General discussion

Locked

Is Vista Doomed from the Start?

By atroon ·
I was discussing this with a friend the other day, and we noticed a pattern in Microsoft's software. All of it was launched with great hype and fanfare and touted as a 'good' product, but the results have been mixed. Going all the way back to 1986:

DOS 3.3: GOOD
DOS 4.2: BAD
DOS 5.0: GOOD
DOS 6.0: BAD
DOS 6.22: GOOD
Windows 3.0: BAD
Windows 3.1: GOOD
Windows 95: BAD
Windows NT/98: GOOD
Windows ME: BAD
Windows 2000/XP: GOOD
Windows Vista: ?

I have used all these OS's with the exception of Vista, and these are my experiences. Anyone have similar experiences?

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

600 total posts (Page 1 of 60)   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

You missed out 2003

by Tony Hopkinson In reply to Is Vista Doomed from the ...

so it's got to be good hasn't it.

LOL

Collapse -

agree, and more

by Kiltie In reply to You missed out 2003

You missed out quite a few DOS versions, and many Windows versions.

Additionally, what criteria did you use to determine "GOOD" from "BAD" and from what perspective?

One may be good for games, but bad for office environment or vice versa
or one may be good from a user point of view, but bad from a techie angle
and so on....
you get my point?

EDIT: typoswe lure
hehe

Collapse -

Here Here!

by unhappyuser In reply to agree, and more

There were MANY versions of DOS that MS came out with besides what's shown. Having worked with CP/M, Xenix, Unix, Linux, DOS/Windows and Mac I can say, in my humble opinion of course, that MS products still lag behind the others and are porrly designed (except maybe Exchange). MS has copied SO many features from other software vendors it's unbelievable.

Then why has Microsoft done so well you ask? Does anyone remember Beta and VHS? It's all about marketing. If Bill Gates had not been so good at this (and a BSer too) he'd be a second rate programmer at Motorola.

Collapse -

Could not agree more!

by Media-Ted In reply to Here Here!

C/PM DEC/VAX were the best. Commodore Geos was slow, but reliable.

Windoze is nearly ubiquitous, and we're pretty much forced to use it for things like video, etc., but it's wholly unreliable.

It is most interesting to see the dismal results issuing from those who have decided to flip to Mac/iMac, and find, as we did, that the mouse acts like an Etch-A-Sketch and the lack of choices and type-able instructions is uselessly limiting on one's productivity.

Also, VHS began adopting ? problems, vis a vis: ? usually kept the tape wound around the spinning head "stretch" while rewinding - thus exposing it to stress and stretching itself. Early VHS placed the tape back into the cartridge before doing any FF or RW which saved the tape considerable tension; later versions deployed the "instant-play" "feature", which ran the tape through all the chutes and ladders and subjected it to extended stress - all in the name of selling more, ...

The "wonderful" thing about these thugs is that they will use their money to gang up against those who produce quality goods so they can force the public to buy their detesable crap with no realy choices. M$ and Macrap do spin their B$ with more quality than their products deliver, ... and will continue to do so, ... much like the "Big-Three Automakers" of yesteryear, ... until the Orient makes the necessary changes and drives them out of business with real choices. It's just that I feel too old to wait for the next generation what'll work.

Collapse -

Crack up

by whocares78 In reply to Could not agree more!

Whats this got to do with anything. we are in no way forced to use it, "and we're pretty much forced to use it for things like video, etc., but it's wholly unreliable" how in **** did you come up with tis bbrilliant piece of thinking. hello each OS has a video player of some sort that will play all formats. what has VHS and beta got to do with anything. so what high quality OS would you use and well why havent you bagged linux yet

Collapse -

Well, as to VHS<>?...

by Media-Ted In reply to Crack up

That was in response to the previous submission by:
electronics_md@...
Job Role: Networking / LAN Administration
Location: Graniteville, VT
Member since: 01/26/2001

As to force: I work at a business that uses computers and I'm forced to use Mac, iMac, and various M$ crap, so if I want to work nearby, yes, I'm forced to use it.

