Setting The Record Straight

Setting The Record Straight

  • Comments 65
  • Likes

As part of one of Microsoft's on-going lawsuits, a piece of email that I sent to Steve Ballmer and Bill Gates recently became public.  It was a rant encouraging a change to the way we were building Windows at the time.  In the email, I made a comment for effect about buying a Mac if I was not working at Microsoft.  Taken out of context, this comment could be confusing.  Let me set the record straight:

  • This email is nearly 3 years old, and I was being purposefully dramatic in order to drive home a point.  The point being that we needed to change and change quickly.  We did:  We changed dramatically the development process that was being used and we reset the Windows Vista development project in mid-2004, essentially starting over.
  • 2-and-½ years later, Windows Vista has turned into a phenomenal product, better than any other OS we've ever built and far, far better than any other software available today, in my opinion.  It's going to be available to customers on Jan 30, and I suggest everyone go out and get it as soon as you can.  It's that good.

The spirit of being self-critical continues to flourish at Microsoft.  Within Microsoft everyone considers it their duty to always put their convictions and our product quality ahead of everything else.  That was the intent of my mail to Bill and Steve, and I consider it a great example of how this company can focus and do what's right for customers.

jim

65 Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Sign in or Join Now
  • Will it be hard to release another "Windows XP"?

    IMAO is the best windows. :D

  • Mobile
    28 Posts

    well jimall you have shared a very vital info with us! i appreciate it.

  • Hi,

    I doubt that Vista is the best OS that is out there. I don't deny its a quite good of an OS, but  it does not seems to be better than Mac in many area. Get a look at  http://itcomparison.com/OS/MacvsVista/macvsvista.htm

    where they compare the two. I can see many areas in there where Vista still need to improve.

    Enjoy,

    VMguru007

  • Windows Vista vs Windows XP & the MAC World

    I have been on Windows sense Windows 95 and I'm from the Hood " I PUSH MY MACHINES TO THE LIMITS"

    and I understand the true value of Windows Vista.

    From it's Smarter Navigation system to is's sleek semi transport installed screens.

    The stereo type of saying A new operating system has alot of bugs is out the window with Windows vista.

    WINDOWS VISTA VS WINDOWS XP

    XP ruled back in it's day but remember when it came out, it had the same problems vista did for the first few years, but everyone loved it!

    As like the earlier years of windows. The newer operating system has old the good perks the old one had but with more horse power under the hood! Windows vista is Windows XP reborn.

    Windows Vista VS MAC

    Mac lovers are very closed minded I tell you.

    The reason why Macs don't have alot of viruses is simple, NOBODY IS CREATING VIRUS TO ATTACK THE MAC OS. WHY "COMMON SENSE" The Majority of the world is running on Windows.

    The applications are all the same, and take alook around you... "what do you see in all electronic stores" P.C.S "not because they are cheap, they are effective!!!

    REMEMBER MAC LOVERS, APPLE FILED FOR BACKRUPCY YEARS AGO "Why is that" hmmmmmmmmmmm

    If Microsoft owns about 48% of Apples share, what makes you think is far more superior...

    FINAL

    IT ALL COMES DOWN TO HOW YOU USE YOUR WORKSTATION.

    Windows worksations are designed with alot of features that makes the workflow fast and smooth, the right click feature allows a user to open and close programs, create files, in just about any type of open window, even if your in a saving window.

    Free your mind from the Matrix way of thinking and you Windows Vista to it's fullest remastered powers...  

    I have and Windows Vista is the Ultimate Operating System to date for real professionals who needs a systematic operating system

  • windows vista is one of the premier os in the world. i'm happy to use windows vista.

  • trli
    1 Posts

    "Windows Vista has turned into a phenomenal product . . . far, far better than any other software available today, in my opinion.  . . . I suggest everyone go out and get it as soon as you can.  It's that good."

    Yes, I agree!  But hasn't it been available for a long time?  I remember buying it in 2005 or so, but I think it was called "Mac OS X 10.4" back then.

  • Walter
    2 Posts

    He Jim, did you mean this email ???

    From: Jim Alichin

    Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 8:40 AM

    To: Eric Rudder

    Subject: EW: losing our way...

    Fyi: In the spirit of sharing my deep concerns, etc. Please don’t forward.

    jim

    From: Jim Alichin

    Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 8:38 AM

    To: Bill Gates; Steve Balimer

    Subject: losing our way...

    Tftis is a rant. I’m sorry.

    I am not sure how the company last sight of what matters to our customers (both

    business and home) the most, but in my view we lost our way. I think our teams

    lest sight of what bug-free means, what resilience means, what full scenarios mean,

    what secur~ty means, what performance means, how important current applications

    are, and really understanding what the most important problems are customers face

    are. I see lots of random features and some great vision, but that doesn’t

    translate tnto great products.

    I would buy a Mao today if I was not working at Microsoft. :f you run the

    equivalent of VPC on a MAC you get access to casioally all Windows application

    software (although not the hardware) . Apple did not lose their way. You must

    watch this new videc helow. I know this doesn’t show anything for businesses, but

    my point is about the philosophy that Apple uses. They think scenario. They think

    simple. They think fast. I know there is nothing hugely deep in this.

    tttp: //www. apple. oom/ilife/videc/ilifeO432C.htm.l

    I must tell you everything in my soul tells me that we should do what I called plan

    ~b) yesterday. We need a simple fast storage system. LH is a pig and I don’t see

    any solution to this problem. If we are to rise to the chsllenqe of Linux and

    Apple, we need to start takrng the lessons of “scenario, simple, fast” to heart.

    I ~

  • Diego
    2 Posts

    All you need is Parallels running on OS X and you're set. All you need to run those pesky Windows apps you can't get let go. Live in a better world. Vista is the new Classic.

  • Nice back peddling Mr. Allchin.  Of course you would like to buy a Mac.  They work.  

    Can't wait to get my Apple TV hooked up to my HDTV and my Mac Mini.  Maybe I'll use my XP box for network storage.

    Hope they don't pay you in stock?

  • I have always found the Mac vs. Windows debate to be a tempest in a teapot. Why does one system have to prevail? Is chocolate better than vanilla? Both Apple and Microsoft have made errors along with their brilliant moves. I have to laugh at Windows users who are flummoxed by the Mac GUI- they are so similar. Vista is gorgeous, and it has clearly borrowed from Apple's ideas. Gadgets and widgets, finder and explorer, and you can now beat the computer at chess on a Mac or a PC! I applaud Microsoft's moves and Jim Allchin's candor, thanks for doing this blog. And I hope that Apple continues to flourish and develop their platform and not put all their eggs into the iPod basket.

  • ALso re the hardware specs: if what the MAC people are saying is true that MAC OS X can run on much lower level hardware, why cant my 'standard model' be the same?

  • 1.This topic began as a sort of explanation regarding Jim's comment expressing self criticism re windows and his desire to buy a mac if he weren't part of MS, so how did this thread turn to an argument over over Mac Vs. Vista's hardweare specs and which is better?

    2.I began using a Windows 3.1 pc when i was three years old.  I'm now 15.  I have seen mac and used it once. (At the N.Y. sate Lego Robotics competition. {My group forgot to bring a computer to program the robot})

    I have friends who have used Mac, Linux and FreeBSD.  I have used Linux (ubuntu) on my own PC for a period and then switched back to what I had previously (Windows XP SP1) because my own Computer doesn't have an internet connection (for personal reasons) and I find Linux to be too internet dependant.  Let me say this: I think that now that wonderful (take the word 'wonderful' any way you want)

    people such as Mr. Bill Gatews and Mr. Steve Jobs have pioneered the Computer industry, especially re operating systems, why can't someone step up and, based on thier work, create a Standard Operating System (SOS) (FROM THE BOOTLOADER UP)that would be able to run all file formats (whether it be a .BIN file or a .EXE etc) and would have 2 versions The GUI or The Command Line, and be customizable to look and feel like the current sdtandards?  

    3.Linux is a bunch of  MAC wannabes by nature.  Linux was based on UNIX. If I had to guess which OS looks more like Linux (Win or MAC) I would say that linux has a MAC-ish feel.

    Look, I've been born and bred on windows, but I think that ,unless Vista is close to perfect (nothing's perfect), It's time for a change.  

  • tbcpp
    11 Posts

    Wow, ^^ Well said.

  • Fairly
    1 Posts

    I feel sorry for you, Jim. I know how hard you and others worked. But time has all but passed Microsoft by and you know it, and your saying it's the best Microsoft ever released sounds like a worn out record and saying it's better than any other software is just silly and very untrue.

    You've had a good career; you and others have fought a valiant fight; but now it's time for retirement and let the new guard take over.

    Thanks for your time.

  • RDM
    1 Posts

    We now have Vista, which is NT 6.0. Discounting the 3 versions of Windows prior to NT, it is really NT 3; in 20 years, Microsoft has delivered three freaking significant versions of its modern OS: NT 4, 2000/XP, Vista. That's on the level of what IBM delivered in 5 years of OS/2.

    Meanwhile, Microsoft used its position to hold back and or destroy any technologies that pushed the envelope, to ensure everything would be tied to Microsoft's own proprietary standards. It assaulted the open web, Java, Linux, OpenGL, PDF... there is not an open standard Microsoft likes. It even hopes to replace JPEG and MP3.

    Gates’ visions include Palladium Trusted Computing and Windows Media / PlaysForSure DRM, efforts to move all consumer technology to a “secure base” that allows media companies to leverage unilateral power against consumers, forcing them to pay through the nose and striping them of any notion of fair use rights.

    Microsoft has utterly failed in all of its efforts to do anything outside of its protected Windows monopoly. Beyond servers, Office, and Windows, every plan to expand into new markets, from WinCE devices to the Xbox and Zune to Origami to MSN TV have all been economic failures.

    The tech industry is full of one-time leaders who fell down dead. Anyone who thinks Microsoft is immune to failure is simply choosing to not pay attention to reality.

    I really hope that Microsoft's valuation drops into the toilet and that investors will pull out to invest in companies who can truly develop killer apps.

  • I like MS and criticize them to improve. I really hope that MS keeps a watch on small features of their competitor's products

    ------------

    http://www.dl4all.com

  • Sephiroth
    35 Posts

    What I’m specifically referring to is having an OS which seamlessly meshes with me as technology changes and advances allowing me the ability to upgrade.  As it stands, Windows Vista and pre-Vista allow me that opportunity to expand and grow.   Apple doesn’t!  If Apple decides to remove its proprietary practices and allow PC system builders to:  1) install and or upgrade any components --motherboards, microprocessors; 2) design and build systems or workstations to his or her specifications and not through its build-to-order options; and 3) recognize that system builders are a formidable multi-billion industry to be reckoned and respected –then I won’t have a problem making that switch to Apple’s OS.

    I’ve never purchased or considered investing in any pre-built systems by Dell, Compaq, HP, or any other companies.  You and I agree on the horrible designs of those systems, the cheap mediocre parts, and the flimsy overall designs.  

    To some degree, I agree that there isn’t any true innovation in the PC market and it’s definitely not a quantum leap.  But innovations are continually beginning to immerge and mature rapidly than ever before.

    In prior computer sales, many times in my conversations with customers, I will first determine their level of expertise and comfort levels in building their own workstations.  Depending on the information I was provided, I would then strongly recommend their exploring the possibility of designing their own systems and I would refer them to reference materials, etc.  

    Did I lose sales?  Yes!  (But it was made up by those buying parts and components for their own systems.)

    Did I earn respect and trust?  Yes!  (More important!)  

    Did I get repeat customers who won’t deal with anyone else but me?  Yes! (More important!)

    If someone comes up with an ingenious way of reverse engineering where I can install OS X or Leopard on a PC, my switch will be instantaneous!

    Certainly, if Apple will allow me a few weeks to take home a Power Mac, I would be more than glad to do so.  So if Apple is up to the challenge, I welcome it!  But I want to design and build my own system and I don’t see that (installing Apple’s OS on a PC) happening at least not in my lifetime.  :-(

  • >>>tbcpp said: "The problem is that there is no true innovation on the PC market."<<<

    To some extent, I agree, and to some extent, I disagree. Your use of the term "True Innovation" is... well... wrong. That's subjective and, frankly, unfair in a debate of this nature.

    I feel that the PC is stagnant, not because of it's nature, but because they're all the same. I don't see a difference between a Dell Dimension and a Dell Precision of the same hardware, other than the case it's all stuck together in. Carrying that further, I see no difference between those and your average HP, nor do I see a difference in the average HP versus the average Gateway. I feel that Dell makes a good computer, better built and better supported than comparable HP and Gateway machines... but how are they different?

    In that, I am sad to see that among ALL of these PC companies, none are truly innovative. They all pack the same hardware into the same cases, and load it with the same operating system with DIFFERING FLAVORS OF BLOATWARE. I'd argue that, really, Dell is the "most innovative," but they have yet to truly be amazingly so. They just happen to stand out.

    That said, I won't switch from PC's... because my programs run on them, and they're a cheaper platform. I got started on one of your so-called "Cheapo PC's" when I began doing 3D Animation, and I've had great success in that field. When it came time for me to upgrade, guess what? I bought a PC. A Dell Inspiron E1705.

    >>>tbcpp said: "On the PC we are stuck with stuff like Intel's memory bus."<<<

    No, on the Mac you're stuck on stuff like Intel's front side bus. Wait, I take that back... you're stuck on either Intel's, or IBM's. Take your pick.

    On a PC, you have an option to use Intel's chips, AMD's chips (which feature HyperTransport, a high-speed point-to-point interconnect), and Via's chips. Ooh, then there's the option of chipsets... you have the option of Via chipsets, SiS chipsets, Nvidia chipsets and ATI chipsets. Thanks to Nvidia, the Windows-based PC was the first platform to embrace multi-GPU computing.

    Multi-way Opteron configurations talk to one another directly, and with Intel chips, there's a shared cache. Do you really want to benchmark your SGI Origin 2100 against a dual Opteron 280 system?

    >>>tbcpp said: "That's better than going with Dell, however, I suggest you use a PowerMac sometime."<<<

    The last time I used a PowerMac, it had two 867 MHz G4 processors (featuring 166 MHz FSB's!) and 1 GB of RAM to run FinalCut Pro 3.0 on Mac OS X Jaguar. At first, the Mac didn't suck. Then we started capturing footage, and crashes came more and more. The frequency in which we'd experience crashes was proportional to how much we'd filled the hard drive. By the time we had "only" 10 GB of free space, we could count on a crash roughly every hour. By the time we were down to "only" 5 GB of free space, multiple crashes per hour were expected.

    Towards the end of that project, a bug came in that the VCR controls on the computer (used to control the DV camera from the computer) simply disappeared. I could no longer control the camera from the computer. It's odd, that that's never happened with my copy of Adobe Premiere Elemnents 1.0, an entry-level PC NLE. It's also odd how, if FCP 3 crashed, I'd lose my data, but my un-innovative Adobe Premiere Elements would save a copy of the project file, which would save all my data to the last edit. I can count the number of times Adobe Premiere Elements has crashed on my hands. I can't do that with FinalCut Pro. And FinalCut Pro never recovered my data.

    Since the Macs I was using lacked a DVD burner, we all pitched in our money for a LaCie Firewire DVD burner... which wouldn't work, because the driver included was for Mac OS X 10.3.8, and we only had 10.2.8, and upgrading to 10.3.8 would've required a $129. So that option was out the door, and we had a very nice, $75 paperweight.

    Not one to waste a perfectly good DVD burner, I gave that to my grandfather, whose computer (at the time) was running Windows 2000. Since it was an old Dell, with a Pentium II, it didn't have a firewire slot. So I took out my trusty old capture card, and put it in. Plugged in the DVD burner. It worked perfectly, on an operating system that came out in 2000, but it didn't work on the version of "the world's most advanced operating system" that shipped in 2002.

    I called my Mac friend, to come with his 12-inch PowerBook (you know, the one that runs like crap), to save the day. He had a DVD burner, so I figured we'd simply export the FCP files into .mov format and send 'em over to his laptop via the network. Too bad that went over like a lead balloon. Frustrated, but not defeated, we simply re-exported the video this time back to the DV camera, and re-imported them onto the PowerBook.

    We all looked on in awe, as my friend seamlessly spliced the clips together in iMovie, and added DVD menus in iDVD, and then we watched as he tried burning the finished product to Apple branded DVD's... and how it didn't work six times in a row.

    My Dell has never had that epic sort of a tale having problems. Neither has my new Dell. They both just work. Have Macs improved? I don't really know. The only place to hear about Mac stuff is from various Mac-oriented sites, and in their glazed over eyes, Macs never sucked that bad to begin with. I don't particularly care -- in my experience, PC's are cheaper, faster, more reliable, more flexible, and more open.

    >>>tbcpp said: "Granted the last one I used was a dual G5 2.0Ghz, but the thing worked like a dream and was built like a rock. No plastic casings, all quality parts inside, no skimping."<<<

    I dunno. Apple has unmatched consumer build-quality, but Dell does a decent job in the consumer area, and Apple doesn't touch Dell in workstation notebook quality. Added to that, Apple's insane lust for tiny, stylish parts does them no justice. Just look at the vents on the MacBooks.

  • tbcpp
    11 Posts

    I'm not complaining about the hardware its self from a PC perspective. It you're going for a PC then this is a fine system. However, you will find that some types of hardware last longer than others. For example, SCSI drives will regularly run for over 10 years. Longer if you never turn them off.

    The problem is that there is no true innovation on the PC market. Sitting next to me is an SGI Origin 2100. 6 processors and 2.4GB RAM. The thing is way over 10 years old but it still runs like a charm. Inside it's built like a mesh network, every cpu can talk to every other almost directly. On the SGI Octane, it has a design where any device can talk to any other device on its dedicated channel. On the PC we are stuck with stuff like Intel's memory bus.

    But, let me guess, you like me built your system yourself right? That's better than going with Dell, however, I suggest you use a PowerMac sometime. Take one for a test drive. Granted the last one I used was a dual G5 2.0Ghz, but the thing worked like a dream and was built like a rock. No plastic casings, all quality parts inside, no skimping.

    What I'm lashing out against is more the chepo PCs that make up 90% of the computer market.

  • Sephiroth
    35 Posts

    Interesting assumptions you’re making here, tbcpp.  I will be more than glad to provide you with my “current” system configuration which can change any day.

