Login:
Password:
Lost Password?
Print this article  |  E-mail this article  |  Comment on this article

Dell promises to protect business customers' right not to use Vista

By Scott M. Fulton, III, BetaNews

April 25, 2008, 5:59 PM

If you're a business customer of Dell, you might have to purchase Vista with your PC, but that doesn't mean you have to use it. Today, Dell is trying a new way to satisfy both business users' wants and Microsoft's licensing requirements.

A recent revision to Dell's policy for business PC customers lets them take full and open advantage of an apparent loophole in Microsoft's operating system licensing, though they'll pay full price for it: Assuming Microsoft goes forth with its plan to discontinue sale of all versions of Windows XP after June 30, Dell will still enable its business customers who purchase Windows Vista Business or Vista Professional to exercise certain "downgrade rights" and have Windows XP Professional installed instead.

"Dell has the ability to exercise 'Windows Vista downgrade rights' on your behalf in the factory if your business is still reliant upon Windows XP and you'd prefer to have Windows XP Professional preinstalled on your PCs," reads its amended policy page on Windows XP. "Downgrade Rights means that anyone with a Windows Vista Business or Windows Vista Ultimate operating system can downgrade to Windows XP Professional provided they have the media for Windows XP Professional."

In other words, a business purchasing new computers from Dell and that already own licensed copies of XP Professional can have that version installed on new systems, provided they go ahead and purchase Vista anyway.

Customers will receive factory support for XP Professional when they elect to have Dell pre-install it for them on new systems -- provided, of course, they're already XP licensees. The company will also officially support Vista even if it's not pre-installed, which most likely means it will provide assistance to customers when (or if) they choose to upgrade.

The stand-alone version of Service Pack 3 for Windows XP went live for MSDN subscribers on Wednesday. It should be downloadable by the general public this coming Tuesday.

Add a Comment (104 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By athome

posted Apr 29, 2008 - 3:41 AM

??????How is DELL helping me then???????

It isn't like they are breaking the rules or doing something behind the backs of MS and their contractual obligations. This is pur marketing bull****. If you don't own a license as well as a business account with them, you don't get XP, but VISTA.

***roll eyes with migrane***

Score: 0

By Straspey

edited Apr 28, 2008 - 4:26 PM

We were at our local SAM'S CLUB outlet yesterday and we stopped by their computer display, where my wife had purchased her HP Desktop with Vista Home Basic (OEM) about eight months ago. The machine has been running smoothly, for the most part, since we bought it.

Anyway...As many folks here probably already know, SAM'S has recently entered into an arrangement with DELL and is selling their laptops.

Yesterday, as we were browsing, we happened to notice a representative from DELL standing by to help customers and answer questions. He was very friendly and we began discussing the pros and cons of many of these issues.

We chatted for a few minutes, and as we were leaving, the DELL rep came over to me and said, "I use a PC for my email, surfing, etc., but for all my important stuff, like music, movies and graphics, I use my MAC.

Go figure...

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 4:28 PM

You mean Dell employees have their own personal opinions aside from those of their "Corporate Overlords"??

*gasp*

The Horror!

/sarcasm

Just as Mac fanboys exist in the general populace, they also exist at Dell, MSFT, RedHat, Canonical, etc....

Score: 0

By shellcodes_coder

edited Apr 28, 2008 - 12:54 PM

Am just wondering why people still use that boring XP. I have already upgraded all my computers in my home and business to Vista SP1. I had been waiting for SP1, and after testing it I finally decided to upgrade all the XP machines to SP2. I haven't seen a single PC w/o Vista Business or Ultimate. As far as UAC goes, it's cool. It's all about safety. As far as Apple and Linux goes, they suck. They are good at barking because Vista SP1 is Mac fan boy's a** kicker :P

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 1:37 PM

Gotta love the folks whining about UAC.

All that proves is that if they used Vista at all, they used it for about 30 minutes.

Once the installs are done, the only things that bring up UAC are system tasks that *should* bring up UAC.

I run Glary Utilities once a day. That's the *only* UAC prompt I get anymore.

Score: 0

By improvelence

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 9:55 AM

I will keep protecting my own right to not use dell.

Score: 0

By bourgeoisdude

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 9:25 AM

They did the same thing with Windows 2000. This isn't unexpected that they'd do the same with Windows XP.

The military will not use Vista for several more years, they always use the older, "more dependable" OS. In fact they didn't start officially moving to Windows XP until 2005 I hear.

The rest of this discussion is likely another XP vs. Vista debate. I don't care about it anymore, and it does nothing but turn visitors away from BN comments. Shame we become so childish over such an issue.

Score: 0

By nn123654

posted Apr 27, 2008 - 1:39 PM

Ubuntu FTW!!!

Score: 0

By The-One

posted Apr 26, 2008 - 8:13 PM

Come on people! This is so stupid. Everyone needs to move on. Vista SP1 came out, and its time to move on! Computers are about the future, it requires change, and quite honestly if you have a computer and want to run some old OS like XP, why not just get a peice of paper out and use it to send your next email.

This anti-Vista mentality is stupid. Move on! Xp has a fair share of issues, and Vista is better.

Score: 0

By improvelence

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 10:01 AM

I really don't think you understand the complexity of a business environment based on your statement. One day when you join the workforce (if you work in I.T.) you will understand. You do realize that there are LOADS AND LOADS of software packages that are incompatible or at least don't work right with vista. We have 40 printers here, all requiring drivers to function. Are you telling me that I will be able to use every piece of hardware I own with windows Vista? What about devices that require a serial interface like those still very common in the manufacturing industry, the same serial interface PHASED out of Vista? What about ERP software, written for Win2k and already barely working with XP? What about the fact that some users who have upgraded to Vista SP1 have had an infinite reboot cycle plaguing them? How would you like to have to fix that on 60 machines? What about AntiVirus incompatibilities? What about training 100's of idiot office personnel to navigate through the new interface?

Ok, I'll stop.

Score: 0

By Lawrence01

edited Apr 28, 2008 - 11:49 AM

Shouldn't a good company be able to get us what we want, if they want XP, why not? Why can't Microsoft give us a choice, we're the customers, the ones they make a living off of.

Score: 0

By athome

posted Apr 29, 2008 - 3:48 AM

People who complain they don't have a choice are just plain stupid. You have a choice to either use it or not. No one is holding a gun to your head or forcing you to buy something you don't want or need. You can still buy XP, or a Mac, or opensource. You found this forum, so you aren't a total idiot.

Secondly, MS did listen to customers and what was created was VISTA. They will continue to make it better, just like....let's think.....DOS, Win3, 95, 98, Me, 2000, XP and now Vista.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 1:36 PM

...
Because they don't want to have to support an already 8 year-old OS for very much longer?

Because they'd like to be able to support something newer, more secure, and more stable?

Change sucks, but staying in the year 2000 isn't going to get anyone anywhere.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 11:08 AM

We have 40 printers here, all requiring drivers to function

Your business aside, most will function. The business class laser printers almost all have Vista drivers. It's the consumer-based ink-jets that get replaced every 3 months that get EOL'd on the support side.

Are you telling me that I will be able to use every piece of hardware I own with windows Vista?

Nope. But for most folks, and most businesses, Vista will come on *new* hardware.

What about devices that require a serial interface like those still very common in the manufacturing industry, the same serial interface PHASED out of Vista?

One of our clients makes cardboard. Not a machine-shop, really, but they have machines dating back to the dark ages of computing. We faced the 98/2k/XP issue, created a few custom interfaces (serial to ethernet), and we were good to go. It was that or leave the control machines on 9x, which simply wasn't a realistic option. That's my only example from a manufacturing standpoint, but ... YMMV, I suppose.

What about the fact that some users who have upgraded to Vista SP1 have had an infinite reboot cycle plaguing them?

Over-reported. Look at the posts here as an example. Most have had great improvements from Vista SP1, few, if any, have experienced the "reboot" cycle. Besides, you test you config on it first. It's a driver issue, so if you have a single config, test it and if it passes, you're good to go.

What about AntiVirus incompatibilities?

...such as? There isn't an AV suite out there that doesn't support Vista by now. Sure, Mcafee and Norton have issues...they always have, haven't they?

What about training 100's of idiot office personnel to navigate through the new interface?

How about switching to "Classic" if they're that stupid?


Ok, I'll stop.

OK. Me too. ;)

Score: 0

By aszure

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 9:01 AM

Have you ever used Vista? Or even better...have you had to support 200+ workstations? We do not want Vista in there at all. Why? Because its not about "moving on"...its about being able to keep business as usual. Vista is inferior to XP in the business arena, and in the business world, as I am sure you are aware, is about money. Personal users want to "move on" then thats fine. But in the business world, you cant just "move on". Because in "moving on" it could involve hundreds of man hours, and not to mention, tons of money having to replace hardware and software that is in the business world that wont work in vista. Try getting a job in IT schmuck and you will see that the world doesnt revolve around you...it revolves around whats best for the users and the company. If we upgrade to Vista...we HAVE to upgrade all of the hardware. Suddenly, the cost has tripled, the time investment has tripled...just to install an OS that isnt ready for prime time.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 9:56 AM

. Vista is inferior to XP in the business arena,

*laughs*

On existing hardware, perhaps, if you have no budget, perhaps. When it comes time for system replacements, your argument disappears.

Hardware sold today is compatible, software has been or soon will be patched.

..and saying Vista isn't ready for prime-time...

Try actually *using* it first, on the hardware it was *meant* to run on. Anything less and you're talking out of your ass.

Score: 0

By improvelence

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 10:06 AM

Vista is in NO way inferior, but not ready for companies like mine. Or should I say, we are not ready for Vista until we move away from RS232 which when using it to interface with a million dollar machine that makes you millions more, is not happening anytime soon. And yes I know I can use conversion but its not as cut and dry with CNC control interfaces as it would seem. All of the new machines we bring in are Ethernet and/or wireless equipped but we make way to much money from the old(er) ones to retire them anytime soon. There ARE still places that cant fully upgrade to Vista yet (our office will have no problem and i am alreayd running it on my laptop)

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 10:55 AM

Wow.

Serial networking. There's a flashback I didn't need.

My deepest condolences to you and your staff.

You are right. For shops like yours, there's little hope for it, but the silver lining here is that such shops are few and far between, thankfully.

Most businesses, at least in my area, are running virtualized win2k3 servers for the network, possibly a linux rack for serving internal real-time apps, and windows boxes on the desktops. Vista will work for them...if they have a hardware replacement cycle coming up before 2010. ;)

Score: 0

By cap737

posted Apr 27, 2008 - 6:01 AM

Sure that would(could?) be a good recommendation for a home consumer buying a new computer but Fulton may be saying it's not that Dell or businesses are anti-vista but it could be that it may not be more cost-effective to move to an operating system that could possibly not work with their custom software or hardware.

Score: 0

By lfmmoura

posted Apr 27, 2008 - 1:13 AM

The point is not whether to move on or not to move on, the point is moving on when it makes sense to move on. And that is even more true with the business market. I've been using Vista for a while now, and honestly, I don't see much that will justify the upgrade. My opinion is that most people will be just fine waiting until Windows Seven. It's not a bad thing that people are refusing to move on. It shows they're not sheep that will buy something just because it's the newest thing around. And it provides good feedback to MS as to what people really want. Certainly there are already people at MS investigating into why Vista has become such a big failure - possibly the biggest since Windows ME.

Score: 0

By ToeKneeC

edited Apr 27, 2008 - 11:23 AM

MS Claims 140 Million copies of Vista sold world wide (not counting Volume Licensing). Doesn't seem to be a failure. But nothing is really new here. When XP shipped, big, big compaines waited until SP1, and many really, really big compaines waited till XP SP2. Most companies like to wait. I don't know why people think Vista would be any different. In fact, when Windows 7 ships, they will most likely wait again for Windows 7 SP2. Which means the first two years of Windows 7 will also look bad in the business World. Vista at home though, on a new PC rocks.

Score: 0

By lfmmoura

posted Apr 27, 2008 - 4:09 PM

Ok. But how many of such are OEM copies, which the users don't really choose?

Still, 140 million, considering this is an OS present in most of the computers in the world, don't you think it's a bit disappointing for an OS that is 1/2 years old?

I know businesses are usually late adopters, but what advantage is there in Vista? The only one I see is preventing users from running everything at admin level - still, this is a tad annoying - MS has to improve on that.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-MS, but I honestly don't see why people should get an OS that is simply a bloated XP with some cosmetic work.

Score: 0

By ToeKneeC

posted Apr 27, 2008 - 9:07 PM

I agree. But the same question came up with XP came out, it it wasn't needed as 98SE did everything fro a business too. Of course that fact that 98SE needed a re-boot once a day helped XP - XP didn't do a lot more, over time we see that differently. And I do agree, where I work, we will wait until Vista SP2 most likely - sadly we just relearn some new IT stuff (like support, deployment and stuff, improved group policies and so on) But for the end user, lets see, more stable (as it's on 2008 Kernel, and assuming the drivers are stable), breadcrumbs, the clock that has calender, even sniper tool is good for free (I prefer SnagIt), better wireless support of our laptop users. The list goes on and on. But again, not ready until SP2 will we change (2400 workstations world wide). SP1 really did help though. Put it this way, I couldn't trust my XP Media Center, now I have 2 installed (2 HDTV Tuners, 2 SD) - never even have to think about them.
As for bloat - yes, then again I remember when people complained that XP needed 256 Megs, but once you went to XP SP2, you needed 512. And a really nice XP machine is 1 Gig. And however you look at it Eye Candy is nice. Oh, I like the new start menu better too :)

Score: 0

By alex_sporik

posted Apr 27, 2008 - 3:51 AM

I disagree that Vista is a failure for MS. This system has a potential, but lots and lots of lazy developers still stick to XP, big companies such as Dell, HP want return of investment into XP platform. So no surprise that Vista sales goes far from skyrocketing. But this is not MS failure, this is more industry overproduction. Don't you think that PC sales going down year by year, and less and less fresh PC users left. :)))

For businesses it's obvious choice, they will move to Vista end of the year 2008.

Your dreams about Windows7 may not come true:), it will be just Vists SP3

Score: 0

By robmanic44

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 7:01 AM

I know 3 computer repair shop owners and they are all running XP. They have no plans to go to Vista. They question my decision to run Vista and have offered to return my computers to XP.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

edited Apr 28, 2008 - 9:51 AM

For free? Not bloody likely.

Hell, I'd offer it. More money from people resistant to change...which is damned near everyone.

If not running it in the store helped me sell the downgrade, I'd do that too.

Suddenly it looks more like they're trying to make a few extra bucks than they are "against Vista".... it's a ploy.

Sell systems with Vista, sell a downgrade, make more money off of the sheep. It's brilliant.

...better yet, sell the systems with Vista, but not enough horsepower to run it well. Then, when the customer comes whining about it, blame the poor performance on Vista and sell them the downgrade. You get to keep building crappy "year-2000" systems and blame MSFT for it.

Score: 0

By lfmmoura

posted Apr 27, 2008 - 4:16 PM

Which potential do you see in Vista? Perhaps I've missed it (no sarcasm intended.) I am a MS-certified professional, and I fail to see a reason for Vista - so I kind of wonder if the average user will see one as well.

As for Windows 7, these are my hopes:
- Less bloatware & eyecandy (seriously thing MS has overdone it in Vista)
- 64-bit only (meaning a slimmer kernel)
- Abandon some really old legacy code (also meaning a slimmer kernel)
- More maturity in the new kernel introduced in Vista SP1 & Win2008
- More maturity in the security interface (please MS: make it less annoying - ;-))
- A browser that is more standard-compliant (been trying IE 8.0 but it's still too unstable)
- Copy Apple's Time Machine (really really cool way to handle backups)
- Make it impossible to install ANY Adobe software in it (ok, that was a joke - but one can dream, right? lol)

Score: 0

By SlapShot

posted Apr 27, 2008 - 7:31 PM

"Copy Apple's Time Machine (really really cool way to handle backups)"

isn't time machine just another name for System Restore which has been around since Windows ME ?

Score: 0

By ToeKneeC

posted Apr 27, 2008 - 9:09 PM

I think it is closer to Shadow Copy. I never had to use it on my Mac...that sits in the corner...

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 9:47 AM

Yes, but MacOSX actually has a nice GUI for it.

MSFT probably would have done that, but by leaving it in the background (supposedly for admin use only?) they are avoiding any "monopoly" issues it might cause.

We'll hear all these cries of MSFT copying Apple again when MSFT designs an easily accessible UI for it in Windows 7.

Score: 0

By imafurby

posted Apr 26, 2008 - 10:00 PM

I dunno whether it's anti vista so much as anti buying a new box to run this groovy new thing. I'm still using win 2k and it's fine for me thanks. i don't need eye candy, widgets, gadgets or any of the useless and utter crud that microsift thinks is going to 'enhance ' my computer experience. I can do everything, and considerably more than the average person needs to do, with win2k and xp.

Score: 0

By ToeKneeC

edited Apr 27, 2008 - 2:34 PM

That just seems stupid to me bragging that you are still using 2000 :) But I do agree, most of the b****ing seems to be they don't want to buy or upgrade their PCs.

You would be better on a good Linux flavor (Ubuntu) if you are going to stay on Windows 200. Even XP is a good jump over 2000 (and cheap). Vista offers some cool items - more then just eye candy (and yes they could have added most of these new cool features to XP). But there is some nice things to save time and added functionality.

Score: 0

By Nathanm

posted Apr 27, 2008 - 2:16 AM

win2k? U need to upgrade to xp. Very few developers will support anything less than xp.

Score: 0

By imafurby

posted Apr 27, 2008 - 5:36 PM

if they (the developers) can build a better mousetrap, i might consider it.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 26, 2008 - 9:47 PM

I agree with Neo. ;)

Score: 0

By mdotwills

posted Apr 26, 2008 - 7:08 PM

more of an "Upgrade" to me

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 26, 2008 - 3:01 PM

Funny stuff. Most businesses whose infrastructure *depends* on compatibility already have this covered through alternative licensing.

If they don't, well, they need to hire some better IT folk.

Smaller business don't generally have enough at stake to warrant the alternative licensing, but then again, are also quite a bit more nimble and often far less resistant to change.

Score: 0

By ToeKneeC

posted Apr 27, 2008 - 12:07 PM

Nicely put PC_Tool.

Score: 0

By Floodland

edited Apr 26, 2008 - 1:30 PM

Dell is right and I think MS wont complain because they are still selling that crappy Vista and they will be able to show higher "market penetration" even if it is bullsh*t.
My bullet goes to HP, which does not provide you with similar choice and they do not even support XP for new computers. There are no drivers for XP listed on their site, sad MS puppet. I wasted many time with their pathetic helpdesk and they denied there were drivers available and that the notebook would not work properly with XP. So, I had to search device per device and finally managed to get computers working as they should and we want.
In the other hand, Dell already sent me the computers with XP preinstalled, Vista license and the Vista CD to upgrade whenever we want.
HP gained another enemy and Dell is showing they are doing things as best as possible.
HP does not listen to their customers and will continue dropping market share...
I hope MS will open their eyes with Windows 7 as by now my company will skip Vista completely.

Score: 0

By improvelence

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 10:10 AM

Here's a thought, if you want to continue living in the past, BUY A BAREBONES PC AND INSTALL THE OS YOURSELF, it's easier than building from scratch and cheap too.

dumba**.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 26, 2008 - 2:57 PM

There are no drivers for XP listed on their site, sad MS puppet. I wasted many time with their pathetic helpdesk and they denied there were drivers available and that the notebook would not work properly with XP. So, I had to search device per device and finally managed to get computers working as they should and we want.

Sounds like you should have done your homework prior to buying?

Yeah, I know....sounds like work, doesn't?

Score: 0

By robmanic44

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 9:53 AM

I'm one of the big dummies that didn't follow your very simple instructions. Now I'm stuck with an HP that runs Vista Home Premium 64bit. HP wants $270.00 to upgrade to Vista Ultimate. I'm selling this piece of garbage for whatever I can get.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 10:50 AM

Which model?

Chances are, a reinstall of the OS without their crap (uninstalling the crap doesn't cut it) and maybe a RAM upgrade could make it quite usable.

If you aren't willing to do that, craigslist it and give me the link. I could always use another laptop. It seems I've been collecting them as of late...

Score: 0

By DonGato

posted Apr 27, 2008 - 10:13 PM

The problem is not that I think. The problem is that they have drivers but they don't list them. You can look for a similar model that was sold with XP and you will have all HP packaged drivers available. So they are hiding the drivers and artificially saying there is no driver support for XP.

In any case, it's a little more work but you can do it. And if you don't like HP go buy DELL. ;)

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 9:41 AM

You are correct, of course. I bought an Acer with Vista. They didn't have XP drivers for that model, but...they did for the Jap version of that model (same hardware).

Go figure... :)

Now they have EN XP drivers for it, but it took them a good year and 3 months to do it.

Score: 0

By improvelence

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 10:13 AM

I bought an Acer with vista also, the first thing I did was reformatted and installed just the vista disk to avoid all the unneeded acer software, only to realize I couldn't activate windows without using the "Acer" branded version...A phone call to India fixed that though. I dual booted with XP 64 for a while and was actually able to find working drivers for everything (took some searching).

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 11:09 AM

Should check 'em again. Acer is now offering XP drivers for most of their newer models on their support website. Took 'em a while, but you should check back. Make a disc of 'em or something. ;)

Score: 0

By Floodland

posted Apr 26, 2008 - 5:40 PM

Yes, there were some computers a client bought without asking first...
Anyway, I still expect any new hardware and their vendors to support XP these days, were are not talking about Windows 3.1!
Anyway, that was a good chance to see differences between HP and Dell... The needed drivers did exist, only HP did not want to support XP...

Score: 0

By ToeKneeC

edited Apr 27, 2008 - 11:18 AM

OK - But I have to ask. What program(s) where they trying to use that wouldn't run on Vista (specially on a new PC as speed shouldn't be too bad). Or was it another issue (networking or something...which). And was this with just Vista or Vista with SP1 (as that fixed all of my network issues). I just have to ask.

Score: 0

By Floodland

edited Apr 27, 2008 - 10:56 PM

The problems started with hardware incompatibility (USB webcams, flash drives, etc, everything working nicely on XP, BSODs included on vista), and the vendors were not responsible as Vista recognized the hardware and tried to load a MS certified driver, later a specific calculation software, and the list go on.
Another hated thing is that you need more steps than before to do anything, why? Simplicity is not a MS strong point: Suggestion, implement KISS concept.
Even the "improved" features sucks. ie: The event viewer which some folks highly recommended is uncomfortable to me, sticking categories where there is no need for.
UAC, which is the most utterly useless crap I have ever seen. If you want to see a properly configured UAC like function, look into Mac OS, it ask for an admin user/password when is needed, not ALL the time popping modal dialogs just to annoy: Are you sure you want to open computer management? DAMN, yes I AM sure, if I clicked it by mistake I can close it faster without being bothered!. Vista UAC is so annoying that even the most respectful user end clicking Yes without looking. Seems like devs never though 1/2 second about it.
The new network center is pathetic too.
Other reasons include the "new" (flawed) network stack, audio performance problems (maybe solved with SP1), the unnecessarily bloated UI, and no REAL improvements in the OS itself (directx 10? Bah, no need for it)...
The lack of customization choices: Why in hell you cannot drag the quickbar to the left or right of the screen, out of the start menu? So hard to keep a useful yet simple function working back from Windows 95SR2?
Did I mention performance? Even with new computers I do not like the OS launching software in background, deciding for the user when is time to reindex, defragment, optimize or sending reports to MS (killing batery life with useless operations).
I like the new start menu to launch programs without clicking and scrolling, but that is not enough.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 9:39 AM

and no REAL improvements in the OS itself

Sorry, didn't realize you were another one of those "Vista is only eyecandy" folk...

Score: 0

By Floodland

edited Apr 28, 2008 - 3:35 PM

No, I already mentioned the new network stack (flawed) and directx 10 (useless). Group policies advances could slightly benefit IT departments, but not home users.
Frankly, I do not see valid advances on Vista. And I do not give a dime a dime about minimal improvements: Eyecandy, individual volume for applications... Would you mention 5 *valid* reasons to upgrade? (without using MS marketing-for-nothing).
And we already discussed Vista in the past, I did not realize you were on of those short term memory folk, ;-)

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 4:26 PM

Server kernel?

Hardened Kernel? (not as impenetrable as it could have been due to whining by the AV corps)

Memory heaps?

User-mode driver model (Video drivers won't cause Blue-screen)

UI lifting done by the GPU instead of the CPU (unless you ditch Aero).

UAC (You can b**** about it all you want, it stops being annoying after your initial installs are done. It's only popped on me once per day when I run my Utilities Suite since SP1)

The list actually does go, on, the user-mode drivers effect more than just video, and it's affects on performance are minimal compared to the trade-off in stability. The kernel overhaul was massive. Even moreso now that SP1 has moved it to WS2k8 Server. Networking, multimedia, memory subsystem, all completely redone (hence the issues prior to SP1)...

If you haven't used it since before SP1, try again. It's fast, it's stable, and it is *far* better than XP on decent hardware.

...that said, I still wouldn't suggest Vista on any system that isn't a dual-core 64-bit arch with 4GB of RAM. But then again, I wouldn't suggest owning a computer with less than that anyway. ;)

Score: 0

By preinterpost

edited Apr 28, 2008 - 6:40 PM

"User-mode driver model (Video drivers won't cause Blue-screen)"

I was under the impression based on data collected (send error report feature) that the primary cause for Vista crashes reported by MSFT were Nvidia drivers.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 7:38 PM

Honestly, that confuses me a bit, as well.

I haven't experienced it, but I can't say that it did or didn't happen just because it didn't happen to *me*, so...

It could very well be how some other product or component interacted with the driver (and that component threw the BSOD), or it could simply be that they screwed something up. Would love to hear how many of those, if any are occurring post-SP1.

Score: 0

By Floodland

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 6:06 PM

I really do not see any problem with the XP kernel and in contrast, I suffered BSODs on vista due to poorly developed drivers (MS certified and included in Vista).
Though, I promise I will make some tests now SP1 was RTM...

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 7:41 PM

Was it the drivers or another app expecting to be able to access them the same way they did in XP?

Still equals a BSOD, but if it's the app throwing it and not the driver, then the point stands.

I would love to hear the results of your testing post-SP1 if your system was throwing those BSODs.

....just post it under any of my posts in future threads. I'm not a huge stickler for keeping on-topic. :p

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 26, 2008 - 9:47 PM

Anyway, I still expect any new hardware and their vendors to support XP these days, were are not talking about Windows 3.1!

I agree....for hardware no bundled with an OS, such as upgrades, OEM parts for a BYO system, etc...

For a complete system bundled with an OS? Not so much... ;)

Anyway, that was a good chance to see differences between HP and Dell... The needed drivers did exist, only HP did not want to support XP...

Acer was the same way until recently. The lappy I bought for my wife came with Vista bundled and they provided zero XP support.

Good thing us techs are good at tracking stuff like that down. ;) (The japanese version of that specific model had the same hardware...and XP support. Go figure)

Score: 0

By zridling

posted Apr 27, 2008 - 12:23 PM

"us techs" ?

oh god, that's rich. toolie's a techie now. he finally learn'd winders!

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 7:57 AM

*laughs*

That was clever, Zaine. Really. I didn't think you had it in you. Did you use both brain cells to come up with that one?

Score: 0

By eunichman

posted Apr 26, 2008 - 10:16 AM

so you have to still pay for vista? bullcrap. if I dont want vista I aint buying it. I will tell dell or any premade seller for OS, None of the above, ship without os or charging me for os or i will look elsewhere. as a business owner IU have an IT dept to handle os installs :)

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 26, 2008 - 2:55 PM

...as a business owner, one would hope you have a site license or volume licensing.

...right?

You wouldn't actually leave your business infrastructure open to the whims of the market, would you?

Score: 0

By DonGato

posted Apr 26, 2008 - 6:50 AM

Nice move by DELL. Wonder how Microsoft feels about this (the major computer maker not stopping bundling XP as they wished). :P

Score: 0

By dpcdpc11

posted Apr 26, 2008 - 4:47 AM

again the same topic... vista vs xp vs apple os.. aren't u ppl tired of this crap?? no mater what u write here ppl who love xp will stay with it... ppl who love vista will stay with vista... ppl who love apple... u know .. same thing. And pls don't say that M$ is controlling their customers.. try to customize a mac to your liking.. try to replace it's shell or something... after getting the hang of vista i can do tones of things with it... i used to be a antivista dude but now i own a quadcore and i dual boot xp and vista... and after testing both os's to the bone i've noticed that vista handles applications better when it comes to using the cpu's cores... one example is when i watch a HD movie, in xp one core is utilized at 70% and if i watch it in vista all the cores are put to work at about 20% and if i plan to do something in the meanwhile then one core gives priority to the movie player.
and i also agree with the idea for dell to let customers choose if the want to buy a pc with or without an os preinstalled.

Score: 0

By improvelence

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 10:15 AM

Anyone else tired of the "ppl" acronym?

Score: 0

By joeshmoe7

edited Apr 26, 2008 - 5:04 AM

Vista runs great on my sempron 2600+ (edit: actually 2800+), 1gbram, 5400 RPM IDE HDD - integrated onboard video - ghetto box. With lots of 1st time tweaking of course, but it sails nicely. SP1 is a big improvement for me.

My only beef with Vista is, i hate the interfaces, so its a matter of opinion for me. My main box will stay XP for the forseeable future.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 26, 2008 - 3:08 PM

My only beef with Vista is, i hate the interfaces,

It does take some serious getting used to.

...out of curiosity, how long did you use "Windows Classic" theme in XP after your original upgrade from the 9x/Me line?

It's still there. Can't imagine why I ever liked it. (patched my theme files on my work systems and am using a custom theme there.)

Still getting used to the Vista Aero theme. I like some parts, dislike others, just taking some getting used to. Not helping that I still use XP at work...

I hear there's a vista theme-hack going around as well, though not quite as usable as it was in XP yet.

Score: 0

By joeshmoe7

posted Apr 27, 2008 - 8:56 AM

For me getting used to XP's themes was a little easier i think. Well i'll just have to keep playing with Vista, i think for my main system i'll just hold off until the next flavor of windows and hopefully true 64-bit will be ready for prime time, and by then i can get a nice quad-X-quad core with 64gb ram or some such monster.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 27, 2008 - 11:46 AM

Heh..

8GB should be more than enough for anyone. :p

/ducks

Score: 0

By Paul Skinner

posted Apr 27, 2008 - 4:42 AM

I still do.

Uses less resources and feels less childish (never did get on with the colour scheme and the rounded buttons everywhere) IMO.

After all, the screen's rectangle, not oval.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 27, 2008 - 11:45 AM

There are themes for the hack uxtheme in XP that are actually quite professional looking and decidedly "non-daycare" looking.

(never did get on with the colour scheme and the rounded buttons everywhere) IMO.

After all, the screen's rectangle, not oval.

Personal preference plays a big part in this to be sure. There's a guy that works here that still swears by the OS/2 interface.

Score: 0

By gregmlr

posted Apr 26, 2008 - 12:04 AM

It's quite a shame that they still have to buy a copy of Vista. Why not just sell them without a pre-installed OS, Dell?

Score: 0

By sjc001

edited Apr 26, 2008 - 5:00 AM

That's how M$ made its fortune in the first place by forcing manufacturers to pay a royalty whether they included a copy of Windows or not on each system to put out through their contract.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 26, 2008 - 2:54 PM

Actually, it's because the license for XP most businesses have is OEM and not transferable to a new PC.

Dell is using a loophole in MSFT's licensing to allow those OEM licenses to transfer to a new PC.

Any business using site licenses, volume licenses, or retail licenses can transfer XP to any new system they buy as long as they want to, no charge.

I know you couldn't care less, you just want to bash MSFT, but I thought I throw a few facts in there for ya. I know how much you hate those...

Score: 0

By sjc001

edited Apr 26, 2008 - 4:25 PM

From Windows 3.1 and onwards, the tool. That is what had first made them.

As for facts. I don't believe that you actually know what real facts are. You only use those that you can manipulate. After all, the best lie is a half truth. Any good priest knows that. Praise be the LORD BILL!!!!!!

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 26, 2008 - 9:42 PM

Wow. Did you even read my post?

The reason Dell can offer an XP install past MSFT's kill-date is due to a licensing loophole in Vista allowing them to downgrade to the OEM XP they had on a previous, no longer used, computer.

This has *nothing* to do with royalties, you idiot.

Score: 0

By ToeKneeC

edited Apr 27, 2008 - 4:10 PM

Correct - We do that currently, we get all new PC's with Vista Business. We down image to XP Pro for free (volume license allowed). We use a special tool that gives us all the drivers durning the image. One image all Workstation (Desktop or Laptop).

Score: 0

By slinkys_delsol

edited Apr 26, 2008 - 2:34 AM

I have been saying this for YEARS!!!

I have worked in IT for 12 Years and if Dell and the other PC companies are listening, when we get those Business PC's:

WE FORMAT THE DRIVES AND PUT OUR OWN BUILDS ON!!!

Even for the Personal PC Consumer, there should be a choice. $699 for PC with OS, $599 for PC Without OS.(You get the point)

Score: 0

By Niro

posted Apr 27, 2008 - 1:53 AM

"I have worked in IT for 12 Years and if Dell and the other PC companies are listening, when we get those Business PC's:

WE FORMAT THE DRIVES AND PUT OUR OWN BUILDS ON!!!"

Really? That gotta be annoying. Dell has our build CD, when we get our PC's from them our build is already on there...maybe when you get to 15 years in IT you'll learn that Dell and other PC companies do that...:)

Score: 0

By improvelence

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 10:16 AM

Yea they also probably stick google desktop into your "build" too. Dell is a scumbag company and always has been.

Score: 0

By Niro

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 11:20 AM

Yes...we are just THAT blind that we wouldn't be able to see changes on our build...-rolls eyes-

Score: 0

By cousinkix1953

edited Apr 27, 2008 - 12:36 AM

Even for the Personal PC Consumer, there should be a choice. $699 for PC with OS, $599 for PC Without OS.(You get the point)...

Yep! I have never purchased a pre-packed computer and never will. We prefer to build our own machines and load them with the OS of our chosing. It isn't even that hard to do and I am no expert.

I've used Windows 98, 98SE, Me, 2000 ans XP over these years. Tried the Vista RC-2 for several months on one machine. Too much BS for me too. I'm not gonna junk some of my good third party software that won't even work on the new Microsoft OS either.

Score: 0

By NunjaBusiness

posted Apr 26, 2008 - 9:00 AM

Don't know what all you "people" are whining about. Anyone who actually KNOWS what the hell they are talking about can buy any computer without the OS. I do it regularly. And I get them from ... that's right, Dell. Buncha dipsticks!

Score: 0

By internetworld7

edited Apr 25, 2008 - 9:16 PM

If Dell really cares about the business interest of it's customers and wants to see them far more productive, they should STOP selling PC's altogether, partner with Apple and become the biggest suppliers of Macs to corporations and businesses. Now that's smart business! Such a mighty act would change America and the world for the better. Overnight, the whole world would be 20 years ahead of schedule by Dell doing this. Hackers and virus writers would be put out of business! :)

APPLE IS THE SALVATION OF BUSINESSES

Score: 0

By improvelence

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 10:18 AM

You had better hope Apple doesn't make it all the way to the top or windows users will be saying the same thing about you. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with apples technology, it has to do with their fledgling market share.

Do you actually believe you cant write a virus for a mac, or for that matter hack one? hahahah

dumba**.

Score: 0

By xanax

posted Apr 26, 2008 - 2:38 AM

You're kidding, right? I hope so.

Put Macs on top and all the hackers and virus writers will focus on them.

Overnight, the whole world would go back 20 years and computers would cost 3000$.

You think Microsoft is evil? Give Apple more power and you'll see what evil looks like.

Score: 0

By aszure

posted Apr 28, 2008 - 9:21 AM

I agree with you to a certain point....

Yes, if Mac is on top, there will be more focus to exploiting it, however, due to the way that the mac os is designed (tis unix after all), there is less of a threat than there is in XP/Vista/2k. Unix by its design is much more secure than windows. Been working in both environments for about 10 years, and I cant remember ever having to clean a virus or malware from a linux box or a mac system...ever. Windows...at least a few times a week. Maybe unix/mac users are a bit more savvy not to click on the banner offering them free sex at 3am...but I would put my money on the OS. If MS used a unix kernel on win 7, then they might have a winner. It worked for mac. Unless you were a mac fanboy from years past, the macos got solid once it was based on bsd. I truly hated the macos until it hit osx.

Score: 0

By internetworld7

edited Apr 27, 2008 - 1:08 AM

You're kidding right? I hope so.

You couldn't be more wrong. Apple, like Google is a company that can do no evil.

With Apple on top, an era of computer utopia would engulf the world. This would have a domino effect to the point that crime and poverty world wide would be no more.

The nations of the world with America leading the way should all switch to Macs to experience a blissful and perfect world.

Score: 0

By SlapShot

posted Apr 27, 2008 - 10:42 AM

the power of tequila everybody

Score: 0

By adento

posted Apr 27, 2008 - 2:54 AM

"You couldn't be more wrong. Apple, like Google is a company that can do no evil."

LOL! You're kidding, right? I sure hope so. Apple is the epitome of evil, but luckily they don't have enough power to exercise their TRUE evilness. You think Microsoft's hold on the OS market is a "monopoly" ? What would happen if Apple had such power, but not only had they a monopoly on the OS but the HARDWARE too?

You Apple fanboys can pretend your s*** don't stink all you want, but there's absolutely nothing special about Apple's OS (it's just Linux under the hood) or their hardware. The only reason people are stupid enough to pay the huge premiums for Apple's hardware is because of their clever marketing and ads that run 24/7 on every TV channel. Yes, Steve Jobs and his cronies did a fine job with those "cool kid" Apple guy vs. "middle aged pinko" PC guy ads, but they're basically flat out lying to you. Apple's hardware is exactly the same as the PC hardware, you're just paying extra for the name and running a special flavor of Linux. That is all.

Score: 0

By ToeKneeC

posted Apr 27, 2008 - 2:40 PM

No to mention Apple doesn't have all the tools in place to support and deploy to a buiness with 1000's of PCs.

Score: 0

By SlapShot

posted Apr 25, 2008 - 9:22 PM

the power of vodka everybody

Score: 0

By