backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 46 comment(s) - last by FaceMaster.. on Jun 6 at 11:26 AM

Windows 7, with Release Candidate box art from a Chinese Windows event shown here, will air to public on October 22. But to take advantage of the back to school shopping season, Microsoft has announced plans to offer upgrade bundles with new machines.  (Source: Redmond Pie)
Upgrades will help to fill the gap of uncertainty for computer buyers

In the computer hardware and operating system business, there's two crucial times of year -- the holiday season in November-December and the back-to-school season in August-September.  Major product releases early in the year are few and far between -- most releases aim to hit at least one of the lucrative periods.  Microsoft yesterday officially announced its Windows 7 release date: October 22. The announcement revealed that while it would make the holiday shopping season, it would miss the back-to-school shopping season.

New information from a senior Microsoft official reveals that Microsoft hopes to still cash in on back-to-school computer sales via Vista-to-Windows 7 upgrade packages.  The move should also lessen confusion and buyer hesitance by providing customers with a clear path to get the hot new OS, as soon as it comes out.  

At Computex in Taiwan, Steve Guggenheimer, corporate VP for Microsoft's OEM computing unit, announced the upcoming program, stating, "Microsoft has been working closely with our partners to help our mutual customers be able to enjoy the many benefits of Windows 7.  With that in mind, we're excited to say that there will be a Windows 7 upgrade program available. Consumers can buy that new PC, whether for a student heading off to college or just because they need a new one, and know they'll get Windows 7 as part of the deal."

The deal will likely be fairly straightforward -- the computer will start with Window Vista, but an extra fee will be front-loaded into the unit's cost, so it will also come with a Windows 7 license.  As soon as Windows 7 is released, you should get it via an update and be able to install.  Microsoft has yet to elaborate exactly how it plans to implement the update process.

Microsoft did not say whether the upgrades would be entirely free, but it seems likely that the fee will be minimal, and possibly rolled into the costs of new OEM products launching during the back-to-school season.

Also at Computex, Microsoft firmed up the release data of Windows Server 2008 R2, a much anticipated business OS.  The company said it planned to release Server 2008 at about the same time as Windows 7, meaning a late October release was likely.  States Mr. Guggenheimer, "With the release of Windows Server R2, companies of all sizes will get big improvements in virtualization, Web, and management.  These areas, along with several features that improve scalability and reliability, help deliver a strong value proposition on the server side to complement Windows 7."

The other latest Windows developments were the recent announcement that Microsoft would "uncripple" the Windows 7 Starter Edition, removing the three application limit.  It also recently announced a pack of touch software, to highlight the potential of touch functionality on the new OS.  Finally, Microsoft reiterated at Computex that starting July 1, users of the Windows 7 beta will see their OS crippled, with reboots every two hours.  Similarly, the Windows 7 Release Candidate will be crippled on June 1, 2010.  These measures are meant to encourage customers to buy an official copy of the product.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
And the price?
By ninus3d on 6/3/2009 9:31:23 AM , Rating: 5
God, stop holding it back guys!
Whats the price??? :\




RE: And the price?
By Finnkc on 6/3/2009 10:07:15 AM , Rating: 5
a massive walking male phallus salesman once told me that ...

if you have to ask you can't afford it

:P


RE: And the price?
By dflynchimp on 6/3/2009 10:10:47 AM , Rating: 2
I'm still with the guy that said Vista Ultimate users should be getting a free upgrade to Win7...


RE: And the price?
By Boze on 6/3/2009 11:26:53 AM , Rating: 4
I'm a Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit user and I really can't agree with you. Blame for Vista's supposed poor performance can't be justifily laid at Microsoft's feet. Most companies, including software and hardware ones, had become complacent over the many years Windows XP had been available, and must have figured they could mostly ignore this new operating system and continue to build applications and hardware for XP. Over time, when they began to "come around" and realize that Microsoft was going to push forward to a new OS regardless, I saw compatibility improve. I have personally found Vista64 to be more secure, more stable, and a better performer than my Windows XP Pro installation. This is possibly due to the fact that I have been running "latest and greatest" hardware for the past six years.

At any rate, I refuse to complain to, or blame, Microsoft for Nvidia's shoddy Vista drivers and other companies' poorly written software. Vista at release was a good operating system that demanded a decent computer to be efficient; subsequent service packs have turned Vista in a great operating system that runs very well even on what I personally consider to be "cheap" hardware. I would imagine I am not the only computer user that has this view. I can remember spending $1500 back in 1994 for a CTX-branded Windows 95 machine with a Pentium 75, 16 MB of RAM, and a 540 MB hard disk with a 14" monitor. That was purchased at Sam's Club, and was on sale, and that was considered an entry-level machine at the time. Nowadays, $1500 will purchase a fairly amazing system from Dell or Hewlett-Packard, one that will easily maximize all the available features of any version of Windows Vista, and likely would run any version of Windows 7 with ease.

Sorry for the rambling, but the short version is this: Don't blame Microsoft for everyone else's combined laziness, its akin to being back in the 1900s and complaining there are no gas stations when you have one of only maybe 100 cars in the United States.


RE: And the price?
By Etsp on 6/3/2009 12:06:03 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not in support of that idea because of the poor Vista support in general... That's not Microsoft's fault.

I support that idea because the Windows Vista Ultimate Extras simply don't exist as they were advertised. Ultimate was supposed to get multiple new features over time, and that never panned out. We got a couple games, and Dreamscene.

Dreamscene.... well, on my system it was locked up more often than it was running...

Only reason I went to Vista was because I wanted to be able to tinker with the domain aspects of GP (Young Tech who needs experience) and I also wanted to use the Media Center Features (Person who likes movies) Only way to get that was with Ultimate...

Then, as it turns out, many of Microsoft's other products are so lacking in security that when you enable FIPS encryption compliance on a PC (to at least get some form of security on Remote Desktop...) they actually CRASH. Windows Media Store Update Manager and Windows Live(What Fallout 3 uses) are my two examples....


RE: And the price?
By Luticus on 6/3/2009 12:44:29 PM , Rating: 3
I got Ultimate because I wanted the complete operating system in all its glory, not for some extras that they promised me. I don't by a $400 (retail at the time, I paid about ~$250 or so because I was “in the business” and bought it OEM) operating system based on a hand full of promises. Ultimate is a valuable operating system despite the lack of "extras", and I personally won't put anything less on any of my Vista PC's. All 4 of my Vista machines are legit Ultimate editions with OEM licensing.

After using Vista X64 Ultimate on my main machine for about 2 months I was so impressed I thought, this has to go on ALL my machines. Even though it isn’t on all my machines (still have 2 on XP, one uses Debian 5, and my servers are all on ’03).

However just for kicks I loaded Vista x86 Ultimate (original first day out load) on my Debain machine using another hard disk I had lying around. The machine is a 5 year old low-midrange hp laptop with a single core AMD processor on 512MB memory with a 40GIG hard disk and ATI integrated graphics. Not only did it install, but it ran… nicely. Not one driver but my wireless card was installed and AERO was disabled (due to lack of video drivers) but the OS worked… I wouldn’t game on it, but Office ‘07 worked on and it was “useable” without any service packs or even one update to the operating system. Due to lack of driver support I promptly switched back to Debain but I think the fact that it worked on hardware that old says something.


RE: And the price?
By Luticus on 6/3/2009 12:45:17 PM , Rating: 2
I agree with you 100%


RE: And the price?
By mattclary on 6/3/2009 12:54:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Blame for Vista's supposed poor performance can't be justifily laid at Microsoft's feet.


I just bought a refurbished Dell Latitude E6400 that shipped with Vista. Since it was a refurb, it came with 1Gb RAM (since upgraded to 4GB). I had Vista up for about an hour and turned off all extraneous running processes. Latitudes come with a minimal amount of crapware too, since they are targeted at businesses. The performance sucked.

So, riddle me this: Why is it after I installed Win 7, the machine's performance became downright peppy (still with that default 1GB memory)?

It's the OS bloat that slows Vista, not poor drivers. Win 7 is a huge improvement, and MS deserves a pat on the back for recognizing the problem and fixing it.


RE: And the price?
By Luticus on 6/3/2009 1:05:41 PM , Rating: 3
I wonder… did your OS come with dell manufacture software installed? A fresh load of Vista on my laptop ran circles around the load that came with it. Also, just because the machine was refurbished doesn’t mean the operating system was, it may not have been a fresh load (depending on where you bought it and how reputable the company is). My Vista x86 Ultimate laptop runs smooth as it gets (1GB RAM), not one problem with it at all.


RE: And the price?
By dflynchimp on 6/3/2009 2:29:59 PM , Rating: 2
Jeez you people are so sensitive. You make it out like I'm one of those sheeple who bash Vista for no reason.

I never said I had any problems with Vista. I actually like using it alot. It's just that as the other DT article stated, MS really dropped the ball on the so called "Ultimate Extras". The bottom line here is I'm just another cheapskate who wants free stuff XD


RE: And the price?
By dflynchimp on 6/3/2009 2:30:53 PM , Rating: 1
Jeez you people are so sensitive. You make it out like I'm one of those sheeple who bash Vista for no reason.

I never said I had any problems with Vista. I actually like using it alot. It's just that as the other DT article stated, MS really dropped the ball on the so called "Ultimate Extras". The bottom line here is I'm just another cheapskate who wants free stuff XD


RE: And the price?
By dflynchimp on 6/3/2009 2:35:09 PM , Rating: 2
the schuck? friggin Firefox double posted me! I WANT FREE STUFF AS COMPENSATION!


RE: And the price?
By mindless1 on 6/4/2009 6:00:03 PM , Rating: 3
Boze wrote: "I'm a Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit user and I really can't agree with you. Blame for Vista's supposed poor performance can't be justifily laid at Microsoft's feet. Most companies, including software and hardware ones, had become complacent over the many years Windows XP had been available, and must have figured they could mostly ignore this new operating system and continue to build applications and hardware for XP. Over time, when they began to "come around" and realize that Microsoft was going to push forward to a new OS regardless, I saw compatibility improve."

The applications from XP run fast enough, the problem is people don't want to pay more for a better computer than their apps, their uses need. People get pissed off when what they could have done in Offce '97 with a P3/1GHz and 256MB memory, makes them pay hundreds more on the price of a beefier new system or else wait for a laggy OS. The operating system is supposed to be a means to run applications, NOT the greatest burden the hardware has for most people's uses.

Boze wrote: "I have personally found Vista64 to be more secure, more stable, and a better performer than my Windows XP Pro installation. This is possibly due to the fact that I have been running "latest and greatest" hardware for the past six years."

No it's because you know little about PCs. Knowledgable users resolved their XP security issues long ago, see no real improvement in Vista security. BTW, I just spend 2 days getting viruses off of someone's Vista laptop so "secure" (not!) it wouldn't even finish booting after the malware had it's way with the OS.

Same with stability, if BY NOW you can't get an XP system stable, look in the mirror as it is not hard. I will grant that a buggy app or driver can cause this, but XP apps are by now far more mature, as are the drivers, so the occasional bugs are more frequent in Vista apps and drivers by far.

Bozxe wrote: "At any rate, I refuse to complain to, or blame, Microsoft for Nvidia's shoddy Vista drivers and other companies' poorly written software."

How long have you worked for MS? Can you not accept that people who didn't have nVidia drivers, still had plenty of complains about Vista? Can you not accept that people complained about Vista with no other apps installed yet? Can you not accept that you are not the only user of a PC, that HEY YOU LOOK AT THESE WORDS YOU HAVE MET SOMEONE WITH DIFFERENT NEEDS THAN YOU RIGHT _NOW_ as well as constantly in the past(!!!!), that these people are entitled to pay for the product they want, not have forced on them what you arguably like.

Boze wrote: "Vista at release was a good operating system that demanded a decent computer to be efficient; subsequent service packs have turned Vista in a great operating system that runs very well even on what I personally consider to be "cheap" hardware. I would imagine I am not the only computer user that has this view."

