The Active Network
ActiveMac Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise  
 

  *  

  Windows Vista snubbed by 2008 Olympics
Time: 03:59 EST/08:59 GMT | News Source: PC Advisor | Posted By: Kenneth van Surksum

The organisers of the 2008 Olympic Games have snubbed Windows Vista in favour of Windows XP, while wireless networking won't even play a supporting role in at the event in Beijing.

Windows XP was chosen to run on all PCs handling chores vital to the Olympic Games, and has been installed on most of the PCs delivered by Lenovo. Vista will only be used on PCs in internet lounges set up for athletes to use during the games.

The Olympic Games require mature, stable technologies, said Yang Yuanqing, chairman of Lenovo, during a briefing in Beijing. The Olympic Games aren't a place to try new technologies due to the size and importance of the event, he said. Everything must work smoothly.

"If it's not stable, it could have some problems," he said.

Write Comment
Return to News

  Displaying 1 through 25 of 184
Last | Next
  The time now is 12:38:05 PM ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us
#1 By 2201 (194.205.219.2) at 8/9/2007 4:24:26 AM
This isn't really news anyway and if it was aimed at once again belittling Windows Vista, then only fools will believe this.

In the Athens Olympics, they used Windows 2000 machines, despite the fact that XP had been out for nearly 3 years prior.

So the decision to use XP machines at the 2008 Olympics is a completely normal choice.

#2 By 432 (209.167.107.58) at 8/9/2007 8:28:59 AM
OK, I can't handle this anymore. This is not "belittling" Vista, it is simply stating a fact, Vista is still not ready for Prime Time, however, I would like to see vista now after the lastest patches have been installed. (Vista Compatibility & Reliability Patch).

I am going to tell everyone a story, I am a geek (go figure I reading Awin before I even start my work) and I love to try new technologies, I push my company to use the latest and greatest all the time. I develop with ASP.net 3.5 FOR PRODUCTION, using Visual Studio 2008 beta 2, I have two computers at work, 2 at home and all of which are running Windows XP. Why, because Vista is not stable. I have tried, believe me I have tried, in fact I really would love nothing more than to be able to run Vista...as I said I am geek. But it if means that my applications crash and restart themseleves, and many of our corporate apps have to suddenly be "Run as Administrator" to work properly and to avoid "sharing violation" errors, crashing and losing valuable data, that this in not a risk I am willing to take. Until the kinks can be worked out (maybe by SP1, I am hoping) then we must also stay with mature stable technologies.

Oh and in the mean time... I'll just keep reading about the true new windows version Windows 7...more and more it seems like Vista may go the way of...dare I say...Windows ME.

This post was edited by SidX on Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 08:41.

#3 By 79018 (70.180.232.32) at 8/9/2007 8:59:25 AM
As a Vista user I understand why they chose XP, most users are not familiar with it, higher system requirements’ and it might have been the cost MS may have been asking.
Vista is extraordinary and yes it is being trash talked, I think most of the negative comments are posted by non users.

#4 By 13030 (198.22.121.110) at 8/9/2007 9:24:59 AM
#2, Your Vista experience seems to be completely different than that of some of our hard-core Microsoft fans here. Perhaps, you're not enough of a fan?

Regardless, an organization chooses the technology that works best for them. I still run Windows 2000 on two of my main development computers because it works just fine and I don't want to pay for any more new OS licenses than I have to. My laptop runs XP Pro because that OS works best on that machine. Vista has been relegated to a test machine (that is due for a hard drive wipe btw).

While #1 would have us believe this is a normal choice, there is still something telling about this. I would have expected Microsoft to have "helped" make Vista prevalent on more than just the computers in the lounges. Instead, the critical computers for score keeping, reporting and so forth will be running XP.

#5 By 10402 (72.252.10.248) at 8/9/2007 9:37:10 AM
have to agree all my vista boxes are rock solid, except for 1 custom app tat that idiots have it screwing with admin level registry keys and saving to files that are not user specific so ya it requires a elevation to run properly but thats not microsofts fault.

As for the Olympics... they need to stop worrying about the damn OS and start worrying about the smog, this is EMBARASSING! They are postponing all indurance races because the smog in china is SO FRIGGING BAD. Thats just pathetic.

As for vista especially after the speed patches this week, its damn solid and secure, and now quite responsive as well. Yes for mission criticle apps like RUNNING THE OLYMPICS i'd say stick to the 5+ year old os thats been put through the ringer endless times, and also theirs the fact that xp lincenses are dirt cheap right now (then again oem vista licenses arent exactly breaking the bank especially over in china)

Besides do you think microsoft really cares? The PC's that people will see like the competitors are running vista, its just the mundane tasks that are xp based... and personally i find that a bit stupid, i think they should have perhaps even run a stronger one like say 2003 standard server, just to have 110% stability. But thts just me

#6 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 8/9/2007 9:45:17 AM
#4: Your Vista experience seems to be completely different than that of some of our hard-core Microsoft fans here. Perhaps, you're not enough of a fan?

I almost fell off my chair when I read that. Good one.

#7 By 2201 (194.205.219.2) at 8/9/2007 10:41:56 AM
#2 the report doesn't state anything that is shocking or revelatory, especially as I cited the fact that in the last Olympics, they used Windows 2000 machines even though XP had been out for years. This is not any indication of Vista's unworthiness at all, just showing common sense really, so the report IS belittling Vista unnecessarily.

Big organisations have always held off deploying the latest and greatest until the technology has had time to bed in. Only relatively recently are we seeing quite a few big organisations deploying XP installations. Why some people think that Vista should suddenly be everywhere virtually instantly after it's been out (and are amazed that it isn't so use it as an excuse that it must be failing) is a complete mystery, when past history shows us that this is almost never the case with a new leading OS.

I think the problem here is that a lot of reports are intended to apparently show the shortcomings of Vista without actually thinking about past history or checking their facts. The Vista Service Pack 1 news is another example, where people are amazed that it was scheduled to be released so soon after the retail release and use that to "prove" that Vista isn't up to it, despite the fact that Service Packs for Windows 2000 and XP have been released in the exact same timeframe without the same level of fuss (of course since then it seems that it might actually take longer than previous service packs to come out but that's another story entirely).

This is not news.

This post was edited by testman on Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 10:43.

#8 By 28801 (65.90.202.10) at 8/9/2007 10:53:54 AM
Why didn't they want to use Linux?


#9 By 32132 (142.32.208.232) at 8/9/2007 11:17:01 AM
#9 What ... no RedFlag Linux?

Did Microsoft buy off the whole country?

What a HUGE LOSS for Linux.

#10 By 13030 (198.22.121.110) at 8/9/2007 12:28:20 PM
#8 and #9, all of China is already using Microsoft products.

#11 By 28801 (65.90.202.10) at 8/9/2007 1:27:20 PM
#10: Vista is about a millionth of a Yuan on the street in China - Linux is still cheaper, so why such poor adoption?

#12 By 37 (76.210.78.134) at 8/9/2007 1:28:16 PM
Because nobody wants to use Linux, besides the hard core computer geeks.

#13 By 432 (209.167.107.58) at 8/9/2007 1:29:01 PM
ch...hilarious. I can't even read the comments most of the time, because of all the bickering. However...fan I am...I want to run vista...i just can't, not yet anyways.

#14 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 8/9/2007 1:33:28 PM
#13: Don't let the Microbots distract you from the real issue, that Vista is too unstable for production use. But don't worry; I'm sure MS will admit to what a load of crap Vista is.... just after they release Windows 7 (or whatever the buzzword of the day is).

#15 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 8/9/2007 1:36:32 PM
#11: 20 years of lock-in and monopoly aren't shed overnight. Why do you use Windows? The day you first started to use a PC, did you do an extensive evaluation of all available OSes and then pick Windows, or did it just happen to come with your PC and it's what all your friends & colleagues use? I thought so.

#16 By 28801 (65.90.202.10) at 8/9/2007 1:52:21 PM
#15: I have actuall tried several flavors of Linux. They have gotten better over the years, but Windows is still superior. Meanwhile, you claim to have installed Vista - wow! Thanks for your help.

#17 By 37 (76.210.78.134) at 8/9/2007 2:15:50 PM
There have been Linux distros for years and years and years and years and years and years, available for free. Mac has been around for years and years and years and years. Windows has been around for those years too, and has always cost tons and tons and tons of money.

Even today, people STILL buy Windows upgrades and OEM PC's like they are going out of style. Windows probably sells in one day what Linux sells in 5 years on desktops.

The choice is there, the consumer's ability to research their choice is there, and companies have tried to offer linux distro's as OEM on more than one occasion (Dell), and Windows still crushes the competition.

Anyway....Apple & Mac FTW!

#18 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 8/9/2007 2:17:12 PM
#16: Good for you that you've used UNIX. I'm not sure how that figures into my question about why you use Windows, but whatever. As for Vista, I've installed it twice actually but I fail to see the relevance of that fact in this discussion.

