Posted on 01/18/2007 3:16:25 PM PST by Swordmaker
XP Successor Doesn't Break New Ground on Ease of Use, But It's Best Windows Yet
A new version of Microsoft Windows, the world's most popular and important computer operating system, will finally arrive for consumers on Jan. 30. It has taken the giant software maker more than five years to replace Windows XP with this new version, called Windows Vista -- an eternity by computer-industry reckoning. Many of the boldest plans for Vista were discarded in that lengthy process, and what's left is a worthy, but largely unexciting, product.
Vista is much prettier than previous versions of Windows. Its icons look better, windows have translucent borders, and items in the taskbar and in folders can display little previews of what they contain. Security is supposedly vastly better; there are some new free, included programs; and fast, universal search is now built in. There are hundreds of other, smaller, improvements and additions throughout the system, including parental controls and even a slicker version of Solitaire.
After months of testing Vista on multiple computers, new and old, I believe it is the best version of Windows that Microsoft has produced. However, while navigation has been improved, Vista isn't a breakthrough in ease of use. Overall, it works pretty much the same way as Windows XP. Windows hasn't been given nearly as radical an overhaul as Microsoft just applied to its other big product, Office.
Vista's Flip 3D feature lets you scroll through images of currently running programs. The sidebar (right) contains miniapplications. The Windows Photo Gallery (left) is for organizing and editing photos.
Nearly all of the major, visible new features in Vista are already available in Apple's operating system, called Mac OS X, which came out in 2001 and received its last major upgrade in 2005. . . .
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Why not? XP is currently outselling all competitors combined by several multiples. Why would that suddenly change, since the cost differences are minimal? Because they made a scripting shell seperately downloadable? LMAO.
By that token, why ever release a new OS? Why don't they just try to sell XP for the rest of eternity? In fact, why didn't they just stop with Windows 95? /sarc.
Because they made a scripting shell seperately [sic] downloadable?
You're ignoring the other features they cut out. The point is that Vista (aka. Longhorn) has been massively cut back since its inception.
I'm not ignoring anything, I simply asked you to justify your claim how a couple of lost features will cause sales to suffer since Vista does contain other improvements, and the unimproved version XP is currently outselling all competitors combined by several multiples. Do you really believe the average customer at Circuit City will say to themselves "what, no WinFS, I'll now completely change platforms"? It sure looked like it.
No. But they will say "Hey, this looks just like what I have now. I ain't plopping down no two hundred bucks for this!". When Windows 95 came out, people lined up for a chance to buy a copy. It just isn't going to happen with Vista. Why? Because there aren't enough new features to justify it. With Vista coming out, Microsoft is trying to convince people to switch platforms--from Windows XP to Windows Vista.
Looks like more of your irrational Microsoft bashing since many of the Vista improvements are actually visual making the "looks" significantly better, plus the fact that shrink wrap sales of XP account for less than 5% of overall sales. There's several legitimate reasons Vista sales could stall, but you're nowhere near the ball park LOL. Go back to my original post several others complimented, maybe you can start over with a different approach and maybe get something right.
But featurwise looks pretty much the same. Which is what I was saying and was self-evident to anyone--except a half-wit troll.
shrink wrap sales of XP account for less than 5% of overall sales.
OEM makes up the vast majority of their sales, that's true. But OEM Vista sales only make up for the loss of OEM XP sales. But MS doesn't want things to stay the same--they want a sales boost from the release (like what happened with Windows 95).
An OEM OS can still be a failure. Windows ME is a shining example of this (which was so bad that many a repair shop refused to support it and the savvy user switched back from it). Moreover, you are ignoring my point that Vista is competing with XP. If people don't like Vista, they will simply reinstall from an old copy of XP (and I'll bet that there will be some who switch to that OS X thingy). For most "average joes", getting Vista requires an investment--new hardware. That's an investment that not many will make if there isn't a good reason for it. You don't seem to understand that there are a number of people out there who keep using Windows 98 because it still does what they need it to and many others who only change computers when the current one breaks.
Also, one of MS's biggest sources of revenue are businesses, so if businesses say that Vista is a DRM-laced, resource hog, that doesn't bring anything new to the table and stick with their copies of Windows 2000, XP, etc. (you see, business apps are not like games, they do not push the technological envelope; there are many IT shops still using Windows 2000) MS could lose a lot of potential income there.
my original post several others complimented,
Argument ad populum is a fallacy. Get a clue or, better yet, get lost.
Typical, with your supposed points annihilated, you somehow feel that undeserved insults will somehow restore your credibility. LMAO.
<<
XP's Successor Doesn't Break New Ground on Ease of Use, But It's Best Windows Yet.
>>
That case of diarrhea is the best diarrhea yet!
Ignoring the fact that I answered all of your "points" and the insult was an aside. A freebie at no extra charge. For someone who is perpetually nasty and condescending, you sure whine a lot when you get a bloody nose.
ROFL!
Speak of the devil.
I'd say your friends who advocate illegal hacking are a lot more appropriate target for that remark, but then again of course you can't even properly insult folks either LMAO.
Awww, come on. That all you've got?
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.