Article: Why Windows XP should be available until Windows 7

Look I am not a vista basher anymore... Vista can work "well enough" if you
have a very fast computer and you are careful.. and of course you have
SP1...
I still cant use vista for my heavy duty geek stuff.. its too slow for my
taste.

But even if I get a 8 core machine with 16 gb ram, I will still be
dualbooting Vista with XP, until and IF Windows7 is very good.

Article
http://www.itworld.com/Comp/2218/win...sta-dr-080218/

I quote here what I have said in the past... it seems that I was right
again...

"Of course, Microsoft knows the general public can't stand Vista. After
trying to deal with companies like Acer and Dell that forced the
organization to push the end-of-licensing date back, it was forced to manage
retailers that simply didn't want to sell Vista in their stores and
businesses that were loath to switch."




--
50 Ways to leave your Vista....

CHORUS:

You just format the drive , Clive
Get a New Mac , Jack
Y'don't need that crap toy, Roy
Just get yourself free
Boot from a *nix, Jix
You don't need to discuss much
Install XP, Lee
And get yourself free

"On the Bridge" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Look I am not a vista basher anymore... Vista can work "well enough" if
> you have a very fast computer and you are careful.. and of course you have
> SP1...
> I still cant use vista for my heavy duty geek stuff.. its too slow for my
> taste.
>
> But even if I get a 8 core machine with 16 gb ram, I will still be
> dualbooting Vista with XP, until and IF Windows7 is very good.
>
> Article
> http://www.itworld.com/Comp/2218/win...sta-dr-080218/
>
> I quote here what I have said in the past... it seems that I was right
> again...
>
> "Of course, Microsoft knows the general public can't stand Vista. After
> trying to deal with companies like Acer and Dell that forced the
> organization to push the end-of-licensing date back, it was forced to
> manage retailers that simply didn't want to sell Vista in their stores and
> businesses that were loath to switch."
>
>
>
>
> --
> 50 Ways to leave your Vista....
>
> CHORUS:
>
> You just format the drive , Clive
> Get a New Mac , Jack
> Y'don't need that crap toy, Roy
> Just get yourself free
> Boot from a *nix, Jix
> You don't need to discuss much
> Install XP, Lee
> And get yourself free
>
>
>
>


With the same writers covering all internet magazines, naysayers in
newsgroups and forums, bloggers who just want to make a name for themselves,
indifferent to very bad support from OEM and 3rd party manufacturers, it's
hardly surprising that Vista looked like it could become the next ME.

But Vista isn't the next ME at all, and never was. While it did have
problems all of its own, the problems which affected Vista users the most
were out of Microsoft's control. Many of its inherent problems have been
fixed now in the SP1 release and STILL the naysayers harp on about issues
which were and are still FUD.

The author in the article mentioned installing 'a Microsoft software
package'. Which Microsoft software package? Does this same package load slow
in XP? He never tells us because it is pertinent to his cause NOT to tell.

UAC does not bother some users as others would claim it does, and in any
case can be turned OFF. Vista holds up better in the event that drivers play
up far better than XP ever did. It can recover itself far better than XP
ever did. It needs more HDD space in order to accomplish this, but so what!!
Hard drives are considerably larger now, and in percentage terms, Vista
takes up no more space than any Windows OS ever did.

Some hardware doesn't like Vista at all, but you have to wonder why. Most
new hardware plays well with Vista to the point where the owners/users of
such equipment don't understand what all of the fuss and FUD is about.

The ONLY reason for switching a new computer back to XP should be because
the cost of upgrading mission critical software is not economic sense.

Sure it needs more power than XP, but not that much more. OEMs are still
selling low specified junk (not enough RAM) just to get sales. They don't
care if users have bad experiences because they just blame Microsoft. In
this way, users may still buy their products in the future, having it on
'good authority' from the manufacturer that it is always the fault of the
operating system..