#19 By 28801 (65.90.202.10) at 8/9/2007 2:41:56 PM
I said I used Linux, are you admitting that Linux ripped everything off from UNIX?

It's figures in because you talk about "product lock in" and “monopoly” - yet here I am, a Microsoft enthusiast, willing to look for something better. There is no such thing as “product lock in”, and even if there were, the way to defeat it is for competitors to make a better product. They haven't! Until Linux shows some "innovation" instead of creating an ersatz Windows OS, I'll stick with the superior product and gladly pay for it.

#20 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 8/9/2007 3:29:11 PM
#19: I said I used Linux, are you admitting that Linux ripped everything off from UNIX?

Non-sequitur. I'm not sure how the roots of Linux came into this. You're another guy who's all over the map when debating. Besides, any idiot knows that a lot of OS concepts used by Linux and Windows came from UNIX.

There is no such thing as “product lock in”

Um, OK. You should talk to some marketing people.

and even if there were, the way to defeat it is for competitors to make a better product.

So naive. The Betamax VCR was a far superior product to the VHS, for example. Where is it today, if your logic is correct? It's been said that a poor product marketed well will succeed, while a good product marketed poorly will fail. Technical superiority is but one factor in the potential success of a product. There are many other intangibles that play a part. You're also assuming a level playing field for competition which is sorely lacking in this world. MS has all the OEMs in their pocket and has had them for many, many years. Only now, thanks to the courts, can PC vendors offer systems minus Windows without fear of retribution from MS (you know, the MS that claims to love choice & competition?). MS has about a 15 year head-start. With the world running Windows at a 90% level, nobody can challenge that in the short term, no matter how good their OS is.

#21 By 28801 (71.58.231.46) at 8/9/2007 4:53:40 PM
#20: All over the place - you brought up UNIX (see post 18) - I didn't!

“Um, OK. You should talk to some marketing people.”

Naturally, Marketing people are going to talk up “Product Lock in”. How else could they keep their jobs? And are those the same marketing people you’ve berated on this site for spinning Microsoft in a positive light?

"Nobody can challenge that in the short term, no matter how good their OS is"

How much MORE time does Linux need: 2 more years, 5 more years, 10 more years?
I submit we will be having this same conversation in a decade with Windows still owning 90% of the market. Of course, maybe by then you will have matured enough to avoid the name-calling. For now, however, don’t change a thing - you’re the Latch that we all know and tolerate.



#22 By 3653 (68.52.54.161) at 8/9/2007 6:39:36 PM
ersatz. nice word. I'm gonna start using that one alot more often.

back on comment #2 SidX questioned if this was 'belittling' vista. I think choosing the word "snubbing" is meant to incite. Don't you agree?

#23 By 15406 (74.104.251.89) at 8/9/2007 7:20:20 PM
#21: Sorry, you're right ther ein that I saw Linux and read UNIX.

Naturally, Marketing people are going to talk up “Product Lock in”.

No. Product lock-in is something you hope for but certainly don't advertise. You don't want your customers to know that, once they buy & use your product, they're practically yours for life -- whether they like it or not.

How much MORE time does Linux need: 2 more years, 5 more years, 10 more years?

I can't answer that, if there is even an answer. I doubt Linux will ever overtake Windows on the desktop unless there is a major event shift of some type. I'm happy for them to coexist, assuming they can properly interoperate. This gives true choice to the consumer. This is also anathema to Microsoft. It's not good enough for MS that it wins, everyone else must lose.

#24 By 28801 (65.90.202.10) at 8/9/2007 7:35:23 PM
#21: OK now that we're friends again – Can you give me an example of how people like us are locked into any product?

#25 By 15406 (74.104.251.89) at 8/9/2007 8:05:29 PM
#24: Four immediate examples that come to mind are the Office file formats, ActiveX in the browser, the proprietary multimedia codecs and the Java extensions. Product lock-in isn't exclusive to Microsoft. That's why standards are so important. This breeds true competition, where each product must stand on its own merits without any external assistance. This, in turn, benefits consumers by having effective choice and the economic & functional advantages that come from true competition.

But back to the subject at hand, Linux is fully capable of running the Olympics as is Windows. They would be stupid to use anything that is so new and untested. They're going with XP because it is satisfactory for their needs. MS may very well have tried (based on their track record) to grease them to promote Vista, but it's almost impossible to tell the Chinese gov't what to do.

Write Comment
Return to News
  Displaying 1 through 25 of 184
Last | Next
  The time now is 12:38:05 PM ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us
User name and password:

 

  *  
  *   *