"Commenters to this blog often debate Windows Vista's merits, and I've even called the operating system a "train wreck." But like XP, which Microsoft greatly hardened with Service Pack 2, Vista will improve with age."

You left out the fact that some of these commenters haven't even tried it. Yes, Vista is not perfect. But it's not a train wreck as you make it out to be either. Obviously, there are a few things that need to be fixed. Hey, even the iPhone that you lavish praise on needs some fixing. However, I've not had any major problems on my system since I switched from XP and actually miss features such as the instant search among others when I have to work on XP machines.

In short, is Vista a train wreck? No! Does it need fixing? Of course it does. That's just my opinion and I'm sure some of the commenters here will try to discredit it with their usual "straw man argument".

Joe ,every piece of software has fault any awaiting us for feedback to improve and fix it .

If we were influenced by your negative comment and not using and attempt to try new software eg Vista, there will be no improvment and forever we blame Microsoft for Vista but on the other hand , we don't welcome with an open heart for their improvment

If we follow your advice and stick to Windows XP , then about ten years down the raod , what is your recommendation in future , huh,, ask everyone to switch to Mac and Linux ....

The comment by Refelction is absolutely right, some of us never even try Vista before but feel bad about it , sound silly ?

Joe , by the way , tell us that you are typing now with an Apple and Linux , not Vista

Joe, try to be positive or may be to attend a motivational course

Ron
Joe has been anti microsoft ever since he started at "Microsoft Watch"and from what I can gather even well before that.
Ask Joe about "The Crane" a subject he wrote about too quickly before he knew all the facts, he was so anti microsoft in that piece it wasn't funny, add on top of that that someone was killed and there was a furore about it and Joe tried to apologise, unfortuantely for Joe the damage was done. And it had "back fired" on him rather badly ... didn't Joe.

I keep worrying about "enterprises" and "consultants" who are reluctant to look beyond next quarter. I fear that more nimble business, some we haven't heard of and some with Korean or Japanese names, might be eager to take advantage of this timidity.

I just see too much evidence that brilliant young entrepreneurs are pushing the envelope every way possible.

Hopefully these "enterprises" will not be our next generation of dinosaurs.

Ron wrote: "We don't welcome with an open heart for their improvment."

Hi, Ron,

Businesses aren't measured by feelings but by performance. Shareholders have their measure, and Microsoft customers and partners have others. Microsoft measures itself, too.

Vista isn't a bad operating system; it's just not a great one. Vista's measure is Windows XP, an operating system that satisfies many of its users and for which there is a strong partner ecosystem. To push beyond XP, Vista needed to be an outstanding operating system--better in every way.

I chuckle every time Neil writes that I am "anti-Microsoft." I am not, nor have I ever been. I used to write about both Apple and Microsoft when I worked at CNET News.com. I got thousands of e-mails from angry Mac users that I was a Microsoft shill--that I was biased against Apple. I wrote hard stories about Apple, and Microsoft, too.

The story above isn't meant to be anti- or pro-Microsoft. It raises a question and then offers answers. Nowhere does the story remotely suggest that businesses shouldn't upgrade to Vista, nor is there anything suggesting they should replace Windows with something else, say, Linux or Mac OS X. There is no agenda. An anti-Microsoft story probably would lambast Vista as a bad operating system and encourage customers to adopt something else.

Some of my blog posts elicit strong reaction from some readers because they hit a nerve--and the truth hurts. Maybe if Microsoft listens to some of that truth, wherever it comes from, the company will become better. Microsoft's corporate culture is self-effacing and self-reflective. Those are good qualities, unusual among big companies, and part of the reason Microsoft succeeds.

Joe

Link below titled; "WGA failure: 12,000 systems affected, caused by "human error""

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070829-microsoft-12000-systems-affected-by-wga-outage.html

Quote; "The failure was caused when "preproduction code" was sent to the production WGA servers. "The production servers had not yet been upgraded with a recent change to enable stronger encryption/decryption of product keys during the activation and validation processes," Kochis says
---------------------------------------------------
Does anyone else think that "recent change to enable stronger encryption/decryption of product keys," means that Micro$oft was tightning down the WGA, in effect?

Joe, We condemned Windows XP before. We still condemn XP before Vista appear.

Since there are bugs in Vista , we assume XP is perfect now. We start to find fault on Vista.

In this scenario, it just like we all start to compare our ex-wife with the current one and start to finf fault on her

The following reasons also contribute to the denoucing of Vista :

1) Microsoft is , big ,profitable , dominant
2) Microsoft seems bully weak Linux sheep..
3) Microsoft desktop OS dominance..
4) Bill Gates is smart , unbeatable (at least at this monment..) whereas SUN which associate with Linux was beaten
5) Microsoft is seen as evil by so-called free-software

However , to be fair , Microsoft patches our Vista free-of-charges

Well , try to ask RedHat to patch your Redhat Enterprise Linux without cost ??

Chips
Weren't you told to "get over it" as far as WGA is concerned.
You are like a dog with a bone.
What happened to your rant on "Skype Me" ???
Oh that right i forgot ... you made up your own story didn't you and got found out !!
Found to be a liar !
Get off your high horse Chips, and give it a rest.

A quote from Joe's article;
""In two or three years, Vista will be the standard, and it will be a fine-tuned operating system," Milman said. "But it's going to take a bit [of time]."
---------------------------------------------------
Just some more Micro$oft major PR spin with that statement. Users are not flocking to Vista, they are almost, as a rule, only getting Vi$ta with new computers. At the current rate of conversion, expect less than 10% of computers at the end of 2007 to be running Vi$ta. In two years time when Vienna/Seven, or whatever MS decides to call it by then, Vista might have a 30% market penatration. Which will leave XP with about 50% of the market, unless some of the XP users move to Linux or Mac.

Chips
"In two years time when Vienna/Seven, or whatever MS decides to call it by then, Vista might have a 30% market penatration. Which will leave XP with about 50% of the market, unless some of the XP users move to Linux or Mac."
Try in a million years matey !!
You live in a dream world, people in business and for games will not switch over to either Linux or Mac. Mac no games or business programs, and the same for Linux, I don't see any support for MYOB or Quickbooks in either.
And that is only a small fraction of software that doesn't work with either.
Try asking Intuit if they would make for Linux and they would laugh at you, an OS with single digit distributionwhy would they even think about it, and Mac the same.
Sure there is plenty of software for either but not to the same capacity and scope, therefore they are not good enough for "mainstream", and I love to tell you this Chips but you already know it, there is only one OS that does it for everyone and that's "Windows" !!

Just because the deployment of Vista may be slow does not mean that Windows people will go to either Linux or Mac, people did the same thing when XP came out (as a lot of people have already said on this site), so why should vista be any different.
People used to knock XP... now they are knocking Vista, again nothing different, and even Joe has that given another year Vista will be like XP is now.
So all you people who want us to port over to Linux, you are happy with yours and we are happy with ours, thank you very much !

This article is joke right ... i hope people realise it and use VISTA before even writting any thing against it.

So what else is new? They've been telling people to not wait ever since their supposed "Fact Rich" program.

Vista is not ready for enterprise or IT Network admins. Why? One word, adminpak. The last I heard it wouldn't be out till SP1, is this still the case?

Ron wrote: "Joe, We condemned Windows XP before. We still condemn XP before Vista appear."

I didn't, Ron, not after Service Pack 2. I had repeated discussions with Microsoft execs warning that XP had reached a "good enough" threshold--that its successor would have to be a whole lot better.

That's the way of product lifecycles. TV sales were big in the early days, but tapered off sometime after color sets saturated the market. Thirty years passed before big screens and HDTV recharged TV sales. Windows is now a commodity, a checklist item on a new PC. Most people don't buy based on operating system.

But new products that do something more that--deliver that "WOW," like CDs compared to vinyl--do succeed.

Joe

"I just see too much evidence that brilliant young entrepreneurs are pushing the envelope every way possible. Hopefully these "enterprises" will not be our next generation of dinosaurs."

Dinosaurs, like Microsaurus Redmondus perhaps?

http://www.eweek.com/slideshow_viewer/0,1205,l=&s=25945&a=213797&po=2,00.aspThe

"Trouble with Vista"

1)It is a resource pig that doesn't deliver enough bacon. With a new OS that got as much ink as Vista, you'd expect to see a significant bump in things like PC sales. But according to most analysts, there's been no impact at all.
2) Promises of substantially better security were a lie. Microsoft promised enhanced security in Vista, but problems—such as the recent spat of driver vulnerabilities—continue to dog the operating system

4)Too much dumb complexity. Shutdown is now a multi-step effort. User Account Control is a pain in the rump. The list goes on.
.
6)Cost. Microsoft went for what consumers would buy rather than what they needed, so in many instances, users are paying more for fewer features. Windows Vista Home Basic? It offers fewer capabilities for the same amount of money as Windows XP Home. Vista Ultimate is all about price increase, particularly for consumers and small businesses that need advanced networking and security features.
7)Slow performance even on high-end systems. Gamers are disabling many features on Vista in order to improve the game performance.


10)People buy PCs, not operating systems.

12)Most new Vista features can be gotten free for XP on the Web.

Advice?
http://members.forbes.com/forbes/2007/0226/050.html?token=MzAgQXVnIDIwMDcgMTg6NTE6MTAgKzAwMDA%253D
"My recommendation: Don't even consider updating an old machine to Vista, period. And unless you absolutely must, don't buy a new one with Vista until the inevitable Service Pack 1 (a.k.a. Festival o' Fixes) arrives to combat horrors as yet unknown."

Advice?
http://torrez.us/archives/2007/08/20/547/
"can say with some conviction that nobody should be using it as their primary operating system"
"I have not used Vista and continue to stick to XP (work laptop) and Ubuntu (home desktop, work desktop)"

Advice?
"David Milman, CEO of computer services company Rescuecom, agreed. "My recommendation to our customers is to wait at least six months following SP1's release before adoption."

http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/
I’ve been anxiously awaiting news of Vista SP1 since, well, since Vista went RTM. I’ve expected that SP1 will bring an end to some of the Vista teething troubles that I and many others have been experiencing. Now I’m starting to worry that SP1 is going to bring with it new teething troubles.

comment courtesy of: The_Decider

MS knows that historically, people wait until SP1 to migrate to whatever new software that MS is infecting the world with.

They also knew that Vista would get lukewarm reception by businesses, at best.

So what did they do? If you guys remember, they pulled out a fair amount of buggy Vista code and told the world it will be part of SP1. This made sense to them, because all they needed was some bug fixes to roll it out. Granted SP1 was supposed to be out about now, but MS is nothing but incompetent.

So what this means, and I think most rational people know this, is that SP1 is really Vista v1.0. Actually it really isn't that since many features were removed because MS couldn't get those features working. Incidentally, many of those features have been available for years elsewhere, and in some cases decades.

So how does MS recover from this train wreck? Simple. They turn SP1 into a psychological and marketing fix, instead of a technical fix.

Will it work? Maybe somewhat, historically MS users and admins have swallowed massive amounts of BS from Microsoft. But many, many people are catching on and sick of the bugs, security nightmares, high prices, and loss of control that comes with a new MS OS. So it might help pick up a few new upgrades, but not as many as they think.

Money is tight these days and how can a company defend spending $800+ for a Vista and Office license, and hardware upgrades for a secretary that doesn't use even 25% of the Office "features"? That is insane. What is there in Vista or Office 2007 that a CEO would need it? Or some random paper pusher? If they bought software from a company that couldn't be bothered with the fairly simple task of cross platform compatibility why not just keep running XP? What does that extra money spent on Vista and Office 2007 buy them?

MS is a lot like our president. Still shoveling the same crap, oblivious to the fact most people aren't even listening anymore, and few of the listeners are buying it.

"What does that extra money spent on Vista and Office 2007 buy them?"

I don't think you work in an enterprise, do you? Business decisions are based on availability of funds most often. Companies buy whatever is the latest software at that time. If they used your reasoning, no company would've upgraded to Windows XP from Windows 2k. But they did and they will upgrade to Vista, because in a year or two, Vista will become the standard. That's the way it works with any kind of software. Sas 9 does not offer much over Sas 8 and each license costs a thousand grand. Why do companies upgrade to Sas 9 then? Why don't they stick with Sas 8 forever? Or maybe switch to some other statistical software?

"MS is a lot like our president. Still shoveling the same crap, oblivious to the fact most people aren't even listening anymore, and few of the listeners are buying it."

And you're like Fox news. Presenting a one-sided and biased view of this issue.

Joe
I loved your statement to Ron "I didn't, Ron, not after Service Pack 2"
Very specific that statement Joe, you didn't condemn Windows xp "AFTER" service pack 2. Which means you did before the service pack 2 though didn't you ??
Again here Windows Vista before any service pack and you are hopping in for your go at Vista, aren't you ?? Yes you bloody well are !!
In a way you actually lied to Ron, he was right in his statement all the time !!
Every time a new version of Windows comes out there they are all lined up ready for Windows to try and run the gauntlet of abuse and half truths as well as the out and out lies. It happened with Xp and it has happened with Vista and dare I say it, but it will happen with Windows 7 as well, and always the same people are the loudest.

reflections Says:
" Business decisions are based on availability of funds most often".
[ ... ]
"Vista will become the standard."

Maybe or make-believe, but in real life (2007), Vista is a standard piece of crap, say the experts. A move to Vista will be lowering the standards, say the experts.

I have seen this sort of thing before.... experts say ... texpert say this ... experts say that.
The truth be known ... idiots like n0ne_n0ne make up the so called experts ... of which he quotes ... none have actually said what he proports them as saying.
In otherwords his statement is a lot of crap !!

I t seems to be a general failing in people that don't like Vista, they tend to lie, first there was chips with the "Skype Me" incident now "n0ne_n0ne has done it as well !
Tell me is a general failing of people chips that they will do or say anything, so that people are put off windows.
Tell me n0ne_n0ne do use Linux like chips does??

"Maybe or make-believe, but in real life (2007), Vista is a standard piece of crap, say the experts.
A move to Vista will be lowering the standards, say the experts."

The same experts who predict 2008 to be the "Year of the Linux Desktop?" Or the same ones who proclaim that "Microsoft is dead?"

n0ne_n0ne
Asimov said once: "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent" Since there is no physical contact among us, the closest thing is to verbally assault (for example;Idiot) the opponent.

----------
..."And thus, the objectives will be achieves at the same time: To expose MS and uncover its Shills (when they respond desperately)"

Why do people defend Vista so much. Those who do not like it are not anit-ms despite what you may think. Vista is just one of many MS products. Just because we don't like product does not mean we don't like them all.

It's like me saying the new ford car is rubbish and then being told I am anti-ford and just ford bashing. Its the same straw man argument over and over again.

Windows 2000 was probably THE best OS for organisations and business, because it was designed with businesses and organisations in mind.

Vista is a jack of all trades yet master of none. The recent discovery of a hard corded limit in Vista that reduces network throughput when any media file is played (including Windows sound) is an example of this. The reason is that Video/Audio playback is not affected.

But this is not a business priority as most organisations don't really want their staff to be watching videos or listening to mp3s at work. They want a solid network connection and would prefer the sound to pop and crackle rather than the network to be degraded.

What exactly is the ROI for organisations migrating from XP to Vista. Even if MS gave away Vista for free the ROI is still too low to move away from a platform that is already fit for purpose.

This forum is turning into a joke. Both these people have no argument. One attacks everyone he disagrees with by calling them shills. The other doesn't listen and dismisses everything as a "straw man" argument. Indirectly at that too. Clever? Ehhhh... not so much.

:-)

Yes, I'm a shill and a fanboy and a clown. Will you sleep better at night now, M and W (who thinks he's my straw man)?

I do not think that I am your straw man. You obviously are unable to comprehend what the term stawman actually means. As you have ignored everything in my post let me ask you again a pertinent question

What is the ROI from using Vista over XP?

"You obviously are unable to comprehend what the term stawman actually means."

Well, you're arguments are a good example of it. By the way, "straw man" has two meanings and when you put give it a gender, it refers to a man made of straw. Arguments don't have genders.

"What is the ROI from using Vista over XP?"

I don't know. And that is immaterial. What does Acrobat 8 offer over Acrobat 7? What does Sas 9 offer over Sas 8? No much. Why do businesses upgrade? Because it's based on availability of funds. When funds are available for software/hardware purchases, they buy the latest version of the software/hardware available. That is why you saw Windows 2000 slowly being replaced by Windows XP. What was the ROI from using XP over 2000? Again, I don't know and it doesn't matter.

You're arguing just for the sake of arguing. On one hand you don't really care about what I think and dismiss everything as a straw man argument and on the other hand, you do care about it, which is what keeps you going on with this argument. Life's full of paradoxes.

i want a new computer :'(

"HP releases its first mass-market Linux PC"
"In a statement, Rob Kingston group manager of HP Australia's Personal Systems Group said, "HP is pleased to be working with Red Hat to bring a powerful new Linux desktop solution to SMBs in Australia, Local businesses are constantly demanding enhancements to the price-performance delivered by their desktop PC. By working with Red Hat, HP now delivers the business-class technology of the HP dx2250 combined with an open and low-cost operating system to support the commercial objectives of small and medium businesses."
http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS2655594862.html

Sweden's Vote on OOXML Invalidated!!
"Just days after Microsoft's attempt to buy the Swedish vote on OOXML came to light, SIS declared its own vote invalid. The post at Groklaw references a ComputerWorld article with revelations from Microsoft: 'Microsoft Corp. admitted Wednesday that an employee at its Swedish subsidiary offered monetary
http://politics.slashdot.org/politics/07/08/30/211227.shtml
-----------

.."And thus, the objectives will be achieves at the same time: To expose MS and uncover its Shills (when they respond desperately)"

Reflections

"What is the ROI from using Vista over XP?"

I don't know. And that is immaterial.

Try telling that to the CEO.

Williams:The ROI (in real calculation and not MS' calculation) is between 53 and 70 dollars per year. As long as there is not any type of trouble. As there undoubtedly is (See "Trouble with Vista".) Depending on the business, the numbers go against Vista. That is why all recommendations are to wait for Vista pack 1. As long as it is a good pack which solves problems and not merely a commercial hook. The opinion of many analysts at the moment is that it is indeed a commercial hook.

Sorry: the numbers ALWAYS go against Vista, the magnitude varying depending of the type of business.

Thanks for the answer Marco, I only wish reflections could have answered it. He implied that organisations always buy the latest OS and equipment when funds become available without the need for any reasonable cost analysis or risk assessment. For according to reflections the ROI on moving to Vista from XP is immaterial.

I am not sure what line of business reflections operates in but I imagine he doesn't have to justify cost purchases at all.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=718

Just another example of an expert showing a bias against Microsoft.

William, where I work, we will switch to Vista when we do our next round of hardware purchases, if there is no hardware support issue. Moreover, many businesses will switch before the end of support for XP.

Have a nice weekend, everyone. You too, William. And don't forget that "straw man" has more than one meaning.

"Moreover, many businesses will switch before the end of support for XP."

How many is many though? 8,16,32,64? What percentage of organisations are going to switch to Vista before the end of the support for XP.

So your company is going to upgrade all its machines to Vista if there are no hardware issues. What about software issues?

Ask yourself what benefits your company is going to get by moving to Vista. It isn't just about the cost of Vista or the new machines, its the downtime in retraining people to use Vista.

XP SP2 is a great OS. Unless your company desperately needs new PC's then I find Vista offers very little that XP doesn't. It just seems a heck of a lot of hassle for very little gain. I can not produce any graphs of figures that justify obtaining the funds to migrate to Vista.

Sure companies will HAVE to migrate once XP support ends. But is that really a way to do business by forcing them to use a platform they don't want? That is the problem with a monopoly reflections. Nobody likes being strong armed into being a customer.

I am waiting to see what happens with the Open standards for Office documents. If these get ratified then I have a good chance of migrating away from MS if they choose to try and force us to migrate to a platform we don't want when we are happy to stay with the platform we have. We would even pay them to continue to support XP. I don't think they will, but I guess stranger things has happened.

William
I do not know what planet you are on, but... here on Earth otherwise known "Terra". We do it the way how "reflections" has said, the hardware catchup is done, and then we put on the OS !
Usually by the time this is done a service pack has come out, and we think "great ... any bugs the OS did have have been fixed and some improvements have been added!"
Just because Vista wasn't adopted straight from the word "GO !".
Really doesn't mean that much in business. Business always tries to get the longest use that it can from it's equipment, and business also wants an OS that people don't have a learning curve to use, Linux ain't it my friend. You look at Linux from your prospective, have another look from a less knowledgable position, Linux is for computer nerds and power users, normal business is NOT that sort of user, therefore Linux will never improve their usage population in business.

Neil. Just like reflections you chose to refute something I never said. Where in my post did I actually mention Linux Neil. Just another strawman argument by the "I love Vista" crowd.

It really gets on my nerves that some people are unable to actually accept that anyone can be negative towards Vista. Are these people really so up the royal backside of Microsoft that people are not allowed their own opinion about anything that Redmond releases. Do these people not care about being forced to upgrade to Vista against all wishes because Microsoft has manipulated the market in an anti-competitive and illegal way that there is effectively no competition or alternative that an organisation can use.

It really frsutrates me that they are unable to accept even the smallest amount of criticism about Microsoft, even when completely justifiable. Don't get me wrong MS is a good software company. With a bit of healthy capitalist competition it could be a great, no, brilliant software company. Until it stops competing with itself then it can serve any old tripe up to its consumers and because of monopoly and proprietary lock in there is no other (sensible) option than to go with the incumbent.

Microsoft reminds me of those monolithic state run organisations of the 40's. It should be split in two. One side sells the OS, the other sells Office. One cash cow for each company. Perhaps this way we get some fair competition. The shareholders get value for money. MS might stop being a loss leader to prevent competition in areas other than its core market (XBOX360 is a loss leader for example) and we just might reintroduce some innovation into the market.

Neil and Reflections, if you are unable to accept anything in what I have said then perhaps its time you quit your job. Why not do an Art degree, or try busking.

William
You talk like a Linux lover, so what else can reflections and I think you are, as you have said you have not said which OS you actually approve.
So... which one do you approve of ??
You have spent three comments and yet not siad anything ... so say something !

William
You are not exactly an XP person are you !
As you bagged the hell out of it, didn't you ??
Sounds like a Linux person, soooo...

William: surely you are took notice of the lack mental ability of a few here, all is about to put the topic aside on favour of verbal abuse, put aside the MS issue for whatever issues (better if a fight). Why? you know the answer, my humble recommendation is to ignore to them, write you opinion and understand the poor people who have to sell their dignity for a laptop, they want you to stop issuing an opinion (It is excellent-your opinion-, I have to say). Do not allow them to reach their objective.
----------
.."And thus, the objectives will be achieves at the same time: To expose MS and uncover its Shills (when they respond desperately)"

Neil. There is really no excuse for ignorance other than stupidity. Do you even bother to read what people write? I don't think you do. Go back and re-read what I actually wrote and not what you "think" I wrote and contemplate on your last two posts.

Link below titled;
ATF pushes Vista upgrades back to 2010

http://www.techspot.com/news/26846-atf-pushes-vista-upgrades-back-to-2010.html

Now why would they not want the "latest and greatest (LOL) from Micro$oft?"

Quote from the above link;

"Some of the reasons cited are very common ones that can affect large departments and their willingness to upgrade"

William
I stick by my statement, now are you going to tell everyone what OS you yourself use or not !

Neil. I asked you to go and re-read my posts to find out what OS I used. Stand by your statement all you want. It only demonstrates is how much a troll you are and that you are incapable of reading, comprehending what people have wrote or that you are unable to follow even the simplest of instructions

I said that we would pay MS to continue supporting XP. I said XP is a great OS. I said that Windows 2000 is an excellent OS. Nowhere did I ever mention Linux Neil. So what are you? Ignorant or Stupid.

Neil, do yourself a favour next time, actually bother to read what people have wrote before you make a jerk of yourself asking them questions they have already answered.

William
Quoting all that does mean squat to me mate, tell me what OS you use.
Because it is quite plain from your comments that you don't like XP or Vista, so... what OS do you use ??

William
Quoting all that does mean squat to me mate, tell me what OS you use.
Because it is quite plain from your comments that you don't like XP or Vista, so... what OS do you use ??

How do you come the conclusion that I don't like XP when I specifically said "XP is a great OS" and "We would pay MS to keep supporting XP". Duh!

Neil, it is plainly obvious that you are nothing more than a troll. From here on I shall not entertain or bother to read anything you write. Have fun.

To William,
your quote;
"Neil, it is plainly obvious that you are nothing more than a troll. From here on I shall not entertain or bother to read anything you write. Have fun."
---------------------------------------------------
It been rather obvious that Neil and his various sock puppets, are either a troll or a shill. Take your pick as to what he is.

Best of all, is that back a couple of months or a little more, Neil was still using XP, and giving out advice on how to use Vista. Perhaps the best way to disguise blogging in the comments section for Micro$oft, is to pretend to be somewhat unknowledgable?

Chips
You know that I am neither Chips, I don't have any sock puppets but I'm pretty sure that you have plenty of them.
You should talk about people character Mr. Skype Me, you make up your own stories, and then present them as fact. Mr.Skype Me.
You have never said anything at all about being caught out with that one have you Mr. Chips ??
"Figures don't lie ... but liars can figure"

@Neil:
Here are the "experts" I was referring to:
"VARs Ripping And Replacing Vista For XP At Breakneck Pace"
"We are ripping it off systems 99 percent of the time," 'said Jay Tipton, vice president of Technology Specialists, a Fort Wayne, Ind., Microsoft Gold partner'.

http://www.crn.com/white-box/200900857

What an article that was !!
One guy actually said that his laptop ran 10 degrees hotter due to Vista ! Give me a beak please ...!!
Is that the best that you could find ??
All the things said there regarding Vista were also said of XP when it first came out.
Ye of short menory !!
Try going back a few years a look up up they said about XP before sp1 (or sp2 for that matter) !!
I myself didn't buy XP until after sp1, and previous was a happy 98 user. Now I am a happy XP user .... same thing !!

To n0ne_n0ne :
Thanks for the Nice informative link. It explains to me why Vista adoption by web hit stats is nothing like the amount of "licenses sold." Because users are wiping Vi$ta off their hard drives.

Some quotes from you link I thought interesting;

"The earliest Tipton sees that ripping and replacing ending is when Microsoft releases Service Pack 1 for Vista. "Hopefully at that time Microsoft will fix all the little gotchas that make the older software not work," said Tipton."

"Coffield said that the biggest hurdles facing Vista are hardware and software compatibility issues. Clients don't want to replace all their hardware and software to move to Vista, he said. Many clients see Vista as nothing more than a prettier interface and they aren't buying the claims that it provides better security than Windows XP, said Coffield. "No one believes that Microsoft knows anything about security," said Coffield."

you link again;

http://www.crn.com/white-box/200900857

"But like XP, which Microsoft greatly hardened with Service Pack 2, Vista will improve with age."

Keep dreaming body Vista will not improve, they will only make as equal as XP is and was and will reamain. I am surprise that you are all Vista supproters. MS wasted their time, money and resources just to make a Windows XP Two-just named it Vista with a few skin changes and boom, nothing really changed. Oh only a "few" changes, but nothing to make me what to upgrade. Vista is crap and MS needs to get that accross that ALL XP USERS THAT I HAVE TALKED WITH WILL NEVER UPGRADE TO VISTA...Appple/Mac has had their operating system out that is no different that Vista is...Explain that one to me...It took them less than MS to get onboard and come out with the same OS that Apple has had out....MS Vista SUCKS!!-That is the bottom line in my view of it all...