MS in a hurry....

MS is in a hurry to get Win7 out...
they want to get vista behind them as fast as possible. They will support it
of course for 3 years as all OS, because they have to.

But as you will see, XP and Win7 will still be relevant for many years.
Vista will be mentioned only as a good example of what to avoid in the
future.

Computer savvy people like win7, but will it grasp the hearts of the
consumer?
Perhaps its just too much like vista. There was a rumor that they would slap
on a new GUI at the last moment..

Now that the RC is out, I don't see them doing that.

Many simple users just ask: they had a good product, XP.. why just they don't
improve upon that and forget everything about vista and its offspring
(windows7)?

My answer is that MS would never do that... even if it means losing their
market share to apple and linux.

Talking about apple... MAC OSX rocks!

-V.B.S

Inline..

"barrel" <> wrote in message
news:gts5ni$h8j$...
> MS is in a hurry to get Win7 out...

If you look at MS operating system release history, you will find that 2 - 3
years is the norm

> they want to get vista behind them as fast as possible. They will support
> it of course for 3 years as all OS, because they have to.
>

That is as maybe, but it was not all the fault of MS..

> But as you will see, XP and Win7 will still be relevant for many years.
> Vista will be mentioned only as a good example of what to avoid in the
> future.
>

Windows 2000 is still alive too, but numbers are dwindling fast..

> Computer savvy people like win7, but will it grasp the hearts of the >
> consumer? Perhaps its just too much like vista. There was a rumor that
> they would slap on a new GUI at the last moment..
>

Windows 7 benefits in that anything which runs on Vista will run on Win 7.
Vista was left to make it on its own by virtually all 3rd party
manufacturers and software authors for a good six months That alone will
ensure a Windows 7 success..

> Now that the RC is out, I don't see them doing that.
>
> Many simple users just ask: they had a good product, XP.. why just they
> don't > improve upon that and forget everything about vista and its
> offspring > (windows7)?
>

The reason for Vista taking so long was because the XP base was not good
enough to be carried forward, and MS had to start over. Windows 7 can be no
more based upon XP than Vista could.

> My answer is that MS would never do that... even if it means losing their
> market share to apple and linux.
>
> Talking about apple... MAC OSX rocks!
>
> -V.B.S
>

To each their own

--

Mike Hall - MVP Windows Experience
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/

"Mike Hall - MVP" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Inline..
>
> "barrel" <> wrote in message
> news:gts5ni$h8j$...
>> MS is in a hurry to get Win7 out...
>
> If you look at MS operating system release history, you will find that 2 -
> 3 years is the norm
>
>> they want to get vista behind them as fast as possible. They will support
>> it of course for 3 years as all OS, because they have to.
>>
>
> That is as maybe, but it was not all the fault of MS..
>
>> But as you will see, XP and Win7 will still be relevant for many years.
>> Vista will be mentioned only as a good example of what to avoid in the
>> future.
>>
>
> Windows 2000 is still alive too, but numbers are dwindling fast..
>
>> Computer savvy people like win7, but will it grasp the hearts of the >
>> consumer? Perhaps its just too much like vista. There was a rumor that
>> they would slap on a new GUI at the last moment..
>>
>
> Windows 7 benefits in that anything which runs on Vista will run on Win 7.
> Vista was left to make it on its own by virtually all 3rd party
> manufacturers and software authors for a good six months That alone will
> ensure a Windows 7 success..
>
>> Now that the RC is out, I don't see them doing that.
>>
>> Many simple users just ask: they had a good product, XP.. why just they
>> don't > improve upon that and forget everything about vista and its
>> offspring > (windows7)?
>>
>
> The reason for Vista taking so long was because the XP base was not good
> enough to be carried forward, and MS had to start over. Windows 7 can be
> no more based upon XP than Vista could.
>
>> My answer is that MS would never do that... even if it means losing their
>> market share to apple and linux.
>>
>> Talking about apple... MAC OSX rocks!
>>
>> -V.B.S
>>
>
> To each their own

It's all a question of how to make the most money, peoples interests are
secondary at best, IMHO.
<H>.

>
> --
>
> Mike Hall - MVP Windows Experience
> http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/

On Wed, 6 May 2009 14:16:11 -0400, "webster72n" <>
wrote:

>It's all a question of how to make the most money, peoples interests are
>secondary at best, IMHO.
><H>.

In the long run, a company cannot maximize profits UNLESS people's
interests are satisfied.

You are implying that people's interests don't have to be attended to,
which is clearly not the case.

Steve McGarrett wrote:
> On Wed, 6 May 2009 14:16:11 -0400, "webster72n" <>
> wrote:
>
>> It's all a question of how to make the most money, peoples interests are
>> secondary at best, IMHO.
>> <H>.
>
> In the long run, a company cannot maximize profits UNLESS people's
> interests are satisfied.

Which is why Micro$lut is history: they hold their paying customers in
utter disdain and assume ALL of them are thieves.

> You are implying that people's interests don't have to be attended to,
> which is clearly not the case.

Agreed, which is one of the reasons why I use Ubuntu.

Alias

"Alias" <> wrote in message
news:gtskt2$uvr$...
> Steve McGarrett wrote:
>> On Wed, 6 May 2009 14:16:11 -0400, "webster72n" <>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> It's all a question of how to make the most money, peoples interests are
>>> secondary at best, IMHO. <H>.
>>
>> In the long run, a company cannot maximize profits UNLESS people's
>> interests are satisfied.
>
> Which is why Micro$lut is history: they hold their paying customers in
> utter disdain and assume ALL of them are thieves.
>
>> You are implying that people's interests don't have to be attended to,
>> which is clearly not the case.
>
> Agreed, which is one of the reasons why I use Ubuntu.
>
> Alias

You have it all wrong.

The main reason why you use Ubuntu is you can't afford Vista.
The second reason why you use Ubuntu is you can't figure out Vista.
The third reason why you use Ubuntu is because you don't do anything with
your computer other than troll so there is no need for you to use Vista even
if you could afford Vista.

measekite Da Monkey wrote:
> "Alias" <> wrote in message
> news:gtskt2$uvr$...
>> Steve McGarrett wrote:
>>> On Wed, 6 May 2009 14:16:11 -0400, "webster72n" <>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> It's all a question of how to make the most money, peoples interests are
>>>> secondary at best, IMHO. <H>.
>>> In the long run, a company cannot maximize profits UNLESS people's
>>> interests are satisfied.
>> Which is why Micro$lut is history: they hold their paying customers in
>> utter disdain and assume ALL of them are thieves.
>>
>>> You are implying that people's interests don't have to be attended to,
>>> which is clearly not the case.
>> Agreed, which is one of the reasons why I use Ubuntu.
>>
>> Alias
>
> You have it all wrong.
>
> The main reason why you use Ubuntu is you can't afford Vista.

False.

> The second reason why you use Ubuntu is you can't figure out Vista.

False.

> The third reason why you use Ubuntu is because you don't do anything with
> your computer other than troll so there is no need for you to use Vista even
> if you could afford Vista.

False.

Three strikes. You're out.

Alias
>
>
>

"Alias" <> wrote in message
news:gtslur$od$...
> measekite Da Monkey wrote:
>> "Alias" <> wrote in message
>> news:gtskt2$uvr$...
>>> Steve McGarrett wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 6 May 2009 14:16:11 -0400, "webster72n" <>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It's all a question of how to make the most money, peoples interests
>>>>> are secondary at best, IMHO. <H>.
>>>> In the long run, a company cannot maximize profits UNLESS people's
>>>> interests are satisfied.
>>> Which is why Micro$lut is history: they hold their paying customers in
>>> utter disdain and assume ALL of them are thieves.
>>>
>>>> You are implying that people's interests don't have to be attended to,
>>>> which is clearly not the case.
>>> Agreed, which is one of the reasons why I use Ubuntu.
>>>
>>> Alias
>>
>> You have it all wrong.
>>
>> The main reason why you use Ubuntu is you can't afford Vista.
>
> False.
>

TRUE


>> The second reason why you use Ubuntu is you can't figure out Vista.
>
> False.

TRUE

>
>> The third reason why you use Ubuntu is because you don't do anything with
>> your computer other than troll so there is no need for you to use Vista
>> even if you could afford Vista.
>
> False.

TRUE

>
> Three strikes. You're out.
>
Three LIES and you're a LIAR.

LIAR

"Steve McGarrett" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Wed, 6 May 2009 14:16:11 -0400, "webster72n" <>
> wrote:
>
>>It's all a question of how to make the most money, peoples interests are
>>secondary at best, IMHO.
>><H>.
>
> In the long run, a company cannot maximize profits UNLESS people's
> interests are satisfied.
>
> You are implying that people's interests don't have to be attended to,
> which is clearly not the case.

That is not an implication but an indication with all the proof at hand.
Surely there have to be considerations, but they are clearly not primary,
that is my contention, or we wouldn't have these overwhelming problems.

On Wed, 6 May 2009 15:42:06 -0400, "webster72n" <>
wrote:

>
>
>"Steve McGarrett" <> wrote in message
>news:.. .
>> On Wed, 6 May 2009 14:16:11 -0400, "webster72n" <>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>It's all a question of how to make the most money, peoples interests are
>>>secondary at best, IMHO.
>>><H>.
>>
>> In the long run, a company cannot maximize profits UNLESS people's
>> interests are satisfied.
>>
>> You are implying that people's interests don't have to be attended to,
>> which is clearly not the case.
>
>That is not an implication but an indication with all the proof at hand.

No. You have chosen the info you call "proof" and have made your
implications based on that selection. Might make you feel good, but
it's bad practice.

>Surely there have to be considerations, but they are clearly not primary,
>that is my contention, or we wouldn't have these overwhelming problems.

Your contention is wrong. You are clearly looking at matters from a
jaundiced viewpoint. I'll leave it at that.

I'm outta here.