-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: What's the most interesting small town you've visited in South Africa?
Crunch time at Microsoft
- Thread starter rpm
- Start date
LazyLion
King of de Jungle
Seems simple enough to me. Keep supporting Windows XP as the legacy operating system for low-end systems (for another 5 years), Windows Vista as the high end system, and the new Windows 7 is exactly what they want it to be, a modular system for a new generation, based on a completely new rewrite. Windows 7 should be an operating system that supports the online world. Does not have to have too many bells and whistles, just a darn good browser and all the network tools to support getting connected. It should be dirt cheap and rock solid. Secure as a fortress. Will not be the first time Microsoft has had to support three operating systems in the field. And only has to last another five years. Then it will be Vista and Windows 7.
Microsoft, are you listening?
Microsoft, are you listening?
TelkomUseless
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2006
- Messages
- 16,570
- Reaction score
- 11,208
I run Vista. Can't compare it to ME. IMHO People like to "diss" Microsoft. For years.. people predicted MS will fail etc.
If you don't like Windows... don't use it.
If you don't like Windows... don't use it.
alloytoo
Honorary Master
Lets be honest, Vista is never going to work in lowerer end legacy hardware, and these new low spec modular devices.
I personally think MS should patch XP to handle more memory, and patch as required for new devices.
If they dump Vista now then they can trim the support cycle (ala ME) and start working on the next generation OS.
I personally think MS should patch XP to handle more memory, and patch as required for new devices.
If they dump Vista now then they can trim the support cycle (ala ME) and start working on the next generation OS.
(Sorry, just pretending I was killadoob there for the moment... but with capitial letters)
P
Picard
Guest
Say MS starting working today on a new OS, how long do you think will it take before it can be released?
ToxicBunny
Oi! Leave me out of this...
Windows 7 has been in development for awhile already... but given the approximate size of the development team etc etc, i'd say to develop a complete new OS of the complexity of Windows, from the ground up, 5 - 7 years...
killadoob
Honorary Master
guys when xp came out did it not need a higher end pc to run it with more memory
exact same thing
only problem is xp is near perfect, i mean you cannot offer to much more in terms of an OS
so it makes sense vista wont become the standard because its basically xp with a few extra useless items
i love vista compared to xp though
exact same thing
only problem is xp is near perfect, i mean you cannot offer to much more in terms of an OS
so it makes sense vista wont become the standard because its basically xp with a few extra useless items
i love vista compared to xp though
Last edited:
Jonny Two Shoes
Expert Member
Vista started giving problems for me, changed to linux...I am more impressed with linux thus far, and it's free.
DragonLogos
Expert Member
of course M$ will make even more, selling 7 to all the punters that bought into ME Vista and all the XP users, before they move off else where - incompetence has its own reward, and is a valuable tool in business if used correctly - like the villain in a stage play it can only appear a few times, and then appears to be defeated
killadoob
Honorary Master
wizard nothing here makes me want to jump to vista's defence as its all true
your posts however always have something to do with why vista sucks and why linux is so amazing blah blah blah
if anything i wish linux could get its act together because windows would become cheaper and if linux could run most windows apps plus games and it was free it would be an obvious choice for people
as it stands linux has be dual booted and you cannot do everything on one platform, only ppl who do basic daily chores can use linux as their main OS which is the reason i choose to defend windows
your posts however always have something to do with why vista sucks and why linux is so amazing blah blah blah
if anything i wish linux could get its act together because windows would become cheaper and if linux could run most windows apps plus games and it was free it would be an obvious choice for people
as it stands linux has be dual booted and you cannot do everything on one platform, only ppl who do basic daily chores can use linux as their main OS which is the reason i choose to defend windows
Last edited:
Abe
Expert Member
The speed differential between XP and 2000 is not nearly as much as between Vista and XP. Between NT 4 and 2000, yes, there was a big difference but MS added lots to 2000 when compared with NT 4 which made it attractive. As you said, there is little or nothing in Vista that can be seen as the "carrot" for people to upgrade. I have an idea that Windows 7 will change that but thats still a couple of years away.
I really wish MS lovers would just get it through their (thick?) heads:
<rant>
LINUX IS NOT F^CKING WINDOWS YOU MORONS!
</rant>
How many times had we heard these spoon fed little cry babies moan about games and killer apps (like photoshop) not being able to run on Linux, not to mention bitching about some obscure soundcard not working blah blah blah... Stop. Think....
If the majority of computers were running Linux isn't just vaguely possible that developers will switch their focus to Linux and not Windows? Hardware manufacturers will include drivers for Linux? Make sense?
Think back to the first time you sat down in front of a PC. Did you know what you were doing? Doubt it. It was a learning curve, just the same at the switch from DOS to Windows 3.1, 3.1 to 95, 98(or ME if you were that unlucky) to 2000... Think of the switch to Linux in the same light... Just remember, Linux *is not* Windows, if it was what would be the point?
<rant>
LINUX IS NOT F^CKING WINDOWS YOU MORONS!
</rant>
How many times had we heard these spoon fed little cry babies moan about games and killer apps (like photoshop) not being able to run on Linux, not to mention bitching about some obscure soundcard not working blah blah blah... Stop. Think....
If the majority of computers were running Linux isn't just vaguely possible that developers will switch their focus to Linux and not Windows? Hardware manufacturers will include drivers for Linux? Make sense?
Think back to the first time you sat down in front of a PC. Did you know what you were doing? Doubt it. It was a learning curve, just the same at the switch from DOS to Windows 3.1, 3.1 to 95, 98(or ME if you were that unlucky) to 2000... Think of the switch to Linux in the same light... Just remember, Linux *is not* Windows, if it was what would be the point?
Abe
Expert Member
Interestingly, if you look at the two core MS Windows versions
Windows 3.1 - Windows 95 - Windows 98 - Windows ME (End of Line)
Windows NT 3.5 - NT 4 - Windows 2000 - XP - Vista (End of Line ???)
Windows 7 looks to be a vastly different architectutre which would make Vista the end of line. In both cases, it would seem that MS has taken the line one step to far. Had Vista been a rebuild along the Windows 7 lines, now that would be attractive.
Cadavre777
Expert Member
The problem doesn't lie with linux or the other open source alternatives. It is up to software developers to write stable cross platform applications. Regarding games, iD Software and Epic Games have done their part, and darn well I might add.
Hardware developers also have to take some responsibility when blame is being handed out. Making use of cheap chipsets that have limited driver support seems to be the norm which is hindering users on all platforms.
Abe
Expert Member
While I like Linux and support it, there is a fair amount of blame that lies in the Linux open source court. There is not a lot of compatibility between versions in linux. The developers will happily change the API for libraries because it's their belief that people should supply the source code for application which can just be recompiled. Unfortunately, most businesses don't supply the source code for their applications so supporting the multiple Linux versions and distributions becomes a costly nightmare. The Linux developers do need to start minimizing changes to the library interfaces.
The same applies to the above point. There is not as much IP in the drivers for hardware vendors so source code releases should not be a problem for them.