Re: Vista???!!
David A. Spicer wrote:
> From the same source:
> http://www.crn.com/it-channel/18821819
> --------------
> Everywhere is walking distance if you have the time. --Steven Wright
>
>
>
> "Jupiter Jones [MVP]" <jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote in message
> news:OIHj7tFwHHA.4332@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> This is similar to what was seen nearly 6 years ago when Windows XP
>> was released.
>> My guess is we will see the same when the next OS is released.
>>
>> For large users there are good reasons to wait.
>> Most of the reasons are the same reasons given and used when Windows
>> XP was released.
>>
>> However for those that say "Microsoft ME II", that is just an opinion
>> the critics like and my guess is it will fade in time as Windows Vista
>> continues to prove itself.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jupiter Jones [MVP]
>> http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
>> http://www.dts-l.org
>>
>>
>> "Jason Williams" <jwilliams@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:etgzXHFwHHA.3588@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>> http://www.crn.com/white-box/200900857;jsessionid=M14TGXUWSSFG0QSNDLPSKH0CJUNN2JVN
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I thought my firm was one of the few! Microsoft ME II, here we come.
>>
This really does not prove the point however. The transition from 98 /
2000 was necessary for most people doing any kind of "Business". 2000
and XP were really not much different, but XP did persuade a lot of
ordinary people to upgrade simply because the "Entertainment" value was
there, over and above what 98 could do. Of course this upgraded a lot of
hardware too - so what you had was a new computer and a new OS that
could do mostly what you wanted.
This time around there's not been a huge improvement in hardware, most
machines that were happy on 2000 / XP don't improve any with Vista and
in fact many will not work or exhibit problems. IF there were some huge
improvement in hardware since XP came out then things might be as they
were during that OS change period, but the reality is that the latest
machine now does NOT run that much faster than a W2000 machine from
2001. If you put Vista on it it actually goes slower. There's nothing
that the stores can demonstrate that is really new, or spectacular, and
people like gamers won't help sell it because it actually screws up
their enjoyment.
When the MS forums are reduced to simply blaming "Driver Manufacturers"
for everything, which is pretty much the only help or advice offered
with no real solutions available it does nothing to help sales.
Many who bought XP bought it with a first computer, or as a replacement
for a real dinosaur. These folks have the internet now and are better
informed, they will read stuff like this before they buy which as first
time XP owners they couldn't have done.
So aside from those who just must have the latest (Who are probably too
busy on their new iPhones to use the computer now anyway) most people
are going to ask what extra they gain from an upgrade and the answer
seems to be a choice of mail clients that don't work as well as the old
one, a couple of games that wouldn't sell anyway, a couple of animated
screen savers and a lot of extra warnings that alert you to what you are
doing, something that most people knew anyway.
I actually Like Vista, but I cannot see why they had to throw in a new
and awkward learning curve simply by rearranging where things are. I
really don't think I'd spend a couple of hundred on the OS when I'm
likely to have to spend another couple of hundred on hardware, numerous
hours trying to hunt down drivers and end up with the same as I have now
+ some fancy graphics. Sorry
