Comments on: Vista price cuts show how much trouble Microsoft is in

Although Don Reisinger applauds the company for dropping the price of retail versions of Vista, he thinks it's nothing more than a ruse to hide the real issues with the OS.

[fcg1502]

@ tajna_rabota: It's not fanboyism or standing up for MSoft, it's the fact that people like me saw the headline to this article looking for a little news piece about the pricedrop. But instead, we get this moron going on some rant about how "crappy" this stuff is and all because of what? He doesn't say. Maybe Vista turned his computer into a robot that killed his puppy. Who knows though because nothing about this article has anything relevant to say and is completely unprofessional. The people commenting are more-so standing up for themselves and their experience with Vista, because the elitest crowd of Linux and Mac users feel it is their right to bash MSoft users and Vista adopters every chance they get. The fact that articles like this get published in the first place is more "laughable" than the "fanboy-ism". Please Don, get back on your horse and ride off into the ocean while holding hands with Jobs and listening to your 15th generation IPod. I'll be buying Vista as soon as the price drops.

[Dalkorian]

It's constantly amazing how M$ apologists will suffer anything and make excuses for it. They must all be into S&M or something. Some people just like bondage and pain. Power to them.

I'd rather do something with my computer than spend 40% of my time with it dealing with corruption issues, crashes, updating AV definition files and tweaking with the firewall. I want my computer to work for me, not the other way around. Ubuntu works for me, XP makes me work for it. Vista is a nightmare that I refuse to suffer for any reason.

To each his own.

[scbajmr]

I fail to see how someone stating they Vista in fact works just fine makes them a M$ (complete with childish $ reference) apologist. Is the fact that 5 year application or device does not work with Vista Microsofts fault? As a OS evolves, eventually compatibility. I guess I can scream and cry that windows 3.1 applications no longer work in Vista too? Apple did the same thing when they released OS X and now Steve is the god of all things computers? Whatever. The fact that you took the opportunity to mention Ubuntu in your post basically shows you are just a Linux (nothing wrong with using Linux BTW) hack looking to just on the bashing bandwagon. But then I would expect nothing less from that crowd.

[sal-magnone]

My previous comment in point - from ./

"Vladimir Vukicevic of the Firefox team stumbled upon some questionable practices from Apple while trying to improve the performance of Firefox. Apparently, Apple is using some undocumented APIs that give Safari a significant performance advantage over other browsers. Of course, "undocumented" means that non-Apple developers have to try and reverse-engineer these interfaces to get the same level of performance. You really have to wonder what Apple is thinking, considering the kind of retaliation Microsoft has gotten for similar practices.

http://blog.vlad1.com/2008/02/28/finding-the-os-x-turbo-button/

[mmichaels]

According to ars technica:

"One of the many recurring complaints about Windows Vista has been its price. OEM versions of the OS are comparatively cheap, and range from $109.99 (Home Premium) to $189.99 (Ultimate) at Newegg. Full retail versions, however, are vastly more expensive. The retail version of Windows Home Basic (the lowest tier on the Vista ladder) sells for $170.49 at Amazon, while Vista Ultimate goes for $329.99. More than a year after Vista's launch, Microsoft has come to the conclusion that these prices might be a tad steep, and is planning to cut the retail price of the various OS flavors. "

I'd suppose this may be why MS would lower the prices on its retail versions and not on its OEM versions. Maybe rather than a PR move, they're actually lowering their prices because they realized that these prices were just plain ridiculous.

I have Vista Ultimate on my notebook. Never had a problem with it.

[dustinfrank]

...and doesn't anyone else remember when the latest Mac OS was released that a small part of the "press" love frenzy praising the launch was in regards to the price point? Now when MS drops their prices, as they most definitely should have, this is a sign of gloom and doom?? Its easy to find the bias when similar events produce different analysis.

[Spartan_458]

Vista is fine. Had it for 8 months, no problems at all. Our XP machine, however, has huge problems. XP's security sucks. Vista is probably the tightest OS out there right now for security. I went for about a month without anti-virus, and no problems.

