Peeps still want to buy it, but microsoft says TOO DAMNED BAD, AND GO FUCK YOURSELF.
http://apcmag.com/5835/vendors_in_no_rush_to_ditch_xp_for_vista
XP unavailable after this year
I'm still trying to figure out why Macroshaft is killing a product that its customers actually WANT. Why not drag that fucker out a few more years & make Vista not suck?
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
How old is that article? I thought Dell already announced that they'd make XP available through Jan 08. Or was that only for businesses?
As for Microsoft pushing Vista, I understand that they put all this money and time into it, so it's understandable that they want it sold, but damn. When your entire consumer base is telling you it sucks, maybe you should hold off on pushing it out until you release a service pack or something...
As for Microsoft pushing Vista, I understand that they put all this money and time into it, so it's understandable that they want it sold, but damn. When your entire consumer base is telling you it sucks, maybe you should hold off on pushing it out until you release a service pack or something...
“Activism is a way for useless people to feel important, even if the consequences of their activism are counterproductive for those they claim to be helping and damaging to the fabric of society as a whole.” - Dr Thomas Sowell
MS is talking about this being the last OS with "service packs", which makes sense. Everyone immediately thinks they'll wait for a service pack before upgrading.
I can't blame MS for not wanting two complete support staffs, either.
They'll either get Vista where it needs to be or they'll die.
I can't blame MS for not wanting two complete support staffs, either.
They'll either get Vista where it needs to be or they'll die.
"... and then I was forced to walk the Trail of Tears." - Elizabeth Warren
If Microsoft doesn't change their tune, eventually someone will come up with a good easy-to-use OS that will win the market from them. It's inevitable. It just might be a few years to a few decades before it happens.
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"
I'd go 100% Linux right now if my windows-only games would run on it without an extra software translation layer that makes them run inefficiently.TPRJones wrote:If Microsoft doesn't change their tune, eventually someone will come up with a good easy-to-use OS that will win the market from them. It's inevitable. It just might be a few years to a few decades before it happens.
That is a hurdle I'm not sure can be.... hurdled.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
It can be done, but not easily. When the magically perfect OS comes along, it'll have to win enough of the business use market to become a serious player before it can start to move in on the games market. But it's not impossible.
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"
This magical OS can't be produced by a company that is out to make a profit, though. Because it does not behoove that company to just stop forcing users to upgrade to an OS that they don't like by force-obsoleting the one they do.
There's no way profit-seeking Microsoft can make anyone happy. *IF* XP were the most perfect OS we could expect for the next couple centuries, Microsoft would still have to obsolete it, in the name of profit. That means we are almost guarenteed to get moved to an OS inferior to the one that preceeded it, eventually. Vista sure seems like that inferior OS.
Edited By GORDON on 1183520312
There's no way profit-seeking Microsoft can make anyone happy. *IF* XP were the most perfect OS we could expect for the next couple centuries, Microsoft would still have to obsolete it, in the name of profit. That means we are almost guarenteed to get moved to an OS inferior to the one that preceeded it, eventually. Vista sure seems like that inferior OS.
Edited By GORDON on 1183520312
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
That's true on the face of it, but there are other ways to make profit. If someone does come up with a truely excellent OS that they can get into the business market, it would have to be using a different profit scheme than Microsoft has for it to work long-term. Instead of trying to make your next round of profits with forced obsolesence, go for something else like moderate liscensing fees to commercial developers or make your money in future upgrades and support. Maybe give away your OS as part of providing IT service to companies, and make your profit as a service provider instead of a software box seller. Or a combination of these. Or something else entirely no one has thought of yet because if they had it would have been done by now and they'd be rich.
As to targeting general business use as a foothold, I meant office desktops as the main target. Most IT personel would be happy to get away from Microsoft if there were another good option out there that the average clueless office schlub could learn to use well. And when it's on the desktop at work it's the most likely OS to be purchased for home use next. Then once it makes it into homes a market for games springs up.
I don't think anyone besides Microsoft has taken that approach yet. Apple is geared towards the artistic type instead of focusing on business applications. And the Linux packages I've seen aren't geared towards use by average clueless office schlubs. Someone has to beat MS at their own game; it's the only way to take them down.
As to targeting general business use as a foothold, I meant office desktops as the main target. Most IT personel would be happy to get away from Microsoft if there were another good option out there that the average clueless office schlub could learn to use well. And when it's on the desktop at work it's the most likely OS to be purchased for home use next. Then once it makes it into homes a market for games springs up.
I don't think anyone besides Microsoft has taken that approach yet. Apple is geared towards the artistic type instead of focusing on business applications. And the Linux packages I've seen aren't geared towards use by average clueless office schlubs. Someone has to beat MS at their own game; it's the only way to take them down.
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"
-
DoctorChaos
- Posts: 1579
- Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:58 pm
A couple years ago, the BIG thing was grid computing. Essential everyone participates in shared processing ala SETI or folding. To that end, there was no OS or installed programs. Everyone had access to a master network that controlled access similar to a wait for it... a mainframe. So the licensing for programs shifts from a single purchase to a subscription service. I think as internet access becomes more ubiquitous this might actually take off.
Wadda mean? Other people can read this?!
I think I disagree.TPRJones wrote:And when it's on the desktop at work it's the most likely OS to be purchased for home use next. Then once it makes it into homes a market for games springs up.
When I worked for Gateway 2000 in 1998, we'd go to the factory floor in North Sioux City, get up in the catwalks, and just watch the PC's roll by on the conveyor. The monitor at the end of the line, counting boxes, said they were producing on average 8,000 PC's a day... and this was one of two manufacturing floors the company had at the time, and it was one company out of the big 3... and Gateway 2000, at the time, was behind HP and Dell in sales (and maybe Compaq?). I tell that story so you can try to comprehend how embedded Microsoft Windows is in the computer manufacturing business. 99% of PC's being sold retail have Windows preinstalled, and there's more PC's than you can comprehend being sold every single day.
How can any other product compete, unless it gives blowjobs, or something? You need a majority user base that is comfortable scrapping their windows install and loading up something else. That user base will never exist, I think. maybe it'll be different once the Boomers kick off and the cell phone generation is the majority.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
TheCatt wrote:Mac.
I'm curious about something. I haven't used one in about five years, so maybe things have changed. As it was back then there was no way I'd ever want an Apple system. The problem for me was that the damn thing wouldn't tell me what was going on in there. I want to know where my files are, and organize them to my liking. I want to be able to tweak every single tiny parameter of everything in my system. I want nothing happening inside my computer without my express permission and guidance.
Last time I used a Mac it was all "oh, don't worry about those things, silly! I'll take care of everything, you just grab a latte and be artistic!" One might say it was TOO easy. It was forced easiness. And that makes me uneasy.
Has that changed? Are Macs these days now compatible with the OCD Computer Nerd mindset? If so I'll try one again.
Edited By TPRJones on 1183574844
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"
-
DoctorChaos
- Posts: 1579
- Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:58 pm
OS X is based on a BSD kernel, so you get all the unix goodness. I actually find the UI annoying, but then I'm a command line guy. The os is vastly superior to the old mac os. The UI is still designed to insulate the user from the lower levels of the computer, but there are a lot of tools one can download to bypass it.
Wadda mean? Other people can read this?!