There's a dirty little secret that's extremely unfashionable to say but is completely and utterly true: Vista isn't that necessary.
As an Operating System, XP firmly falls into the 'good enough' category. At 7 years old, it's actually matured into a reasonably solid product that works. If you run Windows 2000 on modern hardware (providing you can get driver support) you'll find it runs like shit off a shovel. I'm not talking Office 2003 versus 2007 fast, I'm talking Windows 3.1 versus Windows Vista fast.
Therein lies the problem.
Microsoft have the unenviable task of pandering to a massively diverse range of users in order to retain market share, anything that they do to XP will piss off at least a minority. Anything that they fail to do to XP will piss off at least a minority.
Pretty much the only option for Microsoft in terms of releasing a new Operating System is to add features, but doing so without slowing the OS down is a massive challenge.
I don't believe that Vista will ever be considered a success by anyone outside of Redmond, but I do think that Windows 7 will do better simply because of the timescales involved and the fact that it's not Vista.
This is the odd thing - you seem to be trying to disagree with me yet we agree almost completely on everything, except that "Vista isn't that necessary" seems to be an extremely fashionable thing to say.
Comments
There's a dirty little secret that's extremely unfashionable to say but is completely and utterly true: Vista isn't that necessary.
As an Operating System, XP firmly falls into the 'good enough' category. At 7 years old, it's actually matured into a reasonably solid product that works. If you run Windows 2000 on modern hardware (providing you can get driver support) you'll find it runs like shit off a shovel. I'm not talking Office 2003 versus 2007 fast, I'm talking Windows 3.1 versus Windows Vista fast.
Therein lies the problem.
Microsoft have the unenviable task of pandering to a massively diverse range of users in order to retain market share, anything that they do to XP will piss off at least a minority. Anything that they fail to do to XP will piss off at least a minority.
Pretty much the only option for Microsoft in terms of releasing a new Operating System is to add features, but doing so without slowing the OS down is a massive challenge.
I don't believe that Vista will ever be considered a success by anyone outside of Redmond, but I do think that Windows 7 will do better simply because of the timescales involved and the fact that it's not Vista.
This is the odd thing - you seem to be trying to disagree with me yet we agree almost completely on everything, except that "Vista isn't that necessary" seems to be an extremely fashionable thing to say.