Friday, July 25th 2008
Microsoft Spins Over a 'Mojave' Approach to Grow Vista User-base
Choice is a wonderful thing. Informed Choice is even better, where you choose something after knowing its inside-outs. The very opposite of informed choice is dogma, where you rigidly oppose something and stick to your beliefs. Incidentally, dogma seems to be one of the significant factors keeping users away from embracing Windows Vista OS, of what can be inferred from an experiment by Microsoft in San Fransisco, United States. A group of Windows XP users having negative impressions on Windows Vista were introduced to a "new" operating system they referred to as "Mojave". User experiences on using this operating system were noted and feedback taken. A surprising 90 percent of these users gave positive feedback on this new OS. They were later told that the new OS was nothing else but Windows Vista.
Despite Microsoft releasing numerous updates and fixes to the Vista OS making it a fairly stable, reliable OS close to expectations if not exactly on par, it seems to be mass dogma that's keeping users away from adopting this new OS. Going back to that experiment, a user is reported to have exclaimed "Oh wow", something Microsoft expected users to do with the new OS originally, as portrayed in those numerous television and print commercials going with the tag line "wow". Following the recent announcement of a huge budget allocation towards propagating Vista (covered here) for home and enterprise segments, the message being sent out is that Microsoft is not only being aggressive but also proactive.
Source:
CNET
Despite Microsoft releasing numerous updates and fixes to the Vista OS making it a fairly stable, reliable OS close to expectations if not exactly on par, it seems to be mass dogma that's keeping users away from adopting this new OS. Going back to that experiment, a user is reported to have exclaimed "Oh wow", something Microsoft expected users to do with the new OS originally, as portrayed in those numerous television and print commercials going with the tag line "wow". Following the recent announcement of a huge budget allocation towards propagating Vista (covered here) for home and enterprise segments, the message being sent out is that Microsoft is not only being aggressive but also proactive.
231 Comments on Microsoft Spins Over a 'Mojave' Approach to Grow Vista User-base
Inferior gaming performance is also a fact. In benchmarks things are about the same, but with games like Crysis its a whole different story. People report after installing Vista they had to tone their game settings down to medium, whereas on XP they could run most settings on high. Thats a rather dramatic difference.
Now, XP being bloated? I'd like to know how on earth you come to that conclusion. On a fresh, completely uncustomised install XP uses around 2GB, Vista on the other hand even after extensive install customisations still requires at least double that of XP.
Finally, stability. With the majority of NORMAL PC users reporting crashes and the average being worked out at around 17.5hrs between crashes, Vista is just not a stable, reliable OS.
I used XP before SP1, and I have to say regardless of its flaws at the time XP was still far better than Vista on release. I also firmly think XP was far better than Vista when SP1 was released compared to Vista and its SP1. This is all generally backed up in all kinds of articals across the web.
The audio issue is a big thing IMO. Vista just plain sucks. Why bother with a very expensive soundcard if Vista is going to fuck it up and cripple it? Not a bad onboard audio solution by any means, I tried Vista with my Crosshair which uses an ADI 1988B CODEC, and dear god, the sound quality was absolutely horrible, massively muffled and distorted sounding. Back to XP all was well, clear, crystal sounds. All in all like you I'll stand by my original statement - I hope whoever had the moronic idea to drop hardware sound acceleration got fired. I would go into more details, but I'm saving my artillerary for if a certain LindseyM_WindowsTeam dares to step into the shadow of my domain :cool:
Oh and ADI aren't among the best onboard audio solutions - they are THE best :D
Gaming performance isn't inferior at all. I haven't ever had to crank down any settings. The only thing I can't do is AA in Crysis (can't do that in XP either). Other than that I run it in extreme (config mod) or very high on everything and enjoy it very well. Every other game I can completely max out w/ AA and all. Then again, I care really only about true real world performance (my experience playing the game, not at all based on fps). Again, not a fact........
Xp is very bloated compared to 2000. It's progress, more features, more hardware, progressively more "bloated."
Majority maybe reported problems when the os was first released, no longer the case I would suspect. I don't have exact statistics, if you do then show me, so again, not a fact........
90% of users simply double click the icon or the start button from the CD/DVD, without checking what DX mode its in.
thats the most twisted, irrational logic i've seen in a long time. It doesnt make it anywhere near a fact, at all.
