ActiveMac - The Most Activated mac Resource

ActiveMac

User Controls

New User

Edit/View My Profile

ActiveMac

Articles

Forums

Links

News

News Search

Reviews

News Centers

Windows/Microsoft

DVD

ActiveHardware

Xbox

MaINTosh

News Search

ANet Chats

The Lobby

Special Events Room

Developer's Lounge

XBox Chat

FAQ's

Windows 98/98 SE

Windows 2000

Windows Me

Windows "Whistler" XP

Windows CE

Internet Explorer 6

Internet Explorer 5

Xbox

DirectX

DVD's

TopTechTips

Registry Tips

Windows 95/98

Windows 2000

Internet Explorer 4

Internet Explorer 5

Windows NT Tips

Program Tips

Easter Eggs

Hardware

DVD

Latest Reviews

Applications

Microsoft Windows XP Professional

Norton SystemWorks 2002

Hardware

Intel Personal Audio Player 3000

Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer

Site News/Info

About This Site

Affiliates

ANet Forums

Default Home Page

Link To Us

Links

Member Pages

Site Search

Awards

Credits
�1997/2004, Active Network. All Rights Reserved.
Layout & Design by Designer Dream. Content written by the Active Network team. Please click here for full terms of use and restrictions or read our Privacy Statement.

Does Vista's stunted growth hint at the death of the desktop?

Time: 00:01 EST/05:01 GMT | News Source: WinBeta | Posted By: Kenneth van Surksum

Is the desktop metaphor dead, replaced by Web services like Google and Facebook? Or is Vista so bad that it's not worth buying?

New data points to the latter suggestion, leaving Microsoft with two options. It can either view its sagging Vista sales as a testament to the incredible work of art that is Windows XP (gag). Or it can concede that Vista is a pile of potty.

Or perhaps, just perhaps, this isn't a Windows thing at all but simply a recognition that we may have tapped out the "must-have" innovations on the fat-client desktop leading people to wait out upgrades until a hardware refresh makes the choice a no-brainer.

Write Comment
Return to News

Displaying 1 through 25 of 174
Last | Next

The time now is 11:24:40 PM ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us

#1 By 28801 (65.90.202.10) at 1/2/2008 7:58:30 AM

I love the title: �Does Vista's stunted growth hint at the death of the desktop?� The author barely touches on this. IMO the desktop is here to stay. I have not seen any Web 1.0, 2.0, or Flash desktop that is compelling enough for me to make a switch. Like I�m going to store my tax returns on Google.

�it only took 11 months for XP...to surpass Windows 98...�

Then why compare Vista with XP� Wouldn�t a closer comparison be how fast Vista surpassed Windows 2000.

�Fine. But that doesn't change the fact that 42.3 percent of Windows OS sales are XP today. Microsoft depends on new license sales to fuel its growth.�

Which means that 57.7% are Vista! Hey a sale is a sale be it XP or Vista. Sure, MS would rather sell Vista, but I think they would prefer to sell XP rather than relinquish market share to Apple or Linux.

This post was edited by rxcall on Wednesday, January 02, 2008 at 07:58.

#2 By 31608 (190.79.143.140) at 1/2/2008 9:08:20 AM

OMG not another apocalyptic news about Windows Vista

#3 By 2960 (72.196.195.185) at 1/2/2008 10:22:41 AM

Some of these guys should be science fiction writers.

#4 By 95091 (69.70.124.190) at 1/2/2008 10:30:05 AM

I'm really starting to get annoyed with all those posts "Vista is crap, don't install it". I've been running Windows Vista since its early betas and the only problems I've encountered were caused by third parties applications or drivers (mainly ATI drivers). I mean, if you are to write an article about how bad something is, base it on facts. If people can't make a difference between the core os crashing or a third party low level piece of software that was badly written, then they shouldn't write articles.

I'd be curious to see people post their System Reliability chart from Vista to see how bad it really is. I'm currently running Server 08 RC2, which is roughly Vista SP1 and mine is sitting at 9.39/10. My other Server 08 box is running at 9.08/10.

When people say that the web is the end all be all for applications, I tell them to look at apps like this one: http://www.otto.de/vista . Good luck doing that with HTML/AJAX. In my opinion, the biggest weakness of the web, is HTML, talk about a regression in user experience. It still amazes me to see people impressed with what is being done with AJAX when this was possible a long time ago in thick applications. If people would have focused their energy a bit by focusing on the shortcomings (deployment, standards) of thick applications, I believe the web would be a much more interesting place to be. Next generation applications still need desktops just for the sake of distributing computing tasks. Try to generate UIs like that one using strictly server side processing. You'll probably be able to hold, what, maybe 5-10 users per proc if you're lucky.

#5 By 37047 (216.191.227.68) at 1/2/2008 11:10:06 AM

#4: I think a good balance of "Web 2.0" and the desktop application is where one has a lightweight desktop application that is able to use internet protocols to send and receive information from an internet based server, and perform actions based on it. That way, you'd get the benefits of a web based application, where such things as centralized information storage and retrieval are concerned, and the flexibility and power of a desktop application. This kind of hybrid solution is where I see things eventually going.

#6 By 95096 (74.94.136.234) at 1/2/2008 11:39:50 AM

It should read "Does Vista's stunted growth hint at the death of Microsoft on the Desktop?"

I really love the comment by "Unhandled" "...the only problems I've encountered were caused by third parties applications or drivers". So the OS works great...as long as you don't use hardware or applications with it. I've also been running Vista since the sorry-ass early Betas and I can tell you that it is definitely crap. I will not roll it out to my users, even it it COULD run on their workstations (which it can't for the most part without massive upgrades).

I'm not a MS basher. I make my living supporting MS software. I am, however, very, very unhappy when MS releases sub-par software like Vista. If you like Vista then all I can say is that you're a lightweight user.

BTW: XP is outselling Vista. Gee...I can't understand why since Vista is such a wonderful upgrade.

#7 By 54556 (67.131.75.3) at 1/2/2008 11:44:18 AM

#4 "mine is sitting at 9.39/10. My other Server 08 box is running at 9.08/10. "

Any you're proud of those statistics???

#8 By 95091 (69.70.124.190) at 1/2/2008 12:02:47 PM

Keep in mind that those stats include crashes caused by other applications. In my case, the crash was caused by IE on one machine and on the other by an Expression Blend CTP and an application being debugged. Again another proof that people like notketchum jump to conclusions without all the information.

I'm having a hard time understanding why people would blame an OS or Microsoft because a third party driver is crashing. People have to understand why sometimes crashing is the safest option for an OS to prevent corruption. If you think there's a better option in a certain case, I'm sure Microsoft would love to hear about it! When I hear "Oh yeah Vista is crap" without any concrete examples as to what crashes or is crap, I usually tend to discard such comments as they don't contribute anything.

I'd suggest that people check out this Channel 9 video (Processes Gone Wild: Understanding Windows Vista Reliability Mechanics): http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=291969

#9 By 95096 (74.94.136.234) at 1/2/2008 12:09:38 PM

You want it Unhandled , you got it:

1) Hardware doesn�t run well on Vista (even new hardware)

2) The new security of Vista is overkill most of the time, being prompted for every little thing is bad enough but Vista even labels existing applications as suspicious.

3) Lack of drivers for older and newer hardware.

4) Power options do not change automatically for laptops depending on whether you are plugged or unplugged from a power source.

5) The Start Menu has been redone with a completely different look, unfortunately it is hard to navigate and find what you are looking for.

6) Rebooting a Vista machine is supposed to be faster, but it actually takes longer to reboot than XP.

7) The much talked about Aero UI is great to look at, but with all the resources it takes just to run it all you will be able to do is look at it and not actually work on your pc.

8 ) The many different versions of Vista will be confusing to some basic computer users who are not sure of what exactly they need so in the end they will probably figure more expensive means better and pay for a version they don�t need in the first place.

9) Horrible graphics performance that was not an issue with XP.

10) Although the look is �improved� basic functions like add/remove programs are hard to find.

11) VPN doesn�t work correctly, even though there are a few work arounds for this it is still not an easy process.

12) Software that is supposed to be Windows compatible shuts down randomly.

13) Firefox runs ten times better than IE7 in Vista.

14) The sidebar is another resource hog.

15) Readyboost seems like a good idea if you can get it to work.

16) DVD playback through windows media player or media center lacks quality.

17) Minor changes to hardware may prevent the system to boot up.

18) No �open with� when right clicking on a file.

19) My brand new Netgear Eva8000 streaming media device will not work wirelessly with Vista due to some tcp stack problem in Vista (it did work perfect with xp).

20) Windows Improved search is a total mess and not very accurate.

#10 By 54556 (67.131.75.3) at 1/2/2008 12:19:02 PM

#8 "people like notketchum jump to conclusions without all the information."

Hardly; in fact you are the one jumping to conclusions here. I simply work in an environment where reliability is expected as an absolute. My Board of Directors and users don't want excuses, just performance.

#11 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 1/2/2008 12:29:10 PM

PC World said it best:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,140583-page,5-c,techindustrytrends/article.html

#12 By 52115 (66.181.69.250) at 1/2/2008 12:36:08 PM

Things Ive noticed with Vista that erk me.

1) My laptop has to sit for 15-20 minutes while the hard drive tacks out waiting for "TrustedInstaller" to finish whatever the f--- it does. This happens EVERYTIME after a power up/reboot. Autoupdates are turned off by the way.

2) Vista firewall turned OFF; using F-Secure IS 2008. Running VMWare 6 requires it to be ADDED to the aforementioned TURNED OFF Vista firewall in order for Bridged networking to work properly. Good job Microsoft. Good thing I learned this before we tried to implement Vista at work. Can you image trying to troubleshoot an issue with a program (why can't it connect to the internet?), thinking the firewall is turned OFF and allowing all traffic to pass? I was pissed enough after resolving the VMWare issue.

3) Enough of the "Are you sure?; This is trying to run this, that". Who the f--- though an annoying OK box was true security. I get sick of seeing it pop-up and most times press "OK" without reading what it's doing.

4) "We're innovators and Linux is stealing our IP". Ok Balmer, then why are there "new" features in Vista which I've been able to do in Linux for sometime. Who's copying who here?

#13 By 3746 (72.12.161.38) at 1/2/2008 2:28:16 PM

#9

Wow that is a lot of gripes. I will say that I am no vista apologist but I have not had the issues most are complaining about with Vista. I have been running Vista since the betas/RC's and had a pretty good experience. As the OS has matured in the last year and more drivers have become available my experience has become even better. Driver availability is not MS's fault but hardware suppliers. On top of that the maturity of drivers play an important role. When XP came out I remember lots of gamers saying that XP was slow and the FPS they were getting were way less than 98. Some said they would never switch. My guess is very few of them are still running 98. Drivers (especially video drivers) take a long time to test and mature. On my main system running Vista SP1 RC my graphics performance roughly the same as XP running on the same system with the latest video drivers from Nvidia.

Response to your comlaints

1. This is a generalization - every piece of hardware i have tried with Vista has worked fine except one. The one was a gigabit card from linksys which doesn't have a driver - not the fault of MS.

2. Hopefully the UAC gets some attention in SP1. I never liked it myself and disabled it on my own system.

3. Lack of drivers is not the fault of MS

4. Power options change fine for me on my Laptop (XPS 1330) and every other Vista laptop I have tried. My Aero comes on when plugged in and turns off when on battery along with all other power settings.

5. Start menu is a personal thing and can be changed back to classic windows is you don't like it.

6. My main system has Ubuntu, XP and Vista on it. Vista boots and shuts down as quick if not quicker than the other two. Same goes for my laptop which has ubuntu on it.

This post was edited by kaikara on Wednesday, January 02, 2008 at 14:28.

#14 By 3746 (72.12.161.38) at 1/2/2008 2:29:00 PM

con't

7. Aero can be disabled. But why not make use of all the power a modern computer has and is going to. It is almost the same as the complaint about the memory usage. Vista makes use of what is there (superfetch) and then frees up resources when not needed or when another program needs more.

8. Buying an OEM copy is very cheap. It is insulting to the user to not give them options. If the home user cannot understand the difference between 3 different versions (Basic, Home Premium and Ultimate) they should get someone to help them.

9. If you mean 3d graphics performance I agree there were problems with drivers and maturity at the beginning. Now my own testing shows very little difference between XP and Vista at least with Nvidia drivers. But this again is not MS's issue.

10. They changed a location of ad remove programs - it was just different then what you were used to. It doesn't make it any more diifficult to find.

11. Every VPN connection that I use works fine on Vista and I connect to multiple VPN connections in a day for my work. Are you talking about specialized VPN software?

12. I have crashing on programs but I get that on all OS's. Shutting down all the time or in a way that is different from XP hasn't happened to me during my testing. If anything my Vista system is more stable then XP was on the same system.

13. 10 times better? is that a scientific analysis? I find both opera, Firefox and IE7 run fine on my Vista system. I use IE7 and Firefox about even for different things. They each do certain things well and that is why i continue to do use both.

14. Sidebar can be turned off. It doesn't use any crazy amount of memory in my system. I have it fully loaded with apps - clock, system function access gadget, calender, outlook schedule, Remote desktop access, notes, weather, google search and it is using 20MB.

15. Readyboost works fine on my system but it doesn't seem to make a huge difference in speed in the tests I have done. Probably better for lower end systems with less ram. But with how cheap RAM is better just to upgrade.

16. Can't comment on DVD playback because I don't use it. The functionality to play back DVD's is not built into Vista. Could be a problem with codecs or software.

17. Never had a vista system that I was using not boot because of changes to hardware and I have changed quite a few things.

18. I have an open with option when I right click on files. I use it all the time.

19. Is that a problem with the netgear device or with Vista?

20. I use search all the time. Never had a problem with it.

Again most of your issues seem to be things that can either be modified (start menu, aero, etc) or issues with manufactures drivers.

#15 By 3746 (72.12.161.38) at 1/2/2008 2:42:43 PM

#16 By 7754 (206.169.247.2) at 1/2/2008 2:46:49 PM

#9... I take issue with several of your comments (below), but let me say this first. The more people bash Vista, the more you discourage the OEMs, ISVs, and IHVs to get off their lazy behinds (well, some!) and update their products. It took long enough when XP came out (still waiting on some software, sadly), and face it... Vista isn't going anywhere. Quit shooting us all in the foot already! If it's the OEMs, ISVs, and IHVs that are mainly at fault for Vista's teething problems--and I argue that they most definitely are--then level your complaints against THEM, not Vista.

1) Just got a batch of new Dell OptiPlex 745s in August, and they run Vista very well. My PowerEdge 400SC (considerably older) at home runs Vista very well also, and that has quite a slew of devices hooked up to it. One thing that is an absolute must with Vista, though, is 1 GB or more (2 GB or more is what I'd recommend). If you're running it on 512 MB, um... upgrade already. RAM is cheap. (And for business... catch Vista on the next refresh, assuming your ISVs are ready.)

2) What on earth are you doing on your computer that would produce a UAC prompt that often? The UAC prompt thing is completely overblown. Set up your PC, deal with the prompts, then just USE it. Our users have NEVER seen a UAC prompt... and for that matter, if they did, it would be no different than what they saw on XP--if they tried to install software on XP, it would fail, telling them it required admin credentials. At least on Vista it prompts them for admin credentials, which is actually much nicer than running a runas command (particularly on mapped-drive installs).

3) I've found driver support to be generally excellent in terms of availability, although the maturity and full feature-set of those drivers are not quite on the same level as XP. However, considering it is a brand new version of Windows, I'd say this is a far better experience than when XP came out, and it will only get better.

4) I don't know what laptop you're using, but that's definitely not the case with any of the laptops on which I've installed Vista (various Dell and Lenovo models).

5) I guess I'm somewhat indifferent to the new Start Menu's layout for All Programs, but I do find myself using the Search feature to launch programs all the time, which is definitely an improvement over XP.

6) True. These OptiPlexes boot up mighty fast regardless, though, and pretty much the only time they're rebooted is for updates that require it. I'd say talk to lketchum about maximizing Vista startup speed--he's reported some excellent boot time stats for Vista.

7) This is just plain wrong, and has been demonstrated to be false many times. Many benchmarks have shown that Aero has a negligible effect on system performance, and in some cases actually improves it.

#17 By 7754 (206.169.247.2) at 1/2/2008 2:54:45 PM

#9: I guess kaikara has already taken up the task of disputing those points! Regardless, I think there are quite a few unfounded statements in there (e.g., "Open With" is definitely still present in Vista!). Not to say there aren't any legitimate complaints against Vista, of course, but there's a lot of FUD being thrown around out there.

#18 By 3746 (72.12.161.38) at 1/2/2008 3:09:23 PM

#17

Yeah I was waiting for a client to call me back - that is the longest post i have ever made. I am proud of myself but should be sad at the posting loser i have become.

That is exactly my biggest beef with Vista bashers. The majority of people that I talk to that crap on Vista have never used it or are relating what they have heard. The funny thing is on release vista had issues. My own opinion is that most of these issues have been dealt with with updates over the last year. And SP1 goes even further. Just about all the issues I had with Vista have been sorted. Now would I go out and upgrade a 3 year old system that is running XP fine? No I wouldn't.

#19 By 7754 (206.169.247.2) at 1/2/2008 3:46:26 PM

I wish that Microsoft were making a bigger pitch about what makes Vista a worthwhile upgrade, though, particularly on the IT side. My favorite feature at the moment? Recent Versions (client-side). It alone has paid for itself a number of times already when someone accidentally has deleted or saved over their critical file. The coolest part about it? It's accessible remotely via the admin (c$) share. Do you ever hear anything about it? No.... There are plenty of other features that make it worthwhile, but you never hear much about those, either.

#20 By 3653 (65.80.181.153) at 1/2/2008 4:07:42 PM

"Does Vista's stunted growth hint at the death of the desktop?"

What stunted growth? http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=352

And if you don't buy into Ed's arguments, please take a look at Microsoft's quarterly releases for 2007. If you believe some sources, you'd think vista was tanking, along with xbox. THEN WHERE OH WHERE are those record revenues and earnings coming from?

#21 By 95096 (74.94.136.234) at 1/2/2008 4:28:31 PM

Interesting, kaikara and bluvg. I listed 20 points and your rebuttal is to say that none are valid. Stop drinking the Kool-Aid. I�m happy that you�re happy with Vista and I�m not going to go through your list and nit-pick your responses to me. You�re missing the point. Many people (not you two of course) have problems with Vista and I�ve had lots of discussions with my fellow IT professionals about it. The bottom line is that I need to support this and my Dell D620�s and D610 and my Lenovo T43�s work at half-speed when Vista is loaded�that is, when I can get it to load at all. Sure I could chuck my hardware and buy all new, fast, shiny equipment but then my CFO would find another IT guy. My point is that MS has done a lousy job releasing this OS before it was ready. You can point the finger at third party drivers all you want but the bottom line is I need to have their equipment working for my users and if Vista can�t get it done then I will look elsewhere.

#22 By 7754 (206.169.247.2) at 1/2/2008 5:15:41 PM

UnhappyVistaUser... um... so you're allowed to list 20 statements about Vista, and everyone should just shut up and accept them as unquestionable truths? I'm not saying that you haven't had issues, but saying we're "drinking the kool-aid" just because we disagree and provide some valid reasons why... that's a problem. Are we not allowed to correct even such obviously false statements such as 'Open With no longer exists in Vista'? I hardly think that qualifies as "drinking the kool-aid."

No one (here, anyways) is telling you that you have to support those 620/10s or T43s using Vista, but I really don't know what you're doing wrong with Vista on those... I've installed Vista on those same Dell models, and I'm just not seeing that kind of problem--not since Beta 2 days. With 512 MB RAM, yeah, XP runs circles around Vista, but with 1 GB or more, the difference is marginal. But if you're supporting these for business, why not wait until the next refresh anyhow? What's your laptop refresh cycle?

Also, I think folks (those that work in IT for a company that has lots of applications, anyhow) forget the effort they put into getting their first XP system images ready for use and abuse. I think people forget in general how XP's (or better yet, W2k's) early days really were. I remember, too, when everyone was talking about how Active Directory sucked, no one was adopting it, everyone was sticking with NT domains, yada yada yada... but here we are. Some things never change. And, sadly, a lot of IT folks simply live in an echo chamber, repeating falsehoods to each other ad nauseam. That doesn't make them true.

#23 By 28801 (71.58.231.46) at 1/2/2008 5:51:20 PM

#21: What the hell are you reading (or drinking)? Neither bluvg nor Kaikara said that Vista didn't have problems. As a matter of fact they agreed with you on some points and offered solutions for others.

I've got an idea! If it bothers you that much, disable the sidebar, disable UAC, revert the start menu and control panel to "Classic View", and only run Firefox.

There you go, a quarter of you issues solved five minutes.

#24 By 3746 (72.12.161.38) at 1/2/2008 6:06:05 PM

#21

I never said your points weren't valid but that they fell into two major categories - either that drivers are not available/mature or that things have changed and are not the way you like them. The driver issue has nothing to do with MS. They cannot force manufacturers to support their hardware on a platform. It is a catch 22 type thing. Hardware manufacturers will not dedicate resources to a new platform with low market penetration. But people won't buy it until they can use their hardware on it.

As for the usability issue. Just like you it annoys me when they move something that has been in a location that you have been accessing for the last 5 years doesn't make it a bad choice. Almost everyone of the things you pointed out has the ability to change it back or turn it off. Stat menu and aero for example.

Now just because my opinion is opposite of your's does not mean that i have "drank the kool aide". I have spent hundreds of hours with Vista for the past year and i was refuting your points based on my own experience and testing. In fact some of your points have no basis in fact (open with missing) and makes me wonder how much time you have spent with Vista. I noticed this is a common thing though - when someone has an opinion that is contrary they are automatically a shill for MS.

This post was edited by kaikara on Wednesday, January 02, 2008 at 18:25.

#25 By 3746 (72.12.161.38) at 1/2/2008 6:21:43 PM

#22

The point you make in the last paragraph is what I alluded to at the end of my long ass post. People forget the growing pains of any system when it was released. I have been in IT for a long time and seen it time and again. XP has had many years to mature. When XP was released you had 98 to compare it to. Anything looked better against 98. Even then you had many people freaking about how buggy XP was or how poor the performance is. How many of those people that were bitching do you think are still running 98?

Now you have Vista coming up against a very solid and mature OS in XP. I can see why many early adopters are not happy. Most people should have stuck to the tired and true wait until SP1 they probably would have been way happier.

Write Comment
Return to News

Displaying 1 through 25 of 174
Last | Next

The time now is 11:24:40 PM ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us