Latest ads
-
Colombo Red Hat Certified System Administrator (RHCSA) - RHEL 10- Sanjeewani95
- Updated:
-
NURSING , CAREGIVER , HOTEL & BEAUTY COURSES- IVA Para Medical Campus
- Updated:
-
Handmade Character Soft Toys Peppa Pig Family- anil1961
- Updated:
-
Video Content Creator
- pramukag
- Updated:
-
QA Engineer Intern
- pramukag
- Updated:
How many of you still use XP?
- Thread starter chamithal
- Start date
Following reviews gathered from various sources.
Microsoft admits Vista failure
Actions speak louder than PR
By Charlie Demerjian in Beijing
Saturday, 21 April 2007, 12:20
WITH TWO OVERLAPPING events, Microsoft admitted what we have been saying all along, Vista, aka Windows Me Two (Me II), is a joke that no one wants. It did two unprecedented things this week that frankly stunned us.
Dell announced that it would be offering XP again on home PCs. The second that Vista came out, Microsoft makes it very hard for you to sell anything other than Me II. It can't do this on the business side because it would be laughed out the door, but for the walking sheep class, well, you take what you are shovelled.
This is classic abusive monopoly behaviour, Microsoft wrote the modern book on it. It pulled all the major OEMs in by twisting their arms with the usual methods, and they again all fell into line. Never before has anyone backpedalled on this, to do so would earn you the wrath of Microsoft.
But Dell just did. This means that Me II sales are at least as bad as we think, the software and driver situation is just as miserable, and Dell had no choice but to buck the trend. If anyone thinks this is an act of atonement for foisting such a steaming pile on us, think again, it doesn't care about the consumer.
What happened is, the OEMs revolted in the background and forced Microsoft's hand. This is a big neon sign above Me II saying 'FAILURE'. Blink blink blink. OK, Me II won't fail, Microsoft has OEMs whipped and threatened into a corner, it will sell, but you can almost hear the defectors marching toward Linux. This is a watershed.
The other equally monumental Me II failure? Gates in China launching a $3 version of bundled XP. Why is this not altruism? Well, it goes back to piracy and how it helped enforce the MS monopoly. If you can easily pirate Windows, Linux has no price advantage, they both cost zero.
With Me II, Microsoft made it very hard to pirate. It is do-able, you can use the BIOS hack and probably a host of others, but the point is, it raised the bar enough so lots of people have to buy it. Want to bet that in a country with $100 average monthly salary, people aren't going to shell out $299 for Me II Broken Edition?
What did MS do? It dropped the price about 100x or so. I can't say this is unprecedented, when it made Office 2003 hard to pirate it had to backpedal with the student edition for about $150. This time though, things are much more desperate.
If you fit Microsoft's somewhat convoluted definition of poor, it still wants to lock you in, you might get rich enough to afford the full-priced stuff someday. It is at a dangerous crossroads, if its software bumps up the price of a computer by 100 per cent, people might look to alternatives.
That means no Me II DRM infection lock in, no mass migration to the newer Office obfuscated and patented file formats, and worse yet, people might utter the W word. Yes, you guessed it, 'why'. People might ask why it is sticking with the MS lock in, and at that point, it is in deep trouble.
So, it did the unthinkable, and dropped the price. I won't bother to hunt down all the exec quotes saying how people can't afford clean water would be overjoyed to sell kidneys to upgrade to the new version of Office, but they are out there. This was a sacred cow, and it is now hamburger backed up against the wall.
These two actions by Microsoft are proof of what I suggested three years ago. Microsoft has lost its ability to twist arms, and now it is going to die. It can't compete on level ground, so is left with backpedalling and discounts of almost 100 times.
What we are seeing is an unprecedented shift of power. It is also an unprecedented admission of failure. And the funniest part about the moves made? They are the wrong things to do. Microsoft is in deep trouble
The top five reasons why Windows Vista failed
Posted by Jason Hiner @ 4:21 am
Categories: Microsoft
Tags: Information Technology, Microsoft Windows Vista, Microsoft Corp., IT Department, Microsoft Windows......, Microsoft Windows Vista (Longhorn), Microsoft Windows XP, Operating Systems, Software, Jason Hiner
var tb1 = new CNET.Blog.Toolbar.Interact(); CNET.Blog.Toolbar.Interact.allToolbars.push(tb1); tb1.id = 'btl_10303'; CNET.Blog.Toolbar.Interact.service.contentId.push(tb1.id); tb1.idContainer = 'interact_'+tb1.id; tb1.title = 'The top five reasons why Windows Vista failed'; tb1.emailTitle = 'The top five reasons why Windows Vista failed | Between the Lines | ZDNet.com'; tb1.diggTopic = 'tech_news'; tb1.diggBodyText = 'A ZDNET Blog'; tb1.absoluteUrl = 'http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=10303'; tb1.relativeUrl = '?p=10303'; tb1.commentUrl = '?p=10303#comments'; tb1.blogThisUrl = 'index.php?blogthis=1&p=10303'; tb1.noTalkback = ''; tb1.numTalkbacks = ''; tb1.votingId = tb1.id; tb1.voteCount = 114; tb1.voteTotal = 186; tb1.recommend.hasVoted = false; tb1.recommend.contentId = 'btl_10303'; tb1.recommend.userId = ''; tb1.recommend.encodedTitle = 'VGhlIHRvcCBmaXZlIHJlYXNvbnMgd2h5IFdpbmRvd3MgVmlzdGEgZmFpbGVk'; tb1.recommend.encodedUrl = 'aHR0cDovL2Jsb2dzLnpkbmV0LmNvbS9CVEwvP3A9MTAzMDM.'; tb1.recommend.rpcHost = 'blogs.zdnet.com'; tb1.recommend.loginUrl = 'http://www.zdnet.com/1320-4_24-44.html?path='; tb1.recommend.returnUrl = 'http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=10303'; tb1.recommend.cookieResults = ''; tb1.init(); 615 TalkBacks
The public reputation of Windows Vista is in shambles, as Microsoft itself tacitly acknowledged in its Mojave ad campaign.
IT departments are largely ignoring Vista. In June (18 months after Vista’s launch), Forrester Research reported that just 8.8% of enterprise PCs worldwide were running Vista. Meanwhile, Microsoft appears to have put Windows 7 on an accelerated schedule that could see it released in 2010. That will provide IT departments with all the justification they need to simply skip Vista and wait to eventually standardize on Windows 7 as the next OS for business.
So how did Vista get left holding the bag? Let’s look at the five most important reasons why Vista failed.
5. Apple successfully demonized Vista
Apple’s clever I’m a Mac ads have successfully driven home the perception that Windows Vista is buggy, boring, and difficult to use. After taking two years of merciless pummeling from Apple, Microsoft recently responded with it’s I’m a PC campaign in order to defend the honor of Windows. This will likely restore some mojo to the PC and Windows brands overall, but it’s too late to save Vista’s perception as a dud.
4. Windows XP is too entrenched
In 2001, when Windows XP was released, there were about 600 million computers in use worldwide. Over 80% of them were running Windows but it was split between two code bases: Windows 95/98 (65%) and Windows NT/2000 (26%), according to IDC. One of the big goals of Windows XP was to unite the Windows 9x and Windows NT code bases, and it eventually accomplished that.
In 2008, there are now over 1.1 billion PCs in use worldwide and over 70% of them are running Windows XP. That means almost 800 million computers are running XP, which makes it the most widely installed operating system of all time. That’s a lot of inertia to overcome, especially for IT departments that have consolidated their deployments and applications around Windows XP.
And, believe it or not, Windows XP could actually increase its market share over the next couple years. How? Low-cost netbooks and nettops are going to be flooding the market. While these inexpensive machines are powerful enough to provide a solid Internet experience for most users, they don’t have enough resources to run Windows Vista, so they all run either Windows XP or Linux. Intel expects this market to explode in the years ahead. (For more on netbooks and nettops, see this fact sheet and this presentation — both are PDFs from Intel.)
3. Vista is too slow
For years Microsoft has been criticized by developers and IT professionals for “software bloat” — adding so many changes and features to its programs that the code gets huge and unwieldy. However, this never seemed to have enough of an effect to impact software sales. With Windows Vista, software bloat appears to have finally caught up with Microsoft.
Vista has over 50 million lines of code. XP had 35 million when it was released, and since then it has grown to about 40 million. This software bloat has had the effect of slowing down Windows Vista, especially when it’s running on anything but the latest and fastest hardware. Even then, the latest version of Windows XP soundly outperforms the latest version of Microsoft Vista. No one wants to use a new computer that is slower than their old one.
2. There wasn’t supposed to be a Vista
It’s easy to forget that when Microsoft launched Windows XP it was actually trying to change its OS business model to move away from shrink-wrapped software and convert customers to software subscribers. That’s why it abandoned the naming convention of Windows 95, Windows 98, and Windows 2000, and instead chose Windows XP.
The XP stood for “experience” and was part of Microsoft’s .NET Web services strategy at the time. The master plan was to get users and businesses to pay a yearly subscription fee for the Windows experience — XP would essentially be the on-going product name but would include all software upgrades and updates, as long as you paid for your subscription. Of course, it would disable Windows on your PC if you didn’t pay. That’s why product activation was coupled with Windows XP.
Microsoft released Windows XP and Office XP simultaneously in 2001 and both included product activation and the plan to eventually migrate to subscription products. However, by the end of 2001 Microsoft had already abandoned the subscription concept with Office, and quickly returned to the shrink-wrapped business model and the old product development model with both products.
The idea of doing incremental releases and upgrades of its software — rather than a major shrink-wrapped release every 3-5 years — was a good concept. Microsoft just couldn’t figure out how to make the business model work, but instead of figuring out how to get it right, it took the easy route and went back to an old model that was simply not very well suited to the economic and technical realities of today’s IT world.
1. It broke too much stuff
One of the big reasons that Windows XP caught on was because it had the hardware, software, and driver compatibility of the Windows 9x line plus the stability and industrial strength of the Windows NT line. The compatibility issue was huge. Having a single, highly-compatible Windows platform simplified the computing experience for users, IT departments, and software and hardware vendors.
Microsoft either forgot or disregarded that fact when it released Windows Vista, because, despite a long beta period, a lot of existing software and hardware were not compatible with Vista when it was released in January 2007. Since many important programs and peripherals were unusable in Vista, that made it impossible for a lot of IT departments to adopt it. Many of the incompatibilities were the result of tighter security.
After Windows was targeted by a nasty string of viruses, worms, and malware in the early 2000s, Microsoft embarked on the Trustworthy Computing initiative to make its products more secure. One of the results was Windows XP Service Pack 2 (SP2), which won over IT and paved the way for XP to become the world’s mostly widely deployed OS.
The other big piece of Trustworthy Computing was the even-further-locked-down version of Windows that Microsoft released in Vista. This was definitely the most secure OS that Microsoft had ever released but the price was user-hostile features such as UAC, a far more complicated set of security prompts that accompanied many basic tasks, and a host of software incompatibility issues. In other words, Vista broke a lot of the things that users were used to doing in XP.
Bottom line
There are some who argue that Vista is actually more widely adopted than XP was at this stage after its release, and that it’s highly likely that Vista will eventually replace XP in the enterprise. I don’t agree. With XP, there were clear motivations to migrate: bring Windows 9x machines to a more stable and secure OS and bring Windows NT/2000 machines to an OS with much better hardware and software compatibility. And, you also had the advantage of consolidating all of those machines on a single OS in order to simplify support.
With Vista, there are simply no major incentives for IT to use it over XP. Security isn’t even that big of an issue because XP SP2 (and above) are solid and most IT departments have it locked down quite well. As I wrote in the article Prediction: Microsoft will leapfrog Vista, release Windows 7 early, and change its OS business, Microsoft needs to abandon the strategy of releasing a new OS every 3-5 years and simply stick with a single version of Windows and release updates, patches, and new features on a regular basis. Most IT departments are essentially already on a subscription model with Microsoft so the business strategy is already in place for them.
As far as the subscription model goes for small businesses and consumers, instead of disabling Windows on a user’s PC if they don’t renew their subscription, just don’t allow that machine to get any more updates if they don’t renew. Microsoft could also work with OEMs to sell something like a three-year subscription to Windows with every a new PC. Then users would have the choice of renewing on their own after that.
If you needed a reminder of why Windows Vista = FAIL
November 8, 2008 in Uncategorized | View commentsComments
The context for this error? Trying to delete a shortcut from the desktop. Windows thinks it doesn't exist. My eyes tell me it does. Now which one of us should the operating system assume to be correct? There is a selectable object on the desktop. You're trying to tell me it's not there. And clicking on "Try again" gets me right back to the same dialog box.
This is exactly the kind of issue that Microsoft needs to address in Windows 7. It's the kind of thing which shows a lack of thought about the user experience, and too much complexity underneath the surface.
Vista has many good points. In visual looks, I think its user interface is, in many ways, ahead of Mac OS X's (and well ahead of Linux - although obviously that's a subjective view. In terms of how to approaches security, it's ahead of OS X, something that will surprise most Mac users.
But once you start doing things which are slightly away from the most-common tasks, Vista tends to turn into a nightmare. Wander away from the common tasks in OS X, and the operating system tends to retain a lot of consistency in how you use it. In Vista, it tends to either default back to behaviours which are similar (but rarely identical) to Windows XP. Or it just breaks down in a flurry of half-thought out interface ideas.
I've never seen an operating system which appears as half-finished as Vista, and that includes the various alphas, betas and "version one's" that I've used over the years. And given that this is Microsoft's flagship OS, that's a pretty damning thing to have to say.
Microsoft admits Vista failure
Actions speak louder than PR
By Charlie Demerjian in Beijing
Saturday, 21 April 2007, 12:20
WITH TWO OVERLAPPING events, Microsoft admitted what we have been saying all along, Vista, aka Windows Me Two (Me II), is a joke that no one wants. It did two unprecedented things this week that frankly stunned us.
Dell announced that it would be offering XP again on home PCs. The second that Vista came out, Microsoft makes it very hard for you to sell anything other than Me II. It can't do this on the business side because it would be laughed out the door, but for the walking sheep class, well, you take what you are shovelled.
This is classic abusive monopoly behaviour, Microsoft wrote the modern book on it. It pulled all the major OEMs in by twisting their arms with the usual methods, and they again all fell into line. Never before has anyone backpedalled on this, to do so would earn you the wrath of Microsoft.
But Dell just did. This means that Me II sales are at least as bad as we think, the software and driver situation is just as miserable, and Dell had no choice but to buck the trend. If anyone thinks this is an act of atonement for foisting such a steaming pile on us, think again, it doesn't care about the consumer.
What happened is, the OEMs revolted in the background and forced Microsoft's hand. This is a big neon sign above Me II saying 'FAILURE'. Blink blink blink. OK, Me II won't fail, Microsoft has OEMs whipped and threatened into a corner, it will sell, but you can almost hear the defectors marching toward Linux. This is a watershed.
The other equally monumental Me II failure? Gates in China launching a $3 version of bundled XP. Why is this not altruism? Well, it goes back to piracy and how it helped enforce the MS monopoly. If you can easily pirate Windows, Linux has no price advantage, they both cost zero.
With Me II, Microsoft made it very hard to pirate. It is do-able, you can use the BIOS hack and probably a host of others, but the point is, it raised the bar enough so lots of people have to buy it. Want to bet that in a country with $100 average monthly salary, people aren't going to shell out $299 for Me II Broken Edition?
What did MS do? It dropped the price about 100x or so. I can't say this is unprecedented, when it made Office 2003 hard to pirate it had to backpedal with the student edition for about $150. This time though, things are much more desperate.
If you fit Microsoft's somewhat convoluted definition of poor, it still wants to lock you in, you might get rich enough to afford the full-priced stuff someday. It is at a dangerous crossroads, if its software bumps up the price of a computer by 100 per cent, people might look to alternatives.
That means no Me II DRM infection lock in, no mass migration to the newer Office obfuscated and patented file formats, and worse yet, people might utter the W word. Yes, you guessed it, 'why'. People might ask why it is sticking with the MS lock in, and at that point, it is in deep trouble.
So, it did the unthinkable, and dropped the price. I won't bother to hunt down all the exec quotes saying how people can't afford clean water would be overjoyed to sell kidneys to upgrade to the new version of Office, but they are out there. This was a sacred cow, and it is now hamburger backed up against the wall.
These two actions by Microsoft are proof of what I suggested three years ago. Microsoft has lost its ability to twist arms, and now it is going to die. It can't compete on level ground, so is left with backpedalling and discounts of almost 100 times.
What we are seeing is an unprecedented shift of power. It is also an unprecedented admission of failure. And the funniest part about the moves made? They are the wrong things to do. Microsoft is in deep trouble
The top five reasons why Windows Vista failed
Posted by Jason Hiner @ 4:21 am
Categories: Microsoft
Tags: Information Technology, Microsoft Windows Vista, Microsoft Corp., IT Department, Microsoft Windows......, Microsoft Windows Vista (Longhorn), Microsoft Windows XP, Operating Systems, Software, Jason Hiner
var tb1 = new CNET.Blog.Toolbar.Interact(); CNET.Blog.Toolbar.Interact.allToolbars.push(tb1); tb1.id = 'btl_10303'; CNET.Blog.Toolbar.Interact.service.contentId.push(tb1.id); tb1.idContainer = 'interact_'+tb1.id; tb1.title = 'The top five reasons why Windows Vista failed'; tb1.emailTitle = 'The top five reasons why Windows Vista failed | Between the Lines | ZDNet.com'; tb1.diggTopic = 'tech_news'; tb1.diggBodyText = 'A ZDNET Blog'; tb1.absoluteUrl = 'http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=10303'; tb1.relativeUrl = '?p=10303'; tb1.commentUrl = '?p=10303#comments'; tb1.blogThisUrl = 'index.php?blogthis=1&p=10303'; tb1.noTalkback = ''; tb1.numTalkbacks = ''; tb1.votingId = tb1.id; tb1.voteCount = 114; tb1.voteTotal = 186; tb1.recommend.hasVoted = false; tb1.recommend.contentId = 'btl_10303'; tb1.recommend.userId = ''; tb1.recommend.encodedTitle = 'VGhlIHRvcCBmaXZlIHJlYXNvbnMgd2h5IFdpbmRvd3MgVmlzdGEgZmFpbGVk'; tb1.recommend.encodedUrl = 'aHR0cDovL2Jsb2dzLnpkbmV0LmNvbS9CVEwvP3A9MTAzMDM.'; tb1.recommend.rpcHost = 'blogs.zdnet.com'; tb1.recommend.loginUrl = 'http://www.zdnet.com/1320-4_24-44.html?path='; tb1.recommend.returnUrl = 'http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=10303'; tb1.recommend.cookieResults = ''; tb1.init(); 615 TalkBacks
- Thumbs UpThumbs Down
- +114
186
The public reputation of Windows Vista is in shambles, as Microsoft itself tacitly acknowledged in its Mojave ad campaign.
IT departments are largely ignoring Vista. In June (18 months after Vista’s launch), Forrester Research reported that just 8.8% of enterprise PCs worldwide were running Vista. Meanwhile, Microsoft appears to have put Windows 7 on an accelerated schedule that could see it released in 2010. That will provide IT departments with all the justification they need to simply skip Vista and wait to eventually standardize on Windows 7 as the next OS for business.
So how did Vista get left holding the bag? Let’s look at the five most important reasons why Vista failed.
5. Apple successfully demonized Vista
Apple’s clever I’m a Mac ads have successfully driven home the perception that Windows Vista is buggy, boring, and difficult to use. After taking two years of merciless pummeling from Apple, Microsoft recently responded with it’s I’m a PC campaign in order to defend the honor of Windows. This will likely restore some mojo to the PC and Windows brands overall, but it’s too late to save Vista’s perception as a dud.
4. Windows XP is too entrenched
In 2001, when Windows XP was released, there were about 600 million computers in use worldwide. Over 80% of them were running Windows but it was split between two code bases: Windows 95/98 (65%) and Windows NT/2000 (26%), according to IDC. One of the big goals of Windows XP was to unite the Windows 9x and Windows NT code bases, and it eventually accomplished that.
In 2008, there are now over 1.1 billion PCs in use worldwide and over 70% of them are running Windows XP. That means almost 800 million computers are running XP, which makes it the most widely installed operating system of all time. That’s a lot of inertia to overcome, especially for IT departments that have consolidated their deployments and applications around Windows XP.
And, believe it or not, Windows XP could actually increase its market share over the next couple years. How? Low-cost netbooks and nettops are going to be flooding the market. While these inexpensive machines are powerful enough to provide a solid Internet experience for most users, they don’t have enough resources to run Windows Vista, so they all run either Windows XP or Linux. Intel expects this market to explode in the years ahead. (For more on netbooks and nettops, see this fact sheet and this presentation — both are PDFs from Intel.)
3. Vista is too slow
For years Microsoft has been criticized by developers and IT professionals for “software bloat” — adding so many changes and features to its programs that the code gets huge and unwieldy. However, this never seemed to have enough of an effect to impact software sales. With Windows Vista, software bloat appears to have finally caught up with Microsoft.
Vista has over 50 million lines of code. XP had 35 million when it was released, and since then it has grown to about 40 million. This software bloat has had the effect of slowing down Windows Vista, especially when it’s running on anything but the latest and fastest hardware. Even then, the latest version of Windows XP soundly outperforms the latest version of Microsoft Vista. No one wants to use a new computer that is slower than their old one.
2. There wasn’t supposed to be a Vista
It’s easy to forget that when Microsoft launched Windows XP it was actually trying to change its OS business model to move away from shrink-wrapped software and convert customers to software subscribers. That’s why it abandoned the naming convention of Windows 95, Windows 98, and Windows 2000, and instead chose Windows XP.
The XP stood for “experience” and was part of Microsoft’s .NET Web services strategy at the time. The master plan was to get users and businesses to pay a yearly subscription fee for the Windows experience — XP would essentially be the on-going product name but would include all software upgrades and updates, as long as you paid for your subscription. Of course, it would disable Windows on your PC if you didn’t pay. That’s why product activation was coupled with Windows XP.
Microsoft released Windows XP and Office XP simultaneously in 2001 and both included product activation and the plan to eventually migrate to subscription products. However, by the end of 2001 Microsoft had already abandoned the subscription concept with Office, and quickly returned to the shrink-wrapped business model and the old product development model with both products.
The idea of doing incremental releases and upgrades of its software — rather than a major shrink-wrapped release every 3-5 years — was a good concept. Microsoft just couldn’t figure out how to make the business model work, but instead of figuring out how to get it right, it took the easy route and went back to an old model that was simply not very well suited to the economic and technical realities of today’s IT world.
1. It broke too much stuff
One of the big reasons that Windows XP caught on was because it had the hardware, software, and driver compatibility of the Windows 9x line plus the stability and industrial strength of the Windows NT line. The compatibility issue was huge. Having a single, highly-compatible Windows platform simplified the computing experience for users, IT departments, and software and hardware vendors.
Microsoft either forgot or disregarded that fact when it released Windows Vista, because, despite a long beta period, a lot of existing software and hardware were not compatible with Vista when it was released in January 2007. Since many important programs and peripherals were unusable in Vista, that made it impossible for a lot of IT departments to adopt it. Many of the incompatibilities were the result of tighter security.
After Windows was targeted by a nasty string of viruses, worms, and malware in the early 2000s, Microsoft embarked on the Trustworthy Computing initiative to make its products more secure. One of the results was Windows XP Service Pack 2 (SP2), which won over IT and paved the way for XP to become the world’s mostly widely deployed OS.
The other big piece of Trustworthy Computing was the even-further-locked-down version of Windows that Microsoft released in Vista. This was definitely the most secure OS that Microsoft had ever released but the price was user-hostile features such as UAC, a far more complicated set of security prompts that accompanied many basic tasks, and a host of software incompatibility issues. In other words, Vista broke a lot of the things that users were used to doing in XP.
Bottom line
There are some who argue that Vista is actually more widely adopted than XP was at this stage after its release, and that it’s highly likely that Vista will eventually replace XP in the enterprise. I don’t agree. With XP, there were clear motivations to migrate: bring Windows 9x machines to a more stable and secure OS and bring Windows NT/2000 machines to an OS with much better hardware and software compatibility. And, you also had the advantage of consolidating all of those machines on a single OS in order to simplify support.
With Vista, there are simply no major incentives for IT to use it over XP. Security isn’t even that big of an issue because XP SP2 (and above) are solid and most IT departments have it locked down quite well. As I wrote in the article Prediction: Microsoft will leapfrog Vista, release Windows 7 early, and change its OS business, Microsoft needs to abandon the strategy of releasing a new OS every 3-5 years and simply stick with a single version of Windows and release updates, patches, and new features on a regular basis. Most IT departments are essentially already on a subscription model with Microsoft so the business strategy is already in place for them.
As far as the subscription model goes for small businesses and consumers, instead of disabling Windows on a user’s PC if they don’t renew their subscription, just don’t allow that machine to get any more updates if they don’t renew. Microsoft could also work with OEMs to sell something like a three-year subscription to Windows with every a new PC. Then users would have the choice of renewing on their own after that.
If you needed a reminder of why Windows Vista = FAIL
November 8, 2008 in Uncategorized | View commentsComments
The context for this error? Trying to delete a shortcut from the desktop. Windows thinks it doesn't exist. My eyes tell me it does. Now which one of us should the operating system assume to be correct? There is a selectable object on the desktop. You're trying to tell me it's not there. And clicking on "Try again" gets me right back to the same dialog box.
This is exactly the kind of issue that Microsoft needs to address in Windows 7. It's the kind of thing which shows a lack of thought about the user experience, and too much complexity underneath the surface.
Vista has many good points. In visual looks, I think its user interface is, in many ways, ahead of Mac OS X's (and well ahead of Linux - although obviously that's a subjective view. In terms of how to approaches security, it's ahead of OS X, something that will surprise most Mac users.
But once you start doing things which are slightly away from the most-common tasks, Vista tends to turn into a nightmare. Wander away from the common tasks in OS X, and the operating system tends to retain a lot of consistency in how you use it. In Vista, it tends to either default back to behaviours which are similar (but rarely identical) to Windows XP. Or it just breaks down in a flurry of half-thought out interface ideas.
I've never seen an operating system which appears as half-finished as Vista, and that includes the various alphas, betas and "version one's" that I've used over the years. And given that this is Microsoft's flagship OS, that's a pretty damning thing to have to say.
thilankat said:
Well.. true.. But y do u hav to utilize ur resources for the OS itself? isn't it better if they are kept available to be utilized for games and applications.. well.. if computing resources are abundant.. kewl then.. but tht's not the case with most..
My opinion: Vista is better than XP! I am using Vista for 2 years now and I know only to use Vista! I almost forgot XP! 
Everything is good for me in vista, start up time is around 21 - 29 seconds and shut down time is 10 seconds!
When, considering installation also, XP takes around 20+ minutes, while Vista takes 12+ minutes (for me)! I am enjoying vista!
Everything is good for me in vista, start up time is around 21 - 29 seconds and shut down time is 10 seconds!
When, considering installation also, XP takes around 20+ minutes, while Vista takes 12+ minutes (for me)! I am enjoying vista!
Last edited:
