Vista to become another ME?

If you all haven't already been informed, a new operating system is being developed by Microsoft.

They call it Windows 7.

It's in early stages of development and according to Microsoft it is scheduled for release by 2010-2011. But other resources are showing a more realistic date of being Q3/Q4 of 2009.

If this is the case will Vista get phased out by Windows 7? Will all the certifications change?

A lot of companies are now providing downgrade cd's with their Vista pc's. My IT company is not even pushing Vista.

I actually like Vista and have not had many issues.

What do you guys think will happen with Vista now that Windows 7 is on the horizon? Especially with the certification tracks already changing.

Find more posts tagged with

Free for TechExams community: Cybersecurity salary guide

Compare cert salaries and plan your next career move

Button

Comments

dtlokee

I think Windows 7 is going to be what Vista was going to be (back in 2005) but they stripped some of the features out of it (like WinFS). These features will be in server 2008 and I would imagine instead of giving away a service pack for Vista it's a better business choice to charge for yet another upgrade.

mog27

Looks like all of us who held off on Vista made a good decision.

Arvean

it's hard to hold on on Vista when manufacturer force vista down your throat. I bought HP tx1000 "tablet" that came of course exclusively with Vista. I spent 2 weeks finding all the drivers for it to make it work on XP. I find Vista working nicely on top-edge machines, but the policy of forcing it on average and below machines is just pointless. It's like putting XP on dx486

phantasm

I may be switching back to XP. Vista runs nicely on my syste, but I got better performance out of XP.

JDMurray

Crucio666 wrote:

What do you guys think will happen with Vista now that Windows 7 is on the horizon? Especially with the certification tracks already changing.

I see a situation similar to Windows ME, where people wouldn't leave Win98 for WinME and eventually jumped to WinXP. Vista has a much bigger push than WinME because of all the major PC manufacturers installing it on to their new computers. However, like with WinME, consumers aren't rushing to upgrade their old WinXP and 2000 computers to Vista.

Microsoft won't stop selling Vista on the day they release Windows 7, so the certification tracks will remain the same until Vista is no longer sold, just the same way it happened with Windows NT 4 and Windows 2000. When Vista will no longer be sold is the big question.

And there is no surprise that a Windows 7 exists. Microsoft works (at least) two versions ahead in all of their products. When Windows XP was released back in 2001, Windows 6 (Vista) and 7 were already on the drawing board, just as Windows 8 and 9 are now. The surprise is how quickly Windows 7 is being introduced after the release of Vista.

dynamik

phantasm wrote:

I may be switching back to XP. Vista runs nicely on my syste, but I got better performance out of XP.

I'm not singling you out phantasm, but I don't know why people keep making this argument. It's a new OS that does more; it's obviously going to use more resources. You can disable most if not all of these features, but then you're basically going to have XP anyway. If the new features aren't worth the CPU cycles for you, don't upgrade.

I believe that Ray Ozzie (who took over Chief Software Architect role form Gates) is trying to keep things on a three-year schedule. Vista Business was out in the fall of 06, so Q3/Q4 2009 would be right in line with that. Many certifications require updates or renewals every 2-3 years, so this seems to be right in line with everyone else. I think it would be more surprising if they actually hit that date.

phantasm

dynamik wrote:

phantasm wrote:

I may be switching back to XP. Vista runs nicely on my syste, but I got better performance out of XP.

I'm not singling you out phantasm, but I don't know why people keep making this argument. It's a new OS that does more; it's obviously going to use more resources. You can disable most if not all of these features, but then you're basically going to have XP anyway. If the new features aren't worth the CPU cycles for you, don't upgrade.

I believe that Ray Ozzie (who took over Chief Software Architect role form Gates) is trying to keep things on a three-year schedule. Vista Business was out in the fall of 06, so Q3/Q4 2009 would be right in line with that. Many certifications require updates or renewals every 2-3 years, so this seems to be right in line with everyone else. I think it would be more surprising if they actually hit that date.

No worries man. My primary desktop is a gaming PC and I don't run any DX10 games just yet. I run Vista on another machine but am just considering going back to XP for the games.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy Vista for normal everyday use. But when it comes to Gaming... XP was a little better. I could disable a bunch of the eye candy in Vista, but I like it. lol.

itdaddy

yeah, i have vista ultimate for only 40 bucks from a friend who knows
a relative at MS$ who gave me Visat U for only 40bucks it is very prettty
and runs like slow as dirt. ihave a dual core 2 GB ram laptop which my XP screams on
but when vista U is on it runs like crap! what resource hog and yeah i think it is like ME all the way

the only thing i do like about vista is inthe wireless connection applet it gives yo ac hoice
to view your pass phrase; i love that when noone is around i canclick on theoption to show pass phrase while i type i hate masked out passwords if noone is around. that i like only and that it is pretty

but other wise XP pro is my fav!

itdaddy

oh yeah, I cant wait to have an XML based OS I have seen demos and it is fast!
one is called like Xecerion or something like that. YOu can see a demo on YouTube.

oh yeah of course other vendors have been building one of XML based for years then
MS$$ says we have a new OS coming out call .NET..

"Microsoft is the master at stealing other peeps technology and claming they invented it and it will change the world" That is what I give MS$$ credit for that is their trademark!

Invention steeling and saying "we are the first ones!" we will change history!
yeah mr 120 billion net worth Big Bill sick!

Schluep

Honestly I think Vista will be more like an XP than an ME.

ME seemed to find a way to BSOD on a regular basis (even from things such as the name on a jpeg file) and contained major security and stability issues. ME was not being pushed by manufacturers nearly to the extent that XP and Vista are for obvious reasons.

When XP first came out it used far more resources than what most PC's out at the time could handle. Most everyone was disabling the colorful start bar for the 98 style "classic" style, disabling the welcome screen, optimizing the boot sequence, and still having major slowdowns. There were a lot of security vulnerabilities initially that were getting a lot of attention and for many months people thought XP would go the way of ME. Personally I continued using Windows 2000 for the first two years XP was out. Things really didn't become what we know them as now until SP2 was released. There were compatability lists out for hardware and a lot of hardware was not XP compitable. Ultimately XP ended up being far better than Windows 98 and 2K despite all of the initial issues.

Vista hasn't even had SP1 released yet, let alone two. It does not contain the initial security vulnerabilities that XP did and even Administrator accounts do not run processes as such by default anymore. The graphics updgrades and performance hit are relative to what it was for XP. With the powerful new hardware out now it can handle them all turned on with no problems, but you can certainly disable anything not wanted. Hardware compatability is the most talked about issue with Vista, but people forget XP had the same issue. I even had to get a new keyboard when I upgraded to XP.

I think that any time a new OS comes out it is met with more criticism that praise because of the inevitable bugs and/or compatability issues that will accompany it. It takes a few years and some patches to really see what it will be worth in the end. I don't think any of us could truly tell at this point whether Vista will be quickly replaced or turn into the next XP. I do know that most of my business clients with small shops have been buying new PC's that come with Vista and despite many being involved in sales or other areas and relatively computer illiterate they haven't had any major issues with the transition beyond the first few days of getting used to it and a bit of time to get their software and other solutions such as VPN's working.

I'm excited to watch where it will all go. Personally I am staying involved a bit with everything to make sure I am comfortable with it however. My laptop dual boots with Vista/Linux. I have a desktop running XP and a second running Linux. The only thing I have yet to get involved with are the Mac's but I'm sure it will come in time.

Regardless of whether Vista becomes the next equivalent of the success of XP or some later OS, I would have to say we are all in pretty good shape looking back to the days of Windows 95, even though the GUI development and other new concepts probably made it the biggest improvement over previous versions. Could you imagine running Windows 95 again now? How about 98?

Crucio666

it seems a lot of us are thinking Vista will get phased out sooner than XP.

XP has been out for quite a while now and business's etc have built around this OS.

Vista seems to have come, cause issues and will possibly be thrown aside by Windows 7 next year...

Are your companies starting to migrate users to Vista or are they still going to push XP for as long as possible?

I would just hate having to upgrade all my clients to Vista, then next year we have to upgrade them to Windows 7.

Megadeth4168

My office, like many others I'm sure has decided to stick with XP and not move to Vista. This is good and bad for me... Good in that there is little pressure for me to administer it, bad in that I get little experience on administering it....

I think it is still too soon to really say for sure what Vistas fate will be.

snadam

Schluep wrote:

Vista hasn't even had SP1 released yet, let alone two. It does not contain the initial security vulnerabilities that XP did and even Administrator accounts do not run processes as such by default anymore. The graphics updgrades and performance hit are relative to what it was for XP. With the powerful new hardware out now it can handle them all turned on with no problems, but you can certainly disable anything not wanted. Hardware compatability is the most talked about issue with Vista, but people forget XP had the same issue. I even had to get a new keyboard when I upgraded to XP.

Thats what Im thinking as well. SP1 is coming out shortly, and hopefully the driver issues will be resolved. Cant really say much yet because I believe that Vista is nowhere near its full potential yet.

I.T.Nerd

In giving my opinion (and that's all this is), first let me say I think we can look at Vista (or any OS) from different angles. I can't imagine trying to design an OS that would please everybody. If you think of the fact that potentially hundreds of millions of users will use XP or Vista over the life cycles of the OS's, how daunting a task would it be to try to come up with something that everyone will love and have no complaints about (and it actually WORK like it should every single time)?

I think about how I personally would bomb if I was responsible for pleasing EVERYBODY from all walks of life, education, and cultures by building an OS. Now, think about how you would fare with designing a better OS (from scratch) than currently exists. And you get no service packs to bail you out.

I'm guilty as anyone of pointing out the flaws in the work after it's done, and I honestly find myself wondering, "What were they thinking when they did this or that?" The truth is though, I'm playing Monday morning quarterback, after the fact.

I'm often amazed at the millions of people (like me) who pick apart an OS, yet they couldn't do better themselves before the fact. If they, or I could do better, we should.

Having said that, it doesn't negate the fact that we paid for a product that doesn't do everything exactly as we want it to. It does some things well, and other things not as well. Some things it doesn't do at all but we wish it did. In reality, all the design and beta testing in the world won't please everyone. If there's only one tiny hole in a bucket, it won't take someone long to notice it and start pointing it out to everyone who will look.

We shouldn't expect a new OS to be as fast as the old one when we're running it on the equivalent of the old machine. Just because a machine is "new" doesn't mean it's optimal for the new OS. Compatible doesn't mean optimal.

I'm with most people, I'm hard to please when I pay for an OS or have to use it to make a living, but we get too caught up in the things it "doesn't" do, and sometimes forget how the world would be without what it "does" do. So it doesn't make World of Warcraft run quite as fast as we wish it would. Is that really that big a deal compared to how these tools HAVE changed the world we live in?

I'm not denying reality here, I know some of the flaws cause real problems and need to be fixed, especially where security is concerned. But there's never going to be an OS, or Ford, or Chevy, or President, or anything else that will please everyone. I get a little irritated at Vista and XP, just like I do Linux, or any other OS. But I find myself being overly critical because it's the popular thing to do. I'm never alone when I want to be critical of any OS that has come out in the last twenty years.

I do try to give credit where it's due though. They do a lot more things right than wrong.
I already know I'll find plenty wrong with Windows 7, but I also look forward to what they'll get right. They never stop trying. If Vista were perfect in every way for you, there would only be one less person without a complaint. I promise you, I could still find a problem with it.

While we can get irritated when things don't quite measure up, by posting on these forums, we're mainly trying to help each other out to find ways around problems that do occur. I appreciate you all for it. I've been helped plenty of times! I just get on this devil's advocate kick once in a while.

[/i]

JDMurray

Speaking of getting phased-out, Windows XP will no longer be sold as a retail or OEM product as of June 30, 2008. XP will no longer be available on pre-built systems after January 31, 2009, but there are a few exceptions.

Windows Life-Cycle Policy

andygee

I think everyone has learned that all companies now seem to R and D there products in the market place. So anyone who has experience of the last latest release software or hardware has learned to wait for someone to iron out all the wrinkles and botch up the installs etc.
Let some mug early adopter company, crash its network or reduce productvity.

As I.T departments in companies mature, many i vist have senior staff mainly in their late 20's or over in them in london. very few of these people who have one though the pain will bother risking it again and im sure its the same around the world.

Most customers of I.T departments just want to do their job and don't care if its the latest OS or not.

Why would the head of an I.T department fight to get the money to upgrade the companies pc's only to gamble with their career prospects?