“With six separate versions of Windows Vista on the way, Microsoft has a marketing challenge on its hands. How will the company properly inform users as to which versions support which features? One part of the plan is now becoming clear: all four ‘consumer’ versions of the OS will be available to users even after installation. How? They’ll all be available for ‘instant online upgrade‘ once Vista is installed.”
yep, buy one version, and in the future run an online upgrade and change it into another
fair enough
what I can see happening though, is I change a motherboard/hard disk or graphics card, and the next time I run wau, it asks me to purchase a new key because it thinks I am a casual pirate ?
hmmmm
Microsoft would be better off trying to catch the professional pirates instead of making everyone life a pain.
BTW – Suse Watcher is years more advanced than WAU
Edited 2006-03-02 23:39
you got it wrong
it is just a front end to buying more parts that you did not buy in the first place.
the article is at fault here. it gives the idea that Windows has finally caught up with linux in the upgrade department.
but alas, it has not happened and they are still using the “gimme more cash” mentality for fixing their crap
but alas, it has not happened and they are still using the “gimme more cash” mentality for fixing their crap
Erm, depends, I’d say the ones who will get screwed the most are the resellers of Windows, and those who opted for the low end one and could find that they were better off jumping straight to ultimate.
I don’t know what the price will be, but if they make it too expensive to upgrade, no one will use it and head straight for ultimate (is that their real plan?), but if they make it too cheap, it’ll effectively kill of Ultimate in favour of people going for the low end and upgrading.
The idea of a tierd approach sounds nice (initially when I had a look), but looking back, it seems its going to be a sticky widget for end users and possibly in regards to support issues – oh well, I’m sure most will just go for ultimate to avoid the possible headaches that could occur in the future, when software starts saying, “requires Windows Vista Ultimate or better”.
That should only happen with the OEM versions.
If you change enough to where it thinks its a new computer, then you can call Microsoft and talk to a CSR.
I’ve had to do that before. It sucks. I much rather never have to worry about that kind of thing at all. Treating your customers like pirates isn’t very good business practice. I never have to worry about such a thing running Linux. In fact I’m sure every other OS’ licensing is less of a pain than Windows licensing.
If you’re not pirating it, you shouldn’t have a problem. Granted, it’s an inconvenience, but it’s something that you won’t even have to do that often. Most people won’t have to do it at all.
Wow, this really screws the OEMs out of some money now doesn’t it? I guess in the end the user benefits (somewhat), the OEMs get shafted, and MS gets a bigger share of the profit.
Yeah, but when you consider that less than 1% of Microsoft’s revenues are due to retail OS upgrades, it’s pretty clear that this isn’t a market that MS can grow very much.
I disagree. I think the main reason people don’t upgrade is:
1.) It’s ridiculously overpriced.
2.) They don’t know why it’s so expensive (support).
3.) They’re scared to death of installing it themselves.
4.) Shops are as crooked as car mechanics.
5.) It’s not advertised why they need to upgrade.
Microsoft will be solving 5, 4, 3, 2, 1. By:
1.) Only selling part of it to them.
2.) Not selling them a support contract.
3.) Telling them the install doesn’t even require their presence.
4.) Eliminating shops, with 3.
5.) Probably bugging users when they upgrade hardware or add some software or who knows how all that they might want the latest version.
No. Look at this screenshot:
http://www.edbott.com/weblog/images/anytime_upgrade_2.jpg
It tells you to go to the partner site to purchase the upgrade. The OEMs can be the ones to sell the upgrades.
Please do some research first.
Nah, that’s what you guys are for :-).
In all honesty you can’t exactly tell where you’re being sent to from that screenshot, so I’ll file this under the “inconclusive” category for now.
What if it’s a different “partner” than where the user purchased the original license? That OEM still gets the short end of the stick.
If the user bought a computer from an OEM, they have the OEM version of windows, they can’t purchase a license elsewhere.
Ok, I’m not a Windows user and will probably never even touch a machine running Vista, but I’m genuinely curious about something. If I bought Crappy Windows version A and then upgraded to Crappy Windows version B, what happens in 4 months when the bitrot comes and Windows has to be reloaded? Am I now shafted because I don’t actually have physical media to reinstall Crappy Windows version B?
Am I now shafted because I don’t actually have physical media to reinstall Crappy Windows version B
No. All version of Vista will be on the same DVD.
That doesn’t make much sense. If all versions of Windows are on the same DVD, then what is the point of the “online upgrade”?
Secondary thought here, if all versions of Windows are on the same disk then that means three days after it releases, someone will have cracked the encryption and found a way to install the best version with no need to spend more money. That could be quite possibly the dumbest move Microsoft ever made.
That doesn’t make much sense. If all versions of Windows are on the same DVD, then what is the point of the “online upgrade”?
You pay Microsoft, and Microsoft will generate a new key which you put in to Windows Vista, activate, and voila, an upgrade.
Don’t be surprised if in a few days there is a keygen and an activation generator as well out there – because that is all that will be required for things to roll along nicely.
Really…so cracking and installing other versions will not involve copyright infringement, then, but simply refusing to abide by the terms of the EULA? That’s interesting…
No. You are given a key that unlocks the bits to the upgraded version. When you reinstall, you can just use this key again.
edit: And as Thom said, all the bits are on the same media.
Edited 2006-03-03 00:49
I’m not sure about Vista but this is definitely not true for XP. You ARE pretty much screwed when you buy an upgrade and your original installation disk gets damaged. Windows won’t install unless you have that disk handy. It’s never an issue for me because I have plenty of Windows OS CDs hanging around but for the average joe it can be a real pain in the ass. Enough for him to go out and spend another $200-$300 on the full version of Windows.
obvious question: When did MS start allowing OEMS to pass out install CD/DVD again? Last I’ve seen Microsoft discourage the “Dells” of the world to stop passing out install CDs.. will that be changing?
in short how will the average user upgrade if they don’t get install media anymore?
Dangerous Observation: Anybody else notice that Vista seems to be getting more and more restrictive? I’ve thought for a long time that the delay was MS tatic to make drastic changes to how windows is sold, and what it can do…[think new, super-duper DRM, etc]. Notice how MS is wanting to tie OEM builds to motherboards lately. White Box still accounts for 25%+ of the PC market.. that’s a huge amount of sales MS will want to meddle with. I have a sneaking suspision that MS is going to start going after the “neweggs” of the world in the next OEM contract. Due to DRM and such, I think we’re going to see the OEM version have to be sold as “keyed” to your motherboard when you buy it. Soon, i think there’ll be no other way to get it. Also, I think step 2 is requiring all motherboards to include a copy.. so MS gets their dime all around. That also takes the OEM copies away from “white box” dealers, killing the “grey” market. With the “basic” version being stripped down and low cost perhaps MS would go directly to manufactures and pass it out for say $20 extra. In a few years that would eliminate the Piracy problem and secure their monopoly. Of course “what about OSS” you might say.. well MS views every Motherboard not sold with windows to be “pirated” anyway so business-wise they think they “own” the market.
Wether some motherboard makers step up and refuse to play remains to be seen…but there will probably be “concequences” to not bundling like perhaps not being able to use new DRM-based technologies Vista is loaded with. That would drive a wedge in the market between the “old” wide open computers and the “new” feature rich locked down ones. What maker [think ECS or PCChips] would want to be selling permenantly crippled hardware? Even they can’t take that chance.
This isn’t just a Windows issue though, this is a media issue.
… Is getting very, very tiring.
I’m beginning to believe that it’s just pure jealousy. Pure jealousy that Vista looks good, and has some really neat technologies to boot.
What’s the matter, folks? Seriously?
I’m beginning to believe that it’s just pure jealousy. Pure jealousy that Vista looks good, and has some really neat technologies to boot.
It’s because desktop linux is years behind Vista and they know it.
What’s the matter, folks? Seriously?
They’re clinically insane. They think source code is a religion.
They’re clinically insane. They think source code is a religion.
Religion and insanity seem to go hand in hand; just look at the evangelicals and penticostalists who believe that rolling around on the ground whilst blabbering some crap is a ‘sign that they’re receiving the holy spirit!’.
The problem with most Linux people is this; they think in terms of an IT oriented invididual; they failt to realise these things; computers to an end user, isn’t the centre of their existance, a regular end user see their computer as a tool, as a means to an end; and top of the list, the end user doesn’t care about source code; they just want the damn computer to work as expected, and thats it.
Too many people here, however, centre their whole existance around a computer – a glorified number device that gets things done, too bad many people here can’t see it for what it truely actually is – a tool.
> regular end user see their computer as a tool, as a
> means to an end; and top of the list, the end user
> doesn’t care about source code; they just want the
> damn computer to work as expected, and thats it.
Right. And so do i.
(MS-Windows didn’t do that reliably enough for me, so i switched away from it.)
The thing that _really_ sucks about thier monopoly though, is the incompatability in formats and protocols ,they created for continued revenue, which makes interoperation painfull and annoying for compatitors and thier users. So they/we complain about it…
Too many people here, however, centre their whole existance around a computer – a glorified number device that gets things done, too bad many people here can’t see it for what it truely actually is – a tool.
It’s unfortunate that people like you do not realize the importance of computing in the world today and especially the future. Computers have become tools for society and locking society into a monopolistic business with no intent of actually attempting to get things to interoperate is a bad thing. Networked information is growing everyday and as long as we have proprietary protocols and proprietary formats there is going to be serious problems with the networkability of information. The only real way to solve this is open source. Even open protocols and formats are NOT enough. Microsoft and others will just do what they always do, embrace and extend, hide features, and fail to fix bugs.
They’re clinically insane. They think source code is a religion.
Source code isn’t a religion, it’s power. Why do you think Microsoft guards its own source code so jealously?
The problem with most Linux people is this;
Yay! A generalization! These are always true!
they think in terms of an IT oriented invididual; they failt to realise these things; computers to an end user, isn’t the centre of their existance, a regular end user see their computer as a tool, as a means to an end; and top of the list, the end user doesn’t care about source code; they just want the damn computer to work as expected, and thats it.
“End users” don’t actually exist, they are a construction of the mind. Users are as varied as can be, and their needs/wants are as numerous.
Many users may not care about source code, but that does not mean that source code is not important. Very few people care about quarks and gluons, and yet without them matter wouldn’t exist. It’s a good thing open source exists, and that some people care about it, otherwise this would lead to an increased control of IT by just a few companies. And if you don’t think that IT has an impact on all of our lives, then you underestimate its pervasiveness…
But, hey, you’re right. Source code isn’t that important/valuable – so let’s just ask Microsoft to open it up!
You have a convoluted way of thinking. You are beyong regular help, I’m sorry.
End users do exist. Go to your local mall. There are your end-users. I would say that 90% of the people you see at the mall own and use a computer.
‘Nuff said.
All right, insults! Thanks for proving once more that you are incapable of rational debate, and that you will substitute personal attacks for the arguments that you clearly cannot come up with.
“End users” is a generalization, and generalizations are by definition highly flawed. There’s no such thing as a typical “end user”, each of them are different, and have different needs.
That said, if I was to go to the mall and check what are the computing needs of people, probably 90% of them would say: “e-mail, web surfing, listen to music, watch movies and write simple documents on a word processor/spreadsheet.” In other words, all things that can be done on Linux as easily and effortlessly as on Windows or Mac OSX.
But keep coming with the insults, it makes modding you down such a satisfying experience…
You conveniently ignore the point. Yes, there are many different kinds of users. No, 90% of computer users all have the same needs.
I’m afraid you’re not making much sense with your second sentence. Did you mean “No, 90% of users don’t have the same needs” or “Yes, 90% of users have the same needs”?
Yes, we have no bananas…
In any case I did not ignore the point. It is useless to refer to “average end users” when arguing because: a) it is a gross generalization
b) it ignores natural distinctions among users (office users, home users, hobbyists, education uses, etc.)
c) without doing market research we can’t just claim to know what this ill-defined “majority of users” wants/needs
But don’t let that get in the way of you expressing your strong pro-Microsoft bias…
I’m beginning to believe that it’s just pure jealousy. Pure jealousy that Vista looks good, and has some really neat technologies to boot.
It’s because desktop linux is years behind Vista and they know it.
Ok then. Vista hasn’t even shipped. How can Linux be behind something that hasn’t even been released? That makes absolutely no sense. Do you honestly think people are jealous of Vista? How can you be jeoulous of an OS. It’s not like we couldn’t use it if we wanted to. Your opinion that Vista looks good is just an opinion. I can give you plenty of reasons why it looks horrible, but I’ve mentioned them in previous articles many time before. Let’s just say the UI designer must have been a crackhead with a box of crayons.
What’s the matter, folks? Seriously?
They’re clinically insane. They think source code is a religion.
Look who is talking. You have absolutely no technical merit to back up what you are saying. You just proclaim that Vista is the best and that everyone who doesn’t believe that is a zealot. Obviously you don’t understand that it’s not just the source code and the religion you speak of was fabricated by people like you. Some people need/want the source code for idealogical and ethical reasons, not religous ones. Religion requires faith, source code is quite the opposite.
Edited 2006-03-03 15:43
I don’t think it’s jealousy. I just think some people find it’s the “cool thing” to do. I use Linux about 90% of the time, and run XP just whenever I “have to”. However, Vista looks really nice, and could be a great product. I’m betting the majority on here that bash it have never run it. I haven’t run it, so I have no clue how nice/crappy it is.
Yea, that’s why we’re bashing it. Cause we’re so jealous of the pretties!
If anything it’s probably because it’s almost an accepted sport in tech forums
. I’d take most of it with a grain of salt.
The master windows basher knows that Windows is the greatest of all Windows bashers…
I haven’t seen much Windows bashing on this topic.
All of the posts that I read prior to yours were simply questioning the business sense that prompted this kind of strategy, or they were irritated with the hassle that comes with product activation.
Most rational people should be wondering what kind of cost structure this is going to have simply because so few of us have an expendable income. On top of that there are those of us that are interested in business and economics. So, for good or bad, a deviation from old strategies by one of the largest companies in the world can make for some interesting speculation.
Also, product activation can be a pain in the butt. I don’t like pirated software, and I encourage others to always use their computers in ways that are completely legal. Unfortunately, product activation doesn’t stop real piracy. In most cases, product activation and similar tools are a hassle to honest customers rather than serving the purpose that they were created for.
I used to be a big fan of Windows and MS. I really thought they were doing some neat things, and that they had some great technology. They did, and they still do. However, I became somewhat disillusioned when I realized what Linux has to offer. I learned that some of the things I saw XP doing for the first time had been available in Linux for a while (sometimes it was done even better in Linux). As Linux has matured even more, Microsoft now has some competition that they didn’t have before. On the low end of the market (Apple has been offering competition at the high end), Linux now offers a very good experience to consumers, and a lot of times that experience comes free of cost and free of product activation.
Because Vista is Windows it will be practically impossible to completely avoid after it has come out. The great thing is that MS seems to finally be repsonding to competition (some of which is coming from prior versions of Windows in all fairness) with the design of Vista. I think I might actually enjoy using Vista. That does not mean that I’ll think it’s worth the price or hassle in all cases though.
Am I bashing Windows by saying that? No. I’m just being a discerning consumer that realizes other options exist. Others that I have shown Linux to (people that aren’t nerds or geeks) have realized the same thing, and some of them have decided that they prefer Linux regardless of the cost.
Windows bashing is getting very, very tiring.
It hard to take this seriously when it comes from someone who continually indulges in Linux-bashing, and who used to be called Linux is Poo up until recently…
I’m beginning to believe that it’s just pure jealousy. Pure jealousy that Vista looks good, and has some really neat technologies to boot.
What people are criticizing here is not Vista’s look, nor its technologies (which, IMO, are nothing to get too excited about in the first place, considering the OS X and Linux alternatives), but rather Microsoft’s convoluted ways of insuring its revenue stream.
In other words, people aren’t criticizing Vista (well, except for the name – I still think it’s a stupid, ugly name for an OS), but rather criticizing Microsoft. That you would so predictably jump to the monopolist’s defence shows that your own bias hasn’t changed much, despite your new moniker.
Err… convoluted insurance of revenue stream?
I’m sorry, but how? They are offering various entry points for people upgrading/buying Vista, and allowing them to upgrade VERY EASILY to a higher version later. This benefits customers more than Microsoft.
This benefits customers more than Microsoft.
Uh, no. The way to benifit customers would have been to offer a single version of Vista at a single price, with all options available for free after that.
In fact, those who will buy the media at the lowest price will get exactly that once crackers allow them to access the full media (which will require breaking an unenforceable EULA, but no copyright infringement).
The truth is that, with little more growth possible, Microsoft must find other ways to secure its revenue stream. Offering the same product at different prices (which I’m curious to see) is one of them. Yes, it’s the “same product”, because it is the same disk for everyone. Remember that in most U.S. states, and in basically every country outside the United States, you don’t “license” software, you buy it, and you own the copy you bought and everything that’s on it.
MS is basically saying that you don’t own what you own, basing itself on the legal farce that is a EULA.
Uh, no. The way to benifit customers would have been to offer a single version of Vista at a single price, with all options available for free after that.
Then the price of that edition would be higher than the current lower versions.
Come on man, they are a business. They are trying to make money.
Oh, I understand that they have to secure their revenue stream. On the other hand, I don’t believe that proprietary OSes are a good idea.
Let them make money on their productivity software, their Xboxes and their services. Having a closed, proprietary OS is in itself an abomination in this day and age…
To you. I see absolutely no problem with it.
It’s obvious that you don’t. I guess you wouldn’t mind either if the same company made 90% of all cars, but that’s your right. To me, that’s simply ignoring the danger of private monopolies.
What?
You said you see a problem with propietary OSes, and I said I disagree. Nothing was said about market-share.
All right, I should have been clearer. The reason I’m opposed to proprietary OSes is that they can become monopolies or near-monopolies, so to me market share is an integral part of it. My bad for not specifying it.
On the other hand, I have nothing against open-source software acquiring monopoly or near-monopoly status, because it belongs to everyone and no one, therefore it cannot by co-opted by private interests.
Sounds like commie talk to me!
:p
Commie-talk? Hardly. I’m not against private enterprise. I’m against private monopolies, though.
You said you’re against propietary Operating Systems (which are developed through private enterprise).
Besides, the smiley was supposed to signify that I was [mostly] kidding.
Yeah, I know, I gave further details about my position on the matter. 🙂
Er …
In case the Linux cake has gone to your head, along with its “work for free” attitude … Microsoft is a business. Businesses are in the businesses of making money. Microsoft is doing things to maximize their income.
You’re judging them based on this? Sorry, but the world is not a big utopia where money does not exist and poverty has been abolished. It’s not a Star Trek world. The low-down is that people will buy Vista, and most will probably be happy with it. Tough shit for you and your Linux crowd, isn’t it?
I use both Windows and Linux (and occasionally OSX, though admittedly not that often). Unlike you, I’m not biased, but I construct my arguments on an objective review of the facts. I know it’s hard to understand for someone who takes the OS wars so personally, but it’s true.
The low-down is that people will buy Vista, and most will probably be happy with it.
If it’s anything like XP, most people will get it pre-installed on their PC or they pirate it, and then most people will complain endlessly about it then call me and people like me to help them fixed their malware-infected boxes.
Wherever did you get the idea that people actually like Windows? The vast majority of users I speak to see it as a necessary evil. Anyone who’s not a fanboy (or has a rabid anti-Linux phobia, like you) understands that.
I see the zealots are in full force today, modding away.
Please mod this post down at least.
The core OS is the same for all the versions. The difference is the features. Different versions come with different features built-in.
If you want all the features of the entire DVD disk, that would be Windows Vista Ultimate. You click that option, pay for the upgrade with a credit card, get a key to unlock all the features off the DVD.
It’s really a great idea. You can upgrade any computer to any packaged version of the OS, simply and without having to buy software.
For example, you bought the lowest version, you bring it home and you feel like you want more, well you can just add more.
Right now, if you buy XP HOME, there is no way to upgrade to XP professional unless you go out and buy a copy.
If you want to do this with Vista, stick in the disk and put in your credit card and it installs the upgraded modules and applications.
As I said above, all versions of Vista have the same kernal, either a 32-bit one or a 64-bit one and you get both per product.
So If I buy Vista Ultimate, I not only get the 32-bit version but the 64-bit version as well.
🙂
This isn’t the case of “still using the ‘gimme more cash’ mentality for fixing their crap”, like that one user said. You get bug fixes and security updates like you do now for free, this isn’t talking about that.
This is talking about upgrading to the version of the OS you want without having to get in your car, go to compusa and buying yet another copy of an Operating system and paying for the CD and the Box etc..
Also just a note, Vista has basically the same number of editions as XP.
Home, Pro, MCE, Tablet.
They added a Home+some and a Pro (business)+some.
At first glance this seams to be a good thing for the consumer, as he can buy a cheap version and then upgrade when he needs more functionality. However, I really hope Microsoft can resist using Vista as a sales platform. I don’t want to get popups saying things like: Did you know that you can get feature X for only $Y. Upgrade today!
I hate that marketing blurb when they say, that they invented something that has been for a long time in other OSes. Linux supports online update for a long time (yast, swaret, apt, emerge and probably others). Wow – ‘instant online upgrade’ – what a name.
I hate that marketing blurb when they say, that they invented something that has been for a long time in other OSes. Linux supports online update for a long time (yast, swaret, apt, emerge and probably others). Wow – ‘instant online upgrade’ – what a name.
Right. But can you upgrade from Mandriva Discovery to Mandriva PowerPack, by only buying a new license key (so no new downloads or media to be bought)? Can you upgrade without buying new media or downloading new stuff from OSX to OSX Server?
Just to name a few.
No, you can’t.
Note: And for the rest: let’s keep the religion crap for in the living room, irc, or IM, please.
I don’t have to upgrade (SuSE), because I get everything I need for free (servers, databases, compilers, networking stuf, …). When I want to use something I just download it.
He didn’t say every distro.
However, you can upgrade from one version of Debian to a higher one, same with Ubuntu.
The fact that many linux distro’s don’t do tiering is simply because they’re free of charge anyway and the basic version often comes with almost nothing at all
.
Anyway, this is a really good thing to see from Microsoft. Really I think they should make a whole store out of it. They review drivers, why not review software too? I guess they might get into monopoly trouble on some things with that… But they could just allow super easy purchasing of extra Microsoft software.
Now when the user buys a tv card for that old hunk of junk (in 5 years) he can upgrade to media center with ease. Well, if Vista can keep a working install for 4 years that is
.
>Religion and insanity seem to go hand in hand; just ?>look at the evangelicals and penticostalists who
>believe that rolling around on the ground whilst
>blabbering some crap is a ‘sign that they’re
>receiving the holy spirit!’.
Well I don’t think Religion is bad at all, but that is another thread.
I think people can like linux without putting other Operating Systems down.
I think the real productive people on linux keep their mouth shut and just code. The other people use linux but are not productive and shoot their mouth off.
Also don’t confuse Open Source projects with just Linux. Open source is bigger than linux and there are open source projects on windows. I don’t care if people don’t like that or not that is the truth.
A lot of the open source apps that are on Linux also are on Windows as well and this will be even more true starting next year.
…MS checks for unique & legally bought keys every time someone tries to update via windows update?
Personally I’m pulling up a seat to this one — the world’s best hackers against a company that is increasingly tired of having its OSes hacked, covered by a media that is not allowed to report any successes.
Floyd
http://www.just-think-it.com
Does this mean Home Basic will be the only thing on the shelves and we will have to upgrade to the version we want?
>I’ve had to do that before. It sucks. I much rather
>never have to worry about that kind of thing at all. >Treating your customers like pirates isn’t very good >business practice. I never have to worry about such
>a thing running Linux. In fact I’m sure every other
>OS’ licensing is less of a pain than Windows
>licensing
You don’t have anything like this in linux as there is no pirating happening because the OS is free.
However, just because something is free doesn’t mean its better. When I go to E3 I get all kinds of free stuff, but most of it is crap.
I would rather pay to get an OS that I know works with my ATI card and my X-Fi audio chip than take a huge chance on something that isn’t going to work with these.
Windows activation is pretty simple, click a button and you are done. Wow that was hard!
Microsoft has made WA pretty flexible and you can change anything out of your computer you want and still have it work.
The talk about this subject is way overhyped, the fact that I upgraded by AMD 900 Mhz to a Pentium 4 and new motherboard, memory, soundcard, video card, monitor and a DVD-Recorder drive without having to worry is a pretty good indication that your fear is overhyped and probably ment as FUD.
Thanks for playing though.
However, just because something is free doesn’t mean its better.
Nor does it mean it’s worse.
When I go to E3 I get all kinds of free stuff, but most of it is crap.
You can’t compare promotional swag at a game convention with OS projects! That said, the Mario Kart DS stylus I got at the Nintendo booth last year was pretty freakin’ sweet.
I would rather pay to get an OS that I know works with my ATI card and my X-Fi audio chip than take a huge chance on something that isn’t going to work with these.
Why would you take a huge chance? Just check first to see if the hardware is recognized – most ATI cards are, and the drivers are okay (not as good as NVIDIA’s, but there you go). You can also bring a Knoppix disk to the computer store to check if the audio chip is recongnized (3D accel won’t work with Knoppix, because the drivers are proprietary and cannot be redistributed).
Since the PC will probably come with a version of Windows, you can also dual-boot and try a Linux distro while keeping the relative security of a Windows partition.
Since Linux is free, you’re not risking anything, so I don’t understand why you’re saying this. I would have given you the benefit of doubt, but since you claim that the original poster’s comment was “probably ment (sic) as FUD”, I don’t see why I should treat you any differently.
There’s no risk in trying Linux. Stop spreading FUD. Thanks for playing too.
Edited 2006-03-04 01:32
>Nor does it mean it’s worse.
Just stating my opinion here but in Knoppix case its a poor mans windows with less applications and less compatibility. That is my opinion though.
>Why would you take a huge chance? Just check first
>to see if the hardware is recognized – most ATI
>cards are, and the drivers are okay (not as good as
>NVIDIA’s, but there you go). You can also bring a
>Knoppix disk to the computer store to check if the
>audio chip is recongnized (3D accel won’t work with
>Knoppix, because the drivers are proprietary and
>cannot be redistributed).
Taking any of my time is taking a chance. Sticking a CD into a Dell machine does nothing to make sure it works on something else that it may not have the hardware for.
3D accel works fine on Windows, why would I want to bother with something like that on something else?
>Since the PC will probably come with a version of
>Windows, you can also dual-boot and try a Linux
>distro while keeping the relative security of a
>Windows partition.
I have two 40 gig hard drives that are full of windows stuff and only 200 megs on one hard drive left. I couldn’t fit linux on there if I wanted and it is a waste of space for me. Because I don’t care about linux, I have all I would ever need already on what I have.
>Since Linux is free, you’re not risking anything, so
>I don’t understand why you’re saying this. I would
>have given you the benefit of doubt, but since you
>claim that the original poster’s comment
I am risking wasting time and saving myself from grief of trying to get everything to work and trying to get everything to boot correctly without toasting anything else and I am wasting time on an OS that is of less quality than windows. Don’t you get it? If it was quality there would be more people that care, the only ones that care are the few brainwashed people that care about some kind of freedom that doesn’t exist.
Programs like firefox and winamp are free and I run them instead of installing an inferior OS trying to be a Windows clone with their own freedom software that is already on windows.
KDE is going to be on windows by fall, Apache is already on windows and so is GIMP, etc. Why would I care about linux? What advantages does it give me over Vista?
Vista is what I will pay money for instead of getting something of lesser quality for free.
Yes, I don’t mind spending money on software and helping out the industry, you should try it some time.
Yes I use free programs like firefox, winamp and all kinds of other programs, but when it comes to OSes, I pay for compatiblity and quality and while windows wasn’t always quality it is more than enough to quality now.
Just stating my opinion here but in Knoppix case its a poor mans windows with less applications and less compatibility. That is my opinion though.
I wasn’t suggesting using installing Knoppix, but rather using it to determine if the hardware is compatible.
Taking any of my time is taking a chance.
Because you think that using Vista won’t take any of your time? Win95 did, Win98 did, Win2K did, WinXP did, why would Vista be any different? Because the marketing people at Microsoft swear it’s the new Holy Grail of computing? Don’t be naive.
I can install a Linux system, with all productivity apps, and make 3D work with ATI graphics card faster than it takes WinXP to install – and then you’ve got to install additional software, drivers, anti-virus, firewall – and then do it again once bitrot or service packs slows down your Windows PC after a year or two (well, it happens with XP, why wouldn’t it happen on Vista).
You guys paint a very rosy picture of Windows, but I actually spend a lot of time fixing the Windows installations of ordinary users who constantly get infected/hacked. Windows has made me waste a lot more time than Linux ever did!
