Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Windows Operating Systems Software IT

Survey Finds Few Intend to Upgrade to Vista 429

Posted by samzenpus
from the if-it-aint-broke dept.
thefickler writes "A recent Harris Poll has found that while most online computers users are aware of Microsoft's Windows Vista, few are intending to switch over to the new operating system anytime soon. The Harris Poll of 2223 US online adults in early March found that 87% were aware of Vista. Unfortunately for Microsoft, only 12% of Vista-aware respondents were intending to upgrade to Vista in the next 12 months."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Survey Finds Few Intend to Upgrade to Vista

Comments Filter:
  • by ackthpt (218170) * on Wednesday April 04, 2007 @07:37PM (#18613823) Homepage Journal


    Alas, where I work we will be enthusiastically embracing Vista. My supervisor was very upbeat when she
    told me I would be getting a new computer loaded with Vista and that I needed to familiarise myself with it
    because everyone else would be getting Vista, too.

    I'm an old school computer guy. I don't "upgrade" until I have to or there is sufficient benefit to be
    gained. I learned this from a crafty old fellow who felt so, after being burned several times.

    As to why, I see Vista as little more than a ploy to hold market share and gain some profits, as the existing
    XP profit cycle has likely flattened. There will be a few bells and whistles, but the security aspect tells me they know
    less about writing operating systems than their predecessors of 30 years ago. I think they still just don't get it. I also feel it's been rushed.

    After all these years Windows is still a big mysterious black box, wherein things happen of which we know little and therefore
    have little say in behaviour of or control over.

    Besides, I've always been a fan of having the actual code at my finger tips. ;-)
    • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 04, 2007 @07:43PM (#18613893)
      On the other hand, I happen to need to buy a new computer for my son going off to college and being a mere consumer (i.e. powerless to get an OEM to sell me an XP system instead of Vista), I will be buying a stand alone copy of XP from a website to replace the copy of Vista that will come with the machine. My copy of Vista will end up sitting on the shelf. Yes, I know I'm paying Microsoft twice but what can one do? My son needs a Windows based computer and the university doesn't support (and doesn't want to support) Vista.

      Truthfully, I don't want Vista on the computer. However, I wonder how many other people find themselves in this predicament of basically being forced to pay Microsoft twice?
      • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 04, 2007 @07:47PM (#18613943)
        "Downgrading" your license is possible, depending on the license [google.dk].
      • by Grishnakh (216268) on Wednesday April 04, 2007 @08:08PM (#18614161)
        I will be buying a stand alone copy of XP from a website to replace the copy of Vista that will come with the machine. My copy of Vista will end up sitting on the shelf. Yes, I know I'm paying Microsoft twice but what can one do?

        Ever heard of BitTorrent?
        • Actually.... (Score:4, Informative)

          by tacokill (531275) on Wednesday April 04, 2007 @09:00PM (#18614711)
          Actually - read your EULA.

          A Vista license allows you to "downgrade".
      • You have three options:

        1. Buy off-lease.
        2. Buy a Mac. You can dual boot with Windows or use Parallels or VMWare.
        3. Buy a laptop preloaded [emperorlinux.com] with Linux. You can dual boot with Windows or use VMWare (VMWare Server is great for running Windows under Linux).

        There's also a forth if you don't care if it's not legal:
        4. Use an activation crack. There is a really good open source one that always works and gets past all validation checks.

        For the second two, you could just pick up a copy of XP and stick on on. With
        • Any chance you, or some Anonymous Coward, would like to provide a link or other information about that? I'm really curious since I've never heard of a crack being open-sourced before.

          Cracking groups always seemed very -- at some points almost comically -- secretive about their source code and method of exploits; I'd sooner expect a crack dealer to give you the name of his wholesaler than for a cracker to distribute source.

          Kinda makes me wonder if perhaps the number of trojans disguised as cracks [apcmag.com] have been t
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Charcharodon (611187)
        I think you are buying far too much into the negative hype around Vista. The only way you'll be having problems with your Vista laptop is if you plan on buying a bargan basement no frills machine that has minimal hardware specs. Even Xp would be hard pressed to run properly on it as well. That or if your son has a full range of periphrials that are 3-4 years old (printers/scanners etc.). Alot of companies are still dragging their feet on driver support for old gear, but that is nothing new.

        If the univ

        • by greginnj (891863) on Wednesday April 04, 2007 @10:15PM (#18615345) Homepage Journal

          I think you are buying far too much into the negative hype around Vista. The only way you'll be having problems with your Vista laptop is if you plan on buying a bargan basement no frills machine that has minimal hardware specs.
          You're bending over backwards to be tolerant, here. Remember how Dell was selling 'Vista-capable' machines that were "Great for ... Booting the Operating System, without running applications or games" [dell.com] [ yes, caps in the original, like the os was some sort of deity...]. Sorry, it's flash, but this is the original -- click on 'Hardware' then on 'View Hardware Requirements'.

          So Dell is willing to call such a machine 'Vista-capable', and Microsoft was willing to certify it as such. What the hell do I want with an os that does nothing but boot? Dell and Microsoft conspired to screw us both: Dell wanted to unload low-end overstock hardware, MS wanted to limit the availability of pre-installed XP to boost Vista's numbers. Not everyone wants a gamer machine -- if I buy a low-end box that is 'Vista capable', I shouldn't end up feeling like a fraud victim.
          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by Charcharodon (611187)
            Dude, you shouldn't have bought a Dell.

            Really come on getting upset with your Dell purchase is like getting upset for getting crapy food and service from a fast food joint.

            Buying anything that is "XXX Capable" is just opening up yourself to disappointment. I learned that with my purchase of Dolby 5.1 "ready" surround sound powered speakers ten years ago that were anything but ready .

            That is why I didn't by an "HD ready" TV or "802.11n compatable wireless router" and many other transitional technolo

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by morcego (260031)
        Thankfully, around here we can still get Dell, HP and almost anything else with XP.
        Which sucks, since I would love mine to come with FreeDOS (their version of No OS) but,
        unfortunately, they (HP) only offer it on low end systems (Celeron/Sempron), and I'm getting a X2.
    • by geekoid (135745)
      Not flattend much
      The XP market is the same as Vista. New computers.

      Sothe OS itself isn't making more money then XP, but the additional cost of it will be the money maker.

      Personal, it is way above my price point to get what I want.
      Fortunatly for me, where I work has said no vista in ANY enviroment for 2 years.
      We are smart enough to know what happens to early adopters.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      There will be a few bells and whistles, but the security aspect tells me they know less about writing operating systems than their predecessors of 30 years ago.

      Not too realistic when you are comparing the security of software from 30 years ago (in a much different environment) to a global commercialized network with millions of computers being used by your Mother, Father, Grandparents, Etc..

      After all these years Windows is still a big mysterious black box, wherein things happen of which we know little and t
    • "I don't "upgrade" until I have to or there is sufficient benefit to be gained."

      Heh - that's why I have more than one machine @ the desk... one to 'test and familiarize' on, and one (Linux-based) upon which all the actual work gets done.

      /P

    • Windows 98 (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Many people still use Windows 98. They use their computer for reading and writing e-mail notes and for writing asinine comments on Slashdot. Windows 98 is sufficient for these banal activities.
    • by dingDaShan (818817) on Wednesday April 04, 2007 @09:01PM (#18614719)
      It seems that Microsoft didn't make XP bad enough. If it was, people would want to upgrade. See windows 98 for example.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Charcharodon (611187)
      Thirty years ago computer security was not leaving the phone receiver plugged into the modem (literally having the entire handset plugged in, not just a cord) and making sure the door to the computer room was locked.

      I wonder if you are still using wood #2 pencils since there is no "real benefit" to those new fangled plastic and metal mechanical pencils.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Suhas (232056)
      Why would I want to upgrade to Vista? I upgraded my work PC from 2000 to XP a few months after it came out and felt cheated. Like the saying goes, fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. No Sir, I will keep using XP on my work PC and will upgrade to fiesty fawn at home.
  • ORLY? (Score:5, Informative)

    by kv9 (697238) on Wednesday April 04, 2007 @07:40PM (#18613857) Homepage

    Unfortunately for Microsoft, only 12% of Vista-aware respondents were intending to upgrade to Vista in the next 12 months.

    fortunately for Microsoft, the OEMs provide good business.

    • Re:ORLY? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by rackhamh (217889) on Wednesday April 04, 2007 @07:46PM (#18613919)
      Seriously... probably a more appropriate question would have been "How many of you intend to buy a new computer in the next 12 months?"
      • Re:ORLY? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by rackhamh (217889) on Wednesday April 04, 2007 @07:50PM (#18613971)
        To clarify... the article says:

        The poll revealed that 39% of those intending to move over to Vista planned to upgrade their existing computer so it would meet Vista requirements, 35% planned to buy a new computer with Vista preinstalled, 17% planned to purchase a new "Vista-ready" computer, and 8% said that they would install Vista on their existing computer without any upgrade.
        But the meaning of these numbers depends a lot on how the questions were asked. If you ask these questions:

        1) Do you plan to upgrade to Vista?
        2) If so, how do you plan to upgrade? ... then you'll get very different answers from the following:

        1) Do you plan to buy a new computer?
        2) If so, which manufacturer do you plan to buy from?

        The phrasing of the article (focusing on "Vista-aware respondents") indicates that the numbers aren't a good indication of how many people will actually be upgrading. Tons of people who don't know about Vista will definitely be upgrading, whether they plan to or not.
      • Re:ORLY? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Clever7Devil (985356) on Wednesday April 04, 2007 @07:54PM (#18614013)
        I had a short conversation today with a customer service rep from Dell regarding buying a new laptop.

        System Initial Question/Comment: Is it possible to get a laptop with XP or no OS?
        System You are now being connected to an agent. Thank you for using Dell Chat
        System Connected with ATG Anibal
        ATG Anibal Thank you for contacting the Dell Employee and Student Purchase Program. My name is Anibal, I will be your personal assistant today. I will be glad to assist you with your questions.
        ATG Anibal To be sure that I can further assist you, may I have the name of the company or institution that you work for?
        Me ::Deleted my company name for obvious reasons::
        ATG Anibal Yes , those are latitude notebooks. Those are the ones that will give you xp as an option
        Me Alright... can I get no OS?
        ATG Anibal No, is not an option.
        Me So, just so I understand what you're saying. If I want to buy a Dell Laptop I also must buy Windows with it?
        ATG Anibal That is correct
        Me And if I want to buy an Inspiron laptop, I also must buy Vista?
        ATG Anibal That is correct, unless you go with latitude notebooks
        Me Thank you for your help.

        "Is not an option" was my favorite part. YA RLY
    • As long as Dell and company keep allowing you to choose WIndows XP, people will do so, and they currently still let you (as the computer I set up today is testament to).
  • by Alphager (957739) <florian,haas&gmail,com> on Wednesday April 04, 2007 @07:45PM (#18613911) Homepage Journal
    I just switched my Desktop and my Laptop back to XP. Vista did not offer much good to me, and there were several annoying UI-things:
    -Aero is a joke. The ~5 mm glassy effect (which does not improve productivity at all) comes at a way too hefty performance-cost.
    -Vista dumbs the user way too down.

    Example of an everyday-task gone wrong: When using a laptop and traveling much, my ip-adress will often fluctuate. To show my IP-adress under XP, i doubleclick on the connection-icon in the systray and change to the second tab. Under Vista, i doubleclick the connection-icon and end up in the Connection-Center. From there, i have to choose the common Task to manage connections. There i have to rightclick on the connection and click on properties. THERE i have to click on the advanced-button.


    - The driver-situation is embarassing.
    -SSH dynamic port forwarding does not work under Vista (used putty and plink; neither did work)

    What i really liked in Vista was the combined search/run-field in the startmenu. But i can live happily without it when the rest of my system behaves.

    • by geekoid (135745) <dadinportland AT yahoo DOT com> on Wednesday April 04, 2007 @07:51PM (#18613985) Homepage Journal
      You can't open a command window and type 'ipconfig' ?
      • ...would a normal user still have access to that command in Vista (I honestly don't know).

        /P

        • by stubear (130454)
          Would a normal user know or even care what an IP address is, much less how or why to change it?
        • by geekoid (135745)
          I don't think they stripped out the command window, or Ipconfig.

          But I haven't looked. It will be 2 years before I need to get familiar with Vista.

      • by RedWizzard (192002) on Wednesday April 04, 2007 @08:57PM (#18614675)

        You can't open a command window and type 'ipconfig' ?
        Of course, but that's not the point. The point is that the GUI method of getting that functionality is much less efficient in Vista than it was in XP.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by LordEd (840443)
          I don't run vista, so i had to use google to find the graphical instructions (click count is mine):

          1. On the Start Menu, right-click on Network and click Properties (2 clicks)

          2. A Network and Sharing Center window will open. Click View status to the right of Local Area Connection. (1 click)

          3. In the new Local Area Connection Status window that opens, click Details. Your IP Address will be listed among the other connection details. (1 click)

          (that would be 4 clicks)

          In XP, you can right click on your network i

    • FYI

      Type this in the search box from the Vista menu:

      cmd /k ipconfig

      Once it's there, you will have it in your command history. Much faster then clicking the menus and tabs you mention. This is an example of a feature in Vista that is a big improvement over XP.

      • Type this in the search box from the Vista menu: ...

        Ignoring the "search box" part, I think the OP point was about the organisation, layout and general obtuseness of the menuing system. Which is what typical users are familiar with and expected to use.

        Running ipconfig, desk.cpl, compmgmt.msc, etc. directly is always easier, faster, and more efficient, but that's what those Linux nerds do, right? Besides, I'm not sure about Vista, but the menu entry for cmd.exe is typically buried in with the Accessories l
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by lav-chan (815252)

        ... What are you talking about? You can do that in XP too. The 'search box' is just accessed a little differently. Two options:

        1. Start > Run... > cmd /k ipconfig

        2. Win+R > cmd /k ipconfig

    • by kosmosik (654958)
      > What i really liked in Vista was the combined search/run-field in the startmenu.
      > But i can live happily without it when the rest of my system behaves.

      You can use Google Desktop Search (is like Google for your desktop just Google after it to download) just fine in XP. I bet it indexes and searches better than Vista stuff. It is also very confident to launch apps with it. I just can't understand what is with the fucking start Menu anyway. They should get panels in Windows like dock in OSX or panel in
      • by stubear (130454)
        Get TrueLaunchBar [truelaunchbar.com]. It's the best $20 I've evr spent on shareware. It basically extends the functionality of the QuickLaunch bar by allowing users to add menus and plug-ins in addition to shortcuts as well as add more than one quicklaunchbar. The options UI has grown a little unwieldy over time due to the number of features being implemented to control metrics and the look of all the UI elements but it's still a great app.
    • by Anonymous Coward
      I just switched my Desktop and my Laptop back to 98. XP did not offer much good to me, and there were several annoying UI-things:
      -Those ugly Theme things hog way too much CPU.
      -XP dumbs the user way too down.
      - The driver-situation is embarassing.

      What i really liked in Vista was the smart icon arrangement in the startmenu. But i can live happily without it when the rest of my system behaves.


      Fixed. It's just like Windows XP all over again.

      Another 5 years and everyone will be bitching about the switch to Windo
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by krotkruton (967718)
      I've never been a big fan of upgrading Windows either. I've still got 2 computers running 2000 because it's always worked best for me. My University gave Vista away for free to all engineering majors, so I thought I'd give it a try on my best comp. Long story short, Vista works for everyday tasks and video and what not, but I frequently have to restart because of some network problem that keeps happening, my graphics shear and distort randomly, and the driver problems prevent me from playing games and do
    • by SEMW (967629) on Wednesday April 04, 2007 @08:37PM (#18614437)

      When using a laptop and traveling much, my ip-adress will often fluctuate. To show my IP-adress under XP, i doubleclick on the connection-icon in the systray and change to the second tab. Under Vista, i doubleclick the connection-icon and end up in the Connection-Center. From there, i have to choose the common Task to manage connections. There i have to rightclick on the connection and click on properties. THERE i have to click on the advanced-button.
      IIRC, one of the resons behind the Vista Sidebar was to make oft-accessed information just like this very easily accessible. Sure enough, a quick Find More Gadgets search reveals:

      My IP [live.com] -- "a compact gadget to display your current IP address"

      Alternatively:

      Wireless Network Controller [live.com] -- "a gadget to display your wireless network's current status and details. The gadget displays the SSID and Signal Strength; click on the SSID to open the Details flyout for all the network details such as Signal Quality, Security Status and IP Address."

      Another alternative [live.com]; And another [live.com], etc. [codeproject.com].
  • Wow!! (Score:3, Funny)

    by tgatliff (311583) on Wednesday April 04, 2007 @07:45PM (#18613913)
    So is this where the "Wow" starts? :-)
  • by rtb61 (674572)
    It hardly makes any financial sense. Why would you pay three times as much or more for an upgrade than you paid for the original OEM. In the case of Dell boxes you even get a discount for choosing windows, so it would be really foolish to pay far more for an OS that will provides you less performance on the same hardware, as well as restrictions on usage, and a continual risk of reduced functionality, if any software, hardware, or even media, that you install doesn't fully conform to M$ (FU)DRM specs.
  • Anecdotally, the two largest obstacles to Vista have been driver issues and the jump in hardware requirements. The jump in the minimum hardware requirements between XP and Vista has been the largest since we switched from Windows 3.11 to Windows 95. Therefore, when faced with the prospect of upgrading multiple components to meet Vista's requirements most people opt to stick with their existing machines and get Vista pre-installed on their next computer.

    The other thing is the well publicized driver issues
  • A similar survey showed that many people have an aversion to swimming in volcanoes. As one respondent said, "I suppose it's just not my thing: I've never really liked high temperatures".
  • In other news (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Lithdren (605362)
    People dont like to spend money on things that are not clearly better. Whats more, they dont want to replace computers they bought a few years ago, to buy something they already have only is more expensive!

    News at 11.
  • by iamacat (583406) on Wednesday April 04, 2007 @07:48PM (#18613947)
    Most people buy a PC and run the same OS for its lifetime (which is around 5 years if you want current programs). "How many people are planning to buy a PC with Vista as opposed to any other computing device" survey would likely return 90%.
  • What is is (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    What I wanted:

    A lean and mean OS that ran in 64 bits, had good driver support, could make DVD movies, supported Directx 10, and NO DAMN PRODUCT ACTIVATION!

    What it is:

    A bloated and ponderous mess that still can't make DVD movies, tries to support more of Microsoft's proprietary formats, focuses more on eye candy than performance, and has even worse DRM and activation rules. Maybe when Halo 2 comes out we'll rush out and buy Vista just so we can play a game that's been on consoles for over a year....or just
  • First, there's the pressure from microsoft, which will lead to things like XP drivers being hard to get, broken, and feature-poor.

    Second, there's the fact the IT people with a new OS are comparable to monkeys with a box of razor blades. Everywhere I go people tell me that they have no plans to go to Vista, unless Microsoft is strong-arming them into it... but these same people have it on their own desktops, and are griping about problems and gushing about cool features.

    Official policy will have Vista rollou
  • At first, my boss was very excited about Vista (without having tried it on his own skin). I spoke to him about this and asked him to reconsider. Then he went online, googled for reviews and feature listings - and we are now no longer on the road to the DRM-upgrade.

    In fact, given the chance, we'll probably start migrating to some form of Linux within 6-9 months. If only we had a well-functioning* alternative for Exchange/Outlook available...
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by igb (28052)
      Oracle Collaboration Server for calendering, plus Cyrus IMAP for mail. Provides a full service to Outlook users, other IMAP client users (with either a web client or a native OSX/Linux/Solaris/Windows client for the calendaring). Pretty cheap, certainly as compared to Exchange. We like it.
  • Survey says (Score:2, Interesting)

    by DogDude (805747)
    I just heard! There's a new survey out, that says that while 90% of people know it's possible, only 1% of all car owners are planning on replacing their existing engine in their existing car! New car engines are a failure, and nobody's buying them... right?
    • Funny if nothing else, i swear to god thats the first car analogy i've seen in months that was even CLOSE to a proper parallel, and this is spot on.

      Of course this still does not mean that anything will change, nor does it mean future computer purchases and upgrades will guarantee microsoft its current market share in the future.

      If anything, I hope this is that 'clue-in' year we've all been waiting for as a turning point. Seems companies are finding it harder and harder to obfuscate their products and servic
  • XP all over again (Score:2, Insightful)

    by dedazo (737510)
    Let me guess, the most common answer was "I'll upgrade when I get a new computer and SP1 is out".

    That's how Microsoft pushes out the vast majority of licenses. Not through the retail channel.

    This is nothing new, except for the constant "Vista is teh sux" drumbeat.

  • What's old is new? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Tin_Wisdom (1081631)
    Maybe I'm showing my increasingly distressing age, but did we not hear effectively the same thing when Windows XP came out? "Few users are planning to upgrade from Windows 98!" "My Windows 2000 works just fine!" "They can have my Windows 95 when they pry the drivers from my cold, dead peripherals!" Don't get me wrong -- I have no plans to upgrade either.
  • by Windcatcher (566458) on Wednesday April 04, 2007 @08:01PM (#18614103)
    ...from Win2k to ReactOS.
  • irrelevant (Score:4, Insightful)

    by fermion (181285) on Wednesday April 04, 2007 @08:03PM (#18614121) Homepage Journal
    Almost no one pays for a physical product to upgrade their MS OS, it is simply too expensive. Much cheaper just to buy a new machine. It is not surprising that those who bought a computer a year or two ago are not going to plunk down an equal amount to upgrade the OS.

    And this likely does not matter to MS. From some estimates I have seen, MS makes 80% of it's money from license only deals, and most growth comes from OEM sales. Therefore, MS seems to be most concerned with keeping the OEM in line, doing whatever is necessary to keep the desktop monopoly.

    In any case,here are the facts as I see them. MS sold millions of copies of MS Vista even before the product was publicly released. Many were already sold through the commercial licensing program. I seem to recall that every one of those contracts were an implicit sale for MS Vista, which is why MS had to get out the OS, at least to corporate, by december. In addition, many machines that have been shipping since December are also an implicit sale of MS Vista, not to mention most machines that are now shipping.

    I suspect that the retail software channels are kept awake at night figuring out how to convince the unwitting MS consumer that MS Vista "slim" edition is superior to MS Windows XP, but I doubt seriously many higher ups at MS are.

  • by SummitCO (1043824) on Wednesday April 04, 2007 @08:03PM (#18614125)
    What if a monopoly made a product and nobody bought it?
    • by zappepcs (820751) on Wednesday April 04, 2007 @08:32PM (#18614381) Journal
      except in this case, the Monopoly is generated by the fact that just about anyone that buys a new computer will have that product installed on it by default. The fact that its incredibly difficult to get a new big name pc without Windows pre-installed is in itself wrong.

      I hope that this current situation actually does translate to lower new pc sales for the big name manufacturers, giving them pause to think about shipping with GNU/Linux or no OS at all, and do so at an equitable cost structure. Equitable cost structure is one where computers are cheaper without software pre-installed. Yes, I know that this is problematic because of the licensing deals the manufacturers are currently stuck with in order to even supply Windows at a good price.
  • I've been spreading that idea far and wide to many people in many different forums. It's amazing how easy it is to convince people, too. Unlike the jump from Windows 3.1 to 95 or from Win98 to 2000, there's no compelling reason to switch (I actually refuse to say "upgrade"), and a whole bevy of reasons not to. It's a shame Microsoft's monopoly position in the market will force us all to switch sooner or later. I understand you can still get XP from Dell, but that probably won't last long.
  • Users don't choose their OS, they choose the platform. If they chose Microsoft, then they'll get Vista eventually. The only way out is to choose *nix or Mac. And most people aren't ready to make that leap.
  • A business associate of mine took me with her to buy a new notebook pc. At the store (best buy) there were no recent-model computers that didn't have Vista. She had no choice.

    200 million plus new computers will be sold with Vista. So I repeat myself: who cares about the upgraders? In time they will likely have no choice unless they want to move to OS X or linux, both of which I categorize as unlikely.
  • by xx01dk (191137)
    Because nearly everything I read at the time told me that it would be great for gaming in general. At that point I knew a lot about Windows 98; I knew how to install it and then strip everything out that I didn't need. I was able to bend it to my will, and my upgrade to XP was sort of a culture shock because I didn't know where everything was or how to tweak it just hte way I wanted. I remembered that I wavered between the two for about a month and then just dove all the way in and made myself use the (the
  • today released a statement that they earned higher this quarter because of high demand for Vista PCs.
    In fact Circuit City could not keep up with the demand.

  • Unfortunately for Microsoft, only 12% of Vista-aware respondents were intending to upgrade to Vista in the next 12 months.

    Sure, but also ask the question, What proportion of PC's (hardware) out there would actually run Vista well, and I'll bet even MS would admit that it is also low numbers, maybe 20%. So for someone who is truly "Vista aware", they would know that their current PC would not support Vista well... so its not really a fair question.

    Ask instead, What proportion of Vista-aware users intend to U

  • by Cervantes (612861) on Wednesday April 04, 2007 @08:41PM (#18614487) Journal
    It's all about the spin baby...

    "In other news, a recent survey says that over 10% of all adult computer users are intending to switch to the new Microsoft 'Vista' operating system. This is great news for the software giant, as it indicates that Vista is being embraced by more than the 'early adopter' crowd.

    Amazing how different that sounds, eh?

    Err, forgot where I was, sorry. I mean "M$ sucks. Boo. Boo-urns..."
  • by bl8n8r (649187) on Wednesday April 04, 2007 @10:03PM (#18615241)
    like ever even...

    "Russian schools in the area are so scared about being shipped
    off to a Siberian Gulag, that they are buying Linux gear instead."

    http://www.secguru.com/link/russian_schools_to_swi tch_to_linux_after_microsoft_piracy_case [secguru.com]
  • by MikShapi (681808) on Wednesday April 04, 2007 @10:55PM (#18615709) Journal
    The amount of unsubstantiated negative hype going around about vista is apalling.

    Let's look at the facts:

    1. For all intents and purposes it's a Windows XP + stuff. aka a glorified service pack.
    2. Quite obviously it will displace XP in corporations, educational institutions and home with time.
    3. Unless you're using domain logons, It is MUCH MUCH MUCH MORE SECURE than XP because UAC is on by default, palatable to power users (I've been working with it for several weeks now, it's ok) and teachable to non-tech users. Overall, it's worked out much better than you could have done on XP. It is not OpenBSD and shouldn't be compared to it, it is probably less secure than Gentoo with KDE. Nevertheless, compared with XP's work-as-root model, it's worlds apart. I'm not suggesting it's either bulletproof, bugless, unexploitable or mature. But A security model, ANY security model, is better than XP's *NO* security model.
    4. Laugh at UI all you like, but a good UI is something everyone can use to get more done. Both joe averages and powerusers alike. Vista's UI serves as a welcome improvement over XP IMHO. I'm talking about useability improvements ala sidebar, "open containing folder" stuff etc, not eye-candy a-la aero which I frankly couldn't less.
    5. It guzzles 700MB RAM on neutral right after loading. Who gives a flying fuck? My kde desktop at work eats 200MB. the number is *meaningless* unless it indicates, say, an excessive overpricing of the machine. is 200MB a lot? 10 years ago, we'd have all said it was. Does that make my gentoo/KDE desktop bloated crap today? no. On the same coin, when 1GB of RAM is next to free, 700MB is just another meaningless number.
    1GB of DDR2 lappie ram costs 70US$ on ebay. Sure, if you have a P3, run XP. But if you run any form of hardware bought anywhere in the last 5 years, plug some RAM and you're good to go.
    6. Microsoft will stop selling and supporting XP at some point anyway. So it's not like Vista will be some doomed stop-gap measure until something significantly better comes along, like Windows ME was. Vista is here to stay for the next 5 or so years until another "service pack" along the same lines appears.
    7. If whatever DRM is built into the system prevents you from doing what you're used to do with a computer, use Linux.

    Case in point:

    If you're screaming "Vista's shit!" and have an old computer with XP you don't want to spend more money on, you're likely making the right call, but are an idiot for screaming out the shit bit. I have a 2005 Toyota echo and screaming how the 2007 model is shit because I don't need it (having the 2005 one) would make me the same kind of idiot.

    If you're screaming "Vista's shit!" and you're using Linux/MacOS, you're either a clueless fanboy or someone who's tested both ends and can draw up pros and cons of each and stake a legitimate fact-based preference.

    If you're screaming "Vista's shit!" and thinking you'd rather be getting XP with a new computer, you're a total clueless idiot. Especially if your spiel contains the word "security" in it.

    Vista is a welcome improvement on XP. Give it some time to mature, give IT departments time to evaluate and learn to work it, it'll be ok.

    Is it worth upgrading from XP? depends. Depends if you value a better security model (and eye candy). I've serviced many people with many malware computer problems who paid me lots of good money to fix said problems. Wild guess says a security model for them will pay for itself, from the money it costs them to periodically fix their shit. Locks tend to be cheaper than periodically re-outfitting a robbed house, and people tend to be able to do math when it's their money.

  • Back in the Elder Days, when my company was writing DOS-based programs, this system called Windows 3.0 came out, and some of our customers were using it. The owner decided to go ahead and start writing stuff for it, using this Visual Basic instead of the QuickBasic that had been working just fine. Of course, he wasn't stupid about it, by declaring our DOS code obsolete.

    When Windows 3.1 and VB 3.0 came out, it was a lot more stable. We started the migration in earnest. We soon had a halfway-decent system developed on Windows 3.1. Of course, that's when Windows 95 arrived, and I wondered what would possess anyone to switch to that, because Windows 3.1 (Sorry, now 3.11 for Workgroups) seemed to do everything that we could think of.

    After a couple of service packs had been made available, the owner had us start building for Windows 95. I griped, moaned, and complained - why bother? What did Windows 95 offer that was any better?

    We repeated the process for Windows 98 and XP. I didn't want to migrate - it was going to be a pain in the backside, the benefits were not apparent compared to the effort, and we waited until a couple of service packs came out and the bugs got shaken out.

    Now, had it not been for the early adopters who voted with their cash for the new systems, and then beefed unceasingly until the first bugs did get remedied, we wouldn't have been able to do this. Still and all, most businesses are not known for being early adopters if they have an existing investment in their code base to try to wring more money out of.

    This is not a blast at Microsoft. This happens with all operating systems, even Linux. I have a dual-boot laptop that I will upgrade to Vista only when the proverbial gun is at my head, but that isn't because I loathe Microsoft (I don't); it's because I don't see how the changes in the OS will benefit me.

    Of course, after Vista has had a year or two to get some of these early issues resolved, it may be less painful than it seems to be now. But this isn't meant as MS-bashing - just as an indictment of the "jump on the brand new system NOW" syndrome that marketers encourage.

Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward.

Working...