To the DX10 thing, I was referring to the Alky Project, which was an attempt to enable DX10 libraries to run on WIN XP - not the means of "hacking" a game like Crysis to enable DX10-esque features on XP. One thing is for sure, though, with users - if there's a will, there's a way. I agree here as well, and I'm refraining from getting further onto my soap box in regards to Vista and audio . . . I've beaten that topic so many times it isn't even funny. All I'll say is that MS effed up because they were in a rush to release a waaayyyy behind schedule OS . . .
You video/ commercial that I saw on TV in the hotel was enlightening. It showed how dumb a company could be by making their customers/ consumers look even dumber. Does MS get off on this crap? I may not be a rocket scientist but if I was MS I would stop this campaign showing stupidity as a highlight to recognizing Vista. Tell MS to call Steve and then ask him how to make one OS for a fair price.
Then you can see what patches you may need, but leo does come with a lot of drivers.
MS has to many version$ and rakes in everyone's ca$h buying them. MS now with the Mojave experiment will be that much more enlightened...bullsh*t. The blind idiots.
I use MS because I game, if I did not game as much as I do I would have a apple. I am forced to continue using MS until someone out their gets it together.
So what point are you making?
osx86leo4all.wikidot.com/
One OS for a mac
One OS for a x86 machine
Then MS can commit all their intense thought...cough ..cough into getting that OS right. Vista was promised to the end users to end the compatibility issues we went through before its release. Vista was the Holy Grail,,,well it fell short and has more versions than ever before.
So again, call Steve and ask him how he does it Microsoft because you sure haven't got it together yet.
This would be how this goes that MS sees it ok
Windows 3.1 - Windows 95 - Windows 98 - Windows Me - Windows XP Home - Windows Vista Home Premium
Windows NT 3.1 - Windows NT 3.51 - Windows NT 4.0 Professional - Windows 2000 Professional - Windows XP Professional - Windows Vista Ultimate
Windonws 2000 Enterprise Edition - Windows XP Enterprise Edition - Windows Vista Buissiness.
The others fit it also of course, Home Basic has everything Home Premium does minus Aero Glass, it uses the least amount of resources of any windows versions except starter and is designed for older computers. But When the Bussiness world mergerd with the home world it made things alot more complex for the Operating system. You don't see Mac's like this because untill 2-3 years ago they where seen only as media editing computers and still mostly are. The bussiness world left Mac in the 90's to use Linux or Windows.
Release date Product name Version Notes Last IE
November 1985 Windows 1.01 1.01 Unsupported -
November 1987 Windows 2.03 2.03 Unsupported -
March 1989 Windows 2.11 2.11 Unsupported -
May 1990 Windows 3.0 3.0 Unsupported -
March 1992 Windows 3.1x 3.1 Unsupported 5
October 1992 Windows For Workgroups 3.1 3.1 Unsupported 5
July 1993 Windows NT 3.1 NT 3.1 Unsupported 5
December 1993 Windows For Workgroups 3.11 3.11 Unsupported 5
January 1994 Windows 3.2 (released in Simplified Chinese only) 3.2 Unsupported 5
September 1994 Windows NT 3.5 NT 3.5 Unsupported 5
May 1995 Windows NT 3.51 NT 3.51 Unsupported 5
August 1995 Windows 95 4.0.950 Unsupported 5
July 1996 Windows NT 4.0 NT 4.0.1381 Unsupported 6
June 1998 Windows 98 4.10.1998 Unsupported 6
May 1999 Windows 98 SE 4.10.2222 Unsupported 6
February 2000 Windows 2000 NT 5.0.2195 Extended Support until July 13, 2010[17] 6
September 2000 Windows Me 4.90.3000 Unsupported 6
October 2001 Windows XP NT 5.1.2600 Current for SP2 and SP3 (RTM and SP1 unsupported). 8
March 2003 Windows XP 64-bit Edition 2003 NT 5.2.3790 Unsupported 6
April 2003 Windows Server 2003 NT 5.2.3790 Current for SP1, R2, SP2 (RTM unsupported). 8
April 2005 Windows XP Professional x64 Edition NT 5.2.3790 Current 8
July 2006 Windows Fundamentals for Legacy PCs NT 5.1.2600 Current -
November 2006 (volume licensing)
January 2007 (retail) Windows Vista NT 6.0.6000 Current. Version Changed to NT 6.0.6001 with SP1 (February 4th 08) 8
July 2007 Windows Home Server NT 5.2.4500 Current 8
February 2008 Windows Server 2008 NT 6.0.6001 Current 8
2010 (planned) Windows 7 (codenamed Blackcomb, then Vienna) NT 6.1.6574.1 (M1 beta release) Future release
Not to include the other versions of versions...lol