Comments on: Microsoft struggles with Vista's perceptions
Software maker says it has made progress on Vista's performance and compatibility. But it still faces an uphill battle to win over consumers.
Most Popular
15 sites that went kaput in 2009
Web sites launch all the time, but they also shut their doors. We highlight 15 that bit the dust this year.
Top 10 news stories of the decade
Let the debate begin: Was the iPhone more important than iTunes? Was anything bigger than Google finding a great business model? CNET offers its list of the 10 most important stories of the '00s.
About Beyond Binary
During her years at CNET News, Ina Fried has changed beats several times, changed genders once, and covered both of the Pirates of Silicon Valley. These days, most of her attention is focused on Microsoft.
Beyond Binary is a look at how technology is changing our lives and the people behind all that life-changing stuff, with an extra emphasis on that which emanates from Redmond, Wash.
Add this feed to your online news reader
Beyond Binary topics
Binary Bits
Follow Ina on Twitter (Twitter name: InaFried)
-Macs only appeal to graphic artists.
-Macs are nonstandard.
-Macs can't be upgraded.
-Macs don't have much 3rd party software.
-Macs aren't good enough for the enterprise.
Poor Microsoft? What about poor Apple?
If all perception were accurate, then the market shares of Vista and OS X would be much closer than they are.
Similar config machines are arguable, but I can buy a HP or Dell notebook that costs about $600.
-Macs are nonstandard.
Depends on what you mean by Standard ?
-Macs only appeal to graphic artists.
Macs do not provide any advantage even to the graphic artists, they are stuck on tradition/comfort-zone more than anything.
-Macs aren't good enough for the enterprise.
Agreed. But the switch to Apple is not compelling. (same argument can be made of Vista).
-Macs don't have much 3rd party software.
in comparison to windows, yes.
-There are more people than graphic artists that the Mac appeals to. For people who are not happy with Windows as a whole and are not "nerdy enough" for Linux, then they'd see Macs as an open option.
-Apple itself has appealed to more than just graphic artists. The Washington Post just last year switched to Macintosh computers for editing.
-Macs may not be as popular as Windows users, but the market share is growing. Macbook models alone made up 20% of all non-corporate laptop sales. And Apple's market share for the first time last year were in the double digits. And to add on to that, Apple has been shipped more than 2 Million Macintosh computers.
Apple could be looking at the greatest comeback ever in a Windows dominated world.
You want to run your software? Get a PC.
That alone sells PC's at a higher rate than Mac.
Want your stuff to work? Get a Mac.
That is why Mac is growing market share.
Both are perceptions. I'll even spot them as being medium accurate.
Meanwhile, Vista's primary market - businesses - have only given it a 6.3% penetration... TWO YEARS after release.
/P
So if I am right there, where are your perceptions now..
If they make O/Ses that suck and it requires people to keep buying OS/es that improve continually some people will become feteup with paying for non-working OSes from Microsoft and will defect....
So Microsoft can't win here. They will either push to create an Operating System that runs over the Interent e.g. you're computer dials into their computer upon bootup that you must subscribe to monthly... (But this renders your P.C. useless if the Internet goes down on your PC....) But yet again more people will defect for Free O/Ses that can be installed.
OR-
Microsoft can start making Operating Systems that expire on a certain day (Much like your current Virus Scanner company might do.) At which time you'd have to pay every month. Which again may mean some people will get feteup and look for alternatives.... No matter what--- Microsoft can't win...
Dear reader, it would take pages to list the types of crashes and instabilities, and the time I have spent updating the BIOS and drivers. Microsoft can not think it is just a bad perception of Vista; they are dishonest.
Almost every successful new OS has added something in function or useability.
I have liked every previous update of Windows, but this one made me say "WTH were thet thinking".
I don't see any new functionality and the supposed security improvements are a joke.
I never had security problems with XP.
I understand the need for changes in many cases, but I fail to see any valid reason for many of the things done in Vista.
Change for a valid reason is one thing, but Vista seems to have been changed just to be different (no matter what marketing says).
Vista looks like XP run through a blender (lots of rearranging) and poured on the ground to dry, then repackaged in a pretty box (Aero).
If that is the future of MS, they are in deep trouble. Can you say corporate suicide?
The security improvements have saved me a couple of times. You didn't notice that when IE runs at least everything is in a sandbox and protected and can't get out of control..
Learn about WPF, you might change your mind about your opinions..
It sucks computer resources
It sucks more power
It sucks more money
It sucks more time
It just plain sucks!
End of story. Linux, OS X or stay with XP.
http://www.support4vista.com/vista-faq.htm
Several things to say based on comments I read here: Do you know what the one major tech support issue before Vista was. It was services that have dependencies that weren't restarting automatically. Mainly because there was something wrong with it, or it had a dependency on another service to be already running.
Microsoft fixed that by making services restart on their own automatically without a reboot. If one won't start up properly it does bog the CPU down. Having said that if you have a poorly written service running in the back ground or trying to start up and not restarting properly it will slow your machine down. The way to fix it is to go into the services control panel and set it for manual start up or disabled all together. Just killing the service on the task manager is no longer good enough. That's enabled on Server 08 too.
Microsoft's caching and search engine has been said to slow down the machine as it reads files on the disc and tries to cache them while they load up fast. The best thing to do if that's slowing your machine and the reliability monitor will tell you that immediately (just type "reliability" into the search bar and it will bring up the performance and reliability monitor. To get at services just type "services" in the start menu search too..
User Account Control: you can turn this off through the user control panel and MSCONFIG..
These are the two items people complain about saying "OH my computer is too slow.. Well take a few seconds to learn FOLKS!
There is a great website which has a FAQ with most of these tips..Just about everything any one of the 150 or so commented about here can be fixed by visiting this FAQ.
http://www.support4vista.com/vista-faq.htm
I have been using Vista now since 06 for business and personal on a number of machines the latest was a quad core 64-bit Intel box. It works great..
Service Pack One was a major update.. The issues really are gone with Vista..
You should think about the version you choose to run. If you are running old hardware and a graphics card that can't support the new 3D stuff (aero glass is simulated for older computers with older graphics cards).
If you run XP home and your computer is 3 or four years old and has only 512-1gig of ram either upgrade your ram to two gigs or by Window Home Basic. You won't need premium because your computer can't handle most of those extra features anyway..
If you have a Media Center PC you want Home Premium or ultimate..
If you run XP Pro and have to connect to a "Microsoft Network based" server you need vista enterprise or Vista business. These don't give you media center as an option..
If you want everything buy ultimate..
Vista Basic has a much smaller memory foot print like XP home and you don't look functionality..
You can't do the stunning visualization without a 3D card, and memory and a CPU.. Can't do that anywhere else really (if you are using something that requires GPUs and shader technology).
Microsoft has added goodness to Vista to take things like graphics to the next level and support new 64-bit hardware with a whole lot more memory and done this very well. The average lifecycle of a computer is 3-4 years.. Products that were 3-4 years old don't update well do to unsupported vendor drivers for legacy products.
Since Windows 2000 every release has had a year of driver problems because third parties weren't on the ball..
When you start seeing new applications in business and media based on WPF and WCF you'll start to see why Microsoft wants you to update your OS. If you don't know what those things are then you are missing half the fun..
I remember the toxic flames people had for XP five or six years ago, lack of drivers and support new GUI.. By the way you can switch back to the OLD GUI style (even classic windows)if you don't like how things work.. It's not much different from today except the people are bitter to have to learn anything new it seems and if it works different (even if it works better people complaining don't seem to be willing to invest the time) that includes system admins who are commenting here..
I can probably match any complaint you have with an answer.. In the same thought I think they should extend XPs life a little longer.
Vista is twenty times a better product for new hardware than XP and it's a real cop out to see you guys say this.
Half of you are complaining about things that were fixed last year.
Probably a third of you if you were being honest haven't evaluated vista again since service pack one.
The other quotient of you are sys admins who don't wanna have to learn more and it's just an excuse..
The Mac and Linux fanboys, well they can believe what they want but I doubt many of them just run their OS and don't have at least XP loaded somewhere even if it's a virtual environment.
and the other of you with old hardware, get over yourself. A new way more powerful Vista PC put together is pricing at $400 on the low end of things. Not that unaffordable, especially if your work would benefit..
What have we learned:
1) Vista is great! No problems here!
2) Vista is great NOW! Since SP1, all the problems are fixed
(forget about #1, please)
3) All the problems are because of third parties! (please forget
about #1 and #2)
4) Hey, if you weren't such a dummy, you'd know how to fix all
these things yourself! For example, this gem:
"....just type "reliability" into the search bar and it will bring up
the performance and reliability monitor. To get at services just
type "services" in the start menu search too. User Account
Control: you can turn this off through the user control panel and
MSCONFIG."
I mean, what's the problem here?!!!
I also love the completely dense section of advice on which
version of Vista is right for which user.
You said.
Mainly because there was something wrong with it, or it had a dependency on another service to be already running. Microsoft fixed that by making services restart on their own automatically without a reboot. If one won't start up properly it does bog the CPU down.
So you just admitted that there was something wrong with it, and it wasn't working right. Well then of course people were upset. Why should you expect people to be happy with Vista if it wasn't working right? So I guess all the complaints were valid. I'm glad it's fixed now, but your logic is basically there was something wrong, but MS fixed it so people shouldn't have been complaining about it before MS fixed it. What? How did they know what the problem was, or if it was ever going to get fixed?
Anyway, I'm glad it works real well on your Quad Core. I plan to buy one in about three years or so. As soon as I get one I'll try Vista again. Unless Windows 7 is out of course.
Here is my whine, lets see who has had same or simmilar expiriences!
I purchased a brand new DELL XPS 410, with the latest and greatest video card (Nvidia 7900) and sound card XFI. Of course it came with XP. When Vista was released, I figured why not upgrade? I bought the Vista home premium.
My PC was most certainly labled as Vista capable and running the "Vista Capable?" tool, indicated the highest score and advised that Vista can run with all goodies enabled!
So, after the clean install of Vista, soon realized the error of my ways, when during bootup, I lost all sound and the video defaulted to a low setting.
It took two days of searching, in order to get simple stereo sound out of my XFI surround sound, using a Beta driver. The video issue was never totally resolved either and could not run anything with settings maxed out.
Several software utilities and games would not load or install.
End result, wipe out Vista and install XP and everything works like it should.
I'm out the money for what I paid for Vista, but have to agree, that this OS was NOT ready for it's realease to the public. Coorporate greed got the best of microsoft, as always. Very reminscent of the ME debacle.
We as consumers have a reason and a right to whine. It should have worked out of the box and it should have been backward compatible to work with all soft and hardware, period!
Why on Earth would they want to distance themselves from that success?
They should never, never have divorced their OS product line from that name.
Call it XP-II, XP-ng...XP...anything! Anything that removes the notion that XP is gone, gone after being with us for so long and doing such a great job.
Nobody wants a new OS dropped on their lap, not after almost ten years, and a new product name underscores that harsh discontinuity.
Vista is easy to attack because...its Vista...
A name has many meanings, and the name ?Vista? comes across as ?carpet yanked out from under you?.
Hi! Do you want Vista?
Hell no!
Ok...how about XP+?
Well...maybe. XP is good...plus must be better : )
Platform! Apple knew the need and grab the bull by the horn
and took the leap. I am just saying look Mac Os 10.4 can run on
8 year old systems, just try that with Windows Vista. Oh ho hum
back to work on my Dell Latitude C610 Laptop with Windows
2000 PRO.
- by jamesreb May 22, 2009 7:23 AM PDT
- I work for a to-be-unnamed tech company and we're sticking with XP. We're not even going with IE 8 because it won't work with a lot of our apps. I don't even think our clients want us to transition to Vista either. The IT dept. hates it.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 3 of 3 pages (211 Comments)I have it at home and it's not too bad but I wouldn't have upgraded to it if it wasn't for the free offer from Sony when I bought my laptop.