I have two 40 gig hard drives that are full of windows stuff and only 200 megs on one hard drive left. I couldn’t fit linux on there if I wanted and it is a waste of space for me. Because I don’t care about linux, I have all I would ever need already on what I have.
You should have said right away that you were heavily biased in favor of Windows, instead of trying to come off as objective on the issue, that would have saved us some time.
I am risking wasting time and saving myself from grief of trying to get everything to work and trying to get everything to boot correctly without toasting anything else
How can you toast anything? Again, more FUD.
If it was quality there would be more people that care, the only ones that care are the few brainwashed people that care about some kind of freedom that doesn’t exist.
Ah, now we come to personal attacks and insults. Figure.
The freedom does exist, and it’s easy to figure that out, and there are an increasing number of people that care. Growth is more important than market share, and Linux is growing.
Programs like firefox and winamp are free and I run them instead of installing an inferior OS trying to be a Windows clone with their own freedom software that is already on windows.
“Inferior OS” is a matter of opinion. I personally think that Linux is superior: more stable, more secure, more efficient, free. And, unlike you, I use both daily, so I believe I have a more complete appraisal of the matter than you.
Yes, I don’t mind spending money on software and helping out the industry, you should try it some time.
More ad hominem attacks? Good, this will justify me modding you down even more.
For your information, I pay for software. I’ve bought Mandriva boxed sets, I’ve bought Microsoft Office (I use it on Linux for compatibility reasons), I’ve given money to open-source projects which I use. I don’t pirate – it’s people who use Windows that pirate, not those who use Linux, by the way.
My daily work involves designing games for game consoles (PS2, Xbox, Gamecube, DS), and as such I am opposed to pirating software, just so you know. Now, how many Windows users don’t pirate software, hmmm? Yeah, I though so.
Proforma,
The tone and content of your posts seem to indicate that you have little knowledge of linux, or windows for that matter. That in itself is not an issue as we all have areas of expertise. However, randomly attacking the “quality” of software just because you do not appear to have the skill sets to install and operate it is rather pointless.
Refering to Linux as an “inferior OS trying to be a Windows clone” shows how little you know about Linux.
The main reason I use Linux is that I am not caged into the predefined world of Windows. I am “free” to try 39 different versions, extend it, gut it and tweak it into whatever I happen to need at the time.
If Windows does what you want, fine. Don’t assume that the four walls you seem happy to operate within is good for anyone other than yourself.
Windows is a kludge of functionality and interdependencies duct taped and bailing wired together. It tries to be all things at once and 20 years of history has shown it to be an extremely fragile and only moderately capable OS at every stage.
Windows is a like a tool box with one adjustable wrench, a multi-tip screwdriver and a hammer. You can get a lot of things done, but the whole thing is a series of compromises to work with.
If anyone is cloning anything, it’s MicroSoft trying to clone Windows into the flexible and modular OS that Linux IS. The best part of it is that they seem to have a following of people willing to pay for 20 years of Beta quality software upgrades.
At least with Linux Distro’s I can try BEFORE I buy. When something proves to be a poorly implemented POS, I can toss the disc in the trash and not be screwed out of 129 bucks. Or, perhaps Microsoft now “cheerfully refunds your money” when they sell you a defective product! Can we all say Windows 3.x, 95, 98, 98SE, ME. 2000 was pretty decent if not a little too fragile. XP is a joke of fluffy bubbleware. They use lots of “MY’s”, but it seems to me that nothing is mine.
Finally, “Why would I care about linux? What advantages does it give me over Vista?”
I will name just one:
“Freedom” to do whatever you want with it after you buy it, download it, copy it or however you get it.
So, proforma, just stay in your structured world of internet connection wizards and dancing paperclips. Enjoy the artifical boundaries that Microsoft has erected for you. You, like most sheeple, seem to be happy and function well when choices are made for you.
Baaahaaa!
We already knew that the Linux kernel contained fewer bugs than the average proprietary software project. Now it seems that Homeland Security has been reviewing the quality of open-source software as well, and given it the “thumbs up”.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/03/03/open_source_safety_report/
Proforma, I suggest you take a few moments to reflect on this…
Edited 2006-03-05 01:25