Windows 7 Beta Released To Public After Delay 848
Z80xxc! writes "The Windows 7 Beta release is now available for download by the general public, in 32-bit and 64-bit flavors. Microsoft had previously announced availability around 3 PM PST on Friday, but after unexpected numbers of people proved to be interested in the download, had to postpone it to add more servers."
Re:Why 32-bit? (Score:5, Informative)
One of the coolest features... (Score:5, Informative)
http://it-experts.dk/blogs/rsj/archive/2009/01/01/booting-windows-7-from-a-vhd-file.aspx [it-experts.dk]
After playing with it for a day or so, I think Libraries are interesting but I need to play with them some more before committing. The taskbar is nice, and works well - several of the 'cute' features are well thought out, such as the 'Show Desktop' functionality now being a small sliver of the taskbar on the right hand side, which if you hover over makes all windows 100% translucent, and if you click it minimises everything. Each 'window preview' on an application instance icon in the task bar does something similar if you hover on it - only keeps that apps windows opaque. Nice.
It seems very stable - the installer was the Windows 2008 one, it literally asks what language you want, where you want it installed and do you want to upgrade or fresh install. Then its away and installing - everything else is done afterward.
IE8 has issues on this website - lots of refreshing to a blank page for seemingly no reason. Not ready for the prime time - Chrome and Firefox work fine though.
One thing that struck me, and other people I have talked about, is that due to the focus on icons for the task bar now (instead of the label, as Win95 to Vista uses), some people are really going to have to polish their icons (Putty - the icon is nice when its small, but it sucks at larger sizes - at the moment Im using the Kterm icon for Putty!).
While I cant say Ive heavily stress tested it, theres been no show stoppers for me as of yet. I'm currently using it as my main desktop (aside from my OSX systems), so we shall see how we get on in the coming months.
Re:Its just a service pack for Vista (Score:0, Informative)
Re:Why 32-bit? (Score:3, Informative)
answer this and you will answer your own question
why do they still make 32bit versions of linux?
Re:Still no virtual desktop (Score:1, Informative)
Re:All that trouble... (Score:5, Informative)
I'm firmly in favor of the upgrade. iTunes won't work right in Windows XP x64, while it works great in Windows 7. There are a still a few hiccups (it's beta), but it definitely feels like an upgrade.
So far, I've tested the following apps to work perfectly in Windows 7:
- Mozilla Firefox 3.0 (with AdBlock, Flash, and Acrobat Reader)
- Acrobat Reader 9
- GIMP 2.6
- OpenOffice 3
- iTunes (Vista x64)
I can't yet get the drivers for my HP Color LaserJet 2600n working (they're installed, but all tasks are stuck in "pending").
Next up I'm going to install VisualStudio 2K8 and see how that works.
Re:two license keys (Score:5, Informative)
It looks like they're assigning keys from a small pool so they're not unique for each person/installation. Both the 32 and 64 bit ISOs are also everywhere, so you can grab any torrent (the hashes match) and then try to register with one of the following keys:
7XRCQ-RPY28-YY9P8-R6HD8-84GH3
RFFTV-J6K7W-MHBQJ-XYMMJ-Q8DCH
482XP-6J9WR-4JXT3-VBPP6-FQF4M
D9RHV-JG8XC-C77H2-3YF6D-RYRJ9
JYDV8-H8VXG-74RPT-6BJPB-X42V4
4HJRK-X6Q28-HWRFY-WDYHJ-K8HDH
QXV7B-K78W2-QGPR6-9FWH9-KGMM7
6JKV2-QPB8H-RQ893-FW7TM-PBJ73
GG4MQ-MGK72-HVXFW-KHCRF-KW6KY
TQ32R-WFBDM-GFHD2-QGVMH-3P9GC
Of course, the public beta won't get you any free stuff from MS for bug reports so you might as well just rearm it a couple of times and then get the RTM version or install GNU/Linux in disgust.
direct download links (Score:5, Informative)
Direct download links:
32-bit
http://download.microsoft.com/download/6/3/3/633118BD-6C3D-45A4-B985-F0FDFFE1B021/EN/7000.0.081212-1400_client_en-us_Ultimate-GB1CULFRE_EN_DVD.ISO [microsoft.com]
64-bit
http://download.microsoft.com/download/6/3/3/633118BD-6C3D-45A4-B985-F0FDFFE1B021/EN/7000.0.081212-1400_client_en-us_Ultimate-GB1CULXFRE_EN_DVD.ISO [microsoft.com]
I don't get it (Score:5, Informative)
Why is this story tagged "hitler"?
xkcd WHAT?
Re:All that trouble... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:As usual (Score:5, Informative)
The URI for the ISO is in the page source.
Re:Released to public after delay? (Score:5, Informative)
Hah.
Bandwidth wasn't an issue at all for the downloads. The product key and website side of it was. I downloaded the 64bit client from Microsoft at noon yesterday in the middle of the feeding frenzy and still pulled it down at 1200KB/s which is the cap on my connection.
A torrent would not have solved it yesterday.
Re:Still no virtual desktop (Score:2, Informative)
Re:What web browsers support the Windows 7 Beta do (Score:3, Informative)
They're using an Akamai download manager, which sucks ass... depending on your Firefox configuration, it won't even show up at all (not even a "Firefox blocked this application" bar.) I think you need Java to get it to run... but I'm not sure since I refuse to install Java. (I got it downloading correctly in IE, but it uses an ActiveX widget which is almost as irritating as Java.)
Anyway, blame Akamai, not Microsoft. Although I guess blame Microsoft for picking Akamai...
Long Mode is so overrated (Score:4, Informative)
"I still can't believe there will be a 32-bit version."
I still can't believe people's obsession with Long Mode.
Well, actually, I can, simply because 64 is larger than 32, and thus 64-bit equates to "better" in the eyes of lots of people. But lots of people are fools, too.
But seriously, the majority of computer users have absolutely no need for Long Mode. They do things like browse the web, forward email, watch YouTube, and look at porn. You barely need Protected Mode for that.
The scenarios benefiting from Long Mode would be:
That's about it, really.
Most people are concerned solely with the amount of memory Windows reports in the System Properties dialog, and get their panties in a bunch over 700 MB or so of "missing" RAM. While I can understand wanting one's OS to be able to use all the RAM one paid for, most of these people aren't actually ever going to use that much of RAM. They just want their number to be bigger, because that obviously reflects on the size of their testicles. That's why they bought 4 GiB of RAM in the first place.
But even then, Long Mode is not needed to win the penis-length contests. Proper support for PAE would solve the problems. Just about any Intel-compatible CPU made in the past ten years supports PAE. With PAE, the processor can directly address up to 64 GiB of RAM in i386 Protected Mode, even though each user task (process) is still limited to a 4 GiB virtual address space. But it's very rare for a single task to actually need that much.
Of course, on Win i386, it's a little worse than that. Processes are limited to 2 GiB of user address space (with the kernel having the same 2 GiB in every process). But even 2 GiB is a lot of memory. Even Firefox only needs half a gig or so. ;-)
Win i386 actually uses PAE, sort-of. It needs to obtain the NX (No Execute) bit in page tables, for "DEP" (Data Execution Prevention). But Win i386 still limits physical addresses to under 4 GiB to keep crappy drivers from crashing the system. Since Microsoft's all about driver signing these days, they could just add an flag to the driver signature indicating it's qualified to work above 4 GiB, and have an OS boot option or something which allowed all memory to be used. Refuse to load PAE unqualified drivers in that mode.
Meanwhile, Long Mode is not without drawbacks. Long Mode, for those who don't know, is the processor mode AMD introduced which enables native 64-bit virtual addressing. But when in Long Mode, the processor can't do 16-bit Virtual Mode at all. There's still a lot of Win16 code floating around in the Windows world, sadly. Long Mode also means potential compatibility issues with crappy 32-bit code. Sure, it's crappy code, but I've found most code is crappy code. There can be performance costs, too (64-bit everywhere means more stuff than 32-bit most places), although they're minor and may be offset by equally possible performance gains (instruction architecture improvements such as more general-purpose registers).
Since this is Slashdot, I have to mention that Linux i386 supports PAE just fine, and has no problem working with more than 4 GiB of RAM, making Linux x86-64 even less interesting than Win x86-64. Linux also doesn't manage memory the same way as Windows, so the user/kernel split doesn't apply. So Linux x86-64 has all the compatibility problems of Long Mode, with even fewer benefits.
