What does Microsoft have against Windows Vista?
Over the past few months, Windows 7 has become the focal point of Microsoft's message. The company has spent time discussing how it arrived at "7" and why it will be the next great operating system from the software giant.
In the meantime, the company has spent considerable time releasing ads to discuss Windows and PCs, but hasn't done enough to talk about the benefits of owning Vista. But every chance it gets, Microsoft tells the world why we should all wait and see what will happen with Windows 7.
"It's not minor because it's a lot more work than a minor release. It's a major release," Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer said recently. "Windows 7 will be Vista, but a lot better."
Wow. Now I understand that Microsoft has a vested interest in seeing Windows 7 become a success, but doesn't it want to see Windows Vista become a success too? Sure, Microsoft would say that Vista is already a success and it doesn't need to prove it to anyone. But let's face it: major PC vendors like Dell and HP realize their customers still want XP and have yet to adhere to Microsoft's call for every company to give up on XP. And the way I see it, none of the major vendors will do that.
So what does Microsoft really have against Vista? It may not be the kind of quality operating system it has in XP, but it's not that bad, right?
Microsoft is running from Vista and, to be quite honest, I just don't know why. Sure, it's a troublesome product that has annoyed more people than most previous iterations of Windows, but we can't forget that as soon as Microsoft released Service Pack 1, the OS was significantly improved.
But I think Microsoft is running from Vista for another reason: businesses and vendors aren't happy about it.
It's easy as consumers to say that we're the only people who matter in business decisions, but that's simply not true. Microsoft has a slew of stakeholders that it needs to make happy and that includes businesses and its hardware vendors like HP and Dell. In previous years, making Dell and HP happy was relatively easy: release a new OS and they will fall in line. But now that consumer demand for Vista isn't nearly as high as vendors would like and businesses are loath to deploy the operating systems in their operation, two of Microsoft's staunchest allies are turning their backs.
With that in mind, Ballmer and company are forced to run. Microsoft can only put so much pressure on vendors before it fails to have anymore pull. And as Dell and others continue to downgrade Vista to XP, it's becoming abundantly clear that the control Microsoft once had over its stakeholders is dwindling.
Microsoft has finally realized that it upset some people with Vista. And now, in an attempt to return to its former days of prominence, Microsoft is running as fast as it can to Windows 7.
It may make some sense from the standpoint of wanting to return to former glory, but I simply don't think Vista is so bad that it requires shunning. Call me crazy, but wasn't Vista once heralded as the next big thing in operating systems?
If Microsoft still believes that, it better start acting like it or the enterprise and vendors will wonder if it will act the same way with Windows 7.
Check out Don's Digital Home podcast, Twitter feed, and FriendFeed.
Don Reisinger is a technology columnist who has written about everything from HDTVs to computers to Flowbee Haircut Systems. Don is a member of the CNET Blog Network, and posts at The Digital Home. He is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.
Vista, for me, wasn't any different. Actually it was a lot easier. The only real software problems I had were Microsoft programs not being compatible! And then I just upgraded to the newer versions which I was planning on doing anyway.
I think that people's memories of things fade quickly. They had XP for what, 5 or 6 years before vista (can't remember offhand)? Granted the system requirements for Vista was off the charts in comparison, but Windows 7 will have the same or similar (maybe a bit less) according to things I read.
In all honesty, if Vista only required and ran quick with only 1GB of ram and a single 1ghz processor, I doubt there'd of been as many complaints -- and companies would've made things compatible a lot quicker.
The main thing that bothered me with Vista wasn't anything to do with Microsoft, but HP not releasing 64bit Vista drivers for equipment that was on 2 - 3 years old. It was like my scanner was all but forgotten, doomed to future tech and only useful on older operating systems. My printer was given a bit more of a chance, with a driver for another printer that provided "limited" capability. It was like HP was forcing me to buy new equipment if I wanted to stick with Vista.
Vista was a reason to upgrading my hardware in my computer. I went dual core in anticipation with 2gb of ram and a 7600GT and later after the arrival of Vista I went to quad core, 4gb of ram and an 8800GTS 320MB. Then after having reinstalled Vista many-a-time, I realized how fast Windows XP ended up running (yes, I wasn't using my 4gb of ram to its full capability but I didn't mind) and very much so liked gaming on XP. In short, I didn't pee my pants when I wasn't able to run DirectX10 just because my graphics card was capable. Now that I have no time for gaming (boy them Word documents load fast), I have no reason to upgrade my components further, and ultimately, my wallet is happy with that.
why? i guess you haven't used vista yet huh? everyone with 2 brain cells to bang together is running away from vista!
.....the average cnet reader obviously doesn't fit into this category.
if you have two brain cells and just wandered in here by mistake, do yourselves a favor, either install linux or get a mac.
for the rest of you, don't worry, i hear windows 7 is a lot like most windows installs. ie the last OS with a new theme tacked on. tell us all how that works out.
I felt that one from over here...
Winning argument there, Chief.
Oh, and I go with Pratchett on the theory of exclamation marks. This post provides ample evidence why.
Woops!
I am a Vista user since almost 2 years and it is the best MS OS "EVER". I never had even a single BSOD, crash or any anomaly. And it still runs like it did 2 years ago.
Most of the people who complain about UAC are the ones who actually have never even used Vista. And it is a feature you can turn-off. It is these people who have actually driven market perception about Vista than the actual user, because the actual user was probably in love with using Vista and too busy to write and talk about it.
Many people say it is Vista's high hardware requirements that have kept people away. But look at the Hardware that people with XP have. No one these days seems to have less than 1GB RAM.
In the end, unless you're clear about what ails something, you cannot fix it. That's what has gone wrong for VISTA here.
1) No response at all. It all goes strangely quiet.
2) A list of pretty minor issues that were fixed over six months ago.
3) A torrent of abuse accusing me of being a shill/fanboy/etc.
Now I'm not saying Vista is perfect because, frankly, it's not but then neither is any other OS I've used - and yes, boys and girls, that includes various flavours of OSX over the years as well as Ubuntu - so why the irrational hatred?
Really, thats the only issue. Seriously.
-
by TheStairMaster
October 31, 2008 8:45 PM PDT
- I wonder if Microsoft will ever go open source...
-
Reply to this comment
-
(19 Comments)Cuz honestly, the one fastest, yet seemingly off limits way to end any and all effect of the massive Apple campaign against vista is to go open source. Hell, you could even do what a bunch of flavors of Linux do and sell the OS.
sure you wont be able to charge large amounts of cash for your OS anymore, but the one way to get all the vista bashers and code junkies out there on your side is to go open source.