Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

Here, here!!!

Absolutely agree!

Couldn't agree more, the first windows OS i had to use was 3,1, It has been downhill ever since, I sincerly believe the worst disaster to hit the home PC industry was that Bill Gates was not stillborn.

I agree.

Agree with you. My first exposure to computers was when you had the REAL floppies...the old 5" jobbies. I learned DOS and kept having to learn a new OS every time I got a new computer. What makes me nuts about VISTA is the incompatibility factor with some older (and I dont mean ancient like trying to run VisiWord or some such on my computer...we are talking say Photoshop Elements 5.0) programs. Ok, you can go out there and ususally find a patch of some sort to make it work. However, said patch is usually a line of code or a command you have to put into DOS. Now, if MS is trying to made DOS obsolete, then why the freak do they still have you doing this??? Sometimes I wish they'd just leave us alone and let us go back to DOS.

Senora Fossil

Well, then, if Microsoft JUST "fixed" all the bugs in it's current computers that we all own...1. Wouldn't that be counter-productive to their company money-wise as if you actually got your old computer fixed, you would NOT buy a "new" one from their company and 2. If your current computer just DIED, and you needed to go out and just buy a NEW computer without any adjustments/upgrades, the PRICE of that particular computer would most likely be LESS than the price you paid for the exact, same first new one months/years ago, meaning Microsoft wouldn't make MORE big $$$ from us idiot consumers!

They can't just fix old operating systems forever you know, sometimes they just need to start from the ground up and if you think you're going to get that in a free online update you're mistaken. The gap between XP and Vista was already the longest gap between Windows OSs by a long shot.

The only reason they're ditching Vista is because of the stigma it's earned after a bumpy start and a bunch of people bitching about it even though they haven't used it in ages.

I'll give you a few reasons why things change:

1) New hardware (like quad-core CPUs, for instance) needs new system software to take the best advantage of new benefits.

2) Better security sometimes requires a whole new "architecture". A good example of this is the .NET platform, which isolates a lot of processes from hardware (an approach that improves security considerably).

3) When conditions like 1) & 2) above require interface changes, it is provides an opportunity to improve and reorganize things. Look at it from Microsoft's point of view: should they optimize the interface for the people who will be using PCs for the next 20 years, or for the ones who've been using them for the LAST 20 years?

Yes, Microsoft should offer the option to revert to legacy operation wherever practical, and they have in the past (it was only recently that MS Word dropped the option to use WordPerfect's command scheme). I don't know if anyone knows it, but Vista can be easily altered to have the same look and feel as WINDOWS 2000 if the user so wishes.