Piling on Vista

[Banquo's Ghost]

It is what it is- Don't install it or do install it. The fact remains: If it doesn't go anywhere (this dream of MS scrapping Vista and creating an OS that some of you like better...is just a dream as Vista is selling fine) you WILL be installing it at some point in time. You won't have an option. Well, you will- Don't use any current software.

Hate to break it to you, but despite Microsoft's best efforts, people do have options. And some of them are way more advanced than Windows Vista.

[Husar]

Yes, part of my message was tongue in cheek, I wouldn't have payed for Vista either, it's okay with a new Pc but then I don't buy complete Pcs, so...
But then I never payed for XP either, I'm just a cheapskate.

[ArtistofWarfare]

On the contrary. I am not preaching about this issue, and I am not ordering people to accept what you seem to think is the inevitable. It may be news to you but there were releases of Windows, or "upgrades", that were mostly skipped by the vast majority of home users and for the most part entirely ignored by business. Users of Win98 did not necessarily upgrade to WinME, basically because it was crap, and users of Win2k did not necessarily upgrade to WinXP. This was mainly due to the fact that these OS versions were actually very similar to each other and had nothing much to offer over their predecessor. XP was essentially an updated version of 2K with some fancy visual themes. ME was Win9x with a Win2k style GUI and DOS mode made inaccessible, without some serious modification. It was an MS attempt to fool the user into thinking that this was a next generation OS, which is wasn't. My issue with Vista is that MS have done this yet again and are selling a product that offers nothing of what the original Longhorn promised. It is in essence a stopgap OS until the next generation OS is ready.


Very well, valid point, I won't mention "my company" again, but will refer to business as a whole. Business in general has not warmed to Vista. From a business perspective Vista has nothing to offer, and this applies to an OS that is marketed as "Windows Vista Business". That's a fact.


Vista is actually not "selling fine". On what do you base this?


There is no sense in repeating the same argument. How do you know who has and has not Vista? I've just stated in my previous post that people can have experience of Vista without actually installing it on their main PC. Your argument is almost entirely based on the principle that those posting what you would call "anti vista" comments in this thread are somehow misinformed. Let's not start using anti vista / pro vista labels in this thread.


You have not "moved forward in time". That's the part you're not getting. You are using an OS that is a newer version of the same OS that offers nothing much that XP doesn't already have. When it comes to running programs which is what an OS is actually for btw (it is for running programs, not looking nice) Vista is no different from XP. The difference is that Vista leaves less resources available to the system, which is important to gamers in particular.


You are the one debating, with quite some zeal, the merits of Windows Vista. I am merely responding truthfully to the comments that you are making. I am not preaching to people to go back to windows 98 or install Linux. That's up to them. My point is that I do not accept your idea that Vista is the next great upgrade to the fabulous Windows OS. And that we should all rush out to get it in order to "move forward in time".


How is it more secure and stable? Define it.

As to "what does it have to do"? It has to offer much more than those three points, as those three are not worth paying for. If Vista was free or I was fabulously rich I would still not take the time to even install something that offers virtually nothing new. Simple.

I don't mean to be rude here, but I'm going to be honest: Too long, did not read.

I mean- Over Vista? There's just not that much to possibly say. I thought the thread was closed.

Get Vista, or don't. Your option. End of story. There's NO debate.

[ArtistofWarfare]

Hate to break it to you, but despite Microsoft's best efforts, people do have options. And some of them are way more advanced than Windows Vista.

I prefer to use the software the people on earth are using.

[Lemur]

Get Vista, or don't. Your option. End of story. There's NO debate.

If there's no debate, then a lot of columnists, Slashdot posters, bloggers and Orgahs are going to be shocked that they've been writing about a non-issue.

When/whether to move to Vista may be a minor issue for an individual, but it's a huge bugbear for small, medium and large organizations.

[caravel]

I mean- Over Vista? There's just not that much to possibly say. I thought the thread was closed.

It is you that is attempting to block/dismiss the opinions of a certain group of people, i.e. those that criticise controversial software. Instead of actually researching into these issues you have simply dismissed the opinions of others on the basis that if they're criticising any controversial software then they must have some kind of agenda or ulterior motive (such as being zealots that refuse to upgrade for no apparent reason). Honestly, this is how it comes across.

You might like Vista for whatever reasons, but making claims such as this deserves a response of some kind:

If it doesn't go anywhere (this dream of MS scrapping Vista and creating an OS that some of you like better...is just a dream as Vista is selling fine) you WILL be installing it at some point in time. You won't have an option. Well, you will- Don't use any current software.

Also if you won't even read other people's posts then you cannot expect anyone to read yours or take any of your opinions seriously.

[Husar]

When/whether to move to Vista may be a minor issue for an individual, but it's a huge bugbear for small, medium and large organizations.

How many of them have an account here and how many of them have been saved from making this major mistake by reading the org? Why would I, as an individual, care about the problems of a business, when was the last time that business cared about my problems?

[LeftEyeNine]

ArtistOfWarfare,

More constructive way of debate and less I-know-it-all kinda attitude please.

If the debates could be finished off with a "NO debate" fatality move, I'd collect Tribesman, AndresII, Redleg in the same topic and yell "NO DEBATE !" in their faces which would get me around 17 Pure Backroom Awesomeness badges and also get me a 5-year streak of various Hall of Fame awards.

So please be well informed that we hold one-on-one demeanor above the heat/quality/whateverelse of a topic.



















Not that I never imagined to try that, though..hrm..

[LeftEyeNine]

And, lads, let's keep it on the topic rather than doing it ad hominem. Valid for all.

Thanks.

[Papewaio]

I don't mean to be rude here, but I'm going to be honest: Too long, did not read.

I mean- Over Vista? There's just not that much to possibly say. I thought the thread was closed.

Get Vista, or don't. Your option. End of story. There's NO debate.

Pfft.

I don't think so.

Vista would be a better games machine iff MS was not so caught up in making sure the 360 is the premium games bed. As such they purposely stall releases to PC and/or not encourage developers to do a co-release. Either way MS is focusing on their console as a games machine.

I run XP at home (not rebuilt once in over 5 years) and XP on my work laptop. I can at anytime upgrade to a Vista machine. But none of the apps I run, including Office 2007 will work any better.

Some of my fellow techs want to use Apple Workbooks (still can manage Cisco devices off them)... and Apple is now more in line with PCs in their bang for buck... and if you want to play games well... you can either get a console or bootcamp it to XP.

Until a game comes out or a business application that requires Vista there will be no real driver to change across to it. As hardware gets better then there will be a natural takeup of the OS. But right now Apple has huge oppourtunities and they are for once taking up the challenge.

From the Apple website "How to move to Mac":

Why upgrade to Vista when you can upgrade to Mac? Especially when you can move all your stuff from an old PC to a shiny new Mac in less time than it takes to add the memory, hard disk space, and graphics card you’ll probably need to install Vista.

What is unusual is that Apple has been notorious in giving market share to PCs. If anything it wasn't Gates gaining a monopoly it was Job giving away a duopoly.

[Lemur]

Too good not to reprint:

Vista's 11 Pillars of Failure

Vista's 11 Pillars of Failure

ARTICLE DATE: 04.21.08
By John C. Dvorak

While the public's attention seems to be swinging toward Windows 7 (the next iteration of the OS)—a topic I'll address in the weeks ahead—the fact of the matter is that Vista remains. And it seems that the OS now has two distinct groups of users. One group happily uses Vista, with few concerns or complaints. In fact, many of them are baffled by all the grumbling. The other group is the fist-shaking Vista bashers who condemn each and every flaw the OS exhibits.

The latter group is by far the most vocal and easily drowns out the former group. Its complaints stem from the anti-Microsoft backlash, which reflects dissatisfaction with the company's history, business practices, tactics, and bogus announcements. Much of the disgruntlement, however, can be attributed Vista itself—and the poor marketing job done by Microsoft.

I mention the bogus announcements above because, at some point, you do get a little tired of Microsoft making exaggerated promises and then never coming close to delivering the goods. In the case of Vista, it has to do with the three "pillars" that were announced early on. The OS really delivered on only one of the pillars, and that pillar was nothing but Windows dressing: Aero, the resource hog and performance sapper.

With the "pillars" in mind, I decided to take a look at the 11 reasons why Vista remains on shaky ground:

1) Market confusion. From the beginning, everyone moaned about the fact that there were simply too many versions of the OS for sale. Who needs all the variations? It's stupid—plain and simple. What you want is the one best version, not a slew of namby-pamby ones. This happened because the folks at Microsoft know only how to merchandise and, seemingly, not how to market.

2) Code size. I've got two words for you: TOO BIG. Enough said.

3) Missing components. Yes, WinFS, the promised file system and a core pillar of Vista, isn't there. The promises regarding the development of this file system go back to 1991. And Microsoft cannot make it a reality? Why?

4) Laptop battery-life drain. This was supposed to be fixed with special code and hybrid hard disks (HHD). Still, users have to resort to expensive silicon drives.

5) HHD fiasco. I'm still irked about being told by the HD industry that the benefits of the new generation of hard drives will "make people flock to Vista." That was over two years ago, and suddenly there's silence about the whole thing. One of these days, someone will tell me what really happened. My guess: It never worked correctly, and no one could make it work.

6) Bogus Vista-capable stickers. Microsoft's "Windows Vista capable" campaign was an incredible marketing botch. Computers were sold with an indication that they were "Windows Vista capable" when they were not. This did wonders for goodwill.

7) Missing drivers. It seems incredible that all of the Windows drivers that worked with XP did not necessarily work with Vista. How does that happen?

8) Conflicting advice. There was no consistent advice for users about implementation, and Microsoft did nothing to help. Some people said that you should get a new computer only with Vista preloaded and not upgrade. Others said upgrades were fine. Others upgraded and complained. Microsoft should have put up a specialized Web site that could test machines remotely and tell users whether it would be a good idea—or not—to upgrade. A promotional/test CD-ROM that could boot Vista (like those Knoppix Linux disks) would have been a good idea, too.

9) XP mania. You'd think that the world was in love with Windows XP. Everyone wants to keep it on the market, and this makes Vista look even worse. What's more, there were far too many reports about people reverting to XP after an "experience" with Vista. If Microsoft had the testing service that I mention above in place, this would never have happened.

10) Mediocre rollout. Unlike other rollouts of important Windows products, Microsoft did not put on much of a show with Vista. While there were some weird posters placed in subways and maybe a few TV commercials, none of it compared with the rollouts from a few years back, where the company got worldwide attention. By comparison, the company seemed almost sheepish or embarrassed by Vista, something that was also reflected in the recent lackluster rollout of Server 2008—a total snooze. This sent the wrong signals to users and may have made them hypercritical.

11) Performance. You're not supposed to deliver a new operating system that's been in development for more than four years yet performs worse than the previous OS. Performance should be at the top, not the bottom, of the to-do list. You get the sense that Microsoft just piles code on top of code and somewhere in the middle of it all is MS-DOS 1.0.

I could probably put another dozen items on this list. The point is that it's a big list already. With all the resources in the world at Microsoft's disposal, you have to wonder why the company cannot get everything right even once.

[Beirut]

Too good not to reprint:

Vista's 11 Pillars of Failure

T.E. would so proud.

Good stuff.

[Xiahou]

Bloated, confusing/bungled marketing, dropped features? Yup, sounds like Vista.

[Forward Observer]

Here is a rather interesting "system upgrade" review that is pertinent to this discussion. Enjoy

UPGRADE REVIEW

[Husar]

Yesyes, as on SimHQ.

I maintain my opinion that at least the 64 bit business version is working very fine for me. My notebook came with a 32 bit home premium and there I got a bug that the explorer would crash when I tried to put a symbol into the quick-start bar, it was horrible of course until it somehow fixed itself, otherwise it's working fine for me as well. Although I do believe that people who buy 32 bit despite having a 64 bit CPU deserve all the punishment they can get, so I applaud Microsoft's attempt to show them.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I blame any possible insanity in this post on the headache I have due to my cold...

[Lemur]

Last weekend I finished cleaning up my second Vista laptop. This is payback to some dads with woodworking skills who helped me build a play fort for my kids.

Anyway, I just wanted to say I hate Vista. What a bloated, tottering blight of an operating system. One laptop took close to nine minutes from power-on to being usable. What the hell is that about? What, exactly, is MS loading into memory for all that time? And the UAC thing is just laughable. Does anyone not turn it off?

One more irritation I must rant about. What the heck is HP thinking, shipping hardware with a hundred little custom bits of bloatware clinging to their laptops like barnacles on a tanker? I forget the name, but there was one little piece of junk that wouldn't shut off even after I'd shut off its service in services.msc and told it to stop loading at startup in msconfig. I had to uninstall the app, and I wasn't sure even that would work, given how tenacious it was about hogging processor cycles and memory.

Anyway. Sorry. Excuse me. I just needed to rant. Cleaning up a neighbor's Vista machine makes me want to smoke crack and set my hair on fire.

[CBR]

Anyway. Sorry. Excuse me. I just needed to rant. Cleaning up a neighbor's Vista machine makes me want to smoke crack and set my hair on fire.

My future now looks much brighter after my sister decided to wipe out Vista on her laptop. I won't be losing the rest of my hair... at least not in the near future.


CBR

[Husar]

Anyway, I just wanted to say I hate Vista. What a bloated, tottering blight of an operating system. One laptop took close to nine minutes from power-on to being usable. What the hell is that about? What, exactly, is MS loading into memory for all that time?

Could that be due to the bloat ware you mentioned later or was that a Pentium 166 laptop?
Mine doesn't even take half as long when it's in power saving mode.
SP1 also speeds the process up significantly.

And the UAC thing is just laughable. Does anyone not turn it off?

On this I agree, it's one of the first things I did/do in Vista, once it's off it doesn't bother you anymore though.

One more irritation I must rant about. What the heck is HP thinking, shipping hardware with a hundred little custom bits of bloatware clinging to their laptops like barnacles on a tanker?

Perhaps they get paid for spreading all that bloatware?