Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Did you say Vista Sucks?

Last response: in Windows Vista
Share
January 7, 2008 9:15:40 PM

I can’t believe people are so stupid these days, especially the ones who think they are technology experts. They say Vista sucks and so on. What a bunch of whining crybabies. These people need to get a grip on reality and learn something about computers. I will go through a few of the things they complain about and explain. Obviously, these people will simply not understand because they are just ignorant and greedy but I will do it anyway.

Vista is Slow – Yes, Vista is slow on a Pentium 4 with 512 MB RAM. Vista was designed to run on new and future hardware. Listen up! If you want to play with computers people, keep with the times. Common sense should tell you not to try and run a 2007 operating system on 1998 hardware. The computer industry moves forward, not backwards. So either trash your old hardware and get new stuff or keep running Windows XP and keep your mouths shut about the software that runs fine on my quad core machine.

Vista not Compatible – Again you are right! The computer industry is not only about new technologies, it is about making money. Just like I said above, the industry is moving forward at a fast rate. Do you think that all these companies that produced your printers, scanners, TV cards, game adapters and so on, are trying there best to keep your 5 year old equipment and software up to date. Keep wishing. I can just see the guys that make QuickBooks racking their brains to try and figure out how to get QuickBooks 2001 to run on Vista. They would really hate it if you had to spend another $200 to buy another upgrade. Grow up people. Now after all that, Shut the hell up about Vista and go tell HP, Dell, Kodak, Philips Logitech and so on that they all suck for not writing new drivers for Vista.

Vista has bugs – Well what did you expect when you try to please everybody? You want your OS to run all your old programs and all your new programs and all future programs and to work with every piece of hardware ever made. Did you ever stop to think that trying to combine all these different technologies might cause some problems? Like all other operating systems before it, Vista tries to be compatible with all this stuff, but in the end there are going to be problems.

Nothing New in Vista – Maybe Microsoft is tired of getting sued by third party developers for including stuff into their operating system. Just what exactly is this new stuff you want? Do you want a Star Trek computer? Little steps people, little steps. I have been using computers for 27 years and all the operating systems did pretty much the same stuff.

No, Vista is not perfect, but it is just another step in the operating system world. I have used DOS, Geos, Win 3.1, Win 95, Win 98, Win ME, Win XP, Linux and Vista over the years and they all have the exact same problems as Vista when they came out. So what’s all the complaining about? This is how it works, like it or not. If you think Vista sucks, then write your own operating system.

More about : vista sucks

January 8, 2008 12:56:32 PM

There are people that just like complaining.

I also started with DOS 2 (I believe... too far) and I have Vista 64, 4GB of RAM and E6600. It working great. Not perfect because some company are not moving there applications to Vista and 64bits fast enought.

I reminder when I reinstalled Win 3.1 in a newer machine like pentium and damn, that was fast! :)  OS are written for future machine that why it not that fast. XP is working great today because of that. Wait next year for Vista.
January 12, 2008 9:20:10 PM

I don't like complaining, but my entire platform is "vista certified" and all I get are progams that stop running, and bluescreen crashes.

What do you propose for those people?
Related resources
January 12, 2008 9:44:48 PM

righteous said:
I don't like complaining, but my entire platform is "vista certified" and all I get are progams that stop running, and bluescreen crashes.

What do you propose for those people?


Hard to say. But you may have some problem other than Vista. Then again it could be some app or hardware incompatibility with Vista. Without more info it is impossible to say.

Is this homebuilt or brand? OC or stock? How new? Problems all along or did they spring up after running OK for a time?
January 12, 2008 10:00:03 PM

To the OP: well said. I run Vista 64 with 6 gig ram, an e6600@ 3.5, and an 8800 gts. Smooth as silk. Glad to have Vista as a refreshing change from XP, though I still love XP too and run it on my lesser machines. Lot of FUD flying about Vista and very little substance to back up the complaints. The complaints are always so vague.
January 12, 2008 10:42:51 PM

I thought your post was perfectly presented. I could have not witten any differently expressing my disgust with people blaming Vista for their PC issues. I used the same PC with XP for five years (purchased - 04.14.02) until recently upgrading - 09.19.07. I did not have any problems with my old system. NONE. And now with my new system there are no problems either. ZERO. Windows Vista on my new rig is running better than perfect, if there is such a thing. It's a kick ass OS! I have written here recently to blame the hardware, not Vista. I knew it was a matter of time before I saw another post the the one I wrote. Nice work hrm2001. All the complaining makes me sick too. To all the Vista haters, I say, "shut it!" Go back to XP and shut it! You do not deserve to run Vista.
January 14, 2008 11:51:00 PM

Don't you agree that the people who have bought Vista are always the ones that shout out loud that there is nothing wrong with Vista? Why? They payed big bucks for it. Or did they buy that new pc that got Vista allready on it instead of the Pentium 4 with 512 MB RAM you are using as an example. Well, too bad to tell you this but I know different people who don't know how to build themselves a pc and they've bought an allready build pc at some stores and guess what? They had drivers issues and programs that would not run. When XP was first released this issue was way less worse than it is now. So why do you think people are complaining? Cause you spend lots of cash on Vista running superbly for you? Don't make me laugh. I just explained you why your post is total noncence. People don't lie about their issues...you just might have been among the few lucky guys that hasn't got issues YET. It's not that hard to understand. Hope this will help you to understand the whining of people. Wake up...it's reality.
January 14, 2008 11:59:15 PM

