$50 to Get XP On a New Dell
CWmike writes "Dell will charge customers up to $50 for factory-installed Windows XP on some PCs after Wednesday, according to the company's Web site. Buyers of the low-priced Vostro line of desktops and notebooks will pay $20 to $50 more for Windows XP Professional installed as a 'downgrade' from Windows Vista Business or Vista Ultimate than they would for Vista only."
it's expensive, but it's worth it.
why else would you pay more.
XP is smaller, faster, less buggy, and doesn't come encumbered with a ton of DRM crap. How is that a "downgrade"?
Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it. --Mark Twain
Then how much would you pay for Ubuntu, which causes even fewer headaches than Windows XP as long as GNU/Linux supports your hardware?
Why, nothing of course.OCO is Loco
If it's a "Downgrade", shouldn't it be *CHEAPER*?????
It's a "downgrade" only because Microsoft wants to preserve the illusion that Vista is better, and the pricing is set to discourage people from buying it.
But, yes... a significant share of the consumer market, and practically *all* of the informed market, consider XP a vastly improved upgrade over Vista.
I've been using Microsoft OSes since MS-DOS 3.2 (circa 1988), and I've never been nearly as frustrated, disappointed, and often outraged by an OS as I am with Vista. I've been using it for two months, and it's horrid in many, many aspects.
I have been making a list of irritations that are novel to Vista. Every time I run across some new irritant, I pop open this text file and add a line to it. I am also making a list of Vista features that I have turned off because they are buggy, poorly implemented, resource hogs, unsecure, frustrating to use, etc., etc. They are both very long lists, and they continue to grow.
Computer over. Virus = very yes.
As in: "...can you just send me the laptop with nothing at all installed on the hard disk? I intend to install (Ubuntu/Fedora/OpenSuSE) on it. No, I really don't want anything in the way of tech support outside of parts and labor."
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
This story is a cut and paste job from Twitter's journal, made within two hours of the twitter post. CWMike must be another Twitter sock puppet and this story is just more hysterical FUD about Vista.
Then how much would you pay for Ubuntu, which causes even fewer headaches than Windows XP as long as GNU/Linux supports your hardware?
(there are many more ways, but yeah - it's worth paying-back that way, if not in other ways as well).
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Yet again we see proof that Microsoft has a monopoly. If there were real competition in the market, people would not be forced to bend over and pay more. There would be competition, Dell would have to offer it at the same price or another operating system would win.
Also, if there were competition, Microsoft would not have the economic ability to decide to drop a product that people wanted and force them into something they didn't. If I was a share holder and there was actual competition in the market place, I'd have the board and CEO fired for failing their fiduciary responsibilities.
But since they have a monopoly, there is no economic feedback.
How bad is Vista? Well that depends. The UAC does break a good amount of software that works just fine on XP.
Also the journal playback doesn't work with the UAC turned on. It was a security issue but it is also how some programs did simple macros and allowed you to create applications that pushed text into other windows apps.
Also the USB system seems to have some bugs in it.
Also the sound system can be really odd at times. Some computers produce really crappy sound if you record at less than 16 bit 22 khz stereo. That shouldn't be an issue for just recording voice.
It does use more disk space and memory than XP.
It is also different and often it seems like it is different not to be better but to just be different.
So as you have put it if you turn off all the extras then it isn't that bad.
But if you turn off all the extras is it any better than XP?
That is what makes Vista so bad. It really is a lot to some pain for little to no gain.
XP works as well as Vista, uses less resources, and everybody knows most of it's quirks and problems. I feel that Vista is a case of not worth it. And what I find shocking is that most of the normal users out there feel the same way.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
and doesn't come encumbered with a ton of DRM crap
its all relative, isn't it?
compare win2k that had NO activation and you could copy the system disk from one box to another and it would work fine (if the hardware/kernel were compatible).
I am forced to use an acronis (or similar) tool to dupe my system disk. that hurdle should NOT exist but XP sure does like to stop you doing things you need to, at the system level.
not to mention activation, which kept a lot of people OFF xp and made win2k the last 'great' os from MS.
the only useful xp is a corp edition (non activation), sp2, pre-WGA. all others are bolloxed-up. (fwiw, at least SP3 on xp didn't turn on WGA on the corp version I tested it with. so a corp SP2 with SP3 update still seems 'mostly safe' to use).
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
There are a handful of people here on Slashdot who actually like Vista and admit it. I'm one of them.
I haven't turned off any of the extras. Regarding the eye candy, they did an awesome job. It's a slick looking user interface. Regarding performance, it runs beautifully on my Acer laptop (1.6 GHz dual core, 2 GB RAM, GeForce Go7300).
The biggest annoyance for me is the automatic horizontal scrolling in the folder pane of Windows Explorer. I absolutely hate it and want to turn it off, but there is no option.
I've only encountered two actual bugs, and they were both extremely minor. One of them I only encountered once, and can't actually remember what it is right now. The other is just a small bug that occurs when you create a new folder and then try to rename it too quickly.
Overall, I'm happy with it.
"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein
I'm still running Windows 2000 on the last Windows machine. It's so drama-free. No pushed updates, no annoying popups from Microsoft, no crashes in years.
You run Windows 2000. XP is tied to the mothership in Redmond. With Vista, Microsoft runs you.
I think this is a big part of the problem. When you have that kind of time line, the project loses focus. Remember all of the things that were supposed to be in Vista but were dropped along the way? There never seemed to be a clear vision of what it was supposed to be. It doesn't have to be that way. NASA certainly has shown that long term projects can have spectacular results.
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
"go back"? I'm still waiting for a compelling reason to upgrade from 2K to XP. Seriously.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Look folks, the reason for the extra $50 is simple. You get both Vista AND XP.
I know it's a lot more fun to misinterpret the summary, then comment on your misinterpretation. But if you actually RTFA, it's not so sensational.
Considering NVIDIA is too lazy to put in a simple entry in their driver's .INF file so their newer mobile cards would work in XP I want to see how many of the newer model laptops could POSSIBLY downgrade without doing what I had to do - hack the .INF and get the deviceid in there so XP would see the hardware (8600M GS).
.INF file so their card would work under XP (since they ARE using a unified driver architecture and all for the very purpose of keeping things compatible across the board)
Seriously, people at NVIDIA must be REALLY LAZY to not include one line of code into an
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Dell sells you the box without any software or OS installed, and takes $50 off the price?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........