Slashdot Mirror
The Myth of Upgrade Inevitability Is Dead
Several readers pointed out a ComputerWorld UK blog piece on the expanding ripples of the Vista fiasco. Glyn Moody quotes an earlier Inquirer piece about Vista, which he notes "has been memorably described as DRM masquerading as an operating system": "Studies carried out by both Gartner and IDC have found that because older software is often incompatible with Vista, many consumers are opting for used computers with XP installed as a default, rather than buying an expensive new PC with Vista and downgrading. Big business, which typically thinks nothing about splashing out for newer, more up-to-date PCs, is also having trouble with Vista, with even firms like Intel noting XP would remain the dominant OS within the company for the foreseeable future." Moody continues: "What's really important about this is not so much that Vista is manifestly such a dog, but that the myth of upgrade inevitability has been destroyed. Companies have realized that they do have a choice — that they can simply say 'no.' From there, it's but a small step to realizing that they can also walk away from Windows completely, provided the alternatives offer sufficient data compatibility to make that move realistic."
Hey, don't pretend like you have a choice anyway. Vista is co crap, that you have your choice now. If Windows 7 will be good enough, hw vendors stop writing Xp drivers, and your choice vaporised.
Like most people in IT I spend a certain part of the year helping out those less fortunate than myself. Namely all the friends, friends of the wife, some bloke I met in the pub and the school in getting their computers to work. Most recently I fixed a couple of laptops and an internet connection, one was on XP the other on Vista, the wife asked to have her (XP) PC "look like" her husbands as she like the look of the interface. When I said it was a different operating system she said "Isn't it Windows then?"
The point is of course that it is Windows and the difference between XP and Vista for most users does just come down to the pretty window manager... until stuff doesn't work. The XP box was back-online in under 10 minutes, the Vista box took me longer due to the wonderful UAC and a driver problem.
Most of the time however I feel like a Mac salesman, I turn up with my Mac (the trouble shooting box) run all the tests and have them thinking "ooooh that must be hard to use because its so powerful and techy" then let them play around with it for a few minutes. I'd say that around 50% of those people I've supported this year who are looking at replacements are now looking at a Mac.
Now a Slashdot poll on what is the correct payment for these unofficial support calls (often at a party or other social function) would be good. Right now I'm getting around two bottles of wine and a decent meal out of it.
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
I work for a hospital. Our medical records software does not support vista yet. General Electric is the vendor and they have recently announced vista compatibility will happen some time next year.
If they had been ready two years ago we might have tried it. With today's economic situation I don't think we can afford to upgrade.
So no vista for a 5,000 employee organization.
There are hundreds of other hospitals with the same medical records software.
XP just works. Why would anyone upgrade?
Yep, if Windows XP is "good enough", why would people flock to Linux anymore than Vista? It's even less likely than people eventually all adopting Vista. Which to be honest, does not at all look like a foregone conclusion anymore - not sure where that leaves us as it seems unlikely we can stay with XP for very many years more. I guess eventually more people and businesses may migrate to Vista, or else Microsoft will pull a "fixed-up" version of Vista out of the hat with Windows 7... OK so that's not so likely either.
Personally I will be sticking with my 3.5 y.o. desktop with XP (still just under a year's Dell on-site warranty, thanks to a 3 year offer a few months after my one year CAR ran out), and my 2 y.o. laptop also with XP (a year's Dell on-site warranty left on that too).
I did admittedly upgrade my graphics card in my desktop a year ago for €150, but I got €50 for my old card too.
I am inclined to think the days of frequent upgrading are at an end.
-- *~()____) This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds...
Since I'm a software designer and must support the latest standard, I upgraded to Vista so I can make sure that my programs are compatible.
Its been nothing but pain.
I'm very fanatic about keeping my system clean and functioning well, I don't install superfluous applications and am very careful about what I do install.
The problem is, VISTA seems to slowly degrade in stability over time with blue-screens appearing quite often after a few months of regular day to day use. Once it gets to more than 2-3 blue screens a day, I restore the OS from a clean image and then it works well for a while longer until the blue screens appear again.
The funny thing is, the blue screens seem to be from different system components (usbhost.sys, tcpip.sys, memory faults, etc...). If you may think this has something to do with hardware failure (which was my initial guess seeing references to USB and other hardware drivers crashing), you'd be wrong as a clean install or running XP gets rid of all these problems. And I'm not using any weird USB devices either, only Flash Drives and the occasional SD card reader.
Zoom Player Lead Dev.
My mac is still running Tiger and I don't see the need to upgrade to some other cat and I'm still running Mandriva 2007.
The days where I had to have the last are gone. And I consider myself a nerd. Normal users care even less.
Note, well I lied , I do have one laptop running Vista and it's OK. But I don't see the need to upgrade to W7 when it comes.
It's time to realise that Abble's products are the biggest abomination these days. Just say NO to the dumb iAbble way!!
Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon, and for the... ah, wait, wrong cliche.
Still, the fact is that someday, Microsoft will stop supporting XP even when it comes to security. That'll mean all those businesses who try to hang on will be forced to seek another option then, assuming MSFT hasn't learned and made something that would be a logical, worthwhile upgrade from XP. Assuming things stay the same by that point, you might start seeing a frenzied stampede away from Windows.
Do I get bonus points if I act like I care?
Microsoft's problem isn't really Vista, the bit of software.
Their major problem is their lack of understanding that good operating systems can't be created overnight and chucked on the shelves like white goods items under pressure of Sales and Marketing ... not even in a 3-year "overnight". Operating systems evolve into being good, and once they're getting close to being usable then you don't chuck them out just because you want new product in the catalog. Not if you're half sane.
And MS also seems to misunderstand the longevity of operating systems, the attachment that users form with them, people's reluctance to change, and the simple fact that something that works doesn't need to be replaced ... software doesn't wear out, nor obsoleted given incremental upgrades. The "all change" paradigm that seems to hold in MS is in total disregard of commonsense.
And lastly, MS has a real problem in understanding that people buy operating systems to serve their own needs, not to serve the needs of 3rd party content providers --- that's a severe requirements mismatch.
Vista also has technical issues of course, but MS has plenty of manpower to fix those. What I'm not sure it does have the ability to fix is its totally backwards perception of what they should be doing in this area.
"The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
The expression "NO, I WILL NOT UPGRADE" is showing a disconnection from Redmond. "This hardware is fine, I will not switch to Vista, thank you".And from there, from that point of rebelion, other alternatives sounds plausible.
If you are feeling that Vista is a scam, and that someone is trying to push you to buy new hardware, when you are told that there is a FREE version of an OS that lets you stay with your hardware and is community based you hear bells from heaven.
Donde Ser Geek No Duele
More objective reviewers than "everyone I know" have found that the alleged speed advantage of Win7 doesn't bear scrutiny. Some have also pointed out that it's not really a new OS, just an attempt to recover from a marketing disaster by applying lipstick and eyeliner to that sad old pig we call Vista.
Here's just one example. There's plenty of others out there.
http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/index.cfm?newsid=107030
I'll leave aside the whole DRM question, except to note that an OS which I bought and paid for that puts the "rights" of notoriously predatory and dishonest entertainment corporations before my own is not something I'd want on my computer.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
I take issue with this bit:
why would 70% of eeePC sales be XP models?
At least where I'm living (in western europe), there's no way to get one of the decent hardware versions (i.e. models 901, 1000) in the Linux version.
In fact, I've just this morning ordered a couple XP versions, fully intending to not even boot those but to immediately replace them by my favourite Linux version. So, Asus will have sold a couple of XP licenses, but they won't ever get used - how many more like me are there? I don't even know if there's a chance to get my money back on the licenses.
I'm even happily shelling out Euros to at least get the kind of keyboard that's standard in this country instead of the foreign ones offered locally.
Asus, your sales model sucks! Unfortunately, the alternatives aren't any more palatable.
The law of diminishing returns is in effect in OSes as well. It is just not possible to see in the future the massive changes in infrastructure and operating systems we have seen in the past. 8 years ago, going from Windows ME to Windows 2K or from Office 6 to Office 2000 meant a massive increase of stability and features. Today, going from Windows XP to Windows Vista or from Office 2000 to Office 2007 does not offer anything substantially important to the average user.
It is absurd to think that people will keep changing their tools every so often. Once tools are satisfactory enough, they stay. It has happened in programming languages (C, for example, despite all the progress in programming language theory and technology, remains the basis that everything is based on). It is now happening in operating systems. Windows XP will be with us for a long time.
The only time that we are going to see massive changes is when operating systems will become much easier to use, for example like we see in science fiction or something.
If XP is end of life and Windows 7 is supported, it's already better right there. Sorry to say this mate, but I have a vague feeling Windows 7 will be better regardless.
Currently I'm running Vista on my corporate desktop, and I'm not unhappy about it. The only gripe I have with the platform is that network discovery is done every time you open Windows explorer.
If I hibernate / sleep while on the corporate network, and I wake up that thing at home, opening an explorer window will take ~20 seconds because it tries to access the previously mapped network drives. This should be done out of band or potentially not at all in my view, not *every* bloody time you open an explorer. It's a bad implementation.
Apart from that the GUI is nice, the Networking menus are a pain in the backside, and XP's control panel was better. However, it manages sleep / hibernation more nicely and runs very (dare I say it) stable with the software suite I need.
To cut a long story short, I've been with Windows since 1.0x and I can tell you that in general the quality of the OS has been going up steadily. Vista is not perfect, but it's a *lot* nicer than NT4, 2000 for the desktop, 98, 95. Whether it's better than XP is somewhat debatable, but in the end it's a tight race. All in all, the trend is upwards.
Now Windows 7 or whatever the new iteration for the Desktop will be, will likely be better than XP indeed. Anyone who claims different probably hasn't paid attention to MicroSoft's history.
The thing is that this site is a Linux-centric religious institute, so obviously you'll easily and frequently hear "Upgrade myth busted", "Linux to dominate world in 2009" and "w00t!". The truth is that MicroSoft isn't all bad, and neither is Linux, but at the end of the day I do believe people will skip Vista to some degree (ME anyone?) only to hop on board at the next iteration again.
Which is not necessarily bad for the market or the consumers.
Actually I have a little repair shops, and hear is what I hear from those bring in Vista "I hate this damned thing, it is slower than my 4 year old machine! Fix It!". To which I tell them they are pretty much screwed unless they go for an XP "downgrade" (since the Best Buy special would cost more to upgrade to "Vista capable" than to get XP for) and of course their answer is "Do that! I can't get my camera software to work, or my printer, and this thing is too damned slow! Fix it!"
On the good side enough folks have brothers/cousins/uncles/friends who have had the "pleasure" of using Vista that I am building plenty of brand new XP machines. You know it is bad when they would rather shell out more money to me than buy one from Dell with Vista. And the article is true, BTW. I have had a lot of folks coming in who couldn't afford to have me build one that would rather take a used XP box than Vista. Folks LIKE XP, they can't stand Vista, and anything you pick up in the cheap section of Wal Mart, Best Buy, or Dell is going to run Vista Basic or Home Premium and it'll run like hammered shit.
So it is not so much the upgrade myth is broken so much as Vista=WinME II. Although to be fair I didn't have nearly as many folks hating WinME as I have had Vista hate. But if they put out Win7 and it doesn't suck the big wet titty folks will happily go back since Windows runs their stuff and you don't ever need to use a CLI. Linux simply requires to much CLI at this point, especially at the tiniest sign of trouble, to take the average Windows user away from MSFT. They simply don't want to learn CLI.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
What is killing Vista in business is 2 words: mission critical. There is always at least 1 app, usually 2-5 that are mission critical and they simply can't function without. Vista has shitty compatibility with older apps compared to XP and therefor is getting ignored.
And if you Linux guys want a shot at the business sector, I have 2 words for you: VB6 support. VB6 is still the number 3 business language for a reason. It is because VB6 powers the engine the drives the SMB. I have yet to walk into a SMB and not have one or more mission critical apps running VB6. If someone was to put out a "SMB Edition" with built in VB6 support, so one could simply click on the app and it would run, it would go a long way to getting Linux into business. But without solid, easy to implement VB6 support, preferably out of the box, there is no way I can even attempt to convert my SMB clients to Linux. There is simply too many mission critical VB6 apps in that environment.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Windows 2000 is still supported until 2010. At least for corporate people. Microsoft really is between a rock and a hard place with XP support. Corporations see no real benefit to Vista. Pretty doesn't really help.
Office also is facing a real lack of motivation as far as upgrading goes as well.
I think that Microsoft knows that it can no longer brow beat it's customers.
Will more people move to Linux? Maybe if more and more stuff keeps moving to a browser interface and away from VB.
I think Microsoft will end up supporting XP for a lot longer than it ever wanted too. And will be selling it a lot longer as well. I can still buy it at BestCityUSADepoMax.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Well, this Apple "fanboi" is, in my own small way, annoying to Microsoft's OS ambitions because I can run XP in a virtual machine that moves with me across my various desktops, laptop, etc, in a 100% consistent "hardware" environment so I can stay on the hardware upward speed curve as Apple brings out new machines, but I don't have to deal with XP not understanding later architectures, nor with it "playing in the street" outside a network sandbox.
I can keep XP safely off the net, even while OSX is fully connected; I can keep it safely backed up outside the world it knows about; and I can knock it back to a "newly installed, but fully enabled" condition by simply copying one file. I can maintain a full software development environment within this virtual XP machine, and if I need something from the net, I'll get it with the Apple and safely hand it over using a virtual filesystem.
No more Microsoft upgrades. Period. Microsoft has seen their last OS dollar from me. And I'm glad; I feel that it was an abusive relationship, both as a developer, and as a user.
I keep a couple virtual linux machines available on my desktop as well, Ubuntu and Redhat; don't have to go to such extremes, as they're about as safe on the net as OSX is. Someday, if they ever develop an actual open, standardized GUI API that is free for everyone to use, regardless of why they want to use it, I may develop for linux, too. In the meantime, I'm keeping my hand in. I like linux, and I particularly like Ubuntu.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.