Vista = ME II?

I was stunned to read this today. One author thinks the following:

Article wrote:

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.

With the release of a $3 version of XP in China, and Dell reverting back to XP installed products, does this mean Vista is really ME II in the making?

[C]

You know, a lot of people bitched about Windows ME, but I never had problems. Ditto Vista. I really don't know where all the vitriol is coming from here.

Dimmy Joolittle wrote:

I was stunned to read this today. One author thinks the following:

Article wrote: 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.

With the release of a $3 version of XP in China, and Dell reverting back to XP installed products, does this mean Vista is really ME II in the making?

No. It might be a flop partly due to FUD and due to the fact that the drivers are not ready for vista. It will soon be on track after service pack 1

Randolpho wrote:

You know, a lot of people bitched about Windows ME, but I never had problems. Ditto Vista. I really don't know where all the vitriol is coming from here.

I never had problems with ME, my main issue with it was that it was a 'fun-ified' version of Windows 98, complete with the 'fun' logo.

But ME was a very minor release, and thats why many people never bothered to upgrade. Vista is a major release even though they promised more than they put in. People who compare the two look foolish.

I think these technology pundits are in a race to see who can report the most outlandish crap.

Dimmy Joolittle wrote:

With the release of a $3 version of XP in China, and Dell reverting back to XP installed products, does this mean Vista is really ME II in the making?

No it does not.

When XP was released everyone 'hated' it and gave it bad reviews until they actually stopped beleiving the FUD, you expected anything different during the Vista release?

I had to give up Vista and 7.04 earlier.  Here is why.

littleguru wrote:

Got this after a 3 seconds of black screen:

Display driver nvlddmkm stopped responding and has successfully recovered.

It's like the 20th time I get this... I don't understand why Microsoft gives nVidia the "Vista certified" logo. They sure aren't!

I got that once too and was actually quite happy to see it.  Whenever my display drivers stopped responding under XP I was forced to reboot.

Heh I learned my lesson and switched to ATI a long time ago, nVidia was once a good video card maker, since Vista however their drivers haven't been good, mediocre at best!

As for the OP's comments, there will always be people that spread FUD, I personally think Vista is a stepping stone towards what MS envisioned it would be 4 years ago.  Hopefully Windows Client vNext will take this vision to near completion, and if we're really lucky the service packs will help along the way (Explorer on Vista STILL needs alot of attention and fixes).

It will pass with time, XP won't be on sale for much longer (I give it 'til the end of the year, which is about the same time MS stops officially supporting it, unless the PC companies plan on supporting XP themselves which I find foolish), NOTE: I believe I read that MS will stop officially supporting XP for the consumer by the end of this year, (I could be wrong).

Anyone who thinks of Vista as the next Windows ME clearly doesn't know what he/she is talking about.

That doesn't mean, though, that the leap that Vista made isn't as great as was anticipated. It's still a great leap, but I think we had all hoped for more. Also, the abundance of small bugs like the explorer and calendar bugs are annoying. Driver support is prepostorous. I realise that this isn't Microsoft's fault, but they could at least stop handing out certifications to manufacturers (Nvidia, Creative..) until they actually produced something that worked.

I read the inquirer a lot and all i can say is that they've always been byased towards and against certain products and wrote articles for and against them that way but recently it's become so much worse they take positive things about vista and the ps3 and try and turn them into massive mistakes! the truth is though they're the ones who end up looking stupid, this article along with most of the inquirers articles these days is based on no facts whatsoever. that and there articles are designed to provoke a reaction.
i don't know why i still read it

the_sombrero_kid wrote:

the truth is though they're the ones who end up looking stupid, this article along with most of the inquirers articles these days is based on no facts whatsoever. that and there articles are designed to provoke a reaction.

I believe the exact term for what they do is "sensationalism"

Jason Cox wrote:


When XP was released everyone 'hated' it and gave it bad reviews until they actually stopped beleiving the FUD, you expected anything different during the Vista release?

I'm not so sure about that one Jason.  When XP came out everyone I know embrased it with open arms.  Finally, we had an OS that was built off of a solid kernel we all knew and loved (NT/2000) and not based on DOS like 95, 98 and ME.

The bad press coming down on Vista stems from the following things:

• Extremely intense DRM
• Lack of any of the most popular new features originally slated for this release that would have made it a good move
  
• The return of the Confirmations from Hell (remember DOS)
• Multiple versions with only the most expensive/ultimate version meeting feature for feature with what the Pro version of XP and 2000 gave us for all these years and crippling all the other versions so much that you have no choice but to shell out the big bucks for "Ultimate"
  
• And last but not least, the mere fact that Microsoft's new Aero interface requires a "gamer" class video card while Linux and Mac OS X provide the same UI elements on lesser quality video cards is just crazy.

Vista = ME II ?

Possibly.... you have to look at it like this, we had Windows 98 and then 98 SE (i.e. the less broken version) and then all of a sudden they tossed ME at us.  There wasn't really anything in ME to drive people to upgrade but a lot of us did.

Now we have Vista.  Most if not all of the great new features were dropped so Microsoft could get Vista out this century so what did they give us?

• A new Desktop Theme
• DRM Everywhere
• Headaches (hardware and drivers)
  
• Migraines (hardware, drivers and applications)
  
• Did I mention headaches?
• Cool new graphics just like what we have seen on the Mac and Linux but with a new requirement:
  • New Video Cards For Everyone
  • Lots and Lots of RAM
  • Dual Core For Everyone
    
• Big Brother Style Security

The point is, we now have the beginnings of a good OS but it is still "beta" at best and SP1 will not change that.  Heck, you couldn't even develop on Vista day 1 and PowerShell which was originally supposed to be a great new feature in Vista wasn't even available for Vista when it went RTM.

My point is (yeah, I have one).... Vista didn't live up to expectations, many applications are still unstable on it, drivers for popular hardware are still missing, the latest and greates video cards (even the ones Microsoft certified for Vista) don't fully work as described.  All in all this was a rushed release... several years in the making

ME II is the call of a follower not a leader or respected influencer.

I have a dual boot on my laptop because I need XP for MovieMaker.

eagle wrote:



ME II is the call of a follower not a leader or respected influencer.

I have a dual boot on my laptop because I need XP for MovieMaker.

I have great news for you: microsoft released the XP version of moviemaker for vista.