Ten Reasons Not to Buy Windows Vista

In response to the Slashdotted article here, I give you: Ten Reasons Not to Buy Windows Vista.

1. Security
Long-overdue User Account Protection, blah, blah, blah. Every single UNIX varient on the planet has had this for over twenty years. Starting to catch up, ay Microsoft? What are the odds that this will happen without more new holes?

2. Internet Explorer 7
Firefox is avalable now. With better tab handling. And better rendering.

“But IE7 has “protected mode”–a limited-rights mode that prevents third-party code from reaching your system.”
So? It’s all just a fancy name for turning off ActiveX. And you can turn ActiveX back on…

3. Righteous eye candy
Allow me to call OS X, e17, X.org, etc. Plus, you can make the Unix interface look like anything. Even something that lets you get work done.

5. Better updates
Y’ know something? Windows is the only operating system that updates using a web browser. It’s stupid, it’s always been stupid. Need I mention that OS X and Linux don’t do it?

6. More media
Wow! Microsoft can copy Apple by making clones of the iLife stuff. Not even good clones.
Use this handy chart to figure it out:

Windows Media Player – iTunes
The Windows Photo Gallery – iPhoto
Movie Maker – iDVD

Did I mention that everything will be DRMed?

“There are even some nice new games tucked into the bundle.”I’ve seen some of those new games. Solitaire, even when rendered in 3d, is still boring.

7. Parental controls
Third party software has been able to do this for eons. The sad thing is that, knowing Microsoft, the third party software will still be the way to go.

8. Better backups
Already have good backup software on Windows, already have good backup stuff on UNIX. Heck, you can back up all your stuff using cron, if it came down to it.

9. Peer-to-peer collaboration
This is called a “wiki”. Yeah, we all know how great it is. Having in embeded into the OS, though, you just *know* it’ll be a great way to spread viruses.

10. Quick setup
In the words of someone on Slashdot; “Why am I running setup more than once anyways?”

And, finally, here is reason 11 – Digital Rights Management [slashdot.org]
Do you care if your computer is spying on what you do and reporting it? Do you care that Windows Vista supports this crap? It’s amazing that people are even considering using this stuff.

So, what should you do instead of getting Vista? Install Ubuntu. If you don’t want to use Linux, get something from Apple.
But seriously, for your own good, don’t use Vista!


21 Responses to “Ten Reasons Not to Buy Windows Vista”

  1. 1 B. Leggett February 20, 2006 at 9:03 am

    Right on, James. Preach it.

  2. 2 Marco February 27, 2006 at 5:39 pm

    Absolutely right .
    They’re starting to catch up … just by copying . Can’t figure a good one on your own ?

  3. 3 Dave Donaldson June 7, 2006 at 9:13 pm

    Hey James,

    This is wonderful after all. Vista will be just the thing to convince end users that Windows really is junk.

    Now if Adobe, Intuit, Autodesk, Symantec, Network Assocates and Macromedia get with it, as have Apple, IBM, Oracle, SAP, Novell and so many other primary application players, Vista will be just what it’s name implies…a “view”, and nothing more.

    I got a creaking in my old bones Linux/BSD is going to eat Windows’ lunch in the next 2-3 years. Simply because once again, Microsoft doesn’t know when to quit.

    Take any PC, VMWare (ESX or Infrastructure 3), and a bunch of OSes and you’ve got a real solution. Litterally runs anything and everything. Or just run VMWare on Linux and get the same solid cross-platform performance with less demanding hardware requirements.

    My point is…virtualization will replace the need for any God-awful Windows product as your base OS. And rock-solid Linux/BSD performance will simply overtake Windows as a desireable platform when ISVs finally see the light, port to ?nix and as users then make the transition with nearly no pain, atop a platform that can run any OS at the same time.

    Makes sense to me!

  4. 4 James October 26, 2006 at 8:24 am

    Vista lags SO much. It takes ages for it to load programs and essentials, like the start menu can take up to 2 seconds to appear. Its crash reporting thing is annoying too – if a program crashes it launches diagnostic software: ‘Windows is analysing the problem’ ‘Windows is finding a solution to the problem’ blah blah i just want to end the program!
    so yeah

    [The author of this blog would like to note that this comment was left by a reader]

  5. 5 Ross A. November 24, 2006 at 11:14 pm


    1) Security

    a. Windows is the most popular operating system on the planet, found on nearly all PCs in existence.

    b. Most people on this planet are not interested in the field of IT nor do they know anything about it. They are only interested in sending and reading e-mail and surfing the web. Computer usage surveys reinforce this truth.

    c. Microsoft is a company whose goal is, ultimately, to make money. As much of it as possible.

    d. Big businesses like Microsoft, such as the Record Industry of America, make money by focusing their products on maintaining broad appeal, while also tending to niche markets where profitable.

    Based on these facts, one can deduce that

    e. Microsoft Windows’ PRIMARY audience is the average Joe, and SECONDARY audience is IT professionals and technology enthusiasts (like you and me).

