Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Windows 7's Media Hype Having the Opposite Effect As Vista's

Soulskill posted more than 5 years ago | from the decide-first-think-after dept.

Media 864

Death Metal Maniac tips an Ars Technica piece suggesting that the media's coverage of Vista's flaws portrayed the operating system as worse than it was, and, if early reports on Windows 7 are any indication, positive hype will create the opposite reaction this time around. Quoting: "... the problem is exaggeration; ... bloggers and journalists alike use their personal experiences to prove their point in their writing. The blame doesn't solely lie with us, as Vista was by no means perfect, but we did manage to amplify the problems beyond reason. And if the beta is anything to go by, Windows 7 is going to fly. This is, by far, the best beta operating system the software giant has ever released. The media has locked on to this, and is using exaggeration already, before Windows 7 is even ready for prime time." Apparently a decent beta can succeed where $300 million and Jerry Seinfeld failed.

cancel ×

864 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Hookay... damage control? Paid by MS? (3, Insightful)

M1rth (790840) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506247)

but we did manage to amplify the problems beyond reason.

No you didn't. And yes, I've had to use Vista.

Re:Hookay... damage control? Paid by MS? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26506327)

It even looks more ugly than vista, it it the same chaos as vista, you have to relearn everything... Control Panel doesn't look much better, only totally different...

Explorer looks ugly, Vista's Explorer was terrible, windows 7 explorer even worse...

The only thing that got much better was Solitair, Titan Mahjong, both look much much better in comparison to Windows XP games.

Didn't like Office 2007 ribbon? Don't worry, they put those ribbons in paint & wordpad too.

Window decoration was ugly in vista, didn't change in windows 7, still looks ugly.

They only good thing about windows 7 is that you can use it free for 7 months, and Vista only for 30 days...

Re:Hookay... damage control? Paid by MS? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26506497)

Hello, and think about your breathing.

Yes that's right, think about your breathing. Why you might ask? Well it's simple!

Your brain usually takes care of breathing for you, but whenever you remember this, you must manually breathe! If you don't you will die.

There are also many variations of this. For example, think about:

Blinking!

Swallowing saliva!

How your feet feel in your socks!

Your parents having hot sweaty sex!

In conclusion, the think about your breathing troll is simply unbeatable. These 4 words can be thrown randomly into article text trolls, into sigs, into anything, and once seen, will force the victim to take care of his breathing manually! This goes far beyond the simple annoying or insulting trolls of yesteryear.

In fact, by even responding to this troll, you are proving that it has claimed another victim -- You!

Re:Hookay... damage control? Paid by MS? (5, Funny)

duguk (589689) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506541)

You forgot to mention, they've upgraded calc [windows7news.com] !! :o)

Re:Hookay... damage control? Paid by MS? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26506329)

r MM MM MMNMMMM MMMMMMMMM MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM MMMMMM MMMNM MM M Fuck your mother and your father
r MrMrr'ro',oro',o',oro',o',oro',o',oro', ',oro',o',rrrrr@MM Fuck your mother and your father
rMMrWrM'ro',oro',o',oro',o',oro', ',oro',or,r'ro`rr7MrXrM Fuck your mother and your father
rM,rrrM'ro',oro',o', ro',o',oro',o',oro',or,r'ro',rrrrMrrBr0 Fuck your mother and your father
rMrWrrM'ro',oro',o',oro',o',oro', ',oro',or,r'ro',rrrWMrr0rMX Fuck your mother and your father
rM2rSrMr;r,rXi'ro',o o',o',oro',o',oro', ',oro',o',rrrM7rrii@ Fuck your mother and your father
rMSr@MMrX0'ro',oro',o',rrrrSrrrrr;i'ro',oro',o',rr rrrrMMrrMrM Fuck your mother and your father
rMWMMM'ror`rra0BMMMZo',or`rrXBrrSrrroMMMMMMMMMB'ro ',rrrMrrMrM Fuck your mother and your father
rMMrMMrrrrMMMMM MMMMMMMMMMr'ror`r:MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMWrrrMMrMiS Fuck your mother and your father
r MMM2rrMMMMM (o) MMMMMMMMMM rr XMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMorBM:MX Fuck your mother and your father
r MMMrrMMMMMMMM MMMMMMMMMMMMM r MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMrrMMMM Fuck your mother and your father
rMMZrrBMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM r MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMBrrrrMM Fuck your mother and your father
rMrrrrMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM r MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMWrWMrrM Fuck your mother and your father
WMrrirMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM rM MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM,rrrrrM0 Fuck your mother and your father
MXrrrrMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM'ror` MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM'ror`rMM Fuck your mother and your father
MZrrrr7MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM rrorZr MMMMMMMMMMMM MMMMMrrXrrrZM Fuck your mother and your father
MMrrZrrMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM; rrMMrMMr WMMMMMMMM (o) MMrrarrrrM0 Fuck your mother and your father
rMrr,rrrrXMMMMMMMMMMMMM rrr:MMMrMMM:r MMMMMMMMM MMrrrr7rrrrM Fuck your mother and your father
rMM'ro',rrrr,M0'ro',rrrrr,,MMMBrMMMMr,rrrrZMMM:rrr raWrrrrrMM Fuck your mother and your father
r MrrrrriirXrrr7rrSr,2rrrrSMMMMrMMMM'ro',rrrrrr2:r'r o',rrrM Fuck your mother and your father
r MM'ro',oro',or,r'ror`r8:MMMMMrMMMMMr;rr;iio',or,r' ror`rMM Fuck your mother and your father
rr MM'ro',oro',o',rrrrrr;WMMMMMrMMMMMrM'ro',oro',o',r rroMM Fuck your mother and your father
rrrr MMM'ro',oro',o',rrrrrMMMMMrMMMMM'ro',oro',o',rrrXM MM Fuck your mother and your father
rrrr 0MMMMr'ror,r'ro',rrrrBMMM@rZMMM;'ror,r'ror`rraMMMM M Fuck your mother and your father
'ror` MMMMMMrMr,rr;'ror,r'ror`ri'ror,r'ror`rirrrrMMMMaMa Fuck your mother and your father
'ror` MrrBMMMMr2rZMrr@rrrrZ'ro',rrr,,rror'rrrMrr;M@rrrM Fuck your mother and your father
'ror` MMrrrM2MMM8MrrrZrrrXMrrrX,rrrrMorrrrrrrMMMM@rrrrM Fuck your mother and your father
'ror` MMrrrMrrrZMMMMMMMMMMMiMMMrrrrrWMSMMMMMMMrZMrrrrMM Fuck your mother and your father
'ror`r MWrrMMrrWrrXrrrMrrriMaXMMMMMMBMrSrr7rr:rMMrrrrMX Fuck your mother and your father
'ror`r MMrrXMM2MMrMrrrMrrr,rrrM' or`rrrrBraMBMrM2rrriM Fuck your mother and your father
'ro',rr M2rrMrr@rrMMMMMMMMMr rMrrMorMMrZMZMMr;MMrrrrMM Fuck your mother and your father
'ro',rrr MrrrMMM0rZrrrMr rMMB7MM2MMrMrrSrrrrrMWrrrrrM Fuck your mother and your father
'ro',rrr MrrrrrSMMMMWSMr rrirrMrrrarMrrrM:MMBrSrrrrMM Fuck your mother and your father
'ro',rrr MM'ro',rrr2XMMMWMMMM0MMMMMMMMMMMMrrrrrrrr2M Fuck your mother and your father
'ro',rrrr MMr:'ro',rrrrrr;rrrrr8'ro',oro',o',rrrrMM Fuck your mother and your father
'ro',rrrrr XMMM'ror`roaM'ror`rr, rrrr;;:'ror`rrMMM Fuck your mother and your father
'ror,r'ro',rr WMM'ror,r' or`rBrrMrr rao',or`rMMMr Fuck your mother and your father
'ro',oro',o',rr MMMr:rr,rrrrMorrXS2,rrrrrZMMMX Fuck your mother and your father
'ro',oro',o',rrr rMMMZMMrrr;rrrrBrrrrrrMMMM Fuck your mother and your father
'ro',oro',or,r'ror` irXS2MMMMMMB8ZMMMMX: Fuck your mother and your father
and your father
TROLLKORE HEAD, I'M IN YOUR BED and your father
I'M FIZZY FIZZY WIZZY, I'M OFF MY HEAD and your father
Filter error: Please use fewer 'junk' characterso
Filter error: Please use fewer 'junk' characterso
Filter error: Please use fewer 'junk' characterso
Filter error: Please use fewer 'junk' characterso

Re:Hookay... damage control? Paid by MS? (-1)

TheVelvetFlamebait (986083) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506579)

Frist Psot + -1 Redundant = Head asplode

Seriously guys. If you want to silence his opinion, do it the discrete, zero accountability way: with a -1 overrated.

Well (5, Insightful)

rodrigoandrade (713371) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506259)

Call me troll, but I've seen several sub-par products that sold well on hype alone. Windows 7 will do just fine, whether it's any good or not.

At least Microsoft's marketing department is doing its job right this time.

Re:Well (5, Interesting)

mikelieman (35628) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506319)

It looks like their marketing department has refined what appears to be their only effective strategy.... Which we've seen before with Win98->WinME->WinXP.

You HAVE a perfectly serviceable product, WindowsXP.

You release something really shitty, Windows Vista.

The expected backlash gives you an opportunity to announce the release of the panacea for all Vista's ills. Windows 7.

Now, since Windows 7 APPEARS TO BE so much better than the APPARENTLY SHITTY Vista, there's a lot of positive attention.

But at the end of the day, Microsoft's PRODUCTS still aren't compelling -- Windows 7 main selling point is that it just doesn't work like shit -- and that appears to be good enough.

But 'not working like shit' is what we already HAVE, with XP.

Brilliant.

Re:Well (-1, Troll)

Eggplant62 (120514) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506369)

I looked at the beta. I found it to be the same pig, just different lipstick and a new wig. And continuing to require virus protection? EPIC FAIL.

Re:Well (5, Informative)

bobsil1 (115706) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506487)

Win7 has superfast wifi connect and resume. Big benefit on laptops.

Re:Well (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26506657)

So does Mac OS X, at least compared to Windows XP and Vista.

I've no idea about Linux though - actually getting it to suspend, then correctly resume on most laptops while still having the wireless even work is still something of an achievement. Of course, unless you're very lucky, or had it all pre-configured by the hardware manufacturer, the same is true of Windows XP most of the time...

I think Windows 7 is actually supposed to be a prettier version of Vista, the same way Windows XP was nothing but a prettier version of Windows 2000, and Windows ME was supposed to be a prettier version of Windows 98.

Re:Well (2, Informative)

Eggplant62 (120514) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506675)

I'm running Ubuntu Intrepid on a Dell Inspiron 1501. It suspends to disk and resumes very nicely, thanks.

Re:Well (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26506559)

And continuing to require virus protection? EPIC FAIL.

  • A necessary fail. It's either that or they implement their own half-assed solution, like Windows Firewall or Defender.
  • Go back to 4chan, faggot.

Re:Well (1)

Eggplant62 (120514) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506741)

Well, what's wrong with Microsoft actually security their operating system from users running apps that are capable of writing to important system files and installing unwanted services without permission? Maybe that would be a good thing?

Nah, the antivirus software market is big business, and we'd not want to shit all over our business partners, right?

Re:Well (1)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506799)

Trojans, viruses and worms can more than happily run in whatever security context you yourself are running as - even if MS came out with a 100% proof security model, the problem would not go away, it would simply adapt.

Re:Well (4, Interesting)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506787)

I've been using the beta for several weeks now, and its certainly no complete rewrite, but it has had stuff rewritten - its an OS I would more than be happy to use, and that's including any comparison with XP as well as Vista.

Out of interest, how would *you* solve the virus issue? Because its not something you can ever completely solve through OS security alone, when your users still need to do stuff...

Re:Well (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26506393)

XP does not support >=4GB of memory, which makes it completely useless as a workstation, and makes it obsolete as a consumer OS. If all you do is office, it'll work fine - but then again so would NT 4.

This is the only reason I run Vista, and this is why I find windows 7 compelling over XP. A decent windows OS that can take advantage of my hardware.

Re:Well (3, Informative)

erroneus (253617) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506435)

There is a 64 bot Windows XP but they have stopped supporting it. I have it on two workstations at my office and it uses more than 4GB RAM just fine.

Windows Vista's and now Windows 7's most significant competition is Windows XP.

Re:Well (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26506693)

XP 64 is fine if it works with your hardware. It didn't work with mine last time I tried it, and I couldn't find XP 64 drivers.

XP is competing now, but that's a temporary situation as most computers are still being distributed with 4GB of memory.

Re:Well (5, Interesting)

HerculesMO (693085) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506413)

Problem is that it relies on OLD technology to 'work well'.

In that case, why upgrade the Linux kernel, ever? It works well. Why upgrade your car? It gets you from point A to point B. Why upgrade anything, ever?

If you're in that mindset, you would suffice with having a butter churn and live by candlelight. They are servicable too.

But for the rest of us who want "next gen" technology, I think Windows 7 does have some benefits (as did Vista, in a much crappier package) over XP. And if you don't see that, then stick with XP. I don't see the big deal.

poor reasoning (5, Insightful)

Reality Master 201 (578873) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506493)

Problem is that it relies on OLD technology to 'work well'.

That's a dumb argument. I still slice bread with knife, a technology which has been around for thousands of years - I could move to spiffy new computer controlled laser system, but why? It's expensive, both to acquire and replace, it's more work to service, and it doesn't get me much.

So what if the technology is old? Why is the new technology any better? What is the new technology that Win7 introduces that makes it so much better than XP? You don't mention it in your post.

Re:poor reasoning (1, Troll)

HerculesMO (693085) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506551)

I'm sorry, I'm not the developer of Windows 7 so I don't have the details, but from what I've read (and I do read from places other than Slashdot), that Windows 7 stops allowing *some* applications to be written entirely like shit.

That's not to say of course, that there won't be shitty applications out there, but the ones that *require admin rights* and other things won't function well. They are breaking compatibility for those poorly coded apps.

Other things like Direct X, memory management, caching... I guess those are plusses too. On the enterprise end there are *lots* of enhancements and benefits, but since this is Slashdot, nobody's really going to care because they all work for Red Hat and don't use Windows in the enterprise (what a laugh).

I think we'll see the benefits when it comes out.

Re:poor reasoning (2, Insightful)

Reality Master 201 (578873) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506727)

On the enterprise end there are *lots* of enhancements and benefits, but since this is Slashdot, nobody's really going to care because they all work for Red Hat and don't use Windows in the enterprise (what a laugh).

or to translate, "Waaahh. I don't know the specifics, and if I did, nobody would care anyway because they're linux meanies and have cooties, and they suck and my dad can beat up theirs. Waaaahhh!"

So basically you're a low-level Windows admin with not that much understanding of technology and a chip on your shoulder? Cause that's what you sound like.

Re:Well (4, Interesting)

Creepy Crawler (680178) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506535)

And pray-tell, what real benefits are those?

Badly composited windows that take way too many resources?
Removal of receiving and sending faxes from the home (crippled user) version?
Non-accelerated sound system?
DRM system built in on the audio and video subsystems?
Ram gobbler (2GB.. not enough)?
10GB install with no real apps (where did the space go)? yay solitaire.

Re:Well (5, Funny)

LighterShadeOfBlack (1011407) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506567)

And pray-tell, what real benefits are those?

Vista's Freecell is fully horizontally resizable. I've been waiting 15 years for that feature, if that isn't worth the upgrade I don't know what is.

Re:Well (4, Insightful)

wvmarle (1070040) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506501)

I would phase that slightly different.

The bar has been lowered.

Vista was compared to XP, which thanks to its long long long lifetime has become a standard, fairly polished, with known and mostly manageable security issues.

Vista comes along, does things different, breaks a lot, and is considered shitty.

Then Win7 is released, and it is now being compared to it's direct parent, Vista. Not XP. So MS only has to put a product in the market that appears better than Vista (reviewers won't complain too hard about drivers and other compatibility I suppose, it's beta after all), not better than the old and trusted XP.

That said I doubt Win7 will work on netbooks, so I won't be surprised that XP will be with us for a long long time to come.

Re:Well (5, Informative)

SolemnLord (775377) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506671)

That said I doubt Win7 will work on netbooks, so I won't be surprised that XP will be with us for a long long time to come.

Actually, there have been lots of Win7 installs on netbooks, [liliputing.com] and the general consensus is that it runs fine. Is it as quick as running XP? Well, no, but don't forget that XP is a seven-year-old operating system that required a Pentium II at release.

I've been running the Win7beta for a couple weeks now, and it's been a pretty nice experience. My machine's perfectly capable of running Vista, though, so I haven't noticed many speed gains. The UI touch-ups are nice, though.

Why Not as Fast as XP? (3, Insightful)

SerpentMage (13390) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506777)

>Is it as quick as running XP? Well, no, but don't forget that XP is a seven-year-old operating system that required a Pentium II at release.

You see I don't get this comment. Since the operating system 7 years ago had to run on much slower hardware, well, don't expect that now?

WHY F***G NOT! What on earth does an operating system have to do so that it sucks up ever bit of my quad core machine?

Here is the irony. Superfetch... Superfetch makes my programs faster to load and run. Well, are they counting the time that superfetch takes away while I work?

Oh yes, I remember, it runs in the background. Yes, that's right background if you count not moving your mouse or keyboard. BUT you see I write trading systems, and have traders, and they actually don't move their mouse or keyboard. Guess what thinks, it is ok to startup run, and cycle through a terrabyte of data? Yes anything that should run in the background!

I would actually like a faster operating system! I have a hate list of Vista, and not a single thing has changed in Windows 7! Windows 7 is literally putting lipstick on a pig!

Re:Well (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26506765)

Because of the whole Vista debacle most testers are making a point of comparing it to XP, and finding in favour of 7.

Also 7 is based on their microkernel they're specifically designing it to be able to work well on netbooks too.

Re:Well (3, Interesting)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506811)

I think you will find a lot of comparison between XP and Windows 7 is going on, you are simply assuming your view is correct.

I prefer Windows 7, even at this beta stage, over XP - direct comparison.

I'm not sure Windows 7 is actually something new (1)

rolfwind (528248) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506795)

and not just Vista SP3 or 4, with the shit stripped away like some 3rd party apps already do.

People are out celebrating in the streets as if Windows 7 is the greatest thing since sliced bread and all I have to ask is "O rly?" Unless it has a much better security model, and kills off the registry or something - what exactly is the big deal here?

Stripped down Vista SP3/4, wow. Who cares.

Here they are! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26506653)

Re:Well (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26506789)

like most flavors of linux?

Lets be fair (0, Redundant)

thammoud (193905) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506265)

I know this is /. but Windows 7 is much better than Vista and looks to be a decent OS for those who wish to run Windows.

Re:Lets be fair (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26506317)

It's not difficult to be better than Vista

Re:Lets be fair (1)

heffrey (229704) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506333)

Well I think Vista is just dandy and if 7 is lots better then I'll be well chuffed.

Re:Lets be fair (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26506335)

How much did they pay you for slashvertisement? ~

Re:Lets be fair (1)

multisync (218450) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506499)

I know this is /. but Windows 7 is much better than Vista and looks to be a decent OS for those who wish to run Windows

The trouble is, XP is also a decent OS for those who wish to run Windows. Vista offered no compelling reason to change, and any benefits it offered were outweighed by the additional training it necessitated. That's the reason a lot of people chose to stick with XP. Unless Windows 7 offers some tangible advantages over XP, I see no reason to change.

And what is "I know this is /." supposed to mean? I see equal astro-turfing by the pro and anti Microsoft camps around here.

Re:Lets be fair (1)

gbarules2999 (1440265) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506679)

I used Windows 7. There are no advantages. It runs slower than XP, and supports much less (as of beta, anyway). It's not that Windows 7 is bad, it's just that there's no real reason to love it. If we can't love it, then what's the point in spending a hundred dollars to upgrade to what is basically Vista SP2?

Re:Lets be fair (0, Troll)

jo42 (227475) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506715)

The most easily understood comparison between Vista and Windows 7 is this:

a) Vista => Turd

b) Windows 7 => Polished Turd

Q.E.D.

Re:Lets be fair (1)

adamofgreyskull (640712) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506803)

I know this is /. but Windows XP is much better than Vista and looks to be a decent OS for those who wish to run Windows.

FTFY

I call BS! (1, Interesting)

SerpentMage (13390) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506853)

I use Windows XP, Vista, and now am testing Windows 7!

Windows 7 is not nicer. Windows 7 has all of the same problems as Vista. I write trading systems and as such see what Vista, and Windows 7 do.

1) Screen flash, due to the fact that HP has written a bad driver whenever the printer is not started will cause a loop 0 dialog box to appear. Result is that the OS requires a screen flash indicating a different mode. I have minimum 2 screens, usually 3 and 4 are not uncommon. Do you know what screen flash does to 4 screens and how long it takes?

2) Gotta have upgrades. Vista when it receives (Windows 7 as well) critical upgrades requires you to reboot. Well is that not f***n dandy. You boot your machine get your trading setup, and then Vista says, "Hey I have to reboot because you received a super critical update." The worst is that you can only delay it by 3 hours. That is great when you are in the middle of the trade and Windows decides its time to reboot. Also great if you are running a 4 day Montecarlo to wake up in the morning to see a "safe" machine!

3) WTF does Vista or Windows 7 have to search my harddisk? I have a terrabyte of data, and there is always something searching the harddisk for something. Oh yes the fabled "background" task. Did you know when traders run trading strategies they do nothing except stare at the screen. And guess what Windows thinks, "hey I can run this background task..."

4) The directory structure is still a freaken mess. I wish they would adopt an OSX approach where files don't have to be scattered everywhere.

And the list goes on...

Microsoft as I see has a major issue. They have some parts doing good jobs, Office, SharePoint, Exchange, etc. And then there is the Windows division that keeps producing garbage!

I wish, and I really do wish, that Microsoft did not fight the 1999 split up order.

Right now Microsoft is eating up 30% of their profits in "R&D", yet their growth is only 8%. That's called a pig!

I'm so sick of this... (0, Troll)

cyber1kenobi (666018) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506311)

Vista SUCKS. Period. It is an annoying kink in the neck. It's not just hype, it SUCKS. They can try all the spin they want "oh the bloggers gave us a bad rap!" BS If you create an operating system and purposely make it to annoy the users, what do you think you'll get?

Re:I'm so sick of this... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26506425)

If you create an operating system and purposely make it to annoy the users, what do you think you'll get?

Assuming you're talking about UAC, then you'll get a more secure and only slightly more annoying operating system. That was actually one of the things I liked about Vista, though it could have been implemented better. What killed it for me is how bloated and sluggish it is.

Re:I'm so sick of this... (2, Insightful)

AceofSpades19 (1107875) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506457)

If you create an operating system and purposely make it to annoy the users, what do you think you'll get?

Assuming you're talking about UAC, then you'll get a more secure and only slightly more annoying operating system. That was actually one of the things I liked about Vista, though it could have been implemented better. What killed it for me is how bloated and sluggish it is.

The thing about UAC is that it doesn't make it more secure if all you have to do is press allow, users will just click allow each time because it requires no effort

Re:I'm so sick of this... (1)

plutoXL (1314421) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506729)

The thing about UAC is that it doesn't make it more secure if all you have to do is press allow, users will just click allow each time because it requires no effort

Well, I for one think that UAC is a small improvement. Yes, it does pop up from time to time, but it is not too often to be annoying.
Same as if you have a firewall or anti-virus software, you get a window that you can read or just blindly click approve. But the point is that you have a bit more information of what is going on with your system and one more option to help you identify suspicious activity.
As for the "users who just click allow", well if you are lazy enough to read one sentence than no UAC or anything else will help. But people like that probably have bunch of malware running on their system already, since they trained themselves to blindly approve everything. One just needs a bit of common sense. :\

Re:I'm so sick of this... (2, Informative)

sigismond0 (1455695) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506519)

Sounds like you never used Vista. Or you only used it when nobody made drivers for it--which wasn't Vista sucking, it was vendors not making new drivers that sucked. Every single person I know that actually uses Vista (Read: Didn't use it for five minutes and then switch back) loves it. More stable than XP, much better looking, and just a tad slower; though, the ability to drop in more RAM more than makes up for that. Also DX10/11.

whats with the fanboi encroachment ? (2, Insightful)

unity100 (970058) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506827)

ANY post that is even mildly criticizing of vista is modded down. another marketing strategy by m$oft ? like, release in-house fanbois to fight for the product ? maybe that is why 7 is getting good reviews.

Tell me why I MUST have Windows 7 (1, Insightful)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506321)

Windows zealots will have to try very hard to convince me that I need Windows 7. As it stands now, I will not touch it even with a 10 foot pole. Windows XP works and works quite well for me. I plan to ditch it for KDE 4.2 when it comes out though.

Re:Tell me why I MUST have Windows 7 (1)

HerculesMO (693085) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506373)

Newer version of Direct X.

If you play games, you upgrade. If you surf the web and write docs, you can use any OS you want it's rather irrelevant.

Stop being a whiner.

Re:Tell me why I MUST have Windows 7 (1)

mweather (1089505) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506843)

There's no reason that version of DirectX can't run on XP. If you want to let microsoft extory money out of you by holding your games hostage, be my guest. I'm buying OpenGL games.

TFA is totally wrong about why Vista failed (5, Insightful)

localroger (258128) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506331)

Consumers don't care. They didn't care about Vista, except that it didn't work like their old XP box and they had to learn new stuff. Consumers don't like learning the new stuff but they do it because it's easier than jumping through the hoops to get another XP box.

IT people killed Vista, and I see no reason why they will be any happier with Win7. I have talked to dozens of industry people, from the guys who network mom & pop shops to guys who run databases for Fortune 100 companies, and NONE of them wanted anything to do with Vista. Their complaints were that it was entirely too dependent on internet connectivity, it was totaly different and therefore a major hassle to integrate with their existing network infrastructure and to maintain at the user level, and could not be locked down in a corporate environment properly. Win7 is a finger in the eye to these people -- it doesn't even have Classic mode any more. I've only spoken to a couple of them since Win7 was introduced but they aren't impressed.

And it is a truism from the days of Dos 2.0 that people do prefer to use at home what they use at work. When the tech friends they depend on to fix what they can't insist they run XP, they will insist on XP. Office and Word became popular not because they're all that good but because people brought them home and became comfortable with them there.

This has all come down to a giant Mexican standoff between Microsoft, which wants to determine how your computer looks and acts, and corporate IT types who want to determine those things. (As for you determining those things, that ship has sailed; the end of Classic mode tells that tale.) The IT guyes will not give up their control. Microsoft has obviously dug in their heels. It is not clear to me how this will end, but from what I have seen it will not end with widespread Win7 on the corporate desktop.

Re:TFA is totally wrong about why Vista failed (1)

HerculesMO (693085) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506387)

Last I checked, if you don't want Windows 7 or Vista, you don't have to buy them.

I don't get why people get their panties in a bunch when a company releases a new product and you personally don't like it. Don't buy it. Big deal.

But if you run XP now normally, I guarantee you'll upgrade to 7 just with everybody else, because it's the nature of a techy person to upgrade.

And if you don't, then I guess it really doesn't matter, does it?

FYI, I manage 17000+ users in the US alone, and we are skipping Vista and planning on going with 7 for the increased benefits in policy, deployment packaging (read up about WIM), Bitlocker and more.

Not everybody that's "your friend" will follow the path you're proclaiming.

Re:TFA is totally wrong about why Vista failed (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26506463)

Last I checked, if you don't want Windows 7 or Vista, you don't have to buy them.

Until they stop supporting your current OS with security upgrades and activation.

Re:TFA is totally wrong about why Vista failed (1)

HerculesMO (693085) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506505)

And since it costs them cash to do that, I don't see the big deal either.

Activation I'm no fan of, but updates? No, I don't think that those last forever either.

Re:TFA is totally wrong about why Vista failed (2, Informative)

gbarules2999 (1440265) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506705)

What if a computer of yours dies? You can't exactly go out a buy an XP machine anymore; well, not without a price. That's worth complaining about.

Re:TFA is totally wrong about why Vista failed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26506533)

I don't get why people get their panties in a bunch when a company releases a new product and you personally don't like it. Don't buy it. Big deal.

I agree with you, but remember that Windows is not the typical product you buy or not because you like it or not. As far as the OS is involved, the PC market is still dominated by a monopoly, so it's not about choice here.

Me, I use Linux because never felt at ease with Windows since its 3.11 days; and you probably are another programmer/power user who knows what to choose and how - but we are not representative of the vast majority of the PC market that has to do with anything that comes preinstalled with their machines.

Re:TFA is totally wrong about why Vista failed (1)

jo42 (227475) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506751)

Last I checked, if you don't want Windows 7 or Vista, you don't have to buy them.

Yeah, you can always pirate Windows XP. Some solution.

Re:TFA is totally wrong about why Vista failed (1)

Paladin_Krone (635912) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506411)

Its funny you complain about classic mode, because I'm posting from windows 7 running in classic mode... Stop regurgitating the same BS and try the product before you talk with authority about its shortcomings. Ive been very impressed over the last few weeks, and there are a few things different, but thats just progress. You didnt complain about motherboard manufacturers dropping the second IDE channel in lieu of SATA did you?

I get your point, but... (2, Insightful)

Reality Master 201 (578873) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506421)

What alternative is there? You can't stay on XP forever - eventually support will go away, patches will stop, fire and blood will rain from the skies, etc. Eventually, IT will have to move to a new OS, and the odds are that OS will be Win 7 or whatever chunk of crap MS is peddling that year. It's still more compelling for business users than any alternative.

You could move to the Mac, but then you need all new software and you need to completely retrain your staff. Same thing for Linux. So you can move to Win 7 - where you can at least expect some of your software to continue working. Developers can keep cranking out crap in VisualStudio (which is a shitty fucking IDE, whatever it's cadre of loyal adherents say about it), executives can continue using Outlook and schedule meetings with each other, your shitty ActiveX control laden intranet will work without changes (MS is never, ever, ever, gonna give that shit up if they can help it).

Re:I get your point, but... (2, Informative)

AceofSpades19 (1107875) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506445)

What alternative is there? You can't stay on XP forever - eventually support will go away, patches will stop, fire and blood will rain from the skies, etc. Eventually, IT will have to move to a new OS, and the odds are that OS will be Win 7 or whatever chunk of crap MS is peddling that year. It's still more compelling for business users than any alternative.

You could move to the Mac, but then you need all new software and you need to completely retrain your staff. Same thing for Linux. So you can move to Win 7 - where you can at least expect some of your software to continue working. Developers can keep cranking out crap in VisualStudio (which is a shitty fucking IDE, whatever it's cadre of loyal adherents say about it), executives can continue using Outlook and schedule meetings with each other, your shitty ActiveX control laden intranet will work without changes (MS is never, ever, ever, gonna give that shit up if they can help it).

