September 26, 2007 9:05 AM PDT

Why Microsoft must abandon Vista to save itself

Windows Vista

The Microsoft albatross

(Credit: Microsoft)

While Vista was originally touted by Microsoft as the operating system savior we've all been waiting for, it has turned out to be one of the biggest blunders in technology. With a host of issues that are inexcusable and features that are taken from the Mac OS X and Linux playbook, Microsoft has once again lost sight of what we really want.

As we're more than aware, Vista Ultimate comes at a premium. For an additional $160 over the Premium SKU price, Ultimate gives you a complete backup and restore option, BitLocker Drive encryption, the ever so popular Windows Fax & Scan, and the "Ultimate Extras." But what started with a promise of "Extras" by summer, quickly turned into an apology from Microsoft and the eventual release of DreamScene and Windows Hold 'Em (among others) today. And while each of the "Extras" runs just fine, Microsoft's "Extras" blunder is just another reason why the company must abandon Vista before it's too late.

The first indication that Microsoft should abandon Vista is its poor sales figures. According to a recent report titled "Windows Vista Still Underperforming in U.S. Retail" from NPD, Vista sales are significantly behind XP sales during its early days. Even worse for Redmond, some are reverting to XP, citing issues with compatibility and overall design. And if that wasn't enough, Macs continue to surge and with the impending release of Leopard, Microsoft may be in for a rough holiday season.

With each passing day, it's becoming blatantly clear that Microsoft released Vista too early and the company's continual mistakes and promises that can't be kept are further annoying the Windows faithful.

Much talk has been given to Service Pack 1 and how this update should address many of the issues users have with Vista, but I simply don't agree. Will SP1 eliminate the ridiculous Microsoft licensing schemes? Will SP1 drop the price on the higher-end versions? Will SP1 eliminate the need for users to buy a new computer just to use the faulty OS?

SP1 will do nothing but fix the holes and issues we currently know about and create even more. As we all know from the days of Windows ME and even XP, Microsoft is not the best company at finding and addressing security issues, and chances are, Vista will be no different.

One significant problem that I have with Vista is its inclusion of new DRM, specifically the company's decision to install Protected Video Path. To prevent a person from copying (or in most cases, backing up) a movie, the operating system provides process isolation and if an unverified component is in use, the operating system shuts down DRM content. For the first time on any operating system, we're not even allowed to backup our favorite movies? Come on.

I also find it interesting that Microsoft decided to take the user access control concept from Mac OS X and make it much worse. Can someone please explain to me why I need to be asked if I wanted to do something entirely innocuous like open a third-party app from a well-known software company?

Never before have I seen such an abysmal start to an operating system release. For almost a year, people have been adopting Vista and becoming incensed by how poorly it operates. Not only does it cost too much, it requires more to run than XP, there is still poor driver support, and that draconian licensing scheme is a by-product of Microsoft picking on the wrong people.

The road ahead looks dangerous for Vista and Microsoft must realize that. With Mac OS X hot on its tail, Vista is simply not capable of competing at an OS level with some of the best software around. If Microsoft continues down this path, it will be Vista that will bring the software giant to its knees--not Bill Gates' departure.

Of course, categorically dumping an operating system is quite difficult and with millions already using the OS, chances are Microsoft won't find a good enough reason to do it. And while I can understand that argument, there's no reason the company can't continue to support Vista and go back to the drawing board for its next OS. Even better, go back to XP--it's not nearly as bad as Vista.

As a daily user of Mac OS X, Ubuntu and Vista, I'm keenly aware of what works and what doesn't. Mac and Linux work.

The time is up. Microsoft must abandon Vista and move on. It's the company's only chance at redemption.

Recent posts from The Digital Home
The Digital Home Video: Hulu's success surprised me
The Digital Home 30: Can I stream my wedding?
Developer consolidation is bad for the video game industry
The Digital Home Video: How will we determine TV ratings in the future?
Nintendo shouldn't rush to release the Wii 2
Add a Comment (Log in or register) 73 comments (Showing first 20 comments)
Micosoft will not abandon vista.
by mcot September 26, 2007 9:23 AM PDT
They are not going to abandon vista. They are already well into development in the next OS. Why would they waste time and downgrade there new OS? They still get the money from XP sales if people downgrade themselves, so it isn't as if they are losing money.

MAC OS and Linux are still years away from competing with Microsoft's dominance, and both have serious flaws when it comes to third party apps and device drivers as well.

Leopard will probably run great because apple controls the hardware it is run on. People need to realize they are not going to be able to run vista on anything less than 1GB of memory and a good graphics card. Apple can simply stop selling computers with these specs, while Microsoft has to fight the industry to get the hardware companies and computer retailers to drop prices.

You wouldn't run XP on a P2 200mhz with 64mb of RAM, why do people think they can run Vista on a celeron 2ghz with 512mb of RAM?

Better yet, why do PC mfg's sell systems with horrible specs bundled with vista????

If anything Microsoft's only failure is to have proper hardware for their software, and their refusal to let PC mfg's still sell XP for budget [read: crappy] PC's.

Vista works great on my PC, because I have the right specs. Aero is great!
Reply to this comment
Vista is ready for prime time...kind of
by Ammalgam September 26, 2007 9:41 AM PDT
Vista has been a tremendously..... average O.S. It works capably and has some issues but I wouldn't say it substantially under performs.

It has a new interface, some features are more intuitive and some are less intuitive. Take your pick.

Make no mistake, Windows XP had it's share of issues and Service Packs. I remember freezing an image of my XP machine just so I could restore it when it started to get slow and sluggish again.

To all who have reservations about Vista, I would say this. Wait till SP1. If SP1 doesnt clean out the cobwebs and make it better, stick with what works for you.

Free country.

Having said that, it is frustrating that we have to go through this cycle again with Microsoft.

Cheers

Ammalgam
www.Windows-Vista-Update.com
Reply to this comment
Vista not perfect but still great.
by tnmax September 26, 2007 9:50 AM PDT
I too am having a great experience using Vista. Networking is a lot smoother and the aero interface is great. Not to mention the new search features on the start menu. PC manufacturers need to sell pc's with the correct hard when loaded with Vista. I'm running Vista Ultimate on an Intel Core 2 duo, 2 gb ram and a nVidia graphics card with 512 mb memory. I haven't experienced any issues except software compatbilty. The only time Vista has crashed on my pc is when I was installing new graphics drivers back in March. I seem to recall some of the same things being said about Vista being said about XP when it first launched. Now people say XP is the best operating system from MS ever. I also hate to hear people say oh but Apple pc's just work. If they just work then go use one and quit complaining about MS and Vista.
Reply to this comment
Vista not perfect but still great.
by tnmax September 26, 2007 9:51 AM PDT
I too am having a great experience using Vista. Networking is a lot smoother and the aero interface is great. Not to mention the new search features on the start menu. PC manufacturers need to sell pc's with the correct hardware when loaded with Vista. I'm running Vista Ultimate on an Intel Core 2 duo, 2 gb ram and a nVidia graphics card with 512 mb memory. I haven't experienced any issues except software compatbilty. The only time Vista has crashed on my pc is when I was installing new graphics drivers back in March. I seem to recall some of the same things being said about Vista being said about XP when it first launched. Now people say XP is the best operating system from MS ever. I also hate to hear people say oh but Apple pc's just work. If they just work then go use one and quit complaining about MS and Vista.
Reply to this comment
this is a joke right
by sameole September 26, 2007 9:55 AM PDT
Required more hardware to run is not bad as long as it has the feature to back it up. The blog is very weak reason actually to cancel the O.S..
Reply to this comment
So aggravating...
by yipcanjo September 26, 2007 10:02 AM PDT
Am I talking about Vista? Nope. It's not perfect, but I wouldn't go back to XP, personally.

I came into the Vista world begrudgingly, but am happy that I made the jump. There are many improvements in Vista that I would be hard-pressed to be without at this point, and some frustrating quirks here and there. Jumping into the Windows XP world wasn't exactly pain-free either. It never is, as new features get figured out, drivers get updated, etc.. I do wholeheartedly believe that Microsoft is pointed in the right direction, though.

What I find aggravating, though, is articles like this that seem to shoot in the dark. System hog? I'm running Vista on a 2.4ghz P4 (single core, GASP!) w/ 1 gig of RAM. You know what? It works just fine. Stability? Vista is every bit as stable as XP was for me -- which is quite stable, mind you. Interface? I find the Vista/Aero interface *much* nicer to use than the default XP interface. That's personal preference, of course.

If you want to *actually* be helpful, then point out the flaws (and back them up) rather than slinging mud at nothing. Ultimately, you are the only one who is going to get dirty.
Reply to this comment
Maybe Mi¢ro$oft should abandon Vista, but it won't
by shandooga September 26, 2007 11:10 AM PDT
I was turned off by the tiering scheme but I rejected Vista because of the DRM. It's not the place of an operating system to restrict *any* activity I, the owner, decide to undertake. I would like a 64-bit OS with which I could use more than 3 GB RAM but the sacrifice in dignity isn't worth it. I'm not to about to reward this kind of behavior with more money *and* obedience.

Unless Mi¢ro$oft rolls back the control schemes, I guess I'll have to look to the Mac or Linux to meet my extended needs.
Reply to this comment
Vista... ugh
by jhilton32 September 26, 2007 1:48 PM PDT
I participated in the Beta test for Vista, and had a chance to use the full version as soon as it was released - the experiences turned me into a full-time Linux user at home, good job Microsoft!
Reply to this comment
Get a life Dork!
by ferretboy88 September 26, 2007 4:29 PM PDT
I own every different type of computer and use all the different operating
systems. I built my own custom PC and have installed Vista home premium. I
have been using it since its lanch and it has worked better than my Apple
macbook over that time.The only crashed is a few I had with firefox just
needing to quit. But that happens all the time with my macbook. I have been
using Avast(a free antivirus), spybot search and destroy(free) and AVG anti
spyware(free), ccleaner(free), winpatrol(free). I have not had any blue screens
or viruses. When ever I go back and use my xp machine I get so mad because
of all of the times a program has to quit because of an error. I hooked my
vista pc to my 360 through a network and it works great. The photo section
of vista is just as good as my mac. Of all the computers(linux, mac, pc) I have
I love my Vista computer the best. Everything works well for me. Just don't
visit any porn sites. Then you might get a virus.
Reply to this comment
Vista best MS OS yet...
by edgedesign September 26, 2007 5:58 PM PDT
.. if you don't have an older machine, incompatible peripherals or software.

Now may be the best time to consider a Mac.

- No virus/spyware hassles
- Clean, simple, intuitive user interface
- Easy to learn and use
- Fluid software integration
- Solid OS/hardware integration
- Elegant, quality hardware design
- Option to run Windows XP, Vista and/or Linux
- Simple-to-use video/audio/text chat
- Feature-rich iLife suite (photos, video, music, web, dvd)
- iWork office suite that's more intuitive than MS Office ($79)
- Tight integration with online services via .Mac (subscription required)
- Built-in video cameras on every model
- Plug-and-play peripheral support (cameras, scanners, printers, etc.)
- Free OS and application courses at Apple Stores
- Better web standards support via Safari browser
- Comparable in price to PCs when you consider features
- May be big savings when you consider the value of your time and ROI

OR... you could wait another 6 years for the next Microsoft OS.
Reply to this comment
Is this guy for real?
by BigBrownPimpsta September 26, 2007 8:18 PM PDT
1. Go back to October 2001 and compare XP launch; Vista migration has been faster than XP, people were going from 9x codebase to NT. Completely different drivers most of the time. Business know that if they are going to migrate to an OS, it will often be after 1 year at least. This article makes it seem that every OS but Windows is migrated within 2 months.
2. Try running XP Luna theme on a 600mhz Pentium 3 without SP1 and then talk and cry.
3. Overall this article doesn't consider that Microsoft has explained that the full features of vista require a more powerful system, if you want to run Aero on your radeon 9600 on your Amd Barton 3000+ and expect close to XP performance, you are an idiot. Let alone the effects are far more complex. Vista has gotten rid of ALL my spyware problems with windows defender, IE7 and UAC. I can't say the same about XP. Compatability has been better for me on Vista RC2 w/ my 2.6 P4, than XP on my 800mhz athlon after 6 months. It took me a year and a half on XP to get my computer to run most all my hardware. Look at Mac, has all software migrated to Intel Core? Nope. In addition, going back to migration, did you know that often XP drivers will install with little to no issue with no stability problems if you just try manually? No you didn't...

OSX is great, don't get me wrong! But it isn't the overhaul which Vista is and which I would think would be more welcome to modernize it. Also, consider OSX is built for Macs, built by Apple. In the PC market, we have IBM servers (that will not adopt Windows Server within month 2) to chinese built clones with no name hardware. Tell MS to
meticiously regulate where there OS is being installed or change to Mac's philosophy that its a Mac.

Enough said.
Reply to this comment View reply
This is why you are a journalist
by Tyrax September 26, 2007 10:36 PM PDT
You obviously have no idea how to run a business or treat customers.
Reply to this comment
Pass out what you are smoking
by Computer_Ed September 27, 2007 5:50 AM PDT
Don, Seriously what are you smoking and di you bring enough for everyone. Your conclusions are based on hesteria that has been created by tech wantabes that lack any real skill of experience. Experienced techs are finding Vista easy to use and it works solid. I personally have had zero glitches and have done 143 upgrades to date as well as build 172 system.

To quote you:
"Never before have I seen such an abysmal start to an operating system release"

I would say this shows you have been in computing what, a year? Seriously how about the mess that was called ME or lets go back to the release of Windows 95 with the HUGE numbers of headaches it delat with early on. Even further back to DOS 6.0 which was the most useless update ever done.

quote:
"As a daily user of Mac OS X, Ubuntu and Vista, I'm keenly aware of what works and what doesn't."

Yes I am sure your vast 1 or 2 years computing experience makes you an expert. Sorry bub but if I want to actually USE my computer I still find Windows the better solution at providing me the options and choices I desire.

MOST Vista issues come down to crap software or drivers. Vista itself is stable and solid and I have had ZERO issues with anything I want it to do.

I would say a better artilce is CNN needs to abandon bloggers with no clue of the reaility of computer usage.
Reply to this comment
Follow MS in to the new abyss - Singularity
by drumt September 27, 2007 6:03 AM PDT
http://research.microsoft.com/os/singularity/
Reply to this comment
Why pay for a vulnerable OS???
by GNUgawie September 27, 2007 7:23 AM PDT
You stupid people are actually paying for the only OS in the world that supports viruses haahaa
the cost of my OS and all software is $0.
Just use Ubuntu it work.
If it doesn't work for you it might be because you are stupid.
It's no wonder your president is sending your young to there death for his own economic gain..

haha
Reply to this comment
This article failed.
by faviang September 27, 2007 11:07 AM PDT
This might be one of the worst rants about vista i have ever read. I am also running vista on a p4 with a gig of ram, and i have zero complaints.

http://www.securityfocus.com/bid

Look at the compiled list of vulnerabilities on this website for both ubuntu and vista. Ubuntu has a compiled list of 20+ pages of vulnerabilities, while vista ultimate only shows two pages (Most of these apply to XP as well)

And the complaints about UAC? Why complain about a feature that is intended to protect the end user, and could be optionally disabled in less than a minute?

Every time MS releases on O/S it is always a little bumpy, of course there were CNET articles about how horrible xp was when it was initially released as well.

Sorry Don Reisinger, you're dead wrong here.
Reply to this comment
Well Microsoft Can't Stay With XP!
by cross platform September 27, 2007 12:27 PM PDT
They had to do something. As a recent convert from the Mac and OS X I can tell you Xp looks and acts really primative and old when compared to other Os's and the other software that's run on it as well. Finally after all those updates it's ok. But it's really kind of old fashioned in it's look and the way it does things ( it really kind of reminds me of OS 9 ). So they can't just stand pat. They have to do something or fall behind. After 5 years you'd think they come up with something better. However I won't touch Vista until at least SP1. Too many bad stories.
Reply to this comment
Vista: Excitement and Disappointment
by PaulWicks September 27, 2007 4:08 PM PDT
For many years I have operated a modest home music studio based on PC systems. My choice of route was dictated by economic factors. It has been a long, interesting journey, during which I have witnessed and implemented many upgrades in hardware and software as the computer world evolves. From Windows 3.11 to Win95, NT, 98, 2000, XP, and most recently, a hardware failure lead me to a new system with Vista. The switch to Vista was thrilling! The look and feel is truly evolved and provides a pleasant computing experience. The disappointment lies mostly with the lack of good drivers for higher end audio cards, most being in BETA stages if they exist at all. The end result is unacceptable latency and feature deficiencies for these cards. This is not entirely the fault of Microsoft, but they are implicated through their lack of manufacturer co-operation, with the exception of a few that compliment their marketing goals. Vista itself is still refreshing, and I will not turn back to XP. Of all the OS transitions I have experienced, Vista has been the easiest. And yes...I have experimented with Linux alternatives for audio production. The Linux world is moving at a wonderful pace in this field, passing from infancy to adolescence, but configuration is still too time consuming to make this a productive environment for my needs.

For me, the problem is not with Vista itself, but with the compulsion by Microsoft to constantly operate in an obsolete traditional capitalist fashion. (i.e. Last years sales must be exceeded.) The market is seeded with new products before their predecessors have fully propagated and stabilized. I am also a network administrator, and have felt this effect with things like SQL. My request to Microsoft is this: Slow down: The IT world needs stability, not "This years model".

I share other writers frustration with the incessant warnings each time an application is installed. These warnings are presented under the guise of protecting the consumer, when in fact, all they mean is that a vendor has not yet contributed to the needy hands of Microsoft. Microsoft certification is a money grab, not an assurance of safety.

I would also like to address the Mac world mantras "Mac has no viruses...Macs just work". I have been in the IT industry for over 20 years, worked with all the popular systems, including Mac, and can tell you that the whole virus concept started on Apple machines. One company I worked with received software driver disks for some Apple peripherals that where infected in production. Mac users have historically not noticed intrusions or immediate viral effects because so much of the system has been hidden from them early on in the evolution of their operating systems. I agree with the statement "If you are happy with your Mac, then go use it". They are fine machines, despite the extortionate costs, so get back to work and quit picking fights.
Reply to this comment
More useless background noise - also known as FUD
by FusionGuy September 27, 2007 6:20 PM PDT
Please, anybody willing to go on record and say something like this proves themselves to either be a) ignorant, or b) a plain old Microsoft hate monger. C'mon, give me a break and start being realistic.
Reply to this comment
OS X IS NOT A CHOICE!!!
by hswear3 September 28, 2007 12:53 AM PDT
You know I am sick and tried of reading articles like this!

There are really only two operating system choices available to PC users: Windows and Linux. (A MAC is not a PC by Apple's definition or mine.)

So until Steve Jobs decides to offer OS X versions that run on hardware not made by Apple--hardware that I can purchase and have serviced locally, it simply is not part of this discussion.

'Nuff Said!
Reply to this comment
 See all 73 Comments >>
Powered by Jive Software
advertisement

About The Digital Home

Don Reisinger is a technology columnist who has covered everything from HDTVs to computers to Flowbee Haircut Systems. Besides his work with CNET, Don's work has been featured in a variety of other publications including PC World and a host of Ziff-Davis publications.

Don writes product reviews for InformationWeek and is a regular contributor to Processor Magazine. You can visit his personal site at DonReisinger.com or if you would like to email Don with questions or comments, drop him a line at CNETDigitalHome@gmail.com. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.

Add this feed to your online news reader

The Digital Home topics

Subscribe to the Digital Home podcast

Have you ever wanted a no-nonsense discussion on what is really going with all the tech topics related to your Digital Home? If so, join Don Reisinger as he brings you the same biting commentary you've come to expect from his Digital Home blog in all its audio glory.

Subscribe to this podcast using an RSS reader other than iTunes

Subscribe to this podcast using iTunes

Don's links
Don's Facebook account
Don's Twitter feed
Don's Friendfeed account
Don's Google Reader account
Don's Last.FM account
Don's Pownce account
Don's Flickr account

Latest tech news headlines

Featured blogs

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right