Slashdot Mirror
Less Than 2 Percent of UK Companies Have Upgraded Windows
Rob writes "Computer Business Review is reporting that less than 2% of UK-based firms have already upgraded all their desktops to Windows Vista. Just shy of 5% said that they have begun a Windows Vista desktop upgrade program. 6.5% said they will upgrade in the next 6 months; 12.6% in the next 12 months; 13% in the next 18 months; and 18% in the next two years. That means that within two years from now, only 56% of survey respondents say they will have upgraded their firm's desktops to Windows Vista. 'In terms of retail sales of Vista in a box, Ballmer said he believes most of that up-tick is concentrated in the first few months of the software going on sale. He doubted that this would carry over into Microsoft's fiscal 2008, which began in July 2007. Analyst estimates for fiscal 2008 growth in Microsoft's client business unit, which includes Vista, is around the 9% mark. Ballmer said that analysts should consider that rather than creating huge spurts of new growth "a new Windows release is primarily a chance to sustain the revenue we have".'"
Will downgrade new machines from Vista to XP or some alternative due to the overhead and application support? I know in my office, Vista has been vanishing, replaced by Linux running Wine for the few Windows apps we actually require.
Karma Whoring for Fun and Profit.
I still use Windows 2000 as my windows desktop (when i'm not using a *ix system). Nothing wrong with it - no reason to upgrade.
Vista... sucks...
The box said requires Windows 2000 or better so I installed Linux!
Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Isn't it obvious that a business would wait until the new system is firmly established before beginning the costly and time-consuming task of upgrading and retraining (to whatever extent that's necessary)?
'In the next six months' is a subset of 'in the next year', which is a subset of 'in the next 18 months', a subset of 'in the next two years'.
So what? In two years will 20% of business be running Vista, or 50%?
The one thing about capitalism is that it is actually not very kind to monopolies. Investors value growth, above all else, and want to put their capital where growth of the business is most. MS can get some rate of return on existing Windows licensing, but, that's not nearly the same as doubling the size of your business from new customers every year or so, and Wall Street knows it. This influences development decisions at companies - there's no point in investing in something, if its not going to move the price of the shares. At this point, Windows is a good business, but all Microsoft can really do in the OS point is stay put or lose.
This is my sig.
Given that there hasn't been a hard push for Vista for U.K. businesses (and that some vendors have been encouraging their customers to wait), this is not a particularly big surprise. It's just too risky while Vista is this new.
If you take a risk with a new operating system at home and it doesn't work out, you may be out some cash. If you did it across your business, you may be out of a job (and a company, for that matter!).
Misery loves company. Online misery loves unsuspecting random strangers.
This means only 44% of IT departments have a clue.
Home fucking is killing prostitution.
The operating system is getting a very bad reception in the press and from the influential types (us guys) in IT
:/
See my thoughts below.
(yes, this is a re-post, unreplied to though and obviously on topic)
When I tried Vista it forced my Dell 8600 laptop to run it's fan in stage 2 of 3 instead of 1/3 that XP does, somewhere CPU use was too high, no matter what I turned off (Aero etc) - on battery or powered.
The interface isn't for me, I couldn't possibly care less about a fluffy 3D interface, I've never used XP's Luna theme and I've been using XP since 6 months after release, I need a functional fast operating system with clever powerful features, I don't 'watch' my OS I use it to get stuff done.
Another reason why I don't want Aero is I do a hell of a lot of RDP'ing and you can't get Aero over RDP.
I would find switching from Vista classic (or XP classic) to Aero, to classic to Aero when switching in and out of my RDP sessions to be very disorientating.
ALSO Aero seemed to offer no real actual benefits to usability, sadly I have to admit after using Mac OSX that the whole expose thing is surprisingly awesome and convienient, that operating system truely makes a mouse user damn near as powerful as a good keyboarder (wow!)
Aero's flip 3D however was ridiculously bad at actually saving you time and effort.
The widget thing / bar on the right was stupid, it should be like Mac OS - it's there, when you need it, hidden and very easily accessable, NOT a bar stuck on the side (auto hide or not, Mac OS wins that)
The search functionality wasn't as good as locate32, I think in file names, not in contents, if I want my CV I search for *resume*.doc on all drives and I'll find it because I memorise the file name (admitedly locate32 isn't native to XP)
Therefore overall Vista didn't offer me anything that honestly helped me.
I used a full retail version of Ultimate and manage to re-produce a bug where connecting to a VPN would instantly blue screen it too (fully patched)
I dislike the smaller 'stylish' min / max / close buttons at the top right, I like them square and easy to find.
Did I mention Windows Explorer sucked? I spend 80% of my time in it, managing files, doing 'stuff' and it's hard to explain but there was a lack of 'lines' and dividers and bars, the data was hard to take in quickly because the interface looked,... weird I couldn't do things quicker with that, the line showing left pane / right pane sucked.
I think (don't quote me) it forced that silly task pane on as well, which is on in XP but disable-able - I don't think you can in Vista (don't quote)
I disliked the breadcrumb style address bar in folders at the top of explorer, admitedly just today someone found a home made patch to disable it but it's not a stock option in Vista and wasn't available when I tried it.
When all is said and done, I would STILL use the thing if someone just made a shell replacement that made it look absoloutely 100% identical to XP classic mode but with a Vista 'engine'. I don't hate DX10 nor do I detest the search, I can always use my own, I don't have to use flip 3d but I do CONSTANTLY use Windows explorer and I need it looking nice, simple and clean to do shit fast, - I felt hamstrung
Didn't we all see a similar article like this back when XP was introduced?
We all know that businesses work on a far slower cycle than the consumer market - hell, it was only two years ago that my work computer (I'm not in IT) moved from Windows 2000 to Windows XP.
Based on that timescale (5 years), I don't expect to move to Vista till 2009...
Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
What were the adoption figures in the early days of Win2K (which brought native USB support) or XP? Probably just as poor - at least in the case of XP.
None of the companies I have worked for recently have been quick to adopt a new level of Windows. Anyone who expects large companies to leap aboard the Vista bandwagon now is simply deluded. The standard 'wisdom' is that Vista will only start to catch on in a corporate environment once SP1 has been released.
Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
This past week I picked up my first Vista notebook (on purpose). All our previous workstations were either XP or Vista replaced by XP -- and our clients are also XP. But in the past month, I've noticed quite a few clients running Vista on their notebooks they bring in from home, and that's usually a deciding factor for near-term upgrades.
My company has a "Not till 2008" stance on Vista. I've had horrible experiences with it and third party apps since its release, which is expected. The last week since running Vista, I have to say that the interface does LOOK nicer, but it is counter-intuitive for those who are used to the old keyboard commands to get to places. I'm sure its an easy transition, but I can't figure out the benefits, yet.
Here's the downside: while I don't see any efficiency, the few clients who are choosing to stick with it are doing so because of the cool factor. When I explain to them that the 0.25 second "pauses" for all the flashiness (which can be disabled, of course) add up to a 1/2 hour a day in lost productivity, they don't care: it just looks cool! Engineers and designers we work with hate it, but the managements and CxOs that are our primary market love it. Ugh. Vista: The Ferrari of Operating Systems, and just as costly to repair when it breaks down, often.
Perhaps the business masses have yet to migrate to Vista. Well, there still isn't a service pack out for it yet and I believe MANY businesses waited for SP1 to be released for XP before they migrated. Also, MS isn't hurting that bad. Companies are still buying new laptops and desktops and guess what OS is also being purchased with them? XP.
While MS doesn't own the server market, their OS is still are on nearly every business desktop/laptop I see. Yes, that may not be true for some Slashdot types, but it is true for the rest of the working world.
Ninjas don't carry tic tacs
There's no SP1 yet. I know that's the case here, and I'm the senior sysadmin for about 3500 seats. There are some pluses to Vista like Bitlocker for our laptops, amongst other things. We have been doing compatibility testing with Vista for some time now, and have found the vast majority of our applications work okay, only a handful do not. Those handful of users will be refreshed with XP if the software isn't upgraded by then, and if it is, they will run Vista. Everybody runs a 2 year refresh cycle from their start date, so that's how we refresh PCs.
The price is always right if someone else is paying.
"a new Windows release is primarily a chance to sustain the revenue we have"
obviously. there's not really much there in terms of day to day productivity boosters. there's nothing in windows vista that'll change the world or blow my mind. it's pretty easy to to see that this also applies to, for example, office 2007 - how many releases do they need before they get word processing right? the glaring example of this is of course the ribbon bar, imho - a UI change/obfuscation just so that people would have a reason to buy the product again.
"a new Windows release is primarily a chance to sustain the revenue we have"
so this is why the new OS is so craptastic: they only made it to "sustain the revenue", not to actually make anything groundbreaking or desirable to have for one's PC. it all makes sense now!
Most businesses would not even dare to upgrade their XP or even previous versions to Vista, simply because their computers are not powerful enough or supported by Vista. The only "upgrades" will come from new hardware purchases with pre-installed version. The only problem is that businesses are reluctant to upgrade their hardware when it appears to be functional. They will only upgrade when their computers break down or just too slow to perform certain tasks.
I think the problem is that the survey refered to Vista as an 'Upgrade'. Had they asked "What are your firm's plans to make your users' and IT staff's lives miserable by forcing a completely unneeded operating system change onto them?" then they might have gotten a better response.
Nothing personal, it's just that your post is the one I finally decided to comment on. Folks, the subject line is meant to be a terse summary of your post. It is not meant to be the first part of the first sentence in your post.
I had to re-read the sentence fragment above a few times to realize that it was a continuation of what you'd typed in the subject. Many people won't bother and will take that as poor grammar before skipping on to the next message. Free advice: if you want your message to get out, don't do that.
I've been seeing this quite a bit lately and it's irksome. Slashdot has traditionally loosely followed the metaphor of a mailing list, mainly because the crowd that originally made it popular was used to that. There's still a strong influence in that direction. There's no law or rule or FAQ that says it has to be this way, but roughly a decade of practice has made it standard.
Thanks.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
I work at a company with about 7,000 engineers. We have not adopted Vista yet and I would be suprised if we did within the next couple of years. In fact all new machines may ship with Vista, but when they arrive they are loaded with XP or Linux.
Also, I would expect it would be at least a year before we adopt Office 2007.
I work at a government laboratory and security is the primary issue.
How many companies have not upgraded to XP yet?
And how many are still running Windows 98 or 95?
Where is it!? They need to take out the core of Vista, use it in the standard Explorer (maybe a new 08 theme, but no Aero), and market it to businesses. Like they did when ME and 2000 coexisted. They pushed ME, even though there was the better 2000 alternative.
622677120
I really hope the article just did a really lousy job of explaining the study because "Less than 2% of UK-based firms have already upgraded all their desktops to Windows Vista" strikes me as an incredibly meaningless statistic. If a company has 2000 computers, 1999 of which were upgraded to Vista, and one of which is still running XP, then they wouldn't be counted.
If a company has a single computer that can't be upgraded to Vista then that company can never be counted as having upgraded. What percentage of UK companies have 5+ year old computer? What percentage have a Mac?
The one thing about capitalism is that it is actually not very kind to monopolies
./'ers love to hate Microsoft, they aren't going anywhere anytime soon.
/.
Funniest and least factual thing I've read all morning. Thanks for that. Actually, capitalism is kindest of all to monopolies. History has repeatedly and universally shown that unregulated markets quickly evolve to monopolies. End of story.
Investors value growth, above all else
Wrong again. In general, investors (the kind with 100's of millions) want ROI. ROI is achieved a number of different ways, one of them is the appreciation in value of the stock, another is a dividend, another is interest on debt.
I don't care for Microsoft's business practices one bit, but you'll notice none of the investors are running for the exits. The stock still returns well above average for the category, much less the market in general. As much as
I'm sure you've noticed the number of posts with grammar corrections sprinkled throughout the summaries. I try to correct lazy/wrong economic thinking on
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
In fact, given that it's the number that have upgraded all their desktops to Vista, it sounds quite respectable, or at least par for the course.
My company still has some desktops running Windows 98, how about you?
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
signature pending slashdot approval
Over here, the heads of IT, marketing, and managing director (me) all agree that going to Vista is a downgrade* not an upgrade, so the systems now dual boot with Windows XP and Linux**. Microsoft can shove Vista where the sun doesn't shine.
* Having "played" with Vista on another persons new machine and decent spec, it's terrible.
** After learning about Linux from scratch.
Take Nobody's Word For It.
One has to read the subject to get the whole sentence... ... Sometimes. (not this post!)
-orangesquid
will slowly roll out a new desktop OS, this isn't news.
So they fenced in Micro Channel with all kinds of licenses and patents and expected PC manufacturers to beat a path to their door. They didn't. They worked with EISA and VLB and such until PCI came around, and by then IBM was very much an also-ran in the PC market.
I have to say... Vista brings up strong echoes in my mind. It's not an exact parallel but there are a lot of similarities. I think MS's reach is exceeding its grasp here. It happened to IBM (which *owned* computing) and it's starting to happen to MS. Not just the DRM stuff (which is bad enough) but their fixation on (harmful) backward compatibility (which is why UAC is so broken) and their development model being simply not sufficient for managing a codebase of 50+ million lines (they had to throw out features and start over to get Vista shipped at all - years late).
PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
agree.
Form follows function.
At least all the information isn't in the Subject: line with "nc" in the body.
Need Mercedes parts ?
To run Vista, businesses will need new machines (that is, if they bought the current machines for XP) with higher spec, they costs money.
Also you have to roll it out, which costs money
Also you have to buy the Vista itself, which costs a lot of money
You have to make sure your apps run, if not fix them, which costs money.
You have to take support calls for those who can't use Vista, which costs money.
All this, for a differant UI (some argue better, I disagree).
You feel sleepy. Close your eyes. The opinions stated above are yours. You cannot imagine why you ever felt otherwise.
Your post made a point I was thinking of: Vista's no Ferrari, in more ways than that.
It reminds me more of one of those fancy looking kit cars from the 70s & 80s, which looked at a distance like some exotic Lambo/Delorean crossbreed, but when they drove by you could tell that it was a fiberglass body on a VW bug chassis with the original air-cooled bug engine whining in protest at the weight of all that fiberglass and plastic. The rattles and squeaks were also amusing.
Vista may be the "Ultimate Extreme Super-Mega" version of Windows, but under the Areoglass body, it's still got that VW engine.
Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
"unnatural" monopolies
There is no such thing. There are monopolies, oligopolies, duopolies and a few other well-researched market conditions.
IBM, GM, US Steel, AT&T
None of those were/are monopolies. There are monopolies in international cargo shipping (the big-boat kind), international communications, and an operating system developer called Microsoft.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
I've used Win2k since the Corporate Preview Program, but its time has passed.
I have a few systems in the office still using Windows 2000 (we just got rid of our last NT4 system last month), but last week we had a hard drive crash in one of them. I took the opportunity to install Windows XP SP2 on it yesterday and reinstalled the same few (3) applications on it.
The same applications are running noticeably faster. I'm not sure why, since this system really didn't have a lot of clutter on it before, and it was kept pretty clean (we don't allow users to install anything and the drive was defragmented regularly). This system is used for just one task so it was easy to keep it clean; on top of that the hardware is basically the same (apart from having a new same-speed hard drive). It's possible that XP has more performance optimizations particularly in the UI - I don't really know.
Not only that but perhaps more importantly, XP is still actively supported by Microsoft, so as more vulnerabilities are found in Windows, there's a better chance of MS releasing a patch - Win2K is not as actively supported by MS because it's no longer a money maker for them (i.e. you can still buy XP, but you can't buy Win2k).
Putting moderation advice in your
According to this short news story, Microsoft (MS) announced that instead of patching bugs and improving features of Windows Vista in the next service pack (SP) release, they would just install Windows XP. It was due to customers' demands.
[grin]
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
When i read these stories, I have a pretty different view here: this is great news for Microsoft. They continue to have record quarters in terms of revenue and the upside for Vista is just starting. No matter what they say, organizations will eventually move from XP to Vista (and nothing else). It will take a long time just like 2000 to XP. My comments have nothing to do with my feelings about Vista usability etc. I use both a MacBook and a Vista desktop (at work)... I prefer the Mac (don't we all?).
Most businesses in the UK still use Server 2003 and terminals. Ok, I'm basing this one a pretty small sample size (4 companies based in sheffield, around 600 terminal installed base on average), but I reckon if you were to only take business machines which are currently running XP, you'd be a fair bit closer to the 5%. Businesses and Retailers are more concerned with Office 03/07 upgrades than Vista (a case of "we don't really care, you don't need it, but replacing machines off the shelf it's much easier to get them with Vista on")
Service Pack 1 is due pretty soon for Vista, which is going to get more companies looking at it. However, there's a bigger problem. Although it's nicer looking, it doesn't have a whole lot to offer "enterprise" level customers.
There's some stuff I really like about Vista. I like the ability to allow old apps to virtualize access to the one or two directories or reg keys they need to access. The old "manual hunt with RegMon" fix method, as any desktop support person knows, is the most annoying thing about running an XP system as a non-admin. I also like the better device support.
The downsides are there too though...the UI is a huge performance penalty, even with Aero shut off. Most businesses are not going to want to go out and buy RAM for current desktops or junk the older desktops just because they want to roll out Vista. Plus, a lot of early adopters got burned with some of the file transfer speed and network bugs.
Truth is, Vista is not a slam-dunk upgrade. 2000 vs. NT was. Even XP vs. 2000 was, depending on who you ask. The problem this time around is that there's a new user interface, and a huge hardware hurdle to jump. I think Microsoft is going to have a ton of XP holdouts on their hands in the next few years, much longer than they expected. (The place I used to work was an NT holdout until last year.)
IT departments don't always get much say on this sort of issue. My boss said this to me once:
"I know our current system works more than fine for what we do. However, we simply *need* to upgrade our system in order to seem progressive and cutting-edge to our clients."
How many companies with Teh Lunix on teh desktop have migrated to the latest version of Ubunghole?
I'm guessing that would be less than 0%.
Anyone criticizing MS has no clue how large corporations work. Does anyone know how long it takes to not just plan all this stuff out, but also negotiate the licensing, plan out the network and server changes, etc? It's a huge undertaking, and that's why it takes years after the release of a desktop OS to actually make the switch.
Most organizations do migrations through attrition: when they take old machines off the network, they will replace them with PCs installed with the new OS. Then, once they reach a certain amount (usually around 50% or so), they will finish off the rest of the network. This kind of process normally takes about 2-4 years... so there will likely be a boom in Vista migrations around 2010-2012.
So quit whining jealously about Vista. If Ubunghole is so great, maybe you guys should focus on the billions of reasons why companies refuse to use teh Lunix on teh desktop.
This space for rent.
...and they'll stay away in droves.
you had me at #!
We have choices, and WinVista is as wise as choice as WinME was.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
"That means that within two years from now, only 56% of survey respondents say they will have upgraded their firm's desktops to Windows Vista."
I know the article is meant to be negative, but 56% over the next two years is a LOT.
-- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
...but not from xp to vista, their going from 98 to xp.
All the software that the hospital my dad works for uses for their bookkeeping and accounting is all DOS legacy stuff. Only now, 5 years after xp came out, are they finally upgrading.
The GateSatan of Mordorsoft finally has what he wanted. MS Windose now requires an umbilical cord. All users' bases are belong to him, continually inspected. Visla is a dog.
I realize this is probably something that'll never happen, but I've always thought it would be slick to build a web form that had a NNTP interface as well, both accessing the same backend database. That way people could use their newsreader of choice, which often provide far more options for killfiles, rules-based sorting, etc., than a web interface does.
I wonder if any web forum packages have ever considered or supported this.
With more applications being frontloaded onto the web browser, it's probably about ten years too late, both for the idea of a desktop app and for Usenet/NNTP compatibility generally (although I've seen traffic stats that show the number of text postings on Usenet, in absolute numbers, are higher today than they ever were in the past).
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
I've been meaning to ask you though, how many times per day do they let people like you post? Just the two? As in a 24-hour period?
I've always wondered how it would feel to be a troll with negative karma, down there with Klerck, Bonch and the GNAA boys. Do you like it?
i think that's the first intelligent thing I've ever heard come out of Steve Ballmer's mouth... wait, was that Steve or maybe some other Ballmer at MS?
Anyways... if only they'd apply that same philosophy to their marketing and product development cycles... ie: instead of promising the world in a big new release, they should maybe announce and release a new set of Features every year or so and give the product a new name or something only when a major UI change has occurred... they could even charge for them!!!??? hmmm sounds familiar (www.apple.com)
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
Thank you for pointing this out. The subject header appears in a different colour and font and background colour, and is clearly meant to be separate. I see that I'm not the only one to think of the text as a unit on its own. In the same vein, captions of figures in a text should be independent and not have to rely on the text, nor should text rely on graphic captions to convey their meaning.
With this forewarning, I can now, with a clear conscience, refuse to upmod posts with such sloppy use of the subject headers. (In fact, I rely heavily on the subject heading to choose which posts to upmod. I go out of my way to upmod posters who have taken the trouble to compose a concise and relevant subject header, compared to the 99% of other posts with the heading of "Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Yeah!")
404555974007725459910684486621289147856453481154 in hex is "You sank my Battleship?"
[GPG key in journal]
Translation: "Oh fuck. Oh FUCK. Oh fuck oh fuck OH FUCK! We were riding on this being bigger than Jesus^H^H^H^H^H XP and no one's taking! Even our OEM monopoly isn't working! WE'RE GOING TO LOSE THE FUCKING HUGE PROFITS! OUR GOD-GIVEN RIGHT TO HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN PROFIT IS BEING ABRIDGED! *the sky darkens with a cascade of office chairs*
~Eien no Inori wo Sasagete~ Searching for my Hatsumi...
... can work it out just fine.
/. comments display system encourages the practise - doing it allows as much of an abbreviated reply to be read as possible.
...)
I rather like reading posts like that, personally, and the new
(However, I agree that the particular post you were referring to was confusing: this was because the first letter of the sentence was capitalised and there was no starting elipsis, thus giving nothing to indicate that it was a run-on line from the subject
less than 2% of UK-based firms have already upgraded all their desktops to Windows Vista. Just shy of 5% said that they have begun a Windows Vista desktop upgrade program. 6.5% said they will upgrade in the next 6 months; 12.6% in the next 12 months; 13% in the next 18 months; and 18% in the next two years. That means that within two years from now, only 56% of survey respondents say they will have upgraded their firm's desktops to Windows Vista.
Ummmm,no, that means 18% will have upgraded to Windows Vista within 24 months. That's what the data said, and you don't add percentages together when they are all coming out of the same pool. If 18% are upgrading in the next 24 months, then that's how many are upgrading. Micro$oft would love it if 56% were upgrading, but they're not!
So, to review for the slower folks in the audience: 2% of 100% have upgraded, 6.5% of 100% will upgrade in 6 months, 12.6% of 100% in 12 months, 13% of 100% in 18 months, and a GRAND TOTAL of 18% of 100% will have upgraded in 24 months. If that's not correct then someone is misrepresenting their data!
... of people doing exactly what you asked them not to!
It doesn't particularly bother me, I do it myself sometimes, although I tend to use elipses (sp?) when doing it, which at least gives a clue that the first sentence of the post is a continuation of something else.
But that's just me. I even approve of top posting in email messages. It means that the 'download only the first kilobyte' option on my pda actually gives me something useful to read!
Have you been on an instant messaging service lately? Thngs r mch wors ovr thr! Hlf teh tme ppl dnt evn bthr puttng vwls in thr sntnces.
By Will Hill
Posted Friday 21st September 2007 22:22 GMT
You need to read your own news before you conclude there's anything natural about any software monopoly, especially the second rate one in Redmond. The ease with which free software is ported across hardware and software platforms proves that there's no inherent technical difficulty making computers and hardware works and can work better than M$ can ever dream. They are not smarter and hardware makers don't really want to keep secrets. When you read your own stories about forbiding music players from working with OGG, intentionally breaking ACPI power management, sabotaging competing software and other dirty tricks, you know that M$ is a monopoly of the old fashioned kind: "Do as I say of face my wrath". If that's not good enough for you, go dig through the court documents from the US anti-trust case. M$ is so blatant, even the US federal government noticed. M$ spends close to a billion dollars a month in advertising, PR and other BS to snow you under, but they need to be paying attention to their software. Vista does not work and people are not buying it, so the monopoly is failing, and that is final proof that nothing was natural about the Windoze monopoly. Same language, same bullshit reasoning already debunked on other sites: you can't hide, you know. People like me read more than one tech site.
Another name to look out for you under.
Where is this? What website?
Right here, at one of his favourite bullshit machine tech sites.
you can't hide, you know. People like me read more than one tech site.
M$ pays people to read every tech site, it's part of the monopoly waste everyone pays for. If you include the WinTel press, M$ pays people to write a large part of it too.
Why should anyone have to hide from M$ anyway? Could the worst things twitter has to say are true, that M$ is run by a bunch of paranoid control freaks ready willing and able to smear any and all opposition? Come one, everyone knows M$ has product that does not need that kind of backing, right? Theh ar teh best.