Posted on 05/30/2006 11:51:59 AM PDT by N3WBI3
The opening of Beta 2 testing at WinHEC for Windows Vista has once again raised serious questions about Microsoft's ability to keep its promises. We have witnessed up until now the inexhaustible reservoir of excuses coming from MS's officials, who have continuously fed us with plenty of reasons for Vista's delay: they're working on security, they're trying to make it more reliable for business, etc. Although it was initially destined to make its public debut way back in 2002, following years haven't shown us more than small bits of what was to become Microsoft's best product in more than 10 years.
The Beta 2 testing last week didn't bring much hope for most of us, including software and hardware producers too. Developers' feedback, although not a big surprise, turned out to be more than reserved concerning the overall quality of Vista, inducing the-again-not-so-unexpected idea that there is still a lot of work to do in this domain. Moreover, rumors concerning a yet another delay of Vista, previously announced for public appearance in January 2007, came out from CEO Steve Ballmer himself this week, despite his subsequent declarations that "Vista is on track". Developers that have tested Vista even suggest that it is possible for Microsoft not to reach its goal of delivering Vista to corporate customers in November 2006.
It would be a mistake to consider that we are now heading for disaster. Maybe Ballmer's declarations are true and MAYBE Vista shall publicly appear in January 2007. But what's done is done. Microsoft cannot erase what it has implemented in customer's mind: "the best product in 10 years". All the delays pinpointed to one thing: "we are working at improving Vista". So a public release next year without the superior quality that customers are longing for would be an even harder hit to MS's already shooked-up image. The smallest security flaw in Vista would immediately become a gap of global proportions, capable of allowing all the Evil things in the world enter through it (including viruses of course...). Any oversight of a particular aspect in Vista will have huge repercaussions for the entire OS, casting a dim shadow upon the overall impression. And Aero will definitely not be able to compensate it...
There are other reasons to consider while investigating the possible failure of Redmond-giant flagship product. First of all: the price. Microsoft announced that Vista will not show its beautiful face (Aero) to those who possess pirated copies. So if you want to have 3D windows on your screen you'd have to pay a larger sum than for XP (after all, Vista requires 15 G of free space on your hard drive).
Jack Messman, CEO Novell, had already stated since september 2005, during Novell’s Brain Share, which took place in Barcelona, Spain, that switching from Windows XP to Windows Vista will be more expensive than switching from Windows XP to Linux. So far, Microsoft hasn’t published any details about the price scheme it plans for Windows Vista, but ever since the Redmond company announced the hardware requirements, many experts have started to link the fee for a license with the amounts of money that will be invested in a PC that would allow you to run the OS.
And thus we have reached the second reason for Vista's envisioned failure. In order to run it properly not only that you'd have to license it, but you'd also have to think of spending more money on hardware. And this is bad news not only for retail customers but also for middle to small size companies, that don't possess enough money to change their computers like corporations do. And when we think that Vista might not be as reliable and secure as everyone expects...
This is where Linux comes on stage. It's totally free (well, most of the distros are). It has proven its reliability over time and it has convinced IT managers from large corporations (like IBM) to local authorities (like the French Gendarmerie or the Norwegian and Spanish government)to switch to it instead of Windows XP. Servers or desktops running Linux don't suffer from hoax, worms or spyware and they do not provide BSODs (blue screens of death, typically a source of irony for both Windows and Linux users). As for Aero, KDE desktop did long time ago a lot of the things Aero shall do in 2007, and with a whole lot less hardware resources. Not to mention that Novell's XGL Desktop is already not one, but two steps ahead of Aero: at least 1Ghz processor, a minimum of 256 system RAM and an old GeForce MX 400. And visual effects are staggering compared to Aero (just imagine a cube- which is your desktop- and a film being presented on two of its sides...). And last, but not least, the many "flavors" of Linux, which allow the user to turn freely and with no supplementary cost from one distro to another, or even run it from a live-CD/USB flash. And if that's not enough for you, just think at how much will Vista resist getting its Aero GUI pirated...
All in all, the probably unanimous conclusion is that with or without Vista's release in 2007 the winner is Linux. Paradoxically enough, just as many have suggested before, Microsoft shall boost Linux's popularity no matter what Vista will bring new to the OS market. Still, if rumors concerning a new delay of Vista are true, MS's credibility (already at low levels in recent years) will drop significantly, and with it, the finances too.
Their mere existence once again proves you were lying or ignorant when you claimed nothing existed. That is not the only litigation either, just one you have no excuse not knowing about if you choose to post on these threads and claim nothing of the sort exists.
Thanks for the link!!
BTW, still can't find that img on deviantart--do you have the author or the img # by chance?
Which img are you talking about? If need be, I'll put it up on my Photobucket.
Regards, Ivan
Then show me the verdicts from each of those cases--and any other applicable full Circuit, Court of Appeals, and Supreme Court rulings.
As usual, you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about--and looking stupid in the process.
Your background img from your screenshot in post 100.
Ah, OK, that I didn't get from Deviant Art - I'll put that up on Photobucket.
Regards, Ivan
Thanks!!
Link is in your private messages.
Regards, Ivan
Thanks again!!
Whoa, Apple isn't going that far. Anyone can download the Boot Camp software for free, but buying a copy of Win XP and installing it is entirely up to the end user. And Apple provides zero support for Boot Camp.
LOL you were the idiot claiming no such thing had ever happened. LMAO again.
No, I said there was no precedent--so legally they don't exist--as far as case law is concerned.
The actions are current; they cannot exist in case law until after the trials--which as I said start next year.
Clearly you know absolutely nothing about computer security, *nix, and law.
So, what you're saying is, you have only one example, and in your opinion, that constitutes a "mass"?
GE,
I have patiently read this entire thread from beginning to end, and I must tell you that your behavior, Sir, is that of an entirely unbridled penis with ears. You exhibit the rhetorical agility of a damp soapdish and all of the social grace of a battleship in a bathtub.
Whereas everyone else in this thread has posted material that constitutes "opinion" and "debate", and whereas many have also gone to the extent of posting "examples" demonstrating the foundations of their statements in real world fact, you, by contrast, have consistently mocked, maligned, hectored, and heckled with overbearing assertions nearly wholly devoid of factual backup.
You are not arguing, Sir, you are, quite frankly, "compensating". Poorly.
We collectively wish that you were, in fact, 1/10th of the "man" that the braggadocious nature of your posts strives to imply, at least then you'd be okay enough with yourself not to take your inadequacies out on other posters to these threads.
I'm sorry to seem so harsh, but give it a rest; if for nobody's sake but your own.
"As usual--can talk but can't actually produce..."
It would be nice if he also couldn't REproduce.
Eloquently stated. Thank you.
"We collectively wish that you were, in fact, 1/10th of the "man" that the braggadocious nature of your posts strives to imply..."
As my grandpa would say, "I'd like to buy him for what he's worth and sell him for what he thinks he's worth."
True, true...8^)
And you're the idiot claiming that all kinds of stuff is happening or about to happen, and then being silent when asked for proof.
Again, please provide evidence that:
1)People who work on open source projects do so at the expense of their employers, and...
2)That there is a "mass" of lawsuits coming against OSS. To do that, you'll need to provide more than one example.
That's what I am seeing a lot of recently.
There just isn't a *need* for it. Most are perfectly content to keep 2000 Professional or what little XP they have deployed. Throw in a surprising amount of Linux in the back office and you get a not-so-rosey picture if you're Microsoft.
You know, if they could have done 2000 Pro sooner and spent the requisite time hardening it, they would have been a lot better off. Personally, I think 2000 was their best release. It was what NT4 should have been.
As for Aero...Note to Microsoft, you aren't Apple. Never will be. Get over it. You're viewed as a stodgy corporation now. Kind of like IBM minus the aura of competency. All the marketing in the world will not change this. Besides, you've shown time and time again that you can't even get the basics right. Cut down on the featuritis and make a stable operating system. Only if you can manage this, should you concentrate on pretty widgets for executive types to click,
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.