Even the author accepts that Microsoft XP only really came into its own
after SP2, but Vista has made it after SP1. Linux still hasn't made it for
users like Joe Average, and Macs are over-priced, over-hyped lifestyle
accoutrements, living off of the reputation they had for good graphics over
15 years ago..

--
Mike Hall - MVP
How to construct a good post..
http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
http://support.microsoft.com/default...help&style=toc
Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

As I said.. after SP1 vista has become "somewhat acceptible", and thats why
I have stopped bashing it..
And by the way this proves I was never a troll as you and many others
claimed. It was not my fault, that vista was faulty.

But still lots of people are having problems, so I decided to focus my
energy now to help everyone I can with these problems
instead of making fun of vista.
With SP1, vista passed the threshold of total CRAP, to only annoying
requiring you to have patience.

Sure a Vista joke here in there is a must, just to keep that smile on our
face.. but I have decided to
help the users.. they are who I care about.



"Mike Hall - MVP" <> wrote in message
news:e8%...
> "On the Bridge" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> Look I am not a vista basher anymore... Vista can work "well enough" if
>> you have a very fast computer and you are careful.. and of course you
>> have SP1...
>> I still cant use vista for my heavy duty geek stuff.. its too slow for my
>> taste.
>>
>> But even if I get a 8 core machine with 16 gb ram, I will still be
>> dualbooting Vista with XP, until and IF Windows7 is very good.
>>
>> Article
>> http://www.itworld.com/Comp/2218/win...sta-dr-080218/
>>
>> I quote here what I have said in the past... it seems that I was right
>> again...
>>
>> "Of course, Microsoft knows the general public can't stand Vista. After
>> trying to deal with companies like Acer and Dell that forced the
>> organization to push the end-of-licensing date back, it was forced to
>> manage retailers that simply didn't want to sell Vista in their stores
>> and businesses that were loath to switch."
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 50 Ways to leave your Vista....
>>
>> CHORUS:
>>
>> You just format the drive , Clive
>> Get a New Mac , Jack
>> Y'don't need that crap toy, Roy
>> Just get yourself free
>> Boot from a *nix, Jix
>> You don't need to discuss much
>> Install XP, Lee
>> And get yourself free
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> With the same writers covering all internet magazines, naysayers in
> newsgroups and forums, bloggers who just want to make a name for
> themselves, indifferent to very bad support from OEM and 3rd party
> manufacturers, it's hardly surprising that Vista looked like it could
> become the next ME.
>
> But Vista isn't the next ME at all, and never was. While it did have
> problems all of its own, the problems which affected Vista users the most
> were out of Microsoft's control. Many of its inherent problems have been
> fixed now in the SP1 release and STILL the naysayers harp on about issues
> which were and are still FUD.
>
> The author in the article mentioned installing 'a Microsoft software
> package'. Which Microsoft software package? Does this same package load
> slow in XP? He never tells us because it is pertinent to his cause NOT to
> tell.
>
> UAC does not bother some users as others would claim it does, and in any
> case can be turned OFF. Vista holds up better in the event that drivers
> play up far better than XP ever did. It can recover itself far better than
> XP ever did. It needs more HDD space in order to accomplish this, but so
> what!! Hard drives are considerably larger now, and in percentage terms,
> Vista takes up no more space than any Windows OS ever did.
>
> Some hardware doesn't like Vista at all, but you have to wonder why. Most
> new hardware plays well with Vista to the point where the owners/users of
> such equipment don't understand what all of the fuss and FUD is about.
>
> The ONLY reason for switching a new computer back to XP should be because
> the cost of upgrading mission critical software is not economic sense.
>
> Sure it needs more power than XP, but not that much more. OEMs are still
> selling low specified junk (not enough RAM) just to get sales. They don't
> care if users have bad experiences because they just blame Microsoft. In
> this way, users may still buy their products in the future, having it on
> 'good authority' from the manufacturer that it is always the fault of the
> operating system..
>
> Even the author accepts that Microsoft XP only really came into its own
> after SP2, but Vista has made it after SP1. Linux still hasn't made it for
> users like Joe Average, and Macs are over-priced, over-hyped lifestyle
> accoutrements, living off of the reputation they had for good graphics
> over 15 years ago..
>
> --
> Mike Hall - MVP
> How to construct a good post..
> http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
> How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...help&style=toc
> Mike's Window - My Blog..
> http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx
>
>
>
>

