Does anyone else think Vista (and future Windows OS') is dead in the water

cousin_borat

http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/04/11/gartner-says-vista-will-collapse-and-thats-why-the-yahoo-deal-must-happen/

http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/04/14/microsoft.xp.ap/index.html?iref=newssearch

Everyone seems to be running to the cloud and running apps through the browser which is making vista OS less relevant. (Except Adobe)

Sherifu

While it hasn't been adopted as quickly as MS would like I wouldn't say it's dead in the water. It's a stepping stone to Windows 7.

GBX

Its kind of like the Millenium edition between 98 and Xp. but not as bad as ME.
I like Vista.

tech

Vista Sucks I think

cousin_borat

I guess the title wasnt right. The two articles seem to be saying that Microsofts reasons for wanting to acquire Yahoo is that they are in trouble. They don't see a future for Windows since so many apps run online, e.g. Google Spreadsheets, etc, etc

Stephen

Yeah but the likes of Google spreadsheet doesn't come close to competing with Excel. It has far, far less functionality. People that use Excel for work (i.e. most of its big users) could not get their work done with something like Google spreadsheet.

That said I wouldn't put it past Microsoft to come out with some kind of subscription based online office system.

Capt'n Midnight

Lets not forget that microsoft have tons of cash floating about and have historically bought companies to acquire new technologies. Yes they tried to ignore the internet , but were very quick to setup MSNBC

The killer apps are the backend stuff, corporates have lots invested in windows apps and can't really move them. Other expensive apps like Autocad and most accounts and payroll packages run on windows. Look the cost of CAL's too.
Look at the way licenses are changing from buy once, run forever on anyone machine, to paying for it continuously which is were volume licenses have been heading.

As long as people go the easy route of OEM windows microsoft will survive. the number of windows refunds are tiny , for everyone else windows is "free" with their new machine.

If microsoft's share price collapses they can just buy back the company , launch some thing new , price goes up and sell off the shares. Don't kid yourselves they are big enough to manupilate the market. As an example, just imagine the effect on the share price if they announced they were going to buy apple. Imagine the apple share price , but don't imagine they wouldn't have a shed full of apple shares in the bag. There are lots of profit making activities they can dip into , like the microsoft branded hardware.

Microsoft don;t sell old versions of software cheaply, and OEM preinstalls mean other software and hardware vendors will cater
for it and support for older versions will wither and die, no matter what people want.

Happened with DOS --> Windows 95
Happened with Windows 98 --> 2000/XP
Happening with XP---> Vista

gamer

i think winxp is more popular than vista,cos any device works on it,its fast,effecient it doesnt need3gig ram,i think ms os has a long life left ,look at all the free programs out there for windows,you can download freeware to do anything ,alot of this web based apps propoganda is BS , cos not everyone has a 2meg net connection.I,VE never used it but from reviews it needs newpc,plus 2/3gig to run properly,its basically winxp+flashy graphics overhaul+extra security.IF you had a company with 200pcs ,why would you change 2vista ,it would cost a fortune 2upgrade all pcs, and what benefit do you get out of it,the 1st version of any ms product is always flawed.

mathias

Its certainly getting more interesting out there alright , for most people , the do all functionality of Windows is not needed , email and the internet being the sum total of most peoples dealings with computers ,

The runaway success of the EEE Pc , over a million units in a few months , and running linux , is a big sign of things to come , its a simple machine with all the basics instantly accessable .... it certainly looks like the future.

Its not up to competing with a fully featured PC , but then when you think about it , the vast majority of computer users dont need a fully featured PC.

DublinWriter

For once, Microsoft got it right with XP. Previously they had been sitting on a massive revenue stream by successfully releasing quite buggy OSes and having customers constantly upgrading.

Very few corporate sites I know of use Vista or have any plans to migrate to it.

The same goes for MS Office; how many people use even 20% of its functionality?

As for 'running to the cloud', remember Larry Elison's Oracle failed attempt to convince the world to use it's stripped-down network PC.

Microsoft will have to radically change its business model in order to survive or at least maintain its current size.

The other problem with Microsoft is that they don't have a history of radical innovation and their R&D efforts are very insular. Maybe this will change with the departure of Gates, but who knows.

I think Microsoft will go on a shopping spree in the next two years. Firstly, they will acquire Yahoo! this year and then in 2009 either they or Oracle will most likely launch a hostile take-over of Google.

It's fairly evident that Microsoft have to evolve with the environment or face certain extinction.

mukki

gamer wrote: »

i think winxp is more popular than vista,cos any device works on it

but dont forget the reason some harware devices dont work with vista is beacaue the manufacturer dont want to dig up its old details and pay staff to make free drivers for deviced that are out of warrenty, they would prefer you to buy a new device of them

mathias

For once, Microsoft got it right with XP

Talk about rose tinted spectacles !!

When XP was released most were happily chugging along with win 98 SE or win 2000 on a 10GB hard drive with 128 mb ram max.

XP wouldnt run on that , and took 4GB , almost half the capacity of anyones current hard drive at the time just for the install.
People were outraged , you needed to upgrade all your hardware just to get this to run , sound familiar ?
And as for the product activation that was needed into the bargain , how many times was gates cursed for that particular feature?

And as for its reliability at the time , anyone who was an early adopter had the same issues that Vista is seeing now , and XP has only been the stable system it is now since SP2. XP has been around for 6 years , its good rep only started about half way into that stretch.

Who can forget the absolute chaos of the worldwide virus alerts that happened a few short years ago , and the madness of security patch after security patch that was needed to fix XP when all that happened.
http://www.cnet.com/topic-news/msblast-worm/virus.html
For almost a whole year , it was a case of going to work on a monday morning and pressing the on switch on your PC with your fingers crossed , wondering what flaw in XP some virus writer had found this week !

Vista is following the standard Microsoft upgrade path , " release it now , well fix it later " attitude that has always been a part and parcel of every MS OS , including XP.

cousin_borat

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Lets not forget that microsoft have tons of cash floating about and have historically bought companies to acquire new technologies. Yes they tried to ignore the internet , but were very quick to setup MSNBC

The killer apps are the backend stuff, corporates have lots invested in windows apps and can't really move them. Other expensive apps like Autocad and most accounts and payroll packages run on windows. Look the cost of CAL's too.

Good point regarding specialist apps like CAD. In my experience most sectors are moving towards SaaS for applications or cloud computing for things like storage/backup.

Was reading about a company in the US got 10m funding for online GP app. In Ireland Twinfield are doing good business for their accounting and payroll software which runs online.

Villain

No chance of Windows OS' been dead, however they need to evolve quickly, I have been using Ubuntu for a while now and it takes a bit of getting used to and it certainly isn't as user friendly from the aspect of installing apps that users have got used to using.

I like some parts of Vista, mainly the look of it and while it has evolved in a way, most users of XP won't gain very much if anything by moving to Vista but they lose some things.

I'm an I.T. professional and I got a new Laptop with Vista on it a few months ago I have a wireless network in my house and share my main printer through an XP Pro machines which is lcoated beside the printer, now I know if I really want to I probably get the printer working with Vista but I can't just browse to the pc and select the shared printer and hit connect which is what a lot users want.

As someone pointed out not every hardware company is going to get software heads in to write new drivers for old hardware and you can't blame them really their revenue return probably wouldn't warrant the cost.

One thing I HATE about Vista is the crumbs explorer view and the search function is really annoying imo.

cdebru

mathias wrote: »

Talk about rose tinted spectacles !!

When XP was released most were happily chugging along with win 98 SE or win 2000 on a 10GB hard drive with 128 mb ram max.

XP wouldnt run on that , and took 4GB , almost half the capacity of anyones current hard drive at the time just for the install.
People were outraged , you needed to upgrade all your hardware just to get this to run , sound familiar ?
And as for the product activation that was needed into the bargain , how many times was gates cursed for that particular feature?

And as for its reliability at the time , anyone who was an early adopter had the same issues that Vista is seeing now , and XP has only been the stable system it is now since SP2. XP has been around for 6 years , its good rep only started about half way into that stretch.

Who can forget the absolute chaos of the worldwide virus alerts that happened a few short years ago , and the madness of security patch after security patch that was needed to fix XP when all that happened.
http://www.cnet.com/topic-news/msblast-worm/virus.html
For almost a whole year , it was a case of going to work on a monday morning and pressing the on switch on your PC with your fingers crossed , wondering what flaw in XP some virus writer had found this week !

Vista is following the standard Microsoft upgrade path , " release it now , well fix it later " attitude that has always been a part and parcel of every MS OS , including XP.

Exactly most people have forgotten or were not using PCs when the last OS release from Microsoft happened

Unfortunately Microsoft are going no where they and their Operating systems will be around for the forseeable future

Yes there is a move to "cloud" computing but you will still need an OS

Overheal

mathias wrote: »

Talk about rose tinted spectacles !!

When XP was released most were happily chugging along with win 98 SE or win 2000 on a 10GB hard drive with 128 mb ram max.

XP wouldnt run on that , and took 4GB , almost half the capacity of anyones current hard drive at the time just for the install.
People were outraged , you needed to upgrade all your hardware just to get this to run , sound familiar ?
And as for the product activation that was needed into the bargain , how many times was gates cursed for that particular feature?

And as for its reliability at the time , anyone who was an early adopter had the same issues that Vista is seeing now , and XP has only been the stable system it is now since SP2. XP has been around for 6 years , its good rep only started about half way into that stretch.

Who can forget the absolute chaos of the worldwide virus alerts that happened a few short years ago , and the madness of security patch after security patch that was needed to fix XP when all that happened.
http://www.cnet.com/topic-news/msblast-worm/virus.html
For almost a whole year , it was a case of going to work on a monday morning and pressing the on switch on your PC with your fingers crossed , wondering what flaw in XP some virus writer had found this week !

Vista is following the standard Microsoft upgrade path , " release it now , well fix it later " attitude that has always been a part and parcel of every MS OS , including XP.

THANK YOU!

Vista is to XP as XP was to 2000. Some people still swear by 2000. Personally I think its a dinosoar (or at least any machine I've seen running it is..)

Theres not really a thing wrong with the plans for Vista and its almost a shame Microsoft has hit a wall with it in the Marketplace. Yes it is pretty much just an enhanced version of XP. I like it. Sure it isn't without its bugs but neither was XP and even still XP seems to crash more often with me.

Vista Home Premium is limited to 16GB of RAM. Within 3 years I imagine almost all mid-range PCs are going to have at least 8GB if not more. 4 and 8 core machines will be the norm.

To bring you back to All Things Retro for a moment, my mom's basement is a storehouse of old PCs. The once spectacular seeming Win2k machine that ran the starcraft and porn of my youth had a whopping 256MB of ram. My windows 95 machine ran until its death in 03' with an astounding 768MB upgrade I had gifted it a year previous. The processor was a blazing 450Mhz: a top of the line Pentium II processor at the time of production. And 4MB of VRAM? A gargantuan 6GB Hard Drive? I was chuffed. The machine must have cost about $1500 or more circa 1996.

Villain

Win2000 on a good spec is faster imo than XP or Vista on good spec.

Overheal

Villain wrote: »

Win2000 on a good spec is faster imo than XP or Vista on good spec.

Naturally. But theres obvious differences in productivity and compatibility. Win2k won't be supported forever.

An Fear Aniar

People running apps of the net?

Need 100% availability and reliability.

Ironclad security.

Speed.

Can't do that with copper wires - need teh Grid for that.


,

DublinWriter

An Fear Aniar wrote: »

People running apps of the net?
Need 100% availability and reliability.
Ironclad security.
Speed.
Can't do that with copper wires - need teh Grid for that.
,

Huh? What have you been smoking for the past five years?

Managed applications have been making big in-roads into the corporate market. Just look at salesforce.com and their recent acquisition by Oracle (salesforce.com were ironically set up by a former Oracle Director).

Also, SAP and PeopleSoft provide managed hosting of their applications for big clients via VPN's and the net.

Overheal

An Fear Aniar wrote: »

People running apps of the net?

Need 100% availability and reliability.

Ironclad security.

Speed.

Can't do that with copper wires - need teh Grid for that.


,

...........joke?