Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 28th Nov 2012 15:17 UTC
Permalink for comment 543456
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/16/13 9:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/15/13 22:44 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2009-08-18
The sales numbers they were providing were proof enough.
Sales are based on licenses sold. Vista Pro included a license for XP, so did Win7. During the first few months when MS was claiming record sales, it was also shown that most were reverted to XP systems. So, sale of Vista/Win7 did not necessarily mean someone using Win7.
Doesn't really matter, Gym memberships work on this very principle. Also even if you half the numbers it is still pretty impressive the number of sales.
Again it is still a purchase, it is still money going into the kitty.
Also interestingly, nobody criticises Adobe for this pricing model ... Would it be soo hard to consider that they are rewarding existing customers by lowering the price for the update?
At worst count we are still talking millions of licenses sold.
Actually Windows XP was very flakey. There was piss poor support from programs at the time (most used hacks from the Windows 9x line). Some drivers just didn't exist (OpenGL on S3 cards was just a no-no and S3 cards were fairly common or SIS cards in Laptops).
Most of the time you could use a Windows 2000 driver, but I have run into cases when you couldn't.
Let not forget about the MS blaster worm.
Also the default display driver in Windows XP RTM does not support anything past 1024x768 ... thankfully I found nlite.
I fail to see how UAC is any different to OSX and Ubuntus "sudoing" to admin.
UAC was a good thing IMHO. I know it isn't perfect, but at least made people pay attention to the installer.
Modern problems with XP were that it was painful to install updates, Windows Vista, 7 and 8 they just happen in the background and I can still use my PC.
The Metro/Modern UI is a matter of debate, but it doesn't mean that Windows 8 is insecure OS or that it isn't functional in Desktop mode (tbh I really haven't missed the start menu).
Actually Windows has been pretty damn secure since VISTA, most of the exploits require a user actually running code as Admin ... no system not even OpenBSD/Linux etc can protect against that.
There aren't many holes when it comes to the actual OS itself. It is rely on the user being dumb. The only virus that has been successful was Stuxnet, which took security experts years to decipher its inner workings.
Unlike MacOSX which still ships on Mac with the firewall turned off.
I really wish these myths from the past (which was true until Windows XP SP2) that you keep clinging onto are laid to rest.
And if you even quote the number of malware for Windows, it is because it is the most popular desktop OS, not because it is insecure ... Android has had similar problems (and Nokia smart phones early 2000s ... bluetooth viruses).
The same security precautions on Windows can be said about any OS.
This isn't 2001 anymore.
Edited 2012-11-28 21:20 UTC