Why Windows 7 will hit store shelves in 2009

Windows 7 will hit store shelves sometime next year. And if I had to guess exactly when it would happen, November 2 would be my answer.

Yes, I know that Microsoft has said that it plans on releasing Windows 7 by early 2010 and there has been no confirmation on the part of the software giant that would indicate a 2009 release. But when we consider that Vista is still in trouble, Microsoft extended the XP deadline even further into 2009, and there's no end to Vista troubles in sight, I simply don't see any other option for Ballmer and Company.

Microsoft knows all too well that it made a slew of mistakes with Vista. Intent on turning things around and putting this mess behind it, I think the company will make a major announcement in the next couple months detailing the future of Windows and the exact release date of Windows 7. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if we hear about it at CES when Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer takes the stage to deliver his keynote address.

For the past year, all we've heard from top Microsoft brass is how great Windows 7 will be. Ballmer said it will be like Vista, but "better." Gates said that Windows 7 will be the next major release from the company that everyone will want. And time and again, when given the option of discussing Vista or Windows 7, Microsoft almost always chooses the latter.

Realizing that, doesn't it stand to reason that Microsoft would do its best to release Windows 7 as quickly as possible? And if it was shooting for an early 2010 release when it still hoped that Jerry Seinfeld and its own brand of "I'm a PC" ads would improve Vista's standing, don't you think it will try to release it sooner now that those ads haven't done anything to improve Vista's stance in the market?

November 2 seems like the perfect day for Microsoft to release Windows 7 next year. It not only provides the company with ample time to improve the OS and get it ready for the public, but it shows vendors, software partners, and consumers themselves that it's serious about getting Windows right this time. And perhaps most importantly, that release date puts Microsoft in the position it wants to be in: ahead of the holiday shopping season.

Say what you will about Vista and its value, but I don't see it lasting another year. Microsoft has learned its lesson with Vista and its hellbent on ensuring it doesn't commit those mistakes again.

That's why Windows 7 is coming next year and that's why I'm looking forward to it.

Check out Don's Digital Home podcast, Twitter feed, and FriendFeed.

[Empoor]

"It not only provides the company with ample time to improve the OS and get it ready for the public, but it shows vendors, software partners, and consumers themselves that it's serious about getting Windows right this time."

That sentence isn't in line with your earlier-than-expected release date hypothesis. Because if Microsoft really would want to show vendors, etc. that it's serious about getting it right, they would wait until it was finished and well. Vista or not.

[NetworkPIMP]

Take a step back and listen to MS on where 7 is coming from, and you'll hear them beating into your skull that 7 is built on the exact same framework as Vista, meaning that 7 is an evolution of what's already out there. It seems to me that MS is stopping just short of admitting that 7 is what Vista was supposed to be... i.e. that 7 will be the release that's "finished" where Vista was the one they rushed out the door.

[Renegade Knight]

@NetworkPIMP

Exactly.

[Phrank630]

Actually NetworkPIMP it's based of Server 2008 kernel which is a solid and very efficient system.

[bshultsb]

"Microsoft has learned its lesson with Vista and its hellbent on ensuring it doesn't commit those mistakes again."

Has learned it's lesson... Has everyone forgotten about Windows ME? Which one was worse, ME or Vista? Obviously Microsoft has not learned it's lesson.

ME by far was worse.

I owned an ME computer, and now own a laptop running Vista purchased in June. ME was notoriously buggy, blue screening regularly. The machine I bought was recalled twice, due to serious architecture issues that was caused in part by ME issues.

Vista, on the other hand, has been great. It outperforms my XP SP 2 (dual core) desktop machine by a large margin, and I do graphic design work, so that's pretty impressive. The performance on my laptop does so much better than I am seriously considering some of the current desktop offers out there to refresh to Vista on the desktop side as well.

Vista had some issues early on, but I've had no issues with the machine I have, and I suspect that anyone buying a Vista machine today will feel similarly. While Vista had widely reported issues early on, I haven't encountered any of them on my laptop, making me think they were fixed awhile ago and people are just ragging on the old instead of looking at how it's doing today.

[i_am_still_wade]

Anybody who says Vista was a mistake has not used Vista on a powerful machine. If you have the specs, Vista is great. One of the problems was hardware vendors wanting to get rid of old inventory and thus made Microsoft make "Vista Capable" specs. If your computer was made for Vista, the GUI is a lot better than XP.

[aka_tripleB]

Who needs a powerful machine? As long as you're not running Vista on a netbook (or desktop equivalent), it runs fine. And even some netbooks, I understand, can run it with little issue.

[whizkid454]

New head of Windows therefore a much better planned and executed version of Windows. Too bad most of the marketing monkeys are still there to (possibly) flub things up again. Whatever you do, DO NOT RELEASE MORE THAN THREE VERSIONS!

[Cosmo8U]

Vista is a cross between ME and Microsoft Bob. (Which was actually Ballmers alter ego in disguise).

[Spartan_458]

Anyone who bashes Vista hasn't used it or is biased against Microsoft. It's way more stable than XP, and it's a better overall OS.

[ddesy]

@Spartan_458: There are plenty of people, myself included, who have used Vista on a powerful enough machine and still don't like it. That's just the plain truth whether or not you like it.

[Inconnux]

I'll take Win ME every time over Vista. I have run Vista on a high end machine with 4gb ram and a High end Nvidia card and my old Toshiba 600mhz WinME (2mb ati card) still feels faster. I've been using windows since win3.1 and I have never hated an OS more than Vista. XP run far better with great compatibility.

If Win7 is as bad as Vista still is then my next computer is going to be a Mac (and if it is built on the Vista structure it will be) I have always hated apple products so I am no fanboy but I detest Vista more than the Cult of Mac. Congratulations Microsoft you have driven away a customer by giving us no options other than Vista.

[Renegade Knight]

Never used ME. Vista is as buggy as 3.1 though.

@i_am_still_wade
I use Vista on powerful machines. Buggy, but faster about it. How cool is that.
My observation is that machines that had Vista native work better than "vista capable" machines even when the OEM has drivers.

@Spartan_458
Um...no it hasn't proven to be more stable than XP so far. A nicer interface. Yes. More stable. No. But then I can crash OS X so maybe I just do more with computers than some.

[matte989]

There are some things in Vista that are unforgivable. One example is the Network browser. Who would want to work for MS these days anyway? Honest question really.. Microsoft is not cool. It's been how many years and they have never had a good TV commercial. If Windows 7 has the same network browser that Vista has I swear to GOD IN HEAVEN I will drive to Washington and b*#&$^ them out.
(I'm using Vista right now from home but every day at work I think about reloading XP. The network browser is straight from hell).

[Mam00th]

I want to work at Microsoft, they pay very well actually and you get to work on softwares hundreds of millions of people use every day.

[8301]

So do you make all of your purchasing decisions based on who has the best television commercials?

[chabig83]

"... you get to work on softwares hundreds of millions of people use every day."

Yeah. That's why it's so embarassing!

[Penguinisto]

"and you get to work on softwares hundreds of millions of people use every day."

...so did the folks who wrote and released Bonzi Buddy, but I doubt that any of them would actually have that on their resume's, yanno? ;)

[ljb860ljb]

"I want to work at Microsoft, they pay very well actually and you get to work on softwares hundreds of millions of people use every day."

yes if you can live in Seattle for 30K per year....

I for one am 100% MS free and haven't been happier. As for OEMs, they will not get my $$ unless they provide a "naked" machine so that I can install the software of choice and ONLY the software of choice.

[Mr. Dee]

Nothings wrong with Windows Vista and the more than 180 million deployments of it prove that it is indeed a success. The only thing that affected Vista was its debut, device driver and application compatibility, stuff that has been resolved long ago.

[Penguinisto]

"Nothings wrong with Windows Vista..."

Until you:

* copy large numbers of files from one place to another
* try to get a 2-year-old printer to work
* try to run a decent video card on it
* try to turn on all the bells and whistles on a computer that isn't a multi-core machine with multiple GB of RAM
* try to burn a CD or DVD without getting bombarded with unnecessary steps or messages
* try to run older software on it
* try to get the same framerate on your game that your XP-using buddy has.

etc etc etc...

;)

[aka_tripleB]

Check
Check.
Check.
Check.
Check.
Check.
and...
Check.

Sure, I'm running into the frame rate issue, but the showed up after I changed monitors from a 1280x1024 LCD (it died) to a 1024x768 CRT (it was lying around) to a 1920x1200 (1080p) HDTV. It's not a bad GPU, but just can't get up past 30 fps at that high of resolution. The CRT had issues but it was 4 years old and came with one of my dad's cheap PCs. But while the LCD worked, it worked great.

[darksantos91]

I actually have a 6 year old hp printer that works perfectly on vista.

Though i will admit copying large files takes a long time,

And when i burn a cd or dvd i never get bombarded. maybe its your settings or programs you use.

