O
On the Bridge!
http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/vista/10_things_i_warned_microsoft_about_windows_vista.html
this is an article by Joe Wilcox
and he states:
"I worked as an analyst when Microsoft developed Windows Vista. Execs asked
for my advice, and they got it. Did they listen?"
But of course the vistaboys and frank king of the apes, will just discredit
him too...
it seems like they think that their own experience is better than US pros..
yes me included... with over 25 years of computer experience, I know when an
OS is POS.
let the mud flow freely for vista!
let the truth shine, and THEN lets decide if we should use it or not...
not get it shoved down our throughts in the dark (not mine but the average
user)
here is the text of the article
The imminent real release of Windows Vista Service Pack 1 is reason enough
to broach the question. SP1 is an important milestone for an operating
system that bloggers and other critics consistently ridicule. Oh, yeah, the
channel and enterprises aren't exactly loving Vista either.
These 10 things are in no particular order of importance.
1. Windows Vista has to be a whole lot better than Windows XP. Microsoft had
left XP in the market for a long time. That version of Windows had reached a
certain "good enough" threshold, in part because of the stable, supporting
ecosystem. Vista would have to be a whole lot better to drive upgrades in
established markets. I received assurances that Vista would deliver on the
promise, which was later accentuated in the "Wow" marketing. What happened:
Vista wasn't better enough.
2. Vista will miss the big PC upgrade cycle. A major enterprise PC refresh
cycle started in 2004 and continued through mid-2006. In early 2006, I
warned Microsoft executives that Vista would ship too late. What happened:
The major upgrade cycle wound down, but computer sales remained strong
because of consumer upgrades and a massive shift to portables. So, Vista
missed the big hardware refresh cycle but caught another one. However, in
part because of #1, many businesses opted for Windows XP instead of Vista on
those shiny, new notebooks.
3. Windows Vista Home Basic is too basic. I strongly recommended against
Microsoft's releasing this version at any price. Microsoft executives
insisted that OEMs wanted a low-cost Vista version for cheap PCs. But Basic
offered less than Windows XP Home for about the same price. I called it a
hidden price increase. What happened: There is limited demand for Home
Basic.
4. Call it Windows Basic. Vista Home Basic was so defeatured, I strongly
encouraged Microsoft to remove the Vista name from the product. I warned
that Basic would tarnish the broader Vista brand and that its streamlined
features put it in a lower category. I bet a Microsoft product manager $100
that Windows Basic would become the default nomenclature. What happened:
Other problems affecting every Vista version, such as applications and
drivers incompatibilities, overshadowed Basic's weak feature set. Oh yeah, I
owe somebody at Microsoft 100 bucks. I don't recall who you are, but don't
feel impish about collecting.
5. Vista reminds too much of Windows Me. In late 2006, I had dinner with
some Vista user interface designers. By then, I had used Vista betas for
nearly 10 months. They heard: There are two Microsoft operating systems that
the more I used them the less I liked them-Windows Me and Windows Vista.
While not my intention, the comment hugely insulted the UI designers,
because of how much Windows Me is regarded, even within Microsoft, as a
marketing failure. What happened: Some critics have described Vista as
Windows Me II.
6. One Vista version is enough. I opposed Microsoft's Vista SKU strategy
from the first presentation and, later, after some tweaking. I explained
that Windows isn't toothpaste. Too many versions would confuse customers,
creating an unnecessary impediment to Vista upgrades. How could Vista be
perceived as better enough if the buying experience was more difficult than
XP? I strongly advocated a one-version strategy, but with differentiated OEM
pricing depending on features used by the hardware. I reasoned the approach
would simplify Windows purchasing while encouraging greater PC
differentiation. What happened: The OEM market has largely consolidated
around a single version: Vista Home Premium for consumers. It's all Gateway
sells, for example. Many enterprises are adopting Vista Enterprise, which is
a volume licensing-only option.
7. It has to be multiple SKUs or Windows Experience Index, but not both. WEI
would confuse Vista buyers because the ratings would contradict with some
versions. For example, Vista Ultimate could conceivably ship on a notebook
with WEI of 3.0 (out of a possible 5.9). Customers would ask: If it's so
ultimate, why is the rating so slow? I liked the WEI concept more than the
SKU strategy and recommended choosing only the ratings scheme. What
happened: WEI ratings were low the first year on notebooks, even those with
Vista Ultimate.
8. Vista demands too much. From my earliest product briefings, Microsoft
executives carted around big honking laptops-luggables-to get enough
processing and graphics power to run early Vista builds. I was told Vista
would need less power closer to release. Nope. I got my first Vista test
system in February 2006. WEI: 2.0, on above-average hardware. What happened:
OEMs shipped computers underpowered for Vista, even through holiday 2007.
The operating system demands too much from even modestly older hardware.
9. Windows Vista Capable is a bad idea. Why could Microsoft possibly need
two Vista logo programs? The connotations around Capable and Ready were
either too alike or too confusing. I said that there should be one program
for which everything truly was ready. Unfortunately, Microsoft didn't
consult me on the logo programs, so I gave my advice after the Capable logo
announcement. What happened: A Vista Capable class-action lawsuit revealed
embarrassing Microsoft e-mails about Windows Vista decision-making
processes-or lack of them.
10. Vista security features increase complexity, decrease usability. Oh, I
was a loud critic of UAC (User Account Control) and Internet Explorer
warnings. I argued that Microsoft had made Vista much harder to use than
Windows XP. The experience would be worse for many users. Going back to #1,
Vista had to be a lot better, not perceptually worse. What happened: UAC
warnings hurt usability but caused more troubles new user rights mechanism
broke many applications.
this is an article by Joe Wilcox
and he states:
"I worked as an analyst when Microsoft developed Windows Vista. Execs asked
for my advice, and they got it. Did they listen?"
