Sinking Like a Rock

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pete
  • Start date Start date
Linux ain't easy/quick to learn.
Click to expand...

Linux has improved a lot over the past couple of years. And it doesn't
need a $100 video card.
Demand for MS software is price inelastic, and gov't should step in.
-Pete
Click to expand...

I don't think the gov't needs to step in. It's an open question whether
the mass market will adopt Vista as readily as they have previous new OS
releases. First and foremost, there is this ugly DRM issue. Somehow I
don't think companies like Creative ~enjoy~ telling customers they are
screwed, nor do I believe the lack of driver support is a matter of
~laziness~ as some of the callow youth in this group have suggested. The
truth seems to be that the specs for Vista compatible drivers are damned
hard to work with, especially for high-end media hardware. Will
manufacturers really dog their products with "tilt bits" and other such
crap, just because Microsoft and the Hollywood power rangers tell them
they must? Or will they push for a DRM-free OS that shows their hardware
to its best possible advantage?

I think the market will sort this out in its own way.

Charlie
 
I am pretty sure that Microsoft doesn't make its money from the "upgraders"
out there buying their copies off the shelves. The money is made with the
OEM's. You can't buy a new computer with XP anymore so everyone will be
running Vista on their new machines. Pretty soon it will be like XP and the
standard.

I remember clearly when XP came out. I was running a domain of Windows 2000
machines and couldn't see the point of upgrading because Windows XP really
was just a jazzed up version of 2000. However, 3 years later we are running
XP everywhere simply because that is the OS the machines come with.

Yes, you can install Linux and it has come a long way. However, as you can't
buy a machine now without an OS, what is the point? You are buying the OEM
license anyway, may as well use it. Even the best Linux GUI's still don't
compare to Windows for ease of use. Try installing a driver in Linux - what
a pain!!! How many people know how to compile drivers for their exact kernel?

Cheers,
Lara
 
I remember clearly when XP came out. I was running a domain of Windows
2000 machines and couldn't see the point of upgrading because Windows XP
really was just a jazzed up version of 2000. However, 3 years later we
are running XP everywhere simply because that is the OS the machines
come with.
Click to expand...

I wonder if the OEMs will stay on board this time. Vista is making
hardware mfrs. look bad, because they can't come up with drivers that
will work with Vista, in part because the Vista DRM specs call for
changes to the hardware design, not just new drivers. Dell is concerned
because its hot-selling line of cheap laptops aren't powerful enough to
run Vista properly, and so Dell plans to put Linux on some of these
systems.

People say it's like this with every new Windows cycle, but I wonder...
Yes, you can install Linux and it has come a long way. However, as you
can't buy a machine now without an OS, what is the point? You are buying
the OEM license anyway, may as well use it. Even the best Linux GUI's
still don't compare to Windows for ease of use. Try installing a driver
in Linux - what a pain!!! How many people know how to compile drivers
for their exact kernel?
Click to expand...

Hmmm. Perhaps I have been luckier than most, but my recent experience
with Linux has been positive. In the past couple of months, I have
installed Ubuntu on two computers, a desktop and a laptop. I have had no
problems with either, and I like the Ubuntu UI. I haven't had to install
any special drivers so far. In the case of my laptop, I set it up to
boot w2k or Ubuntu. When I installed w2k, I had to go to the mfr. web
site for chipset, audio and video drivers... I required none of these for
Ubuntu and I have the same audio/video quality, resolution, color depth
etc.

If I did have to compile something, I would roll up my sleeves and get on
the boards where Linux gurus hang out. I have never had trouble getting
people to help me if I have a serious question that makes sense. It
could hardly be more difficult or painful than resolving some of the
problems I see posted here every day... what about the poor guy who
installed a game that caused Vista to revoke his license? I bet he's in
for at least as rotten a day as anyone who has to figure out how to
compile something. None of these "MVPs" had anything useful to say about
it, either.

Charlie
 
Today, Pete made these interesting comments ...
Linux ain't easy/quick to learn.
Demand for MS software is price inelastic, and gov't should
step in. -Pete
Click to expand...

Name even ONE thing the government EVER made cheaper, for long?
price controls do not work, competition is what keeps prices down.
If the Linux crowd and the Japanese ever understand those
fundamental economic laws, in addition to simple supply and demand,
we would'nt be having this discussion. But, in the absence of real
competition, MS can price its OS and its apps as it pleases, and
has for decades.
 
why?? why do people have to have a humvee to drive around cities??..
why do people need a 60 inch plasma TV.. why do people need a cell
phone 24/7??..why do people need $300 sneakers??... because they want
it- this country is about what i 'want' not about what i 'need'.. and
big corporations are very happy to keep feeding us with what we want..
 
HEMI-Powered said:
Today, Pete made these interesting comments ...


Name even ONE thing the government EVER made cheaper, for long?
price controls do not work, competition is what keeps prices down.
If the Linux crowd and the Japanese ever understand those
fundamental economic laws, in addition to simple supply and demand,
we would'nt be having this discussion. But, in the absence of real
competition, MS can price its OS and its apps as it pleases, and
has for decades.
Click to expand...

Almost all public utilities everywhere are price controlled since they are a
monopoly in a given area. Any more questions? Basic economic will tell you
that output is lower and price tends to be higher in the case of a monopoly.

Not everything fits the model of pure competition, according to economists.
In fact, there are:
pure competition, monopolistic competition, oligopolies, monopolies.
-Pete
 
Today, Pete made these interesting comments ...
Almost all public utilities everywhere are price controlled
since they are a monopoly in a given area. Any more questions?
Basic economic will tell you that output is lower and price
tends to be higher in the case of a monopoly.

Not everything fits the model of pure competition, according
to economists. In fact, there are:
pure competition, monopolistic competition, oligopolies,
monopolies. -Pete
Click to expand...
I didn't have any questions in the first place. I understand both
micro and macro economics and I understand monopolies and
ologopolies, as well as various forms of free-enterprise. MS is
none of the above but all of the above.
 
The word on the street is that Vista is sinking like a rock:
http://www.dailytechnobabble.com/2007/02/26/three-reasons-why-windows-vista-is-sinking-like-a-rock/

http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/null/18085
Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing.
--
Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
NOTICE: In-Newsgroup (and therefore off-topic) comments on my sig will
be cheerfully ignored, so don't waste our time.
 
Papa said:
Not only that, take a look at the many Vista forums under the
msnews.microsoft.com newsgroup server. There are quite a few complaints
there from many different individuals.
Click to expand...

And the folks without complaints aren't on the forum, so the view is skewed.
 
MacIntosh did it with OSX and survived so I am pretty sure Vista will too. I
got OSX machines that required you buy an ENTIRE new set of software because
ALL the software that ran on OS9 required an OSX version. Talk about costly.
Trying purchasing complete new sets of Adobe and Macromedia products. Driver
companies will come on board.

The difference between Vista and XP is XP was able to run on 3 year old
machines when it got released. It is Not the same for Vista. Therefore you
really need a new machine to run Vista. Therefore you will have new hardware
that will get on board with Vista Drivers. I haven't had any problems with
drivers and I have a Dell Vista Laptop. It is the base Home model and it runs
well.

I am a teckie and I have been trying to compile a Linux driver for my
Linksys and Realtex Nic's with no success. I have scoured the linux boards
for a year now. If you don't have the standard 3Com or Intel Nics then they
won't run. I prefer Windows to Linux simply because it is easier and the
driver install is a download and an GUI.

Cheers,
Lara
 
Today, =?Utf-8?B?bGZvcmJlcw==?= made these interesting comments
....
MacIntosh did it with OSX and survived so I am pretty sure
Vista will too. I got OSX machines that required you buy an
ENTIRE new set of software because ALL the software that ran
on OS9 required an OSX version. Talk about costly. Trying
purchasing complete new sets of Adobe and Macromedia products.
Driver companies will come on board.
Click to expand...

Apple has long been able to convince people to pay a premium for
the HW and periodically trash all their apps when a major O/S
change occurs, as you describe with OSX. I guess if you like Macs
enough and/or need what they offer, that's the price you pays!
The difference between Vista and XP is XP was able to run on 3
year old machines when it got released. It is Not the same for
Vista. Therefore you really need a new machine to run Vista.
Therefore you will have new hardware that will get on board
with Vista Drivers. I haven't had any problems with drivers
and I have a Dell Vista Laptop. It is the base Home model and
it runs well.
Click to expand...

I would agree that it'd be a good idea to have a new or nearly
new PC to run Vista on, preferably one with the power, memory and
HD needed, and properly configured so that you could do a fresh
nuke and install and not try to upgrade over the top of a
wounded-at-some-level XP. My only interest in Vista right now is
exactly that - I'm interested in a much higher power multi-core
CPU box but those are currently expensive and most/all of my
software would need to be replaced, and my legacy HW is likely
toast, so I am sitting it out until the dust settles and drivers
become available, plus let the early adopters beta test with
their Visa cards.
I am a teckie and I have been trying to compile a Linux driver
for my Linksys and Realtex Nic's with no success. I have
scoured the linux boards for a year now. If you don't have the
standard 3Com or Intel Nics then they won't run. I prefer
Windows to Linux simply because it is easier and the driver
install is a download and an GUI.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you would enjoy talking to my nephew who is also my
PC builder. For work reasons, he has 4 or so versions of Windows
because the software for his machine shop won't run across
anything new, and he has Linux because he likes to play with it
at night for pure grins.
 
MacIntosh did it with OSX and survived so I am pretty sure Vista will
too. I got OSX machines that required you buy an ENTIRE new set of
software because ALL the software that ran on OS9 required an OSX
version. Talk about costly. Trying purchasing complete new sets of
Adobe and Macromedia products. Driver companies will come on board.
Click to expand...

Well, of course you are probably right. Your outlook is pragmatic,
whereas mine is shaded by subjective impressions. I dislike the
direction Microsoft has taken with Vista. Vista is not about serving the
customer with a better product, or leveraging new technologies that
everyone is itching to use. It's merely a vehicle to accelerate the
upgrade cycle and boost earnings. Moreover, the company has been quite
ham-handed in its zeal to exert control over its customers.

But, nothing succeeds like success, and I suppose two or three years from
now 90% of the world's PCs will be running Vista. This time, I don't
think I will join the herd.

Charlie
 
lforbes said:
The difference between Vista and XP is XP was able to run on 3 year old
machines when it got released. It is Not the same for Vista. Therefore you
really need a new machine to run Vista.
Click to expand...

I'm running Vista Ultimate on a 3 year old Dell Dimension P4-2.66 w/768MB
RAM. It runs better than XP did, perhaps because my install of XP had grown
corrupted over the years. I say 'perhaps' because it's not certain that it
was, in fact, slower than it should have been.

The only thing I don't have is the Aero interface, because the OEM card is
an AGP8X GeForce MX4. It doesn't support DX9 and other standards, so doesn't
show the spiffy user interface. When I get some money I'll upgrade to 2GB of
RAM and a supported video card. Until then, my old computer is working
better than before.
 
I am using Vista ultimate with a pentium 4 1.6 with 512mb ram.
Surprisingly Vista does run very well, it's not slow at all unlike lets say
XP with 256mb ram.
not bad.
 
Back
Top