So It’s to Be Windows 7…

This makes sense. And I do not think it needs to be 50% better, just better than XP. That alone will put it a quantum leap above Vista.

Cameron, thanks for the comment.
I do, however, still hold to the percentage because it takes into acount the difficulties of changing to a new OS, and the the attending period of normalization, versus the trend to stick with what we know works, especially when there will be support until 2014 for XP.

Those “Mojave” commercials crack me up! What MS does not say is what happens when these folks go home and install Vista on their existing PC. I tested RC1 and immediately knew something was amiss when the install told me that the 10GB partition on my 20GB hard drive would not cut it.

All of the people I know personally who use Vista and have no problems, bought the PC’s with Vista already installed. I would love to see a survey done of how many folks have been able to simply install Vista over XP successfully ( success being measured by their satisfaction) on existing computers. I for one refuse to continue to pour money into new hardware every few years just to stay “current”.

I do not get all the hate mail that OS’s get. I have computers that are running Windows 98, Windows XP and Windows Vista. They talk to each other and they do what I need from each of them. Why is it that we feel compelled to tell a company that your stuff better run on any machine I have. And if the OS is doing what you need it to do, why upgrade it. The only reason I have all three versions is because they are running the OS that came with them. But I suppose if you have to keep up with the Gate’s then just wait for the latest and (sometimes) greatest.

I don’t get the same thing from the choice of name that you do. I’m *positive* that there’s some sort of marketing-related reason for it but it doesn’t say much to me.

Last I heard, they were keeping the same UI, which already turns me off. Have they said anything about DRM?

May I suggest “Windows SODA”?

the name “SEVEN” is already been taken by George Constanza.

Cliffystones, thanks for the comment. Yes, Mojave experiments are nice to see on television, but I wonder how many people either were not fooled, or simply did not like it - those stats are probably buried somewhere off of Puget Sound!

Jerry, I understand what you are saying, but XP does much that 98, 98SE, Me, or 2000 won’t do. It is nice to have those features, and it also makes it easier if you can do one set of updates, instead of several. The range of machines that XP will successfully work on is very wide - I have successfully used XP SP2 on everything from a K6-2-500 (AMD) to the latest hot iron, the key is memory - more is better. I have seen people claiming that the sweet spot with XP is 512 MB, but in my tests the sweet spot is 2GB. I tend to heavily configure my machines, so I know that I need more, but using XP with anything less than 384 MB is simply silly, and also what makes it impossible to do on some older hardware, simply because the motherboard won’t accept more.

As for those who complain about Vista (like me), it is because XP does most everything well, and Vista does them no better, and is slower and more clumsy in the way that the user must do things.

Thanks for the comment.

leftystrat, I’m sure that their will be no lessening of DRM, if that’s the direction you are hoping for.

I think that someone must be awakening at MS, because they are losing market share to Apple in many places, and with the worsening economy, fewer people will be tolerating sloppy coding and exaggerated pricing - as soon as the folks at Ubuntu get their collective stuff together, the market share will really start to drop. (Then again, it may be SuSE that breaks through - it certainly has been evolving faster than Ubuntu lately.)

Thanks for the comment.

kiko, not sure I get the meaning of this…can you elaborate?

First: Does anyone ever use WiKi?
windows 7 is Just V.I.S.T.A. in a new package!
Second:
Why is it that the OS that M$ just added a bunch of unnecessary, Ram using BS to Gets a bad rap. There are very few people that own a copy of win2000 PRO, but most everyone says that xp is better.
As far as updating Please Remember that most updates are NOT Necessary , M$ Just wants you to believe they are and or scare people into installing them.
I have over 500 customers on 2in2000 PRO most have a second HDD just sitting in their boxes with Vista just in case they need to return their computers under warranty.
Have Fun with a big mess named “7″
BILL

BILL, I don’t advocate, by any means, getting OS flavor-of-the-month - but, sometimes there are reasons to do so, XP does things that 2000 could not do, so it was and is, worthwhile. Vista adds nothing to the mix, so it is not worth it for most.

If 7 adds to the mix, people will upgrade, whether or not it is debugged rehash of Vista.

Lot’s of people upgrade only when they need to, but everyone in the software biz wants you to upgrade to keep them going.

Thanks for the comment.

hi Oracle, it’s just a in-joke (for Seinfeld fans)

In one of the shows, George Constanza tells his fiance that he plans to call their baby “SEVEN” (after Mikey Mantle’s number, as George works in the Yankees). She is of course horrified by the idea, and they have a fight over it.

A friend couple who are expecting, hear about it and decide to name their soon to be born baby Seven.
George argues with them that the name is taken already (by him), and he suggests to the couple to call the baby “SODA” (as in whiskey with soda). They refuse. Hilarity ensues…

:-)

>I do, however, still hold to the percentage because it takes into acount the difficulties of changing to a new OS, and the the attending period of normalization, versus the trend to stick with what we know works, especially when there will be support until 2014 for XP.

Hi Oracle,
Your probably right. 50% better would be great. But, if Microsoft is to survive in the top spot they really need to get their OS spot on this time. In my opinion they need to do away with all the different versions, and then price it right. For example with Apple’s OS X it comes with all the bells and whistles, no ‘Junior” version, etc. So, keep it simple and price it right and even if it is just somewhat better than XP, people will buy it.

Take care,
Cameron

I could care less what Microsoft calls it, I just want it to look like the old original windows and work like them, Not only do I think Vista sucks, but I mostly use XP unless my wife is using that computer to do her job on, then I have to use this sucky Vista.

Oracle, you really made me grin sarcastically when you wrote “as soon as the folks at Ubuntu get their collective stuff together, [Windows'] market share will really start to drop”. And when will that be? When hell freezes over? Or as we say over here, when Easter and Pentecost will be on the same day?

Let’s face it, Linux is an OS made by geeks for geeks. They hardly know how to make it user friendly in a way that Joe the plumber can work with it. It’s insiders only. And it always will be, because they do not have the faintest idea how to sell it to a non-tech audience.

We can all sit here as well-informed computer and internet experts, or at least think we are, and discuss things like this ’till we’re blue in the face, but no-one outside that circle is ever going to use Ubuntu or whatever. For starters, because it does not come with their machine and they don’t fancy downloading and installing it.

Not that I enjoy the status quo. I would really like to see some serious competition for Microsoft. But it will take much more than just a small group of techies to get there.

Roelof, where is ‘over here’? Just curious.

I think that the problem is not that Ubuntu, and all other distributions, for that matter, are difficult to use, but that they are different than Windows.

Time and again, I’ve seen that those who are not used to anything have no problem with Linux - it’s the ones who are a little familiar with Windows trying to impose the mindset that ‘this is trying to compete with Windows, so it should work like Windows’ who are causing the problems.

Linux will take over when the first generation of children who grow up using it come into their own.

Thanks for the comment.

Yes, you should not have to make the transition from Windows when you want to use a different OS. Manufacturers should offer an alternative on their machines. But Microsoft has the market in a stronghold.

Ideally there should be a real alternative offered by a serious company that people are willing to trust. All too often Linux is being touted by a small group of insiders, who in their sincere enthousiasm turn themselves into fanatical zelots. Preaching to the converted, I’m afraid.

Oh and BTW, ‘over here’ is the Netherlands. See
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/nl.html