Windows is so slow, but why?

The software company's effort to launch a new version of its OS might be hindered by its past success and its bundling strategy.
The New York Times

The story "Windows is so slow, but why?" published March 26, 2006 at 9:00 AM is no longer available on CNET News.

Content from The New York Times expires after 7 days.

[TyTyson]

Isn't it obvious?

The nature of the peecee market.<br /><br />1000s of diverse systems, legacy code, dumbing down for the <br />masses, fundamental design flaws can't be fixed with patch <br />upon patch.<br /><br />Mutton dressed as lamb.<br /><br />Developing Windows is like trying to turn a tanker.<br /><br />OS X is leaving Windows in the dust, but as we all now Joe Public <br />is dumb and it takes time for them to wake up. They will and <br />they are slowly. Just watch the market share over the next few <br />years.<br /><br />With Vista, as I said over a year ago, Microsoft will truly <br />humiliate themselves. It must be embarrasing to release an OS <br />after having removed feature after feature that Apple users have <br />been using for 2 years or so.<br /><br />Apple will be releasng Mac OS X 10.5 at VERY nearly the same <br />time as Vista (ot maybe even before at this rate - hah!) to rub <br />even more salt in the wounds of peecee freaks.<br /><br />It's a sad embarrasing time to be a peecee user trying to defend <br />their misplaced purchase. To prevent further ridicule I would <br />suggest joining those of us who think for ourselves and do <br />RESEARCH before buying a tool rather than just buying what <br />everyone else has and by looking at the price on the tag. doh.<br /><br />Start your research here.<br /><br /><a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.apple.com/macosx/quicktours/viewall.html" target="_newWindow">http://www.apple.com/macosx/quicktours/viewall.html</a>

[stealt403]

it sure is...

For all of windows' flaws, its still not a useless or crippled OS as you seem to portray it. Among other reasons, I'd rather not be tied in to apple's overpriced and few pieces of hardware. <br /><br />Why exactly do you want everyone to switch to mac os? If Joe Public is dumb, and he switched to Mac OS, wouldn't that make Mac the dumb OS?<br /><br />I'm not sure how you come up with your masterful predictions for the future. I wouldn't be so sure that MS will be humiliated since they already have &gt;90% of the OS market. Change does not happen overnight and people are not switching to Macs at a very fast rate. Rather, most of Apple's growth is coming from its ipods and itunes. <br /><br />You said "to prevent further ridicule..." If all I have to put up with is your ridicule, I'm pretty sure I can deal with it. <br /><br />I think windows and mac and linux users and whoever else should go on using their OS of choice and they can think they are better then everyone else if they want. If they want to switch than by all means go for it. The market #s and $$ speak louder than the ridicule of some elitists using another system anyway.

[bradm2k]

OSX Aint the Cure

I really hate these Apple lovers always trying to flame PC's because of Windows.<br /><br />I'll be the first to admit Windows sucks but I'd rather use a PC with Linux/BSD than switch to a Mac. No backwards compatibility, limited hardware vendors, and serious lack of software titles!! I don't see how OSX is leaving Windows in the dust since I am able to do everything on my PC that you can do on your Mac. Remember Microsoft isnt allowed to include all those special tools due to the whole anti-trust thing. But it doesn't mean they don't exist. <br /><br />If you want to talk about humiliating lets talk about OSX getting hacked in under 30 minutes. How you are able to develop a BSD based OS that can be hacked so quickly is really beyond me. I think Apple is showing that thay are not really up for the challenge of the mainstream just yet. 90% of the market use Windows that doesnt mean 10% use OSX. I did research my product and found that my PC runs faster than your Mac and costs about 1/2 the price. Now who made the dumb purchase?<br /><br />OSX is good but not that good and certainly not worth the price tag. Stop being a tool and look beyond your Mac.

[alawaiblowfish]

Mac for the masses?....um, i think ill pass...

Don't get me wrong, OSX is a beautiful and asthetic operating system. It draws pretty pictures, and browses files and the web with finesse...It's a visual feast, but that's really all there is to it. When I use the computer, I want it to work for me, not give me a show. I find that win xp and one gig of ram run quickly and efficently, even on a gateway with a celeron processor. My laptop runs circles around the seldom used Powerbook G4 we have at work. In addition to the money I saved (since we all know apple laptops are expensive), I get more done with more real-world compatibility, not to mention the ever-handy "right click" (I hate that clear, microballed uni-mouse). <br />I hate to say this, but the ipod and itunes are really the only "innovative" thing apple has going for them at the time.

[Lindy01]

What

features do MAC's have that were ripped out of Vista?<br /><br />What can a MAC do that a PC cant do right now??

[Bob Brinkman]

Ty, please save me along with my pathetic comrads

Oh great and powerful Tyson, you have given us the gift of Mac to replace our PeeCEEz. Now if you holy hand could provide us with the infrastucture and custom apps nessisary to run a multi national coroporation on a single OS we would gladly sacrafice this fattened lamb in your blessed name. <br /><br />Death to the non-believers!

[SeizeCTRL]

ahhh!

You forgot your disclaimer: "This comment brought to you by Apple"<br /><br />But it was a nice try for a fan boy. Only reason I run XP is for games. I have a G4 for music and a Linspire box for just doing web stuff.<br /><br />Until Apple pulls in more games, it will never even come close to catching Windows.

[NRecob]

Message has been deleted.

[Charleston Charge]

Until Macs become more affordable

Joe Public will still be sleeping.

[zackinma]

Don't think so

Yea. <br /><br />I'll rmember to buy a mac next time. You know, when i set up a workstation for someone who needs to run autocad... oops thats right no support for mac... well what about solid works... oops no support for mac... Oh i know, how about if we need to use primevara expedition... oops no support for mac.. Lets talk group policy. I run a corporate network and want to lock down workstations and assign specific permissions for resources on their workstations... oops no support in macs. <br /><br />Blow up macs all you want as the cure all for all computer ills. Until mac has the support of the REST OF THE INDUSTRY they will always be second fiddle to microsoft.

[bemenaker]

Isn't it obvious?

When you see pathetic flamebait that has one purpose, to start an argument. As much as I love /. this kind of drivel is what makes it hard to follow discussions there. Shame CNET doesn't just delete this entire thread.

Good!

Good!.. I am staying with W98.

[lordgrimm]

All your (user)base are belong to us!

It seems ironic that more people seem to want to run XP on Mac hardware than OS10.x on PC hardware. <br /><br />As a "PC person" I can see the attraction - wider (and usually cheaper) software base for a start... <br /><br />Seeing as Os10.x is starting to attract a lot more attention from the black hat community, the usual cry (last defence?) of Mac Fanatics everywhere of "System Security" doesn't hold a lot of water either. XP is certainly flawed - I don't claim it's perfect by any means! - but there are at least good products out there to protect it (and Microsoft's own OneCare product - integrated Spy/Mal/Virus protection looks superb so far).<br /><br />As a side note, I saw my first Mac Virus back in 1988 - it went by the name of "MacPuke" - recently I've seen far, far too many claims that "there are no Mac Viruses". Two comments from that one - first off, just because YOU haven't seen it doesn't mean it isn't out there, and secondly, just because no-one chooses to shoot at you, it doesn't mean you're bulletproof.<br /><br />But (talking of bullets)enough sniping. Welcome to XP, Mac Dudes! I just hope your Macs don't crash as much as our PC's do ;)

[Earl Benser]

Sorry, this isn't the right bus....

... it keeps going in all the wrong directions. Mac users use OS X <br />for rather obvious reasons; XP or Vixta can't compete. And there <br />is no reason to be concerned about an OS X virus until one <br />actually shows up in the wild - so far, nothing..........<br /><br />Sure, XP is adequate as an OS. Vista may be, if MS can ever get it <br />out. The article points out serious development flaws at MS; <br />these may now be fatal flaws. Time will tell.<br /><br />But I'll stick with OS X on my Mac's and XP on my PC's. That's the <br />Good and the Bad - I'll skip the Ugly.

[Zymurgist]

There's a reason...

Several actually. Not that I have any desire to, but the big reasons for running XP on Mac hardware is performance -- the hardware selected for the Mac is really well selected, works well together, and gives you a best-in-class PC. Look at the benchmarks of XP on an Intel Mac -- Mac runs Windows better than any preconfigured PC from PC vendors.<br /><br />The other reason, of course, is the more practical: so you can dual-boot your computer. That's especially important for games. It's relatively easy to get Windows games to run under Linux, but not so under Mac OS/X. However, if you ae dual-booting, you can use Mac OS/X for productivity and Windows for games.

[TyTyson]

ummm

There are no Mac OS X viruses.<br /><br />OS 9 and earlier was a different platform effectively.<br /><br />You misunderstand why people want to run Windows on Macs.

[Gromit801]

Don't Worry

.... they won't.

[Byronic]

Any fool knows Macs have better software

Even MS has admitted that Office is better on Mac, for crying out <br />loud. Yeah, you get Access bundled, but it's trash compared to <br />Filemaker, etc... etc... etc...

[Awesomebase]

Perfect Sense

Uh-huh... I see, so, you're comparing a virus that you "apparently" saw on a Mac, 18 years ago, that you didn't even specifiy did any harm with the fact that Windows has literally 90K+ viruses, many of which cause serious problems on a daily basis for millions of users. That makes sense... and here I was, thinking I was safe with my Mac machines... time to switch back to XP! Your logic is just killer funny!

[Johnny Mnemonic]

Backward Compatibility

I use Linux exclusively and I can also run win32<br />apps quite well. I can even run dos apps!<br />Backward compatibility is not the issue. It is the<br />fundamental design of the operating system that is<br />at fault. I must admit I get a certain sense of<br />satisfaction when I load a Windows virus executable <br />onto my machine and watch how ineffectual it is. <br />I also have a linux gateway running to protect Windows<br />users from themselves by scanning for virus sigs <br />and other patterns. A sad bunch these Windows users.

[Zymurgist]

You can't blame Windows users...

... for not trying something else, particularly Linux. There's a lot of anti-Linux propaganda which is very well crafted. Frankly, most people aren't going to bother looking into anything else if the benefit isn't clear.<br /><br />Linux is a good example. People believe it's complex. To be turthful, the answer is "it depends" -- you can select a distribution like Gentoo where everything is compiled specifically for the hardware on your machine to eke out every iota of performance or Lindows, where everything is point-and-click dead-simple to the point that WindowsXP looks as primitive as DOS.<br /><br />Performance? It depends. Some graphics adapters (like Nvidia and some ATI) perform much better in Linux under X than XP, but other cards, much worse. Applications: some very bloated (OpenOffice), others amazingly light-weight, efficient, and robust (Koffice).<br /><br />Application selection? Look at video editing, there's only 1/2 dozen or so NLE and real-time video editors for Linux, but there's far better support for transcoding and video playback. Office suites, there's only 6. Games? Well, mostly you have to run Windows games under Linux (thankfully most popular games run just fine under Linux).<br /><br />It can be confusing too. Linux distributions come with drivers for just about everything, which is good if you want to plug-and-play, but it also means that if you buy hardware that doesn't ship with a Linux driver -- so in the rare event you find somehting not included in your distribution you need to hunt doen the Linux driver (personally, with the exception of a scanner once, I've never seen this problem). How about the fact that Linux apps typically support keyless cut-and-paste. What's more confusing than that for those brought up on CTRL-C / CTRL-V (which is typically also supported but using a second clipboard). Multiple desktops? Vector icons and desktops? User hotkeys? Multiple scripting / macro languages for apps? Built-in encryption options? A file-manager (Explorer for Windows users) that groks SFTP, SSH, WebDAV, NFS, SMB, Netware, FTP, HTTP, compressed files, disk images, ...? Password wallets? Lots of the common features of the Linux UI have no built-in parallel in Windows, you need to purchase or download software for the same functionality -- and these things can be immensely confusing.