    Current Computer System: (Built and designed by Sephiroth as of 12/14/06)

    AMD 4200+ Dual Core

    2 GB RAM

    4x  Samsung HD300LJ GB ATA-Serial 7200 RPM

    A8N-SLI Deluxe MoBo

    NVIDIA GeForce 6600 GT 256 MB Video Card (Dual DVI)

    550 Watt ATX Ultra Connect X2 Power Supply

    BENQ DVD DD DW1620 ATA Drive

    THX Audigy 2 Creative Sound Card

    Altec Lansing 5.1 Model 5100 speakers w/ powered subwoofer

    24” Dell Widescreen LCD 1920x1200

    And that’s only my computer system.  I didn’t mentioned my more $7,000.00 Home Theater System.  Oops, I forgot to mentioned my 42” Titanium GreyFox Portal and more than $7,000.00 in additional network  CAT-5 wiring, NX-8, and CCTV wiring.  And I haven’t even scratched the surface yet.

    I don’t think being cheap is an accurate description based on your limited assumption.

  • tbcpp
    11 Posts

    Sure, if you lower the bar anything is possible. In other words, your argument could be translated to say "I can dig through trash to find anything I want! Buying quality parts is more expensive and limits my options."

    The fact is Macs, Sun, and SGI workstations are way better designed than PCs. The whole "cheaper is better" view of the PC world has created a bunch of trash that Dell, and eMachines has passed off as computers. Use a reall workstation sometime. A Mac, a Sun, or a Irix box. You may pay though the nose, but they last. You get what you pay for when it comes to PC hardware.

  • Sephiroth
    35 Posts

    I won't get into the specifics as there seemed to be strong feelings here regarding OSX vs. Vista, or Vista vs. OSX.

    As it remains, I'm open-minded and if the path leads to OSX, Leopard, Vista, or Vienna, I'm certain additional pros and cons will be weighed in heavily before someday making that ultimate definite decision.

    Vista’s revised EUA solves the issue that would have limited my ability to make major changes on my systems.

    After visiting Apple.com , if I wanted to configure a Mac even remotely close to my current system, it will cost me $4,356.00 with the following:

    3.0GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon

    1GB (2x512MB)

    250GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s

    NVIDIA Geforce 7300 GT 256MB (single-link DVI/dual-link DVI)

    Apple Cinema HD Display (23” flat panel)

    16x SuperDrive

    Apple Wireless Keyboard and apple wireless Mighty Mouse

    Max OS X

    With $4,356.00 I can build two systems.  As far as upgrades goes, what if Apple comes out with a new microprocessor other than the Intel Xeon in about 6-8 months?   There aren’t any specifications regarding its motherboard, no upgrade flexibility to a new power supply installation, motherboard, and a CPU.  Hence, if I want to make those major changes on a Mac, that, as it currently stands, is impossible. What if I'm tired of the same dull computer case?

    With PCs, the world of unlimited upgrades and expansions is only limited to my imagination.  The current OS supporting my circumstance is Microsoft’s.

    Believe me, if system builders like me had the flexibility as I currently do with PCs but unfortunately not with a Mac, don’t you think I/we would have switched a long time ago to an Apple?

    What it boils down to is an individual’s choice and the circumstances surrounding that choice.  I choose to design my own systems; Mac will not allow me to do so due to its restrictive proprietary hardware.

    All the superfluous redundant marketing smoke screen (sales pitches and glossy advertisement brochures by either Microsoft or Apple) will not persuade my decision.   My decision is based on my particular circumstance as a system builder, and consequently, my path currently leads to Vista primarily on that basis.  Many builders out there will agree.

    The market that makes up systems builders is huge and it is possible we will be the deciding major factor on Vista’s success or failure.  It is us who pushes the technological envelopes; it is us who demand more power, more graphics, and improved technology. And, it us us who demand an OS to migrate with us.

  • I've seen Vista at work when our IT guys were testing it.

    If you really believe that it's a great piece of software, you're either (a) lying or (b) deluded or (c) a Microsoftie. Gee, 2 out of 3 ain't half bad.

    *Not one of the IT guys* thinks it's any good. The HW requirements have (once more) gone through the roof. The performance is woefully inadequate. The eye candy is, as usual, deja vu all over again.

    Two cubicles up, we have a bunch of iMacs for beginning our porting and testing. Thanks to Bootcamp and Parallels (check out their new Beta), we have a solution which will get us out of Win2k/XP hell, and back to Unix (read MacOS X), where we belong.

    Sadly, Vista is doomed to some kind of success, thanks to the OEM bundling that no doubt will take place.

    Posted from an Intel iMac running 10.4.8/Firefox 2.0. I should probably use Safari, but I like the ability to share extensions across operating systems.

  • axual
    1 Posts

    The buy a Mac comment is what it is, and Jim provides a reasonable explanation. The proof will be in the pudding as far as Vista is concerned.

  • "You can't comfortably run Mac OS X on 384 MB of RAM."

    My G4, with 256MB of RAM, runs Tiger just fine.  Mac OS X may require a lot of space, but look how much you're getting in that space.  iLife '06 with iTunes, iMovie HD, iPhoto, iDVD, iWeb and Garageband.  Not to mention there's usually trials of iWork, Microsoft Office and Quicken.  There's usually a game or two, as well.  There are a lot of applications bundled with Mac OS X.  There's a lot of talk here about XP running on older systems.  We're not talking about XP, we're talking about Vista vs. Tiger/Leopard.  Leopard will have nearly the same system requirements as Tiger.  And please, try to remember, Windows XP is what, six years old?  It should run on a six or seven year old system!  I ran XP on a 333MHz system and it was a nightmare.  

  • It'd help if a lot of you weren't outright lying. And I'm talking about, mostly, the people who think Windows Vista has outlandish hardware requirements. You, tbcpp, are pretty out there.

    >>>tbcpp said: "That's an interesting piece of (mis)information there. With Macs you don't have to upgrade nearly as often."<<<

    You don't need to upgrade Windows nearly as often, either. My grandfather uses an old Dell XPS D300 running Windows XP Professional, it has a 300 MHz Pentium II processor, 384 MB SDRAM, an an 8 GB hard drive. I since gave it a 20 GB hard drive, and for kicks, a Geforce 4 MX 440.

    About the only area you're right in, is that Windows requires an incredibly large amount of hard drive space. Of course, Mac OS X isn't free of that criticism -- it takes about 6 GB of available hard drive space.

    >>>tbcpp said: "The Graphics card maybe, but apple osx 10.4 will run fine on many older systems."<<<

    So will Windows XP. I've recently installed Windows XP on a Dell Inspiron 7000 notebook for my father, it has a 266 MHz Pentium II, 384 MB RAM, and an 8 GB HDD. My old Compaq Presario 1700US had an 850 MHz Pentium III, 256 MB RAM, and a 20 GB HDD. All of those ran Windows XP.

