Save Windows XP!
-
I gave you a 2 because you forget about all the non-technical people out there who will be affected by a forced adoption of Windows Vista.
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote:
At least he achieved immortality for a few years.
Looks like he gave you a 1… I balanced it out with a 5.
ROFLOLMFAO
-
I got it running under VMWare. :) (…and Windows XP runs directly between VMWare and the software I need to run.) :laugh:
ROFLOLMFAO
Pay attention - running under *WINE* - NOT Vmware. Running under Vmware requires that you run windows.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
How is it a red herring? You said, and I quote: "For god's sakes, Windows XP is probably the longest supported OS in a long time by any vendor." I countered with an example of an alternate OS that is supported for longer. How is that a red herring?
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
You should have bolded the "probably", like this: "For god's sakes, Windows XP is probably the longest supported OS in a long time by any vendor." My point is that the OS is supported long enough precisely because it's been supported for so long that it probably is the longest supported, even if it might be possible to categorically say that it isn't. The fact that another OS is longer supported doesn't invalidate any of what I said, it's true but irrelevant. Hence it's a red herring.
-
reinux wrote:
Get over it.
"Getting over it" means for me accepting that I have to spend additional development time to migrate and test, update documentation and retrain support. For my customers this either means the inconvenience of digging up an XP system or less features delivered this year. And I have to make this decision for all of them, not individually. I am not so much concerned about Microsoft making money as the cost it means to me. Of course I could say "why bother, it's job security", but I value the product I'm working on more than that. I would accept this as a fact of life if I would see more than marginal consumer value in upgrading to Vista. Just because there is bullshit doesn't mean Vista is good by a negative default. I remember the hesitations for adopting WIndows 98 and XP very well, but unlike Vista they added user value out of the box. Some of the new "features" don't translate into benefits: I don't care about DRM features, Data Redirection makes migration, updating and user management more complicated rather than more simple. I am looking forward to support for future hardware, less reboots, and slick UI. I am looking forward to see Superfetch in day-to-day action. But vista doesn't look finished right now.
reinux wrote:
Because my gut feeling is that my gut feeling is better than yours.
Meh. You smell funny (nose feeling). :sigh:
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
blog: TDD - the Aha! | Linkify!| FoldWithUs! | sighistpeterchen wrote:
Of course I could say "why bother, it's job security", but I value the product I'm working on more than that.
I'm not your boss so I can't speak for you, but I'd say less features should be delivered if you're not prioritizing security. That's uh... common sense. I don't think anyone would disagree.
peterchen wrote:
I am not so much concerned about Microsoft making money as the cost it means to me.
Face it: Windows Vista is going to replace XP sooner or later. And because Microsoft seldom does any retail price cuts on its OS', selling Vista to you earlier doesn't make them any more money than if not.
peterchen wrote:
I am looking forward to support for future hardware, less reboots, and slick UI. I am looking forward to see Superfetch in day-to-day action.
Future hardware? You mean drivers? I seriously doubt you'll be in a situation where in the next year or two your hardware vendors haven't written Vista drivers for some esoteric and/or less-than-cheap hardware and you've lost access to XP. I mean it could happen (I'd blame the driver vendors if after so many years they aren't supporting Vista, regardless of whether or not XP exists at that time), but there are bigger and more likely things to worry about, like getting hit by a car when crossing the street. No argument on less reboots. UI is a matter of getting used to, which again, if you've lived in the IT industry for a while, you'll realize that it's just something that you and every user has to adapt to once in a while. Asking to see Superfetch in day-to-day action is like asking to see the benefits of broccoli in day-to-day action. It's a little absurd. It's there, you'll feel it if you've ever upgraded an XP machine to Vista (I have), but it's not something that you can benchmark very easily[^]. As a subjective measure though, Windows Media Player 11 with a library of 4000+ tracks loads as fast as Notepad does for me. So I suspect that in bringing this up you're deliberately demanding the impossible.
peterchen wrote:
"Getting over it" means for me accepting that I have to spend additional development time to mi
-
So you are right that it is the key that is the important bit and not the media. I was wrong about that. However as Mike has pointed out[^] the problem is they will stop issuing new keys. That is a big deal for those of us who don't want to use Vista until it is fixed and works with relevant hardware.
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote:
At least he achieved immortality for a few years.