You will still have to retrain your staff to use the windows 7 interface and the new office interface

yes, but (2, Insightful)

Reality Master 201 (578873) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506515)

That doesn't address all the other stuff - software that you can still reuse, stuff with an upgrade path to new version. It's still far cheaper to move to a newer windows than a completely different OS for most businesses.

Believe me, I'd love to see MS lose it's market position, but it's probably not gonna happen because people refuse to move to Win7.

Choice of pain (2, Informative)

localroger (258128) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506491)

I know plenty of people (not as many as 2 years ago, but still some) who run Win2K because of their objection to the license key checks introduced with XP. As long as they aren't playing games or HD multimedia, it doesn't seem to matter.

And if a large organization has to make a major unscheduled effort because Microsoft is ramping up the pressure -- you can still get XP but it's more expensive, available on fewer models, and deliberately more poorly supported -- then you have to ask whether to take the next step on that treadmill which is only going to turn again in a few years, or go in a different direction. I have heard the words "Apple" and "Linux" uttered by people who would never have taken either seriously a couple of years ago, and you can see how that's working out for Apple very clearly.

Microsoft's headlock on the desktop is slipping, and with it their lock on the OS. A lot of stuff that used to require Microsoft and Office can now be done just fine with Linux and OpenOffice. My own company would never have considered moving away from Microsoft even two years ago, but now they're asking for a couple of test boxes to be set up, and they also pester our local Apple fanboy a lot about his system.

Re:Choice of pain (1)

cptdondo (59460) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506613)

I wish our IT chief would see that... Even his IT staff has come out publicly and said they would like to use linux for specific purposes.

Fat chance. You can't connect your PDA unless it runs windows mobile. You can't even get to our internal web services unless it's with IE. You can't check your paycheck unless it's with IE. You can't check email externally unless it's with IE.

I asked about using OpenOffice since it has functionality I need and MSOffice doesn't have. No chance.

His priority is:

Has the MS brand on it.
If not, then it must be commercial.

So we have this virtual outboard software which is a total piece of shit; once in a while it corrupts its own database and frantic emails go out asking everyone to close it so the database can be reset. I've offered to rewrite it in PHP and put it on the website. No way. And they pay a per-seat license for this POS.

Unfortunately there are too many people like this in the IT world. They know no one gets fired for using MS, and that's the way they will go. No risk taking for them - MS is in the same position as IBM was a couple of decades ago.

Re:TFA is totally wrong about why Vista failed (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26506517)

IT will lose because it's the Boss who will want Vista/Win7 and make it so, regardless of its (lack of) technical merit.

Personally I miss Windows NT/2000 where I didn't have to screw around with the activation shit. I hate dealing with that crap. As a developer I change my hardware all the time and continuously have to waste time on licensing issues for software that I own.

Re:TFA is totally wrong about why Vista failed (0, Redundant)

Narpak (961733) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506553)

Well as you say XP runs fine and it still covers the needs of many.

The father of a very close friend of mine owns and runs an electric service company, have a few dozen employees. He runs XP (and still runs Word 98 last time I checked); it covers the needs of his company and he see no reason to spent money on upgrades he really don't need at all. Basically his philosophy is "if it works; leave it the hell alone". I reckon his way of looking at the IT issue isn't uncommon among people who are running a business (especially when it is a local one). Vista costs money, new computers cost money, re-education costs money; keeping what you have that works does not infer an additional cost.

Re:TFA is totally wrong about why Vista failed (1, Troll)

zimtmaxl (667919) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506587)

As a matter of fact while people get older they get more used to the things they use. It takes time and effort to get acquainted with something new. Wether the new thing is a car, a new OS, other software or just new socks.

I agree with you except for the Mexican standoff.

To "prove my point in writing" I have tested Windows 7 on my older Tablet PC (motion LE1600) which was designed for XP. So I did use XP and Vista quite a lot of time on this machine. Win7 is far from prime time.
There are still several bugs. But none the less is IS impressive.

You can read more about installing and using Win7 here on my blog: http://max.zamorsky.name/2009/01/13/windows7-auf-einem-motion-computing-le1600-tablet-pcwindows7-on-a-motion-computing-le1600-tablet-pc/ [zamorsky.name]

And here are some nice Windows 7 Humor things I found over at some sites: http://max.zamorsky.name/2009/01/14/windows-7-humorwindows-7-humor/ [zamorsky.name]

Re:TFA is totally wrong about why Vista failed (1)

Osvaldo Doederlein (34220) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506593)

Win7 is a finger in the eye to these people -- it doesn't even have Classic mode any more.

I hated the new GUI stuff in WinXP and always configured it to pure Classic mode (Win2K UI). With Vista I liked Aero enough that I left it on - partially because the Vista Basic UI was so terrible, I admit - but I kept other settings like the Start Menu and Taskbar as much Classic as I could. But with Win7, I finally liked everything and I'm running it happily with minimal changes from the default settings. The new Taskbar, for one thing, is great. On top of that, even at this beta stage app/HW compatibility looks excellent, memory usage is lower and laptop battery usage better, compared to Vista.

At some point you've got to abandon old cruft, like the Classic UI, to cut the bloat and maintenance and security nightmare that is keeping 10+ year old crap in the system. The tight time to do that is when the new features are overwhelmingly better than the old ones, so few people who've actually tried the new stuff will want to go back. I'm not a Microsoft fanboy (just google me) but credit where it's due: Kudos to you guys for Windows 7... if you don't screw it up in the next months (e.g. no new Vista Capable-like fiasco), you've got a smashing winner in your hands.

Re:TFA is totally wrong about why Vista failed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26506767)

Microsoft has obviously dug in their heels. It is not clear to me how this will end, but from what I have seen it will not end with widespread Win7 on the corporate desktop.

I disagree. You assume that IT budget decisions are made by IT savvy types. They're not, they're made by people who couldn't change a plug without giving themselves third degree burns, and who will take the apparent euphoria over Windows 7 (which merely had to clear the hurdle of not being perceived to be as bad as Vista) as proof that Microsoft have fixed their mistakes. Irrespective of what Windows 7 is like, if it doesn't actually self destruct the computer on boot up, it will suffice. The alternatives are to migrate to another operating system, and let's face it, that isn't going to happen.

Re:TFA is totally wrong about why Vista failed (2, Informative)

Dr Egg (1451323) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506825)

it doesn't even have Classic mode any more

Depends what you mean by classic. Classic start menu organisation no, but classic theme yes.