>>>With SP1, vista passed the threshold of total CRAP, to only annoying
requiring you to have patience<<<

Well that I don't agree with, however you have your opinion and I do respect
that. One thing I do agree with and glad to see is your change of mind to
start helping people on these groups. That's why they are here and MOST come
here seeking help.

BTW, a joke or two is fine with me, it's a joke and laughter is indeed the
best medicine.

All the best,
SG

"On the Bridge" <> wrote in message
news:...
> As I said.. after SP1 vista has become "somewhat acceptible", and thats
> why I have stopped bashing it..
> And by the way this proves I was never a troll as you and many others
> claimed. It was not my fault, that vista was faulty.
>
> But still lots of people are having problems, so I decided to focus my
> energy now to help everyone I can with these problems
> instead of making fun of vista.
> With SP1, vista passed the threshold of total CRAP, to only annoying
> requiring you to have patience.
>
> Sure a Vista joke here in there is a must, just to keep that smile on our
> face.. but I have decided to
> help the users.. they are who I care about.
>
>
>
> "Mike Hall - MVP" <> wrote in message
> news:e8%...
>> "On the Bridge" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>> Look I am not a vista basher anymore... Vista can work "well enough" if
>>> you have a very fast computer and you are careful.. and of course you
>>> have SP1...
>>> I still cant use vista for my heavy duty geek stuff.. its too slow for
>>> my taste.
>>>
>>> But even if I get a 8 core machine with 16 gb ram, I will still be
>>> dualbooting Vista with XP, until and IF Windows7 is very good.
>>>
>>> Article
>>> http://www.itworld.com/Comp/2218/win...sta-dr-080218/
>>>
>>> I quote here what I have said in the past... it seems that I was right
>>> again...
>>>
>>> "Of course, Microsoft knows the general public can't stand Vista. After
>>> trying to deal with companies like Acer and Dell that forced the
>>> organization to push the end-of-licensing date back, it was forced to
>>> manage retailers that simply didn't want to sell Vista in their stores
>>> and businesses that were loath to switch."
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 50 Ways to leave your Vista....
>>>
>>> CHORUS:
>>>
>>> You just format the drive , Clive
>>> Get a New Mac , Jack
>>> Y'don't need that crap toy, Roy
>>> Just get yourself free
>>> Boot from a *nix, Jix
>>> You don't need to discuss much
>>> Install XP, Lee
>>> And get yourself free
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> With the same writers covering all internet magazines, naysayers in
>> newsgroups and forums, bloggers who just want to make a name for
>> themselves, indifferent to very bad support from OEM and 3rd party
>> manufacturers, it's hardly surprising that Vista looked like it could
>> become the next ME.
>>
>> But Vista isn't the next ME at all, and never was. While it did have
>> problems all of its own, the problems which affected Vista users the most
>> were out of Microsoft's control. Many of its inherent problems have been
>> fixed now in the SP1 release and STILL the naysayers harp on about issues
>> which were and are still FUD.
>>
>> The author in the article mentioned installing 'a Microsoft software
>> package'. Which Microsoft software package? Does this same package load
>> slow in XP? He never tells us because it is pertinent to his cause NOT to
>> tell.
>>
>> UAC does not bother some users as others would claim it does, and in any
>> case can be turned OFF. Vista holds up better in the event that drivers
>> play up far better than XP ever did. It can recover itself far better
>> than XP ever did. It needs more HDD space in order to accomplish this,
>> but so what!! Hard drives are considerably larger now, and in percentage
>> terms, Vista takes up no more space than any Windows OS ever did.
>>
>> Some hardware doesn't like Vista at all, but you have to wonder why. Most
>> new hardware plays well with Vista to the point where the owners/users of
>> such equipment don't understand what all of the fuss and FUD is about.
>>
>> The ONLY reason for switching a new computer back to XP should be because
>> the cost of upgrading mission critical software is not economic sense.
>>
>> Sure it needs more power than XP, but not that much more. OEMs are still
>> selling low specified junk (not enough RAM) just to get sales. They don't
>> care if users have bad experiences because they just blame Microsoft. In
>> this way, users may still buy their products in the future, having it on
>> 'good authority' from the manufacturer that it is always the fault of the
>> operating system..
>>
>> Even the author accepts that Microsoft XP only really came into its own
>> after SP2, but Vista has made it after SP1. Linux still hasn't made it
>> for users like Joe Average, and Macs are over-priced, over-hyped
>> lifestyle accoutrements, living off of the reputation they had for good
>> graphics over 15 years ago..
>>
>> --
>> Mike Hall - MVP
>> How to construct a good post..
>> http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
>> How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
>> http://support.microsoft.com/default...help&style=toc
>> Mike's Window - My Blog..
>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 13:39:49 +0200, "On the Bridge"
<> wrote:

>Look I am not a vista basher anymore... Vista can work "well enough" if you
>have a very fast computer and you are careful.. and of course you have
>SP1...
>I still cant use vista for my heavy duty geek stuff.. its too slow for my
>taste.
>
>But even if I get a 8 core machine with 16 gb ram, I will still be
>dualbooting Vista with XP, until and IF Windows7 is very good.
>
>Article
>http://www.itworld.com/Comp/2218/win...sta-dr-080218/
>
>I quote here what I have said in the past... it seems that I was right
>again...
>
>"Of course, Microsoft knows the general public can't stand Vista. After
>trying to deal with companies like Acer and Dell that forced the
>organization to push the end-of-licensing date back, it was forced to manage
>retailers that simply didn't want to sell Vista in their stores and
>businesses that were loath to switch."

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

You're making the implicit assumption that Win 7 won't be even slower
and more sluggish than Vista is. I wouldn't necessarily bet on that.

Microsoft IMHO needs to give all their developers weak, wimpy
computers equivelent to what the bulk of their customers use rather
than high end development machines. Then they might have a better
appreciation for how sluggish it can be when a machine goes to sleep
for an extended time to index files or something else that doesn't
actually contribute to completeing the task at hand.

Even their Office 2007 has been a disappointment with lots of effort
put into making things look newer and better at the expense of
exection speed which is all I really care about in Excel. I don't
think that would have happened either if their developers were all on
1GHz single processor machines with 1GB or less of RAM.

That said, if you have a high end machine both Vista and Excel seem to
work ok once you kill a lot of the eye candy features. But they're
forcing the retailers to also put it on low end machines that just
suck with Vista, but would be ok with XP. And these low end machines
go into the hands of people who don't know enough to kill the resource
hogging features. (What percentage of Microsoft's customers don't
even know they can change their browser's home page?)

Bill

Hi here is a post below I made some time ago, it reflects what you are
saying..
--

I suspect that the idiot developers working on vista must have had the state
of the art machines
with huge high resolution screens and infinite disks pace etc.
There is no other explanation for the SLOPPY and IRRESPONSIBLE status of
Vista.

Its slow
its bloated
its ugly on CRT screens,
with bad colors and darn right bad taste!

They should have gave the moron developers the kind of machines they SAY
vista can run on...

a 800 Mhz CPU with 20 gb hard disk space and 256 Mb of ram on 15 inch CRT
screens!!!!

THAT WOULD TEACH THEM to not BLOAT!

The result of this would that they would be forced to make a BETTER
FASTER LEANER MORE STREAMLINED PRODUCT!


This also means that when you would put it on a dual core with 2 gigs of
ram, the OS would FLY not simply RUN (vista now crawls) !

