Date:
Monday , January 29, 2007
Category:
Stuff / Miscellaneous
Manufacturers:
Microsoft
Author:
Kyle Bennett
Editor:
Joey Seiler

Editorial - Windows Vista Ramblings

Will I or won't I do the Windows Vista shuffle? How about you? What do you need to know? How about a whole bunch of stuff that you don't need to know instead? Next week maybe we get Ozzy to chime in on Office 2007.

It is now here, “it” being the new Windows Vista operating system. Monday morning Bill Gates was on NBC's Today Show promoting the new operating system. Had I not known who he was or what Vista is, I would have thought Bill was just another politician dodging the direct question and answering with the standard, “It is going to protect the future of our world...our children.” Well, not exactly, but I still half-expected Hillary and Rudy to show up and break into a song to save our “Global Village.” Okay, that is coming off a bit pessimistic, so I should back up a couple of steps and explain some things. I hope you’ll excuse my rambling.

I am a huge Microsoft fan. More specifically I am a Windows XP fan. I have used every version of Windows ever marketed, so I am confident that I know which Windows versions suck and which versions do not suck. Windows 3.1 = not suck. Windows 95 = not suck too much. Every version of Windows between 95 and XP = suck. Windows XP = not suck. And don't confuse being a Microsoft fan with being blind to their issues, problems, and errors. Windows has its ups and downs. Sometimes upgrading is necessary. Sometimes it’s not. But generally it’s good enough to deserve its monopoly, but even the pressure from that is overrated.

Now to all the Apple and Mac people out there, this may upset you a bit, but, yes, Apple operating systems = suck. All of them. Actually, it’s Apple itself that sucks. It shoves its terribly overpriced “froo froo” hardware down my throat to make me get the OS, and, quite frankly, I am just not buying it. For those of you that will label me as an “Apple hater,” I will staunchly wave my three iPods in your general direction. Give me the opportunity to buy Mac OS X Leopard for PC, and it will be getting some prime time on the home-built system under my desk. I have always wondered if Steve Jobs limits Mac operating systems to his proprietary hardware configurations for the cash or if he just won’t admit to the fact that if his OS powered 90% of the world's computers, its shortcomings would be more apparent and his snappy ad campaigns would fall flat.

I look at the impact Windows has made on the world, and it simply impresses me. Let's face it: Microsoft's Windows operating systems did not make $10,000,000,000.00 (yes, ten billion US Dollars) in 2006 because its products are inherently bad. You can scream, ”Monopoly!” and put forth some conspiracy theories to back up your views, but I’d mildly reply, “Hogwash.” If another company built a better operating system that could be implemented across a huge number of vastly different hardware configurations, we would have heard about it by now. It just hasn’t happened. There is far too much venture capital out there to stop something with that amount of inertia. Again, I don't see any Mr. Jobs stepping up to that plate. It is easy to snipe when you are camper...

Don't confuse my “Microsoft fan” statement with being a “Microsoft zealot.” I wanted to make the distinction because it seems that most of the Microsoft talk I see going on is all negative – and it typically comes from people that use Microsoft operating systems. There are also the Apple user comments, and they don't really count in my book. I will worry about those opinions when Jobs truly steps into the OS ring that Microsoft throws its punches in. I am an OpenOffice.org user and have been making a solid effort to port everything we do at HardOCP over to it. This document is being typed using Open Office and I urge you to give it a try if you have not. All of our Web servers here use FreeBSD, Apache, and PHP installations, and our databases utilize MySQL and PostgreSQL.

One thing that has always bothered me about OS critics is their attitude towards different bundled Microsoft OS applications. In one breath I have seen them harshly criticize included applications of a particular OS for being incomplete or barren in features and then gripe in next week’s column about the included applications being too robust and pushing others out of the market. If Microsoft wants to give me “free” applications, more power to them. If a company can give me a better product, market it to me, and make me decide to buy it, then more power to them. For those that gripe Microsoft is “killing their business” by using monopolistic tactics and forcing its OS upon people, then maybe that company should get into some other business. I own a mousepad company, and I don't cry foul when company X provides a free mousepad with their product, ”effectively killing my business.” No, I just go out and make something that is better than your freebie, do my best at marketing, and move on. If Microsoft gave away mousepad that was better than mine with every OS, I would either make a better product or get out of the business. Most of these software companies we see would not have ever existed without Microsoft, and I think some of the critics and stockholders forget exactly where they came from.

Also, I sometimes wonder how I’m supposed to download the competing Web browsers if Microsoft doesn’t package Internet Explorer with their OS? You think the EU will require Microsoft to include Firefox soon? ;)