Houston we have a problem, lets force feed Vista to people

[AllGamer]

We'll I'm glad I'm not the only one that agrees, Vista is the biggest crap ever in Microsoft history.

http://www.techworld.com/opsys...ewsID=9579&pagtype=all

It's possible, Cherry added, that Microsoft might find itself forced to recognise more reality in the future. "At some point, they might have to consider limiting the availability of XP," to push people to Vista.

The software developer has made at least one move in that direction already. In mid-April, it announced it would terminate sales of Windows XP to resellers and retail after January 2008. User reactions were almost unanimously negative.

 

[VladMM]

:roll:

It's called a business model.

 

[AllGamer]

actually i take the part back about being the biggest crap ever, because it is the 3rd biggest crap ever

the first 2 crap was Windows 1.0 and Windows 286 (2.0), both predates Win3.0 and 3.11 respectively

 

[StopSign]

Wait...you're saying Vista is worse than ME?

 

[stash]

Have you even used Vista, or are you just regurgitating FUD you read on the the intertubes in some feeble attempt to be cool?

 

[AllGamer]

yes i do have Vista 64 Ultimate (crapo) up and running perfectly in my machine, but asides that.... nothing else works, there isn't enough support for it yet.

Re: WinME

WinME actually wasn't that bad, it was just a more polished version of Win98SE, the only crap in WinME was MS first shot at "windows restore" thing, what was actually a crap down version of PCHealth.

Once PCHealth was dissabled, WinME runs great.

 

[Noema]

Originally posted by: AllGamer
yes i do have Vista 64 Ultimate (crapo) up and running perfectly in my machine, but asides that.... nothing else works, there isn't enough support for it yet.

The fact that hardware manufacturers are intent on orphaning hardware is, shockingly, not Microsoft's fault. In fact Microsoft requires manufacturers to provide 32 and 64-bit drivers in order to grant them WHQL.

 

[stash]

yes i do have Vista 64 Ultimate (crapo) up and running perfectly in my machine, but asides that.... nothing else works, there isn't enough support for it yet.

How many contridictions can you have in a single sentence?

Vista x64 Ultimate is crap, but yet running perfectly. But nothing works (hardware, software, what?) because there isn't enough support, therefore the OS is the worst (oh sorry, 3rd worst) thing ever produced by Microsoft?

But after that confusion, you basically lost all hope of credibility by saying Windows ME wasn't that bad.

 

[Nothinman]

We'll I'm glad I'm not the only one that agrees, Vista is the biggest crap ever in Microsoft history.

Funny, I didn't find the word crap in that article at all.

 

[BD2003]

People will move onto vista eventually, just like everyone moved onto XP from 2000, after the years bitching caused by bugs, drivers and "its just a pretty 2000" was over. Serious gamers wont have a choice for long when games start moving past 2gb per process and DX10. If someone buys XP now, they'll probably buy Vista later, instead of being able to move their old OS onto their next PC. MS will end up double dipping and raking in twice the cash in that case.

Sure MS wants people to move onto Vista, but I doubt limiting the availability of XP pro is the way they'll do it. Besides, 99% of the people that build their own PCs and buy their own OSes, know that buying XP, or even still Win2000 is a few mouse clicks away from dozens of places online.

 

[Modelworks]

Vista needs some new applications that are a must have and that only work on vista.
Gaming , dx10 , will not do it.
You have way more people everyday that use the pc for things like office, web browsing, email, etc than you do people who are die hard gamers and want dx10.

MS needs to come up with something the everyday person wants and needs that will not run on anything but vista. Otherwise the everyday person sees no reason to upgrade.

Vista was at 4.5% users in June
Up until June, windows 2000 actually had a larger user base at 4.3%.

If MS were right now to say we will no longer support or sale windows xp.
You wouldn't see much happen right away.
People who have xp would continue to use it today just like they did last week.
Hardware vendors would not stop supporting xp because that would hurt there sales.

The only way people then would use vista would be to force them onto it with new pc sales.


Look at any other tech market.
The only way you get people to upgrade is to offer something they can't have now.
Vista doesn't do enough of that.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: Modelworks
Vista needs some new applications that are a must have and that only work on vista.
Gaming , dx10 , will not do it.
You have way more people everyday that use the pc for things like office, web browsing, email, etc than you do people who are die hard gamers and want dx10.

