The information was obtained from umarzuki.com
It was so funny when I read that short article.
Here is the original top ten list article from Cnet:
Windows Vista
Any operating system that provokes a campaign for its predecessor’s reintroduction deserves to be classed as terrible technology. Any operating system that quietly has a downgrade-to- previous-edition option introduced for PC makers deserves to be classed as terrible technology. Any operating system that takes six years of development but is instantly hated by hordes of PC professionals and enthusiasts deserves to be classed as terrible technology.Windows Vista conforms to all of the above. Its incompatibility with hardware, its obsessive requirement of human interaction to clear security dialogue box warnings and its abusive use of hated DRM, not to mention its general pointlessness as an upgrade, are just some examples of why this expensive operating system earns the final place in our terrible tech list.
And here is what Umarzuki written in his blog where I translated it to english:
1. Microsoft had made a campaign to reintroduce their products before Vista (Not confidence with their own new product?)
2. Vista users have the choice to downgrade to XP (Doesn’t looks good)
3. Vista took 6 years for development, but it only takes a few hours for people to hate it.
4. Awful device driver support
5. Expensive
6. Need high computer system spec which not everyone afford to buy.
I am totally agree with Umarzuki.
Microsoft is not confidence with their Vista at all, in fact, they do know it have lots of bugs at time the release it, it is just that they wanted to launch it as soon as possible after so long they delayed the OS release date.
Because of the bugs and memory hogging problem that Vista have, Microsoft also allow those people who have Vista software license to downgrade to XP. Not only that, even before Vista is released, Microsoft already started the development for Windows 7(Codename Vienna) in order to replace the failure product –> Vista. Windows 7 beta release date is rumored to be at 2009, means somewhere around 2010, Windows Vista will be replace by Windows Vienna.
We can see that Microsoft has admitted that Vista is a failure product by their acts. But still, they are still trying to earn back the cost the spend for developing Vista before release their next operating system. To avoid consumers refuse to purchase Windows Vista and wait for the release of Windows Vienna, Microsoft has forbid the discussion of Windows 7(Vienna) in most of those Microsoft related forums and websites to make sure not too much people know about Windows Vienna.
After took 6 years of development, I actually expect good quality operating system to be release. But sad to say, everyone has wasted their time for waiting since only a piece of crap is produced after 6 years. Windows XP was only took 2-3 years to developed, but it is a lot better than Vista, although its 1st release was a little buggy(Not as much buggy as Vista), but until its SP2(Service Pack 2), it has become very stable. I do not want to mention about XP SP3 as it is almost the same as Vista –> damn unstable and buggy!
While it is still in XP era, SP1 was release about 1 or 2 years later after Microsoft found some bugs and exploit in XP. But for Vista, 3 months after it is release, Vista SP1 was release. This has shown how buggy it is. Service packs for Windows suppose to fix the operating system and make it more stable and free from exploit, but I don’t see Vista SP1 are doing this. Lots of Vista users who upgraded their Vista to Vista SP1 have more problem such as device driver was lost after upgrade and unable to reinstall the device driver back, severe crash after upgrade, and etc. And the sad thing is, SP1 should be patch its memory hogging problem. But still, I don’t see they even care anything about it, Vista SP1 is still hogging huge amount of memory(RAM) which caused less memory for other application running smoothly. Lots of people said they can run their applications smoothly, yeah of course, coz they are using a high spec computer and they didn’t realize that if they are running the same thing in XP or in Linux, it will be even more smooth and have a lot extra memory free.
During transition from Win9x(Windows 95, 98, 98SE, ME) era to WinNT(Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows 2003), old drivers that used in Win9c platforms are not able to be use in WinNT platform is understandable due to they both are running on totally different kernel architecture. But it is not acceptable in Windows Vista as Vista is running on the same kernel architecture which is WinNT. It is ok to have special device drivers for Windows Vista to enhance the performance, but I don’t see why older drivers is not able to be use for lots of device at all. When during early of Windows 2000 and Windows XP time, Windows users who are still using older hardwares are allowed to use Windows NT 4 drivers in these 2 operating systems in order to get the device working, but this is not happening in Vista, device drivers for Windows 2000/XP/2003 is totally not acceptable in Vista at all, except of those drivers that are written to have compatibility for both XP and Vista. Lots of Windows fans said that Linux lacks of drivers support, but now we can see clearly that Windows Vista is the one which lacks of drivers support nowadays. No matter how old is the device driver, in Linux you will still able to use those old drivers, but this is not the case for Vista. Currently, I only see those newer hardwares have drivers for Windows Vista, and also those popular devices might have the driver for Vista. Majority of those older hardwares do not have drivers for Vista at all. While in Ubuntu Linux which I am using now, all the device drivers is already there without the needs to search for it in the internet like hell!
In the efford for Microsoft to force users to purchase Vista, Microsoft has made manufactures like Dell, HP-Compaq and others to bundle Vista license only in their new laptop/desktop models, no more XP. And in these manufacturer’s websites, only Vista drivers can be found and XP drivers are not prepared in the website for people to download it. Although this action able to force people to purchase Vista, but it really pissed everyone who prefer to use XP off. Some of these people who are not using their laptop/desktop for gaming or entertainment already started to switch to Ubuntu Linux(those who heard of Ubuntu Linux before). They prefer to waste the Vista license to use Linux rather than spending huge amount of time for searching for drivers to run XP as some of the devices in these new models are released after Vista was launched.
About its price, it is also very expensive. It was about RM300 for a genuine copy of Windows XP Home before this and there is already have fair amount of tools bundled. But in Vista, RM320 for a Vista Home Basic which have nothing at all is insanely expensive! When people can’t afford to purchase the license and use pirated copy, they take action on these people. So who is the pirate? Pirated software vendor who known as “Robin Hood” for these users or Microsoft?
It is also stupid to force people to have a extremely high spec computer for Vista. They are selling software right? They are not selling computer hardware right? Then why they force people to purchase high spec computer in order to run Vista? This even effected computer manufacturers, since the cost of producing their products will be a lot higher and caused the price of computer models they sell are a lot more expensive than before.
Some of those Vista users said Vista is faster than XP, but is it true? The answer is no, that is not correct.
The correct thing to say is, Vista is running on a faster computer, thats why you feel that the speed is fast. If you having both computer which it is the same specs, one running Vista and one running XP, then start a program at the same time on both computer, you will see that XP is at least 25% faster than Vista.
And by the way, I would hope to get some answer from Microsoft as well.
1. Why the hell during Vista beta stage, the boot loader looks so similar with GRUB in my Linux and it behave almost the same? Are you guys using GRUB codes for that?
2. Why there is a folder named “Jaguar” in the “C:\Windows\” directory during beta stage and there is full of MacOS files such as .dmg packages and .MacOS files in it? Are the skinning engine is taken from MacOS X?
3. If Vista is using so many codes from these good sources, why can’t you guys make it better? I found that you guys are making something sucks using good codes.