Toolbox
Share on facebook Reddit del.icio.us Save to Yahoo! bookmarks Slashdot it Save to Windows live Save to MySpace science news feed Add to google
- size +

From this Vista, it looks like same old Microsoft

By Lou Dolinar, Technology / Software
Just when you thought it was safe to convert to Windows Vista, Microsoft changes its mind, again. This soap opera is getting to be a little old.
In early October, Microsoft admitted that it didn't discontinue XP in June after all, and would continue selling via system builders through January 2009. This is accomplished via "downgrade" rights: Dell, for example, will sell you a system with Windows XP Professional installed, but it also includes the latest version of Vista. Meanwhile, you can still buy boxed XP at Amazon, among other places. The June deadline in itself was an extension, and there's some suggestion that, for corporate customers at least, Microsoft may extend the extension of the extension.

Looking a little further down the line, Microsoft may make Vista irrelevant with the release of Windows 7, which could come as early as 2010. Does anyone seriously expect MIS departments to invest in conversion costs and new hardware, a Vista requirement, in the middle of a recession?

As I wrote a while back, Vista is slower and less compatible than XP, but it does cost more. There are some security improvements, but that doesn't matter to the corporate crowd, which deals with security institutionally. Home users should care, but all most notice the more annoying pop-up warnings and that it doesn't always work with their favorite peripherals.

I'm starting to feel sorry for Microsoft. If it were a person, we'd stage an intervention. At every turn, it seems the world's biggest software company shoots itself in the foot. Does anyone even remember the whole point of Vista? Vista incorporated soup-to-nuts digital rights management, including hardware requirements. Alarmed by Apple's success with iTunes and the iPod, Microsoft decided to try to move in the home entertainment market. Vista would do everything, play your music, tune your TV, record high-def movies - you name it. Vista also would stream this big digital goulash into any room of the house via media extenders.

How many people do you know who use xVista as a home entertainment center? It all sort of worked, but Vista was so late in arriving, the cable and satellite industries built their own proprietary entertainment computers, aka set-top boxes, complete with hard drives, peripherals, networking and - boy that must hurt - usually some version of Linux as the operating system. Apple still rules the roost in music. Meanwhile, Microsoft's critics argue that DRM lies at the root of Vista's inefficiencies and instability when filling its traditional roles.

Then there's the lawsuit. Microsoft blew the deadline for getting Vista into the hands of system builders in time for Christmas 2006, while at the same announcing it would be available January 2007. Rather than sacrifice holiday sales, Microsoft began touting PCs as "ready for Vista." So you'd buy now and upgrade for free in the New Year. Well, some PCs were ready and some only ran the most feeble version of the software, and along came the lawyers. Adding insult to injury, discovery motions in the case turned up memos from Microsoft indicating the company lowballed hardware requirements to help Intel sell more product and that its own executives were confused by the hardware it needed to run.

Next came the service pack fiasco. Corporate buyers like to wait for the first service pack release of a new operating system, the service pack being the final cleanup of bugs. Not to worry, said Microsoft, Vista was so great that it wouldn't need a major service pack update. Oops, Vista was so sufficiently problematic that Microsoft was eventually forced to release a service pack in February 2008 to fix the problem. More ice please: The new SP slowed down Vista; the concurrent release for XP sped it up. Corporate buyers have stayed away in droves.

Even more bad awaits. Microsoft, arguing against expansion of the class-action lawsuit, says it doesn't know who was misled by its ad campaign - clearly, a lot of hardware did work fine with Vista. No problem say the opposing lawyers, just use Windows update to automatically notify all owners of Vista that they may be eligible for damages.

I don't know what to say anymore about Vista. Its growing pains aren't necessarily any worse than earlier Microsoft releases, and I go all the way back to MS-DOS days. All have broken legacy hardware and software, and have typically run slower than their predecessors. You can look at this one of two ways: Has it always been this bad, and was Microsoft able to stomp dissenters? Or has the Internet, in full flower when Vista arrived, merely given everyone a megaphone to complain about it?

Still, if you're happy with your PC, it may just pay to wait for Windows 7. That or interview the Mac guy.

___

(Lou Dolinar writes a technology column for Newsday and hosts Lou's Day, "designed to help normal people unsnarl their computers," at http://www.dolinar.com . He can be reached at lou at dolinar.com.)

___

© 2008, Newsday.
Visit Newsday online at http://www.newsday.com/
Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.

» Next Article in Technology - Software: Why we'll all soon forget about Google's Android

would you recommend this story?

 

User Rating

3.6 out of 5 after 39 total votes
  • not at all
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • highly

Leave a Comment or

Rank filter

Move the slider to adjust rank threshold, so that you can hide some of the comments.
Posted by Bob_Kob 10/15/08 18:23
Rank: 4.2/5 after 5 votes
Well done sir.
Posted by dirk_bruere 10/15/08 18:55
Rank: 5/5 after 3 votes
Just got a new quad core machine. Ported my old copy of XP onto it, from 2003. I'll consider updating to Windows 7 SP1 in around 3 years
Posted by out7x 10/16/08 03:04
Rank: 4/5 after 2 votes
The only value of microsoft is its integration of operating system with applications. I'm still waiting on the Linux world.
Posted by gmurphy 10/16/08 04:50
Rank: 3.5/5 after 2 votes
Linux clarity 2.6.22 #4 SMP Thu May 1 13:41:38 IST 2008 i686 GNU/Linux. The Linux world has arrived ;->
Posted by CreepyD 10/16/08 07:16
Rank: 3.8/5 after 4 votes
The only benefit for gamers was directX 10 - that turned out to be pointless too as no games properly use it. Other than that, it runs games around 40% slower than XP from my experience.
We aren't allowed it at work either as it doesn't work with our software. Well done MS.
Posted by NotParker 10/16/08 11:07
Rank: 3.3/5 after 6 votes
Vista is faster than XP on modern PC's. It even runs fine on small netbook's.

Most of Vistas problems were bad drivers. SP1 fixed most problems.



Posted by axemaster 10/16/08 13:47
Not rated yet.
I have Vista on a very fast gaming computer. I got it for DX10, and it can run Crysis at High with fps=30 so it does very well. But get this - the OS doesn't run the GPU correctly, even with SP1. I have a 8800 GTX Nvidia card, and I love it.

The problem is that it crashes all the time, and I mean full computer death, with nothing working. The problem seems to extend to the OS, because the sound starts an infinite loop every time. I have to reboot.

When it crashes, the screen freezes and jagged white vertical lines cover the screen. Before SP1 it also had diagonal colored lines and crashed more frequently. But the problem still exists. I have diligently updated everything time and again.

Any suggestions?
Posted by xen_uno 10/16/08 16:49
Not rated yet.
I have both XP x64 and Ubuntu 8.04 x64 in a dual boot. XP x64 is what Vista should have been, maybe with a bit more massaging (ie Vista's apparently improved security and better default audio subsystem). They should have left DRM out of the OS and let the content providers worry about it.

I frankly don't care what MS does now though, as having Google involved as a contributor to Ubuntu (Linux) development is nothing but good news. Latest Ubuntu (the easiest to use and maintain Linux) still requires a bit too much computer knowledge to appeal to the masses, but that could change relatively soon after another release or 2.

FYI: Both Earth and Picasa (x64) do run better under Ubuntu tho to be perfectly fair, XP x64 is running the 32 bit versions of each.
Posted by Flakk 10/16/08 19:54
Not rated yet.
I have an HP with an Athlon 64x Triple Core and a middle of the road Nvidia card. Never had a single problem with Vista or XP. I can play all my games, and run all my software with no trouble. I guess I just lucked out.
Posted by Velanarris 10/17/08 12:49
Not rated yet.
The more features you take advantage of in Vista the more problems you'll encounter.

The majority of MS's business is the corporate and business markets. No one wants to embrace Vista as it's too fidgety for end users. The additional security would have been great but the constant prompting it employs prevents the OS from being easily platformed by itself.
Posted by Doug_Huffman 10/19/08 09:48
Not rated yet.
Posted by visual 10/20/08 03:47
Rank: 1/5 after 2 votes
... Vista is slower and less compatible...

As is the author's brain.
Seriously... why so many retards keep bashing Vista without even having tried it? Some bright light above claimed it's 40% slower... lol.

Vista is better than XP in every way except price. Even on older computers, non-aero Vista works better than XP.
Posted by aussiecarter 10/20/08 07:13
Rank: 1/5 after 1 vote
Vista often freezes up when using IE or office 2007. This occurs when performing the most basic tasks. This did not happen with XP. I sit and think during these freeze ups, "This one of the leading companies in the world, how can they get it wrong?". I wish for Google to create an OS. I am happy with Google Chrome.
Posted by Velanarris 10/20/08 19:14
Rank: 3/5 after 2 votes

As is the author's brain.
Seriously... why so many retards keep bashing Vista without even having tried it? Some bright light above claimed it's 40% slower... lol.

Vista is better than XP in every way except price. Even on older computers, non-aero Vista works better than XP.
That's just not true. If vista was better in every way it wouldn't have received as many hotfixes in the fist month as XP received in the first fiscal quarter. That's an apples to apples comparison in terms of stability.
Vista often freezes up when using IE or office 2007. This occurs when performing the most basic tasks. This did not happen with XP. I sit and think during these freeze ups, "This one of the leading companies in the world, how can they get it wrong?". I wish for Google to create an OS. I am happy with Google Chrome.


I like Google Chrome however, there are a lot of things about it, like scalability, that are rather lacking. As for the Vista freeze ups, that's more an issue with office as the same freeze ups occur in XP. There's just less overhead in XP creating less context switching, which is where you'll typically see the long pauses in action from programs.