MS needs to come up with something the everyday person wants and needs that will not run on anything but vista. Otherwise the everyday person sees no reason to upgrade.

Vista was at 4.5% users in June
Up until June, windows 2000 actually had a larger user base at 4.3%.

If MS were right now to say we will no longer support or sale windows xp.
You wouldn't see much happen right away.
People who have xp would continue to use it today just like they did last week.
Hardware vendors would not stop supporting xp because that would hurt there sales.

The only way people then would use vista would be to force them onto it with new pc sales.


Look at any other tech market.
The only way you get people to upgrade is to offer something they can't have now.
Vista doesn't do enough of that.

Its an operating system, not a gaming console. What ran on XP that didnt run on 2000? What ran on 2000 that didnt run on 98? What ran on 98 that didnt run on 95?

They needed to create an operating system that is prepared for future advances in hardware, while retaining a decent amount of legacy compatibility. It needs to be secure, fast, and stable, and have plenty of new features And it is all those things. They cant guarantee compatibility for the hundreds of thousands of programs that exist out there...if those software vendors dont want to update their software, then so be it.

Theres more of an apparent resistance to it because unlike Win98 (2000 was not a consumer OS), Windows XP is actually stable. Most people just want to run their programs and dont care about the OS underneath. Thats perfectly fine, but thats no reason to stall progress forever at Windows XP for those who would actually like a little something more. I personally wouldnt recommend buying a Vista separate from a new PC unless they know what theyre doing, but if I had to choose for myself, its an easy choice.

 

[RebateMonger]

From a business standpoint, I can't wait for Vista to propagate through the office world. XP was a big improvement in "maintainability" over '98, and Vista will be much easier to maintain than XP.

 

[SGT Lindy]

Being a long time MS product fan....I would have to agree.

I know there are people out there that think Vista is great and it works just fine for them but hopefully they did not pay for their copy of Vista....ie it came with a new PC.

Vista has some major problems right now. For me this is the problem that fianally sent me back to XP....

http://forums.microsoft.com/te...7&ft=11&tf=0&pageid=21

That is a technet forum so its lets say "nicer" over all about this MAJOR problem. Go to other places in search of a fix and they are not quite as "nice".

That problem is real, and it is of the top 5 problems stopping my corporation from moving forward with our plans to deploy Vista to about 30K worstations for 12-18months.

Personally Vista has cost me the following....going from 1gig on my (new in march) notebook to 2gig, an upgrade for Quicken, Nero and Photoshop elements. I lost the ability to use NetStumbler which I used for contracting work (finding wireless dead spots for my small business customers) and a few XP powertoys like image resize.

I dont game on a PC so DX10 is wasted on me. So all in all...Vista probably cost me $350 for sofware upgrades and another gig of RAM....all to do the same thing (almost) as XP just slower and for less time on battery.

There were a few things I like about Vista....Aero is cool. The explorer updates like the info in the status bar and the graphical folders were cool...and for a company having a user as a user and not an administrator is cool/isolation mode for IE but most of that is fluff, or can be done with XP as well.

I got my copies of Vista free thank god (with my new notebook, beta 2, RC1...etc) but it still cost me in the end....and now I am back on XP.

Anyone dont think that file copy problem is real.... Move your I386 folder from your PC to a network share or USB drive. Do it right before lunch so you will have plenty of time to eat.

 

[AllGamer]

That's an interesting problem, it doesn't seems to affect everybody, i've got no slow copying and moving files problem, to and from USB drives, or DVD RW, and obviously no problem between HDDs.

unless that is only a problem of the 32 bit version of Vista. (I'm running 64)

 

[AllGamer]

Originally posted by: Noema
The fact that hardware manufacturers are intent on orphaning hardware is, shockingly, not Microsoft's fault.

I definitely agree to that.... Now i'm stuck with some state of the art hardware, yet no full support for them, only partial support with incomplete drivers.... (Creative, Logitech, ATI, etc), software support is not such a big pain, just a long wait, until they release Vista versions of whatever software everyone is waiting.

The hardware is what bugs me the most.

Basically you are forced to buy new hardware only so you can use Vista, which is exactly what the linked article describes. :|

 

[orion23]

Vista was never intended to be an Upgrade OS, but a jump from the OLD to the new Tech, only allowing up to date or newer systems to run it. Vista was supposed to be more of a monster OS but it became less and less as time passed by.

In the end, MS lowered the requirements and pretty much created all type of versions and allowed most to tag along.

Vista so far is the best OS I've used. Very stable, easy to work with.

And most people that complain about Vista, either don't even use it, or have tried it in their crappy 10 year old pc's

 

[nerp]

Considering the changes that Vista underwent during its development process and the complete scrapping and starting over that occured midway through the development process, the final product is remarkable considering how stable it is. I played with some of the early betas and thought it would never be ready for prime time. Then RC1 came out and suddenly, things seemed to be coming together.

RTM has been flawless for me.

But anyway, nobody is being "force fed" Vista. Sure, if you're buying a new, pre-made machine from Dell or HP, you're going to get Vista unless you're offered XP as an option. But consumers still have choice and XP is available still in most stores I swing through as well as online vendors who sell both retail and OEM copies.

I think the whole "force fed" argument would make sense if the hardware refused any installation media aside from a Vista disc. The fact is, consumers have choice and they always will. To this day, you can buy licensed copies of Windows 3.11 on eBay. Does anyone here honestly think that XP will be nonexistant a year from now? Get serious. Stop living in a fantasy world.

If OS choice is that critical to you, buy a machine with NO os installed or build your own. Expecting HP and Dell to cater to tweakmeisters is nonsensical. You constitute a slim minority of buyers who even think or care about what OS is installed and you're lucky that HP and others extended the availablity of XP on some models -- which flies in the face of the whole "force fed" argument anyway.

 

[Noema]

Originally posted by: nerp
the final product is remarkable considering how stable it is.

Well, consiering it's based on a server kernel (2K3) that doesn't come as a surprise.

In my experience NT has been rock solid since 4.0, and most instabilities are caused by crappy 3rd party drivers.

 

[AllGamer]

Originally posted by: Noema

In my experience NT has been rock solid since 4.0, and most instabilities are caused by crappy 3rd party drivers.

Ironically, NT4 had more control and better hardware support than Win2k,

NT4 is quite stable still, many organizations are still running NT4, mainly because the software and applications they run, does not work on any newer OS, and no body ever has time to port it over.

Cost and hours involved to port an application over, usually makes it a big no no, for the Higher up guys.

 

[AllGamer]

Originally posted by: nerp
But anyway, nobody is being "force fed" Vista. Sure, if you're buying a new, pre-made machine from Dell or HP, you're going to get Vista unless you're offered XP as an option. But consumers still have choice and XP is available still in most stores I swing through as well as online vendors who sell both retail and OEM copies.

Thanks God, it was a good thing at least that our collective screaming worth something to the big business boys at HP, Dell, etc...

If not we'd have been already under the World Domination of Microsoft already.

Remember at first it was not offered at all, but after successive demand from the consumer they had to give in and go back to XP as being a choice.

 

[Nothinman]

Ironically, NT4 had more control and better hardware support than Win2k,

Execept for small things like USB...

NT4 is quite stable still, many organizations are still running NT4, mainly because the software and applications they run, does not work on any newer OS, and no body ever has time to port it over.

Anyone still running NT4 is extremely stupid because it's not even getting security patches.

 

[AllGamer]

Actually there are USB PCI adapters with NT4 drivers that works fine

i actually have one of those installed in one of my old NT4 rigs

They don't really need any security patches, since those old programs that needs NT4 to run, don't even connect to the outside word.

Most of those are like the data center, and Accounting firms dedicated servers that all they do all they long is run scripted stuff from DOS prompt that taps into Com ports or parallel ports, or some other dedicated hardware.

As for me, i just run it for fun. I like to have every single OS installed, it's good and quick for reference.

VMware makes these a miracle, although some configs i do have real hardware dedicated to it, depending on the customer demands.

 

[blackangst1]

I honestly cant believe the main anti-Vista bandwagon is STILL screaming "No driver/hardware support!" and, my favorite, "It's just an eye-candy bloated upgrade!"

Un believable.

 

[Nothinman]

Actually there are USB PCI adapters with NT4 drivers that works fine

There are crap PCMCIA drivers that will get you some semblance of hotplug too but that doesn't mean it works well.

They don't really need any security patches, since those old programs that needs NT4 to run, don't even connect to the outside word.

Lack of network connectivity isn't an execute to skip good security practices.