Windows 7 could change our perception of PCs
In a recent study from Forrester Research, analysts found that Dell and Hewlett-Packard provided customer experiences that were well below par, while Apple came out on top.
According to the study, which asked 4,500 U.S. consumers to rate the usefulness and enjoyability of products, Dell received a "poor" rating in overall customer experience. The company mustered a "very poor" when it came to the customer's enjoyment using Dell products. HP's experience was rated as "poor," while Apple led the way for computer manufacturers with an overall "good" experience.
Bruce Temkin, the study's author, wrote that while PC manufacturers have some work to do to enhance the consumer's experience, Windows also contributed to the low marks.
"I do think Microsoft's software has a bit to do with it," Temkin wrote. "Consumers don't distinguish problems with the operating system from problems with the PC manufacturer. Bottom line, the Windows ecosystem needs an extreme customer experience makeover."
I agree with Temkin. But I also believe that Windows 7 is the single Windows OS that can improve the consumer's experience.
Aside from compatibility issues, one of my biggest complaints with Windows Vista was its design. Microsoft tried to be too fancy with the look and feel of the OS instead of focusing more on its ease of use. It wasn't an improvement over XP and it ruined my experience.
But Windows 7 is different.
The Windows 7 experience
Windows 7's taskbar is a game-changer. When you roll your mouse over an icon in the taskbar, thumbnails of every open instance of the application will be displayed. If you're unsure which window you want to open, you can hover your mouse over a specific thumbnail and it will be brought to the front in full size. It's a simple addition, but it makes finding open windows much easier. More importantly, it enhances the consumer experience.
Whenever you perform a clean install of an operating system, it's fast. Windows XP was snappy when I installed it on my machine and so was Vista. But after using Windows 7 and comparing it to a clean install of Vista, I found that Windows 7 booted faster than Vista. It also opened applications quicker than its predecessor. The difference wasn't major, but it was noticeable. So noticeable, in fact, that I think consumers will be happy with what they find.
When I used Windows Vista, one of my biggest complaints was the almost constant annoyance from User Account Control. It was everywhere. "Do you really want to open this application?" "Do you really want to download this program?" "Do you really want to sit that way? It might hurt your back." It ruined my experience.
But in Windows 7, the UAC popped up just once or twice over the course of a week. The annoyance was gone. And, once again, it improved my experience.
There are countless other areas where Windows 7 provides an improved experience over Windows Vista. But those three examples illustrate something we can't lose sight of: using Windows 7 is more enjoyable than using its predecessors.
And isn't that all Dell and HP really need? If Temkin is right and most consumers cannot distinguish between the software and the hardware, won't an improved Windows help enhance their overall experience? And won't that, in turn, help PC manufacturers score higher on the survey?
How much higher is the question. Improving a consumer's experience goes beyond installing better software. The hardware needs to follow suit. Though the specs in most PCs are on-par with competing products from Apple, PC manufacturers need to be aware that part of Apple's appeal is in the design of the product. And although HP and Dell have tried to improve the design of their PCs, Macs are still the most attractive computers on the market.
But as these companies try to figure out how to turn things around, it's Windows, that very OS that's currently bringing them down, that will help them break out of their decline.
Check out Don's Digital Home podcast, Twitter stream, 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.
Windows 7 might very well be the best version of Windows that Microsoft has produced but it's still Windows and in that respect I really don't see it changing perceptions.
I have not tried windows 7 personally but the people whose judgement I trust have certainly given a thumbs-up. So based on recommendation, I think Windows 7 will do what Vista failed to accomplish both with the PC users and Corporate Customers. Upgrading! The economy is a factor for corporate customers, but atleast people wont ditch windows entirely and go other way round.
Based upon your prior postings here on CNET and your very public viewpoint about all things Microsoft, I am not surprised that your opinion of Windows 7 would be so jaded and poor. You went into it with a closed mind and predetermined that you would not like it- and you didn't.
I'd be more curious to see what someone with an open honest viewpoint would make of it.
Quite a few people I know use Windows 7 on day-to-day even mission-critical work. I have Windows 7 as well as a guest VM on my Mac and it works perfectly.
