Microsoft admits Vista failure

stuntfreak

Active Member
Joined
May 15, 2006
Messages
236
WITH TWO OVERLAPPING events, Microsoft admitted what we have been saying all along, Vista, aka Windows Me Two (Me II), is a joke that no one wants.

It did two unprecedented things this week that frankly stunned us.

Dell announced that it would be offering XP again on home PCs. The second that Vista came out, Microsoft makes it very hard for you to sell anything other than Me II. It can't do this on the business side because it would be laughed out the door, but for the walking sheep class, well, you take what you are shovelled.

......


http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=39087
 
Yeah, you always need to take that news site with a grain of salt, but still interesting and funny, nonetheless.
 
I was just reading in Investor's Business Daily that Dell customers were complaining that they wanted XP over Vista (Dell was selling all new computers with Vista installed). Now they are offering Vista as a free upgrade. I bought a Dell laptop right before Vista came out, so I got a Vista Home Premium upgrade for free and I have yet to install it.
 
The Market will decide.

I have yet to be told why vista is a must have, its got some nice stuff, great! However is it worth the upgrade hell and the extra spondies it will cost - and it is particularly expensive in the UK, so no it is not worth it.
 
Vista is too fucking heavy on low end systems.
Why? Why do I need a cool looking OS... I want security for fucks sake!! We all know how good MS is when it comes to that... computer programmers will never be as good as DaVinci or Michelangelo... even 2nd graders can kick their ass when it comes to making something cool and funny.

No. I have no idea how much heavier Vista is compared to XP... but from the beginning it was hyped because it would be "a 3D OS"... fuck 3D... I don't want a3D desktop. Games are for that. Stop playing WOW at work, stop thinking how cool it is to make shit cool and make a true OS that is stabld, secure and easy to use.
 
Last edited:
$299 is wayyyy too much for a piece of broken software
 
Stop playing WOW at work, stop thinking how cool it is to make shit cool and make a true OS that is stabld, secure and easy to use.

Vista is:
a) more secure than XP
b) more stable than XP
c) easier to use than XP

PLEASE people, when you bitch at something, at least make sure you know WHAT to bitch about. Sure Vista has it's downsides: it's slower than XP, the new UI takes some getting used to, it's DRM is border-line assraping, it may be overhyped, it sure as hell isn't cheap (at least Ultimate isn't, the rest is priced the exact same as the XP counterpart (at least the wholesale prices which i know, if prices differ at your local shop, HE is milking you, not MS): Home Basic price == XP Home price, Home Premium price == MCE price, Business price == XP Professional price), and the system requirements are pretty high, but let's be honest, almost everyone out there has a PC that meets the bare minimum specs.

If you prefer to continue running XP, be my guest but please, like i've said a million times before, don't go bitching when you have no clue what you're bitching about.

Don't get me wrong, you can hate Vista all you want for all i care, but at least hate it for the right reasons.
 
Last edited:
I will agree with that.
I refuse to buy Vista because it's slower on games, and it's less efficient on the hardware (stuff runs approx. 15% faster in XP, as of now).
 
I aquired a copy of Vista Home Premium and tried it on my dad's comp, I didn't like the interface change at all. All the icons has no text on it, I don't know wtf I'm clicking. And I don't see a reason to upgrade yet, my video card is not DX10 compatible, so there's no way I can play DX10 games anyways. Other than the cool interface and DX10, I really don't see a reason to upgrade to Vista. And currently Vista has a lot of driver problems, so it's not worth it yet.
 
Vista is too fucking heavy on low end systems

Vista isn't meant for low-end systems, have you read their requirements? Don't complain if it won't run on 10-year-old hardware.

No. I have no idea how much heavier Vista is compared to XP... but from the beginning it was hyped because it would be "a 3D OS"... fuck 3D... I don't want a3D desktop. Games are for that. Stop playing WOW at work, stop thinking how cool it is to make shit cool and make a true OS that is stabld, secure and easy to use.

The desktop is 3D-accelerated and can render things much faster than the old 2D GDI system used in the previous versions of Windows (of course you'll need a proper video card/chipset).

$299 is wayyyy too much for a piece of broken software

I paid $70 for a legit academic copy of Vista Home Premium, no need to spend $299.

I will agree with that.
I refuse to buy Vista because it's slower on games, and it's less efficient on the hardware (stuff runs approx. 15% faster in XP, as of now).

Blame ATi and nVidia for their sub-par drivers. Things will get better soon.

I aquired a copy of Vista Home Premium and tried it on my dad's comp, I didn't like the interface change at all. All the icons has no text on it, I don't know wtf I'm clicking. And I don't see a reason to upgrade yet, my video card is not DX10 compatible, so there's no way I can play DX10 games anyways. Other than the cool interface and DX10, I really don't see a reason to upgrade to Vista. And currently Vista has a lot of driver problems, so it's not worth it yet.

I have no idea what you're speaking of regarding the icons. Then again, I've been using the beta versions for close to a year before Vista was released. Maybe I'm used to it.
 
My honest assessment of Vista is that I can't see why it's better than XP. I can see why it looks better, and that's obviously countered with the argument that it runs slower because of the extra graphical whack. I've heard various things about the DRM (including that thing about Vista actually downgrading the quality of media files - is that actually true?) and that's a major, major turnoff.

In the end, I can't see why I should buy it over XP (which I currently have). If there's an argument from a security standpoint I don't know what it is (I'm not pretending to be an expert on Vista here) but the only times I've ever had problems with my system have been when I've done something, like install a codec or soundcard, or something else. XP's security has never presented a problem for me.

Plus the price, of course.

When 95 came out it was an enormous advancement. Even XP was pretty big, although it fundamentally operated in similar ways to 95 (I'm not talking under the surface, but in terms of what the user could do with it). But Vista seems to be largely based around the dashboard gimmick and the 3D windows. It seemed to sneak out when it was released, rather than engender the massive hype and rush that 95 did. Maybe we live in a more cynical world, where we can see more clearly through the bullshit.

Or maybe it is just bullshit.
 
the reason why I haven't upgraded to vista is firstly the cost (although that is not primary), its mainly because since its new, there would be a million and one bugs which they will need various service packs to fix, which is also the reason why I only upgraded to xp about 2 years ago after xp bugs have been fixed, before that I was using Windows 2000... although that 3d stuff does tempt me, but xp is a great operation systems and it still fullfills my needs and AFAIK, there isn't any software or game that solely works on Vista... and tbh, I can get vista for very cheap $20AUD for an academic version from my department because I'm doing Information Systems but I honestly do not want to slow down my computer for some graphical interface.
 
got a link andyhui01, i haven't seen that price from anywhere from the FIT at monash, ps ingrid is a cow
 
i don't think vista is a failure, and this is just news... i think it's the fact that vista is the first new system from microsoft for a few years. yes i has bugs, and it can cause problems, but i have used home premium and i was very happy with it. everything was very smooth and responsive, even on a fairly low end laptop with 128Mb shared graphics. the OEM version of ultimate looks like a good price to me ($299 sounds cheap here, try $608 for the retail ultimate)

i'm getting vista eventually, and i'm not just following the sheep. i like the extra options it gives, and i didn't get annoyed by constant security messages, because i didn't get any. coupled to a voice system that actually works, i was pleased with my first experience of vista :)

and as for dell... well they rip you off big time with their PCs anyway, so i would never buy from them. i think it's just a scam to make you buy a better system, or vista costs them too much..
 
ok, ME was useless, but Vista is the best windows ever by a long way. That includes the criteria of user friendliness, security, stability.

There are a lot of nerds jumping up and down about how rubbish it is simply because it is new and their tiny little heads can't cope with it. It was the same when XP was released and it'll be the same when the next windows is released.

There are now 3 things that are certain in life: Death, Taxes and Whining nerds.
 
How can you claim that? It's like saying that ME was a more stable system then 98 when it was released..

Because it IS. Because, unlike most whiners, I HAVE actually used Vista in real-life situations.
 
Top