twitter's Journal: Vista Compatibility Issues Keep Deployment at Less 7%

An analyst blames application compatibility for poor adoption of Vista:

The mad rush to commercial implementations of Windows Vista does not seem to have happened despite Microsoft's mild protestations to the contrary. The operating system has reached the dizzy heights of a little over seven per cent of all desktop OS installations, according to Net Applications, and possibly fewer than one per cent in the commercial area, according to Sunbelt Software.

He goes on to insultingly blame ISVs instead of M$. According to him, they are too cheap and lazy to port to Vista. They should be dropping their previous versions so they can push their customers on. Why should they have to? What real advantages are there worth pissing off an ISV's client base? What happened to the (in)famous Windows backward compatibility? It's funny that he did not mention Vista's DRM inspired poor performance, insulting license terms or insane copy protection measures which have kept reasonable shops far away.

Sorry Clive, Vista's a dog and M$ has no one to blame but themselves.