    If one accepts (e.) as truth..one can conclude that

    f. Windows is not primarily designed for you and me. It is made for the average Joe who knows very little about computers.


    g. The average Joe user seldom experiences hacker attacks that are abused by Security vulnerabilities in the operating system.

    h. The average Windows user seldom suffers from problems that Microsoft patches.

    i. Microsoft Security features and patches are made to APPEASE the secondary Windows consumer.

    Other operating systems like Linux and OS X are geared towards ITs and technology enthusiasts.

    So ultimately-

    Do you find Linux / OS X to be superior in terms of Security?


    But don’t crawl up Microsoft’s rear simply because they don’t do what you want.

    Stop standing in the rain and wonder why you’re getting wet.

    If you do not agree with my conclusion, e, that changes a few things.
    f. Windows is primarily designed for IT and technology enthusiasts, and secondarily for home users.
    g. Other operating systems provide superior Security measures than Windows.
    h. Other operating systems are designed more towards IT and technology enthusiasts.
    i. Windows fails in comparison to its competitors.

    But the clear logical conclusion is as I’ve laid it out.

    That being said, I don’t like Windows. However, I am a gamer. Other operating systems trade superior hardware utilization and security for program compatibility, and thats a big no-no for me.

    I don’t cry at Linux for not having good game support because its not designed for gamers.

    You should learn a similar lesson.

    The rest of your complaints can be analyzed in a similar fashion.


  6. 6 James November 25, 2006 at 8:11 pm

    In reply to Ross:

    Part of me knew your entire comment was nothing more then flamebait, but the other part of me wanted to watch you fall, screaming, into a giant vat of your own twisted logic. I choose the happy medium.

    a. I assume you mean desktop computers, here. Because Unix and Linux pwns it, by far, in the server area.

    b-e. I agree with.

    f. Pretty much.

    g. Not hacker attacks, but viruses. You’d be wrong here. You would be *amazed* how many viruses and spyware are on the average Windows box.

    h. SP2 caused a ton of problems on many systems. I had to repair a few computers because of this. The IE7 upgrade hosed both my Windows XP install and an out-of-the-box system another guy on my drom floor had.
    If the few people I know have had problems with major updates, I can only assume that they were not isolated incidents.
    In addition, one of Vista’s major changes is the better update system, implying that people HAVE HAD problems with the old XP update system. So, wrong again.

    i. No, they are made to prevent outbreaks of stuff like Blaster that affect everyone. Actually, the “secondary Windows consumer” probably had the *least* trouble with them on their home boxes, because they knew how to protect themselves.

    Mac OS X, more then any other OS, is geared toward normal users. It just happens to be based on a really secure system that your so-called “secondary consumers” like. My other example, Ubuntu, is also very easy to use. You don’t know what you’re talking about.

    Do I find Linux / OS X to be superior in terms of Security? Yes.

    “But don’t crawl up Microsoft’s rear simply because they don’t do what you want.”
    Microsoft, more then any other company on the planet, has the RESPONSABILITY and the RESOURCES to create a secure, really good OS. EVERY virus that leaks through because of a security hole in their software costs MILLIONS of dollars. Linux and Unix don’t have nearly the same volume of problems, and they are programmed by people without NEARLY the resources as MS.

    “Stop standing in the rain and wonder why you’re getting wet.”
    This doesn’t even make sense. I use Linux, so I’m wearing a waterproof jacket. Really, I’m telling people not to buy Microsoft’s leaky umbrellas.

    So, no. You are absolutely incorrect. Half your revised points don’t even logically make sense if they are the revision of the old ones. Don’t try to make my opinion fit within your flawed logic.

    “But the clear logical conclusion is as I’ve laid it out.”
    Wait, wait, wait. Your clear logical conclusion seemed to be that I needed to stop complaining about Vista. You are complaining that I’m complaining that Microsoft dropped the ball with Vista. Riiiiiight. I don’t mean to sound rude, but please go get a life.

    “Other operating systems trade superior hardware utilization and security for program compatibility, and thats a big no-no for me.”
    They sacrifice program compatibility? What the heck? Are you complaining that you can run a bunch of Windows programs on a system they weren’t designed to run on?
    You are aware that the three things you listed are not mutually exclusive, right? Microsoft could have gotten security right long, long ago. On the flipside, Ubuntu and OS X can’t run Windows apps as well as Windows because the developers don’t have access to the Windows source.

    “I don’t cry at Linux for not having good game support because its not designed for gamers.”
    And this means I can’t blame Microsoft for being very late to the game on many, many things?
    Wait, wait. Didn’t you just complain that Ubuntu and OS X were unable to run all Windows programs? Sounded like crying to me.

    “You should learn a similar lesson.”
    Oh, yes. I shall never comment on any technological issue I don’t agree with again. Truly, a lesson for us all.

    Bottom line, Microsoft dropped the ball. There is little reason to use Vista instead of OS X. You want to disagree with me, disagree with my points. Speaking of which, you still haven’t made a compelling case that Vista has security better then or on par with UNIX.


  7. 7 Joe Friday December 2, 2006 at 2:23 pm

    The title says “10 reasons not to buy Vista”, but the OP doesn’t actually give any reasons, just explains why he doesn’t like Vista. Be honest already, title it “10 reasons why I don’t like Vista”.

    Your statements seem to contradict themselves. I’ll explain in the order you have posted…

    1. Long overdue account protection – again, your title says “10 reasons not to buy…”. I guess account protection is now a bad thing. You shouldn’t buy something that protects your personal information.

    2. IE7 is now more like Firefox. And this a bad thing? Sure, MS is copying Mozilla. Ford copies Chrysler, Chrysler copies GM. Big
    businesses usually watch the competition. When they see them doing something that works, they tend to incorporate that into their own designs. In the case of IE7, MS has seen that tabs and security is the popular thing, so they’ve integrated it into their own design. Other software designers have done the same, copying Windows features in their own software.

    Firefox has had some serious security issues lately too…

    3. Eye candy. See #2. Eye candy sells, thats one of the biggest reasons people buy Apples. They like the pretty colors. MS saw this and made things prettier. Definitely not a bad thing. I will say that Windows could use some more built-in themes, though.

    4. OK for some reason, you didn’t include a #4. I’m gonna do you a big favor and not comment on this. Your post already looks like it was written by a severely under-educated individual.

    5. Updates.. Vista doesn’t use a browser for Windows Update anymore. So this point shouldn’t even be included in your ranting. Do a little research next time.

    6. Media. The new WMP interface has been around since Windows ME. This was a little before iTunes. Unless MS went forward in time, copied the idea and then went back in time and developed it. Of course, you may be small-minded enough to believe in something to that effect, so I’ll just go on.

    Movie Maker was also introduced with Windows ME.. ’nuff said.

    For Photo Gallery, see #2.

    7. Parental controls. IE has always had some form of parental controls integrated. Not as complex as buying 3rd party software, but if they did include something full-featured, you’d just complain that they were forcing you to use that, and not allowing 3rd party apps.

    8. Backups. You say “Already have good backup software on Windows”. I thought this was a post on why not to buy Vista. Now you’ve stated a reason to buy it. oh, thats right.. you’re the same person that doesn’t know theres a 4 between 3 and 5.

    9. Peer-to-peer. Its another one of those things where, if they include it, you complain, but if they don’t include it, you complain because its not there. Some people just like to b!tch and gripe I guess. Do you work for the RIAA?

    10. Setup. Why are you running setup twice? Vista installed in less than 15 minutes on my machine. There was no actual setup process like the previous version of Windows.

    11. Oh look, #11 of the 10 reasons why you shouldn’t buy Vista..
    See #’s 4 and 8. Look for the part about education…

    DRM isn’t just for Windows. Why can’t I do anything with my iTunes library besides listen to it on my Mac or my iPod? Can’t burn it, trade it, switch it to another account, sell it. Oh, thats right – DRM.

    OSX and Ubuntu seem to be having their fair share of problems. Apple has released a lot of security patches lately.

    In short, buy what you prefer. If you need to use mainstream software; need to be able to buy software off-the-shelf; need an operating system that is widely supported, buy Vista. If you need something more stable and don’t mind have to do some technical stuff (console, command line, su, etc), go for linux. If you want and OS that looks pretty; don’t mind having to dig around for software; and have trouble counting to 10 without leaving out or adding numbers, OSX is probably for you.