    By comparison, a friend of mine owns a 12-inch PowerBook G4 with an 867 MHz G4 and 640 MB of RAM, and it runs Mac OS X very, VERY poorly.

    >>>tbcpp said: "Infact I have heard of it running fine on a 400Mhz G4! That's a 7 year old system running Apple's modern OS! In comparision a 400Mhz machine running XP is bearly usable, and Vista would simply not run at all."<<<

    I have proof of Windows XP running just fine on 200 MHz and 128 MB of RAM. XP would be barely usable on 128 MB of RAM, but the feel of Windows XP is largely unaffected by processor speed. You can comfortably run Windows XP on 384 MB of RAM. You can't comfortably run Mac OS X on 384 MB of RAM.

    Windows Vista isn't perfect, but it's darn good. I'd like to see some improvement, because I really think that 10 GB of hard drive -- gone, is a little ridiculous. Especially for notebooks.

    Go Microsoft. :)

  • tbcpp
    11 Posts

    I stand corrected. Thanks.

    But I hope my point is made. The six versions of Vista are going to be a pain to explain, especially to some of our small business clients who blur the lines between home and office.

  • Jim, I can only wish that every company would have such highly educated technology leader in their organization as you are. Too often in business I see sales or marketing type people running the IT departments.  Too often I see developers engage in “monkey coding” (a.k.a. kludge) practices.  With no engineering practices set forth by the leaders and no commitment to architecture by developers (but rather programming by mere convenience to write a “hack” or a dirty patch solution).  Too often requirements create “surface” feature in software that people rarely use, and only bloat code and increase the feature-creep. I applause your 2004 decision to revamp the development practices at the Windows Division.  It would provide great insight for many if they would know more about the reasons and conditions that lead to the decisions.  Usually news articles do not cover such interesting topics, but I think many people in the software development could relate to your 2004 decisions.

    I see growing cap between technical minded and no technical minded people in software development.  More emphasis needs to be put on code architecture and engineering practices inside organizations as more and more software will be written to provide solutions to growing number of business problems.  It should not be necessary to have to present or phrase gravity or urgency of technical situation in “business” terms so that no technical minded people start to pay attention.

    I wish you all the best in future engagements, and congratulate on your leadership of the Windows Platform that you have lead over the many years.  Microsoft is in gratitude for your contributions.

  • JimAll
    16 Posts

    Hey tbcpp:  one correction:  Windows Vista Basic can indeed run more than 3 apps simultaneously (there is no OS-imposed cap); what you're thinking of is Windows Vista Starter Edition, which is only available in emerging markets (e.g., Vietnam, Egypt, etc).

  • tbcpp
    11 Posts

    I agree with what asiafish said almost 100%. However the one thing about Vista that concerns me is this: Areo. I work at a PC retail/ IT tech support store. In the past, when a person came to us and bought a copy of XP they (or we) would install it and all is well. However, %80 of our customers are going to come complaining to us when they try to install Vista, because it "doesn't have the pretty graphics". They will think their computer is broken because it can't do the pretty fades and transparency.

    Doing without all the fancy GUI's is fine for you and me, but for Joe Sixpack, all he wants is the fancy graphics on his cheapo Dell he bought from Best Buy last year.

    And this doesn't even get into the headache we'll have when users start compaining that their Windows Basic (read brain dead) version won't run Areo, or that it can only run 3 programs at a time, etc., etc. And it will be up to us to explain to them that they need to spend more money (in the $100s) to get it to work.

    I should probably start buying asprin now...

  • Whoa, lots of myths here on both sides of the platform divide.  Lets see if I can shed some truth, which as someone who currently owns 3 Macs, 3 PCs and a Windows server, I can do honestly rather than relying on myth and hype.

    First off, Windows activation does suck, but it doesn't lock you out with one or even multiple hardware upgrades.  What it looks for are major changes, like a motherboard swap.  I've upgraded graphics cards, processors, added PCI expansion boards and upraded hard drives many times since the arrival of XP and was only asked to reactivate once, when I swapped a graphics card, hard drive and processor at the same time.

    Another Windows myth is that Vista requires lofty hardware to run well.  Bull!  I run Vista RC2 on a 5-year-old laptop with a Pentium IIIm processor and 640MB of RAM.  This is pushing Vista's minimum specs, but it runs great, albeit without the Aero Glass interface.  The fact that a 5-year-old laptop runs a modern OS is rather impressive, if you ask me, and is about the same as Mac OS X Leopard, which many predict will require a PowerPC G4 or better, meaning a 5-year-old laptop.  Hmm, funny how similar requirements can sound so different to a Mac or a PC user.

    PC fans complain that Macs don't run enough software or that they aren't any more secure than Windows PCs.  Again, that just bull.  First off, modern Macs actually RUN Windows natively, meaning that they run MORE software than regular PCs do.  And yes, Macs are far more secures than Windows.  130,000+ malware attacks in the wild for Windows, ZERO for OS X, do the math.

    What most people really fail to see, however, is how alike the two platforms are.  Yes, each has its pluses (no antivirus required on a Mac, more and cheaper hardware choices for Windows), most things that people use computers for are exactly the same.  

    I wrote an article today in Word for Windows, and when I went to paste in some text from another document, it was as easy as "Control-V".  Had I been using a Mac with Word for Macintosh (or just about any other word processor on either platform), it would have required the far more complicated "Command-V" to do the same thing.  There is no difference folks, for most of what people do.  If you depend on an application that doesn't exist on one platform, USE THE OTHER ONE.

    My primary computer was a 12" Apple PowerBook for three years.  I loved the hardware design and it was reliable and performed well.  My work today is best accomplished on a tablet, and so I bought a Toshiba.  Was it any great effort to move from a Mac to a Windows PC?  Not really.  When I get home and want to do something on the Mac Mini (last year's G4 model) does it take any effort to switch back?  Nope, none, nadda, zip.  Most tasks are accomplished with that single adjustment of using the "Command" key on the Mac in place of the "Control" key in Windows.  

    Put another way, do you forget how to drive when you move from your Toyota at home to a rented Ford?  The controls are marked a bit differently and are put in slightly different places, but after all of about two minutes, its second nature.  So too with computer interfaces.  Microsoft stole so many UI elements from Apple over the years, and yes, Apple stole more than a few winners from Microsoft as well, that even seamingly advanced UI functions like application switching (Alt-Tab) work about the same on either platform.  Alt-Tab, by the way, is an example of a much-loved Mac feature that originally debuted in Windows.

