U.S. Economic Impact of Windows Vista

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

Read the full article at Microsoft.

 

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

A quote from a court case long ago comes to mind - "They would say that wouldn't they"

Harry.

 

To which I ask, "Into whose market?". The answer: Microsoft's market. Sending a lot of money to MS means those funds are money that can't be spent elsewhere. Those same companies could spend that same amount of money on R&D, market research, etc... and in the vast majority of cases get a far better return on their money.

The history of MS OS's shows us that being an "early adopter" of MS products means one technical headache after another. In one of my interviews in 2004 I asked if the expansion the company was undergoing meant that they might move to an AD enviroment based on Server 2003. The reply from the head of the IT department was: "I don't intend to be one of MS's beta testers and have to spend all that money troubleshooting things they should have fixed before they released their product. I've done it before and I won't be doing it again." I was kind of surprised by the answer at the time, but no more as I've now seen the stability of the *nix platforms for myself....

 

Ha! I guess that also explains why most server owners at the webhost I worked at were running RH6 Don't even begin to think that everyone else's latest and greatest is bulletproof. Like Linux peeps have never struggled with broken dependencies??? I'm not putting ANYONE'S latest and greatest in production until it's been hammered on, I don't care who made it.

That said, I'd have no problem loading Vista on my home stuff, though -- especially since I still have RC-1 humming nicely.

 

I'd agree except in one instance. I'd put a new Debian release on a production machine as it has been hammered on for at least a couple of years by thousands of users in almost every hardware configuration you can think of before it's ever officially released.

The hammering of any "official" Debian release starts in Sid, then moves to "testing" and then moves to "stable" so there has been a lot debugging work, in-the-wild so-to-speak, put into any official release over a long period of time. No official release, other than the very first one, starts from scratch either so they(the official releases) are in essence built on what was a very stable platform to begin with.