I’ve been using Linux for over a year now. Its amazing to me that Microsoft manages to stay dominant when a free alternative exists which is better.
Under their, "What have we learned?, section it says:"
An operating system must be robust and reliable. Users do not accept the need of constant updates, which are interpreted as patchs that should have been anticipated before launch. Before marketing a software or an operating system it should be submitted to all necessary tests to ensure its functionality and performance. In this sense, one can say that Microsoft's strategy was entirely wrong, and its only outcome has been bringing discredit to the company.
I've never had a problem with Vista. I knew what to expect when I got it on a new machine that was made for it. That is exactly what Microsoft said to do. They offered many ways to screen an existing system to see if it was compatible and to make recommendations to upgrade or not transition to Vista. When I loaded it on my wife's laptop PC, a CD made specifically to test the system told me to increase the memory before installing it. She has never had a problem. The "constant updates" happen in the background with no impact to functionality. If a user were an idiot that couldn't unwrap a stick of gum then that person might think Vista was a fiasco.
I myself am tired of this constant bashing of Bill Gates because those with weak character are envious of his success.
If you divide Vista’s underperformance by the time it took to develop it, this is a truly dizzying achievement.
If it weren’t for Microsoft’s ability to force Vista into the retail channel, Vista would had died long ago.
Well, that explains a lot.
They obviously never ran Windows Me. I think that was the worst OS by Microsoft I’ve ever seen, and I currently run Vista 64 bit, which had some compatibility problems with some programs I tried to run, but its been much better since SP1. Windows Millinium aka Windows Me was a buggy, slow, cronically crashing POS no matter what updates they released.
I think Vista’s failure was all the changes it made to areas of the control panel and administrative interfaces which consolidated them, but the names for these were too vague, and functions that were related got spread all over the place. The OS from an administrative standpoint just blew. They also went overboard with the notification features. I hope they do a better job with Windows 7.
If you ruled out the communications aspect, I’d still say the award for most overhyped and underperforming piece of technology would be the Atari Jaguar. That thing was a $250 paperweight.
Vista is a POS. Sometimes I help a friend who has it, and it’s like visiting the Stone Age compared to Mac.
Vista is the slowest, most cumbersome boondoggle we ever made the mistake of buying. It was pre-installed on our new computer, and we had to spend $100 to have it removed. It was money well-spent in aggravation saved.
If this is the best Microsoft can do after all their years in the business, they ought to hang it up and let professionals do the job.
“the most overhyped, underperforming information and communication technology (ICT) project.”
#1- The Kenyan in the White House
#2- the lying thieves in Congress
#3- Climate Change/ global whatever
I’ll keep my windows XP thank you.
One of Microsoft’s biggest problems is releasing things before they are really ready to go. They have huge problems with buggy first versions.
It’s funny, though: as much cold, wet dead a$$ as Vista sucks, Windows 2008 Server, which (from what I understand) uses the same code base, is pretty good. I have to deploy a Windows network (one of the PHBs signed off on something expensive without talking to IT, so the camel in now fully in the tent) and I am going to have all 2k8 servers.
And yet, the United States Military continues to use it and push it on a regular basis. This goes beyond stupid.....
Yeah, I've noticed a lot of software is like that. Just never realized that put them in contention for award-winning Fiasco status. < shakes head >
LOL!
Kinda says it all, doesn't it? But marketing always takes precedence over technology and Vista is the result.
I bought some people I know a computer over Christmas with Vista Premium Home Edition. The thing came with 3GB of memory, and cost about $400. No problems whatever. It did everything it was supposed to do, did it quickly, and was nice to look at. The supposed changes to the interface, were minor at didn’t affect usability one iota.
I think this whole Vista fiasco thing is a bunch of FUD and doesn’t reflect what’s really going on. Sure if you install it on a legacy machine, or a new machine with not enough memory, or inadequate video card, it probably will suck, but on a modern, full featured piece of hardware, it’s fine. Don’t believe everything you read. And believe me, I’m not some MS fanboy - quite the opposite.