MS in a hurry....

  • Thread starter Thread starter barrel
  • Start date Start date
B

barrel

MS is in a hurry to get Win7 out...
they want to get vista behind them as fast as possible. They will support it
of course for 3 years as all OS, because they have to.

But as you will see, XP and Win7 will still be relevant for many years.
Vista will be mentioned only as a good example of what to avoid in the
future.

Computer savvy people like win7, but will it grasp the hearts of the
consumer?
Perhaps its just too much like vista. There was a rumor that they would slap
on a new GUI at the last moment..

Now that the RC is out, I don't see them doing that.

Many simple users just ask: they had a good product, XP.. why just they don't
improve upon that and forget everything about vista and its offspring
(windows7)?

My answer is that MS would never do that... even if it means losing their
market share to apple and linux.

Talking about apple... MAC OSX rocks!

-V.B.S
 
Inline..

barrel said:
MS is in a hurry to get Win7 out...
Click to expand...

If you look at MS operating system release history, you will find that 2 - 3
years is the norm
they want to get vista behind them as fast as possible. They will support
it of course for 3 years as all OS, because they have to.
Click to expand...

That is as maybe, but it was not all the fault of MS..
But as you will see, XP and Win7 will still be relevant for many years.
Vista will be mentioned only as a good example of what to avoid in the
future.
Click to expand...

Windows 2000 is still alive too, but numbers are dwindling fast..
Computer savvy people like win7, but will it grasp the hearts of the >
consumer? Perhaps its just too much like vista. There was a rumor that
they would slap on a new GUI at the last moment..
Click to expand...

Windows 7 benefits in that anything which runs on Vista will run on Win 7.
Vista was left to make it on its own by virtually all 3rd party
manufacturers and software authors for a good six months That alone will
ensure a Windows 7 success..
Now that the RC is out, I don't see them doing that.

Many simple users just ask: they had a good product, XP.. why just they
don't > improve upon that and forget everything about vista and its
offspring > (windows7)?
Click to expand...

The reason for Vista taking so long was because the XP base was not good
enough to be carried forward, and MS had to start over. Windows 7 can be no
more based upon XP than Vista could.
My answer is that MS would never do that... even if it means losing their
market share to apple and linux.

Talking about apple... MAC OSX rocks!

-V.B.S
Click to expand...

To each their own
 
Mike Hall - MVP said:
Inline..



If you look at MS operating system release history, you will find that 2 -
3 years is the norm


That is as maybe, but it was not all the fault of MS..


Windows 2000 is still alive too, but numbers are dwindling fast..


Windows 7 benefits in that anything which runs on Vista will run on Win 7.
Vista was left to make it on its own by virtually all 3rd party
manufacturers and software authors for a good six months That alone will
ensure a Windows 7 success..


The reason for Vista taking so long was because the XP base was not good
enough to be carried forward, and MS had to start over. Windows 7 can be
no more based upon XP than Vista could.


To each their own
Click to expand...

It's all a question of how to make the most money, peoples interests are
secondary at best, IMHO.
 
It's all a question of how to make the most money, peoples interests are
secondary at best, IMHO.
<H>.
Click to expand...

In the long run, a company cannot maximize profits UNLESS people's
interests are satisfied.

You are implying that people's interests don't have to be attended to,
which is clearly not the case.
 
Steve said:
In the long run, a company cannot maximize profits UNLESS people's
interests are satisfied.
Click to expand...

Which is why Micro$lut is history: they hold their paying customers in
utter disdain and assume ALL of them are thieves.
You are implying that people's interests don't have to be attended to,
which is clearly not the case.
Click to expand...

Agreed, which is one of the reasons why I use Ubuntu.

Alias
 
Alias said:
Which is why Micro$lut is history: they hold their paying customers in
utter disdain and assume ALL of them are thieves.


Agreed, which is one of the reasons why I use Ubuntu.

Alias
Click to expand...

You have it all wrong.

The main reason why you use Ubuntu is you can't afford Vista.
The second reason why you use Ubuntu is you can't figure out Vista.
The third reason why you use Ubuntu is because you don't do anything with
your computer other than troll so there is no need for you to use Vista even
if you could afford Vista.
 
measekite said:
You have it all wrong.

The main reason why you use Ubuntu is you can't afford Vista.
False.

The second reason why you use Ubuntu is you can't figure out Vista.
False.

The third reason why you use Ubuntu is because you don't do anything with
your computer other than troll so there is no need for you to use Vista even
if you could afford Vista.
Click to expand...

False.

Three strikes. You're out.

Alias
 
Steve McGarrett said:
In the long run, a company cannot maximize profits UNLESS people's
interests are satisfied.

You are implying that people's interests don't have to be attended to,
which is clearly not the case.
Click to expand...

That is not an implication but an indication with all the proof at hand.
Surely there have to be considerations, but they are clearly not primary,
that is my contention, or we wouldn't have these overwhelming problems.
 
That is not an implication but an indication with all the proof at hand.
Click to expand...

No. You have chosen the info you call "proof" and have made your
implications based on that selection. Might make you feel good, but
it's bad practice.
Surely there have to be considerations, but they are clearly not primary,
that is my contention, or we wouldn't have these overwhelming problems.
Click to expand...

Your contention is wrong. You are clearly looking at matters from a
jaundiced viewpoint. I'll leave it at that.

I'm outta here.
 
This isn't true, by the way. Except in the trivial sense in that
you need to satisfy at least ONE interest. That interest is the
*stockholder's* interest in adequate returns. You can get those by selling
phlogiston futures to little old ladies, or by illegally manipulating
futures markets, or by selling parasitic financial instruments built on
optimistic algebra and lots of leverage. You still make money and you
still satisfy the one important interest.
 
It is very sad that Microsoft builds an Operating System Like XP or
Vista and Windows 7 and support it for only three years. They should well
call their selves crocks. People should not have to pay for their inflated
operating systems as they keep raising the prices when they release a new
system. Look Windows XP Home Edition Service Pack 1 was $199.99 at Best Buy
in 2005 full version when I bought it and Windows Vista Home Premium Service
Pack 1 $239.99 on the present Best Buy Web Site. So you all tell me why they
should be allowed to tell people if you want a secure operating system you
have to keep buying their inflated software and why their prices keep going
up each time they release it. People should be able to by a computer and use
it for many years as long as they want. Very sad Microsoft is they way they
are and that is part of the reason they lost a lot of money. And by the way
the patent office rejected Microsoft's pay as you go patent computing patent
because very hard to patent something that has been around for years and for
other reasons.
 
or by selling parasitic financial instruments built on
optimistic algebra and lots of leverage. You still make money and you
still satisfy the one important interest.
Click to expand...

Until it all comes crashing down, like when the banks crashed the
world's economy recently :-)
 
Back
Top