Should We All Forget About Vista?

  dth 11:58 27 Sep 2006

This was the heading from an article that I read in a computer magazine this week (not PCA by the way). To my mind it seems a bit crazy to try and write off an o/s that is still in development and has not be released yet!

The 10 reasons given are:-

1) Too expensive - when an OS costs more than 20% of the PC itself, then ask yourself if you really need it

2) Hardware requirement is excessive. 1GB of RAM on XP is fine, on Vista it's a start

3) Encourages MS to end support for XP. Something it desperatley wants to do as soon as possible.

4) DX10 video cards and games don't exist yet. There may not be many titles for a couple of years yet, unless you include the ancient Halo 2

5) More WGA (Windows Genuine Advantage) rubbish. MS assumes we are all pirates, and gets excited when it is occasionally right

6) More DRM (Digital Rights Management). All your music and video files belong to MS, not you

7) Security prospects. When MS makes a truely secure OS I'll retire, but not yet I think.

8) IE7 - I'm entirely happy with Firefox, so why would I want MS's blatant copy

9) Pretty isn't everything - you can load Windows Blinds into XP and get it to look lovely, but it is just graphics

10) It is warmed over XP - after 5 years we expect and deserve more

I can see were the writer is coming from with WGA but the rest just seems a bit over the top and unfair to me.

  Noelg23 12:44 27 Sep 2006

apart from DRM and WGA, I dont know what the big fuss is all about. I love Vista with a passion and cant wait for when it is released in Jan 2007. It may be costly when it comes out but believe me it will be darn well worth it. So no we shouldnt forget about Vista because it will be the best ever OS Microsoft have made since Win 98SE.

  ade.h 13:50 27 Sep 2006

2, 8, 9 and 10 are all good points.

  powerless 14:14 27 Sep 2006

What exactly DO YOU WANT in the next Windows O/S?

  ade.h 14:34 27 Sep 2006

1. Lower hardware requirements - XP level.

2. Less emphasis on advanced beautifying effects.

3. Less multimedia baggage.

4. No DRM. The user must take moral and legal responsibility for thei media usage, not have MS do it for them.

5. An IE6 emulation mode in IE7 or allow IE6 to run alongside.

That's all that I can think of right at this minute.

  Forum Editor 00:18 28 Sep 2006

that - apart from the DRM aspects - much of what has gone into Vista is the result of consumer feedback. People have actually asked for that "multimedia baggage", and I can't really see why anyone would want Vista to run both IE6 and & IE7 - any more than people wanted to run IE4 and IE5 on the same machine.

As for that DRM situation - it's probably true that if users actually did take moral and legal responsibility for their media usage there wouldn't be any necessity for MS to do it for them would there?

  ade.h 13:53 28 Sep 2006

Re: point 5. It would help me with my recently-begun CSS development. The Sitepoint books and other sources have explained about some of the limitations of IE6, and if I was only testing in IE7, I could inadvertantly hit one of those bugs or limitations without noticing. I will probably work around it by not updating the desktop, then transferring files over, but that does make more work, of course. If you have been using CSS for a few years, it probably wouldn't be an issue - you would probably consider IE6 without really thinking about it.

I probably won't buy Vista in the end - not least because I can't justify the expense - but I want to try it before I judge it.

  phil46 20:46 28 Sep 2006

IS VISTA GOING TOBE A WME?? how long is Microsoft going to support W2000 and WXP as these
OS work well with older computers including my seven year old Brio that i keep going just for fun even with the 1.1 Pentium 3 and 512mb of SDR the maximum the board can take it can't run Vista and there are millions of older computers out there.
If you live in poorer countries people won't be able to afford the cost of a computer to run Vista.

  Totally-braindead 22:35 28 Sep 2006

Its stupid to condemn an OS before its even released. I'm one of the "not interested ones", at least at the moment. In the future I'll probably have to upgrade to Vista as I'm sure software will come out eventually that will be Vista compatible only. But in the meantime its daft to condemn it before even one single unit has been sold.
Its coming, theres no avoiding that and it will effect us all, perhaps we'll love it and perhaps we'll hate it.
Personally I think we'll just have to wait and see. Regarding point 1 I wasn't aware the prices had been set yet and even if they have if a PC is say £1000 are they saying that a copy of Vista is going to be over £200?

  lisa02 23:05 28 Sep 2006

So we now have Microsoft "nannying" us?

I hate DRM with as much passion as I hate thieves.

  LastChip 01:46 29 Sep 2006

It's all speculative at the moment, but Microsoft's Canadian site did (inadvertently?) release proposed prices for each edition for the Canadian market. It has since withdrawn the web page.

If Vista Ultimate (the high end option) isn't in excess of £200, I'll be very surprised. In fact, as I speculated elsewhere, I would hazard a guess at £250-£300.

While the ten points mentioned are clearly meant to have an element of sensationalism, they are non-the-less valid points of view.

The latest clean install of RC1 on my test machine took a little under 13GB of hard drive space. Place this on an older laptop, with perhaps unsuitable hardware and remember two further points: You haven't loaded any applications yet and the aero glass interface (which seems to be a major selling point) wont work. Load some applications and you've now conceivably used 60%+ of your drive space, slowed the machine down and gained very little.

So one has to ask, is it worth it?

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Dell XPS 13 9370 (2018) review

Best Keyboards for Designers & Artists

What to ask Siri on the HomePod

Meilleurs VPN (2018)