For anybody waiting for Halo 2 on PC, it looks like you'll have to upgrade...

[Samuel Dravis]

Oh, I now this situation. It's like Microsoft announces a new OS and everyone goes like "OOH! WOWS!"

Perhaps people were doing that when it was first announced and they hadn't taken everything good out of it. Now Vista appears to be a GUI and a DRM platform; not exactly what I want for an operating system. Keyword is 'operating', not 'operating when the content providers approve (and get paid)'.

 

and then they drop some bad news and everyone goes like "YUCK! DAMN! **** MICROSOFT!"

Which might even be an appropriate response.

 

and then they make some programs that are OS-Specific and everyone goes like "OMG! WTF! WE'RE DOOOOMED!!!" and then three years later they buy the crap and go like "OMG I CAN'T IMAGINE LIFE WITHOUT THIS N3W OS!!!!".

I can imagine life without this new OS right now. It's pretty good. Maybe I'm missing something though; if you want to enlighten everyone on the exquisite benefits of Vista, be my guest.

[Sabretooth]

You obviously didn't get get me, Drave. Everybody critisized XP, but turns out everyone uses it and just about everyone has evolved to it. IMO, that' s what's gonna happen with Vista.

[Samuel Dravis]

You obviously didn't get get me, Drave. Everybody critisized XP, but turns out everyone uses it and just about everyone has evolved to it. IMO, that' s what's gonna happen with Vista.

So we should just take whatever they give us without question. We shouldn't criticize, because we will eventually grow to tolerate it. The Corporation has our best interests at heart always. I shouldn't prevent someone from stabbing me to death - I'll eventually die anyway, so what's the point?

 

Yes, I get you.

[acdcfanbill]

You obviously didn't get get me, Drave. Everybody critisized XP, but turns out everyone uses it and just about everyone has evolved to it. IMO, that' s what's gonna happen with Vista.

with XP, Microsoft promised stability, with Vista, it promises that it will contol my computer in ways i dont want or tell it too.

[toms]

Maybe.. but i delayed on gettng XP until i absolutely had to. And until most of the issues/worried had been addressed/hacked.

 

Not entirely sure what vista is promising that i can't do already. I'm sure it will look all whizzy.. but other than that its gonna have to ahve some pretty killer features to make me willingly upgrade. Tho i'll probably get forced into upgrading in the end once everyone else does..

[Prime]

Everybody critisized XP

I don't know why. It is miles ahead of what came before it in terms of stability. It isn't perfect, but my machine does everything I need it to right now.

 

If Microsoft wants to use Vista to lower their Halo 2 sales, they can go right ahead...

[Kurgan]

Oh, I now this situation. It's like Microsoft announces a new OS and everyone goes like "OOH! WOWS!" and then they drop some bad news and everyone goes like "YUCK! DAMN! **** MICROSOFT!" and then they make some programs that are OS-Specific and everyone goes like "OMG! WTF! WE'RE DOOOOMED!!!" and then three years later they buy the crap and go like "OMG I CAN'T IMAGINE LIFE WITHOUT THIS N3W OS!!!!".

 

Not true. I remember how people pointed out the problems in Windows when it first came out, despite it being pretty. Windows 95 was heavily bashed both before it came out and after. Windows 98 similarly so. I didn't hear much bashing of 98SE, and it was actually an improvement. ME was universally bashed after it came out and proved to be a step back rather than a step forward. Windows2000 I heard almost nothing but praise. Geeks (that weren't Linux or MacOS zealots) loved it, and still do. XP went back and forth. You had mostly praise for it though, except from geeks like myself who prefer Win2k for simple utilitarian reasons (and don't want to spend more money on eye candy crap that takes up more memory). But the general population with fairly decent computers have accepted XP. Honestly in terms of how the OS's have progressed, I think 2000 really is better than what came before it in the Windows line. I can't say the same for the others. About the only real loss has been that it takes better hardware to run it, than say, 3.1 and its way more expensive (windows has been increasing in price with each new version).

 

So it's not some uniform pattern that's always the same, at least not in my experience. I didn't accept XP, and I don't see good reasons to accept Vista (beyond "oh Microsoft will somehow force me to").

 

One thing that really pissed me off the other day. I was thinking of upgrading M$ Office, until I learned that the newest version (Office 2003 Professional?) basically only lets you install the program 3 times. That's it! Then you have to buy it again...

Such crap! If I pay a few hundred bucks for a program I better be able to install it as many times as I #$#$% well please. I mean COME ON! Obviously they just assume you'e a pirate and not a competent computer user who actually upgrades or reformates their system now and then... sheesh. Forget that. My word processer, spread sheet and presentation program work well enough! Oh, and word perfect is far from perfect...!

[toms]

I held off on XP for ages because i didn't like the sound of it's overly invasive elements (having to authorise it every time you change hardware*, having to authorise it to get updates, allowing software like adobe to require online validation, etc...)

I seriously considered going 2000 instead.. but wasn't sure how long it would keep being supported by MS.

 

*though this has never happened... was it a myth or have i just not upgraded anything significant yet. I bet i can't find my certificate if it does happen.

 

But it was about 2 years before anything came out that was XP only... i can't see third party developers following suit and making things vista only immediately as it would severly limit their market. These days you need XP or 2000 for ipods and anything DRM related.

 

Its gotta be hard for MS though... their market is basically built on trying to re-sell the same product to the same people every few years. they can't change much because it would alienate users and break compatibility.. but if the old one works and they haven't changed much then people complain there is nothing new and it needs lots of pressure to force people to upgrade.

 

Its like selling copies of FIFA 2001/2001/2002/2003/2004/2005 - except they don't even have changing rosters to entice people.. and the software costs a lot more. So all they can do is improve the graphics and add the odd extra function.

[Kurgan]

I remember when rumors surfaced that M$ was going to cease all support for Win2k in 2003. Didn't happen.

 

They do have a "retirement schedule" for Windows OS's. Win95 has already been "retired" for example, but it should be awhile before Win2kpro is out. But really all it means is that they'll stop making new windows update stuff available. Then eventually they'll take it off Windows Update and you'll have to manually download the fixes yourself (either from M$ or somewhere else). That's why I've been trying to collect the fixes on disc so if I ever need them in the future. The OS won't suddenly explode and be unusuable even after they cease all support.

 

What would have to happen is a drastic change in architecture that would prevent it being compatible anymore and lack of support from developers. Amateur programmers could still make their own fixes, but no official support. With the Halo 2 thing, they obviously have made some BS encryption or validation thing to prevent compatability. I mean is Vista architecture really so vastly different than XP and 2K (which are pretty much the same) that it won't work on the "older" OS's? The invasive XP stuff is a pain yes. I remember hearing how people used cracks to dodge the validation stuff and third party firewalls to block the spyware crap in XP, but the Professional Corporate Edition let you bypass those things anyway (though I suspect people who had access to that as end users either pirated it or just got lucky through having it at work or something... most dealers will ONLY sell XP home edition or 2003 server).

 

Mainly I just see the DRM stuff, a fancier desktop that requires more memory and tons of useless features. They have to tweak it out for months to make it as secure and stable as the previous OS anyway, so no new version of Windows is worth it at the start. Plus you have to pay a premium price for the same stuff once again. Halo is more or less a console game anyway, so it's not worth it (plus I'd need to buy a brand new PC, and basically give Bill Gate's the keys, which I'm not prepared to do!).

 

I think Microsoft could care less about the end user. They just sell to the people who know jack about computers and own a brand new one they got from Gateway or Dell or Best Buy, who'll chuck the thing and buy a whole new system in 2-2.5 years or whatever without upgrading anything on it and everything is dumbed down. These are the same people who don't delete their cookies and are constantly spammed because they know jack about computer security. They make their money selling liscenses to corporations who buy the right to have their networks outfitted with the latest M$ crap for their needs. And if they stop offering 2000, then the company is forced to buy XP or 2003 or Vista or whatever M$ wants to shovel to them, or else M$ can just screw up their previous contracts. They have tons of leverage as I imagine, since they could say "oh, you don't want to use Vista do you? Well let's pull the rug out from under you then! Maybe we'll just check and see if all your machines are really registered to us or not, hmmmm?" And they own the market so what is the company going to do, go linux? It's such a racket. And people whine that monopolies are not bad things... Sorry for the rant!

 

But yeah, as an end user, I don't see the big deal. Nobody's forcing me to upgrade.. "yet."

[Zappa_0]

I didnt really care for XP when it came out, but after my new pc came with it and started using it everywhere else, its pretty nice. I might just pay the money for the new OS and Halo 2. I will probally have to get a new video card too, but it will probally be worth it. Well I guess we will have to wait and see.

[toms]

I wasn't so worried about MS continuing support for 2000.. more about thrid parties not supporting it. Though it seems my worries were unfounded.

 

Really though, if your OS is working for you then there is no reason to update it just for a new OS. It only needs to be updated if the new OS can do something new, or supports something new. I had ME (which everyone hates) for years, but it ran fine so there was no reason to update it. Then it finally started to go flakey, i wanted new hardware which it didn't support, and i wanted Doom3 which needed XP.. so i upgraded.

 

But if i'd upgraded to XP from the start i'd have had no real extra benefits. (plus paid 4 times as much).

But these support things tend to snowball. Once one person brings something big out that does something new (like not support 98/ME, or the first DVD game, etc..) and the others see that it works ok then everyone copies... and within a very short time you go from everyone supporting ME to nothing supporting it. That was what i was worried might happen to 2000.