Yeah, I know, I WARNED YOU. I'll prattle on forever if no one stops me. 9
billion sounds realistic for Vista if you're including all of the manpower
costs. They'll still do fine on the books though after the sales kick though.
I use to call it "Working on the BLEEDING edge of Technology". It's
definitely painful. I swear the next company I start is going to be a
technology based Neoprene.

"Puppy Breath" wrote:
[color=blue]
> Sorry, didn't have time to read your whole post. But in terms of
> comparisons, the (perhaps undetailed) list is at the Compare Editions page
> (go to [url]www.WindowsVista.com[/url] and click Choose An Edition). The Compare
> Editions link at the bottom of the page pretty much sums it up. Don't know
> if that's detailed enough for you or not. But none of the editions comes
> with the Office programs you listed (Word, Excel, etc.). The development
> tools aren't built-in either. Most of you can get from MSDN. There are
> Express editions of most tools that you can download for free.
>
> Yeah, a lot of people are having a lot of problems with Vista - even on
> machines where it came pre-installed. It's a shame -- both for them and for
> Vista's future.
>
> The "time to shoot the engineers and go to market" mentality isn't unique to
> Microsoft though. The investors and other people with a stake in getting the
> product released were up in arms and really pushing to get this thing out
> the door. Rumor has it that R&D costs for Vista and Office 2007 were in the
> $9 billion dollar range and the money people were getting real uncomfortable
> with that. Investors are sick of Microsoft's seemingly bottomless bucket of
> R&D money and wanted some of that kicked back to them in the form of cash
> dividends. I think they'll win and MS will become just another corporation
> after this.
>
> I got flamed into oblivion when I first suggested that the public release of
> Beta 2 was way too early. But if you ask me, now would have probably been a
> good time to release the public beta, with a product release several months
> down the road. Not that I'm having any significant problems with Vista. But
> because of all the other things you see going on in here.
>
>
>
>
> "NetFodder" <NetFodder@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:05F75074-D4D9-454D-A7F4-536E76E7D7FE@microsoft.com...[color=green]
> > First let me say, I have yet to hear anything good from people who have
> > used
> > it. Which makes me really warry about upgrading. Second, I've been a huge
> > Microsoft software fan forever. I've been deploying and supporting windows
> > since the land before time. So this isn’t some random ranting. I'm just
> > seriously confused about the different versions. I’m permanently disabled
> > from military service now and I’m now feeling out of the loop. I missed
> > all
> > of the beta’s, the conventions, basically all of the fun. Yes I’m
> > disappointed (again) Microsoft keeps ignoring one of its key target users,
> > but I’ll get into that later. I’m also a little frustrated with the
> > marketing
> > team’s constant ability to over boast the functions of a product making
> > its
> > delivery disappointing. We’ve all heard the analogies. They could make
> > jell-o
> > sound like cream brule. Unfortunately when the waiter brings it out, it
> > doesn’t matter if jell-o tastes good, it’s not cream brule. I also want to
> > apologize because I can be excessively long winded. I use teach three
> > dozen
> > different MS products as an MCT. I go off on analogies because I never
> > know
> > the background of those listening. I’m really just trying to have a common
> > ground.
> >
> > What I'm confused about is the 4 versions (5 if you include enterprise
> > which
> > honestly sounds like it's suppose to be bigger and better tha Ultimate but
> > it's actually a step down from what I read). I just can't seem to get a
> > real
> > view of what each one is and what they are. There are a few very general
> > comparisons on the site but not a full list. I mean when Office came out
> > with
> > the Office Small Business, Professional and so forth. You actually had a
> > list
> > of apps (outlook, excel, word, access, front page or whatever). I could
> > tell
> > WHAT the difference was because there was a list of the ones included in
> > each. The best I have right now is my own personal impression of the name.
> > It’s based on my understanding of the things marketing has done to name
> > things in the past. I would love to see some kind of realistic way of
> > knowing
> > the differences. Also I must say I’m wary of the names because of the
> > over-boasting of marketing in the past making it sound like it includes
> > more
> > than it really does.
> >
> > Here’s a quick impression of my understanding.
> > Home edition – It SOUNDS like it would be a natural upgrade for XP home or
> > Media Center; tuned for users at home not having a domain. Not necessarily
> > to
> > be used as a bastardized mega DVR but with the functionality. Mostly for
> > entertainment but very easily let’s you jump into doing a variety of
> > homework
> > or productivity needs. The REALITY, no upgrade path from media center
> > tells
> > me the multimedia is seriously lacking. My honest impression is it’s an
> > extraordinarily locked down Internet Browser with email tuned to try to
> > keep
> > the people who are very naive and always fall for EVERY scam out there
> > safe;
> > the stereotyped 12:00 flashers.
> >
> > Home edition professional – It SOUNDS like this is the type of machine
> > based
> > for the home network. Still tuned for the priority on entertainment with
> > functionality for business productivity. Something for the tech savvy
> > family.
> > Teenagers with cell phones and digital cameras able to take 30 minutes of
> > high quality video on their 1 or 2 gig SD cards. Then able to edit and
> > make
> > creative things to post on MySpace or the family type web sites. Machines
> > able to join a domain because they have a personal server in the house
> > with a
> > couple 400 gig drives in them for sharing stuff. Possibly running a
> > personal
> > family web site and maybe even a light weight email server. Systems able
> > to
> > interact with the web sites on that server like share point or DotNetNuke.
> > Systems where the firewalls are all turned OFF and the network stacks kept
> > thin because they have a wireless router running the firewall. However
> > they
> > do have their anti-phishing and spam stuff going. REALITY – it’s the
> > upgrade
> > path for Media Center which means just like Media Center you probably don’t
> > have domain membership ability (which I always thought was odd that you
> > could
> > install XP Pro and be able to join domains but as soon as you add the
> > media
> > center add-on software your can’t join anymore) You get all of the extra
> > crap
> > people not only don’t need but REALLY NEED out of the way is turned on,
> > like
> > the excessive firewall, bridging and other stuff not wanted. Stuff that is
> > completely redundant or put there to give people the impression they’re
> > getting a lot for their money. Peppered with tons of simple stuff that
> > really
> > is a severe annoyance and in actually prevents you from even being able to
> > see the real meat of the few powerful apps included. One of which is not
> > the
> > Windows Complete PC Backup and Restore. Come on guys, we know there are
> > always tons of bugs. Any type of better backup and restore as well as
> > scheduling should have been included in all versions. There's no excuse
> > for
> > that.
> >
> > Business, This is obviously where they reverse the priorities. Systems
> > designed for the 24 hour “hot cot” call centers and routine productivity
> > users. People who come in to work and don’t really think much of their
> > computers because they’re all locked down to only browsing the company’s
> > internal web site and only run the applications approved by the company.
> > Which is probably easy on this version because any application a business
> > might use has been taken off in order to get them to pay extra for it.
> > Because it specifically says it’s not in the media center upgrade path
> > these
> > are the machines you really don’t want to in the hands of your marketing
> > team
> > because they are the other side of the pendulum needing multimedia apps
> > for
> > creating all the pretty marketing packets and videos. REALITY, it’s the
> > basic
> > Home edition with the ability to join a domain. Also, still already
> > running
> > the firewall and other crap. Which in turn actually pisses off the IT guys
> > because NOW, they have to figure out how to get it out of the way so their
> > custom enterprise management tools, scripts and services will work. And by
> > the way if you were going to get rid of backup on ANY version this is the
> > one
> > to not include it. WHY, because any computer running this will be in an
> > office where any failure to the machine that takes more than 10 minutes to
> > figure out is resolved by re-imaging the system. Places where the IT guy
> > just
> > walks around with the image CD's in his pocket.
> >
> > Ultimate, basically all the stops pulled so you have all the functionality
> > it was designed for but didn’t have to cut out in order to create the
> > lesser
> > versions. Unfortunately this means by default EVERY single function is
> > turned
> > on and running. And even though they aren’t doing any good running because
> > they haven’t been configured they are all running and killing any machine
> > out
> > there. Possibly needing a system housing 2 dual core procs and 4 gigs of
> > ram
> > minimum and still taking 30 seconds just to launch notepad.
> >
> > Honestly this is the same reasoning that when MS launched IE7 they made it
> > a
> > High-priority update. They have finally moved it down to an optional piece
> > but it’s too late. They already pissed everyone off by doing it. The teams
> > try so hard to impress their bosses that the most stupid features are
> > boasted
> > off as mission critical. You know, all the crap that some clueless person
> > in
> > market thinks is a cute feature therefore JUST HAS to be added. Kind of
> > like
> > making the default outlook view “In Groups” and not making and easy way to
> > un
> > do it.
