When you move from XP to Windows 7 you either buy a new machine or upgrade the old one. The first approach clearly costs money. You buy a new machine. Then you have to get security software, possibly some other news apps -- and there's a decent chance the old peripherals won't work (I've got a stack full of defunct HP printers, if you don't believe me).
And management tools all have to move along with the client shifts.
Then you and your end users have to learn the new OS. If you upgrade older systems, almost all the costs are the same (minus the expense of buying new computers), though you may need RAM and other sundry hardware items.
More
Posted by Doug Barney on 05/30/20125 comments
Aero was released with a lot of fanfare. It is now being killed off with not so much fanfare. Sort of like that old Hollywood actor that you aren't sure is still alive or not.
Well, Aero will officially not make the Windows 8 cut. There is no place for a rather useless semi-transparent overlay for Metro, I reckon.
Seemingly no one else noticed the lack of Aero in the Win 8 test releases. I'm not sure it was even necessary for Microsoft exec Jensen Harris to write a 1,300 word obituary for Aero.
More
Posted by Doug Barney on 05/23/201210 comments
It's been a while since I bought a new computer from a retail store. The last three times they were Macs from the utterly pretentious (and kind of creepy) Apple stores, and each time they went to one of my kids. And in no case were they loaded with a bunch of third-party crapware.
Meanwhile, I've had dozens of PCs that were loaded with this junk.
In the rare cases when they were thusly bogged down, I swiftly (but not always easily) removed it. This garbage clogs the desktop, clutters the hard drive, and makes your PC perform like it's running in mud.
More
Posted by Doug Barney on 05/23/201212 comments
One reader gets it all of his chest on why he does not like Microsoft's Web browser:
I used IE in 1996 on both Mac and PC, even thought it was a slow and horrible browser that crashed often -- and no, it wasn't the Windows 95 machine (even though that crashed often as well).
Move forward to 2012: IE is still a slow and horrible browser. And it still crashes. I seriously doubt IE 10 will reverse this trend even though it is already being hyped by Microsoft. Oh, I'm sure IE 10 will be the latest and greatest according to all the writers and experts, but give it a few months for the new smell to wear off and take another look. As for Mac users running IE, I do not personally know of any.
The only thing I think IE has going for it is its two main historically consistent features that every user can count on: slow speed and crashing (which many blame on the Web sites they were on).
Add to that the fact that there is a cumulative security patch for IE every two or so months that both rebuilds the browser and also resets some of your IE settings during the process, and you have easily got what I consider the worst browser available. I don't care what anybody else says in favor of it, it is a horrible browser! If you run a network like I do, you can count on having to push the proper IE template settings out to the entire domain all over again every time there is a cumulative IE update released.
So what is IE good for? Microsoft updates and the few corporate Web sites that require it for them to work properly -- and absolutely nothing more. Don't believe me? I know of two huge corporations (that have to remain nameless) that are currently in the middle of a three-year, $8-million rewrite of the entire corporate Web site and all its applications to upgrade and get away from dependence on Internet Explorer. Wasted time in these environments and wasted productivity equals wasted money. One of these corporations has already done a benchmark study and the results show that by switching from IE to Firefox, the employee time savings and productivity increase alone will amount to about 2.5 months of payroll every year -- way more than paying for everyone's annual vacation time.
When IE 9 was first released, every tech writer out there was hyping how fast it was. Well, the only thing it beat Chrome or Firefox on for speed was Java page loads (and there is a lot more to a browser than Java page load speed), and it wasn't in reality all that much faster. That speed brag lasted for about three or four weeks. How does it compare now?
Why do so many people use IE? Simple -- it comes for free with the computer they bought, and many users either don't know that there are other choices or they are too cautious to try something else. For the past 15 years, everyone I have ever introduced to Netscape, Firefox, Chrome or Opera have permanently switched, use IE only for what absolutely requires it, and have never looked back.
-Dave
More
Posted by Doug Barney on 05/23/201212 comments
Desktop virtualization (I'll use the term loosely because the definition has become a bit murky) has a lot of advantages: ease of management, fewer hardware demands and greater security. Cost is not always on the list of benefits. That's because even thought the desktop may be virtual, the licensing costs aren't.
Wanova, a Turkey-based cloud company, thinks it has a way around this with a new system based on Windows Server 2008 R2 where the desktops are used across wide area networks (WANs).
More
Posted by Doug Barney on 05/21/20120 comments
If you had a Mac 16 years ago and ran Internet Explorer on it, you probably crashed a lot. Of course, if you had a PC 16 years ago and ran Internet Explorer, you probably crashed a lot too, but a Mac crashing that much was unusual.
Some blamed MacOS. Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak blamed Microsoft, is still irritated, and let it all fly out recently in a speech to mates in Australia, by crikey!
Woz himself found a bug in IE that made it crash pretty much constantly on the Mac. Here's how Australian news.com.au covered it:
More
Posted by Doug Barney on 05/21/20122 comments
Readers present their arguments on whether or not it's fair to criticize Microsoft's CEO:
Couldn't agree more with Forbes. Ballmer and Sinofsky need to be purged, and Scott Guthrie put into a position in which he has the power to at least attempt reversing the damage done to Microsoft by the other ass-clowns' abandonment of Silverlight, hosing of Windows Phone and the slow-motion train wreck that is Windows 8/ARM/WOA/RT (all of that DOA, for sure). I don't know that even Guthrie can reverse the massive damage done to Microsoft's credibility within the developer and enterprise communities, but his ascendancy would at least restore a minimalistic sense of hope in a time in which I've none whatsoever. Have heard a lot of people say Windows 8 will be another Vista or worse, but they've got it wrong -- Windows 8 is far more akin to the resurrection of Microsoft Bob. Purge the ass-clowns and do it soon!
-Anonymous
I forget how we are supposed to judge the virtues of Microsoft. Is it based on profits? Or are we to key in on a specific product that Microsoft has marketed? To my mind the worst leader was Bill Gates. He never could get people to buy Microsoft Bob. Microsoft has been an utter failure ever since... right?
-Dan
Ballmer needs to be pushed out in favor of someone, anyone, with enough vision to keep the many subcomponents of Microsoft working together. There have been way too may failed products and initiatives that were lost due to lack of leadership. Windows Live. Zune. Azure. Kin, Silverlight. Windows 8/ARM/WOA/RT (a disaster still in progress). The record profits are notable, but Ballmer didn't invent or oversee development of those cash cows. He is responsible for the new initiatives failing under his watch. One wonders how much MORE profit Microsoft could be making with better leadership.
-Tom
More
Posted by Doug Barney on 05/18/20120 comments
SQL Server 2008 R2 users can now test a nearly ready version of Service Pack 2 (SP2). What will you find in this little gem? Like most service packs, it is not designed to trot out new features, but to bat bugs, fix flaws, make up for mistakes, burnish blemishes... Ah, you get the point.
This pack has no less than 25 fixes, including many that have already rolled out and are now rolled up in SP2. Here are few highlights from Kurt Mackie's report:
More
Posted by Doug Barney on 05/18/20120 comments
Some security tools are straightforward. Antivirus software stops or eradicates viruses. Anti-spam software does the same for spam. Firewalls stand guard at the perimeter (or wherever you happen to place them). Malicious software removal tools remove malicious software after it is has been unfortunately installed.
Microsoft's free Enhanced Mitigation Experience Toolkit 3.0 (EMET 3.0), now available, is a bit harder to figure out. In general it could be called anti-exploit software. But like firewalls, spam and virus tools, it doesn't pretend to block all exploits. That's probably one reason previous versions were not officially "supported" by Microsoft.
More
Posted by Doug Barney on 05/18/20121 comments
Microsoft keeps making friends and influencing people in the open software world. Today it has a terrific détente with Novell, which leads to interoperability and support for Linux, and is a major supporter to the Linux code base and other open source projects.
Now comes word that FreeBSD will run as a host under Hyper-V, a nice little bit of interoperability normally the purview of tools such as Xen.
More
Posted by Doug Barney on 05/16/20123 comments
Here's a couple of readers who will miss the fact that Windows Media Center won't be free anymore:
WMC is very good software. I have a TV tuner card and use WMC all the time. I have two monitors so I can write e-mail on one screen and watchthe news on the other. You are missing out. But I suppose your Mac doesn't have Windows Media Center, does it?
The DVR function is also very nice. Why pay TIVO every month when you can get the same features on your computer with no extra fees?
I gather that the entire DVR market is not growing, and the impending switch to on-demand programming lessens the chances that a Windows DVR machine will successfully challenge TIVO. Apparently TIVO is no longer growing and has probably seen its best days.
But what about the hints that the new Xbox720 will target the non-gamer with enhanced media capabilities? The WMC development team was recently reported to have been broken up and the developers transferred to the Xbox team. Even though Microsoft has been reported to have capped off WMC development, I won't be surprised to see something like it residing in a new Xbox for the media center.
-Eric
In my opinion, Media Center is one of the best things about Windows. It supports multiple tuners (including network tuners and CableCard) and plays a variety of formats (including Internet TV, DVD, Netflix, etc.). Guide updates are free. With a $100 HD tuner, I can watch one show while recording another, or record two shows at the same time. You can get small USB tuners that allow laptop users to watch broadcast TV anywhere.
PC users have always paid extra for third-party software that enables functions not built into the operating system. Although Microsoft has not announced a price for Media Center, Steven Sinofsky has said Microsoft is aiming for single-digit dollars. That sounds more than reasonable when compared to other media applications like CyberLink and Nero.
As for DVD, the OEMs already include playback software on any PC that comes with an optical drive. The excellent and free media player VLC also plays DVDs.
We're used to getting Media Center at no extra charge, but I don't find it at all unreasonable to pay under $10 extra for such a useful product. I think those who are so vocally condemning this should consider the great value they obviously get from Media Center (or why would they be complaining?), compared to the very small amount they are likely to have to pay going forward. I don't believe there's a better software DVR available anywhere, at any price.
-Dave
More
Posted by Doug Barney on 05/16/20121 comments
For many in the media, Microsoft bashing is a regular sport. And the favorite event here is Ballmer bashing. Armed with just a J-degree, a well-worn keyboard and copy of WordStar, these scribes think of all kinds of reasons why Mr. Ballmer is such a failure.
The latest entrant, Forbes, which places Ballmer's wealth at nearly $17 billion, now also ranks him as the executive most in need of firing:
More
Posted by Doug Barney on 05/16/20129 comments