I disagree with Don on one point. Windows 7 is a "major" improvement over Vista in terms of performance. It might be slightly "noticeable" only in brand-new top-of-the-line PCs but it's a major improvement on PCs not qualified for a "Vista Compatible" sticker. Also try opening and working with 10 to 20 different applications at a time for a long time on Vista vs Windows 7. Windows 7 even works on a 512MB VM on a Mac. 15s vs 1min (sometimes even 2mins) boot-time --- isn't that "major"?
I think that just goes to show that you don't know me but you have, in some way, validated my point. What you are effectively saying is that because I normally use a Mac that I am predisposed to dislike Windows and therefore that Windows 7 will not change my perception of Windows PCs. I honestly don't think that - I don't go in with a "closed mind" but simply didn't find anything to get excited about. For example, while the graphical effects are nice, can anyone explain to me why MS Paint still only supports only a single document open at the same time? I'm quite prepared to be wowed by Microsoft (hey, it would make life a lot cheaper) but I need "WOW" and not just window dressing, if you'll forgive the pun. Contrary to what you believe, I am platform agnostic and therefore if Windows 7 doesn't float my boat, I really don't seeing much for others who don't already like Windows.
I rather think that what you are looking for is someone who will jump aboard the Windows 7 hype wagon (patent pending).
Yes, using a beta OS is very aggressive, true. But not necessarily dumb. In this case, using it gets your work done faster - yes definitely more reliable than XP. Besides, this is where backups can come in handy.
No crashes so far. As long as you know what you're doing and have a plan for the worse, you should be fine.
Paint is a basic quick crop tool not a photo editor why does it need tabs? Maybe I should be like jobs on the issue of touchscreen computers whats the point?
Nope - it's dumb. No support, lost productivity (reinstall, reinstall, reinstall...) few (if you're lucky) patches against any 0-day exploits (you're usually stuck until the next beta), instabilities in both the OS and in how the OS interacts with the network around it... even documents created by the thing may or may not have full compatibility.
Your 'friends' got lucky so far. Let it fail once, and let's see your explanation to the powers-that-be... right before they perp-walk you out the lobby.
Choosing between multi-document interface (MDI) and single-document interface (SDI) is purely a design choice. Personally, I like single-document interface since you can launch 2 instances of the app anyway... so toggling between two paint files can be handled from the OS task bar (or ALT+TAB) rather than from the "window" menu of the application.
I'm using a Mac now because I write apps mostly against Unix/Linux environments. But I have to say paint in windows is still more handy than... wait a minute, does Mac even have a "paint" app pre-installed with it? I can't seem to find it, if there is one.
In Windows 7, MS has gotten more control over what OEMs can deploy to their users. They can't just throw anything onto the machine. It has to be tested thoroughly first to ensure 3rd party software plays nicely with Windows and other 3rd party applications. In my opinion it is about time. I always advise people to clean install their machines to wipe out all of the bloat OEMs throw on the users desktop which they will never use or worse, runs in the background consuming system resources for no real reason.
It took no time at all to learn OpenVMS. If memory serves me correctly, the guy behind VMS went on to help Microsoft design features in NT.
I miss OpenVMS and I always had a soft spot for Alpha processors from way back. I used to rip out the Alpha ads in Wired back in the early/mid 90s and hang them up :)
HP could do a lot with VMS, but I would imagine they would let it die.
Want to know why customer experience is so poorly for Dell and HP? It's not because of Windows or the machine, it's because of their 3rd rate 3rd world tech support who are absolutely dreadful and in some cases, makes you wonder if they are legally retarded. I love HP products, but their Indian tech support makes me want to gouge out my eyeballs and poor sulphuric acid directly into my brain. I refuse to buy anything by Dell... been very happy with HP products.
Cody
To use it like a quick launch, simply drag the shortcut to the bar just as you did before and let go- you'll get the option to 'pin to taskbar'. It's the same functionality with improvements. But again, it is different in how it looks and that does throw people off.
So, these features may have been "complicated" for newbies (though, I've never heard that nor seen any evidence of that), but not for experienced, logical thinking power users. They are necessary features for more powerful productivity. Microsoft is dumbing down the UI in a failed attempt to fight back at the "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" ads. They shouldn't let that get under their skin by being more mac-like. They should fight back showing where Windows has its strengths.
But, it looks like the "make it dumb" design team in Redmond has won control. I an VERY unhappy with the W7 UI and *NOT* because it's "change" but because it's *LESS*.
Windows is mainly a consumer OS and thats who they are going to appeal to.
