When you're the only viable game in town, the numbers aren't really
relevant.



"ahmad12" <guest@unknown-email.com> wrote in message
news:994d59c4d001d1e01145bee85cd3f9d6@nntp-gateway.com...[color=blue]
>
> Microsoft announced today as part of their annual revenues
> '_announcement_'
> ([url]http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2008/jul08/07-17fy08Q4earnings.mspx[/url])
> that it has sold over 180 million licenses of Windows Vista so far. Wow.
> What a failure.
> Revenue growth was primarily driven by continued customer
> demand for all products, including *Windows Vista, which has sold over
> 180 million licenses since launch*, the 2007 Microsoft Office system,
> server software, and Xbox 360 consoles and games.
> BTW: They announced '_140_million_copies_'
> ([url]http://www.techspot.com/news/29984-gates-140-million-copies-of-vista-sold.html[/url])
> sold two months ago. So Microsoft is selling 20 million licenses a month
> on average. If that continues, Microsoft will sell over 220 million
> copies of Windows Vista in its first two years on the market. Given that
> XP is basically gone, it will probably be higher than that.
> Microsoft made over $60 billion in fiscal 2008. Yikes.
>
> Source: 'SuperSite Blog'
> ([url]http://community.winsupersite.com/blogs/paul/default.aspx[/url])
>
>
> --
> ahmad12[/color]

Sinner wrote:[color=blue]
> When you're the only viable game in town, the numbers aren't really
> relevant.[/color]

AND in no way reflects the ACTUAL end user count, something Microsoft
loves to omit because the ACTUAL end user count will be lower. Gotta
love 'em eh?

Cheers
[color=blue]
> "ahmad12" <guest@unknown-email.com> wrote in message
> news:994d59c4d001d1e01145bee85cd3f9d6@nntp-gateway.com...[color=green]
>> Microsoft announced today as part of their annual revenues
>> '_announcement_'
>> ([url]http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2008/jul08/07-17fy08Q4earnings.mspx[/url])
>> that it has sold over 180 million licenses of Windows Vista so far. Wow.
>> What a failure.
>> Revenue growth was primarily driven by continued customer
>> demand for all products, including *Windows Vista, which has sold over
>> 180 million licenses since launch*, the 2007 Microsoft Office system,
>> server software, and Xbox 360 consoles and games.
>> BTW: They announced '_140_million_copies_'
>> ([url]http://www.techspot.com/news/29984-gates-140-million-copies-of-vista-sold.html[/url])
>> sold two months ago. So Microsoft is selling 20 million licenses a month
>> on average. If that continues, Microsoft will sell over 220 million
>> copies of Windows Vista in its first two years on the market. Given that
>> XP is basically gone, it will probably be higher than that.
>> Microsoft made over $60 billion in fiscal 2008. Yikes.
>>
>> Source: 'SuperSite Blog'
>> ([url]http://community.winsupersite.com/blogs/paul/default.aspx[/url])
>>
>>
>> --
>> ahmad12[/color]
>
>[/color]

"Yeah-whatever" <idaspud52@nospamhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:48830D7A.4070102@nospamhotmail.com...[color=blue]
> Sinner wrote:[color=green]
>> When you're the only viable game in town, the numbers aren't really
>> relevant.[/color]
>
> AND in no way reflects the ACTUAL end user count, something Microsoft
> loves to omit because the ACTUAL end user count will be lower. Gotta love
> 'em eh?
>[/color]

When I bought my new Tablet, if I had been offered a choice, I would have
selected XP Tablet Edition. There is absolutely nothing about Vista that I
like. It's no more secure than XP, just a bigger PitA.

Then explain why XP has more security bulletins that apply to it on a monthly basis?

If you can't explain or refute that then should you really be claiming that XP is more secure?
"Sinner" <sinner@gatesofhell.org> wrote in message news:SHEgk.4349$jT6.2545@bignews5.bellsouth.net...

"Yeah-whatever" <idaspud52@nospamhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:48830D7A.4070102@nospamhotmail.com...[color=blue]
> Sinner wrote:[color=green]
>> When you're the only viable game in town, the numbers aren't really
>> relevant.[/color]
>
> AND in no way reflects the ACTUAL end user count, something Microsoft
> loves to omit because the ACTUAL end user count will be lower. Gotta love
> 'em eh?
>[/color]

When I bought my new Tablet, if I had been offered a choice, I would have
selected XP Tablet Edition. There is absolutely nothing about Vista that I
like. It's no more secure than XP, just a bigger PitA.

"Sinner" <sinner@gatesofhell.org> wrote in message
news:e3Cgk.4318$t32.543@bignews3.bellsouth.net...[color=blue]
> When you're the only viable game in town, the numbers aren't really
> relevant.[/color]

ditto for your comment

Rich

Apparently, you don't comprehend the written word well. I didn't say XP was
more secure. I said, "It's(vista) no more secure than XP."
"Shane Nokes" <shane@hotwiredpc.nospam.cXoXm> wrote in message
news:08E46657-1019-4D7A-AF13-29A337A20817@microsoft.com...
Then explain why XP has more security bulletins that apply to it on a
monthly basis?

If you can't explain or refute that then should you really be claiming that
XP is more secure?
"Sinner" <sinner@gatesofhell.org> wrote in message
news:SHEgk.4349$jT6.2545@bignews5.bellsouth.net...

"Yeah-whatever" <idaspud52@nospamhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:48830D7A.4070102@nospamhotmail.com...[color=blue]
> Sinner wrote:[color=green]
>> When you're the only viable game in town, the numbers aren't really
>> relevant.[/color]
>
> AND in no way reflects the ACTUAL end user count, something Microsoft
> loves to omit because the ACTUAL end user count will be lower. Gotta love
> 'em eh?
>[/color]

When I bought my new Tablet, if I had been offered a choice, I would have
selected XP Tablet Edition. There is absolutely nothing about Vista that I
like. It's no more secure than XP, just a bigger PitA.

"rasmasyean" <guest@unknown-email.com> wrote in message
news:628d4ab6b76e62d648871f93cd3f494d@nntp-gateway.com...[color=blue]
>
> Sinner;781952 Wrote:[color=green]
>> Apparently, you don't comprehend the written word well. I didn't say XP
>> was
>> more secure. I said, "It's(vista) no more secure than XP."
>>[/color]
>
> That statement is actually wrong, btw. Much of Vista was built with
> the lessons learned from XP regarding security. I think that’s what the
> replier was intending to say. If, however, you are accusing the Vista
> developers of doing a horrible job regarding this aspect, then you’ll
> have to provide some evidence of this. As of today it still stands that
> Vista IS more secure than XP. Vista 64 is even more secure.
>
>[/color]


I hope your evidence isn't the number people complaining viruses, worms,
trojans, etc., in these newsgroups. Just because Vista makes you click a
button a couple of extra times before it will do what you've requested,
doesn't make it more secure.

Sinner wrote:[color=blue]
> "rasmasyean" <guest@unknown-email.com> wrote in message
> news:628d4ab6b76e62d648871f93cd3f494d@nntp-gateway.com...[color=green]
>> Sinner;781952 Wrote:[color=darkred]
>>> Apparently, you don't comprehend the written word well. I didn't say XP
>>> was
>>> more secure. I said, "It's(vista) no more secure than XP."
>>>[/color]
>> That statement is actually wrong, btw. Much of Vista was built with
>> the lessons learned from XP regarding security. I think that’s what the
>> replier was intending to say. If, however, you are accusing the Vista
>> developers of doing a horrible job regarding this aspect, then you’ll
>> have to provide some evidence of this. As of today it still stands that
>> Vista IS more secure than XP. Vista 64 is even more secure.
>>
>>[/color]
>
>
> I hope your evidence isn't the number people complaining viruses, worms,
> trojans, etc., in these newsgroups. Just because Vista makes you click a
> button a couple of extra times before it will do what you've requested,
> doesn't make it more secure.
>
>[/color]

Funny you should mention that. I removed a Trojan off a Vista computer
this evening. LOL, he said he NEVER got any sort of warning at all when
it installed it's self. Yep, really secure. Oh, and I removed Norton's
Internet Security and installed Avast. Norton didn't catch "Jack."