[The_Decider]

LOL

It is a security mess. It is XP security with half-assed, ill thought out "solutions" that take an additional 5 seconds to get around.

Windows security is a total joke.

[ultimatebuster]

Have to agree, even CNET's Worst download of 2007 listed Windows Vista as 10th place worst download.

And again, if you like Vista's style, go download the Vista Transformation Pack from WindowsX

[ruminator]

Hey guys, I don't use Vista and don't trust what most bloggers say about Vista because they often go by hype and second hand info rather than actual usage and testing. However, for this blogger to say that XP is "one of the best OS" out there is ridiculous. Compared to what? Mac OS? don't think so. Linux ? not today. Windoze users are lemmings who after being fed 3.1 to 2000 just don't know any better, so when XP comes along it is a Messianic event. Sure, anything after 3.1 to 2000 would be great; XP may just be the best of a bad lot.

[hanxiansheng]

Many people said that Vista is not stable, so I don't use it. In fact, I can't run it on my computer even I'd like to, because the RAM of my computer is 768MB, Vista requires 1G at least. But some of my friends are using Vista, it seems that the speed is not as fast as Windows XP.
------ Voice Of Dingchao

[Catalina588]

This is a mole hill, not a mountain of a business issue. As stated above, retail sales of Vista go to novice hobby computer builders who need the support (?) that comes with the retail sku. Experienced do-it-yourselfers buy the OEM sku through, say, Newegg.com.

What Microsoft is doing is a couple of common retail occurences:
- getting the software boxes off the shelves, so they can be replaced with SP1 versions of Vista
- setting Vista prices that are more in line with Windows XP.

Remember, the day of woe and rendered garments is only a few months away -- the day Windows XP is no longer sold. (But we'll see if Microsoft flinches from that tsunami of pushback).

[I love Bill Gates]

An OS is just a local file and print server. All I want is an OS to do its job and stay out of the way. The fact that we have to have so much horsepower and there is so much consternation and we cannot have a quiet upgrade path shows how hosed up the business is. From a business aspect everything is going to a browser anyway. For most of my business customers all they need is Linux and Mozilla..

[Cfischer83]

Why post such complete drivel as this? It's obvious you are trying to just get hits to your blog. I mean you do get more flies with garbage (just ask the National Enquirer or New York Times), but why give up your credibility as a journalist (if you even call yourself that) just to gain a few hits? Your credibility is lost to those of us who use both OSes on a regular basis, and pretty soon you'll end up contradicting yourself like Randall Kennedy at infoworld when he told everyone back in 2001 to either stick with their older OS or leave the option open to downgrade after going to XP. Now he's running the 'Save XP' campaign!

I understand the need to get hits, it is business after all, but if you're a worthy writer and want people to continue relying on you for valid information, then telling the truth about a product is extremely important! Vista is not perfect, however to even suggest that XP is better is not a matter of opinion. Vista's architecture was built from the ground up to be much more secure and even take advantage of technologies that haven't been built yet. Vista will still be a valid OS 10 years from now. XP and Leopard won't.

Good reporting involves facts. Facts are absent from this post. You say there is functionality missing in Vista and that Vista is a broken OS, yet you give no examples to back this wildly untrue claim.

Pretty soon you'll end up like Walt Mossberg of the WSJ, John Dvorak from PCMag, Randall Kennedy and David Pogue from the NYT. People will see your posts for the inaccuracies and inconsistencies in them and not trust you anymore. These guys I've just mentioned are not trusted in the PC community because of things like this.

I really hope CNET is reading through your stories and either reconsiders your employment with them or makes you write a retraction, because this is bad... really bad.

[truemetalgeek]

I think too many pass on rumors without even trying the damn thing for themselves!

When I first tried it, I too was afraid and used it for 6 months on an extra PC for a while to try it. I learned how to do all the tweeks i.e. turn off User Access Control which is annoying when it's just you using the PC. After getting used to it I was then thinking my XP Pro machines were kind of plain and missed some of the features of Vista. So I now have Vista on everything. On my laptops it actually loads great form Hibernation. My laptop in my work van I hardly ever shut down or reset. I just close the lid and hibernate. Then it boots up in seconds and I do this all day long. It's on my kid's PC's and they figured it out. So it can;t be all bad. You do need a gig or two of ram to get to use all of the neat features though.

[williamscam]

How would you like a free ipod touch? Well i sure know i would and i have already gotten three of them. If you would just follow this link and all you have to do is sign up and complete one free offer and you well receive a free ipod touch. Here is the link: http://www.YouriPodTouch4free.com/index.php?ref=4746161

[shkeqi]

like it!


http://www.keqi-sensor.com
http://www.keqi-sensor.cn
http://www.worldsensor.cn

[Waam]

Vista is a major step into stagnation. There is ZERO improvement to XP besides, some visuals, and ZERO innovation to Apple's OSX. Thats why it's a colossal dissappointment and further proof all this company can do is copy and paste.

Vista was definitely MSFT's chance to show the world the goods! All it shows us is a fusion copy of XP and Tiger. At least copy Leopard!

[n0oeg]

The big problem with Vista is software compatibility. It is one thing for an individual to go out and replace software with current versions that work with Vista and quite another thing for large businesses. They range from hundreds to thousands of users that have to have either new or updated applications that will run, and that the results are correct. This costs money. Someone has to pay, either with fewer expenses or higher priced products. Companies are acutely aware of global competition. For business, Vista is fluff. XP does what they need, without better hardware and updated software. Vista as an upgrade is very painful for business.

[Fatbob03]

As far as hate mongering on Microsoft I just don't see the point. I do agree that XP is a better OS. I hated the days of Windows 98. I finally bought XP and all my ills were cured. Mind you this was on an old machine. I have to say I wouldn't dream of putting Vista on anything that wasn't brand new. So it's use as a retail product is pretty worthless.

My sister got a Lenovo notebook and brought it home to have me check it out. It had Vista Premium installed. I was immediately surprised by the sluggishness of this brand new system. I decided to use the internal performance monitor and start to run a few normal tasks, i.e.(itunes, internet explorer, office word). The kind of things a college student might do all at once on a laptop. It maxed the memory right out. I understand itunes is a memory hog, especially in windows, but come on. I can run all of the same software on my 3 1/2 year old AMD Athlon 2800 plus Autocad in XP and not run out of memory.

Needless to say she bought a Macbook like mine and it runs like a dream. Vista looks good but in my experience that is where the ends. It has no value where the rubber meets the road, the average user.

[Stanthecomputerman]

I am VERY suspicious of the pro Vista comments on this article. I am a freelance consultant, and VB programmer. Vista is a diaster. Let's start with cost. My first Vista setup involved a non-power user whose HP motherboard crashed. He had no choice in selecting the operating system for his new Toshiba laptop. He already owned Microsoft Office 2000. Cost to upgrade $480. He produced home movies. Cost to upgrade to Vista compatible versions $850. Drivers for his printer did not exist. New printer $374. An operating system that must constantly ask its user if he or she wishes to "Allow" does not take the low level users inability to make such decisions into account. My worst complaint is the confusing file folder system not to mention the lack of an up one level tool on the Windows Explorer.

For my clients with more computer literate staff, the unneccessary learning curve prompted by a new MSOffice has been expensive. These cheerleaders for Vista do not mention the requisite upgrades forced upon my users by switching to Vista. The Mac commercials say it all. I was a Mac consultant until 1989, when it proved to be unprofitable.

One thing that kept Linux and Mac from gaining market share was the gradual need to pay for upgrades versus switching to a whole new platform. Vista is such an expensive shift that the alternatives start looking more attractive. I predict a class action suit against Microsoft of biblical proportion. Every benchmark I have seen places Vista at 50% the speed of XP. On top of all this we still need to purchase virus, spyware, and adware protection from 3rd parties.

In all, I would gladly vote for a Windows operating system that let users gradually shift from Classic XP to something new. I would even be glad to pay Microsoft an annual stipend to upgrade my Operating System, Office Suite, and programming languages slowly over time. Just the Start Menu change from Windows 98 to XP intimdated the low level users. Allowing them to warm up to XP then change from Classic to New gradually is the way to go. This brute force shift is an expensive nightmare.

[Kitzinger1]

Recently I decided to do a full Upgrade on my computer and figured to try out some different OS's and such. I looked at a lot of different products and such before I came to my decision and wasn't influenced one way or the other as far as whom made what.
My new computer is a 9600 Phenom, 790fxQ6 Gigabyte Motherboard, 1066 DDR2 2 GiG Ram running in unganged mode, 3870 Graphics Card.
My old computer ran XP SP2 and when I went to my new one I ported the OS over.

Leopard/Mac vs X86
Before I began to build my new computer I decided to look at the Leopard systems vs X86 systems. Pound for Pound I was going to pay 3X the amount for a Mac system than a X86 system . Further I was going to have to replace all my old software which would of increased the cost to port to Mac significantly. Even further I would be limiting myself on future Upgrades to even more expensive hardware and as a moderate recreational Gamer would be limiting myself in that respect also. For the cost of 1 Mac I could buy 2-3 equivalent x86 systems and that's just in Hardware alone. Mac didn't win.

KDE Linux-
I decided to give KDE and Wine a try to see if it would be a suitable replacement to XP. I had heard good things about Linux and really wanted to get the most out of the 64 bit 4 Core system I had built. KDE looked to me exactly what I was looking for.
I was wrong.
Ease of use wasn't easy at all. Hardware Drivers were tough to find and were buggy at best. It couldn't run any of the Windows programs through Wine and the free software that came with KDE wasn't as appealing as others had made it out to be. My family hated it, my kids couldn't use it, and to get it to run I had to turn off features in the CD:/ All in all it felt about as good as Windows 95.

So I put in my XP SP2 and installed that and began to look at Vista.

XP SP2:
The first things I noticed was that the OS didn't seem to like the 1066 setting. I was getting frequent lock ups in SP 2 that went away when I lowered the Ram to 800. I also had to run in Ganged mode. Besides that the OS operated as would be expected. It recognized my hardware, ran it decently, and had no problems using my Software but I wanted the most from my system. I had an ATI TV Tuner Card in my system and found that I could either pay the $80.00 for Sage or just Upgrade to Vista Home.

Vista Home 64 Bit:
It wasn't easy to make the upgrade from 32 bit to 64. First off the Upgrade I bought online required an already installed 64 bit OS, My first mistake. Then Microsoft wanted me to pay shipping for a CD and I wasn't waiting any longer. With a quick find on Bittorrent I had a full install download and went to town.
Vista 64 bit does require a clean install if you are upgrading from a 32 bit. Seeing as I was experimenting it wasn't that big of a deal but it could be for others. The first thing I did was switch my Ram settings to 1066 unganged and the settings are still the same even as I write this. This tells me this was an SP 2 issue and not my memory.
I did have problems with running some software on 64 bit Vista. Photoshop CS 3 required me to turn on some DLL files and Acronis won't load at all. Besides that everything worked and it worked better than it did on XP.
Bioshock, CoD 4, World in Conflict all run at max settings and they look better than they did in XP. There hasn't been a stutter or a loss frame which I can't say about XP. Pirates of the Burning Sea looks amazing and big sea battles are pretty sweet. I don't need a virus scanner because Vista has one ingrained. All drivers are digitally signed and yes the system is stable. It's very fast and the entire system looks clean. Unlike Linux the OS is user friendly. It took me a second but then I realized it's even more user friendly than XP. The Games have a Folder that is easy to find, the TV function looks better than Sage, and it's easy to set controls. I would have a hard time going back to XP now and so for me Vista has been a huge success.

Most people will tell you I love my Computer and I do. I put the hard work and tears into building my Machine and I wouldn't have it any other way. Vista worked and continues to work well for me. I would of loved to have had a choice but I didn't. That's just the way it is.