What i'm saying is flashiness sells.
If it didn't everyday products wouldn't need to be 300 different colors.
People that pay more feel the need to justify to everyone else and themselves why they paid more.
I'm not saying that Apple is a bad brand, I'm just saying surveys based on brand don't typically tell the whole story.
Her solution? External card reader. Works fine.
Ask her about her Mac? Works perfectly, and she wishes her PC did to.
With Windows, any fault is MS's problem. With a Mac, any fault is anyone but Apple's problem.
Of course people will say they are happy with them.
Still a Mac problem
>>> "Windows holds onto connections to bad disks and devices longer than the Mac does because the Mac polls the ports more often. Simple as that..."
That's the biggest load of BS I've ever heard. You got any proof?
I am Mac developer and I used USBProber (a developer tool) to figure the problem and sure it was. The camera interface bombs out every now and then. The OS attempts to reload it and then the interface bombs. This will continue till the product developer actualy spends time to fix their ROM in the camera.
I tried a USB bluetooth dongle on a PC and it would simply mount but do nothing. all require drivers installed but when it came to actual use nothing. Well a lot of tweaking but nothing again. So what do I do, run a prober (a Windows developer helped me with it) and we found that the firmware on the USB BT device was compatible only with Mac OS and Linux. When it came to Windows it would not do anything.
That explains what I have always believed - use the right tool for the job at hand. Although I love to bicycle I wouldn't dare riding to Niagara from California for a holiday. It would be plain stupid. I would rather take the air route and a car when I am there. If I want to cycle around and enjoy the Niagara I will do it when I get there.
I'm sure it's that way for many people. People who complain about Windows are often not monetarily involved and don't have a stake in it. Same for plenty of Mac users; just because the computers are relatively expensive doesn't mean the users have a stake in saying it's better.
Further, if you feel you've overpaid for something, you are more likely to complain about it, not the other way around. Human nature is to fight back by denouncing the alleged wrong if you've been taken advantage of, not to try and justify getting screwed. So if I buy a Mac, and I promote it, odds are that I don't think I've overpaid, only YOU do.
You're confusing the effect of people who pay a lot and see/hear something that's not really there (a good example is the continuous debate over high-end audio wiring and cables) with people who purchase something, expensive or not, and get buyer's remorse. Not the same thing at all.
I would def get it in for warranty repair though.
"I do think Microsoft's software has a bit to do with it," Temkin wrote" - it has everything to do with it
I think PC manufacturers should take M$ to court on the ground that Windows of trauma suffered by its hapless customers in having to put with Vista idiosyncrasies and lost hours of productivity. That alone should run into $b compensation demands.
"....the Windows ecosystem needs an extreme customer experience makeover." - yeah let's send S. Ballmer to the hairdresser
People don't like change, and people don't like to learn new things. That's why 95% of Americans get home from work and just watch crap TV instead of stimulating their brain with a book or learn something new.
Stop whining and learn something so you can better yourself.
It could be that or it could be poor design. If you have to blame the user for the problems that they are encountering then you simply don't know your market and didn't make the right product for them. Saying that it's their fault is just a cop-out.
You can't blame MS for everything either and notice the OP loses credibility by stating what his issues is.
Flame ms no substance to back it up it's like you guys all have a standard handbook.
Doesn't everyone here work in the tech industry? Oddly, you actually seem to be agreeing with me whilst trying to disagree. You and I are both blaming the manufacturers of the products for the problems that end-users encounter and that's exactly my point - it's the product that is wrong and not the user. Sure, Apple makes some bad decisions and I have absolutely no issue with pointing that out. The product was wrong, not the user.
@monkeyfun14
Er, I don't recall mentioning Microsoft and my comment was directed to product designers everywhere. I think it kinda cute that you stand up for Microsoft but I think you need to understand that not everything that people say is a criticism of the company. Certainly my comment can be directed at Microsoft but as far as computing is concerned it is applicable mostly to hardware manufacturers, OS manufacturers and the software developers making the applications that run on it. Blaming users for problems is just dodging the issue that the product itself, whatever it may be, wasn't right.
"I used vista once! its crap cause i know" get a life, go outside and grill something....
Mmm... grilling...
Why does Apple have such a high rating? Because they have 10% marketshare at best and slightly higher when you include notebooks. And that only recently. Lets see how it holds up over time.
The fact is that people go into the Mac passionately needing to like it.
Ive used the Mac alongside Windows since the original 128 both professionally and personally. I have a Mac G5 dual sitting right here next to my plethora of Windows and Linux PCs.
As a technology professional and computer expert, I find nothing particularly incredible about MacOS and nothing particularly bad about Windows. Over the years they have both had their high and low points.
I suffered through supporting Macs on a TCP/IP network during the OS8 error when Apple couldnt manage to actually produce a working TCP stack or handle pre-emptive multi-tasking. I also suffered through (a few years EARLIER) Windows 3.1 support when the same was true of Microsoft.
People come to these forums with an extremist agenda and have no interest in hearing anything different. Most of the posters have a rabid anti MSFT agenda and its pretty obvious.
Anyone who is an honest technology expert will acknowledge that every system has strengths and weaknesses and success is very rarely accidental and very rarely eternal. Tides ebb and flow with technology.
The Mac thanks to the brilliance of the Jobs marketing machine is the media darling. This article was likely written on a Mac.
To say that the dismal experience provided by HP and Dell with their lousy offshore support and their horrible bloatware isnt the BIGGEST part of their low marks is prepostrous.
Its funny how the endless assertion by the zealots and the columnists who feed them is that Windows has been an essentially unusable torture of a disaster for a decade. Yet it continues to hold large marketshare. The answer is that somehow people simply are shackled to it, or are idiots who dont know better, or any other number of moron conspiracy theories.
The actual reality is that it isnt a 10th as bad as it is portrayed on forums (nor is OSX a 10th as good). But of course its the most zealous who flock to articles like this and of course the columnists want clicks so they can make money. So they print what the people want to hear.
I believe your conclusions about the speed and experience of Windows 7 are correct. I was recently in a situation were I only had access to my slower speed laptop running the Windows 7 Beta (build 7057). When I gained access to my high end Windows XP box again I noticed many of the same things: I was missing the ease of the new task bar, the Windows XP UI felt ancient and dull, and finally even using a much faster computer it seemed as though my applications didn't respond as quickly as they were on the laptop (I have no choice but to assume this was from OS improvements).
I hope Windows 7 helps bring a paradigm shift to the PC market. Unfortunately I have to remain skeptical; the common (novice) user probably won't have the same rich experience. Those who love to hate will use the argument that "Windows 7 is just Vista warmed over [...]" and this will bring down the opinion of the less tech savvy users.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/153624/under_the_hood_windows_7_is_vistas_twin.html
there is a detailed article on why Win7 really is nothing more than a service pack for Vista
And Snow Leopard is the king of changes right?
Funny thing is Leopard isn't even true 64bit.
I am not disagreeing with you that Win7 is merely a "service pack" for Vista; what Vista should have been from the beginning.
My point was simply that Win7 brings to the PC user a better experience than Vista ever did. However, because of the similar appearance and the never ending arguments about Win7 and Vista being one in the same, the novice user will develop a negative opinion about the new OS without having any real reasoning for it (probably).
IMHO, Win7 functionally is leaps and bounds from Vista however similar they may seem.
Based on the working set (memory) and thread count of the kernel, we're supposed to conclude that Vista and Win7 are the same?? ***?
Educate yourself man:
http://channel9.msdn.com/shows/Going+Deep/Mark-Russinovich-Inside-Windows-7/
(If you don't want to use silverlight, select a different fromat from the drop-down just below the video).
It is 6.1 because changing the major version number to 7 would cause issues with non-MS drivers which check the major version number and will say it is not compatible with major version numbers > 6. Blame non-MS driver authors.
XP was version 5.1 - do you really think it was a service pack for Win2k/ME?
@Inconnux
And Snow Leopard is the king of changes right?
Funny thing is Leopard isn't even true 64bit.
And it is for the same reason that Vista is not "true" 64 bit. Both OSs' are dependent on the applications being able to take advantage of the 64 bit architecture. That will only happen with time and development. Also, saying " and Snow Leopard is the king of changes, right", just reveals the utter FUD that you have slung. BTW, I have not heard nor read of one single legitimate source claiming that Snow Leopard was going to be full of changes!! It's mostly under the hood changes. If you have bothered to do any reading on the subject, you might know that already. I doubt it though, judging by the constant FUD. Whatever makes one happy, I guess.
