Podcasting What Geeks Really Want To Hear

Tuesday, February 13, 2007

“Heard Microsoft is coming out with a new OS, called Vista, what do you think?”
It’s not management of a bad product, it’s just a product of bad management. (Read more)

posted by travis at 00:09 in General,Misc    

4 Comments »

  1. Alright, alright, alright. Rebuttle time…

    How can you rightly compare Windows ME to XP to Vista? Are you feeling nostalgic to the days when Apple ran a proprietary OS on a proprietary architecture? Don’t they still have a proprietary architecture? Can you boot off a Windows XP or Windows DVD and take over the entire drive for the MSFT OS of choice, or do you have to jump through a lot of hoops to make it work?

    Granted Vista isn’t Unix, but it doesn’t have to be. Vista is a stable evolution of what XP offers. In all honesty, hardware these days has way too much horsepower for what users need to do with it. We figured out that email, the Intarweb, word processing and spreadsheets work under a PIII-500Mhz, but yet new hardware comes out. Why? To manage the new games and sell new operating systems with more bells and whistles. Apple is just as guilty and probably more, since they get to own a monopoly on their hardware and where their OS can run with impunity. :-)

    Rebuttle complete…

    Comment by cgrant — February 13, 2007 @ 23:51

  2. My comments had nothing to do with architecture, but I’ll answer you anyway.
    Yes, Windows can use the whole drive on a Mac, but you still have to jump through hoops to get it to work–not because the Mac is a proprietary architecture (which it isn’t), but because Windows still uses the same BIOS it’s been using since IBM released the PC rather than supporting the significantly improved EFI that Intel released six years ago (save the 64-bit Server 2003, which supports it because it has to in order to run on Itanium at all).
    “Granted Vista isn’t Unix, but it doesn’t have to be.” I didn’t say it had to be Unix. I said it had to be innovative.
    “Vista is a stable evolution of what XP offers.” It certainly is, but that’s not the point. I don’t think they’re really making the meal taste better, they’re just using shinier dishes.
    “…yet new hardware comes out. Why? To manage the new games and sell new operating systems with more bells and whistles. Apple is just as guilty and probably more….” It’s generally accepted that each successive point release of OS X has improved performance over the last.

    I’m not saying Windows is doomed or inherently bad. I’m saying it’s stagnant, and shows no signs of genuine advancement.

    Comment by travis — February 14, 2007 @ 21:01

  3. Alright, I need to go do some research on this. I don’t know enough now to combat your postulates. There’s got to be a reason to upgrade beyond the warm fuzzies that come from a slick gui. I’ll be back…

    Comment by cgrant — February 15, 2007 @ 20:37

  4. So, after many hours of research, I’ve come up with a laundry list: http://www.labrat.com/news.php?item.233.11

    I expect that we’ll end up in a podcast about this… :-)

    Comment by cgrant — February 16, 2007 @ 00:09

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

26 queries. 0.214 seconds.