And yes, some of my old programs don't work on it. I had to replace my old web cam. but it was designed for a 98 and stunk so I didn't mind. But I have a lot of old programs that work on vista.

[Vegaman_Dan]

Pengunisto rattled off a list of items he finds wrong with Vista... a product that he himself has said he neither owns, uses, or supports. I suppose by that logic I could talk about Porsches or the customization options for aftermarket makers of products for the Space Shuttle too. :)

But hey, let's take his list and go down it line by line:

* copy large numbers of files from one place to another

Drag and drop, copy and paste, however you wish to do it, it works. If you are having difficulty with the operation of your mouse, I'm sure we can find someone to assist you.

* try to get a 2-year-old printer to work

Oh, that's an easy one. 1: Plug printer into the USB port. 2. Turn printer on. If this does not work for you, then the OEM may not have released drivers for it. That's hardly Microsoft's fault. Again, if you need assistance with turning on a printer, a person can be dispatched to assist you with this.

* try to run a decent video card on it

Nvideo, ATI, Intel- pick your choice of card. There are hundreds out there and they support XP and Vista. Your point there is.. well, pointless. You may want to look at video cards available in stores today. It could be you simply don't know about the market and need to update your knowledge.


* try to turn on all the bells and whistles on a computer that isn't a multi-core machine with multiple GB of RAM

Dell Optiplex GX620 with 1Gb of memory runs just fine with Aero and all the 'bells and whistles' enabled. It's not hard, really. And that's with hardware that wasn't built for or certified for use with Vista. Your point is once more proven to be unfounded and just plain misleading. Not doing so well, but you might do better on the next items. Let's find out.


* try to burn a CD or DVD without getting bombarded with unnecessary steps or messages

1. Insert blank DVD. 2. Drag files to DVD. 3. Right click on drive icon and choose 'Burn files to disk'. I know it takes a whole three steps, but I would think that even you could do that. if you used the product you are so quickly slamming, you might have known this.

* try to run older software on it

I use applications from Win95 without issue. I use Photoshop 3.0 without any problems. Poser works too. Sure, there are applications that don't, but then there's a lot of OS9 apps that won't work with OSX too, so.... yeah, another point down the drain for you.

* try to get the same framerate on your game that your XP-using buddy has.

Okay, you got me there. I actually get *FASTER* framerates on the Vista machine than I do on the XP box I have for gaming. Thanks pointing that one out.

You made seven points and all seven were debunked as complete and utter falsehoods. I can't really blame you for being ignorant, but I sure as heck can blame you for spreading FUD on a product you said yourself you don't own, use, or support.

So- why don't you tell us all about the Space Shuttle? Surely you know as much about that as you do about Vista? I mean, since you don't use either one, you should be qualified to say whatever you want. :)

And have a wonderful holiday season.

[Eigentluk]

@Penguinisto:

just went through your list...

* copy large numbers of files from one place to another
... just successfully repartitioned my external HDD, and moved 312 Gig.
* try to get a 2-year-old printer to work
... testing the 14 year old HP deskjet 500C ... works
* try to run a decent video card on it
... I'm looking at what an ATI Radeon HD 4870X2 produces
* try to turn on all the bells and whistles on a computer that isn't a multi-core machine with multiple GB of RAM
... sorry, got 2-core, can't tell - but all the bells and whistles work here
* try to burn a CD or DVD without getting bombarded with unnecessary steps or messages
... Nero express ... check
* try to run older software on it
... by old do you mean outdated as in linux software ? Don't need that.
* try to get the same framerate on your game that your XP-using buddy has.
... check, even got 20 frames more on Eve

[fgsdfgdsfgdsfg]

"180 million deployments"

that is a straight up lie, right out of MS's propaganda book.

it is true many many businesses have purchased vista licensing. what you fail to mention or take notice of is that they use their downgrade rights and roll out XP.

I work for a large corporation. we use volume licensing. we own hundreds and hundreds of vista business licenses with software assurance. not a single computer in our enviroment runs vista. yet microsoft still considers those "deployments". yea right. if you believe that than i have a used car to sell you.

[Penguinisto]

Heh... for refutation, I gotta say that y'all really did a bang-up job in proving me right... the 'you're wrong but I did have problems here, here, here...' routine was interesting, to say the least.

/P

[Seaspray0]

Penguinisto is a lying MS hater who will make up garbage.

As proof... by Penguinisto December 9, 2008 2:44 PM PST "...Seriously - when any 13-year-old in Eastern Europe can write a script or rig a webpage to pop a Windows box, but has to really work at it...".

Since the only standing computer at the last pawn to own competition was running vista, I challenged the penguin to tell me who these 13 year old's were... again, and again since that day. If it was that easy that any 13 year old could do it, then why didn't they? I have asked and asked, but the penguin is ignoring me because he knows he's been caught making up a buch of lies.

[gnutux]

done done done done and done. Windows Vista works fine ... then again, I am using Windows Server 2008 that I heavily tweaked myself...

The only thing not done is the single core ... none of my machines are single core.... so I can't do it. Oh actually, nevermind, I just refurbed my cousin's computer which is an Intel Pentium 4 3.0 GHz running Windows Vista Home Premium very smoothly with Aero on. He runs Windows Vista Home Premium at 1920x1080 resolution ('cuz it's a media centre now).

My computer specs:
http://www.kwokinator.com/node/16

[gabeheim]

Seaspray, then what kind of liar are you? You call penguin a liar, yet you directly lied about Pwn to own, the ubuntu machine was the only one left standing at the end of the day. Therefore, all of your points are invalid, and you certainly did not disprove the ease of breaking windows (What do you expect windows shatter when they get hit?). http://dvlabs.tippingpoint.com/blog/2008/03/28/pwn-to-own-final-day-and-wrap-up

Oh, that's right,you said "pawn to own", whatever the heck that contest was, i don't know, but I don't work in the pawn shop industry.

BTW, i used to be a regular user of windows, but just don't care for the direction that windows is going (still not fixing the true issues). Dealing with windows update on a vista pc made me want to get a sledgehammer. After I authenticate to run windows update the first time, I should not have to authenticate with UAC any further. This with an app that MS wrote. (BTW, the machine has SP1). Windows vista is unmaintainable, they renamed so many components it's ridiculous.

[bdaughtry]

My guess is Windows 7 is just Vista with a different name.

[edmalloy]

Congratulations, your guess is apparently right. I understand that plans for a new kernel were ditched and "Windows 7" is actually Vista 1.0.5.

[whizkid454]

Actually, NO! If you have even looked at the countless articles praising 7, you would probably be shocked to see that in fact, it is Vista, but MUCH MUCH better. I am currently running Windows 7 Build 6956 on a 8 year old desktop with P4 1.6GHz, 768MB RAM, Geforce FX5500, and a 10GB partition for installation. Everything works GREAT, even Aero. Truly, you are mistaken.

[hugociss]

Yep, true true. Microsoft is basically tweaking the UI with EVEN more resource hungry, fancy Aero effects (get ready to buy a octo core proccessor, 16GB RAM, a quad-core graphics card, and TONS of blue screens)

Microsoft never learns from their mistakes, they keep making it until people give in to them.

[BigGuns149]

Actually despite the name it is going to be Windows 6.1 as an internal name, much like XP was 5.1.

I haven't tried running Windows 7 on anything as old as a Pentium 4, although by the time Windows 7 hits stores I doubt you will see many P4s still in use(Intel hasn't released a new P4 in almost 4 years!). I have a machine running Windows 7 with only a 1GB of RAM and a last gen Core2Duo. The guy claiming you need a octocore with 16GB of RAM is so sarcastic it isn't funny. Considering that I can buy <$400 computers with a GB of RAM somehow I doubt that most average people will be whining about the performance of Windows 7 on desktops. I haven't tried it on any laptops, but I would think except for some netbooks it should run fine on virtually anything on the selling today nevermind what will be common when Windows 7 actually ships.

[sting7k]

WHAT IS WRONG WITH VISTA? Honestly. Is my Vista machine the only one in the world that doesn't crash or something? What is all this hate? I simply do not get it. I like Vista way more than XP, in my first year with it my computer has had no problems. Everything so far has "just worked". The only thing that caused problems was the release of iTunes 8 months ago, and system restore and then updating a logitech driver fixed that. I've had zero crashes, issues, things not working, no blue screens, and I am now used to the changes in menus and stuff from XP.

Some things like the UAC and the stripped down networking center might be annoying but they haven't prevented me from using my computer too it's fullest. Just turn the UAC off, you can hide the little red shield and forget about it.

What is everyone's problem? Because it takes a lot of resources? Every computer today comes with more than enough power for Vista. I just don't get it, all my friend's who have gotten new PCs in the last year feel the same way.

If you got burned at the start with a computer that wasn't ready for Vista then suck it up, roll back to XP or get some new hardware. I had to do this for my mom and 2 friend's who had free upgrades to Vista when they got new machines right before release. But to me the only person to blame is yourself for not buying a more powerful machine or not waiting to get one after the release and more powerful hardware came out.

