Microsoft Vista proved one thing: The software giant has lost touch with their customers.
I’m sure that the geeks in Redmond thought features like semi-transparent windows, a sidebar and a ‘better’ search feature were great ideas. Probably because they didn’t have to buy the hardware to run it on. Vista, already in history as Microsoft’s largest operating system failure, had two fatal flaws that even a junior product manager should have been able to spot.
First, Vista consumes CPU cycles and memory like frat boys toss back beer at a kegger. Much of the gain that could be realized by buying a fast new computer is tossed away by the operating system.
Second, and even more maddening, is that there is no real benefit to most users. We want to surf the web, do our email and look at our digital photos. All Vista does is make us buy a faster computer with more memory to do the same things we did with XP. It’s not any easer to connect up to a shared printer at home, and doing just about anything useful requires downloading or purchasing other software.
Now Microsoft wants to be the hero, boasting that the upcoming Windows 7 will offer better performance. Compared to what? And precisely what will it do for us that XP won’t?
Now is the time for a lean, mean, efficient operating system. Let’s hope Microsoft gets it. If not, hang on to your XP licence. I’ll come in handy.
Evolving Squid
Much of the gain that could be realized by buying a fast new computer is tossed away by the operating system.
Bollocks. Completely untrue. That’s 100% myth, especially when you factor in stability.
It is slower on identical hardware? yes, a few percent.
But factor in the time spent not rebooting, not rebuilding your registry, not blue-screening… and it’s a few percent that’s worth it.
The memory thing is a distortion of the truth. XP CANNOT run with more than 3 GB, so the fact that Vista can use whatever memory is available should not be held against it. Similarly, XP is ancient technology, not adequately using the 64-bit CPUs that have been around since before XP was even made. Those are not flaws of Vista, they are flaws of PREVIOUS work and demonstrate that Microsoft was, in fact, on the right track.
The mistake in Vista was permitting a 32-bit version to be released. That was a huge corporate error.
Second, and even more maddening, is that there is no real benefit to most users.
I’ll agree partially here. The benefit is being able to use modern hardware to its fullest potential. There is no short-term benefit to users, but there is a long-term benefit in that newer applications can make better use of the available CPU/memory/whatever.
Give up your XP licence – you’re going to have to sooner or later (probably sooner). It’s half-baked, ancient technology that will be useless in the future. XP is the buggy-whip of the WinTel computer paradigm. It’s already on borrowed time and will get a stake through the heart when Win7 comes out.