    So, will I buy Vista?  Absolutely.  THe improvements to the UI don't really excite me (I turn off most eye candy on both Mac and WIndows anyway), but the improvements to handwriting recognition for my tablet is significant, as are some under-the-hood improvements in the OS itself.  I don't know enough about Leopard yet to say if I will buy it or not.  I bought Tiger because it added features that really work for me, and I'm guessing that Time Machine is such a feature that will have me buying Leopard.

    Finally, I'd like to concur with a previous poster about Windows 2000 being the high point for Windows.  WHen Windows 2000 was released, OS 9 and Windows 98 were both long passed their prime, and this was the first of the modern operating systems.  I still use Windows 2000 one of my PCs, and will likely use it on another instead of buying another XP license.  It still does everything I want an OS to do in the office environment.

  • tbcpp
    11 Posts

    LOL, that is funny. So sad, but so true. Why can't my copy of Windows trust me? I have never pirated Windows, and I never will! Why then must I be treated like a criminal.

    Not to mention M$'s view of DRM. If Vista ever gets to the point where it requires full DRM to play a dvd (or hd-dvd) at full rez, I will switch to Mac/Linux simply because I trust them more, and they trust me.

  • Fista
    3 Posts

    Septhiroth, if you upgrade almost anything in your PC, Windows will complain and possibly lock you out.

    Is that really a better way?

  • tbcpp
    11 Posts

    That's an interesting piece of (mis)information there. With Macs you don't have to upgrade nearly as often. The Graphics card maybe, but apple osx 10.4 will run fine on many older systems. Infact I have heard of it running fine on a 400Mhz G4! That's a 7 year old system running Apple's modern OS! In comparision a 400Mhz machine running XP is bearly usable, and Vista would simply not run at all.

    For that matter, I have a 180Mhz SGI O2 in my room that can capture video and audio and edit it. Try doing that on a 180Mhz PC!

    I'm not a Mac Fanboi, I just can't understand the mentality of Micro$oft. I'm a professional programmer, and when I write code I try to findout how fast I can make it go as I'm coding it. Every Microsoft product I have ever seen seems to be written by brain-dead programmers. Why is it that every other OS is faster cleaner, and requires lower spec hardware? I don't think it's features, it's simply because Vista is poorly designed.

  • Sephiroth
    35 Posts

    It's interesting how if you want to stay on top of technology with a Mac, you have to buy a whole complete Mac system.  Then within months, it will be obsolete.

    A PC gives me the flexibility to upgrade my motherboard and CPU for only pennies compared to having to invest in an entirely new Mac system.  This is one of the primary reasons I remained faithful to PCs and not necessarily the OS even though both are inseparable.

    If Windows Vista is as good as OSX, then there is saving grace up towards Vienna.

    The ball is in Microsoft's court, the game has begun, the clock is ticking, and the audience is on the edge of their seats.

    Make this shot count with Vista!  Make it a sure thing with Vienna!

  • Who released this to the press. Was it a vendictive act? Just curious...

  • Jim,

    I really do hope that you can get Vista right, because I fear the tide of Apple Mac OSX has been flowing strongly since you made that now infamous remark.

    I didn't work for MS and I did make the switch to Apple's OSX and I would say you need Vista to be hugely better than XP to stem the tide.

    I came to this blog via another CEO that made the switch though his comments are more severe on the differences than mine: http://software.seekingalpha.com/article/22341

  • Dont worry Jim most users will stay with Microsoft!

    Because Vista is as least as good as if not better than XP, depending on how you use it.  Microsoft will probably support Vista longer than Apple will support any version of its OS, so relatively speaking its a bargain.

    Mac OS is nice and pretty, but the hardware is relatively expensive.  The big barrier is that people dont want to rebuy their applications, although dual booting is now an affordable option, its adds a little more cost meaning Macs will have to come down in price more for more widespread adoption.

    Linux is more secure, but security comes with at a price "ease of use", most windows users expect to be able to do things without using the command line and dont like having to constantly type in passwords to do basic things like change their monitor resolution.  Sure some distros are better than others, but the simpler/easier to use linux distros ask for fees, making Windows cheaper over time.

    That said I love aspects of all OS's and I hope they all improve, Im sure we all agree that XP had its problems prior to service pack 2, but service pack 2 raised the bar.  A little competition is good.

    I might buy a Mac if they cost half as much, as it is I'ld rather just buy 2 Windows based PC's instead!

  • I agree that its important to let the customers judge how good Windows Vista is and will be. I however feel they will be extremely happy with the final product when it reaches stores on January 30th.

    Its important to note that you must not just judge Windows Vista based upon its look and feel. So much has been done to the underlying code that sets the stage for so much more in the future with both updates to Vista itself and the next version of Windows - Vista is truly a very important milestone for the Windows OS.

    Also: the whole Microsoft copied Apple argument is getting really old. I hear Apple is looking to push for a UI to "compete" with Aero in Leopard. One OS copies another, one company "copies" another. Heck, folks are now saying Google is copying Yahoo! - I think its time to move away from this argument and onto something else.

  • I think it's best to let customers judge how phenomenal Windows Vista really is.

    I find Vista overall a good product but not "the best windows yet" not by a long shot - Windows XP SP2 was the best windows IMHO and still is.

    I'm disappointed with the final fit and finish of Vista - the sound scheme, the wallpapers, the screensavers and what happened to the boot screen? MIA it seems. And what about the huge UI inconsistencies?

    The reason I mentioned fit and finish is because clearly Mac OSX is far superior in this respect and I feel Vista's fit and finish is awkward.

    To end my spiel: Don't be afraid to say that Mac does aspects of the desktop pc operating system better than Windows. Improve and really put an effort in with Windows Vienna.

  • How does this set the record straight? Everyone at MS must wish they had a real Mac, after all you keep trying to make copies of it and alas failing.

    The delayed nature of Vista and its half-baked nature (new file system, one of the basics of an OS, not being delivered) show that Microsoft's development process are nowhere near under control. Reasonable updates to an OS must be delivered every 12-18 months in order to keep up with industry developments. This also makes it easier for users to migrate without the large hurdle that Vista is. Apple has again stolen the march on that one.

