Windows Vista’s new spin on licensing

WE’VE HEARD ALL MANNER of tinfoil hattery about Windows Vista’s schemes for copy protection, which have prompted the usual round of threats from the usual quarters about how Vista will usher in an OS apocalypse and techies will migrate en masse to Linux. The more realistic types are mostly talking about simply staying camped out with Windows XP for the time being while eying the MacOS world with some curiosity. I’m not onboard with the more paranoid visions of the Vista future, but I do think the uneasiness about Microsoft’s plans for Vista has some warrant.

Part of the problem is that Microsoft has, for some time now, been moving slowly but intentionally toward a new model for consumer operating systems sales—one more like the software licensing practices of the corporate world, where licensing is clearly understood by all parties to be “permission to use” rather than any kind of ownership. The distinction here may be a fine one in theory, but it is easily spotted in practice. In the past, the average Joe “owned” a copy of Windows much like one owned a paperback book or an album on CD. There was a physical medium attached to this “ownership,” and one could more or less do as one pleased with the OS, within the bounds of fair use rules. This model of ownership may have largely been an illusion with relation to Windows and other software, but it was a powerful one. Functionally, it worked for the market. Consumers accepted it easily, and Microsoft did little to discourage it.

In the world of corporate software licensing, by contrast, the terms of the license can be almost anything, because they are widely understood to be defined by contract. As a result, large software companies create and offer all sorts of varying licensing options to their corporate customers. These terms are often confusing, and licensing models (per seat, per connection, per year, etc.) tend to change with annoying frequency. The goal of such programs (and of the frequent changes) seems to be to extract as much money as possible from one’s customers, and Microsoft has become a master of this game. Their sales reps exude a reptilian vibe, because sales pitches are often accompanied by an implied (or even overt) threat of a compliance audit or similar legal action, should the customer fail to buy into the terms on offer. Such veiled threats have bite even for scrupulous customers because the licensing terms are fluid, complex, and often ambiguous. If you don’t believe it’s this bad, ask any IT manager who’s had to deal with it about Microsoft’s Software Assurance pitch, and see what he says.

Microsoft has somewhat gently but persistently nudged consumers toward a similar licensing model in recent years, imposing ever more restrictions on consumer OS licenses and beginning to enforce them via mechanisms like software activation and Windows Genuine Advantage checks. By most accounts, MS is ratcheting up that enforcement for Windows Vista. Of course, these mechanisms serve the entirely legitimate purpose of limiting software piracy, but Microsoft is also using them to accomplish goals beyond the scope of keeping consumers honest. As with corporate software licenses, the primary end goal here seems to be to maximize revenues for Microsoft, but MS’s moves have the unfortunate secondary effect of eroding the consumer’s fair-use rights—or at least the very useful illusion of fair-use rights—in the process.

Take, for instance, the activation routine built into Vista, which will monitor hardware changes and prompt a user to reactivate his copy of Windows after certain key hardware components have changed. This mechanism is familiar to Windows XP users, but controversy over its role in Vista erupted when users became concerned that the proposed Vista retail license would prevent a user from transferring his copy of the OS from one PC to another more than once. Such a limitation would be frustrating in its own right, but it could become more onerous if enforced by a routine that keyed on hardware changes in the system, decided that an upgraded PC was essentially “new,” and triggered a license expiration.

To its credit, Microsoft heard the outcry from PC enthusiasts on this issue and amended the terms of its retail Vista license to allow for multiple transfers. The fact that the outcry and revision were necessary still grates, of course. What remains to be seen is how this ostensibly more liberal license will be enforced by the Windows activation scheme. Will the PC enthusiast who decides to devote his evening to a hard drive upgrade be forced to spend an hour on hold waiting to plead with the outsourced call-center worker in Bangalore in order to get his PC re-activated after the change? He may have a legal right to use his OS license in this way, but the renewed emphasis on enforcement in Vista—and Microsoft’s sometimes intentional policy of ambiguity about certain facets of its licensing regime—creates unease.

Assuming Microsoft does the right thing with regard to retail copies of Vista, transfer limitations remain in the OEM versions of the OS. For years now, PC enthusiasts have purchased OEM editions of Windows in order to get a nice discount off of the retail price of the OS. These versions of Windows typically have to be purchased along with PC hardware as a sort of assurance that the OS is intended for use by a system builder, but the last OEM copy of Windows XP that I ordered from online retailer Newegg automatically came with a 99-cent Molex splitter cable. Microsoft has officially frowned on the widespread sale of OEM software for some time, but it has also quite willingly enjoyed nice sales of OEM software to PC enthusiasts via outlets like Newegg. This tradition would appear to be continuing, since the ‘egg is hawking OEM versions of the various Vista editions already. Trouble is, consumers who make this purchase and then upgrade their PCs substantially or transfer the OS to another system will technically be in violation of the license terms—and Microsoft may choose to bring the clamps down via activation enforcement at any point. Again, most elements of this situation are not really new, but they look different when viewed in the context of Microsoft’s licensing enforcement trajectory with Vista.

Another avenue many consumers take in order to save money on Windows is buying an upgrade version. Since almost every PC owner also owns a copy of Windows, and since upgrade editions of Vista typically cost anywhere from a third to a half less than the retail versions, this would seem like a smart route to take. However, Microsoft has decided to prevent “clean” installations of the Windows Vista Home editions from upgrade DVDs. No longer will the installation routine simply ask the user to insert the CD with his previous version of the OS on it. The only way to install a Vista upgrade on one’s PC will be to install Windows XP on the system, activate it, and then do an upgrade to Vista. Additionally, as one of our readers pointed out in our discussion of the topic, this requirement will create major headaches a few years down the road, when users have to deal with the WinXP F6 floppy routine to install storage drivers for newer devices that may not even be supported in Windows XP.

These measures push consumers in various ways toward Microsoft’s apparent ultimate goals of selling a single Vista license for each PC sold and extracting as much money as possible from the consumer for that license. (Actually, those may be the penultimate goals, with the ultimate goal being ushering consumers into the same software-as-service model as the Software Assurance program does for corporations, but let’s not get ahead of ourselves.) As my friend Andy pointed out to me recently, Microsoft could have created an activation/deactivation routine for moving copies of Windows from one PC to the next, much like Apple has done with its FairPlay scheme for iTunes, but it chose not to do so. Instead, Microsoft has gone down a path that restricts the user’s options in ways that are less than desirable, in ways that involve inconvenience and a certain amount of ambiguity and unease for the consumer—just like its corporate software licensing practices do.

We don’t yet know how Vista’s licensing and activation schemes will work out in practice. One would hope for a measure of magnanimity from Microsoft toward consumers, since it enjoys what is essentially a monopoly on OS software for desktop PCs. By and large, consumers haven’t chafed at the existence of that monopoly because it has provided them with a common computing platform at a reasonable cost without causing any major inconvenience. But if Redmond’s newfound assertiveness shatters the illusion of a “fair use” space for Windows and consumers instead see the reptilian visage of an overeager industry tax collector behind it, they may not appreciate their new reality. 

Comments closed
    • l33t-g4m3r
    • 13 years ago
    • figyo
    • 13 years ago

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

    • alex666
    • 13 years ago

    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.

    • StashTheVampede
    • 13 years ago

    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).

    • chumblaka
    • 13 years ago

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

    • albundy
    • 13 years ago

    Let thee rise, oh mighty Google OS!

    • Thresher
    • 13 years ago

    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/74/<]§ Can anyone verify this?

      • Usacomp2k3
      • 13 years ago

      That has been innate to every single Upgrade version of any software on the planet.

        • Thresher
        • 13 years ago

        The license may have invalidated the prior software, but the keys were never actually pulled.

          • Usacomp2k3
          • 13 years ago

          From a practical standpoint, you are right. From a legal standpoint, it has always been the case.

    • herothezero
    • 13 years ago

    q[

    • herothezero
    • 13 years ago

    q[

      • accord1999
      • 13 years ago

      /[<.. at my screen resolution clear type doesn't matter, as long as you are on the native resolution of your lcd it looks just the same expect for "letter shadowing" to which i say.... ?? letter shadowing ?? i need this why ? ... i have always though that letter smoothing made my eyes hurt. i feel like im out of focus ;)<]/ ClearType is amazing at any resolution, though particularly stunning on a 15.4" WUXGA display.

      • poulpy
      • 13 years ago

      On a delicate subject that tend to turn into flamewar quickly one should chose his words carefully:

      – /[<"Linux is only free if your time has no value"<]/ nobody stated that Linux had to be free as in beer, it can be but even if it's not it packs tons of software that you have to buy on Windows (see point 2) - /[<"look at what Vista (or even XP) brings to the table for the average user"<]/ what? a bare OS and no apps? Sure the config tools will be more polished than the average distro but again that's less and less true, Linux is fast paced hence the "are you at the frontline.." Windows XP comes with _nothing_ for the average user, you still have to purchase: an antivirus (and you need to keep paying for it), Microsoft Office, PowerDVD, Photoshop, etc.. On the other hand you have Firefox, mp3 codecs+player, dvd/divx codecs+player, gimp, OpenOffice, ... out of the box with a linux distro. - /[<"if you don't have developers, why use that platform?"<]/ 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. I'm not advocating Linux For Everyone And its Dog, but what you're doing here is throwing some good ole misrepresentations and you just don't know what you're talking about.

        • maxxcool
        • 13 years ago

        **what? a bare OS and no apps? Sure the config tools will be more polished than the average distro but again that’s less and less true, Linux is fast paced hence the “are you at the frontline..” Windows XP comes with _nothing_ for the average user, you still have to purchase: an antivirus (and you need to keep paying for it), Microsoft Office, PowerDVD, Photoshop, etc.. On the other hand you have Firefox, mp3 codecs+player, dvd/divx codecs+player, gimp, OpenOffice, … out of the box with a linux distro.**

        ONLY if you use the correct repositories, or pay for the distro as currently all major disties will not include these codecs on the base install by LAW. Sure there are links and apps to install but most of the time it requires tinkering. Or a build you must buy.

        You still need to install apps you want or need, which half of the time require a trip to the command line or a wiki….

        Linux is great if you have the patience. And the time. I don’t have either and am sick of judgmental linux users and their pandering.

        I have both Ubuntu and Centos, one runs my CS:s server, the firewall and file serving and postfix. But it took damn near a week to set up.

        The other was installed as a lark on a old powermac. and has yet to play cnn videos without great effort with Xine and xmms….

        So i have done my week + 6 months…. it will take me 2 hours from a fresh install to replace the server with server 2003 AND download the service packs.

        As for the mac, well i suppose i could use it as a boat anchor

          • poulpy
          • 13 years ago

          /[<"or pay for the distro"<]/ Sorry but are you not paying for Windows? If you pay for a DVD of Mandriva (sorry to come up again and again with that one but it's the most relevant on this topic) you get ALL the applications that you don't have on Windows (including all the codecs and the 3d proprietary drivers) and online/telephone support if you still have issues. Sure if you decide to go free as in beer you may need to be more skilled but why/to whom would you complain if you didn't pay anything? /[<"You still need to install apps you want or need, which half of the time require a trip to the command line or a wiki...."<]/ Still on the same distro but I'm sure it's not the only one, it's been a few years now that there is a GUI version of the shell tool, where everything is ordered logically and/or searchable. You search, you find, you click, it asks for the DVD and installs everything needed. And you can launch this package manager from a nice GUI Control Center. Again if people like Windows/MacOS/whatever fine with me but there are things that are common misconceptions about Linux and just not true. Installation, ease of use and tools have (at least on the distro I give to computer newbies) really progressed.

            • maxxcool
            • 13 years ago

            Ok ok, good points back…

            But most of what is needed comes with the computer unless its a grey box. All pcs come with DVD software (despite the fact the Roxio is the wart on jabba the huts ass) as well as drivers, basic photo managers and such.

            when you buy a digi-cam it almost always comes with adobe something..

            So its not the software applications thats making it hard on new users..

            The repository shells are laid out alot better, yes. but to the avg user they are still very confusing. its *better*…. but its not there yet. The Mom example applies, despite the description she still would not know what GIMP is for besides a slur on her age ;).

            cheers!

        • Beomagi
        • 13 years ago

        I’ve tried to use and enjoy linux. most of the apps are fine (and every free app you called for linux is there for windows), but it’s not those apps I have a problem with, it’s new apps I wanna play with. Apps that are not on the repository. while you MAY find an easy install, it’s never certain. meanwhile, something like zsnes for windows – copy + dbleclick – w00t! drivers – fglrx, follow a wiki… windows – doubleclick on catas – w00t!

        it’s no fault of linux – companies have to jump on the bandwagon. But why would they when GPL forces them to release the sourcecode for any binary, including drivers? Look at what happened to Kororaa! it’s free to all! the drivers are free to all! but it can’t come with it prepackaged? it was the best looking EASIEST way to get the most awesome out of the box experience, but because someone decided to be anal about having nvidia’s and ati’s drivers in there, it’s in the gutter now. Now it barely supports either manufacturer, and only intel’s video seems to work flawlessly.

      • maxxcool
      • 13 years ago

      Thanks, my thoughts for the most part. snooty/obscure/pain in my ass is not “better”.

    • albundy
    • 13 years ago

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

    • Materiel
    • 13 years ago

    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.

      • Ardrid
      • 13 years ago

      Lmao, that made my day right there.

    • Mithent
    • 13 years ago

    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.

    • herothezero
    • 13 years ago

    q[

    • flip-mode
    • 13 years ago

    Quoting Thresher for truth:

    y[

      • maxxcool
      • 13 years ago

      Hardly. Until my Mom and my Mother in law can plug in their camera and a cd and have linux install it and take care of itself you can forget it. It will never leave the nitche its in.

    • Scorpiuscat
    • 13 years ago

    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?

      • Folk
      • 13 years ago

      I’ve used my “upgrade” copy of XP on three different builds, giving it my previous copy (Windows 95, no less) as proof of upgrade. With Vista, I won’t be able to do that anymore, because the OS I’m upgrading from *[

        • Usacomp2k3
        • 13 years ago

        That’s only the home versions.

      • maxxcool
      • 13 years ago

      2K still is superior to xp. period.

      Since I dislike Windows media player and never have used a “theme” and use Adobe for photo management XP has no merits to even consider.

      the tragic part of 2k’s death is that the M$ bitches cant write drm into the 2k os so they will kill it instead.

      This is bunk ad Xp it littler more than a hussied drm’d prostitute of the OS world. at the core there not alot of differences. (there area few, but not alot)

      As for calling XP a dolled up hussied, get a lot more graphic and adult for my mental description of vista (it involves donkeys)

        • Sargent Duck
        • 13 years ago

        Please elaborate on how 2000 is superior than XP. I’m very interested to know, as I’ve obviously been misguided all these years…..

          • ludi
          • 13 years ago

          To each his own. But if you have 2k with SP3+, you have about 90% of everything that XP Pro includes. The 10% you’re missing is non-core functionality that is typically either visual foofra, or readily available third-party. And XP includes WPA in that 10%, so…

          • maxxcool
          • 13 years ago

          Heheh very well then.

          DRM was not designed to run on 2k.

          2k uses less resources

          2k installs faster

          2k has the same memory limitations as xp

          2k uses less disk space

          2k did not come with a shovel full of crap for a UI

          2k does not try to hijack your file associations

          2k is just as fast in any application

          2k runs the exact same applications as xp

          xp was built out of 2k. to make pretty, and drm friendly.

          xp is just prettier.. with drm.. and more built in apps. to each his own but i can play f.e.a.r, counter strike source, age of mythology series all on 2k, hook up just as easily to any lan, edit my pictrues in adobe on a os that takes less space, and has less fluff.

          but thats my OO… 😉

          people like fluff, people like classic… im a classic coke kind of guy. 2 k does exactly what i need it to do and it doesnt phone home.

            • shank15217
            • 13 years ago

            2k will lose security updates for it sometime in the next few years.

            • maxxcool
            • 13 years ago

            *next few years*

            Yeah it will 🙁 right around the time they kill XP… 😉

            • StashTheVampede
            • 13 years ago

            2k doesn’t have proper multi-threading support — it is recommended you DISABLE it while running Windows 2000

            2k doesn’t have heavy WiFi support.

            2k doesn’t have any form of ClearType

            2k doesn’t have the same application launch cacher that XP has.

            XP is better, for a vast chunk of people out in the world.

            • cRock
            • 13 years ago

            You mean hyperthreading, not multithreading. This would only be significant if running a Pentium 4, and even then the performance benefits of hyperthreading are often dubious in desktop applications.

            The other features you mention are nice. However, one could easily argue that those features hardly make for a compelling upgrade, especially when you consider how much more memory XP requires and the burdens imposed by WGA. Given that the “vast chunk of people out in the world” probably have 512 MB or less in their machines, I would stand by the assertion that XP wasn’t much to get excited about.

            In upgrades prior to XP, there was new functionality introduced like remote desktop, and direct X. Vista is missing the big new piece of functionality (winFS) and we’re left with lots nice features. They’re nice and shiny, but they’re just features. In terms of base functionality, we haven’t moved an inch since Windows 2000.

            • maxxcool
            • 13 years ago

            2k doesn’t have proper multi-threading support — it is recommended you DISABLE it while running Windows 2000

            tell that to enterprise customers like verizon that i support, they have hundreds of dual socketed xeons. 2k supports up to 4 processors just fine. if you mean hyperthreading…well i did not find anything to prove or disprove that. if you have MS article or kb post it back i would like to know.

            2k doesn’t have heavy WiFi support.
            sure it does, install the drivers and use the networking properties tools. works great on my t60p thinkpad.

            2k doesn’t have any form of ClearType
            … at my screen resolution clear type doesn’t matter, as long as you are on the native resolution of your lcd it looks just the same expect for “letter shadowing” to which i say…. ?? letter shadowing ?? i need this why ? … i have always though that letter smoothing made my eyes hurt. i feel like im out of focus 😉

            2k doesn’t have the same application launch cacher that XP has.
            considering i cannot see the differences after clearing the prefetch folder in my common applications, (outlook, office, lotus goats, yim, vmware) i have never seen any use for the “prefetch folder” or the dll cache that gets cleared every time i boot…

            XP is better, for a vast chunk of people out in the world.

            it pretty…. thats about it (but again! my opinions. but xp IS 2k at the core)

            • StashTheVampede
            • 13 years ago

            Hyperthreading, my typo. A clear “feature” of the heavy Pentium4 install base out in the world, not “supported” under Windows 2000.

            2k’s wifi support is a hodge podge of drivers/utils from each manufacturer. XPs support is integrated and looks “seamless” to the most end users.

            2k’s lack of ClearType support makes reading text on LCDs very annoying. Anti aliased fonts makes reading text much easier on the eyes and so many people can attest to this across many resolutions (1920×1200 at home, 1280x1024x2 at work).

            2k’s lack of prefetcher is visible for many people (especially the slower boot times). Sure, you may rarely reboot, or rarely close an application you use frequently, but not everyone does this.

            ClearType and near seamless WiFi are huge reasons for XP. I’ll also add in the RDC support to help people fix their computer from miles away. I can’t believe I forgot this application, it’s saved my ass plenty of times.

            • ludi
            • 13 years ago

            Actually, there’s still a fair amount of hodge-podge WiFi drivers on XP, because not all of them correctly interface to XP’s integrated control applet. This usually isn’t a problem if you buy from a good name-brand, but on the other hand, good name brands also tend to supply a pretty good WiFi utility for 2k.

            Meaning, color me unconvinced on this alleged advantage.

      • indeego
      • 13 years ago

      §[<https://techreport.com/news_reply.x/3096/0/<]§ Not even a mention of DRM in the commentsg{<.<}g

        • maxxcool
        • 13 years ago

        Odd , xp laid the groundwork for OS on top of a DRM model….you’d think there would be something. …

        But then at that time napster was the rage and the RIAA was just a whinny voice and not a litigious monster.

      • liar
      • 13 years ago

      yeah.. 98se for the kids machines, win 2k sp4 rollup1 for mine. Found a program that allows me to download all updates. They do what I need.

      • AGerbilWithAFootInTheGrav
      • 13 years ago

      me 🙂

      amd for 10 charachters worth

      evem when I have Win XP on machines that I use at work, I get them to look and feel like Win 2K as much as possible… WinXP is not for me, and Vista… really incentive to move to Linux

      the only question is how many? probably not too many in the west, but I suspect 50-75% in the growing nations who don’t have money to trow out of the windows for functionality which can be had for free.

      the only aspect of Windows Vista which is unique is DX10, and in that respect it is as a console. I prefer Wiiii.

      • maxxcool
      • 13 years ago

      ME! on my lenvo thinkpad t60p!

      2 gigs of ram, core-duo, ati x1600

      • l33t-g4m3r
      • 13 years ago

      YES! I am still using 2k.
      DRM SUCKS!

      • RayW
      • 13 years ago

      Me. 98SE and 2K.

    • herothezero
    • 13 years ago

    q[

    • bozzunter
    • 13 years ago

    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.

      • poulpy
      • 13 years ago

      6 years of R&D from a -wild guess- big bunch of MS engineers must be something though (let alone free doughnuts and coffee..)

    • cRock
    • 13 years ago

    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.

    • herothezero
    • 13 years ago

    q[

      • DukenukemX
      • 13 years ago

      y[

    • Thresher
    • 13 years ago

    Paraphrasing Leia Organa:

    “The tighter you squeeze, the more systems will slip through your fingers.”

    Microsoft is counting on their near monopoly over the environment to allow them to get away with things we would not have tolerated 10 years ago. As a result of their power play, people will start considering options that didn’t seem as viable as they might have prior to these onerous restrictions.

    For most people, Linux just isn’t a choice. Windows, despite it’s many flaws, has a whole support ecosystem that Linux, with it’s myriad distributions, just doesn’t have. Linux has made progress, but it’s still not a doofus friendly OS. However, given the pressure that the new Windows licensing scheme has brought to bare, there may be enough impetus for some company (IBM?) to create a desktop standard edition that can be used to create a whole ecosystem for developers. I know a lot of rabid Linux users think it’s ready for prime time now, but it’s not, and unfortunately, until there is one standard distro with one standard interface, it’s not likely to be ready for the mass market.

    Another option is Mac OS X. If there was ever an opportunity for Mac OS to take market share, now is the time. The licensing for Mac OS is considerably more open. No registration is required, the OS can be installed on as many units as you like (the EULA does say one license per machine though there is nothing barring you from installing it on several). The OS comes with a reasonable price of $129 and there are only two versions, OS X and OS X Server, which makes it easier on consumers. It is rather unfortunate that this option will most likely never be available since Apple ties its OS to their machines and will probably never license it for generic PCs. That’s a pity because I think they could pick up tremendous market share right now.

    What will most likely happen is that Vista will slowly gain market share through attrition. Many XP users will not upgrade until they get a new box. Many of the enthusiasts will hold on to XP as long as possible. But eventually, there will come a time when we give in and submit to the will of Microsoft.

    Microsoft, with their licensing, has really granted an opportunity for another company to come in and create a new standard. The problem is that this Window (to coin a phrase) of opportunity will close within the next couple of years. The only OS that can fill that void immediately is OS X, but that is unlikely to occur because of Apple’s marketing strategy. That leaves it to Linux to get it’s crap together, settle on a standard distro and interface so that a standard support structure can be built. But this is also unlikely because it seems the various vendors spend more time fighting than they do developing.

    I hold a little hope that something will come along or that Apple will change it’s mind, but the longer this goes on, the more likely we will just submit. And if you think the terms are bad now, just wait until the next Windows version.

    • donkeycrock
    • 13 years ago

    i’ll upgrade when this happens…

    1. Crysis

    2. Unreal 2k7

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

      • indeego
      • 13 years ago

      There won’t _[

        • wierdo
        • 13 years ago

        My understanding is that the next update of DX9 is actually introducing DX10 functionality to XP, is this incorrect?

        I’m thinking MS was forced to do so in order to stay competetive with openGL and encourage adoption of DX10 instead of it being stuck in a small niche?

        Could be just a rumor though, didn’t follow up on that stuff.

          • indeego
          • 13 years ago

          There’s only a few apps/games that use openGL, there is no competition.

          Directx 10 will never be on XP due to Microsoft self-imposed technical reasonsg{<.<}g Directx10 is probably about the only reason to get Vista for PC Gamersg{<.<}g

            • wierdo
            • 13 years ago

            My understanding is that Carmack’s still into OpenGL with his engines, so until he moves away from that then that could be a concern for MS since it’s a popular engine to build on I understand.

            But this is all just gossip talk most likely, so I’m just throwing it here for input and take it with a grain of salt as well.

      • Krogoth
      • 13 years ago

      Nether of those games are DirectX 10 only.

      UT2K7 and Crysis will use DirectX 9 render-path.

      • donkeycrock
      • 13 years ago

      the game industry wont let dX10 only be vista. seems like fair trade issue? or some type of law.

      i wanna play Crysis and UK7 in dX10, i will look better?

        • d0g_p00p
        • 13 years ago

        Good luck with that. DX 10 will never ben on XP. It would require a complete rewrite of the core of XP.

          • ew
          • 13 years ago

          Wow! Cool you must be an OS developer working for Microsoft if you know something like that. Tell me, what other kinds of p00p has Microsoft been hiring lately?

            • SGWB
            • 13 years ago

            No, he’s probably right. “DirectX 10” will never be on XP. However, DirectX 9.X could allow games to do everything they could do on DX 10, but you wouldn’t get the desktop glitz or the ultra protected user-mode graphics drivers that you have with Vista.

        • sigher
        • 13 years ago

        UT2K7 has officially be renamed to UT3
        UT3 will work in OpenGL
        OpenGL will no doubt be extended to support geometry shaders, and possibly UT3 will be patched then to use that.
        (you might have noticed that the nvidia GF8800 DX10 demos seem to be coded in OpenGL, and they were delayed and coincidentally weren’t out until their drivers supported OpenGL on vista)
        However even when DX9 and OpenGL will support functions of DX10 capable graphics cards that’s not all DX10 does, DX10 is a complete new DX designed to cut away the chaff and is reported to be able to do some of the same as DX9 does four times as fast, and even if those are inflated and ideal circumstances figures if it can do stuff 1.5 times as fast merely by being DX10 and games using DX10 routines then that would have quite an impact.
        Finally DX10 is the ONLY reason for joe average to get vista, so I doubt that microsoft will make a XP version any time soon.

    • droopy1592
    • 13 years ago

    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…

      • wof
      • 13 years ago

      You are right.
      It’s not the pirates that has problems with DRM it’s the legit customers that has.

        • wierdo
        • 13 years ago

        again the irony.

        • d2brothe
        • 13 years ago

        Would someone please explain that to sony bmg…seriously…

          • ludi
          • 13 years ago

          I don’t think there’s a stick in the world big enough to get that notion through to the likes of them.

            • SGWB
            • 13 years ago

            Are you kidding? As was already mentioned on these comments, BMG already knows they can’t stop the pirates. DRM is not intended to stop piracy, it is intended to screw the consumer.

    • Bensam123
    • 13 years ago

    Vista is like a monster with jaws so wide you can only see the dancing golden lure infront of you. All you can say is it’s so pretty and walk towards it. With XP I just needed to carry around a weight, but with Vista I need to be slowly digested over time making sure they wring all the nutrition out of me before I’m pooped out of Microsofts proverbial butthole just to find another monster infront of me waiting to eat me again.

    If I look far enough down the road I see a monster that is going to eat the monster I’m already inside. I’ll slowly be digested with the monster I’m inside of already and I’ll no longer even have the option of getting pooped out, only the option of never ending digestion.

    I don’t even think these are called business practices anymore. More along the lines of predatory marketing. I wonder if Microsoft will start a program where we buy so many licenses to Vista, and try to sell them to so many people they will start to pay us a bit of money. The more licenses we sell, the more money we make, and eventually we can work our way up to the top, and make lots of money.

    Yay for multi-level marketing or is it just keeping everyone genuine?

      • indeego
      • 13 years ago

      Well there you go folks. The “car” analogy has been replaced with the Pooping Monster Analogyg{<.<}g

        • Semper1775
        • 13 years ago

        PMA (Pooping Monster Analogy) ftw!! lol. That was quite amuzing to read. I am not upgrading anytime soon to Vista. Hopefully all these little quirks will be ironed out in a year or so.

    • Sargent Duck
    • 13 years ago

    I’ve been running Vista Ultimate dual booted with my XP Pro for a few weeks now. I havn’t really done anything hardcore on Vista yet, just general surfing/computer use, and I’ve been using it more recently just becuase it’s newer. But honestly? The best of a reaction I can get is “meh”. It’s pretty, but I have yet to see anything that makes me want to ditch XP in favor of Vista. With the exception of some underlying technology (better dual core support for example), I don’t really see the need to upgrade at all.

    • Delphis
    • 13 years ago

    Like many, I’m one of the ‘campers’ that will sit on my XP installs until I really HAVE to upgrade. WindowsXP does all I need to do for now. I think there’s plenty of life in the DX9 spec that a lot of games will be written to it for a considerable time as noone would want to eliminate a large potential market by only writing a DX10 game that works on Vista installs, as it will take a long time for those to overtake XP. Once XP is in the ‘minority’ as far as installs then I can see upgrading. By that time I’ll have upgraded my PC probably more than once (so the crap 3D performance of Vista won’t be such an issue) and the bugs, driver issues etc. can be worked out of Vista.

    I’m a Linux user of over 10 years now and much prefer it to work on. My important machines at work and home are Linux. At home my gaming PC and my wife’s laptop are Windows XP and that’s just fine.

    • indeego
    • 13 years ago

    My Prediction? the botnets we see now will attack Microsoft and it’s online activation system/WindowsUpdate. It’s in the best interest of the botnet producers to keep people on XP/insecureg{<.<}g

    • tempeteduson
    • 13 years ago

    This sounds more like a blog entry. 😉

    • Shintai
    • 13 years ago

    Quite happy with Vista here. It´s also spreading rapidly in IT department in the companies I work in.

    Activation is a breeze and its extremely easy even in the corporate environment. I would prefer the old VLK. But I can also see it from the other side. And what we got is very friendly.

      • indeego
      • 13 years ago

      We’re a small shop with 150 apps, and several don’t work. We ain’t touching it for a while in productiong{<.<}g

    • Vrock
    • 13 years ago

    q[

      • quarantined
      • 13 years ago

      I once had to call to get a new key, and it was all fine and good untill the bastard started spewing off the new key. Being the slow witted individual with failing motor skills that I am, I managed to mistake my own handwriting. I spent the next hour trying to figure out which letter/number I had misconstrued. Finally got it right.

      I’d probably make the jump to Vista, but since MS has shat on moving OEMs to new machines, there’s no way I’ll leave XP Pro for a long time.

    • walkerbowe
    • 13 years ago

    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.

      • Dirge
      • 13 years ago

      We can blame the hardware manufactures for poor drivers or lack of support.

        • MorgZ
        • 13 years ago

        We can correctly blame the hardware providers for poor linux drivers but it is still a massive negative when comparing various Linux Distro’s to XP and as such can be considered a flaw in Linux as a viable product.

          • Delphis
          • 13 years ago

          Morgz, Is it graphics card drivers you have a problem with? I’m running a Linux desktop at work with an NVidia card that uses their kernel module and it works fine. *shrug*

          A colleague of mine just recently bought a small Dell XPS laptop and everything on it works under Linux with no problems.

          ‘driver issues’ aren’t what they used to be on Linux.

      • atryus28
      • 13 years ago

      Yes, drivers can be an issue but it’s more on cheap POS hardware than good hardware. Even then though new drivers and such are being made all the time without any support from certain manufacturers and yet there are still a large amount of drivers to make a lot of hardware work. Yes linux still has some more to go but it’s not all on the linux community. Personally once XP is no longer supported all of my machines will run *nix and I might even venture on into the Mac world finally. I am tired of MS’s BS and money grubbing. They will work themselves into the ground in no time. There is no reason on earth why the “Ultimate” edition of Vista costs $400, that’s just ridiculous. I guarantee you once it’s too difficult to get around activation etc that the crowds will slowly move else where.

      • indeego
      • 13 years ago

      Buy your hardware around linux. Problem solved. I like my choice/freedom of OS much more than attachment to hardwareg{<.<}g

      • liquidsquid
      • 13 years ago

      Drivers wouldn’t be a problem if Linux became a lot more popular and drove the market. However Windows still drives the market and therefore what target drivers are written for. The last thing you want to do as a company is spend 50% of your development budget on 5% of the market to appease a few whiny nerds that run most operations in Linux in text anyways.

      -LS

    • Wintermane
    • 13 years ago

    Concidering that most people get thier os when they get the computer and never upgrade this doesnt effect most people. Yes some obsessive people will want the all in one os and will pay the same price as many other high end parts of a pc. Duh.

    • DukenukemX
    • 13 years ago

    Lets look at our options.

    A. Wait for Linux to get it’s act together. y[

      • poulpy
      • 13 years ago

      Sorry but option A doesn’t make sense, what are you expecting here a Universal Linux Distro? Not gonna happen and that’s for the best, it’s a lively eco-system that doesn’t need to be turned into any kind of monopoly or dictatorship.

      IMO the only two last problems with Linux are:
      – proprietary GFX cards drivers that can be a pain in the arse depending on your distrib. Although Mandrive/Novel/RedHat have GUI based package installers that don’t require any tech knowledge.
      – lack of games ported to the OS(major issue, as you can get a friend to help you with the driver part if you really suck but you can’t do much without the software)

      Other than that my mum (0 tech knowledge, I mean a folder is still a “basket” no matter how hard I try..) has been using a Mandriva for 3 years and is more than happy with it (KDE, OpenOffice, Mozilla).

        • Firestarter
        • 13 years ago

        The fact that it’s such a ‘lively’ eco-system is probably the reason that a lot of software is developed for Windows instead of Linux. Who will want to develop a major software package (such as a game) for a platform that is so diverse that it would be impossible to support on a ‘Joe Sixpack with a Dell’-scale? And who wants to install an OS on his computer that isn’t ready (and packing software) for Joe Sixpack?

        That’s why Linux is no threat to XP /[

          • poulpy
          • 13 years ago

          It’s a wide eco-system but if you look at the Joe-Six-Pack Mainstream Distributions you don’t have that many to support. Maybe 3 or 4 and they share lots it’s not like a complete new system.
          Plus often companies choose to support -say- Red-Hat XYZ and that’s it.

          Id Software and Epic (Unreal & Co) don’t seem to be overwhelmed by the support issue so far, they would have dropped the ports otherwise.

          I say the problem is more the vicious cycle: few customers -> few games -> few customers.. The same one that has always prevented (albeit a single consistent operating system) MacOS to get games.

          • indeego
          • 13 years ago

          “That’s why Linux is no threat to XP or Vista on the desktop.”

          But countries around the world disagree with that. It’s now a $35 billion market, and growingg{…}g
          §[<http://www.techweb.com/wire/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=55800522<]§

            • wierdo
            • 13 years ago

            the context is Joe six-packs I believe.

            • indeego
            • 13 years ago

            §[<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Sixpack<]§ no mention of either OSg{<.<}g

            • superchump
            • 13 years ago

            /[

            • wierdo
            • 13 years ago

            Oh come on…Wiki is not reliable 😀 jk

        • Bauxite
        • 13 years ago

        Did the yellow text not register on your monitor?

        • maxxcool
        • 13 years ago

        I am going to download and install Madriva right now:

        if it does not :

        auto update its self
        recognize my memory stick, CF memory card and my HP camera
        know what repositories to use
        play streaming media out of the box from fox,cnn,google,abc
        play dvds in *one* application install
        play mpeg, avi, mp3, mp4, swf out of the box

        I will come back and beat you with a smelly dead carp.

        But likely it wont do one of the listed but i am willing to try it out before passing judgment and once again berating linux for its lack of cohesion and any level of usefull support.

          • poulpy
          • 13 years ago

          Ok so I don’t know where you got the idea that I said Linux was perfect -as no OS is- and I didn’t check the “out of the box” part in ages but I’ll go on with your troll:

          – /[<"auto update its self"<]/ You will be able to point to a repository (using the GUI tool) that will keep _[

            • maxxcool
            • 13 years ago

            ah but i have not had any level of success with it, rehdat, ubuntu, suse… never have any of them done anything window can do out of the box with the evil restore cd.

            see the problem is that my mom can use the restore cd. where as with linux i have to get involved. this is why it is still not a viable alternative.

            codecs are not point and click as you say, half of them are in “other repositories” because of the whole mpeg2 fiasco and mp3 licensing crap.

            if it were that simple i would not have to be at the command line to make parts of it work.

            its to much effort, even for me. this is why linux is not a consumer os, and can never be. …. hell even “linspire” the idiots version of linux is a pain.

        • ludi
        • 13 years ago

        And what does your mum do if she tries to plug in a scanner or printer that isn’t natively recognized by the distro, and doesn’t have a windows-esque 3-click installation CD?

        My guess is, she calls you, and you then engage in things that are somewhat unique to her setup and entirely mystifying to someone who isn’t already moderately steeped in Linux fundamentals.

        That’s great for people in your mum’s position, but it’s not viable as a broader business model.

      • Logan[TeamX]
      • 13 years ago

      I’m still getting security updates for Win2K, and they’ve said that XP Home alone will be supported until 2009… nevermind Pro.

      You’re fine for quite some time till they get their act sorted out.

      • snowdog
      • 13 years ago

      Why upgrade at all? There is zero pressure to upgrade. Face it, upgrading is a large PITA and expense for little bonus. Upgraders are an insignificant part of the market.

      l[

        • wierdo
        • 13 years ago

        Option C seems to be no problem at all, hell I’m using Windows 2000 and it’s still great right now so even XP is not on my radar.

        Option B is not gonna happen because I doubt Jobs intends to open the OS up like that, but your scenario about getting a Mac is more credible, though the price premium is still there so it’s a turn off still. That and the compatability thing, dual booting with WinXP – tricky but supposedly doable? – can mitigate some of that problem, but until virtualization makes it possible to have both running at the same time then this wont be a good option – I hate having to cancel downloads or close windows in order to switch to the second OS to play a game etc…

        Option C … Linux is not user friendly, tried it a couple times and didn’t feel comfortable with it… it’s not for the public, just the professional and enthusiast markets imho.

          • d2brothe
          • 13 years ago

          Agree…what I don’t think linux people realize is that the average user is having a good day if they manage to find the on switch…linux is not even userfriendly for people who are good at tech…plus it lacks niceties and support…it could…but will never be a vaible option for the *AVERAGE* consumer…of course its a great choice for linux zealots.

            • Mithent
            • 13 years ago

            Indeed.. Linux really lacks the It Just Works mentality, which is largely there with Windows, and probably even more so with OS X. Linux might do ‘It’ just fine, but if making ‘It’ work involves recompiling your kernel with new patches and fiddling with text configuration files deep in the directory structure, it’s not accessible to 99% of users. If it involves using the command line at all, 90% will probably be put off.

            Linux is developed for enthusiasts, by enthusiasts, and is never likely to meet the needs of the average consumer without considerable rethinking.

            • ludi
            • 13 years ago

            For that matter, even as long ago as 2000ish I’ve known some fairly competent Windows junkies who stared at me like I was a demi-god when I took a few convenient shortcuts via command line.

            And now it is 2007. The high-school graduating class of 2007 was born in the 1988-1990 time frame. The oldest computer they would likely remember was a Pentium running Windows, and for the most part, the Internet and email have “always been there.”

            Command line? Only if they deliberately cultivated an interest in Linux. DOS is long gone.

            • stmok
            • 13 years ago

            /[< Agree...what I don't think linux people realize is that the average user is having a good day if they manage to find the on switch...linux is not even userfriendly for people who are good at tech...plus it lacks niceties and support...it could...but will never be a vaible option for the *AVERAGE* consumer...of course its a great choice for linux zealots.<]/ 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. 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. I've guided newbies into Linux and once they get comfortable with it, they realise the benefits of it straight away. eg: mundane maintenance is gone. (regular defrag of HDD, etc). A single flakey application does NOT slow the whole system down. You're less likely to use swap in Linux then you are in Windows. Low monetary cost of adoption. No activation and "Geniune Advantage" hoop jumping. No more subscription services for anti-malware nonsense. The improvement in knowledge of good computing practices. The user only needs to upgrade their hardware when the situation demands it, NOT when Microsoft or hardware companies "encourage" it. (You aren't pressured into an upgrade). The two major obstacles I've clearly identified for them are: (1) Improving installation and removal of apps from an "ease of use" sense. As well, current package management systems have limitations in that they don't cover everything. There's always something not found in a repository of a particular distro. It is possible to develop a solution that only requires the user to "double click" a file to install. But unlike Microsoft, the open-source community has to wager in user behaviour. That is, they tend to click anything and everything at the cost of security. You can't just randomly produce a solution that endangers the end-user and promotes such behaviour. Microsoft has done that. Everything is an executable! We can't repeat that, it would be doing both us and the end-user a major disservice. The next issue would be coordinating such a universal packaging solution from a developer perspective. (Which clearly, none of you are or have no idea how big such an undertaking is). (2) Application compatibility. This applies to anyone that relies on a Windows application...Whether it be a game or an application that their business relies on. Wine has scratched the surface. But its important to realise Wine is trying to cover Windows apps compatibility from Windows 3.x to Windoes 2k3. This is why its taken over 10 yrs. (Not to mention the fact that there is no specific documentation available of how Windows interacts with its applications...There's also the potential legal issues that will arise from directly reverse-engineering a Windows box). Some of the features have yet to be implemented, and its far from being user friendly. I don't think its that hard when all you need to do is type r[< winecfg <]r to set things up and r[< wine foobar.exe <]r to execute. There are some DirectX 9 features that have been implemented, which allows one to play Half Life 2 or Battlefield 2, but it still has graphical issues. (Usually graphical glitches and movie scenes that are just black). But Wine has set the concept that it is possible to create a Windows app compatibility layer in Linux (there are also Mac versions). The main issue is that its very hard to do it perfectly. You would have to emulate all of Microsoft's mistakes and issues. (And its REALLY hard to emulate someone else's mess!) A future idea I'm thinking about is to introduce a seamless and secure solution that will be included into a Linux distro (concept demonstrator) from the start. Its pre-configured such that Windows malware is contained within that compatibility layer. And if you're curious about the beginners I teach, all but a few are the techie types. That is, the majority I introduce Linux to, are everyday people who just know enough to turn on a box, check email, chat, surf the web, etc and maybe play an occasional game. Based on their response, the above are the critical obstacles that a Linux desktop distro has to face. The people that have a hard time with Linux are those that have been using Windows for a very long time. (or those MCSE folks that feel threatened when their jobs are made obsolete). I just don't bother with these folks. Simply because the majority of them aren't opened to anything new or to a different approach to computing. I just leave them alone. /[< Indeed.. Linux really lacks the It Just Works mentality, which is largely there with Windows, and probably even more so with OS X. Linux might do 'It' just fine, but if making 'It' work involves recompiling your kernel with new patches and fiddling with text configuration files deep in the directory structure, it's not accessible to 99% of users. If it involves using the command line at all, 90% will probably be put off. Linux is developed for enthusiasts, by enthusiasts, and is never likely to meet the needs of the average consumer without considerable rethinking. <]/ I sort of agree with you, until you've pulled that "compiled the kernel" BS as your reason. That generalistic view should be gone now, and if you've bothered to try Linux yourselves, you would've realised that you don't touch the kernel unless you really wanted to. From my 2 yrs of using Linux, I've only compiled the kernel once, because I was using Gentoo to build a system from the ground up. (Simply because I was curious about Gentoo Linux). Never in my life, have I needed to compile a kernel with any other distro I've used. That includes: OpenSUSE, Ubuntu, Debian, PCLinuxOS, Mepis, Arch Linux, Fedora Core, Vector Linux, DreamLinux, Knoppix, Damn Small Linux, Xandros, Freespire, and even Slackware. The "Just works" mentality is half achieved already. How hard is it for someone to download a CD image, burn on CD, boot up with it, answer a few questions and wait for installation to complete? If that's still too hard, how about double clicking on a Windows installer executable to install Linux? What am I talking about? Read this. §[<http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS4611592451.html<]§ Its still being developed, but once the bugs are straightened out, Steve Ballmer's comment about Linux will be true...Its a cancer that will spread to a Windows box! All I'm asking from you folks, is to not make some generalistic assumptions about Linux before you try it out for yourselves. Actually look at it and see where its at and where its heading before you criticise. I'm fine if you criticise, as long as its one that is backed up by actual issues you've encountered (or a known and common issue that needs to be addressed).

            • thecoldanddarkone
            • 13 years ago

            You’re post is interesting and it has some good and bad points.

            First off My family has gotten 5 virus total since I was about 6 (I’m 24 now), maybe a few more but the reality is we never had an antivirus until 2 years ago or something. Good computer habits make a huge difference in the amount of malware/virus’s you get. We even use ie.

            2nd Linux users do the same thing, they used vista for 1 hour and complain about it, I just read an article where the whole thing was ONE LONG HATE RANT all he could do was point out things he didn’t like, he didn’t even say one thing he liked. Or how about linux user who complained about Vista without using it and defaults with drm.

            3rd, I’ll try linux one more time, except this time instead of a month I’ll try for a week (I used ubuntu one year ago). To be honest, it just wasn’t my cup of tea last time around. So pick one, and I’ll try it.

            • ludi
            • 13 years ago

            /[

      • sigher
      • 13 years ago

      Microsoft has officially extended the life (support) for XP to 2010.
      So that’s long enough for hackers to disable much of the crap in vista and release REAL vista versions without the DRM curse I’d say.
      In fact I would not be surprised if some service pack won’t disable some of the DRM nonsense now in vista, for clearly it’s biting microsoft in the ass too.

      • kilkennycat
      • 13 years ago

      Item C: 2009 for Windows XP Home
      2013 for windows XP Pro

    • Dirge
    • 13 years ago

    y[

    • just brew it!
    • 13 years ago

    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!

      • snowdog
      • 13 years ago

      +1, Yes,Waste of time and money upgrading until necessary. Call me when Vista SP2 is out.

        • Anomymous Gerbil
        • 13 years ago

        Why would the advent of Vista SP2 make upgrading “necessary” for you?

          • ludi
          • 13 years ago

          Probably because by that time, he (and I, actually) will be needing another OS copy to kick around, and Microsoft will finally have most of the teething bugs worked out.

      • Logan[TeamX]
      • 13 years ago

      I agree. Everything in my house is Linux or Win2K, with the exception of my main gaming box. Lately, I’ve been toying with dual-booting Linux and Win2K and ditching XP.

      It’s going to be a long road of testing at work before I find myself able to install Vista at home… if at all.

    • blitzy
    • 13 years ago

    to be honest, I think the cost of Vista is bullXXXX.

    Sure it is one of the most important foundations that your computer relies on, it’s complex and has many facets, but look at computer hardware e.g. CPUs, they must have similar R&D costs AND they have the cost of a physical product unlike software which is infinitely reproducible at minimal cost. Yet why is it that hardware is cheaper? (rhetorical)

    because there is competition. Intel / AMD can’t completely shank you on price because if they try to the other will step in and reap the benefit. Whereas MS has been taxing the PC industry far too long

    In NZ Vista Premium was going for ~NZD$500 last I checked, I could get a E6600 for that price…….

      • Klopsik206
      • 13 years ago

      As long as Windows will not have real competition….

      It looks like Linux is still far from viable alternative for desktop and to be honest I lost my hope it will be in foreseeable future.
      <keep dreaming>Maybe OSX will be eventually be sold separately… </keep dreaming>.

      So for the time being the only option for me is to stick with XP as long as I can.

    • halfline
    • 13 years ago

    Vista looks nice, but I’ll stick with XP for awhile longer. Tho I’m not crazy about everything in the new OS, there is no way I’m going to get a Mac, lol.

    • Maddog
    • 13 years ago

    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.

      • JSchwetz
      • 13 years ago

      I don’t think that any other vendor has the /[

      • CampinCarl
      • 13 years ago

      I’m sure Microsloth would find a way to stamp them out of business.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This