Vista won't be abandoned so here's how to fix it

Why won't you abandon me, Microsoft?

(Credit: CNET)

Since Microsoft has abandoned my plan of abandoning Vista, I feel compelled to help the company out in any way I can. And while I still believe abandoning Vista is the only true option of fixing Windows, I can appreciate the fact that Microsoft has dumped a huge sum of cash into the OS and it's loath to lose out.

Of course, with reports suggesting Vista will become a target for hackers in 2008 and now, even Microsoft executives have no idea what "Vista Capable" really means, I can't help but think this operating system is tanking faster than Microsoft Bob.

But I digress. Although Windows XP running Service Pack 3 is almost twice as fast as Windows Vista running SP1 and major hardware manufacturers are still selling XP machines out of desire for once, Microsoft wants to hold on to Vista regardless of where it takes the company. Will it force the company into a tailspin? I think it already has. Will it get worse? Possibly. But if Microsoft heeds my warnings and follows some of the tips I will outline below, Windows Vista may not be the utter failure I think it will be if nothing changes.

Tip 1: Go open source

Yes, you read that correctly. As far as I can tell, the only real solution to fixing Windows' slew of issues is to go open source. Now, contrary to popular belief, open-source software does not mean free software, so Microsoft can continue to sell the OS on an open-source platform without sacrificing its bottom line.

What will this achieve, you ask? It's quite simple really: an open-source Vista will allow any and all people to fix the code as they see fit and (for once) create a solid and secure Windows OS. Even better, it'll put Apple on notice and help create a possible marketing campaign surrounding the fact that Leopard is the only major OS that doesn't allow users to do what they want with a product they have purchased.

Perhaps most important, an open-source Windows Vista will open the floodgates against malicious hackers who have been fighting against Microsoft employees instead of the public at large. Simply put, you would no longer need to rely on Microsoft cronies to maintain your security--you can do it for yourself and patch any and all holes you can find.

Tip 2: Eliminate all of those versions and only sell Ultimate

Do we really need a slew of Vista iterations? I certainly don't think so. In this realm, Apple has it right: release one version of the software and maintain simplicity. Sure, people like you and me may know what the differences between Vista Home Basic and Vista Ultimate are, but can the same be said for Grandma Jane?

Simplifying its lineup of products will also help Microsoft reduce wait times at its call center (who else has sat through a voice prompt service asking you which version of Windows you have?) and allow for greater control over security and updates.

For my money, I would keep Windows Vista Ultimate on store shelves and get rid of everything else.

Tip 3: Stop focusing on Google and start focusing on Apple

I don't think there is any debating the fact that Microsoft is obsessed with Google. With Steve Ballmer making outrageous claims saying, "Google is only beating us in search" and the company making terrible acquisitions just to try to compete with Google, it has lost its focus.

First and foremost, Microsoft is a software company that has made Bill Gates rich because of Windows and Office; everything else is secondary. And as Google became the online powerhouse in this industry, Microsoft became envious and has tried to find ways to knock the former off its totem pole. Needless to say, it's a fight Microsoft can't win.

Microsoft needs to refocus its efforts on Vista and try to make it a compelling product that consumers actually want to buy. Google will always be there, and it will always be powerful--the same can't be said for Windows if Microsoft continues to ignore it.

Tip 4: Ditch Windows 7 and bring Windows online

This industry is moving towards the online space. Period. And so far, most accounts out of Redmond have stated that the next version of Windows will improve on some of the issues with current iterations of the OS, but no mention has been made (or even rumors leaked) that Microsoft will create an online element for Windows.

And it's for that reason that it should stop wasting its money on another desktop solution and use its endless supply of cash on something worthwhile--an online version of Windows. Can you imagine the surprise on the face of Steve Jobs if Microsoft hit the stage at CES in five years and said that Windows will be heading to the Internet? Even I would be excited to see that.

An online Windows would accomplish two extremely important goals: it would create an extremely compelling reason to buy the service, and it would give Microsoft a competitive advantage over Mac OS X for once.