  • Fista
    3 Posts

    "Vista will clear the hurdle of business and pleasure, that  the latter, supposedly, OSx takes care of."

    Brand, you nimrod, don't make fun of other people's spelling or grammar if you can't do any better.

    "Mac OSx is "invulnerable to virusses" (sic) because viri are not developed for Linux.  Windows is everyone's target, simply because of the wide adoption."

    Let me fix that for you, "Windows is everyone's target, simply because of the massive gaping holes in the OS."

    The idea that attacks have everything to do with market-share has been proven wrong time and time again.

    Let's look at Apache. Easily the most-used web server in the world, yet the majority of attacks are on servers running Windows. Does that tell you anything?

    Perhaps that security has nothing to do with market-share?

    Perhaps that security really isn't as important to MS as they would have you believe?

    Honestly, you don't think the effort has been there already to write a virus for OS X? The programmer would be famous, and there's enough of you MS-followers blindly living the lies that it has to have been attempted by now.

    What's that? This OS X install is still not infected? Five years and not a single virus in the wild?

    Even the most diehard MS fanboi would find it hard to dispute the fact that OS X is inherently more secure than any version of Windows, including Vista. We've seen the security models, we know how many dialog boxes are going to be jumping up at our grandmothers, asking for confirmation or an admin password every hour or so.

    Does this really train people to be more aware of security issues, or does it simply train them to click 'OK' on every button that appears in Vista?

    Anyone with their head on straight wouldn't even think about investing in a whole new machine to run this tragedy of an OS.

    Seriously, how many versions of Vista are there? Will any of them allow you upgrade your motherboard without purchasing a new license?

    Is anyone even taking a look at the complaints?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Windows_Vista has a lot of valid points.

    Obviously MS isn't going to just lie down and die in the OS market, as they have almost unlimited cash to throw at their problems.

    They bled money with the XBox just to get into the market, and are going to be suffering with the incompatible Zune (doesn't work with PlaysForSure, or any former MS partners' music systems, why aren't there lawsuits over these sneaky business practices?)

    It's just stupid to argue with people who have never used a Mac or a Linux machine over Windows. They simply don't have a clue as to what they're missing. They also have no clue how much time they would be saving, not having to bother with drivers, virus definition updates, etc. if they were on a Mac.

    I'm very much enjoying the reports of businesses realizing their machines won't run even the lightest version of Vista. Hopefully once their service contract is up, even though MS is sure to make them an 'offer they can't refuse' they will see the light of freedom and switch to OpenOffice and Linux.

    Who in their right mind wants to pay again and again for the same thing, with only incremental upgrades? I know I can't stomach the though of ever paying for Office again. Incompatibility be damned, the governments of the world will all soon be using OpenOffice. It works great on Windows, have you heard about it?

    Vista is like buying a HD-DVD or Blu-Ray disc of a movie I already own on DVD. I really have to upgrade my whole home theater system just to see a difference?

    I'll close by saying I hope Vista tanks. The more failures MS brings to market, the better it will be for businesses and regular users. Choice is good, but not if all the choices involve Windows in some way.

    Hey, some of you really enjoy tinkering with your Windows box to get it working better or with some device. That's fine, you guys would love Linux.

    The rest of us don't have that much time to waste. Windows slows my work down and gets in my way.

  • You know, I bet there wasn't one person at Apple, even back in 1996, that ever said, "If I weren't an Apple employee, I'd get a PC."  Microsoft will never get it, aside from the fact that you're at least a decade behind Apple.  Microsoft will never have the brand loyalty seen by Apple's user base.  I can't even describe how sickened I am when I'm presented with a situation in which I have to use Windows.  How many years has Vista been in development?  It only took Steve Jobs and NeXT Computer three years to create the most advanced operating system of the time.  What were you guys thinking?  Let's see... I could either pay over a thousand dollars to buy a PC that's capable of running your bloated Windows Vista, or I can buy a beautiful Macintosh that can run Windows and the more advanced Mac OS X for considerably less.  Oh yeah, and why would I want to be treated like a criminal...  can't forget that.  Don't you idiots realize how annoying your anti-piracy measures are?  Windows tempt a Mac user?  Looking back, and ahead to Vista, I can't even imagine that scenario.  End up at Apple?  I'd love to see that interview...  I know I sound quite biased here, but let's get one thing straight...  I was a PC user for over ten years before I bought my first Mac.  Windows XP was the straw that broke the camel's back.  I couldn't take it anymore.  After playing around with Mac OS X at a store display, I bought a Macintosh.  I'm now on my second Mac and plan on purchasing a MacBook within the next month.  Microsoft had better get it's ass in gear if it plans on surviving the next twenty years.  You know what's really sad?  I haven't even mentioned Leopard.  If you want to know why people are switching to Macs, look no further.  I'm the "every-switcher".  The more there are of me, the more there will be in the future.  People see the wonderful things my Mac can do and they want it.  Vista does not have it.

  • Rosyna
    16 Posts

    I don't see the problem with Jim's comment. It seemed clear to me that he was saying if he was just a classic outside observer, with no inside knowledge of how MS and Windows worked that he'd get a Mac if he had to ingest all the same anti-Microsoft comments that all the other users have to. And that Microsoft changing the way the public perceives Microsoft was/is the only way to remedy that. At least that's how I interpreted the comment.

  • Nick White
    1204 Posts

    Hey meh:  your initial suspicion was correct -- we're using the local system time for the Countdown Gadget, as once it's 12AM 30 Jan in your time zone, Windows Vista will be available to you.  Pity those of us on the West coast of the US, or even those in Hawaii (but don't pity them too much ;)!

  • tbcpp
    11 Posts

    I've been using Windows since the 3.1 days. However, in my opinion windows 2000 was the height of the Windows OS line. It was fast, light and worked well, based off of NT, etc.

    I work with Windows machines on a daily basis. I've worked with OS X and Linux. The two things that tick me off about Windows are as follows: 1) Bloat. No matter how you dice it, Vista is full of bloat. As stated above a 3Ghz feels no faster than my old 40Mhz simply because of all the bloat. Why is it that Linux and OS X have their fancy guis running on GeForce3 and 800Mhz. When vista requires a GeForceFX or higher! Don't feed me any of this junk about how Vista looks better. I've seen it. I know how Areo works (I've done graphics GPU programming). And you souldn't need pixel shaders for a GUI!

