Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Ulysses

microsoft to reduce price of Vista

Recommended Posts

I don't think they've dropped the price enough to garner the sales they'd like to get.

 

Personally it'll need to drop at least another $100 before I consider purchasing/using it.

And until that time comes I'll stick with XP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the retail versions price is tripple of the OEM version, it is nothing more than a joke...

And the one machine/OS thing is unashamedly unfair, and clearly only made for bloodsucking, so still no Vista for me...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Microsoft has a lot of work to do if they expect us to buy this thing in a year's time or so. I won't be buying I'm afraid, I'll wait for it to get better or at least get as good as Win98. I don't like XP so I don't think I'd buy Vista either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they'd have to....no-one's gonna buy it :p

 

Just like Macs. :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MAC's would have to be about $1000 less for me to even consider buying one. I won't spend $2000 on a baseline MAC, not when I can build a top-of-the-line PC for around $500.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

baseline mac. That'd be the mac mini. Which isn't $2000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but you can use any monitor, keyboard or mouse.

so you could use your old one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, so they're cheaper than I thought. It's like the soda or pop debate. Neither side is right, they just like to argue  :D

 

Both Vista and Leopard have major flaws. No one makes a perfect OS, not even Ubuntu.

 

Vista-----

can it sync with my Zune? yes

can it run my vpn software? yes

does it crash and have trouble running some of my favorite games? oh god yes

can it run design software efficiently? yes

does it boot/shutdown quickly? oh god no

 

 

MacOS---

can it sync with my Zune? no

can it run my vpn software? probably

does it crash and have trouble running some of my favorite games? oh god yes

can it run design software efficiently? yes

does it boot/shutdown quickly? yes, very much so

 

 

Ubuntu---

can it sync with my Zune? no

can it run my vpn software? only if i were some linux genius who could install it properly

does it crash and have trouble running some of my favorite games? it doesn't crash, but it also can't run my games

can it run design software efficiently? not OEM versions. only the half-retarded cousin of OEM versions

does it boot/shutdown quickly? i could boot/shutdown twice before MacOS boots once

 

 

It's all about what you consider the lesser evil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
does it crash <SNIP> oh god yes

 

Well, that's really a case specific to certain users. All operating systems will crash for someone. I haven't had any crashes in Vista, in fact, I've probably had fewer than in XP.

 

does it boot/shutdown quickly? oh god no

 

Again, I haven't seen Vista performing any slower than XP was. Granted, the system requirements for Vista are higher, but if you can exceed those, performance is not really affected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On all 'current' windows platforms, most crashes are caused by bad drivers or unstable hardware. We all know Vista has had its share of 'bad luck' *cough* with bad drivers. As the 3rd parties get more experience on Vista, the number of crashes should reduce to below the number of crashes on XP.

 

Vista is slower than XP and always will be, in virtually every aspect (every bench I've read confirms it, without a single exception and SP1 does very little to mitigate that), whether or not it is perceptibly slower, depends on the user in question and which tasks he performs. The 'slowness' is a trade-off you make for other 'benefits'.

 

 

My personal opinion on Vista: if we're talking about the 32-bit version, the 'benefits' are not worth the step from XP to Vista, as such imo, XP beats Vista. Unless of course, you want to game on dx10, in which case you have no other choice. If we're talking about the 64-bit version, I'd have to say Vista beats XP. So, to conclude, it's pointless to buy a 32-bit Vista version, but if you're going 64-bit, Vista is probably worth it. Of course, when the OS forcibly ships with the computer you buy, then there usually is also no point to specifically buy XP, the transition to either side (Vista-XP) is not worth the extra money if you've already got one of both.

 

FYI, OEM versions of Vista Ship either 32-bit or 64-bit, never both. Retail versions have both 32- and 64-bit installation possibilities.

 

That's of course just a small personal analysis between Vista and XP, Mac OS really isn't an option, unless you buy a Mac or like to mess around a lot.

 

Linux... well, if you forget about gaming and are willing to put some effort into learning how to operate Linux and are willing to search around on the internet a lot to solve all those 'problems' you're bound to run into, mostly by yourself and are not dumb (you don't have to be smart, but you can't be dumb either) and are willing to forgo some of those popular proprietary applications that are not available on Linux and are content to work with open source variants instead then, if all of those apply, Linux is the OS for you. It'll be more stable; once you get the hang of it, you'll get less easily frustrated by your OS and it's free and new versions are released on a much more regular basis then either windows or mac os. Of course, deciding which distro to install is a daunting task, most people recommend starting with an 'easy' Ubuntu and if you feel you'd like to experiment a bit after you've gotten the hang of it, try some others. If you're still not happy with Linux, you can always try BSD, more specifically PC-BSD, that's about as idiot proof as BSD gets. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally have had a positive experience with Vista. The SP1 upgrade did not kill my drivers, install was very streamlined, my system is now more stable than it was under XP.

 

Still, that's not saying much. Yes, it boots and shuts down faster than XP, but that's still slow compared to MacOS and Ubuntu. Yes, it crashes less than XP did, but it can still have an epic crash from time to time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

XP unstable?? I cant actually remember XP actually crashing like Win 98/ME with the dreaded blue screen.

 

I think the only time I will upgrade to Vista is when software does not support XP and at the moment that is not the case.

 

One thing I have noticed as I sell PC games on ebay are vista users complaining on odd ocasions that XP games wont run under vista, not sure if this is due to there drivers not being updated or not though!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's a directx 10 thing. dx10 does not support directplay. this rules out some microsoft games, specifically freelancer (one of my favs, of course)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if i ever get Vista I probably still have my system as duel boot i,e still have xp on one partition and vista on the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if i ever get Vista I probably still have my system as duel boot i,e still have xp on one partition and vista on the other.

That's probably the best way to go. I'm dual booting Vista and Ubuntu 7.04 at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

XP crashes more times than 98 ever did. Win98 was much more stable than XP and more compatible than XP. As for Vista, I'm not buying that until the bugs are ironed out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if i ever get Vista I probably still have my system as duel boot i,e still have xp on one partition and vista on the other.

That's probably the best way to go. I'm dual booting Vista and Ubuntu 7.04 at the moment.

 

dual booting winxp and ubuntu 6.06 for over a year now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

XP crashes more times than 98 ever did. Win98 was much more stable than XP and more compatible than XP. As for Vista, I'm not buying that until the bugs are ironed out.

I don't think so. :thinking:

 

Besides my experience at home I work in IT Infrastructure in a large corporate environment with 10's of thousands of PC's and I can say with quite a bit of certainty that 98 WASN'T more stable than XP.

I'm not saying 98 was bad, because I really liked it and it was great for it's day, it's just not "all that".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well we do know that XP is better than Vista, I just wish it was more stable than it is, you know like DOS. Granted with DOS if you push the wrong button or type the wrong command the results could get particularly frustrating.

 

I think Microsoft damaged it's profits over the last year or more because of Vista. Why not just improve XP instead of designing another new OS?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well we do know that XP is better than Vista,

Absolutely!

 

I just wish it was more stable than it is, you know like DOS. Granted with DOS if you push the wrong button or type the wrong command the results could get particularly frustrating.

Yea, DOS was the good old days of stability, but keep in mind that the entire OS could fit on a single diskette and every time you added anything you had to install the additional driver for it, no matter what it was that was added to the system. There just wasn't anything built into the OS, except basic system functionality. (Before DOS 4/5 you even had to add your own memory manager.)

 

I think Microsoft damaged it's profits over the last year or more because of Vista. Why not just improve XP instead of designing another new OS?

I'm sure they did. I agree they really should've beefed up XP even more, maybe even make it a paided update and they would've most likely done better and wait for a complete OS replacement until they have the new file system and everything ready.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DOS really made computing into personal computing because as you said not all DOS machines were made equal. Do any of you remember HDM 4? or at least I think it was called that.

 

Beefing up XP like you said would have been a much better move on Microsoft's part. Instead of making a whole new OS they could have improved stability and security on XP, a limiting task considering advances in computer technology but the way things have gone these past few years, certainly a profitable one. When XP came out 128mb of RAM was nothing anymore, absolutely nothing. To run your computer decently you needed at least 256mb of RAM and even then it probably wasn't enough. Then more powerful PCs came out with 512mb+ of RAM giving XP some real usefulness. People could actually use the OS for what it was meant for.

 

Nowadays PCs are coming out with 1, 2, even 3gb of RAM. Two years ago I would not have seen this in stores but now we have souped up PCs whose only drawback is that they use Vista instead of XP. Now a PC with 1gb of RAM is almost nothing thanks to Vista but if you use XP that 1gb will go farther. When I go to a PC store now and see what the're selling I think, wow! Then I realize it's a Vista PC. This can only mean less money being spent on MS's new operating system.

 

I certainly agree that Microsoft has hurt it's bottom line with this new, buggy, slow, incompatible OS and that a service pack or update was all that was needed.

 

I'm sure the 5 year gap between release of OSs made Microsoft nervous. They were no longer getting the income generated by releasing new OSs every two years. They probably figured releasing a buggy system would be preferable to improving the existing system, making it faster, more efficient and less resource-consuming. Perhaps they felt they needed the extra cash to account for a rising overhead.

 

Microsoft has become the IBM of our time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Microsoft has become the IBM of our time.

 

No doubt! Too big for there britches, or own good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×