F
flaming-o
Vista shows that those who run Microsoft are stuck in the Windows 9x
mentality of endless upgrade cycles. They failed to grasp that during the
adaption of XP, and as a result of the actually quite good quality of XP,
computers became a part of everyday personal and business life.
The arbitrary changes to the Mac platform have come home to roost: Adobe is
not working on a 64 bit version of Photoshop for the Mac OS because of
uncertainty about the platform. And Photoshop, if you are a moron about the
realities of color management like most Mac users-is the only dubious excuse
for the Mac platform to exist.
When Vista came out most people were satisfied with their XP software,
boxes and peripherals.
Users do not switch stable staples without good reason. Unless they are Mac
users.
There is no rational, in the sense that Economists define rational, reason
for the vast majority of the XP installed base to switch to Vista. There are
overarching reasons not to switch to Vista.
Despite Microsoft's lame crowing about stability and security the real world
experience of Vista, presuming it will work on one's
machine/network/installed program base, is not better than XP, merely an
arbitrarily different interface.
Interface changes are terrifying to those who barely can cope with the
interface they already use.
Add to that the fact that Vista does not work on a large number of perfectly
useful machines, is incompatible with some programs and vendors will not
supply drivers for perfectly functional existing peripherals and you have
the disaster that is Vista.
With the US economy tanking Microsoft is really going to face crunch time
with Vista. What business is going to waste money changing over to Vista?
The biggest thing Microsoft can do for Vista is to alter it to work with XP
drivers for existing peripherals and allow the XP interface to be used on
the Vista engine.
In which case they might as well ditch Vista and continue to sell XP.
mentality of endless upgrade cycles. They failed to grasp that during the
adaption of XP, and as a result of the actually quite good quality of XP,
computers became a part of everyday personal and business life.
The arbitrary changes to the Mac platform have come home to roost: Adobe is
not working on a 64 bit version of Photoshop for the Mac OS because of
uncertainty about the platform. And Photoshop, if you are a moron about the
realities of color management like most Mac users-is the only dubious excuse
for the Mac platform to exist.
When Vista came out most people were satisfied with their XP software,
boxes and peripherals.
Users do not switch stable staples without good reason. Unless they are Mac
users.
There is no rational, in the sense that Economists define rational, reason
for the vast majority of the XP installed base to switch to Vista. There are
overarching reasons not to switch to Vista.
Despite Microsoft's lame crowing about stability and security the real world
experience of Vista, presuming it will work on one's
machine/network/installed program base, is not better than XP, merely an
arbitrarily different interface.
Interface changes are terrifying to those who barely can cope with the
interface they already use.
Add to that the fact that Vista does not work on a large number of perfectly
useful machines, is incompatible with some programs and vendors will not
supply drivers for perfectly functional existing peripherals and you have
the disaster that is Vista.
With the US economy tanking Microsoft is really going to face crunch time
with Vista. What business is going to waste money changing over to Vista?
The biggest thing Microsoft can do for Vista is to alter it to work with XP
drivers for existing peripherals and allow the XP interface to be used on
the Vista engine.
In which case they might as well ditch Vista and continue to sell XP.