Don't skip Vista, says Microsoft

Arthur said:
C'mon guys. This issue is being overblown by anti-MS journos and forumites. Read the full story in InformationWeek. All the lady said was that companies need to be careful in planning their applications upgrade path lest they find that software vendors (not Microsoft) no longer support their apps on WinXP but don't yet support their apps on Win7. Now this is being reported as MS trying to bully people into getting Vista. This is so bizarre, and of course utter crap .... jeez, and some people compain that MS hypes/overblows things.
Click to expand...

I've noticed a trend on myBB lately that people comment on the heading of the article and once the first such post appears, it triggers comments on that post in turn. So it becomes a positive feedback loop.

No empirical evidence, but I'm pretty sure it was not like this in the past. Guess it's a factor of the number of members nowadays and (I suspect) an average downward trend in age.

Just a general observation.

One thing I'll agree with though. It does seem article headings are becoming more sensationalist and this could well create the wrong impression.
 
Soon they will start spreading thier own virusses for XP to force you to use Vista to force you to use Win 7 to force you to .............................

Alot of forcing happening here!!
 
Shame...

I have read so many people going on and on about vista, jeez. If you are to stupid to realize that it is just not XP, like 95, 98 or ME were not XP. There were just as many issues there changing from a Fat32 to a NTFS system. Or did you all forget? Moving from XP to Vista was the best thing I ever did. Sure took about 3 months from its release to get everything working. But hey that's not microsoft's fault, it was the peripheral component developers who took long! As for stability, XP does not even live in the same universe. In the two years I have run Vista I can count the number of BSoD's on one hand thats had two fingers amputated! Its a pleasure to work with. XP on the other hand will BSoD you just about every other day. Fact is XP has been the single longest running operating system, it makes sense that there is support up the wazoo for it. But it doesn't make it the best. Just learn to deal with change. Sh$t, get with progress. As for Win7, its the exact same as Vista, final! If you hate the one you will hate the other.....
 
vodacom3g said:
One thing I'll agree with though. It does seem article headings are becoming more sensationalist and this could well create the wrong impression.
Click to expand...

I've been saying that the article headings are misleading for a long time now. But the answer was, they post them as they get them.
 
Garyvdh said:
I've been saying that the article headings are misleading for a long time now. But the answer was, they post them as they get them.
Click to expand...

Which is true and a thus more a reflection on the general level of reporting out there. And with level headed people like Belinda leaving, can't see it improving.

I personally blame the Son/Sun for starting the over the top, tabloid heading trend in SA. :)
 
IRG said:
I have read so many people going on and on about vista, jeez. If you are to stupid to realize that it is just not XP, like 95, 98 or ME were not XP. There were just as many issues there changing from a Fat32 to a NTFS system. Or did you all forget? Moving from XP to Vista was the best thing I ever did. Sure took about 3 months from its release to get everything working. But hey that's not microsoft's fault, it was the peripheral component developers who took long! As for stability, XP does not even live in the same universe. In the two years I have run Vista I can count the number of BSoD's on one hand thats had two fingers amputated! Its a pleasure to work with. XP on the other hand will BSoD you just about every other day. Fact is XP has been the single longest running operating system, it makes sense that there is support up the wazoo for it. But it doesn't make it the best. Just learn to deal with change. Sh$t, get with progress. As for Win7, its the exact same as Vista, final! If you hate the one you will hate the other.....
Click to expand...
Yup.

We should remember that any technology at the end of its life is normally much more mature and stable than the incoming technology replacing it.

When plasmas first started replacing CRT, they were not as good for example. We now see the same with LCD replacing plasma.

A product like XP sits with years of development behind it. One would thus expect it to be more stable and better supported than its replacement.
 
Arthur said:
C'mon guys. This issue is being overblown by anti-MS journos and forumites. Read the full story in InformationWeek. All the lady said was that companies need to be careful in planning their applications upgrade path lest they find that software vendors (not Microsoft) no longer support their apps on WinXP but don't yet support their apps on Win7. Now this is being reported as MS trying to bully people into getting Vista. This is so bizarre, and of course utter crap .... jeez, and some people compain that MS hypes/overblows things.
Click to expand...

Idd, this is a simple case of broken telephone:

Go read her blog on what she actually said:
http://windowsteamblog.com/blogs/bu...ndows-deployments-for-business-customers.aspx

We know some of our customers are considering waiting for Windows 7 instead of deploying Windows Vista today. We want these customers to understand the following considerations, so they are not surprised later on:

* You may find your company in situations where applications are no longer supported on Windows XP and not yet supported on Windows 7.
* You will want to take time to evaluate Windows 7 just as you evaluate any new operating system for your environment prior to deployment (see deployment realities above). As Windows 7 is planned to be released in about 3 years after Windows Vista, the total period that many customers will likely be waiting prior to deploying Windows 7 in their environment will likely be in the range of 5 years after Windows Vista release.
Click to expand...

We expect deployment and application migration from Windows XP to Windows 7 to be similar in effort to going from Windows XP to Windows Vista. As I mentioned above, there is a great deal of compatibility between both Windows Vista and Windows 7, as we are not introducing any major architectural changes. Our customers who focus efforts in getting their applications to work on Windows Vista will ease future migration to Windows 7 and help accelerate their Windows 7 deployment.
Click to expand...

In short she meant that it will be easier to move to Windows 7 from Vista than XP. But we all knew that the news loves blowing things out of proportion...
 
RoosTa said:
In short she meant that it will be easier to move to Windows 7 from Vista than XP. But we all knew that the news loves blowing things out of proportion...
Click to expand...

Spot on! I have some applications that can install in vista (setup/drivers) but refuse to setup/install in Windows7. Message " This operating system is not supported". So we will have to wait some time still to do everything with Windows7. After all its only a Beta and a damn good one for that I must say. Patience is a virtue.
 
vodacom3g said:
A product like XP sits with years of development behind it. One would thus expect it to be more stable and better supported than its replacement.
Click to expand...

There is no reason to upgrade because the current OS, XP, is 'good enough'
(and faster than its replacement).
 
zambussi said:
What they're trying to say guys is this " We are a bunch of idiots. We messed up guys. Mr Gates still only uses XP. Stick with XP until we find a way to change XP into Windows 8".
Click to expand...

Ballmer will throw that chair at you if you don't upgrade to Vista/7. ;)
 
IRG said:
I have read so many people going on and on about vista, jeez. If you are to stupid to realize that it is just not XP, like 95, 98 or ME were not XP. There were just as many issues there changing from a Fat32 to a NTFS system. Or did you all forget? Moving from XP to Vista was the best thing I ever did. Sure took about 3 months from its release to get everything working. But hey that's not microsoft's fault, it was the peripheral component developers who took long! As for stability, XP does not even live in the same universe. In the two years I have run Vista I can count the number of BSoD's on one hand thats had two fingers amputated! Its a pleasure to work with. XP on the other hand will BSoD you just about every other day. Fact is XP has been the single longest running operating system, it makes sense that there is support up the wazoo for it. But it doesn't make it the best. Just learn to deal with change. Sh$t, get with progress. As for Win7, its the exact same as Vista, final! If you hate the one you will hate the other.....
Click to expand...

I agree. One thing that works on my nerves was that Vista "is such a leap" :sick: from XP (not so compatible) and all new PC`s have 64bit capability. They should have forced it down in one shot (same drag on like it was from 16bit to 32bit).
However I am still very happy with XP and will wait for Windows 7. I mean only recently 2007/2008 did the new hardware really stop drivers for windows98. So I can`t see why it`s such an issue to have another year or two XP drivers till Win7 is usable, it`s beta reviews look great...
 
Last edited:
why change seomthing that works??? I will rather stick with XP....
 
ingeon said:
I agree. One thing that works on my nerves was that Vista "is such a leap" from XP (not so compatible) and all new PC`s have 64bit capability. They should have forced it down in one shot (same drag on like it was from 16bit to 32bit).
However I am still very happy with XP and will wait for Windows 7. I mean only recently 2007/2008 did the new hardware really stop drivers for windows98. So I can`t see why it`s such an issue to have another year or two XP drivers till Win7 is usable, it`s beta reviews look great...
Click to expand...

You know what get's on my nerves? Artificial obsolescence. XP is good enough, if you run not as Admin. It's fast, reasonably stable and can be 64bit too.
Ballmer just wants to force upgrade everyone and their MS Office to the new
version. There is no sane reason to upgrade, it's all artificial. This isn't a WinME/98SE vs Win2K/XP issue, this is a Win2K vs XP issue and unlike
with 2K which was only for server and enterprise use, XP is available to
all users.

With Win7 a new MS OFFiCE will surely come and Office 2003 will prolly not be compatible anymore. More $$$ for M$. Can't they just file for bankruptcy already???
 
Last edited:
Peter, you can't be serious, mate. I'm sure you know only too well that the PC industry has not yet taken on the characteristics of a mature technology, where the basics are largely stabilised over decades and innovations are small and minutely incremental. We're still seeing large leaps in speeds and feeds, and new capabilities, with much higher demands on underlying subsystems, especially at the higher end. Of course many users simply want an appliance, and current technologies (and OSs) are fine for them - no-one is forcing them to upgrade!

Why change what works? Indeed. If it works for you, don't change! Heck, I know one or two benighted souls who still use Win3.1 and MS-DOS. All they do is word processing.

There was a time when the largest megacorporation DP shops had less than 5 gigabytes of disk. Remember when high speed modems blazed along at 1200 kb/s (yes, that's kilobits per second)? When a large spreadsheet took up half a 360KB floppy? When a massive hard disk was 40 megabytes unformatted? When a very large Novell Netware server had 4MB of RAM? When the Apple Mac had 128KB of RAM, and you could double it to 512KB by soldering chips together? Remember when a high-performance CPU clocked at 10MHz?

Things have moved on from there, somewhat.

And that's the way it is today. Things develop. In just a few years a typical disk will be 1TB. The average email will approach 1MB, and your typical user will demand throughputs and capacities that mainframes couldn't dream of a few years ago.

It's an industry truism that making PCs easier to work requires an exponential increase in hardware and software capability. Even the wildest dreamers never thought we'd reach the limits of 32-bit addressing and gibagits'n-bytes on PCs. Now we know better.

Still. I can see that some people are happy with Old Stuff That Works Fine For Them. But not everyone is.

It's not just Microsoft that's coming out with New Stuff. And it's not just because they're trying to force people to buy every few years. If any one of the major industry-driving vendors sat back for just a year, everyone would be saying "old hat", "long in the tooth", "unable to do anything new", and the like.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X