HAHAHAHHA
http://www.linuxgenuineadvantage.org/

i'll upgrade when this happens...

1. Crysis

2. Unreal 2k7

but hopefully there will be a patch for XP for direct x 10

Who needs Vista? Get WindowBlinds 5 if you want to be vista-ish pretty.

DRM? With all of the HD movies showing to torrents most of the pirates will have no problems with it...

Well this is nice:

If you use an upgrade version of Vista, you lose your XP key.

http://www.tomcoyote.org/tech/vista-upgrade-invalidates-your-xp-key...

Can anyone verify this?

Lets look at our options.

A. Wait for Linux to get it's act together. Not likely gonna happen

B. Maybe Apple will sell a PC version of Mac OSx? Mayb when hell freezes over

C. Or I could just continue using Windows XP. Won't be long before there are anymore Windows Updates.

Then there is a project to develop a windows clone called ReactOS, although in very early stage.
http://www.reactos.org

Wow!!! I am having Deja'vu, I seem to recall almost the exact same arguments against WinXP when it was coming out that I am reading here with Vista. Yet that all died down and people quietly upgraded to XP when they realized that it was far superior to what they were running.

The same thing will happen with Vista and you all know it.

Are any of those that claimed they would never upgrade to XP still running Win98/ME/2000?

These vista restrictions, especially the one that says using the upgrade version of vista renders your XP license null and void (that really sucks), but all of these restrictions, all of them, really reflect the integration of personal computers with hi-speed connections. Think about it: these restrictions would not have been possible with win95 and even win98, as so many folks were still not using the internet, and relatively few had high-speed "always on" connections. MS could not check up on their licensees so easily as they can now. In addition, now that so many of us have hi-speed connections and live on the internet, maybe even depend on it financially or for employment in ways so different from just 10 years ago, MS can now use that leverage and via that hi-speed connection render the OS inoperative if they detect anything they don't like.

In short, the high speed access that so many of us love have made us hostages to MS, and it's getting worse.

Just an observation.

These restrictions just suck. Just make Vista cost between $40-$75/year for home/pro/ultimate. Let me download the ISO, install and activate this mug.

I'm dead serious. Lower the initial cost of the OS and recoup that by charging annually to continue using "all" of the features (much like a non activated Vista won't have all the goodies).

My dad just bought a Vista comp and when it asked for activation it said the key was invalid!! wtf?

Let thee rise, oh mighty Google OS!

Linux in itself has more developers than Windows or any major project you can come up with, your sentence makes no sense I'm afraid.

If that were true, we wouldn't be having this discussion because Linux would dominate the market; a bunch of kids across the planet in their collective basements writing poorly connected/unfinished applets does not a developer community make.

Make it a disposal OS ... at a disposal price. Use once and discard.

edit ... allow minor upgrades but no transfers.

Until a new OS vendor steps up to plate, MS can do what it likes.

I'm sorry, that's most of that is just uninformed generalistic nonsense. Are you at the frontline of the open-source community? Clearly not, with your assumptions.

See, that's exactly the attitude we're talking about. The Linux community is continually talking down to people as if they've been given some mandate from heaven with regard to how people use computers. Why does JoeSixpack, who has only ever known M$ products, need to be at the frontline of the open-source community to have an opinion on whether or not Linux is a viable alternative for himself and his equally average neighbors? How does the OSC--who can't even seem to agree on standard GUIs even today--deem what is viable for mainstream users, for whom they show outright disdain and disrespect? "What, you can't recompile or solve your own driver incompatibilities? You must be a retard and don't deserve to use a computer." These are people that will keep using M$ products like Vista because they can't be part of your elitist community and M$--and their legions of developers--make it easier for them to belong.

I can tell after reading this particular subject of responses about Linux, that the majority of you have not bothered to immerse yourselves into it for at least a week. ie: You haven't even given it a chance and yet you criticise it.

This is the lie perpetrated by Linux proponents ad nauseum. "If you just try it, you'll see how much better Linux really is." Many of us in the IT business have tried to implement Linux--even successfully, where appropriate--and still, we relegate it to where it works well, on specific servers/clusters and technical desktops for scientific and engineering needs. I'm not knocking Linux--it clearly has its place in the world of computing. But even with modern distros, the old axiom is still true; Linux is only free if your time has no value.

Newsflash to the Torvalds crew; people use applications, not OSes, and Linux has no serious application market outside of technical computing and some enterprise operations. WINE is a half-measure that will not fill the need of users--through no fault of the OSC, I will add, it's just the nature of the marketplace. Look at Xandros. It's a great newbie intro to Linux--practically works with no user-configuration at all, and the interface is very familiar to Windows users. But when you look at what Vista (or even XP) brings to the table for the average user--even the average techie user--Linux is a tough sell.

Applications rule the OS world; if you don't have developers, why use that platform?

well, if the game would run on the mac, then it should run on linux.

It'd be nice if Linux, came around and did something nice with there OS's. Drivers are always the problem, when trying to use Linux based systems.

Vista? What's this Vista thing?

Seriously... I don't think I'll be upgrading until forced to do so. Which basically means, until there's some piece of software which is an absolute "must have", and that software won't run on XP.

Heck, I only just upgraded to XP last fall. The rest of the computers in the house are still on Win2K. We only just got rid of the last Win98 system last summer!

After Vista had finished installing and I went into the Services to start turning stuff off, I sunk back in my chair when I saw there were 39 services set to Automatic. Then I saw the "Software Licensing" service and uninstalled.

I definitely won't be upgrading to Vista on this laptop. The only reason to switch to Vista would be to play DirectX 10 games, and this laptop couldn't handle them. Next time I get a new PC with a DirectX 10 card, I'll get Vista OEM with it.

I never upgraded my desktop from 2000 to XP either - I got XP on the laptop. The biggest improvement in my personal experience moving from 2000 to XP was ClearType, which is hardly worth the cost of an OS upgrade.

If the top 10 most important programs were ported to Linux, everything - the whole ecosystem - would change.

Do you know just how many Linux wet dreams start with the word, "If?"

"If Microsoft's headquarters fell into the earth one day..."

"If no one cared about gaming anymore..."

"If Linux coders actually came up with a standard..."

Quoting Thresher for truth:

Windows, despite it's many flaws, has a whole support ecosystem that Linux, with it's myriad distributions, just doesn't have.

If the top 10 most important programs were ported to Linux, everything - the whole ecosystem - would change.

A friend of mine read somewhere that R&D costs were already covered as a whole by Japan's sales only. Which wouldn't surprise me that much.

Vista gives you lots of reasons to stay away.

And Linux gives JoeSixpack exactly what reasons to move to that platform?

MS needs to extract more money from us to keep wall street happy and DRM gives them very tempting means to do so. Basically, it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better.

And Apple doesn't worry about their shareholders? In the midst of a stock backdating scandal? And Apple isn't implementing DRM in their OS either? Please, you're not paying attention. DRM isn't something that either M$ or Apple care about--it's a hassle to them. This is about content providers and their lawyers and legislative initiatives forcing their hand. M$ and Apple didn't dream up that affront to users' rights that is the DMCA, so don't blame Billy G. or Stevie J. when DRM is in their companies' respective products.

Only if you buy Apple hardware. What everyone is waiting for is to see an OSX on the PC platform which isn't that much different from what Apple now has in their machines.

Nobody is going to buy an Apple just for OSX but if it is open to all PCs?

Waiting for Apple to sell OS X for generic X86 systems? Keep on waiting. Perhaps you don't remember, but Apple already tried licensing clones back in the day. Didn't work too well for them as their bread and butter, again, is selling machines with OS X on them. There is zero incentive for them to sell OS X to PC users. Zero. It would be financial suicide.


You don't think any of us have tried it? There's people who have the RTM version 3 months ago. The beta version has been around even longer.

Trust me when I say this but Vista is not an upgrade.

I think all of us in this thread--especially those with months of hands-on testing and experience with the product in its various forms throughout the past year--recall your earlier statements of "fact" about Vista and can safely say that your "assessment" of Vista being merely XP all gussied up like OS X is patently absurd and without foundation.

I would agree that everything will be fine and good until MS starts to tighten the screws. I've already had MS kill perfectly legitimate copies of Windows with WGA. It's only going to get worse. MS needs to extract more money from us to keep wall street happy and DRM gives them very tempting means to do so. Basically, it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better.

As for alternatives, Apple OS X is okay. The DRM infection is limited to iTunes and Apple has show a certain savvy in balancing the interests of hollywood with the interests of consumers. I'm personally not thrilled with some of their decisions (I refuse to buy and iPod or use iTunes), but the OS is still a good platform for running free (as in freedom) software. In short, it's probably not going to get worse than it already is.

Linux is, hopefully, the future. However, it reveals just how much MS has distorted the market when the main competition is still a bunch of volunteers fighting in a loose coalition. The usability of Linux systems can be quite good if configured properly (i.e. a well done KDE desktop). My dad does just fine on this type of system. The incompatibilities between distros can be an annoyance, but it's not a deal breaker. If a products like Oracle and Quake 3 can run on Linux, there's no reason other products can't meet with similar success. The rubs are gaming and third party software support. I honestly don't see gaming as too big a deal. That's what consoles and Windows PCs are for. With MS adopting an open document format, Open Office may finally have a chance to offer seamless compatibility and that's huge. If Adobe was to ever port their product portfolio to Linux, I think we would have a real desktop OS contender virtually overnight.

MS hasn't shot themselves in the foot yet, but Vista clearly represents a loaded gun without a safety. I don't plan on being too close when it goes off. I was excited to buy Windows 2000. XP didn't present a good reason to upgrade. Vista gives you lots of reasons to stay away.

The other thing is, jumping to OS X is just switching one form of monopoly for another.

Truer words were never spoken. If you go with Apple, you enter a contract with a vertical monopoly--Apple controls not only the OS but the hardware platform it runs on and has its fingers in most of the applications that run on their OS. If you go with M$, you enter a contract with a horizontal monopoly--M$ doesn't care about the hardware platform, so long as you're using their OS and their APIs.

Six in one, half a dozen in the other, people.

Frankly, I don't see the new Vista licensing scheme as particularly oppressive--especially since it hasn't been out long enough for us to see how Draconian (or not) M$ will be with regard to enthusiast needs, nevermind that enthusiasts are a minority of any user base.

I have to laugh every time someone suggests this is an opportunity for Linux to take over. We're talking about not just an OS that lacks any adherence to any unified standard, but a community developing Linux that actively avoids--event vilifies--the idea of creating the mere environment in which a viable standard can be distributed and promoted as a viable option for most users--not just techies, server admins and Linux evangelists who crank batches to the poster of Torvald on their bedroom wall.

So much bitching about Vista, mostly from people that aren't even using it yet. Methinks they doth protest too much.