Poor old Microsoft.... (no - really!)

By tonyhughes Hughes, in , posted: 11-May-2006 08:47

This article at The Register by Gavin Clarke notes that Vista requires users to authorise a lot of actions in the new OS, as part of its push towards better security, and not having the entire Vista user population using administrator accounts for their day to day tasks.

This is quite ironic considering that the biggest moans I hear about the incumbent desktop OS provider of the planet is that the security is so lax, and the platform is so open to abuse, spyware, viruses, trojans and worms.

Also, the Yankee Group advising customers that quite a bit of work remains to be done on Vista, and that they should wait around a year before upgrading to the new OS.

Well helloooooooo!!

Its in beta. Of course its not finished. If it was finished, I think Microsoft might think it had a vested (Vistad?) interest in shipping it 4Q '07 instead of the next calendar year.

As for advising customers to wait a year before upgrading, well thats just a given with new technology (no OS pun intended), and knowing that early adopters, developers, geeks, freaks, interested parties & the occasional moron will be diving into it as soon as its released, and the general populace will be waiting until they either:

  • Need an upgrade
  • Know that its stable and worthwhile
  • Buy a new PC with Vista pre-installed

... should come as no surprise, and not be a new fact attributed to the Yankee Group. (Unless I can claim new fact status for advising people to update their virus definitions, or looking both ways before you cross the road).

Early adopters always pay a price, and its well known that some developers are notoriously slow at releasing updated drivers, or fixing new software bugs that can emerge when its dependencies (such as its OS) change drastically.


Vista is looking great, im looking forward to having the final version dual booting with several versions of Linux here on my home PC, and the world is progressing as expected.

More information

Other related posts:
How To Use Windows Vista Upgrade Editions as a Standalone Full Version
Windows Vista 5365 without Aero on a budget PC

Comment by juha, on 11-May-2006 09:09

That said, Vista is very very delayed. What I find interesting here is that Microsoft is able to take its own sweet time with Vista. Nobody else is stepping in to fill the gap. What does that mean? That XP is good enough for most people, that the alternatives suck, or that the operating system is becoming less important than SOAs delivered over the internet?

Author's note by tonyhughes, on 11-May-2006 09:16

Yes it is very delayed, but a new OS is surely nothing more than a product. Its not like they have a government regulated requirement to push a new OS out by a certain date. XP is still being supported. I quite like XP, and think that a major service pack could have extended its useful life for some time to come (perhaps to allow Vista to launch with some desirable but dropped/nonexistant features). Mac cant fill the void, because of hardware pricing. I have still never had a Mac. I would love to, but never have the cash when time for a new PC rolls around. Linux is not mature enough for the masses yet, and some people dont understand free software (put Linux in a glossy box and sell it for $14.95 at Kmart & WalMart, and you would ensure its quick explosion in the consumer desktop space).

Comment by juha, on 11-May-2006 09:33

No, of course not. It's completely up to MS when they ship Vista. I think Microsoft's hardware partners might be a bit upset about the delays but they took a gamble on Vista and it didn't pan out - too bad really. Same thing here with Macs... only wife earns enough to afford one :P

Subscribe To My RSS Feed