--
50 Ways to leave your Vista....

CHORUS:

You just format the drive , Clive
Get a New Mac , Jack
Y'don't need that crap toy, Roy
Just get yourself free
Boot from a *nix, Jix
You don't need to discuss much
Install XP, Lee
And get yourself free



"Bill Martin" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 13:39:49 +0200, "On the Bridge"
> <> wrote:
>
>>Look I am not a vista basher anymore... Vista can work "well enough" if
>>you
>>have a very fast computer and you are careful.. and of course you have
>>SP1...
>>I still cant use vista for my heavy duty geek stuff.. its too slow for my
>>taste.
>>
>>But even if I get a 8 core machine with 16 gb ram, I will still be
>>dualbooting Vista with XP, until and IF Windows7 is very good.
>>
>>Article
>>http://www.itworld.com/Comp/2218/win...sta-dr-080218/
>>
>>I quote here what I have said in the past... it seems that I was right
>>again...
>>
>>"Of course, Microsoft knows the general public can't stand Vista. After
>>trying to deal with companies like Acer and Dell that forced the
>>organization to push the end-of-licensing date back, it was forced to
>>manage
>>retailers that simply didn't want to sell Vista in their stores and
>>businesses that were loath to switch."
>
> -------------------------
>
> You're making the implicit assumption that Win 7 won't be even slower
> and more sluggish than Vista is. I wouldn't necessarily bet on that.
>
> Microsoft IMHO needs to give all their developers weak, wimpy
> computers equivelent to what the bulk of their customers use rather
> than high end development machines. Then they might have a better
> appreciation for how sluggish it can be when a machine goes to sleep
> for an extended time to index files or something else that doesn't
> actually contribute to completeing the task at hand.
>
> Even their Office 2007 has been a disappointment with lots of effort
> put into making things look newer and better at the expense of
> exection speed which is all I really care about in Excel. I don't
> think that would have happened either if their developers were all on
> 1GHz single processor machines with 1GB or less of RAM.
>
> That said, if you have a high end machine both Vista and Excel seem to
> work ok once you kill a lot of the eye candy features. But they're
> forcing the retailers to also put it on low end machines that just
> suck with Vista, but would be ok with XP. And these low end machines
> go into the hands of people who don't know enough to kill the resource
> hogging features. (What percentage of Microsoft's customers don't
> even know they can change their browser's home page?)
>
> Bill

Per Bill Martin:
>Microsoft IMHO needs to give all their developers weak, wimpy
>computers equivelent to what the bulk of their customers use rather
>than high end development machines. Then they might have a better
>appreciation for how sluggish it can be....

When I develop MS Office suite stuff, I'm still periodically
dismayed when something I develop - that runs like a champ on my
developer box - slows to a crawl on the user groups' laptops.

You'd think I'd learn.... but developing on a slow PC is just too
cruel and unusual to the developer IMHO.

But at least now I sneak a few tests in on one of the user's PCs
before saddling them with something.
--
PeteCresswell

its about economics.. how much more work would you need to put into a
program for it to work
blazing fast?

I bet a lot...

MS is gonna make the money anyway.. why put in extra effort? Thats why they
love being a monopoly (not in theory but in practice)

--
50 Ways to leave your Vista....

CHORUS:

You just format the drive , Clive
Get a New Mac , Jack
Y'don't need that crap toy, Roy
Just get yourself free
Boot from a *nix, Jix
You don't need to discuss much
Install XP, Lee
And get yourself free



"(PeteCresswell)" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Per Bill Martin:
>>Microsoft IMHO needs to give all their developers weak, wimpy
>>computers equivelent to what the bulk of their customers use rather
>>than high end development machines. Then they might have a better
>>appreciation for how sluggish it can be....
>
> When I develop MS Office suite stuff, I'm still periodically
> dismayed when something I develop - that runs like a champ on my
> developer box - slows to a crawl on the user groups' laptops.
>
> You'd think I'd learn.... but developing on a slow PC is just too
> cruel and unusual to the developer IMHO.
>
> But at least now I sneak a few tests in on one of the user's PCs
> before saddling them with something.
> --
> PeteCresswell

XP was an excellent product sp1 onwards, not sp2 onwards.

