AbsoluteVista

I agree with you John, that it is wrong for the Government to decide for consumers. But just like the EU coming to the conclusion that Microsoft is a monopoly and charging Microsoft millions of dollars for it, its a similar situation here in Taiwan, just that the issue is a bit different. We have to take into account the unique needs of that country, what its technology infrastructure is like. So maybe they just have different needs when it comes to adopting technology resulting in a much slower upgrade cycle. But I understand the point that consumers deserve a choice. Maybe Microsoft needs to just have longer life cycle in certain countries. Bill Gates once said, you can buy a version of a particular program from us (Microsoft) and never buy another version again. It seems the spirit of that response holds true here.

As for descriminating against Vista, Michael Turton's conclusion that Vista is not great or better comes from a lack in understanding and not using the OS enough to really see the obvious benefits out of the box. My brother upgraded to Windows XP in summer of 2002, loved it, you could say he is an earlier adopter and continued using the OS on various machines, including a Dell Inspiron he purchased in June of 2006 (XP Home).

My brother jumped on the early Windows Vista adopter bandwagon in January of 2007. He loved it! Yes, the things that 'wowed' him was Vista's visual appeal, it looks darn great. And you would be surprised John, a lot of people love the richness, the transparency and realness of the OS. AERO is a bold, serious yet inviting look and many people I ask, new to Vista, previous XP or 2000 users, novices, lab techs, love Vista.

A lot of negativity about Vista has been intensified by a number of things. Things that we have been acquainted with from previous versions of Windows or any other platform...device drivers and application compatibility. It just was not there for many in early 2007, but it did improve and has reached the same level as previous versions of Windows. You would be hard pressed to find most modern hardware released in the last 2 to 3 years incompatible with the OS, not to mention applications that are probably in their second to third generation of full compatibility with Vista.

XP's reception faced many compatibility and hardware issues, I remember some clearly, like Roxio and printer and scanner hardware not being supported. But they eventually were updated to to support XP, Roxio did update version 5 to support XP and the problems died. But because XP was released in a time where the Internet, blogging and the spotlight was not on Microsoft and Windows in a scrutinizing way like it is today. In addition to Microsoft's transparency and openness during the Longhorn project, it set a tone and perception in addition to things that happened during the project like reset and drop of insignificant features. Those are the irrelevant things that are still etched in the minds of many who covered the OS during its development.

Vista in its current form is well accepted, but some lingerings still remained and being revived and utilized by people who have never used Vista, don't use Windows and is being articulated in a way to make Windows out into a platform that is not desirable, these include the voice of Open Source, small resurgence of Apple, Justin Long vs PC and many other insignificant events in the past few years.  

But it still does not hide the fact that people are accepting of Vista's improvements, whether its developer wise, business or consumer wise. Search, collaboration, ease of setup, security, Backup, organization, true hardware and application support, clean interface and just the plain likability of the OS, people see it and are proving it everyday with the millions of licenses that come pre-installed on new PC's or deployed.

I don't know why so much customers are negative about Vista. Nothing changed much from XP to Vista. The major update is the visual appeal, like you said adacosta. But most of Windows XP features are used in Windows Vista. Although I don't have Windows Vista I like it. I work with a friend that has Vista and uses somethings his notebook. I have nothing to complain. The only two things I dislike is that it use huge amounts of RAM. The second, but not a disadvantage is that they must changed vista to 64bit, including all versions. Drivers had to be rewritten for Vista, so it would be better if it was 64bit and not still 32bit.

It's a step Windows made, I can give my opinion about that, but I can't judge if this was either good or not.

Some people don't need to upgrade, simply because they are used to work with Windows XP and everything works. So why would you have 'risk' an upgrade if everything works for now? Also older people that use computers want something they know. Something they already used, it must feel common. When my grandfather updated to vista he said it was a bit difficult working with Vista in the beginning. Microsoft Office was different to use. Beginners don't like something totaly new. But  Vista stays my favorite OS, but I don't run it because  of the huge amounts of ram it uses.

Opensource OS are good. But I think they can never reach the level that Windows can. More then 50% of games and applications run ONLY on microsoft! This is just one example how powerfull windows OS is. Not in meaning of safety or stability but in meaning of use. Which is the most important.

You know, it is almost comical to read this. Here's the deal: consumers in Taiwan don't want to be forced to purchase Vista, they want the choice of XP as the on-board OS when they buy a computer. This sort of <i>Geeks Proclaim! Vista Better!</i> argument is really irrelevant to the issue at hand. I'm sure that on the set of items you use to define the term "better" Vista is best. However, consumers in Taiwan take a different view. They are not silly for doing so, just different. And since you are in business, it might behoove you to view markets from the consumer, rather than geek, point of view. Make more money that way....

When a company uses its monopoly power in the market to limit consumer choice, that is an anti-trust issue. It's not silly, and it is why the government stepped in. Microsoft has a special position in Taiwan thanks to its long association with ITRI here and its software dominates all markets here. This hand-in-glove relationship with the Taiwan government has brought benefits to both parties. Apple is difficult to find and has no real market share here, and few who use computers know anything about Linux (in fact I almost never see any other browser than IE). But it is important to note that Microsoft has a monopoly position that is even more powerful than it has in most other markets. Hence government concern when it uses its monopoly power...

I am not objecting to your position, which has merit, but to its mischaracterization of consumers as "silly" because they do not want a product you think is "superior." If I had a nickel for every "superior" American product that failed overseas because locals didn't think like American engineers, I'd be a very wealthy man...it's mindsets like yours that are the reason US products have a poorer image for quality and functionality among consumers in East Asia, when compared to Japanese and European products. Instead of sneering at Taiwanese consumers and the local government, you should be asking, with genuine curiosity and a humble mien, why Taiwanese consumers might prefer XP to Vista, and address those issues like any good marketer might.

There are a lot of ways Microsoft could attack this problem -- educating consumers, or simply allowing them to get XP but giving them the free/cheap upgrade to Vista on that Glorious Day When They Stop Being Silly and Want The Obvious Benefits. Or let them get XP with a warning. But no, Microsoft decided to force consumers to get Vista and give a stiff middle finger to anyone who thought differently.

<i>Why didn’t you purchase Windows XP?

Or ask you vendor to sell you a system with XP?</i>

The vendors are not allowed to offer XP as the free Windows. I thought about it, but putting on XP would add costs equal to more than 20% of the cost of the computers, which I could not afford. The vendor could easily have given me XP with the computer, same as Vista, but because of Microsoft's use of its monopoly power, he would not. So I got Vista for my kids' computers. It's not that important, but I would have preferred XP. In any case I suspect consumers will either put up with the new system they didn't want, or else do the time honored Taiwan thing and obtain a bootleg copy of XP.

Michael

@Lynnfield: Vista treats system memory like a cache much more aggressively and effectively than any other version of Windows. Basically, memory is never idle in Vista, it is constantly being utilized, so working in the OS seems agile and seamless, thats why the more you give, it the better in addition to that you can do more.

@adacosta: I know, you told me before already. I said that because some people like me, have just less ram (512) so installing Vista wouldn't be a good solution for these people. If I had 2Gb or something Vista would be my OS. That's for sure!

@Lynnfield: In the forum, you mentioned that Bill Gates said that Windows 7 would use less memory. I wonder if that applies to the 512 MB minimum of Vista today or 2010. I am sure by that time, most systems will be equipped with a minimum 2 GBs of RAM.

@ John: I will stick to my view that its not business as usual when Microsoft goes into other countries. If Microsoft is willing enough to support Windows XP Home Edition on netbooks until 2010 and support even Windows XP Starter Edition in certain developing countries, I don't see how it becomes impossible to do the same for countries within the same region through premium SKU's. I personally would rather have China using XP than Ubuntu Linux if I were Microsoft.

Microsoft must realize some situations are not gonna be perfect, and if there needs to be a sacrifice, you just have to make it. Microsoft had to basically give away early versions of DOS before it took off and became an industry standard. In the 21st century, Open Source, Linux, alternative platforms like the Mac are very strong again. Microsoft needs to go back to a grass roots approach to supporting customers, in some cases through a sacrifice. I am sure China is not saying no Vista, just saying, not now.

Ok, so it wasn't given away, lets call it rock bottom prices. I see the best way to resolve this is by asking for an agreement to extend the support of Windows XP longer within their territory. Unlimited Potential is Microsoft just being realistic as I noted and understanding the situation. Its also targeted at the educational sector, not retail. Its better to have the young ones I believe starting on Windows/Office rather than Linux/OpenOffice.org

So, Microsoft does see that you have to apply a different strategy in different scenarios. As for your suggestion about developing Windows 7, I guess the Windows Team was testing Vista on Dell Latitude 840c's  up until BETA 2 then stopped. From the sound of things, it seems like Windows 7's focus on less foot print/performance seems to be about optimizing the code rather outright new features. I remember during Vista's development builds fluctuating in terms of performance, Vista RC1 was like fast and then by build 5744 it was like what happened here. Again though, Vista's perception in the public was attributed to  a number of things, anemic memory in systems preloaded with Vista in late 2006/post Vista and Intel's graphics fiasco.