> >
> > I hate to digress because this is already getting really long. I am
> > seriously trying to find out about Vista, but as much as I love Microsoft
> > products, I find myself suffering from PSTD solely from IE7’s release. So
> > I’ll treat myself to just a little bit of ranting. Any time it’s mentioned
> > I
> > can’t help but pull two fists of hair out. I’m still absolutely
> > flabbergasted
> > that in a time when MySpace type web sites and personal customization are
> > the
> > hugest thing out there, they thought taking all of the customization
> > functionality would be acceptable. That was such an astronomically huge
> > error. I can’t believe they haven’t fired any of the IE team. I lost a lot
> > of
> > respect for them when they did that huge debacle but the fact that those
> > guys
> > still have jobs is beyond my comprehension. I’m not sure I’ll ever be able
> > to
> > trust them again. I still remember putting IE 1.0 on people’s machines
> > even
> > though many said mozilla was better. IE 7 has become a huge black stain on
> > Microsoft. You can get mad about this statement but you can quote me. I
> > have
> > never been able to get people to really understand how truly horrible it
> > is.
> > And yes, I don’t even think you’ll still truly understand. “The release of
> > IE7 was worse that the Holocaust”. I also dare any survivor of Auschwitz
> > to
> > have a conversation with me for 30 minutes and not walk away with the
> > sudden
> > urge to storm Dave Massy’s office with torches and pitch forks. End Rant!
> > By
> > the way, can you run IE 6.5 on Vista?
> >
> > I left this for last and I'm really hoping someone would be able to either
> > answer this or honestly forward this to some one who could explain this or
> > maybe even do something. The HUGEST problems I have about Vista are first
> > there is a very bad set of upgrade paths. I'm absolutely disgusted there
> > is
> > no upgrade path for W2k. Even though I haven’t run it in years I know many
> > people do. That's just really poor work. Even “IF” in essence you were
> > doing
> > a fresh install you still could have created a way to keep selective parts
> > of
> > the person profile information. I have a feeling the first answer someone
> > is
> > going to try and say to me is, you just don't understand, we can't know
> > everything about every program to make sure they upgrade right.
> > Unfortunately
> > if you have the ability to state something like that then you should have
> > the
> > intelligence to work with or around this issue.
> >
> > Did you ever think maybe you could solve the problem by making a very easy
> > way to help people do an "upgrade" when in technical reality it's a fresh
> > install. You could do a really great job of automating the setup. Have it
> > check the list of installed application to see if any have already been
> > worked for upgrade like say office. Then make a list of the other apps.
> > You
> > tell the user they will have to provide the original install disks or
> > select
> > an option to not include it. This way you can use the information in the
> > installer system to re-run their installs and overlay the users previous
> > settings. I'm not going to try and say it would be an easy one, two, three
> > type thing to do, but it really looks like it was just completely ignore.
> > Almost like they twisted it into an up-sale, saying you have to buy the
> > full
> > version versus just the upgrade version.
> >
> > The second thing is how everyone I've talked to says they hate it, or it
> > just pisses them off. The complaint I hear the most is that it nags you
> > constantly about everything. They actually say the mac commercial is not
> > an
> > exaggeration but actually a kind way or talking about it. I hear from
> > fellow
> > IT people they hate how they added so many extra unnecessary pieces to the
> > network stack. I say unnecessary because it's not that they aren't a
> > functioning item but again everyone is more interested in bragging off the
> > programming they did than determining if it really should be added by
> > default.
> >
> > Now, here's the thing about what I said about an ignored user base. It’s
> > also the basis for most of the input I’ve received as to what people think
> > of
> > Vista. The user base is the smart users. I realize there are MANY people
> > that
> > have no interest in knowing the deep inner workings of the OS. I always
> > use
> > the analogy of the car industry back closer to the 60s and 70s. All the
> > cool
> > people knew everything about the insides and the inner works of a car. And
> > then there's people who just really don't care and are very happy with
> > just
> > driving and taking it to jiffy lube to change the oil. But the thing is
> > there
> > IS a segment of users who actually have a big impact on the impression of
> > it.
> > What do you think would happen if “The Fonz" came out saying mustangs were
> > a
> > piece of crap, or sucked. Ordinary drivers recognize if the guy who lives
> > this kind of thing says it sucks I'd rather just avoid it if only to avoid
> > the ridiculing and not buy one. Who do you think people ask if they like
> > Vista?
> >
> > Why isn’t there an IT Pro or Architect Version. A version where by default
> > everything is included but not turned on and running. A version where we
> > can[/color][/color]