Vista - Instead of coming out w/a bug invested Vista

Instead of coming out w/a bug invested Vista, why not truly go back and fix
it w/a clean slate?

In the mean time, why not start pushing the sales of the 64 bit version of
Windows XP (x64). Why not take that product, do some updates to it, such as
DirectX10 and IE 7 for example, maybe change some graphics perhaps, and start
selling that as a replacement to Windows XP. All new systems, both Intel and
AMD based, coming out now can support 64 bit.

In the mean time, go back and start w/a clean slate, Vista.

With everyone expecting Microsoft products to be full of bugs, as has been
their norm in the past, why not break that cycle? If Microsoft wasn't a
monopoly, and truly had competition, they'd have to come out w/much better
products. When you’re a monopoly, then why should you?

Microsoft, in the real world, is considered the most arrogant, and immature
run companies out there.


----------------
This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow this
link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
click "I Agree" in the message pane.

http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/com....vista.general

Thankfully, that's only an opinion ;o)

--
Zack Whittaker
» ZackNET Enterprises: www.zacknet.co.uk
» MSBlog on ResDev: www.msblog.org
» Vista Knowledge Base: www.vistabase.co.uk
» This mailing is provided "as is" with no warranties, and confers no
rights. All opinions expressed are those of myself unless stated so, and not
of my employer, best friend, Ghandi, my mother or my cat. Glad we cleared
that up!

--: Original message follows :--
"GoHack" <GoHack@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:51C65DD3-5E3D-4F26-ADED-BC0B03B19DA7@microsoft.com...
> Instead of coming out w/a bug invested Vista, why not truly go back and
> fix
> it w/a clean slate?
>
> In the mean time, why not start pushing the sales of the 64 bit version of
> Windows XP (x64). Why not take that product, do some updates to it, such
> as
> DirectX10 and IE 7 for example, maybe change some graphics perhaps, and
> start
> selling that as a replacement to Windows XP. All new systems, both Intel
> and
> AMD based, coming out now can support 64 bit.
>
> In the mean time, go back and start w/a clean slate, Vista.
>
> With everyone expecting Microsoft products to be full of bugs, as has been
> their norm in the past, why not break that cycle? If Microsoft wasn't a
> monopoly, and truly had competition, they'd have to come out w/much better
> products. When you're a monopoly, then why should you?
>
> Microsoft, in the real world, is considered the most arrogant, and
> immature
> run companies out there.
>
>
> ----------------
> This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
> suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
> Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow
> this
> link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
> click "I Agree" in the message pane.
>
> http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/com....vista.general

They are already a few years behind, so you want them to start again from
scratch, so we will have to wait a further 2-3 years? It's already been 4
years since the last major OS from Microsoft.

How do you know it's bug infested (I assume it's infested you mean, not
invested) when it's still in beta? You do know what the meaning of "beta"
is right?

"GoHack" <GoHack@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:51C65DD3-5E3D-4F26-ADED-BC0B03B19DA7@microsoft.com...
> Instead of coming out w/a bug invested Vista, why not truly go back and
> fix
> it w/a clean slate?
>
> In the mean time, why not start pushing the sales of the 64 bit version of
> Windows XP (x64). Why not take that product, do some updates to it, such
> as
> DirectX10 and IE 7 for example, maybe change some graphics perhaps, and
> start
> selling that as a replacement to Windows XP. All new systems, both Intel
> and
> AMD based, coming out now can support 64 bit.
>
> In the mean time, go back and start w/a clean slate, Vista.
>
> With everyone expecting Microsoft products to be full of bugs, as has been
> their norm in the past, why not break that cycle? If Microsoft wasn't a
> monopoly, and truly had competition, they'd have to come out w/much better
> products. When you’re a monopoly, then why should you?
>
> Microsoft, in the real world, is considered the most arrogant, and
> immature
> run companies out there.
>
>
> ----------------
> This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
> suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
> Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow
> this
> link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
> click "I Agree" in the message pane.
>
> http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/com....vista.general

All you hear about it is: it being pushed back from release, again and again;
dumping half the code and redoing that, things being dropped that were once
considered part of Vista, and so on. It's just my fear that all this last
minute hacking is going to mean problems for the consumer later on. Problems
that are going to require a service pack(s) to fix.

Why not simply stop, take a deep breath, take a good look at where your at,
and get back on track?

I can only assume the market is getting flooded w/XP, so sales are slowing,
and profits slowing down. To fix that in the short term, simply turn to XP
x64, start pushing that, while in the mean time, get Vista back on track.

I'm sure the programmers are under extreme pressures to get Vista out. I
can only imagine all the dead ended code that is going to end up in that
product. Code that once had a function, but was descided on to not use. It
just becomes to much of a hassel to remove, especially w/the release date
coming closer and closer.

"The Dude" wrote:

> They are already a few years behind, so you want them to start again from
> scratch, so we will have to wait a further 2-3 years? It's already been 4
> years since the last major OS from Microsoft.
>
> How do you know it's bug infested (I assume it's infested you mean, not
> invested) when it's still in beta? You do know what the meaning of "beta"
> is right?
>
> "GoHack" <GoHack@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:51C65DD3-5E3D-4F26-ADED-BC0B03B19DA7@microsoft.com...
> > Instead of coming out w/a bug invested Vista, why not truly go back and
> > fix
> > it w/a clean slate?
> >
> > In the mean time, why not start pushing the sales of the 64 bit version of
> > Windows XP (x64). Why not take that product, do some updates to it, such
> > as
> > DirectX10 and IE 7 for example, maybe change some graphics perhaps, and
> > start
> > selling that as a replacement to Windows XP. All new systems, both Intel
> > and
> > AMD based, coming out now can support 64 bit.
> >
> > In the mean time, go back and start w/a clean slate, Vista.
> >
> > With everyone expecting Microsoft products to be full of bugs, as has been
> > their norm in the past, why not break that cycle? If Microsoft wasn't a
> > monopoly, and truly had competition, they'd have to come out w/much better
> > products. When you’re a monopoly, then why should you?
> >
> > Microsoft, in the real world, is considered the most arrogant, and
> > immature
> > run companies out there.
> >
> >
> > ----------------
> > This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
> > suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
> > Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow
> > this
> > link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
> > click "I Agree" in the message pane.
> >
> > http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/com....vista.general
>
>

MONEY!!!!

Now, to restart Vista??? Try 10 years to build it. they've been working on
it how long and it's not going to have nearly even close to all what it was
supposed to have by now? They say it will have stuff in the one after vista
that should be in vista now, but then that OS won't be for another 3-5 years
after vista. Microsoft is a complete joke when it comes to releaseing an OS
and they have the stupidist programmers and managers out there. Basically
managers because they tell programmers what to do and then release the OS un
finished which I think is managers type decision. Programmers would and do
fix things so it's not their fault entirely the Oses suck when they come
out.

I right now would like them to just keep XP as is. Keep fixing it when
needed and just work on Vista untill it's done even if that meant wait
another 5 years. Add some cool features to XP, but just release Vista when
it's ready. They say they are doing that already, release when ready, but we
all believe this will not truly happen. They way it's shaping up now it
wouldn't be able to come out till mid or end of 2007 probably if they waited
till it's more ready. I think so anyway.


"GoHack" <GoHack@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:51C65DD3-5E3D-4F26-ADED-BC0B03B19DA7@microsoft.com...
> Instead of coming out w/a bug invested Vista, why not truly go back and
> fix
> it w/a clean slate?
>
> In the mean time, why not start pushing the sales of the 64 bit version of
> Windows XP (x64). Why not take that product, do some updates to it, such
> as
> DirectX10 and IE 7 for example, maybe change some graphics perhaps, and
> start
> selling that as a replacement to Windows XP. All new systems, both Intel
> and
> AMD based, coming out now can support 64 bit.
>
> In the mean time, go back and start w/a clean slate, Vista.
>
> With everyone expecting Microsoft products to be full of bugs, as has been
> their norm in the past, why not break that cycle? If Microsoft wasn't a
> monopoly, and truly had competition, they'd have to come out w/much better
> products. When you're a monopoly, then why should you?
>
> Microsoft, in the real world, is considered the most arrogant, and
> immature
> run companies out there.
>
>
> ----------------
> This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
> suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
> Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow
> this
> link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
> click "I Agree" in the message pane.
>
> http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/com....vista.general

Have you ever tried to find drivers for XP x64 and do you relay want them to
push an OS with limited driver support. I just hope Vista x64 has better
driver support.

"GoHack" wrote:

> All you hear about it is: it being pushed back from release, again and again;
> dumping half the code and redoing that, things being dropped that were once
> considered part of Vista, and so on. It's just my fear that all this last
> minute hacking is going to mean problems for the consumer later on. Problems
> that are going to require a service pack(s) to fix.
>
> Why not simply stop, take a deep breath, take a good look at where your at,
> and get back on track?
>
> I can only assume the market is getting flooded w/XP, so sales are slowing,
> and profits slowing down. To fix that in the short term, simply turn to XP
> x64, start pushing that, while in the mean time, get Vista back on track.
>
> I'm sure the programmers are under extreme pressures to get Vista out. I
> can only imagine all the dead ended code that is going to end up in that
> product. Code that once had a function, but was descided on to not use. It
> just becomes to much of a hassel to remove, especially w/the release date
> coming closer and closer.
>
> "The Dude" wrote:
>
> > They are already a few years behind, so you want them to start again from
> > scratch, so we will have to wait a further 2-3 years? It's already been 4
> > years since the last major OS from Microsoft.
> >
> > How do you know it's bug infested (I assume it's infested you mean, not
> > invested) when it's still in beta? You do know what the meaning of "beta"
> > is right?
> >
> > "GoHack" <GoHack@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:51C65DD3-5E3D-4F26-ADED-BC0B03B19DA7@microsoft.com...
> > > Instead of coming out w/a bug invested Vista, why not truly go back and
> > > fix
> > > it w/a clean slate?
> > >
> > > In the mean time, why not start pushing the sales of the 64 bit version of
> > > Windows XP (x64). Why not take that product, do some updates to it, such
> > > as
> > > DirectX10 and IE 7 for example, maybe change some graphics perhaps, and
> > > start
> > > selling that as a replacement to Windows XP. All new systems, both Intel
> > > and
> > > AMD based, coming out now can support 64 bit.
> > >
> > > In the mean time, go back and start w/a clean slate, Vista.
> > >
> > > With everyone expecting Microsoft products to be full of bugs, as has been
> > > their norm in the past, why not break that cycle? If Microsoft wasn't a
> > > monopoly, and truly had competition, they'd have to come out w/much better
> > > products. When you’re a monopoly, then why should you?
> > >
> > > Microsoft, in the real world, is considered the most arrogant, and
> > > immature
> > > run companies out there.
> > >
> > >
> > > ----------------
> > > This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
> > > suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
> > > Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow
> > > this
> > > link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
> > > click "I Agree" in the message pane.
> > >
> > > http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/com....vista.general
> >
> >

As a matter of fact, I'm running x64 now on one of my computers. Had
adsolutely no problems w/it at all. The only software that I've had any
problems in getting to run is one benchmark program, Aquamark3.

The only driver problem I've had w/it is getting one for my printer. The
printer manufacturers are always late, and never provide support for their
older models.

The only way that you are going to get driver support is by Microsoft
providing pressure. Especially if you start pushing the OS on all new systems
being released that support 64 bit.

I like x64 better than XP. It's suppose to be based off of Server 2003,
which I've tried w/Microsoft's temporary license program, but that OS is too
expensive for me to buy.


"Shawn M" wrote:

> Have you ever tried to find drivers for XP x64 and do you relay want them to
> push an OS with limited driver support. I just hope Vista x64 has better
> driver support.
>
> "GoHack" wrote:
>
> > All you hear about it is: it being pushed back from release, again and again;
> > dumping half the code and redoing that, things being dropped that were once
> > considered part of Vista, and so on. It's just my fear that all this last
> > minute hacking is going to mean problems for the consumer later on. Problems
> > that are going to require a service pack(s) to fix.
> >
> > Why not simply stop, take a deep breath, take a good look at where your at,
> > and get back on track?
> >
> > I can only assume the market is getting flooded w/XP, so sales are slowing,
> > and profits slowing down. To fix that in the short term, simply turn to XP
> > x64, start pushing that, while in the mean time, get Vista back on track.
> >
> > I'm sure the programmers are under extreme pressures to get Vista out. I
> > can only imagine all the dead ended code that is going to end up in that
> > product. Code that once had a function, but was descided on to not use. It
> > just becomes to much of a hassel to remove, especially w/the release date
> > coming closer and closer.
> >
> > "The Dude" wrote:
> >
> > > They are already a few years behind, so you want them to start again from
> > > scratch, so we will have to wait a further 2-3 years? It's already been 4
> > > years since the last major OS from Microsoft.
> > >
> > > How do you know it's bug infested (I assume it's infested you mean, not
> > > invested) when it's still in beta? You do know what the meaning of "beta"
> > > is right?
> > >
> > > "GoHack" <GoHack@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > > news:51C65DD3-5E3D-4F26-ADED-BC0B03B19DA7@microsoft.com...
> > > > Instead of coming out w/a bug invested Vista, why not truly go back and
> > > > fix
> > > > it w/a clean slate?
> > > >
> > > > In the mean time, why not start pushing the sales of the 64 bit version of
> > > > Windows XP (x64). Why not take that product, do some updates to it, such
> > > > as
> > > > DirectX10 and IE 7 for example, maybe change some graphics perhaps, and
> > > > start
> > > > selling that as a replacement to Windows XP. All new systems, both Intel
> > > > and
> > > > AMD based, coming out now can support 64 bit.
> > > >
> > > > In the mean time, go back and start w/a clean slate, Vista.
> > > >
> > > > With everyone expecting Microsoft products to be full of bugs, as has been
> > > > their norm in the past, why not break that cycle? If Microsoft wasn't a
> > > > monopoly, and truly had competition, they'd have to come out w/much better
> > > > products. When you’re a monopoly, then why should you?
> > > >
> > > > Microsoft, in the real world, is considered the most arrogant, and
> > > > immature
> > > > run companies out there.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----------------
> > > > This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
> > > > suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
> > > > Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow
> > > > this
> > > > link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
> > > > click "I Agree" in the message pane.
> > > >
> > > > http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/com....vista.general
> > >
> > >

On Fri, 26 May 2006 19:09:04 +0100, Zack Whittaker wrote:

> Thankfully, that's only an opinion ;o)

Yes....but he has some valid points though...

Ciao, Andreas