backtop


Print 104 comment(s) - last by XPguy.. on Jan 17 at 9:46 AM

PC World calls out Microsoft on Windows Vista

The hatred for Windows Vista has been well documented on DailyTech and by millions of Vista users around the web. From the very beginning, many consumers took issue with Microsoft's multi-tiered approach to Vista.

Microsoft currently has four versions of Windows Vista aimed at the consumer market: Home Basic, Home Premium, Business and Ultimate. Vista Home Basic is the cheapest and has the least features, while Vista Ultimate is the most expensive and most feature-filled version.

Many felt that Microsoft should simply take Apple's approach with OS X and just include a single SKU for everyone and charge everyone the same price. Many also championed Apple's 5-user license policy with OS X versus Microsoft's "reduced" pricing efforts with Windows Vista Family Discount -- a program that ended on June 30.

In addition to pricing, licensing and marketing, many people consumers simply are disappointed with Vista's performance. Many users have claimed that Vista simply is slower than Windows XP for many operations with pesky trouble spots including networking and gaming.

Microsoft plans to address many performance-related problems/bugs with Service Pack 1, but Windows XP is getting a speed boost of its own with Service Pack 3.

All of the controversies and disappointments related to Vista were enough for PC World to label Windows Vista the #1 Biggest Tech Disappointment of 2007.

"The user account controls that were supposed to make users feel safer just made them feel irritated. And at $399 ($299 upgrade) for Windows Ultimate, we couldn't help feeling more than a little gouged," remarked PC World's Dan Tynan.

"No wonder so many users are clinging to XP like shipwrecked sailors to a life raft, while others who made the upgrade are switching back. And when the fastest Vista notebook PC World has ever tested is an Apple MacBook Pro, there's something deeply wrong with the universe."

For me personally, I'm rather indifferent to Vista -- I don't hate it, but I also don't love it. I currently own two PCs: a HP desktop with Windows Vista Home Premium SP1 RC1 installed and an Eee PC 4G with Windows XP Home SP2 (nLite’d of course). I don't game on either machine and I mainly use both for Internet, email and productivity (Office 2007 on the desktop, OpenOffice Portable on the Eee PC).

I routinely go back and forth between both machines during the day and don't miss anything in particular from either machine (feature wise) with regards to the operating system. In other words, given my usage model, I could use my Eee PC all day and not really long to be on my Vista-equipped desktop.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: I wish
By glitchc on 12/18/2007 10:25:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:


Yes it would have, but 1gb is relatively small these days and for the price back then you would have gotten a 256mb stick for the "same price" the price really never changes much, just sizes and features increase.



I think what you are trying to say is that the minimum required for each new OS generation costs the same as it did for the previous generation. As in 256 MB was minimum for XP, and it cost just as much then as 1GB, being the minimum for Vista, does today.

Now that the point is clarified, it can be properly debunked since 1) 256MB of RAM was more expensive back then than 1GB is now, by at least twice as much actually 2) the dollar's purchasing power has not been adjusted for inflation, so the dollar is actually worth less now than it was 5 years ago.

Phrasing it better helps, doesn't it?


RE: I wish
By StevoLincolnite on 12/19/2007 3:28:24 AM , Rating: 3
Minimum for XP was 64mb, Vista 512mb. (Although double/Quad-druple that for best results).


RE: I wish
By TomZ on 12/19/2007 8:58:12 AM , Rating: 2
XP doesn't run well on 64MB - never did. While theoretically possible, performance would be so terrible that it is not practical.


RE: I wish
By StevoLincolnite on 12/21/2007 1:20:11 AM , Rating: 2
Depends on how much tweaking you did to you're XP install, And you just proved my point, it does run on 64mb systems and the minimum is not 512mb.


RE: I wish
By bangmal on 12/23/2007 3:14:40 PM , Rating: 1
I throw you a bone. The min ram requirement for xp is 640KB, and vista is 32GB.


"Well, we didn't have anyone in line that got shot waiting for our system." -- Nintendo of America Vice President Perrin Kaplan

















botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki