Vista has three problems.

Windows XP mind/market share
GNU/Linux word of mouth advertising
and it's *not* ready for prime time (half baked) self

Is Windows Vista ready?

"No. God, no. Today's Windows Vista builds are a study in frustration, and trust me,
I use the darn thing day in and day out, and I've seen what happens when you subject yourself to it wholeheartedly." http://tinyurl.com/o8xlo

Next will be the Vista ROI study.
Desperate times call for desperate measures.

n0ne_n0ne, you'd have more credibility if you hadn't posted a review of the product from August 2006, which was written based on Beta number 2 that was released in July 2006. The very person you linked to eventually rated it four stars out of five and concluded that it was highly recommended. http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista_08.asp

Jeez, it isn't like it is that hard finding people who are currently criticizing Vista (Chris Pirillo is one).

Wes Says:
"you'd have more credibility if...
[...]
The very person you linked to eventually rated it four stars out of five and concluded that it was highly recommended."

@Wes:
First of all, I'm not in the credibility game.
Second, the link was to show that it's no secret that Vista was/is 'half-baked'. The problems that plague Vista back then is still prevalent today.

"There's been a lot of speculation and opinion about Windows Vista lately. Many claim that Microsoft's next generation operating system isn't ready and can't be made ready in time for the software giant's self-imposed October (fill-in-your-date here) 2006 Release to Manufacturing (RTM) deadline." http://tinyurl.com/o8xlo

hence, not much have changed if anything for that matter. It's the culture.
(Rush To Market)

Vista was not ready for 'RTM'. The point of fact is stated that there were some questions about the release date. A 90 days different in release date, does not make a product 'RTM' ready. The additional 90 days were used for packaging.

Sever 2008 is been delayed because of the lessons of Vista. Vista is the beta for Server 2008. Microsoft must get Server 2008 right!

n0ne_n0ne
"Is Windows Vista ready?

"No. God, no. Today's Windows Vista builds are a study in frustration, and trust me,
I use the darn thing day in and day out, and I've seen what happens when you subject yourself to it wholeheartedly." http://tinyurl.com/o8xlo
You have taken this completely out of context, Pual Thurrot was talking about the Beta builds !!
Thats why it says "Today's Windows Vista builds" and the emphasis on "Builds".... that would have given anyone a clue what he was talking about.
The above link was well BEFORE Vista went to "RTM".
n0ne_n0ne do better research will you, and don't take things out of context ! !

n0ne_n0ne
You are now guilty of "TRYING" to spread FUD.

TCO is a hype , not really measuring any significant stuff. Only Gartner's blind followers talk of TCO.

In other industries, they never heard of a term TCO. Try to ask a mechanical engineer on TCO and he will throw a screwdrive at you

IT industry have been creating a lot of bewildering jargons that no one able to comprehend.

Beware ! Joe

Neil Says:
"You are now guilty of "TRYING" to spread FUD."

@Nei|:^")
Out of context? What FUD?
Facts are admissible as evidence.
The questions is/was "Is Windows Vista ready?"

The answer is a resounding NO, wasn't then and NOT NOW.
Has the state of Vista changed since then? NO
The purpose of the article was to show that Vista is/was half baked and pushed out the door in shiny packaging to meet the 'RTM' deadline.

Microsoft product release cycle:

RTM -- Alpha
SP1 -- Beta
SP2 -- RC1
SP3 -- Final

To dismiss facts as FUD, makes you a DUFF (Down Under Fan Fund).
The only FUD i see is Microsoft's mercenaries trying to push a half-baked product on the consumer population with 'TCO' hype. Instead of just being a card carrying member, you need to do a better job researching and not just buying the 'TCO' and 'ROI' disinformation.

Let's just chalk it up as the 'Stockholm syndrome'.

Is there anyone who believes anything that emanates from the rotting dungheap Bloatfarm anymore?

This is obviously intended to prop up the dismal mess of the Viasma (Vista Miasma). There are, by now so many reports utterly discrediting Viasma with user dissatisfaction.

Does anyone REALLY believe this bogus TCO numbers?

Like I said: More Bloat from the Bloatfarm.

It can be chewed but never swallowed.

The study ignores the cost to buy Vista, migrate, and retrain users and staff. And, the projected savings are much lower per desktop user. If you accept the savings estimates from the study, with implementation costs considered, the break-even point would seem to be on the order of four to seven years out -- and maybe worse, depending on your new hardware and software procurement costs, training costs, migration labor costs, and mix of mobiles and desktops. Comparing the small savings per computer to the investment required to migrate, the case for upgrading is not compelling. As has been noted elsewhere, the biggest impediment to Vista adoption may be that XP is good enough.

Different topic, but interesting one:
http://blogs.ittoolbox.com/eai/madgreek/archives/open-source-and-microsoft-free-17339
"Before all of the Microsoft defenders start slamming me, let me put my disclaimers out. My goal of this article is to prove that people can be productive at work without the need of Microsoft software"

Different topic, but interesting one too:
"B4 all of the Microsoft Defenders start slamming 'me', let me put 'my disclaimer' out too. My goal of this article is to provide people with the information that one can be productive at work without the need for Microsoft's Operating System"

Look Ma ...
No Windows!!!

"Many architects believe that they cannot migrate their IT systems away from Microsoft(tm) Windows(R) and embrace GNU/Linux like all other professions are free to do." http://tinyurl.com/243vmu

n0ne_n0ne
The author meant one thing and you have (by your own words) taken it to mean what you want it to mean.
That is taking things out of context !
Paul Thorrott's piece was written in 2006, and the author I am sure would not agree with your "current" interpretation of a piece written of "Pre" RTM software.
As for you description of the software well... I take it from that you mean that Linux does not need to do ANY FORM of updating to its OS. So why do they then ???

Neil Says:
"Paul Thorrott's piece was written in 2006, and the author I am sure would not agree with your "current" interpretation of a piece written of "Pre" RTM software."
[...]
I take it from that you mean that Linux does not need to do ANY FORM of updating to its OS.

@Nei|:^")
First; of course Mr. Thorrott wouldn't say that now. I can give you 10 reasons why he wouldn't say that today and I'm sure you can guess at least one.

Obviously you didn't read the first article, but my question is, what has changed from then till now? Minus the 'PR' blitz by Microsoft.

Here is another article with the same context different author one year later, August 2007. Maybe you will read this one before commenting. excerpt below: "Post RTM software".

"The upshot is that even after nine months, Vista just ain't cutting it. I definitely gave Microsoft too much of a free pass on this operating system: I expected it to get the kinks worked out more quickly. Boy, was I fooled!" http://tinyurl.com/35bg5e

Second; this is not about GNU/Linux.

n0ne_n0ne
I will read the article later ... the fact remains that you took article out of context ... will you agree that's what you did ?? No beating around the bush, evading the question ! !

n0ne_n0ne
I got as far as the first line that was enough for me ... Ziff Davis... who owns Eweek ... who Microsoft Watch ... who else Ziff Davis.
I don't have to read it to know that it (the article) would be either bagging Vista or Microsoft or both.
It's like going to a Linux site and reading how good Linux is and that it is best thing since "sliced Bread".

Biased ! ! !

n0ne_n0ne
When was the last time "Microsoft Watch" actually wrote an article that was "complementary" to Microsoft ... answer a very very long time indeed !
This site should be known as "Microsoft Bash" and encites hatred against microsoft !
I have written to Microsoft about it and spoken to several people in microsoft about particular articles and ...they know what going on here that's for sure !!

Lord Ballmer: with all my respect and admiration I am writing you to denounce something incredible, horrible and frightening, the site that should be known as "Microsoft Bash" encites hatred against Microsoft !,letting people to issue comments not favourables to Microsoft,without any kind of censure!!!(the word Microsoft has been said with all due respect and keeping my chin down)

I am sure when they have knowledge of the existence of this letter the fear will take their souls and they will be falling to the ground on their knees, the way I am doing it.

Yours truly, your ever-informing servant who is always be alert of the way of defending Microsoft's interests.

PS: Please, if possible, I want my laptop computer to be black, and with a good video card if available.
Thanks again: The Prosecutor.

"Obviously you didn't read the first article, but my question is, what has changed from then till now? Minus the 'PR' blitz by Microsoft."

n0ne_n0ne... I hope you display that same skepticism with regards to Apple's OS X when it comes out in October (if it remains on schedule), which apparently was in bad enough shape as of August 2007 to be eliciting concerns of another delay ( http://gracefulflavor.net/2007/08/16/i-smell-another-osx-leopard-delay/ )

So, what could change from then to October.... minus any 'PR' blitz by Apple.

Quote;
Neil :
"When was the last time "Microsoft Watch" actually wrote an article that was "complementary" to Microsoft ... answer a very very long time indeed !
This site should be known as "Microsoft Bash" and encites hatred against microsoft !
I have written to Microsoft about it and spoken to several people in microsoft about particular articles and ...they know what going on here that's for sure !!"
----------------------------------------------------
Perhaps there is little that Micro$oft is doing to warrant a "complementary" article. Certainly MS needs to be held accountable for whats its been up to.

I guess we should all be scared now that Neil has come out in the open as a Micro$oft stoolie and informed on all of us that have "bashed" and said things that were not nice about the Evil Empire.

If anyone would know who to snitch to at MS, or who has contacts at Redmond, it would be Neil, for sure.

The Vista TCO Study leaves out the most costly thing about running Vista. If you already have purchased a lot of software that works with XP. then a good share of that is unlikely to run on Vista, without problems.

Not all of those incompatible software programs will be patched or upgraded for free. So it becomes another round of upgrade purchases for 3rd party software, just to run Vista. This is the number one reason so many people wipe Vista off the hard drive of a new computer and install XP or Linux.

Wes McGee Says:
"I hope you display that same skepticism..."

@Wes McGee|:^")
That was a very good try at deflecting the subject in question, Vista's TCO analyst report.
skepticism: In philosophy, the position that what cannot be proved by reason should not be believed.

This has little to do with the delay of a product, heck, even 'Shuttle' launches get delayed. It's about a monopoly *knowingly* delivering a half-baked product to consumers with bogus TCO analyst report.

Would I be skeptical of Apple trying this? Maybe not, if history is 'my' judge.

If you are not skeptical about the Vista's TCO report, then I have a bridge for sale, any takers. It has a great TCO and ROI, just install a toll booth. Charts are available upon request;-)

Read Karl's: very good post on TCO

Let's just chalk it up as the 'Stockholm syndrome'.

"Vista not playing well with IPv6
Microsoft acknowledges some compatibility issues, but calls operating system its best ever"

Oxymoronic
http://tinyurl.com/ysfuzz

Vista have network issues up the 'yin to the yang',
but it never shows up in the TCO or ROI studies:-(

Actually, you're trying to deflect from my point. You're the one who is alleging that it would be technologically impossible for Microsoft to have made improvements in the three months between that first article you linked to and the release of it, despite the person who posted that first review essentially saying just that. Either you were trying to mislead us by posting such an outdated review, or that you are calling the reviewer a liar. It'd be nice to know your position on that.

And there you go again posting old links....

Here's a followup to that one about IPv6...

"Vista testing is ongoing at the University of New Hampshire Inter Operability Lab (UNH-IOL), which ran a series of tests on Vista's IPv6 stack in June. The tests were run over Moonv6, the world's largest IPv6 test bed, which is operated by UNH-IOL.

UNH-IOL created and shared files using Vista's IPv6 software, Adobe's Dreamweaver Web-design tool and Microsoft's MeetingSpace collaboration software. UNH-IOL also tested Microsoft's Longhorn server's IPv6 software and its FTP features. "We proved that applications do work on top of Vista," says Erica Johnson, senior manager of software and applications at UNH-IOL. "All of the Vista testing was proved under dual-stack conditions, as well as IPv6-only."

UNH-IOL also printed documents from Vista's IPv6 software using printers from HP, Konica Minolta and Xerox. "How well Vista handles printing depends on . . . whether the printer company has capable drivers," Johnson says. "

"Although Johnson says the latest round of Moonv6 tests proved that important office applications will work with Microsoft's Vista's IPv6 implementation, she says it was difficult for the lab's IPv6 experts to get everything to work. "If you had zero knowledge of IPv6, you would have a hard time learning how to set up these servers," she says. "There's going to be a knowledge gap for network administrators and IPv6 developers. They're going to have a hard time setting up simple servers for an IPv6 network."

I'm trying to figure out if you're just doing google searches for any bit of damning news about Vista without even bothering to see if there's any wider story or context for it. Quite honestly, I do have more respect for people who are willing to intelligently criticize things than blindly cheerlead (which is why I still read Joe Wilcox), but all you're doing is blindly slamming MS.

http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2007/09/05/microsoft-ships-incorrect-xbox-360-power-cords-fires-monkeys-in-shipping-department/

The above link is titled; Microsoft ships incorrect XBox360 power cords , fires monkeys in shipping department

What do you except when the guy running the company is a Monkey Boy? Monkey see, monkey do.

Seems to never be an end to XBox360 problems.

If you have ever wondered why Micro$oft is going the DRM route with Vista, perhaps this will help. Fair use under attack again.

Quote from the link; "The Copyright Alliance is backed by such heavy-hitters as the MPAA, RIAA, Disney, Business Software Alliance, and perhaps most interestingly, Microsoft"

http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/07/09/07/0047225.shtml

link above is titled; Copyright Alliance Says Fair Use Not a Consumer Right

this link titled; Storm Worm More Powerful Than Top Supercomputers

http://it.slashdot.org/it/07/09/07/122200.shtml

And it only runs as a botnet on windows computers. When will M$ clean up its mess and give its users a really secure OS?

Wes McGee Says:

"You're the one who is alleging that it would be technologically impossible for Microsoft to have made improvements in the three months..."

@Wes McGee|:^")
the answer is Yes, if the technical problems are insurmountable.

OK, there is NO problem with Vista networking, i made it up.
http://tinyurl.com/28ssqz

"Microsoft starts a "Get the Facts" campaign...against itself"

"You've got to hand it to Microsoft. It hates ANYTHING and ANYONE that gets in its way of selling its software."

http://tinyurl.com/3aetmx

To n0ne_n0ne; that last link was great.

A couple of quotes from it was right on the mark;

"According to research conducted by Wipro and GCR Custom Research, total cost of ownership for Windows XP is $4,407 annually, while Vista's cost is $3,802. The $4,407 figure was derived from costs of hardware, software, IT labor, and user costs...."

"Imagine the kind of savings you could get if you just stopped using Windows altogether! Few to no security issues. Less administration. Etc."
----------------------------------------------------
How about zero dollars a year from using a free easy to use community Linux distro.

http://www.pclinuxos.com/index.php?option=com_ionfiles&Itemid=28

The above is a download link for a free ISO of PCLinuxOS. It will set you free.

Link is titled; Microsoft says some way to go on software piracy

http://news.com.com/Microsoft+says+some+way+to+go+on+software+piracy/2100-1014_3-6206677.html?tag=st_lh

Quote from the link; "Microsoft on Friday said it may take decades to tackle software piracy in large emerging economies"
---------------------------------------------------
Wonder what the TCO is on XP running in China? LOL

http://news.com.com/Microsoft+says+some+way+to+go+on+software+piracy/2100-1014_3-6206677.html?tag=st_lh

Quote from the link; "Microsoft on Friday said it may take decades to tackle software piracy in large emerging economies"
----------------------------------------------------
So by "decades," doesn't this also mean the length of time it would take for Micro$oft to make a profit in China as well?

By that time (decades) Linux, BSD, Mac, or a completely new OS, will probably surpass MS as the dominate OS. It could be that M$ is putting Money into these emerging market countries, that it will never get a profit from. Sort of like the Zune and the XBox360.

nice link chips:

"...it may take decades to tackle software piracy..."

"The software company has been expanding beyond its Windows operating system and Office productivity software businesses, saying Web services and consumer devices are key to the company's future. Its software products account for most of the company's profit."

This is a back track from their previous position of 'if they are going to pirate software, we prefer it to be Windows'. It looks as if this 'PR' move is crafted for the shareholder to keep them around a couple of decades with hope. Note, the software is the bulk of their revenue stream.

Who pirates 'free as in beer' F/OSS software?

Windows as we know it, will become legacy software that will be run in a 'VM' until needed software are ported or written for other platform. hence, all other platforms runs some form of *nix.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

**These are my opinions only and in no way are they meant to offend anyone. If for any reason you feel the need to contact me in any way regarding these post, especially for inappropriate wording or a perceived derogatory statement, please fell free to contact me. I am all over the Internet and you can find me there.

Another cost of Vi$ta (TOC) not addressed, is that Printers are not supported for many exsisting products. Since Vista has to have special drivers, many of the printers models already made, will not ever have a Vista driver. Linux has more driver support for printers than Vista does.

And, Linux is gaining more printer drivers as it increases market share;

http://solutions.brother.com/linux/en_us/index.html

Quote from the above link; "Brother is now developing drivers which are designed to work on Linux distributions, Redhat, Mandriva(Mandrake), SuSE, Debian and FedoraCore. We have developed two types of driver: LPR drivers and CUPS drivers."

Wes McGee :
"All of the Vista testing was proved under dual-stack conditions, as well as IPv6-only."
[...]
"There's going to be a knowledge gap for network administrators and IPv6 developers. They're going to have a hard time setting up simple servers for an IPv6 network."

@_:
I _don't_ know how to setup IPv6 in Vista.
This is how it's done on DebianSparc64.
The learning curve is not that steep.

During boot up it is auto detected. ex. below:

this output is derived from $dmesg [enter]

IPv6 over IPv4 tunneling driver
eth0: no IPv6 routers present

to connect to another server with IPv6 is:
ssh -6 Forces ssh to use IPv6 addresses only
ssh -6 f000::000:0000:000:00000%eth0

this output is derived from $netstat -tupn [enter]

192.168.0.1:40071 192.168.2.1:22 ESTABLISHED-
tcp6 0 0 fo80::a00:00ff:fe:39001 fe00::a00:00ff:fe0b::22 ESTABLISHED12045/ssh

It's looks more complicated than it is. As you can see on this particular Linux box (kernel), IPv6 is tunneled through the ipv4 driver. hence, there is no "dual-stack conditions" issues to deal with. "It auto detects"

*pls. disregard the geekness of the explanation. ;-)

"No other operating system has ever been this shaky"
http://tinyurl.com/3bpvgo

n0ne_n0ne;
check this out on the other topic
Office 2007: If, When and Why

think we found something worthy of being posted on slashdot or groklaw.

They are making Windows XP sound really bad! I do not like Vista one bit at all, and now they are saying that Vista cost them less? What is this world coming too?

Sales of tablets at the lowest prices on the Internet.
Gifts and prizes to customers.
Ordering drugs without registration.
Delivery ...