  8. 8 James December 5, 2006 at 3:19 pm

    1. You’re right, Joe. It really should have been titled something like “10 Reasons Windows Vista is Nothing Special,” but that didn’t sound as nice. Besides, it’s in response to an article titled “Ten Reasons to Buy Windows Vista”. Oh, never mind. My point is, almost all the big new features in Vista have been around for a while already in OS X and Linux. I don’t see any major compelling reasons to buy it instead of them.
    That being said, I seriously doubt Vista is more secure then Unix.
    2. “Firefox has had some serious security issues lately too…”
    The difference is, Mozilla doesn’t sit on vulnerabilities for months at a time before patching them.
    3. Windows Vista is late to the party with eye-candy. The other two mainstream OS choices have already had it for a while.
    4. Ok, yes, I did leave that out. I’m not perfect. Wooho!
    That would be desktop search. Spotlight and Beagle say Vista is late with this, also.
    5. Sorry, allow me to rephrase that.
    “Y’ know something? Windows XP is the only operating system that updates using a web browser…”
    I was perfectly aware that Vista used a sane update method. My point was, it’s sad they actually have to include that as a major feature.
    6. Wow, WMP 11 existed before iTunes? Again, this is listed as a big feature, and none of the apps I saw are as good as their OS X equivalents.
    7. Correction. Third party software has been doing this much better then the built-in controls for eons. From what I have seen of Vista, this will continue to be the case.
    8. There is already decent backup software on the current versions of Windows. There is already good backup software in Linux and OS X. Backup on Vista won’t do anything we can’t do already. It is not a major feature, and I can’t see anyone upgrading because of it.
    9. I’m saying, this stuff already exists. You don’t need vista for it.
    10. Setup == Install. I used the bullet point from the article I linked to. The terms are used interchangeably. The question was a valid one: “Why am I installing Windows enough times to actually care about this?”
    Yeah, the whole imaging thing is great for server admins. I’m not sure why it’s marketed as a major feature, and not some side note, though. If anything, it should be the icing on the cake.
    11. Is this the best you could come up with? Does it even matter? It was a bonus point.
    Look, Trusted Computing is DRM taken to an extreme. It takes away a lot more freedom from the consumer then DRM on an iTunes song does. There has been talk about passing laws which would make it illegal to operate a computer without it. Linux and OS X don’t support it. If you’d actually bothered to learn what it does, you’d see why Vista supporting it is a bad thing.
    “OSX and Ubuntu seem to be having their fair share of problems. Apple has released a lot of security patches lately.”
    They don’t have nearly the number of problems Windows machines have, though. No, the “security by obscurity” argument doesn’t hold water so don’t even try.
    Huzzah for Ad hominem attacks! Logic at it’s finest. Clearly, the classiest way to wrap up when correcting someone.
    Vista is late to the game on a lot of things. It is my informed opinion that Linux and OS X still do most of these things better.

  9. 9 Ross A. December 6, 2006 at 3:36 am


    As a forward,
    I apologize for the excessive bluntness of my conclusion as you could’ve taken that as sarcasm/ as an attack (and did), that’s my mistake. I tread as carefully as I could so that you knew I wasn’t some random Windows fanboy (as I said before, I don’t really like Windows) but I failed in that area apparently.
    Regardless though, halfway through your rebuttle you put in personal attacks. I never intended to do such things because I did not want to flame you and I will maintain that respect in this retort even if you do not. I will admit that saying that you were crying could be interpreted as a personal attack, and I apologize.
    Additionally, for some reasoning behind why I posted at all.
    I posted the comment solely because I was extremely disappointed that the article debunked Vista not by intrinsic flaws, but BY COMPARISON to alternative Operating Systems. When I saw “Ten Reasons Not to Buy Vista”, I had expected intrinsic flaws (presumably as did the other person who commented below me), buggy features, undue changes, hardware incompatibilities, etc. I had not expected a feature comparison to Unix, Linux, etc. because that’s beating a dead horse, especially since the target audience of your article is tech-savvy people.

    Everybody that saw your article knows that alternative operating systems beat the hell out of Windows routinely, and I was very disappointed that the article’s foundation for critiquing Vista was primarily through comparison operating systems, and not as to whether or not it was an improvement on XP.

    I decided to post because I felt that the comparison meant that not only was the title of your article extremely misleading (The New Windows: Still Fails To Compare would have been infinitely more accurate), but also, that you were not able to see that alternative operating systems are considered alternative because they supply the user with a completely different experience (read: mostly a better one), and that there is no need to shred Vista to prove that point – everybody knows it, especially the people who would see your post at all – the average person who would theoretically want to be convinced that Vista sucks by searching for your article doesn’t exist.


    Because they don’t even know who/what/where Vista is.
    Saying that Linux is superior for a tech-savvy person is enough, and even that is a massive rehash.

    Please keep the above paragraph in mind because its crucial to understanding my comment and seeing my perspective.
    Below is my retort.
    “Part of me knew your entire comment was nothing more then flamebait, but the other part of me wanted to watch you fall, screaming, into a giant vat of your own twisted logic. I choose the happy medium. “

    Okay. 
    “a. I assume you mean desktop computers, here. Because Unix and Linux pwns it, by far, in the server area.
    b-e. I agree with.
    f. Pretty much.”

    Agreeing with me on E and F is really the ONLY THING I wanted to achieve by posting what I posted. I was trying to show you that it is silly to yell at Microsoft for not designing an OS that has features found in alternative operating systems, because you’re asking them to cater specifically to the less important, SMALLER of its two consumers (techies), because it makes absolutely no business sense.
    I’ll repeat E and F again so you don’t have to scroll up.
    “e. Microsoft Windows’ PRIMARY audience is the average Joe, and SECONDARY audience is IT professionals and technology enthusiasts (like you and me).
    If one accepts (e.) as truth..one can conclude that
    f. Windows is not primarily designed for you and me. It is made for the average Joe who knows very little about computers. “

    I didn’t address OS X, Linux, etc. because we all know they’re superior to Windows for a multitude of reasons.
    If you don’t see why I concluded that complaining to Microsoft for not designing a new operating system that has or improves upon all the features that other operating systems offer, I can draw a parallel for you.

    Let’s talk about the 3rd ( I think it was 3rd at the time) generation iPod. Back when Apples’ advertising had hit its peak in around 2002, I was looking to purchase an mp3 player. So, logically, I bought a Creative Zen NX. Why did I do that, when so many average Joes (and many tech enthusiasts) cited iPod as the best all-around mp3 player?
    Well, people buy things because they fulfill a need. Here is what the iPod (loosely) provides-
    mp3 playback, m4a (AAC) playback, user-friendliness, a sleek display and well-designed interface, an only-one-thumb-required control center, a lightweight and thin design, an optional radio adapter to playback in a car without wires, the ability to transfer files computer to computer without installing drivers by Firewire, big storage space –

    I’m not insulted if you didn’t read all that.

    Of that fairly big list, I have had no NEED for any of those features besides the first and the last – mp3 playback, and big storage. Here’s why:
    I do not need user-friendliness because I am accustomed to technology and am comfortable with uncomfortable interfaces unlike the average person who buys an mp3 player ().
    I do not REQUIRE a simple display for the same reason; any display will do as long as it gets the job done.
    I only really use my mp3 player for exercising and listening to a large music collection in my car. Rigging a car with mp3 storage is not necessarily costly, but I’d have to buy an mp3 anyway to walk outside listening to music, so …

    …it doesn’t matter to me what size the mp3 player is …

    …or if its controls are decent…
    .. or if I can hook it to radio. because its going to be sitting in the same spot..
    … and I’ve had CD player to cassette adapter in my car for ages so wires are no big deal at all.
    Lastly, m4a is mostly associated with iTunes, and iTunes is massively overpriced and also rips off its artists, so I do not use iTunes on principle or practicality reasons and consequently have no need for m4a playback.

    So, what did the Creative Zen NX do for me that the iPod didn’t?
    I needed an mp3 player that could conveniently connect to a car.
    I needed something less expensive than the iPod in 2002, as close to $200 or lower.
    I also needed something that would be fairly durable..

    .. and I’d read that iPod at the time was charging $100 for battery replacements alone (don’t know if they still do that, I hope they don’t), so I didn’t want to deal with that.

    Once again, I’m not insulted if you skimmed. In brief, the Zen NX trimmed the massive amount of fat I didn’t need and I ended up being a lot happier for it. Most importantly of the reasons I needed the Zen NX over the iPod was that the NX doubled as a portable hard drive and the iPod did not.
    Let’s analyze this for a moment.
    Why couldn’t iPod be portable storage too? I mean, that’s what it is. A portable hard drive with mini-OS and a mini-soundcard. Why restrict the users?

    I couldn’t figure out why for the longest time.
    Either way, after doing some hefty research, but mostly based on the lack of file storage, I found Creative’s NX to be the perfect mp3 player solution for me because it came only with things I needed and nothing more.

    I look back now and realize that its simply because Apple was not marketing their product towards people who needed portable storage – not even marketing their product towards people who knew what portable storage was or how it applied to anything. Its not a fault of Apple’s “poor” product, because it certainly does its job. For what it provides the average Joe user, the iPod is excellent.

    When people ask me what mp3 player to buy, I recommend the iPod instantly even though I personally hate it – unless I know the person is tech-savvy and will benefit more from the tech-oriented features.
    So how does Apple and Creative’s difference in marketing their products apply to Windows, Microsoft, and your post?

    Like the iPod, Windows is simply not marketed to technology enthusiasts. It is marketed to as many people as possible for mass appeal and max profit – as you agreed with me. The target audience for iPod is too broad of an audience to include anything that could potentially be seen as esoteric.
    Apple’s target audience is the factor as to why we still to this day do not see proper file storage on iPods; most people who own an iPod don’t even know it’s a hard drive under that smooth white shell – or what a hard drive is for that matter – so they don’t know what they’re missing and don’t really give a damn.
    If Apple were to implement file storage on iPods, you would not see a dramatic increase in Apple’s shares at all. Because a technology enthusiast knows that alternative mp3 players do more for less, and already purchase those alternative players because they suit their needs, and have long since stopped barking up Apple’s tree because they have what they need.
    James – why should one complain to Apple about the complete lack of file storage when one can just buy Creative and circumvent the whole problem?

    Sure, Apple is the biggest company of the mp3 players and makes more than Creative will ever see in a year. But its been much less of a hassle to go out and buy a product that directly suits my needs rather than ask a company to turn a product that isn’t designed primarily for me into something that is.
    Likewise, Windows Vista, for its targeted audience who replied to surveys that said that 50% of people who own a Windows computer only use it for e-mail and surfing the web, is not a flawed product for performing the tasks that most people use it for.

    Just like it makes little to no business sense for Apple to implement file storage even though they easily could, it makes little sense for Microsoft turn the new Windows Vista into a tech-oriented product when most of the people who use it couldn’t even identify the hardware inside their computer let alone tell the difference between operating system versions.

    It would be a dumb business move. The money for Microsoft is designing an operating system that handles e-mail, internet, extremely outdated programs, and looks flashy doing it.
    That type of operating system is where Microsoft will stay no matter how many times you tell people that alternative operating systems are superior (which they are, and I totally agree with you), because most people who own Windows know absolutely nothing about how much it sucks and its likely gonna stay that way for a long time.
    What fueled your entire argument for this article is that Microsoft does not supply in Windows Vista what alternative operating systems already have or do better.

    What fueled my entire argument is the notion that Microsoft’s supplying those features is irrelevant because it is not profitable to be otherwise. That is all I ever intended to get across. Once it is profitable to change Windows to be both a user-friendly and a feature-rich, secure as a lockbox at the bottom of the ocean operating system, it will.

    But right now, the cash is rolling in irrespective of making that change, so an article comparing Vista to other operating systems is comparing one ugly ass apple to an orchard of fresh oranges that we know as Linux, Ubuntu, OS X, etc.

    And it’s a comparison that’s both wholly unnecessary and out of place in an article entitled “10 reasons not to buy Vista.”

  10. 10 OGROK December 22, 2006 at 7:14 am

    Linux is useless to me as a gamer because it doesn’t have the mainstream software support that Windows does, and probably never will. Until Linux comes installed on prebuilt machines, it will always be an enthusiast operating system that nobody but IT professionals and enthusiasts use.

    On an unrelated note, I wonder what will become of Linux once image constraint tokens become commonplace – will it be forced to adopt DRM?

  11. 11 Omar January 27, 2007 at 11:08 pm

    Vista for me is a good OS, but it’s a copy from OSX.

    First of all, the REGISTRY stills the same.

    This of course it’s a security concern for all those Crackers out there.

    For me, it’s a new programming environment with only graphical improvement and no other internal improvements like:

    1- File System. –> Not compatible for writing with any other platform since WINXP (using NTFS).

    2- Registry –> It’s awful to make the same mistakes again with so much Trojans, worms and annoying popups.

    3- All new improvements have already been seen.

    Im not a fanatic, i use Windows, Linux and mac. I use it for programming/Web development purposes and i really need to use Windows, but it is just the same mistakes of another OS based on 1970 technology without any original ideas made from scratch not having success with it.

    I really recommend people not to install it until Service Pack 1 is released.

  12. 12 Miguel January 27, 2007 at 11:25 pm

    This article was written by a Linux fanatic.

    Fanatism in IT it’s a sickness because it allows you only to use one operating system and reprend others.

    Really, no offending, leave fanatism and stop leaving your heart and tears on the keyboard on this forum, no one but fanatics will be at your side.

  13. 13 Dazza January 30, 2007 at 3:08 am

    Heh…to all those buntons calling MAC “more secure”…you’re wrong…

    MAC OS X (not that the u is missing between the s and x) is simply more secretive…they knew what kind of problems would be caused by making their hardware and software back-ends openly accessible to all programmers and etc would do, so they have kept it a big fat SECRET.

    Microsoft on the other hand went with the idea of making their software work on a STANDARD of technology/hardware…

    In the good ol days of Mac vs. PC, PC won because it meant that any problems, you had choices of where to go. And development of new/improved/extra software was a lot more rapid than MAC because of this……but….then comes the internet age and suddenly the people who were winging that MAC should be more open are now happy that it wasn’t, because THIS is the only reason that it’s “more secure”…(which…it isn’t..)

  14. 14 James January 30, 2007 at 10:56 pm

    @Dazza: I’m sorry, but you aren’t making much sense.

    First, just call it a Mac. MAC (uppercase) brings to mind MAC addresses, which have nothing to do with this.

    The “good ol days” don’t matter, in this case. XP is decended from NT, not 9x, and Apple pretty much completely switched operating systems. OS X is not decended from OS 9. It only runs OS 9 stuff in an emulator.

    The OS X core, Darwin, is open source. It’s based off UNIX, which has been around for eons and is basically proven. Windows Vista is far more closed off and unproven securitywise then OS X is.

    You can tweak OS X to run on a normal PC. Apple’s hardware has very little to do with the security of the operating system. Apple makes most of their money off the hardware, though, which is why you won’t be seeing any generic Macs around. Your argument also fails because OS X currently runs on intel processors.

    So, we have the core OS open, and an extremely popular hardware platform. Did I miss something, or has Microsoft open sourced the Vista kernel? Didn’t think so…

    @OGROK: True, Linux hardware support is lacking in some areas. However, it is getting better, and if you do a bit of looking around before you buy, you can get a rather nice Linux gaming machine. The Linux Nvidia drivers are arguably on par, or better then, the Windows ones. True, you won’t be playing the latest games on Linux, but you’d be surprised how much stuff works with Wine. For a casual gamer like me with an older machine, Linux works quite well. I’ve played Unreal Tournament 2004, StarCraft, WarCraft III, Final Fantasy 8, Neverwinter Nights, and a lot of small indie games like Cave Story, mostly without issues. Sure, none of those games are the latest and greatest, but it’s what I like, and Linux works for me.