Then petition against the keys not being issued anymore. Because otherwise this petition isn't accomplishing anything other than causing a stir and antagonizing the very people they want the cooperation of, again, for nothing better than the sake of portraying them as a baby killer. And as Chris said[^], petition against hardware vendors not supporting Vista, not against Vista not magically supporting all hardware.
-
peterchen wrote:
Of course I could say "why bother, it's job security", but I value the product I'm working on more than that.
I'm not your boss so I can't speak for you, but I'd say less features should be delivered if you're not prioritizing security. That's uh... common sense. I don't think anyone would disagree.
peterchen wrote:
I am not so much concerned about Microsoft making money as the cost it means to me.
Face it: Windows Vista is going to replace XP sooner or later. And because Microsoft seldom does any retail price cuts on its OS', selling Vista to you earlier doesn't make them any more money than if not.
peterchen wrote:
I am looking forward to support for future hardware, less reboots, and slick UI. I am looking forward to see Superfetch in day-to-day action.
Future hardware? You mean drivers? I seriously doubt you'll be in a situation where in the next year or two your hardware vendors haven't written Vista drivers for some esoteric and/or less-than-cheap hardware and you've lost access to XP. I mean it could happen (I'd blame the driver vendors if after so many years they aren't supporting Vista, regardless of whether or not XP exists at that time), but there are bigger and more likely things to worry about, like getting hit by a car when crossing the street. No argument on less reboots. UI is a matter of getting used to, which again, if you've lived in the IT industry for a while, you'll realize that it's just something that you and every user has to adapt to once in a while. Asking to see Superfetch in day-to-day action is like asking to see the benefits of broccoli in day-to-day action. It's a little absurd. It's there, you'll feel it if you've ever upgraded an XP machine to Vista (I have), but it's not something that you can benchmark very easily[^]. As a subjective measure though, Windows Media Player 11 with a library of 4000+ tracks loads as fast as Notepad does for me. So I suspect that in bringing this up you're deliberately demanding the impossible.
peterchen wrote:
"Getting over it" means for me accepting that I have to spend additional development time to mi
Summary: cost/benefit ratio to high. I said nowhere that "Vista sucks", Vista lacks finish, needs Service Pack badly. XP should remain available until Vista is out of its infancy. You seem to argue just to win your argument. Hint: there is no first price.
1. Vista has benefits, but they are overshadowed by migration problems and lack of finish. 2. Would a detailed comment on each feature change your attitude? Probably not, so should why I bother? 3. Blindly calling everyone elses criticism "scapegoating microsoft" doesn't help your case, nor microsoft. 4. I don't accept the marketing spin. "job security" == "there's still work for me".
reinux wrote:
Face it: Windows Vista is going to replace XP sooner or later.
*shrug* Sure it is. Do you think I expect anyone to care whether I "accept" Vista or not? Did you even try to understand my post?
reinux wrote:
Be glad that Microsoft has a support cycle of 7 years. Most are much shorter.
Mine are much longer.
reinux wrote:
Also, you sneak in some FUD about DRM,
:sigh: e.g. Protected Process is clearly a "feature" that is there for DRM only. Where's the FUD? It's not a feature unless you call DRM a feature - and I won't.
reinux wrote:
Data Redirection is a legacy feature
It totally crappy by design. I expected Microsoft to enforce their (sensible but user-unfriendly) file locations, but this should have been handled gracefully by UAC, not this backward compatibility kludge. Only UAC is unfinished. Funny that you diss everything I am looking forward to, but expect me to be ecstatic about Vista.
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
blog: TDD - the Aha! | Linkify!| FoldWithUs! | sighist -
Summary: cost/benefit ratio to high. I said nowhere that "Vista sucks", Vista lacks finish, needs Service Pack badly. XP should remain available until Vista is out of its infancy. You seem to argue just to win your argument. Hint: there is no first price.
1. Vista has benefits, but they are overshadowed by migration problems and lack of finish. 2. Would a detailed comment on each feature change your attitude? Probably not, so should why I bother? 3. Blindly calling everyone elses criticism "scapegoating microsoft" doesn't help your case, nor microsoft. 4. I don't accept the marketing spin. "job security" == "there's still work for me".
reinux wrote:
Face it: Windows Vista is going to replace XP sooner or later.
*shrug* Sure it is. Do you think I expect anyone to care whether I "accept" Vista or not? Did you even try to understand my post?
reinux wrote:
Be glad that Microsoft has a support cycle of 7 years. Most are much shorter.
Mine are much longer.
reinux wrote:
Also, you sneak in some FUD about DRM,
:sigh: e.g. Protected Process is clearly a "feature" that is there for DRM only. Where's the FUD? It's not a feature unless you call DRM a feature - and I won't.
reinux wrote:
Data Redirection is a legacy feature
It totally crappy by design. I expected Microsoft to enforce their (sensible but user-unfriendly) file locations, but this should have been handled gracefully by UAC, not this backward compatibility kludge. Only UAC is unfinished. Funny that you diss everything I am looking forward to, but expect me to be ecstatic about Vista.
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
blog: TDD - the Aha! | Linkify!| FoldWithUs! | sighistpeterchen wrote:
Summary: cost/benefit ratio to high. I said nowhere that "Vista sucks", Vista lacks finish, needs Service Pack badly. XP should remain available until Vista is out of its infancy.
Explain what a Service Pack might do for Vista. You say that it needs one, but not why or how it might solve said problems. Give an example of what exactly is so unfinished about it that it warrants moving back to XP. Aand don't blame me if I have an argument against it.
peterchen wrote:
"job security" == "there's still work for me".
I'll get this out of the way: Yeah, I misunderstood that.
peterchen wrote:
1. Vista has benefits, but they are overshadowed by migration problems and lack of finish. 2. Would a detailed comment on each feature change your attitude? Probably not, so should why I bother? 3. Blindly calling everyone elses criticism "scapegoating microsoft" doesn't help your case, nor microsoft. 4. I don't accept the marketing spin.
1 and 2. Well you seem to have tried with DRM and Data Redirection, but it obviously didn't work. You should bother because you haven't bothered to give any significant examples yet that I don't disagree with, yet you still hold to your point. 3. I wouldn't exactly call it blind to invoke the case about scapegoatism in the case of either the garble about Vista's performance, non-existent hardware/software support of improper implementation (it says very clearly in the API documentation where you should save data and why), or ridiculously freaking out over something that happens every time a new product is made, that the old one is discontinued. 4. I don't work for Microsoft. I don't care whether you like Vista or not; what I do care about is how deranged people become when they talk about it. Call it an anthropological concern, if you will.
peterchen wrote:
You seem to argue just to win your argument. Hint: there is no first price.
I argue in hopes that people will quit bitching about Microsoft "killing" XP as if they're murdering their child or something. I argue because it's absurd. Just because you don't agree with me after we've been arguing for so long shouldn't stand as a suggestion to you that I'm only arguing to win, because I could potentially say that of you as well.
-
You should have bolded the "probably", like this: "For god's sakes, Windows XP is probably the longest supported OS in a long time by any vendor." My point is that the OS is supported long enough precisely because it's been supported for so long that it probably is the longest supported, even if it might be possible to categorically say that it isn't. The fact that another OS is longer supported doesn't invalidate any of what I said, it's true but irrelevant. Hence it's a red herring.
But there's that "by any vendor" part.
-
But there's that "by any vendor" part.
Ignoratio elenchi (also known as irrelevant conclusion or irrelevant thesis) is the formal fallacy of presenting an argument that may in itself be valid, but doesn't address the issue in question. "Ignoratio elenchi" can be roughly translated by ignorance of refutation, that is, ignorance of what a refutation is; "elenchi" is from the Greek ??e????, meaning an argument of disproof or refutation.
-
The trade magazine InfoWorld has launched a Save Windows XP[^] petition. OEM and shrink-wrapped copies of Windows XP will be withdrawn as of 30 June 2008. I have nothing against Windows Vista. I'm running it at home. But compatibility issues with the tools I use every day as a developer mean that I cannot run Windows Vista at work, and withdrawing the OS that they do work on will break me in future. In the end I imagine I will need to keep a spare machine to maintain projects using these tools, or perhaps a virtual machine (but I'll need to obtain VMware Workstation for USB device virtualization, which Virtual PC doesn't do). What tools? Microsoft's own. eMbedded Visual C++ 3.0 and 4.0, and Visual Studio .NET 2003 (mostly works, but not supported).
DoEvents: Generating unexpected recursion since 1991
Vista business/Ultimate retail licenses come with XPpro downgrade rights as long as you have XP install media. They already have a way for legacy users to install new licenses, they're nto going to do more than that long term. :rolleyes:
Otherwise [Microsoft is] toast in the long term no matter how much money they've got. They would be already if the Linux community didn't have it's head so firmly up it's own command line buffer that it looks like taking 15 years to find the desktop. -- Matthew Faithfull
