Microsoft has consistently produced operating systems we love to hate. Microsoft has brought ambivalence to a new height. The move from 95 to 98 seemed like a good move. The advent of ME seemed to reflect the dying throes of Atlantis. 2000 was good and after the initial bugs were bottled, XP has stood the test of use. I have no issues with Vista but apparently I am not main stream in that arena. Even Intel didn’t adopt Vista for internal use.
Now we have Windows 7 or Vista rev.2 depending on your point of view. Is it the harbinger of the future or the death knell of Microsoft’s dominance? W7 claims to have solved all of Vista’s problems and added features. They will have a wealth of confusing versions which is always a down side. On the plus side, MS claims that the specifications for your hardware will be no more rigorous than for Vista. The device driver debacle may not occur since W7 claims to work with Vista drivers and even XP drivers. Note I will be using “claims” frequently since I am basing this blog on what I have read. I haven’t seen a copy of Windows 7.
W7 claims to be faster than Vista but it would have to go some distance to be slower. It is reputed to be more stable than Vista and I have found Vista more stable than XP. Supposedly ease of use has improved. My biggest annoyance with Vista has always been the files search. In short, from what I have read, W7 is not a leap into the great beyond but more of a elegant bandaid for the problems that should have been corrected in Vista. Why, pray tell, would those problems not be corrected in Vista? How could you charge for a new OS if you just released the necessary service packs for your existing software? Cynicism is not becoming but sometimes it seems so appropriate when dealing with MS. Let's just hope it is done right this time.
Now we have Windows 7 or Vista rev.2 depending on your point of view. Is it the harbinger of the future or the death knell of Microsoft’s dominance? W7 claims to have solved all of Vista’s problems and added features. They will have a wealth of confusing versions which is always a down side. On the plus side, MS claims that the specifications for your hardware will be no more rigorous than for Vista. The device driver debacle may not occur since W7 claims to work with Vista drivers and even XP drivers. Note I will be using “claims” frequently since I am basing this blog on what I have read. I haven’t seen a copy of Windows 7.
W7 claims to be faster than Vista but it would have to go some distance to be slower. It is reputed to be more stable than Vista and I have found Vista more stable than XP. Supposedly ease of use has improved. My biggest annoyance with Vista has always been the files search. In short, from what I have read, W7 is not a leap into the great beyond but more of a elegant bandaid for the problems that should have been corrected in Vista. Why, pray tell, would those problems not be corrected in Vista? How could you charge for a new OS if you just released the necessary service packs for your existing software? Cynicism is not becoming but sometimes it seems so appropriate when dealing with MS. Let's just hope it is done right this time.
Comments