Maybe the title should be named "Blame Dell (or Microsoft) for the bad economy"

http://vista.blorge.com/2008/12/09/dells-xp-downgrade-now-150/

"t’s hardly controversial to say many people think XP is better than Vista. Now Dell believes some of its customers will consider it $150 better.

The firm has tripled the price it charges to provide a ‘downgrade’ option on new PCs. Where a customer pays the extra cash, Dell will pre-install a copy of XP on the machine alongside Vista.

It’s a particularly pricy option as the deal is only available to customers buying either the Business or Ultimate edition of Vista. (That’s one of the main reasons Microsoft is letting firms continue to exploit this loophole – regardless of what system the customer actually runs, they’ve still paid for an expensive edition of Vista.)

Originally Dell offered this downgrade free of charge before introducing a $50 fee in June, which rose to $100 in October. "

Does anybody actually believe that the operating systems market is operating competitively and everybody just chooses microsoft?

This price gouging should be seen as a red flag and the government should be all over it promoting choice and stamping out all of microsofts anti-competitive business activities such as requireing 2 operating systems be bought by a customer for a certain system.

where is the judicial oversight???

I think the desktop OS is overhyped when talking about cost cutting. Nobody was going to upgrade to Vista anyway and 7 doesn't offer any significant difference (drivers and apps will still not work, they will still need to buy a lot of hardware and train employees).

The real loss is in the server and tools side. Businesses can see large benefits by 'going to the cloud' so thats where they were most likely to spend.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=avsV8CziCIOU&refer=home

Thats competition for you, notice how MS representatives always blame the economic climate while the journalist points to more competition from Linux on netbooks. All major OEMs now supply desktops with a Linux option. In 2002 that would have been unthinkable.

Windows Vista at this stage in its life is a proven product. Businesses will carefully adopt it going into 2009. With SP2 coming it will further cement Vista's adoption. Windows 7 is great, but its not here now, Vista is. Joe still does not get the concept of how businesses deploy software, they are always slow to upgrades and they do it on their own time. A lot of those XP installations are from Company's that are actually coming off 2000 Professional.

Andre, Vista may be proven but XP is even more proven, that's why Vista never sold in the first place. Windows 7 still does not fix any of the problems businesses see with Vista (app/hardware compatibility, training, expense). Why would you upgrade when XP is good enough and most CEO's have more on their mind than flashy desktops for all the staff?

Maybe you could itemize the business benefits for Vista on your blog, security is not such a selling point because many businesses have invested heavily in security. Most of your recent posts refer to a Live service, which should be available on any underlying OS.

Earlier in the year Gartner and IDC said that Vista adoption in 2008 will surpass that of XP’s rate during the same time-frame. They said Windows Server 2008 (which has many ties to Vista) will contribute to this. But I guess the economy plays a big factor.

Oh well. It’s too bad about Vista’s bad reputation. It probably had a lot to do with competitors attacking Microsoft and Microsoft not fighting back thinking that they are an unquestionable giant. Unfortunate for the end-users, Vista is actually a highly capable OS that has features that blow XP away in many regards. It’s just such a big technological (perhaps even methodological) change that many people can’t easily grasp the benefits. Well, in due time people will understand what it has to offer. You see it happening more on the internet starting with the “higher-tech” people I guess. I suppose more lay people will see the benefits but at a slow rate.

"It’s just such a big technological (perhaps even methodological) change that many people can’t easily grasp the benefits."

Like... for example?

I have a Vista machine here that I am prepared to hook up as my main machine, I'm just waiting for that must-have feature. What is it?

Billybob, just a few off the top of my head.
Instant search helps a lot when you get used to using it. It’s in multiple places. You can even change the indexing to your liking.

SuperFetch would benefit many multitaskers (highly prevalent in organizations)…especially in 64-bit Vista. Its built-in auto-defragged helps here too.

S3 sleep and the auto sleep will yield much energy savings as well as be in synergy with SuperFecth…since people don’t have to “leave their computer running 24/7” to obtain similar human productivity.
Built in backup and bit locker should help some people.
There are many more features, but ultimately it’s up to the individuals to see the advantages for themselves of course. But you also have to keep in mind that many of the features are synergistic rather than act plainly by themselves. Not saying that YOU definitely need any of these. But on average, I’d have to say that Vista is a well thought out development (perhaps even a little ahead of its time). I know you can trace individual elements to some past technology, but it’s the way Vista integrates it all into a package. Is it “perfect”? No. But it’s a heck of a lot better than XP (which is more like a toy OS in comparison). Hey, they put it in Netbooks! ;)

I think the big problem for MS is that Vista was different enough from XP that people consider it too big a migration training expense and don't want to do it. With Windows 7 they are widening the gap from XP, so I think this will actually build more resistance.

Also I think MS greatly over estimated how great Vista was (drank way too much of their own coolade). This led them to think they could add things like all the DRM, UAC, WGA and the kill switch without people complaining. Obviously they greatly miscalculated on people being such sheep that they would accept all this to get Vista's supposed benefits.

Instant search is available in all operating systems these days, welcome to the 21st century. I suppose you saw Spotlight, Beagle and Nepomuk? Nepomuk has a stupid name but will probably revolutionise the desktop. Desktop search is becoming semantic and task based on Linux, its way beyond basic filename globbing.

http://www.linux.com/feature/144853

Superfetch seems like the wrong solution to bloating and Windows' terrible virtual memory management. Preloading is a very old concept, if you want to preload something on Linux or OSX, it is very easy to do. Their VM management doesn't suck so applications do not suffer from 'back from lunch' syndrome. I find it easier to just get 4Gb of ram and turn off the retarded swap file. I'd rather a crash than a non-functioning desktop and a forced reboot while the disk is in furious activity.

Defragging is not something non-Windows users have to put up with so telling a non-Windows user that he will not have to defrag is not exactly appealing.

S3 is another patch to a poor problem. Why can't Windows BOOT in < 2 seconds from BIOS? SplashTop can boot in less time than Windows can resume from S3. Its not much use to a business since they mostly use desktops. Maybe I am fussy here, but sleeping desktop machines is very inefficient. Restoring a session on reboot is just as good as a suspend for me, Windows still does not support that, even Firefox can do it reliably.

Windows backup does not compare to the backup on OSX, I know its functionally the same, but OSX is much better because it forces you to use an extra drive (whats the point of backing up to the same drive?). It is user friendly too.

You are right that Bitlocker might be useful for some people (particularly laptop users). I am sure there are 3rd party apps for XP which people with those requirements must use (except the UK government obviously), thats what I meant by existing investment in 3rd party security solutions, its going to be hard to replace those, especially if their existing solution does not work well with Vista.

"Some 46 percent of the survey respondents said their businesses will skip Vista and migrate directly from Windows XP to the next generation Windows,"..................

And won't they just be amazed when they find out the Seven is just the same old pig Vista with more lipstick.

All they so called "upgrades," to Seven by businesses, will not be upgrades at all. Just like the general public, they might upgrade only when they buy new computers that come with Vista, err, I mean Seven, on them. Few in their right minds now, after the early adopters discovered just how bad Vista was, are rushing out to buy a boxed version of Vista separate from a computer sale. Do not expect anything to change here.

So even if Seven is the more polished, refined chrome turd Vista, don't expect it was be liked. It will still fall short in comparison with the likes of XP, Linux, Mac OS X, BSD, and Open Solaris. One of the failing points of Vista/Seven is the complexity of installing programs for the average user. Vista/Seven will fail on some/many xp programs, unless you know what to do, as the OS is too controlling. Its more than just UAC that is causing this complexity. Performance issues, are most likely to additional security features, and DRM in Vista/Seven, which will pose a major problem for Micro$oft, tying to shoehorn a size 13 Vista/Seven into a size 7 Netbook.

Businesses should save themselves a whole lot of pain, instead of moving to Vista/Seven, move to Linux, and keep your XP legacy machines. Run Virtualbox in Linux, XP works very well as a legacy OS in a VM, which will let you still run an XP program that you might not get to run with Wine/Crossover, IF, you need one of those.

While you can say all these things about this and that about all OS's and that all these have existed at some point may be true, but it doesn’t change the fact that it’s packaged in Vista (a Windows OS). Regardless of whether you realize it or not, mostly all companies will not switch to Linux or OSX or whatever and drop practically all of their other software to adopt a new platform with such a little benefit (which can be argued as to whether it’s true). Let’s be realistic here, OK? There is no competitive alternative to Win Office at present or the near future. There’s too much integration with Windows (both sold and developed) in existence. And there is no quick switch from all of these applications and infrastructure within the next few years. Even the XO laptop is more desirable with WinXP because governments want their kids to train with “world class software” rather than some obscure stuff only known to small subsections of IT. Furthermore, this article is about WinXP to Vista. And for some reason, it always attracts some fanboys of other OS’s to clamor about a world-wide revolution of anti-Microsoft movements…just because they think their pet OS works perfectly in their perfectly set up basement. The real world isn’t so dank and musty…

@rasmasyean;

"There is no competitive alternative to Win Office at present or the near future"

bull. StarOffice, Open Office, & oh yeah, Google Docs. Google Docs (Al doesn't use them himself) must stink so bad, entire cities are moving their government work to it. Washington DC IARC, made a wholesale move to Google Docs.

MS Office has nothing to offer but bloat & a high licensing fee (& that f@#$%ing ribbon with no option for classic menus)

Oh, AND the story is from Laura "I saw thousands of lines of stolen code for SCO" DiDio?

HAR HAR HAR!!!!
Does she have *ANY* credibility left after that huge up on her part?

Al wouldn't trust her to tell me what time it is or the color of the sky.

Interesting Washington DC story. However, if you look beyond the attention grabbing headlines, the move is about cloud computing and the collaboration tools rather than substituting MS Office. They still use both. I guess it remains to be seen what comes of this. Maybe it’s good for more “simple stuff” but I guess it remains to be seen how far this will get to other industries. Don’t forget that MS has a development business that tie in to all of these apps. And Microsoft rules over 40% of the server market, all of which integrate in some way to their Office Suite. Whatever changes to the “desktop OS” occurs, it will be a small dent until at least post “Vista era” (4-5 years from now) and likely the “Windows 7 era” (up to 8 years) as well.

@rasmasyean
Quite a little MS opinion you have there. As with all such opinions, you take a fact, and then fudge around it.
-
Will Linux dominate the market in 2009? Of course not, theres not enough time, however combine it with Mac and will be enough of MS's corporate pie taken away to send a message to Microsoft, and certainly stop Windows 7 from being the success MS are telling people it will be. Or does anyone truly believe that all will be forgotten with Vista and people will dive into Windows 7 when it slithers onto the market in 2009.
-
Rasmasyean said "Regardless of whether you realize it or not, mostly all companies will not switch to Linux or OSX"
-
Well they didnt flock to Vista either did they? and I personally know of two that have made the switch, so it does happen. Since backward comp is a hot potato with many companies trying to save money in these economic times, and the fact that Wine is becoming a more reliable alternative than a native WIndows platform for such comp, it makes me wonder, what enticement does Windows 7 actually have?
that brilliant comment of "lipstick on the same Vista pig" is spot on, and is there really anyone here who is looking forward to jumping on the Windows 7 experience when it gets released? (Andre we know you will, so you need not reply)
-
I wont even justify rams remarks about alternatives to msoffice, as its already been discussed, and that coment is not believed by the majority who have actually used the alternatives in a business environoment.
-
and of course our final comment that rasmasyean says, is one typical "just because they think their pet OS works perfectly in their perfectly set up basement"
-
How many times do we see that from a pro-ms poster who has nothing to argue with? Rasmasyean, let me give you some tips (since you appear new to this) and why not use the other common ones as well, such as:
"Get yourself a girlfriend" or what about "Go get a job" or "Experience real life, instead of sitting behind a computer screen"
-
If you need any more, just let me know.

Haha, you blame me for being biased by calling me a "pro-MS poster". But while I talk about market statistics and industry state, you talk about annecdotes and individual cases in supporting your "predictions".

Issue with Linux and Mac and large deployment is central management like ADS. That is under development in the form of freeipa.org.

Simple fact 2009 tech advantages other than software could disappear on Microsoft. Even some cases means to run software advantage could disappear with winehq.org as well.

Expect to see more large deployments over 2009 as management of Linux gets simpler.

MS is about to have a really bad year. Not only are the Linux guys at long last getting there 3d desktop working with high crash resistance of all things. They are getting multi point working as well. So to stay in the netbook market on features Windows 7 will have to go head to head with Linux. XP is not going to cut it any more.

2010 configuration of Linux will get simpler.

So hopefully MS gets Windows 7 out in reasonable condition and on time so its not a walk over.

So you think my prediction is unreasonable?
-
We've seen stats like yours before, its like the ones that claim 2% of the market share is Linux. Its like the MS claim that Office is so much better than Openoffice, yet all these claims, when challenged are never backed up are they? Its like the claim of how Vista is a huge success, or what about Zune? I could go on, I wont.
-
Just take a look back at what you posted, then take a look at what I posted. I never sought to suggest that my post was anything other than opinion. Did you not say "it always attracts some fanboys of other OS".
-
What is a fanboy? Surely someone who champions a product (and an open source one) is a great testimony to it? Afterall theres no financial reward in it for an open source user. You cant claim the same, because we already know the attitude of buying peoples opinion by some proprietary firms.
-
You are typical of someone with a pro MS opinion (and I believe a financial hook to them as well) you make a remark (eg the excellence of Office) then dont back it up. (Didnt you mock me doing the same) Difference between the two of us, I make it clear its my opinion, you make it appear as fact. Did you not say "There is no competitive alternative to Win Office at present or the near future."
-
You are not basing your opinions on facts, a look at most financial journals and "insider opinion" paint a very grim picture for MS.(IMO) I tend not to look at those, as I am more interested in if a package is functional, not how many copies its sold. I find MS lacking in both cases.
-
Nobody has been willing, despite many users requests, to actually have a discussion about what MS software can offer and what open source can. Nobody seems to want to compare products on a like for like basis, and that to me is the best example of fear by people like yourself, that if Opensource is directly compared to its MS counterparts, the MS products will be found lacking (or at the very least, and unnecessary purchase)
-
I use both MS (at work) and Opensource at home. I believe I have a good idea of the pros&cons of both.
-
Ramasyean, notice how many people on this site have posted about looking forward to Windows 7?
-
Have you noticed the balance of Opensource / Windows comments?
-
Shouldnt Microsoft Watch be a forum for pro Microsoft discussion and experience? I wonder why, MS products dont have what you call "fanboys"
-
Oh and welldone, I forgot to mention the term "fanboy" as a possible shiller insult.
-
@Everyone:
You see for a Microsoft Shiller, the concept of supporting anything without financial reward is such an alien concept to them that the only way they can comprehend it, is by using the term "fanboy"

rasmasyean cracks me up.

I'm a windows user, so I have a different perspective than mac users or linux users I suppose. But seriously what does Vista do for organizations?

Whatever is now part of the OS that wasn't before doesn't really matter if organizations already have those features implemented(and probably implemented better). So then you have to go back and say what does Vista bring to the table for these companies?

Better deployment features maybe, but nobody is deploying Vista... it doesn't run on old hardware and it comes on new hardware. What else that hasn't already been mentioned above... I honestly can't think of anything.

Vista may not be bad, but from an ROI perspective it simply does not make sense for a business. I mean were talking hardware and software for users that wouldn't need the new hardware for day to day work except for running the OS. The only thing that might change people's minds is end of support for XP, but some companies wouldn't care cuz MS support blows anyway, and others might just move to something else. If Vista ran *well* on existing hardware(inside the company) then it would be a slightly easier pill to swallow.

rasmasyean stated:
"It’s just such a big technological (perhaps even methodological) change that many people can’t easily grasp the benefits. "

Don't you mean mythological? I keep hearing the myth of the legendary Vista that vanquished all productivity issues that plagued XP.

It makes more sense for businesses just to wait for 7 anyway. Its Vista SP3 or 4 (take you pick, its subject to change).

Andre stated

"Businesses will carefully adopt it going into 2009."

Rhetorical non-sense. A profitable business carefully adopts any new IT or business platform regardless of calendar year. Joe nailed this article and you know it.

@Everyone
I think the above series of replies show that what people really think and what MS claims people think, are two different things entirely.
-
I rest my case.

Goblin :wrote

"You see for a Microsoft Shiller, the concept of supporting anything without financial reward is
such an alien concept to them that the only way they can comprehend it, is by using the term "fanboy" "

-----------------------------------------------------

The odd thing about this, is if I only said that Windows XP Pro is/was the greatest OS ever released. (Which I still believe IMO to be true). I would too seem like a Microsoft fanboy or a Shill.

While that statement may seem like I am a Windows shill, XP is seven years old. It does however have several years left to go. I do hope Windows 7 is a suitable replacement for XP.

When Vista was released, I didn't like what I saw with all the issues including the DRM built into the OS. (remember its YOUR computer..NOT Microsoft's! You bought that desktop or laptop with your hard earned money). This is when I started looking for alternatives to Vista....and apparently so did others.

Linux has made some great advances. Besides the fact that it can run faster on less hardware. I found that when doing video projects, Linux ran faster than XP did.

I needed to convert some videos to a DVD for a compilation.

I tried Windows XP and Nero. Nero would not allow me to convert to DVD without paying extra for a upgrade with the missing codecs.

I looked around and found DeVeDe for Windows, it converted with no issues. (There is a Windows and Linux version).

I was then able to convert it to a burnable ISO and THEN with Nero (in Windows).... I was able to burn a DVD from there. The desktop machine is Windows XP 3 Ghz speed with 1.2 gig ram.

I took the same videos...as a experiment.

In Ubuntu I did the same thing and got it converted using Devede (for Ubuntu) into a ISO.

I used Brasero Ubuntu's equivalent of Nero, and burned the ISO (created by Devede) into a DVD. The laptop has Ubuntu 8.04.1 with a speed of 1.8 Ghz with 1 gig ram.

The Ubuntu machine got the same job done in almost half the time ( with converting and burning ) that the Windows XP Pro did and did it with less processing power.

I shudder to think what would have happened if I tried the same with Vista.

This ongoing issue with businesses not adopting Vista is rather moot...isn't it? . Correct me if I am wrong)...But doesn't MSFT have "Software Assurance" and Volume licensing with these large businesses and Microsoft still gets their money regardless of what brand of Windows OS the businesses runs?

So while Vista is perceived as a failure in the business world, it should not affect Microsoft's bottom line in that respect. It does affect MSFT's reputation however, but it does not affect its financial cash cow...the corporate world. (Correct me If I am wrong). I am not defending Microsoft, but just purely making a observation.

What will hurt Microsoft in the long run is the current financial crisis. While companies signed contracts for three year licenses... It is a sure bet at least some companies have looked for, and are still looking for alternatives to Windows.

Whether it is the adoption of Open Office, the adoption of Red Hat Server, or even the adoption of Linux desktop in some areas of businesses where it is feasible. It is going to hurt MSFT eventually.

Even if businesses go to a all Linux server and still keep Windows, now you are talking the elimination of "client access licenses". What is the cost of a client access license?? $10 per desktop?

Not much, but if you are talking 1000 desktops ...that is a savings of $10,000 alone for the company...not including the elimination of the server license (s) per server.

Now times that by 10 companies..you are now talking about a loss of $100,000 at least for MSFT with out changing any desktop.

Then there is that little "problem" of open source mandates that is starting to rear its ugly head across the globe for closed software/proprietary based companies.

The one a whole separate issue, you have closed source/proprietary antivirus companies who will be hurt by non other than Microsoft next year. When it releases a free antivirus anti malware program for its various operating systems.

My opinion is that MSFT needs to get more into other areas of revenue to sustain the company in the long run. They need to develop/innovate the next Wii or I-POD type of product and do it better than anyone else can.

They need to look out of the box and develop the next killer app or entertainment toy that "no one seemingly can do without"...thats where their future lies..and they certainly still have enough cash to hire the right people to do it.

I think they need a change of leadership to accomplish this, but that lies with the stockholders and investors.

Maybe they need a new entertainment division with a new name and with a new attitude.

Like the way Samsung started "LG" and "LG" has now become a successful brand in its own right. Thats what MSFT should do.

As they say..stay tuned.

Quote Ralph "The odd thing about this, is if I only said that Windows XP Pro is/was the greatest OS ever released. (Which I still believe IMO to be true). I would too seem like a Microsoft fanboy or a Shill."
-
I disagree, check out JMB's comments on this thread for example.
-
I think its very easy to tell the difference between a shill post and one of honest opinion. The first thing about a shill post is that it will claim itself as fact, the second sign is a refusal to critisize anything that is MS, and the third is the traditional quoting of figures and stats, again as fact in order to somehow prove that MS is the better product.
-
Honest held belief posts dont have these. Being a Linux user, I can (and do say) Linux has issues, however unlike a proprietary pusher, we dont hide these facts we expose them in order to improve the product and to give potential users a true idea of what to expect when using the product.
-
You are correct about Brasero, an excellent no nonsense package. (Im currently using 0.8.2) and is another example of a decent, functional and simple program. Why would anyone purchase a proprietary solution?
-
In regards to your comment of "Maybe they need a new entertainment division with a new name and with a new attitude. "
-
Id completely agree. I dont think MS can enter the more "fashionable" markets with their current image, and Ive said before looking at the Zune website, you could be forgiven for thinking that MS was not overly keen on having the MS name on it. Could it be that MS itself knows how its products are received?
-

Also if I could add, that a shill poster would never champion old software to the extent of saying "its the best OS ever", MS wont make money unless people upgrade, and as we will see over the coming months, they will start to distance themselves from Vista in an attempt to push Windows 7 (imo)

"management of Linux gets simpler"

HAHAHAHA. I have managed systems with GNU/Linux and that other OS. I can type a simple command on one machine to update/monitor/start-stop/control any number of machines with BASH OpenSSH scripting in GNU/Linux. It is as easy to manage 1000 machines as one that way. With XP/2003, unless you buy some uber-package there is nothing like that. It comes with every distro of GNU/Linux I have used.

Don't give me AD. It is nothing more than some scripts applied to LDAP/Kerberos. I do not need that to manage a large system. I can use PAM/LDAP/OpenSSH. If one uses thin clients with GNU/Linux, managing a large system takes just minutes per day, a part-time job, because you just have to manage a few servers. That other OS was obsolete by the time XP reared its ugly head. People get so busy managing XP that they have no time to think of alternatives. They have to brace themselves for the next update from Redmond and lose sleep with nightmares about turning their systems into a super-bot. I can live very comfortably with GNU/Linux and the management tools included by default. If one adds something smoother like KACE, it is a walk in the park.

Price is enough of a reason to switch to GNU/Linux. One pays the cost of migration once or one pays the cost of staying on the Wintel treadmill forever.

There are many other reasons to migrate. I like choice. I can choose my kernel, my drivers, my office suite, and I still have thousands of packages of software available. If I choose a large distro like Debian, I almost have too many choices, but I have the time, because the administration is such a small part of my day with GNU/Linux.

Those planning to wait for '7' to change OS will have such a learning curve that it will be just as easy to switch to GNU/Linux. If '7' arrives in 2010, and they wait until 2012 to migrate, that is 4 years, plenty of time to become proficient with GNU/Linux on the server and the desktop.

On the US consumer side, Vista-64 Preinstalled dominates the market, although it's a safe bet that consumer PC sales will be way down this Christmas.

In the US, what percentage of PCs are purchased by consumers, rather than business?

Golbin wrote: "Will Linux dominate the market in 2009? Of course not, theres not enough time..."

Well, Linux is been around for a nearly two decades now. As far as a Desktop operating system goes, it's only at 2%. Linux will never have enough time -- Maybe a couple of centuries judging by the growth rate it's on.

I'm not picking on you, just a little reality on that comment you made.

If Microsoft failed and died out overnight, which it won't, and it will be around for a very long time, Linux will not become anything significant as a major player in the Desktop arena anytime soon. What did help Linux was two things, the Ubuntu Distro and the dismal track record of Vista. Still, Linux and for that matter, Mac did pick up some traction in sales and use.

The Unix flavor known as the Apple's OSX is the only real alternatives to many folks out there.

Apple has succeeded where Linux doesn't -- Delivering a complete system, not just an operating system, but the PC and hardware specifically for the Apple world. The majority of the folks that are against Microsoft, this is a reliable solution for the masses, jst unpack, connect and turn on...

Linux in general doesn't have this, it has to rely on OEMs to install and configure the OS on their machines -- Still with these oems such as HP, Gateway, and Dell, nobody's really buying these systems compared to the Microsoft oem builds.

Not everyone out here is a "geek" or wants to spend the time and money learning to install, configure, and operate Linux.

If you want to call me a Unix Shill, go ahead if it makes you feel better -- But remember, Linux is a downgraded free version of Unix, nothing more, nothing less. Change the GUI, but it's all based on Unix code beneath the skin. Yes, the antiquated "C" code used in programming Unix is also the DNA in BSD, OSX, and Linux.

