Campaign against Vista?
By Alex Zaharov-Reutt
A campaign called ‘Bad Vista’ from the Free Software Foundation is trying to tell Internet users that Vista is bad and that they shouldn’t use it.
The Bad Vista campaign is one that tries to examine Vista’s deficiencies, its use of Digital Rights Management software and other perceived ills. The FSF, of Free Software Foundation wants us all to use Linux or other alternatives.
The problem for them is that most of the world is very happy to use Windows, and when they start using Vista, they will be very happy for the improvements it brings to the Windows experience, as it certainly does bring forth a number of improvements.
While some of these can be retrofitted into Windows XP, such as using a desktop search tool like Google Desktop, Yahoo’s search tool or even Microsoft’s own Windows Search software, it’s often better to have this kind of functionality built right into the operating system.
While I’m happy to agree that some of Microsoft’s restrictions aren’t necessary, I’m also a very happy Vista user, and none of the so-called restrictions have prevented me from doing anything that I wanted to do so far in Vista.
If people are free to make their own software choices, then they’re free to use Microsoft products as well. If you want to go with Linux, or Apple or something else, by all means do it.
But until some kind of critical mass emerges, Linux and Apple (even with the iPod halo effect) still represent only fractions of the market share that Microsoft enjoys.
By all means visit the site and make up your own mind. But until Apple releases some new MacBooks (or MacBook Pros) later in 2007, I’m staying with Vista. And even when Apple does release its new versions, I’ll still be using Windows Vista, even alongside Mac OS X.
Related:
Entry was posted
on Wednesday, December 20th, 2006 at 5:27 am
under
Read more entries by Alex Zaharov-Reutt.
Stumble It!
December 20th, 2006
good info
Regards
anil
http://www.errorforum.com
June 10th, 2007
I recently bought a dual core laptop with 512 MB from one of the “better” brands. Vista was *extremely sluggish*. I had immediately ordered extra memory (matched, two 1GB sticked). Even at 1.5 GB the system lacks snap and has such clutter that I would prefer to have XP or 2000 and for some reason did not play well with the 2nd GB stick (will be looking into this later with mfr).
I would as soon have 2000 with 512MB, lots of choice for utilities that I do use and lots of space. I am very impatient with Vista.
September 18th, 2007
Everyone was disappointed with the arrival of Vista – speaking about dedicated Microsoft users.Don’t take my word for it, check the related articles from MS dedicated sites upon the arrival of Vista. There is no real points to the above article for using Vista. What does it mean “Happy Vista user” exactly ? Does the fact that you have to give confirmations every few seconds gives some kind of strange joy ? And what was the real benefit from jumping from XP to Vista really ? Are Vista able to justify all these years of delay from Microsoft ? I mean, seriously ? And I could never accept as a strong point that “Windows have the biggest market share” or “most windows users are happy to use Vista”. Most Windows users haven’t even seen anything else. I mean, c’mon now, we are talking about a company who managed to convince the entire unsuspected part of the world (aka “market share”) that DOS was a real operating system. And Vista were outdated (in comparison with OSX) even before they were released.
The truth is that if Apple dared to show an OS with all these flaws and disturbed behaviour that Vista has, everyone would bury the company in a few minutes. I totally agree with the previous poster about sluggish behaviour (after everything else already mentioned in this post). And speaking of requirements, did you know that OSX 10.4 Tiger runs on G3 machines ? Do I really have to test Vista on my old 486 for a comparison ?
March 2nd, 2008
Honestly, the benefits of Vista are nil. Why should an operating system require 2 GB RAM to run comfortably? Sure, “hardware is cheap now”, “it is time to upgrade”, etc. but why must software gobble up that memory so pointlessly? Windows Vista has so many stupid processes running that cannot be disabled, it boggles my mind. If I am going to buy a new machine with tons of memory, it should ACT like it has tons of memory. Windows Vista requires 2 GB RAM to behave like Windows XP on 512 MB RAM… and it’s not even running anything!
I run Ubuntu now because old hardware now runs as fast (oftentimes faster) than modern hardware. Oh, and Ubuntu is INCREDIBLY user friendly now. It makes my life as a developer so much easier.