Vista is taking a shellacing in the marketplace

Message

#1 Post by **jdhurst** » Mon Sep 24, 2007 10:40 am

Subject says it all.

According to various sources (reasonable and reliable internet news):

1. XP remains better for gaming than Vista at this point.
2. XP is working well enough and doing all that is required for those using it.
3. Vista pricing is too expensive for many.
4. Machine requirement exceed what many have - so delay until new machine is required.
5. Business report waiting for SP1 to be available as part of the Vista purchase.
6. In September, 62 percent of businesses had NO plans to roll out Vista. This is up (worse) from 50 percent in April. Known roll out plans according to this source makes up about 3 percent of installed base.
7. Microsft is quietly allowing vendors and manufacturers to provide downgrades to XP. These same vendors are lobbying hard to have XP available for everyone (business and consumers) who want XP past January.

This picture is much worse than XP when it was new. XP worked when issued. I had some compatibility issues that were fixed in the first six months and I was into XP within that time frame. I still cannot use Vista because key critical connectivity software is not ready. I also happen to be very happy with XP.

I am NOT saying to anyone "don't use Vista". Please use whatever you wish. I am also NOT saying it doesn't work. It does not work for me -- it may work for you.

... JDH

#2 Post by **carbon_unit** » Mon Sep 24, 2007 11:50 am

I agree with you on all points.
They are moving awfully slow on getting Vista up to speed.

#3 Post by **ryengineer** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 12:18 am

There is a high demand for Windows XP still from Lenovo customers. Few people told me the statistics are pretty much the same at Dell and HP.

mgo · #4 Post by **mgo** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 1:08 am

jdhurst wrote:Subject says it all.

I am NOT saying to anyone "don't use Vista". Please use whatever you wish. I am also NOT saying it doesn't work. It does not work for me -- it may work for you.

... JDH

I have the option of using Vista or XP on my ThinkPads, and XP is still my OS of choice. Vista is "ok" but not compelling.

Maybe Microsoft should re-name it "Vista Valdez" because it's run aground, nobody seems to be at the helm and it's leaking into the ecosystem.

SHoTTa35 · #5 Post by **SHoTTa35** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 9:03 am

really? XP was all good when it came out or up to 6 months after that? Seriously?! I remember lots of people running away from XP for at least a year because of the "Fisher Price" look and all the "security" issues it had. Until XP SP2 it wasn't widely adopted by lots of businesses and people.

The main reason why people are on this Vista is bad thing is because well, quiet frankly XP is GREAT. I loved XP running on the systems of today but when XP came out it practically sucked the life out of a lot of systems. All those people that upgraded from 2000 to XP with their "killer" systems with 256MB of RAM and saw that XP was slow on it then complained and went back to 2000. XP didn't really get better than Windows 98 for a while after it was realeased - talking about the gaming scene. People were still using 9x machines just to game and then another XP machine for other stuff.

With Vista being designed for the next few years, Microsoft finally decided to pump it up a lil to actually use the systems for what they are capable of. If They didn't then we'd still have a "File Manager" and all that stuff running (Windows 3.11). Systems that are being pushed to run Vista shouldn't run it in the first place. Systems designed to run Vista run it much better.

Fact is there are lots of people still wanting XP after going to Vista but the other fact is people hate change. They get into one way of doing things and don't want to change and do it any other way, even if that way is easier and better.

pianowizard · #6 Post by **pianowizard** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 9:56 am

SHoTTa35 wrote:XP was all good when it came out or up to 6 months after that? Seriously?! I remember lots of people running away from XP for at least a year because of the "Fisher Price" look and all the "security" issues it had.

Was Windows 2000 more secure than XP when XP had just been released?

I hated XP's default look too but that was easy to fix -- just switch to "Classic mode" and "Optimize computer for performance". After that, it looked and worked very much like Win2K so there was nothing to relearn. Vista is much harder to get used to because there isn't a way to make it look like previous versions of Windows. If people ran away from XP for 6 months, they will run away from Vista for much longer.

#7 Post by **Kyocera** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:37 am

I agree JD, totally. After using Vista on a few of my machines, I'm down to one with Vista Prem, and it's only still there because it's a factory preload and I'm to lazy to do a clean instlall right now, but it has been on my mind. XP just makes more sense. 2003 server is also a great OS to run if you can, very solid, I have not crashed or locked it up yet

SHoTTa35 · #8 Post by **SHoTTa35** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:46 am

Well i would really like to see some numbers. Dell only sold about 800,000 computers (not sure if it was just for the quater or whole year since Vista) and i'd really love to see how many of those people asked to get XP with instead of Vista. They have the option on their site to select XP instead but Vista is selected by default. Most of the "normal" people out there buying computers buy a computer with Vista because they either:

a) Don't want to buy a new system with "old" software on it. (My friend just said this - she's like if she's gonna spend money then why buy the old version, she's spending good money and want the "best" she can get. Even tho in her case that might have been XP but Vista is the "best" in her eyes)

b) Don't know they can get XP on the machine instead of Vista because they either call up or buy one in the store and those usually only have Vista installed.

c) The Jones effect come into play here also. All of my friend going back to college that got a PC didn't want to bring their "boring old computer" to school this year (and same goes for the ones starting) They all want Vista because they know there will be somebody in the library using it and they will be all oooheed and ahhhed by it (probably not) but kids, you know... they all want to keep up with the Jones'.

So while Vista may not have penetrated the Business market as much yet, i know that most companies (that i've seen, not saying all over the world) bought into XP when the machines came with SP2 already installed. I've seen countless COAs on machines at work and other places stating, "Windows XP Professional w/SP2" on their tags.

In most people didn't go to Windows 2000 either, only a select few because XP came out about 1 1/2yrs after. Windows 2000 cost what, $299 full and 199 as an upgrade. People upgrading from Windows NT dind't even bother for the most part. All the regular users out there went from 9x to XP but that was after some reluctance. Yeah, at first, Even Windows 2000 was more desirable than XP and was even more secure too. Windows XP SP1 was released September 09,2002 and lots of stuff were still crappy in comparison to Windows 9x then still. SP2 is when things started to get secure and that didn't come out till August 25, 2004. By Sp2 tho, lots of people were already on XP and probably nobody was still using 9X but there were still a few that complained that XP isn't as secure as it could be yet. After Sp2 that all changed.

mgo · #9 Post by **mgo** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:53 am

SHoTTa35 wrote:Well i would really like to see some numbers. Dell only sold about 800,000 computers (not sure if it was just for the quater or whole year since Vista) and i'd really love to see how many of those people asked to get XP with instead of Vista.

SHoTTa35: Some good points in your post, without the usual fanboy screetching one sees in some fora. Thanks for the nice discussion.

-mg

#10 Post by **GomJabbar** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 11:36 am

SHoTTa35 wrote:All the regular users out there went from 9x to XP but that was after some reluctance. Yeah, at first, Even Windows 2000 was more desirable than XP and was even more secure too. Windows XP SP1 was released September 09,2002 and lots of stuff were still crappy in comparison to Windows 9x then still. SP2 is when things started to get secure and that didn't come out till August 25, 2004. By Sp2 tho, lots of people were already on XP and probably nobody was still using 9X but there were still a few that complained that XP isn't as secure as it could be yet. After Sp2 that all changed.

My daughter just recently bought herself a notebook computer. She was able to give Vista a look-see when I had the home desktop PC set up dual boot with XP and Vista Ultimate RC1. The eye candy definitely caught her eye. She wanted Vista on her new notebook. Not that long-in-the-tooth XP.

Regarding what's quoted above, I don't really agree with this. I bought my first notebook from a used computer shop. It was a ThinkPad 600E. I was given the option of Windows 98 or Windows 2000 installed. I chose W2K and very quickly was glad I did. Around the same time I bought a desktop PC with XP SP1. Worked fine for me. I don't remember any real problems except that my BIOS was not always spinning up my Maxtor SATA hard drives (Raid 0) fast enough for detection. Fortunately, ABIT soon released a BIOS update that fixed this problem.

IMO, any flavor of W2K or XP is worlds better than the $*#@ &^ Windows 98. Windows 95 was ok for it's time.

pianowizard · #11 Post by **pianowizard** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 11:44 am

GomJabbar wrote:IMO, any flavor of W2K or XP is worlds better than the $*#@ &^ Windows 98.

I hate Win98 and 98SE! On most computers, they can't even shut down properly and I usually need to force them off manually. It's the least reliable Windows version I've used, though I've heard that ME is even worse (I haven't used it).

uberT · #12 Post by **uberT** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 12:12 pm

jdhurst wrote: 2. XP is working well enough and doing all that is required for those using it.

A-men !

SHoTTa35 · #13 Post by **SHoTTa35** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 1:00 pm

GomJabbar wrote:
SHoTTa35 wrote:

Well i agree with you 100% but see, you're a geek (no offence

) For the longest while i don't even think Windows 2000 was an option on most "regular" users computers. Windows 2000 was considered a business operating system and not recommended for the average user. Being the upgrade to Windows NT it was designed for that purpose. Only us geeks even knew what Windows NT is and it's stability and performance when compared to Windows 9x line. We just aren't the majority. There are lots of mom and pops out there buying systems for either themselves or their kids or both for that matter. Dell and HP and all that i don't think even had Windows 2000 as an option for their consumer line, only the Latitudes and the business Pavillions had that. All the inspirons had Windows 98SE as the option. From that i think they mostly jumped to Windows XP. Windows 2000 was a pain in the butt for compatability till about SP2. Almost none of the 9X programs worked on Windows 2000 when it came out.

Yes Windows XP definitely kills anything below it now but it definitely didn't when it was first released. Even after the fact it still took a while to be adopted.

#14 Post by **jdhurst** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 4:00 pm

SHoTTa35 wrote:<snip> Almost none of the 9X programs worked on Windows 2000 when it came out.
<snip>

That was true for NT4. NT4 was not a homeowner's OS, but I moved to NT4 to use VMware. I had to replace most of my Windows 3.1/95/98 applications with new NT-based applications. I spent a bundle of cash doing that. Once done (all in NT4), moving to Windows 2000 was a complete non-issue - everything from NT4 moved into Windows 2000 just fine. Of course, most games did not run on either NT4 or 2000. That was one main reason why Microsoft brought out XP - business and gaming platform rolled into one. I don't play computer games so I never cared about that. I was very, very happy with Windows 2000 and am just as happy with XP Pro. ... JDH

Medic · #15 Post by **Medic** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 9:20 pm

I am slowly awaiting the Service Pack for Vista, once that hits the download server at Microsoft, I have a feeling that most Vista issues will be sorted out. I remember when I first got Windows XP on my Acer Laptop, and I formated to Windows 2000 PRO the same day I got it.

arni · #16 Post by **arni** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 9:36 am

I think that all those statemants about Vista adoption only relates to businesses. And when you look back than businesses were always late in adopting new OSes because of compatibility testing and educating employees. Furthermore most companies are awaiting the first Service Pack before moving on with a new Windows OS.

On the other side consumers where always the first ones adopting new technologies. They alway want the latest and greatest.

But the best thing to date is the fact that nowadays your really have choices. Everyone can decide which system works best for him. Is it Vista, XP, W2K or even Mac or Linux. No one is forced to go the Vista line except those buying stock consumer PCs which come preinstalled with Vista Home Editions. If you go the business way you always have the option to downgrade, at least with Ultimate and Business.

I have been using Vista since RTM on all of my PCs and Thinkpads. Well beeing bumpy in the first month now things stabilized and are working great. I can't remember when i had my last blue screen or a system hang. I think that most people are having problems due to installing drivers and software not offically supported for Vista. And for that you always can go the Virtualization way. Either VMware or VirtualPC are great and free technologies to help you move smoothly to the new Platform. And was that the case when XP came out?

bdmclacken · #17 Post by **bdmclacken** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 6:04 pm

I'm a business user and software developer and so far I like the Vista OS and I think its made my time just a bit more productive. I've used it about 2 months now. I realize for the people experiencing hardware or driver compatibility problems this wouldn't be necessarily be true, and a friend of mine couldn't get his Adobe software working properly under Vista and had to roll back to XP or pay to update the Adobe stuff. I do suspect SP1 will address quite a few issues but for now I'm not awaiting anything myself; things are going pretty smoothly on my system.

I'm running a clean instsall of Vista Ultimate on my T60 after using XP for close to a year on it, and so far so good. I'd say my favorite AND least favorite thing is Vista's search. It is annoying how much resource it takes compared to Google Desktop Search, but at the same time is more configurable and basically works as well once it has finished indexing (its even helped me find things GDS wouldn't find in a few cases). I just wish it wasn't so painful to initialize with the large Offline Files cache I have for my documents folder. Google indexes the equivalent data much faster and I don't see my hard drive/network adapter running continuously for hours or days. Unfortunately, GDS sometimes causes my Outlook to hang, so neither is perfect.

As for reverting to classic view for the people who don't relish the newer interface, it seems to be as simple as switching to the Windows Classic theme. Or, you can also disable all manner of graphics enhancements (r-click Computer, go to Properties>Advanced System Settings>Advanced Tab>Settings in Performance) and end up with basically the classic Windows appearance.

Something else I find useful is the hybrid sleep mode. It basically just works well, at least in my current configuration and it sure is neat to see the machine come awake so quickly, even when I've left Outlook, Firefox, Remote Desktop and an MMC or two open, and yet for it to drain so little battery life while it sleeps. I never shutdown now, just put to sleep, even for long trips.

I like the newer Task Scheduler, it is finer grain with triggers. I managed to find a trigger to run a task every time the machine comes out of sleep which wasn't something I could have done easily in XP. I also like the manner that Offline Files syncs up more than the XP method where it would sort of harass you every time you went offline/online and cause really slow logoffs while it synced up.

arni · #18 Post by **arni** » Fri Sep 28, 2007 2:15 am

Seems like MS is really under pressure with Vista. MS is extending XP deadlines for OEMs. Now XP will be available till July 2008.

Via bink.nu: http://bink.nu/news/microsoft-to-extend ... -oems.aspx

Brad · #19 Post by **Brad** » Fri Sep 28, 2007 4:06 am

Who wants their Vista to look like XP?

pianowizard wrote:Vista is much harder to get used to because there isn't a way to make it look like previous versions of Windows. If people ran away from XP for 6 months, they will run away from Vista for much longer.

Check out this excellent article in my local paper.

Here...

bhurley · #20 Post by **bhurley** » Fri Sep 28, 2007 1:17 pm

bdmclacken wrote:I'd say my favorite AND least favorite thing is Vista's search. It is annoying how much resource it takes compared to Google Desktop Search, but at the same time is more configurable and basically works as well once it has finished indexing (its even helped me find things GDS wouldn't find in a few cases).

Interesting. I'm about to get a Vista machine and have been pondering what to do about this. I had to abandon Google Desktop Search because it too make my Outlook hang (frequently), so I switched to X1 (offered by Yahoo) which plays better with Outlook but seems to hang whenever my computer goes to sleep. If X1 will work with Vista and if the sleep bug gets resolved, I might stick with that rather than using Vista's search. Does Vista search within Outlook files the way Google and X1 do? That's key for me as Outlook's built-in search is useless...I guess they improved it in Outlook 2007 but I'm not planning to upgrade Outlook for another few years.

mgo · #21 Post by **mgo** » Fri Sep 28, 2007 2:24 pm

jdhurst wrote:Subject says it all.

Then there's this interesting article:
"Why Microsoft must abandon Vista to save itself"

from CNET news:
http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9785337-7.html

bdmclacken · #22 Post by **bdmclacken** » Sat Sep 29, 2007 10:48 pm

After you install Outlook, you can just open it once, then go to Control Panel>Index Options and put a checkmark for Outlook. I only have one profile with a single OST file and all aspects of the data is indexed, whether it is contact info or email or calendar events. I'm not sure how it would handle multiple profiles. I use Outlook 2003, and have no immediate plans to move to 2007 either. Once the initial indexing finishes, things work pretty well with the Outlook searches, and the searches through my ofline folders work well too.

#23 Post by **GomJabbar** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 3:19 pm

arni already mentioned it, but here it is again.

InformationWeek wrote:Responding to some customers' lukewarm embrace of Windows Vista, Microsoft (NSDQ: MSFT) said it will extend by several months availability of the operating system's predecessor, Windows XP.

The company said it will make the full version of Windows XP available to PC manufacturers and retailers through June 30, 2008. It will continue to offer a basic edition in emerging markets through June 2010.

And further...

InformationWeek wrote:Microsoft's official explanation for the move is that too many customers have yet to complete the transition from Windows XP to Windows Vista. "There are some customers who need a little more time to make the switch," said Mike Nash, Microsoft's Windows product manager, in a statement posted on the company's Web site.

While that may be, a number of signs have emerged in recent months that Windows Vista's problems go beyond timing. A survey conducted earlier this year by InformationWeek showed that an astonishing 30% of businesses have no plans to purchase Windows Vista. It's an indication that many corporate software buyers may take a long look at Linux, the Mac OS, or some other alternative to Vista once Windows XP is no longer available.

Microsoft To Extend Windows XP Sales As Vista Concerns Mount

#24 Post by **Kyocera** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 3:37 pm

Microsoft to Extend XP Sales as Vista Concerns Mount!

If this is true (didn't read the article but believe it anway) this would be a case of the market finally dictating to MS rather than the other way around. Little step maybe, but significant nonetheless.

#25 Post by **jdhurst** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 5:04 pm

The article is true based on my reading and research. As recently as this past Friday (two days ago), ZDNet wrote "Is Windows XP too good? ..... "

Safe Net *finally* appears to have released the Netscreen Remote client so I am now finally considering a Vista Business Laptop.

But even so, what I have does everything I need, and the change to Vista will be just to keep up. Sooner or later, some client will go to Vista and I need to know more than I do about it.
... JDH

johnvndnbrk · #26 Post by **johnvndnbrk** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 5:37 pm

Kyocera wrote:
Microsoft to Extend XP Sales as Vista Concerns Mount!
If this is true (didn't read the article but believe it anway) this would be a case of the market finally dictating to MS rather than the other way around. Little step maybe, but significant nonetheless.

Gates was quick to say that WinXP is Vista's biggest competitor. There are good reasons to stay with WinXP32, and no compelling reason to move to WinVista32 (64 bits OS'es have their own driver considerations and issues for each). Regardless of the hardware specs of your current system, Vista is a massive resource drain. Although not as bad as on a T61p, Vista on a T60p runs so hot that I would not recommend running this OS w/o some type of notebook cooling plate. This wear and tear on a system cannot be good over the long run. Drivers for most hardware that I have come across are available for Windows Vista, so I really don't have a complaint here. I think Lenovo has done an excellent job in getting their suite of productivity software to Vista users and have made it very easy to install Vista from a personal copy of this software on DVD, and get all necessary drivers and other software using their System Update utility. No other manufacturer of notebooks comes close to Lenovo/IBM with software driver support, which is an aspect of Thinkpads often overlooked.

My complaint with Vista basically fall into three categories; poor overall performance, a poorly designed UI, and a lack of support of Microsoft's own development software. I simply found it amazing that WinVista could not support Visual Studio 2003's debugger or SQL Server 2000. Good ridance to both of these programs, I much prefer VS 2k5 and SQL Server 2k5, but there are always programs which hang around, many of which are based off of the .NET v1.1 framework. Although the network tools are rather slick in Vista, I am often timing out on accessing sites on the internet. The UI reminds me of one pulled from themexp.org and has a type of "friction" to it not experienced in WinXP.

The best aspects of Vista are those carried over from WinXP and I don't believe that with this new OS release that time will eventually cure its woes. After a 6+ year effort before a new Windows OS I was expecting more, I guess. My advice to Microsoft would be to keep the best of whatever was built into Vista, but on the whole chuck this as a lose and start again. Perhaps it could be spun as a type of Windows ME release, except over a much longer period of time. Microsoft is doing very well in their server and application development tools with sharp UI's and impressive technical advances. They could use this as an excuse of negligence of the OS side of the house ... I would buy it, the excuse that is.

John

Truthfinder · #27 Post by **Truthfinder** » Sat Oct 06, 2007 12:28 am

I have loaded Vista into my T60 and find that it runs rather well, however, the issue I have with it is that many of the programs that I purchased only a year or so before Vista hit the market place either runs poorly or not at all with Vista.

Do thay think that we can all afford to trash software in order to change over to Vista. Many of the programs that will not run on Vsta are in the hundreds, if not in the thousands of $.
To me the change over makes for a bad choice and bad business on the part of the software industry.

Yes, Vista is pretty and full of bells and whistles, but not much else.

So, with this in mind, I will stay with what works and that is XP !

We are not all made of money..................

My 2 cents

uberT · #28 Post by **uberT** » Thu Oct 11, 2007 10:38 am

ryengineer wrote:There is a high demand for Windows XP still from Lenovo customers. Few people told me the statistics are pretty much the same at Dell and HP.

I've seen this noted several times recently. The demand for XP continues and laptop mfrs. are being forced to offer it again as an alternate to Vista.

SpawnyWhippet · #29 Post by **SpawnyWhippet** » Fri Oct 12, 2007 4:56 am

I've tried XP32, XP64, Vista Ultimate32 and 64 on my T60p and revert back to XP32 with Office 2003 every time. It's currently unrivalled for performance, stability and compatibilty. Vista takes twice as long to boot and several of the programs I use the most cannot run on Vista at all.

To improve performance further and optimise Windows as far as possible, I always turn all the 'visual enhancements' off so the machine looks like a Win2k interface, stripe my pagefile across the primary and secondary hard drives etc.
My T60p on XP32 runs massively quicker than a friends much more powerful desktop running with Vista.

pianowizard · #30 Post by **pianowizard** » Fri Oct 12, 2007 7:46 am

SpawnyWhippet wrote:My T60p runs massively quicker than a friends much more powerful desktop running with Vista.

Microsoft really should have postponed the release of Vista to 2009 or 2010 when more people have powerful enough hardware to run it well. Vista in 2007 is equivalent to XP in 1998.

Vista is taking a shellacing in the marketplace

Vista is taking a shellacing in the marketplace

Re: Vista is taking a shellacing in the marketplace

Re: Vista is taking a shellacing in the marketplace

My experiment with Vista has gone well so far

Re: My experiment with Vista has gone well so far

Re: Vista is taking a shellacing in the marketplace

Vista search function works well with Outlook

RE: Windows VISTA

Vista and on hand software

Who is online