What Went Wrong with Windows Vista?

You jump to so many conclusions with baseless facts Joe. Windows Vista is seeing wide adoption and people are embracing the operating system. I am currently doing my CCNA training at a Cisco certified Academy and I am overwhelmed when I see the numerous trainees that are pouring in with their laptops preloaded with Windows Vista. I am seeing a combination of both Vista Home Premium and Vista Home Basic installations.

Vista is strong and its penetrating, people want it and they love it. The problem is, people like you and me live in a bubble sometimes so we don't get to see the full perspective and spectrum on things. You probably sit at a computer and read a few disgruntled blogs or forums about Vista and come to a conclusion about the OS.

But I am seeing first hand people embracing the OS, they love it, they love the look and feel of it, people enjoy using Vista, I am actually staying on campus and when I see fellow class mates out with their Vista laptops, I say to myself, wow - Vista is really catching on here, whats even surprising is the fact that there is a stron penetration of premium Vista SKU's, especially for a developing country like Jamaica.

So Joe, I hope you can accept the fact that your opinions are baseless and are only theoretical but are not substantial in anyway to make a point that the OS is not seeing strong adoption.

I remember the other day, I gathered the class around me to show them some of the cool stuff in Windows Vista, and just simple, I mean 'simple, simple' stuff got them excited, the rich visuals, the animations, the effects, the built in search.

You need to have a better understanding of the consumer mind Joe, yes the Lab instructor hates Vista, but you have to understand, you, the lab instructor and I are in a bubble, we see things according to the world of IT and not from the average consumers perspective at all times. Windows Vista is awesome and more and more people will be adopting it this fall and in the coming year. You just wait and see.

Andre Da Costa wrote: "You jump to so many conclusions with baseless facts Joe."

Thanks for the comments, Andre,

Maybe more people just need someone like you to show them Vista, so they can appreciate it. Good for you.

I don't live in an IT bubble. I spend lots of time with real consumers and talk to them about computers. I stake out computer stores, watch the sales and the sales people and talk to shoppers. In the US, people are used to computers and Windows, and most people have a Windows PC at home. The sense of discovery isn't as great, and the consumers are buying a second or third PC.

So, you're in Jamaica? Maybe the "WOW" will happen, but just outside of Microsoft's more established markets. I had thought that Microsoft's increased revenue in markets like China, India and Russia was due to anti-piracy efforts. But, maybe, Vista just appeals to more people.

Joe

I think your article is pretty much on the mark. If the next OS from Redmond leapfrogs over Vista in a couple or three years, it would be a sad waste of billions of dollars and uncountable hours of work. It would also signal to the world that Vista did, indeed fail as a project.

All the Versions of Vista was indeed a major blunder, especially when Ultimate reneged on it's "extra" promises. The Windows Genuine Advantage time bomb also hurt Vista a whole lot, and made people ask, "why spend over 200 dollars and run the risk of getting locked out of my own computer?"

Responder, Andre mentioned his first hand observations of how students are really accepting Vista. In a lot of ways, I can understand that. But I am singularly unimpressed with Aero and other visuals offered by Vista. I'm running it in the good old "Classic" mode because I want max speed on my older R50p ThinkPad that Vista Business is installed on. I've just installed SP1 and other than an initial bootup lock, the refreshed OS seems to be running well, with some improvements in copy and paste but little or no speedup in boot times.

Although I don't care for the Aero thingy or the Sidebar, my 68 year old eyes immediately really like how Vista painted my screen with a kinder, gentler look, especially the text.

"Vista is strong and its penetrating, people want it and they love it."

Andre, Dr. Freud is calling, he wants his slip back.

I definately agree about XP being good enough and I also think businesses learned years ago that jumping into the newest OS's is not worth the risk. Vista is great but XP is very good and it will be years before all the programs are updated to work with Vista. I imagine we will see a strong push over the next two years as companies move to Server 2008 and service pack 1 hits.

In my little IT bubble I never hear anything bad about Vista besides program compatibility but there isn't a whole lot MS can do about that besides offering a very strong Compatibility Mode that you can run them in until the companies upgrade their software. MS gave software companies all the frameworks and documentation necessary so their part is accomplished form a technical standpoint, now they just need to convince companies to step up.

Overall I would say Vista is the best lauch OS I have used. Security is great, hardware support is better than it was with 95, 98, XP and definately better than any version of Linux I have or Leopard. I would say it has set a new standard in OS quality control so I guess it would have to get an A haha

I think the biggest factor for Vista adoption failure is the bloated graphic requirements.
Most users would have adopted the enhanced security capabilities, however, additional graphical requirements does not bring any added value to most businesses. It does not make any sense to a company to upgrade to a new system which runs slower than the existing version. Companies and personal users will live with a less secure system than replace all the systems for a new o/s. The current security in XP is something most businesses can live with.
Microsoft did also not put in enough effort into making the base system faster and leaner. Big mistake.
Microsoft should also have split the graphics into two seperate streams, base and enhanced. The current less capable graphic mode is crappy.
I think Microsoft should now realize that the business customers should be their main focus where performance and seurity (in that order) matters.

Joe,
Re. your response to Andre, I have this visual image of you staking out your local CompUSA and Best Buy stores awaiting "Black Friday" but you're eating pistachios ala the movie "Naked Gun." =:)

Kidding aside, I think your list is on but I'd like to expand Krishna's comment in regards to your item 3, "Complexity is a killer" and your item 6, "The ecosystem wasn't ready." Fundamentally, it isn't that the ecosystem isn't ready, it's that Microsoft built Vista for the wrong ecosystem. MS imagined a continued trajectory along Moore's law -- every increasingly powerful computers. But, the market is changing. Laptops now outsell desktops. People want battery life. Powerful graphics cards are anathema to battery life. People are happy with their desktops at home and are now adding laptops as second or third computers. We are seeing devices like the ASUS EEE and the OLPC emerge -- ultra mobile, low power, go-anywhere devices. MS had a fundamental advantage in this market in that Windows began as a microkernel OS. MS woulda', shoulda', coulda' used this as a basis for a highly-tailorable, high-performance OS for the emerging go-anywhere, always connected, wireless computing devices ecosystem. Instead, they bet on bigger and bigger gamer-style workstations.
You've commented on the OLPC. A few of us have been nagging you to give your perspective on the EEE. I see the next wave of growth coming in low-power, mobile, wireless computers. That's the new ecosystem. MS anticipated a different ecosystem and, having a longer product development cycle, now finds itself at somewhat of a disadvantage when compared to Linux in this ecosystem. MS is frantically scrambling to try to get back in front.

Uh, please remember that the main reason individual's laptops have Vista installed is due to manufacturers pre-installing their equipment with this OS, based on the agreements between themselves and Microsoft. There is NO "ground-swell" of people jummping onto the new platform. The retail market is pushing everyone into Windows Vista.

Joe, you forgot at least two other reasons why Vista has such a negative connotation:

1) WGA and the "reduced functionality" mode. When people were having problems with this, MS said "its just a few percent" ( obvious paraphrasing ). However, a few percent of many millions is lots and lots and lots of individuals. Yes, they are removing it in SP1, but how many people have been burned by this "feature"?

2) The perception among a good many of the more knowledgable computer users ( ie, those that have schooling in computer hardware and software, and others with lots of hands-on ) is that Vista is, to put it simply, spyware. There is a sense that we really don't know when and why it's phoning home. The perception that if we do something that the **AA's don't like we'll get shut down. Ultimately, the idea that the users are not the customers of the OS while the "content industry" is. ( and don't forget the possibly problematic implementations of this stuff )

MSFT shareholders, your competition is pulling the wool...

... and encouraging you to ignore what you should be learning.

hawcreek is no friend of the MSFT shareholder and you already know that. He also posts as vcsy_stock_scam and the entire strategy is to get you to ignore the information about VCSY.

It's not to your company's advantage or health to continue fighting VCSY. If you think it is, give me a reason why you believe that. I believe you can be shown that stand is counterproductive and destructive to Microsoft's future.

Is management fighting just to protect themselves from having it found out they could have settled with VCSY years ago and been able to ship the original versions of Longhorn/WinFS, Yukon and the whole lot of XML productivity applications? NOW what do you have?

(more at url)
http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_M/threadview?m=tm&bn=12004&tid=1321330&mid=1321330&tof=1&frt=1

Hey I-man, your radio show sucks! and your posts make about as much sense as the radio shows does.

1. The WOW marketing campaign actually reminded me of the "Warp 3 (1995) really cool way to run your computer" by IBM. Not only did niether IBM or MS state any reasons to get or buy their Operating Systems at the time, but the advertises left people puzzied for any reason why they would want it. Furthermore, unlike Vista, OS/2 Warp 3 failed even though it was a superior product. The Wow compaign effectively ended when Apple turned it into a joke to be used against Microsoft.

2. Vista also failed because MS could not point to any real reason to upgrade to it over XP. Any percieved so called sercurity upgrades were more than offset by sercurity programs in XP that Vista made incompatable. The net result for the tech savvy public, is that Vista could actually be less secure than XP, considering that so many sercurity programs used to secure XP are broken in it. Also, programs like StartupMonitor (freeware from Mike Lin) will do a lot of what UAC will for XP, without the pain of the nag screens, the price, the bloatware, poor performance, and general pain that is Vista. Users therefore rightly did not see any "VALUE" in downgrading to Vi$ta.

3. Lack of percieved value. Where there is no value, soon users turn to the bugs and the missing removed features they enjoyed in the last OS, XP. The first new things in Vista that removed some functionality is the DRM and the enhanced WGA. The DRM which affected the Video and Audio subsets, even down to hardware design, is at the heart of the poor performance of Vista, and therfore also the poor performance of Vista, compared to XP, as a gaming platform. When Vista actually had more negatives than any positives percieved by the public, who would want it, except for many the MS Shills like Mr. Andre, the Live.com guy whose website reads like the MS cheerleading website.

4. Not only is there NO value in Vista compared to XP, but its a major regression in all areas. So much so that users would not buy the standalones boxed versions.

5. So where is the VALUE? The only real Value that many users and businesses can find in Vista, it to increase the bottom line of Billinares Gates and Ballmer, Period. Vista is causing many Businesses to move to Linux and Mac. The fact that Microsoft has to talk about the vaporware in Windows Seven, is a sure sign that Vista is a dog on the market. If not for the manditory preinstalls on OEM machines, who besides the Shills and early adopters, would own Vista?

Joe Says:
Many people don't like Windows Vista and find many performance and compatibility problems with it. Of those, most of them prefer instead XP, some prefer Mac, and some even migrate to Linux.
@Joe:
What planet are you from? Where do you make up your baseless facts? How much do Apple and Linus pay you?
Joe Says:
Many other people like Windows Vista, value it highly, and find no real problems with it.
@Joe:
What planet are you from? Where do you make up your baseless facts? How much does Microsoft pay you?
@Joe's highly-emotional detractors:
Thank you for your entertainment value! As Mark Twain once said, "But for the fools, the rest of us wouldn't succeed."

Chips, ole buddy,

I am certainly no MS fanbois, but I will give credit where credit is due. MS did address many security issues in the underlying Windows architecture with Vista. I'm with Joe on this, however, in that they should have done more by implementing a virtualization layer to allow backwards compatibility instead of the hodge-podge mix of fixes and kludges MS implemented.

Second, MS added a lot of granularity into the Vista Active Directory. As I noted in a previous post, with Vista, an organization can enforce a policy on use of removable storage devices (USB drives and DVD/RW being two examples). With Vista, an organization can specify that removable storage can be prohibited, allowed - but read only, or can even allow specific, approved devices while prohibiting others. This capability does not exist in XP. I forget the exact numbers, but my recollection is that there is approximately 3x the number of parameters in AD in Vista as compared to XP. This has got to be valuable to corporate IT.

Third, MS wanted to get into your living room and bet that the existing content providers would continue to be the powerhouses - thus the DRM. Turns out that consumers revolted.

Going back to the theme of my previous post in this thread, MS did not anticipate the current "ecosystem." MS anticipated a trend towards high-end, powerful, graphics-capable corporate workstations and existing content providers. The current ecosystem is that all of the HW manufacturers are trying to find the "sweetspot" -- a sub $300 wireless laptop that ordinary Joes will pick up for a second or third computer and the upcoming content providers are selling stuff on MySpace. MS started building Vista, what, six years ago with a different "ecosystem" in mind. MS built the right product for an ecosystem that didn't evolve.

Joe
Have you ever the noticed that it is the same people going on and on and on and ON about how bad Vista is !
Mainly Chips and Marco, (with the spamming of I-Man of course).
And the main reason both Chips and Marco are going so hard at it is to try and get converts to Linux, and after seeing my daughter using Ubuntu and other flavours of Linux for her IT course. I can see why its so hard for them (Chips and Marco that is).
My daughter could not wait to get back to windows (xp) and she also loves using my laptop (Vista Ultimate). When I asked her about Linux she said it was needed for part of the course even though it could be done on Windows (which she thought was silly) but then again the roots for this was that originally "Unix" ruled the roost in networking and so they the teachers must show the basis of networking to the students (which is fair enough).
But these days Unix / Linux is really not an issue anymore, and as I said previously my daughter much prefers Windows.
Of course there are people who prefer their OS to windows ...fine, whatever you like but there is no need to put Windows down, everything that can be said of one OS can be said of another.
I still feel that there is no place at "Microsoft Watch" for zealots of Linux (especially SJVN).
I am not for one minute saying that Windows is perfect, but for that matter neither is any other OS (even though people who use those other OS would say different).
People are all different and different people like different things and in this case ...different OS's.
So I see no need for Chips with all his various links, I am quite sure that Joe can do something similar if he wanted to.
As far as Vista is concerned ... if you have problem ... state it, but don't say Vista is no good and then fail to state the reason why ?? Or as a few people have done say Vista is too slow ...and then not state what ALL the components are of their pc (most notably the graphics card which they know themselves may be the actual cause).
Sure Vista takes more grunt to run it, but so did XP originally, and I remember in the days of the 486 when Doom came out, all computers had a maximum of 4 megabytes of Ram and Doom needed 4 megs to run, so you had to restart with a boot disk. My how times have changed !
When I first saw a computer it had a 20 megabytes hard drive that was bigger than a dinner plate encased in a plastic shell. And we were in awe of a 20 MEGABYTE hard drive. Now a days we would say it was a fossil.

