$99 for a product that will last the next 5 -7 years (like XP). I think that other lesser products require the users to pay for updates every 12 -18 months.
I see what you did there attacking OSX as "lesser". Why don't you just appreciate the success of the operating system you and enjoy and not attack the other major operating systems.
"$99 for a product that will last the next 5 -7 years (like XP)."
But it didn't. Vista was a considerably delayed software project. Microsoft certainly didn't intend XP to "last" as long as it did and everyone had to put up with that. I certainly don't think you'll find users of OS X or Linux complaining that their OS is refreshed often. It's an interesting attempt to spin what is accepted by all to have been a messed up project as a good thing, but definitely invalid.
OSX users have to pay for each refresh though. That is money every year to keep up with the latest.
Linux users get it free. (it doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure this one out)
2007-2012 is my projected life expectancy for vista.
just because they will release Windows 7, doesnt mean that they will automatically stop supporting Vista (they will probably throw in a SP around 2011)
Are you kidding me??? I run Vista Ultimate on my brand new laptop and it crashes ALOT! Vista isn't all that bad, but to claim it 'stable' is laughable.
I don't see that as "attacking" the competition. I would consider that as a comparison. I happen to think that Vista, for me is the best operating system, I have no restrictions and great free ongoing support for a single price of less than $100.
I do enjoy it. I don't think that I mentioned OSX. I don't think that I would really classify OSX in the same category though. OSX is really just UNIX with a GUI interface isn't it. It is not really a consumer level OSX - that was not the intention of OSX. OSX is for graphic designers and video editors, not the general public. Even then I think that you need a high end machine to operate it. Have you ever tried to burn a video DVD in OSX using a G4 ? Are there any real consumer applications that are used it OSX ? Any mainstream games ?
Unless I am mistaken...
As I say though I think that Vista does not really have any competition in the consumer field for me.
I have 3 systems running Vista. Never ever had a crash. (Firefox 3 in beta did drop out quite a few times though). My OSX system does crash and hang all the time.
Seriously, there is something wrong with your Laptop. What kind is it ?
"$99 for a product that will last the next 5 -7 years (like XP)."
Make that "$99 for a product that will --not see any major upgrades for-- the next 5-7 years".
Another thing, why not spend $30 more and get the "ultimate" version? Oh that's right, because your ultimate version costs $260/$400 (depending if you want to upgrade or get the 'full' version. Much more than $30 extra, my bad.
@Hamid, I am sure Bentley/Ferrari doesn't give a damn how many cars Hyundai sold last year. Apple doesn't compete with Vista in itself, it's a "luxury" product.
@Andrew Crazy Microsoft thinking its product is in the same level as Apple. They got to end such madness thinking and stop those stupid "l switched to Windows" commercials.
I received about six copies of Windows Vista (thru MSDNAA and some survey) They were all Vista Business variant. (32bit, 64bit, w/ Media, w/o Media) All my friends in CS department received similar number of copies. I'm sure many CS students in most US university got them for free too. I wonder if all those number also got counted in 180m figure.
What are you smoking guys? I really want some. Yeah it's like $99 for an upgrade but not if you're buying it brand new. If you buy basic it doesn't contain enough and if you guy ultimate then it has too much. It's a huge resource hog, lots of clicking just to get a task done, severely overpriced, not to mention it took forever to launch. I mean at least XP is usable now.
If you have the computer to run it well (and judging that we're all on Engadget I'm figuring we're all techie enough that we do have the specs) then it runs great. But for the average person, not so much. Several of my friends who are now on Vista hate it. Lots of them want to switch back. My friend owns a decent Sony laptop with Vista and all he has had only problems (huge loading time, bogged down, etc).
I personally don't mind Vista. It's a prettier version of XP in my opinion but is also severely overpriced. Although, I do have to tip my hat to MS selling 180 million copies. That's a lot more than people expected.
I've seen some silly comments but suggesting that OS X is UNIX with a GUI and therefore not designed for consumers just beggars belief. Remember that Windows 95 was simply DOS with a GUI but no one suggests that this means it wasn't designed for consumers, since that is exactly what it was designed for. I have no idea what you are calling a "consumer application" but I am sure this is a definition that we can all have a good laugh about.
I will also note that even OS X Leopard runs fine on my old G4 Titanium PowerBook. Yes, it burns data and video DVDs. I'm not sure why you think it wouldn't.
Ultimately, it's clear that you do not own or have access to a Mac. Leopard, with all its flaws, does not crash constantly and the only kernel panic I have encountered with it was due to a compatibility issue with Parallels Desktop and it's kernel extension. That you like Vista is fine but you are not fooling anyone by, frankly, making stuff up. Seriously, it isn't that important a topic...
What they were 'smoking' was Windows Vista. If you actually used it on your computer you would be able to see it's good too. If your friends find it slow, their laptops are probably slow. An old Sony Vaio is still slow, whether it's slow or not.
It is not designed to run on 1GB of RAM or something. 1GB is the new 256MB. If you want to run Vista, you need to run it on a new PC, simple. And unlike you suggested it doesn't need to be 8GB of ram or something, 2GB will do fine on a laptop, 3/4 better on a desktop. That's not too much to ask these days.
I don't know how you can say the OS is overpriced, because a new PC is still about £200 less than a Mac with the same hardware, which is a known fact.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
It's already surpassed XP for the same amount of time, Engadget.
BTW
That was first comment!
And Vista DOES play Crysis (no, it does, shutup)
and it DOES play Doom!
amazing. well done Microsoft ! That is a serious piece of software. I love my Vista. I have 3 copies on 3 home pc's. It is no wonder it sells so well;
1. Fast
2. Stable (not a single hangup or crash)
3. Media centre
4. Intuitive.
Again well done Microsoft.
another thing... Vista is really well priced;
$99 for a product that will last the next 5 -7 years (like XP).
I think that other lesser products require the users to pay for updates every 12 -18 months.
I see what you did there attacking OSX as "lesser". Why don't you just appreciate the success of the operating system you and enjoy and not attack the other major operating systems.
How come Wii Sports gets shit for its sale since it's bundled with Wii but Vista doesn't when it's bundled with 90% of computers?
"$99 for a product that will last the next 5 -7 years (like XP)."
But it didn't. Vista was a considerably delayed software project. Microsoft certainly didn't intend XP to "last" as long as it did and everyone had to put up with that. I certainly don't think you'll find users of OS X or Linux complaining that their OS is refreshed often. It's an interesting attempt to spin what is accepted by all to have been a messed up project as a good thing, but definitely invalid.
I didn't know I was "required" to pay for updates every 12-18 months.
OSX users have to pay for each refresh though. That is money every year to keep up with the latest.
Linux users get it free. (it doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure this one out)
2007-2012 is my projected life expectancy for vista.
just because they will release Windows 7, doesnt mean that they will automatically stop supporting Vista (they will probably throw in a SP around 2011)
Does this inclide the owe soo many ppl who buy vista computers and den change the os to XP ??
Does look like WM 6.1 tough
@kcc
Are you kidding me??? I run Vista Ultimate on my brand new laptop and it crashes ALOT! Vista isn't all that bad, but to claim it 'stable' is laughable.
Even Balmer refers to it as 'A work in progress'
@Josh,
I don't see that as "attacking" the competition. I would consider that as a comparison. I happen to think that Vista, for me is the best operating system, I have no restrictions and great free ongoing support for a single price of less than $100.
I do enjoy it. I don't think that I mentioned OSX. I don't think that I would really classify OSX in the same category though. OSX is really just UNIX with a GUI interface isn't it. It is not really a consumer level OSX - that was not the intention of OSX. OSX is for graphic designers and video editors, not the general public. Even then I think that you need a high end machine to operate it. Have you ever tried to burn a video DVD in OSX using a G4 ? Are there any real consumer applications that are used it OSX ? Any mainstream games ?
Unless I am mistaken...
As I say though I think that Vista does not really have any competition in the consumer field for me.
@mike,
I would send your laptop back.
I have 3 systems running Vista. Never ever had a crash. (Firefox 3 in beta did drop out quite a few times though). My OSX system does crash and hang all the time.
Seriously, there is something wrong with your Laptop. What kind is it ?
@kccboy2004
"$99 for a product that will last the next 5 -7 years (like XP)."
Make that "$99 for a product that will --not see any major upgrades for-- the next 5-7 years".
Another thing, why not spend $30 more and get the "ultimate" version? Oh that's right, because your ultimate version costs $260/$400 (depending if you want to upgrade or get the 'full' version. Much more than $30 extra, my bad.
@kccboy2004
I too have 3 license of Vista installed on a machine from 1.1 GHZ laptop to quad core desktop. All run awesome!
I surprise with the number considering all the bad press and trash talk -and most of the talk comes from people who never used Vista.
Microsoft has sold more Vista licenses in 18 months than Apple has sold licenses of its operating systems in 18 years.
Gotta love it!
@Hamid, I am sure Bentley/Ferrari doesn't give a damn how many cars Hyundai sold last year. Apple doesn't compete with Vista in itself, it's a "luxury" product.
@Andrew
Crazy Microsoft thinking its product is in the same level as Apple. They got to end such madness thinking and stop those stupid "l switched to Windows" commercials.
I received about six copies of Windows Vista (thru MSDNAA and some survey) They were all Vista Business variant. (32bit, 64bit, w/ Media, w/o Media) All my friends in CS department received similar number of copies. I'm sure many CS students in most US university got them for free too. I wonder if all those number also got counted in 180m figure.
What are you smoking guys? I really want some. Yeah it's like $99 for an upgrade but not if you're buying it brand new. If you buy basic it doesn't contain enough and if you guy ultimate then it has too much. It's a huge resource hog, lots of clicking just to get a task done, severely overpriced, not to mention it took forever to launch. I mean at least XP is usable now.
If you have the computer to run it well (and judging that we're all on Engadget I'm figuring we're all techie enough that we do have the specs) then it runs great. But for the average person, not so much. Several of my friends who are now on Vista hate it. Lots of them want to switch back. My friend owns a decent Sony laptop with Vista and all he has had only problems (huge loading time, bogged down, etc).
I personally don't mind Vista. It's a prettier version of XP in my opinion but is also severely overpriced. Although, I do have to tip my hat to MS selling 180 million copies. That's a lot more than people expected.
@kccboy2004
I've seen some silly comments but suggesting that OS X is UNIX with a GUI and therefore not designed for consumers just beggars belief. Remember that Windows 95 was simply DOS with a GUI but no one suggests that this means it wasn't designed for consumers, since that is exactly what it was designed for. I have no idea what you are calling a "consumer application" but I am sure this is a definition that we can all have a good laugh about.
I will also note that even OS X Leopard runs fine on my old G4 Titanium PowerBook. Yes, it burns data and video DVDs. I'm not sure why you think it wouldn't.
Ultimately, it's clear that you do not own or have access to a Mac. Leopard, with all its flaws, does not crash constantly and the only kernel panic I have encountered with it was due to a compatibility issue with Parallels Desktop and it's kernel extension. That you like Vista is fine but you are not fooling anyone by, frankly, making stuff up. Seriously, it isn't that important a topic...
@Drew
What they were 'smoking' was Windows Vista. If you actually used it on your computer you would be able to see it's good too. If your friends find it slow, their laptops are probably slow. An old Sony Vaio is still slow, whether it's slow or not.
It is not designed to run on 1GB of RAM or something. 1GB is the new 256MB. If you want to run Vista, you need to run it on a new PC, simple. And unlike you suggested it doesn't need to be 8GB of ram or something, 2GB will do fine on a laptop, 3/4 better on a desktop. That's not too much to ask these days.
I don't know how you can say the OS is overpriced, because a new PC is still about £200 less than a Mac with the same hardware, which is a known fact.