"Mike Hall - MVP" <> wrote in message
news:e8%...
> "On the Bridge" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> Look I am not a vista basher anymore... Vista can work "well enough" if
>> you have a very fast computer and you are careful.. and of course you
>> have SP1...
>> I still cant use vista for my heavy duty geek stuff.. its too slow for my
>> taste.
>>
>> But even if I get a 8 core machine with 16 gb ram, I will still be
>> dualbooting Vista with XP, until and IF Windows7 is very good.
>>
>> Article
>> http://www.itworld.com/Comp/2218/win...sta-dr-080218/
>>
>> I quote here what I have said in the past... it seems that I was right
>> again...
>>
>> "Of course, Microsoft knows the general public can't stand Vista. After
>> trying to deal with companies like Acer and Dell that forced the
>> organization to push the end-of-licensing date back, it was forced to
>> manage retailers that simply didn't want to sell Vista in their stores
>> and businesses that were loath to switch."
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 50 Ways to leave your Vista....
>>
>> CHORUS:
>>
>> You just format the drive , Clive
>> Get a New Mac , Jack
>> Y'don't need that crap toy, Roy
>> Just get yourself free
>> Boot from a *nix, Jix
>> You don't need to discuss much
>> Install XP, Lee
>> And get yourself free
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> With the same writers covering all internet magazines, naysayers in
> newsgroups and forums, bloggers who just want to make a name for
> themselves, indifferent to very bad support from OEM and 3rd party
> manufacturers, it's hardly surprising that Vista looked like it could
> become the next ME.
>
> But Vista isn't the next ME at all, and never was. While it did have
> problems all of its own, the problems which affected Vista users the most
> were out of Microsoft's control. Many of its inherent problems have been
> fixed now in the SP1 release and STILL the naysayers harp on about issues
> which were and are still FUD.
>
> The author in the article mentioned installing 'a Microsoft software
> package'. Which Microsoft software package? Does this same package load
> slow in XP? He never tells us because it is pertinent to his cause NOT to
> tell.
>
> UAC does not bother some users as others would claim it does, and in any
> case can be turned OFF. Vista holds up better in the event that drivers
> play up far better than XP ever did. It can recover itself far better than
> XP ever did. It needs more HDD space in order to accomplish this, but so
> what!! Hard drives are considerably larger now, and in percentage terms,
> Vista takes up no more space than any Windows OS ever did.
>
> Some hardware doesn't like Vista at all, but you have to wonder why. Most
> new hardware plays well with Vista to the point where the owners/users of
> such equipment don't understand what all of the fuss and FUD is about.
>
> The ONLY reason for switching a new computer back to XP should be because
> the cost of upgrading mission critical software is not economic sense.
>
> Sure it needs more power than XP, but not that much more. OEMs are still
> selling low specified junk (not enough RAM) just to get sales. They don't
> care if users have bad experiences because they just blame Microsoft. In
> this way, users may still buy their products in the future, having it on
> 'good authority' from the manufacturer that it is always the fault of the
> operating system..
>
> Even the author accepts that Microsoft XP only really came into its own
> after SP2, but Vista has made it after SP1. Linux still hasn't made it for
> users like Joe Average, and Macs are over-priced, over-hyped lifestyle
> accoutrements, living off of the reputation they had for good graphics
> over 15 years ago..
>
> --
> Mike Hall - MVP
> How to construct a good post..
> http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
> How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...help&style=toc
> Mike's Window - My Blog..
> http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx
>
>
>
>

