Business 2.0 Says 'Boycott Vista' 756
amyandjake writes "Business 2.0 has a story about Vista's delays, the amount of time wasted by Microsoft bringing Vista to market, and the fact that it doesn't seem to have any compelling features for upgrading. The last paragraph of the story says 'Boycott Vista. Keep your old Windows XP PC around. Don't buy a new one. That's the only way we have to let Microsoft know Vista is an overhyped, late, and pointless update to XP — a perfectly fine operating system.'" Relatedly, torrensmith writes "Paul Thurrott is at it again with his seemingly never-ending supply of information about Windows Vista. This time, he discusses the things he dislikes about the program, in the article The Dark Side of Windows Vista RC1."
so, is MS okay to bundle now? (Score:5, Insightful)
Is the decree of consent over? In Paul Thurrott's article, aside from the refreshing observation Mr. Thurrott is willing to critique as well as fawn, I find it notable he picks one example where MS has been inconsistent and stupid (I agree) with their navigation ergonomics.
From his article [winsupersite.com], it's pretty clear MS is shipping a DVD maker, and from just one screen it appears to be a video/other type of application. Is this now considered de rigeur intrinsic Operating System? I know the definition of OS has blurred and been trickier to pin down, and I would expect an OS to have the appropriate drivers to allow burning of a DVD (it is after all, a component of the OS, or at least drivers for a DVD burner are).
If I were ROXIO or NERO, I'd be pissed, this looks like a de facto and direct competitor product, and if it's bundled as "part of the OS", it would seem close to the line of leveraging again.
And later in Thurrott's article he mentions the builtin virus checking -- something previously discussed on slashdot -- this also seems like another market niche MS is conveniently incorporating as part of their OS.... (how about making an OS much less susceptible to this in the first place?).
Is MS free to do this now?
As for boycotting Vista, I wish the world would consider, but it won't. And, I'll have to have some Vista machine and exposure to continue to pretend to support friends and family. Everything I've read about Vista bolsters the view there is not much new worth the upgrade, and there's enough annoying to induce a ferocious case of buyer's remorse.
Re:so, is MS okay to bundle now? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I have no problems with an OS providin
Re:so, is MS okay to bundle now? (Score:5, Informative)
I think you hit the nail on the head: the article is about not upgrading every PC in your 50-office company, and is not about not buying new PCs.
The author states that there is no compelling reason to purchase an upgrade, and I'd have to agree. What makes Vista better than XP besides more eye candy and sane default security settings? Any competent power user should have the sense to not be logging into their desktop as an admin, and production installations by big companies (should) already have their end-users' PCs locked down to prevent lusers from hurting themselves.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Any competent power user realizes there's close to no software that works in anything but admin mode. Of course Notepad works both ways, and power users only use this to produce them fangled 3D animations and interweb sites.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Yet, even at the time, a lot of companies with a semi decent sysadmin were able to make everything work for the end-user, in normal user mode.
Since Windows XP, the vast majority of major products works perfectly fine in normal user ac
Re:so, is MS okay to bundle now? (Score:5, Funny)
It did take a while, because I kept trying to chmod the files. All I kept getting back was - 'chmod' is not recognized as an internal or external command, operable program or batch file. So I tried reading the man pages on chmod. Guess what happened??
Re:so, is MS okay to bundle now? (Score:5, Funny)
That's because the Windows command for 'chmod' is 'del', and the equivalent of 'man chmod' is 'format c:'.
Have fun!
Re:so, is MS okay to bundle now? (Score:4, Interesting)
But, isn't burning a CD or DVD essentially I/O? (OK, maybe just O.) IANASA, but that sounds a lot like a basic OS function to me. Yeah, I know it's a direct competitor to existing "products". Existing products that exist because a basic OS function was
I'm trying not to be a smart-ass about this (but I was never very good at restraint). So, is it ok for MS to bundle basic OS functions with their OS?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Then how come all the Apple fanboys on Slashdot ddidn't cry foul when Apple started shipping iLife with all their Mac's?
*goes to Mac box, deletes iLife, installs competitors media creation software*
Hmmm, computer doesn't seem to care.
*goes to Windows box, deletes Microsoft media creation tools, installs competitors' stuff*
*OS breaks*
Does uninstalling IE and replacing it with Firefox or Opera still break W
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Wow, that's a pretty good argument. I had no idea my point of view was so nuanced. Thanks for bringing this up, instead of creating a strawman or something, which you could have done. If more people communicated in such a dignified and respectful manner, we could accomplish so much more as a people.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Here's a short list of "OS" apps that'll be dead:
Safari
Mail
iChat AV
Help Viewer
Dashboard
Dictionary
Sherlock
Software Update
Look's like it's not as casual a thing as you want to make it out to be. Then there's a list of several dozen known add-on applications from apple and third parties. The reality is, if you pull WebKit you will not have what people consider a working mac.
The OS providing a HTTP, JavaScript, and HTML subsystems is good for the consumer even if it's bad
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
*That* is why people get nervous when they start adding new apps to their OS. You can't find a computer on the shelf anywhere that has a DVD-RW drive but doesn't ha
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You are saying MS isn't a monopoly? Sounds to me the parent was making a legal argument, and as such the only relevant opinion here is the one of the judge who ruled MS a monopoly. [usdoj.gov]
You dare refuse to pay? (Score:2, Funny)
OK... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:OK... (Score:5, Insightful)
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You also need to avoid dodgy hardware. USB network adapters are an excellent example of hardware which tends to be flaky.
Tell me, why does the driver for a USB network adapter need to sit at a point in the OS where it can bing the whole thing crashing to the ground? (Not that Linux is any better in that regard, but if Windows is so much "better"...)
Re:OK... (Score:4, Insightful)
Statements like this really do suggest the negative effect that Microsoft has had on computing. Users now are "perfectly" satisfied if their OS doesn't routinely crash. What should be a basic assumption has become a lauded feat.
My linux and mac installs don't crash either. Nor do they have a spyware virus problem (or even need for software to prevent such). But that's just what they do to not suck. From usable CLI to functional least-rights users to better software (no Quicksilver, Textmate or iLife for PC) and on ad infinitum, they also do a tons of things that MS just can't offer.
If you're happy with the "accomplishment" of not crashing, good for you. I've experienced more and I've come to expect more.
~p
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Statements like this really do suggest the negative effect that Microsoft has had on computing. Users now are "perfectly" satisfied if their OS doesn't routinely crash. What should be a basic assumption has become a lauded feat.
So you're saying that the beta/experimental drivers in Linux, often based on reverse engineering and no actual documentation doesn't crash? I've managed to do it. Also the latest KDE (running Debian etc
If all an OS has to do to be "perfectly fine"... (Score:3, Insightful)
...is not crash, then you should get yourself an old copy of DOS and be happy.
Some of us, on the other hand, have somewhat higher requirements for an OS: decent POSIX support and standard utility programs (e.g. bash), a UI that doesn't mostly freeze when all we're doing is copying a file, the ability to use the machine without having to worry about malware, etc.
Windows wouldn't meet this criteria even if it were perfectly stable!
Re:OK... (Score:5, Funny)
Ahead of them on that one (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not buying another version of Windows. I don't care how good they say it is. I was told Windows 95 would be awesome, it was suffering incarnate. I was told Windows 98 would be great, they started putting in irritating behaviour and it was still a pain to do things with. I was told Windows XP would be great, it's widely credited with being worse than Windows 98.
Next for me is either Mac or just throw everything I don't have in Linux into Linux. At least that way I stop paying a tax every few years to enrich people who have been very careless with security while at the same time trying to control everyone's market by bundling everything under the sun into it.
I think Vista could be the best thing Microsoft ever did for Apple or Linux.
Re: (Score:2)
Anyways, I completly agree on Vista, XP is a good product there really isn't much reason to upgrade.
You will evententually be forced into Vista, in a year or less you will NOT be able to purchase a computer with XP on it. You might be lucky and have a way of getting XP license cheaply so that you can wipe Vista and reinstall. Eventually everyone else will have Vista, and you will not be compatible.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Jaysyn
Re:Ahead of them on that one (Score:5, Insightful)
Buh...what?
Look, I'm no Microsoft fan, but that just seems crazy. Better for what?
Re: (Score:2)
Widely Credited? (Score:5, Insightful)
Boycot XP a useless update to Windows 2000. (Score:5, Insightful)
Boycott Windows 2000 a useless update to OS/2 (Score:5, Funny)
That is until IBM killed it.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Both I guess.
Windows 2K is just as 'perfectly fine' as XP is (or any other OS).
You just have to define 'perfectly fine' as 'the devil I know, that gets the job done'.
Win 2K is still everywhere. The kernel of XP is just a patched up NT4 kernel anyhow.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Anyways. I have been using Windows 2000 for about 5 years on my computer, and I prefer it to XP. The reason being that it's simpler, slightly "lighter" in terms of resources, and does everything I need just fine. None of the features added to XP really "help" m
Same thing I said about XP (Score:3, Interesting)
Sooner or later, it will have something that you need and can't get on XP, or you will get a new PC that has it bundled (or you are not on windows anyway so you aren't part of this conversation :) )
So what's the alternative? (Score:2)
From the article:
So what do I do once popular applications require more RAM than my PC's motherboard can hold? And is PC133 SDRAM even available anymore?
Re: (Score:2)
Buy a Mac. Run crossover or dual boot to (any version of) windows when you need to. You can use all the RAM you want. You'll be happier all around, I suspect. I know I am.
Two comments (Score:5, Insightful)
2. Would good does it do to send MS a message that XP is perfectly fine? Is any business going to stop developing new versions of sucessful products just because people liked the old version?
Re:Two comments (Score:5, Insightful)
If no one bought Vista, Microsoft would have to consider a different strategy. Perhaps worse, if so few people bought it that (a) they lost money on development and (b) they had to keep losing money on support, that'd really send a message to them. Messages like: We don't like DRM. We don't like bloated code that takes gigs of RAM to run. We don't like code that was written so poorly, or in such retarded languages, that it takes a 2+ GHz PC to get those applications / OS's running in less than sixty seconds. We don't like little "thought bubbles" interrupting us every few minutes to tell us some irrelevant thing like an icon on the desktop is underused. We don't like products that are buggy and are never fixed, but instead we are expected to buy a new product which, perhaps, may fix that bug but has a new set of its own. Don't kid yourself. Microsoft, like everyone else, measures success using currency and nothing else. When you don't buy, you've cast a vote that counts.
Vista isn't pointless. That's just hyperbole. It is misguided, which is something else entirely.
The same thing was said about XP (Score:5, Insightful)
But this didn't happen. XP was adopted, just like Vista will be adopted over time. Trying to stop this inevitable progression is really a complete waste of one's political vigor.
Re:The same thing was said about XP (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
But booting faster isnt worth $99 or whatever to get a copy of XP.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, the major reason for this is because if you're doing the whole Active Directory thing, using it to its fullest extent, then having both Win2K and XP systems on your domain is a disaster. There's a whole pile of complicated compatibility and migration issues when you get be
You know what really grinds my gears? (Score:2, Interesting)
People saying Vista is going to be a terrible OS just because of so called computer 'gossip' they heard [hello juding a book by its cover]! I went a TechNet meeting last week on Vista. After sitting in an auditorium for 4 hours, listening and watching what Vista can do, I can't wait to upgrade.
Vista has matured greatly since Beta 2 (as I had run Beta 2 and am currently running Pre-RC1 right now and RC1 will be installed later tonight). I would greatly appre
Re:You know what really grinds my gears? (Score:4, Insightful)
So basically, based upon a superficial, second-hand interaction with the system, you're boosting it.
Maybe you're speaking a bit too soon?
If Microsoft subscribed to more of an Apple model (at least the recent history model), releasing steady improvements at regular intervals, people would be saying "ooh, look, shiny! Oh look, now the fugly is dockable!". Instead Microsoft still has the terrible habit of trying to reinvent, but they're often running to stand still (or more likely running towards the wrong goalpost). So many times they've rewritten something, in the process ruining what they had.
Vista, for instance, has been promised as a complete overhaul of everything. Geez, I remember 6 years ago reading FUD about how we had to start getting ready for WinFS (I can't even remember what they called it then) because it was going to change everything. Same for XAML (geez, is that even around anymore?) and so on. So for half a decade+ Microsoft has been running on fumes.
Right... (Score:5, Informative)
Because changes happen. Welcome to the world of computing.
lnkbait (Score:3, Insightful)
Paul Thurrott is at it again with his seemingly never-ending supply of linkbait, generating page views for his advertisers by beathlessly stating Vista is great one week and it sucks the next.
Thurrot Proposing big changes? (Score:5, Funny)
Even calling this thing Windows Mail is an insult. The Windows name should only be added to first rate products.
But what would they call their operating system, then?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
According (allegedly) to the Latvians, "Chicken" [yahoo.com].
(If the boycott succeeds, "Microsoft Turkey" might be more appropriate.)
Something analysts are forgetting... (Score:5, Interesting)
All in all, it might not be what the customer wants, but MS is ensuring that resellers are doing their best to convince customers that. With their new online software purchasing model, resellers are seeing a need to do this so they get some sort of revenue (credits) for lost software sales that are supposedly going to be done online through MS and their partners.
Remember, reality doesnt matter... marketing and pressure on resellers does - most people arent computer saavy enough to know whether they are being sold a boat or a boat anchor we've tied around their neck.
-Rob
Confessions of an Ex-M$ Junkie (Score:5, Interesting)
But it wasn't OSX, *Nix or even the delays of Vista that turned me off to Heir Gates- it was the Internet. As soon as I realized that 90% of my "mission critical" activities were all web-based (email, research, development) I realized that it really didn't matter which desktop I used- they all connected to the same Internet.
Once I got past that hurdle, I found the courage to play with various linux distros and ended up on a Mac running OSX. In retrospect, I can see perfectly well that all of these options are superior to windows (for my needs, perhaps not yours). However, I was unwilling to even explore my other options because I had trapped myself into a proprietary mindset- something even more dangerous than a proprietary format.
Having played with these various OSes, I can see that each of them has "borrowed" from each other; features that prove popular in one almost inevitably find themselves to the others. Just like a favorite make/model of car, there is no "wrong" answer, only preferences and favorites. I think the "masses" are begining to understand this, just as they understand a choice between pickup truck or sports car (good for different things).
And this is why Vista is "doomed"- the dreaded Microsoft Monopoly preys on the ignorance and confusion of the masses. And yes, most people over the age of 40 are mildly retarded in terms of computers. But these dinosaurs are quickly being replaced by a new generation, the first generation "raised on the Internet", the first generation of which 90% are proficient and experienced with a home PC. The confusion factor shrinks more every day, directly proportionate to the decline in M$ market share.
Re:Confessions of an Ex-M$ Junkie (Score:5, Interesting)
I used to work at Microsoft. I was a lowly orange badge contactor, but I was there for a couple of years alltogether--long enough to get a peek at the corporate culture. Maybe my area was special, but from what I saw the "proprietary mindset" applied to the people making those products too. I encountered many developers and IT guys who didn't seem to understand that there was a whole world of computers beyond Windows.
It's OK to use Windows. It's even OK to like Windows. But it seems like any computer professional should understand the rest of the ecosystem (eg Unix), at least in general terms. These guys just had a big blind spot though.
What a strange place.
And let's not forget 'bloated' in the description. (Score:4, Informative)
I really think that Vista is going to be a reality check for alot of longtime Windows users. Now, to put this in perspective, I've been a longtime Windows user myself since Windows 95 first hit the market. I've used every version of Windows since then on my own desktop and have gone on to break into IT management when Windows 2000 first came out. I also broke into web development by learning ASP six years ago. So you could say that I've supported Microsoft for a very long time and have stood by them ever since....at least up until about two or three years ago! I used to swear by Microsoft. I never understood Linux; I always thought it was overly complex. I didn't get the overzealous, almost cult-like attitude of the Mac community of users. Let's face it...Windows simply dominates the desktop and it's easy to see how Microsoft can continue to hold onto their userbase.
However, with the release of Vista, I really feel that it will be very similar to what happened with Windows Millenium Edition. Starting with beta 1, I've installed and tried out each subsequent build of Vista all the way up to the latest RC1 release. All I can say is...WHAT THE?? It's a dog...a big ole' stinkin' dog! I couldn't believe the amount of resources you really need to run it. The default install is over 6 gigs, you need at least a gig of RAM just to get by, and the new interface is pointless unless you have a fairly decent video card that is DirectX 9 compatible. All in all, lots of fluff with little substance. Plus, the new User Account Control features really feel like something of an add-on...as if Microsoft just layered it on top of their existing security model leftover from Windows 2000 and XP. UAC is useless...especially when you consider that a user with administrator rights can simply disable the damn thing!
The problem is this: In order for Vista or any other future version of Windows to continue to succeed, Microsoft needs to learn that Windows needs to be rebuilt and reworked with a new security model that rivals even Unix-based operating systems. Nobody can say that Unix, Linux, and even Mac OS X are bad operating systems when it comes to security. They are very secure by their very nature on how they were built. Microsoft needs to learn from this and build on top of it. This is why Apple made such a smart move when they developed OS X. Rather than re-inventing the wheel, they simply took a proven secure OS and built on top of it. The beauty behind this is that the OS is modular and can be easily updated and upgraded. Windows is anything but modular.
I've since moved on from ASP and am now using PHP as my web development platform of choice. Naturally, I use Linux as a server platform and plan to use a Mac as a desktop. I'm simply tired of Microsoft and all their shenanigans. At least with Apple, when they say their going to do something they do it! They don't tease their customers with features and then pull them out later and say, "Sorry! We screwed up!" So, make mine Apple! I'm really looking forward to Leopard! :)
Please Stop These Windows Vistas Posts (Score:5, Insightful)
When it is released and available for purchase, have someone review it like any other product, make one post, and be done with it. We don't need to hear about or debate every single time a developer in the Windows group sneezes or a random blogger decides to write their personal conclusions on a product that isn't even released
Re:Please Stop These Windows Vistas Posts (Score:4, Insightful)
Seriously, though, knowing what Vista has to offer in advance is important to anyone who has to plan in advance. My employer will be buying fifty or so desktop PCs next Spring. Do we get XP or Vista? Can we get XP? If Vista is inevitable or presents compelling needs, do we wait for pre-installed Vista or do we buy XP machines early and upgrade later? What if we don't have a choice? How long will MS continue to sell XP? To support it? What will be the interoperability issues? Do we need to bite the bullet and upgrade absolutely everything to Vista at once?
We have a lot of knowledge and technology already invested in XP and we have to know what's going to happen with its replacement before we sink, ultimately, hundreds of thousands of dollars into a new generation of technology.
So that's why a lot of people want to know whether this thing is worth a damn.
Paul Thurrott makes great points. (Score:4, Insightful)
I fear the idea of Windows Mail, a system that makes Outlook Express seem advanced? Sadly the only thing I'm hearing that will cause users to upgrade to vista is DirectX 10 and of course graphics, and I don't see anyone saying they won't support XP in games just yet.
We're not the deciding factor (Score:4, Insightful)
That's the key that I think a lot of the other comments are missing. As individuals, we're not nearly as important to the absorbtion rate of Vista as Dell, HP, Gateway and all the other PC manufactures are. People "in the know" about Vista don't seem to be terribly excited about it, at least not as much as previous versions of Windows. Those not in the know will be presented with the opportunity to pay a couple hundred dollars for an upgrade, at minimum, to get no more functionality then thay have, and likely find out that the experience will suck unless they also purchace new hardware. That doesn't seem exciting to me either.
But from the day Vista is released, every small to large scale PC manufacturer will be preinstalling it instead of XP. Just about every new machine purchased will be a Vista purchase. The number of copies of Windows bought off the shelf pales in comparison to pre-installed distribution. So what if we don't go out and buy a retail upgrade?
And that's where the magic of Microsoft kicks in. Even when delivering a half-baked, late-delivered operating system, they'll still be successful. There's little to no chance that someone like Dell will be convinced to not deal with Vista. Bigger operating systems need bigger hardware means more sales means more markups. An individual boycot is not only unlikely, it's completely ineffective.
mathematics (Score:5, Insightful)
About 200 million pcs are sold annually. And 96% (?) of those will have Vista.
Microsoft is not worried about the 1-2 year upgrade holdouts.
32 and 64 bit Vista Versions is like Beta vs VCR (Score:4, Interesting)
Are the people who make my development software, business software, media software, and games going to develop their products for both versions of the operating system? Will I have to worry about compatibility issues? If my current library of software, hardware, and games work with the 32-bit version of the Vista operating system will they also work with the 64 bit version?
Can we really expect hardware manufacturers to make top quality drivers for both the 32 and 64 bit versions of Vista? Will it take longer for hardware manufacturers to produce drivers now since they have to provide two versions? Why didn't microsoft make a single unified driver model for the 32/64 bit versions of Vista? As I understand it, Apple has done this.
I wish they had just made a 64 bit version of Vista, and focused on giving it a good Windows on Windows emulation for 32 bit apps and backwards compatibility. The only reason I can see for having a 32-bit version of the OS is because Intel currently ships Core 2 Duo chips that are only 32-bits.
Usually I've always upgraded to the latest version of windows as soon as it was released to retail, but I intend to wait several months before I make a purchase. Now I feel forced to wait until I hear all reviews about compatibility and stability, and opinion articles about 32 bit versus 64 bit. I plan to buy a whole new machine to ensure full compatibility with the new OS and to take advantage of it's high end features.
I like a lot of what I've seen about the architecture of Windows Vista and the new features they have added, what I don't like is the uncertainty of the compatibility. If I buy the 64 bit version of Vista will I be screwed by compatibility issues, and slow hardware driver releases? Will I be able to play my games or am I buying a Beta machine?
I realy don't get it (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
what features are you looking forward to in vista? i'm not trying to flamebait or troll, i just want to know what you are looking forward to.
Re:Flaimbait this is (Score:5, Informative)
maybe not looking forward too but (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It's not *just* a marketing thing, it's also a technical issue. In order to back-port DirectX 10 to XP they would need to include a huge chunk of functionality from Vista (in addition to DX10) into XP. There comes a point where you have to draw the line. (No pun intended.
Re:Flaimbait this is (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Flaimbait this is (Score:4, Insightful)
First of all, the UI changes, IE7, simple network changes, start menu, explorer changes, new dialogs, USB caching, search, WPF, backup utils, audio changes, and speech recognition are next to useless, and are certainly not worth paying for. Some of thing are even a further step backwards over the old W2k way.
The kernel scheduling, file operations, superfetch, DX10, driver changes, and driver API improvements should just have been there already. They are not worth paying for. They are definitely not worth a new OS. These things fix things that Microsoft should have been fixing in service packs.
This leaves the new TCP/IP stack, desktop compositing, and DPI independence (part of the composition engine anyway), and some new security model improvements. Considering how broken people have been saying UAC is, this *really* is leaving the network stack and the composition engine.
As far as the speed recognition FUD, yeah, it might work. It's much more likely that it just doesn't work well enough to be useful. You can't use it while on the phone, or having a conversation. You won't use it in a busy office. It's just a gimmick.
If you want to hype improvements, they *REALLY* need to be both useful and novel. Many of the things on that list we've had for years on other platforms. Many are only niche useful, or not useful at all. Most of the rest of fixes for poorly implemented MS functionality.
Re:Flaimbait this is (Score:5, Informative)
Various kernel improvements in scheduling
Vista does seem to handle high-load situations better than XP (which quite frankly, sucked at dealing with them.)
Completely new TCP/IP stack
Both a plus and a minus -- on the plus side, yes it is fast. On the minus side, what are the bets that a completely new TCP/IP stack is free of security-holes, especially given that this isn't the OpenBSD team we're talking about...
Composited desktop / Aero prettiness
Compositing and hardware-accelerated windows are nice. It's a little on the graphics heavy side though, and does require a beefy video card for the really shiny bits to be usable. That said, I personally (although I expect that others feel differently) find Aero to be so-so... it's got several cool effects, but I actually ended up turning it off when I got sick of it. To each his own, I guess...
Resolution/DPI independence
Except not really. While the frameworks/APIs are in place for this, and some of Vista is resolution independent, much of the OS is still very much bitmap-based. If you don't believe me, take a peek inside some of the shell DLLs. It is prettier, and high-res icons are being used in many places, but the res-independent stuff isn't used very much. (For anyone who thinks I'm an Apple fanboy.... OS X doesn't have res-independence either. Leopard does have it, but it's off by default, and is very very very alpha.)
Revamped security model (UAC, new system services model, etc.)
About time. The UAC stuff is nice, as are the sane default settings, but this isn't really a compelling reason to upgrade (since it's all stuff that a properly configured Win2K or XP box will do.)
IE 7+ (Protected Mode IE) - this will virtually eliminate malware via the browser
Ha ha ha ha ha.... IE Protected Mode is nice... but "virtually eliminate malware"? I think not. As long as the mshtml engine is used as part of the OS, it is still a risk. IE7 is an improvement from IE6, but is still outpaced by other browsers, IMHO.
Much better networking UI / auto network discovery
Better, but still a pain in the ass compared to OS X. This actually _is_ a good feature for people, at least if they're travelling, but not very computer-savvy.
New start menu really is a LOT better than XPs
I agree with half of that statement: it's new. Better is subjective... but it's basically just tries to get you to use the search field instead of the traditional "Programs" hierarchy. I guess that's easier, but I honestly don't like the OS guessing what I want to run. So yes, it's new... but from me it gets a solid "meh... so what?"
Far better Explorer interface
Amen. I like the new concepts seen in the Explorer interface. Some of them are really cool features. My only gripe, and the reason why I currently dislike explorer hasn't changed: from a UI consistancy standpoint, it's complete crap. It breaks it's own rules all the time -- stuff looks different depending on pretty much everything except for the phases of the moon. I know easy UIs have never been Microsoft's strong point, but Vista's Explorer is pretty darn inconsistent. Apple's actually made a screw-up like this too: the "Services" menu in the application-name menu. Each service is pretty cool, but the reasoning behind why they're there, and why they're enabled/disabled seems to be an arbitrary one (to the user.)
WAY better file operations dialogs
WAY better file operations in general
The dialogs are nicer. The operations themselves... well... I haven't really noticed that much of an improvement over XP, to be honest. No complaints though.
ReadyBoost
Works well... if you have a USB drive... and if you keep it plugged in...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
In just about every text entry box in Mac OS X, Apple-Shift-RightArrow will deliver the desired result; in carbon and cocoa the base TextView class has the same behavior, and everybody uses NSTextView unless they're using a decades-old or explicitly cross-platform UI codebase. I can think of a few programs that break this rule, but they're extremely rare -- however I am aware one particularly-popular
Re:Flaimbait this is (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
99% of the stuff they promised to make into VISTA is gone.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's no fault of MacOS X - it is simply a lack of practice. I have been using the Mac for fifteen years and I'm super efficient at using it (keyboard shortcuts you wouldn't even know about probably). I can barely use Windows at all. Is this because Windows has bad keyboard shortcuts - no... it is because I don't have any experience using it.
Re:Flaimbait this is (Score:4, Interesting)
XP doesn't let me do that. I actually am MORE experienced on XP, and it is my preferred OS, but I'm not as fast at it. To my knowledge there's no handy "go-up-a-folder" shortcut or "go-to-desktop" shortcut when in the "open" or "save" dialog. There ARE shortcuts, but none are the ones I used most frequently. Navigating folders/files by keystroke alone is more tedious.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
cmd-D navigates the "open" dialogue to the desktop. and, in the "open" dialogue, ENTER opens folders. But I am sure you knew that.
Oh, and all the spare "ENTER" hits were because QuarkXPress 4.0 is always fussing about some page layout reflow baloney and so one has to go through a bunch of dialogues to open a document. Anyway, I am female. :-\
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Flaimbait this is (Score:4, Insightful)
Vista has nothing to do with 'latest and greatest'. It's the last gasp of the two massive but crumbling monopolies, Microsoft and the entertainment industry, to try and lock down everything you see and hear so they can charge you for it. The future doesn't have these monopolies, content creation is becoming more and more decentralized and their business model is dying and they are well aware of this.
I for one will absolutely be boycotting Vista.
Re:Flaimbait this is (Score:5, Insightful)
I, for one, don't care if Hollywood movies stop being made. It's not as if they're capable of making anything good with those billion-doller budgets anyway!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Dude! Thank you for correcting me! You are right, I am wrong. I'm switching back to 2k this weekend, I hate XP.
Unfortunately, I'm a game developer so I don't think I'm going to be able to get away with this for long - the DirectX SDK will no longer install to 2k unless you use a version that's a few years out of date.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Just because you haven't done more than 30 seconds of research on what's new in Vista doesn't mean there aren't any useful new features.
It means you're being willfully ignorant.
Re:Flaimbait this is (Score:4, Interesting)
So, perhaps you can name a SINGLE "useful new feature" that is worth $170k in new desktops across my enterprise. And when I say "useful", I mean it'll earn that $170k BACK somehow.
Please, name one. And, "Solitare 2007" doesn't cut it.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
No value; existing network is tuned as good as it gets.
> productivity gains from improved UI,
I've yet to meet one SINGLE user who spends *ANY* time in the OS UI. Result: 0. Users spend time in app-land, not the desktop. And again, a new improved "open/save" common-dialogue doesn't cut it. On a good day, a fancy new dialog might change an 8 second process... to a 7 second process. It'll be years before we see our $60 at that rate; you're also ignoring the cash r
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
All of this is irrelevent or already covered by a comp
Re:Another issue (Score:4, Informative)
Vista is supposedly rewritten from scratch. That's fine, because the code now incorporates an awareness of security issues that weren't anticipated when the original codebase was developed...or so they say.
If you listen to Steve Gibson's latest Security Now podcast, he talks about the same mentality at work again - creating new 'features' that might be 'cool' to a technically-minded person, but will create nothing but headaches. The specific feature to which I am referring is Vista's purported ability to broadcast internal, non-routeable IPs, making them accessible from the outside. This completely eradicates NAT as a first (and very effective) layer of security for many people.
Issues like this aside, when code is rewritten, it introduces a whole new set of problems. Obviously, the objective is to minimize them, but I have a feeling that Vista users will experience some of the same kinds of pain they've already endured with XP.
Re:Another issue (Score:4, Interesting)
Exactly. It reminds me of The Onion's article on "World Death Rate Hovers at a Steady 100%" Microsoft says Vista will revolutionize security and make it (nearly) tamper-proof. When you look at how that's been promised in some form for every single OS they've released, and then later proven wildly false, you have to see a pretty consistent pattern.
Re: (Score:2)
Right, O. Thomas is the troll with the flamebait...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Flaimbait this is (Score:5, Insightful)
Vista's extreme support for DRM is my concern. I realize that XP also supports DRM in various ways, but Vista has quite a focus on it, and I'm not inclined to support that. That's what made XP my last Windows purchase. I bought an early Mac mini, and I've been nothing less than delighted with the thing. Feels like my linux machines, only prettier and a lot friendlier. Going to buy another Mac soon.
Apple's pushing DRM in a big way too; but Microsoft dominates the market and that's who I think the message needs to go to. In the meantime, buying MP3, staying away from iTunes AAC media, and supporting anyone who posts actual uncompressed, high-quality audio is the way to go. Vote with your wallet. That is the only thing these companies pay attention to. Every time you buy iTunes or any other proprietary DRM'd solution, you're screwing yourself and everyone else. And not in a fun way.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You know, I really don't think we are. We can buy MP3s, we can encourage uncompressed and non-lossy recordings — disk space isn't really an issue any longer, and when there's no compression, there's less work for your CPU to do, so there's a good reason... and no compression inherently rules out lossy compression which audiophiles and anyone with a really good ear will appreciate. Plain encodings also mean that they a
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
CPU load is probably the least of my worries. RAM however, is a big concern. RAM affects the speed of your computer more than CPU. 30 Megs may seem like a drop in the bucket, but what happens if you have all 512 Megs in use? Or even worse, you're using Windows (which for some reason just *adores* its swapfile.) You
Re:Flaimbait this is (Score:5, Informative)
Sound is an analog phenomenon by nature, and with a good microphone the amount of information we could extract, were we interested, is really incredible. Consider though that 6-channel, 96kHz, 24-bit digital encoding (for instance) is 1.7 megabytes per second. I am not even remotely kidding -- that's 13.824 megabit. A five-minute tune isn't 30MB, it's over 500MB. (We're sticking to SI units here, as is standard).
In digital recording, we're taking quantized samples of an analog phenomenon at regular intervals. This is inherently lossy compression. (Analog recording is inherently lossy also, but that's another issue).
If we want 30MB songs instead, we could use a very simple method of lossy compression -- we could throw away half the samples, two-thirds of the channels, and a third of the sample detail. Then we'd have CD-quality audio. Trouble is, this is very crude; we've thrown away useful detail, like the subtle, soulful sound of a sax, while keeping the same level of detail in silent passages or for simpler waveforms. We've cut the bitrate, but lost too much sound.
Another thing that we could do is use sophisticated mathematical algorithms to analyze the sound in detail and figure out which bits to throw away. We might have problems if our algorithm is poor and throws out something we want, but after years of refinement we've developed algorithms that are far better than simple bit-tossing. In all blind testing, this gives much better results; you may hate a 128kb/s MP3, but try listening to an 8-bit 11khz recording sometime (88kb/s... for mono!)
What we DO need to do is use higher bitrates. MP3 can be encoded pretty well, but nowadays there's no reason to cut the bitrate so much. If we used the bitrate of a CD (1.4 megabit) and our better "lossy" compression formats, we'd get way better sound than we get from a "lossless" regular CD.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Nitpick: it's not iTunes; it's the iTunes Music Store (iTMS). Plain AAC files created by iTunes (e.g. by ripping a CD) are not restricted.
Re: (Score:2)
+5 Flame Bait.
You have it all wrong. Well, your post IS tripe but... If the article was simply, "Windows Vista isn't worth buying because it is crap so don't even consider it", it would be flame bait; and, perfectly correct as far as I'm concerned. Unfortunately for us, the previous article writen by this author listed things that he found acceptable. He obviously wasn't wearing his glasses that day.
A good rule of thumb for software purchasing is: If th
Re:How about this aspect? (Score:5, Funny)
I don't think "churning" is the quite the right word, maybe "lurching" would be a better description.
Re:I'm jaded and even I actually like Vista (Score:5, Funny)
I would guess hundreds of thousands considering the number of huge mufflers and space wings I see glued onto primer gray Honda's..
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And Hondas have way, way better uptime than Windows.
I meant that to be funny, but now that I think about it, it's kind of an interesting point. Cars have wear items like belts and seals. And yet they're often WAY more reliable than Microsoft's software, in terms of how long they can run without a problem.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The number 1 reason for disliking XP and Vista is the DRM and associated crap. Followed by having to prove you ahve a legal copy.
Screw em, I won't be put in a postion to prove my innocence, and neither should yoy.
But you go ahead and take it, I mean who wants to be innocent till proven guilty anymore.
I am sure your information to MS will never get out...