You apparently have no business savvy. And I might add , absolutely zero
programming experience.
"Canuck57" <dave-no_spam@unixhome.net> wrote in message
news:n%z0k.54$ze2.0@pd7urf1no...
>
> "Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@remove_mvps.com> wrote in message
> news:OpeRDj%23wIHA.4772@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>
>>> Mind you, Vista is a bad batch of soup, the best place is the
>>> garborator.
>>
>> You people don't give up easily, do you. This argument has been raging
>> for years, but only at user level mainly because users don't understand
>> the whole picture.
>
> Most people who spend $1000 for a nice system for home don't know how to
> replace or dual boot and install another OS. They just assume the OS is a
> native part of the computer. WinMe, I gave it about the same amount of
> time. I gave OS2 about the same too. Loved OS2, but the driver support
> was just too bad for it to be useful. And I get calls from non-tech
> friends and relatives, unanimous, Vista is not the best.
>
> Users (technical or not) understand the _full_ picture absolutely. For
> without users, there would be absolutely no need for Microsoft. Microsoft
> is in a false sense of security because of the monopoly position with PC
> vendors, but with Eee PC (Linux) and a hoard of new systems like it the
> base is crumbling.
>
> Problem is Redmond wants to lead myopically and push customers, not
> service their needs. They want to pump profits in a commodity market by
> fast regurgitation of old tech making it unstable. And are now failing.
> It will be slow to start, like the mainframe. But Microsoft zenith has
> passed if they don't change course fast.
>
> People are tired of the crash learn of big changes. If they have to, it
> had better be cheap.
>
> Businesses are balking at the fast expensive refresh cycle. They expect a
> 2-3 year old device to work with a PC today. This is NOT unreasonable.
> Would you buy a car you couldn't get tires or spare parts for in as little
> as 3 years? Or a car that needed a major over haul every 3 years? This
> is why many businesses still run W2000.
>
> Software, including the OS needs to be a series of smaller, more planned
> and evolutionary steps. Vista is a complete failure in this regard.
> Thus, continuous improvement of unfinished Vista is improbable. Just
> minimal patchwork. It is in "maintenance" mode while everyone runs off to
> Win 7.
>
> A few suggestions to Microsoft:
>
> We know you know your software market has hits it's elasticity of growth
> in dollars and cents. Software, including the OS is now going to follow
> hardware as a commodity item. Microsoft aught to gear for this now, and
> not wait for 4 quarters of declining revenue to hear the wake up call.
>
> Evolve the OS with compatibility in mind, perhaps on a subscription basis.
> But don't expect $300/3 years for Vista. It needs to be like $20/year
> tops. When you buy a PC it is prepaid for 3 years, like a car warranty.
> Ditto MS-Office. Only rich fools go out and buy the full MS-Office
> ultimate.
>
> Let the user chose, loose the WeSaySo corporation attitude. Users know
> what they want. This means XP will not die until the users don't want it
> any more. Even Ford still makes a Taurus. And due to it's popularity and
> longevity, I can still get parts for it 12 years later.
>
> Simplify licensing. Your own people don't understand it very well. Quit
> packaging a product like Vista 17 different ways confusing everyone. An
> OS isn't a Lamborghini. And it will never sell like it either.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>