Xp still outselling Vista

Discussion in 'Windows OS and Software' started by eleron911, Aug 8, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Shyster1

    Shyster1 Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    6,926
    Messages:
    8,179
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    205
    _Vista is certainly not a "technical disaster" but, in many relevant respects, neither is it an improvement over XP, and it does come with some additional bells and whistles as compared to _Vista that only serve to pull it down just that little bit more.

    In terms of performance, _Vista is intentionally designed to underperform as compared to XP by, for example, intentionally prioritizing the user's requested I/O over background I/O, even if that results in less throughput (i.e., less overall performance). The topic is discussed in rather rosy terms in a Microsoft whitepaper entitled I/O Prioritization in Windows_Vista.

    Also, a number of functions have been removed. Most are of no consequence as they are typically only for legacy support; however, a few had use for experienced users, but were most likely removed to further dumb the system down for purposes of the targetted audience - the "typical" consumer user. A brief discussion on Wikipedia can be read here.

    To be fair, there have also been some improvements, such as a much more sophisticated event monitoring subsystem, as described in this Wikipedia article. As I've gotten more and more interested in plumbing the guts of my OS, I've found myself resorting more and more often to the event logs, and while helpful, the XP event logs can be quite frustrating at times.

    In terms of large enterprises refusing to move over, that to me is less surprising than the objections from individual users given that mixing _Vista machines and XP machines (or, heaven forbid, even older types) on a large network that needs to be secure must be a nightmare; for example, in order for a _Vista machine to properly "see" an XP machine, an extra utility, the Link Layer Topology Discovery Responder, must be downloaded and installed on all of the pre-existing XP machines.

    All in all, _Vista is simply not worth the trouble and hassle of moving over to it, and does not provide a significant enough benefit to outweigh the additional downsides that it adds. Finally, unless you have an enterprise or business version of _Vista, security support will run out on your copy of _Vista two years before it runs out on XP. That means that anyone, other than those with business versions, who moves to _Vista now and is concerned about their security will be forced to move to Win7 in 2012, whereas anyone who's stayed with XP will not have to move to Win7 for security reasons until 2014. Why make two moves, particularly when one will be forced at a time when Win7 is still relatively untested, when you can get to exactly the same spot by 2014 at less cost and hassle with rejiggering your systems, and at a time when Win7 will have been more thoroughly battle-tested in the real world?
     
  2. Falundir

    Falundir Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    213
    Messages:
    308
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    Shyster really hit the nail on the head. A Company/Firm needs a reason to switch, some cost savings benefit, or feature that the prior version does not contain. When it comes to Vista the feature set for business is just too minimal for the cost requirements.
     
  3. Icewalker

    Icewalker Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    63
    Messages:
    105
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
  4. S.SubZero

    S.SubZero Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    467
    Messages:
    1,348
    Likes Received:
    121
    Trophy Points:
    81
    You just keep playing this same tune. You believe what you want, I'll download this month's security updates for _Windows 2000.

    At this point, Vista's reputation isn't going to recover, no matter how much MS throws at it. Vista wasn't perfect at launch, but it wasn't bad. The naysayers made it much worse than it is. PC tech has caught up and far eclipsed the "high" resource needs of Vista (which aren't that far off from other OS's of this same usability). Your typical $800 Newegg econo-build can handle Vista, even Vista x64, with ease.

    Windows 7 isn't going to help, and any tech-saavy IT person knows this. In fact Windows 7 is probably going to end up being even larger and more resource heavy than Vista.
     
  5. d4nz0r

    d4nz0r Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    48
    Messages:
    353
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    Blah blah same old Vista hate, different day. Why do XP users get off on this? Go use your 7 year old OS and we'll use ours. We don't care that you don't like Vista 'because of the annoying UAC popups'.
     
  6. coolguy

    coolguy Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    805
    Messages:
    4,685
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    106
    XP is outselling Vista because it was released in 2001. Stop debating xp vs vista for this simple answer.
     
  7. kanehi

    kanehi Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    146
    Messages:
    1,943
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    XP outselling Vista? People are snatching up the remaining XP discs before it all disappears. Corporations don't usually switch because it's not cost effective and with no real difference in performance. My work uses XP Pro even though they are new computers. It used to be Windows 2000. XP will linger for a while but like previous OS's will fade to glory.
     
  8. chen

    chen Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    224
    Messages:
    741
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    Where did you get all these details about this experiment? You actually researched on it? I guess that all that you have wrote here are your assumptions which may or may not be true...and I'm not trying to prove that VISTA is better than XP because I believe it doesn't too (for now)...It's just like when XP comes out for the first time....it has its problems like VISTA too...but then the problems will eventually get solved....thus the OS becoming more stable like the current windows XP is right now.
     
  9. chen

    chen Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    224
    Messages:
    741
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    I can bet you that VISTA has better securities than your MAC OSX, and your MAC OSX isn't exactly created by Apple...so go ahead and use your form over function OS which I admit is nice and user friendly but overpriced.

    Last year's CanSecWest security conference introduced a "Pwn to Own" challenge in which security experts could win an Apple MacBook if they were able to breach its security. As that contest continued, the requirements for breaching the device's security were relaxed gradually until the security was in fact breached. This year, to make for a "fairer" challenge, the contest organizers used three different laptops: A MacBook Air running the latest version of Leopard with all available patches, a Windows Vista laptop with all current patches, and a Sony Vaio laptop with all available Ubuntu Linux patches.

    Researcher Charlie Miller of Independent Security Evaluators (ISE) won the challenge on March 27 by breaking the security on the MacBook Air in under 2 minutes. When asked, he said that he chose to attack the Macintosh for one simple reason, "It was the easiest one of the three. We wanted to spend as little time as possible coming up with an exploit, so we picked Mac OS X."

    The $5,000 second prize was won a day or two later by Shane Macaulay, a consultant with Security Objectives, breaking into the Fujitsu laptop running Microsoft Windows Vista Ultimate SP1, exploiting a bug in Adobe's Flash Player.

    The Ubuntu Linux laptop, it should be noted, remained unclaimed and unbroken at the end of the contest.
     
  10. Fade To Black

    Fade To Black The Bad Ass

    Reputations:
    722
    Messages:
    3,841
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    105
    I think he was supporting Vista rather than dissing it. Vista Ultimate is double the price of Leopard, so which one is overpriced?
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page