It's a beta right? With a pre-configured cut-off date, right? Then not letting it upgrade Windows XP or Ubuntu or the bare metal is, well, just like:

1. Load shotgun
2. Aim carefully at the left foot.
3. Fire!
4. Aim carefully, this time at the right foot.
5. Fire!

And after reading "Windows kicks Linux to the curb" at:
blogs.zdnet.com/storage/?p=379

I thought, good! Then:

a) Now Linux will be so far off the malware developers' radar screen and will remain safe, smooth, and secure. Let the rest of the world agonize over viruses, adware, rootkits, de-fragmentation, fragile registries, and re-installation. Of course, they blame computer experts when Microsoft's concoctions don't live up to expectations, but that can be a source of perverse joy.

b) Linux is "kicked to the curb" so that the Microsoft race car can careen over the cliff by itself.

Bwwhhhaaaahahahaha!

Agreed, and its not mentioned that Linux was moving along quite happily over the years WITHOUT the increase in popularity it is achieving recently.
-
Infact its been reported that demands for Linux/Open source positions are increasing so I sincerely hope Microsoft keeps "kicking Linux to the curb" its done it the power of good.
-
That in my book, is one thing to thank Microsoft for.
-
Cheers Redmond!

When people wrestle with the kind of complexity Microsoft puts them through over and over again, it betrays a kind of lost cause mentality. The mentality that believes there is no other provider. That the experience is normal. We never should have allowed Microsoft to gain control of our computers. They have caused much suffering and economic loss and have lead us to believe it's our own fault.

I don't care what all of the "experts" may say, I'm staying with the most stable platform offered by MicroShaft to date: XP Professional. You can keep your Vista and use it for toilet paper and probably the same goes for Windows 7. Who needs or want's touch screens and transparent windows or tabs? Who needs to buy more hardware just to support an OS that may be good for business use, but is overkill for most single users? Go ahead folks, pay the price for being on the cutting edge. Just be careful you don't cut your own throats.

Sorry, I posted the below on the wrong thread.
-
In regards to the Linux kicked to the curb article, it appears it has links to the past, as documented here:
-
http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS5784396972.html?kc=rss

I agree with TD2009 on the point he makes about Vista, and probably even Win7 charging system resources just to have transparent windows and animated bells and whistles. Significant Vista marketing was focused on the visual aspect.
On the other hand I find it surprising that not so much is said about the improved security model added with Vista (and also present in Win7); I'm referring to the user restrictions on modifying sensitive system files (or the User Access Control as it is known).
Sure, a similar setup can be achieved in Win XP too - configure limited users, but it needs quite some tinkering (especially the RunAs feature when you want to use it, eg. with Windows Explorer). I believe that this is quite some improvement for the average user, I just think, Microsoft is not doing well with transitions.

The major problem that you are missing is that XP users are more likely to have older hardware which is not supported under Vista/7. People are not going to like 7 if it means that they have to pay for a software upgrade and then half of their hardware does not work.

Increasing revenue is OK but soon you would face a class-action lawsuit.

Partition the HD & do a fresh install on a new partition specifically for windows 7. I skipped clunky Vista & IE. IE (#) is still painfully pokey, so install your favorite browser & enjoy.

Joe, you got your answer, Windows 7 is still in development and the current beta is not a reflection of the final release. You should not have even made a post like this because it can be easily misinterpreted. Vista beta 1 never supported upgrades, that was not implemented until around build 5308. Windows 98 didn't add upgrade support for older versions of Windows such as 3.1 until later into its development. So, this is nothing out of the ordinary.

"A good friend and small business owner has been thinking about a new computer. Because I steered another friend to a an aluminum MacBook, he was thinking about buying one, too. No way, I said. You want Windows 7 Beta 1." - Beta 1 will only work until August, what does this business owner do after that if 7 isn't actually out by then? The article implies that he would be using the machine as a "production" box, i.e for business as well as pleasure, recomending a beta OS for this purpose is dumb.

The fact that the author didn't check the upgrade path is also dumb.

"You must know where this is going right? Windows 7 might not support Vista upgrades." - This statement is dumb.

The whole article is dumb.

You know, stick a Porsche body on a Lada, and you are still driving a piece of crap, no matter how pretty it is.

If the sole reason anyone "upgrades" to Vista SP2...er...I mean Windows 7...is for how pretty it looks, then they are idiots.

Hi Andre!
-
Quote "Joe, you got your answer, Windows 7 is still in development and the current beta is not a reflection of the final release. You should not have even made a post like this because it can be easily misinterpreted. Vista beta 1 never supported upgrades, that was not implemented until around build 5308. Windows 98 didn't add upgrade support for older versions of Windows such as 3.1 until later into its development. So, this is nothing out of the ordinary."
-
Its funny how you dont say the same thing when the comments are good. As I said before, in regards to Windows 7, the good comments are shown as proof the Win 7 will be the best ever, the bad ones are put down to it being a beta. Its win win for Beta 7.
-
Feel like answering the question yet? Theres an open letter to you on my site aswell, but incase IE is playing up, he is the question again (14 times now)
-
On your blog, you claim not to be attending the PDC 2008(I have a screen dump of that page if you need help finding it) Now on this site:
-
http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/microsoft/archives/152854.asp
-
It implies you were there, and you received a review laptop. Since you've always said you are not a Microsoft Shill, Im sure you are keen to clear this matter up.
-
I look forward to your response.

I think upgrading an MS operating system on any computer is crazy. Only get a new OS when you get a new computer. At least then you hope the manufacturer has included the right drivers for what you are buying. I don't think it makes any sense to upgrade an older computer beyond SPs and Windows Update. With the new Vista driver model, so much older stuff doesn't work, that if you have XP working and all your devices working, then leave it that way.
Of course the problem for MS is that computer upgrade cycles are becoming much longer. This means far fewer OS sales if they can't upgrade. Plus if they want to upgrade people they have to support much older devices and software (which they don't seem able to do).
Anyway I think Win7 will be like Vista. Upgrading an older computer that came with XP, even if you format the harddrive, is very problematic and troublesome. Getting it on a new computer, pre-configured, is usually ok (but not great).
I think part of the problem with upgrading (without formatting the HD), is that it leaves all the Windows bitrot behind. All the weird registry settings that have accumulated. All the ActiveX controls and DLLs installed by various programs and websites, etc., etc. If you look at the size of the registry and the Windows\system32 directory on a well used computer, it can be quite scary.

Hi smist08
-
All very true, I remember an article on the Vista site asking "Is bloat a problem?" I was so disgusted at the fact MS needed to ask the question I wrote an article on it.
-
Is bloat a problem? IMO the MS article tried to downplay it, and put the point across that because tech is so cheap it doesnt matter.
-
To me one of two things was trying to be conveyed during that "article"
IMO, they were trying to make light of bloat in order so that people didnt consider it an issue.
-
Unfortunately the audience in general (IMO) that Microsoft is talking to, really isnt stupid, and is well aware that bloat and even the debris of a removed OS are a problem for any PC.
-
Of course thats all my own opinion. Maybe some people dont care? Maybe they were the ones that Vista was aimed at? Who knows? For me I want every 1k of my HD justified and if its not needed its gone. Thankfully Linux platform manages this all by itself, without hardly any input from me.
-
Its funny people call Linux a hobbyist system. Truth is, in my case I spent more time "fixing and fiddling" on a Windows platform than I ever do in Linux. In my book that makes Windows the hobbyists system. Ever spoken to someone who has tried to install the latest game software on Windows recently?

Joe Wilcox says:

"So in the real world, I learned what a little reading could have told me—and so it's my advice to you:

* Minimum 512MB of memory on your netbook or older clunker

* Upgrade from Vista; forget XP"
-----------------------------------------------------
Joe, lets for fun assume that you carried this experiment in "upgrading," or do a full install, a couple of steps further. Next logical thing to do would be to add more memory to the computer. Next after that, if would not upgrade from XP, to reformat and try to install Seven from scatch.

The last problem you will likely run into on these older XP computers, is no Vista/Seven drivers made. Face it, Seven is Vista, and as such cannot replace XP on most of these older computers. The only upgrade path on these machines, is Linux.

www.distrowatch.com

For crying out loud Joe, all your site has become is a Linux forum. How can your subject of Windows 7 upgrade be twisted it into something about Linux? That is all this site has become.

My RELEVANT take on the upgrade subject is: I only tried it on Vista with my wife's P.C. and it worked flawlessly. However it took about 3 - 4 hours to complete. On my own P.C., I did the clean install. That only took about 20 minutes.

The beauty with the upgrade is that I didn't have to worry about things being changed too much for my wife and getting in trouble. Also, although it took what felt like forever, once the upgrade was started, the rest was unattended.

I would think XP upgrades will probably be available on the RTM of Windows 7.

Thanks for the article Joe.

Quote "For crying out loud Joe, all your site has become is a Linux forum. How can your subject of Windows 7 upgrade be twisted it into something about Linux? That is all this site has become."
-
Well since (I presume) most people visit the MSwatch site to read Joes articles. The posts/debate/comments merely stems from that.
Even if it had turned into a Linux discussion, is that any worse than the Microsoft inspired posters who took to imitating Joe and insulting other users?
-
I dont know which you'd prefer to see, but Id suggest if you dont like the discussion, "vote with your feet" and simply ignore the comments.
-
and Ill say again, since Joe has said himself that I am welcome to post here (I presume with my Linux opinion) then you should facilitate the email address on this site and complain to him directly should you feel you have a case to put across, lest you become guilty of something which you are implying that others do...going off topic.

Joe,

If you have your articles researched and written by a 2nd grader, you should not allow them to publish under your name.

We may actually start thinking you have fallen for the "I'll do whatever it takes to get eyeballs for my ads" tactics.

Re: "We may actually start thinking you have fallen for the 'I'll do whatever it takes to get eyeballs for my ads' tactics."

Oops! I've got AdBlock Plus enabled in Firefox 3.0.5. Well, at least the fluff loads quickly!!!

Ridley :wrote

"For crying out loud Joe, all your site has become is a Linux forum. How can your subject of Windows 7 upgrade be twisted it into something about Linux? That is all this site has become."
----------------------------------------------------

So everyone is getting the top version of Windows 7 Beta giving good reviews...so one has to wonder about how well the "lessor" versions will perform and what features will it have. Yet no one seems to talk about this....

You might be surprised that even some Linux fans gave Windows 7 good reviews. In the Ubuntu forums most have said 7 is faster than Vista and has overall good performance.

Of course, Windows 7 is not enough reason to dump Linux and go back to Windows. The various levels of Windows, such as Home, Premium, Business and Ultimate don't exist in Linux.

Linux has Ubuntu 8.10 ( for example). Just one distribution of it. But you can add as little or as many programs and software that you want. With no extra cost, in fact the total cost is free.

And that same Ubuntu 8.10 (for example) can be customized with different desktop GUI's. Kubuntu simply means that it is Ubuntu with a KDE interface. Where as Xubuntu is Ubuntu 8.10 with a XFCE interface.

You can customize your desktop the way YOU want, and you can add all the programs YOU want. With Windows, there are no such options.

I mentioned the KDE interface GUI. Some have noted more than a passing resemblance of Windows 7 to the KDE interface. Its kind of flattering that Redmond is looking to its competition for ideas.

Too bad they didn't take it further and base their core from the Linux kernel. After all Apple Mac is based from BSD.

Microsoft could base their next OS from Linux, and yet still sell it for what ever they want. And yes you can make money from Linux...unlike what some others have been saying.

So bottom line, Windows 7 seems better than Vista. Its not going to stop me from using Linux...or XP for that matter.

First thing comes to mind, why upgrade production environment to Windows 7 BETA? Maybe the money the grab is right there. If it is not broken, don't try to fix it.

As for upgrade paths, even Unix based systems have limitations on their upgrades. For example you can't directly upgrade FreeBSD 4.x to 6.x or 5.x to 7.x and Red Hat Linux had similar issues. Mind you, I understand that we're comparing free OS to non-free OS. But the core argument is the same, not all OS can have a direct upgrade path.

The other thing, hardware is much cheaper nowadays. In fact, Vista runs fast and stable on Core2 Duo processors with 2GB of RAM. The price of 2GB RAM stick today is as cheap as 512MB was 3 years ago. Logically, we should utilize the more powerful CPU for better security and more complex software designs.

In the end, I agree that Vista has its share of problems, but it is not a bad choice as long as you're not planning to use legacy applications or incompatible software.

Linux can/may be the best OS ever in the history of the universe, but there is way too much M.S. bashing in favor of Linux here in MICROSOFT-WATCH. Joe rarely brings up Linux in his articles, yet so many on here find a way to segue almost every Microsoft topic to Linux. I am beginning to think that word got out in the Linux world that they need to praise Linux and bash M.S. in every M.S. forum they can find.

We Windows/Microsoft users have plenty of issues, complaints and problems with M.S. software, so I am definitely not here to extol the virtues of M.S. It just seems obvious that these Linux advocates are here to promote that O.S. in this forum.

I wont repeat myself as ive responded to this on the other thread, suffice to say, where has any bashing taken place? if you mean a critical post about MS backed up with independant facts, then yes, theres been plenty of it. Who is anyone to say whats bashing? who is to say what people should post? regardless of what this site aims to do, spirit of debate should be encouraged and if readers do agree with certain posters, they can simply ignore the post.
-
Joe Wilcox has said himself that I and others are welcome to post here. Since its his site, why do you have a problem?

Post away oh goblin, noone has requested you stop. But Joe may as well rename his site: "Microsoft vs Linux Watch (but everyone knows Linux is better)"

Just keep in mind, this is Microsoft-Watch for now.

Quote Ridley "Post away oh goblin, noone has requested you stop."
-
I know, Joe Wilcox told me himself.
-
Quote Ridley "Just keep in mind, this is Microsoft-Watch for now."
-
I know that aswell, theres hardly much point posting an alternative view to Windows on a Linux site is there? The reason this is a Microsoft news site IS EXACTLY the reason why the alternative view is so important.
-
In the interests of fairness, I would welcome a pro-Windows view on a Linux site (infact I think it shows the "fairness" of Linux users when you have Windows 7 praise on the Ubuntu forum), unfortunately as Ive tried to ask Andre to list, finding genuine users championing Vista is not an easy task (IMO)

For the most part, I believe M.S. users do not waste time on the Linux sites. But Linux users sure do like to push their O.S. on M.S. sites. Must make them feel good.

My PC doesn't have the capacity for Vista or Windows 7. After unhappy experiences with upgrading hardware in the past, I decided to keep XP on the hub that runs my home network and add a new PC that ships with Windows 7, after all the bugs are eliminated, whenever that becomes available. I think it's the best of all worlds--I can add new PCs that run Windows, Apple or Linux without worrying about compatibility!

