A Test From Microsoft

[Guest Reimar]

Microsoft looks to Mojave to revive Vistas image

After months of searching for ways to defend its oft-maligned Windows operating system, Microsoft may just have found its best weapon: Vista's skeptics.

Spurred by an e-mail from someone deep in the marketing ranks, Microsoft last week traveled to San Francisco, rounding up Windows XP users who had negative impressions of Vista. The subjects were put on video, asked about their Vista impressions, and then shown a "new" operating system, code-named Mojave. More than 90 percent gave positive feedback on what they saw. Then they were told that "Mojave" was actually Windows Vista.

"Oh wow," said one user, eliciting exactly the exclamation that Microsoft had hoped to garner when it first released the operating system more than 18 months ago. Instead, the operating system got mixed reviews and criticisms for its lack of compatibility and other headaches.

Read the full article HERE

[A_Traveller]

And to cross post from another thread, as I noted yesterday

I think a more relevant point would be the almost simultaneous viewpoints about Vista being expressed by a}Forester Research which goes as far as to describe Vista as the 'New Coke' as well as noting eighteen months after the release of Windows Vista, enterprise adoption is still in the single digits, [at 8.8%] and the majority of that seems to have come from upgrades of legacy Windows versions, not XP or b} Microsoft who have a programme called Mojave where non Vista users are exposed to a new product, which is a Vista set-up, and reports positive responses from this approach. Though now it has leaked guess they'll have to find another way.

Regards

[Steve2UK]

"Oh wow," said one user, eliciting exactly the exclamation that Microsoft had hoped to garner when it first released the operating system more than 18 months ago. Instead, the operating system got mixed reviews and criticisms for its lack of compatibility and other headaches.

Actually, the full quote was: "Oh wow....... look - shiny things!" [but they'll edit that bit out].

It's a joke, Reimar...... J-O-K-E.

[Guest Reimar]

"Oh wow," said one user, eliciting exactly the exclamation that Microsoft had hoped to garner when it first released the operating system more than 18 months ago. Instead, the operating system got mixed reviews and criticisms for its lack of compatibility and other headaches.

Actually, the full quote was: "Oh wow....... look - shiny things!" [but they'll edit that bit out].

It's a joke, Reimar...... J-O-K-E.

Not my joke (a grrrrrrrrrrr) just only posted from me!

But one thing is very true and that is that many of those who talking against Vista, maybe even never had sit in front of one! Just replying to the bad response from others!

I was listen to an Radio discussion the other day about the experiences with Vista, and there was the same outcome: Negative response, but in the real just only a few people was ever had worked on Vista.

Cheers.

[A_Traveller]

Just as an aside I use a number of OS' including Vista. Further if I had to choose between a PR stunt or Forrester Research, there really is no contest.

Regards

[slackula]

So, let me see if I have this correct..

MS takes John Q. Public off the street, plonks him down in front of a machine that *they* have prepared, LIE to him about which OS it is running, and then films him saying 'Oh wow' when he sees all the fancy eye candy? Correct?

That's it?!??! That is the best they can come up with to counter the enormous amount of negatives out there on Vista? Are they going to film him shelling out hundreds of $$ for his new OS only to discover that he basically has to replace his computer to make it work as well as it was before he upgraded? Are they going to film his reaction when he discovers that his printers, webcam etc etc also need to be replaced? Are they going to film him turning off UAC because it is so intrusive and annoying, thereby bypassing all the much touted security improvements?

I think this will not end well.

[dotcom]

I've never eaten shit either but that doesn't mean I want to find out what it tastes like.

VISTA = Microsoft lost the plot.

[sjaak327]

I see that the usual suspects are posting on Vista (myself included).

" That's it?!??! That is the best they can come up with to counter the enormous amount of negatives out there on Vista? "

I seem to see more and more positives regarding Vista as well. Which is kind of reassuring, because for some time I really thought I was going mad. I mean I kept hearing about how Vista sucks, is slow, incompatible programs, drivers and all of that, but my own personal experience (with multiple computers) were so different and directly opposing most of the whinging.

And of course UAC whinging pops up again. I cannot understand how it is possible that someone can claim it's intrusive, as all it does is ask for conscent once you do something that is deemed administrative, something that other Operating systems (like OSX and whatever linux distribution) do sometimes even in a more annoying way then vista. (and remember in Vista you can customize UAC's behaviour). I agree that some tasks (like changing the all users start menu) should not be considered administrative, and therefore no UAC prompt is needed. As I said before I hardly ever see UAC, unless I do perform admin tasks.

[richard_smith237]

At work I had a new laptop running Windows Vista, it was terrible. I persevered for a week before giving up with it. I got IT to change the system to XP.

It now runs much quicker and I spend far less time waiting for simple applications (Such as MS Word / Excel) to run / operate.

I was not up-to date with the latest news and made my own decision independent of popular opinion that Vista operates much slower on the same computer than XP and on that basis alone I hope I never have to use it.

[Guest Reimar]

I see that the usual suspects are posting on Vista (myself included).

" That's it?!??! That is the best they can come up with to counter the enormous amount of negatives out there on Vista? "

I seem to see more and more positives regarding Vista as well. Which is kind of reassuring, because for some time I really thought I was going mad. I mean I kept hearing about how Vista sucks, is slow, incompatible programs, drivers and all of that, but my own personal experience (with multiple computers) were so different and directly opposing most of the whinging.

And of course UAC whinging pops up again. I cannot understand how it is possible that someone can claim it's intrusive, as all it does is ask for conscent once you do something that is deemed administrative, something that other Operating systems (like OSX and whatever linux distribution) do sometimes even in a more annoying way then vista. (and remember in Vista you can customize UAC's behaviour). I agree that some tasks (like changing the all users start menu) should not be considered administrative, and therefore no UAC prompt is needed. As I said before I hardly ever see UAC, unless I do perform admin tasks.

All new OS's having it's own problems.

Just as an example OS-X Leopard: Why Apple has need to launch within a quite short period 4 different major upgrades comparable with the Service Pack's of Windows? Because that OS didn't has problems?! And that for an OS which is very limited for to use with a variety of hardware! And also limited in downward compatibility, like Safari 3.1 can't work on OS-X 10.5.1 while need min. 10.5.2! And that on an OS which still is running on the same base!

In Windows some like that was never happens since they using NT systems!

Sure Vista isn't a "perfect" OS, as not any perfect OS exist. And if I would listen to others, I never had started to use Vista! But I didn't listen to others, I build my own meaning by testing using my own capabilities and knowledge.

For everything new, there is an period of learning for to get use of it. So for Vista as well or OS-X!

The point about the adoption from Corporates, isn't a point for me because Corporates will never "jump" to anything new for several reasons. And if you take a closer look, you'll find out that until today even Win98 is used in many companies, they even wasn't moving to XP!

Why that's happens could have the reason in financing, but mainly in the overall need of change which could be huge. Corporates using in many ways customized software or special developed software which works on limited systems only.

And System Administrators of bigger companies mainly very conservative humans who didn't like changes in "their" systems to avoid any problems and/or down times, which is understandable.

The latest also applies to me for some of my customers, I can't deny that. But on the other hand I had my experiences with Vista and they are good. For me no more point to change back.

As long as the hardware, which is required for to use such systems, is available I would change to Vista! If isn't I wouldn't!

Cheers.

[A_Traveller]

Well as a Usual Suspect, though I know who isn't Keyser Soze, I thought it would be useful to note that the Mojave 'leak' was timed to hit the wires at the same time as the Forrester report {though the report itself is only available to subscribers }, funny that....

By the by, as to corporate inertia, realistically, when you are dealing with the MNCs the internal labs which did the tests {and reviewed SP1} put the nail into the coffin, not perceptions per se, I know of no corporate that makes decisions on the basis of PC Mag chatter. That has cost MS take up in the consumer & SoHo environments.

As an aside I can recall making semi-serious suggestions that, for example, Byte, and subsequently Wired, should be removed from all First Class lounges, the problems one would get when a group treasure read something...../edit it was even worse when I was sat next to them for the next x hours//

Regards

Edited July 26, 2008 by A_Traveller

[Guest Reimar]

Well as a Usual Suspect, though I know who isn't Keyser Soze, I thought it would be useful to note that the Mojave 'leak' was timed to hit the wires at the same time as the Forrester report {though the report itself is only available to subscribers }, funny that....

By the by, as to corporate inertia, realistically, when you are dealing with the MNCs the internal labs which did the tests {and reviewed SP1} put the nail into the coffin, not perceptions per se, I know of no corporate that makes decisions on the basis of PC Mag chatter. That has cost MS take up in the consumer & SoHo environments.

As an aside I can recall making semi-serious suggestions that, for example, Byte, and subsequently Wired, should be removed from all First Class lounges, the problems one would get when a group treasure read something...../edit it was even worse when I was sat next to them for the next x hours//

Regards

Who told/wrote that?

Cheers.

[A_Traveller]

I am the author of the above.

Regards

[Guest Reimar]

I am the author of the above.

Regards

That's ok as along as you not try to explain that I was talk/wrote that because I didn't!

Cheers

[A_Traveller]

^ What are you talking about? When the poster you know as A_Traveller writes a post, it may surprise you to learn that the use of the perpendicular pronoun is by definition always valid.

Regards

[Guest Reimar]

^ What are you talking about? When the poster you know as A_Traveller writes a post, it may surprise you to learn that the use of the perpendicular pronoun is by definition always valid.

Regards

You know exactly what I'm talking about. And that was just to be and make very clear that I hadn't talk/wrote that!

Cheers.

[JSixpack]

I seem to see more and more positives regarding Vista as well. Which is kind of reassuring

Primarily, you've been filtering your information so that your state of denial has grown more encompassing. Over time, one probably grows accustomed to slower speeds and extra clicks. Yet Vista has now got SP1, which did help a bit--just not enough to make it particularly compelling.

Now, to return to a more realistic perspective, daily go to http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.p....general/topics and browse among 46,000 posts related to Vista problems. Hundreds come in daily. Here are some active older posts:

vista home premium to XP Pro

12 new of 12 - Jul 26

Of a sudden fonts have disappeared

3 new of 3 - Jul 26

Cannot see Volume Control status, hurting my ears!

8 new of 8 - Jul 26

Microsoft $500 million Vista PR: At one point everyone thought the Earth was flat. Get the facts about Windows Vista.”

11 new of 11 - Jul 26

"Program has stopped working"

3 new of 3 - Jul 26

Disk Read Error During Install

11 new of 11 - Jul 26

For owners of scanners not supported by Vista.

12 new of 12 - Jul 26

What an idiot

26 new of 26 - Jul 26

Office 2007 Enterprise Problem

4 new of 4 - Jul 26

Vista Scheduler

2 new of 2 - Jul 26

Desktop search

7 new of 7 - Jul 26

All new OS's having it's own problems.

. . .

Why that's happens could have the reason in financing, but mainly in the overall need of change which could be huge. Corporates using in many ways customized software or special developed software which works on limited systems only.

And System Administrators of bigger companies mainly very conservative humans who didn't like changes in "their" systems to avoid any problems and/or down times, which is understandable.

The latest also applies to me for some of my customers, I can't deny that. But on the other hand I had my experiences with Vista and they are good. For me no more point to change back.

As long as the hardware, which is required for to use such systems, is available I would change to Vista! If isn't I wouldn't!

True, all new OSs do have their own problems. Since WinXP is no longer a new OS, most of its problems have already been addressed and that's what makes it so good and useful right now.

Vista's problems will eventually be solved and average hardware and applications for it will become suitable and more affordable. And then I will be able recommend it in good conscience and use it myself. However, Windows 7 may be out before then.

The decision to move to a new system is rationally based on the resources of time and money required--for both corporate and individual users. As a matter of cost/benefit, if we're spending time and money on a particular item, we need a good reason to do that. Otherwise, we invest or spend elsewhere.

Now, even for individual users, it's undeniable that some common hardware AND software doesn't work on Vista, at least not immediately. For example, this very typical message a couple of hours ago in the Vista support group:

dvd burning software

"I am looking for dvd burning software that works well with Vista. None of the programs that I have used with XP work with Vista. thanks"

http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.p...0d0fca60bf11b6#

Pitiful, isn't it? Can't even burn a DVD! And, worse, whingeing about it rather than just giving up and not burning any for the sheer love and adoration of Vista!

As you say, if Win98 or XP is working well for a user, then no need to move to Vista. Certainly if a user is having a problem with XP, the automatic solution isn't to install Vista, as we sometimes get on this forum.

So why has Vista already sold as many copies as it has, disappointing as sales figures have been? Clearly, as we've discussed before, it's so far been mostly a result of marketing overwhelming to the average ignorant home consumer. We've seen this before many times. Let's take a moment to remember and smile over the hype about Win95 with that FABULOUS unique Start button and music by the Rolling Stones:

.

Consumers DO like those bright shiny things!

[slackula]

Presumably I am part of the 'usual suspects', so I'll posit a previous question again:

Kindly explain why the girl over in accounting needs a computer with 2 Gigs of RAM and a 3D graphics card to run Excel, and kindly provide a compelling reason for me as an SME to upgrade her computer hardware in order to be able to run Vista Minimum or whatever the basic version is called?

If I factor in the cost of a basic PC, plus Vista plus Office (all licensed) then I am far better off buying her an iMac with iWork or NeoOffice or any of the myriad of Linux distros and Open Office or even Office with WINE.

[sjaak327]

I have no problems whatsoever to burn a DVD, in fact CD/DVD burn programs needed to be upgraded when I upgraded from Windows 2000 to XP as well, nothing shocking or strange, I mean surely we are upgrading to a new Operating system, where changes might force someone to upgrade these programs. Nero (the one I used) had an update available for download (free of charge) by the time Vista went RTM.

So instead of going to a forum, this particular user should have gone to the manufacturer's website, for the obvious solution....

I'm not saying that there aren't any problems with Vista, but the OS as such is rock solid, and most problems can be solved by obtaining updated drivers and software. And as noted before, on new system, this shouldn't be a problem at all.

Problems like described above have been witnessed at every upgrade of Windows (except maybe 95-98-me).

[sjaak327]

Presumably I am part of the 'usual suspects', so I'll posit a previous question again:

Kindly explain why the girl over in accounting needs a computer with 2 Gigs of RAM and a 3D graphics card to run Excel, and kindly provide a compelling reason for me as an SME to upgrade her computer hardware in order to be able to run Vista Minimum or whatever the basic version is called?

If I factor in the cost of a basic PC, plus Vista plus Office (all licensed) then I am far better off buying her an iMac with iWork or NeoOffice or any of the myriad of Linux distros and Open Office or even Office with WINE.

Someone at the office would typically be running Vista business, which runs fine at 1GB, but that's not the point, I already stated that even at my workplace, I would not upgrade to Vista either, I mean we replace computers every three years, and the replacement would be running Vista. 2GB of ram is normal nowadays by the way.

I would not get her an imac by the way, nice machines, but in corporate envirornments they are not the obvious choice. They are much more maintenance heavy the PC's (I'm talking deployment, patch management and things like that).

[JetsetBkk]

I am the author of the above.

Regards

Spat my wine at that one! Thanks A_T!

[Veazer]

...

Kindly explain why the girl over in accounting needs a computer with 2 Gigs of RAM and a 3D graphics card to run Excel, and kindly provide a compelling reason for me as an SME to upgrade her computer hardware in order to be able to run Vista Minimum or whatever the basic version is called?

...

Isn't it obvious? After the hardware and OS upgrade she'll have less than half the performance using the same version of Office, so now she'll have time to paint the nails on both hands waiting for the spreadsheet number crunching whereas previously the job was done before she finished painting one hand. Or do you want some freakish half-painted girls working for you?

[HDRIDER]

Hi

I like my VISTA

[JSixpack]

...

Kindly explain why the girl over in accounting needs a computer with 2 Gigs of RAM and a 3D graphics card to run Excel, and kindly provide a compelling reason for me as an SME to upgrade her computer hardware in order to be able to run Vista Minimum or whatever the basic version is called?

...

Isn't it obvious? After the hardware and OS upgrade she'll have less than half the performance using the same version of Office, so now she'll have time to paint the nails on both hands waiting for the spreadsheet number crunching whereas previously the job was done before she finished painting one hand. Or do you want some freakish half-painted girls working for you?

Tnx for the laugh!

[H2oDunc]

Hi

I like my VISTA

Like HDrider I love my Vista. Had Vista Ultimate for over a year now, never had a blue screen or freeze, unlike XP and I love the extras you get especially handling photos. Diference in speed ??????? I wouldnt know then I dont really get too upset if things take a second or 2 to appear thats why I came to Thailand. Can somebody honestly say they get upset if Vista takes 3 seconds more to start or shutdown. MS will always have its knockers no matter what and most of the people rubbishing Vista dont run it. I met a guy yesterday and he was still running 95 and saw no need to upgrade so go figure ????

As for not eating sh*t to know you arent going to like it well I never thought I woud enjoy eating bugs but guess what they are quie nice

[Cuban]

I've never eaten shit either but that doesn't mean I want to find out what it tastes like.

Treating users customers as application testers! I don't want to wonder if my 150 year old 4 bit application might work on an olde emulation within Vista etc . I just want the thing to function, people are now very wise to the 'game' - buy Windows' new shiny Vista - but you will not be able to use any of your old printers, scanners, bar code readers etc etc.

Like the old Ford(GM) Vs Microsoft joke - I don't want to have to buy a new car every time the road is re-surfaced.

[Wolfie]

Its strange, the guys who knock vista always come back to four main points.

1. Cannot use old hardware

2. Vista is Slow

3. Need to upgrade my pc

4. UAC is intrusive/annoying

1. I have to be honest, with the exception of a *very* old webcam that the vendor didn't have the vista drivers at the time vista was first released, i've found every single piece of hardware to work flawlessly, first time, with vista. I'm talking old printers, new webcams, external Hard Drives, External DVD drives, old sound cards, old video cards, new sound cards, new video cards... pretty much everything ive owned/used/bought over the last 12 months. The guys who are having problems must be using old 1970's tech which is no longer supported anywhere, because in my experience this is simply not the case. Vista is very well supported by the driver vendors these days - they were a little slow to start with but now they have caught up

2. I've found, that Vista used to feel a bit slower than the old XP, but after SP1 came out i found that things *seemed* to speed up a bit, it could be marginally slower than XP, but then again i bet you XP is slower than Win95, which was slower than 3.1 etc etc. I have a reasonably good machine at home, admittedly with a slow old 2.4ghz dual core processor which i feel is a little out-dated these days, and i've found Vista to be perfectly acceptable in pretty much any task i've asked it to do. The only time i've noticed a slow down is when i have multiple things running in the background (virus checks, large file transfers, file scans etc - all at the same time) - otherwise it feels just as speedy/responsive as XP ever was.

3. Well, as stated above, i have a reasonable spec machine so i never felt i needed to upgrade anything, so really im not qualified to discuss this point in detail. The only thing i would say is 2GB of ram is a minimum for Vista, and thats not expensive these days. Of course if your talking a PC that cant handle 2GB of ram or is using some slow old dinosaur ram then you probably wouldn't want to be upgrading the thing to vista anyway (time to write it off as a depreciation write off and buy a new one?)

4. UAC - the biggest bugbear of any Vista hater - guess what guys - its easy to turn it off if it bothers you that much! I have ONE application that asks me for permission via the UAC, everything else i've ever used has never asked me for permission for normal execution... the exception to that rule would be during installs of new software where i would get asked ONCE at the start of the process and never asked again, so these people who claim to see the UAC prompt all the time must be trying to do some freaky a*s sh*te, i see it once per day under normal circumstances, or maybe twice if i'm installing something new onto my computer...

Of course, your mileage may vary, but this is my experience.

/edit: added a 4th point

Edited July 28, 2008 by Wolfie

[Thanh-BKK]

Hello

I did use Vista Ultimate for 14 months and had no major problems with it. Certainly no BSOD's and no viruses either. Yeah, there was the odd (old) software that didn't want to run, and there was also unsupported hardware.

But guess what? That happens with EVERY OS!!

I am now using Linux, it was my choice, not because of any Windows problems - by now i am doing very much the same things i did under Windows Vista, i have learned the differences and am able to use the system - but i have also found that Linux shares the same problems of Vista, XP, Mac OS etc etc etc. Such problems are - software suddenly stops functioning, updates break previously working things (and Ubuntu is actually quite good at that!), things nag you for a password etc.

For me Vista was (and still is) a well-built OS that ran fine on my machine, but then so was XP and so is Ubuntu Linux. They all do their job, they all have their hiccups, nothing is perfect in this world.

Just that i have to pay a lot less (read: nothing) for Linux

Best regards......

Thanh

[Guest Reimar]

Its strange, the guys who knock vista always come back to four main points.

1. Cannot use old hardware

2. Vista is Slow

3. Need to upgrade my pc

4. UAC is intrusive/annoying

Wolfie you're very right but forget to mention that even everytime the persons/group who's knocking the door, even at TV!

Hello

I did use Vista Ultimate for 14 months and had no major problems with it. Certainly no BSOD's and no viruses either. Yeah, there was the odd (old) software that didn't want to run, and there was also unsupported hardware.

But guess what? That happens with EVERY OS!!

I am now using Linux, it was my choice, not because of any Windows problems - by now i am doing very much the same things i did under Windows Vista, i have learned the differences and am able to use the system - but i have also found that Linux shares the same problems of Vista, XP, Mac OS etc etc etc. Such problems are - software suddenly stops functioning, updates break previously working things (and Ubuntu is actually quite good at that!), things nag you for a password etc.

For me Vista was (and still is) a well-built OS that ran fine on my machine, but then so was XP and so is Ubuntu Linux. They all do their job, they all have their hiccups, nothing is perfect in this world.

Just that i have to pay a lot less (read: nothing) for Linux

Best regards......

Thanh

Fair comment Thanh, I like that!

I don't need to repeat my experiences, I wrote often enough about it. But regarding the old hardware I can't tell anything else that finally I get everything I still use to work which includes my 12 years old SCSI Scanner.

One thing is like while using Microsoft software: Downward compatibility! That's something were Apple have to learn something.

I'm not pro or contra but things have to work for me and if they did, they get my vote. And I don't mind about any other meaning, experiences or whatsoever. If I don't like something, or it didn't works for me, I don't use it! But if it does, why I should listen to others?!

Cheers.

[nikster]

One thing is like while using Microsoft software: Downward compatibility! That's something were Apple have to learn something.

My vista experience can be summed up by one sentence: More clicks to do less. I even counted the clicks for some things - it's ridiculous. Oh, and: More verbiage to do less, too. Huge giant dialogs.. argh!

Anyway, I do have to really disagree with the above. As a software engineer it's very clear to me that if you have the best and most well thought out system on the planet, you are going to have to throw it out and start over after 20 years. If you have an ugly hack that turned into the most used OS ever, you should throw it out much, much sooner.

And Vista's absence of new features is testament to that. Sure, Vista has a few improvements, a nicer-looking UI ______ ... nothing else comes to mind, please fill in the blanks - it's not much in any case. It took 6 years to develop using the resources of the richest company in the world. With an army of the best programmers money can buy. Why? Backwards compatibility through several decades of software legacy.

Apple showed how to solve this technically - they just kicked out the old, and provided a compatibility layer that basically emulates an entire old system to run old software. Microsoft never did that, and the reason is clear if you consider the risks of such an endeavor - it's no mean feat, it's hard, and it could fail spectacularly. Microsoft didn't have to do it thanks to its OS monopoly and good-enough stability from the old Windows NT core. Apple was forced to go to OS X by circumstances - they had nothing to lose, the company was in the toilet and most people agreed with Michael Dell when he said he'd sell off the pieces and return the money to the shareholders. (*) But look at the results - OS X is wonderful, innovating every 1 or 2 years - there is more useful new features in OS X 10.5 vs 10.4 than in Vista vs. XP, and it only took just over a year to deliver. Granted they're now fixing bugs so let's say 2. Vista took 6. OS X runs on a phone! Vista could not possibly, it doesn't even run on an Eee PC. And it can't be made to.

Code reaches a certain plateau where the introduction of a new feature causes the introduction of a new bug, and the fix of a bug also causes a new bug unless you are extremely careful. Microsoft can compensate for having been in this state for a while with massive, unparalleled resources - brute force if you will. 30 years of legacy code are killing Windows. Microsoft has all the pieces in place to stage a dramatic escape from that code base (e.g. Virtual PC) - but so far they haven't used that.... perhaps they are not desperate enough. Windows sells no matter what, after all.... and it takes a while to melt a glacier....

(*) I didn't just make that up, Avi Tevanian, then chief software architect at Apple said that recently in an interview