Slashdot Log In
Ten Reasons to Buy Windows Vista
Posted by
CowboyNeal
on Sat Feb 18, 2006 12:19 PM
from the lesser-of-evils dept.
from the lesser-of-evils dept.
pennconservative writes "Michael Desmond, writing for PCWorld.com, gives us ten reasons to buy the next version of Microsoft Windows. Some of his reasons sound compelling, and it definitely sounds like Microsoft has found yet another way to ensure market dominance for a few more years. Desmond also gives a few reasons not to buy Vista, but the most compelling of those is the hardware required to run it. Since Vista will likely ship on every new computer anyone buys, I don't see that being a major roadblock."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
One good reason NOT to buy Windows Vista: (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:One good reason NOT to buy Windows Vista: (Score:5, Insightful)
Avereage Joe: But they were sooooo shiny! And look at all the pretty 'features.' And everyone's getting or got a pair! Besides, they go so well with my gamer clothes...I mean work suit.
The number one and number two reason people will buy Vista: it will come on their new PC and it will play all the video games sold for PC (that Average Joe cares about.) You can talk about 'compatibility' with work, but Windows 98 with Office 97 is all that takes for most cases. As soon as Duke Nukem comes out, you can be sure it will have a 'Made for Microsoft Windows Vista' sticker on it.
Parent
Re:One good reason NOT to buy Windows Vista: (Score:5, Funny)
Are you serious? When DNF comes out Microsoft will have dropped support for legacy OS's like Vista!
Parent
Ten compelling reasons why not to upgrade! (Score:5, Insightful)
2. Internet Explorer 7: GetFirefox [getfirefox.com].
3. Righteous eye candy: Ooohhh shiny...
4. Desktop search: Learn to organize.
5. Better updates: Why update? Because it was broken in the first place!
6. More media: More DRM!
7. Parental controls: Real parents don't need an OS to babysit their kids.
8. Better backups: Already have that.
9. Peer-to-peer collaboration: ???
10. Quick setup: Why am I running setup more than once anyways?
In short, 10 compelling reasons why you don't need to upgrade to Vista.
Parent
Exactly: they're not even 10 positive things! (Score:5, Interesting)
I was thinking much the same. For example, when I read this...
...I thought most usability research had pretty much thrown out this sort of visual jiggery-pokery some time ago now, having discovered that since monitors are basically flat, 2D surfaces, trying to project things in funky 3D or to impose layers through transparency just disorientates users. It's always possible that Microsoft have come up with a new and qualitatively different approach to that of the research labs at other big software places like Sun or IBM, of course, but I'm betting heavily on "gimmick" until I see any evidence to the contrary.
It seems to me that the vast majority of the 10 "reasons to buy" have already been more than adequately addressed on Windows platforms by third party software, some of which will presumably still be necessary since it sounds like MS isn't going to include any anti-virus software unless you pay for it. On other platforms, it either was never an issue, or is likewise addressed by third party add-ons. Putting it into the OS may or may not be an advantage relative to starting with nothing, but relative to where we are, who cares?
Of the remainder, if they're genuinely getting serious about security, that's great, but on the flip-side, we all know about the Trusted Computing rubbish, DRM, and all that jazz. On top of that, we have the recent stories about national governments wanting backdoors and entering talks with Microsoft to ensure they get them. If a government cracker can break my system, so can a script kiddie with the right friends, and that's game over for Microsoft's security drive. It's not secure if it has deliberate backdoors!
The more I read about Vista, the less I care, and I'm someone who (at present) does run XP both at home and at work, and uses some OSS for practical rather than philosophical reasons. I've been looking seriously at shifting to an alternative platform for a while, and with all the security and DRM badness going around lately, the obvious commercial alternative -- Apple -- is pretty much ruled out of the game by its own actions. This could be the best thing to happen to open source software since forever.
Parent
Re:One good reason NOT to buy Windows Vista: (Score:5, Funny)
Ballmer: Put the fucking shackles on your wrists! Or I'll fucking kill you!!! (Throws chair.)
Parent
Re:One good reason NOT to buy Windows Vista: (Score:5, Funny)
I mean, that old guy doesn't even read Slashdot and he's heard it a million times
Parent
Re:One good reason NOT to buy Windows Vista: (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:One good reason NOT to buy Windows Vista: (Score:5, Funny)
Because my wife complained that the garbage bag zip ties were irritating her wrists.
Parent
Re:One good reason NOT to buy Windows Vista: (Score:5, Insightful)
If your computer doesn't support drm, then you can't see the content at all. Your system not supporting drm does not magically make all drm protected content play without restrictions. If drm is widespread, then you receive all the disadvantages of drm and none of the benefits (eg. more content being offered online).
The only good thing is if few people have drm then it is harder to distribute drm'd content but if by having a computer that doesn't support drm you are in the minority, there is no direct benefit to you.
Parent
Re:One good reason NOT to buy Windows Vista: (Score:5, Informative)
For a fully functional system, the hardware specification requires that you must have a special new DRM-enforcing monitor, you must have a new DRM-enforcing video care, you must have a DRM-enforcing sound card, and that your motherboard must have a DRM-enforcment Trusted Platform Module (TPM).
The TPM is a boobytrapped selfdestructing microchip that contains the system's master cryptographic keys and lock. If the chip detects any attempt to get at your own master keys, the chip destroys them and effectively destroys all of your "secured" files on your computer.
This chip can be used to encrypt your files such that it is impossible for you to read or modify your files, except with strict approval of the chip and under the strict control of the chip and with only by using the approved and unmodifed software that was assigned to that file. This is called the Sealed Storage system.
The chip also contains a record of the exact hardware you have, and including a security rating andf other details about how the hardware is secured against any attempt you might make to "attack" your own computer and attempt to gain full control over your own computer. This is called the Platform Credentials.
The chip also spys on exactly what software you run. It logs your exact BIOS code, then it logs your exact bootloader software, and then it logs your exact operating system, and then it can log the various programs you have run since bootup. This is called the Integrity Measurments. They define the current state, or "health", of your machine.
The chip can also be used to send this hardware and software spy report to other people over the internet. You are denied any ability to control or alter the contents of this spy report. This is called Remote Attestation.
So... ahhhh.... I think the answer to your original question would kinda be a "yes".
If you're further interested in these issues, the Trusted Computing Group has the technical specifications for the TMP chip freely available on their website. The Microsoft Website and the Trusted Computing Group website and many other websites all offer explanations and documentation on Sealed Storage and on Platform Credentials and on Integrity Measurments and on Remote Attestation.
-
Parent
Re:One good reason NOT to buy Windows Vista: (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, and the MPAA will give Apple an exception to this rule, because Apple computers are like shiny and stuff. Whatever you say.
Or, more likely, OS X will "limit" you in the exact same way. (And by "limit", they mean "allow you to play Blu-Ray and HD-DVD on your computer.")
Parent
Re:One good reason NOT to buy Windows Vista: (Score:5, Insightful)
Hollywood: If you don't (pass the dmca)(implement drm)(produce tpm compatible chipsets) we're going to take our ball and go home.
Appropriate response: Well take your goddamn ball and go the fuck home then.
Parent
Re:One good reason NOT to buy Windows Vista: (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
So... (Score:4, Insightful)
I skimmed the list rapidly and I'm already using the equivalents to at least half of them, probably more (I wrote "skimmed"). Some of the features I have even used for several years...
Not really. (Score:4, Insightful)
Granted, not that I'm not happy that Windows is catching up, but I thought it was funny that to me at least, the only new features were the last three listed. All of which sounded very interesting.
Cupertino, start your copiers!
Parent
Re:Not really. (Score:5, Informative)
Really? Have you actually tried Safari? I somehow doubt it.
Third Party OS X browsers:
Camino
Firefox
Mozilla/Seamonkey
Opera
Shiira
Omniweb
You were saying?
Parent
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
The ability to run specific win32 apps.
That is the only difference.
As you've noted that most of the features in Vista (Music management / photo management / drm / desktop search / etc are already present (or have equivilants) in OS X.
Parent
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Not to put too fine a point on it, but i would say, not only are they available, on Mac OS X, they are superior. iTunes, GarageBand, Final Cut, iDVD. Etc. Apple's been shipping this stuff for years. MSFT's just talking about what they hope to release, and talk is cheap.
Given Microsoft's tendancy to cut features like a boot camp barber cuts hair, I'm not too hopeful everything's going to make it to the final release.
Parent
Re:Counterpoint (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Windows is still the compatible choice (Score:4, Insightful)
Compatibility with more games. Other than WoW, what popular MMORPG runs on Mac OS X?
Compatibility with more vertical-market apps such as the one used by your employer.
Compatibility with more peripherals sold at retail stores.
Compatibility with web sites that are made exclusively for Microsoft Internet Explorer technology and for which there are no close substitutes.
But for the next 3-4 years, you'll get all of those things with Windows XP. So what motivation is there to "upgrade" to Windows Vista? If you wanted the 10 features listed in the article, you could get Mac OS X now. If you want the things you mentioned above, stick with the Windows box you have now and don't waste money on the upgrade.
