Windows "Mojave" - Vista ad compaign

From the Windows Vista Blog:

"Last week we showed a video of the Mojave Experiment to a small group of folks here on campus. Today we are excited to share the results with the public.

For those new to the Mojave Experiment, it's a focus group effort we initiated a few weeks ago. We interviewed and polled 120 participants in San Francisco, in hopes of better understanding everyday users' perceptions of Windows Vista and seeing whether there really is a gap between perception and reality. We wanted to see how people reacted to Windows Vista when they were not aware they were seeing Windows Vista. We recorded our discussions, and today you can see them for yourself."

Video: >> Click here <<

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Brutal Legend, Ghostbusters, more dropped by Activision

Next Story

Dell Studio Hybrid arrives

170 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Don't buy into MS propaganda. I have a friend in upper management of Asus who told me when a rep. that came in to give a presentation and collect the massive Windows licensing fee check started out the conversation with, "Vista was a disaster for us (Microsoft). And as far as I'm concern, anyone praising Vista, was either just taught computers yesterday, or are agents of Microsoft who job are to spread the propaganda to aid MS further unlawful monopoly of the world. This is one of the reason the U.S car companies are going down the tubes, it's mentality of; "they (the public) will buy what we give them, not what they want. They don't know what they want, only want what we give them." You don't even have to read between the lines to see how awful Vista is, as a "poster" at the beginning claims, "just try it." Indeed, just try it and you'll see how it's a "disaster." And as far as "the Mojave Experiment" goes, well, Microsoft had to do something to respond to the truthful claims of those Apple commercials, what multibillion dollar company is going to hang back and let the public complain and speak the truth. To be fair, I use Vista, mainly due to the fact that I didn't want to go through the hassel of down grading my new laptop to XP, which a lot of retailers are making it hard to do now for some reason (probably pressure from MS), and I've have experienced some trouble with Vista, not drastic, but annoying and cumbersome to say the least. It's not perfect, and neither was XP or 2000 or NT, or 98, or 95, but when will the monopoly stop? When will I have some choices beside going to a completely different system such as a Mac? I guess never, we will always be slaves of whatever OS MS dumps onto the market next. Oh, I love how new Windows updates always restarts my computer overnight for me without even asking permission, if I have important things open, forget it. And websites I keep open, forget that too, unless I use explorer which crashes and close by itself "not responding" constantly. It used to be that when I have firefox open and windows shuts me down automatically after updates, once it load, firefox will automatically reload all of the pages and site I was on before the restart. But it seems fishy that somehow after a few updates, firefox stop doing this and guess what explorer started to do it, interesting how a convenient firefox function migrated to explorer after an update. Stay away from VISTA!

I have used vista ever since the CTP. I had the RTM build before it hit stores/oems and i have been giving it a fair chance ever since. Sure UAC has gotten better with SP1 (which i had the day it went RTM) but does it really help with security?? The users are gonna blindly click yes and still get infections... all it does is make it look like they are trying and that the fact users get infected is their own fault.

As it stands I keep restore images for XP SP3 and Vista SP1 on a 2nd internal drive and jump between os's every so often. Don't try to pull the old hardware BS on me... I've seen pretty well identical machines being sold with vista on them (only they didn't have the Nvidia Geforce 6200 card or 2gb ram i added). In theory according to Microsoft i got a "Windows Vista Premium Ready PC" it met all the check marks and overall runs vista ok overall but they did lie to consumers about it being a new os.

The so called new os died with the true codename "longhorn" I've used one of those builds and it would have been nice if they had brought that to market instead of the server 2003 based os.

I probably will try Vista again once i have my Mac Pro... If it can't run vista nothing can.

The only bsod's I've had were due to a old webcam (i tried it for the fun of it ) and once my viaide.sys went bad and had to use repair. Now the funny part is my old Intel Pocket PC Camera(CS630) works like a charm on vista. I've never had any issues with my Sound Blaster Audigy2 value or my Geforce 6200.

Basicly... If you buy new machine give vista a chance unless you need xp. I'll probably stick to xp on my machines since I like the Luna Elements Black theme and its not ported to the vista msstyle engine yet and the fact that unless you need vista features xp is better for VM use since it has lower system requirements.

I better stop typing before this becomes long enough to become a blog post (Too late it probably will )

Hmmm... Bought two laptops last year for my daughters (One for each child). They came preinstalled with Vista! (and all the bloatware, trialware, spamware, etc...) Dumped both their OS'.

One runs Linux and one runs XP. Why? Number one reason is hardware support... Everything just works. Number 2 is speed, I just bought two laptops... what the hell do you mean I need 2 Gigs of RAM for a child's computer?. Number 3 is DRM... I don't like ANY OS validating itself against another computer or suddenly to stop working because it thinks its pirateware.

Vista was an awful mistake... Just like Windows ME. I feel sorry for my users that have it.

So many folks with no problems with Vista here...so let me weigh in:

Bought a shiny new dell laptop, the M1330, a few months ago. It came with Vista. No problem, or so I thought. Everything seemed cool, I really liked some features.

Then I tried to connect to a windows terminal server, you know, like I've done countless times for work. No good, it disconnects me ruthlessly, no matter what I try. (as a win admin, btw)

Call MS, they say call Dell, who says call MS.

I go through a few levels of techs, finally given the official answer: there's a bug in the implementation of the RDP protocol or some crap. No, there's no fix, but maybe the paid MS support might help with a secret patch...pay $250 to find out! This, on my brand new high-end laptop!

No thanks, I "downgrade" to XP. Of course, now my RDP connections are as stable as ever. Oops, but Dell refuses to release XP drivers for this thing. A whole community crops up with folks trying to do the same thing, for various reasons. (Dell allows pretty critical posts in their own forum, to their credit) To this day, BT and some buttons don't work properly, if at all, but at least it does RDP.

The morale to the story? If you love Vista, you just are lucky enough not to have tread in forbidden territory yet. Congrats! (Dell told me that "advanced networking" was not supported...hah!)

Could be they fixed the known, admitted, published bug since then. Guess what? I don't care. I need my machine to work, and XP just does that. (if I wanted this kind of drama, I would use Linux)

Why on Earth would I risk paying through the nose to upgrade my network to Vista? Answer: No reason at all, I would not.

Beyond the technical issues, even the licensing for Vista is a shame, though I read MS is finally going to allow SOME virtual machine instances. Maybe?

Last, this PR campaign is repulsive. It is so obviously a con game, and it just drips with manipulative editing. Completely unscientific and staged. It really is insulting to any knowledgeable, reasonable person. (as are most mac commercials)

It's ok, everyone. Don't feel hurt. Lots of folks loved Win ME, too, and they were all "duh, it works for me, what's wrong with ME?"

But the smart people were very patient, and skipped that whole debacle. We were right on the money then, and so far we are right again with Vista.

Bring on the next OS! Don't f it up this time!

(btw, no need to doubt the claims of Vista bugs, they are all proven and published. Speed tests, too. Duh, just search for "vista copy speed" or something and read you heart out.)

I have the same laptop, I got the ubuntu edition because I didn't want Vista. However i needed xp for world of warcraft and the xp64 drivers are almost impossible to find.

I use Server 2008 for a workstation/gaming OS as soon as it was available and I've never been happier. Vista IS rubbish. Why does Server 2008 use less ram and cpu (even with vista features turned on) ? Because people with servers want to buy less hardware and cut costs. The consumer version of windows is being used to push hardware sales.

Another thing I don't like about Vista/Server08 is the fact that Microsoft removed hardware audio support from the kernel, you have to use horrific software emulation. Probably due to the fact that everyone has a realtek/soundmax/etc software audio codec built into their motherboard, giving those companies tons of money and giving them the new ability to pay microsoft to remove hardware audio support thus removing the edge from the competition who makes decent REAL sound cards. The real crock of **** is that these software audio cards aren't even upgradable.

Been using Vista x64 for the last year or so... And no problems directly related to microsoft.

The only problems EVER were caused by:

Bad ATI-Nvidia drivers that they took forever to fix. <- now don't even start on "OMG driver compatibility and it's soo hard to companies to get drivers signed...." FCK that, seriously, Driver signing is great, it means, hey this driver WILL work since we have actually tested it... And with so many new video cards coming out in short succesion it's probably difficult to keep up. The only issues related to bad video drivers were BSOD if my computer had been sitting there for a while. No in-game issues, nothing. So, that is all null-void since it was a driver/hardware issue.

Some software (codec) compatibility... <- Only one actually and that is Canons fault due to them being to damn lazy to make a RAW coded for Vista 'x64' and 'x64' is the only one that has the issue. So there is a third party driver and it works fine, plus I can just use Adobe bridge or ACdSee. So Null-Void because it's all Canons fault.

Other compatibility? No issues, I run everything from all kinds of games to Adobe products, music production, VJ aps, 3d rendering, database aps, VMware, VNC aps, etc.

Only real issue might be RAM, but I also use memory intensive aps.

And when I get my EEE 1000h pc for school, I'm puting Vista on that...

wow, seems like neowin is still at it. just living cut-throat with microsofts marketing campaign. Even after all the vista betas and alphas it seemed everyone was testing out, microsoft just DIDN'T deliver.

being part of the testing ground like everyone on these forums was fun because we could see progress, then in the middle of it all everything stopped. Having been an avid windows user for close to 12 years now and a vista beta tester still makes me hate vista for what it could have been and the problems I encounter until today.

reading this: http://wilshipley.com/blog/2008/07/mojave-...cience-bad.html pretty much breaks it down. Microsoft took a seamless upgrade and tried to do everything with ti at once and in the end, things broke down.

Having bought 2 new computers this year with vista, I uninstalled and went to XP sp3. Its faster, my hardware works, and my network is not getting clogged up with reports being sent to microsoft, from close to 5 different programs about how my system is doing.

I encourage EVERYONE go to into their vista Problems and Reports section and tell me they are not overwhelmed at the amount of things that go wrong in the system every hour. This is stuff that shouldnt be happening from a OS that was being developed for over 5 years.

Im sorry microsoft, but you take retards out in the field and test on your own special hardware you get APPLE, and I thought being different is what set microsoft apart.

Bring out Singularity already and say goodbye to the fuxxed up Kernel that came after XP. Vista did a lot of good things by doing them badly. Now you've had 2 years since its release and you are still trying to promote it when your new system comes out Late next year. Admit your mistakes and PLEASE OH PLEASE be sure to release one more FIX PACK for SP1 for VISTA! it clearly needs them. How rediculous of microsoft.

and please don't get me wrong, Ive used vista for a whole year on my desktop before going to xp because like EVERYONE says, it becomes slow as a hog and the only good thing becomes the eye candy. I still have vista on my tablets but you wont see them on my desktop for sure. Tablets will have to stick with reinstalls every 6 months to a year tho. Perhaps this is microsofts way of making money, selling vista licenses to every reinstall that occurs. Brilliant.

I think Vista is awesome. Prefer it over xp in about everyway. Unfortunately, it ran like crap on my pc after about 1 month. It kept getting slower and slower. Went back to xp and havent looked back yet. Maybe Ill give it another try one of these days, but there really is no real reason to do so. I think if you have never gave it a legitamate shot, then you have no room to talk about it being a bad OS. I gave it a shot, it didnt work out. I really do miss the folder navigation and the look of it though.

The greatest marketing any company can ask for is word of mouth. That's how any of us really get any type of useful information. There are systems out there now that help get the word out for something that perhaps we find interesting (ie: Digg). That's what lead me here. We give each other warning when there's danger, or suggest a great place to eat. It's what we do.

Problem I see with this campaign is it reeks of desperation on Microsoft's part. I have windows Vista on my machine and to be honest my experience has been STELLAR!! I actually just had to restore a state a few weeks ago and I was so amazed how it easily it worked. Problem is, that no everyone has had that experience so they have shared their experience with others. Now this isn't to say that someone shouldn't try vista themselves but when a company like Dell offers downgrades because of unhappy users what is someone who hasn't tried the product supposed to think?

It seems that everyone from what I can tell is give MS a big pat on the back for taking this "we won't bash our competitor but let our product speak for itself". Believing that is just as gullible as the people who seem be nothing more than "sheep" for following he crowd. I really don't get why Microsoft feels the need to have to do this but if it helps them dig themselves out of this nasty as ditch then by all means, it is interesting to see happen. Oh yeah to all those who have this "Think for yourself man" attitude, all i can say is Windows Millennium Edition.

Nuff said..

Nice move Microsoft. A blind experiment that confirms people let others influence their decisions and now it's time to stop letting others decide for you and go try it yourself.

I think this is a very simple yet brilliant marketing initiative. Microsoft simply challenged people's pre-conceived notions about Vista and then asked them to decide for themselves after USING it.

What a great idea for consumers, "Decide for yourself". Simple, smart, and they don't stoop to the low-class "bashing" tactics like their starved-for-marketshare competitor.

I noticed quite the same. My uncle, for example, his pc never worked, it kept crashing, became slow. It was running a preinstalled XP, with Avast Antivirus etc. He had about three crashes, everytime the store where he bought it reinstalled xp. He got tired of it and came to me.

A little extra ram, Vista, Office, and Avast. That's all I installed. I used as many out-of-the-box-drivers as I could, and if there were additional drivers needed (printer etc) I tried to get the driver-only package.

Now, he's using every single feature in Vista (Ultimate), and he loves everything. He bought himself an external disk drive, backs up his whole pc, his pictures, he enjoys using Flip3D, and every other feature in Vista. This has been a while ago, and he never had one single problem again. When I go over and visit him, I notice his PC hasn't become as bloaty as it was before, because Vista manages to (help you) keep the crap out of it!

Yes, I know, I like Vista, but I just want to say that please, people, try it before you tell everyone what crap it is because you heard it of someone who thinks he read it somewhere that some people can't use Vista because their neighbours told them their PC with Vista crashed once (yes, Vista can crash, but it's much less likely, and if it happens chances are high you can recover it easily).

Probably nobody reads this thing above, but what I actually want to say: TRY VISTA before judging it.

I would like to counter that with:

What kind of jerk encourages people to upset their whole computing world that they already know and love just to TRY some old crap that countless other user s and experts alike have tried to warn them about?

I say, instead, to the average Windows user:

If you have XP now and it works ok, do yourself a favor and stick with it. You just saved a lot of time and money.

If you really need a new computer, be prepared to undergo a serious, expensive, time-consuming overhaul of everything....printers, webcams, whatever....in addition to re-training yourself as a lot has changed.

Oh, and more important than Vista: please save your money and stick with an old version of Office. There's lots of reasons to NOT upgrade Office. Please oh please, if you do upgrade, make sure to save all your files in the OLD FORMAT. So other people can read them.

Thank you.

Hi, I'm a Vista hater.

I'm running Windows Mojave and so far it rules. It's much faster and better looking than that Vista junk. No random crashes, and all my hardware are recognized. Xp is a turtle compared to Mojave. Security is impeccable unlike the security nightmare in Vista. In addition, I love the new sidebar, and media center.

Overall, I recommend Mojave to all those Vista haters.

I'm probably one of the few people who never liked XP and waited for Vista, and love it! Granted I like Linux more, but its my favorite Windows. I've built 9 Vista computers for clients, no one has complained, although they do sometimes have questions.

I'd love to try this Mojave thing with users, they don't seem to notice when I rebranded Firefox as IE6 :P

This silly debate will never cease. People spread BS without even giving Vista a fair shake. I find Vista to be a perfectly nice progression in the Windows line. I still use XP on my laptop and some older machines at work because I know the performance will degrade with Vista. I actually miss Vista on many occasions when tasking on a XP system.

I have never had a single problem with Vista on three of my machines in a home network and corporate network environment using a multitude of apps and hardware configs (old and new). Three different flavors too... Home, Business and Ultimate (32 and 64bit). In my opinion, when comparing Vista to XP, the Explorer UI is better, plug and play is better, native apps (as well as integration)....better. Indexing, searching, OS installation, OS repair diagnosis, shell appearance, are all better than XP. Oh let's not forget more sensible and faster networking (Yes I said faster....although lots of settings are buried initially). Boot up, essentially the same people!!! If not faster on some occassions. A lot depends on your software configuration and hardware setup.

It's really simple, if you don't have newer hardware or are in love with XP for some stupid reason, don't even attempt to run Vista. Also, don't like UAC? Turn it off dummy!!!! Use other tools such as anti-malware along with windows defender instead.

Ok that's it for my rant. I've finally got that off my chest.

I've used Vista, its a bloated piece of crap. I even used that bloated piece of crap for months because Microsoft refuses to support their own mobile phones in XP x64 (i dont run 32-bit software, i live in 2008 thank you very much)

Now I run 2008 Server, way better. It uses less ram and cpu even with vista features turned on. Without such features it only uses 512mb of ram! It just goes to show you Microsoft would rather give businesses better software than consumers.

It appears Goebbels and co are still alive and well. I only watched the opening montage but it would be nice to know what they were shown to make them think it was a "new" version of Windows, interface changes? It will also fuel the global belief that the average American is a moron.

LOL. This is exactly what I meant by holding your breath and stomping your little feet. This is a childish response by you, but totally expected. Oh god you're just soooo cute.

(xbiox said @ #41)
WOW. you people need to step out side for a bit.
really WHO CARES? do you own Microsoft? NO!
.. ok.

Every day I turn on my PC I am reminded of the poor quality of the Windows operating system.

(toadeater said @ #41.1)

Every day I turn on my PC I am reminded of the poor quality of the Windows operating system.

Still running XP, I see...

(toadeater said @ #41.1)

Every day I turn on my PC I am reminded of the poor quality of the Windows operating system.

If it's because the XP boot screen is so horribly pixellated then try turning your monitor on a full minute after boot. :cheeky:

vista was slow but i was running it on 1.2 ghz single core laptop with only 512 mb ram. Had no issues.. drivers had no glitch. this is atleast 4 yrs old machine. i disabled aero and set it to high performance mode and it performed well!!

my new laptop does things very well.. i never had any problem. I use two networks so i keep changing network settings this is the only situation where i see UAC and i completely agree with the UAC popup there.

I had so many poblems with XP when it came out. vista is, if not better, as good as xp. I had so many problems with drivers in the beginning with XP.

Im a network administrator and i deal with about 1000 XP machines (im not trolling) and some of them are not even upgraded to sp1 and they are like pain in A** but i can assure that vista is worth a try.

OH! That's gotta hurt the Vista haters. I was once one of them. Really like Vista now. Hold your breath and stomp your feet all you want kiddies, Vista is no where near as bad as you say. Quick, someone call the whAAAAAAmbulance

the ONLY 2 things that **** me off about vista are:

· external WD drive adds 3mins to the boottime - and the only fix is to plug it in after booting.
· UAC popups when re arranging my start menu.


thats it. i neither love or hate it, its just there.

I've tried it, tested it, used it on various systems, trimmed it down, tweaked it up, virtualized it and dual booted it, I've even slept with the DVD under my pillow. I love Microsoft, and they produce great software, Vista, I'm afraid, isn't one of them.

I find it sad that MS have had to resort to 'paying' people to 'lie' in an obviously scripted advertisement in order to generate sales of this rapidly failing OS.

(scaramonga said @ #37)
I've tried it, tested it, used it on various systems, trimmed it down, tweaked it up, virtualized it and dual booted it, I've even slept with the DVD under my pillow. I love Microsoft, and they produce great software, Vista, I'm afraid, isn't one of them.

I find it sad that MS have had to resort to 'paying' people to 'lie' in an obviously scripted advertisement in order to generate sales of this rapidly failing OS.

:cool:

In my home we have 3 laptops (1 with business (HP) & 2 with home premium, (HP & Vaio)...) and a PC with home premium...I never had big problems...i had few driver problems but with SP1 its not at all there...

I use vista for watching tv, playing games (farcry, aoe3, nfsmw), use for my work (vs.net 2008 development), flash, 3dsmax for some presentation bg animations...and wifim bluetooth....all with avg free antivirus installed. & office 2007

People who are OK with XP simply bash with Vista....it happened to be same..everyone where bashing XP when it required 128 MB ram... period.

(guruparan said @ #37.2)

In my home we have 3 laptops (1 with business (HP) & 2 with home premium, (HP & Vaio)...) and a PC with home premium...I never had big problems...i had few driver problems but with SP1 its not at all there...

I use vista for watching tv, playing games (farcry, aoe3, nfsmw), use for my work (vs.net 2008 development), flash, 3dsmax for some presentation bg animations...and wifim bluetooth....all with avg free antivirus installed. & office 2007

People who are OK with XP simply bash with Vista....it happened to be same..everyone where bashing XP when it required 128 MB ram... period.

Would be nice if they just took Vista ultimate, renamed it to "Windows Vista Second Edition" and released it for the price of home basic instead of intentionally crippling it into different versions to try and make more money

Anyone seen the demo that folks were shown? I'd be curious to see what MS did to the OS to modify it to look or act differantly. As per my comment above, im a firm supporter of Vista and user it on my networks at work and at home, but I'm still curious about what these folks saw. Granted most of them look like installing a program really means calling the overpriced geek squad to do it for them.....

So from what i can read the bottom line is.

1- All people who say Vista is not groundbreaking are MS haters and did not try it.
2- All people who say Vista rocks did try it and are not MS fans.

Hum ...

(Captain555 said @ #35.1)

Again that word. Why "haters" ? Calling them "haters" is just a reflection of your bias.

Because some people think they have a relationship with Microsoft even thought it's just a company like any other company. It's the same with Nintendo, Sony, Apple. They all have their fair share of fanboys who are ready to die for them. All people who say their products are not god's gifts must be haters.

(LaP said @ #35.2)

Because some people think they have a relationship with Microsoft even thought it's just a company like any other company. It's the same with Nintendo, Sony, Apple. They all have their fair share of fanboys who are ready to die for them. All people who say their products are not god's gifts must be haters.

And you go out of your way to insult them...which leaves you in what category, exactly?

(39 Thieves said @ #35.3)


And you go out of your way to insult them...which leaves you in what category, exactly?


In the category of people who first posted to tell his own experience about Vista just to see a fanboy with issues insulting him and i did not like it.

My eye to an eye reaction might not be good but read my first post in this news (couple of replies above) i don't think it was offensive at all.

I would bet that the test PC's showed off to these unsuspecting users all had 4GB of ram, GeForce 9800GTX Graphics Cards, and 10000 rpm sata drives.

A more fair test would have been to select a couple hundred users and give/loan them a boxed pc, the same thing you would find at Best Buy or Circuit City, not a suped-up pc with hardware and performance most user's wont have for another 3 or 4 years.. Let them take it home, assemble it, ACTIVATE IT, and use it for 30 days. Have them log any issues they have, give them free tech support (lord knows their gonna need it), and give them several perhipherals they have to install themselves straight out of the box.

Even disguise it as Mojave or some other name so they wont know it's vista if you want. I guarantee if you do this with 100 people, 60 of them will tell you to take the pc back and shove it where the sun doesn't shine....

Not if you gave them a well-configured Vista machine and not an actual computer you would find at Best Buy or Circuit City. I've had terrible trouble with some OEM installs of Vista. They install so much junk and mess up on driver installs so much that many times the only remedy is to wipe it clean and install a fresh copy of Vista.

That's what I did with my HP laptop - wiped it, installed a clean copy of Vista Business, and let Windows Update find and install the drivers. The improvement in performance and stability was amazing.

Edit:
Oh, and you can see in the video that they demonstrated it on a notebook computer - which, although probably top-of-the-line, obviously didn't have a GeForce 9800GTX and Raptors in a RAID 0...

You're missing the point. These were people that were anti-Vista, that claimed to have problems with Vista specifically...yet when sat down in front of it, didn't know what they were even using. It wasn't that Microsoft stacked the deck with some uber-system that worked perfectly. That's the point...most of these everyday critics weren't "pro" enough to tell what OS they were using.

(39 Thieves said @ #33.3)
You're missing the point. These were people that were anti-Vista, that claimed to have problems with Vista specifically...yet when sat down in front of it, didn't know what they were even using. It wasn't that Microsoft stacked the deck with some uber-system that worked perfectly. That's the point...most of these everyday critics weren't "pro" enough to tell what OS they were using.

Just to be devil's advocate here, how do you know ?

They could be paid actor and you wouldn't know the difference.

(Captain555 said @ #33.4)

Just to be devil's advocate here, how do you know ?

They could be paid actor and you wouldn't know the difference.

You could be an Apple-paid forum poster, and we'd never know the difference. Your point? How "real" is anything you come in contact with on the internet...or anywhere, for that matter?

But in all seriousness, I'm assuming. Because even on a site such as this, that is reputed to be a mecca of sorts for the technically-minded, the level of utter cluelessness about most things is mind-numbing at times. And if the people on here are as brain-dead confused about some of the things I've read, then I'm left wondering at the level of technical competence from some so-called tech "pros" out there spewing their expertise across the net.

(39 Thieves said @ #33.5)

You could be an Apple-paid forum poster, and we'd never know the difference. Your point? How "real" is anything you come in contact with on the internet...or anywhere, for that matter?

And you could be paid by MS.

It's the old egg and chicken debate. Who came first the egg or the chicken ? You could still debate about it after 1000 years.

Let's just say that ad campaigns are not really the most unbiased source of information. And it's true for all ad campaigns. The goal is to sell a product and that's why Chrest hires fake doctor to sell their dental paste.

I remember when Gates and O'Neil did a video to sell the XBox. They were playing PGR (1 or 2 can't recall). When O'neil was turning right on his controller the car was turning left on the screen ...

(LaP said @ #33.6)
It's the old egg and chicken debate. Who came first the egg or the chicken ? You could still debate about it after 1000 years.

It's the egg, unless you're a creationist.

(39 Thieves said @ #33.5)
You could be an Apple-paid forum poster, and we'd never know the difference. Your point? How "real" is anything you come in contact with on the internet...or anywhere, for that matter?

My point exactly

On top of that... the thing I like about Microsoft's ads is that they stay true to themselves and showcase what their products bring to the table.. rather than bashing other company's products and not really focusing on their own products features (*cough cough* Apple *cough cough*).

I actually liked it.. I thought it was well done.. and pretty funny! lol

It's very true though... you shouldn't bash something until you've actually tried it... if you bash something solely based on other's comments that's just lame and stupid....lol.

This is a nice attempt, but unfortunately it probably won't help much. People trust their "friend who knows about computers" more than they do Microsoft, even though their friend probably:

a. Never actually tried Vista himself.
b. Only ever tried Vista in a VM.
c. Tried Vista when it first came out and still had network stack issues and bad drivers
d. Tried program X that requires admin privileges but doesn't notify the OS, and the program doesn't work (which obviously means the whole OS is crap)
e. Makes himself feel cool by hating Microsoft
f. Secretly likes Vista, but wouldn't admit it because he doesn't want to be a MS sellout

Although Vista had its problems in the beginning and deserved some of (not all) the bad press at launch, for the most part everything's been ironed out, and its now better than XP in just about every way. I now use it at home and work, which means I use it for everything: web, email, desktop publishing, photo editing (Photoshop), HD video editing (Sony Vegas Pro), gaming (CoD4 and TF2, mostly), development (Java and .NET), and I did use it as a DVR until my video capture card died.

As an IT professional, that's the thing that always bugs me. Everyone knows someone who "knows about computers" and this person most likely doesn't. They're usually someone who has no clue but screws around with stuff that may impress the average person. Its like you have that guy who works on his car and maybe a few others but no way in hell would I bring my car to him to fix it.

In addition to that most of these wannabes think that hating Vista and/or Microsoft in general gives them "street cred". A lot of IT journalists latched onto this idea and traded in credibility for hits.

Couldn't have said it better myself. Most of these people have only HEARD about it being bad, never tried it for themselves. My favortie is the lady who rates it a 0, even after admitting she's never used it. Seriously? The problem here isnt Vista, its all the dumb users out there who keep IT like myself employed. I love Vista, have since launch, and currently have it deployed on 90% of my workstations at work. My users love it, and they are some of the dumbest people on the planet, so if they can use it and comment on it's ease of use, whats the deal with these morons? Sounds like herd mentality.

Microsoft Windows Mojave I like the name..Windows Vista <-- ****ty name.


goody another one those news... stir up the Vista fans...
Vista still annoying and ugly in my book.

I think its a little too defensive and desperate as a publicity stunt, but it is true that most Vista haters haven't tried it much, and are just relying on what they heard.

I would wish everybody would stop using the word "haters".

If you tried it and don't like it, it is just that you prefer something else, doesn't mean you hate it.

If you didn't try it, you can't hate it. You just choose not to try it.

For me personnaly, I don't hate Vista, I just prefer to use XP. Why ? I tried the first Beta, then I tried RC2. Since then I had to work with it on customer's PC. I have never found one single thing that make want to switch my own PC to Vista.

Nobody has ever given me one good enough reason why I should switch my personal PC to Vista and more importantly, fork out $300 for it.

(Captain555 said @ #26.1)
I would wish everybody would stop using the word "haters".

If you tried it and don't like it, it is just that you prefer something else, doesn't mean you hate it.

If you didn't try it, you can't hate it. You just choose not to try it.

For me personnaly, I don't hate Vista, I just prefer to use XP. Why ? I tried the first Beta, then I tried RC2. Since then I had to work with it on customer's PC. I have never found one single thing that make want to switch my own PC to Vista.

Nobody has ever given me one good enough reason why I should switch my personal PC to Vista and more importantly, fork out $300 for it.

Then I don't think you would qualify as a Vista hater, and shouldn't take offense to posts like these. The haters are those that talk about how Vista is total garbage, a failure, the worst OS ever, Microsoft should drop it and just sell XP, etc. Not to mention the so-called Internet journalists that seem to go out of their respective ways to bash Vista at every turn.

These are what are referred to as "Vista haters". It is a different thing from people, like yourself, who have taken the time to research Vista, see what they like and don't like, and form their own opinion rather than borrowing it from someone else.

As for the "one good enough reason" to switch, there probably isn't one good enough reason because there really isn't any single "must have" feature in Vista. I like and use Vista because of the many small things that go together to provide a better, smoother, experience.

In the end it comes down to personal preference, but it seems that many people's preferences has been formed by scads of misinformation and hear-say rather than actual research and/or experience...

(Captain555 said @ #26.1)
Nobody has ever given me one good enough reason why I should switch my personal PC to Vista and more importantly, fork out $300 for it.

$300? Retail home premium is like $200...and OEM Ultimate is like $160...where does 300 come from lol.

This ad campaign looks like an ad campaign. That is, it looks a bit contrived, even scripted. It certainly does not address many of the genuine complaints neutral third-parties have had with regards to compatibility problems and speed issues, but then, being a web infomercial, it wouldn't as it is simply advertising and not unbiased scientific surveying.

Vista may well be unfairly held in extremely low regard, but this publicity stunt doesn't really prove anything except that Microsoft think most people out there are ignorant about computers, which is probably true.

Plus how many people that had to go thru before they found enough people to put in the commercial. They certainly won't tell us, don't they ?

No problems with Vista here, but, I don't run games. Mine is for "business". Running outlook, excel, photoshop etc...
no issues. If you have the hardware, and the horsepower, Vista isn't bad.

(naap51stang said @ #24)
No problems with Vista here, but, I don't run games. Mine is for "business". Running outlook, excel, photoshop etc...
no issues. If you have the hardware, and the horsepower, Vista isn't bad.

The gaming performance issues were resolved like last year...

This is really sad for Microsoft in that they purposely set forth in developing a campaign to convince people to use their operating system. The product should speak for itself.

The product should speak for itself.

...which is what the campaign is all about. Try it out for yourself, see if you like it. Forget what others tell you. How exactly is this sad? I find this an excellent idea.

Personally I find this message a lot more mature than the Apple ads which basically don't tell you anything about the benefits of their own product but only tell you about how oh-so-rubbish Vista supposedly is.

LOL I guess you didn't get the gist of the whole thing. It's all about letting the product speak for itself, not letting other people's preconceived notions cloud your judgment.

(XeonBuilder said @ #23.2)
Maybe the problem out there isn't Vista. :rolleyes:

Amen brother I've been using Vista since its release (at first on my Dell Inspiron 6400 notebook and now on my custom built desktop) and I had one single BSOD so far in all this time, and I use it daily for hours on end. Far more stable than XP at the time in my experience.

Right right, because consistently slamming PCs and Windows in Apple's 'I'm a Mac' ads are all about a product selling itself...right?

This video reminds me of one of those infomercials you see at 2am as you flip through the channels due to insomnia. Super cheesy.

So, MS controls the experiment and lies to consumers to get the results they want. How about a real world test full of incompatible applications and poorly written drivers. Then let's see what happens.

(betasp said @ #20)
So, MS controls the experiment and lies to consumers to get the results they want. How about a real world test full of incompatible applications and poorly written drivers. Then let's see what happens.

So incompatable programs and bad drivers is Microsoft's fault? It's Microsoft's fault that someone decides not to upgrade their software to a version that will run properly under Vista or not upgrade their drivers.

I guess you're one of those "pros" that told people to avoid Vista like the plauge.

Sure, and then lets put some Windows 3.11 programs to run on an XP machine, and some OS7 apps on Leopard, and try to put in a printer that's not on the Macs driver list, and lets not get started on "drivers" for Linux...

(Ironman273 said @ #20.2)
Sure, and then lets put some Windows 3.11 programs to run on an XP machine, and some OS7 apps on Leopard, and try to put in a printer that's not on the Macs driver list, and lets not get started on "drivers" for Linux...

Some Windows 3.11 programs may very well still run on Vista (x64 not included.) We have an app that was released somewhere in between 3.11 and 95, which runs well on Vista.

OS7 on Leopard? You're SOL. No program that old will run, as they removed that functionality.

(betasp said @ #20)
So, MS controls the experiment and lies to consumers to get the results they want. How about a real world test full of incompatible applications and poorly written drivers. Then let's see what happens.

Why god why would you run your system with defective drivers?

That's like saying "Why doesn't Ford run customer satisfaction tests on their vehicles with sugar in the fuel tank."

(betasp said @ #20)
So, MS controls the experiment and lies to consumers to get the results they want. How about a real world test full of incompatible applications and poorly written drivers. Then let's see what happens.

It's not like XP would kick the bucket any less than Vista will with buggy drivers.

As for who does the experiment. If MS outsourced it to someone else, people would scream bribery. Then if some random blogger did the exact same experiment, they'd be called liars and OMG CONSPIRACY THEORIES. x)

Vista was always good ... sure, there were teething problems ... but seriously ... 90% of the IDIOTS out there telling people it's crap haven't used it!

Vista was always good to people who did not have any problem with it.

Of course if the only thing you do is surf the net or play some games here and there you'll likely wont have any problem with your OS. Mac OSX, Linux and Windows are all very good to surf the net once a day.

But people who experienced BSOD under Vista are not so happy with it. One of my Co-worker bought a new PC last winter with Vista pre-installed and after 1 month Vista went in a BSOD at each boot after a windows update. Can't recall the number of the update and the code of the BSOD. But it was a common error as Google returned lot of search results about it.

She called HP and Microsoft and basically MS said to send the comp back to HP if it was still under warranty or to re-install Vista. She did not want to send the computer back and trying to re-install or repair Windows did not correct the problem (was displaying BSOD when trying to boot the Vista CD) so i went to her house to repair it (i'm a computer technician).

After a complete night working on it i was able to repair it ... by running a disk repair under a Linux bootable CD (found the way to fix it after an intensive and boring 2 hours google search). And no i'm not a fan of Linux. In fact in my opinion Linux is a good command line server but is not better than Windows when you start using X.

So yes Vista does have its share of problem.

I'm actually running it on my dual boot Vista / XP comp. Well i mostly use XP. Vista is a nice OS but the gadgets are really weak. The ones provided by MS are basic at best and the ones made by the community often are poorly coded and can lead to problems with the OS. I had a lot of drivers problem at first too. nVidia took some time to provide stable drivers for my old nForce 4 board. And my X-Fi acted as a paperweight for some time.

MS fault ? maybe not. But people who spend money don't care who's at fault. If it doesn't work right they are not happy. End of story. Pro-MS part of Neowin community might not like to hear it but Vista had problems and it doesn't really matter if it's MS or 3rd party fault the first impression is important and Vista negative first impression as nothing to do with a brain wash.

It's certainly easier to pretend people who talk against Vista are all frustrated Mac or Linux users. But the fact is most of them are simply people who had problem with Vista BSOD like my Co-worker or simply people who needed to wait months for stable drivers like me. You can blame 3rd party all you want it doesn't matter.

If someone got a problem with his automatic window in his car GM, Fors, etc could blame the 3rd party company who made it but ultimately the consumer will blame GM, Ford for it.

MS is not a special entity who should be immune to negative feedbacks. It's business not religion.


Let me summarize what Lap just said:

"Vista has it share of isolated issues.
But I don't like Linux either.
Vista is not perfect, Linux is not perfect, and MacOSX is not perfect.

Many of you said Vista is working for you,
but it did not work for my Co-Worker!
I hate you all."

(thenonhacker said @ #19.2)

Let me summarize what Lap just said:

"Vista has it share of isolated issues.
But I don't like Linux either.
Vista is not perfect, Linux is not perfect, and MacOSX is not perfect.

Many of you said Vista is working for you,
but it did not work for my Co-Worker!
I hate you all."


Gratz for your 14 yo anniversary. You'll start to shave your beard soon.

Let me quote myself.

"Can't recall the number of the update and the code of the BSOD. But it was a common error as Google returned lot of search results about it."

My job is technical support for a company (around 1200 employees). We have a couple of test machines running Vista. Actually Windows XP is installed on all computers and the company has no plan to install Vista. We would need to upgrade the machine to install Vista (Vista is slower than XP with 1GB of RAM) and we had some troubles working with files generated by internal applications under Vista.

What i said is just an example.

Of course no OS is perfect. But as someone who work on technical support co-workers ask me question about their personal computer often and i encountered more problems with Vista than XP. It is my personal experience only and your personal attack against me are really childish.

(LaP said @ #19.1)
One of my Co-worker bought a new PC last winter with Vista pre-installed and after 1 month Vista went in a BSOD at each boot after a windows update. Can't recall the number of the update and the code of the BSOD. But it was a common error as Google returned lot of search results about it.


BSOD pretty much always means a hardware problem.

So... she bought a defective PC, and didn't take it back to the store or manufacturer to get it fixed/replaced? Would you do that if you bought a car that wouldn't start 1 month after purchase?

Or would you say, "Darn, new car won't start. Must be the fuel. I'll pump out the fuel and try some different fuel, instead of taking it back to the dealer where they would fix the real problem for me at no charge."

Seriously, I just don't understand some people.

(Brandon Live said @ #19.4)

BSOD pretty much always means a hardware problem.


Hardware problem, haha.
Usually it means a software problem.

(abcdefg said @ #19.5)
Hardware problem, haha.
Usually it means a software problem.

Usually it does mean a faulty 3rd party driver.

However, hardware failures are a very large portion of BSODs

(LaP said @ #19.1)
Vista was always good to people who did not have any problem with it.

Of course if the only thing you do is surf the net or play some games here and there you'll likely wont have any problem with your OS. Mac OSX, Linux and Windows are all very good to surf the net once a day.

But people who experienced BSOD under Vista are not so happy with it. One of my Co-worker bought a new PC last winter with Vista pre-installed and after 1 month Vista went in a BSOD at each boot after a windows update. Can't recall the number of the update and the code of the BSOD. But it was a common error as Google returned lot of search results about it.

She called HP and Microsoft and basically MS said to send the comp back to HP if it was still under warranty or to re-install Vista. She did not want to send the computer back and trying to re-install or repair Windows did not correct the problem (was displaying BSOD when trying to boot the Vista CD) so i went to her house to repair it (i'm a computer technician).

After a complete night working on it i was able to repair it ... by running a disk repair under a Linux bootable CD (found the way to fix it after an intensive and boring 2 hours google search). And no i'm not a fan of Linux. In fact in my opinion Linux is a good command line server but is not better than Windows when you start using X.

So yes Vista does have its share of problem.

I'm actually running it on my dual boot Vista / XP comp. Well i mostly use XP. Vista is a nice OS but the gadgets are really weak. The ones provided by MS are basic at best and the ones made by the community often are poorly coded and can lead to problems with the OS. I had a lot of drivers problem at first too. nVidia took some time to provide stable drivers for my old nForce 4 board. And my X-Fi acted as a paperweight for some time.

MS fault ? maybe not. But people who spend money don't care who's at fault. If it doesn't work right they are not happy. End of story. Pro-MS part of Neowin community might not like to hear it but Vista had problems and it doesn't really matter if it's MS or 3rd party fault the first impression is important and Vista negative first impression as nothing to do with a brain wash.

It's certainly easier to pretend people who talk against Vista are all frustrated Mac or Linux users. But the fact is most of them are simply people who had problem with Vista BSOD like my Co-worker or simply people who needed to wait months for stable drivers like me. You can blame 3rd party all you want it doesn't matter.

If someone got a problem with his automatic window in his car GM, Fors, etc could blame the 3rd party company who made it but ultimately the consumer will blame GM, Ford for it.

MS is not a special entity who should be immune to negative feedbacks. It's business not religion.

I wonder how these people get BSODs when you claim they dont do anything lol but windows update LOL...so full of **** it could fill the pacific ocean.

Drivers are NOT NOT NOT the responsibility of microsoft, if creative decided to be gay with the x-fi series blame THEM. If nvidia release crap drivers [well what they have been doing for the last year or so] blame THEM.

A BSOD from Windows Update is rather ubsurd under Vista. so please....I've been using Vista for way longer than you and the last BSOD i saw was hm like beta 2? lol...

(abcdefg said @ #19.5)

Hardware problem, haha.
Usually it means a software problem.


There was no hardware problem. I tested all hardware in her PC.

Like i said i repaired it and it works now.

Had to run a fsck from a Linux bootable CD because for a weird reason chkdsk could not repair the file system.

(/ -Razorfold said @ #19.7)


I wonder how these people get BSODs when you claim they dont do anything lol but windows update LOL...so full of **** it could fill the pacific ocean.

Drivers are NOT NOT NOT the responsibility of microsoft, if creative decided to be gay with the x-fi series blame THEM. If nvidia release crap drivers [well what they have been doing for the last year or so] blame THEM.

A BSOD from Windows Update is rather ubsurd under Vista. so please....I've been using Vista for way longer than you and the last BSOD i saw was hm like beta 2? lol...


My god i usually don't comment here just read news. I will stay away from the comments next time.

But wow ...

1- If someone say something negative about MS he lies and hate MS and the whole world.
2- If someone say something positive about MS he speaks the truth.

Listen you can belive me or not i really don't care. I actually like MS products. I'm running a dual boot Vista / XP computer (both copies legal). I own a 360. I own a legal copy of Office. I overall like MS products.

Do a google search you'll see Vista BSOD are common. She got a BSOD after a Windows Update reboot. There's nothing stupid about it.

How do you know you used Vista way longer than me ? I beta tested Vista. I beta tested XP too and XP was a nightmare during the beta test. XP just took less time for it to get good support and become "rock solid".

There's nothing absurd about a BSOD after a Windows Update. The update just corrupted the file system for an obscure reason probably. What is absurd is that chkdsk could not repair it while fsck was able to repair it.

I ran in as much problems with Vista than XP. And i had less problems with drivers support under XP than Vista at launch. Also XP scale better with old hardwares. It's my own experience of course. Working as technical support for a 1200 employees cie i come by more OS related problems that the average people.

It makes me laugh when people say drivers are not the responsibility of microsoft. The main criticize about Mac OS and Linux is the lack of drivers and apps support. How many time people laughed at Mac OS because there's no game on it ? So while i agree that drivers are not the responsiblity of Microsoft i also think that when you sell a OS you must be sure that propular hardwares work on it because if they don't people will blame you and not 3rd party companies. It may not be right but this is the way business work.

Vista is a nice OS. Is it worse than XP ? No. Is it better ? Not really. Different. Some people like other don't. I think it is more secure than XP but i'm not an expert in security so ... Like XP it will become better with time. I do think that at lauch Vista was worse than XP at lauch but i would not say XP SP1 was better than Vista SP1. But at lauch Vista was a mess and users have the right to blame MS for it. It may not be MS fault but this is business and when consumers buy something that doesn't work right they blame the maker of it.

Next time please can you be a little more mature in your comments ? Saying that i'm full of **** is really childish. I have hard time taking someone seriously when he uses words like ****, gay, crap and such each sentence.

Also sorry for my bad english it is not my native language.

(scaramonga said @ #18)
LOL!!

MS are 'scraping the barrel now. :rolleyes:

Yes scraping the barrel... exposing just how STUPID so many people are. How can you have an idea about something if you've never tried it?

Facts are facts right, and most of these people liked what they saw. What they saw was Vista... 'nuff said.

What if i said I hate chocolate and then someone finds me with brown stuff all over my face (that isn't poo)... yeh scraping the barrel for truth lol

On a personal note, I am still using XP but I don't 'hate' Vista, and I HAVE tried it. But I still respect what MS has done with this campaign, because for the average user, they won't know **** from clay... so how can they not like Vista?

Then again, everyone loves to keep a dog when its down, and we all love to sound like experts. Two golden rules that show how stupid people can be.

Vista has been solid for me.

Can't believe they put DVD maker in that ad. It's really is one of the worst pieces of software I have ever used.

i use vista at home and xp at work (out of choice, i asked to be downgraded)

i really really love vista, and it pains me that the people in this video are so stupid to just blindly believe things they have 'heard' or 'read'

why are 'people' as a collective so stupid???

anyway, i am looking forward to my new more powerful work laptop later this year with a bit of vista with baited breath :D

can't live in the past forever!

they should turn that in to a TV commercial and play it as often as possible on all the major networks. it would really help them... seriously. i've been using Vista for about a month now and am loving it. at home i've got an older celeron 1.6 with 1 GB of RAM... works awesome. especially since i moved to OneCare. at work it is on a core 2 duo with 2 GB of RAM and it is extremely fast. never going back to xp again.

This is a great move by Microsoft. I've been using Vista since last January, and people in public/school seem to be impressed by how fast my laptop runs and how nice it looks.

I also must say that since installing vista on my parents computer about a year ago I have not had a single computer related problem from them. That is amazing since i was always helping them when they had xp on it.

(Captain555 said @ #12.2)
The problem is not XP. The problem is between the chair and the keyboard.

That could probably be said in reference to about 90% of all computer problems, OS being irrelevant. And yes, I just made up that statistic.

(Captain555 said @ #12.2)
The problem is not XP. The problem is between the chair and the keyboard.

That's not always true, though.

IE 7 with Protected Mode, Windows Defender, and a hardened OS can go a long way to keeping a new computer running properly.

You throw enough hardware at it, of course Vista will eventually work. But back here in the real world, Corporations aren't going to spend millions of dollars in having to upgrade all thier PCs to run Vista. The ROI just isn't there. Chances are, the next version of Windows will have better adoption luck.

And as for the ad campaign, no matter what...you can't polish a turd.

(Krieg said @ #11)
And as for the ad campaign, no matter what...you can't polish a turd.

"As for the ad campaign, no matter what...
I am still in deep denial and can't accept the fact that people had clouded perceptions about Vista.
I can't accept the fact that this experiment has made people look at things objectively."

Ever run XP SP2 on 256 megs of RAM?

It's about as bad as Vista on 512. And 256mb of RAM when SP2 was released was much more expensive than 512 was when Vista was released.


Oooh sadly I have that one beat - XP SP3 on a 98mb machine. 5 of em. Which I was (sorta) responsible for.

(not actually my fault - I was having to teach special needs IT using these machines and our IT dept thought they were all hunky dory - I didn't and neither did the people who used them!!)

(Pygmy_Hippo said @ #11.4)


Oooh sadly I have that one beat - XP SP3 on a 98mb machine. 5 of em. Which I was (sorta) responsible for.

(not actually my fault - I was having to teach special needs IT using these machines and our IT dept thought they were all hunky dory - I didn't and neither did the people who used them!!)

I know the feeling. I remember when XP came out.

No one had adequate RAM for XP back then. The same can't be said for Vista's release: 2 gigs in early 2007 was pretty common. 512mb in 2001 was not.

Wow, those videos were very good, actually. But it's really sad that it's considered the more mature intellectual thing to first be cynical and critical and negative toward anything new, than to try it out first. But unfortunately that's how things go.

A while back my dad said to me when he talked about getting a new computer, you'll never get me to install that garbage on my computer (referring to Vista). He's never once even seen it or worked with it on any computer ever. And yet he has very strong feelings about it. I've brought him around, since I've been using it for over a year now, but it shows how people can be swayed simply by hearing negative talk from others who consider themselves to be 'in the know'.

lol high time MS did something like this.. now if only they could take on Apple for their iEGO products that'd kick ass.

"I have to tell you that its Windows Vista"

"You just blew my mind"


Awesome...

this is a great ad compaign.

on a personal notice, I was one of those Vista bashers..til I decided to try it myself 7 months ago.

Ive not looked back since then, Vista is great. Enough with the hate.

I guess word of mouth is strong enough to brainwash people.

BINGO!!

I should show this to my friend who recently bought a brand new Dell and asked them to install XP instead of Vista on it. Why XP? Because another friend of his who doesn't run Vista said that it was garbage and he should stay with Windows XP. He's got a 4x faster computer than me and he's now running this 7 year old OS. He feels really foolish now, but there's nothing he can do. Meanwhile, his so called 'friend' gave him advice based on absolute nothing other than other Vista-bashers!

I've been running Vista and Server 08, and I'm sorry it is much better than XP. I used to have to spend so much time tweaking XP and installing other software to get it the way I wanted. Vista is just plain better.

(zarniwoop said @ #6)
I wonder what would happen if some leading linux distros did the something like this Mojave project?

hahaha, here you go:

"Wow, I thought Linux is just for System Administrators with attitude issues! I mean, I wasn't even aware that it has GUI that looks like the Start Menu!"

"I am so happy using Linux with Wine, because I can use UltraEdit-32, MS Office, and even play games like Starcraft or Crysis. Wine is so effective in emulating Windows, I want to switch to Linux!"

"I am having so much fun tinkering with the kernel, that I don't mind getting my actual work done!"

(thenonhacker said @ #6.1)

hahaha, here you go:

"Wow, I thought Linux is just for System Administrators with attitude issues! I mean, I wasn't even aware that it has GUI that looks like the Start Menu!"

"I am so happy using Linux with Wine, because I can use UltraEdit-32, MS Office, and even play games like Starcraft or Crysis. Wine is so effective in emulating Windows, I want to switch to Linux!"

"I am having so much fun tinkering with the kernel, that I don't mind getting my actual work done!"

Maybe in 10 or 15 years ; )

This goes to show how people are sometimes reluctant to "accept" new products by software giants. Honestly, just because Microsoft developed it doesn't mean it's bad. I guess word of mouth is strong enough to brainwash people. It's a good move on Microsoft's part to show this to the public.

Anyway, I've been a longtime Windows XP user and I can say that Windows Vista is amazing. It's better, faster, and more secure than XP and I can't go back. I currently run Windows Vista Ultimate x64 with SP1 and it runs without a hitch. I've come across significantly less bugs than I did with XP and the Aero UI is a welcomed change. Certainly much better than the old "Fisher Price" look in XP.

Sure this video from Microsoft is a tad slanted ..BUT..it does rightfully demonstrate that once folks can separate themselves from all the negative rhetoric about Vista and try "Mojave" with an unbiased mind and attitude then the advantgaes and appeal of Vista are easily percieved. This entire Mojave Project is a great concept and someone at Microsoft PR or thier PR firm is right on the money to do this.

-ps We have 4 Vista Home Preium boxes here on ethernet - no issues. period! GO MOJAVE!! lol!!!!

Too bad this PR team wasn't put in charge of the launch (where they blew 90% of the ad money on the Daily Show and The Vanishing Point Game)

That's right little Charlie,this Viral marketing,or voice to voice marketing,is very effective,and will show the real benefits of Windows Vista to usres,instead of these being convinced by FUD out there.

Tell that to me,i'm a Marketing Professional

hahaha - as soon as that guy said "the speed is incredible" I knew the whole thing was just bulldust!

Likewise when the other guy said "I like that security feature". Maybe he really said "I like the security features NOT" when the stupid UAC kept popping up, but they edited the rest out.

exactly what are you doing that forces UAC to pop up? cuz everyday use doesn't require admin privileges.

if you didn't use vista, you would say something like that

(dvb2000 said @ #3)
hahaha - as soon as that guy said "the speed is incredible" I knew the whole thing was just bulldust!

Likewise when the other guy said "I like that security feature". Maybe he really said "I like the security features NOT" when the stupid UAC kept popping up, but they edited the rest out.

I can say the same thing about your comment. On both my computers ( an old pentium m laptop and a core 2 duo) vista is faster then xp was .

Also uac doesnt pop up if you dont run programs that require admin rights.

I'm another one that sees Vista working faster on my machine. As for UAC, Windows was late to that party, since Linux and Mac have the same feature. You may say "but the Windows version is annoying!!!" No, it's not. It's the programs running under Vista that were made in the pre-Vista days that are requesting admin rights. Just like developers for Mac and Linux now do, developers for Vista will only request admin rights when truly necessary and you won't see the UAC as much. Don't blame Vista for lazy programing.

(Ironman273 said @ #3.4)
I'm another one that sees Vista working faster on my machine.

Maybe you people are seen what you want to see. Beside game using DirectX10, everything run faster on XP than on Vista.

(Captain555 said @ #3.5)

Maybe you people are seen what you want to see. Beside game using DirectX10, everything run faster on XP than on Vista.

Well, that's just incorrect. Maybe some other games do, all depends on your drivers. But applications in general start much faster on Vista and are more responsive. At least on modern hardware.

(Captain555 said @ #3.5)

Maybe you people are seen what you want to see. Beside game using DirectX10, everything run faster on XP than on Vista.

Prove it.

(Brandon Live said @ #3.6)


Well, that's just incorrect. Maybe some other games do, all depends on your drivers. But applications in general start much faster on Vista and are more responsive. At least on modern hardware.


From my own experience Vista boot way faster than XP and run faster too on good hardware. My PC has 2Gb of ram, an Opteron 180, a 8800GTx and a Raptor HD and Vista is much faster than XP.

On older machine with 1Gb of RAM and with integrated graphic card (what you find in most if not all big companies) XP is generally faster.

(Brandon Live said @ #3.6)
Well, that's just incorrect. Maybe some other games do, all depends on your drivers. But applications in general start much faster on Vista and are more responsive. At least on modern hardware.

My point exactly, you seems to see what you want to believe. That's certainly not my experience.


(39 Thieves said @ #3.7)
Prove it.

This is based on my own experience, I don't need to prove anything.


(LaP said @ #3.8)
From my own experience Vista boot way faster than XP and run faster too on good hardware. My PC has 2Gb of ram, an Opteron 180, a 8800GTx and a Raptor HD and Vista is much faster than XP.

On older machine with 1Gb of RAM and with integrated graphic card (what you find in most if not all big companies) XP is generally faster.

I do 10 to 12 upgrade back to XP every months, and every time the PC is a lot faster under XP. That's why I have to wonder where you see those great improvement. I just don't see them.

(majortom1981 said @ #3.3)
I can say the same thing about your comment. On both my computers ( an old pentium m laptop and a core 2 duo) vista is faster then xp was .
Same here. Going back to XP is a bit painful. I'm used to things happening instantly.

This represents all i have been saying to a lot people since Vista came out: Try it...

When people i know tried Vista i didn't like it, at least they knew why. Many people are just driven by whining of the media and blogs or anti-vista campaigns...

I don't mean that people have to buy Vista to see if they like it, but they can install a trial or better yet, keep the copy that comes with computers nowadays instead of asking friends or technicians to remove it and place XP on them right away.

(ajua said @ #2)
I don't mean that people have to buy Vista to see if they like it, but they can install a trial or better yet, keep the copy that comes with computers nowadays instead of asking friends or technicians to remove it and place XP on them right away.

My friends and me are running an italian website about computers and technologies and many of our readers are complaining that Vista is horrible and they would like to downgrade to XP. All those support request drove me to write an article to explain why downgrading to XP is not necessary, not suggested and not the best idea.

The article (in italian) is here; for non italian readers, here is a google-translated version of the article (bad translation to english, though).

The base copncept is: if you buy 2.5 TurboDiesel car, would you replace that engine with a 1.9 diesel version just because the second one (no turbo) has lower fuel consumption and lives longer than a turbo engine?
When you buy a PC with a OEM copy of Windows Vista, you are SURE that system will work, because you already paid someone at your PC's manufacturer to find out what hardware works with Windows Vista. In fact, who is having problems after installing Vista? People with custom built machines that loves to perform upgrades with their own hands.
I am working with Vista since the beta phase and I had few problems only at that stage; after that, I installed Vista on my "Vista-capable" notebook (HP Pavilion DV2600) and I use it for my everyday work.

Couple of things.. Please don't use car analogies, they really don't work in this case.

Second of all, just because you've had good experiences with your machines does not mean everyone else has. Clearly, the testers had good experiences on their machines, or else this product wouldn't be out on the market.

People want to downgrade, because XP will most likely perform better ("faster" in the user's eyes). That's nothing like downgrading to a non turbo engine or whatever your analogy is. Even so, with your analogy, I'd take the non turbo with gas prices like these! What users have a problem with is the fact that Vista is indeed slower on any given machine as it does considerably more processing than XP. There are a lot more processes running in Vista, whether they are all useful or not, I don't know, I haven't looked into it.

Another thing they will notice, is a constant bickering from UAC. Yes, its keeping your PC safer, but its extremely aggravating when you have to confirm everything. For instance, I was renaming files that weren't created by me, I had to "allow" for each file (around 15 files or so). UAC should have some sort of intelligence, and let me rename the other files as well without asking for me to allow again (within that specific folder and using that specific extension). Obviously, in the Windows folder, this should not be done and UAC should bug the crap out of you then. But this was files that some games had created, not essential OS files. Some programs didn't even have permission to modify their own .ini files! Talk about stingy.

Also, I wouldn't count on an OEM copy working with your machine guaranteed, as it could be unstable. In a perfect world, it should work fine, but don't count on it.

Right now, I'm currently running Vista Business, and I'm using my "custom built machine". I've only had a few issues, and mostly they were Creative's fault, but MS is to blame as well. I tried installing Creative's supposedly un-gimped audigy drivers, which was a major mistake. Near the end of the installation, the PC blue screened on me, and the DLL was Creative's audio driver. I restarted and.. wait, I can't boot Vista now! So, I threw the disc back in, did a repair, and I could boot back in again (thankfully MS has improved the Repair option from XP, as I could never get it to work properly with XP). Then I couldn't install the drivers, not even Daniel_k's fixed drivers, because it was complaining that there was already an installation. This was Creative's fault here. I ended up having to reinstall Vista (i searched high and low for creative's files, manually as well as using 2 different driver cleaners) and Daniel_k's drivers gave me no issues (Thanks, Daniel_k!). Creative's sucky drivers caused the issue in the first place, but this should not have prevented Vista from booting, and it should not have blue screened in the first place, especially over an audio driver. Keep in mind, this is not a hardware issue, as I've thoroughly tested my RAM after having to return defective sticks.

Other than UAC, the experience has been pretty smooth. There are a few aesthetic issues I have, and I think they are terrible UI decisions (ie the start menu) but I won't get into them. I do like Vista to a point, but in my particular case, gaming performance is definitely faster in XP, but with my 8800GT, its not really a difference worth crying about.

(WICKO said @ #1.2)
There are a lot more processes running in Vista, whether they are all useful or not, I don't know, I haven't looked into it.

All those useless running in Vista are called DRM. Here's a post I found that explains it:

This is the life of a microprocessor under Window Vista:

Each milisec:
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this movie is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this MP3 file is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this CD is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this movie is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this MP3 file is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this CD is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.

Work a little bit for the computer user. Stop! Report this to Microsft server.

Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this movie is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this MP3 file is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this CD is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this movie is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this MP3 file is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this CD is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.

Work a little bit for the computer user. Stop! Report this to Microsft server. . . . . .

Wondering why it is slow and why the system constantly access the network?

That’s why!

(Captain555 said @ #1.3)

All those useless running in Vista are called DRM. Here's a post I found that explains it:

This is the life of a microprocessor under Window Vista:

Each milisec:
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this movie is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this MP3 file is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this CD is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this movie is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this MP3 file is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this CD is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.

Work a little bit for the computer user. Stop! Report this to Microsft server.

Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this movie is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this MP3 file is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this CD is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this movie is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this MP3 file is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this CD is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.

Work a little bit for the computer user. Stop! Report this to Microsft server. . . . . .

Wondering why it is slow and why the system constantly access the network?

That’s why!

That post is absolutely rubbish. Vista has SUPPORT for "DRM" used in things like Blu-ray films and such, but it does NOT CONSTANTLY CHECK EVERYTHING YOU DO. Nor does it report back to Microsoft's servers constantly. It doesn't need to, for a start, it can just perform those checks when it checks for windows updates. What's more, it would cripple Microsoft's servers.
Not believe me? Go download an illegal MP3 or a copy of a CD and see if Vista lets you play it. Oh look, it does!

(WICKO said @ #1.2)
Another thing they will notice, is a constant bickering from UAC. Yes, its keeping your PC safer, but its extremely aggravating when you have to confirm everything. For instance, I was renaming files that weren't created by me, I had to "allow" for each file (around 15 files or so). UAC should have some sort of intelligence, and let me rename the other files as well without asking for me to allow again (within that specific folder and using that specific extension). Obviously, in the Windows folder, this should not be done and UAC should bug the crap out of you then. But this was files that some games had created, not essential OS files. Some programs didn't even have permission to modify their own .ini files! Talk about stingy.

Ugh, don't make things up to make your point.

If you perform a file operation no multiple files outside of your control, you only get prompted once.

(Captain555 said @ #1.3)
All those useless running in Vista are called DRM. Here's a post I found that explains it:

[i]This is the life of a microprocessor under Window Vista:

Each milisec:
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.
Check if this version of window is legitimate. It is. Report this to Microsft server.

You have been lied to. Vista has no such functionality. Clearly it would be stupid to design software this way.

Vista may verify that your system is legitimate when installing updates over Windows Updates, but that's it. And XP does exactly the same thing.

Check if this movie is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.

Never happens. Unless you're playing a DRM'd video, and it only contacts the server of the DRM technology. Again, XP does exactly the same thing. Don't like DRM? Great, don't buy any videos that use it.

Check if this MP3 file is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.

MP3 files do not support DRM, so you never ever ever have to worry about any kind of rights management activity for an MP3 file. Or for any other non-DRM'd content.

Check if this CD is a legitimate copy. It is. Report this to Microsft server.

Again, you have been lied to. Music CDs do not contain DRM. If any of them do (Sony rootkits and such), that would work exactly the same on XP and has absolutely positively nothing to do with Microsoft. Well, except that Vista x64 blocks such rootkits with PatchGuard.


Perhaps you should learn a bit about Vista before you copy and paste FSF lies and propoganda around other forums.

(Brandon Live said @ #1.7)
Perhaps you should learn a bit about Vista before you copy and paste FSF lies and propoganda around other forums.

I can't believe you want to the whole trouble of refuting my post point-by-point. To you and Kushan and 39 Thieves, you guys need to stop taking things so seriously.

This is called satire. Look it up in the dictionary.

(Captain555 said @ #1.8)

I can't believe you want to the whole trouble of refuting my post point-by-point. To you and Kushan and 39 Thieves, you guys need to stop taking things so seriously.

This is called satire. Look it up in the dictionary.

What a BS Excuse from Captain555.

The irony of this, is that the Mojave Project, is also a satire.

(Captain555 said @ #1.10)

Does this mean I gotcha too ?



It's Official!

Everything that Captain555 says from now on, are all satires.

Signed & PWND,
29th of July, in the year Two Thousand and Eight.

(Brandon Live said @ #1.6)

Ugh, don't make things up to make your point.

If you perform a file operation no multiple files outside of your control, you only get prompted once.

By renaming I meant to say changing the extension, and yes it asked me every time. I don't know if its the same thing as renaming but I wouldn't be surprised if it was. I was changing the file extensions for intro movies for Crysis, so I don't have to sit through them every time I try to play it.

But don't try and tell me it doesn't harass you all the time, because that's a load. Regular users aren't going to bother checking what it's asking, they'll just be annoyed that its continually asking, and they'll just allow everything they see. UAC needs to be a little more intelligent to annoy users less.

you should have started explorer elevated, that would have given you one prompt. After that, you could do all the file operations you wanted without being prompted again. You see, that's how it works, be it UAC on windows or sudo on linux

(XerXis said @ #1.13)
you should have started explorer elevated, that would have given you one prompt. After that, you could do all the file operations you wanted without being prompted again. You see, that's how it works, be it UAC on windows or sudo on linux

But then is this secure? Why isn't it elevated to begin with?

(WICKO said @ #1.2)
...Some programs didn't even have permission to modify their own .ini files! Talk about stingy.

Do you know why they can't edit their own .ini files? It's because they've just dumped them in with the application itself. With Windows Vista, as far as I know, it is better practice to store the files in a location such as Application Data, where the files can be edited without the need for a UAC prompt.

I can understand that UAC may be frustrating to some people, but it has been put there for a reason - your security. It seems that people see it as a chore to just click on 'Continue' when they are sure that the application they are granting permission to is safe. Otherwise, just click 'Cancel'. It is not that hard.

Smctainsh

(smctainsh said @ #1.15)

Do you know why they can't edit their own .ini files? It's because they've just dumped them in with the application itself. With Windows Vista, as far as I know, it is better practice to store the files in a location such as Application Data, where the files can be edited without the need for a UAC prompt.

I can understand that UAC may be frustrating to some people, but it has been put there for a reason - your security. It seems that people see it as a chore to just click on 'Continue' when they are sure that the application they are granting permission to is safe. Otherwise, just click 'Cancel'. It is not that hard.

Smctainsh

I think its a terrible idea to store data for programs in multiple areas. It should just be contained in Program Files. The only advantage I can see is that it makes it easy to copy all the data and move it in one go. But then, thats not guaranteed to work with every application, and the contents seem to be more than just .ini files.

Not only that, but it seems I can't even access that folder! Shouldn't I already have permissions for it considering I'm logged on as an administrator?

(WICKO said @ #1.16)

I think its a terrible idea to store data for programs in multiple areas. It should just be contained in Program Files. The only advantage I can see is that it makes it easy to copy all the data and move it in one go. But then, thats not guaranteed to work with every application, and the contents seem to be more than just .ini files.

Not only that, but it seems I can't even access that folder! Shouldn't I already have permissions for it considering I'm logged on as an administrator?

The application itself should be stored in C:/Program Files. Its settings should be in the registry or in your Application Data folder. Unfortunately, some apps store settings in C:/Program Files (although I thought Vista rerouted that to C:/ProgramData?). You do have access to Application Data, it's just hidden.

(WICKO said @ #1.14)
But then is this secure? Why isn't it elevated to begin with?
Starting Explorer elevated isn't secure.

Explorer isn't elevated to begin with because it'd be horribly insecure. It'd be like running XP as an admin, or disabling UAC and running as an Admin.