[jessiethe3rd]

There's just a bunch of sheep who run around looking at Apple's marketing. It's that and there's also a ton of people who tried to run Vista on a crusty old machine that was barely suitable or XP... these people are upset. Vista is absolutely, 100% fine.

[Penguinisto]

Yes. Kindly ignore the multitude of tech columns showing in heavy technical detail what's wrong with Vista, and just blame Apple. That'll show 'em who's right!

[contentcreator--2008]

Penguinisto, do tell. I have to make stuff work on Vista and OS X, and find that I waste MUCH more time working around the performance problems (big malloc), limitations, and bugs in OS X release by release. I've yet to make a change due to a Vista problem.

Vista networking changes to improve security have been annoying since Macs don't play, but by and in large I think it's pretty tiresome for people to blame Microsoft for their 5-year-old 3rd party printer driver not working. Snow Leopard may encounter many of the same issues in this regard that Vista did.

[SJ2571]

"Every computer today comes with more than enough power for Vista" -- And that's the Number One reason NOT to use it. There's something wrong when a PC needs that much grunt to send an e-mail and write a document. Because that's what you're doing when using Vista. And it's not just Vista. I recently trialled Office 2007 and a send/receive of mail takes no less than 10 seconds. Office 2000 (and even 2003) do it in 1 second or less. See what I'm getting at? Vista and all recent Microsoft products are just bloated and slow when they don't need to be.

[Vegaman_Dan]

Penguinisto wrote:

"Yes. Kindly ignore the multitude of tech columns showing in heavy technical detail what's wrong with Vista, and just blame Apple. That'll show 'em who's right!"

And we should pay attention to a troll who has publically stated previously that they neither own, use, or support any Microsoft products? A person who doesn't even use Vista who is suddenly an expert?


Riiiiiiiight. Your credibility here in infamous.

[Dylan_Wisor]

Someone, please feel free to answer this man's question. Penguinisto (who has yet to make a counterpoint to Dan's comment, I'm still looking forward to that) has pointed to a "multitude of tech columns" (that he didn't bother to cite) that show in "heavy technical detail" (that he didn't bother to elaborate upon) what's wrong with Vista, but I was looking for something with a little more meat on its bones.

[zed_awol]

"If you got burned at the start with a computer that wasn't ready for Vista then suck it up, roll back to XP or get some new hardware."

Suck it up? Microsoft gave the specs to manufacturers so they could say systems were Vista compatible.
Many were not and buyers got burned. Oh yeah Microsoft changed the recommendations after the fact.

[ljb860ljb]

"But to me the only person to blame is yourself for not buying a more powerful machine or not waiting to get one after the release and more powerful hardware came out." purchased a new HP with Vista installed, a year later after needing to reload the OS at least weekly and taking to the repair shop a couple of times even HP gave up. MS always pointed the issues back to the OEM and never even tried to understand what was wrong. At the time I was only trying to use for email and word processing due to all the troubles. Ended up replacing the OS with Linux and have not had any issues since. Everything works fine and find myself 100% MS free.

[Penguinisto]

That's easy:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=vista+troubles&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=vista+bug&btnG=Search
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=vista+rejected&btnG=Search

...take your time.

Or, just blame Apple for Vista's rejection by the world at large. Up to you, kids...

[gnutux]

contentcreator-2008. I use Macs and PCs, and I have yet run into a malloc issue that doesn't happen on Vista as well on MacOS X. Plus, programming on the Mac isn't worse than on Windows. Heck, my Mac is my college portable development centre.

The only reason why Snow Leopard will cause driver issue is the mere fact that Apple is doing a force migration to a 64-bit kernel (which both companies should be doing by now). 32-bit operating systems should NEVER be installed anymore ... esp. if you have a 64-bit processor, it makes no sense unless you're still lugging a 6 yr old device.

As much as I despise Microsoft, Vista was not a disaster, Windows ME was.

Just like how XKCD described: http://xkcd.com/323/

[lmasanti]

quote:
"when given the option of discussing Vista or Windows 7, Microsoft almost always chooses the latter."

Me too! Vista is a fiasco, Windows 7 "is" whatever I want it to be...

[dechah]

I use Vista every day on three different computers and it is a very good OS. It is my most stable version of Windows ever. On par with my two Macs. I actually enjoy using the OS. Sure I will get Windows 7 when it is released, but I am not desperately holding onto an OS I hate as your article implies while I wait. So if it comes out in 2010, I am not bothered.

[Penguinisto]

Don. I agree. The sooner Microsoft can wash everyone's memories of Vista, the better for their business. Now if Windows 7 sucks as well as Vista did, then all bets are off... but that remains to be seen, so no judgments on it here, folks.

That said, I don't see Ballmer wanting to launch an Osborne Effect (Google it, folks), which is exactly what will happen when folks who are wary of Vista hear that the launch of Windows 7 is imminent. So, I think it'll be announced less than a couple months away from launch, and not nearly an entire year.

/P

[Vegaman_Dan]

Penguinisto wrote:

"Now if Windows 7 sucks as well as Vista did, then all bets are off... but that remains to be seen, so no judgments on it here, folks."


I find it hard to believe that you have ever been non-judgmental. Your hatred for all things Microsoft is legendary.

You sure are very loud and obnoxious talking about how much Vista and Windows 7 will suck for a person who claims to have no judgment on the product. .

For a person who is such a proponent of open source, you sure have a closed mind.

[Penguinisto]

Hate to tell you Dan, but until I see and mess with it, I have zero opinions on Windows 7 (though I will admit that it being somewhat based on Vista is a bit of a problem, but I'm willing to wait and see what it does).

Your fabrications and ad hominem to the contrary, I prefer to see what RTM looks like before passing judgment on the thing. Sorry if that disturbs your narrow stereotypes and assumptions, but that's the way it is.

Thing is, and I think you'll agree, is that Vista has been among the biggest boosts to Mac sales ever since its launch. If MSFT screws up with Windows 7 like it did with Vista, then MSFT is going to have some major problems that it may not recover from.

[rhsc]

@penguinisto:

If you have indeed admitted not to use Vista, Dan calling you on it is not an ad hominem attack

[ferretboy88]

Vista 64 bit with new and old graphics cards work for me I don't know what vista you have been using. Go to any custom pc website or game site and see if they use Apples. Why do you spend your entire day talking about microsoft.

[D3vildog699]

i may not like him but the "ad hominem" was just damn good word use

[Pete Bardo]

1. The best time to release Windows 7 would be after Service Pack 2 is released.
2. I wonder if Microsoft gets kickbacks from manufacturers since anyone who wants to run Vista needs new hardware.
3. I'd love to suck it up and get all the new hardware required to run Vista, I just don't have that kind of cash sitting around.
4. All y'all are nuts about something or another.

[Magicland]

You really should get two tin cans and a string if you can't afford the hardware required to run vista. I picked up a $300 laptop that runs it quite well, and I've seen desktop deals, including a 19" LCD monitor for under $500. Quit ******** that your 386 won't run it and step into the future.

[SJ2571]

The funny thing is, a 386 can still browse the net, write documents, send and receive emails, basic image editing (resize, crop, etc) and do 99% of everyday end-user user tasks, in far less than even 1/10th of the hard drive space and ram that Vista requires. So if these types of users are upgrading to Vista, they're plain stupid, and unfortunately that's the way a lot of them are. They've been fooled into thinking they need it when they don't, so they splash out on new hardware that Vista requires and everybody gets rich, except them, who are poorer for the experience.

[BigGuns149]

I will agree with you that a 486 and to a lesser degree a 386 are far more powerful than most people too young to remember computer ~15 years ago would think, BUT I think you are exaggerating how much you can do with such limited hardware. Write documents? Sure. I know a lot of people who would be happy with Word 2.0. Send & receive email? Sure. A lot of other things that people expect their computer to do would be a little more demanding than a 386 could handle.

You can browse the web, but the Internet as it was back in ~95-96 when a 486 or a 386 wouldn't have been an antique is NOT the same Internet of today. Even Opera, which used to pride themselves on running on their browser on a 386 doesn't support a 386 any longer. Even if magically got a modern web browser that rendered modern HTML and CSS you would still have to deal with the media that is on the internet.

I have seen early Pentiums(<166Mhz) choke on Flash even back when Flash wasn't a resource hungry monster(ie. before Flash 5). Good luck getting even a 486 to be able to decode even a very low res H.264 file. Most video isn't in MPEG 1 anymore if you haven't noticed. Even DVDs use MPEG-2 and without a dedicated MPEG hardware MPEG decoder you would have trouble even playing a DVD. You can playback MP3 files on a 486, but don't try doing too much else at the same time because the audio might skip (the compression used quite a bit of processing power by 1994 standards).

If you want to browse the Internet of 1995-96, sure a 386 would cut it, but 99% of people will want more than what Opera 3.62 will support. Furthermore, even basic tasks like DVD playback aren't possible on a 386.

While virtually any new computer will run Vista, there are some people and some tasks that are so basic that a used P4 with XP is going to only do the job, but do it for FAR less money. Nevertheless, I think 99% of people would want to spend the extra $50-100 to get a old 1.6Ghz P4 with XP. They could run a modern web browser and you wouldn't have to go searching for a ISA based ethernet card to hook up your computer to a cheap DSL modem.

[drummer51689]

Vista is a great operating system. BUT when i first got my laptop a year ago i could tell it was really buggy and some things wouldn't install right. I went to install Zonealarm and got the BSOD.

Fast forwarding to now.... i have had no problems with Vista since MIcrosoft released Service Pack 1. I installed a new version of Zonealarm and it didn't give me the bsod. I think this service pack was needed badly and this is how Vista was meant to be when it was released to the public. I think it fixed several of the bugs.

I'm looking forward to Service Pack 2 (SP2) which will improve the boot and shut down time and many other things.

One other thing i wish would happen is that neither Norton or Mcaffee would be installed on the computer when you first buy it. Manufacturers should install more useful and FREE software such as AVG, AVAST, or AVIRA.

I'm looking forware to Windows 7 though!! :)

drummer

[Magicland]

Vista was buggy because Zone Alarm wouldn't run? Zone Labs had over a year of beta versions of Vista to get their program working with it, but they didn't bother to. Don't blame Zone Labs laziness on Vista, blame Zone Labs.

[ggalicia]

Vista was terrible at the beginning. Hope windows 7 is better.

[micromacman]

I have been a vista, Linux, and leopard user for years now and vista still seems to have some bugs wth older and new hardware such as video cards and routers. I hope Microsoft fixes this with windows 7.

[CFSacks]

Just turn off superfetch and the indexing function. When I'm searching for a file, it isn't usually in the indexed portion of the drive anyway. Not a whole lot slower without it. Also stop it from creating a restore point daily. Now my machine runs like XP with the hard drive sitting still when I am doing nothing as it should. I have a dual core with 3 Gig but couldn't stand the constant thrashing of the hard drive. Do NOT disable readyboost even if you don't plug in usb memory (doesn't do much anyway). Ready boost optimizes bootup and if you disable it, your boot times will become really long. This is a second function of it and readyboost must be enabled to have reasonable boot times. Again, this is if you have memory plugged in or not. I have turned off scheduled defrag and a few other things. I defrag when I have done a lot of stuff. When I check whether I need to defrag, I am still told I don't need to after a number of months.

Anyway, my Vista machine boots up fast, runs well and shuts down quickly. It takes around 5 seconds to start Word the first time of a sesion as opposed to 1 with superfetch. Unending thrashing of the hard drive to save 4 seconds? Not!

[strykernyc]

it takes less than one second to start word or any office application on my windows mobile 5 n palm treo 700wx.. see ms should do the same for the pc os. I hope windows 7 is out for pc and mobile.

[BigGuns149]

Word on the mobile version doesn't have the same abilities as the Windows version so we aren't even comparing apples to apples here. Even IF we were making such a comparison a Treo runs off of flash memory so there is virtually no seek time. Go buy a SSD for your computer and you will see applications load fast as well.

[toosday]

Just out of curiosity, what is Vista's marketshare?

[0zSpit]

another question you should ask, why do poor people with no real goal in life complain about things so much? like things they can't afford or operating systems they're not intelligent enough to figure out? why is that?

[toosday]

@ 0zSpit:
Huh? I have no problems with Vista at all. I'm also not here to defend it. I was just wondering what Vista's marketshare is.

Anyone have an answer for me?

[Partha83]

Vista holds a market share of 20.45% vs. XP's 66.31%. Lately however, Vista has been gaining at XP's expense. I was curious myself so I looked it up. These figures were reported in early December. Mac's hold 8.87%, if anyone else was curious.

[gohepcat]

about 20%. That translates to about 200-250 million users. They gain a full percentage point every month, and it's tracking the exact same path as XP. In the real world vista is a success and considering 4GBs of ram is now 23 dollars and dual core machine can be had for 500 bucks, it's hard to imagine why anyone is installing XP on new machines. We are about to roll out 5k Vista Business machines at work. I'm stoked.

[zed_awol]

Regarding market share home use or business? Microsoft has again changed its XP ordering schedule to vendors. has been pushed out to January30, 2009 it's original death date. Companies like Dell can still charge $150 to users to get back XP
XP availability for netbooks will be 2010. Netbooks is a growing market and Vista just doesn't perform on them.
another question I have is the actual numbers of market share growth of Vista for business. I still haven't seen it embraced by the business sector.

[BerMM]

"Netbooks is a growing market and Vista just doesn't perform on them."
Yet I type this on my Eee 1000h running Vista Basic which does everything short of gaming and BOINC just as well as my Q6600 based lanbox.

[mjconver]

It's all about the hardware, folks. If your currently three-year-old hardware still boots up in the morning, then Vista will suck on it.

When Windows 7 is released, God willing, my four (or five) year old hardware will still be booting. There's no way that 7 will outperform Vista, that's not how MS releases bloatware. Since I don't need, nor want to pay for new hardware, XP is just fine by me.

[sharmajunior]

The only problem I have with Vista is the "Trusted Installer" and "UAC". These two things are annoying yet important for security. I think that there is a better way that these two could have been better implemented and not annoy the hell outta a person.

I am tired of Trusted installer ruining my system everytime I make a change to a system file.

The computer and I should be able to work together and not become sad n angry and let go of the whole machine. When this happens, your operating system crashes with neither you nor the thing itself having any control over it and you see everything being torn apart.

[strykernyc]

HAHAHAHA I can't believe ppl dare to use Win ME...shame on you MS and u should have fired everyone who work on Win ME.
when I think of Vista I just can't stop lol.
ok this is a brand new dell laptop with vista. I turn on the machine for the first time and get a bunch steps blah blah I setup a wireless connection and everything works fine and now I setup the dell all in one printer but vista is not responding, reboot and try again...frozen again grr now I check the drivers and make sure the printer is compatible with vista---yes yes yes so I try 4 more times and out of the blue the printer is working but wait now the laptop is not connecting to the linksys router grrrr I reboot and after two yrs of loading vista is working fine but is running slow with a bunch of useless tools etc.. grrr I regret not getting xp with that laptop but thank god for free linux. I end up installing Ubuntu 8.10 free and everything just work and I didn't have to do a thing.

[0zSpit]

two things that say you know nothing. 1, you bought a dell. 2, you still use a printer? what century are you living in? but thanks anyway for your amusing post, HAAAA HAAAAAA

[Dawgpdr07]

dell... are you serious!? Why would anyone with have a brain want to own the **** that dell cranks out? Did it ever occur to you that you bought **** hardware and that the software is just fine?

[Dalkorian]

Funny how the M$ prostitutes here were able to comment on what junk the dell is (I agree), yet were completely unable to recognize the last statement of that post - the FACT that Ubuntu made it all work. Yeah, that's a hardware problem. Now go tell your mommies to wipe your nose for you before you drip on her keyboard.

[stickem2]

"One of the problems was hardware vendors wanting to get rid of old inventory and thus made Microsoft make "Vista Capable" specs. "

This is the exact reason people are turned off by Vista. Bought my daughter a laptop at the Vista/XP changeover. Doesn't run for nothin. Super slow, locks up etc. Why would any mfg ever think that 1gb of ram would run Vista. Ms told them it couldn't but they put it on the system anyway. So... everybody who bought new systems at that time got shafted by the computer mfg, NOT MS. My new laptop came with vista. Couldn't ask for a better machine or OS.

Guaranteed... Windows 7 will be nothing more than Vista with an SP2 pkg and a new name with a few new looks to disguise the sleight of hand. MS has way too much invested in Vista to dump it. Besides... all in all it is a very workable OS with a lot of potential.

[iamrta]

Vista 64 running sweet for me here. ZERO complaints. My 2 year old Canon Pixma blew anyway. I'm convinced most of you just suck at tweaking computers regardless of what degree you have hanging on your wall.

I have no complaints and and hardly ANY crashes. I even have my copy running on a Gateway... *gasp.

..where was I...Oh yeah, Fallout 3. Laterz noobz.

[Dalkorian]

Typical M$ prostitute response - it's ALWAYS the users fault. Never the fault of the morons who designed the worst OS on the planet, hackable by most 13 year old children and so laden with DRM trashware you have to buy a supercomputer to even run it, which you can only do when and if M$ gives you permission.

Enjoy your slavery folks, I have actual work to do (I don't mean scanning for viruses, repairing dll issues, trying to reconfigure the network, defrag the OS or rebuild the retarded registry - I mean actual work, the reason we used to turn on the computer to begin with). How do I do that? OS X on Apple hardware, or Ubuntu on anything else.

Winblows are for slaves who don't want to know anything.