The article is totally misleading . I m surprised how this can come here. There isnt a single bad thing about vista discussed here , all it says is that its bad coz its bad. LOL

new61,
I totally agree.
I'm sick of PC World giving Vista bad press. Okay, it isn't a MAJOR MAJOR upgrade, but I got it preinstalled on my lappy and it works perfectly fine. All he says is "Vista stinks." Lousy argument, illogical reasoning - no factual evidence to back up the crap. I AM DISAPPOINTED, PC WORLD!!!!!!!!!!

---

"The most knowledgable person in the world is not the one who possesses the most knowledge, but the one who surrounds themselves with the greatest number of knowledgable people" - Jeannette Rankin

Whoa. Every Tom, Dick and Harry knows that Vista is not flawless.A lot has to do with third-party compatibility issues--and you correctly pointed out, or at least insinuated, due to the faults of these vendors. Sure, MS should take some of the blame for jumping the gun, but Vista is not as horrible as your unsubstantiated rant seems to imply. The fact that it takes YOU 16 months to accomplish what someone like me (with computer experience as a consumer) could to in a few weeks (despite your obvious pride in boasting your 'computer' experience "since CP/M-80" ) speaks not too kindly the kind of 'expertise' PCWORLD purports to have on staff. One wonders how long it took you to get DOS to work with ALL your hardware.
This really begs the question: Dumb or Dumber?

Maybe I wasn't clear on my point tech geek (ds tech geek, what you are only a geek in Nintendo ). People using XP currently are'nt forced to do anything, true. Hell I still have an Amiga 500 at home, so I'm using a 20 odd year old operating system, I have a VCR in my room, and still occationally watch videos. When I say Microsoft is forcing people to upgrade, I mean it as much as you won't be able to purchase a shiny new copy of XP in a store, unless you go to a specific vendor, you won't be able to pick up a new computer with XP. In that way Microsoft are forcing people to upgrade. This may not be a bad thing per se, and is often a business model adopted by companies inside and outside of the ICT industry, but in this case I see it as a shot squarely aimed at their own foot.

As I mentioned before, a typical 'mum and dad' home user doesn't have or need the latest and greatest computer, and will no doubt run into troubles if they try and run Vista. You try and tell an average user just because the software says designed for Vista doesn't mean that they need to upgrade. As industry standard inevitably marches on to Vista, software will adapt to that 'Vista' feel. The 'mum and dad' user has to either keep their old computer with XP and hope they don't run into trouble, upgrade to Vista and possibly have a system falling over the whole time, upgrade their PC just to run an OS or (shock horror) try a different OS. This is where Microsoft have to pick their game up, as Linux moves out of the geek world and into the mainstream, OS like Ubuntu or Debian may actually pose a threat to Microsoft.

@poglatg
Yes, your view is made clearer now...and your point is correct.
But didn't Microsoft force people to upgrade throughout all of their OS history? Even Apple does that with OS X - you can't buy Tiger off the shelf anymore. Also, XP looks way different than Windows 2000 - but most people have gotten used to it and actually like it over 2000. Also, Vista doesn't have many problems that mum and dad users would run into - unless their perepherals' drivers are outdated or they can't find something instantenously in the Control Panel (which they can search in Help for).

Btw, I knew that i'd get that DS comment sometime... it's actually my initials & PC World auto created it anyways...

---

"The most knowledgable person in the world is not the one who possesses the most knowledge, but the one who surrounds themselves with the greatest number of knowledgable people" - Jeannette Rankin

What, are you a member of BadVista.org to boot? I haven't had any problems with Windows Vista Home Premium that weren't my own fault. Try using some more mature arguments next time you feel like making fun of Vista if you want to be taken seriously.

I love the defenses, "Vista is working for me, therefore it's good. And, when it sucks, it's not Microsoft's fault, it's somebody-else's." The fact that it's been rejected by the majority of PC users, the fact that Microsoft's OS revenue was down 24% while Apple's was up 54% is purely coincidental to you folks. The fact that Apple makes jokes in its advertising about how bad it is and Vista users actually agree doesn't deter you. Neither does the fact that despite being more expensive, it runs slower on higher-end hardware than XP does. Think about that for a minute. You need higher-end hardware and the OS can't even use it as efficiently as its predecessor. I guess that's what you folks call progress. I guess you're all thrilled that they decided to scrap a UI that people have invested a decade or more mastering, just for fun. Oh, and using the abomination called UAC as their approach to "security" isn't the biggest joke in the history of computing to you all either. MSFT loves you.