I do not use a mac, but as I have stated in other articles, my next purchase will be a mac. This will be my first apple product ever. Several people I know are planning on or have done the same. ALL because of Vista.
@plugnpl4y
I would agree that Win7 will be better than Vista, but then again I doubt it could be worse. I have used Windows since the DOS 5.0/ Win3.1 days and have always been a windows supporter. Vista is by far the most hated version of windows I have used... yes even over ME. The fact that Windows 7 is nothing more than a service pack to 'repackage' Vista is not going to win me over. I want backwards compatibility with programs coded for XP.
@dhavleak
Microsoft propaganda... I will take the independent review thanks
@rippleflick
yes I would say that XP was Win2k with a shiny new interface. And when XP was released that is exactly what people said it was. XP was the next in line in the 'NT' code base, at the core level it was not very different from W2k. That is why you could use W2K drivers under XP if there wasn't and XP drivers when it was released.
As for the ME part, Win ME was the last in the 'dos' line of OS's and wasn't even close to the same OS as W2K, So XP had nothing to do with Windows ME.
Long story short, a clean brand new Dell/HP means shortcuts scattered all over the desktop, crappy bundled apps, bloated systemtray and non standard ways to do things. No wonder they did that bad.
A clean install is always going to be the best possible experience in the long run.
I wonder if people would be willing to pay higher prices for PC's that don't come with crap or bloatware? Offering something like would help the PC user experience.
After going through several steps, the guy asks, "what PC did you say you had?" So I told him the HP model number and he put me on hold. After a brief delay, he came back and told me that when HP modified windows for their OEM install, they eliminated one of the database driver files and replaced it with their own that unfortunately wasn't compatible with Office. He was able to e-mail the missing file and it fixed all my problems. I do believe a lot of the problems with HP and Dell are their stupidly changed versions of windows, and talking to people who hardly speak English when you call tech support only compounds the problem.
You do have a point but also realize that on average, Mac's are more user friendly, and have fewer initial issues. If you have a printer and plug it in, 99% of the time it pops up, and installs itself with no issues, and installation screens that just make sense, rather than warning screens about new hardware. While myself, and most other techies are oblivious to these because we are very used to seeing them, the average person doesn't like seeing windows pop up with warning messages.
Granted, this is one very small example in the difference in experiences, and only applies to the non-technical crowd, but lets face it, that is 95% of the market. If something is less intrusive, less "threatening", and provides a simple approach to every day tasks, of course it is going to rank high.
Now the technical crowd of course has its beef with any OS (Mac OSX freezing if you don't eject a network drive before disconnecting from the network...**gurmble**)... but remember that basic consumers are not technically inclined at all, and the things we see are warped by years of doing the same thing 1000 times and getting used to the stupidity.
Seems it's quite a long time since you used a Mac... are you kidding? With Rendezvous everything is seamless, network drives mount and unmount by themselves.
"Now the technical crowd of course has its beef with any OS (Mac OSX freezing if you don't eject a network drive before disconnecting from the network...**gurmble**)... but remember that basic consumers are not technically inclined at all, and the things we see are warped by years of doing the same thing 1000 times and getting used to the stupidity."
I connect to my Windows network (Win 2000 and XP, but the server is 2000) at work and have never had the freeze up problem. What type of network (Win. 2000, XP, Vista) and what Mac OS are you running?? I have 10.5.6 and can disconnect at any time without those freezups. Of course, it could be any number things when it comes to cross platform networking. Best of luck with the issues regardless.
Windows users are conditioned to expect a horrible user experience. So if they get a mediocre user experience, they become overjoyed. It would be funny if it weren't so sad.
It's tragic how Microsoft has created such low expectations for the computing world.
Look carefully at Don's comments. He claims "using Windows 7 is more enjoyable than using its predecessors", and cites 3 examples of that "more enjoyable" experience. The 3 examples are the improved taskbar, faster booting, and fewer UAC prompts. Look carefully at those, because only 1 is truly a "more enjoyable" experience -- the taskbar which has some nifty new features. Faster booting and fewer UAC prompts are actually less painful experiences.
As you say, CDubber, "Microsoft has created such low expectations for the computing world", and Don has perfectly exemplified it in this article, where he confuses "better" with "less bad".
IMHO, "more enjoyable" would be adding features like facial recognition and gps photo tagging, hidef video image stabilization, Facebook integration, music lessons from industry legends, and all the other things Apple did with iLife 09.
Not fewer nag prompts from the UAC.
I'm used to an awesome experience [Ubuntu] and Win7 was still a great leap forward
well past OS X 10.5, Vista[of course], and XP in many areas [not all though]
And also, yes the appeal for apple fans is the design of apple BUT that is also the reason that apple is disliked by quite a few of us.
I dual booted Win XP on here just to try it and found my performance to be slower on XP
With 4GB of ram and a AMD Athlon X2 5000+
XP feels buggy.
Actually The downgrade to Xp was done because initially some programs were not compatible with Vista, And The benefits (security, features, overall experience) far out weigh the negatives with Vista with a powerful enough system.
Get your facts right.
Windows 7 is suppose to be much more appealing to corporations.
"downgrading does not make sense to me. But then upgrading makes no sense to me either"
ya agree with you a lot
I know many consumer level users who have bought Vista machines who if frustration have asked to have XP reinstalled. Once XP is reinstalled, their machines ran far faster and had no problems. This had nothing to do with program compatibility, it was a Vista problem. As for security, the FIRST thing they wanted was the idiotic nagging UAC disabled... so much for security.
If consumers were given a choice between an XP machine and a Vista machine at the same price, 95% would chose the XP machine. The only reason Vista is 'doing well' with consumer is because they don't see any other choice.
Will Win 7 be better for the enterprise? Not unless microsoft makes backwards compatibility a priority and I don't mean with Vista. Almost every business has FAR more invested in software than in hardware. If the expensive software they run won't run on Windows 7 then they will continue to use XP.
i can throw random numbers too, not saying much. Furthermore, UAC is not the only security, and the fact remains that Vista still outsells Macs!
MAC benefits from a more closed architecture, and it looks like Windows 7 is going to get the same benefits from controlling all the garbage apps that OEMs like DELL put on consumer computers that end up trashing the experience. One clear cut advantage for MAC-- it has Final Cut PRO.
Programming for UNIX is sort of a dubious pasttime in light of the Microsoft developer platform that is really great, especially for Internet applications. I have a Windows 2008 Server 64-bit machine running on bare-bones hardware that is truly superb; makes me wonder how i ever tolerated SUN machines. No problem with 32-bit apps from reputable vendors and developers.
In the end for the typical consumer the experience is about not only about software, not only what you get from the OS, also apps like TurboTAx (tenaciously resilient to take over attempts by Microsoft), Excel, the games, and all the rest, but the experience is also about the hardware. My home Vista entertainment system is awesome with surround sound, big monitor, lots of system resources. There is just nothing as good in the price range from the MAC. It seems like the higher end the comparison the smaller the difference in price between MAC and MS.
Back before NT Windows absolutely was the most dismal thing around. Truly M$ was the evil empire. But with XP and Server 2003 the quality and security of the Microsoft platform made it the top market choice. So good and successful that upgrades were not as frequent as Microsoft would have liked.
MAC used to be the only choice for Desktop Publishing a long time ago. Just that market niche along kept the company from going bankrupt, one can argue. But now? What does MAC offer? To generalize and oversimplify--Just a boutique shooshy-foo-foo computer.
Just look inside a typical HP box and then open a Mac Pro. No comparison. You may not like the closed-end systems that the OS requires, but you cannot slag the industrial design unless you are talking through your ass. There's a reason Apple products win design awards.
I think Microsoft should offer different levels of user control out of the box. Beginner, Mediate and Experienced. This will make many of these features that are annoying to experienced users not an issue and protect new users from making huge mistakes that can ruin their systems. I believe Windows 7 will do this.
Now lets talk about the hardware, in December I purchase one of the high-end XPS Studio i& machines. I don't think it was Microsoft that can't figure out to how to turn off (or ignore) my external hard drives on restart, I don't think it was Microsoft that installed below grade firewire card forcing me to spend money to buy a new (Texas Instruments) one. I don't think it was Microsoft that installed the crappy ATI 4850 that not only crashes anytime I go to full screen video but also creates power surges to in my pro-audio external sound card. Yes it might be Microsoft that creates the software for these lazy manufactures to create decent drivers, but it is not Microsoft that gives me the run-around canned answers when I call Dell support.
Believe me I am not letting Microsoft off the hook at all, I am an interaction designer so I have endless complaints based on user experience. I just find it a little frustrating to spend almost $2,000 on Dell's top of the line machine and even though I can show them (with their exclusive remote desktop) the crash log and it clearly shows the video card being the culprit they still continue to give me canned answers. And after several tech support calls their solution to my reboot issue was to start shutting stuff off in the bios and when that failed they then told me to unplug my devices on restarts. Not completely annoyed by this I asked if they would notify me when there is a new bios update (since there is clearly issues) and there response was that they don't notify users of bios updates and tried to reassure me that was nothing was wrong. Let not even go into the printer that the wireless controller died one week past the 1 year warranty (you know the one that cost almost as much as the printer itself to replace), or the one that says I am out of ink two days after replacing them, and yes I ran the software to align and adjust (obviously this last complaint is not exclusive to Dell, there is a reason I didn't purchase yet another HP printer.
Point being I think Microsoft and many others need to think about how and what they sell. It is not just the pretty glossy white covers on their computers it is the user experience. Maybe it is because I don't use a Mac but I don't hear these kind of issues when my friends purchase a Mac. Believe me I thought long and hard before purchasing another PC. If I didn't already have so much invested in it I probably would have made the switch. Apples price point was the deal breaker for me. With all the hardware issues that I have had,,, that extra $1000.00 doesn't seem all that bad, especially since I could have run parallels.
~ C
You sir are a prime candidate for a mac mini. I just did the switch and am very happy. I am running WinXP-SP3 stably as a virtual machine guest on external e-SATA WD Raptor HDD (very fast). I kept all my expensive gear. The mac mini comes outfitted with everything I need except it could use a bit more ram ($55 for 4GB on newegg.com).
I'm running the WinXP VM in "unity" mode so going back and forth is seamless and elegant.
I get the best of both worlds: a safe browsing experience on the mac platform, the use of my Windows program applications like Office, a stable interface with Time Machine backup (on separate partition of the same Raptor drive) that backs up BOTH OS's, and well....I could go on, but needless to say I'm happy in the switch. I went from a nice fast gaming rig I built to this mac mini (don't game much anymore) and could not be happier except for want of a bit more ram (already purchased). I'm running VM not parallels. I couldn't get parallels to install while VM was very nice.
Happy computing in whatever choice you make :)
he needs the power for something
an i7 and a radeon hd 4850 are pretty nice parts
Mac Mini isn't prolly going to work for him
But Mac's just work remember?
You see, this is just the sort of comment that gives you no credibility and you have no place in a sensible discussion. Frankly, you and AppleRocks1963 are just opposite sides of the same coin, and for that you should be ashamed of yourself.
Now do us all a favor and play someplace else. Grown ups are talking.
My god man! You've topped yourself once again! An astounding display of rhetorical wit and skill. I am in awe.
llort
The only problem is that Apple fans can't stand it when Microsoft puts out something that equals that satisfaction rate because it makes them doubt paying all the extra money for it. Probably the same kind of feeling when the owner of a Ferrari gets left in the dust by a souped up Nitros injected Toyota like on the first Fast And The Furious movie.
I own a tablet with XP, a desktop with Vista, a work laptop with XP, and a MacBook with Leopard. I use each of them at least once a day. My primary is my MacBook because it just seems to do what I need, and does it better. It cost nearly twice what my work laptop did yet I don't feel I have to justify the cost and I could care less if Microsoft came out with an OS that gave equal satisfaction. If they did I would install it on my PC and still use my MacBook too. There is a misconception about the high cost of Apple. Yes it costs way more to buy a MacBook than a comparable Dell. But we are talking about an operating system here, and I paid $129 for Leopard and $325 for Vista. From that standpoint I cannot image how much it would cost if Microsoft built and sold their OS/Hardware like Apple does. All that being said there are times when I really enjoy my Windows desktop (gaming anyone) and would not entirely abandon Microsoft. I'm not a "fanboy" of Apple, but a happy Apple AND Microsoft user.
Yes, Super2 I agree with you that Windows 7 is much better than Vista. "Seven" includes a host of new features but most notably refines the overall experience for everyone (basic and power users alike). Windows 7 not only runs faster on the same hardware as Vista but also does it with more finesse. And the biggest benefit of W7 is the compatibility it shares with the latest software and hardware- seamlessly. How can Microsoft do this? Because, my friends, WIndows 7 is actually based off of...Windows Vista! Yes, the basic underlying code is a modified version of Windows Vista. Microsoft has noted this several times since the 7's introduction. While Windows diehards were clamoring for XP 2, Microsoft did the next best thing and designed (in effect) Vista 2. Ensuring compatibility with devices and software is a huge issue for Microsoft; especially considering the large install base of users. So, instead of alienating users by trying to change everything, they (Microsoft) wanted to ensure that compatibility would be as seamless as possible.
Your second paragraph, however, is where I think we part ways. Apple fans, at least those that are able to see clearly, love when Microsoft "gets things right". This drives innovation for EVERYONE. Apple fans are fans because we enjoy the rich and seamless experiences that Apple can provide us. Back-ups, photo sharing, music creation, etc. are just easier to do on a Mac than on Windows. As a newly converted Mac fan, I can easily point out the flaws of OS X just as easily. Once Windows 7 launches, I'm sure that some Mac users will be envious.
That Windows 7 didn't work the way I wanted is part of the reason I'm not a major fan. For example, it won't find my printer connected to my wireless router yet Windows XP is quite happy with it. However, I am prepared to cut it some slack simply because it is a beta and we'll see if things improve with the next release. Right now, however, Windows 7 certainly is not perfect.
- by naterandrews April 21, 2009 8:32 AM PDT
- When you have a standardized operating system that most PC manufacturers use by default, with slight to no differentiating factors- it is hard to distinguish your brand/product from other Windows builders beyond price. That said, I partially agree that Windows does affect ratings for satisfaction, etc.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- by pcdude2143 April 21, 2009 9:08 AM PDT
- Yeah, I'm part of the total rewrite group as well. I'm guessing the main problem with Windows is that everything on the lower levels gets lost as they build the higher levels. So now their piling layer after layer of junk on top of a weak foundation.
- Like this
-
- by biffhenerson April 21, 2009 12:15 PM PDT
- I agree, they need to start a new OS from scratch. No backwards compatibility. No bloat. Yeah they will have two OS's for a period of time but the good news is that at some time they can dump the legacy compatibility bloat. Same goes for Microsoft Office. So much of that package bloat is around to support older software add-ins that use COM+, OLE, etc. At some point they need to draw a line and dump that baggage. On the plus side, it may create jobs for those that need to rewrite those old applications that interface with Office using modern methods.
- Like this
-
- by pithenumber April 21, 2009 1:02 PM PDT
- @biff
- Like this
-
- by unifex_ April 24, 2009 4:03 AM PDT
- @ pith - if people are using old software, they don't need a new OS.
- Like this
-
- by NikEst April 24, 2009 7:12 AM PDT
- No backward compatibility and that's a good idea. Actually, they should release a re-written OS to developers only for a year, to let them port existing software and drivers, then do a public release. Oh, and while the OS is out in developer release, they need to sit and twiddle their thumbs so that what the developers write will actually work.
- Like this
-
- by pithenumber April 25, 2009 10:04 AM PDT
- @Nik
- Like this
-
Showing 1 of 4 pages (193 Comments)Windows Vista has been plagued by slow adoption and bad press, so notably satisfaction for most PC vendors is down. Windows 7 could be a "game changer" because of new ease-of-use features for less demanding users, and better performance for power users. Microsoft is vamping up it's advertising campaign to push Windows into an overall positive light, and this should help shore up brand and partner confidence as well.
Getting into the nitty-gritty details of future Windows, I join a small but growing crowd of Windows users that believe Microsoft must completely rewrite the OS from the ground up. Faster file system, completely new programs, safer and stronger architecture, etc. Once the Windows brand (perhaps post-7?) regains the enthusiasm and partner unity, I think Microsoft should launch this brand new, optimized OS. Yes, there will be a clusterf*ck of hardware and software issues (which could probably be solved with some kind of Legacy or Classic mode), but Microsoft could push forward with a powerful, tightly web-enabled and most importantly SECURE from the top down OS.
Long story short, Windows 7 will help raise satisfaction (how much is uncertain), and with some smart maneuvering, branding, and partnering- Windows (and these beleaguered PC partners) will regain their former "glory".
I'm also part of the "Microsoft is a dirty company" group. But that's another story, for another time.
some people NEED backwards compatibility
and MS can expect all devs play along?
of course not