Time to die, Windows Vista

Kevin Lancaster

Kevin Lancaster

MyBroadband Editor
Joined
Apr 4, 2014
Messages
13,564
Reaction score
136
Time to die, Windows Vista

Windows Vista will reach end of support on 11 April 2017, with Microsoft ending security updates, non-security hotfixes, assisted support options, and online technical content updates.
 
I am still convinced Vista was the rushed windows 7 version to get a cash injection
 
"Microsoft advised Vista users to upgrade to Windows XP."
Couldn't have said it better. ;)

Thor187 said:
I am still convinced Vista was the rushed windows 7 version to get a cash injection
Click to expand...
You don't need to be convinced, you just need to be a realist.
 
Windows Vista was a total non-starter in my client base, can't recollect ever working with it ...
 
Vista wasn't that bad once you've installed two years worth of service packs and updates but I agree it's well past its sell by date.
 
Crowley said:
Vista wasn't that bad once you've installed two years worth of service packs and updates but I agree it's well past its sell by date.
Click to expand...
Is this why W7 only had one service pack as it's Vista v4?
 
What eventually appeared as Windows Vista was a sad little subset of what Longhorn and Blackcomb were intended to be.

But Msft mgt were hugely deflected by endless lawsuits and anti-trust actions around the world as governments fined Microsoft billions for anti-competitive behaviour for doing nasty things like including a browser and mediaplayer in the OS.

WinFS was one of the biggest planned changes, but it eventually got canned.

The gap from XP to Vista is certainly the longest between any Win versions. It was a very turbulent time for Msft. (I retired from Msft in '97.)

Anyone remember the The Mojave Experiment?

When the Vista feature creep started pushing out RTM, features were canned and the gap between plan and doable grew wider and wider.

Vista got tidied up and tweaked a little and appeared as Windows 7.
 
Last edited:
Arthur said:
What eventually appeared as Windows Vista was a sad little subset of what Longhorn and Blackcomb were intended to be.

But Msft mgt were hugely deflected by endless lawsuits and anti-trust actions around the world as governments fined Microsoft billions for anti-competitive behaviour by doing nasty things like including a browser and mediaplayer in the OS.

WinFS was one of the biggest planned changes, but it eventually got canned.

The gap from XP to Vista is certainly the longest between any Win versions. It was a very turbulent time for Msft. (I retired from Msft in '97.)

Anyone remember the The Mojave Experiment?

Vista got tidies up and tweaked a little and appeared as Windows 7.
Click to expand...

No bias at all there, Arthur.
 
Of course I'm biased. That's not a problem. It's prejudice that closes eyes. And on the technology and brand I'm actually agnostic. These are just tools so it's folly to get religious about it.

I sighed with relief when Win7 appeared. Anyone with systems knowledge knows it's largely unchanged from Vista. A lot of code tightened up. But Win7 lovers today are really running a tighter, cleaner Vista.
 
Last edited:
Ms also isn't squeaky clean. They don't just bundle a browser and media player but even today it's hard to completely get rid of the OS trying to use it for everything even if you have other programs configured.
 
Swa said:
Ms also isn't squeaky clean. They don't just bundle a browser and media player but even today it's hard to completely get rid of the OS trying to use it for everything even if you have other programs configured.
Click to expand...
Not clean? Where is this moral law of the universe that says you can't integrate a browser deeply into the OS and you somehow have to make it easy for your competitors to mix in their own? That's not a moral issue - it's an architectural, implementation and marketing decision. The browser is far and away the most resource-intensive app running on a typical PC so there are lots of good technical reasons to bring it closer to various layers and rings nearer the kernel. Sure it might turn out to be an unwise marketing decision, but to suggest there's some sort of ethical or moral violation is ridiculous. What else can you mean by "not squeaky clean"?
 
Arthur said:
Not clean? Where is this moral law of the universe that says you can't integrate a browser deeply into the OS and you somehow have to make it easy for your competitors to mix in their own? That's not a moral issue - it's an architectural, implementation and marketing decision. The browser is far and away the most resource-intensive app running on a typical PC so there are lots of good technical reasons to bring it closer to various layers and rings nearer the kernel. Sure it might turn out to be an unwise marketing decision, but to suggest there's some sort of ethical or moral violation is ridiculous. What else can you mean by "not squeaky clean"?
Click to expand...
The browser isn't a component of the operating system. It's funny that most people want to get rid of IE and if it wasn't for the corporate world MS would have already dropped it. The most resource intensive "app"? Not even nearly. Not by a long shot.

They also don't bring it closer to the kernel level but simply make it hard to replace it.
 
Arthur said:
Of course I'm biased. That's not a problem. It's prejudice that closes eyes. And on the technology and brand I'm actually agnostic. These are just tools so it's folly to get religious about it.

I sighed with relief when Win7 appeared. Anyone with systems knowledge knows it's largely unchanged from Vista. A lot of code tightened up. But Win7 lovers today are really running a tighter, cleaner Vista.
Click to expand...
Hasn't every version of Windows been just another layer added to previous versions? (and some trimming)
Swa said:
The browser isn't a component of the operating system. It's funny that most people want to get rid of IE and if it wasn't for the corporate world MS would have already dropped it. The most resource intensive "app"? Not even nearly. Not by a long shot.

They also don't bring it closer to the kernel level but simply make it hard to replace it.
Click to expand...

You do realize how tied in IE is into windows? Have you tried changing the proxy (without a batch script)?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X