To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
It doesn't have to "not sell" to be a flop. Just as long the number of people and companies switching away from Microsoft technologies continues to increase, then all is well. Microsoft's dominance is not going to go away in the forseable future, and Vista's success is nothing more than the success of eggs on a chicken farm, but as long as people are discovering better alternatives, the consumer (and end user) benefits.
Sorry to say this. I'm hardly a fan of Vista, and completely agree with the 10 reasons stated in the article. Bu I definitely don't agree with you.
This sentence "despite the availability of (better) alternatives..."
Assuming XP is not sold anymore and OSX isn't available for any normal PC, I can't really see this "alternative" that is supposed to be better. Alternatives maybe, but hardly real alternatives for a whole lot of people. Some groups that come to mind are "gamers", "Officeusers" (which actually have tried and partially use OOo (such as myself) and realize it lacks a tremendous amount of features), "Designers" (which need Photoshop/Flash etc etc because photoshop is defacto standard like it or not) and say about anyone in need of specific software not available on other systems (Gee, that's quite a few).
It's getting better, it really is with web based apps and some alternatives getting more software every day.
But at the end of the day, what is "better" is what gets your job done! That means Vista will be THE alternative for say 60%+ of the computer using world. What I'm saying is there is LACK of ANY real alternative for a whole bunch of us
Edited 2007-01-21 20:29
i beg to differ. i agree many people are locked in to Windows pretty well, microsoft has succeeded there. but for many users, an average Kubuntu desktop can do what they need, and better than Windows XP (or Vista). linux' biggest drawback is that it's different, not that it lacks features.
Sure, the linux desktop isn't beter at everything. but for everything it does worse than Windows, there are three things it does better. and not just the maintenability, stability & security things you often here. The basic desktop stuff is better too. compare the KDE or Gnome menu to windows. if you are looking for an image editing app, where would you look? i'd say "graphics", not "Adobe"...
also plug'n'play is working better on linux in many cases. yesterday i gave a presentation, and my (very old) laptop had never seen an external screen. man, was that boring. i had already opened Kubuntu's screen config tool, and was prepared for some VI fun. but when i plugged the beamer's cable in, the screen just showed my desktop. no configuration at all, just working. well, i've worked at an helpdesk, and we got several ppl each day asking how to get windows to show their presentations...
really, i know it's hard to switch to another operating system, even if it's better than what you have. i have gone through that as well. but don't say just because it's different, it's worse...
sure, the linux desktop can't provide for everyone. but why should it? why not give ppl a choice? let the adobe photoshop lovers use a mac (it's superior in that area anyway). let game lovers use Vista and let everybody who wants to work on a pc use linux...
Why? That's not what happened with XP. I believe it took more than 3 years to overtake the 50% mark, but I could be remembering things a bit exaggerated. I do know that the uptake, especially in business, was slow even though "new computers ship with it."
Some people, businesses, install their old OS over the one that came with new computers.






Member since:
2005-07-07
if you see all the 'vista sucks' articles everywhere, you'd imagine it doesn't sell at all... but in a few years, the majority of computer users will be using it, despite the availability of (better) alternatives...