Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Teflon Windows
Forbes ^ | 01.29.07 | Daniel Lyons

Posted on 02/21/2007 7:53:07 PM PST by ShawTaylor

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-193 next last
To: dhs12345
DirectX 10 won't be available on XP, if you're a gamer you will eventually need and get Vista most likely on a new machine, but until DX10 games start showing up there is no need for Vista for a gamer.
41 posted on 02/21/2007 8:34:36 PM PST by this_ol_patriot (I saw manbearpig and all I got was this lousy tagline.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: MediaMole
Well, there's a whole lot more to winders DRM and driver issues.

A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection

While ATi might be slightly better in the drive department than nVidia at the moment; they're not exactly happy with vista. In fact, I think you'd be hard pressed to find any manufactures that are happy about the fact that they are being forced to have engineering design decisions made by those technical geniuses in hollywood.

As for over the air HD,, when they finally get the broadcast flag forced down your throat, you're gonna have a real expensive SD PVR there.

42 posted on 02/21/2007 8:37:16 PM PST by AFreeBird (This space for rent. Inquire within)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel
"Oh, I am very sorry. He said they were overly optimistic"

"Overly optimistic" and "dismal" are not even close to being the same thing.

"Revenues only dropped 28%"

Revenues dropped 28?
When was that?
Revenues of what exactly?
As compared to what time frame?

"and their stock is hovering around $29"

Stock was up nearly 2% today, and it went up yesterday too, and it's only $2 off it's 5 year highs.

Orwell would have understood that statement completely

Just one thing: Orwell had an idea what he was talking about. You don't.
43 posted on 02/21/2007 8:40:31 PM PST by ShawTaylor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: ShawTaylor
Ignoring your stupid, piss-ant little comment, XP, all of it's flaws aside, was a substantial improvement to 98 and - God have mercy on anyone who owned it - ME.

2000 was an excellent OS but lacked the same rich, Object Oriented base for programmers to plug into.  With the release of SP2, XP became extremely strong and stable.  As the OS has matured, hardware producers became more and more savvy about how to manipulate XP to very high, very stable levels.

People who complained about XP being a resource hog were simply not educated enough to see the benefits of the OS.  Vista is the opposite:  no one who's serious about computers cares about the resources Vista uses...for a thousand bucks you can built a system that will eat Vista alive....it's the other aspects of the OS that is the problem.

Vista, is clearly a money-grab and MS has not substantially improved the OS over XP.  They were caught attempting to manipulate the license agreement in such a way as to make it impossible for advanced users to substantially upgrade theyr machines while keeping the same copy of the OS.  The original license agreement stated that Vista could only be installed on one machine....period.  Swap out your motherboard and guess what?  You've got a "new computer" according to the hardware ID number, and you'd have to buy a new copy of Vista.

Now they've announced that DirectX will not be ported to XP.  There's absolutely no programming reason for this.  They're doing this to force gamers to upgrade.  This is a variation on what I refer to as "The Great ADO Scam"  that forced businesses to move from Office 97 to 2000 and upgrade any SQL Servers and their connection licenses.  All MS did was kill DAO, mix it up a little and release it as ADO......while not making it backward compatible.  

They've had to drop the majority of improvements they'd originally planned for Vista because they weren't able to effectively develop them.  

Furthermore, in the interest of DRM, they're forcing hardware vendors to dumb down and slow the hardware.....Not to improve the user experience mind you, but to improve the protections on media content.

I could go on but, I sort of doubt you actually understand half of what I'm saying.

 

 

 

44 posted on 02/21/2007 8:41:28 PM PST by Psycho_Bunny (Maybe the Democrats will accidentally nominate a conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: PAR35
"Forbes used to have qualified writers"

Forbes writers sure seem to know what they are talking about a darn sight more than you do.
45 posted on 02/21/2007 8:41:58 PM PST by ShawTaylor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: this_ol_patriot

except that XP can only support 3GB ram total. Vista will support 4GB. I love the sidebar feature on Vista. Having the weather, news, and time and date on my desktop is a handy feature.


46 posted on 02/21/2007 8:42:09 PM PST by ConservatismNow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Psycho_Bunny
"Ignoring your stupid, piss-ant little comment"

Apply that retarded screech to all your posts on this thread, and you'd be much closer to reality.
How about it?
47 posted on 02/21/2007 8:43:49 PM PST by ShawTaylor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: this_ol_patriot
One would expect that DX10 would render DX9 games. Somewhere along the line, M$ will, through auto update, take away that ability.

Imagine a game publisher having to write two versions of it's game for the winders platform.

I can't imagine they're too pleased with that prospect.

48 posted on 02/21/2007 8:44:02 PM PST by AFreeBird (This space for rent. Inquire within)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: dhs12345

Upgraded security features. Vista ultimate combines all the features of Vista Business and Vista Home Premium. You get remote desktopping and the multimedia features. Great for college students.


49 posted on 02/21/2007 8:44:12 PM PST by ConservatismNow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ShawTaylor

" If your current computer is working well, XP offers no compelling reason to replace it."

THIS is the important phrase ... and it will hold for Vista also.

Do people here really think that Microsoft marketing dosen't know this ?


50 posted on 02/21/2007 8:45:44 PM PST by RS ("I took the drugs because I liked them and I found excuses to take them, so I'm not weaseling.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Blonde
"I bet these ads work better than any attacks they made on XP"

I doubt it. Apple has been attacking XP like forever. Didn't do them much good,
We will see.

"How can you not be at least interested when you walk by one of those stores in the mall?"


Easy.
I walk by one every day here, and haven't even dreamed of going into one.
51 posted on 02/21/2007 8:48:01 PM PST by ShawTaylor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: dhs12345

"Win98 to XP was a huge improvement. XP to Vista?"

98 to XP was a huge improvement becasue there was one and a half OSs between them (ME and 2000).

I closer analogy would be ME or 2000 to Vista, not XP to Vista.


52 posted on 02/21/2007 8:51:25 PM PST by samson1097
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Psycho_Bunny

Lyons is a known MS-Bot and anti-anything-that-isn't-Microsoft. His writings on the subject of the SCO v. IBM and SCO v. Novell writings are similar hack jobs - "open source is lame, SCO and Microsoft is the future"


53 posted on 02/21/2007 8:51:58 PM PST by Spktyr (Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: rrc
The Mac, for all of Apple's (nasdaq: AAPL - news - people ) snazzy advertising, has less than 1.6% share of the PC installed base.

Except that figure for the installed base is wrong.

If Apple Mac's represent 1.6% of the entire installed base of personal computers, that would be 1.6% of 891.5 million which is only 14.26 million. Every current report puts the number of OS X Macs somewhere between 22,000,000 and 23,000,000... or 2.46%. - 2.57%.

However, scientific surveys of computer users done by Consumers (Union) Reports (2005) and Popular Science (2006) put the number of Mac users in the US at between 16,000,000 and 18,000,000. Since those surveys were made, Apple sold around 9,500,000 OS X Macs. Allowing for attrition and retirement of older Macs, although many of them are still operational and are just handed down, the 23,000,000 figure may actually be low.

The Software Publishers Association, in early 2006, estimated that 16% of computer users in the United States are on Macintoshes. Mid 2006 data from another industry source, the Software and Information Industry Association, reports that 18% of all software sold is Macintosh Software (they also report that Mac users buy 30% more software than their Windows using cousins.).

This month's WebApplications.com's report shows that the in use market share of Mac OS X computers making hits on their surveyed world wide websites (heavily PC oriented) topped 6.2% in January 2007. It is interesting to note that LINUX was used by only .35% of the computers hitting their sites.

In addition, Gartner reported that in the third quarter of 2006 Apple Macs hit 6.2% market share of all computers sold in the United States (IDG, which includes servers in their totals, reported Apple's share at 5.8%). In the 4th Quarter of 2006, Apple's worldwide sales market share topped 3%.

The question also needs to be asked: how many of the installed PCs in that 891.5 million figure are dedicated application, non-consumer computers such as servers, point-of-sale cash registers, control computers for CAM, etc.? How many are actually being used by people, consumers?

54 posted on 02/21/2007 8:53:00 PM PST by Swordmaker (Remember, the proper pronunciation of IE is "AAAAIIIIIEEEEEEE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AFreeBird

I'm a gamer not a programmer so I can't say much technical but here's a quick overview I googled up.

http://www.driverheaven.net/articles/dx10/


55 posted on 02/21/2007 8:54:01 PM PST by this_ol_patriot (I saw manbearpig and all I got was this lousy tagline.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: LenS
What the author doesn't mention is that it took some major work with Service Pack 2 to make XP work well. So those old reviews, just like the current ones for Vista, were right. There was no reason to go out and buy it. With MS, you always wait a year or two before you try out their "Beta" version of their latest OS.

If I recall correctly, one year after the release of WindowsXP, pundits were decrying the fact that fewer than 21% of Windows users had switched from their previous Windows versions... and that 21% included sales of new computers. In the enterprise it was fewer than 6%. I suspect we will see the same pattern with Vista.

56 posted on 02/21/2007 8:56:02 PM PST by Swordmaker (Remember, the proper pronunciation of IE is "AAAAIIIIIEEEEEEE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DouglasKC
it's just that there's no way for them to reproduce rapidly because there's so few of them out there.

Viruses have propagated to infect the only 12,000 vulnerable clients over the Internet. If 12,000 is critical mass, then over 25 million is definitely above critical mass.

57 posted on 02/21/2007 8:57:58 PM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ShawTaylor
# 2. The article merely points out that the same things were said about XP when it was launched, and it went on to outsell any operating system in history.

XP sucked at launch, too. It was fairly usable at SP1 unless you were doing wireless, and pretty stable by SP2. Don't expect Vista to be any decent until at least SP1.

58 posted on 02/21/2007 9:00:10 PM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ShawTaylor
Win2K was, IMHO, the best iteration of Windows. We have PCs at the college where I work, and I don't do anything that requires other than word processing, light spreadsheet, etc., on it. The college decided to change all the campus computers, and they made me give up a PIII with Win2K for a PIV with XP. The PIV with XP is slower and crashes more. I had to reboot twice today because it refused to run programs. Clunky, but okay for MS Word, Excel and Outlook. At home I have a three Mac system set up with a wireless network. The newest computer is three years old, and I don't have any problems keeping it up and running.

Microsoft has never, ever, innovated. They have commandeered ideas and successfully implemented them. I do give Microsoft credit for one thing that revolutionized the computer industry. They are street fighters, and broke the good old boy system that was common among computer firms. Companies like IBM that dominated the computer industry were very profitable and had no motivation to upset the high profit margin business model. They were very arrogant, and had no desire to see computers become a commodity product, because it would mean lower profit margins.

MS pushed the envelope, and changed a lot of things.

59 posted on 02/21/2007 9:01:18 PM PST by Richard Kimball (Why yes, I do have a stupid picture for any occasion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DouglasKC
That's why I laugh when people say that they never get viruses on their Macs. It's not that people can't create them, it's just that there's no way for them to reproduce rapidly because there's so few of them out there.

There were approximately 12,000 vulnerable, unpatched BlackICE protected Windows PCs in the entire world, spread out in over 27 countries, when the Witty Worm was written to exploit an already patched BlackICE vulnerability. Within 45 minutes of the Witty Worm's release into the wild, every single one of the vulnerable Windows PCs was infected.

There are at least 22,000,000 OS X based Macs in the world. That's 1,833 times the number of BlackICE firewalled computers targeted by the Witty Worm. The vast majority of the of those Macs are naked, unprotected from any virus or worm that could infect them, yet it is now going on SIX YEARS in the wild without even one self-transimittable, self-replicating malware being found in the wild.

There must be some other reason for the Macs seeming invulnerability to malware other than Security-by-Obscurity.

60 posted on 02/21/2007 9:09:40 PM PST by Swordmaker (Remember, the proper pronunciation of IE is "AAAAIIIIIEEEEEEE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-193 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson