Why Vista has failed so far

Discussion in 'Windows Vista Help' started by Notrod, Jul 7, 2008.

  1. Notrod

    Notrod Guest

    My first exposure to computers was in 1968 in high school. It was an
    ungainly beast the size of a desk that could only do the functions that any
    of today's cheap calculators can do. In college I took classes in computer
    programming and could write programs in Fortran, Cobol and Basic. I've
    worked with Commodores and Tandys. I got my hands on my first PC in 1985, an
    IBM PC with a whopping 20 Megs of hard drive space that was running on DOS.
    Since then I've worked with Windows 3.1, 95, 98, ME, NT, Server 2000, XP
    Home, XP Pro and Vista Home Premium. Currently I am a consultant for the 4th
    largest producer of software in the US. My job is making the users of my
    company's software better at what they do. Our software uses a Linux OS at
    its core. I am not trying to brag, just stating my experience.

    I am running Vista HP on my home computer and XP Pro on my company laptop. I've
    had Vista running for 15 months on its original installation. I always
    wondered at the pure hate people express towards the OS as I have had very
    few problems with it, actually less than I have had with the XP Pro on my
    laptop. But I think I may have figured out why Vista has attracted so much

    When XP first came out it was a huge improvement over Win 98, the most
    prevalent OS in use at the time. Some people were using Server 2000 instead
    of 98, but they were the power users of the time. When XP came out however,
    it wasn't to cheers from the press. The web based review sites and magazines
    blasted it soundly. It was too buggy, there were very real problems with
    hardware drivers and it was a resource hog, necessitating beefing up
    hardware to run properly. Software compatibility was spotty with 98 and NT
    based programs. If you doubt me on that, on an XP machine go to All
    Programs, Accessories and you will find the Program Compatibility Wizard
    that was put in so 98 and NT programs would run on XP. I remember distinctly
    that gamers were complaining loudly how bad XP was for them, that it would
    never be a gamers OS. I had a rather vigorous email conversation with Kyle
    Bennett, founder of the Hard OCP site about this because he had said the
    exact same things about Server 2000 when it came out. And guess which OS he
    was defending while soundly criticizing XP just a couple of years later?
    Yep, all of a sudden Server 2000 was the best OS ever and XP would never
    measure up. Does all this sound familiar?

    So now we have Vista and all of the complaints and criticism that were
    heaped on XP are being thrown Vista's way. I find it funny that so many
    people are quick to say that Vista sucks, but they never can come up with a
    solid reason as to why they think so. Maximum PC magazine recently tried to
    justify their hatred of Vista by publishing a list of 7 things they thought
    were wrong. Out of all 7 the only valid one was that, in some applications,
    Vista is slower. That was the only quantifiable issue they could come up
    with. And yes, on equal machines Vista can be slower. Just as XP was slower
    on a machine designed to run 98 or 2000.

    But this still doesn't explain why Vista has had such a slow start. After
    all XP managed to take hold in spite of all the complaints about it. And
    then the other day I came up with a theory. XP came out at the time when PCs
    were really coming on strong with businesses. There were quite a few before
    XP, but the majority were running 98 which was not an ideal situation. When
    I first started with my current company PCs were nowhere near as common as
    they are today. Expense was a big reason. Mostly just managers had them on
    their desks. The workers that needed computer access did so with dumb
    terminals. With the advent of XP there was also a noticeable and steady
    decline in hardware prices and PCs became much more prevalent. More and more
    the PC replaced the dumb terminal, and they were running XP. A whole lot of
    people learned to use a PC that was on XP.

    And then along comes Vista, and they don't want to change. They are
    comfortable with XP. One of the first lessons I learned in my current job is
    that people do not like change of any kind, and that definitely applies to
    computer programs. I get so tired of trying to explain why my company's
    software doesn't run just like our competitors'. Even when you can show them
    that something is better they will resist the change. They want new, but
    they want it to look and act like their old software.

    Then there are the Microsoft haters. They are a very vocal group that seems
    to take great pleasure in criticizing and bashing anything and everything
    Microsoft and Bill Gates does. To them Gates is the anti-Christ. I don't
    understand the feelings, but I know they are there. I find it interesting
    that these same people have no problem with Steve Jobs of Apple. Here's a
    man and a company that control not only the software but also the hardware
    that goes with it. Talk about a monopoly! Just try and go out and buy the
    Mac OSX software pre-installed on anything except an Apple brand computer.
    You can't. But no one is suing him.

    Then there is the fact that, even though Vista is a good, stable and more
    secure OS than XP, it's not a quantum leap better like XP was over 98.

    The final piece of this puzzle is the fact that businesses are at capacity
    for PCs. We are unlikely to see any further large scale expansion of PCs
    into the workplace like we saw in the early 2000s. Just about everyone has
    their PCs and has had since before Vista. And they are running XP. System
    Administrators lead very hectic lives and they do not want to have to learn
    and support a new OS until they absolutely have to. Plus there is the real
    expense of obtaining the licenses for all those machines.

    So there you have it, millions of users that have learned on XP and do not
    want to change, a huge installed base of machines that will take a long
    time, and a lot of money to upgrade, no real compelling reason to switch and
    a small, but very vocal group that wants to, once again, tell everyone how
    bad Microsoft's latest product is just because its Microsoft's.

    Vista is a good OS that has not deserved the bad rap it has gotten. Some
    people are saying they will wait until Windows 7 comes out. I'm willing to
    bet when it does we will hear the exact same criticisms we are hearing
    Notrod, Jul 7, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  2. Notrod

    Notrod Guest

    ArseClown? Does that mean you like getting fucked up the ass?

    I have spent quite a bit of time browsing this group, thus my post. If the
    best you can come up with is insults, rather than an honest and intelligent
    response, I can't help but deduce that you are a 13 year old virgin that a
    real woman abhors, that can't come up with a better answer than this.
    Whether or not I can attain a full erection, (which I can, there's your
    wanking image for the next month, you queer) has nothing to do with what I
    wrote. With age comes experience and wisdom. Toss out the insults as you
    please. Lack of an inelegant response to the points I raised just shows the
    world how immature you really are. The true sign of a person who can not
    defend their position is insults.

    Unless you have an intelligent reply, that addresses the points I made, go
    back to you cartoon porn sites and let the adults discuss this.
    Notrod, Jul 9, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  3. Notrod

    Clogwog Guest

    Hi Mark, is that you?
    Mark Kent, Linux advocate by night and Microsoft partner by day.
    "At BT Global, our crown jewels are the services we supply to our
    customers. With jNetX we own the intellectual property for our services,
    allowing us to evolve the services as and when required."
    Mark Kent
    Head of Technology Strategy
    Mark Kent's partner Microsoft:
    Mark Kent's jNetX N(X) - Convergent Network Services for Microsoft CSF
    Download Mark Kent's Microsoft demo:
    Clogwog, Jul 19, 2008
  4. Sure looks like it.
    Same formatting and choice of paranoid words.
    Moshe Goldfarb., Jul 19, 2008
  5. Notrod

    Ben Guest

    To directly answer the title of this thread;

    It's quite simple. Vista doesn't offer enough new features that can't be
    found in previous versions of Windows using free software, Vista is
    bloated and consumes more resources than necessary, is expensive, and
    has experienced a lot of problems in just becoming stable.
    Ben, Jul 20, 2008
  6. Believe it or not, with the exception of the stable comment, I pretty much
    agree with your statements. At least from the consumer's point of view.
    Vista, at least from my experience and reports, is rock solid.

    The problem with Vista is that most of the improvements are under the hood.

    The average consumer doesn't see that much like the average consumer
    doesn't see the difference between an SK tool and a Dollar Heaven special.

    The other problem is that the applications and hardware drivers have not
    caught up with Vista quite yet. This is highly dependent upon application
    though with the video and audio guys scratching their head but the average
    user not having too many problems.
    But if you happen to be one of those with problems, Vista is going to suck
    for you. That's just the way it is.

    What it boils down to is why would a consumer switch to an OS that for all
    practical purposes, from their perspective, doesn't do anything different
    than what they have and depending upon their hardware might even perform

    They don't.

    However, the same can be said of Linux but it's even worse because now the
    application factor is at 100 percent because the user is being forced to
    use new applications as well as a new OS and one that is completely
    different from their current one.

    In the case of Linux, being free just isn't enough.

    My personal belief is that one of the big boys, IBM or HP, has got to take
    on Microsoft directly and wage a full scale battle by introducing a
    commercial version of Linux that is FULLY supported and SERIOUSLY marketed.

    Not some blip hidden on a website that is spattered with "We recommend
    Vista" etc.

    The distro of the day, fragmented support and 1000 different ways of
    accomplishing things is a poor method for getting Linux into the hands of
    the average person.

    Linux needs credibility, and yes we all know NASA uses Linux, super
    computers use Linux etc and while that's great in OUR eyes, we are geeks
    and average Jane is not.
    Jane's answer is "I have a desktop not a rocket".

    Jane needs the comfort of an IBM or HP or maybe even Lenovo to back Linux
    FULLY, SERIOUSLY and without pandering to Microsoft to the point where
    it's obvious some are afraid of stepping on Microsoft's booties (shoes, for
    Martii and HPT who's minds are in the gutter)....

    Can it happen?
    I suspect IBM is working on it right now.
    Will it ever see the light of day and stand a chance?
    I honestly don't know because the public is just too fickle.

    Just my 2 cents...
    Moshe Goldfarb., Jul 20, 2008
  7. Notrod

    Ben Guest

    *blinks and rubs eyes, wondering if that's really Moshe*

    Somebody pinch me?
    Ben, Jul 20, 2008
  8. Notrod

    Linonut Guest

    * Ben peremptorily fired off this memo:

    If it works in the first place.

    See my comment above.

    See my comment above.

    Unfortunately, most users simply copy Microsoft software, rather than
    try the good free/Free stuff that is out there.
    Nah. He throws in some rational thought now and then to keep you off
    balance. He'll be raving and slurring in no time.

    All of us should treasure his Oriental wisdom and his preaching of a
    Zen-like detachment, as exemplified by his constant reminder to clerks,
    tellers, or others who grew excited by his presence in their banks:
    "Just lie down on the floor and keep calm."
    -- Robert Wilson, "John Dillinger Died for You"
    Linonut, Jul 20, 2008
  9. Notrod

    Ben Guest

    Is it intentional, or rather just moments of lucidity between extended
    periods of delusion?

    Or did he remember to take his medication this morning?
    Ben, Jul 20, 2008
  10. Notrod

    relic Guest

    Don't you mean 'ArseClown'?
    relic, Jul 22, 2008
  11. Notrod

    Crappy Win Guest

    but the fact that Vista breaks many XP Apps is the biggest factor I read
    about in the business mags.
    Crappy Win, Oct 7, 2008
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.