SyPheR said:
Don't you agree that the people who have bought Vista are always the ones that shout out loud that there is nothing wrong with Vista? Why? They payed big bucks for it. Or did they buy that new pc that got Vista allready on it instead of the Pentium 4 with 512 MB RAM you are using as an example. Well, too bad to tell you this but I know different people who don't know how to build themselves a pc and they've bought an allready build pc at some stores and guess what? They had drivers issues and programs that would not run. When XP was first released this issue was way less worse than it is now. So why do you think people are complaining? Cause you spend lots of cash on Vista running superbly for you? Don't make me laugh. I just explained you why your post is total noncence. People don't lie about their issues...you just might have been among the few lucky guys that hasn't got issues YET. It's not that hard to understand. Hope this will help you to understand the whining of people. Wake up...it's reality.


Thank you for that well sourced and articulate analysis. :sarcastic: 
January 15, 2008 11:15:20 AM

SyPheR said:
Don't you agree that the people who have bought Vista are always the ones that shout out loud that there is nothing wrong with Vista? Why? They payed big bucks for it. Or did they buy that new pc that got Vista allready on it instead of the Pentium 4 with 512 MB RAM you are using as an example. Well, too bad to tell you this but I know different people who don't know how to build themselves a pc and they've bought an allready build pc at some stores and guess what? They had drivers issues and programs that would not run. When XP was first released this issue was way less worse than it is now. So why do you think people are complaining? Cause you spend lots of cash on Vista running superbly for you? Don't make me laugh. I just explained you why your post is total noncence. People don't lie about their issues...you just might have been among the few lucky guys that hasn't got issues YET. It's not that hard to understand. Hope this will help you to understand the whining of people. Wake up...it's reality.




Sypher, speaking as one who went through Pre Service Pack 1 XP, as well as Vista, I have a few issues with your suppositions:


(1) Relative to the rest of your computer, the Operating System is hardly "Big Bucks" - OEM Vista Ultimate is $170, XP Pro has dropped $40 from the same pricing down to $130. Retail Vista? $320. Retail XP?? $280. Incidentally, the current Vista prices are what XP used to go for before Vista was released, and I'm sure that $40 isn't going to break the budget of anyone who'd building their own computer.

(2) It is absolutely true that People Do NOT do their Research when changing Operating Systems. They (seemignly) treat it like simply installing the cool app of the day. They expect all of the old crap they've had working for years to 'Just Work'. Anyone who's been building comps for a while knows very well that reality simply does not work like that. Microsoft *SAID* that a lot of people's old stuff won't work.

- - (2a) Drivers and Applications - Microsoft made a big change in the OS from XP: Drivers and applications/non-OS services can no longer communicate directly to the kernel and to the hardware. This was done because hackers were using this to write malware. Users, IT professionals, and the press have been screaming about Malware in Windows for years. So guess what!?!? Microsoft shut the door. OOPS!?!?! Now we all get a first hand view of the great "service" provided by the Lazy Programmers who couldn't be bothered to code their Drivers and Apps properly. How do we know who they are?? Their stuff doesnt' work any more. Why?? Microsoft closed their shortcuts by forcing the use of the OS. Again - Microsoft said in advance that many older apps won't work any more.


(3) Why do I think people are complaining??

- - (3a) They took an Operating System change far too lightly. They didn't do their research as to what does and does not work, and are now forced to troubleshoot it item by item.

- - (3b) Vista works differently from XP: They layout is a little different, some of the commands have changed, and people are lazy and don't want to be bothered learning new stuff. And yes, User Access Control is freaking annoying. But such is the price of security - *We* are the people running the apps that install the Malware. So the reward for that is "Are You Sure" screens. I figure somewhere around Vista SP3, if we install something we shouldn't have we'll get follow up messages saying "I Told You So, Dumba$$", the information as to who and what will be forwarded to Microsoft, who will have their own version of "MySpace" showing the names, dates, times, places, and type of malware that got into the system because people.... Nevermind - It'd end up being half the freaking Internet... :lol: 


- - (3c) Remember my earlier point about Microsoft changing access to core services?? Programmers have to (re)learn how to write efficient drivers. Slowdowns, errors, and (yes!) crashes are the rewards for failure. Just look to the more recent gaming benchies showing the frame rate difference from XP to Vista has greatly closed. Why?? ATI and nVidia figured out how to write efficient drivers. In the meantime, people b*tch and blame the OS.

- - (3d) It is FAR FAR FAR easier to b*tch and complain about the Error Of The Day than it is to figure out how to fix it. Driver errors?? In XP people know what that looks like and how to fix it. In Vista, people blame the OS and Walk away. Apparently this is acceptable behavior. Settings? People know what they are in XP. Vista's are different. But do people get a book and learn them?? NO, they b*tch and complein that the OS doesn't do what they wanted because that's easier than learning how to make the appropriate change. Etc etc etc... Ad Nauseam...

- - (3e) Lying about issues?? You mean the people who make posts complaining about "Endless Problems", yet when you ask for specifics they go strangely silent???? Naaah... Couldn't be. :sarcastic: 
- - - - (3e1) And far be it for someone to blow a molehill into a mountain, or make something up just to start controversy. That just doesnt' happen on the Internet. :sarcastic:  :sarcastic:  :sarcastic:  :sarcastic:  :sarcastic: 


(4) Pre Service Pack 1 XP.... Better and more stable than Vista!?!??!?! Dude... I lived through first release XP, and there is no comparison: Vista is/was FAR FAR FAR better than XP was at the same stage. More secure, more device/driver support, and *Hugely* more stable. No doubt in my mind. Compare XP SP2/3 to Vista?? Different story because Microsoft have had a good chunk of a decade to work out the bugs. XP SP2/3 is faster and more trouble free than just released Vista. But release to release?? No contest: Vista at release blows XP at release out of the water.
January 15, 2008 12:24:08 PM

I would expect from people that have been using computers for so long (if you can remember using dos you re at least 30) and people who have such superior tecnical knowledge to act different than 12 year olds. Your "logic" is based on the asumption: I once fell from a 20 foot lader and landed without a scratch so if you fell from the same lader and got hurt, you re just a pussy. You ceep forgeting that people paid for an os that in many cases seems to have STABILITY isues! I couldnt disagree more with people critisizing vista speed. Just upgrade your hardware! Now in my personal experience, I ve allways upgaded my pc before installing a new os and in the case of win95, win98 and winXP i didnt have a single issue. WinME on the other hand was a nightmare. Vista is not that bad, but it will not open Firefox, it sometime stalls and in general its not fan to operate. Ive been patient since April cause i realy like its potential as an os but am sorry to say that for me, for the past 9 months Vista is crap
January 15, 2008 12:28:17 PM

What version of Firefox? I ask because I run 32 bit FF on V64, and haven't had a problem... Should probably take this to another thread, tho..
January 15, 2008 12:32:06 PM

alliswell said:
I would expect from people that have been using computers for so long (if you can remember using dos you re at least 30) and people who have such superior tecnical knowledge to act different than 12 year olds. Your "logic" is based on the asumption: I once fell from a 20 foot lader and landed without a scratch so if you fell from the same lader and got hurt, you re just a pussy. You ceep forgeting that people paid for an os that in many cases seems to have STABILITY isues! I couldnt disagree more with people critisizing vista speed. Just upgrade your hardware! Now in my personal experience, I ve allways upgaded my pc before installing a new os and in the case of win95, win98 and winXP i didnt have a single issue. WinME on the other hand was a nightmare. Vista is not that bad, but it will not open Firefox, it sometime stalls and in general its not fan to operate. Ive been patient since April cause i realy like its potential as an os but am sorry to say that for me, for the past 9 months Vista is crap

Did you tried to install SP1?
January 15, 2008 12:34:58 PM

2.0.0.11 It started last month when I downloaded the previous update and the new one last week didnt fix it
January 15, 2008 12:39:55 PM

Not yet. I read that it might create more issues so I ll wait till the weekend comes so i can reinstall vista if it does not work
January 16, 2008 2:13:00 AM

To SyPheR

"Don't you agree that the people who have bought Vista are always the ones that shout out loud that there is nothing wrong with Vista?"

So you are saying that all the complaining is coming from people who do not own Vista?

"I know different people who don't know how to build themselves a pc and they've bought an allready build pc at some stores and guess what? They had drivers issues and programs that would not run."

Would you care to explain why it is Vista's fault that PC manufacturers mislead people by advertising PCs as Vista capable when they clearly are not? Microsoft is even guilty here for giving permission to do so. However, it has nothing to do with Vista's performance. It is the crappy PC and crap ware the manufacturer put on it.

"When XP was first released this issue was way less worse than it is now."

I would have to disagree. I had many problems with XP when it came out. I actually removed it several times and put my old OS back on until I actually stuck with it for a while and fixed as many problems as I could and just got use to the rest. Today it would be a Joke to prefer Win 98 to XP.

"People don't lie about their issues"

Where did I say anyone lied? I said I agreed they had real issues. Because they were using outdated hardware and software. Do people really want technological progress to just stop because they really like what they got now? What about the future. If I had felt this way when I was running windows 3.1 with a 486 computer at 33 MHz, 1 MB RAM and 128 MB hard drive, could you imagine me still using that system today? Well that's exactly what these people are asking for who want to save XP and have Microsoft support it indefinitely. These are the people who need a wake up call.
January 16, 2008 2:29:09 AM

Quote:
What about the future. If I had felt this way when I was running windows 3.1 with a 486 computer at 33 MHz, 1 MB RAM and 128 MB hard drive, could you imagine me still using that system today? Well that's exactly what these people are asking for who want to save XP and have Microsoft support it indefinitely. These are the people who need a wake up call.


Exactly. This is how the machine is improved. New demanding software drives sales of better hardware. Better hardware is expensive at first and soon is as cheap as the old stuff was and we are all very glad to have better software and hardware and that's EXACTLY why we have XP today and not Dos 3.

You sticks in the mud can draw your line in the sand if you want. I'm movin on.
January 16, 2008 3:33:55 AM


Spoiler

Go buy a decent PC before you try Vista. Don't try and run XP on a system that ran Windows 3.1. Get it?

