Mike said:
Saran
In your world, there would be no progress..
Why put words in my mouth? I am all about progress. I just consider
Vista to be akin to trying to take a step forward, but ending up
stumbling backwards. Progress would mean LESS hardware and software
issues. Progress means LESS restrictions with what we can do with
content on out systems. Progress means faster operations, and not
upgrading for the sake of satisfying grossly inflated hardware
requirements.
I'd boil progress in OS making to be some what of the following: faster,
easier to use, fewer compatibility problems, eschewing big brother.
Instead I see an OS that's inflated unnecessarily, and a puppet platform
for the big media industries to clamp down on what we can do with
content we purchase. How can anyone call this progress? Eye candy is NOT
progress. It's a make over (a nice looking one granted), but it doesn't
change the fact that that's all cosmetic, using graphics techniques and
algorithms that have existed for years. It looks good and all, don't get
me wrong, they did a nice job in that respect, but that's not
necessarily what progress is about.
everybody would have to
work for free, and quite how they would live is obviously something
you have failed to consider, except for your own case. No doubt you
expect to be paid for work done..
When I do work, I deliver on my promise, to do what I was paid for. I
don't deliver beta quality goods to my customers. when I service
computers, I do the whole job, I don't stop 3/4 of the way and hand it
back to the customer. When I write code for pay, I make sure it works
and thoroughly test it, rather then making the customer do the testing.
It is the developers duty to test things before shipping to market. Too
many development houses use the excuse of "oh, we'll release patches and
such later on so we don't have to ship a finished product." Severity
varies of course, but it's a common problem overall in this industry.
Latest reports for Vista are very good, even for gamers it seems,
although video drivers are still letting the side down a little. Only
the oldest hardware, or where a hardware manufacturer flatly refuses
to provide free fixes for Vista, doesn't work. The same applies to
software.
Yes, drivers are lacking, but again, I feel I must point out,
considering how long Vista was worked on, considering all the promises,
that pretty much said we'd virtually never have to deal with
hardware/software incompatibilities... this was the big headline in many
early Longhorn previews. With all due respect, I think we got almost the
exact opposite.
If you do not like the way it all works, you are free to switch to
open source for your OS and applications, or you can buy a Mac.
Yes, anyone is, and many are. Some just stick to XP, or 2000, or
whatever. So what? That doesn't change the fact that Microsoft is trying
to ram Vista down our throats, by way of locking certain softwares and
hardwares to be "vista only" when they are perfectly capable of running
on XP and others. I think what angers many people is this lack of
choice.
-saran