Hey Neil maybe you interested in this link:

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/12/06/2129203

Titled: Promise of OOXML Oversight By ISO Falls Through

Quote from the link: "Microsoft is going back on one of their promises concerning OOXML. While they originally made assurances that the ISO would take control of the standard if it were approved, Microsoft is now reversing that position and keeping near-full control over OOXML with the EMCA."

Joe and Chips
You see what I mean yet another link from Chips who is the editor here Joe ??
This is nothing to do with the current subject and Chips couldn't care less.
Whatever appeals to Chips he will write here whether it pertains to the subject or not. So long as he can try and say to people "ms is not good, change over to Linux" isn't that right ??
You should try preaching to the converted Chips or better still get your own site.

joe Says:
"So, you're in Jamaica?"

@joe:
explain please...
Are you saying Jamaicans don't know any better or, are you asking is he on vacation?

It doesn't come across clear or right for that matter. Granted his statement(s) are very out of touch with reality.

Andre Da Costa Says:
"Windows Vista is awesome and more and more people will be adopting it this fall and in the coming year. You just wait and see."

@Andre Da Costa:
Are you in Jamaica smoking a spliff?

In advance, thanks for you all's reply

@BigUp to my brethren Brian :)

Andre Da Costa Says:
"I remember the other day, I gathered the class around me to show them some of the cool stuff in Windows Vista, and just simple, I mean 'simple, simple' stuff got them excited..."

@Andre Da Costa:
Be very careful what you show school kids. In some states or country, showing school kids stuff to get them excited is illegal. e.q. Oprah's school.

Take it as free advice ;-)

Neil Says:
"This is nothing to do with the current subject and Chips couldn't care less. ... You should try preaching to the converted Chips..."

@Neil:
Pardon me...
"Who is browsing the web? More Mac and Linux, less Windows"

@whom_it_may_concern

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

Have a nice day.

layta...

n0neXn0ne
Oh sure !!!
Windows 92.42 %
Mac 6.80 %
Linux 0.57 %

Oh yeah !!
Please note mate that Chips is pro Linux and at 0.57% of the internet usage who gives a **** !
Mac may be ??? Windows definitely !!
But I am (like you are) biased !!

What went wrong? What about:

1. Vista is too expensive. An OS cannot cost so much, period. Why I would use Windows when I can use linux for free or MacOSX costing 100$? It's ridiculous. Btw, Vista Premium retail costs here more than 320€(524$).

2. Vista occupies too much and takes too much time to install. 15Gb to install and a DVD for an OS? We went crazy. No OS should occupy more than 1CD. Just keep the OS core and network drivers on the CD... the user can connect Internet and download video card or other drivers... because Vista requires Internet already to validate so...
Do not include IE7, Media Player, Messenger, Outlook, Office, etc... I use firefox, VLC, Thunderbird, OpenOffice, etc... and I don't want those M$ programs installed or occuping DVD space, period.

3. Vista was released too early and with tons of bugs not corrected.

4. Vista does not apport things new. Just DX10 is innovative and OpenGL 3 is comming to run even in WinXP. DX10 = vista only did not helped IHVs at all. Aero is just a bad copy of Compiz or MacOSX.
WinFS was interesting and they decided not to include it.

5. Vista is inneficient and consumes tons of resources. Requires a big computer to run smoothly. OS should become faster and more efficient with the time, not the inverse. Man... Ubuntu uses 48Mb on startup... and Vista almost 1Gb.

6. Vista copy protection, digital licensing/activation and DRM sux. Legitime/original users are messed too much. Vista OEM license system sux... if you change a bit your hardware need to buy other license.

7. UAC and security system. I dont wanna see a window poping each time I move an item in the startup menu.. oh, come on...

8. Lack of drivers and support. Some drivers are completely immature, provokes BSoD... this scanner has not drivers for Vista yet, etc...

9. Developers could not program for Vista since VS2008 was not released. The question is why I would program for windows using exclusive and non-portable Microsoft technologies when I can do it using Eclipse, Netbeans, Java and open source libraries?

10. Listen EU cometee about monopoly and exclusive closed technologies... or pay 600M. Microsoft should open their mind and code, neither to include some propietary programs so users can freely choose by themselves.

11. There are too many Vista flavours and version. They should copy MacOSX and Ubuntu: Desktop version will all included or the Server one.

12. The Ultimate version is worthless. They promised a lot of extras and currently we have just BitLocker, Dreamscene ...

13. Vista came too late... so made WinXP too strong.

By all this we decided to migrate from Windows to Ubuntu and now we're very happy. Thanks, Vista!

Neil Says:
"But I am (like you are) biased !!"

@Neil:
I am NOT like you "biased" because ...
"Since I switched ... I don't get much of these silly software errors."

layta...

n0neXn0ne
I can't remember the last time I had an error occur mate !
So if that the best that you can come up with boy are you in trouble.
Why trouble ...simply because you are admitting that you ARE biased.

There goes Neil again, making nonsensical claims about the OS that failed to deliver.

The truth of the matter is that Vista has failed way too many people and they are speaking up about it. We all know you can't stand to hear the truth about it, so you come up with all sorts of funny arguments about side issues.

The WOW experience turned into Whoa! as Joe pointed out.

-- Vista FAILED to deliver on its promises.

-- Vista is still a virus magnet.

-- Vista is a performance hog and brings old and some new hardware to their knees.

-- It requires re-training of personnel who are already familiar with Windows XP.

That's all you need for a DISASTER.

Like nearly all microsoft products, from Windows 2008 to exchange 2007, they all are in compeition with there earlier versions. If it works why fix it?

Maddog
You are mad !!
Who said that Vista

Failed to deliver on its promises
Is a virus magnet
Performance hog
Or requires substatial re-training

YOU DID !!
Nobody else .... just you !

Vista Ultimate operates on my laptop quite nicely thank you very much and I have had absolutely no trouble with it at all !!
Maddog says "it's a disaster" nothing could be further from the truth.
The only truth is that Chips, Marco and Maddog are trying with their heart and sole to put Vista down and hoping people will agree with them.
Some people do but I don't ... watch the next thing they are going to do is call me a "paid employee" of microsoft. Is it true ...no way, I am my own person and absolutely no one from microsoft knows me at all here in Australia.
BUBU
A fat lot you know, for example you say " Lack of drivers and support. Some drivers are completely immature, provokes BSoD... this scanner has not drivers for Vista yet, etc..." The manufacturers are responsible for producing drivers and providing them to microsoft, microsoft doesn't produce them. Yet another mis-informed Ubuntu user.

