Windows XP vs. Vista vs. Linux
Mike Ricciuti of CNET says Windows XP is "doomed" and that "most of us will likely be using Vista sometime in the near future" (see Microsoft: All roads lead to Vista). In contrast, Ina Fried of CNET writes that Windows XP may get another reprieve, the title referring to the fact that major computer manufacturers are slated to stop selling Windows XP in June. Who's right?
One reason Mike cites for the Vista assimilation is that "Dell launched a Vista migration program to nudge big companies toward the OS. The PC maker's 'client migration solution' will cut migration costs..." I see this as evidence of Vista resistance. If there was value to Vista, the cost of migrating would not be an issue.
Mike also writes that "Microsoft is greasing the skids for Vista acceptance by offering free telephone support for Vista Service Pack 1 through March 2009".* Microsoft never did this with XP service packs, so why are they doing it for Vista? They are trying to get people to go where they don't want to go.
Let's not forget the price cuts to shrink-wrapped versions of Vista which were to take effect at the same time Service Pack 1 was released. As Don Reisinger wrote (see Vista price cuts show how much trouble Microsoft is in), those price cuts were really a publicity stunt.
I don't think Don's article went far enough though. To me, the price cuts were intended to break out of computer industry news vehicles (like CNET and ComputerWorld) and be reported to the general public. No techie is going to decide to go with Vista because its a few dollars cheaper today than yesterday. No, the audience for the price cut announcement was non-techies.
And the message wasn't the price cuts (hardly anyone buys Vista in a box on the shelf of a retailer). The real message was that Service Pack 1 was about to be released, news that normally stays within the IT industry. The subliminal point being that while Vista may have been bad initially, now it's OK. An unusually well done bit of PR.
As for Mike's point that "XP may work, but it's not pretty", that's damning the OS with faint praise. The four regulars on the Personal Computer Show agree on only two things: making backups and avoiding Vista. After Hank Kee kicked the tires on Vista he was challenged to provide reasons to migrate from XP. All he could come up with was a comment from his wife, "it's pretty".
Back in November, I wrote about a dog and pony show where Microsoft tried to scare people about how insecure Windows XP was. That they have to use FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) to sell Vista says a lot. Think of a politician trashing their opponent rather than touting themselves.
I wrote a trio of postings here on why I think XP is the better choice for Windows users (just comparing XP and Vista, not considering Macs and Linux)
-- I pity the fool (Windows XP good, Vista bad)
-- When to convert from Windows XP to Vista, Part 2
-- Putting Windows Vista on trial
In short, until Vista is at Service Pack 2 or has been around for at least another year and a half, it shouldn't be on your radar screen.
In large part, Mike's argument comes down to this: "I've been running Vista on three machines for well over a year. Compatibility issues are beginning to disappear, my wireless network connection no longer mysteriously vanishes, and other random glitches appear to have been fixed."
In other words, Vista works for me, so it's ready for the world. Many of the reader comments here at CNET make the same point. Vista, no doubt, runs fine for many people. That doesn't make it the right choice for you.
My perspective is defensive computing. To that end, I want mature software, and Windows XP, with 7 years of bug fixes applied to it, is the more mature option. I also want the one with the best chance of working with assorted peripheral devices. Score another for XP.
Cheap Laptops Running Linux
The personal computer field is maturing to the point that people will soon be cognizant of two hardware categories: full-blown personal computers, typified by Windows and Macs, and stripped down ones for children, senior citizens or traveling. Linux is perfect for people with simple computing needs (see Is Linux right for your mother?).
Ina thinks Windows XP will continue to be sold on what are now cheap laptops running Linux. Quoting: "The biggest area where XP is likely to stick around is in the nascent but growing market of low-cost, flash memory-based notebook computers, such as the Asus Eee PC".
I don't know that Microsoft is smart enough to see the threat from these machines. Way back, it was IBM that didn't take PCs seriously. Now, perhaps, it will be Microsoft that doesn't take simple, cheap machines seriously. Every new version of Windows is bigger and more complex. I doubt they can do simple. Large companies usually can't.
Linux does simple.** It can be stripped down as needed. In 2004 I reviewed a product called NASLite that converted an old computer into a Linux-based file server. It was a useful product, but amazing for its size - it fit on a floppy disk. A single floppy contained the operating system, networking software, an internal website used for reporting and a telnet based administrative utility.
On top of this, the Linux GUI is flexible, extremely so. No doubt this will result in some horrible user interfaces, the XO from OLPC comes to mind. But, it will also result in some that are more appropriate for children or senior citizens than a full-blown copy of Windows or a Mac. And people comfortable with Windows XP can find versions of Linux that mimic XP. One of the cheap laptops running Linux ships with a simple interface but it can be reset to the normal user interface of the underlying Xandros Linux.
Linux benefits out of the box from being immune to the vast majority of malicious software being spread online. Thus, children, senior citizens and anyone else craving simplicity doesn't have to deal with anti-virus and anti-spyware software.
The Cloudbook has a normal hard disk, but that won't last. The future for ultra-cheap laptops is flash (a.k.a. SSDs or solid state devices) and flash ram is expensive. All laptops benefit from flash ram because it's rugged, consumes less power (no moving parts) and creates less heat. Cheap small Linux machines especially need the faster read time offered by flash ram, it helps offset their relatively slow processors.
But, to keep the machines cheap, flash ram needs to be minimized. Linux is a perfect fit because it needs relatively little hard disk space. The $300 version of the Asus Eee PC has a 2 gigabyte "hard drive" that fits the operating system, applications and still leaves room for some of your data files. Try that with Vista or XP.
Microsoft may be able to brow-beat the world into using Vista on fully functional PCs, but if they walk away from XP on simple, cheap computers and cede the market to Linux, they are a dead man walking.
*How many of us believe that the free tech support from Microsoft will be useful? For example, see this item from Leo Notenboom about how Microsoft was unable to help him install a legal copy of Windows XP. They didn't know what their own error message meant. Incompetent being the applicable word.
**See my Linux vs. Windows page
Michael Horowitz is an independent computer consultant and the author of several classes on Defensive Computing. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network, and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure. 
Vista when it has the right hardware isn't the worst thing in the world. It's still not good either though.
I have used vista for 8 months and had no problems with it.
Some people can't seem to think of a good reason why to upgrade from XP to vista.
I can think of a lot of things.
1. DX-10
Crysis anyone?
2. integrated search in start menu
no waiting for that annoying dog in XP
3. aero
you know what, I find I work better when something looks good
4. media center
in XP, you had to get a special version, now it vista, it comes in the most likely version people aer going to buy- home premium
5.the sidebar- no need to download resource hoggind third party apps
6. more security than XP
It has a anti-spyware app built in (windows defender), a two way firewall (compared to XP/s one way), ram data scrambling, and guess what- many older viruses are not compatible!
Window Vista is for high end com but it do cost ur com to CRASH and unstable for game also
So Vista Suks i still think XP is the best.
Think would u buy this lousy window vista and need to meet his mininium requirement that is higher than usual requirement.
All Over the won't change to Vista Cost It is SO UNSTABLE AND SUX and COST.
Remember don't buy window vista cost not worth ur money.
Lastly i give rating to Vista is 0 score and this is the worst nightmare microsoft have creater the lousy window
And one other point. The argument that discounts on Shrink Wrap somehow mean Vista is in trouble, I would just suggest to readers and the author that you better take a look at Microsoft Volume Licensing and make a comparison. Shrink Wrap, by far is the most expensive way to buy an OS. Volume Licensing and OEM provide OS licensing at much deeper discounts already and account for the majority of all OS sales. Educational insitutions get Vista for under $10/desktop, governments get it for a little more, so when you look at total sales and profitability it is clear that a price cut is reflecting that the investment in developing Vista has been recouped and that margins have been met and exceeded allowing for a lower price point. Microsof is a volume seller, with retail being a very small portion of the overall OS business in comparison. How do I know this? I used to sell it.
Some of the comments from the Vista fanboys here make me think the Apple fanboys are perfectly rational.
Seriously, some of us just boot into the OS and that's the last we think about it until it's time to shut down for the day. That hardly makes me a fanboy...
I use Vista at home, because I was buying a new PC and knew I'd need to upgrade at some point. There've been one or two issues in places - mainly to do with incompatibility with games. Vista will be a general improvement over XP, but it's not at the moment.
And Russ, I could say the same thing about your comment. Except I will never believe that Apple fanboys are rational.
While being perfect for simple computing needs, Linux is also perfect for complex computing needs well beyond what you see on Windows boxes. Ordinary PCs with Linux (or any other Unix variant) are the capable successors of the technical Unix workstation of the 80s and 90s. The richness of the environment makes it a perfect choice for developing high-performance, demanding applications that can run unmodified on a vast variety of computers, from the tinyest developer's notebook all the way up to a massive Altix server.
Of course, it is modular to the point to be able to run on a cellphone.