All heil the beloved:


From what I have been reading here and elsewhere, the people having the most issues with Vista are the ones running the 64 bit version which seems to be too advanced for some drivers and software applications. Again it is not Vista at fault. Vista is an advanced OS, ready to take us into computing bliss for at least the next five years. Do not blame the OS, blame the hardware, drivers, and software. Give it another 6 more months and these issues will be a thing of the past. Sooner or later these hardware manufacturers, etc, will have to buck up and get with the friggin program. The fact that most hardware, software, and drivers do work just fine proves again that Vista is NOT to blame. Quit your whining. I agree, many need to..."get with the program!"

January 16, 2008 8:05:11 AM

hrm2001 said:


Do people really want technological progress to just stop because they really like what they got now? What about the future. If I had felt this way when I was running windows 3.1 with a 486 computer at 33 MHz, 1 MB RAM and 128 MB hard drive, could you imagine me still using that system today? Well that's exactly what these people are asking for who want to save XP and have Microsoft support it indefinitely. These are the people who need a wake up call.


Technology progressing is a good thing and I wouldn't want to go back to my old Windows 95 Machine. It's not about saving XP indefinitely (well not for me at least), it's just that Vista can do little more than what XP could already with a potential for problems .
Will Vista phase XP out? I believe it will over time. New computers will be sold with Vista and no XP option. Vista will be the only windows choice for system builders. This is what pretty much happens with every edition of Windows. If the past is anything to go by Vista can get better with service packs.

XP will end up just like Win98, but not just yet :)  ;) 
January 16, 2008 1:48:44 PM

The only issues I've had with Vista I could easily blame on software or drivers... rather than blaming Vista. Everytime MS puts out a new OS, there are always detractors; and because more and more people are using computers, you're hearing more and more people bitch about the new OS. Of course, it's also the "cool" thing to do... that's the price MS pays for being #1.
January 17, 2008 12:29:55 AM

hrm2001 said:


SyPheR >>"I know different people who don't know how to build themselves a pc and they've bought an allready build pc at some stores and guess what? They had drivers issues and programs that would not run."

hrm2001 >>Would you care to explain why it is Vista's fault that PC manufacturers mislead people by advertising PCs as Vista capable when they clearly are not? Microsoft is even guilty here for giving permission to do so. However, it has nothing to do with Vista's performance. It is the crappy PC and crap ware the manufacturer put on it.



True, I have to agree with you on that. And that's the whole problem behind Vista. It's the problem I'm kinda bashing on. Everybody agrees on this and so should you...It's all over the magazines etc.....Vista is released too early by Microsoft. And I just hate Microsoft for this doing it over and over again. It's ike a money making machine....we deliver crap with lots of mistakes and we will fix them later in the form of Service Packs....buy it or leave it....your choice. Sure Vista is not all crap....I'm sure I could run it on my Q6600 with 4GB mem and P5W DH DEluxe with good performance. The only problem is people buying a new pc that don't even have pc knowledge are really screwed because of this. People like you and me just find our patches and fixed drivers etc to make our system run smooth like silk while maintaining our (yes weakspot) registry problems.
You are right about XP...sure it also had some problems doesn't all new OS releases? From what Ive read in magazines and on The Internet about XP in it's release period was not that bad then it is now for Vista. Still, magazines have finally got the picture that many people (except for people who prefer XP instead) still own it now wether they like it or not and come with topics like...."HOW TO FIX THOSE VISTA PROBLEMS". They can't get a quality product ready in time because time is money. The proof are the Service packs that really solve big issues...not only minor.
Now you can say that all new os have issueus...sure. But hello.....aren't we living in 2008 now? When you deliver a new OS you make sure that at least the hardware and most software work instead of fixing them problems afterwards. It's called planning and look ahead in time.
For example....how do you think games are created? By a bunch of farmer boys that have never touched a pc? No, they talk to Microsoft and hardware companies like Nvidia and ATI (AMD) before creating it. It's a matter of planning....and that's the main problem why there are so many haters out there. Not that I'm a hater....I use XP myself next to Linux and wait for Vienna instead.
Talking about Vienna...mark my words...the release date is planned at 2010...wanna bet something goes wrong again and they will have to release it 2 years later? ;)  Maybe they even have to rewrite it all over again (just like what happened with vista) .
Well, I emptied my final beer now.... srry for my bad english....I'm off to bed :)  gn8.
January 17, 2008 1:58:44 AM

Yes, I do agree SyPheR. But maybe there is more to this then people realize. Microsoft is a big company with a lot of smart people working there. You do not run a company for 10-20 years and not know how to swindle the people. What is Vista's biggest competitor? You got it, Windows XP. In all the articles about Vista, they make it look like Microsoft is losing out somehow because Vista is not popular. If Microsoft does not sell Vista, it sells XP, and doesn't all the money go to the same place? Microsoft Did not seem to put up much of a fight when retailers like Dell asked them to extend the use of XP on new computers. Well you know what? All these smart people who wanted XP on their new machines will end up buying 2 operating systems from dumb Microsoft when Vista becomes mainstream. I don't hate Microsoft, it's a business and I would be doing the same thing. Its all about making the customers happy and making money. So they do some of both.