But of course the vistaboys and frank king of the apes, will just discredit
him too...
it seems like they think that their own experience is better than US pros..
yes me included... with over 25 years of computer experience, I know when an
OS is POS.
let the mud flow freely for vista!
let the truth shine, and THEN lets decide if we should use it or not...
not get it shoved down our throughts in the dark (not mine but the average
user)
here is the text of the article
The imminent real release of Windows Vista Service Pack 1 is reason enough
to broach the question. SP1 is an important milestone for an operating
system that bloggers and other critics consistently ridicule. Oh, yeah, the
channel and enterprises aren't exactly loving Vista either.
These 10 things are in no particular order of importance.
1. Windows Vista has to be a whole lot better than Windows XP. Microsoft had
left XP in the market for a long time. That version of Windows had reached a
certain "good enough" threshold, in part because of the stable, supporting
ecosystem. Vista would have to be a whole lot better to drive upgrades in
established markets. I received assurances that Vista would deliver on the
promise, which was later accentuated in the "Wow" marketing. What happened:
Vista wasn't better enough.
2. Vista will miss the big PC upgrade cycle. A major enterprise PC refresh
cycle started in 2004 and continued through mid-2006. In early 2006, I
warned Microsoft executives that Vista would ship too late. What happened:
The major upgrade cycle wound down, but computer sales remained strong
because of consumer upgrades and a massive shift to portables. So, Vista
missed the big hardware refresh cycle but caught another one. However, in
part because of #1, many businesses opted for Windows XP instead of Vista on
those shiny, new notebooks.
3. Windows Vista Home Basic is too basic. I strongly recommended against
Microsoft's releasing this version at any price. Microsoft executives
insisted that OEMs wanted a low-cost Vista version for cheap PCs. But Basic
offered less than Windows XP Home for about the same price. I called it a
hidden price increase. What happened: There is limited demand for Home
Basic.
4. Call it Windows Basic. Vista Home Basic was so defeatured, I strongly
encouraged Microsoft to remove the Vista name from the product. I warned
that Basic would tarnish the broader Vista brand and that its streamlined
features put it in a lower category. I bet a Microsoft product manager $100
that Windows Basic would become the default nomenclature. What happened:
Other problems affecting every Vista version, such as applications and
drivers incompatibilities, overshadowed Basic's weak feature set. Oh yeah, I
owe somebody at Microsoft 100 bucks. I don't recall who you are, but don't
feel impish about collecting.
5. Vista reminds too much of Windows Me. In late 2006, I had dinner with
some Vista user interface designers. By then, I had used Vista betas for
nearly 10 months. They heard: There are two Microsoft operating systems that
the more I used them the less I liked them-Windows Me and Windows Vista.
While not my intention, the comment hugely insulted the UI designers,
because of how much Windows Me is regarded, even within Microsoft, as a
marketing failure. What happened: Some critics have described Vista as
Windows Me II.
6. One Vista version is enough. I opposed Microsoft's Vista SKU strategy
from the first presentation and, later, after some tweaking. I explained
that Windows isn't toothpaste. Too many versions would confuse customers,
creating an unnecessary impediment to Vista upgrades. How could Vista be
perceived as better enough if the buying experience was more difficult than
XP? I strongly advocated a one-version strategy, but with differentiated OEM
pricing depending on features used by the hardware. I reasoned the approach
would simplify Windows purchasing while encouraging greater PC
differentiation. What happened: The OEM market has largely consolidated
around a single version: Vista Home Premium for consumers. It's all Gateway
sells, for example. Many enterprises are adopting Vista Enterprise, which is
a volume licensing-only option.
7. It has to be multiple SKUs or Windows Experience Index, but not both. WEI
would confuse Vista buyers because the ratings would contradict with some
versions. For example, Vista Ultimate could conceivably ship on a notebook
with WEI of 3.0 (out of a possible 5.9). Customers would ask: If it's so
ultimate, why is the rating so slow? I liked the WEI concept more than the
SKU strategy and recommended choosing only the ratings scheme. What
happened: WEI ratings were low the first year on notebooks, even those with
Vista Ultimate.
8. Vista demands too much. From my earliest product briefings, Microsoft
executives carted around big honking laptops-luggables-to get enough
processing and graphics power to run early Vista builds. I was told Vista
would need less power closer to release. Nope. I got my first Vista test
system in February 2006. WEI: 2.0, on above-average hardware. What happened:
OEMs shipped computers underpowered for Vista, even through holiday 2007.
The operating system demands too much from even modestly older hardware.
9. Windows Vista Capable is a bad idea. Why could Microsoft possibly need
two Vista logo programs? The connotations around Capable and Ready were
either too alike or too confusing. I said that there should be one program
for which everything truly was ready. Unfortunately, Microsoft didn't
consult me on the logo programs, so I gave my advice after the Capable logo
announcement. What happened: A Vista Capable class-action lawsuit revealed
embarrassing Microsoft e-mails about Windows Vista decision-making
processes-or lack of them.
10. Vista security features increase complexity, decrease usability. Oh, I
was a loud critic of UAC (User Account Control) and Internet Explorer
warnings. I argued that Microsoft had made Vista much harder to use than
Windows XP. The experience would be worse for many users. Going back to #1,
Vista had to be a lot better, not perceptually worse. What happened: UAC
warnings hurt usability but caused more troubles new user rights mechanism
broke many applications.