Slashdot Mirror
Jerry Seinfeld Will Plug Vista
Barence writes "Microsoft has signed up comedian Jerry Seinfeld to its $300 million Vista PR blitz, as it attempts to turn around the negative perception surrounding its operating system. Reports suggest Bill Gates will also appear in the ads, which, given the comedy timing he displayed in his 'Bill's Last Day' video, and the deadpan manner of Seinfeld, could result in a huge hit for the company." Reader Zarmanto notes in his journal that "Mac users might be quite amused, considering that (like many other TV shows) the set of Seinfeld always had a Macintosh prominently displayed in the background."
Yes. And after a long hard days filming, the stars of the show would all use that computer to surf the net and read Slashdot, because that's the kind of introverted computer nerds they were.
So, this could either be a great move on MS's part or an illustration of how woefully out of touch with popular culture they are. Seinfeld hasn't been on the air in over 10 years at this point (new episodes at least).
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 is the magic number.
Who use this buggy, slow Operating System?
George Costanza. That way he doesn't have to work. He just tells his boss that his computer is slow so he can't get much done.
"Mac users might be quite amused, considering that (like many other TV shows) the set of Seinfeld always had a Macintosh prominently displayed in the background."
Just an FYI, mac users are pretty similar to PC users. Most of us just don't care.
Have they realized Vista is an O/S about nothing?
with my .45.
"Man is nothing without the works of man" -- Helvetius
No, the parent should be moderated as incorrect. Jerry Seinfeld was offered $5 million per episode to do another season of Seinfeld and turned it down. So no, he won't just go wherever the money is.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 is the magic number.
Instead of paying already rich celebrities to pimp out Vista, how about invest that $300 million into developing a SP2 that fixes the damn thing already.
Since Seinfeld always had a Mac on his desk in his show. In fact, if you look closely he had the latest model new Mac every year.
First version: "George doesn't like computers. George is getting angry!"
------------
Second version: Newman is sitting at home watching TV and eating cheesy puffs, his phone rings...
Kramer: "Why aren't you at work, buddy?"
Newman: "Luckily for us, the US Post Office has 'upgraded' to Microsoft Windows Vista. Mouahahaha!"
Vista has established a reputation as "the operating system you don't want". People hate it. People that haven't tried it hate it. Some people sit around and worry that someday someone will make them upgrade to Vista. An ad campaign simply can't compete with people talking to others about how much they hate Vista.
It's funny, but I've never heard people openly talk about how much they hate a Microsoft product before. Personally I think Microsoft has made a LOT crappier products than Vista. Outlook, IE6, and Exchange are a lot worse than Vista.
AccountKiller
He'd be perfect...If you don't use Vista, you're an idiot!
What?
They wanted Lucy and Desi to push Vista but they never returned Steve Ballmer's call!
This is only just the beginning. The next step is the new catchy theme song by Wynn Newton.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Which operating system are you referring to? Because if it's Vista, then I've got to say that I don't find it at all annoying. It works quite well, the security's a welcome addition. The biggest problem is that they don't have the equivalent of a command line "sudo", but then again, I'm one of the very few people who use a windows command line I'm sure. Overall, Vista works quite well for me, much less of a headache than Ubuntu. Just my 2 cents, but I get the feeling that Vista had more bugs before SP1, and now people are just angry that it wasn't a huge leap over XP.
Wouldn't that generate better PR than using a deadbeat comedian?
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Oh shit an ad! I'm peeing my pants right now! Committing to enjoying 30 seconds on TV and committing to adapt to an upheaval of what you depend on daily for crucial tasks are two completely different things, and a quick joke will not ease the tension most people (not to mention businesses) are feeling when they have to consider making the switch.
Twinstiq, game news
It works quite well, the security's a welcome addition.
What security? You mean that little pop-up thing asking you "are you sure you want to do that?" every time you click something. The little pop-up that annoys people to the point where they begin to just ignore it, or figure out how to turn it off? Or is there some other amazing new security features in Windows Vista that I'm not aware of?
So, when are we going to see all games that are released for Windows simultaneously released for Linux? As far as I can tell, this is one of the main things holding Linux back. Wake me up when that happens because the day it does is the day I'll never use Windows again.
We'll make great pets
are kramer, george and jerry gonna come and fix the pc issues that my close circle is gonna have afterwards ?
No, Kramer will be busy filming another commercial in which he gives his opinion of the black Macbook.
Vista is a joke.
Agreed. It's also an example that shows that not all jokes are funny.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
n/t
Looks like some M$ fanboi modded you down for being correct.
Vistas "security" features are pathetic and too little far too late. Joe Sixpack might take it seriously "Ooh, aah, dis noo operatin' systums got increased securitah!" but at the end of the day it's just security theatre.
Debian FTW
Jerry will plug Vista? Like popping a cap in it's ass? THAT WOULD RULE!
The little pop-up that annoys people to the point where they begin to just ignore it, or figure out how to turn it off?
The same could be said of any security feature. Good security's hard, and I've found the vista pop up to be no more annoying than the ubuntu one. I haven't used a Mac in years, but from what little I remember, it seems like it still has the pop ups. So, your two actual points seem to be that it pops up more than necessary and that it can be turned off. The first is a problem with other companies requiring administrator rights when they don't really need them, and the ability to turn it off is just giving people more options. So where's the problem?
Who use this buggy, slow Operating System?
George Costanza. That way he doesn't have to work. He just tells his boss that his computer is slow so he can't get much done.
You know, if Vista came with a hideaway under-the-desk bed, I'd probably use it.
The bed, that is, not Vista.
Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
There's only so much you can do when people hate your product before trying it. Chevy's been battling this for a couple years now. They hold focus groups to look at new/prototype designs and the ones with the Chevy 'bowtie' logo consistently score lower. They even show the same model twice slightly modified in some way (different angle, different color) and adding a Honda or Toyota logo drastically improves its score. Consumers dont want to buy the same re-hashed crap over and over. You eventually have to release quality products.
I dont think Vista's all that bad, but reputation is powerful.
They should care -- they pay for that. Macs don't show up by accident -- they show up because Apple pays for them to show up. When you buy a Mac, part of what you pay goes for Apple to buy product placements.
Just FWIW, the last time I checked Apple had the largest product placement budget of any computer maker I could find. At least at that time, HP had something like 10 times the computer sales, but less than one third the product placement budget.
Source, please.
As far as I can tell, Apple's product placement "budget" consists largely of making flashy-looking hardware that style-conscious Hollywood set designers want to use. They officially deny paying anything for placement.
(I have heard that they give away freebies, though. Supposedly that's how the Macintosh Plus got into the Scotty scene in Star Trek IV)
The US free market: two halves of a government-granted duopoly are free to set the market price.
Is advertising that powerful? I'll admit I haven't used Vista a lot, but there doesn't seem to be any improvement over XP. The blind test was a nice idea, but I'm guessing are used to a fairly stable, fairly usable OS.. sorta like XP.
Vista is a service pack to XP. Apple has the right idea here. Get a decent base, then release updates of that. The difference is, Apple release them pretty much as updates to their core and advertise it as such - Microsoft do the same thing, but say it's all new.
I don't have anything aganist MS, but Vista was a non-starter. Despite the money they've put into it, I think they'd be better moving on and just trying to brush Vista under the carpet. I'm unsure how much mainstream press Vista's downfalls have had, but two years of bitching is going to be hard to just throw advertising at.
Then again, people are that stupid.
Sorry, my cat brushed the keyboard as I was hitting submit. The actual link is:
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/techinvestor/industry/2007-03-08-apple-marketing_N.htm
The US free market: two halves of a government-granted duopoly are free to set the market price.
Jerry: Hi, I'm a PC.
Bill: And so am I - but deep down inside, I wish I was a Mac.
Jerry: Well, try Vista, and you'll be one step closer.
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck
to sell a joke?
Clearly this is simply meaning that Vista has stolen enough ideas from OS X to make even a make user endorse it.
Actually, he doesn't know he's pushing Vista. He thinks it's the upcoming Windows Mojave, which totally rocks.
The problem is that users learn to ignore the pop-ups, and they happen so often that most users can't even tell if it's because of their own actions, or those of a malicious attack. Because of this, the messages serve no real security purpose, since even if someone were to maliciously try to abuse someone's computer, the user would probably just dismiss all of the pop-ups without a second thought. Also, most of the 'security' pop-up windows are not from other programs requiring administrator rights, the majority of them come from the operating system itself, for example you have to go through a couple of them just to open the device manager.
For lack of a better signature...
Didn't they try this with Jay Leno for Windows 95?
Ah yes, here we go.
I guess it was more at launch, then after launch.