Cheers

"rasmasyean" <guest@unknown-email.com> wrote in message
news:c42f0f2b2431716df7c92761383023bc@nntp-gateway.com...[color=blue]
>
>
> I don't think anyone would say that Vista is immune to viruses. Just
> be because you got one doesn't prove anything as many people get viruses
> trojans spyware, etc. 50 caliber machine gun bullets go through
> soldiers armor. Does that mean soldier armor is "not secure" so they
> shouldn't wear it? ROFL!
>
> Here's the description of the security enhancements. Take it for what
> you will, man.
>
> 'Windows Vista - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia'[/color]


Oh Yeah, Wikipedia. Now there's an irrefutable source for ya.

rasmasyean wrote:[color=blue]
> Yeah-whatever;782088 Wrote:[color=green]
>> Sinner wrote:> > >[color=darkred]
>>>> "rasmasyean" <guest@xxxxxx-email.com> wrote in message
>>>>
>>> news:628d4ab6b76e62d648871f93cd3f494d@xxxxxx-gateway.com...> > > > >
>>>>>> Sinner;781952 Wrote:
>>>>>> That statement is actually wrong, btw. Much of Vista was built with
>>>>>> the lessons learned from XP regarding security. I think that’s what
>>>> the
>>>>>> replier was intending to say. If, however, you are accusing the
>>>> Vista
>>>>>> developers of doing a horrible job regarding this aspect, then
>>>> you’ll
>>>>>> have to provide some evidence of this. As of today it still stands
>>>> that
>>>>>> Vista IS more secure than XP. Vista 64 is even more secure.
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I hope your evidence isn't the number people complaining viruses,
>>> worms,
>>>> trojans, etc., in these newsgroups. Just because Vista makes you
>>> click a
>>>> button a couple of extra times before it will do what you've
>>> requested,
>>>> doesn't make it more secure.
>>>>[/color]
>> Funny you should mention that. I removed a Trojan off a Vista
>> computer
>> this evening. LOL, he said he NEVER got any sort of warning at all
>> when
>> it installed it's self. Yep, really secure. Oh, and I removed
>> Norton's
>> Internet Security and installed Avast. Norton didn't catch "Jack."
>>
>> Cheers[/color]
>
> I don't think anyone would say that Vista is immune to viruses. Just
> be because you got one doesn't prove anything as many people get viruses
> trojans spyware, etc. 50 caliber machine gun bullets go through
> soldiers armor. Does that mean soldier armor is "not secure" so they
> shouldn't wear it? ROFL!
>
> Here's the description of the security enhancements. Take it for what
> you will, man.
>
> 'Windows Vista - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia'
> ([url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Vista[/url])
> [url]http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_ff_x64.asp[/url]
>
> And if you don't like the warning pop-ups, just turn it off. You can
> do that, too.
>
>[/color]

Hehe, It wasn't MY computer but a clients. After reading many unfounded
claims of Vista's security, I have to laugh, and occasionally comment.
AND turning off warnings is a good idea for the general user? As they
tend to become less frequent with normal usage for many people, there is
no reason to turn it off. I counsel my clients to pay attention to what
they are/were doing when a warning pops up and act accordingly with
their response. If they are not sure, the best action is to deny and
call to find out if it's ok or not for the next time. Anyway, I have
cleaned my share of crap of of Vista machines. (Already)

In the end, no matter what OS you use, one must practice "safe hex,"
have a good AV installed and up to date... LOL, and as I read in the
previous post in this thread, use like 13+ root kit checkers, plus
spyware scanners, spyware blockers etc. Yep real secure. Oh, and I
really don't care about more secure than another, it should be designed
as close to bullet-proof as possible. <sigh>, but nothing is nor will be
perfect. ...YET anyway. What I don't like is people painting a pretty
Vista security picture. It's still quite vulnerable.

I have and use Vista Ultimate, practice very safe hex, have and keep an
anti virus up to date. No probs on mine so far... Well as far as virus
problems go. Other problems, well that's another story. (But not too bad)


G'day