Re:I don't get it (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Downloading now (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Why 32-bit? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Microsoft Download Web Page the USUAL MESS (Score:3, Informative)
ugh.
http://download.microsoft.com/download/6/3/3/633118BD-6C3D-45A4-B985-F0FDFFE1B021/EN/7000.0.081212-1400_client_en-us_Ultimate-GB1CULXFRE_EN_DVD.ISO [microsoft.com]
There, that works in all browsers. You just had to dig a little bit. (thats the 64 bit version)
Re:Use Internet Explorer (Score:3, Informative)
64bit:
http://download.microsoft.com/download/6/3/3/633118BD-6C3D-45A4-B985-F0FDFFE1B021/EN/7000.0.081212-1400_client_en-us_Ultimate-GB1CULXFRE_EN_DVD.ISO [microsoft.com]
32bit:
http://download.microsoft.com/download/6/3/3/633118BD-6C3D-45A4-B985-F0FDFFE1B021/EN/7000.0.081212-1400_client_en-us_Ultimate-GB1CULFRE_EN_DVD.ISO [microsoft.com]
You just need to look for the direct link. The main page uses a download manager like MSDN, but its the only reason, and if you dig a bit you find the direct downloads. It seems to be up and down in getting the initial connection with the site being hammered, but once download starts its really fast.
Re:Here is my take on it.. (Score:1, Informative)
Take your tinfoil hat of, would you? The "embedded DRM schemes" in Vista are the only way Microsoft can enable blu-ray and HD-DVD playback on Windows. If it doesn't provide the protected content path, users would not be able to play any blu-ray movies.
Fact is that dispite all the scaremongering, bullsh*t and FUD that's spread around on the DRM in Vista, all of it is optional. It's there in the OS so applications can make use of it, but in contrast to what the tinfoil hat crew like to say, it won't do anything if you don't want to. As long as you stay away from any blu-ray or other third-party software with similar DRM measures, Vista will behave no different than XP.
Re:Still no virtual desktop (Score:5, Informative)
Not true. This was explicitly requested (and rejected by MS VP in charge of Windows Steve Sinofsky) on the Engineering Windows 7 blog: http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/ [msdn.com] (I can't find the exact place where he said they weren't going to do it right now, but he did say so). It won't be happening in Windows 7. Sorry.
Re:All that trouble... (Score:0, Informative)
iTunes does not work proper on any win32 installation (nor mac for that matter). Its a shitty app and you are better left without it.
Obtw: iTunes has no (more) problems on MY xp64 bit installation than it does under vista 32/64bit so it must be a luser issue.
Re:Why 32-bit? (Score:4, Informative)
That's misleading at best. The Atom netbooks released in 2008 had N270 Atoms. "Atom implements the x86 (IA-32) instruction set; x86-64 is so far only activated for the Atom 230 and 330 desktop models. N and Z series Atom models cannot run x86-64 code." (Wikipedia)
That is because.. (Score:5, Informative)
MS is typically paranoid about really really old OSes, and uses a layout with a iso9660 visible file:
mount -t iso9660 -o loop 7000.0.081212-1400_client_en-us_Ultimate-GB1CULXFRE_EN_DVD.iso t
[root@localhost Download]# ls t
readme.txt
[root@localhost Download]# umount t
[root@localhost Download]# mount -t udf -o loop 7000.0.081212-1400_client_en-us_Ultimate-GB1CULXFRE_EN_DVD.iso t
[root@localhost Download]# ls t
autorun.inf bootmgr efi sources upgrade
boot bootmgr.efi setup.exe support
Re:Here is my take on it.. (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.osronline.com/showthread.cfm?link=97522 [osronline.com]
In short, there's NO WAY to disable driver checks now without resorting to test mode.
General public SHOULD be able to install unsigned drivers. It's not your right to tell them what NOT to do. Anyway, inability to install drivers is certainly a limitation compared to WXP.
If you disagree, then please explain how freedom is slavery and ignorance is strength.
Re:Site seems to break (Score:3, Informative)
What web browsers support the Windows 7 Beta download experience?
Internet Explorer 7 and Internet Explorer 8 Beta 2 support the Windows 7 Beta download experience.
Typical MS. Does this inspire confidence in their products for you?
Re:Released to public after delay? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Long Mode is so overrated (Score:5, Informative)
I'm more interested in the extra registers that you code can assume exists on 64-bit x86s. Also, managing a larger than 32-bit addressing space in 32-bit mode can lead to a lot of extra instructions, since you can't use 64-bit registers to hold the data.
So yeah, I'm interested in 64-bit mode. Because it should help my machine run more efficiently. And Vista and Windows 7 don't support Win16 apps, so it isn't going to be a problem that win16 cannot use a hardware acceleration mode while running in 64-bit mode.
In the end, your argument is simply "why do we need 64-bit mode, we can do anything we want in 32-bit mode with a little extra work". Yeah, that's true about 16-bit mode too. It can do everything 32-bit mode can do (even without protected mode), and yet we switched away from 16-bit to 32-bit.
64-bit mode is on the rise because apps and OSes are starting to creak a bit with the limitations of 32-bit mode, and programmers being lazy beasts, would rather just change a compile option instead of write a bunch of paged data management code (a la EMS,XMS,EEMS and the old DOS extenders).
Re:My experience with Windows Hitler. (Score:3, Informative)
Then I need to still give full disclosure: I -am- a senior .NET software developer for a close Microsoft partner (though its a company that does NOT operate directly in the IT/Software field). So I am potentially still biaised. If it helps, I used to hate Microsoft like the plague and ran Linux only for years, long before Ubuntu and other friendly distros were out, so its not like I'm COMPLETELY clueless :)
Anyway, since my install is in a VM, I just tried simply reducing RAM to 256 megs. So it isn't completly representative since I do have a Core 2 Duo 3ghz and the VM is runnning with hardware virtualization enabled, so its not really a low end system, but people always complained about RAM bottleneck in Vista, never CPU, so it should still be interesting. Also on a VM I can't use Aero, but 1) Win7's Aero uses about half the memory of Vista's, and 2) you wouldn't use Aero anyway on such a limited system.
End result: the system does NOT swap on a clean boot, though with superfetch and other stuff enabled it does use up almost all of the RAM. Internet Explorer 8 and Windows Media player, are very responsive. It is most definately usuable, and I'd dare say its running "great".
By the way, if you use it on a tablet PC, they vastly improved the touchscreen support (not all of the new stuff is in, and without a multi touch screen you wouldn't be able to use it all anyway, but its still pretty cool). The writing recognition is better (the examples they give you to test it is with mathematical equations, and its as close to perfect as one could expect with today's technology).
If your tablet PC has 128 megs, I'm sure it will "Work", but that won't be comfy...well, let me try it i guess!
Re:Viruses gone, stupid drive letters remain! (Score:3, Informative)
So, outside of your 'fucking' orgy...
What is so bad about drive letters really? Is C:\ really so different from hda1, sda1 or /volumes/? I haven't actually played around with it much, but I would almost assume that drives are accessible without directly accessing the corresponding letter within Vista/7 it's just not fully implimented yet...
I have no problem whatsoever with using backslashes, programmatically or manually... I prefer to think of \.\.\ as "into the computer" whereas /././ is "outside" the computer... but there really isnt a standard anyways
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Path_(computing) [wikipedia.org]
If you have tested and/or seen any videos on Win7, they do have something close (but largely inferior) to Expose
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8AqXaNr8ag [youtube.com]
And with the whole thumbnail API and stuff it would be fairly easy for someone to make pseudo-port of Expose to Windows...
Vista is trash, at least in comparison to XP, or Win7, but so far I really like Win7, and if it remains and/or improves on it by RTM release, i'll switch immedietly to it.
Re:What web browsers support the Windows 7 Beta do (Score:5, Informative)
Also: got full speed on my connection during the entire download.
Re:Why 32-bit? (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Still no virtual desktop (Score:3, Informative)
I haven't tried it, but some of the Linux administrators at work just download the add-on from Sysinternals.
It doesn't come with the operating system but it is free, produced by the vendor and most people seem happy with it. Of course this only applies if you actually want to use virtual desktops over slamming Windows - but if so here is the link:
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/cc817881.aspx [microsoft.com]
Re:Site seems to break (Score:2, Informative)
Re:All that trouble... (Score:4, Informative)
Did you know that some REALLY old school DOS apps bypassed the OS and wrote files straight to the hard drive? That's the kind of behavior the GP is alluding to. I've seen it first hand... dang, have I been dealing with computers that long. How old am I? Oh...
That's one example, but there are PLENTY of really old DOS apps that want direct hardware access -- and plenty of companies still using some of them.
I don't mean to sound down on DOSbox, I'm just answering your question: the answer is that it won't always do the job.
Re:All that trouble... (Score:3, Informative)
iTunes. 3d-accelerated games. Wine doesn't quite cut it in every case, so I still end up using a bit of Windows...
Not Vista, of course...
Re:Unsupported browser? (Score:3, Informative)
You could just grab the ISO file directly:
32-bit [microsoft.com]
64-bit [microsoft.com]
Re:Why 32-bit? (Score:2, Informative)
iso = An ISO image is an archive file (a.k.a. disk image) of an optical disc using a conventional ISO (International Organization for Standardization) format that is supported by many software vendors.
img = a leading talent agency originally known as the "International Management Group"
or
img = The IMG file format is an archive format used for creating a disk image of floppy disks.
hmm either way, I am sure that .iso is more of a standard for creating DVD installations disks then img
Re:All that trouble... (Score:4, Informative)
You're smoking crack. From a strategic standpoint, why would Microsoft do *anything* to prevent the creation of solid drivers for their OS? Can you think of a single reason, you paranoid loon?
No, what happened is that companies like nVidia, Canon (my personal thorn-in-the-side: the LiDE scanner works, where's the fucking driver?!) wanted to save time and money, and possibly get more hardware sales, by being shitty to their customers. That's all there is to it.
Re:All that trouble... (Score:3, Informative)
I was surprised that Parallels actually uses Wine's Direct3D implementation on the Mac to provide D3D to Windows installations.
Wine has gone from "dancing bear" to actually working, and surprising me when it doesn't.
Re:All that trouble... (Score:3, Informative)
Um... I type my root password in Linux more often then I hit UAC in Vista (never mind Win7). It might have something to do with the fact that I'm constantly installing things like different wine snapshots and trying different drivers in hopes of getting my webcam working right (it used to work with the universal driver, and no longer does. No clue why, but I'm trying to get back there), but that doesn't change the fact that principle of least privilege is more of a pain in Linux than in Vista (for me). Then there's the encrypted wallet that I need to use for my IM passwords and such, which I must enter a password for as well (since Linux, unlike Windows, doesn't encrypt data using your login credentials).
Of course, running XP as a non-administrator is far more painful the Linux and Vista put together, so I actually consider UAC a major improvement. However, the vast majority of people run XP as an admin, so properly restricted privileges, no matter how painless the elevation process may be, come as something of a shock to them.
Re:All that trouble... (Score:2, Informative)
The item that I find troubling is this:
Before you install this beta release, back up all MP3 files that might be accessed by the computer, including those on removable media or shared network resources.
Meaning what exactly? Windows 7 takes it upon itself to make sure you're not pirating music by doing what? Erasing all your mp3s? Anyone know? I suppose I didn't really expect MS to come to their senses on DRM, but one could hope.
Windows 7, still Defective by Design.
It had some issues with MP3s with more than 1KB of meta-data (tags, etc), AFAIK. Accidentially deleting the first 2-3 seconds of such songs. A quick google will give you more details.
Re:All that trouble... (Score:4, Informative)
Geesh, if I didn't notice your fairly low UID, I would've guess your to be around 15 or so going on that statement.
They dropped the old support because they (and many other companies) expected to the masses to keep trudging the Microsoft Treadmill and go out and buy Vista in droves just like they did for 98 & XP. As we all know, that didn't happen. People weren't enticed by the "Oooo! Look! Flipping Windows and a tiny Start button!" like Microsoft and friends assumed they would. People haven't even gone out to buy Microsoft's "Mojave" like they were supposed to either, for that matter.
Personally, I'm going to find things very interesting when VII actually hits the streets. Will the masses jump? Are the masses just as tired of dancing the Redmond Slide like most of us /. type folks are?
Re:All that trouble... (Score:4, Informative)
Anyone who had bothered to read it would have seen:
When MP3 files are added (either manually or automatically) to either the Windows Media Player or the Windows Media Center library, or if the file metadata is edited with Windows Explorer, several seconds of audio data may be permanently removed from the start of the file. This issue occurs when files contain thumbnails or other metadata of significant size before importing or editing them.
And the steps:
4. Read the article and install the update available at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkID=139391 [microsoft.com].
5. Once you have installed the update, you can safely reset the read/write status of your MP3 files to your preference.
Re:All that trouble... (Score:1, Informative)
Specifically it had trouble with those MP3s in Windows Media Player 12 if it was set to update media files with additional information that it found on the Internet. When rewriting the ID3 tags it would accidentally write over a portion of the song. The same would happen if you attempted to manually modify the meta data of the songs from Windows Explorer.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/961367 [microsoft.com]
It is a little surprising that Microsoft let the beta out with this bug and I'm sure that a number of users will unwittingly smack into it. The fix was available before the beta went public (I downloaded the beta and the fix from MSDN on Thursday).
Re:All that trouble... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:All that trouble... (Score:3, Informative)
If you believe Slashdot, of all places, has been taken over by Microsoft evangelists you clearly have your blinders on. Just look at all the crap being spewed in the comment to this story.
Re:Site seems to break (Score:3, Informative)
That being said, if you really want to know, it's because the downloader provides integrity checks, failproof Resume/Pause, bandwidth limiting (if you don't want to hog your line), and other stuff.
Win32 boot switches (Score:3, Informative)
"There IS an OS boot string to let processes address up to 4Gb of RAM (or more)..."
No. Not for Win32.
There is the /3GB switch. This enables what Microsoft calls 4GT (4 gigabyte tuning). It changes the kernel/user split from 2/2 to 1/3. However, applications have to be compiled with a particular option (IMAGE_FILE_LARGE_ADDRESS_AWARE) to use it. Further, it robs the kernel of memory it might need for other things, so it's not a no-brainer. It's mainly useful if you're going to be running a single large application on the computer (e.g., Exchange Server). If you're running a multi-process workload, you're often better off giving the kernel its memory. And you're still limited to a 4 GiB virtual address space.
There is the /PAE switch. PAE = Physical Address Extension, which changes the physical address word size from 32 bits to 36 bits. This will let the processor address up to 64 GiB of RAM. However, you're still limited to a 4 GiB virtual address space. It's useful for a large multi-process workload. For example, a machine with 8 GiB of RAM can run several large tasks, each task using up to 2 or 3 GiB of memory.
Further, on the "workstation" versions of Windows (2000 Pro, XP, Vista), the /PAE switch doesn't actually increase the amount of physical hardware address space the operating system will use. It does enable PAE, but Windows still ignores physical addresses above 4 GiB. Also, PAE will already be enabled on XP SP2 and Vista, to get the NX bit.
There is also AWE (Address Windowing Extensions). This is not an OS boot switch; it is a collection of system calls. AWE is just bank switching all over again (like the ancient MS-DOS EMS). To obtain more than 2 (or 3) GiB of primary storage (memory), an application can switch pages of memory in and out of its address space. However, it cannot access pages not actively mapped to its address space, so the application basically has to do its own memory management. Ick.
*None* of this applies to Win64, which is 64-bit everywhere. However, Win32 executables running on Win64 are still limited to 2 GiB of process address space (or 4 GiB if they were compiled with IMAGE_FILE_LARGE_ADDRESS_AWARE).
References:
* http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(VS.85).aspx [microsoft.com]
* http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366796(VS.85).aspx [microsoft.com]
Re:All that trouble... (Score:3, Informative)
Vista ended the year with 21% of the desktop, up 8% in from February.
The MacIntel with 7%, up 3% and Linux (all flavors) 0.8%, up 0.2% since February. Top Operating System Share Trend [hitslink.com]
Are the masses just as tired of dancing the Redmond Slide like most of us /. type folks are?
No one is stampeding to buy anything right now.
But those who are in the market are most buying Vista. The perception remains that OEM Linux is a bottom-feeder and the Mac the "high priced spread."
Re:All that trouble... (Score:5, Informative)
And what's the "Forced Upgrade" percent in that? I bought a new laptop in June. It shipped with Vista. Am I in that 21% even though I've booted to it a grand total of 6 times and haven't booted to it since August or so? I "bought" a Vista license, but only because I was forced to.
I tried to return my Vista license. Circuit City, after having to call two or three other Regional Managers (not the lowly multi-store supervisors, corporate managers) told me they refused to give me the money owed for a Vista License. I showed the Store Manager the EULA that states in the very first paragraph that I can return it to the store of purchase for a full refund. They refused to honor it. They said I had to go to Microsoft. After calling Microsoft three times (their server kept hanging up on me...), told me they wouldn't honor it since it states I have to go to the store of purchase.
Guess what. Circuit City, after I told them all that, told me "O-Well" (yes a direct quote), and hung up.
So now I'm in the 21% of Vista License holders?!? Pfffft... That's just corporate spreadsheet fixing...