Vista at release was a joke, it couldn't even copy files on many standard installations, otherwise stable hardware/drivers/apps, without strange lags and hours of waiting for what should take minutes. It senselessly moved around controls that the whole world had learned to use, it brought a ludicrous nagging UAC that not only becomes tiresome, it should never flash the freaking screen dark then light again. Yes it can be disabled, but both are a problem with the solution being stopping point of entry of malware in the first place, NOT ignoring that and impeding even basic uses of a system. For pete's sake you can't even run an app you approved for installation and answered yes to on the UAC multiple times already without it asking you again and again. It is simply broken by design. I could go on, but you know fully there are plenty of poor mistakes made in the OS that are mentioned too many times by too many people to continue to brush aside, and if you're the type that can't accept this fact, a basic web search will find millions of examples.

Boze wrote: "I can remember spending $1500 back in 1994 for a CTX-branded Windows 95 machine with a Pentium 75, 16 MB of RAM, and a 540 MB hard disk with a 14" monitor. That was purchased at Sam's Club, and was on sale, and that was considered an entry-level machine at the time. Nowadays, $1500 will purchase a fairly amazing system from Dell or Hewlett-Packard, one that will easily maximize all the available features of any version of Windows Vista, and likely would run any version of Windows 7 with ease."

Again you fail to see that people don't want to pay $1500 to counter mistakes made in OS design. A minority of systems sell at that high a price point, if that is what is needed for seamless Vista use, Vista should only ship on such well endowed systems. If technology doesn't allow us to do the same things we did back in '95 for lower cost at the very least, we are going backwards (and wasting more power in the process, a $1500 system may use twice the power of a Pentium 75 box if not more, those shipping with as little as 90W to 250W PSU.

People aren't looking to "maximize all the avilable features" of Vista, they're wanting the operating system to be a transparent, meaning no thought or action due to it, means to an end which is an application or activity like merely writing an email, surfing the web, playing a video or a game. All Vista brought to that is support for the next DirectX version, and I have not seen anyone using Vista become significantly more productive which they should have given they needed a system upgrade for more performance to even run it.

Boze wrote: "Sorry for the rambling, but the short version is this: Don't blame Microsoft for everyone else's combined laziness, its akin to being back in the 1900s and complaining there are no gas stations when you have one of only maybe 100 cars in the United States."

The short version is, it would be ridiculous to not blame the developer for the problems in their product, to acknowledge that the use of a computer defines what OS and software is best for it, that you are the lazy one if you found XP security or stability a problem and inability to deal with basic PC issues like this makes you the person in the 1900s.

Now click your oversized color gradient icon that permits you to click again to shut down your computer because you aren't safe on the internet without learning basic security practices.


RE: And the price?
By TennesseeTony on 6/3/2009 6:10:32 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, I believe they will give you a free upgrade to Windows 7 if you purchased Vista Ultimate, the basic version I think is what they've decided upon.

YES, I'm joking. But hey, you didn't specify that you wanted the top of the line one! :)

Oh, and I think you got slammed on pretty hard by the previous post, I don't see you blaming anyone, you are just a cheap bas....s fisherman, yeah, and want something for free.


RE: And the price?
By FaceMaster on 6/6/2009 11:26:15 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'm still with the guy that said Vista Ultimate users should be getting a free upgrade to Win7...


Yeah and while we're at it why don't all owners of Half Life 2 get Half Life 3 for free when it comes out? Oh wait, because they'd make more money if everybody paid for it again.


RE: And the price?
By reader1 on 6/3/09, Rating: -1
RE: And the price?
By omnicronx on 6/3/2009 11:18:41 AM , Rating: 4
So? You are still using Windows, with the possibility of buying Windows Apps, which only helps MS keep their market dominance. When it comes down to it, business OEM's and consumer OEM's are not going to use pirated software, and these two groups account for almost all of Microsoft's sales. As long as people like yourself are still using Windows, MS could care less. And lets not kid yourself, people like you would not have paid for it regardless of price point.


RE: And the price?
By reader1 on 6/3/09, Rating: -1
RE: And the price?
By Luticus on 6/3/2009 1:21:18 PM , Rating: 5
You're an idiot.


RE: And the price?
By mindless1 on 6/4/2009 6:11:58 PM , Rating: 1
LOL, do you realize what you just wrote?

You refuse to pay for an operating system and you are against piracy, so basically you are saying you have no way, can't even figure out how, to wipe your own ass.


