Yet another reason to NOT run Vista

With all due respect, fleurya, I think it's more complicated than that.

Windows has a hold on the market, denying that is not living in the real world. If you came up with a car that ran on, say, processed chicken bones instead of gasoline it might be a great idea and a better mousetrap. But the entire world is set up to feed cars gasoline. The logistical and infrastructure changes necessary to support a FCBFV (Fleurya Chicken Bone Fueled Vehicle) fleet would be enough to kill your great new invention.

I work for a fairly small company, probably about 200 employees. I'd guess there are 100 or so Windows machines company-wide. Our database is set up in Windows. All of our office applications are in Windows. Our email system, servers, etc. are all Windows. It doesn't matter whether Mac is better or Linux or anything else ... the cost on a corporate level to migrate to a new OS company-wide is not worth it. If our little company doesn't want to spend that kind of money, I can't imagine GM or Smith-Barney or Bristol-Myers Squibb doing it.

The established corporate base is what keeps MS on top in the OS world. The move by Apple to use Intel chips and develop ways to integrate Win applications into OS X seamlessly (eventually, hopefully) had to be motivated primarily by this fact. Giving corporations a reasonable cross-platform upgrade path is the only way Macs will ever penetrate the business market in a major way.

fleurya said:

For those who think Microsoft is a monopolizing, underhanded company who offers inferior products, I don't want to ever see any of you shopping at Wal-Mart!!

Click to expand...

actually i don't really feel that way about microsoft, but i'd buy 10 copies of vista ultimate before feeling comfortable setting foot in a walmart.

Granted Windows is everywhere and has cause people to buy more recently due to the fact that's it's everywhere else. But back in the day people had choices and nobody was on top. For some reason, they chose to buy Windows and the rest is history.

Click to expand...

I addressed the fact that Microsoft has a stronghold . . .now. But how did they get it? They played nice with PC manufacturers (IBM) by licensing their software rather than closing themselves off. So Bill developed the software, worked with IBM and others to make it work, and he's done. He didn't have to come up with working capital to build PC's, building a limited number and take them to market. Instead there were, say, 5 manufacturers building 5 times (or more) as many PC's as one could do alone, marketing them, and selling them to the consumers. Which gets your product out exponentially faster than competitors and next thing you know, Microsoft today. Not saying they haven't done anything considered underhanded to get there, but I would challenge anyone to find a Fortune 100 company that hasn't done something questionable to get on top. It's pretty much a necessity to keep up with the pack. You have to admit, it was a genius business move.

Of course that cooperation with PC builders has limited MS in their development in ways Apple hasn't had to deal with. There are quality manufacturers and quantity manufacturers. Microsoft is the Wal-Mart of the OS world.

fleurya said:

I addressed the fact that Microsoft has a stronghold . . .now. But how did they get it? They played nice with PC manufacturers (IBM) by licensing their software rather than closing themselves off. So Bill developed the software, worked with IBM and others to make it work, and he's done. He didn't have to come up with working capital to build PC's, building a limited number and take them to market. Instead there were, say, 5 manufacturers building 5 times (or more) as many PC's as one could do alone, marketing them, and selling them to the consumers. Which gets your product out exponentially faster than competitors and next thing you know, Microsoft today. Not saying they haven't done anything considered underhanded to get there, but I would challenge anyone to find a Fortune 100 company that hasn't done something questionable to get on top. It's pretty much a necessity to keep up with the pack. You have to admit, it was a genius business move.

Of course that cooperation with PC builders has limited MS in their development in ways Apple hasn't had to deal with. There are quality manufacturers and quantity manufacturers. Microsoft is the Wal-Mart of the OS world.

Click to expand...

I agree with your statement above completely. When I refer to "underhanded tactics", I am referring to Microsoft's tendency to buy out competitors to shelve their technology, blatantly stealing technologies (via reverse engineering or simply copying them) or marginalizing competitors by including things like browsers with the OS thereby negating the need to use a competing product. The latter is not such a bad thing when the technology is clearly better than the competitor - but as was evidenced by the stagnation of IE6, once they conquered the market, they stopped developing it until a new competitor started to threaten their market share.

Again, and I think this is the third time I've said this in this thread, I am NOT a Microsoft hater. I hold an MCSE, administer an MS network and in general feel that they've done more good than harm. It's Vista that really gets my goat for those reasons I've mentioned previously.

And to be honest, in light of some of the more recent articles I've read on Vista, I'm starting to change my tune just a bit. I still have no desire to "upgrade" from XP, but it doesn't look all that bad for the price since you can now use an upgrade edition to do a clean install.

But I think we're beating a dead horse here. My point in starting this thread was to advise this forum about the inability to use an upgrade version to do a clean install - and that point is now moot, regardless of my opinion on MS.

Well anyways, i'm running Vista Ultimate on my macbook right now and all the features of Vista are working great. Though there a little bit of a problem with the lack of right click.

fleurya said:

But how did they get it? They played nice with PC manufacturers (IBM) by licensing their software rather than closing themselves off. So Bill developed the software, worked with IBM and others to make it work, and he's done.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry. At what point in history did Microsoft and IBM "play nice" together? Was it when MS loopholed its way out of the DOS agreement with IBM, when they completely dropped the joint project that was supposed to be OS/2, or ...? Remember the days when MS-DOS magically stopped running 1-2-3 properly?

MS was and continues to be successful because of legacy. The Mac might have been revolutionary in 1984 but it didn't run the programs people and businesses had for their DOS PC's. Windows 3.10, when it came out, brought the GUI revolution to the masses because it had legacy compatibility with all the old programs and data. You also had the benefit, at the time, of being the OS that ran on the computers being built and sold by IBM, which was the corporate computer powerhouse back in the day. Win 3.11 became so entrenched, IBM couldn't even get companies to buy OS/2 with their PS/2.

If I see one major difference in corporate outlook between MS and Apple, it would be this:

The MS way: design what we can market and sell the most of
The Apple way: design what works best

The two should be the same in theory, but you know what they say ... theory and practice are the same, in theory, but not in practice.

When I refer to "underhanded tactics", I am referring to Microsoft's tendency to buy out competitors to shelve their technology, blatantly stealing technologies (via reverse engineering or simply copying them) or marginalizing competitors by including things like browsers with the OS thereby negating the need to use a competing product.

Click to expand...

I think that's best shown on an episode of "The Simpsons" when Homer starts a business (Hyper-compu-global-network?) and Bill Gate comes to buy him out. Instead of giving him money, he has his men smash up the place. Then he says, "do you think I got rich by giving people a lot of money?" Hilarious.

cwa107 said:

Saw this posted on Digg today. Apparently you can indeed use an upgrade edition to do a clean install, after all. Not that I'll be doing it anytime soon, and I'm sure it's not an "officially" supported method, but at least it's possible.

Click to expand...

I just picked up the upgrade copy of Vista Home Premium for my wife on her desktop at Best Buy. I'm in the middle of backing up her machine now because I'm going to do a clean install. It says right on page 3 of the instructions that you can chose between a clean install (losing all your files and settings) or an upgrade. So I guess your theory about it not being possible, or not supported is incorrect.

For the record, I could care less because I'm a Machead, but my wife wanted Vista and I just figured I'd post to debunk the thoughts of not being able to clean install.

Jamo said:

I just picked up the upgrade copy of Vista Home Premium for my wife on her desktop at Best Buy. I'm in the middle of backing up her machine now because I'm going to do a clean install. It says right on page 3 of the instructions that you can chose between a clean install (losing all your files and settings) or an upgrade. So I guess your theory about it not being possible, or not supported is incorrect.

For the record, I could care less because I'm a Machead, but my wife wanted Vista and I just figured I'd post to debunk the thoughts of not being able to clean install.

Click to expand...

It wasn't "my" theory - I cited an ars-technica article originally that stated it wasn't possible with an "upgrade edition". A full version has the inherent ability to do a clean install OR do an upgrade. Is the version your wife purchased an "upgrade" edition or a full version? There is a fairly significant price difference between the two.

I picked up the "upgrade" version for her computer. It was $159 at Best Buy. It states in the manual that with this disc I can do a clean install or an upgrade.

And I wasn't trying to offend you, I was just replying to a thread with false information. After reading the whole thread one might be confused and think they had to buy a full version to do a clean install, I just wanted to set the record straight, since nobody had yet, by saying that that rumor was false.

Jamo said:

I picked up the "upgrade" version for her computer. It was $159 at Best Buy. It states in the manual that with this disc I can do a clean install or an upgrade.

And I wasn't trying to offend you, I was just replying to a thread with false information. After reading the whole thread one might be confused and think they had to buy a full version to do a clean install, I just wanted to set the record straight, since nobody had yet, by saying that that rumor was false.

Click to expand...

No offense taken at all, I apologize if the tone might have looked that way. I started this thread before Vista was released, so it was purely speculative based on what I was reading. Either way, had the article been true, I later posted another link to an article that suggested a workaround. My guess is that one of the editions doesn't like to do a clean install, but it's good to know that that's not necessarily the case.

fleurya said:

Regarding Microsoft's success.I think it's kind of interesting the way people view Microsoft as a company that bsuts down people's doors and forces them to use their product. We live in a free-market economy and people are free to buy what they like. Granted Windows is everywhere and has cause people to buy more recently due to the fact that's it's everywhere else. But back in the day people had choices and nobody was on top. For some reason, they chose to buy Windows and the rest is history.

For those who think Microsoft is a monopolizing, underhanded company who offers inferior products, I don't want to ever see any of you shopping at Wal-Mart!! Andi f any of you out there invest in a large-cap mutual fund, chances are you have given money to and own part of Microsoft (Bill Gates thanks you).

As for me, I live in the real world, make my choices (which is why I have a MBP), and realize everyone has the power to make their own choices.

Click to expand...

My sentiments exactly... people just dont get it.. no one makes you buy MS products.. you just do because you know full well its gonna be something that works.. theirs nothing on the market as good as office bar none and please dont bleat on about staroffice its still not a patch on MS office

andy_st200 said:

no one makes you buy MS products..

Click to expand...

Except Dell.
Gateway.
HP.
Toshiba.
Sony.
Panasonic.
Shall I continue?

andy_st200 said:

... no one makes you buy MS products..

Click to expand...

yeah right, not unless you like having other choices, for instance...

the best consumer sound card out there
the latest video card
(so that you could play that new game that just came out)
a motherboard that allowed you to overclock and tweak your system to the max

and at consumer price points...
to be the first on the block that had TV on their computer
to be the first to use your computer as a DVR
to be the first to be able to take advantage of SATA drives
to be the first to take advantage of SATA RAID set ups
the widest selection of software to choose from
.........

bobtomay said:

the widest selection of software to choose from
.........

Click to expand...

doesn't apply to PCs anymore. Macs now have the widest selection of software.

StretchR said:

doesn't apply to PCs anymore. Macs now have the widest selection of software.

Click to expand...

Eeek! While you're correct, StretchR, and it's very true ... it still makes me cringe to hear it. That was what IBM always used to say about OS/2.

OK, you have to admit that no matter which side of the argument you fall on, this is pretty darned funny:

http://www.macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/video_how_to_install_microsofts_windows_vista/

Too funny !!!