I also realize that Solaris and Free Solaris is also a fringe OS in comparison and Unix has been around much longer than Linux (no matter the flavor of the Unix derivatives) and Microsoft for that matter.

-------------------------------------------------

Just Goggle "Linux is Unix" and there will be more than enough information for everyone interested in knowing this fact.

"Maybe a couple of centuries judging by the growth rate it's on."

If you go by the past growth rate then Linux will achieve 100% penetration in less than 5 years. Linux has been growing at a faster rate than the OSX.

I suppose you meant raw numbers, either way I seem to remember MS apologists laughing at Firefox's market share. They sure are not laughing now.

The rest of your rant is from 1998, please try to get up to date. Please run start -> run, type "cmd" (without the quotes), then check your HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Yourself\Clue key and set the DWORD value to "1" (without the quotes). Then reboot and you should have a clue.

Just Google GNU's NOT Unix - its in the name.

No you are not picking on me, I was responding to an opinion that seems to be implied. That opinion is that 2009 will be the year that Linux destroys Windows. I was making a comment saying that IMO, even as a Linux user and supporter, I cannot see that happening. Either you havent read or havent understood the point I was making.
-
I have no reason to call you any type of shill, I would hope you can appreciate the difference in your posting to the likes of say Andre.
-
Then you let yourself down. I do like the way to try to belittle me by saying "im not picking on you", a very cheap way to imply false sympathy for me. I assure you, you are not doing so and I would like to continue by qouting your remark of "not everyone is geeks" that fact is wrong. That would be the comment I would use if I was going to label you a shiller, which I wont.

Why am I a “shill” if I post real stats rather than conjectures? LOL
Whatever. I’m done arguing here. Some of the things you say about Linux is so off the mark. Linux has its purposes, but it has a loooong way to go for serious desktop penetration. I don’t think you really need to be a “shill” to see that.

Google "ie entrenched" to be enlightened. I'd post a link but last time the site didn't take it.

This article says that businesses have such a tie to IE with all the other server/office products that it's not as easy as you think for FF to be adopted in significant numbers quickly. Speaking from real-world experience, I would agree with the article.

You see, MS develops their stuff with businesses in mind so that's why FF gains consumer internet usage share because it's more of a "consumer" product. Why doesn't MS make IE "better" for you and me with all the $$$ they have? You gotta look where the $$$ comes from….Businesses. Much of the "consumer arena" actually STEALS MS products too! So go figure…

Quote Rasmasyean "it has a loooong way to go for serious desktop penetration."
-
I dont think anyone is disputing that, however the erosion has already started, just look back at previous comments on this site, you will find plenty of business that disagree with your opinion. Infact many of the business I have been to ARE favouring FF over IE. But thats a moot point. For Open source there is no rush, we've been around during times when even the simplest of peripherals was a chore to get working on Linux, and this current increase in popularity of the Linux platform will only help increase the speed in which it is deployed to more desktops to the detriment of MS. (IMO) At the end of the day from my experience I believe the better platform is Linux, I believe others are too.
-
Since you say youre done arguing (and I personally thought this was a debate) I dont suppose you will explain what you meant by "Linux has its purposes" as I would be genuinely interest to hear.

SolarisMaximus : wrote

"Well, Linux is been around for a nearly two decades now. As far as a Desktop operating system goes, it's only at 2%. Linux will never have enough time -- Maybe a couple of centuries judging by the growth rate it's on."

----------------------------------------------------

OK lets say Linux desktop has 2 %, thats a number what some feel comfortable to be focusing on.

However few if any are focusing on the Linux server segment.

Lets look at a hypothetical situation in which a company needs to cut back on their IT and licensing fees.

If just one company with 1000 desktops dumps their Windows server and decide to go with a Linux server...and keep Windows on the desktop and do nothing else. How much money will the company save and most importantly how much will that cost Microsoft in license fees?

Microsoft charges $799 for a additional 20 client access licenses for Server 2008. With the Server 2008 license you get 5 CAL's. With the Enterprise Server License you get 25 CAL's.

So how much is a company shelling out for just client access licenses for 1000 desktops? (Not including XP licensing, Windows Office licensing or Server licensing).

MSFT charges almost $40 per computer for a 20 CAL , so then with volume pricing or some bulk deal...what is it? .... I think $20 per computer might be a good guess.

Just by switching to a Linux server a company could save themselves (at least) $20,000 in client access license fees alone. And that doesn't even include the price of the server license. Add $4000 for a Server Enterprise license and now we are at roughly $24,000.

I would venture to guess maybe four servers would be needed for 1000 desktops? Lets say four servers at $4000 per license per server? Thats $16,000 plus the $24,000 in CAL's. I guess the figure could be about $50,000 per company.

Now multiply that by 50 or 100 companies moving to a Linux server...now we are talking a fairly good chunk of money saved in license fees.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/pricing.aspx

So the point is we could argue till the cows come home on whether Linux desktop is 2 % or 4 % or whether it will reach double digit figures.

Meanwhile few are willing to talk about that 93 % Linux market share that Linux enjoys in the Top 500 super computers. Insignificant you say?

Go ask Wall Street, where Linux enjoys a very healthy market share.

Few are willing to talk about companies who are moving to Linux servers to save them money in client access fees and expensive server licenses.

And the thing is, how much of a stretch is it really...for a company to start adopting open source applications like Open Office and eventually down the road ...Linux Desktop purely for financial reasons...especially if that same company just switched over to a Linux based server?

@Ralph:
When you consider that since the dawn of Vista, Mac OSX has doubled desktop market share, but Linux has increased 3X to 4X its desktop market share. While still very small in numbers, that makes Linux, the fastest growing by rate of increase, desktop operating system out there. And with linux, there is no big advertising budget, just for the most part, happy linux users who pass on their success to others, by word of mouth.

Could it be this reason, that the M$ astroturfers attack and FUD linux every chance they get? They sure seemed worried to me about Linux, and rightly so.

Goblin I am not saying Linux will destroy Microsoft in 2009. But it could cause major harm.

Server use of Linux is popular because it stable. Same kind of stability on desktop changes things a lot.

2009 is the year Linux kinda goes after the company desktops. Multi attack too. Visualization for running those odd needed applications on a central server. Since windows can be warped up inside a Linux virtual machine it no longer sees how many clients are connecting to it. MS CAL licensing is in trouble in 2009.

There are many moving problems freeipa.org is going after to remove Apple Solaris Linux ok basically anything no Microsoft from having to connect to the ADS server. So 1 cal is all you need for all your non Microsoft Machines.

Samba team are planing release of a version with a ADS server in 2009. We already have post path ok closed source cisco that is a drop in replacement for exchange. Basically most of Microsoft server stack is under threat.

Lots of saving for businesses. Problem is also that key business applications for some companies work in winehq.org but not Vista if that stays the same for windows 7. Some companies basically only have the selection between buying vista and downgrading to XP so stuff works and having security problems that are built into XP. Or buying Linux(Note the word buying) Commercial versions have better font support and so on due to patented code being enabled. When they price it out Linux can be cheaper boot faster more secure.

Why are they not changing in large numbers management of large numbers of Linux machines. TCO Linux is losing to ADS TCO savings.

1 to 2 percent desktop market share is exactly what you would expect from Linux in its current state. The state it will be in 2009. You cannot guess.

OK fine I’ll get back into the “Linux taking over the world” discussion if really want and show you some more enlightening stats.

Where to you get the 2% desktop figure? Google “marketshare hitslink 11” and it says 0.83% internet traffic. If anything, this is over-representative of install base because “internet” is more done on Linux since more ppl who have Windows play games and do work rather than roam the internet with their time. Even Vista has 1/5 of this traffic (that highly excludes the DX10 gamers and small but growing media center users). Think about China where all software is “free” anyway. Google “China 244 copies Vista sold” so you can’t even use the cost argument here.

Even if you look at servers (where Linux “has its uses”) on average, companies like MS Servers more…40.8 % vs. 14.0%. Both have been gradually increasing with MS Server leading the capture of other technologies. Google “idc press release server market share” for the quarterly reports.

And when you do a “cost analysis” on CAL’s and OS pricing, etc. you’re neglecting the most important factor...people. The last time I checked, you can’t just buy enterprise computers (or get them for free even), and plop them somewhere and it does everything by itself including converting all existing software and hardware infrastructure by themselves. So you’re going to have to fire all your employees use to MS stuff and hire brand new employees that know both technologies AND the business and transition all of this overnight? If there is “cost savings” in using Linux, it will be is small “specialty use” scenarios (desktop is not among the best at this point). Remember that not everything is about saving a dollar simply like that. There is a British saying “Penny-wise, Pound-foolish”. The point…MS stuff, if perhaps not for your use, IS the most versatile and powerful in a broad range of business applications. That’s how they got there to begin with and they have tons of $$$ to hold on to that position. It’s going to take much longer than a few years to unseat them. I just don’t see Linux as that “revolutionary technology” that will cause this type of disruption in the IT world.

Funny enough on that new and old employees thing Linux interfaces can be that close to windows interfaces that users don't notice the difference for a long time.

Yes System Admins notice the difference. Training is not exactly a major issue.

Process of conversion is parasitic. Meaning you don't give up Windows in one hit. Most business who do the conversion slowly untangle self. Sorry to say server side MS is not the most powerful software. Client side lot of cases not everyone needs full blown MS Office. Simple case of sorting your employees of who needs the features and who does not. Cutting costs accordingly.

Current major issue is CAL's since Linux machines at moment still have to register with ADS threw a third party commercial module to be fully managed. Cost savings of deploying Linux is not that great. Freeipa.org opens up the cost savings.

Nothing says in the process of cutting cals that you have to give up the means to run Microsoft software.

This is the problem idea that Linux has to straight up take over the world to do Microsoft major harm. If your check of where resources comes up that lets say 70 percent of your staff does not need MS office at all because OpenOffice.org will do there requirements. Next upgrade cycle you can cut costs. Like a call center where it can turn out that no one working in the call center part needs windows or ms office at all. Major cost saving. Now do Point of sale terminals need Microsoft. The list goes on. Major reason why Microsoft is where they are is management of OS's nothing more. Without that market numbers in business could reduce to 10 to 25 percent of total deployments of machines.

Besides you did not fire all you employees when you changed from windows 98 se to XP. So why Windows to Linux. You had to retrain a lot to cross the 98se to XP change. Just like you will have to retrain a lot to cross the change from XP to Windows 7. No matter what you are going to have a stack of employees who don't know crap about what they are doing. Problem here is lot of XP hardware is good enough to run Linux. Push comes to shove do you buy new hardware or reinstall the old ones with a different OS and keep on going with them. Tight incomes forces this option on table.

You need to learn the difference between revenues and deployments. On average Linux OS's cost 1/4 of Microsoft so sorry by those numbers MS is losing majority in deployments. Yes on average MS server licensing also costs more than the machine its running on. Even trying to be optimistic to Microsoft you would have to cut there numbers in half or double Linux's. So Linux is not that far behind windows.

z/OS is given freely away with IBM z series hardware. That hardware also runs Linux. revenues give no clues to numbers. Deploying Linux I am just as likely to use Z series hardware as anything else. Next little rub that z/OS + Linux numbers come to over 23 percent.

Remember the IBM z series hardware cannot run Windows. So Linux numbers dropped a little IBM's boomed. Nothing says Linux numbers changed at all. All the Linux change might be is that Linux people are liking IBM z series hardware more at the moment. MS numbers on the other hand dropped with no possible location they could have moved to.

I don't call that report positive outcome for Microsoft. This quarter Microsoft and Linux numbers dropped Microsoft dropped by a large percentage. Next quarter will be interesting to see the trend.

Linux cannot be counted that simply. There are a lot more white box servers out there in the small end that don't get counted for Linux.

PS also go read Redhat Licensing. It also explains why Linux numbers might have dropped in poor money times.

It is per active server licensing. So you have a old server you are perfectly free to strip the OS off that and move it too the new server. So tight times in for Linux numbers equals more companies doing server upgrades with OS less servers.

@oiaohm
Youve hit on some very good points. In the case of business the migration to open source / Linux can take place at the pace of the company. Open source apps are available in Windows flavours and I think it starts with the replacement of simple MS apps with their open source alternatives, eventually ending in (hopefully) a migration to Linux.
-
I see many users taking this route, starting with FF then looking at the requirements needed and coming to the conclusion that a/they dont need the bells and whistles of an MS product, and b/ they dont need to lock themselves into any MS product either.
-
Despite what people say and what figures are quoted, I believe that the Windows platform is no longer the definitive platform to be using. In days gone by there were no alternatives to MS's wares, today there are many solutions available, and are viable.
-
This is what is MS's competition, not Linux, not Mac but the realization that people no longer consider Windows the only platform run on PC.
-
The figures for Vista take up are misleading at best (IMO). A quick search of any forum will reveal users requesting help on downgrading on a pre installed Vista machine. I believe that if anyone here draws from personal experience and actually considers how many businesses and/or friends/family actually use Vista, the ratio is pretty low.
-
I know of 5 people who bought a machine pre-installed with Vista. Whilst I would love to say they all converted to Linux, they didnt, what they did do was downgrade (although I consider it upgrading) to XP
-
Windows 7 better be good for MS's sake. A Vista SP3 will not wash with a public who were burned in the past, and users cannot continue to use XP until Windows 8 comes out (IMO)
-
People seem to think that any Linux supporter has a "Linux taking over the world" attitude. Fact is they dont. Ive said before I would not want mass migration to the Linux platform from Windows, as I think alot of the "average Windows" users are responsible for the binary slug of Windows (with their demands of a nannied O/S). I would not like to see Linux become a product like that.
-
What I would like to see is more people exercising their right to choose. That can only be good for everyone. If MS realize that people are no longer willing to accept "any old rubbish" then it may make the Windows product better as MS will not want to the loose the money. This IMO is why Linux (and other alternatives) are so good for the computing world, they encourage all platforms to "up their game"
-
Afterall, if Linux/Mac was NOT an alternative and a viable one, we wouldnt be having this debate and everyone would be using Vista.

"Some 46 percent of the survey respondents said their businesses will skip Vista and migrate directly from Windows XP to the next generation Windows,"......................

I got bad news for those businesses planning on migrating directly to Windows Seven, its still really just Vista. And as such will have the same program, driver, and hardware incompatibility as Vista has. Forget trying to put Seven or Vista, on that old P3 or P4, you are going need all new hardware, with lots of horsepower, just to get something acceptable performance wise. And then, it most likely will still not run as nicely as that old P3 or P4 did with XP or Linux on it.

The easy way to think of it, is, Windows Seven is Vi$ta.

Joe
Aren't you kind of "whipping a dead horse" here !
After all you have saying this sort of thing ever since Vista came out.
So what if businesses don't like Vista... so what !
You have said it yourself (even in this article) that businesses will migrate to Windows 7.
What microsoft didn't get with Vista they will get with Windows 7.
In fact I dare say that a lot of people will migrate from Vista as well, seeing all the new things that are in it.

Question is more complex than that Neil will they be able to afford or justify the cost.

Besides lot of businesses will wait for the first service pack. So forget 2009 it will be some time in 2010 when they start looking at migrating to Windows 7. Windows 7 will have to be really good for them to do anything before 2010.

Longer the down turn lasts less chance even Windows 7 has of getting anywhere.

Most of the issues of the Linux are going to go by by in the first half of 2009.

Vista and XP both will not be getting usb 3.0 support from Microsoft. So yep could be completely useless on new motherboards with usb 3.0 support. Who wants not to be able to use USB keys. Linux is already marked to receive usb 3.0 support possibly before Windows 7 is released. Windows 7 usb 3.0 support will be a latter update. Great sata all over again. Particularly with laptops without cdrom drives and only usb ports and network ports to connect install media.

Yep downgrading is going to be screwed.

The game has changed badly. MS let down hardware makers with Vista. Lot of ram makers could hit the wall. So now they are backing many camps in the hope that one sells.

Yes we have a double it problem. Vista failed and now other markets tighting bottom lines.

Question is more complex than that Neil will they be able to afford or justify the cost.

Besides lot of businesses will wait for the first service pack. So forget 2009 it will be some time in 2010 when they start looking at migrating to Windows 7. Windows 7 will have to be really good for them to do anything before 2010.

Longer the down turn lasts less chance even Windows 7 has of getting anywhere.

Most of the issues of the Linux are going to go by by in the first half of 2009.

Vista and XP both will not be getting usb 3.0 support from Microsoft. So yep could be completely useless on new motherboards with usb 3.0 support. Who wants not to be able to use USB keys. Linux is already marked to receive usb 3.0 support possibly before Windows 7 is released. Windows 7 usb 3.0 support will be a latter update. Great sata all over again. Particularly with laptops without cdrom drives and only usb ports and network ports to connect install media.

Yep downgrading is going to be screwed.

The game has changed badly. MS let down hardware makers with Vista. Lot of ram makers could hit the wall. So now they are backing many camps in the hope that one sells.

Yes we have a double it problem. Vista failed and now other markets tighting bottom lines.

Neil, you say so what if business dont like Vista.
I think MS will be glad you dont work for them. However I think you will find that MS believes Vista WAS a complete sucess. There not much festive cheer around for MS, its IEexploits have just today hit the mainstream media, and BBCnews 24 is suggesting either get an Ie replacement or run a crippled IE with poorer performance, just to prevent the latest possible exploit.
Maybe for xmas this year even Windows users will be surfing under an alternative? Now, hows MS stock after todays revelations?

Unfortunately the business world doesn’t move that fast that USB 3.0 support will be such a big deal in the next couple of years. Besides there’s always third party hardware solutions that will crop up. Remember when you had to install a TCP/IP network card? I don’t think it’s such a big deal. Most people store stuff online anyway and some companies disable those devices for data security. There’s a difference between upgrading your home rig at the first sign on new technology and doing massive deployments in industry.
I’m not sure where you get your notions about IE from. Is it based on your theory on the way the world “should ideally work”? Note that A LOT of the business world still uses pre-IE 7 versions. IE6 is one of the most abundant browsers (despites its “security flaws”). As a matter of fact, companies like this aspect of it for various scenarios. And especially since there is so much code deployed around this browser, it’s hard to move quickly to a new platform (both browser and OS). As to whether these “flaws” (or features) cripple an organization…there are other methods to compensate for these things.
And I don’t know why you are talking about P3s, P4s and such. Why not talk about what can run on 386 machines? Sure there are those few food processing controllers running Win3.1 that recently made its 1 billionth donut…but. It’s obvious that to remain competitive, practically all businesses have to upgrade hardware both to run new software AND to take advantage of new technologies. The computer these days is more of an entire system than simply a “machine that runs an OS”.

Goblin, I don't know about zune but check this out.

Also, check this out...

Google:
Vista - a $6 Billion Dollars Operating System

I don't really know what the markup of it is but for simplicity let's assume that they make $100 off each license on average (which is a conservative estimate wouldn't you say?).

If my math is correct, that's $18 billion dollars as of the last public claim of 180 million copies sold.

Google:
Microsoft: 180 million Vista licenses now sold
If my math is correct again...that's TRIPLE the initial costs!

Of course they likely spent a little more after-market like for Jerry Seinfeld and stuff like that but I don't think it’s anywhere near $12 billion dollars.

And I'm sure they sold more since then.

I like the faith. Parts die rasmasyean. Its a simple IT fact of life.

Problem is here USB 3.0 will start shipping in motherboards in 2009. It really does end the downgrade option unless maker does provide Usb 3.0 drivers. Leap of faith time. Idea that third party will solve it. Its a little bit of a problem. Lag.

The thing you are missing is yes companies might disable USB ports to users but on some laptops the only way to connect floppy cdrom drive or anything else is the USB ports. So yes it will be install threw network. Now if laptop does not have XP drivers you are minorally harmed now. This is now a killer blow to anyone needing disks in field.

Ie usb ports are normally disabled to users but usable to system admins if the need required it.

Yes they made Triple initial costs maybe. Yet profits are down this year compared to what they normally would have sold.

$100 dollars per copy is about right not conservative if anything it might be high. Large numbers of Vista Starter and basic have been sold that only make about $50 dollars each after paying all the middle men. Then there are school discounted rates of 20 dollars a copy. Yes the also count them in there 180 million. Then partner sold copies what are under 15 dollars a copy.

Yes they count any copy no matter the channel.

Yes 100 dollars might be a little high. So at best they made triple. Then you have companies that strong armed Microsoft in there as well.

20 dollars a copy is what hardware makers are going to be pushing for or lower in 2009.

@rasmasyean
-
I love to debate. I am still waiting for someone to print an argument in regards to the benefits of Vista. But none are forecoming, because IMO there are none.
-
The only benefit that people have touted is: "Well its made a profit and sold alot of units, so it must be good" - Well im sure it is good, for Microsoft.
-
Are you seriously telling us that after years of feedback/reports from users of XP, Microsoft took all that on board and released Vista?
Are you really saying that Vista is the product of "the best of XP" If you are, then stand by your convictions. If you are not, then like the majority of comments, you are another unsatisfied customer.
-
The claim of "well theyve sold alot" doesnt cut it, does it?

Goblin :wrote

" I am still waiting for someone to print an argument in regards to the benefits of Vista. But none are forecoming, because IMO there are none."

----------------------------------------------------

One benefit of Vista is the increase in Linux usage and Apple has just about increased their market share three times.

I did hear that Vista was the only OS that could play Blu-Ray on a computer. But then again, even if that were the case...why would anyone watch (or attempt to watch ) a high def Blu-Ray movie on a cramped 17" laptop screen anyway?

Most sane people would want a stand alone Blu-ray player .... But then since I use Linux...what do I know?.. :-) lol

If one really wants to talk about slow or no adoption...Blu-Ray seems like another Vista. It is supposed to be the greatest thing since sliced bread, yet it is still over priced for both the players and the movies.

Blu-Ray is overly DRM laden and the burners and the blank discs for Blu-ray are expensive if you can find one.

DVDs is king and very versatile unlike Blu-ray. You can by a upscale DVD player for well under $75 that will will look great on your HDTV. Blank DVD's are affordable than ever sometimes $22 or less for a 100 pack.

Sounds almost like the Vista vs XP debate. (I'm sure this will invoke flame wars... lol)

Here's a synergistic advantage I see regarding the mentioned Superfetch that you don’t seem to like.

With 64-bit...

Consider that many workers like to have, say 20 windows open and do not shut down in order to save time in the morning (even Monday morning), they can now leave 40 windows (or more) open. Also, the more RAM they have, the more stuff can be SuperFetched and Auto Disk Defragmenter and whatever can run more efficiently in the background when AFK too.

For the above scenario, workers will probably “lock” Vista with the S3 sleep more because they can resume in 5 seconds anyway, or it will just auto-sleep after a period…translating to a huge savings on energy consumption.

No, Vista has not let me down...
I would never go back to XP myself unless there is an absolute need for an unsupported item. Or I'm building an old computer for "older" friends and family who don't need the power.

Also remeber that a professional IT team worth it's weight can get practically anything to work. Just because you don't find a "compatability solution" on the internet doesn't mean that there isn't one. Perhaps it's a concept that its "foreign" to some of your "Linux Open Sourcers", but secrets aren't always shared readily in the business environment. And most normal people aren't forum junkies. ;)

Here’s a brief list I personally like and many apply to businesses as well.

SuperFetch makes my "free" RAM not go to waste (esp. with 64-bit).
Persistent Defragger - No more need for other defrag software.
Backup Utility - No more need for other backup software.
Instant Search Box all over the place.
[Manual / Auto]“S3” Sleep (no rebooting, only takes like 5 seconds to resume, and only 2 watts).
I like the fact that it asks me when things run so I can stop it.
Windows Media Center.
No need to download and update “Activesync”. It has an improved Windows Mobility Center.
Dictation with speech recognition sometimes faster than typing long stuff.
Touch-screen technology with Tablet PC.
Performance Monitor much improved over XP.
Windows Presentation Foundation (I haven’t made anything yet myself, but it seems like a leap from the old days hehe).
All other business and developer technologies seem so cool too but I guess they won’t be used much until more people migrate to Vista for developers to sell stuff to.
Makes me feel safer with the security upgrades (esp. with 64-bit) at least, but it’s hard to tell what would it be like without it because I knew what I was doing with XP anyway and had updated protection software.

From the Adobe FAQ...

What are the advantages of 64-bit computing?
In early testing of 64-bit support in Photoshop for Windows®, overall performance gains ranged from 8% to 12%. Those who work with extremely large files may realize noticeably greater gains in performance, in some cases as dramatic as ten times the previous speed. This is because 64-bit applications can address larger amounts of memory and thus result in less file swapping — one of the biggest factors that can affect data processing speed.

Now I know there's 64-bit XP and most Linux these days is 64-bit. But the key thing is software availabilty. Not all developers make the effort to do that much cross-platform support. As always, there's a difference between theory and practive.

This YouTube clip is from the maker of software that is the most prevalent in companies that makes hard goods. It’s called SolidWorks and is a leading design software. Windows only!
Apj4odggoGY

Google:
Data Shows Vista More Secure Than XP

In XP machines, Microsoft's own software contained 42 percent of the vulnerabilities attacked, while 58 percent were in third party software. For Vista machines, Microsoft's software had 6 percent of the vulnerabilities attacked, with third-party software containing 94 percent of the flaws.

They should do a 64-bit focused study. I wonder what that would look like.

@rasmasyean, regarding your comment on SolidWorks I have to say the following:

It is totally irrelevant and just comes to show how the industry has been warped backward by the Wintel group.

I've used (and probably still have somewhere) Protel PCB design software. Now called Altium (www.altium.com). It is a top of the line Printed Circuit Board (PCB) design software. It is also Windows only. Should I recommend Windows Vista to others based on this? Hardly so! Most don't even know what PCBs are and the rest probably never opened an electronic device to see whats inside.

Maybe the laptop I'm using was designed using SolidWorks (for the casing) and Altium for the PCBs. But people don't really care, they just want to use it.

Getting back to SolidWorks I'd like to comment that I've used Pro/ENGINEER. Now I'm not going to discuss which is better. There is plenty of literature out there to make your mind on. Starting with: www.unitec.com/solidworks/ brochures/SW2009_Benchmark.pdf. BTW, it seems SolidWorks is better than Pro/ENGINEER, but that's beyond the scope of this post.

What I'd like to say though is that Pro/E is supported on both Windows and Unix and I got my training in Pro/E on Windows. Specifically Windows NT on Alpha chips back in '96 or '97. The Alpha chip was a 64 bit RISC device.

I find it amusing that you're all over this board boasting the benefits of 64bit computing as something new. When the truth is that it's been around for over 10 years. BTW, I'm convinced that those who chose Pro/E on Unix over Pro/E on Windows had an easier time supporting it than being dragged through NT/W2K/XP/Vista and Alpha, Itanium and Xeon architectures. Just my opinion though.

This has got to be one of the key issues that upsets me when working with Microsoft. They're all hush hush and ohh bad bad about a technology or product until they themselves have it. So now that 64 bit is in their mainstream consumer OS then oh ho ho, jump on it boys! Oh and when they do not only do they portray it as the next best thing to sliced bread, they also grab you by the neck and drag you through the upgrade path. Like it or not.

The whole Vista Capable lawsuit is just more of the same and comes to show how the average consumer is being kept in the dark (and dragged through the mud).

Microsoft is the late arrival to the party who thinks the party hasn't started until they're in the house.

@rasmasyean, again

"Google:
Data Shows Vista More Secure Than XP"

And this is a good thing in what way? I would expect to have new products improve over previous ones. That statement should be a given and the doubt of such a thing is proof of the bad state Microsoft in the consumers' eyes.

XP was released prior to Bill Gates security initiative memo. I would expect all things following such a memo to improve. Also note that improving over XP security record is not a hard thing to do either.

You're basically patting Microsoft of their back for achieving something which is their obligation to do. And certainly not some sort of added feature we should be glad to have.

@Gerardo
As requested, I’m just pointing out he “benefits of Vista”…over XP…and apparently over Linux since this was brought into the discussion. I never said that they were the “first” to do 64-bit or whatever. What’s the difference anyway whether they were first or last? Who cares! Unless you want to get into a “philosophical debate”… As for the 64-bit, don’t forget that 64-bit Vista is a mainstream OS. 64-bit XP is NOT. That makes a big difference because the applications and peripheral support count when you are deploying a platform “across the board”. And you no longer need to have a "lone XP 64-bit computer" next to your 32-bit machine...etc.

The “Wintel group” became prevalent because of “Open Architecture”. This enabled the rapid advancement and distribution of computing products. Note that this is different from “Open Source” as manufacturers have more avenues to make a profit because you can’t duplicate hardware like you can copy software. Hence there are many business models by which companies sprung up…mostly in China now, but anyway… So, perhaps there are “better” methods than which “Wintel” has followed (of course that can be argued as well). But what you can’t deny is that this open architecture has enabled a whole set of standards by which thousands of companies were able to take part in pervasively putting computers into so many industries. Bill Gates saw this and that is why Windows dominated, whether or not it is the most “elegantly designed”. Perhaps that is also that mark of “Wintel”. It’s a market force more than some “evil tyrant/partnership oppressing the world”.

@rasmasyean:
You wouldn't be another Microsoft employee would you?
http://silverlight.net/members/rasmasyean.aspx

Not the first you know to pretend to be just the average user who works for Microsoft.

As far as your list of improvement of Vista over XP, a small comemt:

All 4 services run low priority but generates enormous harddisk activity and should therefore be disabled in Vista:
1. SuperFetch
2. Defender automatic scan
3. Defrag automatic scan
4. Indexing and MS search

Its called beating the hard drive to death, and this is an improvement over XP?

@The Hand

Microsoft employees ask questions about licensing and how to find resources about programming Silverlight?

You should be a detective! LOL

Gimme a break. When you have nothing better to argue you just blame people on being a "shiller" or perhaps a "troll".

Go ahead and save you hard drive for 10 years instead of 8. Let me guess, you still have that really slow 10gig hard drive from 1998? Hey it still works right?

@rasmasyean:
LOL, I don't think I used the word "shill" or "troll". The question was, "You wouldn't be another Microsoft employee would you?" And your answer, pretty much indicted you.

But at least, here we have a softie that admits that all the hard drive paging that Vista is doing is shortening the drives life. Its only the length of time that it is shortened, that he got wrong, as it greatly shortens the live of your C: hard drive.

And as far as that is all "you people" have, I did not see you answer a whole lot of questions, rather avoid them.

You have to learn to read dude...
The "member" in the Silverlight site is member of their forum. I don't know how you got that I "avoided" silverlight questions when "asking" the questions myself? And there are only 4 posts there! Are you joking? Or are you just fooling around? Or maybe you're the one who is a "Linux employee" (or related). rofl. Whatever, I wouldn't care if you were. It would actually be more of challenge and I would welcome any argument based on facts and non-biased logical arguments. Not some ill-conceived fanatical misconceptions, which you obviously have if you think only an MS employee can discover these features of Vista…let alone think that corporations hire people to post on random/obscure forums to sell a few extra items…meaning no offense to Joe Wilcox. ;)

I notice that rasmasyean, still has not answered the question about his relationship with Microsoft. Why?

BTW, I have no relationship with any linux, microsoft company, etc. I am just a home user. As far as MS astroturfers posting comments here at MS Watch, that has been very well documented, and you only need to read many of the back articles to find those examples. MS Watch may not be the bigger site on Microsoft, but it is one of the larger and more interesting ones. Thanks to Joe Willcox for that.

Well, rasmasyean,
The Hand has a point, why not just come out and say it, if you work for MS or not? Not everyone that works for MS is evil or anything. Look at Jesse Meats, at least she is right up front about who she works for (not meaning you do).

But a point that I brought up a long time ago, is this:

FTC Moves to Unmask Word-of-Mouth Marketing

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/11/AR2006121101389.html?nav=hcmodule

Quote from the link;
"The Federal Trade Commission yesterday said that companies engaging in word-of-mouth marketing, in which people are compensated to promote products to their peers, must disclose those relationships.Word-of-mouth marketing can take any form of peer-to-peer communication, such as a post on a Web blog, a MySpace.com page for a movie character, or the comments of a stranger on a bus."
--------------------------------------------------
Now I am not saying that you are doing anything wrong, or you work for MS, but it would be nice to hear that from you, as The Hand has asked. Certainly there are others that do work or are compensated by Microsoft, that are breaking the FTC laws posting here in the comments. And just because they might be from a foreign country, dosen't mean that Microsoft itself cannot be held accountable by the FTC for this type of activity.

@chips b malroy:
The fact that it is illegal to do what a lot of the MS Astroturfers are doing and so far getting away with in the comments on this site, is not going without notice. Thanks to your link, I am seriously thinking about going back and documenting many of the data and posts, of some of these people. How hard can it be to file a complaint with the FTC. Might even think about contacting groklaw and the EFF, and see if they interested.

About Jessie Meats, I strongly disagree with you there. She (if) is still just a salesman for MS, and as such does not impress me. Not only that, but even your link, with the FTC law, she is not in compliance with, as you see, to be in compliance, she would have to have a disclaimer or statement in every post that she works for M$.

Sorry for not replying sooner rasmasyean, ive been away.
-
Ok Rasmasyean, forgetting all the Microsoft PR youve been spouting for the last few post (by the way, I will challenge each point if you wish)
-
Before I do, let me ask you a simple question which requires a simple yes or no answer. Lets see if your typical shill Linux insults will stretch to answering a Q.
-
Are you saying that after years of feedback/bug reports/praise from users of XP, Microsoft took all that on board and released Vista?
-
Are you saying that Vista represents everything that was good about XP?
-
If you are (and I repeat) stand by your convictions by agreeing. If you dont agree then really your true feelings about Vista are the same as ours.
-
And maybe you could also respond if you work for MS? Im sure Joes site logs IP's so dont worry about anyone pretending to be you. Yes or No, such a simple answer.

https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/

You guys are a riot. Do I actually have to “state a claim” like this a court of law? Are you guys attorneys? I thought I was clear enough. OK, for your humor…

I am not an employee of Microsoft nor am I affiliated with Microsoft in any way nor do I hold any interest in the Microsoft Corporation. And William Gates has not invited me to his barbeque either. hehe

Besides, I think some of you are taking that FCC thing to seriously. And fyi, most companies, especially major corporations have policies against “representing the firm in unofficial business”. That’s grounds for termination or disciplinary action at least.

I’m just both a home and professional user that has used DOS and gone throughout the moves all the way from Win3.1 to XP (with direct involvement from NT onward). I have also been through and an increasing number of MS stuff along the way like Servers, Sharepoint, etc. not because I have any MS certifications or training, but because that’s just what has happened on an industry-wide scale since the dawn. I can also say that most people have had a “resistance” to each new major technology we have moved to…especially Windows, which tends to affect a wide range of workers. But afterward, they always learn that it is “better” (more productive) after a learning curve…and many new technologies open new doors to better productivity. Sometimes it’s just a handful of things used in one product and not “all the amazing new revolutionary features”. Different people find other subsets useful.

Not that all I’ve ever done was “Windows”…I’ve also worked with many systems across the board involving from legacy systems and unix, to Windows and developed stuff in various languages in all of them as well as used 1st and 3rd party vendor products directly and indirectly. And including “IT” I also have quite a bit of knowledge of the manufacturing sector as well.

So all this stuff you see as “MS PR” is not a sales pitch. I’m just helping you see it from another angle and providing a real-life view of things because one too many times have I’ve seen some hardcore “linux fanaticism” and “MS collapse” that absolutely makes no sense. I mean everyone gets frustrated with things but then when you just spout lies and false info without knowing what you are talking about…well…lol

Personally, I think its a waste of time to file a complaint Hand. Buts its your time to waste.

Jessie is not so bad for a softie. At least when she went after one of my points, an admittedly weaker point too, she was very polite about it. Polite discourse can be respected, and even encouraged. But I do and have even stated, that anyone, who works for MS, and posts here, cannot take a very negative point of view, on Microsoft, without getting fired. Therefore, for that reason, and the fact that she is up front about working for MS, her posts are somewhat marginalized, as we know she cannot agree too much with us.

And this is of course why a few others will not admit to working or receiving some sort of compensation from Microsoft, for posting here. And to lie about that, might just compound the infraction with the FTC, or other laws on the books, could be another reason that you seldom get an answer, to your question.

@rasmasyean
-
"Do I actually have to “state a claim” like this a court of law?"
-
No, we were just asking a question. Youre not obliged to answer us. Its up to you.
-
"So all this stuff you see as “MS PR” is not a sales pitch. I’m just helping you see it from another angle and providing a real-life view of things"
-
Since I am a professional coder who develops with MS products at work, and since Ive made the decision to use open source at home (because of experience) Id say that Im in just a good (if not better) position than you to have a balanced view.
If I admit to making a living from MS products AND choose to use open source at home, what does that say about my opinion?
-
If you want to spout CV's as some sort of badge of honor, I too have been around since the "old days" of Win 3.1 and before. I migrated to the A500 and 68k asm, where I became involved in the demoscene. I came back to PC after A1200 died "officially", I consider myself established in C++ and lately Python/Perl and....this all means nothing and is rather silly when talking about products in way they are discussed here. PEOPLES PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE DOES NOT GIVE THEIR OPINIONS ANY MORE WORTH.
-
IMO "“linux fanaticism” comes from honest held belief of users who have used MS, tried open source, and found the latter to be better. I dont think there is a single Linux user here who hasnt had (or still having) extensive experience with Windows....thats what makes our views more balanced. There are many pro-ms'rs that will post never having used Linux.
Why dont you think you ever see a Windows Fanatic? Could it be that there is nothing to get fanatical about?
-
You said "I can also say that most people have had a “resistance” to each new major technology "
-
Ok then, answer my question, which I will repeat:
-
After years of XP users giving feedback/bug reports/praise about XP, do you believe Microsoft took all that on board and released Vista? Do you believe Vista represents the "best of XP"?
-
Afterall, you are saying people are resistant, and in MS's history I dont believe its ever released a product which has received as much negativity as Vista.
-
Finally you said "I mean everyone gets frustrated with things but then when you just spout lies and false info without knowing what you are talking about…well…lol"
-
Please quote me with any facts that you think are false. Are you calling me a liar? Please quote me (or anyone else) with hard facts, not generalizations. I want to see what you are claiming as lies.
-
and please, answer my question and at least stand by your convictions.

"...46 percent.. will skip Vista and migrate directly from Windows XP to the next generation Windows." Why? Because they *can* skip Vista ( WinXP's End of Life in 2014). These businesses would skip Windows 7 as well if WinXP's end of life was 2017+

Business value is critical but the driver for corp OS is end of life. Why? Many companies only deploy a new OS via a hardware refresh (usually 4 years). New desktop HW in the the $500 range w/ laptops a bit higher. That can run a mid-sized company close to $500M per/yr over 4yrs. That is alot of IT budget and the $500M is only HW costs - you need to add appcompat costs, deployment costs, training, etc. In this economy, the I see companies on Windows 2000 moving to Vista and few Windows XP comapanies moving. Its all about the HW refresh costs with most of these.

Windows 7 is based on Vista - it has the same application compatibility, the same driver compatibility, the same HW requirements, etc. - but it will be deployed in much greater #s than Vista. Why - because companies have to get off of Windows XP.

Vista and XP and my little world
Sales and statistics. Does Vista outsell XP? Most likely so, it is actually being used, well that’s another story. We ordered 9700 new laptops and 2800 new desktops all with Vista Home basic. The OS on those drives never get a chance to boot. They are immediately imaged with XP Pro legally with our enterprise licensing agreements with MS. A sale from my company gives MS two reasons to celebrate. One MS gets to tout it sold another Vista 12,500 licenses looks good for press and two MS gets to sell another 12,500 copies of XP behind the scenes that it profits from and doesn’t get any negative media attention. Lesson here sales figures and statistics are bull shit.
Superfetch- Do you need it? No, it simply caching frequently used libraries is and old trick going back to Windows 3.1. For most home users and gamers it actually slows the computers. Heavy multi taskers will see a performance increase but at the expense of a significant amount of ram that must flush and refill when full causes ever more disk thrashing than the worthless annoying index search.
Search- Baked in to be turned off on first boot. Corporate users are typically locked down to saving files in very specific areas (My Documents) so local PC OS wide searching is really waste in the corporate world. Sure search is built in to Vista meaning you get it if you want it or not. Index searching is also a free download from MS for XP for people who want to experience this wasted system resources first hand. Most people I know that use Vista disable it immediately due to the constant disk thrashing.
Vista 64 bit- YAAAAAAY! and still only a handful of obscure applications available. Hasn’t caught on anymore than XP 64 bit. Is 64 bit a good thing? Sure but few people use it and few people write applications for it.
Readyboost- Good way to waste your new USB thumb drive. Would it not be easier to utilize cheap and faster RAM for this task.
Least Privileged Access- Missing from XP and from brings no value to the business Vista. I understand this with XP given when it was made but Vista doesn’t get a pass. You would think that in your face UAC and well written GPO Vista could do a better job of this but no it cannot. You still need a product like BeyondTrust to appropriately manage this task.
This just my little world with my own experiences with Vista. By contrast had Vista been more like Server 2008 then maybe they would have had an OC that people may have considered. As for Windows 7 well time will tell. The beta looks ok but from an enterprise perspective I don’t expect to say any sort of fast adoption.