Vista License agreement analyzed by att'y

Be sure , there is going to be lots of similar stories in the next couple of years.
MS thinks they have won and gained control, the truth is only going to poke them in thier eye.

Digispam , thank you for one of the best posts I have seen concerning the "magic" of Apple
Have a cup of coffee on me. :thumbup:
Macs are overpriced, over handled, over controlled. I work at a computer networking company and I have had to deal with macs. Mac OS X is a collection of operating systems not a single version. Early on, it was way, way, way less stable than even WinME! Now it is on par with WinXP AT BEST, but at a much higher cost because most software and all hardware costs more, plus you always have to make special arrangements to work with anyone else because they have a pc. Most mac users end up with a pc also if not at work, then at home therefore further increasing the price.

Graphics people work Macs because they were raised on them not because they are more powerful. That hasnt been true in several years. And have you noticed how proud they are about the new intel chips they use? and how they can run Windows stuff too? why is that? I thought macs were the shiz?

Sure macs are great and do everything so well - as long as you want to pay out the ass and only do what Apple says.

Using a mac on the net is like being the only veggitarian in a steakhouse. It will stay that way at least through the product lifecycle of Vista. Linix is in the same boat too.
Click to expand...

I am not worried about DRM or any corporations attempt to stifle free enterprise , you see there are always cracks , in their ceiling. :)
 
Dunhausen said:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/infoworld/20070209/tc_infoworld/85937

Microsoft is saying they will have a new Windows out in two years.

That's a pretty stupid thing to say if you want people to buy Vista. So, basically, this is Microsoft's way of admitting Vista is crap and hoping to avoid driving people away from their product line by promising something better very soon.
Click to expand...

No offense, but that's incorrect. It means that they are announcing that they will continue to lead the pack. 2.5 years has been the turn around time per OS for the last 15 years (win3.x - win95 /winNT - win98 - winME/win2000 / winXP - Vista)

XP lasted 5 years because XP SP2 is almost a different OS than XP original release. It may not look like it in the user interface, but in terms of technology, it is quite different.

Meanwhile, Mac keeps releasing new OS 'versions' and they keep calling it OS X, I guess to make believe it is all great. And Linux still doesnt have the clean easy GUI or the hardware support to compete.

But again, I'm no fan of m$. They're crooked, but they do have the best OS bar none. It is true - the world runs on Windows, and it will continue to do so for the forseeable future.
 
digicam said:
No offense, but that's incorrect. It means that they are announcing that they will continue to lead the pack. 2.5 years has been the turn around time per OS for the last 15 years
Click to expand...
If a 2.5 schedule is the standard, how is announcing the next version in two years "continuing to lead the pack"? For that matter, how does Windows lead the pack in anything? They have industry saturation going for them, and that's about it. Windows is lightyears behind other OSes in any kernel-level software technology. Go ahead, try to use Windows for paravirtualization, or see if it scales to a few thousand CPUs. Heck, Vista is going to be the first implementation of symbolic links. How many decades has everyone else had those? And beryl/compiz give a much cooler, more powerful, and less memory intensive GUI than even Vista has, and they have been out for a while.

Anyway, it's entirely irrevelant to the discussion whether Windows releases are like clockwork or more like airport flights. The point is that announcing they will have another release in two years, especially in light of the very negative reviews Vista has received, is definitely going to drive down Vista adoption. So either Microsoft hired a complete bumbling idiot for their Vice President of Development, which does not bode well on it's own, or they think it's more important to cover for Vista's problems.

digispam said:
And Linux still doesnt have the clean easy GUI
Click to expand...
Maybe if you haven't used Linux since 1988.

Wanna know where Vista's multiple desktops idea came from? I've had them on my computer for 10 years.

or the hardware support to compete.
Click to expand...
Out-of-the-box hardware support trumps windows easily. I can't tell you the number of times I've had trouble with drivers on windows only to pop in knoppix and have it work flawlessly. I even had a friend switch to linux because he couldn't get his wireless card to work under windows.

Where Windows wins is the OEM versions where the software comes with the comp and you have everything pre-configured. But change out some of your hardware and chances are linux will still work but windows will need to go out and download new drivers.

digicam said:
XP lasted 5 years because XP SP2 is almost a different OS than XP original release.
Click to expand...
That may be true, but that proves my point rather more than it proves yours.

SP2 was not sold as a separate OS. It was an upgrade to an existing OS brought on by the problems that the existing version was having. Microsoft certainly would have preferred to market the changes as a separate OS (if they could have gotten away with it) because that would have made them a lot more money.

As you suggest, SP2 was indeed part of the reason XP lasted 5 years--Microsoft engineers had to dedicate so much time to fixing bugs in XP that their Longhorn project was delayed.
 
ChadHahn said:
Switch to Mac. As you can see in this video, Vista is just a pale rip off of OS X anyway.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDNuq94Zg_8
Click to expand...

Pogue is an idiot. He's just some "yay Mac!" dork.

Apple didn't invent any of the features he is talking about anyway, but Mac fans pretending Apple invented things they didn't is not new.

I guess the extent to which he analyzes an OS is what little gimmicks it includes like 3D chess or always-on-top applications (not sure how that is even a "thing" at all). The only really useful feature is the way the search results come up as you type, but that's not really Apple's invention anyway.
 
dunhausen, it looks like you have dismissed windows out of hand. Once you're dead set against m$, I dont think you can look at them objectively. Thats understandable given their crooked monopolistic behavior.

However,

The fact is that windows is the world standard. With every new os, this argument starts up again all over the place, and then windows is the world standard again. Despite all the years and years of trumped up hype, Linux is still a distant, 3rd place (or 2nd, depending on what market you look at). It's not bad technology, quite the opposite. But they just cant seem to put it all together. But trump windows for hardware support? maybe if you havent used windows since 1988. Of all the pro Linux arguments, that one doesnt hold water. Innovative? yes. efficient? even more so. secure? you betcha. but not better hardware support. I have never failed to get any device to work under win2000 or above. The world designs their hardware to work with windows.

so like i have been trying to say, I am no huge fan of m$, but I have eyes. Windows is and will continue to be the world standard for the forseeable future.

More power to you if you can help change that, I'll be the first to join you when you do.
 
What I am arguing for superior hardware support is this: A linux install CD will, by default, support more hardware than a windows install CD.

I am not arguing that linux supports more hardware in general. I fully recognize that everyone with the exception of academic/research facilities makes drivers for windows. But for the drivers linux does have they have been much better about integrating them into the base install.

And I cede that Windows is the desktop standard. That is where its advantage in software/hardware support comes in. It is not exactly the world standard--more and more states and national governments are officially adopting linux to run their facilities--and it is certainly not the industry or academic standard. Linux and BSD dominate in the server market and you would be hard pressed to find a university network that did not use Linux or some other *nix (possibly with a Windows dual boot).

I don't hate Windows or Microsoft either (apart from how much time they cause me to spend charitably removing malware from my friend's systems). But since they are the industry standard, I have to use Windows a lot, and so can hardly be suppressed from expressing my gripes about its failings. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top