"come down your throat"

[Pez D Spencer]

i thought this was an odd quote:

"Anderson speculated that the reorganization is also sending a message
to partner companies furious about Vista delays that may cost the
industry "billions." "So many people have been hurt by this current
delay that if you didn't do some kind of reorg, the industry would come

down your throat," he said."

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2002885561_microsoft24.html

 

[Leythos]

i thought this was an odd quote:

"Anderson speculated that the reorganization is also sending a message
to partner companies furious about Vista delays that may cost the
industry "billions." "So many people have been hurt by this current
delay that if you didn't do some kind of reorg, the industry would come

down your throat," he said."

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2002885561_microsoft24.html

The bigger question is why does the industry think that it's a good idea
to push a new OS on people at Christmas time when they should be holding
off and introducing it slowly so that they work out the bugs so that the
first Service Pack can be released before most home users even consider
it.

The delay will mean many less problems for users, which equates to less
problems for the vendors, which equates to less expense for them and
happier customers.

 

[Pez D Spencer]

why do i need vista, anyway? i'm just going to disable all the
bullshit os x knockoff parts, anyway! not that os x is bad--when i
worked for apple, i was on it 8 hours a day.

xp is just fine by me. xp does everything i could want it to do short
of playing games...for that, i'll use my xbox or ps2...and 360 when i
squirrel away enough to get it AND oblivion.

 

[John Waller]

That's an understandable technical perspective.

The marketers will not see it that way at all.
Christmas is by far the biggest sales period for any retailer and
pre-Christmas Vista would have caused a huge spike in the sale of new
computers.

 

[David Candy]

"I won't ..." is the biggest lie told by men.

 

[NoStop]

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2002885561_microsoft24.html

The bigger question is why does the industry think that it's a good idea
to push a new OS on people at Christmas time when they should be holding
off and introducing it slowly so that they work out the bugs so that the
first Service Pack can be released before most home users even consider
it.

The delay will mean many less problems for users, which equates to less
problems for the vendors, which equates to less expense for them and
happier customers.

Sadly, for a guy that claims to be around computers for so long, it's really
hard to believe that you have yet to clue into what MickeyMouse and its
releases are all about. It has nothing to do with bringing out new and
better and more innovative products. It's all about the bottom line. It's
called "marketing" and that is what pushes MickeyMouse forward and all
their associates that participate in the process of "selling" technology to
the public. Of course a delay before the busiest sales period of the year -
Xmas - is going to get alot of these blood suckers in a knot. You can be
sure that MickeyMouse didn't want to have to delay the release like this.
They did because frankly they have long since lost control of the code base
of this bloated "operating system" of some 50 millions lines of patched
code. MickeyMouse has a very serious problem on their hands and they could
delay Fista for another year and still have those problems. It's going to
come out full of bugs and problems. And you can quote me on this, say 3
months after Fista's release and after end-users have had the time to put
it to some real tests.

Fista, whenever it finally comes out is going to be THE tipping point for a
groundswell of computer users who will finally say "enough is enough" and
move on to a real operating system.


--
From a Wintard helping another Wintard with his Windoze Problem:
"You might also want to try one of the numerous EXCELLENT
registry cleaners, and perhaps a ram washer."
View Some Common Linux Desktops ...
http://linclips.crocusplains.com/index.php

 

[Leythos]

Sadly, for a guy that claims to be around computers for so long, it's really
hard to believe that you have yet to clue into what MickeyMouse and its
releases are all about.

Based on what you've said, and what I said, it appears I have a lot of
it right. It's about sales and sales are made to happy customers and by
new customers that have friends that are happy with the product. So, a
delay to make the product more stable/secure means more sales for MS.

It has nothing to do with bringing out new and
better and more innovative products. It's all about the bottom line. It's
called "marketing" and that is what pushes MickeyMouse forward and all
their associates that participate in the process of "selling" technology to
the public. Of course a delay before the busiest sales period of the year -
Xmas - is going to get alot of these blood suckers in a knot.

Blood suckers being the Vendors selling computers with the new OS
installed on it - the ones that don't care if anything works as long as
they sucker you into purchasing it.

MS is doing them a favor by not releasing Vista until it's ready.

You can be
sure that MickeyMouse didn't want to have to delay the release like this.
They did because frankly they have long since lost control of the code base
of this bloated "operating system" of some 50 millions lines of patched
code. MickeyMouse has a very serious problem on their hands and they could
delay Fista for another year and still have those problems. It's going to
come out full of bugs and problems. And you can quote me on this, say 3
months after Fista's release and after end-users have had the time to put
it to some real tests.

I never install a new OS on a production machine for the first 6 months
it's on the shelves, only a fool would. I think the delays are good for
MS and it's marketing and it's stability.

I think the biggest problem for users will not be Vista itself, but the
hardware necessary to have a fast machine - just like with XP, people
will try and install it on systems that meet the "Minimum" spec and then
wonder why they get the Minimum performance - not to mention the fact
that they didn't have a valid reason to upgrade in the first place.

 

[Stubby]

Many people are saying, "I don't want a new machine unless it is 64-bits
and running Vista." So computer sales will be low this year. (Sell
your stock in Dell!). Of course "64-bit" will not make anything faster
except a few video and audio processing programs. So it just appeals to
the techies with vivid imaginations.

 

[Alias]

MS is doing them a favor by not releasing Vista until it's ready.

Sure. When was the last time MS released an OS to the public that didn't
need a new version or service pack? I'm going to wait until SP2, when
Vista really will be "ready".

Alias

 

[Bill Braun]

I was talking with one of the folks in our IT department and without
knowing what sources he reads, he thinks that there is a revolt in the
making about the practice of releasing beta ware and letting customers
shape it into the "final release", which we all now know as a Service
Pack. I sensed that corporate customers are starting to protest loudly
enough for developers to listen. We'll see.

Bill B.

 

[Mistoffolees]

Sure. When was the last time MS released an OS to the public that didn't
need a new version or service pack? I'm going to wait until SP2, when
Vista really will be "ready".

Alias

At least that is an improvement. It used to be wait until
SP4 or newer. But the point with Windows Vista, is it going
to be Windows NT4-SP5.2 (with XP being NT4-SP5.1 and 2000,
NT4-SP5) or Windows NT SP6.0?

 

[Mistoffolees]

Scratch the above...just got in my morning coffee. Is Vista
going to be looked at as Windows NT6.0 or Windows NT5.2 (or
Windows XP-SP3)?

 

[Plato]

Sure. When was the last time MS released an OS to the public that didn't
need a new version or service pack? I'm going to wait until SP2, when
Vista really will be "ready".

A "service pack" is just the new name MS created for upgraded versions
of its OS's.

 

[Mike Williams]

A "service pack" is just the new name MS created for upgraded versions
of its OS's.

<Yawn>

 

[Mike Williams]

A "service pack" is just the new name MS created for upgraded versions
of its OS's.

<Yawn>

 

[nubian]

At least that is an improvement. It used to be wait until
SP4 or newer. But the point with Windows Vista, is it going
to be Windows NT4-SP5.2 (with XP being NT4-SP5.1 and 2000,
NT4-SP5) or

Windows NT 6.0?
That's it! Give the lady a cigar!