Parent
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:So... (Score:5, Funny)
Gosh, that's got to be embarrassing [arstechnica.com] for you.
Parent
Misleading headline (Score:5, Insightful)
Requirements won't be an issue (Score:5, Insightful)
I was reading about Vista last night and it's including features like a revamped sleep mode which is a cross between standby and hibernation. They have have SmartFetch or whatever it's called so it knows what applications you typically use and at what times so it'll preload them into memory making it seem snappier.
All in all, it sounds like Vista will be a pretty good release (at least, in my opinion).
Re:Requirements won't be an issue (Score:5, Interesting)
Could you please provide a link to this article? While I'm interested to read it, I don't really buy this. Friggin' XP can't figure out how often I use programs now. (When you go to "Add/Remove Programs" it is supposed to tell you how often the program is used.) For example what XP says/actual:
Adobe Acrobat: "occasionally" / several times a day
APC PowerChute Personal Edition: "rarely" / is _always_ running
Gaim: "occasionally" / is _always_ running
Firefox: "occasionally" / default browser
Thunderbird: "frequently" / finally got one right
WinRAR archiver: "rarely" / several times a day
I don't want Microsoft deciding which programs it thinks I use most often and wasting memory + CPU "pre-loading" things. Maybe, just maybe if the damn OS wasn't so bloated they wouldn't need to preload applications. Then again, if the OS wasn't so bloated it would stop crashing because they could get all their garbage out of kernel space and back into userspace where it belongs. As it is, they have to put things in kernel space to keep the entire system from grinding to a halt when you run 'calc.exe'. Basically, get the entire GUI out of kernel space. AFAIK they can't do that because it would be way too slow.
Granted TFA was very much non-technical, some things missing from the list: (If I'm wrong about any of these being in XP, please feel free to correct me.)
- for-real no-shit multitasking. Linux has it. OS X has it. It aggarvates me to no end that the system severely drags and/or blocks while doing things like copying large files, burning a CD, scanning the "network neighborhood", or basically any other process which the kernel determines is "intensive". I can do 8 semi-CPU intensive things at once with no problem on a *nix machine without X slowing to a crawl. Good luck trying that on XP. A user-space process or application should never be allowed to block.
- Real ability to disable write caching. This is more a technical point, but nonetheless. The little box that is supposed to disable write caching for USB/Firewire devices seems to have no effect. I'm constantly getting the "This device cannot be stopped right now, try again later" BS from XP. Again, this is a "feature" to speed things up because the system is so inefficent.
- Stop the auto-mounter. Goes along with the above: the ability to turn off automounting of filesystems, or at the very least mount them as read-only. Windows will *always* try to write to a filesystem no matter what. Writing to a hosed disk is a good way to make it worse. Sure you can mount the disk while acting as user who doesn't have write privs to files, but that isn't the same. XP stills writes system and metadata to the disk.
- Unbinding IE from the system. I thought this was decided by a court that they had to do this. The last time I tried to uninstall IE the clipboard stopped functioning in MSOffice. Until I reinstalled IE, of course.
- Make it easier/possible to stop services that are not critical. This fails on XP mostly because nearly all of the services are "critical" to the operation of the OS. Again, to compare this to the *nix model - I can stop almost any service except for init and the system will continue to run. Why can't I enable networking and disable the filesharing by stopping the service that makes the SMB ports listen? A firewall is needed, yes. But it would be even more useful to be able to stop those services which should not be listening anyways.
- Stop telling me "access denied" when I'm the fracking system admin. I really hate that. Processes can't be killed, services can't be stopped, files can't be deleted, etc because "Access denied". Kill the damn process if I tell you to.
- Stop with the stupid exclusive file locks. Some of this is the fault of applications
Parent
Honestly (Score:5, Interesting)
New computer? Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
The age of the compelling application is mostly over because existing hardware (even systems several years old, and thus dirt cheap) fulfill almost all of the average person's computing needs. I'd wager that 90% (or more) of average household computer usage is spent in two applications: email and internet browser. (the other 10% is word processing, accounting/taxes, etc.)
And no, gamers aren't "average" computer users. They're always looking for state-of-the-art.
Seriously -- other than as a new game platform, why would the average person buy a new computer? Mom & Pop don't understand/care about new video production, DVD ripping, file sharing, etc. They just want to occasionally look something up on the net, buy something off eBay, or get a photo of the grandkids. If they already have a system (and market saturation ##'s suggest that they do) convincing them to shell out a grand for a new box that doesn't offer them anything more than the old one is going to be a tough sell.
After reading through his list (Score:5, Funny)
Any Color You Like, As Long As It's Black (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Any Color You Like, As Long As It's Black (Score:5, Funny)
-jcr
Parent
No 1 Slashdot reason (Score:4, Funny)
No wait, thats not right.....
Such wonderful reasons! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Such wonderful reasons! (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes I have and it's not as great as Windows. iLife is not bundled with Mac OS although it is bundled with the machine. It's not the end-all of bundled software either.
Parent
Re:Such wonderful reasons! (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
The 10 reasons: (Score:4, Funny)
2. Because they have a million tricks up their sleeve to obselete your old software.
3. You're too stupid to use linux.
4. Your new hardware has been sabotaged for any "pirated" software like linux.
5. Because we get kickbacks from Ballmer if you do.
6. As an american, you are culturally programmed to want new toys and to believe what marketing firms tell you.
7. Because it will be secure. *snicker*cough**snort*LOL... damn, I can't keep a straight face.
8. Because we at Microsoft have been busy trying to convince you that cool tricks are only possible on Vista, and considering our other OSs are steaming shitpiles, you just might believe it.
9. Because WE SAY SO.
10. If you haven't bought Vista yet, then the terrorists have already won...
Let's See (Score:4, Interesting)
Seems like I've had 8/10 of those for over a year with my Mac. Way to "innovate". As long as you have to buy a whole new computer to run this OS, why not buy a whole new computer and try a better OS than the one you have now. One that has been out for almost a year (10.4). One that isn't a "1.0" like Vista will be.
If you really like MS though, why not wait for Windows Vista "98" when they iron out the kinks. (OS X had 'em too early on).
In case of /.ing, the 10 reasons are (Score:5, Insightful)
2. new IE almost as good as Firefox
3. new eye-candy almost as good as OS X
4. new desktop search almost as good as Google Desktop
5. new update program almost as good as Mac Software Update
6. new media programs almost as good as iLife
7. new parental controls almost as good as proper parenting
8. new backups almost as good as things not breaking in the first place
9. new P2P almost as good as turning off your firewall
10. new quick install almost as good as all the other planned features that don't actually exist yet
"Taking Security to the Next Level" (Score:5, Funny)
So, instead of a wide open door with a 'PLEASE ROB ME!!!" sign taped to it, they've half closed the door and put up a sign that says "ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL, I WOULD PREFER THAT YOU NOT STEAL ALL MY BELONGINGS, IF THAT'S OK WITH YOU."
When your starting from the gutter, the "next level" is only the curb.
outnumbered (Score:5, Informative)
More than 10 reasons never to buy ANYTHING from MS (Score:4, Informative)
Cool (Score:5, Interesting)
1. Packet filtering capabilities, per-use administrator rights -- from Linux.
2. Tabs in IE -- from Firefox
3. Eye candy/transparency -- Mac OS X
4. Non-awful search system -- everyone was ahead of MS here
5. Better update system -- still no systemwide yum or apt, but the most abysmal thing about maintaining a Windows box was keeping it up to day, and IE was a piss-poor tool to do so with. See Linux.
6. Looks like MS is bundling the equivalent of rhythmbox/iTunes and gqview into Windows.
7. Parental filtering options -- Okay, I'm not aware of anyone else that bundles this in, so this may be new.
8. Better backups -- Linux's amanda.
9. Peer-to-peer collaboration -- I don't yet know enough about what this actually translates to to be able to comment on it.
10. (apparently a wishlist item, not a real feature?)
Ten Reasons NOT to buy Windows Vista (Score:5, Interesting)
10) Upgrade hell....a new motherboard counts as a "new computer" and thus requires a new Windows license.
9) If you don't have a computer capable of running it to it's full potential...why bother?
8) DRM embedded into the OS. Less control for the user.
7) Viruses
6) Worms
5) Spyware
4) Vista will feature ads.
3) It's still Windows, so it'll still look like something made by Playskool.
2) You're going to have to relearn everything anyway, particularly the Office interface which will be radically different with the new release....might as well switch to something new anyway
1) Gates is evil. What more do you need?
Re:can they all run it though? (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:can they all run it though? (Score:4, Insightful)
Compared to the XP fisher-price look?
Just be grateful, OK.
Parent
Re:can they all run it though? (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
what do low-end machines run on then? (Score:5, Interesting)
Will they get XP if their system does not meet the requirements? Surely Dell will sell a low-end machine that might not have the hardware to run Vista? Or worse yet, they sell a machine that meets the minimal requirements, and performs like a dog. I wouldn't think that they'd want that perception, right?
DT
Parent
Re:Reasons to buy Windows? (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually there is [slashdot.org].
Parent