As it stands right now, the future of Windows Vista doesn't look good. With a host of issues that could easily cripple the OS and even more problems with executive strategy, Microsoft is in a bad situation. And unless it changes its strategy, look for those problems to grow.

[Leria]

Microsoft should not abandon Vista, and should not just sell Vista Ultimate. They should just sell Vista Home Basic and Vista Ultimate...... those are the only two things that have a real market: Ultimate for power users like myself who want Windows Media Center, and Home Basic for those who just need basic functionality.

They should also make the $300 dollar package (retail and upgrade) able to be installed on up to 3 computers at the same time!

[marpincan]

Actually they should make it $100 package that is installable on 3 computers. TRhe only way they are moving the vista at this point in time is by packaging it as part of a system and stacking the cards with similar systems packaged with XP. I recently purchased a couple of middle of the road computers (dual core but not top of the line as I am not into the games) and what I found was that for the same price most of the systems bundled with Vista came with far better hardware (bigger hard drives, more memory etc.) than the systems bundled with XP. Why are they doing this ? Well it is simple - given the opportunity to buy the same hardware and pick your OS for the same price, most people would go with XP. So it looks like Micro soft is pricing the OEM versions of VISTA far cheaper than XP. OBVIOUSLY BECAUSE THAT IS THE ONLY WAY THEY CAN MOVE VISTA. Know this brings me to another point as when purchasing The retail version, MS is charging conciderably more for VISTA than XP so IMO They are ripping off the retail purchaser of VISTA big time.
So what did I do under this situation ? Well I bought the 2 almost identical computers in 2 totally different ways. For the First Machine, I bought the better hardware that came with VISTA (as far as I was concerned, based on price- I was getting VISTA for free or close to it and I could always dump it if I did not like it). For the 2nd machine, I bought an almost identical computer with out the OS and dumped one of my coppies of XP into it (only difference is first machine had a Mach Speed MB and 2nd Machine had an Intel MB - BOTH mb's being all in one with same capabilities and in the same price range). Based on my experience with the 2 machines and what I use them for, I would have to say that VISTA is nothing more than a bloated version of XP. Ya it works and based on what I do, I haven't even found any buggs in it. But i do see where it is at times slower than the machine I have running XP and I can here the hard drive clumking away as it does its vertual memory thing. IMO - I could do everything I am doing on the Vista machine more efficiently on the XP machines (I have more than 1) so short of another reason for making money, I am not quite sure why MS bothered. VISTA does not bring much to the table. Keep giving it way and people will use it. That is the only reason I have 1 machine running it.

[c152driver]

Is bashing Vista just the fashionable thing to do these days? This phenomenon seems to be feeding on itself with people declaring that Vista stinks simply because other people say it does.

Is Vista perfect? No. Is any operating system? I have been using Vista for a several months and find the experience to be an improvement over Windows XP.

Sadly, I think the Vista bashing boils down to a fear of a change.

[three_toed_frog]

Seriously. I agree.

Vista is not nearly as bad as countless others in the tech industry make it out to be. I've had a few issues with slowdowns and lockups, but because I know where to look, I find that these issues aren't the fault of Vista.

Poorly written drivers and programs are the culprits here, but figuring that out would actually require these so called "journalists" to do some actual research; an art that has long been dead.

I have an issue with each and every one of these points in the article, but the one most glaring here is the last one.

I can't possibly understand how you would bring an entire operating system "online."

Yes, I know there are projects out there that aim to do this, but those are more like operating environments, very much like Windows 1-3.x which ran on top of DOS.

You still need a browser to run them in, and that browser needs a platform to run on. Windows, Linux, Mac OS, Solaris; those are platforms. Those are operating systems.

The last time I checked, Firefox didn't classify as a stand alone operating system that you could boot from.

Jesus. -_-;

[jbuchacnet]

Wow! Sounds to me like you are either a Microsoft employee or have been brain washed. Try finding inexpensive virus software for Vista. First, there are not many on the market to choose from, and the ones that are available cost more money than they should. Also, does any of your old software work with Vista? I doubt it. Have you tried to manually delete any files yet. Good Luck!

[three_toed_frog]

In response to jbuchacnet,

An inexpensive AV solution that works with Vista.

How about Grisoft's AVG? They produce a free edition that, while not as full featured and customizable as their paid-for "professional" edition, it does the job and it does it well and with efficiency.

And also, all of my old software, including a few 3D games from the mid 1990s work fine in Vista.

And uh... why wouldn't you be able to delete things? You're doing it wrong, I think.

Not everyone who genuinley likes Vista is a Microsoft employee.

[jbuchacnet]

in response to three_toed_Frog. I appreciate the virus the referral, already found avast that does the job, but seriously......i'm deleting my files wrong? I tried to delete in Command Prompt mode and by selecting the files with Administrator rights. Try to delete a file from the system 32 folder! If you figure that one out then I digress.

I agree that not everyone who likes Vista is a Microsoft employee, but can you blame me. I have a 3 games and Norton so far that will not work on Vista. Overall, I just don't like how they changed the Control Panel, etc. Don't take me the wrong way, I like change, upgrades, continuous improvement, etc. , but I don't like all the User Control Permissions and Access Denied prompts.

[cuvtixo]

Their stock has not been performing as hoped- basically their performance for investors translates into finding shortcomings with their product.
You can disagree, but...

[john3347]

No, c152driver, Vista bashing is not a fear of change. Vista bashing is buying a new computer with Vista pre-installed (you know, all the right drivers, etc.) and seeing what junk it is with all of its pop-up windows and freeze-ups and changes for the sake of change and then having to figure out what drivers etc. are going to be necessary to upgrade it to Windows XP (Windows 2000 is no longer available) so you will have a functioning machine.

[gangadude]

Not so. I've been using Vista on a 2GB RAM Dell XPS 1210 and it has been a terrible experience from day one. I try to open a folder and have to wait for 10 seconds (do it a 100 times and there go 20 minutes of your day staring at nothing). Vista crashes or periodically one of the svchost services consumes 100% of a dual-core CPU. The thing is a beast consuming resources and offering little in return. My next laptop will be a Mac - so much for fear of change.

[webcocnet]

Um, it's not Vista bashing. It's Vista studying.
http://thetechblogsa.blogspot.com/2007/11/vista-choking-on-xps-dust-trail.html

[JT_07]

I normally love the articles on CNet but this one completely misses the mark. It wouldn't matter if you''re talking about Vista or Linux or Apple. The article title implies that you'll give ways to fix Vista but all you did was bash MS.

I agree that there are areas of improvement but what was said in this article could be applied to any OS and nothing was specific to Vista. And by the way, going open source is not all it's cracked up to be. Have you ever tried to install anyting on Linux?

[The_Decider]

What does Linux have to do with a license? They are separate things.

BTW, installing 99% of the thousands of Linux titles takes a single mouse click. That has nothing to do with a license either.

[shaganasty]

yes, as a matter of fact I have installed programs in linux and it is not hard.
besides being easy, you will also learn about an o/s.
I run suse, windows xp pro and vista Ultimate and rate them in the same order with vista being at the bottom as it "always" has problems with no response

[spoonman522]

The author might not have seen this, but it turns out that all those reports of XP being almost twice as fast as Vista are misleading. It turns out that they used one piece of software on XP and a different piece of software on Vista to compare results. So obviously you are going to get varying results. To read more check this link out: http://www.betanews.com/article/XP_SP3_outperforms_Vista_SP1_but_less_when_running_same_Office_version/1196208954
Other than that I have been a Vista user since early March, no probs here. Definitely perfer it over XP.

[chash360]

The tests you speak of were not objective quantifiable comparisons of performance, but did prove qualitatively, beyond any doubt that XP runs faster than Vista. The only part in question is by how much, which can't be measured with the tests, because they were not 'apples to apples' comparisons. Older software, on an Older OS, ran faster than Newer software on a Newer OS, with the same hardware, you can't get much more clearer than that!

[jbuchacnet]

We bought a new computer for our Mother and it has Vista Home edition. What a nightmare. She installed Norton AntiVirus 2003, which is not Vista compatible. Now, we can't uninstall the Norton drivers because the uninstaller is not compatable with Vista. Warning messages upon every boot up, and no way to fix. I tried to manualluy delete by going into driver folder under \Windows\System32 and even under Administrator rights you can delete anything from this folder. So, with that being said, not only do you not have permission to your files, chances are none of your old software is compatible.....what a surprise time to buy all new software. I will never switch to Vista...happy with XP....It seems with each new Microsoft OS release more and more user access is take away.

[sanenazok]

Download the Norton Removal Tool:
http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT/tsgeninfo.nsf/docid/2005033108162039

You can also Google it. It runs on Vista to remove Norton programs no problem. Don't go deleting files from C:\Windows\System32

Lastly, don't complain about installing incompatible software. Research is fun.

[bnoble126]

Vista
I have used Vista for over 6moths now. It over priced,but I love Vista. It runs very good on my computer, with almost no problems. I don't see what all the Vista hater are talking about.. I thing Cnet need to get some people working for them that are not in darkages.

[Al Giacoio]

Yes Don your an idiot ! ! ! I have been running Vista and have had no problems - AT ALL. Go back to your MAC and play with your pictures, tunes and whatever else you do and maybe when you grow up to be a big boy you will buy a PC. MAC OS Kitty has more security flaws, application problems and is far more unstable then it's prior version or did you forget to mention that!!!

[menotbug]

Wow. Anyone else find Al's post slightly ironic?

[cuvtixo]

not purposefully ironic, but yeah, almost too ironic to be moronic or idiotic- its Giacoionic!

[rapier1]

1) Going open source won't fix any problems. So many people seem to think its a panacea but its not. It doesn't magically make things better or somehow create a large pool of highly skilled programmers dying to work on the product for free. Under the right circumstances this can happen but its not a cure all.
2) Eliminating all those versions is, in case anyone missed this like the author seems to have, would act in a way diametrically opposed to open source. Open source *generates* multiple version and different distributions very very quickly. The BSD world splintered into Free, Net and Open. Linux has more distros than you can shake a stick at. If you want to get rid of 'confusion' of multiple versions of an OS you may want to rethink your advocation of open source.
3) Its sort of stunning to hear people say "Google will always be there" the same way that people used to say "Microsoft will always be there".
4) I can't think of anything worse than cloud computing in as far as privacy and performance goes.

[cuvtixo]

Open source will fix some problems. This article doesn't suggest its panacea- just an improvement. In the case of Windows, there already is a large pool of highly skilled programmers working for free! A big problem with Vista seems to be drivers- and publically available source does seem to help with driver issues.
The problem with multiple versions isn't when the different versions are FREE!! You have set up multiple straw-man arguments here, which is actually pretty clever, as long you realize your not really arguing or refuting the author

[Penguinisto]

Simply "going open source" won't do anything if the license is still restrictive and the codebase is crap. OTOH, there is incentive and a huge potential to be gained by allowing folks to clean up Windows and improve it. Sadly, one look at MSFT's EULA will tell you exactly how free and open such a move would be... as in: not at all.

2) You are incorrect about "multiple versions" - The top Linux distros all adhere to the LSB (Linux Standards Base). I can very easily tell you the diffs between Fedora, Ubuntu, and SuSE, their merits and weaknesses, and which is best suited for what situation. Not so with Vista. Also, all basic Linux distros carry the same basic price: $0.00 Again, not so with Vista.

Google is just a company that is good at what it does. MSFT is obsessed with them, hates them, loathes them... to the detriment of their nont-Google-competing products. Why? I dunno. Ask Ballmer.

I actually agree with you on #4.

As for what MSFT should do to avoid the tailspin they're in? It's real simple:

* stop obsessing over Google.
* clean up Vista. Overhaul the thing. Entirely. Like Apple did with OSX. Gut the bastard and start over.
* accommodate cross-platform tech, instead of doing your level best to hinder it.

Those would be a good start...

/P

[cuvtixo]

Windows doesn't compete with OS X (except in the media?) Apple is a hardware company- M$ is software (and lion's share of profit is Office, not Windoze.) If Vista enhances Office, (to the detriment of other OSes, mainly Linux) its done its job. Vista does fail, however, if it is not as easy to install and setup as linux distros like Ubuntu. Right now its seems easier to buy a new Vista PC than to upgrade- and as long as the economy doesn't tank - maybe that's OK

[The_Decider]

Really?

Apple makes Processors? How about Motherboards, Graphics Cards, hard drives?

No?

Hmmm, they are as much of a hardware business as Dell is. Not that I am lumping Apple and Dell into the same category.

Putting together hardware into a coherent package does not a hardware company make.

[chash360]

In that sense then HP, IBM are not hardware OEM's for PC's either, niether makes x86 CPU's anymore, neither makes video cards.

I would argue that Apple is actually the one of the most complete Computer providers as they are one of the few that developes or integrates the hardware, AND actually writes the OS to go with it.

Thats way more than what Dell does. I don't think any other OEM does this for the consumer market PC platform. IBM was the last for PC's. There are a few that do this in the enterprise markets (HP, Sun, etc.) but thats a different platform, different story.

Integrating different hardware and making it all work together, and selling it, does a hardware company make. If you have to layout a printed circuit board, choose circuits and chips to use, and/or write a driver to go with the product I will qualify you as a Hardware OEM, even if you don't make chips or the printed circuit board, or the harddrive, etc.

That does not qualify Dell, because all they do is slap there name on it, maybe designed some plastic, but its mostly off the shelf, or outsourced. No real hardware or software dev there.

[Penguinisto]

You misspoke when you said:

"Leopard is the only major OS that doesn't allow users to do what they want with a product they have purchased."

Leopard (like all previous versions of OSX before it) is based on the Darwin (BSD-derivative) kernel, and yes you are allowed to modify the crap out of it, since Darwin is open source.

/P

[cuvtixo]

Although Darwin has not been given the kind of support Apple should give it! and kernel developers are disenchanted with microkernels- Xnu is just not interesting or promising enough for other unix developers. MacPorts.org is a good start, but Apple really should cooperate better with existing Open Source projects (didn't play very nice with KDE Konquerer) They're better than MS in this regard, though.

[oludir]

For once, comments that make sence.

[sanenazok]

Look kid, if you don't like it don't use it. The OS on your system is not like your parents - you ACTUALLY GET TO CHOOSE IT. So you don't like Vista, then use something else and stop writing completely un-researched filler (referring to your cite to the XP is faster than Vista crap "study").

With a title like that I was thinking you would be offering some sort of optimization tips or something remotely useful. Also I've been using Vista for six months. If I didn't like it (I do, really) I would do something you seem incapable of - I would STOP USING THE STUPID THING.

Finish your homework rather than writing filler. Better yet, finish your website you lazy bum: http://www.donreisinger.com/

[therealwillhill]

Vista is all that's worst about M$ and should be dumped as fast as possible. Crippled versions of Vista exist only to haggle as much money as possible out of home users. But going ultimate only won't fix performance issues which are based on digital restrictions and other user hostile code. Sabotage of competitors is another issue that won't go away, as Google and Anti-Virus makers have pointed out.

Going "Open Source" won't fix things either. M$ has already tried this with their "Shared Source" rip off. Systems that don't give users real freedom don't attract developers, which is why M$'s code has not been cleaned out in the last five years of their program. But M$ can't deliver freedom because they have promised to deliver you to the entertainment industry. Besides, if people want free software they can start with GNU/Linux which already works and does what users want.. The first thing people will do with any real freedom M$ gives them is remove anti-competitive traps and make their software work with Wine.

Don't believe the things I say? Read the Vista Failure Log, where experts tell you better than I can:

http://slashdot.org/~twitter/journal/177855

[LJKelley]

First, I enjoy Vista just as it is and use it on 4 different PCs (not all mine but in the family) and they work great and better than XP.
Second going open source would KILL Windows, because of the hate out there the community wouldn't evolved instead hackers would find easier targets and hacks. Let's face it you and other people will always be critical of MS and would still hate them even if they solved world hunger.
Third you can't have a truely online OS, you will always need something to boot it all and I don't think most people would be comfortable with everything being shipped across the globe... we have our private files.
YOU FAIL!!

