Why cant MS

Actually Intel had the choice to just use the GMA 950 to run Aero-although not nearly as capable as the x3100, it could still do it. But of course they see that they have an crapload of GMA 915's to get out the door before the new year, so they figure "hey let's do both." Microsoft was, IMO, pretty stupid to lower the graphics requirements just so Intel could get rid of old stock. I concure that the end user's experience should never be lowered, just to help a partner meet quota. Hopefully, they've learned from this experience and have maintained a little bit greater distance between themselves and partners.

Intel should have ensured that their part of creating the optimum end user experience was top notch, instead of worrying so much about their pocketbook. Period.

 

Both are wrong.

Vista is based on Server 2003's kernel. or you can say the XP kernel, cause they all are like siblings in one big family

The hardware support problems originated from Vista's new display device driver model, among other things. Otherwise it shares much in common with XP, incase you didn't notice the difference when you look through the control panel.

@ OP: You can cross your fingers and hope they backport that taskbar! I find it highly unlikely though, since it would break all sorts of programs. Funny how people want change and then complain when app Combatability takes a nose dive.

This is true though.

 

Ahh, the sweet voice of reasonableness! In the meantime, everyone else might want to go take a gander at the Wikipedia page that compares_Windows_versions to get a better idea of which iterations share a kernel or codebase with which others - it's quite informative, really!

 

ahhh i definitely don't think they say its garbage... ever see the mojave experiment?

 

I did, I also saw the Apple commercial. 4 for advertising, 1 to fix vista. You really think that amt would fix vista? Oh, your right, lets move all of it to advertising. And what do you get? You get the Mojave experiment. haha

go figure.

 

So your basing your judgment of Vista on apple commercials? Epic Fail.

 

Yeah, I seem to recall them paying the participants to say good things about Vista - oh wait, they didn't. Vista has already been fixed, it is called SP1. Maybe Apple hasn't seen it yet which is funny because it alone has a larger marketshare than Apple does altogether.

 

Apple still has such a small market share, Microsoft really doesn't consider them a major threat.....yet (according to Bill gates like 3-4 months ago anyway) I don't think MS puts much stock into what apple says for this reason good for them cause apples suck, and are actually more prone to hacking etc. that windows is, its just a misconception that applies are 100% safe. wrong.

 

Apple deriding Vista in that commercial is quite silly since why can't you just say "Apple should put more money into Snow Leopard so that it's has as many features as Leopard".


Apple spends a crapload on advertising and the second MS does something, they get all butthurt

 

They way Apple is advertising against MS is just obnoxious.

If Macs were so good, why aren't more people buying them?

The iPhone is about the only good thing to come from Apple, and it wasn't even good until 3G and the 2.1 firmware.

 

Last I checked they have about 20 percent of the laptop market and about 35 percent of the revenue share (due to overpriced components). Apple has been growing their business at a healthy rate with high margins per unit. To say they are not taking Apple as a threat is not likely. You also still have a majority of businesses that are still exercising their downgrade rights for XP and refuse to use Vista on new or upgraded systems. That with the fact some are going as far as leaving MS for Apple and you will have a worried MS for sure. I think MS will react by finally doing something they are not good at.. LISTENING. I am convinced that W7 will be leaner coded OS. It will boot faster and most definitely take less memory and HD space to install. This is not a option for MS at this point. Maybe the apple threat is not enough for them to do this but their business customers that are telling them they don't want or will ever install vista is something they will listen to.

Bill may be saying that Apple is no threat but that's just his poker face if you ask me. The collimation of Apples success in grabbing more market share, businesses rejecting vista, and Vista's disastrous start on weak systems with inadequate GPU and driver support will no doubt bring us an OS that people WILL want. And I am thinking that 7 will indeed be here before Christmas next next year. MS has much at stake at this point.

 

Everyone at my work is using Vista now without any issues. I've been playing around with Win 7 and so far it seems very nice. A lot more control over how the OS works instead of taking a broad approach to everything.

 

The problem is all the businesses still running legacy software and hardware that don't want to upgrade.

How is the industry supposed to move forward if all the old stuff is still supported?

 

In a office place I can see vista working ok. How about medical? Or manufacturing? I have not seen any vista machines running in any of the X-ray rooms I have been at.. or the image readers servers. The IT department says that the pacs system can't handle vista.. not even close. When I worked at Sennheiser they told me the specialized software could not run on Vista.. barely getting it to work on XP as it is. And that stuff was hugely processor intensive and the extra bloat of vista would cut into the cycle time in testing microphones what have you. But the last I checked a few months back it was still around 60 percent of businesses NOT moving over to vista. Its a big problem for MS. They cover up the numbers buy not telling how many are exercising those XP downgrade rights. The college I am at just bought all new PC's that are all running XP PRO. And this just in the last month clearly two years after Vista's release.. The campus was still having major networking issues with vista and they finally gave up trying.

 

The real issue is businesses don't see the cost/benefit of those upgrades. I use XP and Vista.. Both are good for home use for my needs. But Vista has not made anything more productive for me. Vista takes ALLOT longer for me to tweak after a clean install. I spent a couple of days in msconfig, services.msc and many other areas in the registry to cut out services and bloat just to get it to a usable state. My HP DV6500t was shipped with vista and the oem version of vista was pathetic. I still wish I could lean it out more but I think it will take another SP from MS to gets things speeded up.

The bottom line is vista is much the same as XP.. Its provides little new for the user but demands much more in hardware. For somebody in a small business or home this may not be a big deal. For a hospital or other large business its a pain to upgrade for something that will not provide any more productivity or will effect the bottom line.

MS biggest blunder was waiting too long to get vista out. In those 6 years there was soo much legacy software generated for XP. And then they muffed up the vista launch royally. They will probably get it right with W7 but it will come when businesses are soft and budgets for IT departments are tight.

 

That is, ultimately, why XP and _Vista are both Frankensteins - a perverse blend of the up-to-date and antediluvian legacy support, and thus why so much of what goes on under the hood is, in essence, a kludge. Unfortunately, since Microsoft's business model depends on making profits at the margin with extremely high-volume licensing, their product development is driven, ultimately, by the needs of enterprise users, not individual consumer users.

Worse yet, because Microsoft keeps trying to reinvent the OS-version of Musak (designed to offend none, but ends up offending all), both enterprise and individual users lose out in the end.

Would that Microsoft would simply give up the fetish for trying to invent one unified OS that will work for all needs, and simply fork the OS at a suitable point and go down the path of two independently developed OSes - an enterprise OS and an individual/consumer user OS. Given the ability to port documents and other datafiles between various different OSes now (and particularly since Microsoft's engineers will have full access to the underlying source code for both OSes, obviating the reverse-engineering issue that bedevils most cross-platform attempts, like Wine for linux), I doubt if the compatibility issues that would arise by having two independent OSes would cause any more fuss than the current Frankensteins have caused.

 

Don't know where your getting your numbers from but they don't have 20% market share, at least not in the desktop/Laptop market which is what I was refering too - maybe in the overall electronic market since they have a huge share of the MP3 player market etc.

However, just computers OS's not 20% currently MAC OS's have about a 6-7% market share, with XP taking around 70% and Vista about 15% the rest is other OS'es w/ MS OS's owning over 90% of the market..

(was surprised vista is still so low

Computer sales you can kinda extrapalate that if most MAC user use a MAC OS (and don't install Windows) that Apple owns about 7% of the computer sales compared to PC's owning about 90%.

 

What are you talking about? The guy asked if I saw the mojave experiment. I said yes, but I also saw the apple commercial. Your point?

The mojave experiment is just a weak attempt to point the blame on the consumers. Almost as bad as the Seinfield commercial. haha

 

How is it bad? It proved a point, that people believe whatever they hear with no experience themselves.

 

atbnet is right.

One guy in the Mojave experiment even said... "I've never used it before, I heard it was so bad, blah blah..." Later... he says this... "Wow, this is great! Oh... it's Vista? Hmm. I guess it's all about using it yourself."

Ignorance is bliss.

 

Well obviously the rumors came from somewhere. You can't take vista as it is now, and compare it to when it first came out and then blame everyone for thinking it sucks. That's MS fault for releasing earlier version of VISTA in the 1st place.

People heard the Vista sucks because of their original experience with the early releases. You can't throw in Vista SP1 fix and spit on the consumer face saying they were wrong..

That's like China saying their toys are safe since they remove the lead from the paint and than spitting on the consumer for listening to the "rumors"..

 

Uh, guys - teacher's (I mean mod's) coming, hows about we all stop arguing XP vs. _Vista, ok? Or do we all want another fine thread cut down in the prime of life?

 

Your analogy misses the point. It would be like them proving there was no lead in the product with which to begin. I have used Vista since it was launched and the problems were mostly baseless. People either had it on old *** computers or didn't like the drastic change. The rest just listened to all of the naysayers and decided it sucked without ever using it.

 

So your're saying vista never had any problems and sp1 didn't fix anything at all? haha. Imma stop arguing with you.

Even though MS stated and have accepted Vista is trash. haha. Moving on to WIN7.

 

No nothing is perfect with the first release build, but compared to XP pre SP it was far ahead. People were ready to call it the next Windows ME. You must have bought into the hyperbole. How is creating another OS accepting it as trash? You do realize Microsoft released a new OS every two to three years before XP was launched. They are just back on the normal product cycle.

 

Win7 won't have many bugs at launch for 3 main reasons:
1. Same kernel as vista SP1/2008 (Vista s 6.0.0000, Server 08 and SP1 are 6.1.0000 and (right now) 7 is 6.1.8xxx)
2. At the pre-beta stage it is now, they finished the kernel/API and added some new features that may not even be kept in the final version. Since the API is finished and been released to developpers, they won't have any excuses or not having their drivers ready
3. The public beta that will be launched this winter or spring will be feature complete,so 7 will be undergoing a full year of testing.

 

Let's not turn this thread into a flame war, thanks.