[News] [Rival] CIO.com: "Microsoft Should Toss Vista in the Trash" - Linux

This is a discussion on [News] [Rival] CIO.com: "Microsoft Should Toss Vista in the Trash" - Linux ; Blog: Should Microsoft Throw Away Vista? ,----[ Quote ] | Throw Vista away. That's what many have now argued that Microsoft should do. | Give it a dignified resting place, as a stepping-stone OS, and come up with a | ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: [News] [Rival] CIO.com: "Microsoft Should Toss Vista in the Trash"

  1. [News] [Rival] CIO.com: "Microsoft Should Toss Vista in the Trash"

    Blog: Should Microsoft Throw Away Vista?

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Throw Vista away. That's what many have now argued that Microsoft should do.
    | Give it a dignified resting place, as a stepping-stone OS, and come up with a
    | replacement that's more sensible for enterprise IT. There is historical
    | precedent in the consumer OS space for such a move; look at Windows ME and
    | how it became a footnote in Microsoft history.
    |
    | "Microsoft should toss Vista in the trash, as the company did with Windows
    | Millennium eight years ago, then issue a Windows XP Second Edition (as it did
    | with Windows 98 eight years ago) that capitalizes on some of Vista's key
    | benefits.
    `----

    http://www.cio.com.au/index.php/id;1952707477


    Related:

    E-mail: Microsoft 'botched' dealings with Intel, HP

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Internal Microsoft e-mails revealed through a federal class-action lawsuit
    | arising from the troubled launch last year of the Windows Vista operating
    | system have provided a provocative inside look at the software giant's
    | machinations with Intel, HP and Dell.
    |
    | The e-mails include an exchange in which one senior Microsoft executive
    | described dealings with computer makers as "really botched." Another manager
    | complained Microsoft was "caving to Intel" and "really burning HP."
    |
    | The e-mails are included in 145 pages of documents unsealed by U.S. District
    | Judge Marsha Pechman in Seattle late Wednesday. They include internal
    | reports and some handwritten notes that offer a rare look inside at the
    | famed "Wintel" partnership, and touch upon the alliance's dealings with
    | Hewlett-Packard, Dell and other computer makers.
    `----

    http://origin.mercurynews.com/busine...nclick_check=1


    Microsoft knew of Vista shortcoming prior to release

    http://www.marketwatch.com/news/stor...D&siteid=yhoof


    Microsoft dropped Vista hardware spec to raise Intel profits

    http://www.channelregister.co.uk/200...apable_emails/


    Microsoft 'Caves' To Intel

    http://www.forbes.com/2008/02/28/mic...rtner=yahootix


    Has Vista lost all credibility?

    http://apcmag.com/8344/has_vista_lost_all_credibility


    Will Windows Vista Succeed In 2008? Don't Count On It

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Vista has certainly been slow out of the gate. Sure, Microsoft is putting the
    | operating system on newly shipped systems, but Vista sales didn’t benefit
    | from the upgrade surge that previous OSes got upon release. A year after it
    | began shipping, less than one percent of corporate desktops are running
    | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^
    | Vista.
    | ^^^^^
    `----

    http://www.informationweek.com/blog/...indows_vi.html


    Windows Vista kicked out of Olympics PCs

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Microsoft's latest version of Windows is too risky to implement for the
    | important computers managing the 2008 Olympic summer games in Beijing, said
    | the event's computer supplier and sponsor Lenovo.
    `----

    http://www.electronista.com/articles...n.olympic.pcs/


    Acer: PC industry 'disappointed' with Vista

    ,----[ Quote
    | Acer president Gianfranco Lanci became the first major PC manufacturer to
    | openly attack Microsoft over the Windows Vista operating system in the
    | Financial Times Deutschland on Monday.
    |
    | Lanci said the operating system was riddled with problems and gave users and
    | businesses no reason to buy a new PC, according to the report. Taiwan-based
    | Acer is the world's fourth-largest PC manufacturer, after HP, Dell and
    | Lenovo.
    |
    | "The whole industry is disappointed with Windows Vista," Lanci said.
    `----

    http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/...SS&NewsID=9579


    Interesting comment from CompUSA

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Every single one of them he said was returned from consumers... and that they
    | (CompUSA) couldn't ship them back. As he heard, Microsoft wasn't giving
    | credit back for unsold or returned copies... and didn't want the returned
    | figures made public... He wouldn't say that every single one of them
    | exchanged for a copy of Xp, he didn't know if that was true. So, I asked how
    | many boxes did they have. Same glare, followed with a "You do not want to
    | know" type statement.
    `----

    http://zerias.blogspot.com/2007/12/i...m-compusa.html


    Windows Vista: Sold but not deployed

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Microsoft says it remains happy with enterprise sales of Vista -- however,
    | the software behemoth acknowledges that many businesses which have bought
    | Vista licences are yet to deploy the software.
    `----

    http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/softwar...9284495,00.htm

  2. Re: [News] [Rival] CIO.com: "Microsoft Should Toss Vista in the Trash"

    Roy Schestowitz espoused:
    > Blog: Should Microsoft Throw Away Vista?
    >
    > ,----[ Quote ]
    >| Throw Vista away. That's what many have now argued that Microsoft should do.
    >| Give it a dignified resting place, as a stepping-stone OS, and come up with a
    >| replacement that's more sensible for enterprise IT. There is historical
    >| precedent in the consumer OS space for such a move; look at Windows ME and
    >| how it became a footnote in Microsoft history.
    >|
    >| "Microsoft should toss Vista in the trash, as the company did with Windows
    >| Millennium eight years ago, then issue a Windows XP Second Edition (as it did
    >| with Windows 98 eight years ago) that capitalizes on some of Vista's key
    >| benefits.
    > `----
    >
    > http://www.cio.com.au/index.php/id;1952707477
    >
    >


    Except that there aren't really any key benefits. There is nothing in
    Vista which cannot be done in XP which people actually *want* to do.

    The only sane upgrade route now is onto Linux, or as some folk are
    doing, onto Mac, but it should be noted that the Mac is not an open
    platform.

    --
    | mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |


  3. Re: [News] [Rival] CIO.com: "Microsoft Should Toss Vista in the Trash"

    Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > Blog: Should Microsoft Throw Away Vista?


    Can Microsoft go another six years, and waste another 10 Billion USD,
    with (essentially) no product in the meantime?

    Given their track record, is it likely they'd end up with a useful
    product after another attempt anyway, especially given that all their
    seasoned staff have now abandoned ship, and their current pool is H-1B
    visa cheap labour?

    --
    K.
    http://slated.org

    ..----
    | 'When it comes to knowledge, "ownership" just doesn't make sense'
    | ~ Cory Doctorow, The Guardian. http://tinyurl.com/22bgx8
    `----

    Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.23.8-63.fc8
    20:47:14 up 96 days, 18:23, 5 users, load average: 0.00, 0.02, 0.08

  4. Re: [News] [Rival] CIO.com: "Microsoft Should Toss Vista in the Trash"

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [H]omer

    wrote
    on Wed, 26 Mar 2008 20:47:42 +0000
    :
    > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >> Blog: Should Microsoft Throw Away Vista?

    >
    > Can Microsoft go another six years, and waste another 10 Billion USD,
    > with (essentially) no product in the meantime?


    10?

    10?????!

    Ye gods, that's most likely off by at least an order of
    magnitude; recall that MSFT's raw revenue is $50B/year --
    6 years of $50B/year is about 3% of the US GDP, or $300B,
    assuming MSFT retains that amount of revenue, and I for
    one unfortunately don't see how they can lose it.

    (That's also about twice the size of the government
    stimulus package passed earlier this year.)

    Disgustingly huge, though not quite as bad as certain
    other governmentally-sponsored efforts west of China...

    Of course you're probably referring to R&D costs, which
    might be $2B/year. I'd frankly have to look, but in the
    meantime other departments will be trying to sell Vista
    or XP to OEMs, which includes such things as print media
    adverts, Superbowl ads, and Web Flash development for
    purposes of getting the message out to the customer,
    presumably in as obnoxious a manner as possible...

    That's more wasted revenue, when they could just support
    Linux, X, KDE, Gnome, and OpenOffice instead. ;-)

    (Not horribly likely, but one can dream.)

    >
    > Given their track record, is it likely they'd end up
    > with a useful product after another attempt anyway,
    > especially given that all their seasoned staff have
    > now abandoned ship, and their current pool is H-1B
    > visa cheap labour?


    One wonders.

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    Useless C/C++ Programming Idea #12398234:
    void f(char *p) {char *q = strdup(p); strcpy(p,q);}

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


  5. Re: [News] [Rival] CIO.com: "Microsoft Should Toss Vista in the Trash"

    The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
    > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [H]omer wrote on Wed, 26
    > Mar 2008 20:47:42 +0000 :


    >> Can Microsoft go another six years, and waste another 10 Billion
    >> USD, with (essentially) no product in the meantime?

    >
    > 10?
    >
    > 10?????!

    [...]
    > Of course you're probably referring to R&D costs, which might be
    > $2B/year.


    Why Vista might be the last of its kind
    [...]
    If we assume Microsoft's costs per employee are about $200,000 a year,
    the estimated payroll costs alone for Vista hover around $10 billion.
    http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm..._btview04.html

    --
    K.
    http://slated.org

    ..----
    | 'When it comes to knowledge, "ownership" just doesn't make sense'
    | ~ Cory Doctorow, The Guardian. http://tinyurl.com/22bgx8
    `----

    Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.23.8-63.fc8
    01:04:36 up 96 days, 22:40, 5 users, load average: 0.10, 0.45, 0.62

  6. Re: [News] [Rival] CIO.com: "Microsoft Should Toss Vista in the Trash"

    ____/ [H]omer on Thursday 27 March 2008 01:04 : \____

    > The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
    >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [H]omer wrote on Wed, 26
    >> Mar 2008 20:47:42 +0000 :

    >
    >>> Can Microsoft go another six years, and waste another 10 Billion
    >>> USD, with (essentially) no product in the meantime?

    >>
    >> 10?
    >>
    >> 10?????!

    > [...]
    >> Of course you're probably referring to R&D costs, which might be
    >> $2B/year.

    >
    >
    > Why Vista might be the last of its kind
    > [...]
    > If we assume Microsoft's costs per employee are about $200,000 a year,
    > the estimated payroll costs alone for Vista hover around $10 billion.
    >
    >
    >

    http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm..._btview04.html

    Well, expect another rubbish O/S in 3-4 years from now. They'll delay and
    delay... the same sort of procrastination you now find with SP3 of XP, SP1 of
    Vista (almost worse than RTM), Server...

    Microsoft has openly admitted its troubles on several occasions. Usually these
    were leaks. Many Microsoft products depend on Windows' codebase, including
    Home Server that will continue to corrupt people's data (memories, finances)
    until June at the earliest.


    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    ..oʍʇ sɐ buıɥʇ ɥɔns ou s,ǝɹǝɥʇ 'ɹǝpuǝq 'ʎɹɹoʍ ʇ,uop :ʎɹɟ
    ..oʍʇ ɐ ʍɐs ı ʇɥbnoɥʇ ı puɐ ...ǝɹǝɥʍʎɹǝʌǝ soɹǝz puɐ sǝuo .ɯɐǝɹp 1nɟʍɐ uɐ
    ʇɐɥʍ 'ɥɥɥɐ :ɹǝpuǝq

  7. Re: [News] [Rival] CIO.com: "Microsoft Should Toss Vista in the Trash"

    On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 02:01:58 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > ____/ [H]omer on Thursday 27 March 2008 01:04 : \____
    >
    >> The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
    >>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [H]omer wrote on Wed, 26
    >>> Mar 2008 20:47:42 +0000 :

    >>
    >>>> Can Microsoft go another six years, and waste another 10 Billion
    >>>> USD, with (essentially) no product in the meantime?
    >>>
    >>> 10?
    >>>
    >>> 10?????!

    >> [...]
    >>> Of course you're probably referring to R&D costs, which might be
    >>> $2B/year.

    >>
    >>
    >> Why Vista might be the last of its kind
    >> [...]
    >> If we assume Microsoft's costs per employee are about $200,000 a year,
    >> the estimated payroll costs alone for Vista hover around $10 billion.
    >>
    >>
    >>

    > http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm..._btview04.html
    >
    > Well, expect another rubbish O/S in 3-4 years from now. They'll delay and
    > delay... the same sort of procrastination you now find with SP3 of XP, SP1 of
    > Vista (almost worse than RTM), Server...
    >
    > Microsoft has openly admitted its troubles on several occasions. Usually these
    > were leaks. Many Microsoft products depend on Windows' codebase, including
    > Home Server that will continue to corrupt people's data (memories, finances)
    > until June at the earliest.


    Yea, yea yea....

    And expect Linux to STILL be hovering at 0.6 percent, or at best 1 percent
    of the desktop in 3 or 4 years despite all of Microsoft's blunders.

    Tell me, how can an OS that is supposed to be so great, and is free, still
    hover at 0.6 percent of the desktop market despite Microsoft screwing up
    left and right and don't kid yourself Vista IS a screwup IMHO anyway....

    So why can't Linux be given away to desktop users?

    Why so many downloads yet so low a usage figure?

    Why don't people who try Linux stick with it?


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  8. Re: [News] [Rival] CIO.com: "Microsoft Should Toss Vista in theTrash"

    On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 23:38:44 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:

    > Tell me, how can an OS that is supposed to be so great, and is free,
    > still hover at 0.6 percent of the desktop market despite Microsoft
    > screwing up left and right and don't kid yourself Vista IS a screwup
    > IMHO anyway....
    >
    > Why so many downloads yet so low a usage figure?


    Maybe because website statistics have long since been discredited as a
    valid indicator of desktop-OS usage?


  9. Re: [News] [Rival] CIO.com: "Microsoft Should Toss Vista in the Trash"

    Moshe Goldfarb wrote:

    > Yea, yea yea....
    >
    > And expect Linux to STILL be hovering at 0.6 percent, or at best 1
    > percent of the desktop in 3 or 4 years despite all of Microsoft's
    > blunders.
    >
    > Tell me, how can an OS that is supposed to be so great, and is free,
    > still hover at 0.6 percent of the desktop market despite Microsoft
    > screwing up left and right and don't kid yourself Vista IS a screwup
    > IMHO anyway....


    In some ways it is - in other ways it's great. It's easy to find effusive
    praise of Vista, and the anecdotal evidence is strong that people like it.
    For instance, the ratio of Googling "I like Vista" to "I don't like Vista"
    is 35800/54900 = 65%, which blows away the ratio of "I like Linux" to "I
    don't like Linux" of 36100/98600 = 37%.



    You're wanting to be left alone, aren't you Moshe? 'Cause when you ask
    honest questions like these on cola you're really not expecting answers.

    > So why can't Linux be given away to desktop users?
    >
    > Why so many downloads yet so low a usage figure?
    >
    > Why don't people who try Linux stick with it?


    Answers will vary with whoever you ask, but:

    1) far and away, the top reason in my opinion is the quality of the apps and
    games. I recently experimented with XUbuntu - worked reasonably well as far
    as booting and loading and web surfing, but it wasn't long before an app
    installed via Synaptic failed to show up in the menus. Used Gambas for a
    bit - and I'm very comfortable with RAD systems like this - and it just
    doesn't cut it. Sorry if it sounds harsh, 'cause I'm sure the developer has
    worked hard on it, but it just plain stinks compared to MS Visual Basic.
    Amarok.... well...

    2) inertia - all my work and life history is in Windows

    3) free has a certain negative connotation, and there's no marketing to
    build a "brand" image for Linux.







  10. Re: [News] [Rival] CIO.com: "Microsoft Should Toss Vista in the Trash"

    On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 13:48:05 -0000, El Tux wrote:

    > On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 23:38:44 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >
    >> Tell me, how can an OS that is supposed to be so great, and is free,
    >> still hover at 0.6 percent of the desktop market despite Microsoft
    >> screwing up left and right and don't kid yourself Vista IS a screwup
    >> IMHO anyway....
    >>
    >> Why so many downloads yet so low a usage figure?

    >
    > Maybe because website statistics have long since been discredited as a
    > valid indicator of desktop-OS usage?


    Except the fact that they all seem to agree more of less on the 0.6 percent
    or so figure.

    At least the ones that are neutral in this, like the BBC, or the w3schools
    sites.

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  11. Re: [News] [Rival] CIO.com: "Microsoft Should Toss Vista in theTrash"

    On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 12:19:38 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:

    > On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 13:48:05 -0000, El Tux wrote:
    >
    >> On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 23:38:44 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >>
    >>> Tell me, how can an OS that is supposed to be so great, and is free,
    >>> still hover at 0.6 percent of the desktop market despite Microsoft
    >>> screwing up left and right and don't kid yourself Vista IS a screwup
    >>> IMHO anyway....
    >>>
    >>> Why so many downloads yet so low a usage figure?

    >>
    >> Maybe because website statistics have long since been discredited as a
    >> valid indicator of desktop-OS usage?

    >
    > Except the fact that they all seem to agree more of less on the 0.6
    > percent or so figure.
    >
    > At least the ones that are neutral in this, like the BBC, or the
    > w3schools sites.


    But, is it valid to assume that Linux users would be as attracted to BBC
    as Windows or Apple users? People who embrace a niche OS like Linux tend
    to be individualistic and - according to the wintrolls here - elitist.
    Will they get their news from the same place "everyone else" does, or
    will they perhaps seek some less-traveled path? Do Linux users spend
    the same amount of time surfing the Web or visit the same number of
    sites as Windows/Apple users? Does their use of Linux lead to an
    interest in different kinds of sites from Windows/Apple users?

    When I started using Linux I began spending more time exploring its tens
    of thousands of free applications and learning to do all kinds of neat
    things with it, and less time puttering around on the Internet. The time
    I did spend on the Internet came to be dominated by Linux-related news,
    howto's, discussion groups, project forums, and Linux newsgroups.

    Pre-Linux, I spent a lot of time on tucows and softpedia digging for
    usable software, and on Amazon scouring the user-reviews in preparation
    for making costly commercial-software purchases. The first two also
    carry Linux software and Amazon is a general retail site, so you'd think
    all three would be OS-neutral. Yet, if you'd been using any of those
    sites to count OS-hits, you'd have my many hundreds of visits as a
    Windows user but no visits when I switched to Linux and no longer needed
    them (I don't need tucows or softpedia because I only use distro's with
    their own repositories). Think that might skew the results some?

    Visit the web-statistics sites, and you often find warnings like this
    one:

    http://www.upsdell.com/BrowserNews/stat.htm

    "Caution : stats mislead. Caching distorts raw data; audiences vary for
    each site; methodologies vary for each survey; surveys miss or omit
    important details; surveys mis-identify browsers or other user agents;
    some search spiders pose as browsers; small sample sizes exaggerate
    fluctuations; and stats don't count those who stay away because
    their browsers are not supported."

    "Caution Caution : browser stats may help you decide when a browser is so
    uncommon that a site need not support people who use it; and the stats
    may satisfy the curious; but the stats are useful for little else."

    ....

    "The best stats for a site are the stats gathered for that particular
    site: and even these are skewed by caching and faulty
    browser-detection. For example, consider Kerry Watson's Browser
    Statistics page: this page uses three different hit counters whose
    reports should be comparable; but they are not, in part because of
    faulty browser detection."

    "Bottom line: use statistics with extreme caution."

    Or, how about this one:

    http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

    "Statistics Are Often Misleading"

    "You cannot - as a web developer - rely only on statistics. Statistics
    can often be misleading."

    "Global averages may not always be relevant to your web site. Different
    sites attract different audiences. Some web sites attract professional
    developers using professional hardware, while other sites attract
    hobbyists using old low spec computers."

    "Also be aware that many statistics may have an incomplete or faulty
    browser detection. It is quite common by many web-stats report programs,
    not to detect the newest browsers."

    "(The statistics above are extracted from W3Schools' log-files, but we
    are also monitoring other sources around the Internet to assure the
    quality of these figures)."

    This page is a bit dated but is still educational:

    http://www.j3e.de/statistics_lie.html

    After explaining in detail many sources of error in web statistics, the
    author wraps up with:

    "...What do we conclude from all this? The number of hits in a log file
    doesn't say anything, it says nothing about how many people are using a
    certain browser. Ready made statistics published by so called "analysts"
    say even less - they lie. To get statistics which are just a little bit
    near reality it's not enough to have a program which analyzes a log
    file, it needs some mathematical background and a good understanding of
    what is going on there at all. I never saw a webserver statistic that
    was not totally dumb."


+ Reply to Thread