lpq's Journal: MS research proves placebo effect works w/software as well

I keep seeing these advertisements about Windows "Mohave" -- a ad campaign where they convince 'everyday users' (i.e. people who don't know squat about computers) how great Vista is by fooling them into trying it on specially tuned systems provided by Microsoft. Of course, the systems provided by MS have all certainly been equipped with high-end hardware, and pre-installed and pre-tuned by MS engineers to shine. And the non-computer savvy types see the new Vista interface and, of course, "oo" and "ah" over the high end interface (only in premium versions of windows costing up to hundreds extra on top of the high end hardware).

The 'computer-ignorant' "users" were easily fooled by MS and thought it would great to try it home...so the ads would have us believe.

So what does this tell us? If you throw computers at customers that cost 3-4x what mid-range computers cost and pre-tune and set them up with the most user-friendly settings and extra hardware (how man computers, available today, 'come' with the ability to receive HD-TV already built-in? Even if you buy an HDTV card, how many would be able to save HD-video & audio to disk "in the background"... OR are they only intending to sell these computers as "Media Centers" -- and not general purpose computers? Did they show any of the consumers the feature where NBC "accidentally" tests remote blocking of end-user recording of their favorite programs? I'm sure they'll love Vista once they've switched over and depend on it to record their favorite shows...

Vista got a bad wrap because it was evaluated by experts and compared to Windows XP. It was slower and provided little to no user benefit. The only beneficiary of Vista was NBC & Hollywood. Of course Apple users have nothing to feel smug about, Apple has bowed down and added the same DRM to all their new system.

Upcoming, probably more for the computer experts, is 'Windows 7' -- already said not to be a radical departure or change from Vista. But the problem is -- all the things added to Vista that slow down drivers and performance and remove user rights -- they all be in Windows 7. So how would Win7 be different from a Vista SP2 or SP3? I'm guessing most of the work on Win7 will be to support new hardware and to address performance problems -- so reviewers won't slam it as bad as they did Vista. MS has already lowered expectations with Vista, so even if they get back all of the speed lost in Vista -- will it be any faster or better than XP? Or is it just another offering to seduce us into a MS-NBC-Hollywood media controlled future?

Perhaps Windows 7 is more like a "Mohave 2" (with no real improvements, and almost as good as XP in performance (even with all the DRM layers in the background). MS may also be hoping that the price of high-end hardware will come down to mid and lower price-points so consumers can buy more computer to handle the 'basic' Aero-version. But since most consumers will want media playin too, they'll be persuaded to buy 'ultimate' to get Windows Media Player (a free download under XP, but a new level of expense when sold as part of Vista).

So much for computers being a benefit for all mankind. Instead of being used to further knowledge, their biggest use appears that it will be to further subdivide waning resources in order maximize money extraction from the masses to the elite. But hey, it's the word of God: For to all those who have, more will be given, and they will have an abundance; but from those who have nothing, even what they seem to have will be taken away (Math 13:12 + 25:29, Mark 4:25, Luke 8:18 + 19:25-6, Thomas 31:1). Hmm...when Christians say the US is a 'Christian' nation are they really meaning Christianity = Capitalism? Interesting...