M$ jamming Vista down our throats

[cavalierlwt Profile]

http://tinyurl.com/2sfbyj

I understand the move to end XP sales from a business viewpoint, but I don't recall this much resistance to previous versions of Windows as I'm seeing with Vista. I remember I was happy to upgrade to XP as soon as it was released. It's actually kind of creepy to go to Bestbuy or Compusa and not see a single copy of XP on the shelves for the last couple of months.

[Ldsmith104 Profile]

guess if I can't by it I will be forced to find a pirated copy...

[SavageParrot Profile]

LoL the one that is cracking me up at the momment is that I keep being offered an update that's gonna tell me if my copy of windows is genuine or not. I happen to know that it is but I'm not gonna instal that patch. How dumb do you have to be to make something, designed to catch illegal copies of windows, a voluntary update....


"I know why don't I download this patch that will make my pirate copy of windows unuseable. That sounds likea good idea..."




Retards...

[Lord ZOG Profile]

I'm curious how much Vista is actually hurting PC sales. I think more people are choosing Mac over a Vista powered PC. You'll never hear it from Microsoft, who seems oblivious to the fact that their customers actually have opinions that might matter.

I'm doing everything I can to avoid buying Vista for my clients. Dell still offers XP on their Business division machines (OptiPlex, Latitude, Precision). It might cost a few extra bucks for the business machines, but it's worth it if only to aboid Vista.

I have Vista on a few of my machines, and I don't mind it...but I think the issues with Vista would be a nightmare for most of my end-users.

On a related note; has anyone noticed how long it takes Vista to delete files, especially network files? Every machine I've installed Vista on has taken three to four times longer to delete similar files than XP.

[Wesley Profile YIM]

Vista sucks

[MAN-AT-ARMS]

Not just deleting files over a network. Just accessing them at all is slow as hell. I tested out the Media Center, which I was gonna see how well it would stream movies and music from my main computer to my TV over my network here...It was awful...totally unusable. Formatted...installed XP and I'm using MediaPortal...Works great.

[Lord ZOG Profile]

Is Vista shaping up to be Windows Millenium II?

Microsoft Bob II?

[cavalierlwt Profile]

Honestly, I predict in time they will get their Vista drivers squared away,and it will be at worst a real pretty version of XP, at best the equivalent of a good service pack for XP. I don't know if we're quite into 'Bob' territory just yet. It is very noticeable though that the public just seems to flat out *not* want this upgrade. None of the positive excitement like that around 95 or XP.

[Darknut Profile]

Well, I did hear many complaints about XP when it came out. Part is people naturally hating change and the other part is that there is some truth to the complaints.

I'm not concerned about software compatibility or driver errors or some random bug but the interface. The rest can—and most likely will—be patched or worked around or replaced with alternatives but the interface will most likely never change. I hate how Microsoft hasn't figured out that power users and administrators don't need wizards for everything. Thank you Vista, Master of Wizards, for I, your MCP in Vista and XP, am unable to change my TCP/IP settings without your help.

Vista wouldn't be so bad if Microsoft enabled you to turn off the wizards and go back to the classic configuration panels; as they are much easier to work with when you know what you are doing. It'd also be great if you could easily turn off different "features" of the operating system instead of having to kill them in the registry or computer management. I'd also like a fully customizable UI. I don't need fifty-million shortcuts to the same function every where I go. I don't need a billion things in my context menu when I right click. I'm tired of firing up ResHacker to change these things or add to them.

Additionally, they should split the registry between programs and OS. The OS usually doesn't screw up the registry or pollute it with garbage; the applications you install tend to be the source of the corruption. If they split it they could decrease the amount of registry corruption/pollution while still maintaining shell integration.

[Lord ZOG Profile]

I like the idea of the split registry, but how about they get rid of the registry period? Mac and Linux seem to function fine without one, why does Microsoft hang onto that like a spolied 3-year old and his binky?

I think the registry points to one thing - Microsoft's greed. The registry effectively makes moving applications from machine to machine a nearly impossible task. Mac's approach is both simple and affective. You can simply drag applications from one Mac's Application folder to another Mac's Application folder. The icons you're dragging are actually compressed folders with everything in them that the program needs to run.

I think Microsoft simply threw the User Access Control in as if saying, "OK, you want security people, THERE'S security. Deal with it."

All they're doing is driving people to Macintosh more and more. Time to buy more Apple stock.

[Chin_Sack Profile YIM]

I really wanted to get a new laptop too, but I dont want Vista. I guess I will have to learn to deal with out a laptop then.

Vista cant even use SLI at all. SO thats no good for my current comp since that is what I run now...

Its people like Bill Gates that just make me want too....wait, think after what happaned yesterday...me wont say it...

[Lord ZOG Profile]

Get a Dell Latitude D520, opt for the "Customize with XP" option.

Decent, if not very flashy machines. $1400.00 or so for a decently equipped machine with 3-year Accidental coverage (I never get the Accidenatal coverage for myself because I'm careful with my machines, but for my ham-fisted clients with shaved-ape kids I recommend it).

[Darknut Profile]

I like the idea of the split registry, but how about they get rid of the registry period? Mac and Linux seem to function fine without one, why does Microsoft hang onto that like a spolied 3-year old and his binky?

I think the registry points to one thing - Microsoft's greed. The registry effectively makes moving applications from machine to machine a nearly impossible task. Mac's approach is both simple and affective. You can simply drag applications from one Mac's Application folder to another Mac's Application folder. The icons you're dragging are actually compressed folders with everything in them that the program needs to run.

I think Microsoft simply threw the User Access Control in as if saying, "OK, you want security people, THERE'S security. Deal with it."

All they're doing is driving people to Macintosh more and more. Time to buy more Apple stock.

The registry gives shell integration without altering the core system files (although this isn't always the case) and it has some other advantages if you know what you're doing such as being able to double click a single .reg file that will result in 100+ changes to the OS while taking a mere second of your time.

If they implemented the split registry extracting a single program for use on another machine would be easy.

I like the concept of the registry and think with some tweaking they could make it much better and more administrator friendly.

It'd also be cool if the core of Windows could be installed in EPROM akin to the Mac OS.

[Lord ZOG Profile]

The Windows registry is as advantageous to administrators as it is to hackers, probably more so to hackers since there's a large portion of complete morons using PCs.

While I generally agree with you, I think leaving my Ferrari running while I hop in a Harlem CVS is equally as "advantageous".

Ideally, Windows should be a closed system. Don't let programs change anything in the OS. Keep programs compartmenal and seperate. Developers never do the right thing, given unlimited access. They'd eat their young if it got them an extra $5.00.

[smikey Profile]

Dell re-adds XP as option over Vista on new PCs
By Justin Mann, TechSpot.com
Published: April 19, 2007, 6:39 PM EST


Deployment of Windows Vista is facing another setback, with Dell no longer making it the only option for Windows on new systems sold. Due to “significant” customer demand, Dell has restored the ability to choose Windows XP over Vista on new systems. This decision came about through the polling system they have created on their Ideas in Action page, and quickly became one of the most popular topics when it was introduced:


"We heard you loud and clear on bringing the Windows XP option back to our Dell consumer PC offerings," Dell said on its Ideas in Action page. Users get to vote on various suggestions, and the notion of bringing back XP got 10,000 "points," making it among the most popular requests but well below top picks such as adding Linux or OpenOffice.org to its PCs.

Obviously, Microsoft doesn't want more XP licenses sold, and soon plans to cut OEMs off from purchasing more. In the interim, however, it is clear the consumer demand for XP over Vista still remains high. The reasons are self-apparant, from user familiarity to program compatibility to just plain choice. It is encouraging to see Dell actually respond to customers in such a fashion, and hopefully they will continue to do such.


Came across this today-at least someone is listening.