    “On an unrelated note, I wonder what will become of Linux once image constraint tokens become commonplace – will it be forced to adopt DRM?”
    I don’t know. I’m not too keen on the idea in the first place, regardless of operating system. It seems too invasive.

  15. 15 James January 31, 2007 at 2:40 am

    @Miguel: Call me a Linux fanatic if you wish. Of course, I use Linux exclusively. Oh wait, I also use XP. And UNIX. And DOS. And BeOS. I will admit not having nearly as much experiance with OS X as I’d like, but that’s mostly because there’s only one in the campus computer lab. I haven’t used Vista for extended periods of time yet, but that’s kinda hard to do with a new OS and a ton of classwork.

    I do have at least some experiance with the things I complain about. I like to think having experiance with a lot of operating systems lets me be less biased when criqueing them.

    I do use Ubuntu Linux as my primary OS, partially because it’s more secure, but mainly because Windows XP got bit-rot halfway through last semester. The my XP partition is completely clean of viruses and spyware, but it runs like a dog. I’m no stranger to tech support, and I’ve done all the clean-outs and optimizations I can think of, but if it’s gonna take a full reinstall every semester, I’ll pass. Meanwhile, Ubuntu just keeps chugging along.

    So, call me a fanatic if you wish. I prefer to think of it as idealism. Microsoft Windows runs like 90% of the desktops in the world. They have a ton of really smart people, a ton of money, and they’ve had a ton of time to come up with something outstanding. Given how many people use their product, they have the responsability to at least come out with something rock solid and innovative.

    I just really don’t see that with Vista. It dosen’t appear to contain much that is new or innovative. I certainly don’t see enough to justify the $400 price tag. Heck, the last midrange computer my family got cost less then that.

    I’m not a complete hater. Office 2007 indroduced an open format and a great UI improvement. Of course, I’ve heard rumors that the new UI is being patented dispite prior art, and people are complaining about the quality of the XDOC specs, but at least Microsoft is trying.

    You can say what you want about my idealism, but you must admit, I wrote this a year ago, and it’s still one of the most popular posts on my “forum”. I guess people like so-called “blood and tears.”

  16. 16 LunaSea June 2, 2007 at 12:06 am

    I can’t believe how everywhere I go I see people arguing the virtues of linux over windows. It is almost a waste of time because either you’re for the one or for the other and no amount of discussion is likely to change anyone’s mind.

    I think the thing that SHOULD be raising everyone’s feathers is the lack of an option for something so pervasive in our lives and society as a computer operating system. MOre people own computers that own cars.

    I bet we all use different toothpaste, drive different cars, wear different clothes, eat different food, drink different drinks, have different windows in our houses, paint on our walls and credit cards in our pockets, etc. We live in a world with choices on everything except this. Why?

    I absolutely hate that I can’t buy a computer anywhere without a choice. Regardless of which I choose, I want a choice! It’s like going to a car dealer and finding the perfect car, (a corvette, a bmw, a subaru or whatever) then being told that I can only have a standard chevy 250 engine. That any car I pick will have the same engine. Period. No choice, no complaints, take it or leave on foot!

    Anyway it seems that this is the real issue here. I’ll have a bud, and I’ll buy you a heinekin, or miller or whatever your CHOICE is and then we can discuss why we can’t have a choice of operating systems and not ‘which one is better’.

  17. 17 ozi June 26, 2007 at 8:03 pm

    First of all the computer industry is already in a crisis,
    Pc and hardware sales have dropped in a huge way, and while vista is hampering the game market and sound acceleration in its new OS, and causing incompatibilities in many drivers, blue ray disks (drm), and generaly all over the software market, its sure to make the pc industry crash alltogether.

    Messing up vista by dumbed down code, leaving it slow and inneficient and non compatible, has confused windows users to the point of hating MS, and made them forsake new pcs and any upgrades alltogether, and also has left gamers frustrated and wondering WTF is wrong with Microsoft for hampering performance and inflicting so many restrictions on the same people that made Microsft successfull in the first place. Obviously, not fare, and its not helping anyone. At best it only encourages piracy. Microsoft is either willingly going to commit suicide, or criple the pc industry, because of vista ,or its gonna change to whAt people want. MS is a product vendor, so MS must accomodate to you and your desires, the buyer, not the other way around.

    + pc hardware improvements such as in graphics cards and cpus have pretty much reached their thermal limmits. Were at a point where its time we benchmarked software for speed and efficiency and gave hardware makers a break.

    microsoft wished vista could run without scsi, no dsp sound card, no graphics card, for a big oozingly slow and inneficient and almost useless pc that you cant even play a spng on that melts your cpu. And the problem here is that some conceptors at microsoft and not practical realists,
    and have an anarhicist mind, and apply anarchistic concepts to computing software and hardware, wich can cause bloddy train wrecks.

    The solution is easy! Get dumb and dumber out of the microsoft programing rooms. And then some wonderfull things will happen and people wont hate microsoft anymore.

    REMEBER Impractical idealists need to stay out of the computing industry.

  18. 18 Lazor December 29, 2007 at 10:05 pm


    Any new OS is going to have compatibility issues, because drivers haven’t been written yet.


    You have no idea how many times I’ve seen blog posts/forum posts like this one. These articles are written by people who want a niche operating system(or in the case of a Mac fanboy, can’t handle something that doesn’t “just work”).
    Windows is designed for the gamers, or a casual PC user. I want to buy a piece of software, and not have to worry about compatibility issues, not search for non-existant drivers.
    I don’t think you’ve actually installed Vista on your computer and left it on your PC for about a week(google why).
    You’re like the people that bash the Zune because they don’t like the wireless(WTFPMG!!! WIRELESS IS GIMPED EVEN THOUGH IVE NEVER USED IT AND JUST WANT To COMPLAIN ABOUT YOUR NOT IPOD).

    This poorly written comment is brought to you buy my sister playing her flute next to me.

  19. 19 James January 1, 2008 at 10:52 pm

    @Lazor: I’m sorry, but you need to double check the dates of posts before posting. For reference, Vista was released in like November 2006.

    “These articles are written by people who want a niche operating system(or in the case of a Mac fanboy, can’t handle something that doesn’t “just work”).”
    When did I say I wanted a niche operating system? I want something that “just works” (This is the operating system’s friggin job, after all) and contains enough innovation to justify the absurd cost and long development time.

    “Windows is designed for the gamers, or a casual PC user. I want to buy a piece of software, and not have to worry about compatibility issues, not search for non-existant drivers.”
    Than you should not be running Vista. As you said, it’s a new operating system, and it has tons of compatibility issues; both with hardware (for the same reason Linux has hardware computability issues; vendors need to write drivers) and with software (Tribes flat out won’t run, and many other games require patches).
    Aside from that, Windows should be designed for everyone, not just gamers or the casual user.

    “I don’t think you’ve actually installed Vista on your computer and left it on your PC for about a week(google why).”
    Actually, I’ve run it in a virtual machine. I don’t have it installed because it’s stupid to install Vista on a two-year old laptop without drivers. It’s also unwise to run an operating system on a computer that barely meets the minimum specs.

    “You’re like the people that bash the Zune because they don’t like the wireless(WTFPMG!!! WIRELESS IS GIMPED EVEN THOUGH IVE NEVER USED IT AND JUST WANT To COMPLAIN ABOUT YOUR NOT IPOD).”
    Actually, I’m like all the other people who were doing commentary on Vista before it was released.

    Now that it has been released, I’m taking it on the authority of other people who do use it on a regular basis that Vista is big and bloated, and there’s not too much special or unique about it.

    On a side note, the reason Zune music sharing is bashed is because it works differently than what people were expecting before release. “Share music with your friends wirelessly!” is significantly different than “Share music for three plays with your friends and no more, even public domain music!”

  20. 20 Burke January 31, 2008 at 10:24 pm

    It has been almost a year that James has written the post and a month since the latest comment, but I wanted to add a few of my own.

    I agree with James that Microsoft is very slow and late on things. On the other hand, why would they hurry? As many indicated, they hold 90% of the OS market and whatever they put out is sold. It does not matter to them that none of your old software or hardware does not work on the new OS. They just need to get the hard currency for their wheels to turn.

    Whatever they wanted/planned to produces with Vista, that I am not quite sure, but IMHO they put VISTA on the shelves much earlier than it is supposed to. Not only that the stuff they present as breakthroughs have been around for a long time, but their version is often more bloated and sluggish. I don’t mean to say that we would have a very good product if they waited longer and worked more on it. I certainly do not believe that. Humbly, I think that Microsoft (or at least the OS writing wing/branch) has become a huge corporation, much like a sweatshop for software/code writers. They became too much self-involved and lost their touch with reality; namely, the consumers and the limits of hardware available/affordable for this folk.

    I am not in IT sector or a code writer myself, but I can imagine that this is difficult stuff. However, I had several friends from university who are employed by Mr. Gates and, if my knowledge of a few of them means anything, Mr. Gates is employing thousands of geniuses. And look at their products. They lack vision, spirit, and authenticity. Yes, corporations tend to imitate what works for competing products, but Microsoft -with all its financial and human resources- should not be the one lagging behind. It should be the one coming up with the amazing ideas and incredible things. They sometimes do that, but not as much as it is supposed to. Maybe they are not given enough freedom and just included into certain projects groups working on obsolete ideas.

    In my opinion, unless Microsoft provides more freedom to its code writers, lets them to come up with crazy ideas, and tries to emerge with things revolutionary to people, it is going to lose the wind. Yes, it is sort of a monopoly at the moment, but that’s just a matter of time…

  1. 1 Edgardo Rossetto .NET » Blog Archive » Programadores .NET, ¿vale la pena cambiar a Windows Vista? Trackback on October 11, 2006 at 8:52 pm
Comments are currently closed.

RSS Status

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.


Creative Commons License
This stuff is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

%d bloggers like this: