Jump to content

Vista???!!

Guest Jason Williams
Guest Jason Williams
in Tech Help and Discussions

Guest, which answer was the most helpful?

If any of these replies answered your question, please take a moment to click the 'Mark as solution' button on the post with the best answer.
Marking posts as the solution will help other community members find answers to their questions quickly. Thank you for your help!

Featured Replies

This is similar to what was seen nearly 6 years ago when Windows XP

was released.

My guess is we will see the same when the next OS is released.

 

For large users there are good reasons to wait.

Most of the reasons are the same reasons given and used when Windows

XP was released.

 

However for those that say "Microsoft ME II", that is just an opinion

the critics like and my guess is it will fade in time as Windows Vista

continues to prove itself.

 

 

--

Jupiter Jones [MVP]

http://www3.telus.net/dandemar

http://www.dts-l.org

 

 

"Jason Williams" <jwilliams@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:etgzXHFwHHA.3588@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> http://www.crn.com/white-box/200900857jsessionid=M14TGXUWSSFG0QSNDLPSKH0CJUNN2JVN

>

>

> I thought my firm was one of the few! Microsoft ME II, here we

> come.

  • Quote
  • Mark as Solution
    •

    From the same source:

    http://www.crn.com/it-channel/18821819

    --------------

    Everywhere is walking distance if you have the time. --Steven Wright

     

     

     

    "Jupiter Jones [MVP]" <jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote in message

    news:OIHj7tFwHHA.4332@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

    > This is similar to what was seen nearly 6 years ago when Windows XP was

    > released.

    > My guess is we will see the same when the next OS is released.

    >

    > For large users there are good reasons to wait.

    > Most of the reasons are the same reasons given and used when Windows XP

    > was released.

    >

    > However for those that say "Microsoft ME II", that is just an opinion the

    > critics like and my guess is it will fade in time as Windows Vista

    > continues to prove itself.

    >

    >

    > --

    > Jupiter Jones [MVP]

    > http://www3.telus.net/dandemar

    > http://www.dts-l.org

    >

    >

    > "Jason Williams" <jwilliams@gmail.com> wrote in message

    > news:etgzXHFwHHA.3588@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

    >> http://www.crn.com/white-box/200900857jsessionid=M14TGXUWSSFG0QSNDLPSKH0CJUNN2JVN

    >>

    >>

    >> I thought my firm was one of the few! Microsoft ME II, here we come.

    >

  • Quote
  • Mark as Solution
    •

    David A. Spicer wrote:

    > From the same source:

    > http://www.crn.com/it-channel/18821819

    > --------------

    > Everywhere is walking distance if you have the time. --Steven Wright

    >

    >

    >

    > "Jupiter Jones [MVP]" <jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote in message

    > news:OIHj7tFwHHA.4332@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

    >> This is similar to what was seen nearly 6 years ago when Windows XP

    >> was released.

    >> My guess is we will see the same when the next OS is released.

    >>

    >> For large users there are good reasons to wait.

    >> Most of the reasons are the same reasons given and used when Windows

    >> XP was released.

    >>

    >> However for those that say "Microsoft ME II", that is just an opinion

    >> the critics like and my guess is it will fade in time as Windows Vista

    >> continues to prove itself.

    >>

    >>

    >> --

    >> Jupiter Jones [MVP]

    >> http://www3.telus.net/dandemar

    >> http://www.dts-l.org

    >>

    >>

    >> "Jason Williams" <jwilliams@gmail.com> wrote in message

    >> news:etgzXHFwHHA.3588@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

    >>> http://www.crn.com/white-box/200900857jsessionid=M14TGXUWSSFG0QSNDLPSKH0CJUNN2JVN

    >>>

    >>>

    >>>

    >>> I thought my firm was one of the few! Microsoft ME II, here we come.

    >>

     

     

    This really does not prove the point however. The transition from 98 /

    2000 was necessary for most people doing any kind of "Business". 2000

    and XP were really not much different, but XP did persuade a lot of

    ordinary people to upgrade simply because the "Entertainment" value was

    there, over and above what 98 could do. Of course this upgraded a lot of

    hardware too - so what you had was a new computer and a new OS that

    could do mostly what you wanted.

     

    This time around there's not been a huge improvement in hardware, most

    machines that were happy on 2000 / XP don't improve any with Vista and

    in fact many will not work or exhibit problems. IF there were some huge

    improvement in hardware since XP came out then things might be as they

    were during that OS change period, but the reality is that the latest

    machine now does NOT run that much faster than a W2000 machine from

    2001. If you put Vista on it it actually goes slower. There's nothing

    that the stores can demonstrate that is really new, or spectacular, and

    people like gamers won't help sell it because it actually screws up

    their enjoyment.

     

    When the MS forums are reduced to simply blaming "Driver Manufacturers"

    for everything, which is pretty much the only help or advice offered

    with no real solutions available it does nothing to help sales.

     

    Many who bought XP bought it with a first computer, or as a replacement

    for a real dinosaur. These folks have the internet now and are better

    informed, they will read stuff like this before they buy which as first

    time XP owners they couldn't have done.

     

    So aside from those who just must have the latest (Who are probably too

    busy on their new iPhones to use the computer now anyway) most people

    are going to ask what extra they gain from an upgrade and the answer

    seems to be a choice of mail clients that don't work as well as the old

    one, a couple of games that wouldn't sell anyway, a couple of animated

    screen savers and a lot of extra warnings that alert you to what you are

    doing, something that most people knew anyway.

     

    I actually Like Vista, but I cannot see why they had to throw in a new

    and awkward learning curve simply by rearranging where things are. I

    really don't think I'd spend a couple of hundred on the OS when I'm

    likely to have to spend another couple of hundred on hardware, numerous

    hours trying to hunt down drivers and end up with the same as I have now

    + some fancy graphics. Sorry :)

  • Quote
  • Mark as Solution
    •

    Charlie Tame wrote:

    > Alias wrote:

    >> Jason Williams wrote:

    >>> http://www.crn.com/white-box/200900857jsessionid=M14TGXUWSSFG0QSNDLPSKH0CJUNN2JVN

    >>>

    >>>

    >>>

    >>> I thought my firm was one of the few! Microsoft ME II, here we come.

    >>>

    >>

    >> Win ME was better: no WPA, WGA or DRM.

    >>

    >> Alias

    >

    >

    > If you had said Windows 2000 that would have been credible, but ME???

     

    Windows 2000 was even better than Me.

     

    Alias

  • Quote
  • Mark as Solution
    •

    "When the MS forums are reduced to simply blaming "Driver

    Manufacturers"..."

    If that were true it would indicate problems with the forum or

    perfection in the OS.

    But it is simply not true as a wide variety of other issues are

    discussed in these newsgroups.

     

    But the fact is if the hardware is not supported in an operating

    system, the hardware manufacturer needs to update drivers as it

    determines the customers needs.

    And the customers MUST contact the manufacturer if they desire drivers

    or they are also in part responsible since they did not inform the

    manufacturer of their needs.

     

    --

    Jupiter Jones [MVP]

    http://www3.telus.net/dandemar

    http://www.dts-l.org

     

     

    "Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message

    news:ePIfYKLwHHA.4464@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

    > This really does not prove the point however. The transition from 98

    > / 2000 was necessary for most people doing any kind of "Business".

    > 2000 and XP were really not much different, but XP did persuade a

    > lot of ordinary people to upgrade simply because the "Entertainment"

    > value was there, over and above what 98 could do. Of course this

    > upgraded a lot of hardware too - so what you had was a new computer

    > and a new OS that could do mostly what you wanted.

    >

    > This time around there's not been a huge improvement in hardware,

    > most machines that were happy on 2000 / XP don't improve any with

    > Vista and in fact many will not work or exhibit problems. IF there

    > were some huge improvement in hardware since XP came out then things

    > might be as they were during that OS change period, but the reality

    > is that the latest machine now does NOT run that much faster than a

    > W2000 machine from 2001. If you put Vista on it it actually goes

    > slower. There's nothing that the stores can demonstrate that is

    > really new, or spectacular, and people like gamers won't help sell

    > it because it actually screws up their enjoyment.

    >

    > When the MS forums are reduced to simply blaming "Driver

    > Manufacturers" for everything, which is pretty much the only help or

    > advice offered with no real solutions available it does nothing to

    > help sales.

    >

    > Many who bought XP bought it with a first computer, or as a

    > replacement for a real dinosaur. These folks have the internet now

    > and are better informed, they will read stuff like this before they

    > buy which as first time XP owners they couldn't have done.

    >

    > So aside from those who just must have the latest (Who are probably

    > too busy on their new iPhones to use the computer now anyway) most

    > people are going to ask what extra they gain from an upgrade and the

    > answer seems to be a choice of mail clients that don't work as well

    > as the old one, a couple of games that wouldn't sell anyway, a

    > couple of animated screen savers and a lot of extra warnings that

    > alert you to what you are doing, something that most people knew

    > anyway.

    >

    > I actually Like Vista, but I cannot see why they had to throw in a

    > new and awkward learning curve simply by rearranging where things

    > are. I really don't think I'd spend a couple of hundred on the OS

    > when I'm likely to have to spend another couple of hundred on

    > hardware, numerous hours trying to hunt down drivers and end up with

    > the same as I have now + some fancy graphics. Sorry :)

  • Quote
  • Mark as Solution
    •

    "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message

    news:uAOLm1IwHHA.4916@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

    > Jason Williams wrote:

    >> http://www.crn.com/white-box/200900857jsessionid=M14TGXUWSSFG0QSNDLPSKH0CJUNN2JVN

    >>

    >>

    >> I thought my firm was one of the few! Microsoft ME II, here we come.

    >

    > Win ME was better: no WPA, WGA or DRM.

    >

    > Alias

     

    I would rather have that and stick with Vista than switch to Windows ME...

     

    Just out of curiosity, how many other people would rather have Vista than

    Windows ME?

     

     

    Jeff

  • Quote
  • Mark as Solution
    •

    Jeff wrote:

    >

    > "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message

    > news:uAOLm1IwHHA.4916@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

    >> Jason Williams wrote:

    >>> http://www.crn.com/white-box/200900857jsessionid=M14TGXUWSSFG0QSNDLPSKH0CJUNN2JVN

    >>>

    >>>

    >>>

    >>> I thought my firm was one of the few! Microsoft ME II, here we come.

    >>

    >> Win ME was better: no WPA, WGA or DRM.

    >>

    >> Alias

    >

    > I would rather have that and stick with Vista than switch to Windows ME...

    >

    > Just out of curiosity, how many other people would rather have Vista

    > than Windows ME?

    >

    >

    > Jeff

     

    Fortunately, neither are necessary to have. I ran Win Me back in the

    day, however, and had no problem with it as long as I defragged and kept

    it clean of temp and errant registry files.

     

    Alias

  • Quote
  • Mark as Solution
    •

    "Jupiter Jones [MVP]" <jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote in message

    news:OIHj7tFwHHA.4332@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

    > This is similar to what was seen nearly 6 years ago when Windows XP was

    > released.

     

    Nearly identical!

    > My guess is we will see the same when the next OS is released.

     

    Absolutely. And it happened with the jump the Apple OS went through when it

    was totally revised.

    >

    > For large users there are good reasons to wait.

    > Most of the reasons are the same reasons given and used when Windows XP

    > was released.

    >

    > However for those that say "Microsoft ME II", that is just an opinion the

    > critics like and my guess is it will fade in time as Windows Vista

    > continues to prove itself.

    >

    >

    > --

    > Jupiter Jones [MVP]

    > http://www3.telus.net/dandemar

    > http://www.dts-l.org

    >

    >

    > "Jason Williams" <jwilliams@gmail.com> wrote in message

    > news:etgzXHFwHHA.3588@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

    >> http://www.crn.com/white-box/200900857jsessionid=M14TGXUWSSFG0QSNDLPSKH0CJUNN2JVN

    >>

    >>

    >> I thought my firm was one of the few! Microsoft ME II, here we come.

    >

  • Quote
  • Mark as Solution
    •

    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

    Guest
    Reply to this topic...
    Go to topic listing