Another liar feigning ignorance....

Oh, I love it!
Ballmer should go to jail. I know it is not going to happen, but it is a good "start me up"...

So basically Vista sucks, they should of took more time to develop it more. Now Windows 7, will be coming soon, they hopefully won't have to worry or even fail again, as Windows 7 is suppose to be the successor of Vista. Apprently so *Rolls eyes*

Someone I know is involved in a class action suit about this up here - and they're going to win.

And each 'winner' will receive $10, of which it will require documentation costing $12 for duplication and shipping and coupon for the fisrst shipping copy of the beta for Win7.

An exaggeration? Have you received any of the PayPal resolution and settlement packages? Why even bother filling out the paperwork required.

Its a Pyrrhic victory at best.

I said it before and I wi,l say it again... It's time MS went back to the drawing board, wipe the slate clean and start from scratch. So much has been put against windows in every version and so much of it is true...

MS, start from scratch, take your time, build a while new operating system from the ground up. Make it modular. Offer a speedy core with basic functional abilities and a few applications (word processor, spreadsheet etc). A while new file system, a whole new core, etc. use NOTHING from any current or past version of windows. Modules can include a workplace module with things like an office suite, a graphics design suite, and other thinsg useful in a general workplace. make a sales module with an office suite, a PoS suite, and other things useful to a sales business. Make an expanded networking module with the ability to make networking more pc's together easier and more efficient; make a gaming module with tools and games geared toward gamers. etc.

Now this will take time to do.... a whole new os from scratch.. take your time.. do it right, we can wait. we are patient.. the fact that we are still your customers with all the probs with your current os choices proves that we are.. patiently waiting for a GOOD os everyone can use and enjoy.

I would say release Win7 first. Make sure the problems with Vista's launch don't plague Win7, and then do the whole "from-scratch" bit.

As I understand it, they are already working on it (min-win). From the looks of their "new" development philosophy (the only code going into Win7's "winmain" branch is tested and working), they're on the right track.

Still problems with USB though. One hopes they get that right this time around and gives us something we can actually use until they get min-win or whatever out the door.

Not possible. So many apps and drivers are built to take advantage of Windows anomalies and bugs that to start over would be unthinkable - most of this crap is undocumented.

Stuff - Would - Break.

Worse than Vista caused.

That almost makes sense. Almost.

And it might, were it 1995.

But the real problem MS faces, is not how to build a newdesktop centric monstrosity to compete with XP or Vista.

The problem is that the model is changing. And desktop users and gamers don't really matter.

The model is moving to a centrally managed virtualized 'thin' client model. No one is looking to deploy a new fat standalone client complete with the myriad admin hassles, security exposures, etc. etc. etc issues. Infact, it is surprising that many here run multiple dsktops, and one might ask why they are not using a robust server with thin client terminals running off virtualized images - minimizing admin tasks and making security and backups and disaster recovery a relative breeze - not to mentionbeing more cost efficient.

And as far as a distributed networked model, with all due respect, MS's model is a mess.
Once could easily argue that the Windows Registry and Active Directory are two of the largest sources of problems.

There are better existing models. But then, MS is also interested in the promotion of an 'open', but controlled environment that they can milk as a revenue stream - so don't count on it being as open as what is already in existence.

This issue has been addressed at length in many of the trade journals - but then, the desktop users generally don't see these. But I would suggest querying these resources.

But suffice it to say, the age of large bloated standalone desktop OSes has seen its zenith. And partly due to their bloat and associated admin problems, they themselves have provided the impetus of their own demise.

Should MS invest the millions to reinvent a model whose time is passing? Why? When their accountants would argue that as they control the majority of the market they can continue to milk the standalone market while developing a new model - as the majority of the users will simply complain but not switch. And while developing a new OS, which would effectively orphan the legacy environment would be a financial boondoggle - even if it turned out to be the most elegant OS ever imagined.

Yup, what Ford needs to do, folks, is to simply go back and totally overhaul the Edsel, and take its cutting edge improvements and repackage it in a more elegant package. That will save Ford. Sorry folks, but it will nor more save Ford, then would reinventing the standalone desktop benefit MS, at the cost of MILLIONS (perhapos Billions) over a time frame of say 10 years! Like it will matter then.

You design (and invest) to where the market will be, not to where it was. Looking backwards to move forward is not the answer.

I think, if they released it not as a new version of "windows", but as a new OS, they could make it work.

It would take a huge effort working with OEMs to get it out there though.

I believe that's underway. M$ recently released concept code that they tout as potentially the next generation of OS for just that purpose. I think I saw the article here, actually.

It sure sounds good, and it would be great if they could pull it off.

Sounds like a pipe-dream, doesn't it? A Microsoft OS that can be minimal, compatible, usable, and functional all rolled into one?

hmm?

And the arguments and disagreements continue.
This kind of thing has been going on for years. I have a Dell E510, with a ATI pro 2600 512 megs of ram on the video card, 3 gig of ram in the machine, dual processor. (and have had no trouble withit, but did replace the power supply) and it runs XP. According to the Microsoft software which informs you about a upgrade, all I would have to do is get some updated drivers and perhaps replace a piece of software or two. I certainly am no expert in this, but it seems to be little trouble. BUT, Dell did tell me it was Vista ready when I purchased it in 2006, (however when I did write Dell and ask if they had updated drivers etc, they did not answer me at all, which is not unique for Dell, very sloppy tech support). Now just what does that mean in all reality, Vista Ready, which implies to the beginner that it can be upgraded with no problems at all, Ya Right?

Microsoft and certain computer companies have a interesting way of getting themselves into trouble by implying things that may or may not be true. Then when they are asked for help by their customers, that help is NOT forthcoming. A really sad situation but very typical for American Companies. I live in USA and can tell you, most companies will boast their products into saint hood before they know if they are a saint or not, just to sell a product....

Just my opinions of course...

"Implying things"? What does that have to do with this case?

The problem here is that compatibility was explicitly stated!

And it was patently false.

You know, Microsoft might have considered a software patch / update to allow these video cards to use Aero. It's absurd that Aero requires the video cards that it does considering that Stardock's Aero Skin does not. There were so many things that Microsoft could have done. At the end of the day, much about Vista's rush to the market is an enigma to me. At the core, it's a great OS given the right hardware.

"Vista's rush to market"

Now THERE is an oxymoron!

Yup, they needed 10 years...oh, but that is how long Windows 7 will take...IF it ships on time! hmmm.

LOL!

Now THERE is a foxymoron!

Aero requires a graphics card with shader model 2 (VS and PS 2.0). That's the minimum requirement to run Aero

5 years, but who's counting.

Microsoft's official response, by an Email dated 26th January, 2008, to WinVistaClub states that Windows 7 is still in the planning stage and will take approximately 3 years to develop. http://www.winvistaclub.com/i7.html

If XP was released in 2001 and we assume tha developement of Vista essentially began with the release of XP...Then, if we make the leap and say that Windows 7 is what Vista should have been - which all of the Win7 issues have implied, then from 2001 to 2011 (2008 plus 3 years) is 10 years to develop a mature replacement for XP.

Sorry for the new math. But who can count? ;-)

In any case, the reference to a "rush" is ludicrous - except to say that much time was wasted and the kids waited until the last minute to get it out the door like a kid who procrastinates and does his term paper the night before its due..

""Vista's rush to market"

Now THERE is an oxymoron!

Yup, they needed 10 years...oh, "

My bad. Thought you meant Vista took 10 years to develop.

We'll see with Windows 7.
I can't imagine it'll be out 2011. 2010 at worst, I'd say.

Pre-beta of Win7 was out the door at PDC. it is obviously out of the "planning stages".

So far, so good. Hopefully, Microsoft will stick to their current dev philosophy and give us something that's actually usable out of the gate.

Vista is working fine now for the most part, but with this, and the issues it had from the start, it's no wonder people are avoiding it.

I'd guess 2010, if I had to. It usually takes ~14 months for them to go from Beta to RTM (barring the Vista debacle).

MS should have never offered Vista as an upgrade to XP. All of the store bought desktops and notebooks that are pre-configured and sold with Vista OEM are fine.

Everyone I know who upgraded to Vista with PC's designed for XP have nothing but problems.

That's not true. I have seen so many Vista users running on their old machines. Just seen one or two complaining that Vista slows down their machine. I have Vista home premium installed on an old machine P4 1.8 Ghz 1 GB memory and it runs w/o any problem. It has not even crashed once. Though it didn't support my old LAN card which had unsigned drivers for XP...but that's the manufacturer's fault. I got a new one and works perfectly. CrApple sucks!!

it must be opposite day LOL.

I have one computer that i upgrade from XP to Vista with zero problems at all.(just that stupid file copy taking forever but that has been fixed for a long time)

Wasn't even a powerfull pc just an AMD 3500(single core) and 1gig ram.

My new quad core system runs Vista like a dream:)

So here the troll states that BOTH Intel and MS are misrepresenting the hardware requirements for Vista!!

Swooft, nitwit!

The BS just gets deeper and deeper! LOL!

I have yet to see anyone remotely tech savvy *not* complain about Vista, especially in regards to its speed. Just yesterday I helped a friend with a VPN issue involving accessing a shared folder on an SBS2003 system. It's something you can set up in about a minute in XP, but in Vista, it involved a pile of Googling (which showed that Vista had major VPN glitches), an obscure update from Microsoft, and some finger crossing. What the hell?!

And this morning I tested out a very old brickish Pentium II powered Thinkpad with just 16 Mb of memory and running Win 95. (Another friend wanted me to make sure there was nothing important on it before tossing.) That thing started up, shut down, and was snappier in feel than any recent PC I've been on. So much for progress....

Last time I heard someone know so little I was watching Hogan's Heroes

The system is getting even more ingenious of getting money out of Microsoft. Not to defend MS, but come on.. Next law suit will be "Microsoft didn't pay us money. As we proceed with the case, judge, we'll find something".

This is what happens when you try and pass on a shiny turd to the world. Steve Ballmer and the rest of the dorks at M$ should just get a Mac and retire Windoze.

Yes guys get a Crapple Mac and be a f**got like me and the rest of the iCrap users because Macs are only for ignorant gays. That's why billions of users stick with Windows because they are cool and very few stick with Crapple Mac. Guess what Christina Aguilera is helping us win the battle to legalize gay marriage again :) yeah, I will marry Stevie Blow Jobs.

Your's truly
iCrappleTard7

LOLLLLL o man. thanks.

Or Macs are for people who enjoy Garage Band, edit video for a living with Final Cut Pro, or have taken classes in Aperture and are convinced that Adobe Camera RAW doesn't cut it for them (which is a debate between our photographer and me). Otherwise, Macs are for people who find motivation from cosmetics.

"dork" lol...aren't you the one who said Apple was the only recession proof company in the world? I Don't think Ballmer would take *your* advice

~_~

Sounds like Ballmer shouldn't have to testify. He didn't make these computers, it's the manufacturers that are at fault. Microsoft at worst are accomplices to fraud by allowing their stickers to ship with these machines. Intel should have just as much responsibility too.

'rolls eyes'

OMG Microsoft put stickers on computers and now they are in trouble. :P

Only a rodent would surmise that that is the extent of MS culpability in this fraud fiasco. Even if it is meant in jest...as stickers can be a powerful motivating force. How else do you think Obama got elected? ;-)

LOL @ the Obama bit.

It's a pathetic fraud if it's a fraud.

Anything to get rid of Ballmer though.

I hope it makes it to youtube. It'll be the most popular video on the site in no time. His outbursts, comical wording, and chronic foot-in-mouth syndrome are things of Legend.

No matter what anyone thinks of Microsoft, Vista, or any of that BS, this alone should keep the masses in giggles if not outright laughter for the next few years.

You almost have to feel sorry for the guy. He's got brains, but when it comes to speaking it apparently goes offline.

I can see the video now: "DEPOSITIONERS DEPOSITIONERS DEPOSITIONERS DEPOSITIONERS!"

That was funny! :)

Damn wierd your courts.

Under English law, if you are required to appear in court it is for as long as it takes to answer the questions put to you.

Oh yeah, US law is for the poor only isn't it? ;-)

Two words:

Bernie Ecclestone

"Beyond ruling that Ballmer's deposition will last no more than three hours, the court also stipulated that the deposition can take place any time over the next 30 days "at a time and place of Mr. Ballmer's convenience.""

Convenient time would be sayyyyy, 3 am?

How about 3am for 6 minute slots every day for 30 days?

Ballmer's Yacht with a harem of sexy law clerks at the beck and call of the court.

yes, yes...on his yacht in the middle of the pacific too!

Can you imagine being on a jury and having to sit through 3 hours of Ballmer?

lol i feel bad for all of them :P