As much as I hate to admit it, switching the “friends and family users of techies” over to Vista may not be a bad idea at all.

Here is where I was going to link to a fantastic review and article on Vista and of course Vista vs XP.  But MaximumPC Magazine doesn’t archive their magazines until they are a couple months old.

Essentially what the article said (Their January 2007 Magazine), was that even for gamers there isn’t an immediate need to upgrade, since few video cards are compatible with DX10 and since few video games are taking advantage of DX10

However the security updates are very well done and make huge strides toward improving the system.  And fact, some are so well done and do such a great job that the only thing that should be holding users back is the price of Vista.  The security features are a good improvement for those that know little about computers and system security. 

As with any M$ OS there are of course annoyances, but it makes sense to upgrade the non-techie users due to security upgrades.  Of course as funds are available. 

After reading the article I am a lot less outspoken against Vista, but just like Maximum PC stated, I think Vista should have been an upgrade.  There is no reason, except for M$’ greediness, to have users paying for Vista just for the intrinsic security features that should have already existed with XP.  Some of these security features have existed in Linux and MAC for 3 or more years.  How long does it take for M$ to steal ideas from competitors?

The only reason I will lay down the dough for Vista is if a DX10 game comes out that I must own.  Otherwise I am happy with Ubuntu and XP.

I’m a home user and something of a luddite, but aside from perhaps some security fixes, a different coloured start menu and a new design of paperclip assistant I don’t see much difference between the versions of windows and office that I have had, other than they need more resources. I might upgrade if minimum spec requirements for something makes me.

I used the RC1 version for a while, and liked enough I will most likely buy it, too.

I agree with WEBS that it should have been offered as an upgrade, but we all know THAT wasn’t going to happen.

XP and Ubuntu, thanks. May actually legit my copy of XP long enough to take that in hand, but I don’t see myself purchasing new PC games anymore. Black and White 2 may be my last. I’d rather have a working copy of XP and leave it at that. I use Linux for everything but gaming anyhow.

I’ll hold off on buying Vista till they release at least SP2 for it.

There are a lot of reasons I am not upgrading to Vista until I absolutly have to. The biggest reason is money. Les saw that Microsoft is offering a small discount on multiple licenses purchased. That “discount” will not help my household upgrade to Vista.

I have 5 Windows based systems in this house. 4 of them could run Vista with Aero. I calculated the upgrade price to just under $1,000! This includes a notebook that never had a ligit copy of Windows to begin with, so an upgrade isn’t an option.

I also have 3 Mac’s that I maintain. Two in the house and one at my parents. To upgrade all three (5 if I had them) to Leopard when it comes out will cost a whopping $200! Apple has a family pack license that allows up to 5 systems to be installed/upgraded for $200.

Distant Claws isn’t far off in his assessment. Oh sure, there are some pretty major security fixes. However, I predict that a lot of people are going to be turning those security features off when the 100’th “So and so program is doing something questionable, are you sure you want to let it proceed?” dialog boxes popup. I know I wanted to turn it off from the Beta and 2 RC versions I tested.

Also keep in mind that if you want the Aero feature, and you want to be able to connect your Vista OS to a domain, you have to purchase the $400 version.  That is what pushed me away.

I don’t know about the domain thingie, but Aero works on the Home Premium edition. For a feature guide, check out: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/getready/editions/default.mspx

I sometimes wonder if microsoft and the antivirus companies secretly create their own viruses/security flaws to create a market for newer versions with security improvements that should’ve come free. It’s difficult to believe many people would go to all the effort of making a virus only to malicously hurt people that don’t affect them, if it was targeted to shut down a bank’s security, wipe police databases or harm a rival company I could understand

Part of the draw for hackers to create virus’ is similar to the draw of an artist who paints or sculpts.  I sometimes wonder why the hell someone would want to throw paint on a wall and try to sell it, but people do.  And they do it for their own personal satisfaction and for the chance of a claim to fame.

Most people like to have recognition beyond a self pat on the back, and for artist and hackers it is the chance of being famous. 

Writing a virus as complex as the ones that float around today is not a simple task.  It takes expert knowledge of Computer Science skills and knowing how to program in multiple languages and a strong grasp of IT networking and social networking skills.  One way to prove these skills is to piss people off by destroying their information or whatever.

But I sometimes wonder about a lot of the spyware software.  Most of it, from my experience, finds crap that isn’t even on my system to begin with.  In other words, the program either places it on there or tells you it’s on there so it looks like it is doing something, and to get you to pay for the “Professional” version.

Webs, I agree and will expand a bit. Virus creation and execution is a proof of concept, not only for a particular security vulnerability, but for the skill we think is required. In doing so, we advance our knowledge of the systems in use. Most programmers that I know of don’t feel particularly challenged doing grunt work. They don’t mind their jobs, but don’t feel engaged by them. Writing an effective virus can be a tremendous challenge, and when successful, offers tremendous personal reward. In short, viruses are often written out of boredom, for a personal reward.

That’s not to say that there aren’t commercial groups that do the same, however; simply, it’s not necessary. If I want to force someone to adopt this service pack that does stuff we don’t want to tell them explicitly about, the way to do that is to scare them with security. Say, “We found a flaw”, watch a virus be released for it a few days later, and watch people upgrade without any investigation as to what they’re putting on their PCs. Viruses are a potentially effective form of fear-mongering, and most of that is regulated by script-kiddies, IMO.

Browsing a computer magazine in a shop (I rarely buy, so I can’t actually quote verbatim) about Vista I spotted this important caveat

You can only transfer the licence ONCE.  This the journo said would affect those who do major upgrades to their own PC’s as certain changes would trigger the ‘platform move’ signal, so the 2nd upgrade would disable Vista.

Don’t ask me for references, like I say a quick browse in a (uk) newsagents.

Last Hussar, if you are planning on upgrading your system more than twice, (once for Vista and once after), then I suggest buying Vista Ultimate. Vista Ultimate doesn’t have this ONCE situation.

As to the virus issue, back in the day, viruses were written to gain recognition. These days, they are written to make money. Spammers are willing to pay big bucks to gain the ability to send out millions of spam messages without alerting an ISP that spams are being sent out.

The license transfer thing is currently enforced with some copies of XP as well.  I had to go through some hassle of proving I purchased the copy I have when I upgraded a bunch of peripheral hardware (new video card, sound card and NIC) along with a second hard drive.  The whole thing is shit since none of THOSE things would necessarily be indicative of a new system.  A new motherboard and/or processor I can see might indicate a new computer (ok, would BE a new computer), but adding a second hard drive and the other stuff?  That’s just too damn much control over my computer.  I guess I’m just dumb for sticking with it (well, I’m lazy is the real reason).

TAFKA, that “hassle” was another big reason that I switched and I switched my parents to OS X. I “had” to reinstall Windows on my parents Windows box and after reinstalling Windows with Dell’s reinstall disc, I was told that the version may not be genuine. I stumbled through Microsoft’s website for quite some time before we finally found a page that showed us what to do to “fix” the problem.

You see, Apple doesn’t consider it’s users criminals like the RIAA/MPAA and Microsoft does. There is no “check” to see if you are running a ligit copy of OS X. Plus, it’s priced so that folks don’t necessarily need to steal it in order to use it.

Of course Linux is priced even better.

The long and short of it is that you couldn’t give me Vista for free. A few links with background material:

4 “Reasons” to Dump Linux

A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection

Vista’s EULA Product Activation Worries

That first article was fucking hilarious Elwed, thanks!!

Ubuntu!

Anyway, my paleo-laptop woudn’t bear Vista anyway, so why o,n Earth bother?
I’m a typical end-user and it’s something of a relief that I don’t have to bother about security and purchase anti-virus…

More good news:

Opinion: ‘Vista Casts A Pall On PC Gaming’

Here is a brilliant idea: make games for Linux, screw Vista.  I mean come on, the only reason I still dual-boot Ubuntu/XP is because most of the games (except World of Warcraft) are incompatable with Linux!  But I forgot, you can’t make millions of dollars off of open source software, huh…

I think there is a section of society that is against the idea of pc gaming in general, I have known people who see computers as work objects only, see video gaming as a waste of time and the cause of unreliability, also there are those who think that children will become bloodthirsty murderers for ‘killing’ imaginary people who follow set paterns and don’t look or behave enough like real people for a gamer to identify as alive, and therefore not have sympathy towards

It is a sad thing that more power should be given to this group of people, such that they can impose their dislike for video games, porn, etc through parental controls and the like. What is there that children need protecting from? What could be so wrong about something that it needs parental control, surely children would be more in touch with reality if they were exposed to all aspects of the world as early as possible so as not to have an illogical fear or hate.

As for those of us who don’t want to be restricted by some security features and parental controls, microsoft would do well to allow these to be turned off, otherwise home users like myself won’t buy it (I have a sneeky suspicion they want to shut down the PC gaming market somewhat to promote xbox+xbox game sales)

Consoles sell more games.  More game sales equals more money.  So, shut down PC gaming and move gaming to consoles.  Fuzzy logic.

there are those who think that children will become bloodthirsty murderers for ‘killing’ imaginary people who follow set paterns and don’t look or behave enough like real people for a gamer to identify as alive, and therefore not have sympathy towards

Well, I’ve played many a violent video game (Mortal Kombat, Grand Theft Auto) in my formative years, and I haven’t become a serial killer yet.  But then maybe I am an exception.

Well, Microsoft doesn’t see the PC as a “Work” computer only. During Bill Gates keynote at CES, he made it quite clear that Windows is a gaming platform and is the biggest selling gaming platform.

I’m unclear about WildTangent’s complaint in reguards to Vista. Some casual games that his site sells seem to work fine for me under Vista. I’m a big PopCap fan. I have quite a few of their games.

There has been a lot of FUD about Vista. Personally, I’m all for that since I’m a Macintosh user now and would love to see more games developed for the Mac. I’m actually surprised that there are not more games developed for OS X. OpenGL has multi-threading so 3D will be much faster and is in WoW. It has a ton of Core tools to make developing 2D and 3D games much easier. Yet there are only a handful of games developed for the Mac.

Oh sure, I understand the market share thing. However, if some of the “FUD” turns out to be true, then maybe instead of Linux which is just hard to use for normal people, game developers look to Mac and OS X for a platform to protest Vista. I’d be all for that.

Linux which is just hard to use for normal people

Proof that Elwed is abnormal from Dave.

Dave M.: During Bill Gates keynote at CES, he made it quite clear that Windows is a gaming platform and is the biggest selling gaming platform.

At least that’s what he told the public. If gaming is going to be as difficult as it sounds, gamers are going to vote with their feet and microsoft knows that, it doesn’t have to be the official policy. Segregating the market by function allows specialisation and makes the consumer have to buy and keep up to date two items instead of one.