Apparently, government agencies have figured out a way to make Vista run smoothly (many of them will be upgrading to Windows 7 from that OS, rather than XP). Fred figured out how to do it, too:
I made sure the notebook I could only get with Vista -- and not XP Pro which I'd have preferred -- came with a good 3GB of RAM (to minimize swapping), and disabled UAC (only way I could get write access to my HOSTS file).
-Fred
More
Posted by Doug Barney on 10/12/20090 comments
I've been doing this work so long that I've seen first-hand the move from 16 to 32 to 64 bits (and used my fair share of tortoise-like 8-bit machines, as well). More recently, I've witnessed the rise of multicore processors, which are slowly being exploited by new software.
But like drag racing, the quest for computing speed is never-ending, and the next generation is clearly 128 bits -- with multiple cores, to boot!
Now rumors are flying that Windows 8, likely a few years out, will exploit all 128 bits in a 128-bit processor. And with Microsoft developing tools for multicore, Windows 8 could be one smokin' OS.
More
Posted by Doug Barney on 10/09/20098 comments
Some patches are good. When I was a teenaged hippie, I had nearly a hundred patches hand-sewn on my jeans. The pants were so frayed, my Swedish grandmother replaced the whole backside, which also soon got patched.
Other patches aren't so good -- patches on inner tubes that fall off faster than a 4-year-old on a two-wheeler, and "Patch Adams" are examples of that.
Microsoft patches are almost always good, so I'm optimistic that next Tuesday there will be another fine batch. And what a big batch it will be. Eight fixes are deemed critical (often, that term is scarier than need be).
More
Posted by Doug Barney on 10/09/20090 comments
Doug asked recently whether readers saw a serious advantage in getting a higher-end version of Windows 7 instead of a low-end version. Here are some of your thoughts:
For most consumers, the short answer is "eye candy." Otherwise, no! Most consumers would find Windows 7 Starter to be just fine on hardware with under 4GB of RAM. (Windows 7 needs no more than 2GB for most consumers.) That's why Microsoft has severely restricted the hardware on which it can be sold. And there is NO retail channel for Windows 7 Starter. Windows 7 starter will not allow any customization of the wallpaper and it won't run AERO. I don't recall if Starter will do back ups or not but that would be the only BIG issue for most consumers.
Microsoft has good reasons for offering three editions in the U.S., though they should be named simply Home, Professional and Ultimate/Enterprise. But by making Starter available anywhere in the industrialized world (and even talking about Home Basic), Microsoft is just giving itself a black eye in terms of public perception.
-Marc
I would prefer to use Windows 2000 Pro over the featureless versions of Windows 7 Starter.
-Anonymous
From a price standpoint, Ultimate makes no sense. My clients, all small businesses, have not moved to Vista but they are looking at Windows 7. But for them, I cannot justify spending the additional amount for the Ultimate version.
Microsoft needs to simplify the options. Take us back to the days of Windows 2000 and Windows 2000 Server. I can almost justify one version of Home version, but why two? What Microsoft fails to understand is the cost to maintain these different versions, let alone explain them. And I cannot believe that their transaction costs are higher with all these versions. I would love to see a breakdown of the market share of all the XP and Vista versions.
-Thomas
More
Posted by Doug Barney on 10/09/20090 comments
Some reports are suggesting that a higher-than-expected percentage of users will stick with XP rather than move to Windows 7. But that doesn't apply to these readers:
I'd start deploying Windows 7 at work tomorrow if there was budget for it (sigh). I plan to buy a new laptop with Windows 7 on Oct. 22 for home. I've used Windows 7 at work personally since it was available through MVL. It is far superior to Vista with no real issues to keep XP around.
-Jim
I am sick of XP, to tell you the truth, though I got my money's worth out of it. I received a free upgrade to Vista when I bought my Dell a few years ago and never installed it, mostly because of the bad press. Now, I can upgrade to Windows 7 for $200 (Ultimate), but I have to do a clean install from XP which is a drag. I'm looking to "upgrade" to Vista for a couple weeks, then go to Windows 7 to take advantage of the upgrade pricing and hopefully not have to re-install 50 applications (go ahead and say it).
XP is just not taking advantage of newer machines. Since i/o prioritizations was introduced in Vista, Windows has the architecture of a "mature" OS, but most people just don't realize the difference it will make. It will take all day Saturday to do the upgrades, but it will be worth it in the long haul.
-Bill
Windows 7 does everything that XP does and more (at least, everything that I have tried to run). I have been running 7 since the beta and now RC1 (on a MacBook, no less). Pre-ordered 7 for 50 bucks back in late June -- can't wait until the 22nd!
-Mike
At home, I've already moved to Windows 7. As for work, all new laptops issued to my employees will have Windows 7 on them. I see no reason to move to Vista, and then to Windows 7.
-Steve
More
Posted by Doug Barney on 10/07/20090 comments
The U.S. federal government may not always make the best choices (have you looked at our tax code lately?), but in the case of operating systems, it mimics the best thinking of many of you Redmond Report readers. The feds have largely skipped over Vista and are now gung ho for Windows 7.
Other areas of the government, however, are on Vista, and for them the move to Windows 7 will be a tad easier. Apparently, Vista government shops tend to be more disciplined, patch and update their software frequently, and are careful in application choices and configuration. And that's precisely why Vista works so well in these well-run environments.
More
Posted by Doug Barney on 10/07/20092 comments
For those who care about market size, SMB means small to medium-size businesses. For Windows IT mavens, it means Server Message Block, which is a way of sharing files.
Anything that shares is a vector for intrusion, and security gurus believe that Microsoft's SMBv2 is ripe for attack. In fact, code to do nasty things to SMB has already been written. But Microsoft appears nonplussed and may or not patch SMB during this month's Patch Tuesday.
Posted by Doug Barney on 10/07/20090 comments
While the PC market is dominated by Windows (with Apple getting a small slice and Linux a sliver), the mobile phone space has more competitors than "Dancing with the Stars." There's Palm, Apple, Google, BlackBerry, Microsoft and more. Microsoft has been in this market for years and must be dumbfounded that it doesn't rule.
But Microsoft barely ever says "uncle." It just released Windows Mobile 6.5, which has a full QWERTY keyboard (not full-size, of course) that can either work through a touch screen or keypad.
More
Posted by Doug Barney on 10/07/20091 comments
Doug asked last week whether Microsoft should've been made to pay that $388 million Uniloc fine (now overturned) just for making product activation a pain. These readers think not:
"Activation pain and suffering"? I don't know about you but I haven't gotten a false negative on WGA since the first time I used it under XP. I ignored the error and within a week, Microsoft had fixed it. I haven't had a problem with WGA since then, and I have upgraded my system to Vista and now to Windows 7. Once, I did move a legal copy of Vista Ultimate from one machine to another and a very courteous Microsoft representative manually registered my hardware for me. No questions asked.
In the end, Microsoft has a right to do what it can to make sure that Windows is being used legally. Whether WGA is effective enough to be worth the bad PR Microsoft has gotten over it is a different question. Frankly, I don't think that WGA is an effective deterrent against the real pirates -- those selling copies of Windows on the streets of Beijing. The very idea of it upsets a lot of honest, upstanding customers. But again, if Microsoft doesn't mind being bad-mouthed over WGA, they have every right to employ it to protect their intellectual property. It's certainly no skin off my back.
-Marc
No, they should not have to pay the consumer. In the first place, what inconvenience did the consumer suffer? The inability to steal a software product from the manufacturer? The product activation process is painless.
If people were honest, Microsoft would not be forced into product activation-type tactics. I am amazed at how many people pirate software. Does anyone realize the number of coding hours these products require? From that standpoint, the price Microsoft asks is extremely reasonable. As the owner of a company that does software programming for a living, I understand the need to protect your product. Stealing is wrong, and copying software to multiple machines without a valid (paid-for) license is stealing. Microsoft and any other company has the right to protect their investment.
-Arlene
More
Posted by Doug Barney on 10/05/20090 comments
It's official. The starter version of Windows 7 for netbooks will no longer be crippled.
Windows 7 Starter isn't the beefiest Windows ever, to begin with. It's 32-bit only, can't play DVDs and doesn't have the XP compatibility mode. But originally, someone in Redmond had the brain-dead idea of letting it run only three apps at a time. I'm currently running four apps, and I've just booted my machine!
More
Posted by Doug Barney on 10/05/20095 comments
IT expert and author Brian Posey thinks that despite all the love for Windows 7, many will in fact stick with good old XP. Why? He offers 10 good reasons.
Many fear that XP product support will vanish, but Posey points out that official support will be around for five more years. XP also doesn't need a lot of PC horsepower, which is a huge advantage over Vista. (But Redmond Report readers have told me that Windows 7 runs great on low-end machines, so I'm not sure I side with Posey on this one.)
More
Posted by Doug Barney on 10/05/20099 comments
If it seems that I've been writing a lot about Steve Ballmer, it's because he's been on a whirlwind tour of speeches and interviews. Let's face it -- the man has a lot to say.
In a recent interview, Ballmer explained why I have yet to buy myself a Mac laptop (even though my three kids old enough to compute all have them). Macs are simply too expensive.
More
Posted by Doug Barney on 10/05/20095 comments