"I am my own person and absolutely no one from microsoft knows me at all here in Australia."

Remembered to Neil the Shill:

Neil :

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

Ha,ha,ha really funny

I support 276 small to medium-sized business clients, running various accounting and manufacturing software packages. As of today, only 1 has adopted Vista, and that's because the owner insisted on it. He likes his toys.

At that location, we had to install a terminal server to run his business, because none of the software ran correctly on Vista. Fortunately, the Vista RDP client runs normally.

When a few of my clients have asked me about moving to Vista, I tell them sure, go ahead. It will cost you tens of thousands of dollars, disrupt your daily operations, and gain you nothing more than a fancier clock widget on your desktop.

FWIW, my daughter likes Vista. She's a freshman in college, studying art. She says Vista is pretty.

"Microsoft already is advancing plans for Vista-successor Windows 7", that's not a sign that they're dissapointed in the performance of Vista, it's a sign that they are not going out of business. They advanced plans for XP when 98 was released.

Interesting article. I'm a fan of Vista but I agree with much of what you're written. Particularly too many SKUs!!! I think that's a much more important factor than you've made it out to be.

I have had nothing but trouble with Vista, its strange and uncomfortable to use. The only reason it is taking hold is that Vista is the only operating system being offered by the retailers.

I use Vista and mandriva on my laptop (opensuse and vista on my desktop), i'm not related to IT, I just like computers. That said , i think linux is a great OS for surf the internet, write emails, and work fast, and compiz-fusion it's amazing, the problem is that openoffice sucks, office 2007 is way much better (in my opinion).
Now, I'm chilean, and in my country the gratest problem with Vista is that stores sell underpowered celerons, with 512mb ram, integrated graphics, and vista basic, or even worst starter, so there is no WoW at all. They just sell crappy computers, so vista it's not an option, and I think it's a good OS, not a great one, but better than XP.
(sorry for the bad english i speak spanish)

My organization is looking at Vista. what issues do I see?
We run a fair number of graphics intensive programs and switch from Open GL to Direct10X is a pain. One of our primary vendors solutions is to incorporate another "translating" layer between the video system and the image on screen, which means slower output.
Memory is used quite heavily, both by Vista and by our apps. We have a 3 year replacment cycle for high end users and 4 years for standard business users. Vista's demands for cpu's, on top of other graphics and application requirements means a substantial portion of our staff would be running hampered at best.

Vist seems like a fine product, but until my applications run on it and I can get my inhouse "CPU-environment" up to spec for it, its not a good fit.

The problem with computing and cell phones today is that they offer more variety of capabilities, but the resources needed to use them keeps going up and up. Cell phones can do all these wonderful things but the network capacity is still inmature and you still cannot get a signal everywhere no matter who the service provider is. So if a call cannot be made, what good is sending pictures?

The same is for software especially Microsoft. The need for MEGS of RAM and Hard Drive space is a never ending battle. What Microsoft should concentrate on is using more FRUGAL coding for it's platfoms- OS and Suites. Apple does a wonderful job of this and an Apple machine uses much less resources to do the same thing.

Microsoft needs to make their systems more efficient. That is the new buzz word in today's economy. Do more with less. We do not need OS and Suites that keep on devouring resources. Pretty soon we will need a server to run all this stuff in our homes. People it is Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Access. Why so complicated?

More Value-Added R&D needs to be done outside the bubble at Redman, Washington. They need to walk a mile in our shoes!

It's an interesting article, but I don't agree that any of those are particularly 'deep' reasons for Vista's slow adoption. In my opinion, the REAL reasons are pretty simple.
1. You need a pretty heavy system for Vista to run really well, and I use 'well' very loosely as there are still problems and bugs involved. Because of this, you have a daisy chain of issues that stem from people thinking the OS will run fine on their brand new 'budget' PC from Dell or their PCs that they purchased/assembled 2 months ago.

For example, I'm running Vista 64 PERFECTLY on my Quad 6600 (2.4ghz@3.6ghz on an Abit IP35 Pro) with 4gb of Ram and an 8800GT 512mb card - this is vs. my Athlon 64 3500 with 2gb of Ram and a Radeon X1600 which felt in comparison, like XP on a say, Celeron with 512mb Ram (not molasses slow, but not as quick as we'd like). Would XP be faster on my current machine? Damn right it would!
But I'd be losing some key features in Vista that I just can't have in XP - features I'd rather have than not have, in retrospect (kind of like a cell phone - you're fine without one, but you can't see yourself without one a year into owning it).

With that said, when XP was released I purchased it and ran it fine on my then, current hardware - that simply isn't the case for Vista no matter what anyone says. Most people who are enjoying their Vista experience are people who have upgraded in the last year, and upgraded to something with pep - by this definition, I am excluding anything offered by Dell, HP, Gateway, etc. etc. for under $1000, and so...THAT is the problem.

People are moving to a brand new OS with new budget hardware thinking, 'this thing is going to slap XP really hard!' and...well, it's not happening. So, in the end, you have multitudes of people wondering why the heck they 'upgraded'. Not only that, but people who go out and buy the retail product for 230-350 for home premium and ultimate respectively I can imagine feel especially let down that they went from a peppy XP to a not so much so, Vista.

On to reason 2. I run Vista 64 not because I am a glutton for punishment, but because that is where we should be heading. And unfortunately there aren't enough adopters of this frame of mind to 'force' devs to start building programs that take advantage of this technology. Apple had the right idea - even though Leopard is causing all hell right now, it's forcing on some level, devs to move toward 64bit vs. sticking with 32bit, as all Apple OSes moving forward will be 64bit with 32bit 'compat. In contrast, MS is allowing consumers and devs to continue with the 32bit nonsense. With Vista 64 you break the 3gb Ram boundary and life is a bit different.
Right now it doesn't show as much because there are next to no programs out there written to use it - but the trickle that are, are just a phenomenal difference from their 32bit cousins. This I have to tie into your reasoning (too many SKUs), that's quite the understatement. Vista I think reasonably should have scrapped 32bit and just made 64bit versions with a great 32bit layer. I like them being broken up into business and home premium...and sure, 1 that blends them - so ultimate is, ok - but that's where it should have stopped. Basic is just so useless.

In the end though - I have to agree with Andre on some level. I think that Vista will pickup. Computers are getting faster, tomorrows 'budget' rigs will be what we consider today's high end ones and at that point in time, Vista will run as XP does now and people will be happier with the product. All in all, this is exactly what happened to XP as well even though it performed well on those systems I still remember MANY people complaining about how hogging it was to resources, how slow it was compared to 2000 and millenium, and how it didn't seem like much of an 'upgrade'. History repeats itself, and in a few years, I have no doubt in my mind that we'll be complaining about Windows 7, how hard it is on hardware and 'what went wrong with it,' after a year of release and seemingly slow adoption/missed goals, etc.

Joe on Wednesday I bought my first Vista PC. A Satellite A215-SP4057. Really low price machine with nice features. A vista 3.0 Experience for an integrated video card. Comes with dual core Athlon 64 and can hold up to 4 Gigs of RAM (a great Linux target platform).

I must admit I didn't know if I was running Aero. It turns out I was. Guess I just missed the WOW in it. Conclusion: there isn't anything new or outstanding to call home about.

The application compatibility is good. I ran MS Office 2003 with no problem. The development software I'll be using on the project I bought this laptop for works well (Java 6, Eclipse, Tomcat, MySQL and Access). It didn't want to connect to my 2003 server though (guess because it is Vista Home Premium). So I bridged file transfers through my Mac.

I'll agree with your point 10. I'd prefer a Business version of Vista, but the laptops that run it cost twice as much. I'm stuck with whatever the store (in this case Office Max) offers me. Why can't I just say I want this hardware with that software. I'd like to choose my own price points.

For me the WOW never came and yes there is to much new complexity for nothing. Relocation of features and controls makes it hard to figure out things and Microsoft's idea of naming controls with long phrases isn't working. For example bundling all the Control Center's entries into fewer groups makes it hard to figure out what each group contains and does. Thus I switch back to classic view. Making these changes mute points and a 0% improvement over Windows 98 in regards to the GUI.

OK ok ok, Enough!
This reminds me of the old Canon vs Nikon debate that we photographers used to have to endure for some 30 years.
MS Vista has it good and its' bad.
It requires way too much RAM at bootup, I used to have MS2000 professional running on a compaq rack-mount server with 1GB and it ran flawlessly with total boot up time less than that of Vista Home Basic. Now Vista basic needs at least 1GB of RAM to boot, and while this lack of RAM ultimately rests on the shoulders of the PC maker who bundled Vista with their systems, I see no reason for any OS to require 1GB of RAM to BOOT!

Vista's constant need for downloading new crap on to my computer simply astounds me. Especially considering alot of these updates occur without my knowledge and rarely with my consent. Can any of you Ubuntu haters say the same thing about any flavor of Linux?

I do like the new layout of the CGI but that is just me, personal preferences never make the case IMHO.

I like the added functionality of the control panel.

I like the fact that it is built on the 2000 kernel, and that all of the services are still there for me to get to so I can restart, enable or diable them. How many times have you had to re-start the print spooler? At least I can still find the print spooler.

I remember when XP first hit the scene, people were scrambling to find new drivers, software hardware etc. same is true here. Only time will tell if Vista is a bust or not.

I personally detest Vista at this time, ask me again in anothe year or so.

MS has always had a pre-disposition for deploying what I consider Beta versions of OS's ever since Win 95 if not Win 3.1
J-bird

Andre wrote:

I remember the other day, I gathered the class around me to show them some of the cool stuff in Windows Vista, and just simple, I mean 'simple, simple' stuff got them excited, the rich visuals, the animations, the effects, the built in search.

Andre, this is a very sad thing to write home about and something I would not boast. There isn't anything WOW about Vista once you've seen other desktop environments. Your paragraph comes to show your and your class' relative low experience in the matter and that your comment can't be taken to seriously. To be impressed by the "simple" Vista things is not something to boast about.

Vista... I've seen it but I haven't tried to upgrade yet as I see no reason to do it.
Windows XP jump from Win95 was because of stability.

In between jump from Win95 to Win NT3.51 because you could control desktops better and network easier. You soon migrated from WinNT because Win XP built all of the Networking and desktop controls of WinNT into it.

Windows 95 jump from Windows 3.11 was because of new functionality and the WOW factor was there.
Windows 3.1 jump from DOS. It was a huge leap in visual technology.

Jump from MAC to Windows 95 was because corporate society started dictating compatibility with MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, plus it was difficult to network a MAC in to corporate environments.

So the main question for me is: What features and functionality does Vista offer over Win XP?

If you're a gamer... maybe the graphics capability.
If you're into multimedia then there is more support.

So far for business, I currently see no major advantages except for security. I can the same work on a Windows XP system as on a Vista machine and probably more as most of the software manufacturers are still supporting development of Windows XP applications, many are starting to support Windows Vista and more are starting to support Linux.

My problem and probably many of the corporate/government organizations are that we still use dated computers over 2-3 years old and they still do the job. Thanks to the web browser,(no thanks to IE as too many applications support the non standard ActiveX platform which don't work on Firefox or Opera) many of the applications now work through the browser so I really don't care what OS, I'm on as many of the corporate applications are now web enabled.
Older computers are just not powerful enough to use Vista. So most of the Vista users are supplied on new computers. When I upgraded from Windows 95 to WinXP, I could do it without upgrading my hardware. With Vista if you bought a computer a year ago you can upgrade, but if it's over a year ago... probably not. The only saving grace is that computer prices have dropped very rapidly now so that the older models now are cheap enough to upgrade and run Vista. Maybe I'll do that but since I'm typically a laptop buyer I probably won't as laptop prices really haven't dropped down under the 400 price range for something decent.
I can still pretty much everything on my older laptops (IBM T22,X20 (8-9 years old??) and if I need a work horse on my newer 2 year old HP NC6220 running Win XP.

What I can't understand is why we can't have an OS which runs faster and with less bloatware. Oh, I guess I have to use one of the stripped down versions of Linux for that or even better... My Palm Treo (PALMOS) does that, though I'm hoping for a more stable OS. I can watch movies, listen to music, download and upload files fairly quickly, write emails, have a decent contact database and a good calendaring system, instant message, work on spreadsheets (though on limited views), word process, even review presentations, backup my documents and files to my internal SD card. Oh yes..contact my friends, family, colleagues by voice and probably soon by video. If we are moving to Web 3.0 doesn't the browser become the OS?

What else do I need? Well a much larger screen or a projected visual hologram and probably voice enable everything so I don't have to type anymore.

If Microsoft wants to get smart they need to build the next generation OS for the smart phone, which is portable and you can run it on almost anything. (Move it from one phone to another, to a desktop/laptop computer at home or work, or any other device including their xBox,Sony PSP, Car, etc...)

Vista in my opinion is is a stop gap measure for them until they figure what's next.
I for one, will stay WinXP and possibly move to Linux unless Vista comes with my next PC, however I won't pay much extra for it.

Somewhere between Windows 3.1 and Vista, Microsoft forgot how to get products RIGHT instead of just getting them SOLD and OUT. Their ideas and notions of what their users want (whether formed by committee or individual assertion) are as detached as British Royalty is from "the commoners".

I've been managing and consulting in IT for almost 25 years. Initially I was a Microsoft "champion", immersing myself in each new version of MS-DOS and then spreading the gospel to my colleagues, staff, and students.

Remember those days in ancient history when Microsoft would actually distribute something called "beta" code to IMPROVE the quality of the final product before it was shipped??? No SP1,2,3, 4-100 back then. No patches.

I think MS has truly forgotten what business they're in. They've become more interested in their hype than the product they deliver. I've been a loyal devotee through thick and thin for a LONG time and I'm tired of bad and broken code, no commitment to support, and a general apathy towards their customer base (unless a fortune is paid for support).

I feel myself quickly approaching a mutiny and quick adoption of everything on the Apple tree. Hardware or software, they WORK and are designed by people FOR people who rely on their technology. Itunes and Ipod are obvious examples of what is possible under the Apple tree. They even reinvented the MP3 format in the name of better quality with AICC.

Didn't mean to write this much, but this is SUCH a sore issue with me.

Wake up Gates and Ballmer. Keep it up and you'll soon follow the other corporate dinosaurs that preceeded you into the grave, including those you helped put there in your early days, when you cared about the quality of your products and the perception of your customers.

Make the change. But make it snappy, or it may not be Zune enough.

I think that vista failed because it was designed by it programmers and professionals and not the everyday user. The user side of vista came towards the end of the vista release. Next Time they should find a way to implement security, and ease of use.

I manage a about 60 PCs, 50 of them have W2K and the rest have XP Pro. Vista??? NO Way!!!

Stu Amen!
Couple the fact that MS could care less what its' customers think with their single-mindedness on Certifications (after all it was Novell and MS that started the whole certification self-interest bull in the first place, and all certifications prove is that a person can sit through hours of mind-numbing study and then pass a test, and then when many of these bootcampers hit the streets they are as clueless as I was when I started in IT) and it's obvious that all MS is interested in anymore is how many millions can we make today on poorly coded and minimally tested software, and then how can we make more by making some slob take a test showing that he can install and maintain these bloated monsters.
MS could take a remedial lesson from Open Source and start releasing Betas and perhaps even Alphas again.
Microsoft will continue to create less than optimal products as long as they can work their sweet deals with VARs selling bundled computers with MS OSs on them. We as consumers need to send a message to MS that we want better.
Dell has picked up on all of this and are going to start offering Linux as an alternative mainly because of the bad feedback they have received on Vista.

It was simply the upgrade price's fault.

As far as I can see, here in India, Vista is not picking up as fast as as MS would have liked it - the way XP picked up can be a good reference.
Personally, I am very comfortable with a 32 bit XP SP2 system on my laptop! My only reason to move to a new OS would be to leverage my 64 bit platform - my laptop sports AMD Turion 64 x2! I am skeptical of 64 bit version of XP because of the apprehensions vendors displayed. Almost all vendors I interacted with, told me to move to Vista for better 64 bit support. I would not know if this is another of MS's ploys to get VISTA down in to the market.

Vista adoption:

Why it is slow: Easy....price, price, price and migration headaches.

Why it will be adopted eventually: Because most people/businesses will have NO CHOICE, PERIOD.

My company builds and services computers, networks etc...

I have not, and will not be installing Vista or migrating any of my client's assets to Vista (Unless they specifically request it and are fully aware of the costs involved). Why, it's not for any other reason than COST, simple economics.

I cannot justify the costs associated with Vista, to my clients. It is simply to expensive. And to upgrade current assets means either new machines or very costly upgrades to existing assets. It's not to expensive if you talking about one or two machines, but I'm talking hundreds or thousands of machines, depending on the client.

When I can no longer sell systems with OEM XP Pro installed. I will be going to Ubuntu at this point version 7.10.

To migrate to Ubuntu requires NO upgrades in hardware. Actually most of my client's machines will be over spec. as is for Ubuntu. I have already begun to migrate them to OpenOffice/Firefox etc... and they are having no problems using them. So migration will be less trouble and less costly. There will be a slight learning curve with Ubuntu, but there would be with Vista anyway, so that issue is a wash. On my end patch management/security etc... becomes easier and less costly for my clients.

It's a simple case of economics. I have to increase the cost of the system(s) to cover the higher price of Vista. In my opinion the only versions worth installing are the Ultimate versions. This adds a full $200 to the system. That is $100 dollars more than my current cost for Windows XP Pro OEM. Upgrades are $50 more...go figure.

The margins on systems are to slim to entertain that type of increased cost. Whereas, with Ubuntu, for me, as a reseller, the cost is next to nothing.

Other than those issues mentioned above, I have no problem with Vista. It's just simply to expensive.

Vista's "Bang for the Buck" is sadly limited. Vista’s entry versions don’t offer enough new “goodies” over XP, and it's other versions are way over priced for the individual. The high price combined with the hardware upgrades to support it place Vista’s purchase firmly in the “I’ll wait until I buy a new machine that comes with it” category. Microsoft would have to discount their prices by a good 50% before I’d even consider upgrading my handful of (home) machines.

For the webmaster for this site:

Have you folks EVER considered putting a printer friendly format link to this page!!!!!!!!! Lousy print layout.

My biggest problem with Vista has been the UI. On one hand, they've tried to redesign it to be simpler, but instead of the unified, intuitive Office ribbon, they've got the design-by-committee feel whereby somethings are definitely simpler but other things are more of a mess but seem like somebody felt it would be simpler. But the biggest issue I have is just the jumbled mess that explorer.exe has become. It's a 10 year old .exe that has had features added layer by layer, but with so many code paths, somethings work fine while others are buggy and unpredictable; it was kinda bad with XP (some windows won't take focus, some will, sometimes clicking the taskbar button stops working until window state is cycled, system tray icons don't always refresh when their underlying datasource does). Over the years, software will eventually lose any elegance it had and become a hodgepodge of tacked on features that deviate from any unified architecture, and I think the Windows shell has hit a critical mass on this with Vista.

Vista is garbage! It reminds me of Windows ME (another piece of garbage).

This OS is so incredibly unstable that it's hard for me to get through an evening's use without the thing crashing or some other OS related issue.

I'm going back to XP and soon as I can manage it. Microsoft has lost the image war (and their respectability) on this product - they ought to hang it up and go back to the drawing board, and in the interim give their full support to XP.

I think the problem with Vista is that Microsoft forgot just who it is that is actually paying for their product and worse, decided that what Microsoft saw as its best interests were a lot more important than the best interests of its customers.

The biggest issue is Microsoft's having decided to become another RIAA or MPAA about copyright security. Both the music and movie industry revenues have been plummeting since they started getting in their customers' faces about the old mine and thine issue. Microsoft is setting itself up to be in that same very leaky boat. The article's author used a very apt word, "frisked", to describe what Vista does to the people stupid enough to buy it.

The next biggest issue is the ridiculous performance of Vista compared to XP, especially when you are doing graphics intensive apps like CAD and 3D modelling.

Not to put too fine a point on it, Vista sucks.

Keith,
You make a valid point!
unfortunately I can't hardly see a resolution to the whole code-path issue in software as most companies are going to continue to tweak what it already has.
After all they want to decrease over-head as much as the rest of us and not re-code existing applications.
Your point on Vista shell hitting the critical mass with tacked on goodies is dead on. Many Windows features seem harder to deal with than ever before.

Much of the comments point to one common theme:
Perceived Value

Upgrading from an OS which works and people are fairly pleased with it, is going to be an uphill battle, unless it comes with more features and functionality which make the user become more productive.

One good comment was about 64-Bit Vista. The question is how many programs are designed to support 64 Bit Vista though? I'm sure there are advantages of moving to 64 bit computing however the adoption rate on the desktop is slow.

One of the worst mistakes made, was trying to force gamers into buying it, by only allowing DX10 on Vista. It's bound to get negative reviews.

The real problem is Microsoft just doesn't care and refuses to listen to customers.

Several years ago after battling my way through various levels of Microsoft's defense to talk to someone in charge, I was told a "blue screen of death problem" that I was experiencing may not be a bug. I was furious, but no one at Microsoft cared. Software that crashes or fails should EMBARRASS Microsoft enough to take action and fix it, but they just don't care. They make BILLIONS from sloppy software that they never fix and they cost all of hours of time working around their problems. Why should I be a loyal customer?

I knew I would be a bit of a masochist looking at Vista early. In many ways I like Vista and it appears to be more stable with some wireless connectivity problems I was having. BUT, I can't search many old files. Microsoft in their attempt to be Google decided that Windows Explorer had to index files or they cannot be found. My guess is I can't search about 20% of the old files I have, some of which go back to Windows 95 or before. And after battling through several levels of Microsoft's defense to get a solution to Vista's search, there is no solution -- at least for now. Microsoft just won't listen and fix a REAL problem. When I think Microsoft Vista is not finding files using Windows Explorer, I must via a network do the search from Windows 2000. What good is Vista's search if you cannot trust it to find all the files on your PC?

I gave up on OS/2 years ago because I almost had to beg IBM to buy the product. Microsoft is getting the same way you must beg to get any attention or find anyone that can make a difference in fixing problems. They seem to introduce change and new problems just to charge customers for the problems they have created. Microsoft just don't care enough about customers. They waste people's time with things that are not needed, and things that are need are not fixed when they break. After having been a loyal Microsoft customer since before Windows 95, it may be time to move on. They don't care and there are alternatives.

There are some good features in Office 2007, but if you're a power user, there are so many features that are hidden or broken up in ways that don't make any sense. I still can't believe how many times there is a new complicated path to do something and you end up with the same old dialog box from the past. It's different, but it's certainly not better. I still can't remember how to split a table in Word 2007 something that took seconds in earlier versions. And, it's a great new feature that some controls can be off the screen to the right so they can't be seen.

Access 2007 is a mess. The user interface is much more difficult than earlier versions. And why am I still limited to Access mdb files of 2 GB or less? I want improvements that make a difference, not just a pretty new interface that is confusing.

The real problem with Vista/Office 2007/Microsoft is the total lack of respect for customers. Why can't I trust Microsoft to introduce new products that work as well and as easily as the older version? With any release Microsoft can make arbitrary changes and introduce new and unnecessary complexity I don't want to see. Why should I trust them for the future? Microsoft should be embarrassed by the number of unnecessary file formats they have imposed on the world. History will NOT record this because many files will be lost in decades or centuries because of file incompatibility problems forced by Microsoft for no good reason.

I've given up on Borland and their software developer products since they don't care. It's time to give up on Microsoft since they don't care either.

No customer respect. No loyalty.

I bought a new laptop in February 2007. The ballyhooed sidebar has been deleted from my desktop due to no meaningful applications for it. IE 7 has bit the dust twice. I switched to firefox which is faster and free. After I wear out this laptop, my next computer will be an Apple. I've tolerated windows more than long enough.

I have been test driving Vista and frankly I dont have enough bread crumbs to get home! What a terrible business OS. I don't want more choices, I want simplicity. I do litigation support in a mid size law firm and we will NEVER EVER use all of the crap that is built into the OS. I am sticking with XP.

So let me understand this. . .

We just did a desktop refresh a year and a half ago of 20k workstations across 4 countries. We put a great deal of thought and money into a strategic desktop life cycle. We communicated this strategy with our executive management and customers. We are at least a year out from our next major refresh.

So now, because micosoft releases Vista, we should begin deployment, immediately. Which begins with, another workstation refresh if performance and stability are to mbe maintained.

Our question then is, is high availability and stability more important that jumping on the bandwagon & stuffing more cash in MS pockets?
Do we tell our executives, customers, and peers that our life cycle strategy will now be controlled by MS because they are extremely avuncular and very concerned for our companies success?

Or is the real question, do I want to continue working in the role and company in which I am currently employed.

Stay the course people. In your personal and professional lives. Don't be let an OS lead you around like a bull on a chain. Show some patience and versimilitude. Wait for a product that is released with improvements that can be immediately exploited and measured, and meets your schedule, not the vendors.

If your buying a new machine for home or school, and optioning Vista makes sense, great, go for it. But if you are a large enterprise, sit this dance out. It is a waste of your resources.

regards,
bufo

Very much on the mark. So far I haven't had one customer with Vista who actually preferred it to XP. I have, however, had customers pay me to install XP over the top of their preinstalled Vista.

One customer earlier in the year was annoyed with one particular Vista 'feature'. To me, this one almost summed up one big thing MS had done wrong in Vista. They built a brand new Help system, as the old one came from the stone age. But they then removed the old one from Vista, and in one fell swoop broke the Help function on just about every pre-Vista application. Now THAT is just dumb.

So uh, what's gonna happen here.
they'll either fix Vista make it palpable or come out with XP2?
If you scape off the XP, and wash off the white out, I think you'll find the Seahawks colors under there.
Yeah, you just bought ANOTHER copy of Vista.

db.

Vox populi, vox dei, "The voice of the people is the voice of God"....but Ms is deaf.
And this have to cost; costumer perception and when this perception is negative (Ballmer don't push me!,Gates remove your hand of my pocket! it's not my fault why I have pay two times?!)it could go from not buy the product until the French revolution but.... Ms continue deaf.
-------

http://www.eweek.com/slideshow_viewer/0,1205,l=&s=25945&a=213797&po=2,00.asp
The Trouble with Vista

12 reasons why it's problematic.

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
3) Software application incompatibility. It's unfriendly to some VPNs. And it has trouble getting along with IE 7.
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.
5) Hardware incompatibilities still abound. Microsoft rolled out the Vista Capable program in March 2006, but consumers found out that not all versions of Vista could run on the computers. Some sued. Microsoft was late issuing system requirements, and then had to revise them later.
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.
8) No compelling reasons to upgrade from XP. XP is good enough, and Vista doesn't offer enough compelling enhancements.
9) Too much like Windows XP. Five years after its release, XP is rock-solid and has a large base of customers who feel it is good enough for them. Vista isn't enough of an improvement to make them crave the new OS.
10) People buy PCs, not operating systems.
11) Vista PCs are just like XP PCs. Why would users want to spend more money and make a change?
12) Most new Vista features can be gotten free for XP on the Web.
--------
BTW: Joe listen your guts (only thus you escapes from mediocrity)

OS Religious Wars (Vista vs. XP vs. Linux vs. Mac) ... �are you just got to love them� =D
The hard-cold-fact is Vista will win irrespective of whether it is or is not the best operating system, because ... �drum roll� ... that�s what comes on 99.9% of new PCs � which means for the majority of buyers there is no choice (and they don�t have the knowledge or skill to realize if they installed XP or Linux on that same machine it could operate significantly faster).
When an organization buys a stack of new PCs and they can only choose between Vista Business or Vista Home Premium (and XP is not offered as an option) then they have to go with Vista ... no choice, it is Vista because it is built into the purchase price.
Secondly when I bought my new laptop six months ago it only came with Vista and only Vista hardware drivers. You needed a PHD in computer hacking to get XP and every device running successfully (though fortunately the manufacturer recently released a complete set of compatible XP drivers). Hence most people don�t have the knowledge or skills to exercise a choice; they can only go with what came with the machine.
-------------
At work my laptop is the fastest �Vista� machine in the place (and that is with only 2 GB of ram), faster then any of the newer high end workstations. And my machine is the most compatible with all our applications and hardware devices. So, how do I do it?
Well in reality I run Windows XP with Service Pack 3 (which gives a visually evident 10% to 20% performance increase over SP2) that is camouflaged as Vista. I use; bricopack-vista-inspirat-ultimate (which does resource [bmp, ico, avi]�injection� into XP�s EXEs and DLLs), Y�z Shadow, TrueTransparency, QTAddressBar, VisualTooltip or VisualTaskTips, WinFlip or ShockAero, Styler Toolbar, vista-drive-icon, ViStart, and Vista Sidebar port with Alky. Add in the ports of Vista screensavers and games. Plus applications like DeskSpace or Shock4Way3D, UberIcon, ObjectDock or RocketDock, plus Multiplicity. Now that gets the real �wow� statements from other staff members. And the kool thing is I can turnoff / uninstall the visual niceties I don�t use like start-menu, flip-3d, visual taskbar thumbnails, drive usage indicators when I need more grunt.
I tried Vista, I really tried Vista, I wanted it so much to work; but the application and hardware incompatibilities means my Vista-Pretending XP-SP3 is the only viable option. It all comes down to a choice between a few hundred dollar operating system OR a few thousand dollar software applications and hardware investment.
------
As for the future of Vista, I personally believe it is a lame-duck� due to things beyond its control.
First - processing power; quad core and by the end of 2008 hexa-core & octa-core; there are statements that you need a 1GB ram per core to get the best out of each core, yet Vista 32 is limited to 3GB-4GB (depending on who you listen to). So you go 64 bit, then all your hardware requires signed drivers so that creates a problem for existing devices.
Second � change in application direction; web applications & client-server are the way of the current future for both work and home applications. Home servers to stream media to your devices, mini laptops like the ASUS Eee. Games; Wii, Xbox, Playstation3 � do you really need to spend a couple of thousand on a PC when you can buy a pre-build device that is dedicated to games. The current future is relatively smart (but speedy) end user devices with high powered servers.
Third � Windows 7; word is it has gone light on operating system and is targeted for 2009 / 2010. Application compatibility will be via virtualization. XP is good enough until then.
Vista good or bad does not matter� it was just delivered too late, the world changed � it is a dinosaur (the last of a long line).
....
Something else to consider:
For business of more then 10 office-bound users there is only one true choice � Terminal services (Windows 2003 Terminal Server or Citrix). At the beginning of the year when Vista hit the public market I did a cost analysis of upgrading users to Vista. These are the results in Australian dollars at the time.
Consider � 10 users � with XP pro (512MB ram, 2Ghz cpu)

Vista Upgrade
Vista Business upgrade ($380) $3,800
Ram upgrade ($200) $2,000
Installation & configure Vista, reinstall applications, & configure user (2.5 hrs x $150/hr) $3,750
TOTAL (Vista upgrade) $9,550

Terminal Server
HP ProLiant ML110 G4 (1 x Dual-Core Xeon 3040 / 1.86 GHz, 4GB ram, 2 x 160 GB harddisk $2,550
Microsoft Windows 2003 $1,400
Windows 2003 Terminal Services (5 CALs) + 5 CALs $2,550
Installation & configure Windows 2003 & terminal server, install applications, & configure user (4hr x $150/hr) $1,500
TOTAL (Terminal server) $8,000

As the number of users increase then Terminal Server becomes even more profitable solution then installing Vista.

In number 5 you note that the fellow whose team is responsible for the Office 2007 interface is now going to oversee Windows development and present this as a good thing. I beg to differ. As a tool for basic office automation processes in the majority of business environments the change in interface offers only the need for retraining with no functional advantage with respect to the execution of typical tasks. Theoretically, aside from the egregious waste of screen real estate for the ribbon, the new interface is really only valuable to someone first learning the product who will likely do much formatting in complex documents. For the literal millions of people needing to knock out letters, memos and reports it represents only a business cost to first purchase and then retrain and accept the subsequent reduction of productivity while coming to terms with the new interface. Then there's the pesky issue of decreased performance compared to Office 2003 due to greater resource demands.

If a legacy interface is to be altered it should be done in a way that consolidates functionality and offers real performance gains. Neither Office 2007 nor Vista meets this standard. One of the real issues here, and one of the reasons I believe Vista to be irrelevant, is that the computing environments for the majority of businesses have matured to the point that good old reliable XP and capable as well as familiar Office 2003 are more than sufficient to the tasks at hand. Frankly my clients aren't interested in new features or functions unless there is a clear and direct payback. The real software market of interest is industry-specific vertical market applications and databases.

For the last 20 years operating system and later office automation purchases were a lot like auto purchases some decades ago; a new model is released and people flock to snap it up; it's newer and therefore better. But as with automobiles most business people have a good sense of "good enough," a concept that shouldn't necessarily be spoken of with derisions since it is not out of hand synonymous with mediocrity, and hence are not going to invest scarce assets in something just because it's new. Like with one's car, we tend to do the same thing with the new one that we did with the old one and understanding this many among us actually keep our automobiles until it makes functional sense to move to a newer model. Similarly many are inclined to keep their current OS and Office revision until a new version demonstrates clear benefits as they, not Microsoft or the trade press, define them. Neither Vista nor Office 2007 passes this test for many organizations.

So I'm not at all encouraged by the new sheriff because he's likely optimizing for the wrong goal like his predecessor.