I've read a number of analysts' take on Windows XP. They're not very
enthusiastic about what it's going to add to Microsoft's bottom line.
Like you say, Microsoft came out with Windows 95, claiming it better and more
stable than 3.1. Better, perhaps, but not much more stable. Then came Windows
98, which was marketed as more stable than Windows 95. Not really. Then
Windows ME, same spin. Little difference. Getting the picture? Microsoft has
more money than God and what they've really excelled at this past decade is
marketing. Along the way, however, most people with any intelligence stopped
believing Microsoft's propaganda.
Then a funny thing happened with Windows 2000. Microsoft said it was a complete
rewrite of NT and that, finally, it was to be notably more stable. And guess
what? It was. IMO, it's the first mature OS they've ever produced. And a lot
of other people believe that too. However, the sales numbers and adoption rate
of Windows 2000 have been disappointing to Microsoft. Displaying rather sound
caution, many people are only now beginning to adopt the new OS.
Now Microsoft is coming out with Windows XP later this year. What's the
incentive to switch? After years of struggling with inferior MS products, users
are finding Windows 2000 to be quite a relief. It's almost as if Microsoft
screwed up and made Win2k too good of a product, especially in light of their
past marketing strategy. XP is going to be a very tough sell.
Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: Angel Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sunday, April 15, 2001 7:05 PM
Subject: Windows XP..I hope its not the future..
>(cross post by moi,from the REBOOT Windows mailing list heh heh )
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>----------
>
>I really can't understand all the bruha about Microsoft Windows XP.
>
>They advertised 98 as being "more stable" than windows 95....then Win2K was
>supposed to be the most stable thing out there..and now XP is supposed to be
>even more stable than Win2K...
>
>Which leads me to believe that Win2K wasn't all that stable, since they
>improved so much upon it...and well..that would mean that 98 was a
>joke...and 95...you get the picture.
>
>Why are we Windows PC users so ecstatic that we're finally supposed to be
>getting a "stable" operating system that 'doesn't crash in a week since I've
>been running it"??
>Isn't that a darn pathetic boast for someone to make about their operating
>system??
>
>Unix and other OSes have had stability for a long time afaik. It seems that
>we just accepted the crashing and idiosyncracies of Windows as par for the
>course.
>
>And that brings me to Windows Media Player 8.
>
>Why are we windows users speaking about this as though it was the holy
>grail??
>So it can burn CDS from MP3s..so what?
>Matchbox Musicmatch Jukebox was doing this ages ago..and so was RealJukebox
>I believe from Real.
>And they also had security measures included to protect music....so...
>
>Media Player isn't 'new'...its actually **'Late'**.As usual..what Microsoft
>is doing, has been done before by their competition..they are simply
>"Embracing and Extending".
>
>Not to mention we must now take into consideration Microsoft's definition of
>a Windows XP ready machine....
>
>One that does not allow User customisation. Yup..didn't you read about that?
>You know Microsoft has a Spec for a Win 98 machine..and a spec for a Win2K
>machine?
>
>Well a Windows XP Machine is not supposed to allow User Upgrades to the
>system. i.e. swapping out sound and graphics cards etc.
>
>You're not supposed to have access to the expansion slots..that's only
>supposed to be handled by the OEM manufacturer or some other , I presume
>Microsoft Authorised company.
>
>Pretty neat huh?(sarcasm)
>
>Add to this the burden of some new "Product Activation" scheme, that would
>require people living outside the US and especially in developing nations to
>make longdistance phone calls (if they don't have fast, affordable internet
>access) to get their authorisation numbers..and heaven forbid if they decide
>to ^^upgrade^^ their systems without buying a completely new one from a
>"Microsoft Authorised" manufacturer....and all this to prevent "casual
>copying".
>
>Gee..I always thought that Microsoft made a hell of a lot off the corporate
>market with it's eccentric Licensing schemes, and that where it really lost
>was in the counterfeiting of Microsoft software in Asia and other parts of
>the world.I've never seen any statistic for home users making "casual
>copies" as hurting Microsoft's billion dollar bottom line....
>
>but yet it implements an entire system to prevent "casual copying by the
>home user"....????
>
>o_O?
>hello?
>
>Or is this all part of the first steps toward moving the "Home Market" to a
>subscription model that starts from the Operating System level?
>
>Hey thanks for buying Windows XP for US$150.00 ..we activate you today for a
>year...
>after that you give us another US$50.00 and get another year...
>and after two years you might realise that you've paid more for the software
>than you would have with a flat price at Retail....
>After three,well...you're already "Locked In" now aren't you..and you ain't
>going nowhere bub.
>Guess what?
>Price just went up for the next Activation...tsk tsk tsk.
>
>I've been reading that Microsoft is doing this because it fears its profit
>margins will be in trouble in the emerging Internet Economy and because the
>market is reaching "Saturation Point"...umm...????
>Hello??Does anyone else that heard/read that think its rubbish?
>
>Moving software to a Subscription Service does nothing to benefit the
>customer..it benefits the Publisher of the Software only (I wouldn't even
>say the Developers..they get taken for a ride on a regular basis by their
>Publishers).
>
>*shrug*
>Win XP may be more stable,and it may even be faster than Win2K (is it faster
>than 98 at running games?) but is it the way of the future?
>
>I certainly hope not.
>
>-Gel
>www.carigamer.com
>Island Gaming At Its Best!(tm)
>
>
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
