Vista sales slow to a trickle - Linux

This is a discussion on Vista sales slow to a trickle - Linux ; http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...ista-sales-slo w LAST WEEK, Microsoft appeared to be opening the Champers over its record profits, however the spin aimed to conceal what appears to be a slowing of sales of its Vista operating system. -- Posted via a free Usenet ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Vista sales slow to a trickle

  1. Vista sales slow to a trickle

    http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...ista-sales-slo
    w

    LAST WEEK, Microsoft appeared to be opening the Champers over its
    record profits, however the spin aimed to conceal what appears to be
    a slowing of sales of its Vista operating system.



    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  2. Re: Vista sales slow to a trickle

    On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 04:10:34 GMT, Keith Windsor wrote:

    > http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...ista-sales-slo
    > w
    >
    > LAST WEEK, Microsoft appeared to be opening the Champers over its
    > record profits, however the spin aimed to conceal what appears to be
    > a slowing of sales of its Vista operating system.


    Lol. Sure, sales are slowing. That's to be expected. The first 6 months
    of sales of new products are usually much higher, since everyone that's
    been waiting for the product rushes out to buy it.

    When a new distro of Linux is released, let's say Ubuntu or Fedora, initial
    downloads are crazy for the first few weeks, then start to slow, after a
    while they really start to drop off, just because those that really wanted
    it went out and got it right away or within a short period of time. What
    follows is the "normal" rate.

    And I wouldn't call a 7% drop "slowing to a trickle".

  3. Re: Vista sales slow to a trickle

    Keith Windsor wrote:
    > http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...sta-sales-slow
    >
    > LAST WEEK, Microsoft appeared to be opening the Champers over
    > its record profits, however the spin aimed to conceal what
    > appears to be a slowing of sales of its Vista operating
    > system.


    There is no marvel as to why:

    Apple fans rejoice!

    http://www.technologyreview.com/Infotech/17992/?a=f

    So you might think I would be predisposed to love Vista,
    Microsoft's newest version of Windows, which was scheduled to be
    released to consumers at the end of January. And indeed, I leaped
    at the opportunity to review it. I couldn't wait to finally see
    and use the long-delayed operating system that I had been reading
    and writing about for more than three years. Regardless of
    widespread skepticism, I was confident that Vista would dazzle
    me, and I looked forward to saying so in print.

    Ironically, playing around with Vista for more than a month has
    done what years of experience and exhortations from Mac-loving
    friends could not: it has converted me into a Mac fan.
    Here is another disappointed user who is more impressed with Apple:

    http://www.winmatrix.com/forums/lofi...hp?t15505.html

    Yanike
    Oct 25 2007, 01:51 AM

    LOL! I had to log in at work to post to this.
    After 5.6 years, we give you 100 reasons to switch to Vista.

    100 reason after 5.6 years and apple has 300 after 21 months.

    Vista is probably a great release for some Windows users, but I'm
    still disappointed.

    I hate that some companies are still having problems developing
    drivers for it (CREATIVE!!!!).

    I just think Vista is a complete joke.


    Mac OSX Leopard:

    Mac computer with an Intel, PowerPC G5, or PowerPC G4 (867MHz or
    faster) processor
    * 512MB of memory
    * DVD drive for installation
    * 9GB of available disk space
    * Some features require a compatible Internet service provider;
    fees may apply.
    * Some features require Apple's .Mac service; fees apply.


    Windows Vista Ultimate:

    * 1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor
    * 1 GB of system memory
    * 40 GB hard drive with at least 15 GB of available space
    * Support for DirectX 9 graphics with:
    o WDDM Driver
    o 128 MB of graphics memory (minimum)
    o Pixel Shader 2.0 in hardware
    o 32 bits per pixel
    * DVD-ROM
    * Audio Output
    * Internet access (fees may apply)

    Leopard does WAY MORE and OFFERS more and still doesn't cost and
    take as much as Vista to run.

    Microsoft has lost lots of it's user base with the disappoint of
    Vista.

    I have some questions for Microsoft.

    Give me 10 reasons I should give you another 5+ years to
    disappoint me again?

    If the new iMacs with Leopard can run XP (Only thing someone
    really needs to run M$ software) and it's going to be supported
    for a few more years (SP3 hopefully SP4), why would someone need
    Vista?

    Why would someone care about Windows 7 when Windows Vista was a
    disaster and pocket eater? If Vista requires a super computer to
    run right, I wonder what type of machine we would need to run the
    so-called better Windows 7? Also, how many would have the dough
    to fork out for it and the new PC, which I know we would need?
    Hmmm.. With Vista, if you have a computer more than 2 years old,
    you pretty much need one hell of an upgrade or a new PC. So, with
    Windows 7, how old would your computer have to be to run the
    minimum requirements?
    Here is one Windows user who now prefers Ubuntu over Vista:

    http://community.zdnet.co.uk/blog/0,...331777b,00.htm

    or http://tinyurl.com/2txg7r

    Monday 22 October 2007, 1:43 AM
    Vista versus The Gutsy Gibbon - Ubuntu 7.10

    Posted by Rupert Goodwins

    But again, the experience was mostly fine. Having used Ubuntu for
    the best part of a year, I'm a fan. I can (and will) go into the
    bipolar experience thereof - but for every ounce of frustration
    in trying to track down the answer to a problem through the
    jungle of forums and dubious advice, there's half a pound of
    pleasure when I can just install an application that does
    something I want done.

    Which leaves my Vista machine. This is a Sony laptop that I've
    borrowed from the review pile while my lovely Dell X1 is up on
    bricks, and it's been my first serious encounter with the OS. And
    it's not been a good experience. There are plenty of specific
    problems that may be Vista or may be Sony. The wireless
    networking is vastly unreliable when switching between different
    access points, for example, and I've traced this down to a habit
    it has of creating new profiles and populating them with
    incorrect DNS addresses.

    But mostly: it's slow, it's intrusive, and it's arbitrarily
    different. It takes minutes to wake up from various sleep states
    or from a restart; minutes in which parts of the system seem to
    get going only to lapse into an unresponsive state where you're
    not at all sure whether your mouse clicks are registering. When
    you're going through a lot of restarts (as in, say, when you're
    trying to diagnose a wireless network problem), that adds up to a
    lot of pain.

    Elsewhere, it behaves like XP behaves on a 256MB computer, only
    it's running in 2GB. Everything is just... slow.
    (I won't mention the dead laptop at work that's dead because the
    Windows Genuine Advantage system has decided that its copy of
    Vista is illegitimate. It came in as a review machine, without
    the usual documentation, so we don't have the OEM's licence key.
    We do have the OEM's Vista still installed, but that's Not Good
    Enough.)

    So here's the funny thing. I've used Windows since 1.0. I've
    lived through the bad times of Windows/386 and ME, and the good
    times of NT 3.51 and 2K. I know XP if not backwards, then with a
    degree of familiarity that only middle-aged co-dependents can
    afford each other. Along the way, I've dallied with many other
    operating systems on many other platforms - but never with Unix
    and only lately with Linux.

    Then how come I'm so much more at home with Ubuntu than Vista? It
    boils down to one abiding impression: Ubuntu goes out of its way
    to get out of your way, even if it doesn't succeed all the time.
    Vista goes out of its way to be Vista and enforce the Vista way.
    You must conform regardless of the implications.

    Call me curmudgeonly, call me prejudiced, call me atypical, but
    isn't computing all about doing what users want?
    --
    HPT

  4. Re: Vista sales slow to a trickle

    Erik Funkenbusch did eloquently scribble:
    > On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 04:10:34 GMT, Keith Windsor wrote:


    >> http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...ista-sales-slo
    >> w
    >>
    >> LAST WEEK, Microsoft appeared to be opening the Champers over its
    >> record profits, however the spin aimed to conceal what appears to be
    >> a slowing of sales of its Vista operating system.


    > Lol. Sure, sales are slowing. That's to be expected. The first 6 months
    > of sales of new products are usually much higher, since everyone that's
    > been waiting for the product rushes out to buy it.


    Yeah, right...
    What's really happened is they've sold millions more copies than neccesary
    to the retailers and installers, no-one actually WANTS vista because of the
    incredibly bad press, so no more orders from the retailers are forthcoming
    because they're already overstocked to the eyeballs...

    Maybe microsoft will sell another copy of vista in a year or two, when the
    backlog of original copies have been cleared.

    (I refer to you to the PC world story (UK) previously reported in this
    newsgroup)
    --
    __________________________________________________ ____________________________
    | spike1@freenet.co.uk | |
    |Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| "ARSE! GERLS!! DRINK! DRINK! DRINK!!!" |
    | in | "THAT WOULD BE AN ECUMENICAL MATTER!...FECK!!!! |
    | Computer Science | - Father Jack in "Father Ted" |
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  5. Re: Vista sales slow to a trickle

    Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

    >On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 04:10:34 GMT, Keith Windsor wrote:
    >
    >> http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...ista-sales-slo
    >> w
    >>
    >> LAST WEEK, Microsoft appeared to be opening the Champers over its
    >> record profits, however the spin aimed to conceal what appears to be
    >> a slowing of sales of its Vista operating system.

    >
    >Lol. Sure, sales are slowing. That's to be expected. The first 6 months
    >of sales of new products are usually much higher, since everyone that's
    >been waiting for the product rushes out to buy it.
    >
    >When a new distro of Linux is released, let's say Ubuntu or Fedora, initial
    >downloads are crazy for the first few weeks, then start to slow, after a
    >while they really start to drop off, just because those that really wanted
    >it went out and got it right away or within a short period of time. What
    >follows is the "normal" rate.


    Bad analogy, idiot, considering the bulk of Visduh sales are
    pushed-out via OEM's at a sort of linear rate. This is totally
    different from the spike of downloads that occurs with a new version
    of Linux.

    Clearly Visduh had an early spike just to stock store shelves and
    distributors, and then languished.


  6. Re: Vista sales slow to a trickle


    "chrisv" wrote in message
    news:8q9ei35jn3p491fou5kpfo1016i7jqlmug@4ax.com...
    > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
    >
    >>On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 04:10:34 GMT, Keith Windsor wrote:
    >>
    >>> http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...ista-sales-slo
    >>> w
    >>>
    >>> LAST WEEK, Microsoft appeared to be opening the Champers over its
    >>> record profits, however the spin aimed to conceal what appears to be
    >>> a slowing of sales of its Vista operating system.

    >>
    >>Lol. Sure, sales are slowing. That's to be expected. The first 6 months
    >>of sales of new products are usually much higher, since everyone that's
    >>been waiting for the product rushes out to buy it.
    >>
    >>When a new distro of Linux is released, let's say Ubuntu or Fedora,
    >>initial
    >>downloads are crazy for the first few weeks, then start to slow, after a
    >>while they really start to drop off, just because those that really wanted
    >>it went out and got it right away or within a short period of time. What
    >>follows is the "normal" rate.

    >
    > Bad analogy, idiot, considering the bulk of Visduh sales are
    > pushed-out via OEM's at a sort of linear rate. This is totally
    > different from the spike of downloads that occurs with a new version
    > of Linux.


    So it's more like "car sales" where for example, something like the PT
    Cruiser and VW Beetle were initially in huge demand. But now sales have
    slowed. Or maybe it's more like a movie where opening weekend there's a huge
    rush to see it but 6 months later attendence is down.


    > Clearly Visduh had an early spike just to stock store shelves and
    > distributors, and then languished.


    Clearly you are an idiot. Don't forget that Microsoft continues to sell
    about a BILLION dollars a month of Vista. If the bull**** you're claiming is
    even remotely true then OEM's wouldn't have enough space on their shelf to
    hold all of the (unsold) copies they've been buying the past 10 months.



    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  7. Re: Vista sales slow to a trickle


    "John Locke" wrote in message
    news:ffuei3582b10jmunq09t7klkm82msv6lmv@4ax.com...
    > On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 09:52:12 -0400, "Sophie McDowell"
    > wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Clearly you are an idiot. Don't forget that Microsoft continues to sell
    >>about a BILLION dollars a month of Vista. If the bull**** you're claiming
    >>is
    >>even remotely true then OEM's wouldn't have enough space on their shelf to
    >>hold all of the (unsold) copies they've been buying the past 10 months.


    > Since when does an OEM license take up space on a shelf ? I think
    > you're a bit confused.


    It's a metaphor dimwit. Most anything doesn't really "sit on a shelf"
    because it's stored on a pallet somewhere in a warehouse.

    The fact remains that you advocates have been claiming for about a year that
    MS was stuffing the channel or that sales are due only to OEM's buying
    licenses which don't sell and all sorts of crazy ass lies.

    But a year later the OEM's are still buying Vista licenses by the BILLIONS
    of dollars. Yes... the license doesn't physically "sit on a shelf" but
    there's no way in hell that OEM's would be buying billions of dollars in
    licenses for about a year now unless the licenses are being used.

    Do you really believe that Dell, IBM, HP, etc. have BILLIONS and BILLIONS of
    dollars worth of unused licenses on hand but then they turn around and spend
    BILLION$$$ of dollars on even more licenses?

    Perhaps that's how you would run a company (which explains why you never
    will) but Dell, HP, IBM, et-all know what they are doing and they are not
    going to waste billions of dollars buying more of something that according
    to the COLA idiots, is selling so poorly that they can't move it.




    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  8. Re: Vista sales slow to a trickle

    On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 09:52:12 -0400, "Sophie McDowell"
    wrote:


    >Clearly you are an idiot. Don't forget that Microsoft continues to sell
    >about a BILLION dollars a month of Vista. If the bull**** you're claiming is
    >even remotely true then OEM's wouldn't have enough space on their shelf to
    >hold all of the (unsold) copies they've been buying the past 10 months.

    Since when does an OEM license take up space on a shelf ? I think
    you're a bit confused.


+ Reply to Thread