As far as people complaining about Vista, It just bothers me when someone with no knowledge about computers is telling people to stay away from Vista because it is garbage. Like an article I just read the other day, and this was suppose to be some tech writer. He was complaining that whenever he went back to a certain folder, Vista removed all his columns for file details. He said he would add them back. but the next time they would be gone again. Boy something was really wrong with Vista for sure. The damn fool apparently did not know anything about Folder Types. You know in the folder properties where you select either Music, Pictures, Documents. For example, If you take a folder full of documents and make the folder type MUSIC. You will lose all your document column details and will only be able to sort by Artist, Album, etc. And if you add or change columns they will revert back to the default Music folder type. That was his problem and he did not have a clue. If there had been a place to comment on that page I would have told him what a fool he was.

Anyway, In my opinion if you have a PC from before 2007, stay with XP. If it is 2007 or later, and at least a dual core CPU, 1 GB RAM (minimum) and a decent graphics card and no desire to run old software, Vista will work fine for you. I would like to point out that I am using Office 2000 and Quicken 2001 with no problems so far. Actually I download and install lots of programs to try out, then mostly uninstall them and clean up my machine. But I do not think I have come across any program that would not run because of Vista.
January 17, 2008 8:38:20 AM

Vista was Rewritten?? Where do you people get this stuff??

Aahh... Nevermind - I found it - It appears some moron in Australia with a blog decided to take legitimate information about a service being rewritten, and used that to say that almost the entire OS was being redone. Too bad that was debunked almost two years ago. But what the hell...


http://blogs.pcworld.com/techlog/archives/001723.html
January 17, 2008 1:55:35 PM

Scotteq said:
Vista was Rewritten?? Where do you people get this stuff??

Aahh... Nevermind - I found it - It appears some moron in Australia with a blog decided to take legitimate information about a service being rewritten, and used that to say that almost the entire OS was being redone. Too bad that was debunked almost two years ago. But what the hell...


http://blogs.pcworld.com/techlog/archives/001723.html


Didn't get that news...thx for sharing it. :) 

Too hrm2001>>Yes, totally true. I agree on everything you've said. It's like you say. If people can't run Vista on their PC's they can always buy XP, right?
Microsoft wants to stop XP sails at the 1st of July.
Hope they'll reconsider this strategy for people who don't have a pc yet that is capable of running Vista while being in desperate need to buy a new copy of XP. Oh well, these people can always start using Linux right? ;) 

Btw, what do you think of this...Microsoft again under EU investigation. I think it's a good case Microsoft has to stay true to certain rulez that apply in Europe.

Here is a little piece of what they will investigate at first;

The first new investigation -- triggered by a complaint from Norway's Opera Software ASA -- will look at whether Microsoft illegally gives away its Internet Explorer browser with Windows. Opera had called on the EU to strip Internet Explorer out of Windows or carry alternative browsers.

The investigation will check if "new proprietary technologies" held other browsers back by not following open-Internet standards. Regulators said they had also received allegations that Microsoft illegally had packaged desktop search and Windows Live into its operating system.

And this is the 2nd investigation;

The second investigation will examine whether Microsoft withheld information from companies that wanted to make products compatible with its software -- including Office word processing, spreadsheet and office management tools, some server products and Microsoft's push into the Internet under the name of the .NET framework.

Because Microsoft supplies the software to the vast majority of home and office computers, rivals complain that refusal to give them interoperability information shuts the door on a huge potential market.
January 17, 2008 2:17:43 PM

Quote:
The first new investigation -- triggered by a complaint from Norway's Opera Software ASA -- will look at whether Microsoft illegally gives away its Internet Explorer browser with Windows. Opera had called on the EU to strip Internet Explorer out of Windows or carry alternative browsers.


This is madness. A maker of an OS should be able to put in a web browser. Any web browser they want. If you prefer Opera or FF it is a click away. The EU is making a bald money a grab, IMHO.

I don't think MS should be able to actively try to crush the competing browsers but simply leaving them out of the Windows install? How is that crushing anything? It's a free choice. You can use any browser you want.

Hell, maybe I'll write my own version of notepad and demand that be included too, or Solitaire. A browser is an integral part of an OS at this point.
January 17, 2008 5:39:03 PM

Microsoft is hindering interoperability by not following accepted open Web standards.

If this is true I think Opera has got a point. The stuff that microsoft intregates IE into Windows is kinda old news don't you think so? It's not the main issue.
It's more the open web standards that troubles the competition and that also leaves us browsing less comfortable. So it's not only Opera's problem....it's our problem as well.
We all know people who don't know anything about computing use IE as they never even heared of Opera/Firefox/Camino/Safari etc...
I just hope this bullshitting around with open web standards will come to a halt.
January 17, 2008 6:03:16 PM

Quote:
If this is true I think Opera has got a point. The stuff that microsoft intregates IE into Windows is kinda old news don't you think so? It's not the main issue.


Actually, I think for Opera it is the main issue. They want NO browsers pre-installed on windows and want to be on the Windows disk along with other browsers to show up as an option when you go to 'choose your browser'. This is old news in the US of course but the EU is trying to open up the same old question, big time!

As far as the 'open standards' are concerned I have not followed that closely but in general I do think MS should follow the standards set by the appropriate standard setting body. I'm not sure they should be forced to do so though. And the politics behind all of this is trecherous, on both sides. That is a tricky business.

The push to get Opera on the Windows install is what sparks my ire. The browser standards issue I am open to.

MS seems to think they own the consumer PC platform and in a way they do I suppose, since other platforms form only a tiny share put together. It's a tough call. I tend to think the market will sort these things itself and I seriously doubt the EU has any more clue than the US justice depatment did about trying to goveren the wild and ever changing world of technology.

I don't like MS being heavy handed. I don't but I like the EU meddling even less. It already netted them $700 mil in fines or so. Deep down I'd like to see MS just pull out of the EU and let them scramble. I don't think MS will do this though. Too much cance this would allow another OS, Linux likely, to get entrenched.

Can you imagine what the EU would do to Apple? They bundle everything and control their platform ten time more than MS.
January 17, 2008 6:26:06 PM

I don't see the harm in including a Browser with windows. It's a Microsoft OS ,so what is the problem with including Microsoft applications? Like someone has already mentioned, other browsers are just a simple click away. I don't understand how Microsoft is crushing other browsers, it's just utter nonsense.

Quote:
We all know people who don't know anything about computing use IE as they never even heared of Opera/Firefox/Camino/Safari etc...


I personally prefer Firefox over Internet Explorer because it's a tad faster for me and possibly more secure.
Internet Explorer 7 is by no means a bad browser and from my experience it suffers less bugs than Firefox. I would rather use Internet explorer over Opera and certainly more so than the awful safari.
January 17, 2008 6:47:38 PM

Nah, you guys are missing out on the point here. The main problem is that people who make websites have to make the website compatible with all browers >> IE/Firefox/Opera. Never heared of this problem? Open web standards. It's not only about IE being integrated into Windows. I agree about the integration part and me too see it as kinda harmless. That's not really monopoly. But the Open web standard used to build websites with are as they continuesly change them giving compatibily issues in other browsers except IE. If you think this is a good development think twice....it's not. It costs the browser developers damn much time to addept to this problem while Microsoft who has IE integrated does not have to worry about these development delays as they have none. That's the whole idea behind this matter. You can't make me believe that's a fair competition.
January 18, 2008 12:45:03 AM

Great discussion. If Microsoft was the horrible beast people make it out to be, they would have written code in the OS to block installation of other browsers, hell, all other non MS software a long time ago, but they never have done this. It's the internet/PC savvy like you guys who know the difference, and seek out alternative non MS apps.
January 18, 2008 11:40:26 PM

I usually don't get too involved in these kind of issues, but I will give my opinion on the matter.

1. If MS were to remove IE from the OS, we would have a slight problem. We would have NO browser! How would we get one installed onto the computer? This is assuming that MS does not provide any service to install one. Which I wouldn't blame them if they did that. The only way to get a browser would be to call the companies for Firefox and Opera and ask them to send you a CD. I don't believe you can even get them in a store. I don't think a lot of people would like that. And I think including Opera on the Windows Install CD is a ridiculous request.

2. I'm not that much into business, but I really don't understand how a company that gives away their product for free can say someone else is a monopoly? What are their damages?

3. Is Internet Explorer an essential part of the operating system? I would have to say Yes. The majority of people buying computers today is to get on the internet. Think of all these novice uses that use IE because they know of no other browser. Can you picture them sitting in front of a computer that does not contain a browser. I can see them all taking their computers back to the store because they can't get on the internet.

4. I really don't believe the problem is a monopoly. It is the lack of consumer awareness, or how ever else you want to put it. Should MS be singled out and punished for utilizing mass consumer ignorance?

5. About the web standards, I'm not sure if I understand properly. Is it that most web page developers are only concerned with making their pages look good in IE (who doesn't follow the standard) and the other Browser companies have to edit their software to conform to the web pages? I'm not sure. I do agree that MS should follow a standard that has been setup. But I do not know much about this subject.
January 19, 2008 12:11:11 AM

hrm2001 said:


5. About the web standards, I'm not sure if I understand properly. Is it that most web page developers are only concerned with making their pages look good in IE (who doesn't follow the standard) and the other Browser companies have to edit their software to conform to the web pages? I'm not sure. I do agree that MS should follow a standard that has been setup. But I do not know much about this subject.


If you want to know about web standards....read here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_standards

The complaint calls on Microsoft to adhere to its own public pronouncements to support these standards, instead of stifling them with its notorious “Embrace, Extend and Extinguish” strategy. Microsoft’s unilateral control over standards in some markets creates a de facto standard that is more costly to support, harder to maintain, and technologically inferior and that can even expose users to security risks.

And this while Opera has long held the position of innovator in the Web browser market, having introduced and pioneered features like tabbed browsing, Speed Dial, integrated search bar, mouse gestures. At the end we are the onces that pay the price.

I think the real European inventor of this deserves credits and not to be put in the background by Microsoft while Microsoft copy's (just like they've copied/stole most of Vista's interface layout from MAC OSX 10) all of those inventions into their own new browsers while making it difficult for the competition by controlling the webstandards in their own little way. I think Microsoft is about to pay the price again and again we will see lots of people who don't understand anything about webstandards say that Europe is bad etc while in fact it's a good thing that we try to solve this God blesh America Microsoft problem. There are rulez too. Even their God knows it ;) 
January 19, 2008 12:40:01 AM

There are two issues here. Standards and, for lack of knowing the proper term, browser bundling. Opera wants you to have a choice of browsers, likely by having theirs and others, included on the Windows install or else by having no browsers at all on the install.

I'm flexible on standards but not on the bundling. I think this happened a ways back in the EU about WMP. MS was forced to release a version, N I think they called it, that had not media player at all. The same editions of XP, identical, except N had no WMP. I'd like to know what if any effect this had on popularizing other media players.

Perhaps MS should just release a ver of windows in the EU with no browser. Of course there is a catch 22 there.

MS has the perfect right to put there own browser on there, imo. Other browsers are just A CLICK AWAY. NO CHARGE. The success of FF proves it can be done. Why hasn't Opera been able to achieve the same penetration as FF? They want the EU to do all the work for them. Screw em, I say
January 19, 2008 9:49:05 AM

notherdude said:
There are two issues here. Standards and, for lack of knowing the proper term, browser bundling. Opera wants you to have a choice of browsers, likely by having theirs and others, included on the Windows install or else by having no browsers at all on the install.

I'm flexible on standards but not on the bundling.


Yes, indeed there are two issues here but you are only using the issue bundeling to bash on EU and Opera while in fact the most important issue here is something that not only Opera agrees with but also Firefox and other browsermakers.
It's just that Opera makes the call.
Have you ever noticed what is happening with Firefox 3 for example? It totally sucks in security. It's got bugs etc.
It's just plain simple what Microsoft is doing.....why don't you talk about that instead of the stupid integration part that Microsoft has been blamed for over many years.
It's totally true what you say about that. I think it's complete noncence too. But dont give Opera and EU all the blame cause this time the web standard issue is more important.
I would like you to answer this question please.

Do you think it's fair that when Web Standards being edited in a private way so the competition has problems keeping up? Look at the proud American product Firefox 3 that now totally sucks and other browsers like Safari that have issues because of this etc. Don't you think it's time that someone stood up against this? PLease don't start about bundeling again that we allready know of....we talk web site development standards here that is the most important factor. We allready know the integration part sucks and that it's useless too blame Microsoft for doing that.
January 19, 2008 10:22:52 AM

Windows Vista is by far the best windows, I just wanna give it to the guys a microsoft for doing such a fine job with this product and i have nothing but good things to say about vista.Microsoft keep up the great job you been doing thanks.


William,
January 19, 2008 2:35:52 PM

SyPheR said:
Yes, indeed there are two issues here but you are only using the issue bundeling to bash on EU and Opera while in fact the most important issue here is something that not only Opera agrees with but also Firefox and other browsermakers.
It's just that Opera makes the call.
Have you ever noticed what is happening with Firefox 3 for example? It totally sucks in security. It's got bugs etc.
It's just plain simple what Microsoft is doing.....why don't you talk about that instead of the stupid integration part that Microsoft has been blamed for over many years.
It's totally true what you say about that. I think it's complete noncence too. But dont give Opera and EU all the blame cause this time the web standard issue is more important.
I would like you to answer this question please.

Do you think it's fair that when Web Standards being edited in a private way so the competition has problems keeping up? Look at the proud American product Firefox 3 that now totally sucks and other browsers like Safari that have issues because of this etc. Don't you think it's time that someone stood up against this? PLease don't start about bundeling again that we allready know of....we talk web site development standards here that is the most important factor. We allready know the integration part sucks and that it's useless too blame Microsoft for doing that.


I made a big deal about bundling because, as I read the story when it came out, it seemed to me that that was the big issue. Anyway, I was a little foggy on that but I found the Opera itself has published it's complaint on it's website:

Quote:
The complaint describes how Microsoft is abusing its dominant position by tying its browser, Internet Explorer, to the Windows operating system and by hindering interoperability by not following accepted Web standards. Opera has requested the Commission to take the necessary actions to compel Microsoft to give consumers a real choice and to support open Web standards in Internet Explorer.

Opera requests the Commission to implement two remedies to Microsoft’s abusive actions. First, it requests the Commission to obligate Microsoft to unbundle Internet Explorer from Windows and/or carry alternative browsers pre-installed on the desktop. Second, it asks the European Commission to require Microsoft to follow fundamental and open Web standards accepted by the Web-authoring communities. The complaint calls on Microsoft to adhere to its own public pronouncements to support these standards, instead of stifling them with its notorious "Embrace, Extend and Extinguish" strategy. Microsoft's unilateral control over standards in some markets creates a de facto standard that is more costly to support, harder to maintain, and technologically inferior and that can even expose users to security risks.

"Our complaint is necessary to get Microsoft to amend its practices," said Jason Hoida, Deputy General Counsel, Opera."The European Court of First Instance confirmed in September that Microsoft has illegally tied Windows Media Player to Windows. We are simply asking the Commission to apply these same, clear principles to the Internet Explorer tie, a tie that has even more profound effects on consumers and innovation. We are confident that the Commission understands the significance of the Internet Explorer tie and will take the necessary actions to restore competition and consumer choice in the browser market."


So, it's two prong but it sounds to me that the bundling issue is primary in the complaint.
Anyway, you and I seem to agree on the bundling. About the standards: what is unclear to me is this -

1. is MS changing the OS, frequently, with an aim to disrupt the competition, to break browsers other than it's own? Doesn't sound like it. The browsers still start up and run and render the vast amount pages correctly, so it's more subtle than this

2. Is MS changing IE as it pleases, on the fly as it were, thus forcing web page creators to change their pages and in the process break those pages on other browsers?

3. Is MS simply sticking to it's own standards which are contrary to what the non-MS consensus believes should be standard? In which case web creators will of course make their pages compliant with the dominant browser, IE, and the other browsers can either do it the MS way or the highway? Not a nice choice to have to make but they can do it, if they are willing to make those concessions. If this is the case I see no legal issue myself.

It sounded to me like #3 was the case "and by hindering interoperability by not following accepted Web standards", and "Microsoft's unilateral control over standards in some markets creates a de facto standard that is more costly to support, harder to maintain, and technologically inferior and that can even expose users to security risks."

but I am happy to admit that I have not looked into the standards thing deeply. If FF is having issues exactly how is MS responsible?

So, if you know the details please fill me in and make the case.
January 19, 2008 4:38:42 PM

Excactly...we can't know everything orelse the case would allready be clear if it was that simple.

You are right about MS simple sticking to it's own standards and offcourse they come with updates. If this happens Firefox will still start up newly designed pages but once webpages are designed with the new standards Firefox needs to be adjusted again to make the code work. This takes time plus it causes security problems and leaks that nobody want. It's that simple. It's not good.
Microsoft should pass on the updates they do or at least communicate with other webbrowser developers before doing so.

It's the same like....Crytek is developing Crysis and suddenly Vista gets changed and Crysis shows bugs cause it was written to function with a certain code that is now updated. You see that happen? I won't. But in browserland is does happen when loading webpages and that pisses Opera etc off. But anyways...we should just wait and see what happens. There first comes a whole investigation. Nobody gets the blame YET.
January 19, 2008 5:12:49 PM

SyPheR said:
Excactly...we can't know everything orelse the case would allready be clear if it was that simple.

You are right about MS simple sticking to it's own standards and offcourse they come with updates. If this happens Firefox will still start up newly designed pages but once webpages are designed with the new standards Firefox needs to be adjusted again to make the code work. This takes time plus it causes security problems and leaks that nobody want. It's that simple. It's not good.
Microsoft should pass on the updates they do or at least communicate with other webbrowser developers before doing so.

It's the same like....Crytek is developing Crysis and suddenly Vista gets changed and Crysis shows bugs cause it was written to function with a certain code that is now updated. You see that happen? I won't. But in browserland is does happen when loading webpages and that pisses Opera etc off. But anyways...we should just wait and see what happens. There first comes a whole investigation. Nobody gets the blame YET.


As I see it, it all depends on the details. If MS is merely writing IE a certain way and other browser comapanies and the standards groups don't like that way but feel they are being forced to comply, else their browsers don't work on any and all pages, then I see a potential sort of moral issue but not a legal one.

I do feel a real sense of unfair play if the other browsers are not getting advance warning of changes to the OS itself, which would injure their products. This much I would feel somewhat comfortable with legal intervention - somehow I think there is a lot more going on here than just that though.

I'm going to read up on this more. I simply don't fully understand the standards issue.
January 21, 2008 5:56:38 PM

In regards to Vista, it's a new operating system. There will never be software or an operating system released that doesn't initially have some bugs and/or compatibility issues. Period.

In regards to the whole MS/EU suit thing. Who cares? MS is a business. The idea of a business is to make money. If you don't like it, don't buy it. Period. The whole issue of integrating and this idea that MS is changing stuff to "hinder the competition" is nothing but socialist political rhetoric.

Quote:
The main problem is that people who make websites have to make the website compatible with all browers >> IE/Firefox/Opera. Never heared of this problem? Open web standards.


As a web developer, I, too, find it frustrating to have to cater to multiple compatibility levels. But the reality is that the web standards are there as a basis. Would it be nice is MS adhered to them? Yes. Should they have to? No.

Quote:
Do you think it's fair that when Web Standards being edited in a private way so the competition has problems keeping up?


You're saying MS is controlling the web standards now? Sorry, friend, but I think your tin foil hat is defective.

Quote:
Look at the proud American product Firefox 3 that now totally sucks and other browsers like Safari that have issues because of this etc.


Just for the record, Firefox 3 is in beta stage. If a browser can't keep up with the current technologies, it's their own problem.

P.S. As hrm pointed out above, check his links. IE8 passes the "Acid 2" test.
January 21, 2008 6:28:07 PM

alliswell said:
I would expect from people that have been using computers for so long (if you can remember using dos you re at least 30) and people who have such superior tecnical knowledge to act different than 12 year olds. Your "logic" is based on the asumption: I once fell from a 20 foot lader and landed without a scratch so if you fell from the same lader and got hurt, you re just a pussy. You ceep forgeting that people paid for an os that in many cases seems to have STABILITY isues! I couldnt disagree more with people critisizing vista speed. Just upgrade your hardware! Now in my personal experience, I ve allways upgaded my pc before installing a new os and in the case of win95, win98 and winXP i didnt have a single issue. WinME on the other hand was a nightmare. Vista is not that bad, but it will not open Firefox, it sometime stalls and in general its not fan to operate. Ive been patient since April cause i realy like its potential as an os but am sorry to say that for me, for the past 9 months Vista is crap



I had that same problem with Firefox just not opening sometimes. The process would be there, but the app would never actually load. It turned out to be caused by the JohnQ TV plugin that I installed on Firefox a while back. Once I removed JohnQ TV .. firefox began working perfectly again. That is of course if you have any plugins installed within firefox.

!