[rcrusoe]

The Backward compatibility curse

"Microsoft feels it can't get away with breaking compatibility"<br /><br />Which mean to me, the Windows we've got is the Windows we'll get. <br />As long as MS keeps this attitude, imo, they are doomed to <br />producing new versions of their old vulnerabilities. <br /><br />Too bad, they could do so much more.

[AlphaTwo]

It's funny how it degraded to a PC vs Mac Holy War...

Stop it with the Mac is better or PC is better crap. Seriously. The article just used Apple as a possible solution as where MS can go with windows. That is all. It was not a comparison on which OS is better.<br /><br />You know what? Let's play a game of Armchair CEO. If you were Ballmer, what would you do: Keep delaying your software years and years until it works? Or do what Apple did, say screw you to compatibility, and potentially, millions and millions of customers? There is no easy way out for Microsoft. <br /><br />"Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don't."

[TyTyson]

Exactly

There IS no easy way out for Microsoft, and that is why Apple <br />will take advantage of this situation.

[Awesomebase]

Good solutions...

Well, the problem has been that there is no incentive for MS to do better. They have 90% of the market, so there is really no where to go.<br />Yes, it would be a good thing for them to actually come up with a brand new OS. They can do it alongside development of Vista. I don't know why everybody thinks it has to be "exclusively" Windows. They can do something completely new that is more secure, faster, more efficient, and adds something truly original to their portfolio. Without taking risks, there can be no great reward. So yes, you are right, there is no easy solution, but that doesn't mean that we can't disagree with the one that they chose. Apple didn't say "screw you". They said that it is time to move on and the move has paid off for everyone. Transition is never easy. I think MS would benefit greatly from doing this. They could actually get the profits they deserve from people that constantly and blatantly copy their software instead of purchase it. I say, go ahead and cut them off. There is no compelling reason not to except for genuine simpathy. But, in real life, we don't sympathize with a jewellery thief, or a bank robber... why is it any different with software? Just because it is easier to do? That is where MS gets caught... they don't want to stand up to that group of people until they have comfortably established themselves as the defacto standard around the world. It is a risk that they are taking at the expense of timely updates and genuine innovation...

[NRecob]

Message has been deleted.

[TyTyson]

yes

You are the perfect peecee user - very representative.<br /><br />Please don't get a Mac.

[J.G.]

A sad day for Microsoft

When the New York Times publishes an article in which experts <br />nonchalantly say Windows is an inferior operating system, one feels <br />for even Bill Gates. I am no supporter of a certain Oscar nominated <br />movie, but I will borrow a line from its truly offensive theme song <br />to describe what Microsoft needs to do to Windows: "Whoop that <br />trick!" Yes, it is time to kick the current Windows to the curb and <br />start all over again.

[robertcampbell2]

Oh Please

Experts my butt. Everyone in the computer industry has an opinion on Microsoft and if it is a negative one, it will be the lead on Cnet, Zdnet, eweek and the rest of them. <br /><br />Lohr and Markoff's "article" is a blend of fact and fiction. And in case anyone is counting, every single version of Windows (and just about every other piece of damn software) has its release pushed back. It's part of the process, welcome to the real world of software. <br /><br />The fact is when you have a minicule market share, you can push out all you want. When you have 330 million users using your operating system and the vast majority of the business sector using servers, "pushing out" software takes on a whole new meaning.<br /><br />In the end it will matter little, Gates will do what is neccessary and a few years from now, the number will closing in on a half a billion.

[byl01]

We'll remember the good old days

The integer-number performance of CPUs has essentially stabilized (as it is based on clock speed). So, with the OS getting bulkier, PCs bought in 2007 may feel slower than the current ones (for office applications, anyway). Guess we'll remember the good old days of super-fast systems - 98 SE and XP.

[J.G.]

Listen to the experts

Earl, despite his dyspeptic nature, made a point that the 'we must <br />defend Microsoft' lobby is missing. The criticism of Windows in the <br />article is not coming from Apple or Linux fanboys, but from some <br />of the most prominent computer software experts in the nation. <br />They know what they are talking about. Windows bloated state due <br />to refusal to scrap old code is devastating. Instead of attacking <br />other OSes, Windows user should need to pay more attention to <br />what has happened to their own.

[capfan12]

business backlash

Do you know how much of a backlash Microsoft would face if one day they cut legacy support from businesses that have invested millions if not more in custom software that will not run on new versions of windows? <br /><br />but then again the max/linux/anti-MS lobby would just say hey look by cutting their legacy support in windows Microsoft is enforcing their monopoly by forcing corporations to redevelop all custom software if they want to move up to the next version of windows or face losing tech support.

[NRecob]

MAC ZEALOTS ARE INCREDIBLY INSECURE

I WONDER WHY THAT IS ;)

[CentrOS]

We're actually not...

We have absolutely nothing to be insecure about...

[Dibbs]

flamebait

shut up, troll. your comment deserves no reply.

[tundraboy]

MS is becoming as unwieldy as GM, or already is.

I remember how the big three kept flogging twin- valve pushrod iron-block engines when everyone else was going multi-valve overhead cams and aluminum alloy. I even remember a GM exec's lame excuse that pushrod engines suit the customers needs just fine. By the time they started to catch up it was already too late. A whole generation of customers had deserted them and their reputation for using outdated (product and production) technology had been cemented.<br /><br />Sometimes, you just have to chuck the technology you're using and win your existing customers all over again. Better to "steal" your own existing customers then have your competitors do it. {Steal your existing customers, that is.)<br /><br />MS will just have to forget about supporting legacy apps in the new OS or end up left with the most backward (and usually poorest) customers as the more technologically advanced ones (who don't want to deal with the bloat and complexity) move on to another OS.

[techned]

Apple is not all its cracked up to be either

One of the problems I have with this article from the NY Times is that they forget to mention that Apple OS and machines are closed systems - meaning that it is Apple that controls the hardware, as well the software.<br />You can only get Apple made hardware only - not Toshiba, Hewlett-Packard, Dell, Lenovo, etc. - there are no lesser price or better quality alternatives to the hardware you can get, unlike a PC that uses Windows (which can also be used with Linux). It's this problem that has many businesses not interested in Apples, even the new Intel machines; I remember when they were unveiled, me and a few of my peers were hoping that Apple would loosen its control over its hardware and let Third-party hardware vendors in - no dice, it was disappointing because we love the Macs but that this closed system would only hinder if not stop its appeal to the vast majority.<br />Despite the success and publicity that Apple seems to be enjoying, it's because on the popularity of its IPod mp3 players but that can only last for five to eight years the most before its competition can offer a better machine and service.<br />OS X is a wonderful OS but it suffers the same problems as Linux - a popular alternative to Windows but stuck in a niche market among the Apple die-hards and graphics labor market.<br />Windows for all its faults and problems still allows consumers a very wide variety of choice in terms of hardware - the ability to mix and match according to your budget. And despite all the publicity regarding security holes and internet-related problems in Windows, it is still the best supported OS in regards to these issues, unlike OS X and Linux which have not encountered these problems because of their low profile; and despite being the most advanced OS around, Apple had problems patching up some of the known security issues with OS X.4 (Tiger), while the majority are considered unpatchable at this current time.<br />I'm not a Windows diehard or Microsoft fan - I hate a lot of the inconsistency in Windows regarding its Windows Server software and Office crap but I've seen both sides - the good and bad, and know that you can't fault Windows or Microsoft for its current problems, it's just another consumer-friendly company catering to its base.<br /><br />My Two cents.

[open-mind]

Apple OS and machines are closed systems

A big chunk of OS X is open source:<br /><br /><a class="jive-link-external" href="http://developer.apple.com/opensource/index.html" target="_newWindow">http://developer.apple.com/opensource/index.html</a><br /><br />And Macs can boot Windows/Linux natively, even without assistance from Apple or Microsoft:<br /><br /><a class="jive-link-external" href="http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060316-6393.html" target="_newWindow">http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060316-6393.html</a><br /><br />So in a nutshell, Apple PC hardware can boot Windows, Linux, or OSX. All other PC hardware can only boot Windows and Linux. Which is more closed?

[Zymurgist]

I agree somewhat...

Apple's control of the hardware is somewhat <br />tight, but I'm not sure how that plays out as <br />far as a purchase choice. Their hardware is <br />exceptionally good for consumer PC hardware -- <br />and sold at a reasonable discount (compared to <br />something of equal quality elsewhere). With the <br />exception of the motherboard and case, most of <br />the other components are commodity and you can <br />use most commodity hardware with it. <br /> <br />Apple's principle issue, in my mind, is inertia. <br />More so, than Linux. They simply have many <br />competitors, all of whom have products which are <br />interchangable and thus commodities. You can say <br />that Apple should make their platform into a <br />commodity too, but, in practice their selling <br />points are difference (not Windows), quality and <br />consistency (hardware, software, and the <br />interoperation thereof), and attention to <br />design. I suspect that Apple does much better by <br />not commoditizing their platform. <br /> <br />I would also disagree that Linux is "niche". <br />That would imply limited fitness. Linux has <br />limited penetration in some areas, but not for <br />lack of fitness for the task. Linux isn't likely <br />to be a widely used home OS until: it ships by <br />default on as many machines as Windows, and <br />vendors write software for it. The latter is <br />mostly (but not completely) dependent on the <br />former. It might change a little with .Net, <br />since .Net applications are much easier to get <br />running under Linux than normal Windows <br />applications (even if MS' support for it is <br />waning a bit). The current desktops of most <br />Linux distributions are not sufficiently <br />different from Win XP in everyday use to pose a <br />significant issue, and hardware support is about <br />the same these days (with the exception that XP <br />generally requires a driver from the vendor). <br />Linux is very rapidly growing, but almost <br />exclusively in areas where people consciously <br />choose which OS to install. The average retail <br />consumer doesn't want to have a choice of OS, <br />and the average retail vendor has no desire to <br />give them one. So long as entry into the desktop <br />market will require a proactive step on the part <br />of the consumer, it's not likely to take off. <br />The fitness or quality of the product has no <br />bearing on it at the retail level.

[Gromit801]

Uhhh..

The "Vast Majority" don't give a rat's butt about Apple being a <br />"closed system" as you put it.<br /><br />The vast majority only care about buying the cheapest computer <br />they can find, or something similar to what they use at work.

[webdev511]

4 "New" versions of OSX? not really

More like 4 service packs with added features.<br /><br />MS just needs to suck it up and drop backwards compatibility. If you need to run a legacy app, run it in a Virtual Machine.<br /><br />Vista has a lot of good ideas (tried and true unix ideas) it's just a matter of if or when we'll actually see them.

[Christopher Hall]

They're beginning to understand

Look at what they're doing with DirectX 10. It runs completely separate from DX9 and below, which reportedly nets them a performance increase of around 600%. That's huge. Imagine what they could do to Windows if they took a page from Apple's book (ie - cheated and burned down the house of cards).

[Byronic]

OSX versions add far more than Windows versions

Or MS office versions for that matter. There are far more than <br />features added on top with each OSX version. They entire system <br />has been reworked 5 times now. Most new software doesn't work <br />on the first 3 versions anymore. <br /><br />It's FAR MORE different than, say 'doze 95 to 'doze 98. <br /><br />Try not to comment on things you have no clue about.

british empire = mircosoft ??

