Linked by Eugenia Loli on Thu 12th Apr 2007 00:49 UTC, submitted by Dan Warne
Windows Computer makers have been told they'll no longer be able to get Windows XP OEM by the end of this year, despite strong ongoing demand for the OS. Analysts and computer makers are wondering if the move is premature given Vista's ongoing performance and compatibility issues. Dell recently said it would reintroduce XP on a range of machines due to customer demand but Microsoft will only allow this until the end of the year.
Order by: Score:
Microsoft's motto
by sigzero on Thu 12th Apr 2007 01:00 UTC
sigzero
Member since:
2006-01-03

"We are going to screw you and we don't care. KACHING!"

Reply Score: 5

RE: Microsoft's motto
by giraffe on Thu 12th Apr 2007 01:12 UTC in reply to "Microsoft's motto"
giraffe Member since:
2006-10-13

Microsoft is giving the people what they don't want. Again.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Microsoft's motto
by flanque on Thu 12th Apr 2007 02:10 UTC in reply to "RE: Microsoft's motto"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

You don't know that. You're speculating. Maybe you and the people you've asked say that, but that doesn't quantify to the global population's preferences.

If demand really does drive Vista sales down and XP sales up Microsoft will re-evaluate the situation and either re-list XP or fix Vista.

If people don't like it, they can of coarse choose Linux. It's apparently superior in every way anyways. In fact, superior to every Windows version, ever..

Edited 2007-04-12 02:11

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Microsoft's motto
by Anonymous Penguin on Thu 12th Apr 2007 03:06 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Microsoft's motto"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

Indeed. But they can "of course" also buy a Mac and use another superior OS (especially once Leopard is released)

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: Microsoft's motto
by flanque on Thu 12th Apr 2007 03:08 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Microsoft's motto"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

Or get Linux.. it's free remember?

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Microsoft's motto
by heh heh on Thu 12th Apr 2007 03:30 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Microsoft's motto"
heh heh Member since:
2005-07-06

As in how much free time do you have?

Reply Score: 5

RE[6]: Microsoft's motto
by Johann Chua on Thu 12th Apr 2007 06:09 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Microsoft's motto"
Johann Chua Member since:
2005-07-22

It takes a lot more time and effort to keep Windows up and running.

Reply Score: 4

RE[7]: Microsoft's motto
by Shannara on Thu 12th Apr 2007 18:08 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Microsoft's motto"
Shannara Member since:
2005-07-06

Not if you know how to use a computer ...

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Microsoft's motto
by BluenoseJake on Thu 12th Apr 2007 12:48 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Microsoft's motto"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

Cheap at twice the price ;-)

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Microsoft's motto
by Anonymous Penguin on Thu 12th Apr 2007 16:11 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Microsoft's motto"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

Well, that isn't always the case, to be fully honest.
An example: Vista Ultimate full version costs in Europe almost 600 Euro.
An iMac 17" starts from 999 Euro including OS and Monitor. Is that expensive?

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Microsoft's motto
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 22:45 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Microsoft's motto"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

Well, that isn't always the case, to be fully honest.
An example: Vista Ultimate full version costs in Europe almost 600 Euro.
An iMac 17" starts from 999 Euro including OS and Monitor. Is that expensive?


Considering the specs you can get for that kind of money from any other vendor: yes.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Microsoft's motto
by yak8998 on Thu 12th Apr 2007 04:05 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Microsoft's motto"
yak8998 Member since:
2006-07-28

Businesses don't want vista right now, and for many, it will be a while before they do. I'm in IT at a hospital, and we're probably going to end up buying a bunch of extra copies of XP incase this really happens. Linux doesn't work in the business world many times; 95% of our applications won't even run on firefox (on windows), and its going to be a long while before they get all the code updated for even IE7/vista (estimates right now are 1 year at the earliest). I use Linux at home, but its going to be a while before it makes big inroads into the corporate world, windows is too entrenched, especially in sectors like healthcare which use a ton of large, custom software apps

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Microsoft's motto
by Soulbender on Thu 12th Apr 2007 11:16 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Microsoft's motto"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

"Linux doesn't work in the business world many times; 95% of our applications won't even run on firefox (on windows),"

You probably shouldn't equate your particular situation with "the business world" in general.

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: Microsoft's motto
by yak8998 on Sun 15th Apr 2007 16:00 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Microsoft's motto"
yak8998 Member since:
2006-07-28

Touche, crappy example. I just threw it out there because its one of the worst cases I've seen.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Microsoft's motto
by BluenoseJake on Thu 12th Apr 2007 12:50 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Microsoft's motto"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

I would think that working at a hospital, you would have a volume license. Every place I have worked at, we had volume licenses, at my shop we don't even care what OS comes on our new computers, as we are just going to wipe it and install an image on it anyway.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Microsoft's motto
by butters on Thu 12th Apr 2007 04:49 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Microsoft's motto"
butters Member since:
2005-07-08

If demand really does drive Vista sales down and XP sales up Microsoft will re-evaluate the situation and either re-list XP or fix Vista.


No, they won't. Microsoft said that OEMs won't be allowed to sell Windows XP computers past January 2008, and I don't think there's anything that will change their mind. If they extend the OEM licensing contracts, that would be an admission that Vista is not a suitable upgrade for many XP users. Not only would this be incredibly uncharacteristic for Microsoft, but it would irreparably damage the Windows platform. If they let the contracts expire despite significant demand for XP, they screw over their customers and force them away from the Windows platform.

In this context, it makes sense that Microsoft has all but canceled XP SP3 and is quickly sunsetting XP. Sticking with XP is a no-win situation for Microsoft. The future of the company rests with Vista. If they can't whip it into shape and drag their massive ecosystem kicking and screaming from XP to Vista, then they are surely screwed.

They are finding out that hard way that while everybody loves backwards compatibility, you have to break it eventually. The longer you wait, the more likely your installed base will migrate to a competitor when you do.

Vista's strategy of partial backwards compatibility might have been the worst possible decision. They should have either released XP with an updated UI or a brand-new OS. Some of Microsoft's customers wanted backwards compatibility. Others wanted a completely new OS. What they did was give us a compromise between backwards compatibility and a redesigned OS. It's not either of these things, so nobody got what they really wanted. The backwards compatibility folks have to port their applications/drivers and the complete redesign supporters have to live with the vestiges of the Windows legacy.

The key to maintaining a platform is baby steps--small but continuous improvements that keep the technology moving forward with the times without leaving your ecosystem in a lurch. Microsoft has gone and tried to change the world again, but the world has gotten too large and complex to change. They ate their humble pie and scaled it back as much as possible, but there's a limit to how little you can change in a 6-year development cycle. They changed too little since 2001 yet too much since XP. This is what happens when you don't do baby steps.

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: Microsoft's motto
by Earl Colby pottinger on Thu 12th Apr 2007 16:52 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Microsoft's motto"
Earl Colby pottinger Member since:
2005-07-06

I agree with you. Yak8998 was talking about the number large custom software apps as locking users into the WindowsOS platforms. But if the work to move the old software from XP to Vista is too great, then you open up the opportunity to suggest porting the code to an entire different OS as being just as cost affective as Vista, especially if the alternative OS offers a number of savings.

When you add the cost of Vista and the hardware to support it you MAY (note I said 'may') find it cheaper to go elsewhere.

Linux for example may let you get away without upgrading any hardware and very low costs for the OS even on CD.

Macs have gotten cheap enough in some models to make it worth the cost to go that direction rather than the cost of upgrades or a computer to run Vista.

And a number of the other OSes (Sun, IBM, etc) out there offer features that are not in high demand over-all but if they turn out to match your business needs you may start considering them if the natural path of upgrades starts lokking expensive.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Microsoft's motto
by CPUGuy on Thu 12th Apr 2007 01:42 UTC in reply to "Microsoft's motto"
CPUGuy Member since:
2005-07-06

How is it that they are screwing you with this?

Not like you are paying any more or less either way.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Microsoft's motto
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 01:50 UTC in reply to "RE: Microsoft's motto"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

How is it that they are screwing you with this?

Not like you are paying any more or less either way.


Because considering it's a Windows OS, XP is rather good, and Vista puts the "crap" in "Microcrap"?

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Microsoft's motto
by CPUGuy on Thu 12th Apr 2007 03:29 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Microsoft's motto"
CPUGuy Member since:
2005-07-06

Sure it puts the crap in Microcrap, until you actually use it and stop being a troll.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Microsoft's motto
by dylansmrjones on Thu 12th Apr 2007 11:45 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Microsoft's motto"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Considering you don't know how hardware and software interacts (claiming you cannot change BIOS through software... looool), I'm surprised you can see the difference between GEM and Windows.

Why don't sit down and write another MyGift2U.VBS or whatever you earn a living from. (Mails from Nigeria anyone?)

Fact is: Vista is selling badly compared with numbers of computers sold. XP sells better still. Most computers sold in Denmark are shipped with XP (without the option to buy Vista instead). This is embarrassing for Microsoft so in order to force Vista sales up they remove the option of buying XP. When users cannot buy what they want, they will buy what they can get.

In this case Microsoft is forcing the hand of the customer. Btw. in a fashion perfectly reasonable, but none the less quite ironic. MS beaten by MS. It proves Microsoft has become a giant on feet of clay.

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: Microsoft's motto
by CPUGuy on Thu 12th Apr 2007 21:09 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Microsoft's motto"
CPUGuy Member since:
2005-07-06

Please, oh please point out when I said that you can't change the BIOS time?
I said Vista wasn't doing it (not on it's own), not that it couldn't be done.

Good job on the personal attacks though!

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Microsoft's motto
by dylansmrjones on Thu 12th Apr 2007 23:01 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Microsoft's motto"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

You claimed there was no function in Windows to do so.

It's not plain wrong because there is no function to do that


Fact is Windows modifies the bios clock on shutdown. It is not even an option.

You did naturally contradict yourself and was unusual ambiguous - even for you. You even ruled out the option of software bugs not to mention default settings and so on.

If there wasn't a function in Windows to modify the BIOS clock it wouldn't be possible for Windows to modify the BIOS clock. And if it possible to change the BIOS clock from within Windows then Windows also have a function for modifying the BIOS clock. Else it would be impossible. Just like you cannot access a device without it being supported by the OS.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Microsoft's motto
by CPUGuy on Fri 13th Apr 2007 01:58 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Microsoft's motto"
CPUGuy Member since:
2005-07-06

What was claimed was that a bug in Vista was changing the clock to some day in 2005. This simply is not the case.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Microsoft's motto
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 13:14 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Microsoft's motto"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

Sure it puts the crap in Microcrap, until you actually use it and stop being a troll.

Ah, so the great majority of the buying public are trolls? That arrogance is exactly what is going to get Microsoft hoist by its own petard in the end. And I've got front row tickets.

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: Microsoft's motto
by CPUGuy on Thu 12th Apr 2007 21:11 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Microsoft's motto"
CPUGuy Member since:
2005-07-06

What majority of buying public is saying it's bad? That majority that, for whatever reason, spreads FUD about anything that is against what they are in support of?

Reply Score: 0

RE[6]: Microsoft's motto
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 21:22 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Microsoft's motto"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

What majority of buying public is saying it's bad? That majority that, for whatever reason, spreads FUD about anything that is against what they are in support of?

I can get some examples for you (I'm doing it right now), but for my money, if you trust the buying public that little you aren't going to get very far.

Try this for starters:

http://www.itwire.com.au/content/view/11136/53/

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Microsoft's motto
by CPUGuy on Fri 13th Apr 2007 02:07 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Microsoft's motto"
CPUGuy Member since:
2005-07-06

Well, let's start with that article.

The majority of users are not planning to upgrade.

There is so much wrong with that. First, the number of people that would even consider an upgrade would most definitely not be any sort of majority of users.

Second, who exactly did they poll and how did they translate that into a majority of users?

Third, I myself wouldn't even recommend buying an upgrade as XP works pretty darn well (especially if you know what to avoid and how to keep your system running nicely) and there just isn't much of a point in spending money on it.

Keep in mind I'm typing this on my AthlonXP system running my free copy of Vista.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Microsoft's motto
by yak8998 on Thu 12th Apr 2007 04:06 UTC in reply to "RE: Microsoft's motto"
yak8998 Member since:
2006-07-28

Its not just price; that'd be sweet. Its software compatibility that is causing the big gripes. And also from the sound of the article, system administration

Reply Score: 1

v No escape from Satan
by edwardyawn on Thu 12th Apr 2007 01:01 UTC
Well, that's it then
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 01:23 UTC
twenex
Member since:
2006-04-21

I will personally go to the ends of the Earth rather than buy another computer with Windows on it. Microsoft have screwed me over for the Very Last Time.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Well, that's it then
by blitze on Thu 12th Apr 2007 01:27 UTC in reply to "Well, that's it then"
blitze Member since:
2006-09-15

I'm sure that if MS can't push a decent Service Pack out the door for Vista by years end they will reneg on stopping XP from being shipped.

Nothing to see here and it's not like they said they are pulling the support from XP, just OEM distribution.

Still, I hope for an opportunity to arise for something other than Windows to make a move into Mainstream Desktop Computing.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Well, that's it then
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 01:42 UTC in reply to "RE: Well, that's it then"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

Nothing to see here and it's not like they said they are pulling the support from XP, just OEM distribution.

...without which it will be impossible to get a Windows XP computer. Who wants a Vista one?

Reply Score: 5

RE: Well, that's it then
by Anonymous Penguin on Thu 12th Apr 2007 02:56 UTC in reply to "Well, that's it then"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

Build Your Own! You'll have better hardware quality and you can put whatever OS you like on it.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Well, that's it then
by yak8998 on Thu 12th Apr 2007 04:08 UTC in reply to "RE: Well, that's it then"
yak8998 Member since:
2006-07-28

again, this isn't home users that are the big issue. Its businesses. Its easy to build your own (or hell, get a friend to do it for you) but its a bit different when you're ordering 20 PCs a week and trying to support over a thousand.

Reply Score: 2

So not surprising
by cornelius on Thu 12th Apr 2007 01:27 UTC
cornelius
Member since:
2007-02-19

I'm not surprised at all, as Microsoft is the evil empire. You don't think they really care about their customers, do you?

But I don't think this is really a bad thing, because it constitutes a perfect selling point for Linux, and an additional pressure for Dell, HP, etc. to provide pre-installed Linux (or no preinstalled OS). I think this *is* the perfect time for Linux (with the compiz/beryl goodness) to make a move and thrive as a better alternative to Microsoft's resource-hungry vista crap. If only we could put more pressure on companies like AMD to provide more-than-trivial-and-pathetic driver support.

Edited 2007-04-12 01:29

Reply Score: 5

RE: So not surprising
by Duffman on Thu 12th Apr 2007 06:33 UTC in reply to "So not surprising"
Duffman Member since:
2005-11-23

I think this *is* the perfect time for Linux (with the compiz/beryl goodness)
Yes, with all the goodness of a pre alpha software, I can't wait for it.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: So not surprising
by l3v1 on Thu 12th Apr 2007 07:17 UTC in reply to "RE: So not surprising"
l3v1 Member since:
2005-07-06

I think this *is* the perfect time for Linux (with the compiz/beryl goodness)


Well, because compiz/beryl is what matters ? Yeesh.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: So not surprising
by raver31 on Thu 12th Apr 2007 17:34 UTC in reply to "RE: So not surprising"
raver31 Member since:
2005-07-06

I think this *is* the perfect time for Linux (with the compiz/beryl goodness)
Yes, with all the goodness of a pre alpha software, I can't wait for it.


Duffman, you and other trolls like you don't even seem to be trying anymore.
Go stand in a corner until you can think of something original.

"pre-alpha software", what is that then ? Non-existant ?

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: So not surprising
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 18:11 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: So not surprising"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

Go stand in a corner until you can think of something original.

Have they ever been able to do that?

Duffman, you and other trolls like you don't even seem to be trying anymore.

Must see the writing on the wall. "Mene, mene, tekel, upharsin" or "delta, epsilon, lambda, lambda"? - doesn't make much difference really.

Reply Score: 2

RE: So not surprising
by dagw on Thu 12th Apr 2007 12:09 UTC in reply to "So not surprising"
dagw Member since:
2005-07-06

I think this *is* the perfect time for Linux (with the compiz/beryl goodness)

So what you're saying is that compiz/beryl is not only feature by feature compatible with Photoshop, but that it can also open and edit both InDesign and all Office files? Great I didn't know that.

Reply Score: 1

Perhaps it's in fear...
by JacobMunoz on Thu 12th Apr 2007 01:28 UTC
JacobMunoz
Member since:
2006-03-17

...of the open source world. Now that the mono community is tackling the .Net 2.0 framework, and ReactOS group is tackling the OS - it's only a matter of time before these two groups become heavily incorporated and WindowsXP will become obsoleted from the outside of Microsoft instead of within. So XP's a dead horse - it's done. SP3 will not happen, because they don't need it - periodic updates already happen. They're done, now it's the community's turn to reproduce the environment.

I have had no real complaints about my XP-on-HP laptop, in fact it's been a real dream. But I recently witnessed Vista first-hand on a friend's brand new machine and I can tell you that I will never personally use or recommend it.

Let's face it, XP works. Linux works. MacOS works. Even FreeDOS works! I say BeOS works. She says Amiga works. But now we're all wondering if Vista works as well as we were told, and it's unimpressive. I abandoned Explorer for my shell (I use BBlean/BlackBox) and I've not been hit with viruses/holes like everyone else I know. Just hack your shell a little, and you can make the most out of the weakest OS.

As mono progresses, I'll feel no guilt if I find myself running VB.net 2.0 apps under *nix.

So what do we do till then? Keep a legal copy of XP hidden under your mattress... just in case things take a while.

Edited 2007-04-12 01:34

Reply Score: 3

I'd do the same
by fulvioo on Thu 12th Apr 2007 01:36 UTC
fulvioo
Member since:
2005-11-11

Spare 30 seconds of your time and think.

Microsoft made Vista and wants their consumers to use it. Why would they keep selling away OEM XP?
How many vendors sells backdated software?

Edited 2007-04-12 01:38

Reply Score: 5

RE: I'd do the same
by llamakiller4 on Thu 12th Apr 2007 01:43 UTC in reply to "I'd do the same"
llamakiller4 Member since:
2007-04-12

Think how and fantastic and secure XP might have been if Microsoft had spent all that VISTA money and development time perfecting Windows XP.
I bought a new pc a couple months ago to last me for a year or two and then it's Apple I suppose.
No Vista for me.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: I'd do the same
by flanque on Thu 12th Apr 2007 02:14 UTC in reply to "RE: I'd do the same"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

Sure, but then you'd expect it as a free service pack upgrade whilst Microsoft invested millions into developing it.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: I'd do the same
by archiesteel on Thu 12th Apr 2007 02:39 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I'd do the same"
archiesteel Member since:
2005-07-02

Yes, because it would kill them to give back to those people who made them into a multi-billion dollar company.

Face it, Vista is there to serve one main purpose, i.e. guarantee the revenue stream so that MS's shareholders can continue to increase their net worth.

When you're defending Microsoft's actions this way, what you're really saying is that Microsoft's billionnaires and millionnaires really need even more money from those who use their software. Perhaps it's time for MS to go on a diet instead, and accept that its monopolist position is intenable, and that its revenue stream will not always be guaranteed.

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: I'd do the same
by flanque on Thu 12th Apr 2007 02:43 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: I'd do the same"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

Um, they're a private enterprise with shareholders. It's function is to make money. That's what it is all about.

Their drive to make better software and to help people is designed to drive the value of the company higher and increase profits.

They're not in it for the love. Sheesh.

Reply Score: 5

RE[5]: I'd do the same
by Windows Sucks on Thu 12th Apr 2007 02:46 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: I'd do the same"
Windows Sucks Member since:
2005-11-10

You got it right, all they do is make more money. Making better products is still up for debate.

Reply Score: 5

RE[5]: I'd do the same
by diskinetic on Thu 12th Apr 2007 02:51 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: I'd do the same"
diskinetic Member since:
2005-12-09

There's nothing wrong with making money. It's the concept that they have to make ever more money and eventually all the money that keeps me off the reservation.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: I'd do the same
by archiesteel on Thu 12th Apr 2007 02:59 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: I'd do the same"
archiesteel Member since:
2005-07-02

Um, they're a private enterprise with shareholders. It's function is to make money. That's what it is all about.


There comes a time when the need for sustained growth carries within itself the seeds of its own undoing. This is starting to happen for Microsoft. The shareholder's short-term vision is clouding them from seeing the reality that their customers are less and less inclined to guarantee the company's revenue streams.

I assume you're a shareholder as well (why else would you spend so much energy defending MS's financial bulimia)...ask yourself how wise it is for the company to bet the house on expansion when you've already got a quasi-monopoly...

Their drive to make better software and to help people is designed to drive the value of the company higher and increase profits.


Well, duh. That's a textbook case of corporate development in the software world. Unfortunately, Microsoft's position makes this incredibly difficult. If you make good software products, people don't want to change/upgrade as often. If people don't change/upgrade as often, that means less revenue. So MS is now in a position where it must pressure its user base into unecessary upgrades just to keep shareholders happy. That's not a good situation to be in, and if you can't understand this then I suggest you get some perspective on the whole thing, because you're sorely lacking it.

They're not in it for the love. Sheesh.


Survival sometimes means getting smaller and leaner. Unlimited growth will often lead to collapse. Don't profess to understand the dynamics of the corporate world if you can't grasp these simple facts.

Edited 2007-04-12 03:04

Reply Score: 5

RE[6]: I'd do the same
by flanque on Thu 12th Apr 2007 03:08 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: I'd do the same"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

I'm not a shareholder. I didn't profess to know about the dynamics of the corporate world. That was your assumption.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: I'd do the same
by archiesteel on Thu 12th Apr 2007 04:01 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: I'd do the same"
archiesteel Member since:
2005-07-02

Then why actively defend Microsoft's dubious tactics to guarantee its revenue stream? What's in it for you?

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: I'd do the same
by trenchsol on Thu 12th Apr 2007 17:00 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: I'd do the same"
trenchsol Member since:
2006-12-07

Archsteel, Microsoft will go on a diet, when their revenue stream dries up. Then they will look for something else. As long as that doesn't happen, they will make more bilions.

Business and money keeps this world running. Ones who are not comfortable with that should look for another planet. Even that would not solve the problem, because ones who are less idealistic and more idealistic will start a business there, because they will have less competition in new environment.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: I'd do the same
by trenchsol on Thu 12th Apr 2007 17:02 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: I'd do the same"
trenchsol Member since:
2006-12-07

I am sorry, there should be:
"less idealistic and more oportunistic"
in the last sentence.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: I'd do the same
by bornagainenguin on Fri 13th Apr 2007 18:43 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I'd do the same"
bornagainenguin Member since:
2005-08-07

Whoa! Wait a tick here!!

I thought the free Microsoft Service Pack was a feature over MacOS X's yearly (or nearly so) OS releases? Or have all the Astroturfers who crawl out of the woodwork to tout Microsoft's Service Packs as a major advantage over paying for a new revision of OS X (with all the assorted new features, speedups and improvements) been lying to us? If the service pack becomes superfluous how exactly do you (and Microsoft for that matter) justify the cost of Windows, especially given the steaming pile that is Vista?

--bornagainpenguin

Reply Score: 2

RE: I'd do the same
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 01:48 UTC in reply to "I'd do the same"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

Spare 30 seconds of your time and think.

Microsoft made Vista and wants their consumers to use it. Why would they keep selling away OEM XP?
How many vendors sells backdated software?


Ok, then, how about this? Since the dawn of Windows, there have been 6 major releases ("major" in the sense of "shouted about", not necessarily as in "point-oh") - Windows 1, 2, 3.0, 98FE, ME, and Vista - that have been an absolute joke upon release, even amongst those who are Microsoft fans (and that's without taking into account DOS 4). What other major company would get away with making a sow's ear out of its first three major releases of its flagship product, and every second release after that? THAT is why we expect Microsoft to keep supporting XP, because it, and not Vista, is about as good as the OS on 90% of the world's computers is going to get for the foreseeable future (barring a mass exodus to Linux).

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: I'd do the same
by flanque on Thu 12th Apr 2007 02:19 UTC in reply to "RE: I'd do the same"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

You talk like these things don't happen in Linux releases. The distros and software are up to what version now and yet users are constantly faced with ridiculous annoyances, like bad installers, and are then served with a, "oops, a small bug slipped in, sorry.. but hey we fixed it really really quickly so it's OK".

Please.. give me a break. Linux is as equally at fault of shipping with problems as Windows.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: I'd do the same
by Noremacam on Thu 12th Apr 2007 02:26 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I'd do the same"
Noremacam Member since:
2006-03-08

"Please.. give me a break. Linux is as equally at fault of shipping with problems as Windows."

This is true, but you could always use another linux distro if the one you downloaded has problems. Can you get another windows?

Edited 2007-04-12 02:26

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: I'd do the same
by flanque on Thu 12th Apr 2007 02:31 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: I'd do the same"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

Completely separate issue.

But to answer your question, people can quite easily choose Linux or Mac (or many others) if Windows doesn't work for them. At this point in time, there's also previous and differing versions of Windows. Compatibility is a concern but Linux certainly isn't even close to being any better at compatibility between versions that Windows is. In fact many would argue that a thorn in Microsoft's side is that they work so hard to maintain compatibility.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: I'd do the same
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 14:22 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: I'd do the same"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

But to answer your question, people can quite easily choose Linux or Mac (or many others) if Windows doesn't work for them.

Not if the app doesn't run on Linux or the Mac or any of the others, they can't. That's a situation that doesn't arise between different distros of Linux at anywhere near the same degree.

At this point in time, there's also previous and differing versions of Windows.

And as various articles including this one have stated, not only will there soon /i]not[/i] be previous versions of Windows around, but "differing versions" don't tend to "differ" by much more than a registry key.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: I'd do the same
by Almafeta on Thu 12th Apr 2007 02:50 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: I'd do the same"
Almafeta Member since:
2007-02-22

Not counting the various versions of Vista, there's XP (still for sale for now, and with its popularity, likely to get extended support), 2003 (still current), and 2000 (back copies are still for sale and Microsoft still supports it).

Not to mention the fact that older copies of Windows can usually be obtained for cheap or free if you need them.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: I'd do the same
by Windows Sucks on Thu 12th Apr 2007 02:57 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: I'd do the same"
Windows Sucks Member since:
2005-11-10

They only support 2000 with patches that apply to multiple versions of Windows. They don't make anything for 2000 alone. Have not done that for years. So use 2000/ ME /98 etc at your own risk.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: I'd do the same
by archiesteel on Thu 12th Apr 2007 03:01 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: I'd do the same"
archiesteel Member since:
2005-07-02

Not to mention the fact that older copies of Windows can usually be obtained for cheap or free if you need them.


Really? I'd be interested in free, legal versions of older Windows OSes...where can I find them?

Reply Score: 5

RE[6]: I'd do the same
by Kroc on Thu 12th Apr 2007 08:24 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: I'd do the same"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

http://www.discount-licensing.com/

This is entirely legal because of UK law that gives Software Licences the first right of resale according to our Sales of Goods Act.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: I'd do the same
by archiesteel on Thu 12th Apr 2007 13:41 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: I'd do the same"
archiesteel Member since:
2005-07-02

This may be cheap, but it's not free. I'm looking for free Windows license, which the OP suggested can be found.

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: I'd do the same
by Soulbender on Thu 12th Apr 2007 11:12 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: I'd do the same"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

It's perfectly legal for someone to sell you their copy of Windows. Just like how they can sell you their old car or old VCR or any other old product they aren't using anymore.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: I'd do the same
by B12 Simon on Thu 12th Apr 2007 11:43 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: I'd do the same"
B12 Simon Member since:
2006-11-08

That's true if you're talking about one licence. How about licences for, say, a 1000 PC network?

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: I'd do the same
by archiesteel on Thu 12th Apr 2007 13:38 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: I'd do the same"
archiesteel Member since:
2005-07-02

The OP referred to free versions. That's what I'm interested in.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: I'd do the same
by Windows Sucks on Thu 12th Apr 2007 02:26 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I'd do the same"
Windows Sucks Member since:
2005-11-10

And that is the funny part!

"Please.. give me a break. Linux is as equally at fault of shipping with problems as Windows"

The fact that you can compare Windows made by a multi billion dollar company (So much money that people can afford to fly into space! LOL!) to Linux mostly produced by guys up late at night drinking pepsi or coke! LOL!

That is a sad, sad state for Windows.

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: I'd do the same
by flanque on Thu 12th Apr 2007 02:38 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: I'd do the same"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

You're misguided and trolling. You make it sound like it's a handful of people doing this casually.

A significant portion of Linux development comes from corporates such as IBM, RedHat, Canonical, etc

You've also completely ignored the number of man hours spent by the Linux community over Microsoft's. The Linux community would without any doubt consume more man hours than Microsoft's development teams.

Yes there is a sad aspect here, and it's your blanket commentary that the money behind Microsoft is the defining factor of good development. It's not.

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: I'd do the same
by Duffman on Thu 12th Apr 2007 06:44 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: I'd do the same"
Duffman Member since:
2005-11-23

Yes there is a sad aspect here, and it's your blanket commentary that the money behind Microsoft is the defining factor of good development. It's not.

Yes it is. There is by far more full time developpers on windows than on linux.

Reply Score: 0

RE[6]: I'd do the same
by flanque on Thu 12th Apr 2007 08:02 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: I'd do the same"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

There is by far more full time developpers on windows than on linux.


Not all development is done by full-time developers.

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: I'd do the same
by Soulbender on Thu 12th Apr 2007 14:31 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: I'd do the same"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

"here is by far more full time developpers on windows than on linux."

Number of developers isn't a good measurement of the quality of the software produced. Many developers can even be a detriment to the quality.
We all now what they say about the number of cooks and the soup.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: I'd do the same
by brucecampbellite on Thu 12th Apr 2007 12:07 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: I'd do the same"
brucecampbellite Member since:
2006-08-14

I see this line of reasoning all the time. You can't eat your cake and have it. One minute you position linux as a superior operating system, and the next minute when your arguments are torn down, you play the 'but linux is made by a bunch of volunteers on their spare time' card.

If you're going to debate technical superiority, keep it at that, and forget about who spent what.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: I'd do the same
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 14:25 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: I'd do the same"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

you can't eat your cake and have it. One minute you position linux as a superior operating system, and the next minute when your arguments are torn down, you play the 'but linux is made by a bunch of volunteers on their spare time' card.

That isn't meant as an excuse for Linux. It's an example of how laughable Windows - a professional product made by a multi-megabuck screw-them-before-they-screw-you company - is compared to the cooperatively-written hacker's Linux. And for certain purposes (such as invulnerability to viruses and stability) Linux was way ahead of where Windows is now, ten years ago, when it was predominantly a hacker's system.

Reply Score: 4

Pepsi and Coke?
by startxjeff on Thu 12th Apr 2007 18:05 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: I'd do the same"
startxjeff Member since:
2006-09-29

I'm sorry, but what about we developers who prefer Dr.Pepper?

Reply Score: 3

RE: Pepsi and Coke?
by Windows Sucks on Thu 12th Apr 2007 18:41 UTC in reply to "Pepsi and Coke?"
Windows Sucks Member since:
2005-11-10

Dr Pepper is great man! I love it also. :-)

Sorry I left you out. :-)

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: I'd do the same
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 13:08 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I'd do the same"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

You talk like these things don't happen in Linux releases.

They don't? Since when did you hear people saying "Linux 2.4 was crap, but 2.6 is good" or "Linux 2.6.18 was crap, but 2.8.19 is good"?

like bad installers,

What bad installers?

"oops, a small bug slipped in, sorry.. but hey we fixed it really really quickly so it's OK".

Yes, exactly. *A* small bug. Vista, i.e. the whole operating system, is a bug - and at 15GB it's hardly a big one.

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: I'd do the same
by stare on Thu 12th Apr 2007 14:18 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: I'd do the same"
stare Member since:
2005-07-06

Since when did you hear people saying "Linux 2.4 was crap, but 2.6 is good"

Happens all the time. "Suse 9.3 was good, 10.1 is crap", "FC4 suxxx FC6 rocks" etc.

15GB it's hardly a big one

Except it's 6Gb, not 15.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: I'd do the same
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 14:27 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: I'd do the same"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

Except it's 6Gb, not 15.

Maybe in Windows-pusher land it was.

Happens all the time. "Suse 9.3 was good, 10.1 is crap", "FC4 suxxx FC6 rocks" etc.

No, that's a different question. I was comparing kernels, you are comparing distros. And as I said before, that's not the issue - the issue is who suffers when they bring out a bad product. Every other OS company or project does, Microsoft don't.

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: I'd do the same
by stare on Thu 12th Apr 2007 14:55 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: I'd do the same"
stare Member since:
2005-07-06

Except it's 6Gb, not 15.

Maybe in Windows-pusher land it was


It's in the world of people who at least tried to install the OS before bashing it.

Happens all the time. "Suse 9.3 was good, 10.1 is crap", "FC4 suxxx FC6 rocks" etc.

No, that's a different question. I was comparing kernels, you are comparing distros.


That's your fault. The post you replied to was about Linux in form of end-user products (i.e. distros).

BTW, if you want to compare kernels, fine, what's wrong in NT5 compared to NT4 kernel?

And as I said before, that's not the issue - the issue is who suffers when they bring out a bad product. Every other OS company or project does, Microsoft don't.

Microsoft does the same, but the latest Microsoft OS which was "bad" is Windows ME. All following OS'es (2K, XP, 2K3, Vista) are great, so they receive the well-deserved market success.

Edited 2007-04-12 14:56

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: I'd do the same
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 15:02 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: I'd do the same"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

All following OS'es (2K, XP, 2K3, Vista) are great,

Vista, great?! Now we know you work for Microsoft!

so they receive the well-deserved market success.

LOL. That's the funniest thing I've heard since...the last time someone praised Microsoft.

Reply Score: 5

RE[7]: I'd do the same
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 15:07 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: I'd do the same"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

It's in the world of people who at least tried to install the OS before bashing it.

The point of reviews and sharing opinions is so that you don't HAVE to make mistakes that others did. Why should I assume I'm going to think Vista is anything but a joke if the great unwashed don't?

Happens all the time. "Suse 9.3 was good, 10.1 is crap", "FC4 suxxx FC6 rocks" etc.

No, that's a different question. I was comparing kernels, you are comparing distros.

That's your fault. The post you replied to was about Linux in form of end-user products (i.e. distros).


The point I was making is that Linux distros are not consistently inconsistent, and that even if they were you have a choice between provider X and provider Y, which you don't get in Windows. Congratulations on missing it.

BTW, if you want to compare kernels, fine, what's wrong in NT5 compared to NT4 kernel?

I was comparing Linux kernels only. Not having worked for Microsoft, I wouldn't know - but since the kernels are reputedly good, it proves that Microsoft don't need a crap kernel to make a crap Windows.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: I'd do the same
by flanque on Thu 12th Apr 2007 21:04 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: I'd do the same"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

You should re-read before you post. I didn't narrow it to comparing Linux and Windows kernels. I was talking about at the distro level. People complain all the time about bad aspects of distros, just like they do about aspects of Windows. Only the very naive and ignorant use blanket statements like, "Windows sucks" and "Linux sucks". It's over generalised and demonstrates a true lack of objectiveness.

Bad installers.. happens all the time. You can check the Linux review archives for evidence. I don't need to prove this. It's very well known, even if you don't want to acknowledge it.

As for small bugs.. it's not singular. It happens all the time. If you're going to deny this, you really are demonstrating that you are blinded by the band wagoning that is so apparent in the Linux community.

And just in case you're wondering, since I tend to get accused of this.. I'm not a Microsoft shareholder or "Windows admin". I'm a Solaris and Linux systems engineer.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: I'd do the same
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 21:14 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: I'd do the same"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

You should re-read before you post. I didn't narrow it to comparing Linux and Windows kernels. I was talking about at the distro level.

Well, I wasn't, so you were going off the point. Another point is that if SuSE Linux sucks, you can go use some other Linux that doesn't.

People complain all the time about bad aspects of distros, just like they do about aspects of Windows. Only the very naive and ignorant use blanket statements like, "Windows sucks" and "Linux sucks". It's over generalised and demonstrates a true lack of objectiveness.

OK, then. Let me rephrase. I have used versions of Linux and BSD I like, and versions I haven't. I haven't yet used a version of Windows I haven't grown to hate, and I've used all of the consumer versions between 3.1 and Vista.

Bad installers.. happens all the time. You can check the Linux review archives for evidence. I don't need to prove this. It's very well known, even if you don't want to acknowledge it.

I asked you to give me examples, not yourself an escape clause.

As for small bugs.. it's not singular. It happens all the time. If you're going to deny this, you really are demonstrating that you are blinded by the band wagoning that is so apparent in the Linux community.

I didn't say there weren't small bugs. I said that you don't get a situation in Linuxland where you can't escape from a distro's bugs. As for "band wagoning", if you believe there is more of that in the Linux world than the Windows world, then not only can you not spell, but you are also a proud citizen of Cloud Cuckoo Land. As for the Solaris community, I haven't yet heard anyone from the Slowlaris community who doesn't slaver over it. Let's see if Ian Murdock's recent apppointment to Sun can change that and give them some perspective.

Reply Score: 0

RE[6]: I'd do the same
by flanque on Thu 12th Apr 2007 22:33 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: I'd do the same"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

I've reviewed your comments and you were not in my opinion talking about the kernel level. You were quite clearly discussing the operating system as a whole. My comments were on-topic.

Nobody said you have to like Windows, but you do appear to have an agenda and are severely biased against Windows.

"Yes, exactly. *A* small bug. Vista, i.e. the whole operating system, is a bug"


You try to give the impression of a singular bug. It's not singular. It happens all the time in Linux based operating systems. SUSE is up to v10.x now and it _still_ has completely unnecessary irritations. Ask around, there are plenty of complaints just for that distribution alone.

I cannot see where I spell something wrong. I did check it in Word, though I suppose I should have used OO instead - that would have been more accurate perhaps. I do use Mozilla with it's inbuilt spell checker too. You did however spell, "apppointment" incorrectly. Hmm..

I really don't have much to complain about Solaris. It's a very solid platform which is supported very very well by Sun and the community.


Maybe you just dislike the fact that I have valid, differing points of view. That doesn't make me wrong.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: I'd do the same
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 22:43 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: I'd do the same"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

Nobody said you have to like Windows, but you do appear to have an agenda and are severely biased against Windows.

Yes, it comes from having to put up with it on a weekly to daily basis.

You try to give the impression of a singular bug. It's not singular.

I did not. Since my opinions are a matter of record on this very site, I wonder that you have the audacity to attempt to misrepresent me on it. And you are still missing the point that if one distro has a bug, you have a choice of another distro that doesn't, which you do not have with Windows.

I cannot see where I spell something wrong. I did check it in Word, though I suppose I should have used OO instead - that would have been more accurate perhaps. I do use Mozilla with it's inbuilt spell checker too. You did however spell, "apppointment" incorrectly. Hmm..

The error in question was "bandwagon", which you spelt as "band wagon". Of course the spellchecker is not going to flag it as you spelt "band" and "wagon" correctly. On a completely different subject, that's why it's such a bad idea to rely on a computer spellchecker.

Maybe you just dislike the fact that I have valid, differing points of view. That doesn't make me wrong.

I don't object to "differing points of view". I DO object to misinformation, especially on subjects I care about.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: I'd do the same
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 14:18 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I'd do the same"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

Please.. give me a break. Linux is as equally at fault of shipping with problems as Windows.

As much as I disagree with it, that wasn't the point at issue. The PAI was that when other companies/projects make a complete ass of themselves, they suffer for it, whereas MS do so with impunity. I stand by that statement.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: I'd do the same
by psychicist on Thu 12th Apr 2007 15:40 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I'd do the same"
psychicist Member since:
2007-01-27

Have you ever run a serious Linux distribution like Slackware or Debian? They are for the most part error-free and keep running till the end of times if the hardware lasts that long.

I will not deny that there are many distributions that like to fiddle with things and introduce their own break and patch cycles, which are mostly uncalled for in a production environment.

But when choosing for serious Linux, BSD or Solaris distributions the breakage and patch rates will be substantially lower than with any Windows version ever created.

Reply Score: 3

RE: I'd do the same
by isaba on Thu 12th Apr 2007 08:21 UTC in reply to "I'd do the same"
isaba Member since:
2006-12-30

Yes, you are right. That's a good point of view, very well business oriented. Fine......Oh, just wait a second!...what about WE customers?

On the other hand, you say "how many vendors sell backdated sw?" Again you are partially right. But I find it just like saying: "Have thieves the right to feed their children?"...yes, as long as YOU don't mind to be stolen.

Edited 2007-04-12 08:22

Reply Score: 1

Sounds like...
by ThunderBug on Thu 12th Apr 2007 02:14 UTC
ThunderBug
Member since:
2006-03-05

Sounds like a good reason to take another look at monopolistic practices.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Sounds like...
by cmost on Thu 12th Apr 2007 09:46 UTC in reply to "Sounds like..."
cmost Member since:
2006-07-16

Hey, it's Microsoft. They'll do whatever they want and you'll like it. Because you never took the time or had the curiosity to consider that there might be excellent (if not superior) alternatives; because you thought Office was THE only productivity suite; because you're willing to pay exorbitant prices for what amount to service packs and minor updates... you screwed yourself. With the world in its hand, Microsoft can and does do whatever it pleases. Now, with Vista sales sagging and enthusiasm for the OS non-existent, Microsoft is taking actions to force its dominance and improve its bottom line - again. No surprise. Bend over and enjoy the screw. You earned it.

Edited 2007-04-12 09:47

Reply Score: 5

Hahahahaha!
by Windows Sucks on Thu 12th Apr 2007 02:21 UTC
Windows Sucks
Member since:
2005-11-10

Better save up your chips for that new PC or upgrade you thought you could put off.

You know that not long after this the patches etc will stop.

Oh well. The fanboys getting ripped again.

Reply Score: 3

We're staying with XP
by Dubbayoo on Thu 12th Apr 2007 02:33 UTC
Dubbayoo
Member since:
2006-02-09

We're staying with XP for now. Most of our machines were replaced in the last 18 months and we put 2K on. I don't think the specs will support Vista. Our new CRM software requires XP so any new boxes will be Dell Optiplex with XP Pro.

Reply Score: 3

only way
by backdoc on Thu 12th Apr 2007 02:36 UTC
backdoc
Member since:
2006-01-14

It's the only way they will ever get people to buy Vista.

Reply Score: 5

Product activation
by ectropy on Thu 12th Apr 2007 02:51 UTC
ectropy
Member since:
2006-12-14

When will Microsft stop product activation for XP?

I suspect the primary purpose of product activation is retirement of older OS versions -- to slowly eliminate the competition of earlier releases from the market. Piracy is the secondary goal.

XP would continue to work until you have to reinstall. Eventually, nearly all XP installations will have to be replaced (excepting hacked and corporate versions.)

Reply Score: 3

RE: Product activation
by Kroc on Thu 12th Apr 2007 08:16 UTC in reply to "Product activation"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

Which is why I have a legal licence key sitting here, but a hacked version installed on my computer. I cannot afford (in time) to be calling Microsoft every day because I'm running the same copy in Bootcamp, and then through Parallels in Mac OS X. It's still only one installation, but the hardware changes entirely depending on what side I boot it from and XP comes up saying that I can't do what I'm legally entitled to.

Reply Score: 5

kicking and screaming!
by matthekc on Thu 12th Apr 2007 02:54 UTC
matthekc
Member since:
2006-10-28

You really should not have to drag customers in kicking and screaming it's bad for the customer and the whole company image.
I have three family members who already have Vista and hate it. I have one looking at Linux unfortunately she isn't really computer literate if she wants to try Linux I'll have to do the install and some hand holding. I'm pretty sure all three would happily trade it for xp.

Reply Score: 5

RE: kicking and screaming!
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 14:32 UTC in reply to "kicking and screaming!"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

I have one looking at Linux unfortunately she isn't really computer literate if she wants to try Linux I'll have to do the install and some hand holding.

Same position here. Except the OS of choice (for the person in question) is Windows...

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: kicking and screaming!
by matthekc on Thu 12th Apr 2007 23:01 UTC in reply to "kicking and screaming!"
matthekc Member since:
2006-10-28

Years ago when she got her first computer it was like that but she adapted to windows eventually. I don't get very many questions anymore. My Aunt is no dummy just doesn't have strong technical leaning.

Reply Score: 1

No SP3?
by Sabz on Thu 12th Apr 2007 03:52 UTC
Sabz
Member since:
2005-07-07

was that story true afterall?

Reply Score: 2

Think About The Low End Market
by th3rmite on Thu 12th Apr 2007 04:19 UTC
th3rmite
Member since:
2006-01-08

Vista requires much beefier hardware to run now than XP did. If I want to buy my daughter a computer, I'm not sure she requires the beast of a computer to run Vista when XP works just fine. The people it will really hurt is the people who can't afford an expensive computer system. Do you think there are going to be many $300 computer systems with Vista(that can actually run it decently)?

Reply Score: 3

RE: Think About The Low End Market
by trenchsol on Thu 12th Apr 2007 16:48 UTC in reply to "Think About The Low End Market"
trenchsol Member since:
2006-12-07

As I said before, Microsoft maybe wants to shake off customers like you. Vista software costs more itself. Maybe they want to establish some kind of luxury brand, something for buyers with deeper pockets.

If you buy Apple (hardware + software), you will pay aproximately twice for roughly the same functionality. Maybe Microsoft wants to go into that direction.

Maybe DRM initiative is for the similar purpose. They might want to limit a number of hardware platforms, and sell expensive software on expensive platform. Generaly, it is more comfortable to sell less products at higher price each than more product at lower prices.

Reply Score: 1

twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

Microsoft maybe wants to shake off customers like you. Vista software costs more itself. Maybe they want to establish some kind of luxury brand, something for buyers with deeper pockets.

Microsoft a luxury brand! That's funny. Do you do shows?!

Reply Score: 4

trenchsol Member since:
2006-12-07

Do you do shows ? Obviously, yes.
You probably think that the quality is needed to establish a luxury brand. No, just good marketing.

Reply Score: 1

twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

You probably think that the quality is needed to establish a luxury brand. No, just good marketing.

Actually, either both or the former. I've never seen an advert for Lexus, but I know they do luxury products. Same for Rolls Royce.

The attitude that "the only thing you need to establish a product is marketing" is exactly why Microsoft's habit of churning out crap to much fanfare is going to doom it in the end. Sooner or later someone is going to shout "His Imperial Majesty is butt-naked" loud enough to be heard.

Reply Score: 2

trenchsol Member since:
2006-12-07

There are many good cars on the roads that cost much less than Rolls Royce. When you buy it, you pay the brand.

Yes, you are right, "the only thing you need to establish a product is marketing" is what Microsoft is doing for years. And they do get away with it. You don't need to shout anything. It is like Coca-Cola. It is not healthy, quite the opposite, it doesn't taste very good, it is too sweet, so you are still thirsty after it. All they have is marketing, commercials with people in the swimsuits laughing without a reason.

Windows are similar, you can use them, but always something is missing, and nothing works quite the way you need it to. I think that it is intentional, to make people wait for the next version of Windows.

Reply Score: 1

twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

There are many good cars on the roads that cost much less than Rolls Royce. When you buy it, you pay the brand.

Yes, you are right, "the only thing you need to establish a product is marketing" is what Microsoft is doing for years. And they do get away with it. You don't need to shout anything. It is like Coca-Cola. It is not healthy, quite the opposite, it doesn't taste very good, it is too sweet, so you are still thirsty after it. All they have is marketing, commercials with people in the swimsuits laughing without a reason.

Windows are similar, you can use them, but always something is missing, and nothing works quite the way you need it to. I think that it is intentional, to make people wait for the next version of Windows.


None of which supports the theory that Microsoft will (forget "could") establish Windows as a "luxury brand". Coke just isn't sexy anymore, not least because you can get a hundred and one facsimiles that are good enough. You are right that you can make a buck out of marketing crap, but you can't get away with marketing crap as luxury. What you describe is much more like the process of selling Trabbis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trabbi) than Toyotas, which in turn are more downmarket than Lexus.

Reply Score: 2

trenchsol Member since:
2006-12-07

The fact is that Microsoft OS cost more and more, and requires more expensive HW each time. I don't know the explanation, but it is not an OS for everybody anymore. Some people simply don't care that much for computers to spend that money. I know a person who decided to just not own a computer because of that.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Think About The Low End Market
by Doc Pain on Thu 12th Apr 2007 18:11 UTC in reply to "Think About The Low End Market"
Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

"Vista requires much beefier hardware to run now than XP did. If I want to buy my daughter a computer, I'm not sure she requires the beast of a computer to run Vista when XP works just fine. The people it will really hurt is the people who can't afford an expensive computer system. Do you think there are going to be many $300 computer systems with Vista(that can actually run it decently)?"

I may add another construction: Many home users (such as Joe Q. Sixpack and Jane Average) feel they need to buy a new computer because MICROS~1 released a new OS. But they surely will encounter a problem: The problem that the new PC (with the new OS) won't be the only things they need to buy. What about their printers, scanners, digital cameras and other peripherials? Will they be recognized? Will there be a driver for "Vista"? Where to get the driver? Will it work? What about the software? Will it run, too? How much will it cost to eventually replace the old peripherial by a new one? How long will the new one work? You can get as many examples from reality as you like. Just see that some of these peripherials are called "obsolete" today because they run with "Windows '98" and even with "Windows XP", but with "Vista"...?

Remember: Primarily, users don't use the OS, they use the applications running on top of the OS. But if the application is not available / not installable / not working, the OS is blamed. (NB: This is not a try of defense for malfunctioning OSes.)

Reply Score: 2

My guess...
by google_ninja on Thu 12th Apr 2007 04:27 UTC
google_ninja
Member since:
2006-02-05

My guess is that they just don't want to have to support two completely different OSs. This isnt like 2k->XP, Vista is completely different in a whole lot of places, and that means totally different exploits, bugs, etc.

As for screwing customers, I have yet to run into anyone with trouble on new hardware. I got a HP Pavilion dv9000 about a month ago, and vista runs like a dream on it. I have zero issues with it, and although it isnt exactly revolutionary, Its lightyears better then XP, and is the first version of windows to fix several issues that have pissed me off since I first started using it with win98.

As for linux, when it hits a decent marketshare, and provides full asp.net/vb.net support, with an ide as nice as VS.net, I'll consider using it (I do enterprise software/websites for small-medium sized businesses, and there is nothing like asp and vb in the free world). Until then it will be a toy to me. a fun toy, don't get me wrong, im an engineer and i love to tinker, and linux is a tinkerers dream. but it just doesnt have what i need to make a living at this point.

Reply Score: 4

RE: My guess...
by lemur2 on Thu 12th Apr 2007 09:49 UTC in reply to "My guess..."
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

{ im an engineer and i love to tinker, and linux is a tinkerers dream. but it just doesnt have what i need to make a living at this point. }

I'm an engineer, and I love to tinker, so I find that Windows just doesn't have what I need to make a living. Windows is written purely to make a profit for Microsoft, not for me, and I cannot include Windows as a part of any product I offer to customers.

Firstly, support runs out for Windows products in just a few years, and Windows is an immutable binary tied to x86 architecture and I am given absolutely no ability to port it if I must in the future move my product to a new platform. I cannot know for sure what is going on inside of Windows.

Secondly, I know that there are elements in Windows that are simply not written in my interest nor my customer's interest, but rather are designed for Microsoft's interest or Hollywood media companies interest.

The topic of this thread is an excellent case in point. Had I used Windows XP as a part of my products just a few years ago, I would have to be going to my customers today and saying "sorry, what I sold to you a short while ago is now obsolete, and you are up for an expensive upgrade". Since my product uses Linux, I can simply say instead: "here is your update, free of charge".

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: My guess...
by google_ninja on Thu 12th Apr 2007 17:01 UTC in reply to "RE: My guess..."
google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05


I'm an engineer, and I love to tinker, so I find that Windows just doesn't have what I need to make a living. Windows is written purely to make a profit for Microsoft, not for me, and I cannot include Windows as a part of any product I offer to customers.


How is making high quality frameworks/apis, and rapid application tools designed to not make a profit for you? From my point of view, there is nothing around that matches ASP.net and VB.net for rapid application development, that allows me to do more for my customers in less time. I would say linux is designed to keep me from making a profit, because there is no way I could remain competitive using things like PHP and C. You could say Java/JSP as a possibility, but the SUN way is far from RAD, and while JSF is a start, it really has quite a ways to go before it offers what asp does when it comes to abstraction and encapsulation of the presentation layer (I know, I was a JSP/Java developer for three years before I went out on my own. It is fantastic for huge projects, but doesnt scale down well)

And if you want to bring up mono, don't bother. Mono is playing a perpetual catch up game, and will alwas be a gimped (lacking features and more buggy, less performant) version of .net. Linux seriously needs something like .net, but this approach means that for all practical reasons they will consistantly be a major revision behind windows.


Firstly, support runs out for Windows products in just a few years, and Windows is an immutable binary tied to x86 architecture and I am given absolutely no ability to port it if I must in the future move my product to a new platform. I cannot know for sure what is going on inside of Windows.


I really have to question, what exactly is your profit that the unability to port the OS is a major issue for you? I write software for small businesses, they will alwas want the most bang for their buck, that means intel.

Secondly, I know that there are elements in Windows that are simply not written in my interest nor my customer's interest, but rather are designed for Microsoft's interest or Hollywood media companies interest.

The MEDIA PLAYBACK was written for the ABILITY to meet the requirements made by Hollywood media companies. I don't see how the lack of the ability to play HD-DVDs in linux is a selling point, although you are not the first one I have heard it from. The lack of the ability to legally play DVDs in most parts of the world is a major problem in my eyes, and one of the reasons I don't use the system. If they can't get their act together with DVDs, I doubt you guys will ever see a legal HD-DVD playback solution appear.

And by definition, Microsofts interests *are* your clients interests if they are a customer. The one and only component I can think of is registration/activation, and that is a pain in the ass ONCE. I never even experienced it, as HP images a pre-activated Vista. I don't see how, say, .net 3.0, or directx 10 are anything but extrordinarily high quality APIs that are of a huge benefit for people creating software.

The topic of this thread is an excellent case in point. Had I used Windows XP as a part of my products just a few years ago, I would have to be going to my customers today and saying "sorry, what I sold to you a short while ago is now obsolete, and you are up for an expensive upgrade". Since my product uses Linux, I can simply say instead: "here is your update, free of charge".

7 years is not exactly a "short while", and there is nothing stopping you from offering xp updates until the end of days.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: My guess...
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 17:36 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: My guess..."
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

Where to begin. Let's try at the beginning.

How is making high quality frameworks/apis, and rapid application tools designed to not make a profit for you?

What "high quality frameworks or api's"?

From my point of view, there is nothing around that matches ASP.net and VB.net for rapid application development, that allows me to do more for my customers in less time. I would say linux is designed to keep me from making a profit, because there is no way I could remain competitive using things like PHP and C.

Yeah, people who write in C are absolutely drowning in debt.

And if you want to bring up mono, don't bother.

Yeah, vomiting is not a good idea when you're next to a computer. Seriously, (a) only you brought it up, and (b) it was created by a guy who likes Microsoft products. Is it any surprise it sucks?

I really have to question, what exactly is your profit that the unability to port the OS is a major issue for you? I write software for small businesses, they will alwas want the most bang for their buck, that means intel.

Looks like you completely missed his point about future platforms. I've noticed a complete lack of imagination is helpful when pushing Windows.

The MEDIA PLAYBACK was written for the ABILITY to meet the requirements made by Hollywood media companies. I don't see how the lack of the ability to play HD-DVDs in linux is a selling point, although you are not the first one I have heard it from. The lack of the ability to legally play DVDs in most parts of the world is a major problem in my eyes, and one of the reasons I don't use the system. If they can't get their act together with DVDs, I doubt you guys will ever see a legal HD-DVD playback solution appear.

DRM is the last gasp of an industry trying to mold the new economy to their old-economy practices. As such I doubt we will see much traction in HDTV or -DVD until DRM is removed.

And by definition, Microsofts interests *are* your clients interests if they are a customer.

Er, you what? Viruses, product activation, high licensing fees, and per-seat licensing are in my favour?

The one and only component I can think of is registration/activation, and that is a pain in the ass ONCE

Once every time you need to reinstall Windows or add a new hardware component, you mean. And as we're discussing Microsoft, that first "eventuality" tends to come up a lot.

I never even experienced it, as HP images a pre-activated Vista. Yeah, and everyone buiys HP.

I don't see how, say, .net 3.0, or directx 10 are anything but extrordinarily high quality APIs that are of a huge benefit for people creating software.

Spoken like a true bullshitter, er Microsoft marketing manager.

Reply Score: 0

RE[4]: My guess...
by google_ninja on Thu 12th Apr 2007 22:38 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: My guess..."
google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

What "high quality frameworks or api's"?

DirectX is an almost universal industry standard. .net is quickly becoming so, at an almost shocking speed considering how new it is.

Yeah, people who write in C are absolutely drowning in debt.

C++ is virtually obsolete, C is downright archaic, and hasnt been used for new things in a very long time now.

Remember the big push for an open java a year or two back? That was initiated because the technology used currently by most open source projects is so dated that it isnt even taught in schools any more, and they are having a hard time finding new blood. Miguel was pushing mono, havoc was pushing java or another alternative, seth was saying that while its nessicary to have a modern api, using something patented by MS was a bad idea. Noone was saying that C is the way of the future.

Yeah, vomiting is not a good idea when you're next to a computer. Seriously, (a) only you brought it up, and (b) it was created by a guy who likes Microsoft products. Is it any surprise it sucks?

Miguel DeIcaza likes microsoft? he has been refusing jobs with them his entire life, was on the FSF board of directors, was one of the founders of GNOME, and has been a major contributer to the project since its inception.

Some people look at technology with a pragmatic view, others look at it with a Dungeons and Dragons type view.

Looks like you completely missed his point about future platforms. I've noticed a complete lack of imagination is helpful when pushing Windows.


you mean like x86, right? the new platform that everyone was going to go to eventually. Ms decided that they were gonna screw their ISVs and not support it. right?

just because linux runs on toasters, doesnt mean that the world will start flocking to use some new high powered computing toaster platform. and if they did, ms would go that way. porting is mostly an issue of man hours, and ms has more money and programming talent then any other company in the world. I dont think its being too far out to hedge my bets that they will continue operating the way they alwas have, and go with what will be most used in business.

DRM is the last gasp of an industry trying to mold the new economy to their old-economy practices. As such I doubt we will see much traction in HDTV or -DVD until DRM is removed.

Kinda like how DVD never took off because of the CSS DRM? HD-DVD is simply more sophisticated.

But regardless, DRM in some form will alwas be with us, and the inability to play commercial content thet was legally purchased without resorting to breaking the law will alwas result in a gimped desktop experience.

Er, you what? Viruses, product activation, high licensing fees, and per-seat licensing are in my favour?


The context of that statement was in relation to components, which aparently are not done to make a profit, but done so microsoft can make a profit. I said other then activation, which only needs to be done once and is there to prevent theft (which is insanely common), the interests of microsoft coincide with its customers (in relation to components.)

Virii (i dont know why you would bring that up, as it is not in their interests either), and liscencing schemes are a completely different issue then what was being discussed.

Once every time you need to reinstall Windows or add a new hardware component, you mean. And as we're discussing Microsoft, that first "eventuality" tends to come up a lot.

The VAST majority of the world doesnt install new hardware or the os with enough frequency to make this an issue.

Yeah, and everyone buiys HP.

I never said that, I only brought it up because I cannot comment on how terrible it is, as I have never (and most likely will never) experience it.

Spoken like a true bullshitter, er Microsoft marketing manager.

How is that bullshit? It is almost impossible to find a game developed nowadays NOT developed with directx, and currently the only equivilent to .net on linux is java, which has very different strengths. These are things that are kind of self evident, and you saying they are bullshit shows your lack of knowledge about what you are talking about.

Just because you believe that microsoft is evil and must be vanquished by rightousness, doesnt mean the rest of the world does. Even amoung serious contributers in the opensource community, that attitude is not shared. It is only by fanboi teenagers who live in their parents basements and think they are l33t because they installed gentoo that the rabid anti-microsoft hatred is truely felt. They are a corporation, like any other corporation they exist to make money, not make the world a better place. While the OSS ecosphere is interesting, and ethically laudable, where the rest of the world makes its judgements on technology is on technology, not morality and mythological battles.


I have been using (and loving) linux for 3 years now. It is not the platform I use professionally for reasons i have already outlined. Even the hint that linux is not viable for certain situations, or even worse, that microsoft provides a fantastic toolset, is abhorrant to the fanboi, and people like you tend to come out of the woodwork. I believe the ideal situation would be Linux in the server room, and the office for large businesses with the support staff to adiquently administer it. Mac on home computers, as it is simply the best designed desktop os out there. And windows in small-medium sized business, as that is where the functionality with easy configurability and administration tools really shine. This would break up the marketshare to something that makes more sense, while forcing the OSs out there to stop trying to be everything to everyone, and instead focus on their strengths.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: My guess...
by cjcox on Thu 12th Apr 2007 23:02 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: My guess..."
cjcox Member since:
2006-12-21

Granted DirectX owns the gaming industry, BUT only because of Windows... and NO other reason. As Microsoft keeps pushing people away, another platform will take hold. It's just a matter of time. And.. it might be a DirectX variant... who knows.

C is still more popular than C++ and certainly Java. If it's a lines of code contest, then COBOL wins hands down... sorry, but 2nd place isn't even in the same ballpark. I don't think you'll see too much embedded development done in anything "higher" than C. C isn't even close to being "downright archaic" or "virtually obsolete". I don't like C++ either (personally). Microsoft has done the most to keep that puppy alive.

Mono, which is a portable superset of .Net, may well be the better .Net. Don't confuse .Net with .Net plus Microsoft proprietary closed solns. .Net on Linux is reality TODAY and is most popular with WINDOWS users.... believe it or not.

Microsoft DOES have some talent. HOWEVER, it is Microsoft LAW to only higher young inexperienced talent. That's just a fact... not making that up. And there's a huge REASON for that... young minds can be shaped. I can name many companies with far more experienced developers that are capable of actually building things from scratch (noting that most Microsoft technology is not original but obtained through acquisition). If Microsoft was as talented as you describe, they wouldn't have some of the obvious flaws they have in their software... and Vista would be bought up today like gang-busters etc.



Linux is VERY viable for almost ALL situations. And that's not "fanboism"... it's just a fact. Yes.. there are places where Microsoft is so entrenched that Linux is not considered, but for every place where Microsoft fits, I can probably show you at least 10 places where Linux is a better fit. It's just too flexible. My experience in the field is that users live within the confined limits of Microsoft because they don't know anything else is out there. I've never met an MCSE that didn't switch over to Linux after they gave it a chance... none... Linux is flexible and that means power. Admins love power and flexibility. IMHO Windows is for the lazy MCSE or Sys Admin that doesn't want to explore the riches of the world that surrounds him/her. Which I find to be a very sad thing.

The assumption that Microsoft's toolsets are a good reason to support a single non-open platform is ludicrous IMHO. No reason to be chained all of your life. Microsoft won't even give you the saw to cut your chains. At least with Linux, you have the freedom to pursue whatever you want... even Microsoft, if that's what you want to do.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: My guess...
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 23:27 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: My guess..."
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

All very well said, sir.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: My guess...
by google_ninja on Fri 13th Apr 2007 15:44 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: My guess..."
google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

Granted DirectX owns the gaming industry, BUT only because of Windows... and NO other reason. As Microsoft keeps pushing people away, another platform will take hold. It's just a matter of time. And.. it might be a DirectX variant... who knows.

Talk to a game developer. They will tell you directx kinda sucked until version 4 or 5, but now there really isnt anything available thats better.

C is still more popular than C++ and certainly Java. If it's a lines of code contest, then COBOL wins hands down... sorry, but 2nd place isn't even in the same ballpark. I don't think you'll see too much embedded development done in anything "higher" than C. C isn't even close to being "downright archaic" or "virtually obsolete". I don't like C++ either (personally). Microsoft has done the most to keep that puppy alive.

Im not talking about legacy, im talking about modern development. In the embedded space, java is currently the most used. In the business space, its java, with .net creeping up. On the desktop space, its C++, with .net creeping up. C is simply not used due to its non-OO nature.

Mono, which is a portable superset of .Net, may well be the better .Net. Don't confuse .Net with .Net plus Microsoft proprietary closed solns. .Net on Linux is reality TODAY and is most popular with WINDOWS users.... believe it or not.

I develop in asp.net 2.0. If I used linux, I would be working in a gimped environment, with less features available to me. And don't even talk about deploying on linux, the performance and stability are well below the windows implementation.

This is the problem about reverse engineering vs writing your own thing. You will alwas be playing catch up.

Microsoft DOES have some talent. HOWEVER, it is Microsoft LAW to only higher young inexperienced talent. That's just a fact... not making that up. And there's a huge REASON for that... young minds can be shaped. I can name many companies with far more experienced developers that are capable of actually building things from scratch (noting that most Microsoft technology is not original but obtained through acquisition). If Microsoft was as talented as you describe, they wouldn't have some of the obvious flaws they have in their software... and Vista would be bought up today like gang-busters etc.

Flaws in ms software has to do with beurocracy, not with talent. MS only hires the top 2 percentile out of universities, they have most of the top programmers in the world on their payroll.

I wasnt referring to that though, I was referring to the lack of a modern language for linux desktop development. Theres a reason that most new stuff in gnome is either python or mono with gtk bindings, because new programmers dont learn C any more, and C++ is currently being phased out of schools.

Linux is VERY viable for almost ALL situations. And that's not "fanboism"... it's just a fact. Yes.. there are places where Microsoft is so entrenched that Linux is not considered, but for every place where Microsoft fits, I can probably show you at least 10 places where Linux is a better fit. It's just too flexible. My experience in the field is that users live within the confined limits of Microsoft because they don't know anything else is out there. I've never met an MCSE that didn't switch over to Linux after they gave it a chance... none... Linux is flexible and that means power. Admins love power and flexibility. IMHO Windows is for the lazy MCSE or Sys Admin that doesn't want to explore the riches of the world that surrounds him/her. Which I find to be a very sad thing.

Microsoft has made it insanely easy to administer their platform, and has the products nessicary to run todays businesses. Any trained monkey can become an MCSE, Linux is far more complex and difficult an environment to administer. This is why I said MS is an ideal platform for small to medium sized businesses, who want to hire a guy, not an it department to administer their network.

And like I have said before, there is nothing on linux that offers the same rapid application development as VS.net, nothing. That is also a huge factor for an enterprise environment, how much will it cost to get your software made. It is one of the last large holes in the linux software stack, and its something that desperately needs to be filled. Currently, it looks like either java gui frameworks need beefing up in a seirous way, or mono needs heavy optimization and a good IDE.

Not only that, but mac is so much of a better desktop os then linux its hard to honestly compare the two. If you are a geek, then linux will be a joy and a pleasure to learn. If you arent, then never recommend it to anyone you dont want to have to administer yourself.

The assumption that Microsoft's toolsets are a good reason to support a single non-open platform is ludicrous IMHO. No reason to be chained all of your life. Microsoft won't even give you the saw to cut your chains. At least with Linux, you have the freedom to pursue whatever you want... even Microsoft, if that's what you want to do.

Neither I or my clients are chained to anything. MS simply provides the best tools for the job, and in good concience I cannot recommend PHP/Linux above ASP.net/Windows. If one day it makes sense to do so, I will whole heartedly, as like I have previously said, I find linux cool and the opensource world a nifty idea. But right now, a non-biased evaluation of whats available based on technological merits will give me windows with .net every time.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: My guess...
by twenex on Fri 13th Apr 2007 00:06 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: My guess..."
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

DirectX is an almost universal industry standard. .net is quickly becoming so, at an almost shocking speed considering how new it is.

Since neither is under the control of any more than one company, neither is anything near to being an "industry standard". The only reason .net is growing "at almost shocking speed" is because Microsoft - the company with 90% marketshare - are desperate to get people to use that rather than code for Linux or the Web.

C++ is virtually obsolete,

My programmer friends will probably tell you that if C++ is "virtually obsolete", it is because it wasn't done very well or pushed by a company with absolute power.

C is downright archaic, and hasnt been used for new things in a very long time now.

As another poster said, it is much less archaic than COBOL. I know it is used to code Linux and the BSDs, and I can't see Microsoft having programmed XP in anything else, quite frankly.

Remember the big push for an open java a year or two back? That was initiated because the technology used currently by most open source projects is so dated that it isnt even taught in schools any more, and they are having a hard time finding new blood.

I don't see open source projects "having a hard time finding new blood", and the reason why C, etc. was no longer used in schools was because schools were being forced to teach Microsoft technologies instead of long term prospects.

Miguel DeIcaza likes microsoft? he has been refusing jobs with them his entire life,

I think you will find he WAS refused jobs by Microsoft. I.e. he tried to get one and failed.

you mean like x86, right? the new platform that everyone was going to go to eventually. Ms decided that they were gonna screw their ISVs and not support it. right?

What part of "the future" do you not understand? In fact we're already seeing the future, if that means post-x86: AMD64, as its name suggests, is a non-x86, non-Intel-originated technology. As is the web.

The context of that statement was in relation to components...

I am, or was, a Microsoft customer. I can tell you it was NOT in my interest to be sabotaged by viruses or have Win98 crash on me every five minutes. And yes, that is an exaggeration. But not by much.

Virii (i dont know why you would bring that up, as it is not in their interests either), and liscencing schemes are a completely different issue then what was being discussed.

Actually, the issue being discussed was whether Microsoft acts in the interests of customers. Since they allow Windows to be plagued by viruses, quite clearly they don't.

just because linux runs on toasters, doesnt mean that the world will start flocking... and ms has more money and programming talent then any other company in the world.

Microsoft may have more money than any other company in the world, but if you haven't noticed Linux is created by a consortium of companies and individuals. Not that it does them much good, as that talent they allege they also have doesn't seem to be much in evidence.

The VAST majority of the world doesnt install new hardware or the os with enough frequency to make this an issue.

Nevertheless, it is one. Just as whether a country is democratic or not is one, despite the fact that in the US and Europe only between 40 and 60% of the population vote regularly.

How is that bullshit...

I don't recall exactly what you said, but I do remember that it sounded like marketingspeak. Thus bullshit. And the fact that it is used by whatever proportion of people you quoted does not automatically mean it's the God's bollocks or whatever overwraught metaphor you chose to use.

I have been using (and loving) linux for 3 years now.

And yet like most people who take that line, you seem to be both one of those sad Windows worshippers, and also completely ignorant of the Linux ecosystem, as you so ably demonstrate below.

It is not the platform I use professionally for reasons i have already outlined. Even the hint that linux is not viable for certain situations, or even worse, that microsoft provides a fantastic toolset, is abhorrant to the fanboi,

No, it is abhorrent to anyone who has actually USED Microsoft products but knows there are better alternatives.

and people like you tend to come out of the woodwork. I believe the ideal situation would be Linux in the server room, and the office for large businesses with the support staff to adiquently administer it.

Oh yes, because you still need to use the commandline to administer it. I thought you claimed to know something about Linux.

Mac on home computers, as it is simply the best designed desktop os out there.

Yes! Let's exchange one proprietary company for one which is even MORE proprietary and controlling!

And windows in small-medium sized business, as that is where the functionality with easy configurability and administration tools really shine.

Any desktop Linux is no more difficult to administer than Windows.

Just because you believe that microsoft is evil and must be vanquished by rightousness, doesnt mean the rest of the world does.

Just because you believe that I believe they are evil, does not mean I do. They are merely incompetent.

Even amoung serious contributers in the opensource community, that attitude is not shared. It is only by fanboi teenagers who live in their parents basements and think they are l33t because they installed gentoo that the rabid anti-microsoft hatred is truely felt.

Actually, I suspect the only "rabid hatred" is felt by those whose self-esteem is so low (probably due to an unfortunate addiction to Microsoft products) that they lash out and call anyone who has anything good to say about Linux "a teenager who lives in his parents basement and thinks he is l33t because he installed Gentoo".

Quite clearly you need to get out more.

While the OSS ecosphere is interesting, and ethically laudable, where the rest of the world makes its judgements on technology is on technology, not morality and mythological battles.

I support FOSS software because the history of the PC, on the hardware side, and Microsoft, on the software side, show clearly that proprietary technology is A Bad Idea. The fact that you need to resort to such drivel is probably just a reflection of the fact that you rely on such Bad Ideas.

This would break up the marketshare to something that makes more sense, while forcing the OSs out there to stop trying to be everything to everyone, and instead focus on their strengths.

An operating system is something that is used to work on a computer, which is a general purpose device. Thus any operating system can be made to serve any use a computer can be put to.

One would think with the sort of expertise you claim to have you would understand this basic concept.

Given your opinions, in future, (remember that?) I think I'll just remember that your comments are not worth pissing on even to avoid splitting of the bladder. And if you find that comment objectionable, just remember that I have as much right to object to lies as you have to object to "colourful metaphors".

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: My guess...
by lemur2 on Fri 13th Apr 2007 01:46 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: My guess..."
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

{I really have to question, what exactly is your profit that the unability to port the OS is a major issue for you? I write software for small businesses, they will alwas want the most bang for their buck, that means intel.}

Where you wrote "profit" I take it you meant "product"?

My product is flight simulators. My original code base ran on SGI machines ... porting to Windows was going to be a huge effort, but a port to Linux was trivial ... and I can still use cheap x86 machines (intel or AMD) with Linux, but I can also use other architectures just as easily. Part of the codebase was written originally in Ada for OpenVMS on Alphas ... I had little trouble porting that code to Gnat on Linux, and I have no license issues.

My products typically have to be designed to be operational for 30 years ... the life of the simulation target. The only way to achieve such a lifespan is to design the system for portability from one architecture to the next.

With Windows, you have zero chance to do that. With an open source OS ... I have already done it with little fuss.

Oh, BTW, with simulator visuals ... all of the database generation toolsets and rendering programs utilise OpenGL. That fact rules out Windows and ActiveX right away, on its very own. Windows used to support OpenGL, but Microsoft are trying to kill OpenGL off now, so I can't use Windows for the simulator visuals. You get this sort of thing happening with a proprietary vendor who wants to kill competing open standards. If you use open standards, you get portability and independence from any one vendor ... which is an absolutely critical design aim if you are looking for a 30 year product lifespan. Windows avoids open standards like the plague. By so doing, Windows immediately rules itself out of contention for my products.

Windows (any version) will be utterly unviable as soon as you can no longer buy x86. You sometimes even get problems whereby you can no longer buy an older (say seven-year-old) version of Windows, and no hardware is available now for which your seven-year-old version of Windows has drivers, so once your original machine and Windows version is end-of-life your application can no longer run, and you must redesign it.

Edited 2007-04-13 01:50

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: My guess...
by Doc Pain on Thu 12th Apr 2007 18:31 UTC in reply to "RE: My guess..."
Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

"I'm an engineer, and I love to tinker, so I find that Windows just doesn't have what I need to make a living."

I can agree to this. I'm working in a computer sector in healthcare and I cannot tell my customers things like this: "If you want to use our Software with 'Windows', you can, but you'll need to buy all new PCs, new OSes, and pay a lot more money for the migration. And in some years, you'll have to do it again."

While this may be okay for home users and companies and authorities who don't have to look very deeply into their pockets, this repeating "renewal" is critical where systems are setup once and then have to run for 10+ years.

"Firstly, support runs out for Windows products in just a few years, and Windows is an immutable binary tied to x86 architecture and I am given absolutely no ability to port it if I must in the future move my product to a new platform. "

When you work with multiple platforms, you simply cannot use "Windows" because it's not compatible and not standardized. I've just supported a diagnostics setting consisting of two Linux PCs, an SGI Indy and two Sun SparcStation 20. Maybe "Windows" would be great if all of them were x86 PCs, but they aren't, so you simply have to work with what you've got instead of suggesting to buy a whole new setting instead.

"I cannot know for sure what is going on inside of Windows."

These things are essential to know where I work. I cannot tell my customers, "Uh, I don't know why the program stopped working. No error message, just an hourglass? And, no, I can't tell you why you can access the files while Dr. Schulz cannot. And I see no chance to find it out."

I visited a big hospital once, plugged in my laptop into one of the ethernet ports available in nearly every room, and what a surprise, I could access files with confidental data! I don't need to say that the server was a "Windows" box some very smart guy had set up. :-) When I reported this, the answer was just some more surprising: "Who cares?"

But finally, "Vista" has better tools for system diagnostics and error chasing, but it's still not comparable to the tools I have available in standard environments, such as Solaris.

At last, from engineer to engineer, one true wisdom: Use the right tool for every task. "Windows" definitely is not the one and only tool for every imaginable task. There may be tasks where a MICROS~1 product is the right tool, but there are other tasks, too.

Reply Score: 2

RE: My guess...
by JonathanBThompson on Thu 12th Apr 2007 11:21 UTC in reply to "My guess..."
JonathanBThompson Member since:
2006-05-26

I'm so glad to see someone positing a very realistic and insightful response that isn't obviously a fanboy, that shows maturity in understanding the reality of managing old/new products.

So many people here are whining about the end of sale date of XP, saying how unfair it is, how much it screws the customers. Where in the law or the moral statutes is there written that any company must keep selling the old product alongside the new one that is supposed to replace it? This generally doesn't happen with cars, for example: once the 2005 model years were done, surely nobody expected to get a new one made for them to buy, did they? Surely the next model year (in most cases) has at least a few changes either in styling and/or under the hood, and yet people don't whine about that. And yes, cars do also have bugs/defects from year to year, and even in the middle of their model year production runs ;)

Another reason not previously mentioned in this article thread is this: as long as Microsoft keeps selling new copies of XP (note: selling, not supporting, which they'll do for quite a while yet) in meaningful numbers, there's little incentive for hardware manufacturers to update their drivers for existing hardware, or write new Vista drivers for new hardware when it comes out, because there will be (possibly) much less demand for it if everyone can use XP. As to how fair you think this is, oh well, but that's a side for you to think about. In the mean time, if Microsoft extended XP sales to OEM's indefinitely, it wouldn't really serve the existing customers that have already bought Vista, either, due to the previously mentioned driver issues.

Do I have Vista at this time? No, I'm running Win2K3 R2 on my old server, as well as BeOS, and using an old Win98 SE install on a laptop. Why? Because I have very old hardware (dual p3-450's) without a lot of RAM (320 megs for the top system RAM amount) and that doesn't do that well these days even under a Linux GUI system, so I won't bother with upgrading the OS at this point for 8 year-old hardware.

Will I eventually get Vista? Chances are high I will: I write software for a living, and it is foolish to ignore things for some stupid ideological reason when it can put food on your table for honest work on a given platform. I admit, I won't bother getting it until I have hardware capable of running it properly, as I do have my limits as to self-torture tolerance ;)

Reply Score: 3

Corporate irresponsability
by jaramin on Thu 12th Apr 2007 04:50 UTC
jaramin
Member since:
2006-03-31

The video game industry is usually to blame for ramping up hardware requirements for desktops. Non gamers, or people who can live with lighter games, are now being forced that way too if they want to stick with Windows, legally.

If one is aware of the e-waste and digital divide problematic, then it should become clear that Microsoft is externalizing extremely high environmental and social costs by phasing out XP. Corporate irresponsability at it's best.

Reply Score: 2

Win2K is better
by funny_irony on Thu 12th Apr 2007 04:55 UTC
funny_irony
Member since:
2007-03-07

Win2K is better than WinXP and Vista.
My USB thumb drives have no problem under Win2K.

Win XP cannot recognise my USB drives.

Their product is getting worst.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Win2K is better
by raver31 on Thu 12th Apr 2007 17:52 UTC in reply to "Win2K is better"
raver31 Member since:
2005-07-06

I also think Windows 2000 was the best OS that Microsoft ever produced.

XP was too much like a kids toy for me, and Vista was good in a few of the betas, but the final version is crap.

25Gb to install and 728Mb Ram to sit on the desktop with nothing running ?

Nah,

Windows 2k was sweet

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Win2K is better
by imstillatwork on Thu 12th Apr 2007 18:18 UTC in reply to "RE: Win2K is better"
imstillatwork Member since:
2007-03-22

"5Gb to install and 728Mb Ram to sit on the desktop with nothing running ?"

quite the BS...

right now I'm sitting at 481 MB ram used with a development application running and firefox (ff=66+MB ram...) with aero on. Seen it as low as 350MB used with nothing running (aero off)

I'm using 7.5 GB of hard drive WITH open office, photoshop, and at least 10 other apps installed right now.

"XP was too much like a kids toy for me," that's a nice opinion, and I hated the default theme - but that has nothing to do with the functionality.

Reply Score: 1

2 cents
by timbobsteve on Thu 12th Apr 2007 05:06 UTC
timbobsteve
Member since:
2006-06-25

Vista is not ready for Enterprise. I wouldn't touch it with 10 foot pole. We had a small test user group running Office 2007 and it caused more problems than any previous test/upgrade from MS. If that is any indication of what Vista is like to work with in Enterprise then you can forget it.

NOTE: I have used Vista @ home and even there it failed to impress and brought up more problems than it solved. For all its fancy gimicks and flashing lights, it failed misserably to better my computing experience in any way.

At this stage I would be more likely to use OLPC SugarUI than Vista, but hey... thats me.

Reply Score: 3

ic how it is
by poundsmack on Thu 12th Apr 2007 05:12 UTC
poundsmack
Member since:
2005-07-13

where was all the resistance from the cunsumers/comunity when windows ME stopped being shipped. I for one was devistated ;)

Reply Score: 1

Alternatives
by Luminair on Thu 12th Apr 2007 07:22 UTC
Luminair
Member since:
2007-03-30

I wonder if MS will actually push people toward alternative software when they push them from XP to Vista.

I know I am hoping for all the emulation and virtualization folks (vmware, xensource, wine, cedega...) to steam toward a world with fewer borders between operating systems.

I can see the future now: OpenSolaris with a Linux Container running Cedega running DirectX 9 for Windows games!?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Alternatives
by Kroc on Thu 12th Apr 2007 08:19 UTC in reply to "Alternatives"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

Half of new Mac owners are Windows switchers. So the answer is yes, Microsoft are pushing people away from Windows onto alternatives. The real question is if businesses are taking the same leap onto things like Linux?

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Alternatives
by BluenoseJake on Thu 12th Apr 2007 13:00 UTC in reply to "RE: Alternatives"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

half of 3% I bet MS is scared of that

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Alternatives
by Kroc on Thu 12th Apr 2007 14:33 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Alternatives"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

Or 500'000 people a quarter, 2'000'000 a year. That's not an insignificant number any way you slice it. Get real, Mac might be 3% worldwide, but in certain industries (like design and print) it's over 50%, and if you look at just consumers and not businesses, Apple are a significant player.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Alternatives
by BluenoseJake on Thu 12th Apr 2007 15:11 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Alternatives"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

3% is still 3%, however you slice it. You can cut the numbers anyway you like, but it is still only 3% of the ENTIRE DESKTOP COMPUTER market, not per quarter, but OVERALL, regardless if some industries is 50%. I use Ubuntu mostly myself, but I do realize it is a Windows world, and so does MS

Reply Score: 1

RE: Alternatives
by trenchsol on Thu 12th Apr 2007 16:10 UTC in reply to "Alternatives"
trenchsol Member since:
2006-12-07

Maybe Microsoft does push some consumers to other platforms. If you can sell 100 products for 50$ each, it is going to take much less effort than selling 1000 products for 5$ each. If you have distinguishing brand, perhaps you can get away with it.

Reply Score: 1

v xp
by twistys on Thu 12th Apr 2007 10:35 UTC
Both good and bad...
by riha on Thu 12th Apr 2007 11:16 UTC
riha
Member since:
2006-01-24

It all depends on the Service Pack. If it is released before the end of the year i think it is a good thing to do, but if no Service pack or fixes for all the compatibility issues are released, then it is an bad thing and i think that if that is the case, then a lot of people will go over to macosX and linux instead.

Reply Score: 1

Developing World
by alucinor on Thu 12th Apr 2007 12:14 UTC
alucinor
Member since:
2006-01-06

What about developing world IT markets, like the BRIC countries + eastern europe? Most people and companies in these countries can't afford hardware to run Vista as efficiently as XP. I mean, I'm sure they're more interested in getting things done than obliquely flipping through pseudo-3D windows or DirectX 10 videogames. Linux is going to start to look more and more attractive (vs. Windows Starter Edition, LMAO) since it better reflects the real needs of the majority of the next decades' stakeholders, not this masturbatory pipe dream MS is smoking.

I figure MS will catch on in time, but will they be able to find a volume big enough to sate their need for growth? It's like Goliath drinking weight gainer; eventually he's going to get so heavy he starts falling over the potholes created by his own two feet (Windows on the one foot, Office on the other).

Break up the company!

Edited 2007-04-12 12:17

Reply Score: 1

Who cares?
by monkeyhead on Thu 12th Apr 2007 12:28 UTC
monkeyhead
Member since:
2005-07-11

Last year, the big complaint was that Microsoft hadn't released a new OS in so long.

Fast forward a year, the new OS is out, and now folks are complaining because Microsoft is going to stop selling their 'out-dated' OS.

After all the R&D they dumped into Vista, I'd be shocked if they didn't stop selling XP.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Who cares?
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 14:36 UTC in reply to "Who cares?"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

Last year, the big complaint was that Microsoft hadn't released a new OS in so long.

Fast forward a year, the new OS is out, and now folks are complaining because Microsoft is going to stop selling their 'out-dated' OS.


That's because when a company that makes as much noise as Microsoft releases its first new OS version in six or seven years, you expect it not to suck.

Well, you do if you aren't paying attention.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Who cares?
by monkeyhead on Thu 12th Apr 2007 18:02 UTC in reply to "RE: Who cares?"
monkeyhead Member since:
2005-07-11

What does it 'sucking' or not have to do with with them discontinuing an old out-dated product line?

I get deja vu when I hear all the complaining about Vista. It was the same basic crap when XP was released.

I don't even like Microsoft or their products, but I'm not daft enough to not realize 90% of what people complain about is baseless nonsense.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Who cares?
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 18:07 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Who cares?"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

What does it 'sucking' or not have to do with with them discontinuing an old out-dated product line?

Because people want something that doesn't?

I get deja vu when I hear all the complaining about Vista. It was the same basic crap when XP was released.

There is one difference: The non-techie crowd agree.

I don't even like Microsoft or their products, but I'm not daft enough to not realize 90% of what people complain about is baseless nonsense.

Irrelevant, since that's true about anything.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Who cares?
by Almafeta on Thu 12th Apr 2007 14:37 UTC in reply to "Who cares?"
Almafeta Member since:
2007-02-22

Last year, the big complaint was that Microsoft hadn't released a new OS in so long.

Fast forward a year, the new OS is out, and now folks are complaining because Microsoft is going to stop selling their 'out-dated' OS.


The general rule to get along well on OSNews is to assume that Microsoft (and by extension, all other closed-source) can do no right, and that Linux (similarly, all other open-source) can do no wrong.

Reply Score: 2

v RE[2]: Who cares?
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 15:03 UTC in reply to "RE: Who cares?"
RE[2]: Who cares?
by trenchsol on Thu 12th Apr 2007 16:13 UTC in reply to "RE: Who cares?"
trenchsol Member since:
2006-12-07

Indeed.....critical thinking is good only for infidels and apostates.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Who cares?
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 17:23 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Who cares?"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

Indeed.....critical thinking is good only for infidels and apostates.

I'm glad to hear you admit that.

Reply Score: 2

Damn them....
by BluenoseJake on Thu 12th Apr 2007 12:46 UTC
BluenoseJake
Member since:
2005-08-11

For giving you a year after the release of thier new OS to continue purchasing thier old one, I don't think many other commercial software companies do that. Plus, you'll still be able to buy the retail versions, or just make a copy, Just like Win98 holdouts have been doing for years.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Damn them....
by Snapper on Thu 12th Apr 2007 16:59 UTC in reply to "Damn them...."
Snapper Member since:
2005-11-16

By BluenoseJake (1.68) on 2007-04-12 12:46:48 UTC

For giving you a year after the release of thier new OS to continue purchasing thier old one, I don't think many other commercial software companies do that. Plus, you'll still be able to buy the retail versions, or just make a copy, Just like Win98 holdouts have been doing for years.


Sun is still supporting Solaris 8, 9, and 10.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Damn them....
by BluenoseJake on Thu 12th Apr 2007 21:44 UTC in reply to "RE: Damn them...."
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

and MS will support XP until 2012, they just aren't going to sell it to OEMs to install on new computers. Not the same thing at all

Reply Score: 2

Damn them....
by BluenoseJake on Thu 12th Apr 2007 12:47 UTC
BluenoseJake
Member since:
2005-08-11

Seems to have posted twice, don't know why

Edited 2007-04-12 13:04

Reply Score: 3

XP works okay but Vista is sexy
by buff on Thu 12th Apr 2007 13:38 UTC
buff
Member since:
2005-11-12

I am mostly a Gnome linux user type. I occasionally have to use Windows to run TurboTax or MS Office when a file messes up in Open Office. The other day a coworker of mine bought a new PC with 4 gigs of RAM and running Windows Vista. I played around with Vista for several hours and I was impressed. It felt very smooth. All the desktop eye candy makes it look very slick, sexy almost. For a second I almost thought I was on a Mac. It made me realize that I didn't really need Vista since XP was working fine for me but Vista has huge consumer appeal since it looks so good. When MS stops updating security patches for XP then I will have to look at it. The reality is though a year from now when all the driver issues with Vista are fixed it will be a pretty decent OS.

Reply Score: 3

who is complaining
by trenchsol on Thu 12th Apr 2007 14:00 UTC
trenchsol
Member since:
2006-12-07

Considerable share of those complaining are the ones that don't use Microsoft products at all. The rest just don't like new product.

The truth is that nobody is forced to use the product she/he doesn't like. One can use MAC, some easy to use BSD, like PC-BSD or Desktop-BSD, Solaris or Linux.

If the specific software is required, business can be reorganized. For example, I have been working in big news agency, and photo department had two MACs for special applications, the rest were Windows PCs.

If Microsoft made wrong marketing decision, it will hurt their business and lower their profits. If not, then they did the right thing. Narrowing the number of platforms to maintain certainly lowers the costs.

Reply Score: 1

We did it to ourselves.
by systyrant on Thu 12th Apr 2007 14:04 UTC
systyrant
Member since:
2007-01-18

I'll admit this puts a little blood back into my face. I realize XP can't be supported forever, but I just don't think Vista is going to be up to the task by the end of the year. Moreover I feel like now Microsoft is going to rush out patches for Vista that will probably only cause more problems.

At home I'm giving up Windows for Linux and I hope a Mac (saving my pennies), but at work it's impossible. Neither Linux nor the Mac will run the software we have and there is no alternative that will run on either platform.

However, the only people that need to be blamed for Microsoft's dominance is ourselves. Even after we all got a clear view of how Microsoft is we just kept right on supporting them. Oh, well. We'll all burn in the hell Microsoft created and thank Bill for the opportunity.

I have a feeling that I might be moving out of the IT business sometime around the first of the year. I'm rather tired and burnt out. The computer industry just seems like a big mess of B.S. to me anymore.

Reply Score: 3

RE: We did it to ourselves.
by buff on Thu 12th Apr 2007 14:37 UTC in reply to "We did it to ourselves."
buff Member since:
2005-11-12

At home I'm giving up Windows for Linux and I hope a Mac (saving my pennies), but at work it's impossible. Neither Linux nor the Mac will run the software we have and there is no alternative that will run on either platform.

What you mentioned here is what keeps me using XP occasionally. I do most of my work on linux but some of the applications just don't give me what I need. For example, I was using Open Office and it kept messing up this file another student sent me. The images were jumbled and the spacing was messed up. I ended up using Word 2003 to fix the file. I found the grammar checker in Word pretty nice too and it helped me out. I could have installed Wine or virtualized XP but I just wanted to make a quick change. I am convinced that desktop linux for Windows users will not take off until either emulation or virtualization of Windows applications is transparent to users. That really is the holy grail missing which would allow a desktop migration for previous Windows users.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: We did it to ourselves.
by systyrant on Thu 12th Apr 2007 18:41 UTC in reply to "We did it to ourselves."
systyrant Member since:
2007-01-18

You may very well be right. The one thing that many "die hard" Linux users can't or won't understand is that the majority of people who use computers could care less about what OS it's running. It's all about the applications. I want to support open source as much as possible, but I still have to get things done.

I'm not a developer and I can't say with any certainty why many open source applications aren't as good as their proprietary brethren, but my assumption from reading other articles is that they lack any real organization or leadership.

My feelings on the whole Linux Desktop subject is that Linux will take off when the following things happen: applications that people want to use become available (either through virtualization, emulation, or because the developer decides to port it to Linux); it becomes stupid easy to use (without sacrificing the ability to get down and dirty), and when we have two or three really good versions.

To comment on my last item. I believe we have at least two really good Linux systems for the desktop. Ubuntu and Suse. It's a personal opinion base on my experience. I've tried out Fedora, Ubuntu, Suse, Mandriva, debian, etc., but I was only comfortable with Ubuntu and Suse. It doesn't mean the others are any less qualified to run as a desktop machine.

Reply Score: 1

It is games
by Edward on Thu 12th Apr 2007 15:48 UTC
Edward
Member since:
2005-09-17

That I still have windows for, oh & ya MS is one money hungry company. Plus, why do you have to wipe your drive to do a install of windows, with OS X doesn't it just deletes the system folder or whatever to do a fress install?

Edited 2007-04-12 15:51

Reply Score: 1

oh, boy....the cycle continues
by imstillatwork on Thu 12th Apr 2007 17:46 UTC
imstillatwork
Member since:
2007-03-22

that's right... Am I the only one that sees it?

When windows 98 came out everyone (techs) said:
* It's too slow, I'm staying with 95
* crashes randomly - locks up
* No reason to upgrade 3.1/95 does everything I need


When XP came out tech people HATED it..
* too slow!!
* doesn't have drivers!!
* buggy!!
* I'm sticking with 98 - it's THE BEST! (see above)

Now Vista is out...
* "too slow"
* nothing new
* no reason
* bad drivers
* I'm going to stay with XP, its the BEST EVER! (see above..)

So all i can figure is that people like to piss and moan... I don't get it? Am I missing something here?

Reply Score: 2

RE: oh, boy....the cycle continues
by trenchsol on Thu 12th Apr 2007 17:56 UTC in reply to "oh, boy....the cycle continues"
trenchsol Member since:
2006-12-07

All that you mentioned is true. Most of the people realy had what they needed with older platforms. There was a security problem, but it did not go away.

People upraded because they were not able to run new software, not because they lowed the OS. I like to play a couple of first person shooters, and I am realy sorry that they don't work on Win95.

Reply Score: 1

RE: oh, boy....the cycle continues
by Kroc on Thu 12th Apr 2007 18:17 UTC in reply to "oh, boy....the cycle continues"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

What has been the same every time is that every new version of Windows has been slower and less efficient on the same hardware. It's taken at least a year before the new OS ran acceptably. The track history you've pointed out is also the fault of Microsoft and not just picky users.

Linux and Mac users literally can't wait to upgrade, because it brings more speed every time, not more regressions and headaches like Windows.

Reply Score: 2

imstillatwork Member since:
2007-03-22

"Linux and Mac users literally can't wait to upgrade, because it brings more speed every time, not more regressions and headaches like Windows."

HA... freaking HA.
So any version of os X is just snappy and fine on first / second gen imac hardware? okey dokey good buddy.

Reply Score: 1

psychicist Member since:
2007-01-27

No, he probably didn't mean to say that. But you can be sure that any hardware that runs Linux or OS X well today will run the newest Linux or OS X versions even better in five years without any hardware upgrades.

You can't say the same thing about Windows. Even though OS X is not very fast by default it hasn't become slower over the last few years either.

Reply Score: 1

imstillatwork Member since:
2007-03-22

owell. I don't really care. just seems like vista bashing is the trend, so all the cool people jump right on that wagon.

I've made it a point to try a new Linux version once a year, but missed last year - I've got all new hardware this year - so should be fun.

I also follow be - haiku very closely and ran r5 for over a year as my only platform. I really only switched back to windows for games, and that's all I've supported for work. Now I'm developing - and don't do support. I'm open to anything that works. I'm not going to buy a mac when I already have some top of the line hardware available. And honestly Windows has never prevented me from doing anything. It's comfortable and works. (for me)

Reply Score: 2

psychicist Member since:
2007-01-27

Well at least you have experience with systems other than Windows so that should make you already more credible than many that have only ever used Windows and consider it the pinnacle of computing.

I have never used BeOS but I am looking forward to Haiku and ReactOS development. Even though I am primarily a Slackware Linux, BSD and Solaris user I still like to try out other operating systems.

The problem is not really Windows, but more the company behind it that is more concerned with furthering their own financial position than customer satisfaction and technical excellence.

I wouldn't have a problem with an (arguably) technically inferior Windows OS that would just keep running and be fairly secure like Unix/Linux systems do. But the fact that Microsoft has failed time and again to realise this has made me abandon Windows five years ago.

I have "converted" many relatives and friends to Linux OSes, be it Slackware, (K)ubuntu or even the slower OpenSUSE. But I don't force them not to run Windows. I just install it in VMware so they have access to it when they want it or need it and they access their files via Samba shares.

Still I get very few calls for support since the Linux systems keep running. And nowadays even 3D is starting to work in virtual machines so you can play games and use 3D applications in them.

I'm glad that Windows works for you and if you're comfortable with it please keep using it. It was too unstable for me even without internet access and all. Windows XP SP 2 has certainly improved this for many people.

Windows works better for people that have knowledge about their system and know what to do and what not, also on the internet. But many not so knowledgeable people don't and I don't think it is the right thing for them.

I don't own or use Macs either BTW :-)

Reply Score: 1

Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

"But you can be sure that any hardware that runs Linux or OS X well today will run the newest Linux or OS X versions even better in five years without any hardware upgrades.

You can't say the same thing about Windows."


The quotient "speed = hardware / software" is increasing very slowly in the MICROS~1 world (with Intel inside)... but who's using a five year old PC?! :-)

Reply Score: 2

imstillatwork Member since:
2007-03-22

I had been running 2003 server on my dual pIII 866mhz up until just several months ago. Not the fastest, but snappy for daily activities & running a few apps. defiantly faster than some early P4's (yuck)

I think I built that in oh, um... 1999

My only reason for upgrading hardware was a power failure that fried the board & ram & psu - figured might as well start fresh & new.

Reply Score: 1

psychicist Member since:
2007-01-27

As a matter of fact I am. But I am using it as a server nowadays. Not just for serving files but for VNC sessions that I keep running all the time and I connect to from my slower six year old laptop.

Both have never run better than they do now with the latest version of Slackware and future versions promise even more performance.

Reply Score: 1

Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

"As a matter of fact I am. But I am using it as a server nowadays. Not just for serving files but for VNC sessions that I keep running all the time and I connect to from my slower six year old laptop.

Both have never run better than they do now with the latest version of Slackware and future versions promise even more performance."


Same at work: P2/333 with BSD, runs fast and stable. No need to buy something new which consumes more energy.

The "who still uses..." was a rhethorical question. Reality tells that still some of these old, "obsolete" or "antic" boxes are still in use. Especially Linux can give them the power to run as a useful tool again.

Reply Score: 2

Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

As a matter of fact it is, actually. I would know I own both new and old hardware. Do you even have a Mac?

Upgrading an old machine from Panther to Tiger makes it actually go faster

RAM is the only limiting factor, but even the old machines will support 768MB or more of RAM which can be easily picked up.

Reply Score: 2

flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

Bad/poor/slow/buggy drives are the problem of the vendor, not Microsoft. The driver framework is just fine.

Reply Score: 2

RE: oh, boy....the cycle continues
by ma_d on Fri 13th Apr 2007 00:56 UTC in reply to "oh, boy....the cycle continues"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

When windows 98 came out everyone (techs) said:
* It's too slow, I'm staying with 95
* crashes randomly - locks up
* No reason to upgrade 3.1/95 does everything I need

Windows 98 was like ten times more sluggish than Win95... Install Win95 on a Win98 era machine (if the drivers work) it screams! It's actually really impressive.
98 added virtually no new graphics and was only marginally more stable, it wasn't worth an upgrade. Microsoft should have waited on 95 before they released and 98 should have been NT4.1orso with a nicer desktop.


When XP came out tech people HATED it..
* too slow!!
* doesn't have drivers!!
* buggy!!
* I'm sticking with 98 - it's THE BEST! (see above)

It was buggy, partially because the old drivers "worked". WinME had a similar problem, unfortunately for it driver writers never quite got the news.
Windows XP wasn't really usable until SP1 and it wasn't ready for the world it was entering until SP2.


Now Vista is out...
* "too slow"
* nothing new
* no reason
* bad drivers
* I'm going to stay with XP, its the BEST EVER! (see above..)

Vista does feel a little slow. I can't talk a lot about it because I only use it under emulation.

What you need to understand about the complaints is that most of them are pretty accurate. They're complaining about actual issues. Some of them will be resolved as a result, others just aren't resolvable without losing something more important.

It is actually valid to run an older piece of software past the release date of a newer version. It's called running a proven code base.

Reply Score: 2

imstillatwork Member since:
2007-03-22

Vista does feel a little slow. I can't talk a lot about it because I only use it under emulation.

What you need to understand about the complaints is that most of them are pretty accurate. They're complaining about actual issues. Some of them will be resolved as a result, others just aren't resolvable without losing something more important.

It is actually valid to run an older piece of software past the release date of a newer version. It's called running a proven code base.


Don't tell me what I need to understand as if I don't... The fact is that the cycle is continuing. It's happened and will happen. That's all I'm saying. That's all I was pointing out. cool?

Reply Score: 1

Hmm...
by Novan_Leon on Thu 12th Apr 2007 19:32 UTC
Novan_Leon
Member since:
2005-12-07

I hate to be the one to say it but, Linux is nowhere NEAR being able to compete with Windows. Mac, yes; Linux, no.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Hmm...
by psychicist on Thu 12th Apr 2007 19:37 UTC in reply to "Hmm..."
psychicist Member since:
2007-01-27

Maybe you could elaborate on why this is so? Because this is not what my experience tells me and lately more and more people around me get interested in Linux out of their own will ?!

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Hmm...
by Laurence on Thu 12th Apr 2007 20:00 UTC in reply to "RE: Hmm..."
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Maybe you could elaborate on why this is so? Because this is not what my experience tells me and lately more and more people around me get interested in Linux out of their own will ?!


The problem with Linux is it's just too damn confusing for the noobies. Even down to picking which distro to go with can be a mine field if you really don't know your debians from your red-hats.

Personally I think it will take a centralised corperate OS (like SkyOS, but obviously not SkyOS) to truely rival Windows in the PC desktop wars - however no other non-windows PC OS is as near to complete as Linux is, so the war is a long time to come.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Hmm...
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 21:03 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Hmm..."
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

The problem with Linux is it's just too damn confusing for the noobies. Even down to picking which distro to go with can be a mine field if you really don't know your debians from your red-hats.

I love this. Paternalism is alive and well and living in Corporate America!

Seriously, if this is the problem then people need to know they can go to their hardware vendor and get one. Another reason for Microsoft to Fear Dell, and for everyone else to Praise Them.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Hmm...
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 20:57 UTC in reply to "Hmm..."
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

I hate to be the one to say it but, Linux is nowhere NEAR being able to compete with Windows. Mac, yes; Linux, no.

I disagree. People are wary of monopolies. Microsoft have gotten away with it but any change is going to be away from monopolies in software, not towards monopolies in both software and hardware.

Reply Score: 2

Microsoft doing the dirty
by Laurence on Thu 12th Apr 2007 19:54 UTC
Laurence
Member since:
2007-03-26

last weekend I was out laptop shopping with the girlfriend (for the girlfriend) and she had a budget of just 400. For that price you can get a reasonable system (and one that's more than capable for her needs) but every system had Vista pre-installed. I kept asking the shop-keepers if there was any way I can ditch Vista (as even the pricer systems in her budget only just met Vista minimum requirements) and install XP or Linux and they simply said it would be breaking the warrenty to install anything other than what was supplied.

It was very frustraiting given that the laptop barely runs the OS even with Aero turned off and as it's not my laptop, I'm not willing to break the warrenty.

Microsoft clearly have screwed over their hardware manufactorers as well as the Jo Public

Reply Score: 1

Customer desire?
by eantoranz on Thu 12th Apr 2007 21:35 UTC
eantoranz
Member since:
2005-12-18

I'm sick and tired of listening to commentators here and there say that "FLOSS people need to get in touch with customers". Is this the perfect example of "listening to customers" that we have to take?

So much for customers desire (Give me a brake!!!)

Reply Score: 1

RE: Customer desire?
by twenex on Thu 12th Apr 2007 21:44 UTC in reply to "Customer desire?"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

A vote! A vote! My Linux for a vote!

On second thoughts, you can't have my Linux. Do you do Windows? ;-)

Reply Score: 2