<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:s="http://www.techrepublic.com/search" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"  xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
    <title><![CDATA[Discussion on Vista is killing my staff ]]></title>
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789]]></link>
    <atom:link rel="hub" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" />
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789/rss" />

    <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>2013-05-25T19:15:09-07:00</lastBuildDate>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[You're Dead On!]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2441991]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I do everything from building machines to consulting to networking to training, and that has been my mantra for years.  In fact, every time I teach a class on anything Microsoft, I always ask the question, &quot;have any of you ever met a Microsoft Beta-Tester?&quot;  When they all shake their heads &quot;no&quot;, I ask, &quot;would you like to meet some Microsoft Beta-Testers?&quot;.  When they start looking excited and shaking their heads &quot;yes!&quot;, I say, &quot;then look around the room - we're ALL Microsoft Beta-Testers - they just don't pay us to be Microsoft Beta-Testers&quot;.I ALWAYS recommend that one waits until all the &quot;gotta be firsts&quot; rush out and buy the latest/greatest and find out that it doesn't work the way it is supposed to, let MS start sending out their SPs, and like you said, don't even make a jump until they've done 2 SPs before considering it, MAYBE.Seems as if the MS development team is constantly fighting the marketing side of the building, trying to finish development before the marketing department starts screaming &quot;we've go to get it out the door - NOW!&quot;  Too bad, because I know for a fact (because I've known some MS developers), at MS, that's SOP - to push the envelope and release &quot;CRAP&quot; before it is finished being developed or even beta-tested (at least the little done before shipping an MS OS or app).  The problem most consumers have is that MS forces the OEMs to carry (especially for home consumers) only their newest OS with no possibility of a second OS option.  Of course the OEMs like it that way as well - costs less to pre-load one OS and let the consumer battle it out with MS over the OS not doing what it is supposed to do, or use it as an excuse for why half their older external equipment doesn't work with the new OS.I'll really be glad when we get to the point where all software (at least apps - not the OS) is like cable TV - you just subscribe to what you want and don't worry about versions, etc.  At that point every app will be a web app of some sort, compatible with all dumb machines (at that point - since the OS [so to speak] will NOT be the main attraction).But, we have a ways to go before that happens - there's too much money involved in doing it the way we're currently doing it now, and MS especially doesn?t want to rock that boat.Having said that, I?ve noticed that sales of MAC and Linux machines have started rising, in part (I?m sure) due to Vista and MS Office 2007. Since Vista is extremely slow (when compared to XP) and all of the MS Office 2007 apps have changed the paradigm which MS had us believing in for the last 20 years (you know ? FILE   EDIT   VIEW, etc.) it has made for a better case against the status-quo (Microsoft) and more for the stylish (MAC) or down-right cheap (Linux).  If I had to foot the bill for 60 new machines, each with copies of an office apps package like MS Office (word processing, spreadsheet, presentation, email) and my choices were PC with MS Vista, MAC with OS X Leopard, or an inexpensive Linux running OpenOffice I might start changing my thought process.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2441991]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[terry@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sun, 02 Mar 2008 21:43:15 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[You asked &quot;What was Microsoft Thinking&quot;?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2441979]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[The answer would probably be...&quot;Ka-ching!&quot;]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2441979]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[four-eyes_z]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sun, 02 Mar 2008 21:11:24 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Amen, brother!]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2441956]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[You are EXACTLY correct.  There is no compelling reason to have business customers move to Vista, even if the kinks have all been worked out.  Yes, the eye candy is cool, but how does that increase business productivity?  If one of my clients could give me a legitimate business reason for moving to Vista, then I would step up and support that client doing so.  I must say that I'm not overly worried about that happening any time soon.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2441956]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[james.gentry@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sun, 02 Mar 2008 20:10:26 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Well I am a &quot;consultant&quot;]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2441785]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I AM a consultant and my job is to to what is right for the client, even if they don't know what that is.  The customer is always right is good enough for Geek Squad but my clients pay me to tell them when they are F#&amp;%ing up.   To imply, (as Microsoft does) that Vista's problems are an opportunity for revenue is unprofessional to the point of criminal.  There is absolutely no way a competent computer professional with the clients best interests in mind can recommend Vista.  None.  Period. This isn't chicken little.  This is good business. People need to do WORK.  Office, Quickbooks, Autocad etc.  There is no way that you can make the argument that a Vista system is better for day to day work than Xp. There are NO features in Vista that actually INCREASE speed thus productivity. PERIOD. Our clients pay for our expertice, if yours don't beleive you when you tell them NO to Vista, ya might need to work on your credibility.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2441785]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[derek@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sun, 02 Mar 2008 11:55:33 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Vista works for me]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2441325]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I'm in the business of repairing, upgrading and networking PC's for small businesses and home office clients.  I do not consider myself a &quot;consultant&quot; but a PC &quot;doc&quot; or mechanic ..... and, while I  use ubuntu and XP for my personal and internal business use, that is my choice.  When clients ask me if they should upgrade to Vista or purchase a Vista machine, I tell them it is their choice and give them a realistic estimate of the costs for the hardware and peripherals that will work in a satisfactory manner.  Given those costs, some have chosen to go with Mac systems, others have chosen to stick with XP until hardware costs come down or peripherals wear out.  If properly configured, Vista systems run just fine, and if folks want the &quot;bling for the bucks&quot;, it is their CHOICE ...   I earn my fees either way.  Some of you folks need to stop complaining .... the situation is what it is and it is up to us to adapt or find something else to do for a living.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2441325]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[mlansing@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2008 10:34:28 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Re Microsoft just might listen after somebody in big business sues them]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2441231]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[What exactly is wrong with using M$ for Microsoft?The MS that you want to push into use is a recognized Disease with no known cure Multiple Sclerosis. So just how is it helpful to make a lot of people think that computers have caught an Incurable Disease.Personally to me that is far more childish than using something that everyone understands and accepts.Just remember that MS was around and known as MS long before Billy Boy cobbled together that Punch Tape in the garage so it quite rightly has the rights to MS.Microsoft being a new comer gets what it's given and shouldn't have complaints.If you think that this is unacceptable you are welcome to deal with the Medical Profession that I do on a daily basis and waste the best part of every day explaining that the Computers are not sick and do not need putting down and being replaced.ColCol]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2441231]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[HAL 9000]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2008 06:42:23 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Re Microsoft just might listen after somebody in big business sues them]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2441002]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[On what grounds?M$ has got things sewn up so tightly that they are impossible to sue because a OS or any other product of theirs doesn't work as claimed.As things stand now you can only instigate any Legal Action Against M$ for False Advertising where they have deliberately misinformed the General Public but as far as Faulty Software is concerned they are untouchable.After testing Vista since the Volume License Product was released I'm waiting to see what Windows 7 looks like. I don't think that Vista will be a working alternative to XP ever for Business at least.Col]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2441002]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[HAL 9000]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 2008 18:25:23 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Using &quot;M$&quot; seems to be the &quot;in&quot; thing nowadays...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2441031]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[NT ]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2441031]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[four-eyes_z]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 2008 17:34:10 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Who sold you Vista?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2440964]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Go back to XP.Microsoft just might listen after somebody in big business sues them.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2440964]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[BALTHOR]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 2008 14:55:34 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Why are you trying?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2440746]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I just question WHY you're trying to bring Vista in.  Is there some software or functionality that only Vista brings?  If these are supported clients, why would they not listen to your advice?  Was your advice to move to Vista?I can't turn left or right without reading a reason to stay away from Vista, in the business sector.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2440746]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[TeoMcDohl]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 2008 11:59:46 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Nothing is free]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2440742]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Anyone who claims that Linux is free is kidding themselves.  Line of business applications?  Cost for training employees to use the new software?  Everything has a cost.  Linux is not free, to a Systems Admin.And as a sidenote: do we have to talk like 12 year olds and use &quot;M$?&quot;]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2440742]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[TeoMcDohl]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 2008 11:43:42 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Vista support cost]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2440524]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Why does Vista cost so much more to support?  Because even doing simple tasks can take 2x as long in Vista.Try this, try editing the hosts file on a Vista computer. Should take less than a minute. Adding printers, installing software...heck even copying files is slower on Vista.I agree, Vista was designed for guys that charge by the hour;)]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2440524]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[derek@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 2008 08:20:43 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[OS newbies, eh?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2440472]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I've been using or supporting Windows since 3.1.  Having been saddled with ME before, I wouldn't touch Vista with a 10-foot pole for at least 2 more years.  Even then, I've seen far too much detail on numerous sites and discussions to do that without serious consideration.  And most of the problems I've read about are being discussed by the technical people, not newbies.  Where have you been lately?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2440472]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[LarryBoy2]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 2008 07:28:55 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[I think you have the wrong people working for you...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2440358]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I've dished out countless Vista machines and have yet to hear anything negative that SP1 hasn't corrected.In my opinion, it's more about who installs it rather than who runs it.  Also, very early in the Vista game, I had started to recommend no less than 2GB of RAM on any version of Vista.SP1 makes an amazing difference...if you haven't, check it out.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2440358]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Reb00t]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 2008 06:47:00 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[One Man's Opinion]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2440151]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I went from DOS to 2000 willingly, lagging far behind those on the bleeding edge in the upgrade process. It was a decision that served me well. 2000 was the only OS in my Microsoft experience that was actually faster than the previous OS. It's happened only once since DOS in my lifetime. I moved to XP because in the wisdom of Adobe, you had to have XP to get the CS Suite and Premiere Pro. My testing showed XP to take exactly twice as long to render an edit as 2000. That would make Vista 1/5 to 1/10 as fast as 2000. I wonder if anyone has ever run a comparison?The trend continues... I don't think a M$ os will ever be faster than its predecessor again, in my lifetime.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2440151]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[ronmoody@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 22:56:45 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[That would be really nice...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2440105]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[But the sad reality is (for us corporate users), most of the applications we use only work with Windows.  A few apps are starting to be converted to web-based apps (which unfortunately doesn't mean it is guaranteed to work on just ANY browser).  Some are thin/thick clients that still need Windows (because of ActiveX and dependency on some DLL's).  But for those client-server / standalone / legacy apps that were made with only Windows in mind, there's not much choice is there?  Convert these apps to a Linux-compatible version?  Not likely due to costs and time constraints...  Plus you have to consider the amount of time and money that will have to be poured into training the people how to use Linux.For home users, this may be viable especially if the user is a first-time computer user.  But you still cannot deny that a lot of apps and games are made for Windows only and that will heavily influence users on what OS they want installed on their PCs.If only the open-source / Linux community had the marketing muscle and influence of MS (which is probably NOT likely to happen anytime soon)...  Maybe things just might change for the better.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2440105]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[four-eyes_z]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 21:37:48 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Don't Boot Up M$, Boot OUT M$!   GO LINUX!]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2440079]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[My suggestion is to move to Linux.  I am a new user to Linux (~ 2 weeks and counting) but, I have seen a remarkable difference in how it handles everything.  I switched from XP Home ed. which worked so so but, was getting slow.  Now I've got an OS that rivals the looks and functionality of the new M$ and Apple OSes on a 5 year old laptop.Secondly, IT'S FREE!!!  And, supporting software is FREE!!!  In business it's about the bottom line so, this makes sense.(I would suggest however, to make donations to some of the Linux development organizations with that financial savings.)]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2440079]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[rngunter]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 19:10:30 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Software downgrade - Vista back to XP]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2439487]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Has anyone heard about this NEC software that allows you to downgrade Vista back to XP - is it worth it?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2439487]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[jeremy_perkins_2001@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 08:35:53 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Please stop...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2439479]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Quit complaining, do your homework, install SP1 on Vista, and move on down the road ... there was a FANTASTIC post on this thread which details the same adoption woes w/ XP when moving from Win2k and 98/ME.  Truth be told, Windows7 won't be ready until 2011 so get used to Vista SP1 . . . it's not that bad unless you are too lazy or not that good of an admin.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2439479]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[nowikn@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 08:26:15 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Yes we are  here for a reason, and part of our expertise is...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2439455]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Knowing when not to bet on a dog.Vista is a dog, by the time M$ gets their act together, the next OS will already be out.  In the meantime, it is also part of our expertese to steer management away from making decisions that will harm the bottom line, the increased expense of maintaining vista prior to M$ getting their act together alone justifies delayiing or scrapping the idea altogether.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-254789-2439455]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Locrian_Lyric]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 08:17:19 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

