Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 24th Jul 2007 15:08 UTC, submitted by Uncle Fester
Hardware, Embedded Systems The head of PC maker Acer, Gianfranco Lanci, has hit out at Microsoft's Windows Vista operating system, saying that the 'entire industry' was disappointed by it. Few buyers have purchased new PCs specifically for Vista, Acer's chief says "The entire industry is disappointed by Windows Vista," the head of the world's fourth-biggest PC maker told the Financial Times Deutschland in its online edition on Monday. Never before had a new version of Windows done so little to boost PC sales, he said. "And that's not going to change in the second half of this year," Mr Lanci said. "I really don't think that someone has bought a new PC specifically for Vista."
Thread beginning with comment 258162
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I've heard this before......
by embleau on Wed 25th Jul 2007 19:06 UTC
Member since:

Let's see New version of Windows is terrible, OMG it's sucks. No need to upgrade. It's SLOW. Worst version of Windows yet. This is the end of Microsoft...... I'm staying on my old version of Windows. I'm moving to Linux, Solaris, Mac, Unix...

Now.... when did I hear this.....

OH YEAH.....

6 years ago when Windows XP was released.....


True not all of us have the funds to upgrade our hardware right away, but Vista WILL BE the mainstream OS within a year or two. Why? As a previous poster pointed out, Joe SixPack just bought that new computer 2 years ago and sees no reason to upgrade, but Joe Sixpacks kids are going away to College. So he gives kids old computer and buys a new one... with Vista. Kids go to college and decide they want to upgrade old computer to Vista, they get student discount at college. Seeing the treadlines here?

Microsoft did not and does not expect Vista to be an overnight landslide success. I remember hearing stories in 2001 about people buying new computers and removing XP for Windows 98 or 2000. This is common... it's called CHANGE and people fear it.

For most of the people out there who have tried Vista with bad results. I believe most of you tried it with the preconception that it will fail for you, so you nitpicked it to death and then gloriously proclaimed that it SUCKS.

I'm typing this on a older Dell Inspirion 1501 running Vista Business with Aero on and it runs fine. It doesn't I/O thrash, it just .... works.. and works fine.

90% of the Vista problems right now is NOT Microsoft's fault it's the hardware manufactures and their slowness on putting out new updated Vista Drivers. When Vista first came out HP didn't have a full driver for my Network attached All in One Printer. Their website said, just add a printer and make a network port for the printers IP. Great... but then I can only print, not scan or fax. It took them 3 months to put out a driver. Is that Microsoft's fault? Matrox still hasn't put out good video drivers for Vista. Is that Microsoft's fault?

I know many people, including the company that I work for, that have migrated to Vista already and have had NO problems and have been extremely happy with it.

Does that make Vista the perfect OS? Hellz no! No such beast, not even Linux is perfect.

I love this site but at same time I hate it, but I keep coming back. Linux users like to beat their chests and claim they are "enlightened" or not a "lesser minded" user. But some of them are also the first ones to show their ignorance and blant bias without research. SOME not ALL, I do respect majority of the peoples OPINIONS here.

Sorry for the rant,

Reply Score: 2

RE: I've heard this before......
by makfu on Wed 25th Jul 2007 22:46 in reply to "I've heard this before......"
makfu Member since:

Dropping all the anti-hype, and other nonsense, there are some really compelling reasons to like Vista such as prioritized IO, prioritized paging, a fairer scheduler, vastly improved audio, video and network stacks and a solid security model. That said, there is no denying that Vista hit some non-trivial initial snags that revolved around three key problems:

1. Several big hardware vendorsí drivers simply were not ready (as in badly, badly broken). While this problem has gotten much better, driver maturity is still a problem for some vendors and will likely remain so for a while to come. Some of this is due to the radical changes in several key driver stacks, some of it is Microsoftís fault for not pushing hardware vendors harder and a lot of this is just apathy and sloppiness on the part of some vendors.

2. Vista is big. You canít get around the fact that its in-memory footprint is bigger than XP. Yes, people have been misreading the memory counters and such. Yes, much of what people perceive as memory utilization is actually pre-fetched pages in the system cache (standby list). However, the actual working set of many of the base system processes is simply larger and there are new subsystems that just didnít exist in XP. This isnít all bad, as the system tends to scale much better on large memory configurations. That said, Vista really doesnít run well (e.g. as well as XP) with 1GB. It needs at least 1.5 to run well, which means 2GB for most peoples configurations.

3. Vista implements some cool IO technologies (IO priority, bandwidth reservation), but itís also susceptible to poor IO subsystem implementations. Some hardware vendors implemented disk subsystems with serious latency issues. The biggest problem is these systems may still obtain decent winsat scores, but actually perform very poorly in terms of actual user experience. Given item 2, Vista endís up doing more IOís (especially) on 1GB and less configurations than XP, thus highlighting the problem much more clearly. Systems with good storage subsystems (7200 RPM disks or 5400 RPM disks with large caches and a quality controller implementation) tend to perform quite well, even on lower memory configurations.

Now, with all that said, the above problems are in the process of being resolved or will simply become non-issues as the relative power of common hardware increases. Remaining issues that ARE actual bugs will get fixed (software isn't perfect people).

The Windows folks made some very hard decisions with Vista, including breaking a lot of drivers and legacy code in order to move the platform forward. These were good and necessary changes that will pay BIG dividends over the next few years. Furthermore, on a modern machine, with plenty of memory, a modern (dx9+) GPU and fast disk subsystem, Vista today is a better OS than XP.

Edited 2007-07-25 22:52

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: I've heard this before......
by lemur2 on Thu 26th Jul 2007 02:05 in reply to "I've heard this before......"
lemur2 Member since:

90% of the Vista problems right now is NOT Microsoft's fault it's the hardware manufactures and their slowness on putting out new updated Vista Drivers.

This perhaps arguable right now.

Vista does, however, contain a number of provisions which deliberately will make Vista stop working or work only with reduced functionality.

DRM "tilt" bits and WGA checks are just two such provisions that are known about right now.

When in the near future these "shoutdown Vista functionality" features begin to get triggered, either in error due to bugs or maliciously due to malware ... then we will begin to see a fallout of Vista problems that are due directly to Microsoft writing Vista in Microsoft's interest and not the user's interest.

Other features of Microsoft software that are undeniably written exclusively in Microsoft's interest and not the users interest is Microsoft's avoidance wherever possible of open formats and protocols. Lack of SVG support, attempts to make it so that Vista clients can be served only by Windows servers, poor support for web standards and utter refusal to include proper, integrated support for ODF in Office 2007 (that is, so that ODF could be chosen as the default file format) are the best-known examples of this.

All of these endemic and severe problems with Vista are directly and unequivocably Microsoft's fault.

Gianfranco Lanci is right.

Edited 2007-07-26 02:06

Reply Parent Score: 2