Windows

Sanity check: Five reasons why Windows Vista failed

With Windows Vista's public perception in shambles and most IT departments stubbornly refusing to adopt it, has the time come for an early post-mortem on Vista? Here are the top five reasons why Vista has failed. Hint: Most of them aren't technical.

With Windows Vista's public perception in shambles and most IT departments stubbornly refusing to adopt it, has the time come for an early post-mortem on Vista? Here are the top five reasons why Vista has failed. Hint: Most of them aren't technical.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Friday, Microsoft gave computer makers a six-month extension for offering Windows XP on newly-shipped PCs. While this doesn't impact enterprise IT -- because volume licensing agreements will allow IT to keep installing Windows XP for many years to come -- the move is another symbolic nail in Vista's coffin.

The public reputation of Windows Vista is in shambles, as Microsoft itself tacitly acknowledged in its Mojave ad campaign.

IT departments are largely ignoring Vista. In June (18 months after Vista's launch), Forrester Research reported that just 8.8% of enterprise PCs worldwide were running Vista. Meanwhile, Microsoft appears to have put Windows 7 on an accelerated schedule that could see it released in 2010. That will provide IT departments with all the justification they need to simply skip Vista and wait to eventually standardize on Windows 7 as the next OS for business.

So how did Vista get left holding the bag? Let's look at the five most important reasons why Vista failed.

5. Apple successfully demonized Vista

Apple's clever I'm a Mac ads have successfully driven home the perception that Windows Vista is buggy, boring, and difficult to use. After taking two years of merciless pummeling from Apple, Microsoft recently responded with it's I'm a PC campaign in order to defend the honor of Windows. This will likely restore some mojo to the PC and Windows brands overall, but it's too late to save Vista's perception as a dud.

4. Windows XP is too entrenched

In 2001, when Windows XP was released, there were about 600 million computers in use worldwide. Over 80% of them were running Windows but it was split between two code bases: Windows 95/98 (65%) and Windows NT/2000 (26%), according to IDC. One of the big goals of Windows XP was to unite the Windows 9x and Windows NT code bases, and it eventually accomplished that.

In 2008, there are now over 1.1 billion PCs in use worldwide and over 70% of them are running Windows XP. That means almost 800 million computers are running XP, which makes it the most widely installed operating system of all time. That's a lot of inertia to overcome, especially for IT departments that have consolidated their deployments and applications around Windows XP.

And, believe it or not, Windows XP could actually increase its market share over the next couple years. How? Low-cost netbooks and nettops are going to be flooding the market. While these inexpensive machines are powerful enough to provide a solid Internet experience for most users, they don't have enough resources to run Windows Vista, so they all run either Windows XP or Linux. Intel expects this market to explode in the years ahead. (For more on netbooks and nettops, see this fact sheet and this presentation -- both are PDFs from Intel.)

3. Vista is too slow

For years Microsoft has been criticized by developers and IT professionals for "software bloat" -- adding so many changes and features to its programs that the code gets huge and unwieldy. However, this never seemed to have enough of an effect to impact software sales. With Windows Vista, software bloat appears to have finally caught up with Microsoft.

Vista has over 50 million lines of code. XP had 35 million when it was released, and since then it has grown to about 40 million.  This software bloat has had the effect of slowing down Windows Vista, especially when it's running on anything but the latest and fastest hardware. Even then, the latest version of Windows XP soundly outperforms the latest version of Microsoft Vista. No one wants to use a new computer that is slower than their old one.

2. There wasn't supposed to be a Vista

It's easy to forget that when Microsoft launched Windows XP it was actually trying to change its OS business model to move away from shrink-wrapped software and convert customers to software subscribers. That's why it abandoned the naming convention of Windows 95, Windows 98, and Windows 2000, and instead chose Windows XP.

The XP stood for "experience" and was part of Microsoft's .NET Web services strategy at the time. The master plan was to get users and businesses to pay a yearly subscription fee for the Windows experience -- XP would essentially be the on-going product name but would include all software upgrades and updates, as long as you paid for your subscription. Of course, it would disable Windows on your PC if you didn't pay. That's why product activation was coupled with Windows XP.

Microsoft released Windows XP and Office XP simultaneously in 2001 and both included product activation and the plan to eventually migrate to subscription products. However, by the end of 2001 Microsoft had already abandoned the subscription concept with Office, and quickly returned to the shrink-wrapped business model and the old product development model with both products.

The idea of doing incremental releases and upgrades of its software -- rather than a major shrink-wrapped release every 3-5 years -- was a good concept. Microsoft just couldn't figure out how to make the business model work, but instead of figuring out how to get it right, it took the easy route and went back to an old model that was simply not very well suited to the economic and technical realities of today's IT world.

1. It broke too much stuff

One of the big reasons that Windows XP caught on was because it had the hardware, software, and driver compatibility of the Windows 9x line plus the stability and industrial strength of the Windows NT line. The compatibility issue was huge. Having a single, highly-compatible Windows platform simplified the computing experience for users, IT departments, and software and hardware vendors.

Microsoft either forgot or disregarded that fact when it released Windows Vista, because, despite a long beta period, a lot of existing software and hardware were not compatible with Vista when it was released in January 2007. Since many important programs and peripherals were unusable in Vista, that made it impossible for a lot of IT departments to adopt it. Many of the incompatibilities were the result of tighter security.

After Windows was targeted by a nasty string of viruses, worms, and malware in the early 2000s, Microsoft embarked on the Trustworthy Computing initiative to make its products more secure. One of the results was Windows XP Service Pack 2 (SP2), which won over IT and paved the way for XP to become the world's mostly widely deployed OS.

The other big piece of Trustworthy Computing was the even-further-locked-down version of Windows that Microsoft released in Vista. This was definitely the most secure OS that Microsoft had ever released but the price was user-hostile features such as UAC, a far more complicated set of security prompts that accompanied many basic tasks, and a host of software incompatibility issues. In order words, Vista broke a lot of the things that users were used to doing in XP.

Bottom line

There are some who argue that Vista is actually more widely adopted than XP was at this stage after its release, and that it's highly likely that Vista will eventually replace XP in the enterprise. I don't agree. With XP, there were clear motivations to migrate: bring Windows 9x machines to a more stable and secure OS and bring Windows NT/2000 machines to an OS with much better hardware and software compatibility. And, you also had the advantage of consolidating all of those machines on a single OS in order to simplify support.

With Vista, there are simply no major incentives for IT to use it over XP. Security isn't even that big of an issue because XP SP2 (and above) are solid and most IT departments have it locked down quite well. As I wrote in the article Prediction: Microsoft will leapfrog Vista, release Windows 7 early, and change its OS business, Microsoft needs to abandon the strategy of releasing a new OS every 3-5 years and simply stick with a single version of Windows and release updates, patches, and new features on a regular basis. Most IT departments are essentially already on a subscription model with Microsoft so the business strategy is already in place there.

As far as the subscription model goes for small businesses and consumers, instead of disabling Windows on a user's PC if they don't renew their subscription, just don't allow that machine to get any more updates until they renew. Microsoft could also work with OEMs to sell something like a three-year subscription to Windows with every a new PC. Then users would have the choice of renewing on their own after that.

Will your company eventually migrate to Windows Vista? Take our poll and join the discussion.

About

Jason Hiner is the Global Editor in Chief of TechRepublic and Global Long Form Editor of ZDNet. He is an award-winning journalist who writes about the people, products, and ideas that are revolutionizing the ways we live and work in the 21st century.

614 comments
scott.ager
scott.ager

Jason: Very nicely written and well thought out. Having started out with Fortran, then DOS/Basic, then Win 3.1, I found your tour down "memory lane" to be right on the money. I agree with your thesis.

purplefishtoadstool
purplefishtoadstool

I don't know what everybody's problem is, I have had my vista for about 2 years and it hasn't let me down yet!, Vista is the best thing that has happened to the world of computers so far :D. I mean Microsoft isn't that great at making games, but they can make Awesome Computers! -Microsoft Rules-

aliajao
aliajao

The problem is just speed, i guess it will be better microsoft consider all present system runing 1gb memory or more to be able to run vista with same speed as XP, and majority of computers can not get more than 2gb ram, unlike the new machines coming with 4GB, so this will slow down the pace at which enterprises change over to Vista

hellomad.madrasi.bs
hellomad.madrasi.bs

its easy to find fault. here is a question. "NO I DONT WORK FOR M$." here is the question anyway. when M$ gives the source code under shared source alliance which is for free and all it req is a simple regn and download and compile? why not build one app from the source? did any one here in majority finding fault with M$ OS even bother to compile the app/kernel from source? did you even under go the pain of being a labor of source code compilation? if no then what rights have you got to question? considering you may/not download via file sharing agents like p2p, file share sites and old newsnet? even ever compiled anything from the source code when its all available for free w/o involvement of fee? did M$ ever say no to the code? hell, it gave away its kernel source for you to fiddle with. why not download the kernel and compile it? and then make it work the way you want. did many who are finding fault and creating CONFUSION NON-SENSE DOUBT (CNB) as opposed to FUD, try the alternative? than give MS a bad name and hang it here? and then? when the source is free? and available and all MS asks is to respect the valid offer and not give away to others w/o their consent, else they got no issue if you screw/love/break/mutate with it w/o charging a penny? why taking M$ to stand on and fight back. source code is free. download and compile one filename.c file and compile it w/o any error. and give your THEN EXPERT COMMENT. half the people here doesnt even know jack squat and makes max noise. the kernel source is free. so go compile your source code share, and make a binary and let us experiment, we will also laugh at your extreme abnormal procastinating looseless programming skills. till then? try and improve than degrade and make it smell stink and taste bitter. anyone agree with me? incl. coders? when you cant even compile source code for kernel and then keep adding app addons for an OS which is charged for binary and change the look and feel of the OS working environment, YOU GOT NO RIGHTS TO QUESTION IT. things are already available to public since ages and since you are a whining retard thats all can be expected with your friggin expert retarded opinion. make one app, let us post the drawbacks and face the heat and then make such comments. till then adopt the policy "silence is golden." how you think IF M$'s OS vista offered as RTM/VL/OEM gets the update from M$ update server. arent you basically wrong at the first step and trying to prove you are an uber idiot? the OEM/VL/RTM source are the same and given to these, for OEM a small fee, and for others at time a small fee for media and all via MSDN. geez. stone age morons. did M$ at any point of time stopped you from building your own thing just like apple/linux/bsd unlike HP-UX, AIX, and the utter BS SCO. you can happily jolly well register here and argue for hours trying to prove all eternally wrong is/are wrong, when you could have just gone to shared source by M$ and got all the source and averted a disaster, but then again since you compiled it, you only can fix it. like "you break it, you bought it." SIMPLE. so. vista is as good as any other OS, its just we who dont know nothing yet we talk the max. http://www.microsoft.com/resources/sharedsource/windowsacademic/researchkernelkit.mspx here is the URL the kernel is the same, the source codes for ia64, x86, x86_64 in resp folders, compile and build and show and then perhaps we can forward this discussion. period.

zdnet
zdnet

My Reason #1: I have a hermit living near me. no electricity, no running water, no land line phone, etc. solar panel to charge his cell phone. weekends he uses my back porch to connect to my wireless network and trade his stocks. haven't seen him in a while. called to see if he was ok. he said he bought a new laptop loaded with Vista, and he hated Vista so much and it caused so many problems he didn't want to use the computer anymore. VISTA, NOT EVEN GOOD ENOUGH FOR A HERMIT.

melekali
melekali

...the two main reasons Vista "failed" (unsure this is true, but that is being asserted) is Apple's sucessfully making it a demon and the driver compatibility issue. We will completely deploy Vista over the next 6-12 months. It looks quite nice on a box built with enough system resources (it's not slow at all on our systems) and does have some nice features and the security is much better out of the box than XP (though my XP machines at work and home are completely hardened). I had it pushed to my machine before I dared burden any of my users with it (also we have some software in the office and I want to test on my machine before we push it to the critical system with that software). I generally use my machine as a guinea pig since my data is always backed up and I just plug in a new os, move data and load software and I'm back in business. So the bottom line is, with our old computers we would have not been able to go to Vista. Being forced to do so, I bought enough to replace all the computers ad I have to say I am a bit surprised. I am an early adopter for one other crucial reason - I cannot remote into Vista boxes from XP, but it works fine the other way round. While I know I could make it work, its too much work and our environment is too controlled to allow me to run any software I want. So there you have it. Under the right conditions, Vista works just fine. Stuff is moved and I have to find it, but it is quite pleasing to the eyes, more so than XP, especially with the Areo interface.

sentinel66
sentinel66

Oh! What's that Lassie? You need a 64-bit OS to run more than 3.5GB of RAM? OMG! No way? Are you saying we would have to recode the whole program in a major update that would piss everyone off? Sounds just like releasing a new software package into a hostile consumer base. So in order to take advantage of advances in hardware are you saying software has to change as well? Preposterous. How can software change when I'm so comfortable with it! I mean I can't fork out some cash to buy an upgraded machine even when the warranty coverage from the manufacturer has long expired and they aren't even making my components anymore. Lassie, are you saying I have no foresight? Please.

bdub01
bdub01

I never heard about that before, very interesting... I have to admit there are times in my life where my finances arent very organized and having to pay an OS subsription could be that gentle wind current that puts me over the crazy line but I still ike the idea. Microsoft categorizes their licenses already, for each version of windows it would be best if they offered the same. 1. OS - one time fee 2. Security update - subscription 3. Software updates - subscription 4. Driver Updates - subscription but unnecessary 5. Service Packs - One time fee or something like that. I still like paying hte one time fee and not having to worry about hammering out installments every once and a while. I think they would loose face in that though and Ill bet thats why they abandoned it. Bill Gates was all about bringing computers to every home and school, donating old comps to the less fortunate.. imagine Bill Gates showing up at your door (when your piss poor in a third world country) and handing you a free computer ..then asking for a three year subscription fee? Conflict of interest. Microsoft may try it now that BG is gone but I dunno... About Vista... Ill wait for Windows 7. Vista went the way of "Windows ME".. - Hey what's "Windows ME"? huh? wtf?

davidkalinos
davidkalinos

If you really wanna know whos fault it is...IT professionals. All these IT people upset because they learned how use XP and now they even have to learn something new. I can hear it now "oh no its not called add/remove programs anymore, what will I do to find it" GEESH. Get your lazy butts up and learn how to use Vista so you can tell others its easy, it just takes learning where everything is located and where new features are. Vista has the best security of any Microsoft product to date. Viruses, Spyware, Malware, etc dont stand a chance and its the best was to clean up businesses. I'm not saying it wont eventually have some of these problems, but for now Microsoft is ahead of the virus, and spyware builders.

davidkalinos
davidkalinos

I just dont understand some IT people. Vista is absolutely awesome and completely compatible with nearly everything. I have 4yr old hardware and my computer boots with Vista Ultimate in about 15-20seconds from post. In 2004 I bought, Intel P4 3.6Ghz, 2GB 677Mhz DDR2 ram, 120GB Sata HD, 600 watt power supply. Most important thing in XP or Vista is that when you install software you do NOT want it to load during boot. You should only have 2 things loading during boot, Anti-virus, anti-spyware. After that, things should only be loaded as needed. After running Vista Ultimate 32-bit for 2 years I recently went to Vista Ultimate 64-bit and everything I have works with it. Printer, scanner, monitors, video card, etc......

mikifinaz1
mikifinaz1

Give me an hour and I can fill that list up; like too many versions that only run on a mini-mainframe and the rest don't run right on less robust machines or breaking out networking into a seperate product, and that GUI (what junk) or, or... I worked at MS when the major whining was about not being about to keep their code on their servers and rent time to use it (subscription). The Internet was not robust enough then. Why would anyone want to back step to the days of the mainframe with the white coats holding everyone by the short hair? Once XP became a reality and knowing their ultimate goal it was easy for me to transition to Mac and Linux OEM on a Dell. Now that all the old timers are gone and MS is filled with bean counters and career sharks; I hope Mac kicks their butt and Linux steals their lunch.

enquiries
enquiries

great article as usual. In performance matters tho don't forget the moving of the graphics subsystem out of the kernel memory space and making it a service. This was always going to have an effect on performance. OEM hardware has simply not advanced quick enough - or rather become cost effective enough - to compensate.

scardall
scardall

I for one will not use Vista untill i have no choice at all. I need speed not song and dance. When it comes to virues and malware etc. Use the right software Programs (kept up to date) and you'll be ok , with rare exceptions . Vista is waste for all but microsoft.

Splain
Splain

Well, I run XP Pro and Vista in a duel boot for only one reason. I'm a photographer and I use an Olympus and XP does not have a built in raw file viewer but Vista does. If XP had a Olympus raw file viewer I would dump Vista in a heartbeat.

sykandtyed
sykandtyed

and 1 vista that is a bloody nuisance with constant nag screens to verify running some applications even after granting them permission. I made a critical mistake of buying a hp notebook that has propriety hardware that make upgrading to XP pro unusable. hp locked-in ???features???? and frequently connects to their site without my permission, As a result I don't connect it to the internet when using it as an expensive calculator. Lesson learned. No more hp or Vista. Vista is a bloody nuisance.

schroeder915
schroeder915

As a technical matter, the reasons you stated for why Vista failed are all technical, except one, which is erroneous. "Apple successfully demonized Vista" -- this occurred only after Vista demonstrated itself to be a horrendous operating system. All of the other explanations explain the technical reasons for why Vista failed. "Windows XP is too entrenched" because ... because Vista is a resource hog requiring a machine which didn't even exist for the average consumer. "Vista is too slow" because ... yeah, again, because it has too much crap, and within those 50 million lines of code are too many things running in the background killing the processor. "There wasn't supposed to be a Vista" because ... yeah, because the business end of Microsoft came up with something which the technical end of Microsoft couldn't resolve. "It broke too much stuff" because ... because a technical solution hadn't been arrived at to work with peripherals. Bottom line: Yeah, Vista sucks the big one. I feel sorry for all the people who have to live with it for years to come. If you can't have XP, get a Mac.

cardhun
cardhun

http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=10303 Reason #5, claiming that Apple successfuly demonized Vista, grossly misrepresents reality. Simple word-of-mouth advertising established Vista's reputation with the public. The claim in Reason #5 gives Apple far too much credit. If Vista was a product that delivered value to customers, it would have won public acclaim. Instead, Vista won public criticism and popular rejection. Microsoft felt compelled to try to restore Vista's image with a $300 million ad campaign, promote XP license substitutions, and extend OEM XP licensing. Those are not signs of a successful operating system marketing strategy. Instead, Vista appears to be going the way of Windows ME and Windows Bob.

V
V

This subject will rumble on for the next 12 months, inviting more opportunities to bad mouth Vista. Deserved? Yes. Achieves anything? No.

berry_milkshake
berry_milkshake

u people are stupid for arguing over such a subject... com on leave it to the dealers and chill all,,,

malmquiste
malmquiste

I am having trouble connecting to the internet via Vista Home Premium and my Verizon DSL Fujitsu modem. If anyone has any suggestions please help! I am very frustrated, Verizon can't help and HP is trying to help but we still can fix the problem. Otherwise I am still going to give Vista a try! If not than I will go back to XP Pro

Doug Vitale
Doug Vitale

Vista has much higher system requirements and resource usage than XP. I suspect that many users bought Vista and installed it over XP on machines dating from 2002 - 2005. Big mistake from a performance perspective. Microsoft also shot itself in the foot with the ridiculous "Designed for Windows Vista" stickers that really meant "Designed for Windows Vista WITHOUT Aero Glass" or whatever the fancy GUI is called. I bought a Dell in the middle of 2007 with dualcore 2.13 Ghz CPUs, 2 GB of RAM, and a high-end Nvidia graphics card. Not Surprisingly, Vista runs like a charm on it. I have not had any difficulty getting my Canon printer and scanner to run on Vista, the Nvidia driver has been fine and so has the Creative Sound Blaster audio driver. That being said, I disapprove of quite a few of the interface changes that Microsoft implemented in Vista and the User Account Control should be been designed differently to make it less annoying and intrusive. I am a Linux fan so I cannot be accused of being a Microsoft/Windows partisan. Here are some benchmark tests showing that XP beats Vista in terms of gaming performance: http://www.computerhope.com/forum/index.php/topic,44055.0.html

dbecker
dbecker

It made lots of money.

