Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 18th Feb 2009 23:28 UTC
Editorial Does Windows 7 contain more DRM than Windows Vista? Does Windows 7 limit you from running cracked applications, and will it open the firewall specifically for applications that want to check if they're cracked or not? Does it limit the audio recording capabilities? According to a skimp and badly written post on Slashdot, it does. The Slashdot crowd tore the front page item apart - and rightfully so.
Permalink for comment 349746
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

Ran out of time? How long exactly was it between the release of XP and the release of Vista?

Abusing me by way of message achieves what?

Windows Vista was restarted and based on Windows 2003 SP1 rather than Windows XP. There was a penalty that was paid because of it, but management at that time believed the penalty was worth it.

Considering that when the change was made - Netbooks and other resource constrained devices weren't on the radar, they were making decisions based on what one could reasonably expect in the future based on present conditions.

Well, yes, that is the claim, and there is no reason to suspect why it wouldn't be so. In fact, given Vista's poor performance, it is hard to see how Windows 7 could fail to be a significant improvement.

If it were DRM as the primary cause of performance issues, and given that the DRM has been retained, then going by the detractors logic, there should have been no significant improvement.

Criticising Vista's poor performance is relevant to this rant ... how exactly?

Thank you for ignoring the kernel of this post; it was a counter to DRM phobia and the black helicopter nonsense regarding it and the apparent 'performance sucking' of DRM by virtue of it just existing in Windows.

The two are interlinked, but hey, you chose to ignore it in favour of attacking me personally.

Reply Parent Score: 1