"kookieman" <> wrote in message
news:%...
> XP was an excellent product sp1 onwards, not sp2 onwards.
>
> "Mike Hall - MVP" <> wrote in message
> news:e8%...
>> "On the Bridge" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>> Look I am not a vista basher anymore... Vista can work "well enough" if
>>> you have a very fast computer and you are careful.. and of course you
>>> have SP1...
>>> I still cant use vista for my heavy duty geek stuff.. its too slow for
>>> my taste.
>>>
>>> But even if I get a 8 core machine with 16 gb ram, I will still be
>>> dualbooting Vista with XP, until and IF Windows7 is very good.
>>>
>>> Article
>>> http://www.itworld.com/Comp/2218/win...sta-dr-080218/
>>>
>>> I quote here what I have said in the past... it seems that I was right
>>> again...
>>>
>>> "Of course, Microsoft knows the general public can't stand Vista. After
>>> trying to deal with companies like Acer and Dell that forced the
>>> organization to push the end-of-licensing date back, it was forced to
>>> manage retailers that simply didn't want to sell Vista in their stores
>>> and businesses that were loath to switch."
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 50 Ways to leave your Vista....
>>>
>>> CHORUS:
>>>
>>> You just format the drive , Clive
>>> Get a New Mac , Jack
>>> Y'don't need that crap toy, Roy
>>> Just get yourself free
>>> Boot from a *nix, Jix
>>> You don't need to discuss much
>>> Install XP, Lee
>>> And get yourself free
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> With the same writers covering all internet magazines, naysayers in
>> newsgroups and forums, bloggers who just want to make a name for
>> themselves, indifferent to very bad support from OEM and 3rd party
>> manufacturers, it's hardly surprising that Vista looked like it could
>> become the next ME.
>>
>> But Vista isn't the next ME at all, and never was. While it did have
>> problems all of its own, the problems which affected Vista users the most
>> were out of Microsoft's control. Many of its inherent problems have been
>> fixed now in the SP1 release and STILL the naysayers harp on about issues
>> which were and are still FUD.
>>
>> The author in the article mentioned installing 'a Microsoft software
>> package'. Which Microsoft software package? Does this same package load
>> slow in XP? He never tells us because it is pertinent to his cause NOT to
>> tell.
>>
>> UAC does not bother some users as others would claim it does, and in any
>> case can be turned OFF. Vista holds up better in the event that drivers
>> play up far better than XP ever did. It can recover itself far better
>> than XP ever did. It needs more HDD space in order to accomplish this,
>> but so what!! Hard drives are considerably larger now, and in percentage
>> terms, Vista takes up no more space than any Windows OS ever did.
>>
>> Some hardware doesn't like Vista at all, but you have to wonder why. Most
>> new hardware plays well with Vista to the point where the owners/users of
>> such equipment don't understand what all of the fuss and FUD is about.
>>
>> The ONLY reason for switching a new computer back to XP should be because
>> the cost of upgrading mission critical software is not economic sense.
>>
>> Sure it needs more power than XP, but not that much more. OEMs are still
>> selling low specified junk (not enough RAM) just to get sales. They don't
>> care if users have bad experiences because they just blame Microsoft. In
>> this way, users may still buy their products in the future, having it on
>> 'good authority' from the manufacturer that it is always the fault of the
>> operating system..
>>
>> Even the author accepts that Microsoft XP only really came into its own
>> after SP2, but Vista has made it after SP1. Linux still hasn't made it
>> for users like Joe Average, and Macs are over-priced, over-hyped
>> lifestyle accoutrements, living off of the reputation they had for good
>> graphics over 15 years ago..
>>
>> --
>> Mike Hall - MVP
>> How to construct a good post..
>> http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
>> How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
>> http://support.microsoft.com/default...help&style=toc
>> Mike's Window - My Blog..
>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>


It really came of age after SP2 which was not just a patch roll up. It was a
major rewrite of more than a few lines of code..

--
Mike Hall - MVP
How to construct a good post..
http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
http://support.microsoft.com/default...help&style=toc
Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx