OSNews

LOL, sad but true.

"In conclusion, there is nothing wrong with voicing your disappointment online, but it is not okay to do so based on lies".

I don't remember having read lies in comments. There have been dropped features and you listed them in this article.

True; and lets remember, all the comments are nothing more than opinions - hence I find it funny when people take points off, all they prove is that the original poster made a point which makes them uncomfortable.

PS. your post was at -1, so I added an extra point to bring it up to 0 - I wish people didn't abuse the moderation system; its getting as bad as Digg and Slashdot.

Edited 2007-12-16 16:13

That's the summary i could never put into words myself. Although you missed some of the retarded features that are much like the ones added in XP to fix the previous release. In XP it was System Restore! Wow, let's ADD more software to recover the system after our faulty software. And in the next version, we'll ADD SuperSystemReadyBoostedRestoreV2 to try and repair the system, when SystemRestore fails.

Things like ReadyBoost .. to squeeze back 1% of the 50% performance they removed.. by .. eeeh.. hardware accelerating the UI? now, how did we manage to make it slower with hardware acceleration.. who knows.. ..i'm still appalled that Vista is actually slower.. if i had to put my money somewhere i'd rather buy XP Service Pack 3 than Vista!

But i'd have to agree with Thom on one thing.. we should be thankful they did not release more 'features' ..but then.. what are customers paying for ?
A 50% drop in performance? despite the $2-800 investment they had to make to make the damn thing run? Don't say Aero.. it's not a feature. Don't say ReadyBoost.. It costs even more, to get back a fraction of the performance you lost..
in fact.. just.. for the love of god.. mention a useful feature in Vista.. (for customers, not hardware manufacturers moving more product).

I'm so annoyed with this disastrous product!!!

I think the sadest part - I don't even think Microsoft knows what the customer wants in the way of operating system features. When Windows Vista was being developed it appeared they were falling into the trap of rather than leading they thought that they had to have almost every bit of feedback from the 'geek elite'. They thought that 'community' entailed listening to every whim and demand of the noisy wheel.

The net result, as far as I can see, is an operating system where it appears that features are just thrown at a product in a vein hope of actually having boasting points rather than actually adding features which add genuine usefulness to the end consumer.

I look on the *NIX world with the likes of GNOME and KDE, and they continuously not only add features but question features. GNOME questions whether having hundreds of features actually adds to the end user experience or simply makes things more complex than they need to be. Better still, software developers within these communities are willing to look at Mac OS X, look at Windows, heck, even look at Amiga and adopt ideas which are good.

At the end of the day many software companies become fixated on this idea of innovation - consumers don't care who came up with who first, who invented what first, what they want is a product that works. The product will be judged not whether it is the first to deliver a certain feature but how well it actually works within the operating system.

Edited 2007-12-16 22:48

//Wow, let's ADD more software to recover the system after our faulty software.//

Faulty software written by a third-party.

Nice try.