At home, as you can see from my entries scattered throughout this discourse (it's my only submissions in this forum since joining), I began with Apple, but bought an Osborn for my first personal/business use. Previous to that, I had employed two Frieden Just-O-Writers for word processing, paper tape and all. My first DOS was C/PM, although Apple had something they called DOS, but it was horrible, like a rack of dominos, if one bit got bumped, and entire disk could be corrupted.
I traveled around the country writing research papers for clients on their machines as well as on my own, so I had the plethora of Operating Systems, Trash-DOS, Adam, Sinclair, TI, the gamut. Some of those clients had 8086's and 8088's, but their systems were so slow with M$ that I found it much easier to type in WordStar on the Osborn and modem it to the M$ in ASCII - even at 110 baud it was quicker than waiting for M$-DOS to boot and try to open WordPerfect and try to figure the different F-strokes for underline, bold, etc..
Finally a friend(?) gave me a Sharp PC-7000, a "lunch-box" portable with a blue LCD pop-out display. This came with DOS 2.11, PC Tools 2.11, WordPerfect 3, so I used it on occasion, but preferred to program SuperCalc and dBASE II 2.3b in C/PM and null-modem it into other systems (using a piece of gum wrapper foil to jump the 2-3 pin connectors).

Because M$ would not release a new version unless and until it interferred with Lotus and other "competitors", I was negative about them ab initio - still am.

I am forced to use their crap because when I was buying computers, they came with M$ bundle in the box. I wanted to use video production, and I already know Mac is not for me. The mouse is like an Etch-A-Sketch, with a sling-shot response; I know, I must use them at work still, so I am not going to use a painfully inferior system to do something Pinnacle and Premier say they can do on M$. It is ubuquitous, and it is in control. If you don't like the term "force", you must deliberately ignore history because force is what M$ produces more than anything else.
I have ?-tested for Ashton-Tate/Borlund International, so I think I can claim some knowledge and experience with other "power-users", and I know force when I encounter it - daily.
As to "tis bbrilliant piece of thinking. hello each OS has a video player of some sort that will play all formats", I, ... oddly, don't have a complaint; MediaPlayer is a very usefull piece for viewing MPG(1&2), AVI, MP3, and such. Version 10 is easy to use, but does not play in "all formats"; I know because I have it reject many things I try to open, even .avi, so I guess you just don't have the experience to back up your statement.
The reliability factor is what I have described - perhaps in too much detail already elsewhere, but I cannot use older devices in XP - I paid full price for them less than 5? years ago, and there is no excuse for M$ not to support them except that they want to be the be-all-and-end-all of everything, so they close out all perceived competition - again. Arrogant, bullyish behavior, but monopolists are like that - read history over and over.

There is ample evidence brought forth in other comments on this very forum to show that O/S-2 was better than anything M$ has produced yet - or is realistically expected to produce. Their stuff is already described by others who have at least as much experience as I, as bloated with startup times which are ridiculous. They are fulfilling the definition of tyranny as described in that wonderful paper, The Declaration Of Independence, "but, when a long train of abuses evinces ..." read it for yourself and consider WGA and all the other debacles.

In short, M$ is not out to compete, they are out to destroy and conquer. They have broken laws and used thug tactics internationally to accomplish their goal. They are a joke among real programmers of the past, but those programmers realize that, for now, they are forced to deal with M$ until something, a real choice comes around. Many have switch to Unix<> for everything they can; some have seldom dealt with M$, but there aren't that many quality professionals out there who are happy with M$. Too often they must "say the right things" to avoid offending clients who choose not to inform themselves about M$ and just want results (see the article about the Bureaucrats above - I didn't write it), but they - down deep - resent the company and its tactics and crummy problems and persistance in continuing the legacy that has brought the power of computing to its knees in favor of bsods and maintainence. The old-timers know what quality and production were. It's a shame the younger set may never know.
This year I'm paying professionals to see if I can "migrate" to Suse for everything, photography, musical scoring, video, publications, but I'm going to be faced with a learning curve, because the programs I must use at work are not going to migrate with me.
End Of Line (MCP)

P.S. Sorry to the rest of you. I have appreciated all the old-timey comments - brought back wonderful memories.

Collapse -

You Just Don't Get It

by jrs_mcp In reply to Well, as to VHS<>?...

This isn't about you!
This isn?t about the good old days when you used paper and pencils by candlelight.
This is about the new world with electricity, and fiber optics, and mass communications.
Quit harping about the past and grow up!

Sure Microsoft has been accused of behaving badly; no one disagree with that point; but has anybody produced something better on such a scale? No.

The reason there are vulnerabilities in Office and Windows OS is because of the hackers, not the programmers. There are problems with all Operating Systems and all applications. If the hackers spent as much time looking at Linux, Mac or whatever, the way they spend their time looking at Windows, they could find just a many problems and vulnerabilities.

The issue is that the majority of the world uses Windows; and from a hacker?s standpoint - if you were trying to disrupt the world and trying to create chaos would you try to topple the king or the mayor.

The real problem is that the hackers spend their time trying to break things instead of fix things ? that?s because they?re lazy. It?s much easier to destroy something that it is to make it better. What a waste of brain power.

No one produces a product that was meant to be crap least of all Microsoft. ?You play to win.? ? Herman Edwards. The object of any business is to make money; and that is all MS is doing ? ethics aside. If you don?t like it don?t buy it. It?s easy to complain without having any answers ? do you have the answer? Until something better comes along guess what ? the world will keep buying it. If you don?t like it create your own app.

Microsoft has dedicated a lot of capital and resources to produce products that will help the average user as well as businesses - not old farts like you. If the world wanted a command line interface everyone would look like you; but they don?t. You are a minority ? in fact you?re almost non existent when you look at the number. At some point you become divisible by infinity.

I am not saying that MS has the answer; in fact in 10 years I don?t believe MS will be the dominant desktop OS; but they will still produce applications that help us in ways you can?t imagine ? they are forward thinking, are you?

This is a new millennium - from this point forward. Try to make this a better place instead tearing down what someone better than you thought up.

Collapse -

jrs_mcp....just don't get it?

by maldain In reply to Well, as to VHS<>?...

Hmmm, while the command line has it's place...when you do start then run I bet cmd is the default so you're not too far off the command line yourself. If you think that's all the 'NIX OS's are is a command line interface it's you that's in the dark but not lighting candles. The first thing would be the X windows display manager has only been around since dos 3.3 and has improved steadly with each passing year. Additionally, there isn't a program you can run under windows that doesn't have counter part in the 'NIX world that either works as well or is superior to the Microsoft offering and guess what the people that wrote those 'NIX programs don't feel the need to rummage through your personal property every thirtieth of a second to see if there's not something else they can gouge you for. The fact is that Microsoft has behaved like a bully and put their resources into calling you and treating you like a criminal.

Collapse -

Forced ot Choice

by cherokee_tribute In reply to Well, as to VHS<>?...

Speaking of being forced to use a particular OS, I am attending University of Phoenix online. I'm taking IT Professional snd my homework has to be done in Microsoft Power Point, Microsoft Excel and Microsoft Word. My classes are downlaoed to Microsoft Outlook Express. I can go to class online, but their email system stinks, so my "choice" is OE. I don't know UNIX as well as I would like, but for my purposes I think it is the way I will go after school.
The unfortunate thing of all this is that Microsoft has made it so that web pages ALL seem to be compatible with MS, even though some can be viewed properly with Mozilla (which I like) and iRider (which I also like, but ALL sites can be viewed in IE.
I don't post very often, in fact rarely, but my idea is become familiar with all OS's and be ready to use the ones you have no choice with, because sometimes there isn't any good choice except quit your job or get everyone fired at Microsoft, including Bill and staring over as a competitor not a manipulator and dictator.

Collapse -

MS Vulnerabilities and Forced Use - web site compatibility

by Deadly Ernest In reply to Well, as to VHS<>?...

1. The reason so many hackers attack MS, is because they KNOW how to write code, and they get upset about how the MS marketing liars say how secure and safe it is, when it isn't. So they set out to prove it isn't.

Most MS software isn't secure and has a lot of poor coding in it simply because MS puts too many features in it that should be separate applications. They could include these on the CD to be loaded after the OS, but they choose to install them direct into the OS. They also code in lots of special doorways to allow their other software easier access to the OS. These doorways are open to use by anyone else. The vast majority of hackers don't do anything special in attacking Windows, they just use the same code that MS uses to access these doorways to allow them in and then send it other coded instructions.

The majority of attacks that work on Windows don't work on other systems as the other OSs don't have these open doorways to give them free access.

The real problem is poor coding, as a result of bad management decisions and directions, that leave the system vulnerable.

MS have produced good OSs in the past, then they started adding all the crap features into the OS instead of as application.

2. The reason so many web sites show better on Windows than other browsers is nothing to do with how MSIE is written, it's because the web site designers create them using MS software or software designed specifically for Windows, and thus the web sites come out cultivated for Windows. In the past I've used MS FrontPage to create a web site that looked great in Netscape Navigator but crap in MSIE, simply because I used html code and colours that favoured Netscape over MSIE. For the last year or so, I've been using FireFox and every web page I look at in FF, shows the same way as in MSIE, with two exceptions.

In both those cases I went to web sites that caused a client trouble, in MSIE accessing the web site resulted in trojans being automatically loaded to the system, in FF the browser detected the trojans and stopped loading the site, thus protecting the system.

------

In the early days, MS offered good software that was well coded, for that time, and did it's job as well, or better than, others. When they switched to Win 95 there was a change in management direction, and the way they coded software. Since then, things have gotten worse, the MS focus now is very predatory and marketing with no focus on coding quality.

Back to Windows Forum
600 total posts (Page 1 of 60)   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next

Operating Systems Forums