But make no mistake - it's a serious OS, much more serious than that chronically insecure desktop OS most people tend to use because it came bundled with their computer.
You haven't used Linux in the past 2+ years have you? Especially when "Linux is perfect for people with simple computing needs", but even moreso than that!
"In large part, Mike's argument comes down to this: "I've been running Vista on three machines for well over a year. Compatibility issues are beginning to disappear, my wireless network connection no longer mysteriously vanishes, and other random glitches appear to have been fixed."
In other words, Vista works for me, so it's ready for the world."
Funny, that's not how I read it. After "well over a year", the compatibility issues haven't totally disappeared yet, they're just starting to. Basic things like networking are FINALLY working (apparently meaning they haven't been working until now) and random glitches are FINALLY going away. I want to be fair, this would be somewhat acceptable for the first month or two, but after a year? That's just silly. Maybe it helps to prove my belief though - that M$ fanbois are all masochists who get a thrill from pain.
You correctly point out, however, that installing from the command line is a viable alternative however. Having the power to install software from the terminal is extremely useful in batch install situations. You could install 100's of things at the same exact time. Yet you fail to realize that GUI front ends have been created for the command line.
I know countless people like you in the same situation. They have installed Ubuntu and still think it's too hard to install software and stuff because "it's Linux". All I can tell them is "Go to Add/Remove, search, and click." I'm at my wits end teaching people thing concept over and over :P
1. How to change a network setting?
2. How to connect a network printer ?
3. How to add in a new hardware?
4. How to connect my veido, camera device?
5. How to install software that is not inside the synaptic lib? For example, How to install a codec for playing realone vedio?
6. How to change the bootup menu? (from default linux to windows)
7. How to setup FireFox to work properly with Youtube
...
I like Linux a lot and I spent almost 6 yrs programing inside Linux. Linux is ju
st a super machine than windows ( not for media and game), but even so, the above couple questions took me a big time to fix it, almost each one cost me half or whole day.
Linux's design assumes that user should know some thing which turns out most users even computer engineers do not have the basics information to setup the linux box.
I am now have Ubuntu and Windows XP at home. I keep Windows XP for some Online software such skype(with phone), MSN, and QQ (chinese ICQ), other than that, I abandoned the Photoshop, MS-OFFICE, replace with GIMP and OpenOffice, both in XP/Linux. It feels real good I use same software on XP box and Linux Box.
I think it is true at some area Linux is too hard for normal user and lack of some hardware supporting. But once Linux had it, it is always feel much better than windows.
Like the previous post says, you have not run Linux in quite a while it seems.
Both my parents are in their seventies and have XP/PCLinuxOS dual boots. My mom wouldnt know how to install a program in Windows any more than I would know how to sow a hemline. Yet I showed her how to use Synaptic and to check off the games she wants and then press the Apply button and the program and any other dependencies are installed. Ready to go. Last time I checked, she had downloaded every card, sudoku, board, logic, etc game that was available in various repositories. THAT was the biggest problem I had.
2007 was the year I felt comfortable leaving my parents on Gnu/Linux full time but I have weened them to free software like Firefox (and Add-ons), Thunderbird, Handbrake, VLC, Open Office. and web services like Skype, Google Calendar and Docs, Picasa for years, it was pretty smooth transition. My father is even thrilled at how quick his old T21 Thinkpad is with Xubuntu, The whole idea of having KDE on his desktop (and showing off his Compiz!) and XCFE for his old laptop is what he enjoys most. Being able to recycle old hardware and not be forced to upgrade to run the latest proprietary OS' is a very big deal with people for whom computers isnt a priority.
Linux is easy enough for grandparents and grandkids to use as a primary desktop.
Then they ***** because it's not "ready for most users" , actually the truth is when the only tool can use is a hammer, every problem is a nail.
http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm
Enjoy!
- by jgeprogrammer March 28, 2008 7:06 PM PDT
- For me Vista has had on again off again problems and I agree just because Vista works for me does not mean Vista is for everyone. Vista, no mater how you look at it, has its issues. These issues start with hardware requirements, compatibility problems, and requiring the average joe to learn a new OS.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (36 Comments)If anyone really has looked at both Mac OSX and Vista, you will see Microsoft again stole some of the look and feel from the Mac. I am sure Microsoft is wonder why Vista is not being as accepted as the Mac OSX. They have the same Areo look, they have the same security pop up windows and they are even running on the same processor. Sorry to you Mac people, I don't use OSX and these are the only things I could remember.