Comments on: Microsoft needs to lift its head out of the sand

Don Reisinger thinks Microsoft needs to stop focusing on being tight-lipped and tell us what's really going on with Windows. If it doesn't, he thinks it'll have more trouble going forward.

[David Gerard]

Microsoft keeps touting how many licenses of Vista have been paid for. But the number I'd like journalists to start talking about is: how many of those are actually in use, and how many have been either shelved or downgraded to XP? The thing is, Microsoft *knows precisely* how many copies of Vista are actually being used - it's the number of individual copies pinging the Windows Update servers. Please, journalists: start asking and keep asking until you extract an answer.

[VistaSucks7]

Ok---you geeks are killing me! As a normal computer user, Vista is the worst thing that MS has ever put out---Hands Down!! I have used MS products for years and put up with all the quirks, but this Vista OS is by the far the biggest piece of trash they have ever put out. The mere frustration using the system is enough to make you want to switch to Apple. The proof is in the pudding.....look at how well all the other competing operating system's are doing, sales are only going up. So all you geeks with Microsoft in your back pocket need to just sit down, crush your false love for MS by sitting your fat ass on it, and pull YOUR heads outta the sand.

[jupiter38]

I am starting to wonder if Microsoft is staring into oblivion. Within the next few years solid state hard drives will become the norm, and given Microsoft's propensity for slightly imprecise operating systems, how will they will fare with devices which require absolute precision.
This has always been Apple's strength, ie, complete compatibility between hardware and software, so naturally they can (and already have with the MacBook Air) make the transition from freewheelin' hard disks to SSD.
But Microsoft's OS's have always relied on spinning hard disks to find endless alternative code routes, because of their software architecture. But SSD's will not tolerate such obtuseness.
And don't forget that it is much easier for virus or spyware writers to smuggle their evil little creations onto people's spinning magneto drives, but with a good SSD, such malicious codes can much more easily be conatained and then destroyed.
So, all things considered, i have to say that Microsoft had better polish up its act, AND its products, or it could find itself going the way of the analogue telephone, ie, once universal and largely responsible for the advent of the inernet, but now collecting dust in some museum of kitsch.

[Anchelspain]

"Microsoft should seize every opportunity to reassure us that its next operating system will not suffer from the same problems we have seen with Vista"

All right, if you're going to write an article about how bad Vista is, maybe you should write those problems. Oh, and don't mention the problems Vista had during the first half year. Mention instead the problems Vista has NOW. Vista with SP1. How many "problems" can you list then without having people counter everyone of them?

Vista is NOT worse than XP. I just don't see where people like you is getting that idea. Worse compatibility? Sure... go name an application that doesn't work after the switch from XP. If there is one, I'm sure the developers have already released a new version. The only applications that really gave some troubles were certain drivers (which are all now solved) and antiviruses (which are all, once again, fixed).
Or were you meaning the higher resource requirements for Vista? Oh wait, didn't that happen when XP was released too? The requirements got higher as well! That doesn't make XP any better than Vista then, does it?

I myself find Vista a whole lot better than XP. From the easier usability (the new Windows Explorer is so much better) to a better design.

Also Aero improves usability a lot too, specially when working with video applications: try moving the Windows Media Player window while the movie is playing both in XP and Vista. In XP the screen will become black. In Vista it will keep playing the movie inside the window. Now apply this very same improvement to other applications that work with video, such as websites, video editors like Pinnacle Studio, etc.
Making the jump to the hardware accelerated desktop that is Aero is so much better. Needing higher graphic card requirements for this is not a drag, it's a necesity that should have been done much sooner on Windows.

I could go on for HOURS. And mind you, I'm no Vista or Microsoft fanboy. But I'm also not the kind of person who will see writers like you step on everybody else without enough reasons and not do a thing about it.

As some other people here has said: most people who have actually used Vista like it. Ask around, that's a fact. So stop believing everything Apple says in their ads against Vista.

[jupiter38]

And dont forget also that SSD's are much kinder to the environment.
Just think about all those 1 billion plus computers, not to mention the huge mainframe computers which are on 24/7, all being replaced by SSD's devices which burn about 85% less power.
Bring them, and quick. The price of oil might start to fall aswell, LOL.
Good night all.

[Kainchild]

I got to find the article but the reason why the drivers and devices don't work with Vista was because of that "security update they did to this operating system. There was an old article about how MS made a deal with big Hollywood executives to put in more security features into Vista to not allow illegal copying but they in the process ended up causing problems for both new drivers and device detections. They did do some of kind of update but I noticed it didn't help for newer drivers and devices, plus not to mention still bugs with the stuff they fixed.

Also they didn't include a new filing system with this version which was the first version of windows NOT to have one. Instead they added a graphical interface that slows up most older systems that forced people to have to either buy new ones or pretty much end with a newer version of XP but with all the bugs from the security feature. that's why people don't like this new one and stuck with XP. This version was a gimp. This is a great article Don Reisinger. Hopefully when Viacom (aka Paramount Studios) buys this web site, you'll still have a job ;-P.

[Mr. Dee]

And what will saying Vista is a failure achieve? Would it not further damage the operating systems reputation? First of all, Windows Vista is not a failure, next 140 million licenses sold is not a failure its actually astounding. Building Windows 7 on the solid foundation of Windows Server 2008 SP1 means reassurance to customers who have invested heavily in Windows Vista can have the confidence to deploy their existing infrastructure on Windows 7 when its released. This means existing hardware and applications will work on Windows 7 without any alteration. Windows 7 will use the same driver framework as Windows Vista. You say that Windows Vista is causing certain customers to downgrade to Windows XP? What is the catalyst for this? The only one I can think of is compatibility. As Steve clearly noted in the interview, Windows 7 will bring compatibility forward. The evolution of Windows 7's kernel will insure that.

Quote:
But we're actually going to bring forward the compatibility, and we're going to make sure that there's a lot of value for everybody who's a customer of Windows 7. - Steven Sinofsky

The silence on Windows 7 is important, its the right approach and other company's are doing it, look at Adobe with the next release of Creative Suite, they are releasing information in a timely relevant manner.

Other reasons to consider, over discuss Windows 7 now what does this say about Vista, that Microsoft has lost faith in the product and admitted defeat? Also, Windows Vista was just released world wide a year and a half, Windows 7 won?t be here until at least early 2010. Why would they want to jump the gun so early and start shooting themselves in the foot like they did with transparency of the Longhorn project?

[Hasta-la-Vista]

I'm an experienced computer user - not a techie. I've used PCs at work and owned my own PCs at home for 15 years now - through the parade of Windows versions, including the horrible ME which I replaced on that machine with a clean install of Windows 2000. Last year I bought a new desktop and a notebook, both came with Vista. AACK!! Vista, with its instability, strange "security" features that deny me - as admin - access to folders, incessant updates, lumbering startup, and more, finally did what those obnoxious Apple ads couldn't: sent me to the Apple store where I spent a lot of money for a new iMac and an Airport Extreme. And I couldn't be happier about it. I ditched the Vista desktop, have kept the Vista-afflicted notebook to run a coupla programs I need for work. I love using my Mac, and compared to that experience, cranking up the Vista notebook is clunky and irritating. I hope that by this time next year I will not need to run any Windows-based software and will have replaced the notebook PC with a MacBook Air.

[TheGearbox]

IMO, XP was a total joke, and remained that way until Vista launched. Now all of a sudden everyone loves XP? It's obvious that Microsoft's OS's are too open and have to cater to too many people. We will never get what we want from them.

[RobinQueens]

I believe vista is "acceptable" if,and only if A: you have it pre-installed on a new machine
B: you have at least 3GB of ram C: you decrapify all the pre-installed garbage that the PC makers install and D: you dont use it after you have recently used/own an OSX machine.
I repeat..following those suggestions will make it "only" acceptable. I also do believe vista runs better on an intel mac than it does with the inferior hardware most PC vendors currently use. and yes! I have vista home and ultimate on both my intel Mac machines. The reason being it was my first use of mac, and I needed to have windows around to run certain applications.

[jbailey3]

I just got Vista a few months ago and haven't had a problem with it. Why is everyone still insisting that it was a bomb? I love the look, feel, and security of it. Also, Windows Media Center blows everything out of the water. My Vista PC is the hub of all my media.

MS doesn't always get it right, but I haven't had any complaints about Vista so far.

PS - I am an Equal Opportunity Computer User. I have 2 OS X 10.4s, 2 XPs, and 1 Vista, so I'm not a fanboy of any brand.

[Igiveup2]

Reisinger needs to pull his head out and stop reciting FUD as if it were fact. Ironic that Reisinger rants about Apple fanboys. He just needs to look in the mirror.

There is no need to "admit" a failure with Vista because it is the best OS produced by Microsoft to date. The graphics engine is the most advanced one out there, including OSX. The kernel architecture and code is vastly improved over XP. Security is vastly improved. Windows explorer and search features are vastly improved. Onboard support and help are vastly improved. The list goes on. Evolving Windows 7 within the framework of Vista/Server 08 is an endorsement of the approach started with Vista. Nobody can objectively say that XP is a better OS at its core. Migration and compatibility issues make XP a better choice for some situations, but those are not issues intrinsic to the OS.

OEMs are responsible for the driver issues that occurred early on. ISVs also blew it when they didn't adapt to new permissions standards. Maybe some of these issues arose from confusion during the development of Vista. Not issuing confusing information to software and hardware partners seems to be one theme of Sinofsky's interview. Lesson learned, maybe a bit overzealously.

No performance issues with Vista here. Not everything's perfect, just as OSX and Linux aren't perfect. But it's way solid, fast, and secure.

[john55440]

Thanks Don, for yet another brainless anti-MS rant!

[justdenny]

"most people want to know if Windows 7 will deliver the kind of experience that would prevent them from switching to Mac OS X?"...wow, I didn't know you knew enough people to know what it is that most Windows users want MS to tell us...I'm impressed. Even though I was reasonably certain that you were just an egotistical blowhard, I've finally seen the light; you're just basically a moron with an audience. I currently use all three, XP, Vista, and OSX, and I can guarantee you that the 'great, unwashed" aren't going to OSX regardless of what MS or.....yes.....even you, says. It's a shame CNET makes me click on these links before I find out who the author is.