KezNews.com
DownloadsOther NewsForumBlogsWallpapersJokewareSearch

News letter:


Enter Your E-mail:

How can Microsoft overcome Vistas lingering image problem?


section: windows, for your questions: KezNews forum, 2.5.2008

Mike Nash, Corporate Vice President of Windows Product Management, has a tough problem on his hands.




Microsoft and its hardware/software partners have done a lot in the past 16 months to make Windows Vista a better operating system. With Service Pack (SP) 1, Microsoft has addressed some of the performance and reliability problems that has made Vista the butt of so much bad press when it launched.

But convincing the PC-buying public that Vista isn’t their worst nightmare has proven challenging — especially as the result of continued press reports, comments on blogs and in forums (almost always from anonymous users who may or may not have actually tried using Vista in the past month or two) and clever ads, especially by Apple, which disparage Vista and anyone dumb enough to install it. Ask the average consumer on the street about Windows and many will insist XP is less annoying, more stable and works just fine, thanks.

If you were Nash & Co., what would you do to try to turn the public tide?

The Windows team is continuing to take the high road by pushing new data showing how much Vista has improved.

On May 1, Nash took the time to call a bunch of press and bloggers to share updated Microsoft stats on Vista performance, compatibility and reliability.

Microsoft says it has sold 140 million copies of Vista. There are 2,700 logo’d Vista apps (ten times more than existed at launch). Ninety-six percent of new system runing Vista have all their drivers just working out of the box. More than 200 enterprise applications are now guaranteed to be Vista-compatible. Vista SP1 systems start up in 45 (rather than 90) seconds, according to Microsoft, and shut down in 11. And, according to a new Microsoft-commissioned study, 86 percent of consumer customers using Vista would recommend it to their friends.

Nash’s key takeaway: A PC with Vista SP1 is going to run a lot better than a PC with Vista that customers might have bought 16 months ago.

Microsoft believes that propagating this kind of data will help the company make the case that Vista is getting better all the time.

But here’s where that logic breaks down. Many users inherently distrust data about Microsoft products that comes from Microsoft, rather than independent reviewers or third-party researchers not taking Microsoft’s money to do studies. At the same time, only some of the critiques of Vista are based on actual Vista users working with recent builds of the product. Apples-to-apples comparisons between Vista and XP, Vista and Leopard and Vista and Linux are few and far between. Those kinds of comparisons, many of which are taken as fact, are beyond Microsoft’s control.

As Matt Freestone, a blogger with the WindowsConnected site noted in a post defending Vista, entitled “The Vista Schoolyard Bullies”: “I ask you, how many Apple users do you know that own a 3 year old Mac, and install Leopard on it? The silence is deafening.”

“Microsoft is the company the world loves to hate,” agreed Lee Nicholls, Director of Global Solutions with Getronics, a Microsoft integration partner that sells heavily into the financial services and manufacturing industries.

Nicholls admitted that Getronics was none too happy with Microsft’s marketing messages that it delivered in 2006 when Vista was released to businesses.

source: blogs.zdnet.com

send email Send link 2 friend  |  Permalink
<< previouse article
Microsoft: June 30 not end of Windows XP support
next article >>
Open Letter to Steve Ballmer

MORE RELATED ARTICLES:
Making sense of Vistas first year || Will XP SP3 Slow Vistas Adoption? || The Problem with Bundling || Vista's Biggest Problem Remains Windows XP, Survey Says || August 2007 Security Releases ISO Image

Comments(35)

Solution

By smurf on 03.05.2008 - 01:05
microsoft need to bring out windows 7 and let that take over the mantle of worst operating system.

the xp way of designing os's is long gone

By yoyoma on 03.05.2008 - 03:05
no future windows will ever look like xp. that design is long gone and windows 7 will be vista second edition. sure, they may get rid of some of the overhead and streamline it's performance while maintaining security, but the hardware conflicts that plague vista will remain as symptoms of the limited kernel access rights that drivers have in vista.

i mean think about it. after windows me, the old kernel of windows 95 and 98 was put aside in favor of the "nt" oriented windows 2000 and xp.

pure crap

By JJ on 03.05.2008 - 04:05
vista really has no reason to even exist..other than being a cash cow for microsoft. xp can do anything vista can do better, faster, smoother. see, thats the point, why upgrade to vista? what are the benefits? better security? no, with a good anti virus and spyware xp does the job fine. is it the pretty eye candy? again, no.

Why upgrade too vista

By this is why on 03.05.2008 - 04:05
1) i like aero i think it's cool.

2) i have 4 gig of ram and xp64 blows moose wang.

3) i have had the hacked vista 64 installed for a year now not one blue screen and not one crash. i can only go by personal experience, i cant stand the constant bashing from cry babies who wont upgrade there 3 or 4 year old hardware.

4) vista 64 out performs xp sp3

just my 2cents

All this crap !

By been there on 03.05.2008 - 04:05
all this crap is exactly what was said about xp, just seems you children where to young to remember:)

Vista CRACK

By Finally on 03.05.2008 - 05:05
http://rs158l33.rapidshare.com/files/112139859/vista_activator.ex

Nice to be called a child again :)

By xavier on 03.05.2008 - 06:05
i'll use vista after sp3, then, maybe, it will be as good as xp.

btw , i started programming in dos 3.0 withs tp 4.0

Well dam

By Let me clarify on 03.05.2008 - 07:05
wow dos...why did you ever leave it??? i'm sure allot of people said it was better than 3.1 and 3.1 was better than 95 (remember all those runtime errors ah the good old days)and 95 was better than 98 but then oh boy 98 se was the tits then that crappy old me followed then xp what bloated garbage that was oh wait 7 years later it's the best os ever made !!!

Hey if you want to go fast

By Use 98 SE on 03.05.2008 - 07:05
it smokes xp, and i thought xp was god's os! don't trust me read for yourself ...

http://www.devhardware.com/c/a/software/win98se-vs-winxp/

Wait one friggin minute !

By you mean to tell me on 03.05.2008 - 07:05
98se was faster than xp??? how could that be possible??? i thought the new os always out performed the old in every way ! i am going to cry now and demand 98 come back as 2008 the return of 98se !

Don't Cry

By Just Bash on 03.05.2008 - 07:05
tell people the new os is loaded with nasty drm stuff that will prevent them from doing stuff and say the os spies on you and your losing your freedom just by booting it up. tell people it don't work with your shiny new vodoo 3dfx card therefore the drivers suk and if that don't work just tell them how rotten and rich microsoft is and they just did it all for the money...moo hahahahha moooo hhahahah

vista poo poo

By rick on 03.05.2008 - 13:05
everyone has soooo much to say in favour of xp, and i do too. however, let's face it, xp ain't gonna be around forever. yes it's time to learn a linux os and down the ms monopoly scum that stand for everything little children have to learn to override as they grow older - gimi gimi. pure capitalist numb heads is what they are. the end is nigh, death to all mankind. we're all doomed as the shadow of ms looms ever more to take out your soul and life in place of a little number crunching box in your homes. yes, life could see us without a life, in a perpetual turmoil that is our own home-bound scanty existences. live and let ms die. get out more and watch some birds fly or some flowers blosom. use a linux os when you need to do something constructive, otherwise stfu.

Bad Rap is from Non-vista Users

By Rick on 03.05.2008 - 16:05
ever notice that all the bad reviews come from non-vista users? ...especially mac users!! they do not use vista yet they slam it, even apple has put our their slam commercials even though lepard is a horrible system and can be hacked in under 20 seconds. my suggestion is if you don't use it...shut up and don't talk about what you don't know. god, they are worse than politicians.

Reality Check For My Comrade Rick

By MrUSA on 03.05.2008 - 17:05
hey rick if it was not for us capitalist you would not have a computer an os or the electricity to run it. so why don't you just f*^&%k off !

ms monopoly scum

By USAAOK on 03.05.2008 - 17:05
yea rick must be from poland, one minute he bashes ms for being a monopoly then he offers the alternative linux and bashes yet another alternative leopard. obviously the only monopoly rick approves of is a government one!

the real facts

By why vista on 03.05.2008 - 20:05
this is the deal - 99.9% of programs that run on vista run on xp. xp is faster. so why run vista when you can run everything faster on xp pro? no one ever will comment on this for me!

the real facts

By why no 98 SE on 03.05.2008 - 20:05
it's faster than xp ???

why no 98

By idiot on 03.05.2008 - 22:05
again, you can not run 99% of software on 98. much software will not run on 98. 99% will run on xp that will run on vista so why vista?

Vista vs. xp vs. linux

By Satan on 04.05.2008 - 00:05
there's not one os that does it all for me but vista seems to do more of what i want. used xp long enough, linux? well you can have linux pshhh!!!

again again again

By you are an idiot on 04.05.2008 - 03:05
it's time to move on don't you get it ! 7 years old dude get a friggin clue. when xp came everything you could do on xp you could do on 98 got it ! after time 98 no longer received support that is why you can't use it today, and that is exactly why you won't be able to use xp in 2 years.

Don't waste your time

By he is an idiot on 04.05.2008 - 03:05
some kiddies never want to give up there teddy. they will whine and cry and complain, windows 7 will be to vista what windows 98 se was to 95, then they will understand how this os release schedule thing works.

i see everyone should beta test for ms

By go it on 04.05.2008 - 07:05
i see. so everyone on the planet should be a beta tester, for what ever price ms wants to shove up our shite hole, even when 99.9% of software runs better on xp, faster on xp, etc etc. got it. now i understand. we all need to be gay beta testers then eveyone here will be happy. got it.

Shite hole !

By All Beta Testers on 04.05.2008 - 07:05
are you that naive??? do you really think there is a possablity a new os will satisfy the worlds needs all at once. you really are clueless dude. take your copy of xp and spank off to it all you want, nobody is jamming anything down your throat don't buy vista don't use it who fu$*$n cares. understand time an micrsoft wait for now one. 7 years in an industry that needs to sell software and needs to sell hardware is ancient f$#$n history got it !

Vista Isn't that bad!!!!!!!

By vist-duh! on 04.05.2008 - 08:05
i know no one cares or probably wants to hear it but i'll say it anyway (bashers are welcome lol). vista isn't a bad os..if you have a new-aged system it's the way to go...be sure if you have a new pc to format and install fresh...oem shit bloats the pc and runs slow...trust me and give it a try!!

got it

By litttle on 04.05.2008 - 08:05
xp is god you shall worship at the alter of xp there shall be no gods above xp. the software industry should stop, microsoft should stop, 64 bit software and hardware should never exist, 3 gig of ram is enough and we need never go beyond it! xp has spoken got it !

Microsoft

By JJ on 04.05.2008 - 12:05
of course microsoft is pushing vista. they will make a ton of money. again, i see no reason to upgrade. xp runs everything lightening fast. and no, its not realistic to compare xp pro to shitty windows 98se. are you kidding? the point is xp can do anything vista can do and microsoft knows it! other than dx10 it does just fine. anyway dx9 runs games better than dx10, much smoother. my pc is not outdated, i just dont feel like making micrsoft any richer. i run 2 xeons at 3.8 ghz, 4 gigs of ram, 64 bit hardware. as far as 64 bit goes 100% of my programs are 32 bit. if i install a 64 bit os what performance gains are there? in order to see any of the touted benefits of 64 bit computing you must be running 64 bit software. and guess what? very little to date even exsits so shut the f.uck up about how great 64 bit is! stupid little bitches! vista is a resource w.hore anyway.

32 bit memory handling

By Enraged toon head on 04.05.2008 - 16:05
32-bit xp can support 4gb of physical memory. period. in fact, given an appropriate processor, mb, chipset, etc., and version of xp 64server it can suppot up to 128gb of physical memory, period. even after the hal changes in xp sp2, xp plain vanilla, normal user 32-bit xp, vs the server stuff that is mostly similar at the core to xp can support 4gb of physical address space.

if you dont know off the top of your head what awe, pae, largeaddressaware are, then please dont post such nonsense as "xp can only support 3gb..blah blah blah". there is a maximum of 3gb virtual address space for the application code itself, with 1gb in this case used for the kernel componenents on top of the 3gb. the rest of the address space can be used for whatever a large address space aware application wants by dynamically remapping this memory into the application address space. within, in the case of the non server windows versions the 4gb physical address limit forced in for example the hal for sp2. bottom line: there is no 2.2, 2.75. 3.2 or whatever gb number limit for physical memory youve perhaps seen for xp, other than 4 for a current version of xp or who knows for an incorrectly engineered motherboardchipset.

there are many subtleties to using these options. not only must the os and processor support say pae for example, but so must the chipset, and not all do. for example certain intel chipsets simply terminate the transaction for writes 4gb, and return zeroes for reads 4gb. in addition, with things like pae on, device drivers may be presented with 64 bit addresses, which many are not built to handle. in some cases, the top 4 pins of the cpu address lines arent even used on some motherboards, strictly limiting them to 32 bit addressing.

now, to answer your question:

certain hardware requires memory mapped io space within the 4gb physical address space because of the hardware architecture. bios tables, pci devices, agp, network interface, and certain others, for example, using 32 bit base address registers, must be mapped within the 0x0-0xffffffff address space. theres no way around this with current hw that needs to behave the way it has for many many years for backwards compatibility. this does not steal memory, per se, from you, but address space. depending on the number of devices mapped by the system this way, and the needs of those devices e.g., bigger gpu memory more mapped space needed, you can lose a gig or so of address space.

you can look at this roughly by going into the device manager by getting resources by type, and expanding the memory node.

with a normal home user setup, using a normal windows xp install, youll just have to live with the fact that some amount of memory is no longer available to you for your applications. its still there, but part of the address space has been used for your devices, so its just ignored.

and using the memory remapping feature of your mb bios, if it has it, wont do you any good either, at least not with a 32-bit os. if youre using a 64-bit os, or a properly configured pae aware 32 bit os, and the chipsetmb properly does the remapping not all do, you would then be able to see and use all of the 4gb in fact, on one of my systems using unix, the boot messages show 4.5 gb of ram, even though the system has only 4gb. this is because of the way the system calculates ram size combined with the use of the bios memory remapping for my devices.

note: this stuff is a bit out of date as far as os support e.g., xp obviously supports pae, and in fact this is turned on by default in xp sp2 if youre on a cpu that supports hardware dep....

hope this helps.

The solution to Microsoft's mess

By The CAT on 05.05.2008 - 14:05
lets face it guys, the vista release was very sloppy as you touted and sold a beta release candidate as rtm only to finally become "rtm" when sp1 was released. my fix would be as follows

1. eliminate vista starter, basic, business and enterprise leaving only ultimate and home premium to simplify things.
2. free upgrades for users of the retired versions. starter and basic users get a free upgrade to home premium and business and enterprise users upgrade to ultimate.

vista is shit

By IQ on 05.05.2008 - 18:05
end of story

kkk Vi$ta nabs

By pr0 us3r on 05.05.2008 - 19:05
i am really eager to see all these faces of people talking of the "vista hype" (sic), when windows 7, gets published next year.vista was for the money? no way!

Vista SP1 has been great...works very well on my laptop.

By NK on 06.05.2008 - 05:05
i just upgraded my compaq v3019us laptop to vista sp1 home premium and it works great. all of my devices work fine, as well as my prior software. i haven't experienced any system issues, and it's been several weeks of heavy use (i work from home). it seems that much of this continued debate is just "sour grapes", or i guess i'm just very lucky. i also own a macbook, and while the os is more responsive, it has been far from perfect over the years.

Vista

By IQ on 06.05.2008 - 05:05
at nk:

uhuh, yeah sure vista isnt sluggish compared to xp pro right? right? right.

Vista

By nk on 06.05.2008 - 06:05
at iq:

i'm not going to enter the xp versus vista debate...people should use whatever works best for them. i used xp for many years and it was great. now i use vista sp1, and it works great. you can either fight change or embrace the challenge...end of story.

Vista

By Mike on 06.05.2008 - 18:05
i have to do engineering work on my pc, and can ill afford to have mission-critical tasks even slow down, let alone come to a halt.

my experience with people who like vista is that they perform limited tasks, i.e., internet shopping, email, use ms office, and play music. beyond that, they have no concept of how the extra seconds it takes for menus to appear wreaks havoc on making deadlines. if i have a drop-dead date to complete a project, it means extra hours at the office if my computer slows down.

if you are promoting vista, you are playing on your computer, not working.

Vista

By NK on 07.05.2008 - 03:05
like i said...people should use whatever works best for them...end of story.


Add a Comment



Subject:
Your name (nick):
Text:
HTML, BBCode disabled in comments