http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/27/1852202
makes one want to puke, group think at its worst
why would Microsoft give up on an OS that in under a year is on more computers than Linux or OSX? (http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=5)
-
-
That business model only makes sense to the slashdot group, where common (business) sense, also known as reality, is shunned in favor of idealism and mindless fanaticism.
Next they'll say since Novell is making so much money from Linux (as a direct result of the Microsoft deal it seems), they should abandon it as well. -

The author never said what MS should abandon Vista for... -
Minh wrote:

The author never said what MS should abandon Vista for...
MS-DOS... because if MS are not really careful, then Free-DOS is going to take over... because we all know that anything open-source means ultimate world domination...
-
Well, I know that the new computer I'm putting together will not get Vista.
-
prndll wrote:Well, I know that the new computer I'm putting together will not get Vista.
IMO, your loss. I've been running Vista 64-bit on my new machine, and I have very few gripes. Of course, I don't have very many legacy apps and the hardware is all properly supported. -
I don't consider it a loss. I tend towards making my own decisions about things and I don't usually bend my will around other companies like is required my MS. This is actually the reason I don't use MSN. Microsoft has been alot to the world and I personally am greatfull for their existance. I'm just not the type to keep up with the "jones's". If I can't have a computer my way then I don't need to have one. I will have one.
You obviously have made up your mind on Vista. Well, you can have it.
I personally see nothing in Vista that makes it stand out other than a few changes to the GUI. Vista just isn't for me. I'm just simply more interested in what IS good rather than what LOOKS good.
-
prndll wrote:I don't consider it a loss. I tend towards making my own decisions about things and I don't usually bend my will around other companies like is required my MS. This is actually the reason I don't use MSN. Microsoft has been alot to the world and I personally am greatfull for their existance. I'm just not the type to keep up with the "jones's". If I can't have a computer my way then I don't need to have one. I will have one.
You obviously have made up your mind on Vista. Well, you can have it.
I personally see nothing in Vista that makes it stand out other than a few changes to the GUI. Vista just isn't for me. I'm just simply more interested in what IS good rather than what LOOKS good.
I'm just saying that the improvements outweigh any kind of negatives for me. It is your decision to make, of course, and I wouldn't want to imply otherwise (I just think that its not the best one).
The GUI is mostly improved (at worst, stagnant or mildly annoying), and there are plenty of new things and features that make me happy. -
This is what I think. In a rounded up way I think he has a couple of things right and the rest is just stupid.
-
I'm not trying to ruffle anyone's feathers here. But if we're going to talk about what's stupid....
I think it's stupid for people to make decisions about what os to use based souly on what MS will support and what they wont. The choice of os should be made on preferance and on need. Not everyone needs or has any desire for the biggest part of what Vista is. Some will get use of it but most wont. Most people will use it simply due to the fact that it's what was on the computer when it was bought. It was the same thing with XP.
If I were to even suggest using something like 98se or 2000, the first response I would get is something about MS no longer supporting these os's. 98se is still viable. It's just not supported by MS. What does that mean anyway? I can't call MS for answers to problems I might have? lol! I don't need or want MS support anyway. They have a tendancy to make things worse with their kind of support. I will fix my own issues.
I just simply choose not to use Vista. I need to see something worth while about it first. Before I even consider it. It's no differant from Windows Media Center Edition or Windows Home Server. Those two os's serve no purpous to me since other os's do all those same things. Any computer can be a server and they all handle various media. Dressing things up to look cool just doesn't mean the same thing as doing things right.
-
Like all evolutionairy processes, some will make it, others will go extinct.
I for one am using it on my home computer and business laptop. And by the end of the year all our consultants will run it.
Added value in Vista is hard to see for the end user. Like all technical products, it's hard to explain what is better. People don't tend to see any further then the GUI.
Maybe you should ask HP or some other hardware manifacturor if it was harder writing drivers for XP then for Vista. -
Wow!
The author must be hit-starved to come up with such unsubstantiated drivel.
Yes Vista is not as good as it should be, but abandon it?
Guess what, MacOSX sells (and will continue to sell) at a fraction of the rate of Vista ... should Apple abandon it too?
-
Support is a big issue. But if your preference is to use an older OS like 95 or 98 go ahead. Just be aware there is very little software especially av and firewall software that supports that OS anymore.
prndll wrote:I'm not trying to ruffle anyone's feathers here. But if we're going to talk about what's stupid....
I think it's stupid for people to make decisions about what os to use based souly on what MS will support and what they wont. The choice of os should be made on preferance and on need. Not everyone needs or has any desire for the biggest part of what Vista is. Some will get use of it but most wont. Most people will use it simply due to the fact that it's what was on the computer when it was bought. It was the same thing with XP.
I would agree with you that 2000 is a better OS. Microsoft has just increasingly screwed everything up since then. Windows 98, if you want to use it go ahead but thats not the viable solution for all. Your little skirt fit here makes no sense since no one is holding a gun to your head and saying "USE VISTA!!!!" Just be aware, you will not get Media Player, IE 7 or any improvements for older OS's.
prndll wrote:If I were to even suggest using something like 98se or 2000, the first response I would get is something about MS no longer supporting these os's. 98se is still viable. It's just not supported by MS. What does that mean anyway? I can't call MS for answers to problems I might have? lol! I don't need or want MS support anyway. They have a tendancy to make things worse with their kind of support. I will fix my own issues.
You may not have a need for a home server. Some of us do. I personally use Windows Server 2008 Core or a nlited Windows Server 2003 Core at home. I will more than likely go Windows Server 2008 when its released because I have simply fell in love with RC0. Desktop experience; YUM. Its waaaaaaaaaaaay better then Vista was in its RC phase.
prndll wrote:I just simply choose not to use Vista. I need to see something worth while about it first. Before I even consider it. It's no differant from Windows Media Center Edition or Windows Home Server. Those two os's serve no purpous to me since other os's do all those same things. Any computer can be a server and they all handle various media. Dressing things up to look cool just doesn't mean the same thing as doing things right. -
prndll wrote:I'm not trying to ruffle anyone's feathers here. But if we're going to talk about what's stupid....
I think it's stupid for people to make decisions about what os to use based souly on what MS will support and what they wont. The choice of os should be made on preferance and on need. Not everyone needs or has any desire for the biggest part of what Vista is. Some will get use of it but most wont. Most people will use it simply due to the fact that it's what was on the computer when it was bought. It was the same thing with XP.
If I were to even suggest using something like 98se or 2000, the first response I would get is something about MS no longer supporting these os's. 98se is still viable. It's just not supported by MS. What does that mean anyway? I can't call MS for answers to problems I might have? lol! I don't need or want MS support anyway. They have a tendancy to make things worse with their kind of support. I will fix my own issues.
I just simply choose not to use Vista. I need to see something worth while about it first. Before I even consider it. It's no differant from Windows Media Center Edition or Windows Home Server. Those two os's serve no purpous to me since other os's do all those same things. Any computer can be a server and they all handle various media. Dressing things up to look cool just doesn't mean the same thing as doing things right.
How hypocritical. *You* don't need/want support, so you assume no one should. Your needs aren't mine. If you don't need, of course you should base your decision on that. Laughing at other people who say they need it is just wrong. -
I still stand by my prediction that Windows Vista will be installed on 1 billion computers by the end of 2010.

Can anyone at Microsoft tell be how many Windows Vistas are installed as of the end of September 2007?

-
elmer wrote:

Minh wrote:

The author never said what MS should abandon Vista for...
MS-DOS... because if MS are not really careful, then Free-DOS is going to take over... because we all know that anything open-source means ultimate world domination...
Isn't this the "Year of the Linux Shell"? -
I dont think they understand. 90% of the IT world depends on Microsofts technologies to run, especially businesses. As long as they're around MS will be here too.
Vista ROCKS. It's the users lack of knowledge that kills it.
- Steve -
Christians should abandon Jesus?
Thread Closed
This thread is kinda stale and has been closed but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums,
or Contact Us and let us know.