Re: Article: 10 Things I Warned Microsoft About Windows Vista
Kind of dumb to try to run a new os on a 6 year old machine. Enjoy Linux.
"Administrator" <larsenvl@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3B47F841-1580-425A-8868-058FB8DF0740@microsoft.com...
> Wow, There needs to be an uprising of disgruntled vista
> users and microsoft needs to fix the damn thing. (vista)
> I am a college student and spent good money on updating my pc and also
> bought a new laptop. Man, was that a mistake! My machine I built in 2002
> and has xp on it and runs so much better! I am so disappointed and am
> investigating open source because I am sick of being at the mercy of an OS
> that does not function properly.
> vista sucks the big one! and I cannot even downgrade because they put
> vista home pre. on the machines I bought. What crap! and thousands of
> dollars later I have
> an Os that I do not like! Microsoft better listen to us or linux will be
> on the horizon and looming large!
> "On the Bridge!" <On@the,bridge> wrote in message
> news:47de8718@newsgate.x-privat.org...
>> http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/vista/10_things_i_warned_microsoft_about_windows_vista.html
>>
>> this is an article by Joe Wilcox
>> and he states:
>> "I worked as an analyst when Microsoft developed Windows Vista. Execs
>> asked for my advice, and they got it. Did they listen?"
>>
>> But of course the vistaboys and frank king of the apes, will just
>> discredit him too...
>> it seems like they think that their own experience is better than US
>> pros..
>> yes me included... with over 25 years of computer experience, I know when
>> an OS is POS.
>>
>> let the mud flow freely for vista!
>> let the truth shine, and THEN lets decide if we should use it or not...
>> not get it shoved down our throughts in the dark (not mine but the
>> average user)
>>
>> here is the text of the article
>>
>>
>> The imminent real release of Windows Vista Service Pack 1 is reason
>> enough to broach the question. SP1 is an important milestone for an
>> operating system that bloggers and other critics consistently ridicule.
>> Oh, yeah, the channel and enterprises aren't exactly loving Vista either.
>> These 10 things are in no particular order of importance.
>> 1. Windows Vista has to be a whole lot better than Windows XP. Microsoft
>> had left XP in the market for a long time. That version of Windows had
>> reached a certain "good enough" threshold, in part because of the stable,
>> supporting ecosystem. Vista would have to be a whole lot better to drive
>> upgrades in established markets. I received assurances that Vista would
>> deliver on the promise, which was later accentuated in the "Wow"
>> marketing. What happened: Vista wasn't better enough.
>> 2. Vista will miss the big PC upgrade cycle. A major enterprise PC
>> refresh cycle started in 2004 and continued through mid-2006. In early
>> 2006, I warned Microsoft executives that Vista would ship too late. What
>> happened: The major upgrade cycle wound down, but computer sales remained
>> strong because of consumer upgrades and a massive shift to portables. So,
>> Vista missed the big hardware refresh cycle but caught another one.
>> However, in part because of #1, many businesses opted for Windows XP
>> instead of Vista on those shiny, new notebooks.
>> 3. Windows Vista Home Basic is too basic. I strongly recommended against
>> Microsoft's releasing this version at any price. Microsoft executives
>> insisted that OEMs wanted a low-cost Vista version for cheap PCs. But
>> Basic offered less than Windows XP Home for about the same price. I
>> called it a hidden price increase. What happened: There is limited demand
>> for Home Basic.
>> 4. Call it Windows Basic. Vista Home Basic was so defeatured, I strongly
>> encouraged Microsoft to remove the Vista name from the product. I warned
>> that Basic would tarnish the broader Vista brand and that its streamlined
>> features put it in a lower category. I bet a Microsoft product manager
>> $100 that Windows Basic would become the default nomenclature. What
>> happened: Other problems affecting every Vista version, such as
>> applications and drivers incompatibilities, overshadowed Basic's weak
>> feature set. Oh yeah, I owe somebody at Microsoft 100 bucks. I don't
>> recall who you are, but don't feel impish about collecting.
>> 5. Vista reminds too much of Windows Me. In late 2006, I had dinner with
>> some Vista user interface designers. By then, I had used Vista betas for
>> nearly 10 months. They heard: There are two Microsoft operating systems
>> that the more I used them the less I liked them-Windows Me and Windows
>> Vista. While not my intention, the comment hugely insulted the UI
>> designers, because of how much Windows Me is regarded, even within
>> Microsoft, as a marketing failure. What happened: Some critics have
>> described Vista as Windows Me II.
>> 6. One Vista version is enough. I opposed Microsoft's Vista SKU strategy
>> from the first presentation and, later, after some tweaking. I explained
>> that Windows isn't toothpaste. Too many versions would confuse customers,
>> creating an unnecessary impediment to Vista upgrades. How could Vista be
>> perceived as better enough if the buying experience was more difficult
>> than XP? I strongly advocated a one-version strategy, but with
>> differentiated OEM pricing depending on features used by the hardware. I
>> reasoned the approach would simplify Windows purchasing while encouraging
>> greater PC differentiation. What happened: The OEM market has largely
>> consolidated around a single version: Vista Home Premium for consumers.
>> It's all Gateway sells, for example. Many enterprises are adopting Vista
>> Enterprise, which is a volume licensing-only option.
>> 7. It has to be multiple SKUs or Windows Experience Index, but not both.
>> WEI would confuse Vista buyers because the ratings would contradict with
>> some versions. For example, Vista Ultimate could conceivably ship on a
>> notebook with WEI of 3.0 (out of a possible 5.9). Customers would ask: If
>> it's so ultimate, why is the rating so slow? I liked the WEI concept more
>> than the SKU strategy and recommended choosing only the ratings scheme.
>> What happened: WEI ratings were low the first year on notebooks, even
>> those with Vista Ultimate.
>> 8. Vista demands too much. From my earliest product briefings, Microsoft
>> executives carted around big honking laptops-luggables-to get enough
>> processing and graphics power to run early Vista builds. I was told Vista
>> would need less power closer to release. Nope. I got my first Vista test
>> system in February 2006. WEI: 2.0, on above-average hardware. What
>> happened: OEMs shipped computers underpowered for Vista, even through
>> holiday 2007. The operating system demands too much from even modestly
>> older hardware.
>> 9. Windows Vista Capable is a bad idea. Why could Microsoft possibly need
>> two Vista logo programs? The connotations around Capable and Ready were
>> either too alike or too confusing. I said that there should be one
>> program for which everything truly was ready. Unfortunately, Microsoft
>> didn't consult me on the logo programs, so I gave my advice after the
>> Capable logo announcement. What happened: A Vista Capable class-action
>> lawsuit revealed embarrassing Microsoft e-mails about Windows Vista
>> decision-making processes-or lack of them.
>> 10. Vista security features increase complexity, decrease usability. Oh,
>> I was a loud critic of UAC (User Account Control) and Internet Explorer
>> warnings. I argued that Microsoft had made Vista much harder to use than
>> Windows XP. The experience would be worse for many users. Going back to
>> #1, Vista had to be a lot better, not perceptually worse. What happened:
>> UAC warnings hurt usability but caused more troubles; new user rights
>> mechanism broke many applications.
>>
>