Microsoft Gives Up On Vista

http://filesharingtalk.com/vb3/pictu...&pictureid=218

"The question now isn't "Is Vista Dead?" It is. The real question is: Can Microsoft get Windows 7 out in time to save its desktop domination? I think Microsoft "could" pull it off. Here's how."

Vista is dead.

That's not what Bill Gates said at a seminar on corporate philanthropy in Miami on April 4, but it might as well have been. What Gates actually said, according to the Reuters report, is that he expects that the next desktop version of Windows, Windows 7, would be released "sometime in the next year or so."

Goodbye Vista. It has not been fun knowing you.

I predicted that Microsoft was giving up on Vista in January. It seems I was right. Microsoft's own top brass had hated Vista when it first came out, why should they expect anyone else to like it?

Vista SP1 has proven to be a painful upgrade and its performance still lags behind XP SP2 and, the still unreleased XP SP3. Worse still, from a Microsoft executive's viewpoint, Windows is actually losing desktop market share to Mac OS X and Linux. Microsoft never loses desktop market share. But with Vista Microsoft is finally losing customers.

I think Microsoft saw the handwriting on the wall early on. The company started playing up Windows 7 as early as July 2007. Now, Microsoft's business plan is always to get its customers to upgrade to the next version. It's how they make their billions. But, in this case, Vista was barely out the door.

Can Microsoft actually make a Windows 7 that can ship by 2009 that will win customers? Vista was infamous for its blown deadlines. Windows 7 must not only replace the failed Vista, it has to convince Microsoft's customers that Windows 7 will really be better than XP.

That isn't going to be easy. I find it more than a little telling that Microsoft has given XP Home a new lease on life for UMPC (Ultra Mobile PCs). Still. I think Microsoft has one card up its sleeve that just might keep its customers happy and make it out in 2009: Server 2008 Workstation.

In stark contrast with Vista, Server 2008 works extremely well in eWEEK Labs and in my own Linux-dominated office. Even with some security troubles, Server 2008 is a darn sight better than Vista or Server 2003.

Cleaned and Speeded Up

So, what Microsoft could do is use Server 2008's kernel as the core of Windows 7. On top of that it adds a cleaned and speeded up Aero Glass interface, Silverlight and Internet Explorer 8. At the same time, Microsoft should dump the Vista user interface command structure and return to XP.

One reason why people don't like Vista is not only is it slower than XP, it requires them to relearn how to do bread-and-butter operations. While Microsoft is at it, they can also throw out such annoying 'Vistaisms' as requiring users to answer seemingly endless menu choices on whether they really want to install a program or what have you.

To make darn sure that Windows 7 doesn't have the software compatibility problems that still plague Vista SP1, they can also add an XP compatibility layer. This would actually be an XP VM (virtual machine) running with Server 2008's Hyper-V virtualization. If an application doesn't run with the native Server 8 core, no problem; just automatically run it in the XP VM.

Old Windows hands will recall that Microsoft once used a similar approach in Windows NT 3.5 with a WOW (Windows on Windows) sub-system that let users run Windows 95 applications on NT.

If Microsoft were to take this path, I can actually see the company delivering a new desktop operating system by 2009 that users would actually want to use. If they try, as they did with Vista, to reinvent the desktop operating system wheel, there's no way they'll get anything out until 2011 that users will want to run.

And, by then, Microsoft's problem may be convincing Linux and Mac OS users to come back to Windows rather than trying to get XP users to upgrade. - By Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols 2008-04-04

:source: Source: http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Windows/Mic...s-up-on-Vista/

Thank god, good bye vista!!!! :sick::sick:

interesting news:-)

bb Vista!

Quite a subpar article.
First of all, for Windows 7 they are making the MinWin kernel, so if they were to scrap that and go for the Server 2008 kernel that is included in Vista SP1, they would get heat for yet more dropped features that they failed to deliver.
Secondly, anything that has the words "return to XP interface" in it automatically gets flagged as nothing more than a troll article - for quite normal users, the Vista interface is far superior to XP.

The only redeeming part of this article was the talk about the XP virtualisation - make applications that are designed for Windows 7 run in Windows 7, anything else gets virtualised to not have to hassle with being backwards compatible in the core of the OS.

Really, do people not realise the same things were said for Windows XP?
Quit it already, it's getting old now.

waves goodbye to vista :D

I totally agree with true_neo... The line 'in my linux dominated office' made me laugh, this guy is like 'oh look at me I'm so important and using linux'... Also I heard that Vista and Server 2008 has the same codebase, thoguh I could be wrong.

Finally Vista is DEAD.........:D

There's been so many issues with Vista, and not all of it Microsofts fault. Many hardware manufacturers have used the OS upgrade to render existing XP compatible hardware obsolete. This has backfired because a good proportion of consumers don't wish to throw their existing hardware, which costs money, away, for the sake of compatibility (re. Creative).

Vista could have been the New Technology OS, but it has been marred by extremely poor support, and people expect their machines to run better than the previous OS, not worse, especially considering that the upgrade is NOT cheap.

Vista eats too much ram anyway so it can never be an ideal OS.

What a terrible article and I absolutely agree with true_neo's assessment of it as well. I too remember the same things that people initially said about XP upon its debut...very very familiar. Vista is unlikely to die anytime soon...it will only get better.

And, are the RAM requirements of Vista really too much?? I wonder what you might have thought of the upgrade from Windows 98's 16 MB min to XP's 128 requirement. I mean, come on, I bought 4 GB of performance RAM just the other day for less than $100. I remember paying more than that for 512.

I am absolutely satisfied with my Vista Ultimate x64. BTW, I have 4 Giga RAm and an Intel Core2 Quad Q6600. In most cases people are just not willing to put the relevant hardware under Vista. And they bitch and moan if anything "bad" happens. Don't expect miracles!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sylar666

I am absolutely satisfied with my Vista Ultimate x64. BTW, I have 4 Giga RAm and an Intel Core2 Quad Q6600. In most cases people are just not willing to put the relevant hardware under Vista. And they bitch and moan if anything "bad" happens. Don't expect miracles!

---

I think much of the same way. Vista certainly was a push to up the ante on computer hardware. Call it progress.

:thumbsup:

There was a brilliant article somewhere in which they were saying that Vista SP1 is an epic fail, IBM recommended users not to upgrade etc., but later they revealed that it was a prank, in fact they just changed the appropriate words in an article about Windows XP SP2 from a few years earlier. Was quite amazing, too bad I don't remember where I've read it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by emperorIX

I mean, come on, I bought 4 GB of performance RAM just the other day for less than $100. I remember paying more than that for 512.

---

Not everybody lives in the future. 4GB RAM here would never be under €700

Yup, Vista will be "dead" in 2011 when Windows7 is released to the public.

Astalavista baby! ;)

never even wanted it.

I agree with neo Vista is better in some ways with the interface and esp. that nice little wireless diagnose feature.
But I would love to have Vista not eat so much ram, If you ever go game shopping you know what I mean.

I used vista for 8 months (like 3 installations) and I was not happy with it. I switched back to XP. The performance on XP is far superior to vista, and vista degrades MUCH faster than XP. BTW, I have an e6600 C2D @ 3GHz and 4 GB DDR2800 ram. Vista sucks all of it up so that there is no difference in performance from a P4 with 1GB.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sickest

never even wanted it.

---

i agree i didn`t even install vista so i think they finally came to the conclusion that vista su**s

I kinda liked vista:huh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheFoX

There's been so many issues with Vista, and not all of it Microsofts fault. Many hardware manufacturers have used the OS upgrade to render existing XP compatible hardware obsolete. This has backfired because a good proportion of consumers don't wish to throw their existing hardware, which costs money, away, for the sake of compatibility (re. Creative).

Vista could have been the New Technology OS, but it has been marred by extremely poor support, and people expect their machines to run better than the previous OS, not worse, especially considering that the upgrade is NOT cheap.

---

Creative have been doing this for years. I bought a boxed retail SB128 many months after Win ME was released only to find that they didn't support my particular incarnation of it (or about half a dozen others) under ME and officially stated they'd never even worked on drivers for it even though those on the ME disc were clearly labelled as theirs.
I have not bought or recommended a Creative product since.

There seem to be so many vociferous people with short memories when it comes to Vista; everything that has been said regarding its performance or hardware requirements has previously been said, not only about XP, but about all Windows releases since '95.
"Windows 95 Sux" springs to mind.
15 years ago it cost me £30 to buy 4MB RAM and last night I ordered 2GB of DDR2 for less than £20.
Upgrading for Vista is cheaper in real terms now than it was in '95.

I don't have a blistering PC (Athlon64 X2 5200, 2GB RAM, nVidia 7300GS) but x64 Ultimate is smooth and sweet on it.
What I like even more than the visuals is that Vista manages to actually find drivers on Windows Update every time it looks which is something XP hasn't managed once in about 6 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chewie

(...)
What I like even more than the visuals is that Vista manages to actually find drivers on Windows Update every time it looks which is something XP hasn't managed once in about 6 years.

---

Hmmm that's odd I've lived totally the opposite experience to that :unsure:

These news makes me happy. Vista is the most horrible OS I've ever tried.
After a few days with Vista, I did an uninstall, went back to XP, and never looked back ever since...

I mean obviously the businesses and corporations, under pressure from Microsoft, by releasing programs and games just for Vista, have adopted Vista for survival measures.

But I'm sure a lot of businesses are either using Server 2008 or XP SP2. It's just like mbucari1 said, performance is simply not the same.

After all the reviews on vista, I kinda reluctant to change my xp.
Although vista's interface is nice, sleek, but problem lies on the ram and drivers.
Still quite buggy. Good to see vista is dead now, xp FTW, support extend for ANother 2 years :P

Xp was a lagging bug infested piece of s...t when it first came out. Vista runs great on my Pc, i also got xp and vista on my laptop (dual boot) there ent much in um,

The problem is people want all the fancy looks of a new Os, but don't wanna payout to upgrade there hardware, ram so on, vista is here to stay i am afraid!

Vista dead? YEAH RIGHT.
The only way Microsoft can kill vista is by making Windows 7 a wonderfull product that will make everybody forget about vista AND xp.
Vista will hunt Microsoft until then.

thank god i didn't upgrade my computers to vista!!

it was screwed up from the begining and the hi-tech demand....you need to upgrade your PC to run it ....is just crap, looks better and works awful

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterSister

http://filesharingtalk.com/vb3/pictu...&pictureid=218

"The question now isn't "Is Vista Dead?" It is. The real question is: Can Microsoft get Windows 7 out in time to save its desktop domination? I think Microsoft "could" pull it off. Here's how."

Vista is dead.

That's not what Bill Gates said at a seminar on corporate philanthropy in Miami on April 4, but it might as well have been. What Gates actually said, according to the Reuters report, is that he expects that the next desktop version of Windows, Windows 7, would be released "sometime in the next year or so."

Goodbye Vista. It has not been fun knowing you.

I predicted that Microsoft was giving up on Vista in January. It seems I was right. Microsoft's own top brass had hated Vista when it first came out, why should they expect anyone else to like it?

Vista SP1 has proven to be a painful upgrade and its performance still lags behind XP SP2 and, the still unreleased XP SP3. Worse still, from a Microsoft executive's viewpoint, Windows is actually losing desktop market share to Mac OS X and Linux. Microsoft never loses desktop market share. But with Vista Microsoft is finally losing customers.

I think Microsoft saw the handwriting on the wall early on. The company started playing up Windows 7 as early as July 2007. Now, Microsoft's business plan is always to get its customers to upgrade to the next version. It's how they make their billions. But, in this case, Vista was barely out the door.

Can Microsoft actually make a Windows 7 that can ship by 2009 that will win customers? Vista was infamous for its blown deadlines. Windows 7 must not only replace the failed Vista, it has to convince Microsoft's customers that Windows 7 will really be better than XP.

That isn't going to be easy. I find it more than a little telling that Microsoft has given XP Home a new lease on life for UMPC (Ultra Mobile PCs). Still. I think Microsoft has one card up its sleeve that just might keep its customers happy and make it out in 2009: Server 2008 Workstation.

In stark contrast with Vista, Server 2008 works extremely well in eWEEK Labs and in my own Linux-dominated office. Even with some security troubles, Server 2008 is a darn sight better than Vista or Server 2003.

Cleaned and Speeded Up

So, what Microsoft could do is use Server 2008's kernel as the core of Windows 7. On top of that it adds a cleaned and speeded up Aero Glass interface, Silverlight and Internet Explorer 8. At the same time, Microsoft should dump the Vista user interface command structure and return to XP.

One reason why people don't like Vista is not only is it slower than XP, it requires them to relearn how to do bread-and-butter operations. While Microsoft is at it, they can also throw out such annoying 'Vistaisms' as requiring users to answer seemingly endless menu choices on whether they really want to install a program or what have you.

To make darn sure that Windows 7 doesn't have the software compatibility problems that still plague Vista SP1, they can also add an XP compatibility layer. This would actually be an XP VM (virtual machine) running with Server 2008's Hyper-V virtualization. If an application doesn't run with the native Server 8 core, no problem; just automatically run it in the XP VM.

Old Windows hands will recall that Microsoft once used a similar approach in Windows NT 3.5 with a WOW (Windows on Windows) sub-system that let users run Windows 95 applications on NT.

If Microsoft were to take this path, I can actually see the company delivering a new desktop operating system by 2009 that users would actually want to use. If they try, as they did with Vista, to reinvent the desktop operating system wheel, there's no way they'll get anything out until 2011 that users will want to run.

And, by then, Microsoft's problem may be convincing Linux and Mac OS users to come back to Windows rather than trying to get XP users to upgrade. - By Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols 2008-04-04

:source: Source: http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Windows/Mic...s-up-on-Vista/

---

Microsoft knew Vista sucked when they released it and just figured that they would work the bugs out later. With so many people giving Vista the finger and finding other OS Microsoft has to do something.

Actually Microsoft is releasing SP3 for XP this month. To keep it going, I would think. I mean don't get me wrong, SP2 is still annoying when you instal it, because of the useless programs you have to clean out with XPLite, like the Messenger that comes with it, some of that endless list of MSN games, and piles of other useless things like NetMeeting and bla-di-bla, but I still stick with it because Vista just seems like too big a leap atm. It's basically a MAC clone, visualwise.

good think i have not installed vista on my pc.

I've just switched to it, and it wasn't that bad, and the good thing about it the security.
now most of the hackers targeting XP. Every day there is ton of new viruses.

lol @ article and linux noob that wrote it.

true_neo said it all. this is clearly a biased article, and it's worth crap.

i've Vista Ultimate X64 and it runs smooth and hiperfast on my machine, uninstalled windows XP forever, and not coming back to it.

i've a fairly powerful machine (c2d e8400 @ 4,3ghz @ 4gb ram @ 7950gx2) and it certainly runs smooth, no drivers incompatibility at all, the online driver database works flawlessly, it makes a way better usage of the ram compared to XP, which simply doesn't use the RAM for anything and lets it stay unused there waiting for the bus...

soon i'll try out on my home seedbox server 2008, as i am really curious about it. that machine runs windows 2k3 and i love that OS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cabalo

lol @ article and linux noob that wrote it.

true_neo said it all. this is clearly a biased article, and it's worth crap.

i've Vista Ultimate X64 and it runs smooth and hiperfast on my machine, uninstalled windows XP forever, and not coming back to it.

i've a fairly powerful machine (c2d e8400 @ 4,3ghz @ 4gb ram @ 7950gx2) and it certainly runs smooth, no drivers incompatibility at all, the online driver database works flawlessly, it makes a way better usage of the ram compared to XP, which simply doesn't use the RAM for anything and lets it stay unused there waiting for the bus...

soon i'll try out on my home seedbox server 2008, as i am really curious about it. that machine runs windows 2k3 and i love that OS.

---

+1 I've had NO problems with Vista 32 and 64bit. If you don't have a powerful machine to run it quit complaining. It's not really an OS you just put on a 4 year old PC and expect it to work. I did it right, I built a brand new PC and Vista worked perfect without a hitch and is much faster than XP. Runs sooo smooth on 8GB ram 64bit

I have to agree. I never did understand the fact that everyone seems annoyed by it. I never had issues with Vista at all. (although I AM a bit of a nix geek :P)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by t4sK

I have to agree. I never did understand the fact that everyone seems annoyed by it. I never had issues with Vista at all. (although I AM a bit of a nix geek :P)

---

It's got a ton of little annoyances but you get used to them.
All microsoft products have those.:P

Oh well I guess I'm just a bit frustrated that my lappie doesn't have the drivers for Vista, even though it came with that often-misleading "Vista Ready" or "Vista Prepared" sticker.

And yeah I know people who have Vista running even smoother than my XP. Maybe the article is a bit biased, but all articles are. The truth is Vista did not cling as smoothly as Microsoft was expecting it to. It had to force people to change to it, and TBH not all of us have that kind of cash lying around that we can just *SWOOP* and have a new machine in a flash. It's expensive shite where I'm at ATM. And let's not get into credit talk, coz I am not going down that road any further :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rossco

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by t4sK

I have to agree. I never did understand the fact that everyone seems annoyed by it. I never had issues with Vista at all. (although I AM a bit of a nix geek :P)

---

It's got a ton of little annoyances but you get used to them.
All microsoft products have those.:P

---

:yup: all MS prods have bloat ware . but vista has some exclusive share :lol: