Crippling Vista

[Bernie]

Pretty sure he was being sarcastic...

Indeed I was.

 

[Bernie]

That is an interesting train of thought Michael. I think Apple are
probably the best placed company to compete with MS on the pc platform.
They have great PR and a good reputation for style. They even have a
reasonable O/S. But there are a few things that may be stopping them;

Would an OS X type O/S run existing Windows apps? Is there a bunch of
code in the Windows O/S that is owned by MS and would be difficult to
get round? There is an awful lot of code running in corporations that is
specific to Windows that is likely to be broken by a new O/S. Just look
at the problems MS is having getting apps to run in Vista.

But the home market is different. There isn't the investment in Windows
based code but there is some investment in games and other applications.

A new O/S that would be very pretty and fast and reliable is one thing
to come up with but it would also need the support of application
developers very rapidly for it to catch on big time.

Having said all that now is a better time for them to try it than 5
years ago. There are way more apps that have been ported to multiple
O/Ses. Since MS declared war on their own customers with the destruction
of Visual Basic a lot of developers having to learn new languages have
gone for languages that can create portable apps. It would be a sweet
revenge for many, myself included.

 

[Guest]

I see most of you understand what a "business" is. Thats good. You have
choices still too. You don't to buy vista. You don't have to buy a Mac. And
you don't have to install linux. What you haven't realized is that the answer
to your problems is simply using xp for your work stuff and getting over it.
Yes, I am talking about Pete's "problem". Vista isn't crippled, why would
they cripple what they spent years to make? You have a choice, you aren't
being forced into anything. You could alwasy install MS-DOS if you got bored
and hate vista.

The point is that it is a business. And its a good business. They have the
majority of the market for a reason. Don't complain that microsoft is a
monopoly because you workplace uses windows. It is your company's fault they
use windows. They made that choice. Now you have a choice as well. Don't
complain about having choices.

I know you won't believe this, but believe it or not, Microsoft doesn't owe
you anything. Yup, thats right. Microsoft doesn't have to give you a free
upgrade, they don't have to give you all those pretty features for free, just
like you don't get cruise control or a V8 engine in your car at the base
price. "Oh no, my car is crippled, they put a V6 engine when they could have
put a V8!". Just like you can choose another car by spending more, you can
choose vista home premium over vista home basic. That is how businesses work.
They offer many services, they want you to buy the most expensive thing there.

You know, I think I wrote too much already. Thats what you get for making me
ready 43 posts to get through this nonsense.

Mac is for those who think they are "special" and have too much money, and
Linux is for those in denial. Windows has pretty windows, what could be
better than that?

Ummm, if any part of this seems harsh or mean to any group of people or
person, I meant it in the nicest possible way.

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

I agree. Most of the froth comes from people seeking validation of their
own choices. Those who flame MS, Apple, Intel, AMD, or whatever seem to
think that tearing down the other guy's favorites somehow makes thier own a
better product, thus validating their own choices.

 

[John Jay Smith]

not even the eyecandy if you have taste!

X-No-Archive: yes


Actually, I've read a number of posts by beta/alpha testers that do NOT
like Vista, -except for the eye candy.
-Pete

 

[Beck]

Agreed. Until it is accepted by the masses, the software choices
for Linux will remain limited.
IMO, one Microsoft killer could very well be Apple. It has been
speculated many times, but if Apple was to release some version
of OS X to the general public for install on any pc- many users would
buy it. I would. I think the atmosphere is right for such a release.
Steal Microsoft's thunder by releasing such a product a month before
Vista is released. I can see it, taste it, and believe it would a
resounding
success, and for the life of me, I just don't understand why Apple will
not do it. They'd still have those followers who would only buy Macs.
It would shock the computer and software business to its core.

I agree with this too. I would buy it (if the price was reasonable).
People are scared to jump to mac because they can only get it on an apple
machine. That is a lot of money to fork out if you find you do not like the
OS. Boot Camp dual booting with XP is a step in the right direction but you
still need to fork out initially for that apple computer, cannot be done
properly, vice versa.
If they want to increase their market share, the only way to do it is to
release it as a standalone OS that will install on any type machine.

 

[Beck]

Neither Mac nor Linux are practical alternatives for my situation. MS has
a monopoly for all practical purposes.
-Pete

Well Pete, I don't think things are going to change any time soon. Until we
see more companies coming out and making operating systems, we will still
have the MS monopoly and I would imagine that will be the same for many
years to come.

 

[Ground Cover]

Bad analogy - why? There's basically only one "Vista" - if you don't get all
the features it's just because it was either crippled or removed. It's not
like there are seven or eight distinct operating systems , rather, seven or
eight distinct levels of crippling - that's all. As a matter of fact, the
full retail Basic DVD -ROM will probably have all the Ulitmate software but
the product key will tell the install routine to cripple the installation
into the "Basic" format.

This is not a criticism of Microsoft marketing - they can do as they please
pretty much - but let's call a spade a spade.

And as far as marketing goes, it probably a very cunning and profitable idea
[even if it is somewhat chincy cheap on their part in my opinion considering
they make profits greater than oil companies]. Folks may end up paying twice
or even three times for Windows .. first when they buy the computer (Basic)
... then a second time to get the Aero effects enabled (Premium) .. then a
third time to get something only the Ultimate version enables.

But, let's face it, it looks as if Vista will be a pretty cool system. It
will be a welcome update with a better security model. Malware writers will
have a harder time with Vista and wide scale adoption of Vista will go a
long way to keep the Internet safer in many ways.

 

[Pete]

x-no-archive: yes

I see most of you understand what a "business" is. Thats good. You have
choices still too. You don't to buy vista. You don't have to buy a Mac.
And
you don't have to install linux. What you haven't realized is that the
answer
to your problems is simply using xp for your work stuff and getting over
it.
Yes, I am talking about Pete's "problem". Vista isn't crippled, why would
they cripple what they spent years to make? You have a choice, you aren't
being forced into anything. You could alwasy install MS-DOS if you got
bored
and hate vista.

The point is that it is a business. And its a good business. They have the
majority of the market for a reason. Don't complain that microsoft is a
monopoly because you workplace uses windows. It is your company's fault
they
use windows. They made that choice. Now you have a choice as well. Don't
complain about having choices.

I know you won't believe this, but believe it or not, Microsoft doesn't
owe
you anything. Yup, thats right. Microsoft doesn't have to give you a free
upgrade, they don't have to give you all those pretty features for free,
just
like you don't get cruise control or a V8 engine in your car at the base
price. "Oh no, my car is crippled, they put a V6 engine when they could
have
put a V8!". Just like you can choose another car by spending more, you can
choose vista home premium over vista home basic. That is how businesses
work.
They offer many services, they want you to buy the most expensive thing
there.

You know, I think I wrote too much already. Thats what you get for making
me
ready 43 posts to get through this nonsense.

Mac is for those who think they are "special" and have too much money, and
Linux is for those in denial. Windows has pretty windows, what could be
better than that?

Ummm, if any part of this seems harsh or mean to any group of people or
person, I meant it in the nicest possible way.

No offense taken. Just a disagreement among honest people. Thanks.
-Pete

 

[jonah]

x-no-archive: yes


No offense taken. Just a disagreement among honest people. Thanks.
-Pete

I don't think MSFT has a monopoly as such, they have a lot of power
based on market share but thats not a monopoly as such there are
viable alternatives just not "easy" alternatives. The EU will hurt
MSFT more and more until they comply with EU demands but, I won't get
into that it would take a book, suffice it to say the EU detests MSFT
and they have more money / power, and they will get what they want
eventually. While its not important to the US consumer directly it is
entirely possible that US consumers will benefit by default as EU spec
OSs make their way back across the pond in far less restricted
versions, and we all know that hacked versions of Vista will be around
on usenet weeks before the final release, lets not kid ourselves.

I agree that MAC should allow their OSs to run on standard hardware,
this would IMO make huge inroads into MSFTs market share overnight.
WGA for instance is already subject to class action and being
backpedaled on visibly, if Leopard was an straight swap for Windows
guess what I would install, and MSFT would be forced to have a major
re-think on what they can and cannot foist on the consumer at every
level which is not a bad thing.

Linux distros are not perfect, they are not as user friendly as the
Linux community likes to pretend, you need to be dedicated to get even
the easiest Linux distro bent to your will which takes hours of
frustration and battling with obscure GUIs and command line codes.
Having said that Windows Vista Networking is the absolute pits and
although I can set up Samba / NFS sharing with ease now I still have
not got Vista to share folders properly - thats pathetic.I would say
that Linux is worth learning, not in great detail but enough to get by
with confidence, then it becomes an entirely viable second line OS. I
use my SuSE 10 to surf and DL from iffy, unknown sites and to handle e
mail thereby keeping my XP systems safer. There is also WINE which
runs a very large amount of WinXP apps directly on a Linux box, best
of both worlds but it needs Linux setting up correctly first.

As to the versions of Vista, I am a bit confused as to how many, I do
not like the overbearing security stuff where Admin is not really
Admin and I am suspicious of the way MSFT still insists on embedding
things like IE and Winmail deeply in the OS.

I will get a copy of the top version of Vista for work purposes but it
will never become my premier system, that will stay XP unless MAC port
to generic hardware. No2 system will be SuSE or Ubuntu and Vista will
remain a test system to help me fix client machines.

Finally as a European citizen I am politically right of Attilla the
Hun and I have no problem with MSFT making money, that is what they do
and they have done a vast service to the globe making computing
relatively cheap, reliable and universal, I do object when they take
the piss though.

Jonah

 

[Ground Cover]

XP Pro x64 is actually different. The others are variations on a theme.

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

I repeat. Vista is no more crippled than XP where you have:

XP Starter
XP Home
XP Pro
XP Media Center Edition
XP Home N
XP Pro N
XP Pro x64

So is Vista Home Basic a crippled Ultimate or is Vista Ultimate an enhanced
Home Basic?

Answer: Neither. The sku's are simply what they are.

Bad analogy - why? There's basically only one "Vista" - if you don't get
all
the features it's just because it was either crippled or removed. It's not
like there are seven or eight distinct operating systems , rather, seven
or
eight distinct levels of crippling - that's all. As a matter of fact, the
full retail Basic DVD -ROM will probably have all the Ulitmate software
but
the product key will tell the install routine to cripple the installation
into the "Basic" format.

This is not a criticism of Microsoft marketing - they can do as they
please
pretty much - but let's call a spade a spade.

And as far as marketing goes, it probably a very cunning and profitable
idea
[even if it is somewhat chincy cheap on their part in my opinion
considering
they make profits greater than oil companies]. Folks may end up paying
twice
or even three times for Windows .. first when they buy the computer
(Basic)
.. then a second time to get the Aero effects enabled (Premium) .. then a
third time to get something only the Ultimate version enables.

But, let's face it, it looks as if Vista will be a pretty cool system. It
will be a welcome update with a better security model. Malware writers
will
have a harder time with Vista and wide scale adoption of Vista will go a
long way to keep the Internet safer in many ways.

 

[Pete]

x-no-archive: yes

Well, Pete- the situation will remain the same until there is a viable
alternative to Microsoft. You want to regulate something
just because it is the biggest? Out of all the software companies
in the world, and all the throngs of people who work on Linux worldwide-
until someone steps up to the plate and makes a better OS that is
also user friendly- things will *not* change. Think of all the brilliant
minds
on this planet, especially in countries like Japan. Why hasn't someone,
some company risen up and made a Windows killer? What are they
waiting for? You tell me.


-Michael

The lead time has given MS an unbeatable software base advantage.
-Pete

 

[Zapper]

You are right of course..

They should only ship 1 version of the software, that would be the best for
everyone involved, right?

TOOL

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

XP Pro x64 is the same as the rest of the XP line. It is feature identical
with XP Pro x86. The only differences are those things requried to run
32bit software in a 64bit environment and the capacity to use greater
resources.

 

[Ground Cover]

Or Answer: Both. The sku's are simply what they are. Ohmmmmmmmmmmmmm

All / Nothing Is Not / Is

Be here now.

Touch this dot . and smile.

 

[Ground Cover]

Did you touch the dot?

 

[Pete]

x-no-archive: yes

Yes indeed.

You are right of course..

They should only ship 1 version of the software, that would be the best
for everyone involved, right?

TOOL

 

[Pete]

x-no-archive: yes

There is too a spoon.

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

What the h*ll are you talking about? You and Pete are just spouting
gibberish.