describe the scientific nature of the 'whammy'" - Agent Scully
This patch will solves Windows Vista compatibility issues. It will install Virtual PC 2007, along with a Windows XP images. It will also modify the registry to run the Virtual PC on start up as well.
The only way Microsoft will be in serious trouble is if they start losing overall OEM sales to competition like Apple or the various Linux distributions. I suppose they would be in trouble if they don't expand any further either, but then again, that's why they're branching out of the desktop and servers and going into things like video games and digital cable boxes.
You're missing the point. What if "Susan" says "no, you can't have a code?" You're shit outta luck, that's what!
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Yeah...totally OT, but anyway, if you live in an area of the US with a reasonably sized Jewish population and want Coke with real sugar, just stock up during passover with the passover version. It has a yellow top with Hebrew writing on the 2 liters. I bought like a case of them....that ought to last me the whole year, as I only need Coke to mix with my Jack Daniels.
Do not fold, spindle or mutilate.
Sure it would if you created a truly sandboxed network with routing and machines running with said IP addresses on the other side of the rotuer. However, if it uses HTTPS with a Microsoft or otherwise trusted CA signed SSL cert, you'd have a much harder time duping that.
$ man woman *
-bash:
I am willing to buy it and I need ultimate because I make use of both media centre and thinks like IIS locally when testing ASP. However:
OEM version has restrictions on reinstalling it after more than one or two hardware changes, not willing to pay £120 ($240 US) for something I can't use after I upgrade/change my PC.
Retail version is far too expensive at £350 ($700 US), this would allow me to have the pleasure of hardware upgrades (gee what a benefit!) without problem (well, not entirely, I'd still have to deal with activation crap each time) but again, I can't justify that cost.
Upgrade version isn't a bad bet but I have no guarantee the install-from scratch trick will always be reliable. What if a post-system setup patch comes down from MS to disable the system if it can in some way work out I did it this way? Upgrade edition is also rather expensive but of course not as bad as retail.
Now take those two points, consider the fact I have 2 XP desktops and a laptop and I want a common platform amongst them all, multiply the costs by 3 and see the problem.
I'd be willing to pay for 3 OEM licenses if I could use them indefinitely through as many hardware upgrades as I wanted, I am of course not going to pay for one retail license. What it comes down to is that MS have the option to take around £300 off me to kit my systems out - if they don't provide that option, one of two things will happen:
1) I'll find a reliable way to pirate it
2) When the time comes that I really do need to drop XP, if no price drop has occured, I'll move across to Linux (hopefully in the 2/3 years that'll take, distros like Ubuntu will be incredibly mature)
The ball is in MS' court at the end of the day, if they want me to switch to Vista I will and for what imo is a very reasonable price. Most people couldn't even justify as much as the ~£300 I'm willing to pay so as a non-business customer. The alternative is that they push me away as a customer, and hopefully I'm not alone with this entire dilemma, if this is true then maybe they'll realise about the same time they push a whole lot of us away such that XP useage stats decrease without at the same time boosting Vista useage stats as we all move to Linux or whatever. I'll admit right now I'd rather not switch to Linux, but if Vista remains such an unfeasible option indefinitely, and XP gets phased out such that patches aren't issued then I might as well switch to Linux, sure it still probably wont do DirectX 10 ever but at least it'll be supported and updated which eventually XP wont be.
Sometimes it feels like companies just don't want to actually take my money.
Ever heard of a *routing table*? Pretty easy to send IP requests elsewhere...
That said, yes, the nasty activation crap has repelled me for some time. I have enough legit licenses, it's just that they don't necessarily go with the hardware on which they're now running. Plus I like to use one image for everything, so that when a machine goes wonky, I can just reimage it and restore the user data.
They use cane sugar there as well and it is significantly better than the stuff we get here in the U.S.
...but they won't... They aren't interested in market share, unfortunately, just profit margins. If they had any sense, they could strike now. Microsoft's only real lock-in is with Office, and that can be overcome. Otherwise, it doesn't really matter what OS you run for the vast majority of people that use a computer as merely an Internet terminal. OS-X doesn't have all the technical problems and headaches that Microsoft OS's do, and has lots of bells and whistles to boot. If the price and model availability were more competitive, Apple could make some real inroads into the PC market, especially if they could convince businesses that the total cost of ownership would be lower and worth the switch.
But they won't do either... They like high margins and don't like hiring salesmen. It's a shame... they are blowing a great chance to take down the Microsoft monopoly a peg or two.
Thanks,
Mike
That matters not- you can run a transparent firewall (linux box) that would be reply for those addresses.
Has anyone noticed every other release of Windows, how "industry cool to (new release" and then "Is (new relese) in trouble?"
No, it's not. Wait a couple of months and it'll be everywhere.
And while you guys are throwing away your "obsolete" heardware, I'm gonna be going to the surplus outlet and upgrading my Linux boxes with absurdly-overpowered hardware, cheap.
This is that part where someone mentions, "those who don't learn history are doomed to repeat it". This is just one small example.
--- For a good time mail uce@ftc.gov
Say, come out with a pessimistic article three days or so before an earnings report to help nudge prices a smidge downward, buy a bit of stock, sell after the earnings report comes out?
So.. exactly what part of that article qualified as journalism? It read like a page from a scandal rag... well anyway...Why upgrade... you probably shouldn't.. you've already decided you don't like it..... why else? You're computer probably can't handle it anyway. Unless your purchasing new hardware or you're the tuner type like me, Vista really doesn't hold much in the "I need it now" catagory. Of course, if you're a gamer, there's good reasons to upgrade, as long as you're willing to buy a DX10 card with it. (And don't give me the XP could run DX10 line, that's pure BS and anyone who programs understands exactly why XP can't use the memory funcitons that are in DX10.)
As for the two indications the article spoke of: First Dell letting people have XP again. Yes.. they should. Especially on the low end sale computers, they just arn't designed to handle it and really suffer in the performance department. So putting XP back on the low end stuff is a good thing. I applaud Dell for not screwing their customers on the OS. As for the second "Indication", ug... this guy's so far off base it's comical. The computers that will run the XP starter edition and Office that Microsoft is selling for $3 a copy can't possibly run Vista in the first place. Often these developing nations that are going to get this software are looking at getting the bottom of the barrel, whatever is left over after the rest of the world bought their machines. They can't run it, end of story, and MS isn't going to say to a devloping country, "Oh sorry, you have to buy Dell's highend machines, because we're only giving you Vista." *sigh*
People please... logic... it's not just for breakfast anymore.
In short, hate on Vista all you want. Call it MEII, call it the worst OS from MS, I really don't care, but at least show why it's a bad os, not "Oh MS must think it's failing because they're giving away copies of XP to people who can't run Vista." And before you judge, run it on a PC that it was actually designed to run on, not one that's 2 years old and you bought on sale from Dell for $499
who said vista was an upgrade?
microsoft?
you can take their word to the bank... and deposit that check in microsoft's account.
Open Source Windows.
Your ad could be here!
Dunno where you pull that "info" out of, but I remember it quite differently.
When 95 came out, people were literally storming the stores. There were geeks camping outside like it's some sneak-rare-midnight-preview of Star Wars 7. There were people buying it that even didn't have a computer 'cause it was supposedly SO cool you had to have it.
98 was originally more a downer, even though it did add new features and fixed a lot of problems. And the "SE" of it surely showed that it was superior to its predecessor and soon became the clearly superior system to 95.
ME was a desaster. For many reasons. First of all, it was essentially Win98. Second, pretty much all the new gadgets that separated it from 98 were buggy, flawed or simply useless and nobody wanted them. Most had all 3 features. And finally, 2k was around the corner.
2k was a definite improvement, over both, WinNT4.0 and Win98. It was the merge of the simplicity and compatibility of 98 and the stability (you there, stop that snickering, will you?) of NT4. It certainly was a key cornerstone in the development of the Windows platform and was received as such. Geeks, gamers and businesses alike loved it.
XP already had to deal with a problem: What for? 2k was already the "perfect" system. It had everything you wanted to have. There was no really compelling reason to upgrade, and it would have been far from impossible for MS to add the features (like WiFi and other support) to the core of 2k if they would have wanted. Of course, they wanted to sell XP, so that was a no-go option.
And Vista now is suffering from the same problem. Why upgrade? We might see some reason in a few months or years, when some new fad or feature picks up that MS doesn't even dream of supporting in XP, so we'd have to switch to Vista to benefit from it, but so far, we're at the same point where we were with the introduction of XP: Why upgrade?
XP is "good enough". In some ways, it is even "better" than Vista. We will eventually see the reason why we'll have to get Vista instead when MS refuses to support some essential hardware, but the way you put it is simply and plainly wrong.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Where did you get that? I have an old dot matrix printout at home of that rant. It was hilarious back in the 80's. The copy I got was from a former (late) co-worker of mine; his name was on it, I always assumed that he wrote it (he was a pretty funny guy).
The trouble is, Microsoft need a "next big thing" to convince investors to hold on to their shares. Once investors realise their share price is more likely to decrease over time than increase, Microsoft's upper management are in for a rough ride.
Ehm... You mean as in 100% hardcoded, because I do control my DNS server (separte Unix machine). That said, if I know those IP addresses, I still can route them to somewhere else (I also control my router, go figure!). My idea can work.
I heard Windows bypasses the hosts file for some sites, but I still thought it did genuine DNS lookups.
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
I remember seeing very few DOS 4.0 installs, and just a couple of DOS 4.01 (which was more stable).
But wasn't this around the time of the memory manager wars?
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
MS is suffering for the market they created, consumers who are satified with mediocre, resistant to change and generally lazy.
MS for years has built a audience that was willing to accept good enough. With XP for many MS finally delivered "good enough", Its fairly stable, acceptably easy to use and has more features than the average user has any need for. Though there are some nice new features with Vista the important ones are not ones that are noticable to the novice. The only compelling selling point for Joe Average is the eye candy which was "good enough" in XP for most and is stripped out of the affordable versions of Vista anyway. The lack of bells and whistles on the low end versions of Vista coupled with mostly fud articles on backwards compatability plus the much publicized DRM issues scares off a large portion of their target audience. If home users arent upgrading you can bet that businesses are going to drag their heels as well. Sadly I dont see this as being something that will move people to Linux in the immediate future, it does buy Linux developers time to make more inroads towards usability, ease of install and buzz, all of which need improvement and can lead to increased market share.
The question of whether Vista is a failure is moot because the usual meaning of failure doesn't apply in this case. Most Windows purchases in a few years will be Vista simply because it is the latest version of the OS and eventually, most people want to have the latest version. They may delay for an SP or two, but not forever. So in that sense, Vista cannot be a failure. The Dell issue is just a speed bump.
The real measure is whether the dissatisfaction with Vista will increase the rate of switchers to another track, e.g. Mac or Linux. The only way to tell is to compare the rates of switching to and from Windows before and after the Vista dust has settled down.
If the net switching rate away from the Windows to other OSes jumps significantly enough for MS to feel it in their pocket, then it could be considered a failure. I don't think we have those numbers yet.
Vista not selling and selling XP instead is actually worse than people switching, in the short run.
The shareholders will want to know just what they sunk those 5bil for. And this would not look nicely on the value of MS shares.
The more XP systems are running in businesses, especially when they were bought so recently, the longer large corporations will put pressure on MS to support XP.
Hardware manufacturers will frown, since their sales will not pick up as much as they should with Vista selling. Especially graphics cards might suffer quite a bit, and they will probably delay Vista drivers even longer since there is no market for them and a good Vista driver is not really a selling point while a good XP driver is.
Content providers will not be happy either, since there will probably be no full HDDVD/BluRay support for XP, with its lack of DRM. So they will have the choice between a sales hit and opening their precious "uncrackable" copy protection scheme so it runs on XP as well.
The list goes on... in general, a lot of businesses would suffer a bit with XP selling any longer. And no, I don't mean that as a bad thing. Quite the opposite, rather, nobody suffers that doesn't deserve it.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
They invented the "3 years delay rush".
Patents pending, all rights reserved.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Raised with Macs? You poor deprived child. I got two words for ya, Captain Comic.
With regards to the original post, I won't be getting Vista for the next couple of years. 2 things why. Thing 1, my original copy of Win XP Pro still works like new, even after 5 years of usage! Reason 2 = Ubuntu, and the fact I'm an idiot and even I can install and operate it, and even an idiot knows a free lunch when they see one.
A offputting variant of what people are used to, late to market, costs more, works worse, bad enough to make even the suck-up trade press like ZD question the value of upgrading.
Are we looking at Windows ME: Next Generation?
Missed one in preview:
Personally, I'd rather pay more for goods, and create a perhaps-unnecessary domestic industry, than buy cheap imported goods and have high taxes in order to support all the unemployed people on the dole.
(Actually the first version was grammatically correct but the meaning was different if parsed literally.) Shame on me.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
I had IBM DOS 4.00 on my IBM PS/2 30 286 machine. Man, that was an awful DOS version. I remember unable to get enough free conventional memory for games and stuff. Ugh.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
While 2K is nice and stable running lots of games, one of the best reasons XP was great for gamers is that they could get Win2K stability, but backwards compatibility with Win98 only apps/games. After 7 years, one of the pleasant side effects is that more things are compatible with 2k game-wise, but this wasn't always the case.
-- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
Only to idiots, are orders laws.
-- Henning von Tresckow
The Edsel failed because Ford built the 'best big american car' with too much bling, too many features, too much cost, too late, and in the end it was just more of what everyone had already. What the car buyers wanted was compacts and foreign imports.
...
Vista is failing because Microsoft built the 'best big american OS' with
What businesses want is thin client and central servers so that anyone can log in from any machine and have all their data available.
What home users want is games, internet access, and simple stuff.
Vista is too much, too much hype, too much cost, too much hardware requirement. An XP computer for internet is enough. If they can't buy XP they will buy Linux or Apple.
They do not want (in general) to see movies on their computer because that stops them playing games or browsing the internet while the movie is on - a DVD and TV does what they want for that.
They don't want one super all-in-one machine because that does only one thing at a time. They don't want several all-in-one machines because they can't afford that.
They didn't want one Edsel, couldn't afford two Edsels, they bought a compact and a foreign import so that they could commute _and_ do the school run, or go to the shops.
French Coke with "real ' sugar (beet) is quite good.
You're exactly right. XP had a shaky start but matured into something people really liked. I don't see a reason to rush to upgrade your existing XP box. The notebook I bought 3 weeks ago came with Vista Home Ultimate and I have quickly grown to like it quite a lot. There is a learning curve and they did get a few things wrong, but all in all, I would say it's decent. Vista is the present, XP is now the past. It will get better.
Hopefully, slow adoption will force MS to realize they need to release a better OS from day one, rather than make everyone wait for SP1.
eom
You're lucky.
Windows Vista, or MeII as they dubbed it is a nightmare. It's the only OS I've ever wanted to throw out a window. To give you some perspective, I usually like new Microsoft operating systems. Indulge me in being a karma whore for a minute:
"These two actions by Microsoft are proof of what I suggested three years ago. Microsoft has lost its ability to twist arms, and now it is going to die. It can't compete on level ground, so is left with backpedalling and discounts of almost 100 times."
I like the inquirer. They're on of the better publications of their genre. Although both the Inquirer and the Register are always quick to point out the fact that Microsoft will die. And, while I agree that Microsoft will die at some point, I think that saying Microsoft will die when they hold the three dominant computing platforms in terms of known users is a little premature.
I say "known users" because Microsoft controls the outlet. You would think that would be enough, but it's not.
So, as a result they start intentionally confusing users, this edition, that edition, some other edition. They put DRM features that do nothing to pirates, but harm lagitimate users. Then, as if all this wearen't enough they dumb down the multi media and sell it as a "high definition OS." And here's the kicker... everyone else (think Adobe) follows suit. Seems to me that if Lemmings really did jump off cliffs, they would look a lot like Microsoft executives... or the MeII's of the software industry.
This signature has Super Cow Powers
That's strange, I did a quick search on Snopes... http://www.snopes.com/cokelore/newcoke.asp
What happens if you don't know what GTFO means?
GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
We're not exactly best friends but he is a lot more level headed in private e-mail than he comes across in some of his articles. I'll say about the same thing here that I told him. I'm not happy with Vista because of product activation (See Windows XP) and because there doesn't seem any real plan on what to make out of it aside from being pretty, more DRM, and technologies to Embrace-Envelope-Extinguish things that are already out there, such as Adobe's Flash and PDF. Microsoft has historically taken a long time to release major products, and twisted and modded them until they started to work. They did this with the Original Windows which eventually became Windows 3.1, Windows 95 which became 98, and so on. XP has for all practical purposes been refined and reworked up to the present. Even Windows 2000, probably the best version they put out, was delayed.
So I have no doubt Vista will eventually be the staple product; although it's so mucked up right now it may take a "Vista II" interim release to dispel some of the bad vibes. As for me I really only ever wanted a clean and fast 64 bit OS that worked with the newest hardware. That's it. I don't need or want someone's idea of a multi-media/gaming/come all "experience" that is really for tomorrow's hardware today. But then who is going to listen to me?
I'm pretty sure microsoft will have to keep their XP activation servers open for a long time. If they turn them off in even a decade, they will be wide open for some very nasty, very easy lawsuits. The windows licenses don't have an expiration date, so MS would have to demonstrate the the customer had violated the terms before they could stop activations without breaching contracts left and right.
Microsoft's alternatives would include giving all remaining XP users a refund (not feasible, even for them) and setting up an automatic approval server or other mechanism that would allow XP to be activated without troubling them. Unfortunately, that would make piracy even more trivial, and XP will continue to be usable (if a bit insecure) for years to come.
$5bn development costs might not be huge for MS, but it is still a wad of money and shareholders are going to want to see some benefit for their investment. Most shareholders will probably be wondering why MS spent $5bn when the masses would rather have XP, and anyone buying a new PC would have bought XP if they didn't buy Vista. In other words, for the shareholders Vista has been pure cost with no benefit.
This comes at the same time as Zune too. It would have been easy to say "Hey we goofed with Zune, but Vista is great". Now they have to admit two major screwups at the same shareholder meeting. Ouch!
Engineering is the art of compromise.
This is not so. I occasionally do work for a sugar refinery that supplies over 10% of the US supply. A manager there told me that their sales dropped steadily as the original sugar-sweetened Coke Classic was phased out for New Coke, and did not resurge when HFCS-sweetened Coke "Classic" was "reintroduced." New Coke was, in fact, a spectacular feint which got the old taste of Coke out of peoples' mouths while preserving their market share and keeping demand up. People would have noticed and most likely pitched the same uproar over the old Classic to new Classic transition that they did over old Classic to new Coke. But New Coke was deliberately designed to be a lot like Pepsi, so that for people who hadn't had the old stuff for several months generally couldn't tell the difference.
Brackets contain world's first nanosig, highly magnified:[.]
In Reading the story, it seams that the author is making the argument: "Vista is in Trouble because it is hard to Pirate."
I do some consulting with an IT company that services other small to medium-sized businesses -- all of which work in a Windows environment. They're more on the hardware end, but all that hardware comes loaded Windows, so they're up-to-date with all the latest MS marketing spin.
It seems like what is getting aggressively pushed to their larger clients is Sharepoint. I suspect this -- the latest version of Sharepoint -- will be one of the main gateways to getting business customers to step up to Vista.
As many have noted, Vista and the new Office are incremental improvements at best to what most people already have. The latest version of Sharepoint, from what I have read and seen of it, is a notable upgrade from the previous version. It's basically a CMS for intranet sites, but the document versioning is new and it's something many business users I've talked to find really useful. It also offers wiki and blogging, which will likely be a first introduction to some desktop-locked late-adopters who have never heard of live journal or wikipedia. Sharepoint strikes me as MS's effort to lock the most compelling features of the Web 2.0 up in a corporate LAN.
I suspect that the success of Vista for businesses hinges on MS's ability to hook their clients on Sharepoint. Would be interested to know if anyone else in the industry has noticed this.
Tom
Innovation makes enemies of all those who prospered under the old regime... -- Machiavelli
.. that pushed me back onto the mac.
Keep your Vista, my shiny new MacBookPro and I are plenty happy with OSX (and XP under bootcamp).
~!J!
Even if Vista turns out to be a big turd, Windows is so entrenched with businesses, hardware manufacturers and game developers that there's just no possible way Vista doesn't achieve nearly the same market share as WinXP enjoys today by virtue of the fact that it will be the path of least resistance for 90+% of the population. They'll fix most of the compatibility problems by the time SP1 ships, manufacturers will have updated most of their drivers and most of the whining will die down to a dull roar.
I suspect that given today's other viable alternative desktop platforms (Apple, Linux within a few years, maybe even Google at some point), Microsoft will probably concede a few percent of its desktop market share over the next 5 years, but I wouldn't say they're in trouble... yet.
Yes, that sounds good, doesn't it. It's difficult to think ahead years at a time. However, I've already been down the road. I've got win98 machines, no longer networked, that are doing various things. They work fine, no particular need to fuss with them. Microsoft stopped supporting them - meaning no security updates, no nothing - fairly recently. In 1998 that didn't seem like much of a threat. Today, it means they can't safely be on the Internet. There's no recourse other than upgrading them, but if they fail, reinstall requires no interaction with Microsoft.
Having gone from brand new win98 install to "no longer supported", I tend to think in terms of "what happens?" when the latest and greatest thing of today is discarded, as win98 was. It'll happen; you can count on it. As I said in the original post, since activation is required for a reinstall, and activation, even today, is based on Microsoft policy, you are tying yourself to the whim of whoever sets that policy a few years down the road.
Do you think in five years, when Vista's been out all that time, that they'll re-activate copies of XP? They might, but where is the certainty? And then when Vista is 10 years old and HooHaOS is the latest and greatest, will they reactivate Vista? You seem to think so, while I observe that the fact is I'd have to guess. In the end, I'm not willing to tie the continued functioning of my computers to a guess about Microsoft's future policies. To be frank, I don't trust them.
OSX will work for me as long as the computer does and I keep track of the install disks. Linux will work for me as long as the computer does and I have disks. Hell, I've still got a couple of machines running AmigaOS, and Commodore is long since nipples-north. XP and Vista will work as long as Microsoft lets it, and as long as they are around to let it. After that, one crash, and you're dead in the water -- you must migrate to something else, regardless of what compatibility problems and other inconveniences (like spending money) that may cause you. See the conceptual difference?
Activation is literally Digital Rights Management, where the concept is, you don't have ANY right to reinstall your software. That right belongs to Microsoft and is entirely subject to Microsoft policy, as well as their existence. My reaction to that is unprintable.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
ME was a disaster partially because they took away easy access to the DOS prompt, which was required for techs to work on the hybrid OS. Therefore, techs hated it, recommended against it to all their friends, ridiculed them when they did have it and told them that everyone "cool" stayed on 98SE.
Also, Microsoft screwed up the driver model, causing ALL scanners and ALL older non-plug-and-play hardware to die a horrible death. Everybody with older hardware (and the techs helping them) found it cheaper and easier to reinstall 98SE instead.
Many games were horribly broken on Windows 2000, as game developers dragged their feet. I tested about 30 of my kids' Reader Rabbit type games on Windows 2000 and could only get about 5-6 working. On XP, to my complete amazement, 29 of the same 30 games worked out of the box (or with only minor tweaking of the "Run as Windows Version" options). The funny thing is that only 28 of the 30 worked on Windows 98SE. But setting the problem (Windows 3.1) game to "Run as Windows 95" fixed it.
Vista is hard for techs to work on. They don't like it. They keep telling their friends that they are cooler to stay on Windows XP.
With Vista, Microsoft screwed up the driver model causing MOST existing hardware to die a horrible death (and my MOST I do mean more than half of what worked on XP). It is cheaper and easier to reinstall XP instead.
Vista won't run hundreds of games that work perfectly on XP.
See the problem?
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
Currently, all XP licenses are available. Starting in 2008 they will discontinue OEM licenses, but others will still be available.
My new Inspiron 1501 Laptop came with a standard Vista Home Premium CD so when I wiped the HD and reinstalled, all I got was Vista (which may or may not be a good thing, but at least there was none of the other crap there).
Life needs more saving throws.
I think it is a sign of the times. Technology has developed at a neck breaking pace and now reached a level of maturity while of course a large user base now has grown up with Windows 95 and up. Like everyone else I feel that XP does a pretty good job. Doesn't crash, I know how to work it and doesn't leave me wishing for more.
I think Vista is a scary OS. I hear about DRM limitations but also so called "security" features that will break a lot of applications and generally make life for a software developer hell.
Just Like Microsoft Office, Windows is finished and pretty much complete. In fact I have an old PC for my son that runs nothing else but a Firefox browser and a flash plugin. He can do everything on that that he needs to do so we basically don't care for Vista, glass interfaces (bah you could cut yourself) and so on.
In the gaming arena the same trend is developing, suddenly people go out and buy a Nintendo WII instead of the much more advanced PS3 or XBox360. Why? Because the cheaper box does the job just fine. It is time Microsoft goes out and finds a new market to open up and they are miles behind Google.
Soon I be buying a new PC for one of my projects but I will not accept Vista on it.
Ok, let us presume that Microsoft would not, under any circumstances, refuse to activate an OS they took money from you for. Even if some serial number generator put your serial number out on the net, Microsoft would say, well, we love you man, and so we're going to re-activate you anyway.
Now. Suppose Microsoft is destroyed as a company. Big earthquake, sinkhole, meteor, new OS company kicks their ass, Apple takes over, the stock market crashes hard and they simply bail, a worm kills every Microsoft machine out there and no one trusts them any longer, linux becomes the obvious choice even to the sheep out there, whatever.
Microsoft is gone, just a memory, like Commodore is today. Who are we going to sue? And how does that help get XP or Vista or HooHaOS working again, anyway?
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
I know of people who had their serial number stolen by a virus or trojan and after they reformatted and reinstalled the system, found out that the serial number had been spread on the Internet and blacklisted and they were forced to buy a new copy of XP.
A friend of mine had that happen at his college dorm. Colleges are well known for a high level of infections on their systems, a lot of botnets use college networks to send spam because they are so easy to infect because the administrators have relaxed network settings that give easy access for the students on open wireless networks, and it is so easy to get into the network and start infecting systems. Anyway after a virus infection he tried getting rid of for months, he decided to reformat his system, only to find out that his copy of XP, despite being legal with the hologram and all, was blacklisted and he had to buy a new copy of XP. Anyway he had two systems, and after that one of them runs Unbuntu Linux instead of XP and he uses it as a firewall for his XP system that he had to buy a new copy of XP for.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
I'm a Mac user at home but I (have to) use Windows in the office. Since I need to know about Windows I gave it a try on my bootcamp partition. I removed my rather well working XP installation and went about to set up a similar working environment with Vista Ultimate Super Duper Everything in it edition on my first generation MacBook Pro with 2GB RAM and 2GHz Core duo.
After installing Vista and Office 2007 I was shocked to see that more than half of the 20GB I reserved for bootcamp were gone (12.somthing GB actually). While this is a lot it's actually ok since one can only run Vista on higher end machines and most people probably do not only have 20GB for their installation.
But trouble really starts when one tries to work with Vista. While I really like the new Office 2007 I can only describe Vista as a PITA.
I would think that my one year old MBP is still a rather fast machine. But Vista takes its time on day to day operations and does not at all feel responsive:
* Copying a few small files takes seconds to even start and then you can watch each file being copied very slowly
* Sometimes the operating system just waits for no particular reason. Checking the taskmanager during this does not reveal CPU or Disk activity. What's happening?
Then there are the issues with the new gui which of course can be overcome by going back to traditional style and the issues with the new security features.
* Switching between windows with the new (very stylish) GUI is a pain. It's really hard to recognize which application you switch to and for some reason only known to the developers, the first app after hitting alt tab is not the next one in the list as it used to be but the current one. This is annoying since you need two tabs to quickly move to the next app.
* The confirmation dialog is frustrating as well. It pops up way too often. One would think that it would not ask you to confirm opening something after explicitly clicking on it but it does. So compared to the Mac, it does not only ask you once changes are actually made but it asks you in advance and sometimes when you confirm the changes. That's too much.
* The new gui really looks nice but it's sluggish. While I can't measure anything I have noticed that I tend to click in the wrong places or at least windows thinks I do. I've been using many window managers including older Versions of Windows, various Linux desktops and OSX. I never had that many problems hitting the right spots to resize windows etc.
* Then there is all that flashy stuff trying to catch your attention. Come on, copying some files is not that interesting. Is usually use two monitors and I park long running status windows on my smaller screen while working on the larger one. Vista is really annoying in that those flashy status bars keep on blinking in your peripheral vision and that blinking is really distracting. It tends to generate the impression with me that something needs my attention. But of course it's only the statusbar telling me that the operation is of course not yet done. All those notifications originating from the status bar are in the same class of distractions. As with XP I don't care about most of them and some outright make me angry because the operating system tries to tell me how to work with my computer.
Compatibility? What?
* It's really frustrating to see how many of my Windows apps have problems running on Vista.
After all my impression of Vista is really bad. It's unresponsive, sometimes even slow and it generally feels very bloated. It is even worse than XP because it continuously wants your attention. If you switch to the classic look most of the "wow-factor" is gone and only some of the annoying stuff is left. I don't game so I don't care about the new directX. So what exactly are the advantages of using a more unresponsive system that is overprotective, tries to tell you even more how to work with your machine and has lots of compatibility issues with hardware and software you spent significant amounts of money on?
Vista will eventually be selling at a "normal" pace. People will eventually buy new machines when their current one croaks, and they will select the default MS OS out of habit, and everything will be back to "normal". A slow start does not mean much other than delayed profits for MS.
Table-ized A.I.
When OEM's are providing customers an option to stay with XP, there no longer is an automatic 'Vista migration' anymore. The trick just went away. If Dell decides that they can't sell PC's with Vista but they can with XP, then Dell will continue to sell XP and customers will continue to get XP systems.
Actually, Dell will stop selling PCs with XP when Microsoft orders them to. Have no illusions about this. Microsoft controls the flow of OSs. The moment Microsoft want to bring the hammer down, it will. Completely and utterly.
Coke first used corn syrup in World War Two.
In 1980 - five years before the introduction of New Coke - half the cane sugar in Coke had been replaced by corn syrup. Six months before New Coke - all the cane sugar had been replaced by syrup.
Syrup was cheaper. Diet drinks were cutting deep into sales and profits. Knew Coke
Just to provide some facts (I hate to do this, especially on /. where I will be modded to hell)
Vista will allow you to perform a fully functioning install without using *any* serial or license key. You can run Windows Vista, fully functional, for 30 days without entering a key or verifying that key via the activation product. Sure, during that 30 day period you need to fix up your license details and activate the product. This is an anti-piracy process. If you respect copyrights and have legitimately paid for your software, this shouldn't be a problem.
If you don't respect copyrights, or just feel like pirating the product, or don't want to phone home to Microsoft, it's a simple matter of using any of the fire-and-forget third party product activators.
Now, most importantly, all of those facts above indicate clearly that Vista can be installed and running and useable immediately after the initial install process. It's not as free as open source/free software is, because you're dealing with proprietary code.
But if you ask me, it is a million times better than OS X. At least with Vista I get to choose who I buy the computer from. Microsoft doesn't lock me in or tie me down to a specific hardware platform like some DRM laden MP3 player sellers do.
I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
Your trolling would be much more effective if those "mac" chicks were naked. I'm just saying.
Microsoft is gone, just a memory, like Commodore is today. Who are we going to sue? And how does that help get XP or Vista or HooHaOS working again, anyway?
If Microsoft is gone, it might be time to start looking at alternatives. Microsoft is a big company, and it would take an amazing product marketed correctly to bring them down.
After all, I am strangely colored.
I have 4 vista machines. All upgraded or replaced XP machines. This is for personal use. I must be some kind of freak!
I've always had to either edit /X11/xorg.conf or run sudo dpkg-reconfigure xserver-xorg to get the best output from my graphics. At that, 7.04 is not quite tweaked enough yet, which reminds me that I need to compare my xorg.conf file with the one I copied from the Live CD-which worked flawlessly, as near as I could tell. You may wish to try the current version of Mepis, which is what Kubuntu should have been. PC-BSD worked fine out of the box on a laptop I bought in mid-2006, but the software offerings are somewhat limited, if you don't want to use the classic FreeBSD s/w tools like ports or binary packages. Looking back at your post, I'd strongly suggest you check the forums on anything you wish to try about wireless support>
Good luck.
If you want your life to be different, live it differently.
This would be an interesting test.
Another thing I can't confirm though is whether it uses some sort of SSL or other signed tunnel communication to prevent man in the middle attacks (if you can really call it an attack).
I suppose really whether you can pull this off or not depends on whether MS expected you to try. If they did, it'd be using some sort of digitally signed communication with checksum verification and all sorts of other stuff. If they didn't, it's a call to a "YES" or "NO" web service.
Amusingly, Windows Vista's business edition makes this sort of thing much easier with it's optional reliance on an "activation proxy" server which is fully within your boundaries, and essentially responds that Windows is good to go to every activation request, and activates itself less frequently (note: not compatible with XP).
It also makes me wonder why some of their products go the other way... Visual Studio 2003: "You have 50 launches left before you need to activate", Visual Studio 2005: "Welcome to Visual Studio. Did you want to join the Customer Experience Improvement Program?"
For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
The point still stands. If you want to do business in the US, you will be forced to do certain things. Even if you are only forced to 'make reasonable accommodations.'
I'm not sure what part of my post you didn't get, but let me explain it another way: If you want to run OS X on a supported platform, you have to buy from a single vendor. The same isn't true of Windows or Linux.
The Soundblaster Live! (and LiveDrive!) I have never worked properly with XP after I upgraded from ME years ago (performance problems, features not working etc etc). Creative suck, no question, but the card is now pretty old so I am no longer worked up about it. You can get good, working drivers from the http://kxproject.lugosoft.com/KX Project and they might do a Vista version if we all give them enough money. Either that or run Linux. The KX project at least makes the hardware usable, which it never really was under XP.
"No, don't try to convert them to Linux (unless they ask you to) but go help them when their computers fail. When you hear a friend or a relative suggest that they're going to buy a new PC because their old one is getting slow, go and help them out. Tell them it probably just needs a reinstall, maybe a bit more memory, a bigger hard disk... But *STOP* them buying new computers just for the sake of it."
You're trying to put an end to dumpster diving, aren't you?
I have a Win2k vm running on an Ubuntu VMware host.
There comes a point after successive rounds of intensifying hostility to the customer that this customer flips them the bird.
Has there been a significant step in the evolution of the MS EULA that has been in the customer's favor? I'm not aware of one. Having run out of scope to do harm with the license, now the violation is baked into the OS. No thanks.
(Interesting Freudian typo - I wrote "evilution" at first...)
The "Juggernaught" seems to have done just fine for itself after the MS BOB flop of an operating system. They sky is not falling, no matter how much the submitter might hope.
They scrapped all the new development and retrenched to get something out the door, based on the win 2003 code base. I think this was discussed in the famous, "I'd buy a Mac" email from Jim Allchin.
s ystems/allchins_buy_a_mac_email_exposed.html
http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/operating_
There *IS* a huge issue with the XP cutoff, but it's not the one that's been mentioned.
The big issue is that millions of people have computers running under XP now, and those computers are only useable as long as their software is being maintained. Computers are not like washing machines, in which the operating system doesn't require maintenance throughout the lifetime of the hardware. If their operating system isn't maintained, computers fairly rapidly become a brick, because what's held on a computer evolves, and current-day operating systems are not robust against such changes.
So what Microsoft is doing by cutting off supply of XP is *FORCING* people to make another substantive purchase, instead of keeping the product that they sold in a working condition for the reasonable lifetime of the computer, which is well over a decade because computers have upgradeable hardware.
It's the forcing of a purchase that has monopolistic undertones, because the majority of customers will have no alternative but to comply once their XP system curls up and dies.
From the article, Microsoft seem to be bringing themselves down. The main areas of marketing an OS seem to be: (1) Reliability of the kernel, (2) reliability of Device drivers, (3) The Windows user interface, (4) Available applications, (5) Ease of installation/upgrades of applications/device drivers, and (6) Security against viruses/botnets/trojans.
.doc format is fighting against the XML format as well as the .pdf format and OpenOffice.
(1) I'll give them this one
(2) There have been some problems related to installation of drivers certified to work with Vista.
(3) There have been some problems with getting a graphics card/drivers to work with Aero.
(4) There are many more options available to read E-mail (webmail, Mozilla/Firefox) not including OpenOffice. Microsoft Word
(5) Implementing an activation protocol to reduce piracy is only encouraging people to try alternative OS's (Linux), and not just for mature hardware. Any more new features are only seen as bells and whistles.
(6) Microsoft had to delay the release of the Monad shell (Vista equivalent to bash) because of fears that hackers might write
scripts exploiting this utility. This has come back as the PowerShell. Windows XP suffers the problem from having too many icons/menus required for system maintenance that it becomes quicker just running the system search command.
I haven't seen this for a few days.
I was actually beginning to get a bit worried.
Just as one human being to another, I'm glad you're ok.
"There is nothing nice about Steve Jobs and nothing evil about Bill Gates." - Chuck Peddle
I've had Windows 2000 more or less since it came out, and I've played tons of games on it. The only gaming APIs that didn't have much support were the 1998 and previous versions. The only recent exception to that rule is Jade Empire, which requires XP. But several other popular games (e.g., Oblivion, Vanguard, EQ, EQ2, WoW, City of Heroes (and CoV), Guild Wars, etc.) work just fine.
Presumably, if microsoft ceases to exist as a company, somebody will still own the IP for windows XP (at least, until the copyright expires). If the owner of said IP is not microsoft, they are not likely to care about piracy of xp, so they would probably be willing to release a patch to disable activation, or something to that effect.
and if Dell decides that it has been spammed by a handful of geeks demanding consumer products - XP or Linux - they have no real intention of buying, what then?
it didn't take Walmart long to discover what geek cred was worth when it came time to count up sales.
A coworker familiar with the manufacture of jet engines mentioned there's a requirement for car manufacturers (and Prat-Whitney engines) to provide parts for their products for at least seven years. So far I've only found a mention that "both US and foreign car makers are only required by law to provide replacement parts for something like seven years ( http://www.scca.com/garage/forum/forum_posts.asp?T ID=5003&get=last )" and a lot of mention of Lemon Laws in various states.
_ (business)
:P
I also came across this about "planned obsolecence" that may be interesting in this discussion, as applies to Windows and dropping support for XP to force upgrades: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence
I wonder how long it will be before Microsoft is put in the same catagory as Ford Motor and Lockheed Martin for supplier of vital and expensive products.
Something I've noticed, while administering desktop PCs for clients as well as my own XP laptop and desktops, is that the memory requirements of a Windows PC get larger over the life of the computer.
One cause of this is installation of drivers and add-on applets for various peripherals and software packages. A printer adds a status applet that takes 4MB. An accounting package adds a process that checks for updates, taking another 2MB. Over the life of a PC, these things add up, until the commit charge starts to exceed the amount of physical RAM. That's when the system starts sucking mud, especially on startup.
Another cause is Windows Update. Every patch increases the memory footprint of the OS, albeit in small increments. But over the 3-5 year lifespan of a computer, hundreds of updates are applied (yes, hundreds: my brand new HP workstation needed 68 updates to XP out of the box).
So that 512MB nominal minimum for Vista will double in a couple or three years. I know this because XP workstations that were delivered to a client with 256MB three years ago (and ran fast and responsive out of the box) now take four to five minutes to settle down into a usable state after startup or reboot. I had the same situation with my 256MB Toshiba laptop, sluggish until I added a 512MB DIMM.
Maybe it's because I remember the days when one could do useful things with a computer that had just 8 or 16 or 32MB of RAM, because the operating system wasn't taking up 50% to 66% of physical memory and paging things out to disk.
I don't mean to single out XP or Vista. My OS X workstation and my Red Hat server are the same way, though they're both running services that my XP workstations aren't. When I was doing computer animation, I kept a Win98 box around just for the DOS version of Autodesk 3DStudio. When booted into DOS mode, the OS and 3DS took just 3.2MB of the 512MB available, leaving the rest free for textures and meshes.
Imagine that, an OS and software taking less than 5% of the available RAM.
That's why giving up 50% of memory to housekeeping functions seems like an anathema to me.
k.
"In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart." - Anne Frank
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Microsoft is in the almost unique position (in the computer industry, that is) of not having to care about timing.
Release Vista this year or next, it doesn't matter. People adopt now or in three years, it doesn't matter. If you're an accountant you'll have to change the forecasts and projections, but ultimately it's not that big of a deal. If the 'buy Vista' bubble is huge and short or moderate and sustained, people WILL buy it, when you can force it on them.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
If you pay attention to where the spam is coming from as well as where all the CCs are stolen from (there have been CCs stolen, but in each case, they traced it to a stolen password from a compromised Window box; The last KNOWN case of that not being true was 1999 with www.playboy.com), it is nearly all Windows. In particular, a LOT is XP (the supposedly good windows). But I have yet to hear that virus are running wild on vista. Nor have I heard that they have the show stopper openings that Windows is infamous for. Iff they have truely prevented this, then it is ready. Disregard all the other issues. They are fixable.
As to the new technology that MS is "developing", get real. Until somebody else does it so that they can "borrow" it, or they buy the company, they will not get anything that innovative.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Lot of "probables" there. I prefer a sure thing myself. Stability is my bag. If you like to play the horses, by all means.
What?
And kids, this is probably the best sign you would be so much happier with a freshly cracked Vista downloaded off the 'net... when available.
:)
Ok, so it comes with a free botnet or other zombified software pre-installed, but at least it:
a) never requires an activation
b) is probably safer as the commercially available Vista
c) might even have *gasp* some levels (or ALL levels) of DRM disabled
Ok, ok, so I'm being saracastic... still... is it only me, or does Windows mainly survive BECAUSE of the pirates, and not vice-versa ?
I mean... hell... if everybody that had XP (or will have Vista in the future) would have to actually PAY for it... how many computers with Windows ** would be around on the net ? My guess is, significantly less.
Oh, and you can bet your ass that whoever has a pirated copy of Windows *WOULDN'T* have bought it anyway.
On second thought, maybe the FOSS community should support the fight against software piracy more actively
By reading this signature you agree to not disagree with the post you just read.
"Clarus" means nothing to me you trendoid numb-nuts. "Claris", on the other hand...
Here's a filthy pinkish-beige finger for you.
When you care about the long range stability of a platform that much, you use an operating system that you control i.e. Linux or BSD.
I tried your suggestion and had to immediately run for the plunger; and now I also have a pretty bad rash. Thanks jerk.
How does a 7-person democracy cut a pie? Into 4 pieces.
I meant the long term stability of the license, which I wold care about if I was a corporation using their software.
What?
I couldn't find a source for this in a quick search just now, but I read soon after the New Coke debacle that the switch was made not for the switch from sugar -> high fructose corn syprup, but to get rid of an even more expensive ingredient: the vanilla. Coke was reportedly buying a whopping 1/3 of the worldwide vanilla crop. When they briefly phased out the classic formula they stopped buying. Then, when Coke Classic came back, they started buying vanilla again.
Again, I read this claim long ago, so don't bet your life on it's being true, but it is interesting the Coke was (and still is) using real vanilla when most foods have long since switched to much cheaper vanillin.
I'm sick and tired of these hip, "ironic" sigs. This is an actual, honest-to-goodness no-nonsense sig!
They say patience is a virtue and indeed it is. As linux users wait years to perfect the ultimate OS, Microsoft keeps spitting out BS. I am finally happy Microsoft is falling hard... It was all a dream and it is now becoming a reality... thank GOD>
I have at least a dozen WIN98SE boxes all running (home & work, combined), and most are on the Internet regularly. We're using FireFox and Thunderbird. FF has the AdBlock and NoScript utilities installed. (Worth their weight in gold-pressed latinum!) Annual sweeps with AdAware & SpyBot S&D show nothing more than a few "tracking cookies" once in a while. (In the IE days, those sweeps removed *dozens* of adbots, etc, every *month*!)
;)
98SE, behind a standard router, with FF, is "safe enough" to use online, constantly. For one thing, how many virus writers are still actively targetting 98SE? In the past year, I have seen several serious virus warnings, all of which concluded with these words: "Windows 9x is not affected by this attack." to which I just smile, smugly.
98SE is a snap to reinstall if/when the thing blows up beyond repair. Unfortunately, the WindowsUpdate site is becoming very buggy! Many times, it thinks I'm using a Mac! What's with THAT? Reload, reload, reload, ah, there it goes! That's the typical pattern. I suspect that someone at MS has been tinkering with the site deliberately, to annoy the crap out of die-hards like myself who insist on keeping *fully functional* systems running as long as possible.
Vista? Yeah, that's the "New ME", alright. "Mistake Edition". They can keep it.
Willie...
Why not?? I've built several. How many does it take?!
To be honest, Vista isn't a necessary upgrade at this point, or even a wanted one. Windows XP is doing just fine, and if DX10 doesn't actually need to run on Vista (like another article posted earlier said) then there is no real reason to upgrade to Vista. I think that Vista will be like Windows ME; nobody will buy it and Microsoft will begin working on something that actually works right and actually is better so that people will move from XP to whatever their next OS is. Either that, or they'll fix all the "features" that are wrong with Vista.
With whispers on the wind of Windows Vienna (could be speculation, who knows) but this is starting to feel like Windows ME all over again. I for one hated Windows Millennium Edition, it was an orphan operating system, poor driver support and about as stable as a one legged drunken sailor aboard a dingy in the midst of a tornado!!
_ begins
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_%22Vienna%22
http://apcmag.com/4357/vista_goes_gold_the_frenzy
I pose the question, is Vista just another tide Microsoft over till they release the next real XP Upgrade? Is the public going to be fooled again? I don't know, but I don't forget things that easily and history has a funny way of repeating itself.
I'm quite aware I'm going to have to support it as an operating regardless and it will most likely drive me up the wall just like Windows ME did. But for me personally I will be sticking to Ubuntu for my workstation and Windows XP for my gaming rig (well at least until I can game on Linux.. Yes I'm allowed to dream!).
# cat
Damn, my RAM is full of cats. MEOW!!
Vista can't fail; especially when MSFT has so many screws it can easily turn to "influence" the marketplace. Let's say the whole Zune thing actually gains traction and given time there are several more products that make up the Zuneworld; all MSFT has to do is have it be VISTA COMPATIBLE ONLY. MSFT can leverage the XBOX, IE, and a host of other products into making sure you upgrade to Viista whether you like it or not. When a company has 90% of the market and is already proven guilty of abusing its monopolistic powers the question isn't "where do want to go today?", the question is "when will MSFT make you go there?"
There is no security when liberty is sacrificed.
While the Slashdot summary was correct, the writer of the article itself was not so particular with the facts. The headline reads 'Microsoft admits Vista failure', yet the article contains no quote from Microsoft to this effect (or any quote at all for that matter). So where is the admittance to back up the headline? The article goes on to state: 'It [who I presume is Microsoft, given the context of the opening paragraph] did two unprecedented things this week that frankly stunned us.' The problem here is that the first 'thing' is Dell's announcement that it would be offering XP again on home PCs. How does a business decision by Dell equate with an admittance of Vista's failure by Microsoft? Okay so maybe I'm being pedantic, but surely accuracy in reporting as opposed to misrepresentation, even in an unbalanced opinion piece like this one, is not too hard an ask?
Sooner or later, people are going to buy new computers. And what operating system will come with these new computers? Windows Vista. If you walk into a Best Buy or a Circuit City today, there probably won't be one computer on sale without Vista on it. Whether they like it or not, the computers that people buy will come with Vista, and that's what people will use since they probably aren't going to install other operating systems. Sure, Windows ME was a flop, but that was because it caused all sorts of problems with stability and the like. Vista, as far as I know, doesn't have major stability problems and is not a step backwards from XP (although it isn't a step forwards, either). In the next couple of years, millions and millions of computers will be sold, and along with them, millions and millions of copies of Vista will be sold as well since it will most likely be pre-loaded on these computers.
Microsoft's business model makes pretty much every operating system they make a popular one - As long as there is demand for new computers, there is demand for Vista.
(Well, actually I did buy Vista, for my Mom's machine, as a guinea pig...)
Why I didn't buy Vista for my own machine, is simple. Games run 30% slower on it.
As someone who buys RAM with the fastest timings just to squeeze an extra three or four percent out of a game, "upgrading" to Vista is unthinkable. And looking at the situation with the NVIDIA drivers, just makes it even worse. They are quite horrid, and 64-bit compatibility is entirely lacking, as in, they don't work at all.
So, I'm going to do what everyone else is doing, which is to sit on my hands, and wait for some compelling reason to come out, wait for Vista SP2's release, and then finally upgrade.
The fact that it's being adopted slowly is absolutely no surprise to me. All of my techie friends have had the same reaction as me... even my Microsoft-employee friend only installed it on one of his three computers at home.
I hate nerds, and there are nerds everywhere here. They smell bad, girls hate them. It is fun if you manage to find one on a beach though. I enjoy kicking sand in their faces, and laughing at them while they cry. I would steal their girl-friend if they had one.
Steve Jobs!!!!! HEY STEVE!!!!! WAKE UP!!! Wake up and release the MacOS X for Intel and you'll be rich! I'm waiting for that day for long time ago. There is already one step done on this way, but I'll love to see MacOS X for PC someday soon. For sure, at this point a release of this kind will benefit lot of us. Apple can do that, they have now incomes from other stuff (ipods, iphones, apple software and hardware)... COME ON....... Steve?
You forgot that the nice Indian lady named "Susan" indirectly accuses you of committing the capital crime of installing XP on a second computer. Only after you rigorously denied that, will she give you the activation code. But the question is: Can she say no? What if she does? Then you're buggered.
I used to avoid these activation orgies by simply installing a corp version on my PCs until MS stopped that with their WGA notification tool. I know it wasn't really 100% legal but hey, I had an XP licence for every machine in the house, so it's not that I didn't pay for XP. Now I have an interesting situation at home: 2 of my XP licences are OEMs, the other two are systembuilder versions. While the systembuilder version doesn't seem to give a toss how much hardware I replace and never asks for a new activation, the OEM Version on one of the machines already asked for reactivation after installing a BIOS upgrade. Of course it wouldn't activate because "it's already been activated on another machine" and I had to ring Mickysoft. The systembuilder version doesn't even care how many times it has been activated. It simply does it without hassles...no phonecalls required.
Being GS/OS, MacOS 7/8, Win 2/3/9x/2K/XP and RH8/Ubuntu 5.10 Linux/NetBSD/Solaris 10 multilingual, so to speak... >:P
I don't myself know OA-Shift-1/2 but "Clarus" is a half-dog half-cow that goes "moof"...part of an Apple injoke...
-uso.
GS/OS pwn3d, btw.
What you hear in the ear, preach from the rooftop Matthew 10.27b
I got windows XP the month it came out even though I said I wasn't. In general even though I was running a great 2k box, all the little improvements blew me away and I had to move to XP after I checked it out.
I got Vista for free from MS and after reading gaming reports on the fps loss and it making many games unlplayable I didn't want to touch Vista with a ten foot pole. I installed the vista buisness it on my dual core rig and was not happy with the slowness when moving the windows with all the eye candy. I have a decent geforce 6800, 1 gig of memory and that was noticably pokier than XP even with aero turned off.
I got my sister a great el Cheapo laptop from the Fab HP (I make my own desktops but for non gaming laptops you can't beat HP). It had vista basic with 512 ram. After reading tons of reviews about being horrbly slow looking at the nice specs on the dual core cpu on a 499 laptop I couldn't resist. I figured that I can add ram for that price. Well after removing useless norton, and all the redundant HP software except the fast start media player that normally isn't loaded into memory and the button controls it is actually very speedy. After configuring everything to my liking I found at least the user directory structure a breath of fresh air. The user configuable favorite folders are an unexpectedly nice addition after I was playing around with vista for awhile. The power configuration options are really nice too.
The prgrams HP that were bundled with the laptop were properly configured and dind't constanly ask me for admin rights unlike some programs I loaded on the laptop myself. So once everyone gets on board with vista we will probably have less of the security screens that are the most annoying feature of vista (I know you can turn it off but that would kinda defeat a main reason to go to vista)
Vista will be ok once there are some decent video drivers for it. But if you don't game Vista isn't that bad right now once you fool around with it for awile, and disable the crap manufactures load on it. Even the basic verson isn't that bad at all. I really don't know what MS was thinking with the horrid FPS losses that vista brings though. Oh well they will pry XP from my cold dead hands. I am sure that Halo 2 will definitely be a vista system seller.
I had to upgrade one of my PCs eventually anyway, so I went to one of the East Coast Computer Shows. Just looking for something prebuilt with 64-bits that ran XP (I don't do much gaming... and admit now that the PC being replaced was a Celery that I picked up at the Staples by my house in an emergency three years ago... was working on something major for a customer when its predecessor died).
Two things: first, there were a LOT more people at this show than there've been at others I went to (could be because all the CompUSA's in my area have closed.)
Second, several vendors said they were getting many requests for XP-based computers... the only ones pushing Vista were the Dell resellers.
These aren't really geek shows anymore. Swear most of their customers came straight from a soon-to-be-closed CompUSA across the street from the Montgomery County, MD Fairgrounds.
XP and Vista were almost the same price at this show, depending on which version of Vista you wanted (didn't care enough about Vista to see which kinds were being sold).
The NT code base is a 19-year collection of broken promises (remember, the NT family of operating systems had its genesis with Microsoft's hiring of Dave Cutler and the christening of the 'OS/2 3.0' project in 1988). Say what you want, but ultimately NT is derived from a single-user, single-tasking OS, with multi-user and -tasking provisions tacked on as an elaborate series of afterthoughts. Such a cobbled-together design has reached a head with daily tales of 0day sploits and malware epidemics. After five years in development, Vista has proven to be marginally superior to XP in a few respects, and a regression in many others (witness the ridiculous resource requirements for even a minimal installation). All of the above is why hear about the next version of Windows being a ground-up rewrite, finally breaking a 26-year legacy of backwards compatibility. Why? Because it's about damn time. Legacy support wouldn't be so onerous if we had a solid base (as the various Unices and clones do). Wonder why we hear lots about 0day sploits affecting Linux, OSX, and their ilk -- but it doesn't amount to much? It's not merely because they provide a less-attractive target due to the smaller percentage of people using such systems -- non-Windows boxen now have to account for at least high single-digit percentages. It's largely because the systems are designed in such a way that even if compromised, the damage is largely contained. If Microsoft really wants to thrust a stake into the heart of security vulnerabilities, they need to rewrite the operating system from the ground up. IF they were smart, they would swallow their pride and plop .NET and Win32 personalities on top of an *ix kernel and be done with it. But only in my wildest nocturnal emissions would that ever happen....
'He who has to break a thing to find out what it is, has left the path of wisdom.' -- Gandalf to Saruman
Go back to O.P. and read closely. You can't help but see that the progression from discussing Vista as a costly marketing failure has led naturally to discussing Coca Cola's failed introduction of "New Coke" (and the implied discussions about the moral prostitution of Bill Cosby in selling the stuff on prime time tv), which is presented as a very similar marketing failure. The case is made that in both instances the corporations purposefully set out to destroy their existing massive customer base by removing their best selling products and replacing them with products that the market quickly decided were inferior. An interesting extension that I had never heard before is that Coca Cola may have done this deliberately (screwing Bill Cosby both ways) as part of an ulterior campaign to introduce the New Classic Coke, which otherwise would have been rejected outright.
"New Classic Coke" replaced sugar, the traditional nemesis of all Good Moms Throughout The Land, with the new and more horrific nemesis: high fructose corn syrup. Twice the sweet at half the cost, maybe fewer dental caries, but much more asthma and obesity, and all kinds of other health and ecology impacts that we'll discover over the 10 years or so. But the profit margins are so much better with HFCS, and then there's the high margin tag-along markets like asthma inhalers and diet foods.
There were significant asides about the government subsidizing several aspects of HFCS production and managing to do so while projecting the image that it was subsidizing traditional farmers, not multibillion dollar chemical corporations that have bought or leased much of the USA corn belt. These were not directly relevant, it is true: there is no indication that Microsoft has been accepting government subsidies, or even hinting that they would like them. On the contrary, Microsoft would prefer to buy government policies.
So the discerning reader is now prepared to question whether Vista is nothing more nor less than a strawman set up by Microsoft as part of a larger marketing campaign that will involve the announcement of "Classic Windows XP" later this year.
Classic Windows XP will provide all the features that Windows XP provides, but with all the actual processing done on Microsoft's own servers, using its proprietary tunneling protocols, encryptions, and secret handshakes to move data back and forth between client machine and Redmond. Most computer systems built after 2005 will be capable of running Classic Windows XP, although the addition of a second 250 GB hard drive will be necessary in some cases. The footprint of Classic Windows XP on ram and hard disk will be no more than 20% greater than most of today's Windows XP installations, but there will be a major shift in internal resource allocation:
Classic Windows XP will perform significantly more slowly than today's Windows XP since transferring all that data back and forth to Redmond over those tiny innerweb tubes will slow things down. However it will look pretty much like today's Windows XP, and people will have forgotten how fast today's operating system is by the time the "Classic" version becomes available.
So, this summary should demonstrate to everyone that this thread has actually been on target all along.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
They could go broke in 10 years. Broke, bankrupt and gone. You're probably thinking it couldn't happen that quickly to a company that big, with that much money, but look what Georgie Dubya Bush and a horde of fraternity brothers did to the USA, in only six years. It could happen.
Well, it is worthwhile to point out that Vista is the first Microsoft OS that people don't want. While w2k and XP were welcomed with apathy by new PC buyers, Vista actually is met with a rejection reaction. That becomes really interesting.
The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
From a 60M pageviews/day website, out of the 97.58% users that report Windows as their OS, 1.87% are running Vista. 2.18% are running Win98, 3.55% 2000 and 91.53% XP.
I read (somewhere) yesterday that directx 10 is also coming to XP. Looking at this article one could wonder if this is another indication that Vista isn't what everyone wants.
I have a reasonable hi-end system, and had Vista installed by default. Everything was ok, until I had to move my pc from one flat to the other. I didn't have cable internet so I had to connect via wlan. Then I found some interesting "feature". When playing WoW, every now and then (around 60 seconds) game lags for about 1.5 - 2 seconds. First, I thought it was some server problem but then I looked on the internet and saw great number of recent posts/articles about that lag which is affecting not only WoW, but every application that uses internet. Problem is this; Vista has a service which is used for configuration and connection to the wlan. That same service searches for new wireless connections every minute and causes a huge lag spike. That "feature" cannot be disabled, and if you stop the service, you cannont connect to wlan. Thing is though, when casually surfing the web you don't even notice it, but when playing any online game you notice it right away and the problem is so big you can't play under that conditions.
The only solution was to deinstall Vista and put XP. XP actually does the same thing as Vista every 60seconds, but it has separate services which can be stopped/disabled. So when you connect to your AP, you can disable Wireles Zero Configuration service and you will get no lag spikes. And one more good thing came out of installing XP. Everything is significantly faster. Higher frame rates, general windows responsiveness, much more available RAM, much faster boot and shut down time.
Trolls are like broken clocks. They show the truth two times a day. The rest of the day they talk nonsense.
It is not yet a problem. But what happens when Microsoft decides at some point that XP and Vista are obsolete and will no longer be supported, including activation?
I guess that legitimate customers could sue Microsoft at this point and win in court. But some of us prefer not to give them the option of refusing activation in the first place. Like GP, I don't run XP on my private PC for that reason (let alone Vista, which appears to be worse in almost every regard). As long as Windows 2000 does the job, fine. After that, it will be Linux, even if I need to dump most games as a consequence.
C - the footgun of programming languages
It still doesn't migitate the exact problem people are complaining about.
I have a Win2000 at home, installed once in Mar 2000, and never reinstalled. If my hard disc dies, I might still be able to reinstall it without hassle. With XP I have to go through an activation process, which in turn is depending on Microsoft actually supporting XP at that point in time. With Windows Vista, the activation process got more sophisticated.
Why don't I just upgrade to WinXP? Because Win2000 runs and is proven stable (to me). Because my home box is just a P3 500 MHz with 512 MByte, which happily houses Win2000, but gets overwhelmed by XP's complexity. Because the machine just works for me (never a hardware failure until now, and all I ever changed was just an additional 80 GByte harddrive).
So I am using my pc since about seven years now without major problems. Why introduce additional problems just by a strange activation process that does nothing for me in terms of additional productivity? I'll just use Win2000 a few more years. When XP is no longer supported, and all XP installations have to be upgraded to whatever Microsoft OS is dominating then, I might still be able to use Win2000.
I went through this procedure a while ago when I reinstalled XP in VMware. Automatic activation failed: I had previously used the key in QEMU and the activation server considered this as a new PC.
Somewhat annoying, but it's not something you'd need to do daily. I'm worried more about what will happen in the future. If MS wants to, they could just deny all activation requests for older versions.
WWTTD?
We are a Microsoft Enterprise site with about 1000 PC's & I'm testing Vista at the moment. My test machine is an old Dell GX240 with a 1.5GHZ P4 so we didn't expect blinding speeds, but most of our hardware is that age so I used that. Had to upgrade to 1GB of RAM and it had a 16MB Graphics Card so that had to go too but apart from that it's the same as it came out of the factory.
I was expecting a lot of hassle installing it but it was very straight forward apart from the 3Com 905 card didn't have drivers, which suprised me as it's a pretty common card. Loaded the XP drivers and it was fine, then it updated to Vista drivers on the Windows Update.
So far it's been stable, fast enough, we have had no issues which anything apart from an old Lexmark Z33 printer which refuses to print.
So far so good for Microsoft eh? Well no... we have no plans to upgrade it because everyone who has seen it has basically said "is that it?" and have walked away disapointed. OK, when people see Aero for the first time they usually go "Wow!" but after 5 minutes playing with it, they get bored.
After my initial testing I said anyone else in the office here can install it if they like, out of 20 people only 2 have bothered, no-one else is interested.
Jonathan
Why? Why on earth? What do all these versions do and why do I need to do research into that before I can buy?
Yeah.
"Please God, don't make me use my brain! I'll do anything...anything but that!"
Windows 95 was damn near completely unusable before 95B; Winsock 2 and a raft of stability improvements made all the difference.
You need to remember that Gates' philosophy has always been, "Ship it now, fix it later." Microsoft throw something broken and unfinished out the door in order to initially plant a flag in the market, and then they worry about actual usability in service packs later. That's always been their MO.
Sure, Aero is completely redundant (like I said it would be) and won't be touched by anyone who cares about hardware efficiency. I'm guessing it will also continue to piss gamers off as well, since one thing Windows has never been good at is RAM flushing, and if Aero fills up your vram with textures, chances are it won't be entirely empty for when you then try and load a game, meaning performance problems.
Once they bring out a few service packs though, Vista will predictably become something which the average person will probably find acceptable. If Microsoft alienate gamers with it however, that will be another nail in the company's coffin.
That's a brain-dead user interface, or a very smart way of tricking people into submitting the "more than one" answer. Chuckle.
Microsoft has a history of being able to encourage people to buy their products using their desktop domination as a leveraging tool, some may call the practice wrong but in this world it's the money that determines the rules.
>>>please remove "nospam" from email address
Then there is all the bug fixes.
The EULA is not one I can agree to.
So I have a pirated copy to replace the one license I have.
Uhm...
Juggernaught is not a word.. I can imagine it being something along the lines of naught but juggs (Titties!), but it's not an actual word.
The word you're looking for is 'Juggernaut', from an old Hindi word used as an alias for Vishnu, Lord of life and death, present and future, creation and destruction..
Coz eternity my friend, is a long *ing time.
Drink bleach and die, you unimaginable shithead.
I installed Vista on my desktop computer a month ago to fix some compatibility issues with software I wrote. Firstly, the upgrade process was a pain in the behind. It took numerous reboots and trials before I figured out that to get the installer working, I needed to reduce the display resolution (you wouldn't guess that in the first half hour, would you?). Should be mentioned that I use a triple-head setup (Matrox Parhelia 128MB). That graphics card has never bothered me in XP - and I don't see why it should under Vista. Even after disabling every single piece of visual snacks, desktop looking like Windows 95, everything ran eight times slower than under XP. Which means tapping fingers while waiting for file explorer windows to open. I have a screenshot of my favourite dialogue box somewhere: "Moving file xyz.txt (324 bytes). Estimating remaining time...". The task manager has not changed visibly since XP and should consume about the same CPU load as before (about 3-5%). Nope. Under Vista, the task manager consumed a whopping 35-40%. This was on a 2.4GHz celeron.
After fixing the compatibility issues I had, I reinstalled XP.
Vista reminds me of Windows 98 and Me, the final and unimpressing generations of OSes descending from Chicago code. Back in the day, Microsoft saved their day by abandoning that code and switching to the fresher code base of NT 4.0. To me, it seems that the golden years of that code are now behind it and I don't see any replacement coming out of Redmond.
This has been a question on my mind since, well, win95. When installing the OS or larger applications, it seems to go through this annoying phase of "checking for disk space" which could take minutes. This has always been a point of frustration as free space is if i'm not mistaken part of the directory and other operating systems have no issue in this regard.
It seems to me that NT/2k/XP microsoft really got their groove on as far as a balance between legacy support and function, and future editions should rather than add in geewiz features should focus on fixing some of the sloppyness of the past. I remember win3.1 where the user could try to copy a large set of files to floppy, and if a file was too big for a floppy it would continue to try to copy the file, until the disk was full, ask for another disk, and continue to try. I think this was actually fixed.
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
Do you think the pricing of Vista would be the same if MacOSX and Linux did not exist? Do you think Vista would have even been released without their competition?
???
* Driver issues are nothing new and will be ironed out soon enough.
* Software compatibility is again just matter of time.
* In a years time this will all be a joke and Vista will be doing just fine.
* XP was simply out to long. I don't know about anyone else but to me it feels old, because it is.
I want Vista, the assumption that no one does it somewhat annoying.
If I had been in his shoes (my legally bought copy didn't work anymore), I would've said "Fuck this, I'm going to TPB to find a torrent." and then I would have done exactly that.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
Move along, nothing to see. It does make me chuckle to read that Linux is going to take over the world, if we all had a technical degree at Harvard then maybe.
Can't you ghost a fresh install and use that image in case of a crash? I recently had to recover a WinXP installation from Sony recovery CDs and no activation was needed there.
The computers are mine, the software is legitimate. That is all the antipiracy protection MS needs to know about.
They have no bussiness being the gatekeepers of my computers.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
If they had realized or at least internally admitted that this "upgrade" is really not half as huge or earth shattering as they had hoped and instead priced it as a small to moderate upgrade more would have sold. Instead they priced it so that the OS was essentially the single biggest cost in building a new system in many cases. (short of of the GPU for gamers)
They also tried to play the "let's granularize by feature" game and lost miserably.
My personal opinion as to why is that MS needed something to rake in big money to make shareholders happy. So they placed some ill advised bets on what the market would and wouldn't take and so far they've lost them all.
The next foot I see falling will be an interesting stand off. At some point MS will declare that all XP support and patches will end on some given date, then Dell and the other PC manufacturers will either have to capitulate and push Vista more or say "Well, we'll just start selling systems with on there, they charge the customer an upgrade fee to put Vista on instead."
And even being a Windows user and not a "fan boi" of any given linux distro even I hope they choose the second option.
I'm a fiscal conservative, it's a pity we don't have a political party anymore
I baught vist Ultimate because it was what supposed to be the replacement for windows XP Pro. Funnything is that it does not have IIS and many other functionality. So i'll have to install Apache and MySql. Exactly why did I buy Vista?
They hide all kinds of stuff. The OS is really not user friendly. The search function keeps getting harder and harder to use. I don;t know find this here to me was simple.
I've been actively using Linux and FreeBSD for years now and there's still something that I find nice about Vista.. I work for small local IT company and we probably get around 10-20 new PC's a week for our various customers with Vista pre-installed on them.. After De-Whoring each computer by removing Google Toolbar, Roxio, and any prepackaged virus software or Greeting Card Magic, the computers run great..
The only problems I've been seeing are when people are upgrading their computers.. If you have some special type of device that doesn't have proper drivers, of course Vista won't work the way you want it to.. If you run some horrible old 16-bit application and are angry that doesn't work right in Vista, then boo-freakin-hoo.. but for the most part, there are still some little quirks here and there that MS needs to fix, but Vista in general is actually a huge step in the right direction as far as people's computers becoming more advanced and usable.. it's slightly educating people too given all the new System Performance utilities, and Parental Control, and AV..
all in all, if you simply don't like MS, then don't use their OS :-D i've come close to smashing my Windows machine in the past, but I think they're surely making a bit of progress.. just wait for newer computers and newer hardware, then we'll start to see the need for Vista..
*plays the Apogee theme song music*
After one post people started talking about coca-cola, i mean just that shows that Vista is in trouble
The first link merely confirms that Vista implements protection for protected media (I.e. HD-DVD / BluRay), not for other media. In short, it's just like XP, except you gain the ability to play HD-DVD/Bluray. I'm calling FUD. (It also conjures up some bizarre scenario requiring simultaneous HD-DVD watching and medical diagnosis, and even that oddball scenario seems doubtful, as it assumes that content protection degrades everything displayed on screen, and not merely the protected content stream. Is that really true?)
a me-vista-4.html?Itemid=42
The second one regarding AEC cites the same article as the first one, and after some further googling, it appears to be bullshit as well.
"Apparently this was written by someone who's never sat at a vista machine nor seen the changes at the application level in the way Vista's mixer handles audio from different applications. Acoustic Echo Cancellation functionality works fine in Vista here. As well as being commonly used in "applications like hands-free car phones", it's also commonly used in VOIP systems, and these seem to be unaffected in Vista. How to implement AEC (and we admit that how AEC is implemented at the driver level is different in Vista) is well documented in the DirectShow9 SDK for Vista."
http://www.fastsilicon.com/opinions-editorials/bl
(Sure, just a link, but so is yours. In addition, your source's bizarre hospital-diagnosis mishap example is so plain weird as to discredit him as a source in itself)
Hence, I'm calling FUD again.
...then, maybe, people would buy it. My increasing frustration that XP-era problems still crop up and haven't been fixed (see my blog for examples - simple disc burning being the latest!) makes me worry that no innovation is really going on at Microsoft, just a banzai approach to fixing and patching. I wanted Vista to do lots of cool new things, all I really got was XP in a new jacket and I can't see the mass market moving onto Vista until XP really starts showing its age, a process MS will do anything to accelerate. http://www.goffee-freelance.co.uk/
If he's the Walrus then can I be a penguin please?
That's still as illegal as pirating the OS and not having a legally bought copy.
Don't forget the 3rd catch -- Once you install and activate that OEM copy, you can't transfer it to another computer (but I believe you can convince the phone activation people that you've upgraded the motherboard, without mentioning that you also upgraded the CPU, RAM, HDD, Video card, keyboard and mouse, and they may let you reactivate).
And don't forget that sexy "my-toy-windows" look and feel!
... fucking (you wish) nerd
...simply Windows ME in a new, metrosexual package.
I've hit this with branded OEM versions of XP Media Center Edition, and I'm sure they'll do the same thing with Vista. The OS locks down hard to the motherboard model, even going to far as to require a Sony Bios on an OEM system I tried to repair.
Currently, I build machines for resale with a generic XP OEM license, and I have pretty high confidence they can be upgraded or repaired in the future with standard parts without too much problem with authorization. I do this instead of reselling OEM machines--which I can buy assembled, with comparable specs, and branded OEM versions of XP,--at the same price point. I think I am giving my customers better value with a pristine install of XP, the original media and license (instead of a Restore Disk or partition), and the ability to replace or upgrade the motherboard with something other than an identical part.
But I'm afraid Generic OEM versions of Vista will be just as hard to service as the current branded OEM versions of XP. And that's going to take a big bite out of my business, and my customers wallets.
Fundamentalism is a crime against humanity
Face it, Microsoft will force the upgrade. They always have.
However, the real problem with Vista is that it doesn't solve any pressing problems. Let's look at the last few releases of Windows:
Windows 95 - compelling upgrade because it brought a relatively modern (c. 1983) interface to the Wintel world.
Windows 98 (all versions) - compelling because it finally brought reasonable stability to the 9x branch.
Windows NT 4.0 - did for NT what 95 did for 3.1. Worked great once SP4 came out.
Windows 2000 - compelling because of Active Directory in enterprise environments.
Windows ME - absolutely no reason to use this release. It sucked big time, and we all agree on this.
Windows XP - compelling because it brought truly working USB and (post-SP2) wireless networking, along with other much improved hardware support. Especially compelling upgrade for portables.
Windows Server 2003 - partially compelling, especially if you need the new features of R2. Improved Active Directory and hardware support.
Windows Vista - no real reason to upgrade. No paradigm shifts have occurred in hardware since Wi-Fi, no major architecture changes in the software. A huge amount of cruft added on top, along with an extremely intrusive UI and DRM scheme.
To an extent I greatly agree with you. The concepts of purchasing a license and basically MS having you by the balls when it comes to loading your OS, and what you do with it is fundamentally wrong. But, at least for myself, I haven't run Windows 98 since I "upgraded" to XP, I have also never had an issue with reactivating my machine, even after multiple re-installs, having to call the number, and moving to new platforms. I think that if you're doing it with legit intent, and it gets screwed up, the user has done something wrong. When it comes time for me to decide if I want to goto Vista (if), I will more then likely not look back as I haven't with moving to XP from 98. Any of my old systems run some form of Linux, and it will more than likely stay that way. Once MS gets to the point of not supporting or activating XP, I doubt I'll be relying on a system that uses it. That being said, I can't see them stop re-activating XP machines even if they stop supporting it. Unless it's in a move to solely prop up their next cash cow or they go out of business. I can see a far amount of lawsuits that would ensue. But we know they're capable of a lot. I look at the OS in this case as I do hardware. I plunked down a far amount of money for my old Nvidia TNT2 Riva, but it's been past it's time, time to move on down the road... Sure, it still works for some applications, and serves the purpose for the most minimal tasks, but like Win 98 it's obsolete.
Are we seeing the stumbling of the Microsoft Juggernaught with the slow adoption of Windows Vista?"
I sure hope so. Microsoft has forgotten who its customers are (hint: it's not the RIAA). Maybe the Vista reception will make them stand up and take notice—and get back to the client-driven business model that made them successful in the first place.
This, of course is the wrong place to say that; slashdotters tend to suffer from the delusion that they are the market.
I'm a Programmer. That's one level above Software Engineer and one level below Engineer.
The comp usa nearby, which is going out of buisness so cutting prices horribly (mostly junk, but I'm wondering about a few things every so often) has Vista on a 50% discount, and falling... They still have dozens of copies left, and they don't seem to be going away. Meanwhile, people are more people are interested in buying worn out fixtures than Vista. It's rather sad.
There are many, many examples of game companies shutting down the servers for online play for older versions of their games to force upgrades to the latest edition. Electronic Arts is particularly guilty of this. Don't think Microsoft won't do it if they think they could get away with it!
"Did the submitter know this is /.? Plenty of us here think the answer is yes, and have been thinking that for a loooong time."
This was my first sub. I have been wondering about how Vista is catching on for personal reasons. I'm scared of the authorization process getting even more restrictive than at present--the current situation with XP is already making my business as a small computer repair shop more difficult. So I don't have much fondness for Vista.
I've also had a lot of customers saying they don't hear good things about Vista. Currently, they're the majority by far. So when I saw the report that Dell had backtracked on offering Vista-only, it seemed like a good time to see what others thought on the subject.
Hey, it's the only sub I ever got accepted, and it's being hit over and over. The section on New Coke dwarfed a lot of other discussion threads all by itself! And I'm picking up some pretty good tech tips from some of the submissions.
So, yeah, I'm way happy for how I set it up and how it's going.
YMMV
Fundamentalism is a crime against humanity
So? GP never said anything about legality.
Legality is not the same as morality/ethics. Some people are more concerned about the morality of their actions than the legality of their actions. I, for example, care very little about the legality of my actions. However, I am concerned with the likely consequences of my actions, and that means I must consider whether I am likely to be punished is some way for actions I am considering. This is often related to the legality of those actions, but again it is not the legality which concerns me -- only the ethical considerations paired with whether and to what extent I am likely to be punished. Sometimes, those two sets of concerns are even at odds with each other, unfortunately.
In the hypothetical case we're discussing here, illegally obtaining a replacement for a legally-purchased copy of WinXP is not likely to be punished. In fact, even if Microsoft were to attempt prosecution, there is at least a chance of avoiding punishment as a result of possessing a valid license, so punishment is less likely in this case than for someone pirating the OS without owning a legal copy. I also find nothing morally objectionable about it. So, I would do the same thing (though maybe without the cursing).
I am of the opinion that the only thing "wrong" with copying unlicensed software is the fact that it's illegal. That is why I consider it an important point that in this case it's still illegal, as not breaking the law is the only valid reason for buying a windows license. Personally I pirate Windows without the intermediate step of paying for it, and feel no qualms about it. Frankly I'd rather avoid it entirely, but such is the curse of vendor lock-in.
Are you talking about Microsoft there? In iTunes I can import CDs I own and put them on my iPod DRM free. Seriously. I don't know about the Zune but I'm presuming that it's not much different. Buy from the Zune/iTunes store, you get DRM (not always with iTMS nowadays). Buy CDs or pirate them or something, you don't have DRM. What's the difficulty there?
That's a little off-topic though. Regarding your actual point, it's a trade-off. With Apple, you're locked in to hardware; with Microsoft, you're locked in to software. Over time, I would argue that the latter costs you a lot more with upgrades to Windows and Office. It's not really a problem for me because I don't use or need Office to do my work. I still use a mac though because the hardware and the software that's available for it are much more conducive to graphic design tasks*. Also, I like to have an operating system that I can ignore while I'm working. I think before you go 'round saying that Vista is a million times better than OS X, you have to give much better reasons than hardware lock-in.
( *I dual-boot ubuntu and os x on all my machines and spend equal time in each. Only problems with linux is that gimp doesn't support CMYK colour and all the keyboard shortcuts in InkScape are different from Illustrator. )
The GP asked a very simple question that is easily solved by 2-3 minutes of Google use. I for one am tired of uninformed assholes who can't be bothered to do the most basic, effortless research who still for some reason decide to spew their ignorance on public forums. The response was mild considering how old this situation is getting.
So climb up on your high horse and tell everyone they should play nice, like some great big Slashdot nanny, if that's what makes you feel like a fine human being. Let the rest of us deal with the ignorance in our own way.
Now Visual Studio. Programmers, for the most part, are generally very capable users. They know what all is out there, and they are much better at coping with the differences between products if they get too pissed off. If Microsoft pushes them too hard, they may well find a lot of their developers switching over and using Borland development tools instead (I like Borand better anyways but that's a different topic
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
> it's hard to really put my finger on a single 'killer app' that makes Vista better, but as a user, the overalle xperience just feels more polished.
Funny thing is, almost no one can give anyone even one good reason to upgrade. Not even one. I mean, how hard could it be to say that the search in the start menu is kinda nice, or maybe the new interface is shinier? But apparently all the people who are new Vista fans can't find much to actually recommend it.
Forgive me for saying this, but it's just not worth anything to give up all your application support, drivers that work well, and user familiarity for what amounts to a few shiny graphics and many worthless pains in the ass, like UAC (which does NOT improve security; you don't do that by training folks to press "allow").
Don't get me wrong, though. I suspect that Vista will gain traction even if no one wants it. There are plenty of things like the artificial DX 10 exclusivity and OEM programs that I would expect to push Vista out the door one way or another.
But if Vista eventually "dominates", well, let's just say that I don't think it will be because it's the better product.
Douche vous-même!
World of Warcraft started years ago!
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
The only reason you would change is if your needs changed or your WANTS change. That is really the only reason any consumer buys or upgrades a computer- their current computer situation does not fit their needs or wants.
Personally I am too addicted to new software to not have my needs change. Developers of the web and applications have raised my needs for power considerably over the past few years with new great features that eat ram and CPU but do great things I never knew I wanted before. Flash movies, browser inline spell checking, interactive DHTML, "Web 2.0" sites like Digg and other web browsing heavy weights that eat the CPU of a modern machine to run "smoothly." I don't NEED that stuff to run smoothly, but I want it to. I have spent over $1000 dollars in monitors and hardware to basically make Firefox run better over the past few years- and it was all worth it! I don't mind when Firefox starts acting up and eats 500mb cause I got another 3 gigs to spare.
That extra hardware means that I can also use that Firefox in 2009 when X great new feature eats a gig when turned on. I will yell "have at me great Mozilla beast!" Just as I have done before. Thats why nothing from the 98 days would work for me and millions of others.
I sell computers to customers all day that are trading in what I consider to be dinosaurs (95 and 98) in order to get a new computer. Their needs are less than yours- most only want to get on the internet. But they all want new computer because they just got a high speed connection and few systems from the pre-XP era can keep up.
If your computer needs and wants haven't changed in a decade, then that is cool. But you know the world has changed around you, and if you ever want something new you are so far behind the curve everything would change. Almost nothing could come with you easily...
I got Parallels to run Windows 98 the other day just for fun, so there might be a way to drag your favorite OS into the future without having to be left behind.....
Open Source Sushi
I just want to say that I was delighted to read such a clearheaded and inherently correct paragraph. My hat is off to you, sir.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
What I do is make sure that a legitimate license has been paid for Win XP Pro and then use my downloaded XP Pro corporate which requires no activation. The version I have is still fully updating with no problems.
The same will happen for Vista if any of my clients goes against my recommendations and buys it. I found a version of Ultimate that requires no registration and will be using it with those clients who buy Ultimate.
Cheers
Who is this delectable creature with an insatiable love of the dead?
Don't know why I chose yours out of all the random replies to respond to, maybe because you seemed less fanboyish than most. Here goes...
.ani exploit, but the vast majority of exploits common to previous Windows version don't work anymore or require a substantially stupider user) the bundled functionality is probably the biggest upgrade. Not only the included software, which has been upgraded, but stuff like integrated search, network diagnostics, even weird little stuff like the ability to set volume levels for different programs independently.
Aside from security, which really is improved (yes, there have been things like the
Better security is something you can sell some (though not all) users on. They might not understand the details of stuff like ASLR or even that it blocks a large family of common exploits (return-to-libc type stuff) but telling them "if you run this nominally safe program in XP, somebody can take over your computer. If you run it in Vista they can't." is pretty good. Less important but probably more sellable is the improved speed and reduced risk of identity theft from the restrictions on malware. Far, far too many people still don't run with any real antispyware, for example; even if they occasionally run AdAware or something they only do it when they notice a problem. I'm not saying Windows Defender's detection/cleaning engine is the best, but at least it's real time. Having a two-way firewall that asks you for permission when an unreconized program attempts to access the Internet is another good thing. I haven't even mentioned UAC (though I personally consider it superb) because I realize a lot of people will click Allow without thinking, but at least there is SOME protection for those who do think (and it's not too hard to figure out when UAC is likely to prompt you; even if you allow those prompts without reading them, one at an unexpected time will send up warnings in a lot of peoples' minds).
Better included software and capabilities is another thing entirely. This is something people can see, something you can really sell them on. A lot of people still use Outlook Express, for example (don't ask me how they can stand it). Windows Mail combines a similar interface (no learning curve) with insanely better capabilities (particularly the addition of junk filtering and indexed search, and de-integration with Messenger). Windows Calendar is better than Outlook 2003's calendar (for a home user, it doesn't have as much groupware capability) and is dead easy to use. Windows Vista's search feature has something on pretty much every other desktop search out there. It's faster, more convenient, and doesn't require manual installation like Google Desktop, Windows Desktop Search, etc. It is far faster than Beagle on my Linux system, and much more integrated. Spotlight comes closest, but having the search in the Start menu (accessible from the Windows key) is a nice touch, and I prefer the way the Start menu search lays out results. It is also extendable; I don't know about Spotlight but on my Windows system I can search Google, Wikipedia, my music or pictures, or anything else I want to set up by just typing an extra letter or two before the search string. This all thanks to a handy search enchancer called Start++, which is a free download and can do more than I've listed here. It's not included (though it would be awesome if they included such functionality in SP1) but installing it puts Vista's search well ahead of any Spotlight setup I've used. Even little things like SuperFetch (learn which programs users run at given times fo the day and week, and prefetch them so they load instantly) is actually a very nice feature from an end user perspective.
I've got my gripes with Vista, but none of them have to do with it being a minimal upgrade from XP. Most of the things it lacks I get from my Linux installation (dual-boot on the same laptop, openSuse if anybody cares) but a lot of Vista is nice enough I actually use it more than Linux at the moment. Before Vista came out, I'd used Linux pretty exclusively on my home system for months; I can't stand XP anymore.
There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
I remember "Moof", I just never knew it had a name. :D
Thunderclone: ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE! ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE!
And here is Commodore's corporate site: http://www.commodorecorp.com/
Still, probably no support for the Amiga. Too bad -- that was a hell of a computer in its day.
Sig goes here.
I gotta admit though, VS is pretty slick. And I especially love the way it goes ballistic at you if you use proprietry tags in your HTML. "Filter? What's that? That aint CSS 2.1! BAD DEVELOPER!" "-moz-opacity? Nope, that aint CSS 2.1 either. BACK IN YOUR CORNER!"
Besides, when you consider Mono, VS' output really is quite easy to port to Linux
For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
Just like people do with other abandonware, people bypass those mechanisms. They are already bypassed. And if Microsoft isn't supporting the applications, they have some very patchy legal ground to take action against anyone with a legitimate license for their product, regardless of the method used to fulfill the license.
I'd also like to point out, as you mention yourself, if Vista becomes obselete, then... why would you use it?
Nobody uses Win98 or 3.11 anymore (apart from a few crazy nutjobs).
We see this every upgrade cycle. Before the new product, everyone is busy flaming XP, 2000, NT4.0 whatever as a useless, buggy, unstable OS. As soon as Microsoft releases the new product, suddenly nobody wants to upgrade because XP, 2000, NT4.0 whatever is perfectly fine, stable enough, does the job they need. Then when they adopt the new product anyway, it's useless, buggy, and unstable (but they still won't admit that it's less so than the previous version).
I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
You can't live in the past. You'll have to buy new clothes, new car tyres, eventually everything needs to be replaced. Congratulations on lasting so long with what is now an anachronism.
But ours is a society of upgrades and replacements. Even the linux guys will tell you, as a matter of fact one of the most appealing things for me about open source is the sheer rate at which upgrades and improvements are made available.
I bet you wouldn't be doing so great if you had Linux from 2000. But Linux, in the past 7 years, has made tremendously more progress than Windows has. Maybe some part of that is because Linux still has a way to go, but a lot of it is because of the great community and business community that drives it. You don't see people complaining about wanting to or needing to upgrade their Linux installs, do you?
I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
In the case of graphics design, the only area where Apple has a legitimate market, I'll give you that. You said yourself you don't need Office to do your work, so you're not a regular business user. Some tools are better suited than others for some jobs, and remarkably enough, Apple has a niche where the machines are tools instead of fashion accessories.
Elsewhere in business, my argument still stands quite well.
With Microsoft, you're not locked into software, either. You can use Openoffice.org, you can even replace the shell if you don't like it that much. Service packs are free. Upgrades, just like with OS X, cost you money.
As a matter of fact, you've just told us that you're locked into using Apple gear because of the software available for it... ironic, isn't it?
I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
As a matter of fact I HAVE a linux from seven years ago. (More correctly: It was a Linux from 1999, so eight years). It started out as a DLD (Deutsche Linux Distribution), then got a new kernel to use my ISDN card, then it got overinstalled with a RedHat 5.2, without actually reformatting the HD, then again an Upgrade Installation with RedHat 7.3 and then gradually upgraded with diverse redhat-release.*.rpms until RedHat 9.0, but with a custom kernel to cater to my diverse SCSI-drives.
;) ). Even video replay is fast enough for most DivX, and for DVDs I have a DVD player. I don't play 3D Real Time games, because I like round based games. Maybe I'll upgrade to 1 Gigabyte of memory, but PC133 RAM is slowly going expensive. It is still much cheaper than a new computer though. I bought one recently for my wife for US$300. It serves her needs. It even is fast enough for Google Earth. It'll probably get upgraded once or twice. And it will run until something nonreplacable breaks. That's all.
There is actually no point for me to upgrade the boxes, because I can install the software packages I need, and when I need them. For some software I lost the installation medium, most prominently my CIV Call to Power from Loki Software (which I bought originally), which let me hesitate to reformat everything to start from anew.
And for "living in the past". Indeed I am somehow living in the past. I grew up in houses built around 1900. I currently live in a house from 1820. My brother's house was built 1374. (Yes. More than 600 years ago). My parent's house is from 1998, but it is built in an old vineyard, and the vineyard walls are older than 150 years. I just don't see the problem. You can just gradually upgrade houses. Install electricity. Install air condition. Install new isolation. Paint the walls. Build in new windows.
And you can gradually upgrade computers. And then they reach the level of usefullness that caters to your needs. I don't need much of the features newer computers offer (there is one exception right now: Google Earth
Sure, XP is known to be cracked. Vista will probably be cracked as well (according to some Slashdot news there are already partial cracks in circulation). But downloading such cracks from a random internet site will always carry a risk of getting a trojan as well. Not really what I'm looking for
I might not agree with Microsoft about Vista being obsolete (assuming for the sake of the argument I'd use it in the first place). A similar situation is now approaching for Windows 2000. Which I'm still using and consider mostly OK. But Microsoft has already reduced support to a minimum and announced its complete end in 2010:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/server/evalu
C - the footgun of programming languages
Vista is fully cracked through a number of different and fun exploits that fully activate the product.
I've downloaded and tried a few (after verifying them with some trusty AV scanners, I never saw one with a trojan in it)
So long as you don't do anything crazy like download and install WGA or apply patches designed to compromise the compromise, you can have a zero cost fully functional Vista install today.
I support a lot of servers for a big mining company, ranging from some archaic NT4.0 servers (yuck, why won't the customer let us kill them??) to mostly Windows Server 2003 and we're even playing with Longhorn betas and Vista. We find even with the Windows 2000 servers there are a lot of limitations that newer enterprise management tools get stuck on. We much prefer the extra functionality from the newer products.
This post was brought to you by a cracked vista install and Firefox.
I bought Vista and have been using it for almost a month and a half. For me or any nerd, hardware incompatibilities are a fact of life, and relatively expected. That's not really the issue. The issue is the massive amount of change for changes sake. Tabbed control panels with all options clearly presented have been replaced with idiotic explorer pages with lists of nearly incoherently named options. The Start menu cascade has been replaced by a ridiculous window that must scrolled and double clicked thru. The icons for networking that used to bring up the control panels now bring up another tiny Explorer window with more vague options. The list goes on and on. Everyday I use Vista another bvllshit aspect presents itself, another useful option replaced by lists of meaningless settings. Moving from Win2K to XP was painless. I went to the setting tab and set it to "Classic" and all the Fisher Price XP nonsense was gone. But the underlying OS was now a far more usable and stable iteration of the NT code base. Vista does none of that. It is merely a theme. 5 years and how many billions of dollars and all Microsoft gave me for my 150 C$ was a splashy interface with a myriad of pointless options, and a code base so bloated that 2 gigs of RAM is an absolute requirement before the system will even talk to you. If Vista did not come loaded on your machine, it's not worth a penny extra to put it on an existing machine. And for some odd reason, the majority of people in the market for a Windows OS have realised that all at once.
Fiat Homos et Pereat Theos