[Flatworm]

I really wonder what is the genesis of the new cottage industry of Vista bashing. Vista is GREAT. Sure it's different, and while there are some complications, these have arisen from a resistance by some hardware manufacturers to provide Vista drivers for their legacy products DESPITE Microsoft's nearly Herculean efforts to make Vista available with the longest lead time anyone ever heard of in any industry of any type ever (HP, are you listening?). These are NOT problems with Vista but instead are the product of lazy, careless and/or greedy other companies who seek to blame Vista for their own shortcomings.

I LOVE Vista. I used XP since it came out (and 98 and 95 and v. 3 and even v. 2 Windows before them). It took a little bit of getting used to, but Vista is "more better" than XP than XP was over 98. It's just different, and takes a little bit (a VERY little bit) of learning.

Now that I have grown genuinely accustomed to Vista, going back to XP (which I run on my other computer in my home and use in the office where I work) is something I tolerate, like when I need to drive an old, beat-up car rather than my spiffy new one, or watch the old standard-def TV in my bedroom rather than the new Sony KDL-52XBR4 in my living room.

What is the matter with you people? Remember the resistance of old WordStar users to WordPerfect when it was first introduced. Some things, like human brain inertia, never change.

I have NEVER, EVER had a crash on Vista and I do a lot of video editing and multitasking with high-maintenance applications. XP was adequate (which plays a part in the resistance to Vista). Vista, however, is actually SUFFICIENT, and in addition, it's actually elegant.

[dminott]

Vista offers so many advantages over XP.
Yes, there is a learning curve, as with any new software.
I think you have to look at the overall picture, since each
user's experience and needs are different.
I use the sidebar every day, the snipping tool regularly,
and the performance info & reliability tools to see how
the addition of new software affects my system.
The only drawback I've found, so far, is that the system
is not as fast as I would like, even though I have 2GB RAM installed.
I have the UAC disabled, and after 3-4 months of operation,
I have NEVER encountered any spyware or malware.
I am using OneCare for protection, and it makes maintenance
on our three laptops easy and practical.
I can only see things getting even better as the service packs
are released!

[Zeppo]

Some folks are naive and as the years pass remain that way. The writer of this original article is one such person.

[Dango517]

The Giant is steering from it's slumber and has identify the pesky insects that annoys it's sleep.

Wonder what would happen if the Windows users rallied and attacked the next release of Mac and Linux? I beat the Vista users alone could cause them untold grief and bring about there demise.

Are you sure you want this war Pods and Gibbons? Better sign a truce quickly. We're on to you.

[jordanpdx]

I won't even pretend to imply that I know much about computers. This is my 3rd computer in 7 years. Started out with ME, then XP and now Vista Home Premium (predoaded) and I, for my part, have had no problems with Vista. In all honesty, it's seems to be working better than the previous two OS I have had. But to be honest though, I haven't downloaded anything other than Adobe, Ispell and MSN Virtual Earth. All my software is Windows (anti-virus, etc.) and it all seems to work seemlessly. I was guilty of downloading this and downloading that just to see what it would do on my other OS's. And what would that do? Screw up my system. So from my perspestive, I decided to go against the trend of using different manufactures programs and just stick with Windows apps and contrary to what others have told me through the years as to why I should hate Windows, I went with the flowl and flow it does.

[gangadude]

To all those trying to defend Vista - if you enjoy it, by all means - continue using it. Personally, I'm taking it off a 2GB Dell XPS 1210 (came with Vista pre-installed) because it's been nothing but a nightmare. The system is unstable, at times for no apparent reason consumes 100% of the CPU, and has a host of seriously irritating "features" like having to wait for explorer windows to open or not being able to delete files without going through some intricate ownership taking song and dance. No - I don't have a virus on my machine (it's heavily protected by anti-virus and firewall) and I downloaded and installed the recent two "performance enhancement" patches. It's just a miserable product that pretty much deserves most of the abuse being heaped at it.