It's Vista reloaded (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26506343)

But if a little hype is what it takes to wean people of XP, then so be it. XP is not ready for coming challenges: 64bit, more than 4GB of memory and IPv6, to name just three. XP's included driver base is also getting annoyingly out of date. It can hardly be installed on a modern system without first making a new install medium with nLite. I'm still going to turn off all the UI flashiness in Windows 7.

Re:It's Vista reloaded (1)

Mascot (120795) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506635)

XP is not ready for coming challenges: 64bit

XP x64 edition.

more than 4GB of memory

See above.

and IPv6

Included as of XP SP1.

The only reason XP will not be a feasible operating system for very much longer, is that Microsoft will not keep updating it and application and hardware vendors will also stop supporting it. Since nobody but Microsoft *can* update some of the parts in it, that's game over.

In the case of XP x64 one could argue the above happened within days of it shipping. But it's limping along on my system and still doing the job I need it to do. That being running my applications.

Vista Lite (2, Informative)

usul294 (1163169) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506399)

From what I've been hearing, Windows 7 is pretty much Vista with alot of the bloat turned off. Having done that myself in my Vista install, even with all the fancy graphics turned on, I've had a good experience. I hope everyone else gets the same in Windows 7 and gets to love the fancy 'start search' bar as much as I have.

Re:Vista Lite (5, Interesting)

nwoolls (520606) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506489)

Then you've been hearing wrong. Which is sort of the point of the article. There's all this positive hype around 7, true or not, just like there was negative spin around Vista, true or not. Show me one thing in Vista that's "turned off" in 7, bloat-wise. Windows 7 is Windows Vista with performance optimizations, visual tweaks and UI improvements.

Re:Vista Lite (5, Interesting)

Mascot (120795) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506685)

I was ready to throw Vista out of the window within minutes of my first encounter with it. So far I've clocked a few hours in Win7 and, as of yet, the same compulsion has not struck me.

Only time will tell if that's going to last. UAC really *really* still needs a "remember my answer for this file" checkbox to avoid being turned off completely. It makes no sense what so ever that I should have to click "yes" every bloody time I start my defragmentation application. Sure, if something tries to start it without my direct interaction, tell me. But as long as I'm selecting the menu option to start it, and I've previously said "go ahead", and the file hasn't changed... Just bloody start it already!

It's revolutionary for windows (1, Insightful)

Venture37 (654305) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506447)

I guess the question is "is it too little too late?" M$ lost quiet alot of their userbase to Apple & Linux, will they get those users to switch back for Windows 7?? The sad thing is that this release is just M$ playing catch up with other platforms packed with things they should have done a long time ago, if you compare it with other platforms it doesn't actually offer anything revolutionary in the core of the OS. did it ever??

Re:It's revolutionary for windows (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26506603)

>M$ lost quiet alot

WTF does that mean?!?

Re:It's revolutionary for windows (1)

Venture37 (654305) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506649)

try reading the whole sentence up to the comma ;)

Re:It's revolutionary for windows (1)

Zironic (1112127) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506639)

Are you on drugs? Windows still has a 90% market share.

Re:It's revolutionary for windows (1)

Venture37 (654305) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506699)

ok, but hasn't that been dropping over the last couple of years??

Re:It's revolutionary for windows (1)

Mascot (120795) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506739)

If OS X and Linux had had anywhere near the application selection as Windows did when Vista hit the market, things may have been different. But Windows is still king of the hill in this area.

So, no, I don't think it'll be too little too late.

if you compare it with other platforms it doesn't actually offer anything revolutionary in the core of the OS.

Nobody cares about "the core of the OS". Apart, perhaps, from the media industry that needs it to be locked down for them. What people care about is what applications you can run on it.

NO, i didnt. (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506451)

i dont know about you but i had to endure hell because of my close social circle's woes induced by vista. be it games be it work be it unthinkable other stuff. and sometimes STILL.

no exaggeration there. vista was that bad.

I read, I downloaded, I installed (1, Informative)

gearloos (816828) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506453)

After downloading and trying out Win 7, I might make a suggestion. Use VM software as it will make it easier to start fresh every time it decides something will never work again. For me, It locks up every time I try and run anything. What did I do, you may ask? I ran Solitaire one time. That was enought to throw the awesome Windows 7 off balance. I'm going back to my Mac. Wake me when Windows 2364 comes out, should be next year according to Msoft revisioning. I hear it is much improved.

Re:I read, I downloaded, I installed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26506565)

You're right. How dare Microsoft have the audacity to release beta software with glitches in it. Is it like they expect us to do their testing for them or something? God bless you for having the foresight to realize that OSX, a stable piece of software, would crash less often than something in beta. You've saved countless people's lives.

Not a Surprise (1)

DaveAtFraud (460127) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506511)

It has usually taken Microsoft two releases of an OS to get it right. Compare the following:

Windows 3.0 vs. Windows 3.1
Windows 95 vs. Windows 98*
Windows 98 vs Windows 98 SE (Second Edition)*
Windows NT 3.1 vs. Windows NT 4.0
W2K vs. Windows XP

Attempts to prolong a decent "second release" such as Windows ME as a successor to 98 SE have also usually been miserable failures.

Cheers,
Dave

* The original 98 was better than 95 but Microsoft really didn't get 98 right until SE.

Who would have guessed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26506513)

Just goes to show if you wright usable software people will use it. and never believe what someone elise says about something when you can find out for your self.

Tho I cant comment on 7 to much as I could only stand a few hours in it before I remembered how much of an unmanageable mess windows is and released I had fallen out of practice with all my windows management skills since I finally abandoned the platform for good a few years ago. (expose how did I ever live without you)

ease of deployment (2, Informative)

m0s3m8n (1335861) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506545)

When I looked at Vista, ease of deployment was a big turn off. We are mostly a Novell shop and I use imaging to push out software / os. Someone mucks up their system, two clicks, a reboot, and 30 minutes later they have a shiny new system. Sysprep allowed this with NO USER INTERACTION (Corp license key). Vista was not so nice about this and 7 will probably be the same way.

Vista? Windows 7? No longer matters to me... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26506581)

I discovered Mac OS X last year and I'm done with any Microsoft OS.

If Windows works for you, that's lovely. Enjoy using it.

But I'm done. No more blue screens, or missing .dll's, or virus infections, or spyware, or mysterious errors that appear and then disappear for no know reason. Meh.

No pity for people who believe marketers (0)

Progman3K (515744) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506585)

If after all this, people willingly choose Windows, then they deserve what they'll get.
There is no sense trying to convince them otherwise.
Also there is no point because many more people (real people, not astroturfers) are embracing Linux every day, the trend cannot be stopped and MS knows this.

If in the meantime MS wants to keep milking consumers and maybe even tangentially improve their product, then fine.

Not matter what the 'buzz', we all know that when it comes to it, most people seek out their most trusted tech-people and ask "So, this new computer I'm buying, what should I put on it?" or "I'm tired of Vista/XP whatever, what should I do" the answer they'll get will be from someone they know will really have their best interests at heart and that person will invraiably say "Get Linux" or even "Buy a Mac" WAY before they advise them to install Windows (any version)

The elephant in the room is over there...

Windows 7: Lowered Expectations Edition (2, Insightful)

Renderer of Evil (604742) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506617)

After the shit sandwich that was Windows Vista anything can look like a winner. Microsoft could have repackaged Windows 2000 and the technobloggers would have gone nuts how stable and clean it was.

I have friends who will run out of breath arguing how Vista is perfect and has gotten a bad rap due to vast Apple/Media conspiracy to spread rumors and undermine the OS. It's nearly impossible to convince them otherwise. Every objection is met by sarcastic remarks like "LOL MIKKKRO$OFT AM I RITE?!" and the like. You're either an Apple kool-aid drinker or a Linux zealot if you don't submit to Microsoft's talking points on how amazing their latest Windows is.

Soon after Windows 7 Betas appeared and couple of high-status media degenerates started hyperventilating about how perfect the OS was, every Vista evangelist suddenly came out and openly distanced themselves from Vista.

I can bet you lots of money that all these Windows 7 superfans will turn on it as soon as Microsoft pre-announces Windows 8.

If microsoft REALLY wanted to show it cared... (1)

voss (52565) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506655)

It would give a free upgrade for Vista users to windows 7, that would get people migrated over to windows 7 much more quickly and create demand for windows 7 apps which would create a compelling case for people to buy new pc's

Still no sudo (1)

Kupfernigk (1190345) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506665)

I know there are people who claim that sudo is insecure. However, Windows 7 still has a problem in that ordinary users tend to need to be admins. So when you run a process in a terminal window, magic causes it not to run with admin status to reduce the potential for harm. There is a workaround to get a privlege elevation box before the terminal window is opened - the one that comes at the top of Google involves writing a javascript which calls an asp which puts up the privilege elevation box. It works, but when is Windows going to get a proper security system that isn't half baked with magic?

Re:Still no sudo (1)

jythie (914043) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506763)

sudo is quite secure when used correctly. Unfortunately it has morphed into a general purpose 'I want to run as admin for a single command' utility rather then 'these users have these special abilities' one.

Re:Still no sudo (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26506779)

Erm, runas? It's been around since forever. Though I'd agree that the post-Vista security model is half-assed, nonsensical, and often completely broken. Turn off UAC and everything's happy again.

Expectations (1)

jythie (914043) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506733)

And of course this can all backfire if you have all these high expectations and hype, then the OS does not live up to them like people expect it to.

Vista 'spin' (1)

ZekoMal (1404259) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506737)

For a looong time, I believed the spin on Vista. I accepted that it must be crap, because it was being called crap. I even made jokes about it.

Then, my friend got it.

With her ownership, I can proudly say....it sucks.

None of the programs we have work properly, and it took the two of us a good twenty-thirty minutes to figure out where Heretic had installed to. Search function was bizarre, the setup was even stranger. It took far longer to start up, despite being on a good laptop. Nothing was in the same place, and it popped up every time a program was run to ask if it was safe.

And then the 'Mohave' commercials came out, finally trying to cry that Vista was good. Instead, they made it sound as though retarded chimps loved it. "I can set a timer on computer usage so my kids aren't on it all day!" "I can make videos!" "It's so easy to view pictures!" "I just love it!"

What part of any of that couldn't be done already? XP did it, maybe not with pretty pretty lights, but it did it. And Apple users are heralded as music/video/picture fanatics. So, how was this positive hype for Vista? "Hey guys, look! When we tell people it's another product, they tell us they love it because it does everything a Windows 98 could pull off! See?"

So this wasn't just negative hype; this was 'it sucks'. When 7 comes out, casual users might like it, but most heavier users will begin seriously considering a switch. I'll probably keep my non internet computers on XP, but switch to Linux on my internet computer. I'd prefer to be confused with something cool then be confused with something frustratingly cheapened.

par for course (1)

fermion (181285) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506821)

Most people are very patient with MS. It is the cheap option, and what can one expect when one is buying the low cost option.

That said the issue is that MS has not learned from past mistakes. They released MS and 2000, the later which was no bad, but theyu charged for these even though these were beta for XP. Customers who were stuck with ME were just told to sod off.

Now MS Vista is released, in various incomplete versions, and forced onto innocent consumers just like ME. And, instead of putting out MS Windows 7 as SP3 or SP4, MS is likely to sell it as a new product, likely again in various non functional versions.

Yes, the issue is that Vista would not run on old boxes. It is also that Visa would not fully run on new boxes, at least not boxes pushed as Vista ready. From an IT perspective, all the cool stuff that would differentiate it from Mac OS X and *nix are gone, and all that is left is eye candy and features that are best suited for a toy machine.

When all else fails... (1)

ilo.v (1445373) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506861)

Apparently a decent beta can succeed where $300 million and Jerry Seinfeld failed.

What an incredibly novel idea for Microsoft. When all attempts at spin fail, and only when all attempts have failed, you can always just build a better product.

Sounds a little like Win95 hype (1)

almaden (631213) | more than 5 years ago | (#26506865)

This discussion reminds me of some of the press and marketing hype before Windows 95 was released. Many PC industry authors praised Win95 as a "complete rewrite from the ground up", "a completely new 32-bit implementation of Windows", or "Windows with DOS completely removed".

In his excellent books "Unauthorized Windows 95" and "Unauthorized DOS", author Andrew Schulman went to great lengths to debunk the popular misconceptions about DOS7 and Win95. Many times things were hinted at by MS, fanned by the press to include their own desires for the OS, and then left to stand by MS. Pretty great marketing.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>