Dragonofdepth@Yahoo.com
Dragonofdepth@Yahoo.com

I am against subscription. Greed is smudge all over Microsoft's logo. I hope in the future that they do not implement that idea. People will say that we pay for subscriptions for anti virus programs but I say this, your operating system will be still working without it (also there are free anti virus programs) unlike the OS which would shut down completely and you wouldn't be able to get work and play done. When MS decides to do that, I will be turning to Apple. I am just grateful that Apple exists and people are using the products. That's why I am glad for competitors; they keep the other fiends from committing acts that would not benefit the consumers.

Tearat
Tearat

Guess that?s why there is so much money to spend on new hardware and software upgrades Business should have no trouble rewriting everything just because some idiot forgot to add a 32-bit mode that works to a 64-bit OS It was so hard to get the 8-bit software to run on the 16-bit then 32 bit OS Or is it because the talented program writers refuse to work for the idiots running the madhouse Or is it cheaper for MS to get everyone else to rewrite his or her software After all the shareholders are going though the same recession Or is it all because some Brain dead moron decided a 32-bit CPU should have a 32-bit address bus The 8086 16-bit CPU had a 20-bit address bus with a total of 1 Meg of ram Translate that to 32-bits and you have a 40-bit address bus with a total of 512 Gigs of ram The 8088 8-bit CPU had a 20-bit address bus same as the 8086 Translate that to 32-bits and you have an 80 bit address bus But that would be a 64-bit CPU with a 32-bit data bus Now if they had some real brains they will have allowed for a 128-bit address bus for the 64-bit CPUs We don?t need all the pins on the package just yet Ps its not that hard to multiplex the address outputs if you need to cut the pin count The north-bridge chip handles the addressing at the highest system speed so let it do it As for software If you need more memory in 32-bit mode you can switch to 64-bit mode swap some data with the unused memory above 4 gigs then switch back to 32-bits Something like they did with DOS when it needed more than 640K

Neon Samurai
Neon Samurai

security updates are corrections to product flaws which have security implecations for the end user. I still feel the product developer should be responsible for correcting the product. AV software's intention is to watch for signatures so a subscription fee to updated signature files makes sense. At the OS level, new ways to drain money from the end user is suspect. The same goes for drivers. Drivers are the one type of programming that should be free and open. You buy for a chunk of hardware, the manufacturer should either make sure it works with industry standards and provide drivers across platforms or provide driver interface specs. There is more harm to the consumer than value to the retailer in the current environment of bad drivers and unnecessarily limited hardware. The real problem though is that the OS is the product meant to drive profits. It has a one time sales spike off which all future support and maintenance must be funded. When it feels old and stale for the consumers, it's sales drop and the company has to do another launch party for the new version and new sales spike. It's parasitic and cyclical always focusing on maximum profit at minimum expense rather than improving computer science and the end user experience. If they manage the OS as an ongoing evolution instead of major release rollercoaster and drive a steady but stable profit then it would probably go better. Of course, the goal is to make money not better software which makes it no different from any other manufacturing and retail outfit.. well, for MS.. legal and advertising firm. Product X, a room full of MBAs and a strategy to benefit the share holder at the end consumer's expense.

tracer
tracer

on 4 year old hardware??? Please tell what hardware you bought 4 years ago can run Vista... Ok, I saw Vista, installed it and kicked it after an hour of my system: CRAP. And thats was in the very beginning! Doesn't mean I want to run a mac or Linux!! Just means to me MS screwed up and after many years in software I hope to be able to see whats CRAP and what isn't.

Tearat
Tearat

At some of the things MS does I here I was thinking that Direct X was a good way to give fast access to the hardware and bypass all the bloated code in the rest of the OS But no that?s not good enough it needs to be moved Not that I believe anything they say PS it makes you wonder if a kernel based OS is the best choice to carry us into the future

Tearat
Tearat

Besides the people who will read your reply Have you told Olympus that you want a raw file viewer for XP? Have you checked if other companies who make that type of product offer one for XP It will help if you can tell Olympus that when you ask them for what you want One more thing Have you check to see if you can download something that will do what you want I would start with this Website http://www.microsoft.com

wpres
wpres

As stated a million times, the problem with Vista was that it was released to soon for the hardware vendors. The operating system is fine. I have been running Vista over 2 years now. (I had the beta, before the release). I have been running several computers in an enterprise environment for over a year. All of these computers are running several different business applications just fine. Vista has run very solid, and we no longer experience the operating system feezes, or lockups that you experience with XP. I wouldn't go back to XP for nothing. You people need to get over your cry baby bullshit, because I am sick of hearing it. There is absolutely no reason for the enterprise environment not to adopt Vista, as they phase out older machines. It is nothing more than pure laziness and complacence on enterprise users still running XP on newer machines being phased in. You act like a bunch of old women waiting for someone to help you cross the road. Get off your asses or move on to a Mac, good luck running your business applications.

Tearat
Tearat

Yes no point is there It takes a lot longer for Microsoft to listen or understand what the real customers are saying You need many years of bad PR, low sales and a drop in share prices before it makes an impression on them

marketingtutor.
marketingtutor.

Never ceases to amaze me how this kind of subject brings em' out of the crevices of IT just to have a whack at Microsoft. It's a fundamental flaw in people. That is why we have a two party system here in the US. People are so damn quick to polarize instead of using their brains to analyze.

Neon Samurai
Neon Samurai

I like to think of it as peer review. One must present and justify there opinions. The opinion must stand up to review by others in the same area of expertise. If you prefer, consider it Musha Shogio; traveling from discusion to discussion testing one's opinion and experience against other experts. Granted, it would be nice to see more discussion rather than argument over things like OS perferences and applicable uses but such is the way of the forums. Welcome.

Alaxar
Alaxar

UMMMM this is 2008, you're showing a link to articles that were posted over a year ago. Try this.... http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=1390&page=3 "Well, XP SP2 is still the better OS when it comes to gaming. However, Vista is getting better. Thanks to several performance updates from Microsoft, better drivers from hardware vendors and updates from the game makers themselves (a good example of this improvement is Oblivion, which was awful on Vista when it went RTM but has improved to the point where it?s actually better on Vista than on XP)."

Tearat
Tearat

About games Doug Got anything else that is worth the time to look at Edited to add Sorry found more in the links on that page Thanks Doug

straightp
straightp

except I would become a hardcore linux user. Macs are nice but they would break my bank. If anyone says they aren't that expensive just deposit $2000 in my paypal account and i'll go buy one.

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

They were fun. Unfortunately the abstraction we use to isolate code from the fact that there is always much less physical memory than adressable gets in the way. We would be going back to himem and such in autoexc.bat, sort of like /3GB in fact..... :(

Tearat
Tearat

They should fix all the mistakes (defects) they have in their products Time passed is not important They should not have sold a faulty product in the first place If the product is their labour then they should have to spend time correcting their mistakes They should have to do it until they have fixed every mistake no matter how long it takes But that?s not the world we live in is it? It should be part of the law You may not sell or licence products that have defects You have x number of months to fix the defects or you will be fined x number of dollars for each defect You will be fined every month until you fix the defects The fine will be increased by x number of dollars each month I would like them to start telling the share holders (owners) they are the ones who will be paying the fines We would see how long good enough would last then They race will be to fix the mistakes so you can sell it Not to make it good enough to shove out the door as soon as you think you can get away with it If the OS were an ongoing evolution you would see less problems getting older software to run on new systems You would be able to pick the change that caused the problem As it is now make your best guess You would also be able to give a measure of time it will take to fix the problem That is not possible if you have a large number of changes in the OS at one time The drivers would have to written for the moving standard that is Windows That would not happen if MS would standardise their OS But good luck with that Manufacturers hate standards They only use them when they have no choice The solution is very simple for an OS The OS creator has a standard driver interface, which the hardware creator can design software to use Or the OS creator writes the drivers and supporting software at no cost to the hardware creator I would love to see how long it would take MS to give up and write the drivers for Vista if the latest games could not be played because the drivers were written to the XP standard I wonder how that would affect future versions of Windows It would be so funny if Nvidia and others said stuff you we created the drivers to the XP standard You can fix Vista or rewrite them why should we have to spend time and money to fix your mistake The whole driver thing is a joke Vista is software there is no reason that it could not have been written to use XP drivers and allow the new drivers to be used for new hardware If they did nothing else they could have created an XP interface layer for XP drivers Problem solved No one has to do anything to make old hardware work with Vista

Slayer_
Slayer_

Yikes, I've been viewing raw files since windows 95. We have several community made programs that can do it. FlyRawGui is my favorite, it converts RAW files to BMP files. As techno rat said, search microsofts website, they will have something. Otherwise there are millions of other programs that can do, I bet even gimp can do it.

cardhun
cardhun

Many more specialized devices and applications are used in industry besides common household items such as printers, scanners, faxes, PDAs, iPods, and digital cameras. Walk into a doctor's office. The scheduling and patient data software are all XP applications. A modern automated physician's office has networked computers in each waiting room with keyboard input devices for physician's notes. These systems are connected to central servers holding patient databases. Prescriptions are entered into the patient record right in the examining room, checked automatically against a drug database for interactions with medications already prescribed, and printed out for patient retrieval at the nurses' station. All of these systems employ specialized applications running under XP Professional. Walk into a medical lab. The processing systems, patient data, scheduling, report printouts, and armband printers are all controlled by XP systems. Walk into a radiology office. The x-ray systems, CT scanners, and MRI machines all interface with XP computers for control and data capture to a central database for physician access online. Walk into an optometrist's office. The patient data, sales, product inventory, lens options, lens treatments, appointment scheduling, and printers all interface with networked XP systems. Even the digital cameras for retinal photography interface with XP computers for control and data capture to the patient database. Walk into a pulmonologist's office. All the same XP patient data and scheduling applications on XP systems are present. The stress machine and pulmonary function test devices are also specialized devices controlled by specialized applications running on XP systems. That is just one industry with very few representative examples. Manufacturing is even more disparate, employing a range of control applications hosted on a variety of operating systems. The problem of device driver and application compatability scales by orders of magnitude when we consider the much broader range of industries, all employing equally specialized devices and applications. Vista's poor interoperability was the first public criticism by early adopters. Expecting the whole of international industry to continually expend the resources chasing the ephemeral chimera of the latest Microsoft product version in the name of Microsoft profits is not reasonable, much less rational.

Tearat
Tearat

People keep having the reverse happen to them ?As stated a million times, the problem with Vista was that it was released to soon for the hardware vendors.? OR MS was too slow in selling information to hardware vendors so they could be prepared ?The operating system is fine. I have been running Vista over 2 years now. (I had the beta, before the release).? No that does not mean the OS is fine it just means it worked ok for you for over 2 years ?I have been running several computers in an enterprise environment for over a year. All of these computers are running several different business applications just fine. Vista has run very solid, and we no longer experience the operating system feezes, or lockups that you experience with XP.? Good for you You got all those apps to run fine Still proves nothing I like how you used the last ?you? This XP computer I am using does not freeze or lockup but I am not dumb enough to think there are no problems with XP or that it is fine I have no problems with any of the apps or system tools I use I had a quick count 72 That?s not all of them just some of the ones I have used and tested Some do the same things as others No I did not count the office suites or any other suite as separate apps I tried Vista I tried everything that I knew I tried everything that has been suggested ever on every forum to fix things that were wrong at the time I succeeded most of the time but got sick of it I will try it again later to see if it is worth the money paid for it Yes the mighty Intel was of no help with the problems with their own drivers and hardware ?You people need to get over your cry baby ********, because I am sick of hearing it. There is absolutely no reason for the enterprise environment not to adopt Vista, as they phase out older machines. It is nothing more than pure laziness and complacence on enterprise users still running XP on newer machines being phased in. You act like a bunch of old women waiting for someone to help you cross the road. Get off your asses or move on to a Mac, good luck running your business applications.? You are asking for trouble if you want to suggest that all IT pros have control of the budget or are lazy But it?s your funeral Complaining is the ONLY way people have of telling the stupid idiots who run the corporations that there is something wrong with the product they think is so wonderful To bad if you don?t like it Stop reading or get over it MS and others need to wake up and realise that the release and fix approach no longer works That you cannot own it and blame someone else for the problem If MS insist on putting their name on other people?s products then they should shut up and take the crap that is thrown The fanboys need to realize that the argument about MS not being responsible for the mistakes made by hardware makers, builders and assemblers will never work Microsoft chose to sell Windows to them They are now trying to tell them they cannot sell computers with XP It cuts down on the choices they have

regretela
regretela

I am a graphic designer and student running Vista x64 Ultimate on my home PC. The system works great for me. I recently built a new machine because the ram in the old one (7 years old) was maxed out at 2gb. I went with Vista Ultimate because I did not want to move backwards. My husband runs XP x64 on one of his machines, and comparatively, mine runs better, freezes and crashes less. The only time it has crashed has been when there was a scanner driver installed that apparently was not compatible with Vista X64, though it was supposed to be. All my old plugins and programs run fine. I can load 3gb graphic files in less than a minute, where it was taking me 20 minutes before. No problems here. Oh, BTY, really don't like using MACs. They are annoying, as are their whiny, snotty ads. Maybe part of the reason that Vista has such a bad reputation is that Home Premium, the version loaded on retail PCs and notebooks is crappy, MS having disabled some of the features that make Utlimate work better than Home Premium.

cardhun
cardhun

With Microsoft's inflictions on its honest customers with mis-validation, unrecompensed damages to small businesses, flirtation with kill switches, restricted licensing, baked-in DRM, and now Vista. Vista was supposed to be the latest truly modular Windows operating system completely re-architected around a protected kernel with the most defect-free and best performance, availability, and reliability of any Windows version ever released. What the public received was another Windows version with degraded interoperability; arbitrary and unnecessary user interface changes; UAC interference with standard everyday file and I/O operations; and still more of the same old updates, patches, and another service pack to fix defects Microsoft assured would be absent. It's not polarizing to hold Microsoft accountable to clean up their act and start focusing on customers and quality instead of products and profits. It is instead a failure to be informed about Microsoft's customer relations that leads to making excuses for Microsoft.

Slayer_
Slayer_

If we didnt once in awhile try and force our opinions on others every once in awhile eh?

lcarliner
lcarliner

Especially in these hard economic times, the best thing that Apple can do is some very aggressive price cutting to build market share. This would then make underlying Apple hardware and software attractive to embedded systems developers, like on-line lottery ticket dispensing machines, point of sale terminal systems, commonly used in restaurants and fast food establishments, etc., not to say a much larger user base to make Apple products attractive to software developers!

Tearat
Tearat

The 286, 386, 486, P1, 2, 3, 4 that they screwed it up Didn?t they add NEW instructions to those processors? Didn?t they add new memory modes? So how many address bits should a 64-bit processor have Tony adding extra address information to an existing instruction would be stupid You would need to create a new instruction that does the same thing but has a higher address range Is that the same thing? No not exactly the same But if you were to program the memory manager or chipset to remap or translate addresses you do not have that problem Now which is the easy answer? So how do you handle 32-bit software in a 64-bit system Would you A) Leave the first 4 Gigs available for use B) Remap free unused memory to the first 4 Gig area C) Translate addresses to a higher free area Or is there something else you would use All of those would have to be done by the OS and system hardware There have been hardware options that allowed higher ram to be mapped to a lower area for years They used to include them in the chipsets Which is where the memory manager should be Someone screwed up The 8086 was a 16bit with a 20 bit address bus CPU Someone forgot to add the extra 8 bits to the 32-bit versions They forgot to add the commands that would support that addressing You think they would have had the brains to look and what had been done in the past with 8-bit CPUs and take it to 64-bits I would like to know what software needs more than 4 Gigs by itself You can leave out the data files they do not need to be loaded all at once I know there will come a day when they are that big But the systems we use are not fast enough for that Something to think about A 32-bit quad core could handle up to 16 Gigs of ram Or you could use one of the cores to swap memory for the others which would allow 3 cores with 4 + 4 shared Or you could have one core with 4 + 12 shared How would they talk to each other? Shared I/O or banks of ram One more thing What software is the only software that should use absolute addressing? I know you know the answer to that one Did I pass the test? Or do you need more You may like to know that I limit the technical stuff to a minimum when posting in a forum There is little use for information on hardware in the age of software That shows the skill level of the modern IT pro They know how to make someone else?s software do what they want The software is mostly MS for the home PC But some times its driver related which is as close to the hardware as they get

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

The only thing I can think of to do away with the limit, you could expand it by adding an address length modifier within the instruction But how big would that be? one word e.g 8 btyes on a 64 bit, that would be alot of address space, but it still has a limit, it would be damn slow when you got into high memory. OS's too big to fit in memory, is the way we've gone, it was easier and cheaper to throw hardware at optimising that, than the level of coding complexity required to manage a wholly modular OS.

Tearat
Tearat

But you know all of those The solution that worked best with DOS was to move the OS out of the 640k area not the apps But really A CPU that has the same number of address bits as data bits Or worse less address bits than data bits But just so we don?t forget that last address bit is a 2 Gig address Gee 2 Gigs is that all One more thing There would be more space if it were not for the huge OS and mostly unwanted software taking up memory If you think it?s not too big try typing out a 2 Gig text only letter Don?t cheat do it by hand I have better things to do

Slayer_
Slayer_

Somehow I thought most of those were a unix system, like I did a Walmart once, their machien installation, thats some weired stuff. I just figured most of those were the same. I have to laugh cause no banks or credit unions want to move to Vista, Vista breaks all their banking system software, most banking system software uses a DOS interface or a Windows 9x interface. Even the newest EroWorks is only a Windows 9x interface. (like not even a year old in Canada) and doesn't work under Vista. It's sad, all this stuff worked up till Vista. Also of course people don't liek to replace hardware, most the Credit Unions I got to only use 10 mbit LAN lines making them very painful for us because our software can install itself (something else that breaks completely with Vista) and the network load is fairly large, its only at top 80 meg download, but 80 megs over 10mbit takes a long time.

Deadly Ernest
Deadly Ernest

when a software or hardware company bows to the MS bosses and designs their software or hardware to work 'Out of the box' with any version of Windows instead of making them 'Plug-n'Play' and write Windows drivers for them. It greatly reduces the compatibility field.

Slayer_
Slayer_

I'd say probably one of the worst for that. I think at rakion.org there is has been several religion topics, usually ballooning to 20 or 30 pages with in a day full of flames. (the 20 or 30 pages is normal for all topics at Rorg, the flaming is not :))

Neon Samurai
Neon Samurai

These forums would be of no interest if it was a hundred people with the exact same opinion and experiences. For me, the difference is in debate versus argument. In an argument, the only goal is to find fault with the other person. It doesn't matter how unsupported one's own position is as long as the other person is somehow wrong. "political debate" is a good example as it seems to be all about proving the other candidate inferior rather than presenting one's own strengths. On the other hand, debating a topic provides room to actually discuss it (discussion may be a better word actually). If there is a flaw in the other person's theory then discuss that or give them the information they may be missing. Focus on the topic and strengths rather than looking for opportunities for someone to be wrong. It's not like we all stick to this ideal of course. It has been a noticeable difference in forum discussions lacking in the need for someone else to be wrong about a topic. Religion, Politics and Operating Systems will always be easy topics to devolve into arguments though.