"Hay guys, I hear Windows 95 is fast enough to handle all of OJ's alibis at once!"
ReactOS will never mimic Windows perfectly, so why the hell should anyone bother dual-booting ReactOS and Linux? What benefit do you get that you don't get without Windows and Linux?
"It's free as in beer" is unacceptable; Windows is essentially free and everyone knows it.
"It's free as in freedom" is equally unacceptable because nobody important gives a shit.
"You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
Elaine (with Apple-ish grin): I just bought a Macbook
Jerry (non-chalantly sipping his coffee in front of his Dell): So? I've got Vista.
Elaine (frowning): But this is a Mac, Jerry.
Jerry: But it's not Vista.
Elaine: No, it's not Vista. It's a Mac.
Jerry: It's very shiny. What'd that thing cost you?
Elaine (defensive): What does that matter?
Jerry: One thousand?
Elaine: Jerry...
Jerry: Two thousand?
Elaine: Stop...
Jerry: Three th--
Elaine: $2755.
Jerry: Inclu--
Elaine: Including tax.
Jerry: 1250
Elaine: 1250 what?
Jerry: Vista.
Elaine: But it's not a Mac!
Jerry: It checks email.
Elaine: So does my Mac.
Jerry: Surfs the web.
Elaine: So does my Mac.
Jerry: Makes movies.
Elaine: So does...it does? I thought Windows didn't make movies.
Jerry (shrugs and sips): Vista.
(Door explodes open!)
Kramer: Jerry! The Dell store down the street is selling computers with Vista for $1500!
Jerry: 1250
Kramer (walking over to Jerry's laptop): Oooh, is that...
Jerry: Vista.
Kramer: Niiiice.
Visualizing group of homeless with cardboard signs at freeway offramp...
"Will Endorse Vista for Food"
Seinfeld was doing HP commercials last year.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BraU_cpfBeI
Guess he just decided to switch.
If Vista were merely a service pack to XP, why does have it such a drastically different driver model (which was the cause of most problems for early adopters). Ask the video and sound card vendors if Vista was just a service pack. The reason for any software and hardware incompatibility issues is exactly because it's NOT just a service pack. It was a major release. Vista is to XP, as XP was to 98 - there was a painful transition period there too. And that pain was mostly caused by the software and hardware vendors dragging their feet in producing updates and drivers for an OS that is in pre-release/beta, and readily available to them, for over two years prior to launch day. Only a completely stupid person think otherwise. "Then again, people are that stupid."
Just imagine the speed gain when running XP on this beast.
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
Makes me wonder if there's been a virus that pops up Vista 'security' messages, like "Vista wants to increase the size of your p3n1s, Cancel or Allow?"
Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
My Desktop OS History:
1985-1987 - CP/M
87-96 Various versions of DOS
93-present Linux, FreeBSD
96-98 Win95
98-2000 Win98
2000-2002 Win2000
2002-2008 WinXP
2008-present Vista SP1
Note the linux years there. I was running slackware before many knew linux existed. With that said, am I a minority for actually having a positive Vista experience? Yes, I have a powerful machine with lots of RAM, but so far I've found that I'm quicker to navigate and more productive in Vista than I ever was in XP. I run the 64 bit version and have had very few problems. I think many of the things they have done are a great improvement over previous versions of windows.
Does that make me evil?
I have a hard time believing that, so nice troll.
But in case you really didn't know...
This man neigh defined the 90's, at least for whitebread America, well him and the Simpsons. You do know who Homer Simpson is right? Because they are about equal on the 'people you should know list'.
You haven't seen him on tv lately (presuming you own one) because he doesn't need money after all the millions he made so he just does standup because he likes it better...he's not washed up by any means, he left the game at the top.
I do recommend renting the seasons of seinfield, if only for the cultural experience and the humor which examines everyday human anxieties.
There hasn't been a live-action comedy that can compete since the show left the air in my opinion, although Scrubs comes close.
"I only speak the truth"
Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
The problem is that users learn to ignore the pop-ups, and they happen so often that most users can't even tell if it's because of their own actions, or those of a malicious attack. Because of this, the messages serve no real security purpose, since even if someone were to maliciously try to abuse someone's computer, the user would probably just dismiss all of the pop-ups without a second thought. Also, most of the 'security' pop-up windows are not from other programs requiring administrator rights, the majority of them come from the operating system itself, for example you have to go through a couple of them just to open the device manager.
To play devil's advocate:
I'm an Ubuntu user. I used to be all cautious about "sudo", but frankly, there's just so much that I don't know about Linux/Ubuntu system administration, that most of the time I'm just copying and pasting commands from webpages, all liberally sprinkled with sudos. You want to be able to listen to mp3s? Type "sudo bla bla bla". You want to be able to watch divxes? Type "sudo yakity yakity yak". Want to be able to sync your music collection with your iPod? You gotta type sudo.
As a novice Linux user, I've become numb to these "sudos", just as you accuse novice Vista users becoming numb to the pop-ups. Just the other day, I had an Linux-knowledgeable friend of mine ask me to change one line of a configuration file to another. The file was writable only by root, so of course, I "sudo gedit", made the change, and saved it. And I have no idea what that change does. I'm just trusting my friend not to screw me over because that's the path of least resistance. I'm sure a lot of novice Windows users just blindly follow the advice they receive from their more advanced Windows using friends.
There's simply no fix for stupid/lazy users. I'm stupid and lazy when it comes to Ubuntu. There is nothing you can do to change that because frankly Ubuntu is such a tiny part of my life that it's not worth the extra time and effort required to actually fully understand all the implications of every sudo command I type in. I don't keep any valuable data on my Ubuntu box. If it comes to it (perhaps because someone gains root access to my box and locks me out), I can simply reformat and reinstall Ubuntu.
Guess what? A lot of people feel the same way about Windows: They simply don't feel it's worth their time and effort to learn all the implications of every prompt they click "yes" to. And if it comes to it, they'll just reinstall Windows. It's simply not that big a deal to them.
And just like your complaint about the majority of the prompts coming from the OS itself, a lot of the sudos I have to type in seem to come from the "Ubuntu OS" itself. You might try and get technical on me and tell me that this module or that section strictly speaking isn't part of the "OS", but really, I don't care. I'm using Ubuntu. I go into the Synaptic package manager, something which, as far as my user experience is concerned, is entirely "part of Ubuntu", and it's giving me that sudo password prompt. So really, from my personal perspective, Vista is no worst than Ubuntu (and Ubuntu is, IMHO, the best Linux distro ever), but it has the added bonus of actually being able to run all the Windows-only apps which I simply refuse to give up.
IIRC, the word on the tribute shows and fan sites has always been that damn near everything in the apartment was there because Seinfeld had one just like it at home.
The boxes of cereal in his cabinets were the brands he ate. The fruits Kramer mooched from his fridge were the fruits he'd have at home. He was known for supporting products, characters, and shows on his show that he actually used, admired, or watched. He's a huge Superman fan IRL, for example.
I'm not sure why I remember this, because I think the show was funny (and still watch the occasional syndicated airing on the CW) but I was never a diehard fan. I might not be recalling correctly, but it'd be an odd thing to remember for no reason.
This pop up would single handedly bring down every computer owned by a male (and some by supposed females) in mere minutes.
Slashdotters may also remember the big launch of Windows 95 when M$ hired Jennifer Aniston and Mathew Perry to make a lame features/tour video. Hence, the Jerry Seinfeld campaign isn't even something new, but at least here they're copying themselves so it will be funny when Balmer throws a chair a mirror.
Say hello to my little sig.
Perhaps Vista is destined to become highly collectable like Henry Ford's greatest failure.
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
Ah, another complaint about UAC from someone who doesn't seem to have been within ten feet of a Vista box.
I find I don't get UAC prompts any more often than I get the equivalent on OSX or Linux boxes. Most Vista sessions I don't get prompted for admin privileges at all.
Perhaps if you're getting them more than twice a session you've got a virus and the damned thing is just doing its job!
All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.
The nature of UAC is one of the biggest myths about Windows.
I use Vista regularly and UAC popups aren't very frequent. Copying files into protected directories such as WINDOWS are the most common cause for me (and a normal user would never do this).
Other than that, legacy applications (in my case, Delphi 6) sometimes need to be run as admin and therefore throw up a UAC prompt when run.
UAC is a sensible feature that in reality is quite far removed from the bullshit spread about it.
Amnesty International
The reason that Vista has a new driver model was that Microsoft wanted to build DRM into its driver model. Unfortunately for Microsoft DRM isn't really a feature, but an anti-feature. No one *wants* a computer that tries to stop them from copying files.
You are certainly right that the pain of transition from XP to Vista was similar to the pain of transition between Windows 98 and XP. The problem is that the benefits to the upgrade are not nearly as profound. Windows XP was so much better than Windows 98 that people were willing to put up with the difficulties. Windows Vista, on the other hand, has comparatively little to offer. In fact, in several ways Vista is a step backwards. No one wants to pay extra for even more intrusive DRM and a User Account Control that is intrusive without really aiding in system security.
I would also point out that third party hardware and software vendors are not in the business of selling new copies of Windows. That's Microsoft's job. If selling new versions of Windows requires some help from the people that create the hardware and software that people actually use, then Microsoft should have done a better job of making that happen.
It shouldn't surprise anyone that the hardware vendors saw Windows Vista as a chance to sell everyone new hardware. Rewriting old drivers for Windows Vista doesn't make these companies any money, but forcing Vista users to purchase a new printer (or whatever) does make them money. The same is true for software vendors. Patching old versions of software so that they work with Vista doesn't make the vendor any cash. Selling a new Vista-compatible version, on the other hand, does generate revenue.
Microsoft's hardware and software partners were only acting in their own best interest. Microsoft would have done the same thing had the roles been reversed.
The end result of Microsoft's Vista moves is a general trend away from Microsoft. Apple's got nearly 15% of the U.S. computer market and a whopping 66% of the over $1000 computer market. Microsoft still is clearly the 800 pound gorilla, but it no longer can be considered a given that a PC is running Windows. To a certain extent this trend is due to Vista.
Instead of creating growth for Microsoft Vista is causing people to rethink their reliance on Windows, and Microsoft doesn't really have anyone but itself to blame.
Actually, they will re-do the Soup Nazi sketch (here, "The Driver Nazi"), with a Steve Jobs lookalike kindly asking for driver support for his hardware (and some aero dressing, while they're at it), and Seinfeld in an Ahmadeehnedjad disguise, answering, "You're pushing your luck, little man. No driver for you, come back, NEXT YEAR!!"
A World in a Grain of Sand / Heaven in a Wild Flower,
Infinity in the Palm of your Hand / And Eternity in an Hour.
I'd love to see your sources for those 'statistics' of yours, because everyone I've heard is grossly misconstruing the truth.
The 15% Apple marketshare claim came out for new, retail sales only for a quarter, in the US. This stat didn't including online retail sales, so it pretty much knocked Dell and most HP machines out of their numbers, along with most all other major PC sellers. Again, complete 'Apple-washing' of statistics to make them sound better.
CNN money clearly states Apple's actual market share of sales, which is 4.7%, which mirrors Apple's real-world share.
http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2008/01/17/reports-apple-slipped-to-4th-place-in-q4-us-sales/
Of all of the honest to goodness metrics very closely mirror the ones of this site. My personal site, along with my company's website's OS stats also mirror these numbers.
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp
Apple has increased marketshare, but only by about 1% of total to 4.8% over the past two years. Vista on the otherhand, has gained 11% total market share over the same period of time, all while XP's share hasn't budged over the past three years.
I use Vista and I run in Vista as a normal user. I only get UAC when I install new software or go somewhere on my computer that I shouldn't be like the Windows directory and I start copying files into it. When I do get UAC I have to type the admin password to continue. Sure if I was running as an admin user I would get annoyed with it and probably turn it off, but the point is not to be an admin. So for an average day on Vista doing normal tasks (browsing web, writing documents, play videos, play games) I see the UAC window zero times just as I would see the password box zero times in ubuntu for the same tasks.
The misconception around here that UAC pops up all the time every click is really overblown thanks to Apple sponsorship, ignorance, and the usual anti-MS bias.
Makes me wonder if there's been a virus that pops up Vista 'security' messages, like "Vista wants to increase the size of your p3n1s, Cancel or Allow?"
Allow, allow!
"Please mod parent -5 Banned... Jeez"
Oh, come on. It's pretty cool having Michael Richards commenting on Slashdot.
Michael Reed, freelance tech writer.
...but forcing Vista users to purchase a new printer (or whatever) does make them money.
Can you point to a single instance of a company forcing users to buy a new peripheral rather than updating their drivers?
Which is exactly why I shouldn't be required to pay do damn much for it since I already have XP. Vista is ridiculously expensive and there are too many versions, with the cheapest versions not even being the equal of XP Home.
I dream of a better world... one in which chickens can cross roads without their motives being questioned.
You want to be able to listen to mp3s? Type "sudo bla bla bla". You want to be able to watch divxes? Type "sudo yakity yakity yak". Want to be able to sync your music collection with your iPod? You gotta type sudo.
I myself have also been using Ubuntu since Breezy Badger (5.10) and I find with each release that comes out, less and less command line work is required to get things to a point where I'm happy.
To be brutally honest, the only things that require the command line now are little things I've done to make my life easier as a sysadmin, for Mp3s/Divxs/xvids etc. Enabling the Multiverse in sources is all that is required. Which is not enabled by default as in some countries the packages aren't legal.
Skip back to windows world for a moment, user A gets a divx, it won't play, that get told it's a codec issue and some moron links them to a "Partner Software" encrusted codec pack which rights off their machine. Skip back to Ubuntu for a moment, user A tries to play a divx, someone suggests enabling the multiverse in sources (System -> Administration -> Sources) and the next time they open it in totem, it pops and says it needs this codec, would you like to install it? You install it and then the video plays... What could be harder??
# cat
Damn, my RAM is full of cats. MEOW!!
The tense is correct actually. The line of arguement is leading from premise to conclusion. He is extrapolating from data to speculate of future events. He is not being an historian, but a philosopher. Also, you could argue that in this case, 'wont' is being used in the subjunctive tense.
Clearly this is simply meaning that Vista has stolen enough ideas from OS X to make even a make user endorse it.
I didn't realise Jerry Seinfeld managed software builds...
How dare you be so modest!! You conceited bastard!!
I don't quite agree with that assessment... but after watching Bee Movie (Biggest waste of time I've ever had.), I began to think maybe Mr. Seinfeld has finally sold out. Apparently he just can't be very funny unless Larry David is helping him with his comedy.
I am beginning to think that maybe Darl McBride was attacked viciously by a penguin as a child.
I find it appropriate that the person who tells us Vista is wonderful is a comedian.
You, my friend, should be working in the advertising industry. And I don't mean that in a bad way.
Booting? That's what Vista is stopping that laptop from doing.
More to the point Vista is preventing you from taking a screen shot of a video, even one you've recorded from the evening news. A still image of a news broadcast in the context of a discussion regarding the broadcast or its subject is fair use, and Vista is preventing you from that fair use and so depriving you of your civil right of freedom of expression. That's not a minor thing. Maybe you don't care because you don't care to discuss current events or world history in the lens of public media - but some do and they're rightly offended.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Just took a screenshot of a DVD by simply hitting the print screen key. Pasted into paint with no problem. And how is a BSOD related to DRM? Have you every used Vista?
On more than 20 different platforms. This isn't going to surprise you: some of them work well and most of them don't.
No fair using VLC - they don't honor your DRM system. They're open. Try again with Windows Media Center as delivered, and/or with patches. For bonus points post a link to a screen cap with media center displaying TV.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
http://i494.photobucket.com/albums/rr308/daldredge/Untitled.jpg http://i494.photobucket.com/albums/rr308/daldredge/Untitled2.jpg Just so you know Vista only runs on two platforms.
Creative.
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/03/29/046201&from=rss
Maybe he's just getting closer to where the money isn't and Microsoft hit his selling price. You don't actually think Seinfeld, the actor and comedian, was just so jazzed about Vista that he had to tell someone about it, do you?
Do not try and troll the twitter. That's impossible. Instead... only try to realize the truth.
What truth?
There is no twitter.
Then you'll see, that it is not the twitter that is trolled, it is only yourself.
Vista runs on x86 and x64. Are other versions available that I am currently unaware of? Now back to the main point, you have been proven wrong now quit moving the goal posts and admit that you are mistaken. However if you wish me to do your HD test I will provide you with a shipping address to which you can mail a Vista x64 compatible HD tuner so I can take yet another screen shot that shows you have no direct knowledge of the subject at hand. However it would be less expensive for your to do a google search for such screen shots.
I use Vista and I run in Vista as a normal user.
That puts you in the minority.
It takes a conscious effort to set up Vista that way.
I know, because I walked my son through the last part of the Vista setup when he got a new laptop.
The first user that is created is an admin. If you want to set up a non-admin, then you have to go back after the wizard is finished and set one up. Most people just start using the system after the wizard is finished and never set up a normal user (which, BTW is much less obvious how to do than it should be).
This renders the UAC pretty much useless, since it pops up and you just click on it and are never prompted for an admin password.
It's a typical half-assed Microsoft move. They had the opportunity to redesign the wizard to walk users through creating a normal account in addition to the admin account, but they didn't do it.
So most users (I would venture >95%) are one click away from malware.
A house divided against itself cannot stand.
The reason that Vista has a new driver model was that Microsoft wanted to build DRM into its driver model. Unfortunately for Microsoft DRM isn't really a feature, but an anti-feature. No one *wants* a computer that tries to stop them from copying files.
Are you just making up random things that look like factoids to support a later argument?
Very little of that paragraph is factual.
The #1 reason the video drivers (at least the major portion of them) were moved to userspace was because its 'the right thing to do'. Video driver crashes are one of the top causes of XP BSODs. Your reasoning lacks support and logic.
And what Vista computer have you ever seen that stops anyone from copying files? Such a thing does not exist.
Windows Vista, on the other hand, has comparatively little to offer. In fact, in several ways Vista is a step backwards.
You really should do some research. Dont think I'm saying that Vista is perfect, but you trying to suggest that there arent massive internal and technical improvements to Vista is just ignorance. Go read up on Wikipedia or any of dozens of industry blogs & mags that documented it. I'm sick of making links to people who cant be bothered to validate their personal mythologies.
Any user of Vista who has decent drivers for it sees immediately a couple things:
1. It performs much better than XP under heavy disk load, in terms of shell responsiveness. In XP, heavy disk load would bring the desktop to a halt, often even freezing the cursor, which is quite impressive. This doesnt happen any more. The shell can still slow down a bit under heavy load, but it degrades much more gracefully.
2. It lasts much longer than XP before needing reboots, especially under a large amount of hibernates and standbys per day. XP would degrade after a couple weeks, especially under many standbys/hibernates per day, and running leaky apps like Eclipse. This degradation is massively reduced in Vista.
3. The desktop/shell is impervious to interruption. XP would freeze the desktop for any number of reasons, usually around network problems. This _never_ happens on Vista.
4. It's MUCH easier to run as non-admin, due to UAC. UAC may not be perfect, but its light years better than explicit RunAs in XP.
No one wants to pay extra for even more intrusive DRM and a User Account Control that is intrusive without really aiding in system security.
What would you suggest as an alternative to UAC? Would you prefer everyone go back to running as admin? Would you prefer that Program Files and Windows directories not be locked down to non-admins, so that UAC wouldnt be triggered as much by rogue programs?
Suggesting that UAC doesnt improve security at all is absurd. If nothing else, it means that everyone runs as non-admin by default. That right there is so hugely massive, and so long overdue in the windows world, that saying that its not an improvement is just loony.
Microsoft's hardware and software partners were only acting in their own best interest. Microsoft would have done the same thing had the roles been reversed.
This is one of the sensible things you had in your post.
Microsoft is nowadays caught in a catch-22 of sorts. It's customers are primarily Computer OEMs and Intel. It's customers really arent the end-users.
This creates some really problematic dynamics for the long term health of the company.
Apple's got nearly 15% of the U.S. computer market and a whopping 66% of the over $1000 computer market.
That is a fairly outlandish claim (the 66% part). You'll need to back that up with something before it'll get anything but laughs. Big corps dont buy 66% apples. Engineering & CAD/CAM firms dont buy 66% apples. IT folks and developers dont buy 66% apples (though developers is probably the single biggest niche demographic that apple is doing well in).
Anyone who works in this industry and sees the buying patterns sees the 66% as absurd.
The new driver model wasn't "for DRM," but for system stability. Nvdisp is responsible for what percentage of bluescreens again? It's mostly a conceptual extension of Windows XP's user-mode driver framework, and it lets Vista do nifty things like inform you from the system tray that "your display driver has been restarted" rather than bluescreen.
There's no DRM in Vista unless you're playing Blu-Ray discs. Or using iTunes. But then it's more accurate to say that there's DRM on the Blu-Ray discs and in your iTunes library. UAC can be turned off, and it does help security. I work at a help desk, and I've found that whjile most users will click through whatever "this is a virus!" warnings they get, there's also a large minority that freak out when Firefox offers to add an exception for our self-signed security certificate.
Some people say "If I don't know what it is, then maybe I should hit 'cancel' until it goes away." These people are outnumbered by those who hit "OK" until it goes away, but they're the group UAC is aiming to protect. The rest of us are smart enough to know where the "control panel" is.