This kind of reminds me of the British Empire. Colonialism really helped the British they required all raw resources to be given to the british manufacturers. This was a great deal for the manufacturers. They got massive ammounts of supplies at the rate they dictated. But because british companies were insulated from competition. But when the colonial system broke up and faced increased competition from America their companies couldn't compete. <br /><br />This is similar to microsoft they are a monopoly they have benefited from a monopoly but this has left thier company slow and ineficient. Their bundling is similar to the british bundling of manufacturing and suppliers. <br /><br />Microsoft doesn't make products for consumers. It makes products for businesses and then as almost an after thought they who then convert the product for home use.<br /> <br />Its not a ground up approach for consumers its a supply side approach of providing a good framework for suppliers and then let the suppliers fit it out.

[Captain_Spock]

The Sun (MAC) will never set on the Empire!

History has a strange way of repeating itself and it appears that all is so consumed that hardly much thought is given to the fact that Windows's Half Brother (the late OS/2 as some seem to think) ruled in the ATM and Network Computing Space... that said, it should be remembered Christopher Columbus' Ships were not the only ones that sailed the seas which became to be dominated by the British Empire so if history have any lessons for us we may yet see an overladen Windows and its Half Brother "OS/2" (serving as the fast escort ship that cuts through the rough "internet tidal waves") maintaining the 90% market share lead on any competition than can come from the Mac and Linux or other ships!)

[hahne59]

Perhaps Use The Same Backwards Compatibility System As Xbox 360?

Perhaps Microsoft could provide backwards compatibility the same way that it does with Xbox 360. <br /><br />Pretend I want to play Rainbow 6 (an original Xbox game) on Xbox 360. I put in the game, a message shows up that says "You do not have the proper software to run this game, you need to update. Press A to update, B to not update." Then it updates and I'm playing in minutes.<br /><br />Maybe they should do the same with Vista 2010. I want to use old Office 2000. So I put in the installation disc, Windows says I need an update, I update, and I'm using old software in seconds.<br /><br />And just to speed things up, you just offer individual program updates. <br /><br />Simple. No need for legacy code. Just download compatibly on demand.

[203129769353146603573853850462]

Bad headline, it's "Microsoft is slow"...

...not Windows! <br /><br />Duh.

[darrius3365]

re:

it's the New York Times, remember...

[deathstar2000]

4 versions of Media Center is not a sign of innovation

I can't believe that clown from Microsoft in the article points to 2 versions of tablet PC software (which no one uses) and 4 versions of Media Center as a sign that Microsoft has innovated. I use Media Center and it SUCKS. I bought an OEM version and installed it. Want to watch television? Not so fast...you have to buy a third party video decoder. Want to burn a show to DVD? Again, you have to buy a third party application. Does the program keep crashing? Microsoft refers you to "thegreenbutton" website which consists of a bunch of geeks providing useless advise. Good luck calling up the tech "support" guy in Bombay...he'll tell you to call the company that you bought the Media Center computer from for help. When you try to explain that you purchased the software separately, you can hear the terror in his voice as he slowly realizes that his canned list of responses does not apply. Whenever I fire up Media Center I'm simply amazed at how bad it is, and how crappy their tech support is. Don't believe me? Go to Microsoft's website for Media Center. It's like a bad brochure, with absolutely no real technical help.

[Rolndubbs]

Media center

Media center isn't suppossed to be sold as OEM. If your having issues, its most likely the hardware that you are using. If you buy a media center from a respectable brand, you shouldn't have any of the issues you speak of. That being said, I built my own media center, and after a week or so of tweaking, it runs great.

[redlizard00]

330m windows computers

and 1018 million regular internet users, according to recent stats. How may mac / linux usrrs I wonder?. And what is the ratio of kosher / pirated versions of windows?. Mexico, China, Russia=high, I suspect...

[Thomas, David]

A Lot of Caca

Your right, there is a lot of feces out there! LOL

[NRecob]

Message has been deleted.

[Bob Brinkman]

First, look at the "a" on your keyboard

Now, look a quarter of an inch to the left.