Linked by David Adams on Wed 23rd Apr 2008 17:23 UTC
Windows Hot on the heels of our previous story outlining the fiasco that Vista's release has been, TechRepublic's Jason Hiner predicts that Microsoft is aware of its blunder and will respond by making a release of Windows 7 ahead of schedule (primarily by overhauling Vista and calling it Windows 7, it seems) in order to encourage its enterprise clients to upgrade directly from XP to Windows 7.
Thread beginning with comment 311154
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Vista is just fine for me
by elektrik on Thu 24th Apr 2008 08:14 UTC in reply to "Vista is just fine for me"
elektrik
Member since:
2006-04-18

The reason most software fails to work on Vista is the fact that MS actually did the RIGHT thing for once and removed some of the cruft. It constantly amazes me that the same people who call for a from scratch rewrite of Windows are the same folks who complain about all of the incompatibilities in Vista. You can't have it both ways.


I would have to be bold enough as to disagree with you here to some extent. In the Apple world, for transition to OSX from OS9, they used (Apple people, please forgive my crude oversimplification) a virtual machine to run their software-My point is: Why would amaze you that people would expect the same from a company with such vast resources as Microsoft?

Reply Parent Score: 2

andrewg Member since:
2005-07-06

I would have to be bold enough as to disagree with you here to some extent. In the Apple world, for transition to OSX from OS9, they used (Apple people, please forgive my crude oversimplification) a virtual machine to run their software-My point is: Why would amaze you that people would expect the same from a company with such vast resources as Microsoft?


Classic sucked big time. It was incredibly slow on an incredibly slow OS and crashed a lot. Yes 10.0 was a beta at best and so slow that one could be tricked into believing the bouncing icons were animated backgrounds. 10.1 was the real release. If you used classic under 10.0 you would have known that apart from being slower than molasses running uphill in the middle of a Canadian winter there were many applications that simply would not run.

If anything Apple tricked its incredibly tolerant and at that time much smaller and more hardcore user base. They promised backwards compatibility, then when it sucked badly the relatively few and mostly small development companies ported their mostly small applications to the OS X. Companies like Quark took ages to get their software on OS X.

Reply Parent Score: 4

elektrik Member since:
2006-04-18

I can't comment on Apple hardware, as I don't touch it that often, but surely you can't believe that they *tricked* every single "hardcore" user? Could it be that perhaps you had a subjective experience?

No matter, it was just an analogy I used to point out that Microsoft could do something similar, and with extremely vast resources in comparison to Apple could create a VM that would be less "buggy" than the Apple example I gave

Reply Parent Score: 1