Linked by David Adams on Wed 23rd Apr 2008 16:31 UTC, submitted by CIozzio
Everyone's been talking for what feels like an eternity about Vista being a major blunder, and everyone has their theories as to why it happened. So why would John C. Dvorak be any different? He's got 11 reasons why the OS was destined to flop.
Thread beginning with comment 311031
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2007-07-13
Try linux - it's so far behind the times that it seems great at old shit.
What a load of bollocks that statement was. Admittedly Linux can be 6 months behind in some hardware support (usually new Intel chipsets and some new wireless cards) in general it is generally able to support very modern hardware these days (especially with Nvidia and Ati providing Linux drivers for their newer devices). Linux 'seems great at old and new shit' because it is designed well and is (slowly) starting to get the vendor support it needs.
Member since:2005-07-06
" Try linux - it's so far behind the times that it seems great at old shit.
What a load of bollocks that statement was. Admittedly Linux can be 6 months behind in some hardware support (usually new Intel chipsets and some new wireless cards) in general it is generally able to support very modern hardware these days (especially with Nvidia and Ati providing Linux drivers for their newer devices). Linux 'seems great at old and new shit' because it is designed well and is (slowly) starting to get the vendor support it needs. "
For me, I think the hardware support on Linux is pretty damn impressive, an as for the quality of the distribution - you won't hear a complaint from me; today they're leaps and bounds ahead of anything Microsoft can put out.
With that being said, people don't run operating systems, they run applications. That is what is sorely missing from Linux (and *NIX in general) - mainstream applications from big name vendors. Photoshop Elements for example, an Office suite which doesn't take aeons to load (ok, and exaggeration, but OpenOffice.org is hardly setting the world alight in terms of 'teh snappy').
With that being said, my expectations are probably higher than most peoples; having seen, however, my mother and father use Linux quite comfortably without any need of intervention by me (as technical support) on a regular basis, I'd say that Linux is more than ready for the desktop.
The key is marketing, and I think the best form of that is kiosks setup around the world (yes, I know, I think big) in malls and allow end users to come up and use the computers for themselves - "this is Linux"; just like Apple did in New Zealand and Australia, where they have no go from relative obscurity to something as a 'must have item'. If people just get to see Linux, ask the questions, I think they would be more inclined to choosing Linux (or what have you) over Windows. The problem is that the current crop of OEM's are so dependently suckling on Microsoft's tit - that it is Microsoft who is actually undermining their model (pushing prices down to unsustainable levels (low margins)) and that given the mercy they are at when it comes to shoddy third party drivers, it makes the whole experience with their hardware more uncomfortable and painful than it needs to be.
Edited 2008-04-23 22:25 UTC
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2008-01-19
I don't get all the problems with Vista, I agree to begin with there were driver issues, but that happens with every release of a new OS, it takes about a year for things to settle down.
I've been using Vista on all 4 of my home machines since release, and have gone thru the driver headaches, and have kept updating, and am now using SP1 across the board. It's all working great - it looks sleak, it's reliable, it's smooth and seems fast enough to me given it's a modern OS so should really demand modern hardware. There's nothing wrong with that.
After trying some laptops in the IT department I run at work, we've decided it's stable enough and good enough to now try to migrate to this on all our work computers - we waited till SP1 like most companies, and have found it works a lot better on a domain environment (folder redirection in group policy, wifi access to the domain being 2 main examples).
There are tonnes of little tweaks in it as well not just the modern look and feel, but the search is great, the tagging of photo's is amazing, the re-arrangement of the users folders is a godsend! Along with that it's got proper built in support for far more modern hardware.
There are some annoyances being a network admin I do get annoyed with the bloated network interface, but i can see how home users would prefer it.
I think the problem with Vista, is not so much Vista, but more the publics view of it:
1. XP is good, so for most people why bother? Not everyone is like me and wants the best of everything, but then I am an OS enthusiast, I love playing with operating systems.
2. Most people can't be bothered to upgrade or can't afford modern hardware, so expect moving on to vista to work on their old load of crap properly - it wont! It's like trying to put a Ferrari body on a Ford Escort and expect it to go at 180mph!
3. The changes in Vista have annoyed people who have gotten used to a certain way of doing things - like my network example earlier, it took me months, and as another example I still look for Add/remove programs in control panel... but you get used to it if you stick to it - it's about breaking old habbits.
4. UAC has probably annoyed people a lot too - but that was the point - UAC is great!! It's finally breaking that perception that everything should just run with admin rights... linux users should be happy with that, it's a good thing, software should be written properly, and users shouldn't be an administrator all the time (never in a corporate environment).
5. Old hardware isn't working properly - well big deal, it's OLD... why should they support old hardware? it's not cost effective to support some joe bloggs old scanner just for him - and the company who made it either no longer exist or no longer support it either - basically it's not Vista's fault, bug the manufactuer, and don't blame them for not wanting to - there's no money in it! Try linux - it's so far behind the times that it seems great at old shit.
I'm sure there's other reasons, and I'm sure there are genuine problems - but I would bet that 95% of it is down to the reasons above.
Edited 2008-04-23 18:50 UTC