The Vista Death Watch

[lordsmurf]

I hate to admit it,I'm MS Hater, So I don't mine using Bogus articles. It just makes me feel good.....

You hate Microsoft, yet you use Windows XP. You are a walking paradox.

I'm a computer hater.
But I still have to use them, even for my hobbies that are supposed to be fun!

[Midzuki]

RLT69 wrote:

Microsoft has several different business areas.
One is responsible OS development.

Since when?

I think gamers would like to run a 64 bit OS,

as long as the 64-bit OS remains an OS and does not want to be
the main star on the block.

*****************

[Dv8ted2]

I hate to admit it,I'm MS Hater, So I don't mine using Bogus articles. It just makes me feel good.....

You hate Microsoft, yet you use Windows XP. You are a walking paradox.

I'm a computer hater.
But I still have to use them, even for my hobbies that are supposed to be fun!

You choose to use them for hobbies. There is a difference. :P

You already knew that.

[JohnnyMalaria]

It's amazing what people call a failure. A true failure of a flagship product would lead to major structural reorganization to prevent it from happening again - involving significant numbers of redundancies to pay for the failure.

Wow, you really don't know what you are talking about do you. MICROSOFT HAS REORGANIZED ITSELF STRUCTURALLY.

You should re-read what I said since you missed a key point: involving significant numbers of redundancies.

i.e., when a flagship product tanks after launch and under performs by billions of dollars - so as to be labeled an outright failure - then, in addition to restructuring, redundancies will occur. This is not the case with Microsoft and Vista. Microsoft restructured but this was prior to Vista launch and didn't involve across-the-board redundancies (I can only find news of 214 in sales - perhaps news of others is buried elsewhere) - compare to, say, Sun's 3300 redundancies in 2004.

[lordsmurf]

You choose to use them for hobbies. There is a difference. :P
You already knew that.

I guess I could still use S-VHS and build a darkroom in the garage.

[Nilfennasion]

There are some people for whom "hobbies" are not optional, but rather compulsive patterned behaviour hard-wired into their brain much like Defend Microsoft At All Costs Including Ridiculous Misinterpretations seems to be hard-wired into the brains of many a forum user here.

I do not particularly enjoy using Mickeysoft programs on my computer, either, but since I cannot afford to buy a Mac yet and Linux is basically used by a bunch of thuggish morons who fail to realise that not everyone learns how to perform a new task with a new tool in exactly the same way (for the most part, anyway), using a collection of sloppy code I have yet to pay for really is my only option. AmigaOS/Workbench was always my OS of choice, but try doing HD video editing in that.

[edDV]

In my limited experience the secret to getting Vista to work is buying the Vista update to your key applications. I recall the transition to XP was much the same. Holding off for an SP1 is still wise for most.

After a couple of months and stepping up to Vegas 8 I'm adequately happy with Vista. Now this one is working, I'll install Leopard on the Mac downstairs

Been listening to Leo Laporte and others detailing the Leopard traps and disappointments. I'm kinda fond of Tiger but oh well, others want to try Leopard. Here we go again...

[SCDVD]

In my limited experience the secret to getting Vista to work is buying the Vista update to your key applications. I recall the transition to XP was much the same. Holding off for an SP1 is still wise for most.

After a couple of months and stepping up to Vegas 8 I'm adequately happy with Vista. Now this one is working, I'll install Leopard on the Mac downstairs

Been listening to Leo Laporte and others detailing the Leopard traps and disappointments. I'm kinda fond of Tiger but oh well, others want to try Leopard. Here we go again...

You mentioned a very important issue. When upgrading any OS, it's important to upgrade applications and drivers. A lot of problems can be avoided if this is done. I also agree there is usually no good reason to rush out and upgrade to a new OS version as soon as it is released. No amount of beta testing will find all of the bugs in a new OS. Nothing can take the place of millions of users to uncover previously undiscovered bugs.

Now that Leopard has been released, we will hear complaints about it as well. You could replace the words Microsoft and Vista in this thread with Apple and Leopard and be close to the same points and complaints.

[rkr1958]

Just saw the latest Mac vs PC commercial during the Redskins-Cowboys game. PC is campaigning for Vista with the slogan, "Ask not what Vista can do for you but what you can buy for Vista." Then PC confides secretly to MAC that he downgraded to XP a couple weeks ago and has been very happy since.

[JohnnyMalaria]

Better than having to pay for an entirely new PC just to get an OS. I sure as hell wouldn't buy a new PC just to see what the OS is like. Apple's advertising insults non-Mac PC owners and must only serve to give their existing customers a smug git feeling. What a waste of money.

If Apple made their OS available without being forced to buy their hardware, many people would try it and probably use it.
But then Apple would have to employ many more developers to ensure compatibility in the open platform world.

[rkr1958]

I don't know but those commercials seem effective. I work in a AIX, UNIX & PC software development environment. The last thing most folks there want to do when they go home is to have be IT for their family's computer and home network.

[JohnnyMalaria]

I see the domestic IT argument. I presume OS X is effectively free with the hardware and the OS upgrades seem reasonably priced. i.e., I doubt Apple make any money on the OS.

I'm curious about OS X but, realistically, it is inaccessible since my current hardware is more than adequate.

If the average consumer is in the market for a new PC, one that can run OS X and Windows makes a lot of sense - assuming Windows really does run as well on Mac hardware as non. But you would have to pay the retail price for Windows.

[Dv8ted2]

It has been said before, but it makes you wonder how much of a piece o S**t OS X is because Apple never really talks about their product. They are too busy pointing out Microsoft's shortcomings.

It is funny how Leopard is starting to get deadpanned yet all Apple can talk about is how windows sucks.

On a side note, Apple just patched roughly 44 security holes after Leopard was launched.

[satviewer2000]

Well one way or another, we will ALL (with the exception of a very small number of computer nerds) be using Windows Vista eventually. There's just no other realistic competitor. Does anyone REALLY think that we're going to throw out our PC's and buy Macs instead? Or does anyone REALLY think that the majority of people will be using Linux?

If any of you are old enough, you'll remember Windows 1.0 and 2.0, or maybe not, but does that matter? The original Internet explorer could not even touch Netscape, but where's Netscape now? Remember OpenGL? The critics said that DirectX would never replace it? Well, most of you probably have never even heard of OpenGL, but I'm sure you know what DirectX is.

The point is, Microsoft keeps moving forward and will eventually win the battles. They learn from their mistakes and keep tweaking things until they get them right. You can't get 100% of everything right the time the first time around.

This is just the way the business world works. Microsoft won't win every battle at the outset, but they've got the deep pockets to ride out the war until they do win, and in the end, they ALWAYS win.

[Midzuki]

satviewer2000 wrote:

Well one way or another, we will ALL (with the exception of a very small number of computer nerds) be using Windows Vista eventually.

What is the make of your crystal-ball

***********************

[JohnnyMalaria]

satviewer2000 wrote:

Well one way or another, we will ALL (with the exception of a very small number of computer nerds) be using Windows Vista eventually.

What is the make of your crystal-ball

***********************

Reality.com

[Midzuki]

Thanks for that URL

[MJPollard]

Well one way or another, we will ALL (with the exception of a very small number of computer nerds) be using Windows Vista eventually.

Don't know about your reality, but my reality involves skipping Vista entirely and waiting to see what Windows 7 brings to the table. MS can have my XP when they pry it from my cold, dead keyboard.

[MikieV]

But then Apple would have to employ many more developers to ensure compatibility in the open platform world.

Exactly the issue.

90% of the "it just works" bragging is only possible because Apple knows exactly what the hardware is.

Opening-up iTunes, iTMS, Quicktime, iPods and iPhones to the Windows-based world has exposed Apple to all the joys of supporting "white box" computers, let alone supporting computers by HP, Dell, Gateway, Lenovo, Toshiba, Sony, Acer, yada, yada, yada...

They are making tons of money now, why would they want the headache of supporting the Mac OS on Acer computers???

[MikieV]

There's just no other realistic competitor.

Yes. That was what those US & EU anti-trust & abuse of monopoly judgments were about...

The original Internet explorer could not even touch Netscape, but where's Netscape now?

See above comment about abuse of monoploly rulings...

OpenGL? The critics said that DirectX would never replace it? Well, most of you probably have never even heard of OpenGL, but I'm sure you know what DirectX is.

Ah yes, DirectX & ActiveX.... Why do Game graphics need to be tied to a specific OS? Why do Web functions need to be tied to a specific OS?

sorry, stupid questions...

Microsoft won't win every battle at the outset, but they've got the deep pockets to ride out the war until they do win, and in the end, they ALWAYS win.

Which brings us back to those US & EU rulings about exactly how Microsoft has been working to keep those "deep pockets" from being threatened.

Which is silly, because with all the revenue from whichever windows-du-jour being sold on all new PCs, and the money-train of Office... why strong-arm competitors when you should easily be able to stay ahead of them via near-bottomless funding for R&D & marketing???

[BJ_M]

90% of IT Professionals Don't Want Vista

A survey by King Research has found that Ninety percent of IT professionals have concerns using Vista, with compatibility, stability and cost being their key reasons. Interestingly, forty four percent of companies surveyed are considering switching to non-Windows operating systems, and nine percent of those have already started moving to their selected alternative. "The concerns about Vista specified by participants were overwhelmingly related to stability. Stability in general was frequently cited, as well as compatibility with the business software that would need to run on Vista," said Diane Hagglund of King Research.

http://www.computerworlduk.com/management/infrastructure/applications/news/index.cfm?newsid=6258

[Dv8ted2]

90% of IT Professionals Don't Want Vista

A survey by King Research has found that Ninety percent of IT professionals have concerns using Vista, with compatibility, stability and cost being their key reasons. Interestingly, forty four percent of companies surveyed are considering switching to non-Windows operating systems, and nine percent of those have already started moving to their selected alternative. "The concerns about Vista specified by participants were overwhelmingly related to stability. Stability in general was frequently cited, as well as compatibility with the business software that would need to run on Vista," said Diane Hagglund of King Research.

http://www.computerworlduk.com/management/infrastructure/applications/news/index.cfm?newsid=6258

I saw that posted on slashdot earlier. I find it fascinating that the same people that were beating Microsoft over the head about security are choosing to stay with a less secure operating system. I am not claiming that Vista is perfect, because it is not, but it seems to be more secure.

[JohnnyMalaria]

Ah yes, DirectX & ActiveX.... Why do Game graphics need to be tied to a specific OS? Why do Web functions need to be tied to a specific OS?

You touch on a common misnomer (not necessarily yours, of course!) - ActiveX is more than those things you are warned about when browsing. ActiveX controls are used in standard applications. e.g., our main application uses many for such things as audio meters, vectorscopes, transport controls etc. Why? Because they are reusable and lightweight. Most are typically graphical elements that use COM. COM is a wonderful feature of Windows. DirectShow filters are an example. Indeed, entire applications are examples. You could argue that Vegas is a huge ActiveX control. Our app is now automatable and, like others, can be controlled from Excel (and just about every programming language). You can create your own specialized user interface and functionality. Thanks to COM.

A few years ago I wrote a program to complement EditDV (R.I.P.) which was a Quicktime-based NLE for DV. I hated programming the Quicktime stuff - clunky, slow and frustratingly limited. Compared to that, DirectShow is a breeze, very powerful and very lightweight. Ideal for high performance, low overhead applications.

If you want OS-independent and, by extension, CPU-independent games, you can kiss goodbye to performance and, most likely, pay more for them.

[rotten apple]

I'll be honest, I used to be a Windows user, ...snip... Offensive Steve Jobs Propaganda/sundry deceits edited out of users post .......er that all thats was left sorry

Yes its the usual style over substance,cerebral lite, technology knowledge free Jobs victim,i'm afraid

Yes we're informed windozzee was slow and EVEN SLOWER with succesive OS's up to XP

" BIllions " of malware programs (no wonder the OS is slow you daft !!) causes poster to pay thru nose for protective software. Talk about clueless why wait till a billion malware infect your computer if you bothered to investigate the problem when it started you could have avoided the problem/ slow PC etc in the first place. You also show your complete IGNORANCE when you had been computing for YEARS by this time by + STILL getting ripped off for crappy antivirus/malware software when you could have got superior versions for free !!!




ERE IT COMES!!!!!........

Another thing I've noticed with my Macs is that they're faster than my Windows machines -- MUCH FASTER, and faster than comparable Windows XP machines

The POINT BEING YOUR Win machines - ie not one run by anyone with anything approaching competance in knowledge and experience of running a PC. Given the evidence already of the breadth of your knowledge what is the likelyhood of you knowing what a "comparible" WinXP machine exactly is considering the large numbers of "subtilties" there are.

To be fair in your incredibley conclusive scientific tests you do mention RAM and conclude this says something about how win is coded. What you don't EVER mention is if the value of that little processy thing inside each computer compares you know LIKE THE 'CORE 2 DUO' THAT REVOLUTIONIZED PC PROCESSING ONTO ANOTHER LEVEL so much THAT Apple HAD TO HAVE THERE OUTDATED MACRAPS processors REPLACED WITH THE VERY SAME INTEL PC C2Ds ROTFLMAO!!!

Look i think Vista is not worth an upgrade ( as a day to day system and not wasting money on replacing things that still have lots of life left and frequently used) but i even i know all that IRRITATING UAC makes it more difficult for the malware ie slows it down for a better chance of protection. but YOU:

... cannot find a single redeeming quality to this OS!

Yeah VERY credible...if Jobs said stick your finger in the fire you would!


Yes have a good slag at Vista ENJOY because after the iPhone DEBACLE unlike Microsoft (like intel) who have gigantic resources and can aford flops Apple Computers DON't and are at far more risk from being extinguished considering there lack of relative growth in the comp mkt over the years - just think YOUR WORLD will be over - only 1 company make the hardware AND the OS - the prognosis isn't good especially given the superficial style over substance nature of the main consumer base. Yes Macs can run windows but EVEN with C2D its that slow,buggy and unstable its no more than a gimmick and tool for Propaganda!

Instead if one program crashes, that's all that happens -- nothing else gets screwed up

I don't call the entire load of work you were doing on the comp at the time being lost when you have to reset the **** "nothing". Why bother with crashing a program and system when a Mac can shut down at random;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pw-BGBdB2Qk


OH! So this is what happened in the past like Windows to Macs TOO! Have you used XP for an extended time recently?.Just wait till you get on Leopard its getting the same stick as Vista now(only no-one give a toss because so tiny is the conversion rate to Macs, Linux growth is far more impressive (unsurprisingly) without all the incidious spin,hype or deceit on the APPLE LEVEL of fiction.)

Why do I run a Mac? Simple -- video editing is much easier and faster on a Mac.

SWEEPING SUBJECTIVE + POINTLESS GENERALIZATION(but well trained like a monkey) of the year award - you're forgetting about the Proccessor again aren't you( ie.Macs faster/easier compered to a PC with a CELERON !!)Claiming that "holywood level" artists who are technologically clueless work exclusively on Macs speaks volumes as a defense i'm afraid. I think you find few people who are computer savvy and want value for money wouldn't be seen dead associated with, let alone buying a Mac, Mac ads themselves very design and target audience confirms all my fears about Mac users in general. Also re bloatware i think you'll find bloatware on every new mac you buy , just because its all in house/apple doesn't stop it from being bloatware....you get the chant about getting the OS and all it applications included in the Mac price but what if you don't want or like those apllications like the HEINIOUS imo messy DRM infected iTunes - you don't get a choice except not to buy one (the best advice Mac fanbois could EVER give).

You say how relatively easy cf win it was for your Mum and g'friend to learn OSX but given your OBTUSENESS when using a windows PC which only PC novices in their first years could be excused suggest that you would make such an abysmal teacher as to hinder anyones "win learning curve".

" but at least I know that Apple isn't going to alienate consumers and get away with it, you need only look at the iPhone price drop earlier this year for proof of that. "

No of course they won't get away with it, its not like Apple is repeating the same GREEDY beyond belief SCAMM AKA Daylight robbery in the UK now is it?
Perhaps you should read some UK sites customers reviews to see that "Apple isn't going to alienate consumers" - i'm sure all the claims of wanting to lnych Mr Jobs are PURELY COINCIDENTAL - You're brainwashing really has been a complete success hasn't it....

[rotten apple]

Lets consider this for a moment.

1. Simplified networking - Faster way of seeing the machines around you
2. Moved the graphics processing out of the kernel space
3. junk mail folder for the renamed outlook express ( windows mail)
4. more difficult to use unsigned drivers
5. built in calender
6. more games
7. Two way firewall - improved concept and better than the XP firewall
8. built in synchronization
9. protected mode for internet exploder
10. more focus on security

I could go on an on......

It seems like Vista improved quite a bit over XP.

ROTFLMAO !!!

I thought you were being sarcastic/satirical untill i read the responses!!!

Operating System: Vista Ultimate (2), Vista Business

ALL systems conversion - now thats something you don't see everyday though given your 'reasons' for improvement its no suprise - BUT BOY DO YOU HAVE LOW EXPECTIONS compared to the general population..

The failures of Longhorn/Vista are well documented. Most PC users realize Vista is not worth the upgrade. Certainly not worth buying a new computer just to run Vista. We'll be waiting for the next release of Windows.

Just as halsboss commented from his experience, just like my experiences with the majority of PC users i know,just likes those i see all over the net frequently with the term "Vista".Yes they may ultimately be subjective but its the overall consensus that applies the label in the sense that XP was considered to what i guess is the opposite to a flop..A HIT!


You are the DREAM customer of Mr Jobs - could he interest you in his latest project the 8th wonder of the world..its 3 yes 3!!!! DEVICES IN ONE...AN iPOD!,A PHONE!! AND!!! an INTERNET COMMUNICATIONS DEVICE( ?!)!!!!..the iPHONE.... tada!! it includes a majority of technology thats 3 YEARS OUT OF DATE and in the UK it only costs over a $1000 when you add in the 'exclusive' rental contract smthg like 18months @ £30.p.mnth. I can tell from your 'high' expectations Dv8 you'll be buying at least one...sorry to tell you the max is 3 per person (or per credit card (?)the details of which they insist on(NO CASH) to 'protect' your phone from being 'used improperly by someone else').Oh and a strange coincidence but i'm shocked at the actions that appear next to the LOVELY Mr Jobs name in graffiti all around the uk

[rotten apple]

Nice to see the PCMag backseat drivers second guessing MS' business model. Some of the assertions are just plain idiotic.

A product that sells twice the volume of its predecessor over the same period isn't a flop.
A company that sees its lastest Windows client increase volume by 20% each quarter isn't a flop.
A company that sees overall growth of 25% isn't a flop.
A company that can make 75 cents on the dollar per unit sold isn't a flop.

Inspite of all the (some justified) criticisms of Vista.

Is the twice the volume of its predecessor a fair comparison though?Was the computer population of comparible size as it was when XP was released? I think market share is what would be used for a fairer cf. - but was XPs success defined most by this period otherwise you can't assume that Vista has more success at the start it will account for more overall success.

The overall company comments if meant to be indicative of lack of Vista's financial failure i get the implication that Vista is by far the main source of income over this period (yet i thought that MS were so surprised to see how XP retail sales were still dwarfing a hyped up Vista !(SEE!!! blah..blah...) they back tracked on their not another sp for XP (? not sure but Vista retail sales still dwarfed by XP)). If you mean OEM sales surely thats due to their monopoly,inexperience of new system use and lack of practical choice not about the products success due to its merrit/lack of failures - the system currently in place means it can't fail initially

Finally as this thread has pointed out " FLOP" is a very subjective concept - ie could MS sell/hype a SH!T (a relative 'one',of course) as their new OS (oh! look they just have ) and not show any sign of financial difficulty indeed quite the opposite? I think they could at least initially given their monopoly and relative lack of cyber/tech knowledge among the gen public!

GREAT eg imo;

For me, Vista is a failure for one reason only - it isn't what it set out to be. That is a simple fact. It doesn't have most of the features that were the real selling points. Vista really is XP Service Pack 3. XP SP2 was a major change to the OS, and had Vista been bundles as SP3, it would not have been lambasted in the way it has.

[Dv8ted2]

Lets consider this for a moment.

1. Simplified networking - Faster way of seeing the machines around you
2. Moved the graphics processing out of the kernel space
3. junk mail folder for the renamed outlook express ( windows mail)
4. more difficult to use unsigned drivers
5. built in calender
6. more games
7. Two way firewall - improved concept and better than the XP firewall
8. built in synchronization
9. protected mode for internet exploder
10. more focus on security

I could go on an on......

It seems like Vista improved quite a bit over XP.

ROTFLMAO !!!

I thought you were being sarcastic/satirical untill i read the responses!!!

Operating System: Vista Ultimate (2), Vista Business

ALL systems conversion - now thats something you don't see everyday though given your 'reasons' for improvement its no suprise - BUT BOY DO YOU HAVE LOW EXPECTIONS compared to the general population..

The failures of Longhorn/Vista are well documented. Most PC users realize Vista is not worth the upgrade. Certainly not worth buying a new computer just to run Vista. We'll be waiting for the next release of Windows.

Just as halsboss commented from his experience, just like my experiences with the majority of PC users i know,just likes those i see all over the net frequently with the term "Vista".Yes they may ultimately be subjective but its the overall consensus that applies the label in the sense that XP was considered to what i guess is the opposite to a flop..A HIT!


You are the DREAM customer of Mr Jobs - could he interest you in his latest project the 8th wonder of the world..its 3 yes 3!!!! DEVICES IN ONE...AN iPOD!,A PHONE!! AND!!! an INTERNET COMMUNICATIONS DEVICE( ?!)!!!!..the iPHONE.... tada!! it includes a majority of technology thats 3 YEARS OUT OF DATE and in the UK it only costs over a $1000 when you add in the 'exclusive' rental contract smthg like 18months @ £30.p.mnth. I can tell from your 'high' expectations Dv8 you'll be buying at least one...sorry to tell you the max is 3 per person (or per credit card (?)the details of which they insist on(NO CASH) to 'protect' your phone from being 'used improperly by someone else').Oh and a strange coincidence but i'm shocked at the actions that appear next to the LOVELY Mr Jobs name in graffiti all around the uk

Let's not get carried away here. I am not a Mac fanboy. I have used Macs back in college and think they are overrated. I prefer the openness of the windows world. I have no use for an Iphone. I already have a cell phone and do not need an overpriced phone that does more than I need. My reasons were valid and you launching Ad Hominem attacks does not solve anything here. I am in IT, and I decided to embrace change rather than fight it and be left behind. Nobody said you had to agree with me, but I am saying that Vista is not the trash that people are saying it is.

[JohnnyMalaria]

Also, OS X doesn't bog me down with useless code the way Vista does, (and all Windows OSes to a far lesser extent,) and it doesn't run on the "Christmas Lights" system of "One light goes out, they all go out," or in this case, "one program crashes, the whole system crashes." Instead if one program crashes, that's all that happens -- nothing else gets screwed up. To Microsoft's credit though, they did improve this in XP.

Typical ignorance of the Mac apologist.

The problem you describe was with the consumer versions of Windows - i.e., Win3.x, Win9x and WinMe - and was because these versions do not have a separate kernel. A video driver, for example, is shared by every program running that needs it, rather than each getting its own copy. If one app crashes the video driver, all the apps die and, sometimes, the whole OS comes down.

With the professional versions of Windows - i.e., WinNT 3.x, 4.0, 2000, XP and Vista - the OS is completely different under the hood. Each app (process) gets its own copies of everything, its own address space etc etc. If one app crashes, only it crashes and everything else continues. If a driver crashes, then the system detects a problem and tells the processor to stop in order to protect the OS. This is the bug-check or BSOD. The OS also stops if the driver does something wrong (not necessarily crashing).

So, your assertion about "improving this in XP" is plain nonsense. Microsoft have had this "improvement" since the introduction of the NT line of Windows more than 15 years ago.

In contrast, Apple only introduced this with OS X (server in 1999 and desktop in 2001). Moreover, this was the first Mac OS to feature pre-emptive multitasking and multiple processor support. Until then, the Mac OS offered nothing more than Windows 3.1 in terms of stability, function etc. Windows NT - introduced in 1993 (workstation and server) - has supported pre-emptive multitasking, multiple threading and multiple processors - and does so to this day. Unlike Apple, Microsoft wrote their own kernel (development started in 1988 in collaboration with IBM) - and this kernel is NOT Windows - it supports WIN32, POSIX and OS/2 natively. Apple does its usual thing - use existing open source code, dress it up, slap it on proprietary hardware and use their marketing group to spread misinformation about their products in the form of "cute" advertising.

For the desktop versions, Windows is eight years ahead of Mac OS regarding virtual processes, pre-emptive multitasking, multiprocessor support and more. 8 years is a l-o-n-g time in this realm.

And, since it keeps popping up elsewhere, Microsoft introduced a fully 64-bit Windows (Server 2003 for Itanium in mid-2003) before Apple.

Keep drinking the Jobs elixir.

[fritzi93]

I've been watching this thread with great interest. I'm skeptical and intend to wait at least a year to see how Vista pans out, maybe skip it entirely.

Anyway, I love to read a nice juicy rant once in a while. That was really first-class.

[JohnnyMalaria]

90% of IT Professionals Don't Want Vista

A survey by King Research has found that Ninety percent of IT professionals have concerns using Vista, with compatibility, stability and cost being their key reasons. Interestingly, forty four percent of companies surveyed are considering switching to non-Windows operating systems, and nine percent of those have already started moving to their selected alternative. "The concerns about Vista specified by participants were overwhelmingly related to stability. Stability in general was frequently cited, as well as compatibility with the business software that would need to run on Vista," said Diane Hagglund of King Research.

http://www.computerworlduk.com/management/infrastructure/applications/news/index.cfm?newsid=6258

Your opening line is wrong. The article says 90% have concerns and more than half have no plans to deploy Vista. That's different than saying 90% don't want it.

This report about a survey omits important information:

1. Who are the "IT professionals"? Do they actually decide the IT strategy for their company or are they any old IT person?

2. What are the demographics? Are the companies all Fortune 500 (or equivalent)? Are they all small businesses? A mix?

3. Why do the "more than half" have no plans to deploy Vista?

There's a world of difference between more than half of 961 IT execs for Fortune 500 (and equivalent) companies having no plans to deploy Vista and, say 960 small businesses + one behemoth stating the same.

Saying more than half have no plans to deploy doesn't mean that they see Vista as a risk. It could mean that those companies have just completed their upgrade cycle, the cost of deployment would not be cost-effective (new training materials, software validation for in-house systems etc) or they are waiting for the server equivalent.

Third-party reports of surveys are also vague and raise more questions than they answer. I'd want to see the true survey results and determine where the inherent biases lie - and then make my own conclusions.