Vista Makes CNET UK's List of "Worst Consumer Tech"

Several anonymous readers pointed us at CNET UK's Crave blog for a list of what is or was, in their opinion, the worst consumer tech in history. Vista comes in at number 10, in company with Apple's puck mouse (number 6) and Sony's CD rootkit (number 9). According to Crave: "[Vista's] incompatibility with hardware, its obsessive requirement of human interaction to clear security dialogue box warnings and its abusive use of hated DRM, not to mention its general pointlessness as an upgrade, are just some examples of why this expensive operating system earns the final place in our terrible tech list." That's gotta hurt a little, coinciding as it does with Apple's Don't Give Up On Vista attack ad.

Comments

Vista is #10?

[downix]

Come on Microsoft. Vista is #10 on the index. You need to try harder, that #1 slot can be yours within an SP or two!

Re:Vista is #10?

[MarsDefenseMinister]

I have movies which I ripped myself from DVD's I own. They are in .avi format. I can play them everywhere, on Linux, on Mac, on Windows 2000, Windows XP.

Windows Vista says there's a byte error in the file and refuses to play the movie. This is Windows Media Player, same version as the version on XP.

Vista DRM is a little over-zealous. Or maybe Vista itself just is incapable of playing movies.

Re:Vista is #10?

[gordgekko]

At the risk of eventually being declared an astroturfer as you will undoubtedly be, I share the exact same experience that you do when it comes to Vista and my media. The operating system hasn't done one thing at all to get in my way of using legitimate or shadier media.

And while I'm digging myself a hole here on /. let me hand you a shovel as well and tell you that I like Vista. It's probably the best operating system Microsoft has ever released, though given some of their earlier efforts that's hardly unqualified praise, and surpasses OS X in several aspects (though it trails in others).

Re:Vista is #10?

[dhavleak]

Windows Vista says there's a byte error in the file and refuses to play the movie. This is Windows Media Player, same version as the version on XP A bug isn't the same thing as 'abusive DRM'. Have you tried contacting MS about this? I'd also suggest doing an MD5 hash to check for data corruption.

I know as soon as I say 'there nothing I can't do on Vista that I can on XP' there will be legions of anecdotal 'I can't do this, that and the other' responses. It doesn't change the fact that the DRM stuff is a myth.

Re:Vista is #10?

[Anonymous Coward]

It is not a "myth". It depends on what you are trying to do. For general purpose PC use, Vista is no more restrictive than XP. For multimedia, home theater it can get ugly.

Video gets downgraded to crap if you don't have crappy DRM through the whole path. I tried recording some shows and and get sorry Charlie messages. I tried to burn the shows that I could record to DVD and get sorry Charlie messages.

Sorry, I don't want a computer telling what I can and cannot do. I switched to Mac and multimedia has been so much better. The only thing from Apple' that I stay away from is TV/Movies from iTunes since I cannot burn them to a DVD to watch.

Re:Vista is #10?

[GIL_Dude]

As someone who Beta tested the OS and who has it on 3 work machines and a couple of home machines (except for one box that dual boots Ubuntu and XP) I can almost agree with you. However, if you try to capture audio as it is playing you will find it has more DRM than XP. Using freeware like Audigy on XP you could (depending on your sound card) capture what was being played. Some cards called it "what u hear" others "wave out mix" - but generally you could grab it.

With Vista, you can no longer do that. It does stop me from ripping that 2 second sound byte from DVD that I sometimes want for my own use. In fact, that's the only reason the XP box still exists; it would be just Ubuntu if not for that one thing. So, to be fair - there is more DRM in Vista than in WinXP. It hasn't hurt much yet for me - but it has been a small pain. I think what we need hear is more honest talk from folks who have tried it and seen what sucks and what doesn't and a little less vitriol from some folks anyway who haven't even tried it.

Re:Vista is #10?

[PhrostyMcByte]

I generally agree with you, except for one area where there IS abusive DRM: mandatory x64 driver signing.

They snuck it in under the guise of improved security, when the real purpose is to stop people from making drivers to intercept DRMed data. For proof of this, try watching certain DRMed content in 32-bit Vista with an unsigned driver loaded - it won't let you.

End result? People who want to still get past the DRM, developers have to pay large yearly amounts for a code signing certificate (which can be a severe cost for small-time and Free/Open Source developers), and users have to pay more to offset development costs.

Re:Vista is #10?

[flyingsquid]

Pardon my ignorance but what's an astrosurfer ? Thanks by advance.

Well, for example, the Silver Surfer. Offhand, I can't think of any other examples.

Re:Vista is #10?

[cnettel]

What codecs do you use on each machine? An AVI is just a container and I somehow think you didn't rip into a Windows Media codec, hence the WMP version is (almost) irrelevant.

Re:Vista is #10?

[Dak RIT]

Well, considering Vista's "Content Protection" is talked about very specifically by Microsoft itself, including Windows Vista Content Protection - Twenty Questions (and Answers), it would appear that nobody including Microsoft is denying its existence in Vista, or that it goes far beyond what any previous operating system would do with regard to "Content Protection."

Here's a quote specifically from the the link above, which is provided by Microsoft itself:

"Windows Vista includes content protection infrastructure specifically designed to help ensure that protected commercial audiovisual content, such as newly released HD-DVD or Blu-Ray discs, can be enjoyed on Windows Vista PCs. In many cases this content has policies associated with its use that must be enforced by playback devices. The policies associated with such content are applicable to all types of devices including Windows Vista PCs, computers running non-Windows operating systems, and standalone consumer electronics devices such as DVD players. If the policies required protections that Windows Vista couldn't support, then the content would not be able to play at all on Windows Vista PCs."

Just because you have yet to run into Vista's DRM or that you don't deal much with A/V content that would cause you to notice limitations when using Vista doesn't mean that it isn't a significant issue for many people. Oh, and if you read the questions Microsoft responded to in the Vista blog you will also notice that Microsoft does admit the DRM will increase CPU resource consumption.

Wired also has an article covering Vista's DRM that specifically addresses criticism of Vista's DRM and Microsoft's response to that criticism. And if you'd like to see what your boss is reading, Forbes also has an article on Vista DRM entitled "Why Vista's DRM Is Bad For You."

Perhaps you should do some research before you post.

Re:Vista is #10?

[Four_One_Nine]

I can't think of any other examples.

Elroy Jetson?

Re:Vista is #10?

[SEMW]

If it plays on default Mac, Linux, Windows XP and Windows 2000 installations, I don't need to know what codec it is, do I? Actually, I would bet that it *doesn't* play by default on a fresh installation of Windows 2000 or XP. At several points, you *will* have installed codecs on your OSes; if you've ever installed a media player, ripping software, DVD player, or many others. Only you haven't yet on Vista. Download and install one of the many thousands of codec packs floating around if you really can't be bothered to work out what codec your DVD ripper is encoding into.

Re:Vista is #10?

[mysticgoat]

You offer an opinion backed by personal experience.

I offer an alternative opinion, backed by John Locke's original description of the dynamics of a fair market. Here is my opinion:

Calling DRM "abusive" is redundant, but appropriate. Furthermore, "Digital Rights Management" has nothing to do with managing the rights an individual has under copyright law, nor does DRM benefit the creators of the materials it is attached to. The beneficiaries of DRM are third party corporations who once had a purpose in preparing and distributing old media like vinyl and eight-track tapes, but are now obsolete and too dinosaur-stupid to figure out how to do anything else with their resources.

DRM is at best only one more weak reason for The Revolution. It isn't a particularly good reason of itself: history will regard it as insignificant.

And that also pretty much summarizes the problem with Vista. After years of promising all kinds of significant improvements in computering, when it finally came to market, we found that Microsoft had switched focus away from the significant things that were promised, and instead concentrated its efforts on insignificant and sometimes irritating "features" like DRM.

The revolution will not be televised; you will not see it in Vista commercials. The revolution will not come from Redmond. It is, however, unfolding all around you, and you will see it if you bother to look beyond the commercials for other ways to get things done and make your life richer.

Re:Vista is #10?

[tthomas48]

We bought my wife a brand new computer with a faster processer, twice the RAM, and Vista rather than XP that it replaced (the laptop had to be replaced because we lost the screen). The Vista computer is SLOW. I'm sure there's a point where you get a fast enough computer to make it not matter, but it makes computers that could fly with XP look like you're trying to run it on a 486.

And I can only assume you've turned off the security prompts if you like the OS. It drives me bananas to click on something, have the computer lock up for a second, redraw the screen shaded, and then pop up with a security warning. Just a warning. No prompt for a password. Nothing. I feel so much more secure for losing that 5 seconds of my life every time I want to look at that control panel.

It's a POS. I'm sure you could make it work as well (or possibly better) than XP, but who has that kind of time? It's broken as shipped. And fixing it makes Linux's foibles seem easy to deal with. I'm a Linux fanboy, but I at least recognize Windows 2000 and XP as being perfectly decent operating systems. Vista is not. I'd prefer to use Windows Me over Vista. It crashes about the same amount and is quicker.

Re:Vista is #10?

[Mex]

Hey, you know what's interesting? Isn't ZDNet and Cnet basically the same company?

Because that's a good business. One site criticizes Vista, the other defends it. One hand slaps you and the other provides the cure. Ad money goes to the same boss.

Re:Vista is #10?

[bzipitidoo]

You completely miss the point. It is not Vista or any other OS's business to dictate to users above and beyond the necessities of serving the users up to the capabilities and limits of the hardware. Nor is it remotely practical to attempt to enforce anything using what essentially boils down to an "evil bit", as it is so easily circumvented and so often wrong. And the rules that it is trying to enforce are themselves excessive, of doubtful utility, subject to interpretation, changeable at the drop of a large bribe, and difficult to follow. So there are 3 reasons why Vista's attempt to do so is annoying, insulting, and stupid. Vista should have stuck to the business of operating the computer, and let the users worry about the morality and legality of the uses to which they would put it. Vista shouldn't be a nagging nanny, "helping" people obey ethics that they are too "stupid" to figure out for themselves.

You saying it's a "matter of legal compliance" completely ignores the impossibilities of actually forcing compliance, even upon somewhat willing users. You might as well be implying the answer to the question "how do you put a giraffe in a refrigerator?" with "open the refrigerator door, put the giraffe in, close the door." Just about anything can be used to break the law. People can be shot, stabbed, strangled with pretty much any sort of wire (network cables, piano wire, guitar strings, etc.), run over with cars, bludgeoned with hard drives, and on and on. But you don't and you won't see "smart" knives. Even if it was possible to make a "smart" knife, circumvention is as easy as whipping up a plain old knife out of pretty much any old sheet of suitable material. Stone Age tech-- actual Stone Age as in 8000 B.C.-- can circumvent a "smart" knife. Cameras can photograph anything-- there is no way to selectively cripple them so they won't photograph copyrighted material. If such a thing as a camera that "respects" copyright could be made, few would willingly buy it even if it wasn't more expensive, slower, and prone to false positives. Before there were cameras, there have always been eyes and visual memory. Suppose there was a "smart" car that wouldn't exceed the speed limit or allow the driver to run red lights or steer into oncoming traffic. The car still couldn't tell if one of the passengers had just robbed a convenience store, or memorized a few pages out of a book. Nor could it tell when it might be time to break the rules, as for instance in a medical emergency. And the car could still be hacked. An OS is no exception to these basic facts of nature that neither copy protection nor "evil bits" work. Don't know what drugs MS was on when they actually seriously tried to make a "smart" OS capable of preventing its users from committing just one kind of crime, and, like obscenity, a very difficult to define and detect crime at that.

Re:Vista is #10?

[Technician]

I don't have that kind of cable so I haven't tried it but it seems like a fully analog method should work.

One of the complaints of Vista was the shutting down of other processes when protected media was playing up to and including completely disabling analog outputs. Reduced resolution includes the streaming web radio station playing in the background. Try playing a HD movie while listening to a webcast. Either the resolution of analog outputs is reduced or shut off. DRM often shuts down the unrelated unprotected stream. Enjoy. The analog hole works as long as the input is on another machine and the content creator permits some analog output.

I haven't tried that kind of cable either. I haven't wasted my time or money on protected content to test it. Regular DVDs are broken enough to be useful. The Kalidascope case has deemed that not all home media servers are illegal. Protected content is broken enough to simply be not be useful.

Most people haven't tried to play HD movies on their Vista Boxes, simply because they don't have a HD drive, or haven't spent the money on the higher cost movies. What you are used to with standard DVD playback is easy compared to using protected HD content. If you are not using encrypted protected output devices, HD will often play back in lower quality if at all on the analog monitor and speakers you have.

Expect the HD DVD you just bought to fail to play on your headphones on your laptop. It is in the spec and is what the complaints are all about. Even if you don't play HD content, the DRM is still a major source of processor cycles and short battery life. DRM is a big part of the long boot times and slower than XP performance.

MS missed the boat on not releasing a non-media edition. The non-media edition would have HD playback disabled, no DRM, and should have fast performance. The DRM/HD playback module should be an optional upgrade. Most of us don't use it and don't want it.

Re:Vista is #10?

[dhavleak]

It is not Vista or any other OS's business to dictate to users above and beyond the necessities of serving the users up to the capabilities and limits of the hardware I agree with you, but that's not my point. Read up on the Image Constraint Token and you'll realize that MS's hands are tied in this matter. By law, to play HD media that uses the ICT, they need to provide the protected video path, or if the hardware does not support it they need to downsample media with the ICT bit set. They have no choice in the matter. Nor does Apple or anybody else who doesn't want their butt dragged into court by the MPAA.

Every single Blu-Ray or HD-DVD player you buy in a store today will have a protected video path. They will downsample HD content with the ICT bit set if it is played over a non-HDCP path (i.e. component outputs). The reason you don't see that yet, is that hollywood has agreed not to set the ICT bit on any media until 2012. It's all in the original three links I posted!! Just to spell it out -- I am not saying that this is good/acceptable -- it sucks. But I don't see everyone in /. up in arms about it when it's identical to the protections in Vista. And I don't see anyone really bothering to get to the root cause of both cases (ICT, MPAA, govt/courts not doing anything to protect our rights).

Again, I am not saying this is fair. I'm saying, blame the MPAA or the govt. for not stepping in to rectify this bullshit situation, instead of yelling bloody murder at MS when they have no choice in the matter.

Regrading giraffes, refrigerators, knives, etc. -- I don't see how they are relevant to this thread. Even the matter of the "impossibility of forcing compliance" isn't relevant. The MPAA knows very well that all DRM schemes can be hacked. The aim is never to make it 100% unhackable. The aim is always to make it so inconvenient to hack that only a very small % of people ever bother taking the effort. At no point did I defend any of this nonsense as a Good Thing, or a win for consumers. My point is that everyone's anger at Vista is misdirected, and they should know who the real culprit for this mess is. Of course, my original post got moderated as 'Troll', for even daring to suggest on /. that MS may not be completely evil.

Re:Vista is #10?

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree with you, but that's not my point. Read up on the Image Constraint Token and you'll realize that MS's hands are tied in this matter. By law, to play HD media that uses the ICT, they need to provide the protected video path, or if the hardware does not support it they need to downsample media with the ICT bit set. They have no choice in the matter. Nor does Apple or anybody else who doesn't want their butt dragged into court by the MPAA. ...

Again, I am not saying this is fair. I'm saying, blame the MPAA or the govt. for not stepping in to rectify this bullshit situation, instead of yelling bloody murder at MS when they have no choice in the matter. They have a choice. You know, Microsoft could grow some balls and not just not support it. Then inform users the reason they can't play a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD is because the MPAA wants to screw over their customers. Redesigning your OS just to make the MPAA customer screwing easier isn't a good decision. Microsoft controls 90%+ of the desktop market, they could force the MPAA into some sort of compromise if they had the sack to.

Re:Vista is #10?

[dhavleak]

You know, Microsoft could grow some balls and not just not support it. Then inform users the reason they can't play a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD is because the MPAA wants to screw over their customers To quote the GP: "It is not Vista or any other OS's business to dictate to users above and beyond the necessities of serving the users up to the capabilities and limits of the hardware."

The point being, it is not up to MS to grow the balls to not support HDCP/ICT, and not play Blu-Ray or HD-DVD even if the user so chooses. It's up to the users to get incensed at the right people (the MPAA) and not buy any products with the ICT bit enabled, 2012 onwards, as a mark of protest.

Users, sadly, will not do this. The ever growing iTunes sales are proof of this. Which is why it's also up to special-interest groups (like the EFF) to lobby the government to take action, and to simultaneously pursue legal remedies in courts.

Re:Vista is #10?

[Joce640k]

The aim is never to make it 100% unhackable. The aim is always to make it so inconvenient to hack that only a very small % of people ever bother taking the effort.

It only needs *one* person to make an effort and the pirates have their copy.

Meanwhile, countless "legal" people are being inconvenienced and expensed because of the DRM. People should have the right to make backup copies of their paid-for media. Accidents happen, thefts happen, etc., etc...

Re:Vista is #10?

[Ed Avis]

Microsoft's record of 'legal compliance' in any other area is remarkably poor; they tend to drag their feet on anything which would help interoperability and the consumer; but when it comes to misfeatures which restrict the user and reduce the PC's capability, they eagerly implement and gold-plate them. It would be good to see some of the robust Microsoft screw-you attitude applied to the movie studios and their ridiculous demands as well as to antitrust authorities.

Re:Vista is #10?

[rhade]

The reason you don't see that yet, is that hollywood has agreed not to set the ICT bit on any media until 2012 so we can all be nice and comfy at home with our blu-ray/hd-dvd combo drives, looting the shit out of bittorrent then suddenly nothing works.

Explain something to me . . .

[UnknowingFool]

Apple's puck mouse was #6. Vista was #10 and Sony's rootkit was #9. I admit that the mouse was more form than function. But it didn't really cause harm unlike like Sony's rootkit and isn't the fiasco that is Vista. So why is it higher? Also if users didn't like the mouse, they could replace it with a $20 model from a store. Many people I know don't use the mouse that came with the computer. You can't easily replace Vista or get rid of the rootkit.

Re:Explain something to me . . .

[NetDanzr]

I admit that the mouse was more form than function. But it didn't really cause harm unlike like Sony's rootkit and isn't the fiasco that is Vista.

Vista and the Sony rootkit can cause onsets of rage or heart attacks in few cases, but that mouse was an ergonomic disaster. Using it for a few hours cramped your fingers so much that many male Apple users ended up lonely at night, without their hand being able to perform its marital duties.

Re:Explain something to me . . .

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok, name 3 bits of hardware with Vista only drivers

011

Re:Explain something to me . . .

[badasscat]

I'm on my third 360 but besides it breaking all the time I would not call it a POS. It's actually quite great.

If you bought any other product that required two replacements for defective hardware, I guarantee you would not be saying that. Try this: replace the "360" in the first sentence above with any one of the following: "Camry", "47 inch plasma television", "lawnmower", "food processor". See? It sounds ridiculous.

Why do people have this double-standard about the Xbox 360? If it's broken on you twice, it is a piece of junk. Apply the same standard of quality to it as you do to anything else.

btw, I was amused to see the 360 at my local Gamestop displaying the RROD on my trip there this past weekend.

Re:Explain something to me . . .

[bennomatic]

I can't tell if you're joking here. I don't think anyone would dispute that the XBox 360 does all sorts of cool things, but I think what the parent poster was referring to was not the thing's capabilities, but rather the fact that it breaks down all the time. That's what most people don't like about it.

I don't think anyone has ever complained about the gaming experience, or how HD DVDs look on the XBox 360, but a lot of people have complained that it's not reliable, and a gaming system that can't game is, in most people's minds, a POS, or something equivalent.

Out of curiosity, how often does yours break? I know someone who went through three in a matter of six months. He ended up buying another one to ensure that he had a spare around when one needed to be sent in for warantee work...

Re:Explain something to me . . .

[moosesocks]

Apple's puck mouse was #6. Vista was #10 and Sony's rootkit was #9. I admit that the mouse was more form than function. But it didn't really cause harm unlike like Sony's rootkit and isn't the fiasco that is Vista. So why is it higher?

If you RTFA, you'll notice that the ordering of the items in the list seems arbitrary, and that the authors don't really refer to any sort of ranking within the list.

And yeah.... the puck mouse did suck, but it also wasn't horribly difficult to go out to buy a new mouse if you hated the thing. It was the first apple peripheral, after all, to use a universally standard interface. (Apple really led the pack with USB and Firewire. The PS/2 interface *still* shows up on many PCs! It's a bit sad, however, to see FireWire slowly dying out, as it was undoubtedly the technically superior interface for data transfers)

Re:Explain something to me . . .

[causality]

Why do people have this double-standard about the Xbox 360? If it's broken on you twice, it is a piece of junk.

It's not limited to the Xbox; you can see similar low expectations with lots of computer or electronic devices. There is a general laziness/stupidity (it can be hard to tell the difference) that average users display due to basic computing that they do not display for things at least as complex, such as their finances, politics, religion, job skills, love lives, etc. This is why there arose the saying "an expert is someone who can read the manual". It's why you hear about users who use their mouse as a foot pedal, or users who answer "Uh, Google!" when asked over the telephone which Web browser they are using, or really forget to turn the machine on (and/or connect the power cord) often enough that it's the first thing a tech asks about. It's why you don't hear about drivers who try to use the accelerator as a hand pedal or car dealers who say "Uh, the road!" when asked what model car they're selling today or televisions declared defective that were never plugged in. There's just something about computers that makes people go into a "dummy mode" where they assume that everything they thought they knew needs to go out the window, except that they take this too far and throw out basic reasoning, the laws of physics, logic, and notions like cause-and-effect as well. With this seems to go their self-confidence and the willingness to try and take a risk of making a mistake, even though the price of failure is much lower in computing than in personal finances, job performance, relationships, etc.

As with most things in life, this situation did not arise from a vacuum and has a deeper cause. The fact that most people do not notice this because $TV_SHOW, $CELEBRITY'S personal drama, or latest $BE_AFRAID_OF_THIS news presentation are more important is part of the problem. That cause might be laziness, in the sense of being too lazy to increase your skill level even though doing so is possible; maybe it's also the whole instant gratification culture that fails to do a cost-benefit evaluation of self-education (on computing or anything else where mediocrity is widely tolerated). It could also be that the rote memorization and the following of procedures that dominates everything else that most people do really has made them so stupid (muscles and wits both entropy if not used) that they clam up when faced with a new and more dynamic environment. In either case, the process by which we have become this way and who really benefits from this situation -- that is, a nice and docile and complacent populace who have a hard time thinking critically -- is something that should be considered carefully.

Apply the same standard of quality to it as you do to anything else.

I wish we would start doing this with all commercial software, on the grounds that since you are paying for it, it's something like fraud if it does not work as advertised or frequently malfunctions. Perhaps ideally it would be understood that with free-as-in-beer software (both GPL and closed-source freeware), if I did not pay for it then I have no reasonable expectation that it will be of any value to me at all, but if I did pay for i.e. a commercial Linux distribution, then this should apply to that vendor as well. This idea of holding the manufacturer liable should not apply to "pirates" who did not pay and should be to the same degree that product liability would apply to a vendor of any tangible retail goods, where there may also be such concepts as contributory negligence.

And why not? The software companies (along with the *IAA's) talk about "intellectual property" when they benefit from what amounts to artificial scarcity, so why not give them both sides of the coin when it comes to treating 0s and 1s like tangible property? Other industries don't get to pick-and-choose the advan

Think different?

[garcia]

That's gotta hurt a little, coinciding as it does with Apple's Don't Give Up On Vista attack ad.

I wish they would go back to the ads showing how sexy the technology they offer is (like the PC with a mess of wires in the back compared to the iMac with nothing but the keyboard and mouse or the continuing awesome iPod ads with catchy tunes from bands with moderate success prior to the release of the video) instead of those crappy "attack" ads. Hell, go back to the old ads with the geek chic that was ever so popular here on Slashdot even.

Just enough talking about Vista and Windows -- they're starting to sound like politicians. In fact, they've been picking up other bad habits. My wife and I went into the Apple store at the Mall of America and while I was gawking and drooling over those huge displays, two of their employees launched a Best Buy style sales attack on her. She actually said, "you know, we used to enjoy entering this store and you're now very much like Best Buy, you might want to rethink that." The sales people actually left her alone after one replied, "sorry, I will bring that forward." Who knows if they did or not.

Think different, again, please!

Re:Think different?

[garcia]

Drooling over hardware like an idiot.. you already own a Mac don't you?

Yeah, and I really can't say I like my Mac. I do, however, love those huge displays that I don't see demoed in any other store like they are in the Apple store. If drooling over hardware like those displays makes me an idiot, I guess I'll deal with it but for you to assume that it was because I was just drooling over it w/o any practical use for it then you're sorely mistaken.

Re:Think different?

[QuantumG]

Macs are powered by a combination of the Jobs Reality Distortion Field and the smugness of their users.

as much as I dislike Vista

[jtroutman]

and its onerous security notifications, adherence to DRM and general pointlessness, I don't think that "incompatibility with hardware" is really a valid statement. It runs on modern hardware from a wide variety of vendors. If you want to see an operating system with stringent hardware requirements, you need look no further than OSX. At least I can show people how to run the OS on my own hardware without the software's manufacturer coming after me and threatening legal action if I don't stop.

Re:as much as I dislike Vista

[Osty]

and its onerous security notifications, adherence to DRM and general pointlessness, I don't think that "incompatibility with hardware" is really a valid statement.

I'm not even sure "onerous security notifications" and "adherence to DRM" are valid statements. If you're seeing a bunch of UAC prompts, either you're running some really crap apps that don't understand how to work in a multi-user environment, you're doing a lot of admin work (in which case you may as well just turn off UAC), or you're doing something very, very wrong. In an average week of work + home computing, I see maybe two or three UAC prompts the entire time, and I'm running with UAC on.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "adherence to DRM", but I assume you're referring to the old, debunked rumor from several years prior to Vista's release that claimed all audio and video would be degraded if you weren't using DRMed content and/or locked down hardware. That's been proven false many times over. Obviously Vista has to follow certain rules in order to play HD-DVD and/or Blu-Ray content, but that's the fault of the MPAA, not Microsoft. Either you implement the secure pipeline and require hardware to match (HDMI-everything), or you don't get to play that content at full resolution. The same applies to any OS, not just Vista.

Re:as much as I dislike Vista

[Just Some Guy]

I don't think that "incompatibility with hardware" is really a valid statement.

True. Many people don't own printers or scanners or sound cards, and so will never notice that half their peripherals are now driverless.

Re:as much as I dislike Vista

[jtroutman]

In an average week of work + home computing, I see maybe two or three UAC prompts the entire time, and I'm running with UAC on.

That's three times more than are necessary.

Obviously Vista has to follow certain rules in order to play HD-DVD and/or Blu-Ray content, but that's the fault of the MPAA, not Microsoft. Either you implement the secure pipeline and require hardware to match (HDMI-everything), or you don't get to play that content at full resolution.

And if Microsoft, with 90+ percent of the market, said, "No, if you want to get your movies into our market, you'll get rid of this annoying, overhead causing crap that our consumers hate."

And as for the old, debunked rumor from several years prior to Vista's release you should read this, last updated earlier this year.

Re:as much as I dislike Vista

[Just Some Guy]

Obviously Vista has to follow certain rules in order to play HD-DVD and/or Blu-Ray content, but that's the fault of the MPAA, not Microsoft.

BS. The *AA members need Microsoft more than Microsoft needs them. Imagine the hurt if MS announced that their systems will no longer play anything other than Red Book audio CDs. What's Jane Teenager more likely to do: run out and buy a Mac or just download her albums from now on?

Microsoft happily caved, pure and simple. They give the excuse that "the *AA made us do it!", but that's just a convenient cover story so they don't have to admit that they want DRM (so they can be the next iTunes Music Store). If they truly didn't want DRM, they wouldn't have it and there's not much that anybody would be able to do about it.

Re:as much as I dislike Vista

[calebt3]

That's three times more than are necessary. I enter my password quite often in Ubuntu when doing admin-level adjustments.

Re:as much as I dislike Vista

[Technician]

And if Microsoft, with 90+ percent of the market, said, "No, if you want to get your movies into our market, you'll get rid of this annoying, overhead causing crap that our consumers hate."

By default, Microsoft should have left HD playback out of the OS. MS should have a HD/Content protection option for those who want to pay for a HD drive and use it with HD content. Build in HD DVD content protection into on OS that is loaded on a PC that doesn't even come with HD drives is a terrible mistake.

The ball would still be in the media companies lap. They can either sell stuff that will play on the PC's, or sell stuff that requires a crippling upgrade to the hardware.

Some people will want the upgrade and others will want to avoid the upgrade. Either way HD content is protected even if it doesn't sell.

Re:as much as I dislike Vista

[DECS]

Microsoft's attempts to get into media with Windows Media DRM and Media2Go/PlaysForSure/Janus/Zune have very clearly outlined where the company wants to go, and its not anywhere near liberal DRM. Bill Gates hoped to spring Palladium on the PC, so that no media or software would work without Microsoft's permission. Windows Media DRM tried to do similar things with music and movies. It's fortunate for consumers that Microsoft has failed, but that failure was right in line with what the studios pushing HD-DRM were asking.

Conversely, Apple has maintained an anti-DRM stance for years prior to opening the iTunes Store, as was documented in the Steve Jobs Rolling Stone interview* back in 2003. It hasn't changed since. Apple set up the most permissive DRM in the industry, and was the first major commercial music distributor to deliver DRM-free music from a top five label. That's despite the fact that Apple holds a majority position in the online media market. Do you think Microsoft was gearing up to liberalize media downloads after it expanded its monopoly position into media?

Arguing that Microsoft now has no significant control over DRM policy is a bit weak. It is interesting that Apple hasn't moved to support playback of either Blu-Ray or HD-DVD and the required HDCP DRM. While that might happen in the future, one might expect that Leopard would deliver the underpinnings, and no evidence has arrived to suggest that's the case. Modern Macs appear to have the hardware to support HDCP, but Apple isn't exposing it to jump on the HD-DRM bandwagon. Microsoft is.

*Rise of the iTunes Killers Myth

The article should have been called

[ClosedSource]

Nine old obscure products I can use as an excuse to slam Vista.

Why the pro-Apple stance when the mouse was worse?

[ToastyKen]

The Apple mouse was ranked 6th while Vista was 10, but the article has a pro-Apple stance. I just wanted to point that out. I mean, I'm a Mac fan, and I know Vista is the more current topic, but still, kinda unfair....

(Yes yes, I know, "You must be new here." :P)

You have obviously never used one

[Bryansix]

I have had the displeasure of using one of these things and they are right about not knowing which way is up. Because it is circular there is no way to control how the thing is rotated so it frequently would become the case that moving the mouse (if you could call it that) left would move the cursor up on the screen. It seriously made me hate MAC computers just based on the "PUCK" and it made me contemplate putting out a hit on whomever designed this useless piece of shit. Yes, you could replace it but most Universities with MACS did not replace them.

Re:You have obviously never used one

[RabidOverYou]

Okay, one more time. It's it's, as in "it is", not its. It's a contraction, not a possessive.

Torture device.

[jo7hs2]

That device (puck-mouse) should be listed as a torture device. It hurts your hands, it is counter-inuitive, it clicks sometimes for no reason, and it is the ULTIMATE nightmare in function follows form.

Gates gambles on Longhorn

[suburbanmediocrity]

I seem to recall reading a number of articles a few years ago where Gates and Balmer said that they were "betting the company" on the upcoming release of Windows. I wonder how this is working out for them.

Re:Where's the DRM?

[Bryansix]

UAC is NOT working as advertised. It is so useless that EVERYBODY turns it off! That is everybody who can find the button to turn it off. I've used Vista and within the first five minutes I turned off UAC and this wasn't even MY computer. The whole problem is that there is no ROOT account. You have to explicitly tell an app to run as Root and even then it balks at you. And a shitload of apps didn't work on it and many still don't. How much did Microsoft pay you?

Virtualization is how Linux will win.

[headkase]

I've run Linux as my only OS for a whole year once, but now I'm back to XP simply because I like to play my games. I see no compelling reason to upgrade to Vista - I don't have DX10 hardware and WindowBlinds makes XP look almost as nice. Right now I run Linux in VMWare and I really hope someday that I can switch to Linux fully as my booted OS and run my Windows games in VMWare or equivalent! Games are the *only* reason I still use Windows, Linux is much more fun to tweak for a person like me!

Faint damning is almost praise.

[Futurepower(R)]

"Vista... general pointlessness as an upgrade..."

Praising Microsoft products again, I see.

Microsoft has once again released a product before it was finished. That has wasted the time of many, many educated people, dragging down their quality of life and their productiveness.

That is NOT "pointlessness". That is abuse.

The Crave "article" is embarassing

[Infonaut]

The abundance of "lists as articles" makes me want to vomit, but this one takes the cake. They just randomly put down ten tech mistakes in an ad-baiting format (click here to see the next on the list - we won't tell you what it is, but if you click here, we'll get more ad revenue!). What's the time period? What are the criteria for selection?

The writers just pulled nonsense out of their asses, and somehow that passes as valuable information. In this so-called Information Age, one would think better writing would rise to the top. Sadly, that doesn't seem to be the case. We get crap, but at least we get it instantly!

Re:The Crave "article" is embarassing

[mux2000]

We get crap, but at least we get it instantly!

I'm using Vista, you insensitive clod!

Windows, OS X, and Linux user

[Master Switch]

I spend much of my time using Windows (2K pro, 2003, XP, and Vista) and OS X , and a little on Linux. I consider myself experienced with both OS X and Windows. I much prefer OS X but I can say there is also some things I like about Vista. I have not had any speed issues and only a few software compatibility issues. I appreciate the structural improvements made in such areas as the management console, event logger, command line utilities, and kernel structures. Vista isn't the upgrade it should have been but it is not horrible. Microsoft is on the right track with UAC, and with some fine tuning it will be worth the trouble. The display subsystem is moving in the same direction that NeXT aka OS X took 15 or so years ago (think display post script in NeXT, now display PDF in OS X). It's taken Microsoft far too long to catch up but I do think they are on the right track. Remember the resistance XP met with when it first arrived. Now it's well received. I think Vista will eventually achieve this status a few years down the road.

How quickly we forget...

[HerculesMO]

I'm running Vista now (it's free from work, so I decided to install Business edition), and I have no real issues with it. It's a memory hog and whatever else, but I just have to laugh and say, "how quickly we forget".

Almost all of these complaints were exactly the same when XP was released. Memory, drivers, utility, etc... Vista runs all my games (which is why I have it) without a hitch, even the old DOSBoxed ones. I know we will have Mac fanboys up and down the aisles here so my probability of being modded down is higher, but so much software written for OS9 doesn't work on OSX any more at all. At least I can say that four OS versions later (95, 98, 2000, XP) and software CONTINUES to work (maybe not all of it) well... that's not too terrible either. I'm not saying Vista is "the shit" either -- I much prefer my Macbook for the OS use, but when I want to play my games, old and new... I can run them on Vista without a hitch.

I'll wait for SP1 to see how well Vista fares in the future, but as it stands right now, I haven't had a BSOD or a crash in over a month, and my games play fast and furious, though I do lose a few frames per second since the drivers just aren't as good for Vista yet.

I'll be patient, and remember my history.

Re:How quickly we forget...

[Techman83]

"I'll be patient, and remember my history." And so will I, Millennium Edition anybody? *shudders*

Re:How quickly we forget...

[techstar25]

It's much more fun to just complain that Vista is the worst OS ever. I was forced to use Vista because it came on my laptop and XP drivers are not available yet. I spent 15 minutes tweaking Vista (Defender, UAC, Classic UI theme and start menu, etc), and voila, I now have an XP machine. Well, actually it's XP but without all the problems that XP had when it debuted.

uac = ! evil

[Skuld-Chan]

I don't see what the big deal is about UAC - especially as the Mac does the same thing. Any time you need to run an app that requests administrative rights - the UAC prompt pops up. All its doing is asking you if you really requested this elevation. You can change it so that it asks you for the admin password, but this isn't default behavior.

My friend who is a Mac die hard tells me - but you need to fiddle with the UAC prompt when setting the clock! Well? Guess what - you do on the Mac as well. Same with installing most apps, setting a good chunk of settings as well.

Also on the Mac if you try to copy a file into a directory you don't have permission to - it prompts for elevation - same as Vista.

I think most people are pissed off because it doesn't work like XP which let you have free run of the machine, but then the slashdot crowd bemoans the fact that XP is insecure. Microsoft fixes that - and now Vista is crap - I don't get it.

Fact is - I play games on my Vista box, browse the net, and watch "pirated" videos on it - and gasp - it works quite well. My TV tuner work, my scanner works, both my printers work, my video card works, everything works - and this is even the x64 version. I rarely ever have to deal with UAC unless I'm installing something.

Re:uac = ! evil

[UnknowingFool]

I don't see what the big deal is about UAC - especially as the Mac does the same thing. Any time you need to run an app that requests administrative rights - the UAC prompt pops up. All its doing is asking you if you really requested this elevation. You can change it so that it asks you for the admin password, but this isn't default behavior.

The difference is that only a few tasks on a Mac asks you for a password while nearly everything in Windows is considered an admin task. As an owner of a Mac, I can go weeks without my Mac asking for a password. The most common event that requires a password is when I get system updates from Apple every few weeks. Otherwise it never asks me for admin rights.

My friend who is a Mac die hard tells me - but you need to fiddle with the UAC prompt when setting the clock! Well? Guess what - you do on the Mac as well. Same with installing most apps, setting a good chunk of settings as well.

Changing the time on the machine should be considered an admin task as this affects many things on the machine. So what? Installing many apps on a Mac does not prompt you for a password.

I think most people are pissed off because it doesn't work like XP which let you have free run of the machine, but then the slashdot crowd bemoans the fact that XP is insecure. Microsoft fixes that - and now Vista is crap - I don't get it.

Microsoft didn't fix the underlying security issues. It just shifted the responsibility to the user to constantly approve what might be a security risk.

Re:uac = ! evil

[Shados]

Personaly I didn't see an UAC prompt on my 2 computers (work computer is on Vista too) in weeks, except when 1) using Visual Studio, which is optional and I configured it myself, because Visual Studio has system tools in it, such as controlling services from inside the IDE, of course it would need admin, 2) installing softwares available to all users of the machine, 3) reviewing the event logs.

The only time you'll get -spammed- with UAC prompt is if you put user files directly in your C drive (in vista, user folders are in C:\Users, as opposed to Documents and Settings bullcrap of XP. That was one thing I was quite jealous of from Unix-style system, as they have more sensible defaults on that one, ie: /home) so there's no reason to do it anymore even if you're lazy (in XP and 2k I would always dump stuff straight in C:\ to avoid having to navigate to my document...), or if you use programs that were coded by idiots who missed the message back when the Windows 9x line was being phased out to stop developing software that relied on admin.

MS isn't kidding when they say the worse part of windows is bad software... Without bad drivers you can go for years without ever seeing Windows crash, without bad software you can go for weeks without seeing UAC...

Re:uac = ! evil

[Skuld-Chan]

The difference is that only a few tasks on a Mac asks you for a password while nearly everything in Windows is considered an admin task. As an owner of a Mac, I can go weeks without my Mac asking for a password. The most common event that requires a password is when I get system updates from Apple every few weeks. Otherwise it never asks me for admin rights.

Last time I saw the UAC prompt on my Windows machine is when Firefox wanted to update itself. Before that I haven't seen it in at least a month.

If your seeing it every other minute I have to ask - what are you doing? Virtually anything logo certified after Windows 2000 (when Microsoft really started defining what makes a good clean Windows app) should not be seeing UAC prompts - because they stipulated back then that a good application should have full functionality as a user.

Every time any app on my Mac wants to update I have to type in the password - sometimes several times. I really honestly don't think its all that different than Vista. Vista assumes if you are designated as an Admin you shouldn't have to type in the password - thus the continue/cancel dialogue.

Vista also evaluates the risk of elevating an app. If its not signed, downloaded executable - the UAC prompt will have a red with adequate warning. Heuristics are used in legacy setup applications to determine if the process should be elevated - by default all MSI projects are elevated (with the UAC prompt of course). Non signed executables trying to be elevated contain adequate warning.

Also the UAC prompt appears on a separate desktop - so if the machine is compromised an application can't simply click on the prompt for the user.

Changing the time on the machine should be considered an admin task as this affects many things on the machine. So what? Installing many apps on a Mac does not prompt you for a password.

Any app I install in a directory I have read/write/execute permissions to on Vista doesn't require a UAC prompt either - and they do exist.

Microsoft didn't fix the underlying security issues. It just shifted the responsibility to the user to constantly approve what might be a security risk.

Actually there are no underlying security issues in XP or Vista (no more than any other OS) - just bad practices. Vista enforces out of the box the bad practice of running as Admin all the time - by default users are default users - which is 99% of what keeps the Mac so secure.

The Puck beats the rootkit?

[Quiet_Desperation]

At least you can swap in another mouse in a few seconds. OS X has supported two buttons from the beginning which is why those that still complain about one button get pushed around and dirt put in their hair.

Re:Don't worry, i won't flame you :)

[gordgekko]

> 4. The point with Vista is not whether it ACTUALLY prevents you from watching DVD's. The point is that it can in the future, and that you won't be able to do ANYTHING about it. Vista is taking all the decisions for you, and where you'd like to be asked "Cancel, or Allow?" regarding updates-from and reports-to Microsoft, you won't be. If Redmond decides to install a rootkit on your vista, you won't even notice!

No offence, but this exact same statement (well, statements) can be made about Apple as well. What's preventing them from injecting new DRM into OS X in a future update? Because Jobs wears turtlenecks? The only operating system I trust in that respect is Linux and its variants so I guess I'm agreeing with you in that respect. I'll tell you what -- and I am a man of my word and owner of Gutsy Gibbon on DVD -- if Vista ever screws with me when it comes to backing up or playing my digital media, I join the FOSS army faster than you can say Monkey Boy.

Re:Don't worry, i won't flame you :)

[toadlife]

1) DVD Shrink. Get it, and back up your dvds with it. it will remove the retarded region thingy for you automagically.

2) Yes. With DVD Shrink. It has never failed me.

3) It commercial software. Lots of commercial software has this type of protection.

4) Don't buy "protected" content (if it ever comes to fruition, that is). And take of the tin foil hat.

Re:Whew!

[rHBa]

Like this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZX_Spectrum

Re:Interesting that this article came up....

[Chess_the_cat]

Oh yeah, I remember that thing. The Barcode Battler it was called.

Re:Whew!

[Victor Antolini]

At the risk of having a thousand demons raping my karma, I do think some stuff from MS is cool, or at least far better than other alternatives.
I'm too lazy to think of any product, maybe that's why I think they're cool?

Vista, MS garbage

[harvey the nerd]

I had an important business presentation with a Vista laptop that I had to buy in a hurry several months before (old one was damaged right before a business trip). The damn thing updated Vista online overnight by itself and then collapsed the next day on reboot and couldn't restart for 15 minutes in a meeting. There is no excuse for the problems that I have had with this Vista laptop, it should be more stable before it ships. IMHO any IT type recommending Vista deployment before SP1 or 2 should be terminated on sight. It is by far the most annoying I've had, far more than anything on previous 95, 98SE, XP laptops.

Puck mouse

[CaptainCarrot]

It may look much slicker, but Apple still could have learned from a similar design failure from a few years earlier. The old VAXstation 3100s used a round mouse, and everyone hated the fucking things. As with the Puck mouse, you couldn't easily tell by feel how it was oriented, and with three buttons instead of one it wasn't difficult to accidentally use the wrong one.

At least Apple avoided the other problem with them. The VAXstation mice didn't use a ball, but a pair of cylinders mounted so as to engage the surface at right angles to each other. When you were using it at the edge of the mousepad, one of they cylinders would invariably go past the edge so that the cursor would stop moving in one direction.

Re:Puck mouse

[CaptainCarrot]

???

I use a 3-button mouse both at work and at home. The problem wasn't with the number of buttons, you ignorant foob, but the fact that with the mouse turned the wrong way it was easy hit the wrong one. If you're trying to do a quick copy to the command line in an Xterm, it's most annoying.

Not a myth

[DrYak]

Vista's DRM problems are no "Myth" at all.
Maybe some overblown exaggeration made by some blogger and the Zdnet blog you're citing is specifically attempting to debunk them.

That doesn't prevent Vista's DRM to suck anyway.

- About the HDCP/DRM
Needing a whole DRM stack just to connect your screen is what I find the most abusive.
It's MY display that I BOUGHT legally with MY OWN MONEY.
It's MY graphic card that I BOUGHT legally with MY OWN MONEY.
I have complete legal ownership of both these items.
THEN WHY THE HELL MUST THERE BE A DRM STACK that has to decide what goes on my screen and what doesn't ?
Why is it putting arbitrary restriction on what I can do with something I own legally ?
All this stupidity only because the **AA are afraid that someone *might* attempt to pirate digital content at no loss using the digital transmission.
(As if all this has prevented Muslix64 and Co to design a method to decode HDDVD & BD using keys dumped from software).

The some idiotic design is replicated on other channels, including the audio path. And give the ability to the audio player to refuse to play if it considers the driver stack insecure.

- About the drivers for Vista 64.
Sorry, but Windows Vista 64 driver models seriously challenge free drivers (like kxProjet alternative drivers) and completely prevent open source driver project ( like 3DFX Voodoo 3/4/5 - which are compatible with 64bit system : XP 64).
The former, as a free/beer project may not have the budget to buy signing keys.
The later, as a free/speech project need to grant its user the ability to do whatever they want with the code. Should a newer patch be available for either Mesa or Glide, I should be able to recompile mine and load them (the recent patches to enable Quake4 on MesaFX comes to mind as an exemple). Without a signing key, it's something impossible to do. This both contradict the fundamental liberties that organisation like FSF are fighting for, and also violates GPLv3 (don't know if currently there are GPLv3 drivers being developed).
Yes, one could find signing key from other CA. But that cost money that some project don't have, or would require every single end user to have access to the key in order to keep the basic software freedoms.

And the ActiveX fiasco (and the various CA-signed malware that has appeared in the past) has already shown that merely signing code won't actually guarantee it's quality.

So these two are clearly both useless (video content got copied anyway, signing has never kept out malware) and arbitrarily restrict users freedom (I should decide what goes on my hardware, without needing to pay additional fee just to use something I've already paid for).

Re:Whew!

[PopeRatzo]

I do think some stuff from MS is cool

Sure, just not their operating systems. I like the Zune and the XBox360. After that, there's a long ellipsis.

Re:Whew!

[glittalogik]

The Ergo 4000 keyboard is the best thing to happen to my wrists in a long, long time. Now if I could just get a vertical mouse that doesn't look retarded...

You Just Made The Baby Jesus Cry!!

[mpapet]

Microsoft is on the right track with UAC

Oh no it's not. UAC is not a security feature. I don't know what it is, security is not it.

"processes running in the sandbox are running as you, and so can read and write any files, Registry keys, and even other processes to which your account has access. That caveat creates major gaps in the walls of the sandbox and malicious code written with awareness of the restricted environment could take advantage of them to escape and become full administrator."

http://blogs.technet.com/markrussinovich/archive/2007/02/12/638372.aspx

"Are you sure?" is not security. Linux, BSD's and OSX are dramatically better online user systems. It's just so much easier when you deal with a well designed system to begin with.

The display subsystem ... is laden with DRM. Microsoft checks with the RIAA before it shows you anything. See other comments in this story.

Apologize to the baby jesus!

Re:Whew!

[Calinous]

Microsoft Natural Keyboards.
      I can't think of anything else, except some of their games

Legal complaince?

[jotaeleemeese]

Next:

- Ford, Toyota, Hundai et all enforce speed limits.

- Bacardi, Budweiser enforce amounts of alcohol you drink before getting behind the wheel.

- Gun companies enforce gun laws.

Did you get it or should I throw more analogies at you to remark how idiotic is for MS to be enforcing the wishes of content producers?

Naivety

[hyades1]

I was amazed at the number of comments on the site from UK people who like Vista just fine. I was also surprised at the level of naivety on display. One person said they had no problem with the intrusive security measures because they just turned all that stuff off! Another said people should quit whining and upgrade their computers. Apparently he was unaware that a mid-sized company with 25 desktop computers and maybe another dozen laptops would be stark, raving mad to throw them all out (and maybe some other hardware, too) in order to use an operating system that has known, acknowledged issues.

And I would NOT like to be giving a PowerPoint presentation in front of 150 people when Vista performed a spontaneous update, decided something was wrong and went into that barely-functional drone state.

Re:Whew!

[HeroreV]

Microsoft is way too big for me to have a single opinion about all of it. Same with Sony and other large companies/organizations. Some parts of them may be horribly evil, but that doesn't mean there isn't significant goodness in there as well.

Come on guys

[kaosum]

Why are you being so hard on Vista. Its vastly superior to any previous version of Windows. It offers better end user security, better Windows updates, and being Windows, its but the best supported software of any other OS.

Windows needs your permission to continue

Posting Operation Microsoft Internet Exlporer

[Continue] [Cancel]

TFA isn't really about Vista

[Sloppy]

Sure, Vista is a crappy product, but its presence on this list isn't particularly noteworthy or interesting. And Vista is lame in a mostly non-mysterious way: thanks to preload arrangements, they're guaranteed some market success no matter how bad it is. Vista doesn't make you wonder, "WTF were they thinking? Did they really think they'd be able to sell this?"

The bad mouse is the same. If you bought an iMac at the wrong time, you were going to get one of those. It's lameness didn't really endanger Apple's profitability much.

No, the true "star" of this story has to really be the Barcode Battler. That is just spectacularly bad, and makes you wonder how they imagined making any money.