V
Vic
PC Magazine article:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2074983,00.asp
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2074983,00.asp
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
R
Richard Urban
Article dated December 20, 2006.
How is this relevant to anything?
--
Regards,
Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)
How is this relevant to anything?
--
Regards,
Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)
F
forty-nine
Vic said:PC Magazine article:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2074983,00.asp
The article just shows that computer users have personal preferences.
If you like Linux, use it.
If you like Apple, use it.
If you like Windows, use it.
Pretty much how most consumers are.
They have personal preferences.
I prefer Windows.
I also prefer Chevy, and wouldn't buy a Ford ever again.....based on a bad
experience in the '80's.
But, if a bad experience with Windows causes you to jump ship to
Linux.....hehehe......are you in for a surprise.
N
netlink_blue
Vic said:PC Magazine article:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2074983,00.asp
I enjoy working with computers. Trying new programs, doing installs.
If my employer asked me to run a Mac computer, I would gladly do so.
I wouldn't be surprised that the Mac "experience" may feel more polished
and sophisticated. I like to think that I would be intellectually
honest enough to see the strengths (and weaknesses) of Mac OS vs.
Windows OS.
Of course, the company would foot the bill for all hardware and software
needed.
I have too much time and money invested into Windows at home to be able
to afford purchasing a Mac, repurchasing a bunch of neat software, etc.,
just to play with another OS.
Knoppix on a DVD I already have, to get a bit of Linux flavor.
y'arrb
Netlink
R
Robin
Can anyone post any Vista-related articles that DON'T date back to a year
ago, before anyone had actually run a fully-functional, patched version for
more than 24h before writing what they didn't like about it?
Honestly, where are all the One Year Later articles? Are these writers
standing pat, or ashamed to admit they were a bit hasty -- as they have been
with XP, 98, 95, and every other Windows version when it first came out..?
I find that the same people who say "stick to XP" are the same ones who said
"stick to 98SE" when XP first came out. It just isn't "cool" to like the
shiny new thing.
And I'm not even a Vista owner (yet).
ago, before anyone had actually run a fully-functional, patched version for
more than 24h before writing what they didn't like about it?
Honestly, where are all the One Year Later articles? Are these writers
standing pat, or ashamed to admit they were a bit hasty -- as they have been
with XP, 98, 95, and every other Windows version when it first came out..?
I find that the same people who say "stick to XP" are the same ones who said
"stick to 98SE" when XP first came out. It just isn't "cool" to like the
shiny new thing.
And I'm not even a Vista owner (yet).
D
David
hasty? YOU are the one who is hasty. You are making a value judgmentAre these writers
standing pat, or ashamed to admit they were a bit hasty -- as they have been
with XP, 98, 95, and every other Windows version when it first came out..?
And I'm not even a Vista owner (yet).
before even owning it! Vista has a number of irritating
characteristics. Buy your copy and then we will see how wonderful YOU
think it is.
R
Robin
David said:hasty? YOU are the one who is hasty. You are making a value judgment
before even owning it! Vista has a number of irritating characteristics.
Buy your copy and then we will see how wonderful YOU think it is.
Speaking of hasty... where, pray tell, did I so much as hint that the
product was wonderful?
What I did was ask why all the anti-Vista articles are a year old. I would
gladly read and appreciate an article - good or bad - written by someone who
didn't rush to publish something about the shiny new unpatched OS without
having run it for more than 24h. Give me one that's recent, and written by
someone who ran the OS for at least a few weeks.
If you consider that somehow unreasonable or unfair to the anti-Vista camp,
and feel this gives you the right to get frustrated, sarcastic and
borderline insulting with me, well... doesn't that say more about said camp
than you care to share?
Robin
F
flambe
There are plenty of current articles and opinion pieces in print and on the
web with regard to Vista vis a vis XP.
I don't recall reading a single comparison that favors Vista or can cite any
must-have feature of Vista.
Recently published statistics show Vista is in use on about 10 per cent of
computers. This is about double Apple's market share and about 5 times Linux
share of desktops. Vista desktops are mostly in the home as business
penetration is scant. The federal government to date has said it will not
purchase Vista.
Microsoft has little to worry about from Linux or Apple. Apple has no
product that competes in large scale network environments and there are
almost no Apple compatible business operating software packages that small
businesses run on. The inflated cost of Apple hardware, which is mostly mid
level Intel stuff, is also a no go for businesses. All of this keeps small
and large business wedded to Microsoft OSes.
Apple has hardly any presence outside the U.S. where Linux is a slightly
bigger player on desktops.
Tellingly, Microsoft has had to push back the date it will stop supplying XP
to computer vendors.
Microsoft has the power to cram Vista down end users throats, and that is
what it will require, but it will be a pyrrhic victory.
In any event, as Internet bandwidth increases the OS and locally installed
productivity programs will be less important than web based applications.I
did not believe this prediction a few years ago but now I see it as
inevitable. This is not going to happen tomorrow but bandwidth
infrastructure will gradually get to that point. Even Microsoft is
scrambling to provide a web based Office type suite.
web with regard to Vista vis a vis XP.
I don't recall reading a single comparison that favors Vista or can cite any
must-have feature of Vista.
Recently published statistics show Vista is in use on about 10 per cent of
computers. This is about double Apple's market share and about 5 times Linux
share of desktops. Vista desktops are mostly in the home as business
penetration is scant. The federal government to date has said it will not
purchase Vista.
Microsoft has little to worry about from Linux or Apple. Apple has no
product that competes in large scale network environments and there are
almost no Apple compatible business operating software packages that small
businesses run on. The inflated cost of Apple hardware, which is mostly mid
level Intel stuff, is also a no go for businesses. All of this keeps small
and large business wedded to Microsoft OSes.
Apple has hardly any presence outside the U.S. where Linux is a slightly
bigger player on desktops.
Tellingly, Microsoft has had to push back the date it will stop supplying XP
to computer vendors.
Microsoft has the power to cram Vista down end users throats, and that is
what it will require, but it will be a pyrrhic victory.
In any event, as Internet bandwidth increases the OS and locally installed
productivity programs will be less important than web based applications.I
did not believe this prediction a few years ago but now I see it as
inevitable. This is not going to happen tomorrow but bandwidth
infrastructure will gradually get to that point. Even Microsoft is
scrambling to provide a web based Office type suite.
D
dennis@home
flambe said:There are plenty of current articles and opinion pieces in print and on
the web with regard to Vista vis a vis XP.
I don't recall reading a single comparison that favors Vista or can cite
any must-have feature of Vista.
pcpro in the UK recommends vista but not as an upgrade.
www.pcpro.co.uk but it may not be on the web yet as the mag has only just
hit the shelves.
R
Richard Urban
You are comparing ALL versions of Apple (since you didn't give a Mac version
number). You are comparing ALL distributions and versions of Linux because
of the same.
Instead of comparing against Vista, compare against ALL versions of Windows
to get a truer picture of the percentages of Linux and Mac's in use today. A
damn small percentage I would say.
--
Regards,
Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)
number). You are comparing ALL distributions and versions of Linux because
of the same.
Instead of comparing against Vista, compare against ALL versions of Windows
to get a truer picture of the percentages of Linux and Mac's in use today. A
damn small percentage I would say.
--
Regards,
Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)
D
Doug Weller
On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 14:13:39 -0400, in
I skimmed through one at the train station today, I forget which magazine.
It concluded -- if you are getting a new PC, buy Vista. Maybe not
upgrade. Service Packs made a big difference to XP, they may for Vista.
Speaking of hasty... where, pray tell, did I so much as hint that the
product was wonderful?
What I did was ask why all the anti-Vista articles are a year old. I would
gladly read and appreciate an article - good or bad - written by someone who
didn't rush to publish something about the shiny new unpatched OS without
having run it for more than 24h. Give me one that's recent, and written by
someone who ran the OS for at least a few weeks.
I skimmed through one at the train station today, I forget which magazine.
It concluded -- if you are getting a new PC, buy Vista. Maybe not
upgrade. Service Packs made a big difference to XP, they may for Vista.
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. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.