Ridley dont be silly. MS users do post on Linux sites, and as i said before i would encourage that and like to see more of it. I was not aware that areas of the internet were closed to opensource users, and i was not aware there was a rule of "this is my area, go back to your own" i hope you are not suggesting that. I also challenge your comment of pushing Linux. We dont need to, we expose its existance and its up to the individual if they try it. There is no financial rewards to be had from talking about foss that I know about. Can you say the same about proprietary products?
-
In regards to making me feel good, ill let you in on a secret. For every user who has messaged me to thank me for saving them money by trying out an alternative i do feel good. Im pleased people can get functionality they want without lockin.
-
On the otherside of the coin i feel good when genuine people tell me they have tried an aletrnative and prefer ms products. To me those people can spend money on proprietary products safe in the knowledge that they are choosing the right packages for them.
-
Enlightenment, balanced view and exposure to new ways of tackling computing problems, these are the things that make me feel good, and I think the majority of "Linux fans" (which is wrong, we are open source users) (IMO) think the same way.
-
Open source is not just about Linux, thats why you see things like open office mentioned when talking about msoffice. Open source users dont have to use Linux, thats why open office is available in Windows flavor, and so many other great foss packages which can save a user literally hundreds of pounds.

It would be a waste of my time to copy and paste all the posts by Linux users that are infomercials for that O.S. It is all over this and many other M.S. topic sites. It is just my observation that Linux user troll M.S. topic sites promoting their O.S. I know they are not getting paid to do so, but I doubt they are doing it for altruistic reasons. They just desire to attempt to give the impression that Linux is so popular that M.S. sites are loaded with Linux promotion. Perhaps trying to keep their free O.S. alive/relevant.

goblin :wrote

"MS users do post on Linux sites"
-------------------------------------------------
Correct. On the Ubuntu Forums there is a Windows section just as there is a Mac section.

Consequently on the Vista Forums, there is a Linux section and yes,... a Mac section.

Interestingly enough, on the Vista Forums there is a big interest with both regular and power Windows users who are dual booting with Linux.

We who use Linux happily welcome Windows and Mac users looking for information on Linux. There are quite a lot of "dual booters" who are very happy to have the best of both worlds.

Some people only use Windows for Tax Cut programs or for gaming and the rest of the time they use Linux for all around general computing and have the added benefits of "safe surfing" with no headaches or concerns that one bad site could hose their system.

Linux cannot mentioned without mentioning Windows on many non Linux sites and tech news articles. I don't have a problem with that and I am sure most Linux users don't mind either.

I keep hearing that Linux only has a .86% market share, there two points to be made here regarding that figure.

So how long will Linux be stuck at that .86% figure? Interestingly now we see whole countries moving to open source, we see schools around the globe moving to Linux desktop to save on licensing fees, we see figures any where from 10% to 30% to even 50% Linux market share on the netbooks.

So these figures increase daily and yet Linux still only has a .86%? Someone a month or two ago innocently quoted a 2% market share for Linux desktop here on MS Watch.

And some shill got on here(non regular poster ) practically had a nervous breakdown over that figure. THAT was funny....

Linux is competition for Windows, and Mac is competition for Windows. The only difference between Mac and Linux is..., Linux is free and Mac is not and Redmond can't compete with free.

Joe, I can't find your "Linux section"

Windows 7 is getting funnier all the time. Ubuntu migration wizard works on XP and Vista. So by the time Windows 7 gets released Ubuntu might have simpler and more effective upgrading than MS.

Come on MS wake up if you don't fix the upgrade problem you might as well hand Linux the Desktop market on a silver platter to take.

Don't say applications. Wine is getting to the point were its more compatible with Windows XP applications than Windows 7. Yes wine does still have a major bug no central installing.

Yeah, I see SO many major PC manufacturers moving to Linux... Yeah, right.

Ridley they have not swapped yet but they are checking there options.

MS still has a window. If they don't get there issues sorted out they will lose.

Sign of checking there options every major PC builder are providing coders working actively in the desktop section of Linux. So yes they are checking there options. Before Vista you did not see that.

I have heard the same old story about Linux for over 10 years now, and still it is just the smallest of blips on the radar. Many mfgs have tried offering it and later quit, due to lack of interest. The general public just isn't going to go for Linux.