Not quite sure what you're getting at with a "forcing users to purchase a new printer (or whatever)" to make money. When my dad was going to college, he bought a Windows 3.11 desktop with an HP Deskject 660C (I think that's the model number, anyway.) My Vista rig prints to it just fine - follow Microsoft's guidelines, documentation, and warnings (this is deprecated! this will change! we're not kidding this time! please quit using the 10 year old DirectSound libraries! etc.) and you won't have too much more work to do.
DATABASE WOW WOW
I read this earlier today. One of the justifications for hiring him was to compete with Apple by trying to reduce their image as a "stuffy" company.
I wonder how they think they can achieve that by hiring a middle-aged comedian who hasn't appeared in popular culture for 10 years, and even when he was popular, based his entire routine on whining about pointless social details.
Er, let me correct that. For the kind of money they're paying Seinfeld I could convince you I really believed Bill Gates was divinely inspired. You offering?
Help stamp out iliturcy.
More to the point Vista is preventing you from taking a screen shot of a video, even one you've recorded from the evening news. A still image of a news broadcast in the context of a discussion regarding the broadcast or its subject is fair use, and Vista is preventing you from that fair use and so depriving you of your civil right of freedom of expression. That's not a minor thing. Maybe you don't care because you don't care to discuss current events or world history in the lens of public media - but some do and they're rightly offended.
Uhm, quite a few media players on XP use screen overlays, which will result in a blank box where the video should be - nothing new in Vista, nothing to do with DRM and nothing to do with violation of rights.
The key difference between UAC and "sudo" is the level of understanding necessary to formulate the action. You may think you are being lazy when you type in the "sudo mount /dev/ipod" for the thousandth time but in reality you are being effective and efficient. You researched the right command to mount and access your iPod. You more know what the command is doing to both the system and iPod to do what you need. After that, using it once or a million times isn't lazy.
UAC does improve security but through "nagging" instead of a systemic fix. You brute force the user away from questionable actions instead of just having the system never bothering to do it. Approach it like a novice user: where all they see on the screen are series of buttons and things to click on with labels they aren't familiar with. A few are good, most are harmless, a few are bad, one special one is catastrophic. When they click any of the buttons, UAC kicks in and says "Allow this happen?" If they user doesn't know what all of the labels on all of the buttons mean, what is the purpose of asking for confirmation? It doesn't add any safety except to warn the user one of the buttons could be dangerous. That is useful information in of itself but fails to reveal to the user which one is the dangerous one.
Or simply put, "sudo" is rarely used because the user is unsure of the command while UAC is invoked for too many commands where the user is unsure of the command being executed. If you clicked on an email that said "save the attachment 'script.pl', type 'sudo script.pl' to win!" most Linux/BSD/Unix users would be like "Huh?!?! No way I'm doing that!" On Windows, in a similar situation user is only going to see a couple prompts warning them something dubious may happen if you proceed where some will be scared off from clicking "Allow" but some can and still will click it. It isn't that the Linux user is "smarter" than the Windows user. It is the UI model is broken on Windows where Microsoft/Vista assumes the user knows what a good action and bad action are. If they knew that, then UAC wouldn't be necessary in the first place.
You misunderstood what I wrote.
Set aside whether Vista sleeps/hibernates reliably, as thats not what I'm speaking about.
What I'm saying is that in XP, the more you would sleep or hibernate, the more you would accelerate system degradation.
So running a desktop for 3 weeks would work great, but running a laptop where you hibernate or standby 5-10 times per day, it would last much less time before needing a reboot.
Not all apps deal with sleep/hibernate well. Tons of devices/drivers dont deal with them well. So doing lots of sleep/hibernate would mean the system would degrade faster.
With Vista, the system is overall much more stable, and seems more resistant to leaky apps and problematic drivers, so it lasts longer under that type of usage than XP did on similar hardware. ..
Back to your comment, Vista does sleep reliably, at least on machines with good drivers.
The measure of whether a system is able to come out of sleep/hibernate successfully (a totally separate thing from what I'm talking about above) is 100% a driver issue. Device manufacturers have to write drivers that deal properly with standby/hibernate and recovery from such.
Most dont.
This is why you'll have someone with a high quality machine (like what I'm using) where sleep and hibernate work well, but another person running different hardware (especially consumer level crap) but the same Vista will lock up trying to come out of sleep or hardware.
This is one area where Apple's own-the-hardware/own-the-software approach pays off, and why things like that work so well for Macs.