Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Not Ditching Vista Until At Least 2011
CWmike writes "Microsoft will not dump Vista when Windows 7 launches, and plans to keep selling it to computer makers, system builders, volume licensees and consumers at retail until at least January 2011, a Microsoft spokesman said, citing long-running policy. Earlier today, a Microsoft general manager hinted that the company might ditch Vista as soon as Windows 7 ships. He also said that support for all versions of Vista will end in April 2012. Neither is true, according to the company. Michael Cherry, an analyst with Directions on Microsoft, said, 'to try to stop Vista or make it unavailable, that would just draw attention... The truth is, few people will be likely to order it once Windows 7 is available.'"
Well remember MS continued to offer Millenium until 2003 even though XP launched in 2001. Offering and actually selling are two different things, I know I never heard of anyone buying Millenium after XP shipped.
They may drop the support for consumer versions and keep the business ones available. Sounds logical to me, for consumers there is very little reason to stick to Windows Vista for new systems. Those companies that did switch (the sorry sods) however will need new systems with the same OS.
I bought a pc about 2 years ago and it had Vista on it. I mostly use Linux but keep the Vista partition around so I could easily use Windows-only apps. It pisses me off that I won't get the Vista Service Pack (Windows 7) for free.
Look, I'm an Open Source advocate as well and I use Linux and OpenBSD... However lumping together Windows 2000 and Windows ME is just not fair. Windows 2000 was pretty much their best operating system ever, and Windows ME their worst. Just in case you didn't know: Windows 2000, meant for the business world and used in the business world was a big hit. It was and is still very popular in corporate environments.
Windows XP has exactly three things that make it "better" than 2000: Fast user switching, good wireless support and terminal services (only in Pro). The first and the second are good for home use, the terminal services only for business use.
Windows 2000 is used to this day in controlled secured environments.... I wouldn't call it unsuccessful in any sense of the term.
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
He also said that support for all versions of Vista will end in April 2012
End of the world prophecies in 2012 - coincidence? I think not.
Obviously Microsoft will only stop pushing Vista at the behest of the four horsemen.
The first and the second are good for home use, the terminal services only for business use.
Oh, man, you have no idea. I use RDP and terminal services daily around the house. Until I found mpd and Pitchfork, it was how my music machine ran. I still use RDP to another old computer that runs my IRC and Pidgin stuff (VNC and NX ran like shit, but RDP was fine, so RDP it was).
Terminal services is a vastly underappreciated piece of awesome.
"You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
'Customers who purchase a PC with Windows 7 pre-installed will be allowed to downgrade to Vista," Francis said.' That's the hardest I've laughed in a while. Thanks Richard Francis!
We should troll Microsoft by starting a 'Save Vista' campaign. Imagine the warm glow Steve and Bill would share on hearing it. It's almost too cruel. Almost.
I'm certainly going against Slashdot groupthink here, so I'll undoubtedly be modded "-1 Troll", but Windows Vista is really not as bad as people think. The key thing to keep in mind is to make sure your system has enough resources to run it, because it is demanding. Don't try and put it on your P4 with only 512 MB RAM with integrated graphics. You'll regret it. I also wouldn't recommend upgrading to it from Windows XP -- it doesn't offer anything of significant value over XP that makes it worth rushing out to upgrade for. But if you're buying a new system, and it happens to have Vista AND at least 2 GB RAM with a decent graphics card, I wouldn't worry about it.
Why the hell cant you get it right microsoft? WHY?
Because obviously they hadn't had the luxury of your well-reasoned, thoroughly detailed, and above all, well-worded criticism. 'S obvious innit?
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
Unmourned. Unwept. Perpetually left unloved because your ugly older sister XP always came across with the full release and a happy ending while you were still whining that you wanted another 2G of RAM to show the boy how pretty you were.
I'm sorry I could never be the user you wanted, Vista. I tried. I really, really tried. I even had Millennium on my system for a while, so I know I'm not a completely unreasonable task manager. You wanted too much from me. You wanted to be my Trophy OS...pretty...never doing a real job...pretty...profligate with my hard-earned RAM...pretty. It wasn't enough. I'm so very, very sorry. Your sister XP gave me that dirty smile, and threw my RAM back in my face and performed like a trapeze artist. I was lost, dear Vista. She did everything I wanted, and she never said no, and she just kept going and going and going.
I don't care too much that you're prettier...much prettier. In fact, I'll never tell her, but sometimes when she's happily multi-tasking away, I close my eyes and pretend she's you.
But there's something about her that makes her a magnet. Something you'll never understand. Even when she's making my old CPUnit, do things I thought it could never, ever manage, she doesn't just swallow. She gargles.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
The geek's obsession with activation can be really puzzling to others. ;-)
We geeks have a strong aversion against giving up control of our toys
That includes wanting to reinstall the OS when we feel like it, without asking someone for permission. And the typical geek does this more frequently than every 8 years.
C - the footgun of programming languages
Interesting.
If Microsoft does something incremental (eg. 2000 -> XP, or Vista -> 7), people complain that too little has changed, that it's basically just a "service pack" which Microsoft is charging money for.
If Microsoft does something too radical (eg. XP -> Vista), people complain that too much has changed, that they should have just touched up XP a bit, given it a visual makeover and a few core updates and that would have been enough.
Conclusion - Microsoft can't win. At least with the fussy pricks on Slashdot.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_new_to_Windows_7
Conclusion: You're a giant idiot.
What you say:
Wow. Talk about "entitlement generation" - you fit the profile perfectly. Sorry but you're going to just have to pay, same as I paid for my previous OS upgrades. The real world doesn't hand-out free lunches.
What your sig says:
My $7 per month dialup connection can download TORCHWOOD in just three hours! Who needs broadband internet? (wink)
All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.
What is scary is those videos are showing the head of one of the most powerful fortune 500 companies. The guy comes off as a cross between a used car salesman and a self help guru. And the microsoft shills can mark anything negative about Ballmer as flamebait ALL you want, I have enough karma I really don't give a shit.
What I DO give a shit about is a company (MSFT) that I have been supporting for nearly 15 years has been run into the ground by the piss poor management and direction of Ballmer. Ever since he took over the company has been hopping from one idea to the next like it has ADHD, while its CORE market, the business and enterprise desktop, has been all but ignored as Ballmer has chased the home users in his attempt to be as hip as Jobs. Vista is a complete and total failure, the Xbox 360 has been hemorrhaging cash, their attempts to get into search and the cloud have been disasters....hell can you name me ONE thing besides MS Office, which from what I've read has basically been left alone by Ballmer, that hasn't been a failure under Ballmer? I bet you can't. He is simply a lousy CEO.
The company has lost focus and direction, they are for some reason chasing a market that they already have a lock on (home users) while at the same time risking the market (business) that could most easily switch to another OS like OSX or Linux. I could fill this post with links of many saying the exact same thing as this, but why bother? Everytime I have dared say Ballmer is a bad CEO or that Win7 risks going down the Vista road of failure I have had the post marked up only to have it then buried under flamebait or troll for daring to say Win7 has no clothes. So mark me down ALL you want. MSFT will keep losing market share and Ballmer will keep stumbling from one failed idea to another, until finally the board gets tired of the waste and fires his dumb ass.
By completely destroying backwards compatibility and not bothering to give a transition period (As Apple did with OS9-OSX) they have screwed the one thing that has kept businesses buying their product-the fact that their old apps will continue to function. His answer of "Running XP in VPC" for Win7 is about as lame and pointless as you can get. Whereas with OS9->OSX you could still run your apps because it was close to the bare metal and simply used a translation layer, with Win7 those apps that companies depend on will have the choice of running slower than before or being broken. And mark my words, screwing up all those apps and screwing all that hardware by not supporting XP drivers WILL come back to bite them in the ass with Win7, just as it did with Vista.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.