David's Blog

The only big issue I ever had with Vista was driver support. Since I'm running 64 bit, there are a slew of peripherals that don't work on my machine ( and a few apps). In fact, even Microsoft was slow on the uptake with Home Server support for V64.

Whether this was Microsoft neglect or indifference on the part of hardware vendors, I do no know. Perhaps they should have kept the number of Vista to a minimum (8 is way too many to keep track of).

Russ & Theresa...comments...I'm waiting.

I really do not want to get into a Mac vs. Windows war, but this guy talks about the microsoft experiment, and he has some great points. I think it is just Microsoft being really bad at marketing their products. I mean I think C# is a great language and Visual Studio is a great product, not everyone knows about it. anyway here is the site:
http://wilshipley.com/blog/2008/07/mojave-experiment-bad-science-bad.html

John

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&taxonomyName=windows&articleId=9110472&taxonomyId=125&intsrc=kc_feat

FTA...When Windows 2000 was released, people complained about compatibility and performance issues and said they preferred Windows 98. When Windows XP came out, people complained about complex hardware requirements. They said they didn't need to upgrade because Windows 2000 was sufficient for their needs. When I spoke at a launch-day session about the benefits of Windows XP SP2, customers complained about high-compatibility restrictions and complicated features. Sound familiar?

Addressing John's article...If people have a problem with an old software program not running properly on Vista then they should complain to the software vendor to update the program itself. These are the same complaints when any new OS comes out. People have an older version of a program and don't want to purchase the new version. That is fine and they need to understand that they will have to use the older OS. This happens on any platform.

Hi All,

As John pointed out, Will Shipley's article makes many good points. I will also agree with you Bubba, that people using old apps, regardless of the OS, need to know that there might be problems.

I have NOT used Vista. (We currently do not use it here at TI. I'm not sure about their roll out plans, but i know it wasn't happening in 2008.) The only feedback i have heard is from three people: guy that sits next to me, a software vendor who's company makes ax windows xml editor we use, and my brother-in-law. The guy who sits next to me, had an existing xp setup, software, printer, fax etc. All working fine. They upgraded to Vista and none of their peripherals worked for them. The software vendor guy reported the same thing. He was po'd because when he called to downgrade to xp, so he could get back his stuff that was working, he was told he had to buy the high-level Vista version (Supreme?) so that he could THEN downgrade to xp. (I think he ended up doing that.) My brother-in-law did what he does whenever there is a windows upgrade. He bought a new machine with the OS on it. He has had know problems. When i ask him how its working and what he does, he says its fine, he only does the basics, but that it DOES ask him to confirm whenever he does something.
As i said, i haven't used Vista, and can't comment on it. I do believe that a LOT of people were led to believe that their existing working xp configurations would work after the migration, and some got screwed!

Read Will Shipley's article again!

Russ

@John:

Will Shipley is an idiot.

From his article...

"...Microsoft took a bunch of “regular folks” XP users who were afraid of Vista"

[writing as a test subject] "...and all I've ever used is XP."

"...showing a carefully selected subset of Vista features to an ignorant XP user for a few minutes, the XP user will often say he finds Vista acceptable. Wow."

Please tell Will that 22% of the people in the experiment identified themselves as Mac users.

I doubt he even watched the video...he probably just posted to his blog as soon as he heard the concept...why does this sound so familiar?

The others were Windows XP, Pre-Windows XP, and Linux users.

Click on the first link on the Mojave Experiment page...the information is right there!

I'd like to see the opposite experiment.

Take a group of people that are not OSX/Mac users.

Ask them about their perception of OSX. Then show them the Mojave-version of OSX.

I doubt the Mojave-version of OSX would fare as well.

Here are some details about the experiment:

• The focus group took place over three days in San Francisco and was conducted earlier this month.


• All participants were either Mac, Linux, or users of versions of Windows that came before Windows Vista. Respondents were chosen from the focus group organizer's database, called at random, but then selected based on having a low perception of Vista (<5 rating on a scale of 1-10).


• The participants were given a demo by a trained retail salesperson - geared towards the experiences they seemed most interested in following a series of interviews. While the retail salesperson drove the demo, it was geared by the interests and direction of the participant.


• We did not use some geeked out or custom built PC. We used an HP Pavilion DV2500. It had 2GB of RAM and was running an Intel Core 2 Duo CPU T7500 @ 2.20GHz. The OS was a 32 bit version of Windows Vista Ultimate.


• Of the 120 respondents polled, on a scale of 1:10 where 10 was the highest rating, the average pre-rating for Windows Vista was 4.4. After they saw the demo, respondents rated Mojave an average of 8.5.

Russ…I have a similar story…

I have NOT used OSX. (We currently do not use it here at work. I'm not sure about their roll out plans, but I know it wasn't happening in 2008.) The only feedback I have heard is from three people: guy that sits next to me, a software vendor whose company’s software we use, and my sister-in-law.

The guy who sits next to me, had an existing Mac setup, software, printer, fax etc. All working fine. They upgraded to OSX and none of their peripherals worked for them.

The software vendor guy reported the same thing. He was po'd because when he called to downgrade to OS 9, so that he could get back his stuff that was working. He was told he had to buy the high-level OS 9 version so that he could THEN downgrade to OS 9. (I think he ended up doing that.)

My sister-in-law did what she does whenever there is a Mac upgrade. She bought a new machine with the OSX on it. She has had no problems. When I ask her how it’s working and what she does, she says its fine, she only does the basics and that’s about it. She said that the Mac is preloaded with apps that are used as defaults like Safari which doesn’t work with all websites and constantly has to be updated for security and bug issues.

As I said, I haven't used OSX, and can't comment on it. I do believe that a LOT of people was led to believe that their existing working Mac configurations would work after the migration, and some got screwed!

Maybe people just want an OS that doesn't crash.

Hi bubba,

Good story. (Where have i heard this before.) :)

I don't doubt that these events actually happened however there are some things that are just factually incorrect, but i'll address those later.

While it is possible that a person migrating to OS X might have their OS 9 configuration not work, OS X provides a mechanism to return to their previous OS state. People can do this from their OS X and OS 9 cds and are encouraged to do so if they have problems. For the guy who had the existing mac setup, you don't say if it was OS 9, OS X, Intel or PowerPC. If he had upgraded to OS X, and this was a Powerpc machine, he would have dual boot capabilities and access to everything that he had on OS 9. If it is OS X that he started with, and he upgraded to a newer version of OS X, i don't know what that could be. I have experience with this OS and would be more than willing to help them, as would be many of the mac community or the people at a local Mac store. They can ask questions or take their machine and have it looked at, and usually diagnosed for free. If they want to email me, my email is russurquhart1@verizon.net and i would love to help them if i could.

As for your software vendor guy. As you stated, he called to downgrade to OS 9. (As you didn't tell me what type of machine he has , but as you've stated he had had OS 9, and wanted to go back to OS 9 this means it must have been a Powerpc based machine. (OS 9 never released for Intel machines.) You've also stated that he is a software vendor guy. (His company makes software for mac's? I'd think he would have someone in the shop that could help him with this, but perhaps not.) See now, here is the point where i think you are pulling my leg! :) When you buy a Mac, even though the OS is loaded on your computer, you are give the physical disks for that OS. i.e. if he EVER had OS 9, regardless of what he upgrades to in the future, he STILL has the OS 9 disks. He could then downgrade to OS 9. (Assuming he disabled dual boot capabilities when he downgraded from OS X. You didn't say that he had installed OS X, but he would have had to, in order to downgrade to OS 9.) So, from what you've said, we must assume that this guy, had a working OS 9, upgraded to OS X, did NOT accept the default dual boot option to OS 9, lost or tossed his OS 9 disks, and was unable to borrow a copy of OS 9 from work. Is that correct? Ok, here is where i think you are pulling my leg again, you said he was told he would have to buy the high-level version of OS 9, right? There is only one version of OS 9! (just like there is one version of OS X, development tools and all.) And if this was one of the first versions of OS X, it came WITH the latest version of OS 9 for those people who wanted to dual boot. But lets say he didn't do that. If he called Apple Care, they would have a record of his computer, they could send him another copy of OS 9, if not sell him one right there. No high-level of OS 9 required, even though, according to the scenario we've discussed, at some point he actually had probably TWO copies at least of OS 9 that he lost! I think you're pulling my leg on this one!
Now, for your sister-in-law, you say she has a lot of Mac's. If so, then her behavior is not consistent with most mac users. (Actually most Mac uers tend to keep their Macs for as long as they can, because they continue to work, and buy new ones when they finally need more processing power or drive space. Not because of the OS. In fact, up until OS 8, i think, every Mac released to that date, could be booted up with any version of the Mac OS up to OS 8.) But, let's say she has the money, and likes buying Mac's, that's great! So, as she is a mac user, she MUST know that she isn't locked in to Safari. (In fact if she is a mac user of old, then she was probably using some other browser before Safari. (IE for the Mac was standard and installed before Safari was available. In fact, if she still has all her Mac's, then she DOES have it installed on one of those machines.) I have it on my machine. as I have upgraded OS X over the years. She also probably knows that Firefox is available for OS X as well as Camino, Opera, and i think iCab. And she probably knows that, after she installs one of these, they ask if they should be the default browser, or not. She can also change this in the Configuration Setting as well. As she is a mac user, as you say, i'm sure she knows much of this, but, feel free to give her my email address and i'll gladly try and help her.

If she or anyone lost their configurations settings, that is a problem. While i'm sure it can happen, that hasn't been my experience. I have successfully moved my wife's Powerbook contents and settings, for example, over to her new Intel MacBook. (I didn't do a lot, the install asks if you have an existing Mac and if so, instructs you to connect the two via firewire. It does the rest.) That went without a hitch. When i first moved over to OS X from OS 9, i had an OLD Compaq Laser Printer, that i just KNEW wouldn't work under OS X. (It worked fine under OS 9, with an old printer driver i found for it.) After i installed OS X it found and used the printer straight away! (I used that old printer till it finally died.)

I was merely reporting what my experience had been. While the software vendor visiting was a one time thing, i CAN give you the names and contact info of the guy who sits next to me, as well as my brother-in-law if you want to help them or corroborate any of this.

Whatever the reason for the perceptions about Vista, warranted or not, the fact is that their sales of Vista is down. If not for the fact that they are mounting this 300 Million dollar campaign, then look at these two links that i noticed yesterday:

http://www.campustechnology.com/articles/65772

http://apcmag.com/xp_still_killing_vista_in_sales_volume_hp.htm

I wasn't trying to slam Vista, only what i had seen/heard, from actual people. I think that, had the version of Vista that they showed in their ad, been the one that they initially offered to the people, they would be far fewer problems.

If the people you described are INDEED real, i would very much like to help them as their experiences are NOT the norm and my offer still stands!

Russ

Yes we all know that ALL operating systems NEVER crash!

Russ

Where do people get the idea that Macs don't crash?

Not to stir the pot, but:
http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/marketing/why_the_mojave_experiment_fails.html

He has good points also.

And for the Wil article, that is just one persons opinion...or maybe not. Like I said before, I don't want to start a war here, nothing ever good comes out of that...well unless you believe our most awesome president...NOT!!!

John

@John:

All it takes to stir up the pot is to tell people Vista isn't as bad as they think it is! :)

I read your posted link...here are my thoughts:

"Microsoft treats its customers like they're stupid"

...because they use Wizard GUI interaces?!?! Puleez! Is that like the way Apple doesn't want to use a two button mouse/trackpad (still not standard on any Apple laptop) because it makes the UI too complex? Apple has no delete key on the keyboard because its users wouldn't understand the difference between a delete key AND a backspace key. Apple won't let you resize a window from the upper-left...because that would be confusing. If Microsoft treats its customers like they're stupid, then Apple treats its customers like they had a lobotomy.

I don't even know what wizard issue he is talking about. I can't remember the last time I used a wizard in Vista.

"Microsoft embarrasses Mojave participates"

I don't know why people would feel embarassed if they were shown what they have heard is not same as their actual experience. The people that should be embarassed are the ones that are misleading people.

"The marketing campaign blames customers for Vista's problems"

What is the problem that Vista needs to fix? I instantly know someone doesn't know what they are talking about when they say "Vista sucks, but they fixed a lot with SP1, so now it is better". Guess what...SP1 was a *very* minor update. It is very difficult to tell the difference between Vista and SP1.

Probably the biggest issue Vista had was lack of driver support at launch. Now that Vista has 205 million users...you can expect everyone is making drivers for Vista.

"Microsoft denies there is a real problem"

Really? Microsoft should spend *less* on R&D and *more* on marketing? More fluff...less substance? I have no respect for this guy.

As for marketing...
Microsoft should be more like Apple and lie to people about how their computers don't crash and don't get viruses, and how the PowerPC is twice as fast as Intel (why would they dump the PowerPC if it was so wonderful?).

"Mojave seethes with arrogance"

I don't get this...Mojave points out the biggest issue with Vista is perception and not reality and it has people talking...the more people talk about it, the more effective the ad is. No technical points...just anger towards Microsoft...typical.

After looking and thinking about the Mojave experiment, I think it is a pretty good piece of marketing. Certainly Vista has a perception problem. (MS spending $300 Mil on this add confirms that. Kind of risky to do that because if you do you kind of "confirm" that there ARE issues, whether they are perceived or otherwise.)

The add is good in that it shows participants, who had a negative perception of Vista, being surprised to find that "Mojave", which is really cool, is actually Vista, i.e. their perceptions were wrong. The message to the viewing audience is that it is all a matter of perception.

I DO agree with you Dave in that i think SP1 was a minor update. I also do agree that one of the biggest issues with Vista was a lack of driver support at launch time. (I would suspect that it was this lack of drivers that caused those users who upgraded their machines to Vista from xp to experience problems, wouldn't you think?)

It's approximately a year and half later since Vista's release, is that correct? What the Mojave experiment ought to show, and the ad doesn't, imo, is two things. Let people who ran into problems on their migration to Vista, take Mojave for a spin, on their machines. Also, in the ad presented here, let the people themselves, take this Mojave equipped laptop for some serious drive time, instead of letting the handler do the driving. THEN, after these extended test drives return the results. I actually think the people would be more happy as Mojave is a more mature version of Vista, and i think the results would show that.
I agree that i didn't find the testers hostile to the users.

As for Apple, as with anyone who makes ads, i don't take their ads as sacrosanct. The point of the don't crash, was that you don't have to restart as often as a pc. The virus ad was that you won't get a pc virus. the powerpc ad was in 1998. The G3 may have been more powerful than a Pentium II. Apple changed to Intel because its ten years later and IBM wasn't able to keep the Powerpc as a fast performing chip in the numbers they wanted. Intel provided the power and the numbers they wanted so they went to them. Simple.

(Do you really take ALL ads as serious as you do Apple? If so you better sue the Axe body spray people!) :)

And if Apple is SO evil, and i can understand you feeling that way, why did you feed their coffers by buying an iPod?

Russ

Good point, Russ.

I'm dumping my iPod for a Zune...it has a better UI.

Your right Dave. Look at this:
http://www.engadget.com/2008/08/05/zvue-strikes-again-with-pre-loaded-elvis-presley-pmp/

LOLLLLLLLLLL!!!!

John

There is a discussion about the Mojave ad, and how other business have done similar ad campaigns in the past, with some input from ad men.

http://gizmodo.com/5031741/microsofts-new-vista-ads-dont-work-other-companies-we-suck-ads-did

fwiw,

Russ

Is a zvue a licensed Zune?

I'm not a zealot for any platform, but I can say that 1) my zune works almost perfectly well now for me that they added podcast support, and 2) I don't mind not having to mess with iTunes and the several system sucking resources the iTunes application installs! iPod has an advantage in being able to display Japanese song titles, zune can't.