RE: And the price?
By Luticus on 6/3/2009 12:51:01 PM , Rating: 2
While I can't say every peice of software I have is 100% legit (I like to test drive things sometimes), I can say I own atleast one legit copy of everything I have. Every Microsoft operating system I've ever used has been 100% legit and 100% updatable because I like updates, and I like supporting the copanies that work hard to bring us great software like Windows 7 and Windows Vista. I can also say that any software I use professionally I purchase legit.


RE: And the price?
By Smilin on 6/3/2009 5:52:06 PM , Rating: 2
It's going to be the same price it's always been.

Ever since Win98 it's been:

99 upgrade.
199 full.
199 upgrade to "pro" (w2k, xp, vista premium etc)
299 full "pro".


clean install > upgrade
By Quijonsith on 6/3/2009 2:20:37 PM , Rating: 2
I don't know how things will fan out for windows 7, but my experience with windows ever since 3.1 has been that upgrading always introduces instability and unreliability. In the same cases, forcing a clean install from a full copy of the program or even the upgrade disk itself (which usually asked to provide the disk from the previous version to verify license) worked substantially better. I hope this plan of selling vista computers with upgrade licenses to windows 7 doesn't show the same trend.




RE: clean install > upgrade
By Luticus on 6/3/2009 3:43:48 PM , Rating: 2
As a rule of thumb a clean install is always better. I hope they can make the upgrade thing work too. Another concern is how will they handle system reload? If it's a download, will they have to redownload to reinstall? So many questions...


RE: clean install > upgrade
By Smilin on 6/3/2009 5:58:36 PM , Rating: 2
That's the common wisdom but with a little added knowledge it isn't necessary to clean install at all.

If you're curious now, go run the Windows 7 upgrade advisor. It will tell you with surprising accuracy what will and won't work. Follow it's advice and you're good.

I just took an HP laptop that I got back from the shop. It was a blown HDD under warranty so I got back a newly loaded machine complete with all HP crapware. Out of curiosity I upgraded to Win7 without a clean install.

I got one warning from the upgrade advisor, I disabled that item before starting and the upgrade went quite smooth.

Keep in mind that the big overhaul in driver architecture is done. The compatibility differences between Vista & Win7 will be trivial compared to XP & Vista.


RE: clean install > upgrade
By crystal clear on 6/4/2009 4:45:20 AM , Rating: 2
Pre-installed Windows Vista Service Pack 1 or Windows Vista Service Pack 2 will be required for the Windows 7 Upgrade option. Windows XP that was installed as a downgrade from a Windows Vista license is also eligible under the program but it will not support a direct upgrade to Windows 7. A clean install is necessary.


Encouragement to buy a legit copy?
By Amiga500 on 6/3/2009 10:10:00 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
Lastly, Microsoft reiterated at Computex that users will see their OS crippled, with reboots every two hours.


Is that not the norm for Microsoft software? ;-)




RE: Encouragement to buy a legit copy?
By tone4sho on 6/3/09, Rating: -1
By tone4sho on 6/3/2009 11:04:28 AM , Rating: 1
lol guess so *rolls eyes*


By TSS on 6/3/2009 8:46:20 PM , Rating: 1
it's old dude. i've just had an XP SP2 rig that ran the same install for 7 months without a BSOD

even that's not special, but get this: the 8 months prior, it ran with corrupted memory modules. before i replaced those, i was getting BSODS every 3 hours (after 8 months, before that it used to be once every 3 days). i never reinstalled. 7 months later, it was still up and running.

it had slowed down considerably, fragmented as hell but still running and crash free. i hope vista's about as stable as that.

that said, here's http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrAD25V7ll8 just for fun :P


Pay Twice
By Gio6518 on 6/3/2009 5:00:23 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
the computer will start with Window Vista, but an extra fee will be front-loaded into the unit's cost, so it will also come with a Windows 7 license


so if you buy a new pc or laptop right now you have to pay for vista and are being pre-charged for windows 7 ?

oh yeah that sounds fair




RE: Pay Twice
By bodar on 6/3/2009 6:29:37 PM , Rating: 2
It's probably just the price difference between Vista and Win7, since there are indications that Win7 will cost more.


By crystal clear on 6/4/2009 3:08:33 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Microsoft did not say whether the upgrades would be entirely free, but it seems likely that the fee will be minimal, and possibly rolled into the costs of new OEM products launching during the back-to-school season.


No confusion its all very crystal clear

"23rd October is the date the Windows 7 will be available. There is a 30 day upgrade time so that customers don't wait to buy a new computer, so if you buy during that 30 day period, you'll get a free upgrade to Windows 7", Bobby Watkins, Acer's UK MD told Pocket-lint.

http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/news.phtml/23846/a...

Also as appearing below (5/9/2009) in my earlier comments-

Its for existing users & not for anything else
By crystal clear on 5/9/09, Rating: 1
By crystal clear on 5/9/2009 4:44:24 AM , Rating: 1

Smart marketing means -

Sell Vista based systems now with a free upgrade option to Win7 with NO downgrade option to WinXP.




By crystal clear on 6/4/2009 3:18:48 AM , Rating: 2
For consumers this means that later this summer, if you purchase select systems through retail or directly from Dell, you may order a Windows 7 upgrade kit that will be shipped to you after Windows 7 has officially launched on 22 October.

Dell says that once the Windows 7 Upgrade Option program is officially announced by Microsoft more details will be available including supported PCs, languages and countries.

In addition, Dell has provided feedback on how its testing of Windows 7 has gone, saying "so far so good…Overall we’re impressed with how well the operating system is working on our systems".

The manufacturer highlights "solid improvements in boot time", improved battery life over Vista and says: "This is more qualitative than quantitative… the systems just feel faster in a good way".

http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/news.phtml/24549/d...


Windows 7 Upgrade Option program
By crystal clear on 6/4/2009 4:27:49 AM , Rating: 2
OEM partners may publicly acknowledge their participation in the program, but they are still not allowed to market the program or otherwise publicly disclose the program details until June 26, 2009.

This is an optional program, so not all OEMs may choose to participate. OEMs that choose to participate in this upgrade program will have the freedom to determine how to best provide qualifying end users with the details.

The following are the only valid upgrade paths under the program :

Windows Vista® Home Premium -> Windows® 7 Home Premium
Windows Vista® Business -> Windows® 7 Professional
Windows Vista® Ultimate -> Windows® 7 Ultimate

Microsoft Windows Vista® Home Basic, Windows Vista® Starter Edition, and Windows® XP (all editions) are not qualifying products under the program.

PCs with a license for Vista Home Premium, Vista Business and Vista Ultimate purchased between June 26, 2009 and Jan. 31, 2010 will be eligible for a free or reduced-price Windows 7 upgrade.

Microsoft will publicly announce pricing for all Windows 7 retail products in mid-June 2009.




By crystal clear on 6/6/2009 9:35:37 AM , Rating: 2
Best Buy memo explains that Vista doesn't work, details Windows 7 upgrade plans

http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/05/best-buy-memo-e...

Free upgrades for PCs purchased with

Windows Vista® Home Premium -> Windows® 7 Home Premium
Windows Vista® Business -> Windows® 7 Professional
Windows Vista® Ultimate -> Windows® 7 Ultimate


For others-

Windows® 7 Home Premium upgrade - USD 49.99

Windows® 7 Professional upgrade - USD 99.99


lol they're serious??
By poohbear on 6/4/2009 6:24:27 AM , Rating: 2
lol i thought Win 7 was to win over the win XP users, they expect us vista folks to switch over too???? are they on crack, i just bought it last year, am i expected to pay $150 for an OS every 2-3 years? gimme a break.




oh boy
By tastyratz on 6/4/2009 2:18:48 PM , Rating: 2
its "vista read" sales all over again.

New PC's "7 ready"

Think they will touch that labeling again?




Get Real
By tone4sho on 6/3/09, Rating: -1
RE: Get Real
By Lonyo on 6/3/2009 11:13:17 AM , Rating: 5
Yeah, replacing an OS after only a few years means it's a failure.
Like 95 -> 98, or 98 -> XP. (And that's ignoring ME and 2k).
Oh wait, the only OS that had a very long life was XP, and Vista being replaced ~3 years after launch is about the norm.


RE: Get Real
By jimshorts86 on 6/3/2009 11:17:47 AM , Rating: 2
Get over yourself and your sense of entitlement pal. Microsoft doesn't owe you anything.

Vista is an operating system. It works. Not without a few hiccups I understand but calling it a failure is extreme. Did it blow up your computer? No. Did it delete all your files? No. Just because it did not suit your expectations does not me the majority of non-tech savvy people find it a reasonable if not perfectly functional operating system.

If you really think it's a failure then you should switch to something else rather than just complain and moan. That's just common sense.


RE: Get Real
By Luticus on 6/3/2009 12:59:23 PM , Rating: 2
People choose Windows over FREE operating systems... Companies can’t give their product away as fast as Microsoft can sell Windows. This is also true with office. By your logic you're calling every other operating system in the world a failure because like it or not, Vista out sold everyone. You can use the "Windows is bundled" argument all you want but take in to consideration that manufacturers are the ones who chose to bundle the OS. Microsoft managed to sell it to the manufactures who managed to sell it to us.


RE: Get Real
By Belard on 6/3/2009 3:41:05 PM , Rating: 3
Vista is the best selling OS at this time for the obvious reason thats beeon going on for over 15 years.

Its call a Monopoly. If Windows had 30% of the market, Apple with 30% and the rest Linux. You betcha that Windows would be a better and lower-cost OS in order to compete.

There was a time when there were MORE Apple and commodore computers than PCs.

If I didn't need to use Windows in business with others, I'd be using Linux. I grew up on Amiga and until XP, MS had nothing on an OS that came out 15 years before.


RE: Get Real
By ClownPuncher on 6/3/2009 3:57:59 PM , Rating: 2
Does not compute.

There were more mac's and commodores (therefore holding a larger OS market share) but Microsoft used its monopoly (wait, didnt they have a smaller market share just a few words ago?) to crush apple and commodore?

You have fetal alcohol syndrome.


RE: Get Real
By Luticus on 6/3/2009 4:20:32 PM , Rating: 2
All I can say is that if there was ever a time to overtake windows and prove it's as bad as everyone says it is… the time was the year of Vista's release when Microsoft broke a lot of backwards compatibility. A huge reason Windows has a "monopoly" is because of all the legacy code people keep crying about. People don't want to give up all their old programs, and now that a lot of them don't work anyway, why not switch if Windows is so bad?

Windows is less and less needed in business every day. Linux has Open Office which is highly compatible with MS Office. Linux has access to almost every web browser excluding IE (6.0 can be had with Wine). There's another thing, Wine. With Wine a good number of Windows only programs actually do work in Linux. I just got my Debian system to connect and authenticate to my Windows Domain via Likewise. Linux also supports remote desktop and can actually utilize the remote desktop built into windows with no modifications to the Windows machine necessary other than allowing remote desktop connections. Linux allows a form of drive mapping via mounting the file system to a folder, and you can configure it to do this automatically on boot by modifying your ‘fstab’ file. You can also mount ISO files to folders with no additional software (at least in Debian you can). For media there’s Amarok, XMMP and TONS of other software available. For chat there’s Pidgin (which connects to EVERYTHING) and a slew of other options available. For programming Linux has a huge number of FREE compilers and development tools. If you choose a mainstream distribution like Debian, Mandriva, Fadora, or Ubuntu/Kubuntu (among others) you don’t have to worry much about your distribution not being supported by any particular application. Now I'm not trying to say that Linux supports everything that Windows does (because it doesn’t) or vice versa but I am saying that you do not *have* to run Windows to survive in the business world... it's just more convenient.

Everyone keeps saying Mac is so much better than Windows in business and development, why not switch to that if you hate Windows so much?

quote:
Vista is the best selling OS at this time for the obvious reason thats beeon going on for over 15 years.

I understand what you’re trying to say, and the only thing I can say in response is that it’s been selling that well all this time for a good reason. Contrary to the “cool, edgy, tech guy” opinion, Windows is pretty darn good software.

This whole Windows “monopoly” argument is getting a bit stale, I could almost understand had you used the gaming edge but business... seriously? I don't know man... I'm calling BS.


"If a man really wants to make a million dollars, the best way would be to start his own religion." -- Scientology founder L. Ron. Hubbard

DailyTech Poll
Do you use copy/paste on your smartphone? 




16 Comments









botimage
Copyright 2010 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki