Windows

The perception of Vista doesn't match the reality of Mojave

Microsoft demoed a new operating system called Mojave to Vista haters. They loved it. Surprise! It was Vista the whole time. How much does the perception of a product drive the reality of the marketplace?

Microsoft demoed a new operating system called Mojave to Vista haters. They loved it. Surprise! It was Vista the whole time. How much does the perception of a product drive the reality of the marketplace?

___________________________________

Marketers spend billions of dollars every year trying to influence our purchasing decisions. They'll do just about anything to separate us from our budgets, but most of the money is spent trying to build up an image of a product in the purchaser's mind. Product X will make you feel better, be smarter, save money, or get "lucky."

In a marketer's mind, perception becomes reality. The goal is to get a good image of your product in a purchaser's mind or, failing that, a horrible image of a competitor's product. Done properly, the sweet smell of success or the stench of failure will attach to a product and marketing dollars will become less important.

Bait and switch

Take Windows Vista for example. Since before it was launched, it has suffered from a horrible image. It's bloated. It's slow. It's buggy. It's not secure. It's hard to manage. On and on and on.

Some of this image has been driven by a disappointed computer press. Part has come from competitors, such as Apple, who have been lampooning Vista since Day 1. And another part comes from Microsoft haters who would love to see Redmond be reduced to a pile of rubble and the rest of the planet running something else -- like Linux.

What if Vista really isn't that bad though? Microsoft recently debuted a new operating system called "Mojave" to a group of skeptics. Mojave received favorable reviews from aboutd 90% of the group. Turns out that Mojave was really Windows Vista. Separating the prejudice of the name of the product from the reality of the software, people actually liked it.

How much does perception drive your reality?

Ideally, we wouldn't make purchases without fully exploring and testing all the options. Unfortunately, there's not time or money available to do so. Instead, we often build our own perception out of a mix of marketing, reviews, and anecdotal reports from others. Where it makes a difference, however, is whether we allow these perceptions to drive the final decision or we actually look past them and do a little bit of examination.

I think the best course of action would be to take the perception into consideration, but the only way you can truly make a proper decision is to actually do some testing. Using perception may be a good way to weed out obvious bad choices, but once you've eliminated the first round, you need to have something more solid to base decisions on.

Theoretically, that's the best way to do it. Unfortunately, it seems like too often we make knee-jerk decisions about just about everything based more on perception than on fact. I guess that's what keeps marketers in business.

What about Vista?

What do you think? Is Vista really a train wreck or has it just been suffering from a combination of Microsoft hate, bias, and misperception?

96 comments
crazytonyi
crazytonyi

A couple orders gourmet coffee and their order is secretly switched with Folger's Crystals. To their surprise, it taste's great! They assumed instant coffee tasted bad, and this assumption was proven wrong by a simple taste test. But they did not, in this example, avoid drinking instant coffee because it gave them heartburn, or because it made them jittery all day, or because it left stains on their teeth after drinking it for two weeks... Vista looks great. Microsoft spent a lot of money on it, they aren't going to do that and make a product that makes a bad first impression. It has some benefits over XP (we can argue what these are some other time). But anyone who has (attempted) to run Vista on a virtual machine, or had to reinstall it after a "recommended update" or has dealt with any of the other VERY legitimate issues with Vista will tell you that this is not simply a problem with perception. If that were the case, why didn't Microsoft feel the need for similar "Mojave" type campaigns for Windows 2000, XP, or even Windows 95?

Neon Samurai
Neon Samurai

Linux is hard Linux is all the same OS Linux is only for nerds Linux does not work with any hardware Linux always requires archaine magic to fix All programs for Linux are crap BSD is only for servers Windows has no value Windows is never the right choice Windows crashes just trying to present the BSOD from the previous crash Vista is complete crap Vista will free your computing experience Vista will protect you from all the Internet's ills No programs run on Vista Microsoft is the only software platform available outside the Apple store Apple makes you cool Apple in impreneterable Apple always "just works" Using Apple will cause world peace PC means non-Apple not Personal Computer How much does perception distort reality; just ask any marketing professional or political campain manager. (been sitting on that for days but I couldn't resist posting any longer even with the discussion long gone stale)

thorncarver
thorncarver

My opinion on Vista from experience (I beta tested most of the CTP's, and am an HP tech): RC* versions of Vista had several terrible memory leaks. the final product is NOTHING like ANY of the previews. OEM (and illegitimate) versions ARE NOTHING like a retail version, they are loaded down with extra processes/mods ( e.g. 20 extra processes in an HP OEM laptop) the retail version is much higher performance. Vista is faster than XP in most cases (except network transfer) as long as you have a modern system, it's dirt cheap to get a dual core system with 2 GB of RAM now days... instability in Vista is often caused by poorly written drivers (from hardware manufacturers)... most hardware released within the last year has good stable drivers, you have to get updated drivers from chipset manufacturers sites. The only problem I have had with Vista is WaveRT vs WDM causing buffer under-runs, and higher USB-MIDI latency (using sound cards without WaveRT support. Long story short, people have their reasons not to update, but Vista is a good operating system, and a lot of the vista hating is rather mis-guided. As I tell my customers, use what works best for you, as long as a computer accomplishes you're tasks, then thats all it's there for.

itware2008
itware2008

Vista is really difficult to configure to work on a workgroup with other OS even Microsoft.

badwalb2
badwalb2

Microsoft gets waay more crap than it deserves from Apple lovers and just haters in general. and because of all of that crap, normal consumers don't try out or even research a product and just ignore it because of all of the bad things they've heard of it. i hate people like that. and for you Apple lovers, Microsoft's done more stuff for the industry than Apple ever could. maybe.

naughty_lcy
naughty_lcy

Vista is ... Vista. But its not better than XP, yah? Or even any different ... Why should everyone waste money to change their OS then? At least thats my perception. ~_~

Bill Harrison
Bill Harrison

I'm not surprised by the reaction of the Mojave subjects because I've seen similiar reactions over the last year. My first look at Vista was RC1. I installed it on a Dell laptop and took it on vacation. I was disappointed by the speed and the battery drain but my kids loved the games. I knew that eventually our company would have to confront Visat in some way. My method has always been immersion. I install it on my primary workstation and work on it all day long everyday. It's the Cortez approach. If find that if I try to set up a secondary test station it is too convenient to jump back rather than slug through any problems. I preordered Vista Ultimate. So I cringed as I said goodbye to XP and installed Vista Ult on my 3 year old Dell workstation. Trying to convince myself that I had to get my head around Vista, expose any weaknesses or incompatabilities. I don't recall at that time much bad press about it but then it was "opening day". My first reaction was surprise that my boot time was faster than XP. I was expecting RC1 type of performance but at every stage it was faster. Faster to splash. Faster to log on. Faster to desktop. I installed all our company's software and found only one piece that didn't work. Setting the compatability mode to XP SP2 fixed that however. The only thing that was cause for concern was the slow copy to network drives which was corrected somewhere along the way. UAC seemed exessive at first but after the inital config, it doesn't present itself enough to complain about. So after a year and a half of daily use, I have yet to experience any kind of "lock up", blue screen or program not responding. After all that I've heard and read, I know that I must me the exception to the rule, the golden child. It must be regional though because as I've talked to other Vista users, I find that their experiences are not unlike my own. Being know as "the computer guy" to my family and friends, the Vista subject comes up, usually in the "I've heard Vista is horrible" context. I assure them that my experience both at work and now at home [after using it at work for several months I wanted it at home]. I show them my "Reliability rating" show them the software and devices I'm connecting [even Red Alert 2 in compat mode of course]. I won't say no complaints because that would lend itself to perfection but nothing leaps to mind. Oh the interface and rearranging of the furniture did take me a a few days to get comnfortable with and prompted a few "why did they move that theres?" Apart from that, I don't have any problems recommending Vista to people who are concerned about getting a new computer. I do recommend them to play deep on the RAM and Video card but I've always made that recommendation on new pc purchases.

rsmastersjr
rsmastersjr

I've studied the Vista marketing debacle throughout graduate school; many speculate Microsoft bet too heavily on the deployment of next generation hard drive technology. I think arrogance and poor timing had bigger effects. The detractors come from four camps. One group doesn't like change. A second is dedicated to the advancement of Apple. The third tries to get by with substandard hardware. The fourth consists of the technocrats--those that actually might benefit from shutting down a few processes. There's a fifth group that has no idea what they're talking about--they are, however subject to the influence of branding. I've got three machines running Vista. They all do well. I anxiously await Windows 9. The next couple of iterations are in the books. Microsoft needs to roll the dice and start from scratch on the next O/S. Duct tape improvements can go on for so long.

JohnMcGrew
JohnMcGrew

Yeah, I was predisposed to believe that Vista was trouble before I layed a finger on a Vista-capable" PC. But it was my actual experience with Vista that validated my "perception". I simply do not expect a brand-new PC to be slower than the 3 or 4-year-old one that it replaces. And my clients who pay for it don't either. Yes, in many things (marketing & politics in particular) perception is the reality. But sometimes, reality justifies perception.

Echojr
Echojr

It's not bad, but is much of an improvement over XP? Not really. Is it what computer savvy users want? Not really. Is Vista anywhere near what it could be? No, and that's the real issue. It's an SUV in the era of $4.00 a gallon gas. It works, but just as I'd rather drive a hybrid than an SUV, I'd rather have a lean, efficient, and economical O.S. instead of Vista.

hmoulding
hmoulding

I know we tried Vista in our shop and found it not ready for prime time. And I was in the audience during the release party hereabouts and we all laughed as the demo turned up one problem (crashes, freezes, and other annoyances in a demo?!?) after the next. So it seems to me Vista started out as a train wreck that is slowly being rescued by MS via marketing and post-release bug fixes. Which is good, because in a year or so we'll be forced to use it whether we like it or not. As for the Mojave thing, how much of that is marketing and manipulation? You get a focus group who believes Vista is crap, and some friendly droid shows them the OS that's supposed to be the Next Big Thing. It wouldn't surprise me to find that the focus group would be receptive to the new OS. Whatever you might not care for, "at least it's not Vista...."

jhilgeman2
jhilgeman2

We've recently ordered 5 Dell Latitude laptops, pre-installed with Vista Business, for executives and some company employees. Each one of them has learned how to "deal" with Vista, which prompts the question: If Vista isn't so bad, then why do people have to "deal" with it? From troubles connecting to the network, to troubles with the print spooler, to software issues and even one blue screen, there are clearly issues with Vista that have not been resolved, even with SP 1. All of our other machines that are running either XP Pro or some form of Linux have been working just fine, so the problem has been isolated to these Vista laptops. I appreciate the attempts at improvement that MS has made, but attempts don't mean success. First-hand experience: Stick with XP.

jmgarvin
jmgarvin

1) GPOs not pushing with UAC turned on 2) Not playing nice in a mixed environment with XP, Vista, 2k3 Servers, and *nix/Mac (eg DFS not showing up properly in Vista and Vista shares not properly sharing to non-Vista boxes) 3) Copy/paste bug still exists 4) Wireless issues 5) Broken drivers or no existent drivers for various corporate hardware 6) Application support issues from various vendors 7) .Net 3.5 removal/downgrade issues 8) Pushing via WSUS to Vista is problematic 9) Resource usage is through the roof and on and on and on...It's not that it's a bad OS for home use, but honesty, it's just not built for the corporate world.

jdclyde
jdclyde

When is the last time actually sitting down and using a package matched the flash and glitz from a demo? (never?) How did the demo address bloat? Didn't. How did the demo address security? Didn't. How did the demo address compatability? Didn't. Based upon everything I know about Vista, the biggest issue is the insane hardware requirements just to have a word processor. Heck, to run full Vista takes more than a good gaming rig from two years ago. They put to much emphasis on pretty instead of function. When the strip it down, then talk to me.

CharlieSpencer
CharlieSpencer

Vista is okay on hardware that exceeds MS' recommended configuration by about 50%. It's okay if you run MS' upgrade compatibility tool and follow it's recommendations. It's lousy if you purchased one of those low-end systems MS allowed the manufacturer to declare 'Vista Compatible' or 'Vista Ready', or whatever the marketing phrase was that meant it would run Vista at the lowest end of the performance curve. It's lousy if you bought into the marketing buzz and installed it as an upgrade on older hardware. If these are perception problems, MS brought them on itself.

Tearat
Tearat

?Windows crashes just trying to present the BSOD from the previous crash? Priceless that one ?Vista will free your computing experience? Does that mean you will find ways to live without a computer Be very careful with Apple PCs How will they get along without the raincoat? Or is that a Scottish Mac-raincoat Or are we hungry for the wee Mac-burger ?How much does perception distort reality; just ask any marketing professional or political camPAIN manager.? Do you know of any that tell the truth? We can ask them and the Happy emerald big fellow Happy emerald big fellow = add-speak for Jolly green giant

Tearat
Tearat

?OEM (and illegitimate) versions ARE NOTHING like a retail version, they are loaded down with extra processes/mods? I will assume your are talking about OEM computers not the OEM version of Win Vista If your HP computer is loaded down with extra unwanted junk Wipe it and reinstall from the original Windows Disk Install the drivers from the driver disks Or download and install the latest drivers from the chipmakers Or if you have to from HP Wait you cant do those can you? HP doesn?t supply you with a Win Vista disk or Driver disks Hard luck for you To bad the recovery disks will just reinstall the extra junk To bad if you cant get the latest drivers until you install the drivers Next time Do not buy a computer that does not come with a Windows setup disk and driver disks ?Vista is faster than XP in most cases (except network transfer) as long as you have a modern system, it's dirt cheap to get a dual core system with 2 GB of RAM now days? What cases you will have to be specific It will depend on the hardware I will depend on how much other stuff is going on in the background Only 2 GB maybe for Vista basic but not for the others Laptops will need more than a desktop Some people in this discussion insist that Vista has faster and better networking I think if it is faster it is only because MS screwed up in the previous versions of Windows ?instability in Vista is often caused by poorly written drivers (from hardware manufacturers)... most hardware released within the last year has good stable drivers, you have to get updated drivers from chipset manufacturers sites.? Instability in Windows is mostly caused by Microsoft Mostly by making the same mistakes they made with previous versions You know Not giving hardware manufacturers enough time or the correct information Not to mention the same stupid mistakes they keep making in creating the OS Mistakes they keep making every time they start on a new version Adding in unwanted useless software and calling them improvements There are more but you get the idea ?Long story short, people have their reasons not to update, but Vista is a good operating system, and a lot of the vista hating is rather mis-guided.? Long story short people have good reasons not to downgrade Also some don?t want to spend money to do what they already do with XP Vista offers some new features but not enough to justify the extra cost of new hardware and software I tell my customers not to waste their money upgrading a perfectly good XP system Unless it is too slow or has defective hardware that cannot be repaired or replaced Since XP can do just about everything Vista can do If it cannot then add on software will do the job fine One more thing Tell HP to do their customers a favour and stop installing the crap ware on their systems Including the HP adverts

Tearat
Tearat

Microsoft does not get enough criticism If they did Vista would be a lot better right from the start If the Windows/Microsoft fanboys would shut up Microsoft would have to defend its products Normal Consumers will take whatever OS is installed on the computer they buy When they get sick of it they will pay someone to fix it Usually this means downgrading to the previous version of the OS For you MS lovers PC manufacturers and IT workers have done more for the industry than Microsoft ever has Mostly by making MS products work

Tearat
Tearat

Some TR members would question your choice of a Dell So you have double the luck It is unfortunate the some of us have to deal with all the mistakes made by the manufacturers It can cloud your view Reality can also be a burden for a lot of us Enjoy Vista Ultimate I am sure you will find it worth every penny you paid for it

Tearat
Tearat

?The third tries to get by with substandard hardware? That statement has the feel of arrogance Many have no choice when it comes to hardware Cost and budgets are only part of it It is interesting to note A lot of the hardware that is substandard or old was new when MS started working on Windows 6 With each new version Windows has become less likely to run on older hardware What was behind the change in MS philosophy? I know but you can tell me and everyone else I wouldn?t want to be wrongly accused of getting it wrong Ps good one throwing in the statement at the end ?I've got three machines running Vista. They all do well.? Translate to ?I don?t have a problem so there is no problem? I do like the distraction tactics as well

Oz_Media
Oz_Media

Well mine runs like a rocket, screens pop and it is no problem. HP Notebook, cheap one too. No issues, unlike Vista which had me revert to Win2K on all my machines until they finally released SP3 and made it a useable OS. I'd say you have too much running, hardware that isn't optimal and didn't give it the same attention as when setting up XP. Its been the same old story since the mid 90's with Win95btaking over for 3.11. Just sounds like abroken record after a while. When the new MS7 OS comes out, everyone will be saying how the they reverted to Vista to get away from the new, buggy and slow OS. Its the same old same old, fear of change, complacency, etc. I think MS sees it too and that's why they don't start making excuses or working overtime to fix small isolated issues for people who complain about a new OS's.

Oz_Media
Oz_Media

To date, XP was the most bug ridden, insecure, unstable, and hardware specific OS released. It wasn't until well after SP2 that it became USEABLE and not until SP3 that it became worthy of widespread use. I think that Vista has proven to be far mroe stable and secure out of the box. Hardware compatibility issues still exist for older boxes, but that's been the case since Windows 3.11 for Workgroups. You want the latest and greatest OS, you need the latest and greatest hardware (hey, I didn't make the rules). I think Vista will prove itself long before XP did, as for me, a new notebook with a Vista install runs like a top. I run high end audio editing, 3D modelling (MAYA), the entire Adobe suite (with all the old Macromedia products too), the latest games, streaming audio video, vehicle disgnostic software etc. all from a cheap (under $1100.00 Canadian) HP Pavillion entertainment notebook. Was a LITTLE BIT problematic, would be slow, at first but it runs quick now and programs and menus 'pop' again, can run a whole bunch of apps at the same time, just works exactly as I would like it, and I'm not patient when it comes to file copies, hangs etc. Far better at the same stage in the game than XP was, a close 2nd to Win2K though, that was a pretty robust OS, but didn't have the same ease of use as Vista.

Tearat
Tearat

?As for the Mojave thing, how much of that is marketing and manipulation? You get a focus group who believes Vista is crap, and some friendly droid shows them the OS that's supposed to be the Next Big Thing. It wouldn't surprise me to find that the focus group would be receptive to the new OS. Whatever you might not care for, "at least it's not Vista...."? Very true that Another technique is to place people in the audience who clap and cheer at the right times Eventually the rest join in I guess they don?t want to be left out or look stupid because they missed the punch line

John Sheesley - TechRepublic Pro
John Sheesley - TechRepublic Pro

Unfortunately, every time there's a major change of a desktop OS, the users have to 'deal' with it. Again, think back to when XP shipped. Users had to learn to deal with the changes to the Start button and where Microsoft moved everything too. Many people turned off the Luna interface and went to Windows Classic, which replicates the feel of Windows 95. Until an OS has been out for a few years and people get comfortable with it, they always have to learn to 'deal with it'.

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

We still get regular AD funnies across mixed environments. I had a blank proxy the other day, strangely ineffective. :p I quite like the OS, but I'm just using it not managing it.

Freebird54
Freebird54

although I see where you are coming from :) Compiz Fusion shows the hardware does NOT need to be high end for a 'pretty' and WOW-inducing experience. I've got more than Vista effects with the integrated graphics on this mid-range mobo... and on my 2000 homebuilt as well! (1 GHz T-bird, ATI Radeon of the time) SO whatever the problem was and is, being pretty isn't the right excuse :)

NotSoChiGuy
NotSoChiGuy

Comdex 98 in Chicago. Bill Gates showing a demo of Win98. BSoD. I've been at some pretty good comedy shows that didn't get as much of a laugh from the audience as that did. And I'd say the product very much matched the demo!! :) But you're right, by and large, for the 30-60 minutes you're getting pitched, sales reps/engineers are able to pour perfume on a heaping pile, and cover the smell.

Neon Samurai
Neon Samurai

Waterdamage. I'm sure you can fill in the rest. So it was off to the shop for a fresh wrt54gl until we determin if insurance will be covering a replacement 350n. On the front of the box: " Windows Vista Compatible " (the sticker was two lines of text) Now what the heck is OS dependent about a router? It's not running vista and I'm sure I can reflash the firmware with or without IE; there are no drivers required on the workstation before it works against the network port. Purely marketing. I'm not sure if it's really on topic at all but your comment braught it back to my fragile mind so I had to share.

John Sheesley - TechRepublic Pro
John Sheesley - TechRepublic Pro

I'm not sure that HP is any more of an egregious offender in the preloaded crapware department than anyone else. I recently bought an HP laptop and spent about an hour and half taking all of the 'unnecessary' stuff off of it. That said, I've seen Dells and Gateways loaded down even more. And IBM/Lenovo were pretty bad as well.

badwalb2
badwalb2

"PC manufacturers and IT workers have done more for the industry than Microsoft ever has Mostly by making MS products work" good point. didn't think of it like that.

rsmastersjr
rsmastersjr

I appreciate your comments Techno Rat. Your thinking is good. The hardware/software balance is confounding. You're a technocrat. You wouldn't release software that needed new hardware. But some of the technocracy has become subject to the laws of economic enterprise. New products generate new streams of revenue. And why wouldn't Microsoft want to share access to that revenue stream with Intel? Do you think Microsoft will start from scratch and deploy a new O/S? I think a new competitor will emerge. Apple loves the fringe; I don't see Apple ever being mainstream--even the die-hard Apple-ites, in their deepest, most private moments, would have to agree they have no desire to be like everybody else. This is too much fun....

shardeth-15902278
shardeth-15902278

XP did have a rocky start, but it did at least bring something(s) new to the table. Specifically, much improved support for Hardware, more specifically, user-friendly support. USB hardware support is probably the most glaring example. There were things that made the changes worth dealing with. Something that improved the end-user experience to an extent which outweighed the retraining cost. I'm not sure that Vista brings anything to the table that really benefits the end-user experience sufficient to outweigh the headaches. I'm not saying it is bad - I use it on a couple systems. My workstation, 64 bit, 12 GB RAM, it completely makes sense to run it, XP64 driver support is abysmal at best. The other system is a laptop... I am having to work around quite a few application, driver and general usability issues. The only thing I am getting back? about 2% increase in battery life. Worth it in this case? No. Maybe they will impress by by SP2, but at this point, It just doesn't seem to bring anything to the table that justifies the pain of change.

Mark W. Kaelin
Mark W. Kaelin

I thought the same thing Neon, but the fact that a router is compatible with Vista turns out to be important, as I found out first hand. Vista has a new communications stack that works better with routers that are compatible. When I bought my gaming PC with Vista it had a terrible time connecting to my old router. It would drop the connection after about a half hour. I bought a new Vista compatible router and it has run beautifully ever since.

CharlieSpencer
CharlieSpencer

I guess it isn't compatible with them. I've never had an OS-specific router, and I'm willing to bet you still haven't either :-)

Tearat
Tearat

After your comments about my reply and HP I will ASSUME you know what I mean I know you did not think it was a good idea I also know you were not defending it or the people who do it Or were you? Driving cars for free I have no problem you get what you pay for I still want the choice of buying them without Can the PC makers justify the lack of choice? Can Microsoft justify sales of Windows without a disk? Can component makers justify sales of their products without drivers for different OS including different versions of those OS? Eg Windows versions XP, 2003,Vista etc A question about products and advertising I will stick to cars Lets keep it to one Ford in this case Private cars only How much Ford advertising would you be willing to accept? What percentage of the cars surfaces covered by Fords logo or other forms of marketing This includes inside and out Boot/Trunk and Engine bay You can ignore model names and numbers There is no right answer But how much would it take for you to by from someone else Ford is just a random choice it could be GM, Toyota etc The question is still the same For me it is very little 1 percent or less It is my car now not theirs

JohnMcGrew
JohnMcGrew

...than have it subsidized by crapware, which literally takes hours to clear out, and still inevitably leaves registry-residue that you?ll be stuck with for the life of the machine. But unfortunately, this appears to be the future, as more and more products we buy will be subsidized by crapware and advertising. Unfortunately, subsidized price notwithstanding, consumers will suffer in the long run as the manufacturers will ultimately respond more to the needs and desires of those paying the subsidies than to the end users. (DRM integration into products is a good example of this) Whoever pays gets to call the shots.

Tearat
Tearat

All they have to do is supply you with the Windows install and driver disks Then you can wipe the drive and re install And only if they must Include the application install disks Or ask what you want to install during the recovery process It?s not that hard Give us a choice We have paid for them They are our computers They are our copy?s of the software We should decide what we want on them How would you like it if your car came with advertising all over the outside and inside? Or if every possible safety add on had been installed How would you feel if that decreased the top speed of the car? Or it cost more to run But with current epidemic of advertising How long before that happens to the car

John Sheesley - TechRepublic Pro
John Sheesley - TechRepublic Pro

All of that stuff is there for a reason. *Theoretically* it's to the benefit of the purchaser so they don't have to purchase and install their own versions of the software. More to the point, that stuff's there because HP, Gateway, Dell, and the like are paid very well by the companies that create it. Those companies, like Symantec and others, probably find it's cheaper to cut a deal with OEMs and preinstall their stuff rather than do marketing and retail placement. So, those of us who aren't interested in that sort of thing are stuck with it, while Aunt Minnie who doesn't know to install Antivirus on her machine gets it preinstalled. It wouldn't surprise me either that the OEMs use the preinstall payments from 'crapware' vendors as a subsidy for their prices. It's possible that if they're being paid a total of $100 per machine from the dozens of vendors that preload, that they pass that along. Im sure they just pocket it, or a vast percentage of it, but the extra money can be a competitive advantage. So, all of that stuff is there for a reason. Just not for a good reason for most of us here who visit TR.

Tearat
Tearat

HP, Dell, Gateway any others you like to add thorncarver mentioned HP So I stuck to HP It?s not about who has the most John It?s about the fact that there is crap ware ?I'm not sure that HP is any more of an egregious offender in the preloaded crapware department than anyone else. I recently bought an HP laptop and spent about an hour and half taking all of the 'unnecessary' stuff off of it.? I would rather spend an hour and a half installing the OS package and the drivers I then have a computer free of crap ware But the corps still try There are a few who try to add crap ware to the drivers Or worse you can?t install the driver unless you install the control app, which just happens to make your pc unstable I have a list of manufactures who are suspect I get phone calls about problems people are having I run through the list Then if they have a suspect device I tell them to take it back or buy a new one from someone else Plus the usual uninstall tips At least dell supply driver and OS disks Well they have so far on the ones I have seen

Tearat
Tearat

In the IT industry there people who insist on defending corporations Apple, Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Dell, HP, etc In almost every other industry the corporations and their products are trashed regularly by the public and the press But in IT its hands off my pet corporation and my pet products Best way to look at them Think of them the same way you would think of an oil corporation If the new product sucks or it offers little or no value over the old product Don?t buy it Imagine the fuss if any of the oil co tried to stop selling everything but the latest highest octane petrol Would you accept the argument? Your car is too old to run on it You have to buy a new one Imagine if they came out with a new mixture of ingredients every 3 years

Tearat
Tearat

You have to wonder about the attitude of many TR members ?The hardware/software balance is confounding. You're a technocrat. You wouldn't release software that needed new hardware. But some of the technocracy has become subject to the laws of economic enterprise. New products generate new streams of revenue. And why wouldn't Microsoft want to share access to that revenue stream with Intel?? Your right I haven?t and would not release software that needed new hardware with some exceptions Security is one Fingerprint scanners and the many other ways of checking identification Protection eg Viruses and the many malicious threats There are others But you get the idea Let me put the rest another way Product quality control has been left up to the customer Testing requires money and time Something that business is reluctant to part with Old products generate revenue as well Most of the time more than the new could ever hope to achieve Microsoft and Intel should be competitors They should not be collaborators As for the rest of your post MS say they will start from scratch But they say a lot that seldom happens Think they will do just enough to show they tried Then pretend to give up and repackage the old troll into a new box But who knows With Bill gone they may be able to surpass the awesome products he contributed to You?re right this is fun It is great for wasting time But you have to keep in mind TR is a major world influence Everything we write will change the world It is so important what we write It?s just as well I don?t have a huge ego like some TR members Finding out I was wrong about something would be truly devastating Being fooled would be the end of the world for me Cheers Buddy

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

like a joke at the moment. For our customer base (mainly SMBs), it's a bit higher, and it's climbing steadily. So in our case, it was worth the effort. Of course that doesn't mean it is for anyone else.

Tearat
Tearat

Thanks for the joke I will put it with Intel?s joke Intel? Celeron? Dual-Core processor

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

Best does not apply.... The need is Vista compatibility There's nothing difficult about doing it, given you aren't dependant on 3rd parties. No, don't be silly. :D

Tearat
Tearat

Is not the best way MS could have raised security or awareness of security As for software developers Have MS done enough to convince them of the need? Have they made it as easy as possible for them? Have MS stuck to there own rules? I would ask them but talking to politicians may provide more information The truth is unlikely in both cases

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

is certainly coloured by my technical appreciation of what it's meant to achieve. I don't consider switching it off an option. I won't put anything on my own PC where that is required. As far as I'm concerned that's like going to a website that suggests you turn your firewall off to get functionality. Work, of course is a different matter and Vista as a Business OS is a much risker proposition on several fronts. I get may be one nag per day in the normal course of events. Can't remember the last 'surprise' one I had. Others could be getting them once every two clicks. Security consciousness is rising, unfortunately, knowledge of the consequences to accessibility are as usual tragically lagging.

shardeth-15902278
shardeth-15902278

I can see your point, it does (potentially) indirectly benefit the end-user by forcing developers to clean up their code (assuming they don't just convince the user that the inconvenience is MS fault, and get them to switch it off, or find other ways to work around it, rather than WITH it). However, from a direct, current end-user experience I don't see it fair to call it a perceived benefit (Perhaps I am not judging end-users' level of interest in security fairly, but I doubt it). It feels more like a "deal with it", than a benefit.

Dumphrey
Dumphrey

Its my favorite feature of Vista. And in XP its amazing how many programs and services need admin privileges to run right... Alot of times this is just not acceptable. Also, UAC forces a non-admin user role to daily tasks, which drastically cuts down on virus and malware problems. Not eliminate, but decrease. My one regret is that vista was not 64 bit only; hopefully 7 will be. Someone needs to force the change to all 64 bit code.

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

given of course the hardware was OK and probably going to do an office upgrade anyway. Of course UAC is the major bug bear for 3rd party apps, so if they are required and non -compliant. Forget it. Vista wthout UAC in my opinion is a complete waste of effort. My liking for UAC is simply that it forces software devlopers to update their security model, in useful ways. Also I can't help but feel when seven comes out, anything non-compliant is even less likely to run.

Neon Samurai
Neon Samurai

I'm surprised that there is a basis for it but that does make sense. I'd read of the new network stack but I didn't realize it extended into the protocol. Well, the wrt54gl seems compatible if anyone is looking. Mine may not even come out of it's shrinkwrap if the other two routers work when dried also.

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/932134 Basically some of their new stuff only works with IPv6, so they changed the protocol stack, thereby giving every one who could not find a major business need for windows meeting space, a serious implementation problem. Not too clever sometimes MS are they?

jdclyde
jdclyde

ANY OS that isn't going to run on a standard TCP/IP network is bound for trouble. It is one thing to enable a new "feature" that will allow more connectivity, but if it isn't backward compatible, there is going to be he11 to pay.

Neon Samurai
Neon Samurai

Linksys firmware; linux kernel based dd-WRT firmware; linux kernel based naw.. not worth mentioning on the packaging; it just works away in the background dependibly. ;) I know the sticker puts the questioning new buyer's mind at ease with the new branding. It just struck me for a moment on the way back from the shop when I noticed it. The 350N seems to run now that it's been dried. It's reaction to being drenched was to reset everything back to factory defaults. That is a solid bit of hardware.

Editor's Picks