    2) I don't like the way Microsft treats me like a criminal. I'm constantly having to type in product codes and register by phone, and then there's the whole Windows Genuine (Dis)advantage. MacOSX? They require one product key, and it's activated. And we all know Linux is free.

    So Micro$oft, start caring about your customers , and I might start caring about Vista.

  • Hash
    6 Posts

    Heh ... Graphic,

    I might be on idiot.com, but care to refute any of the stated facts in my post ?  You can slam my opinions by name calling but the facts speak for themselves.

    Hint:  The DOJ trial is a matter of public record, and so is the SCO lawsuit.  Learn to READ and not just be spoon fed by the Microsoft PR machine.  Maybe all those years of MS associated existance have hindered that ability.  ;-)

    Hash

  • Jim,

    Think of it this way... come Feb 1st, you'll be free to finally use your Mac. The wait must be killing you, I know, but you know it will be worth it. I felt the same way when I left MS.

    Mike

    PS: All the best in your new ventures... hope you end up at Apple. You were wrongly singled out for Vista mess.

  • Graphic
    1 Posts

    Wow Hash... you should come under the alias of conspiracy theory king!!

    In my many years of existance (and a lot of them have been MS associated) I have never heard such imaginative MS slandering.

    Well done on making yourself look like the biggest tool on the internet.

    (Be sure to keep an eye on idiot.com There will be a full story on Hash shortly)

  • Hash
    6 Posts

    "Windows Vista has turned into a phenomenal product, better than any other OS we've ever built and far, far better than any other software available today.."

    Yeah ... just like Windows XP was the "Most secure OS ever" a couple of years back.  How did that work out?  

    "Let me set the record straight:"

    Care to set the record straight when you testified in the DOJ trial that revealing source code (APIs) could damage National Security and threaten the War effort in Afghanistan?  And then when Linux became popular, suddenly Microsoft found the "Shared source code" religion and it was OK to share code with Russia and China?  No National Security implications there.  Or was that taken out of context too?  After all you were only under OATH in a federal court!

    If the DOJ had any balls (or wasn't paid off by political contributions) someone should be in prison for either Perjury or Treason.  Take your pick.

    Then again, lying at the drop of a hat seems to be a prerequisite of Microsoft managment.  

    "We had nothing to do with funding SCO" - and Richard Emerson, Ken Lustig and Tivanka Ellawala mysteriosly spoke to Baystar on their own.  Ballmer's and Gates played the "plausible deniability" card.  I wonder if Jim Allchin knew about the SCO deal?  Want to set the record straight on that?

    And Ballmer's latest "undiclosed liability balance sheet" or whatever comments regarding Linux.  

    Disgusting, despicable morally and ethically bankrupt monopoly.  Which also makes buggy, malware infested bloatware.  

    Maybe others should take your advice and buy that Mac.

    Hash

  • JoeDuck
    2 Posts

    Nice post Jim - sincerity can be Microsoft's salvation as an internet powerhouse.  More discussion like you fostered there and here is needed, not less.

  • Dear Jim,

    Your comment was not taken out of context, it is just being taken in the context that people would like to see it.  I for one, thank you for the comet, as it shows how serious you were at the time and that you needed to be.  I have been frustrated with the windows operating system for quite some time now, and was getting ready to get 'em at.  Because you made the comment, you voice that feelings of a lot of frustrated windows users, which has now culminated in the creation of vista.

    I have been working with the Vista beta for about three or four months, and I must finally say that Microsoft has given me an operating system when I did not have one before.  It has post my performance and my ability to get things done more than I could have imagined.

    So in conclusion, I would like to  thank you for being so serious about having a working operating system and therefore making that comment, because it has changed my computing world.

    You was truly,

    Iam bennu

  • Yes, here, here, I say more power to you.

    While it may not be a competitor in the enterprise, the Mac and Linux are absolutely competing desktop operating systems, even as dominant as Windows is. The fact is that you can go, plunk down $600 and have a Mac mini up and running. Likewise, a Mac user could easily go pick up a cheap PC and, after January 30, be looking at Vista's desktop in minutes. My hope would be, if Vista's a success, that it'll tempt a Mac user; if it doesn't (emotional platform loyalty aside), I think you should wonder why. For me, that reason is often *not* noticing the OS -- just being able to run everything that platform has to offer without having to even think about the OS. XP isn't quite there, I think everyone can agree, and I hope Vista is closer.

    As a journalist, I feel obligated to keep up with all the different OSes. So when I hear about Microsoft "dogfooding", great -- but it's important to keep that perspective about the whole market, too.

    And, meh, Vista release is like New Year's. You have to break a bottle of champagne across the bow of your new PC--- erm, actually, maybe I'll use an old, non-working PCjr for that.

  • I applauded the honesty of the e-mail. There's nothing wrong with a company admitting that its competitors do some things better. I'd be more worried about a company that *didn't* do this, because it would indicate that management is delusional.

    To continue to thrive, Microsoft needs to look at the competition, identify places where other companies are doing better than them, and make the changes necessary to eliminate the gap.

  • meh
    2 Posts

    Oh, By the way.  You need to fix the clock in the top right counting down to Vista.  At least use the UTC time for it as right now it shows the count down to Jan 30 at midnight, in the time zone you are in, and I am assuming that the release is not being done 5 times, once in each time zone of the US.  If it is though, please ignore this comment.

  • meh
    2 Posts

    The remark in your e-mail about buying a MAC really did not disturb me in any way.  Looking at what was quoted, it was very easy to tell what was being atempted in saying that.  I have been a Windows user since the 2.0 days and have seen some improvements and to be honest, if it were not for a very bad response from your tech support, I would probably still be using windows.  However, Windows 98 is the last MS OS I purchased for my home because of that response.  For my job, I do use XP and Visual Studio, so I am still involved with Windows and one thing that really has me bothered is how much eye candy and fluff has been added to the interface.  Do you realize how much time is spent with the fades and rolls and such in the windows?  Not to even mention the size of the code.  The improvement in speed from the old 2 MHz PCs to the 3 GHz pcs of today has been totally subsumed by the extra effects being used.  For me, at least, I would prefer more stability and less eye candy.

  • Sephiroth
    35 Posts

    Constructive criticism, even when it eats down to the core “apple” (no pun intended) of our pride, is like a thorn in our flesh.  But it is only through gradual removal that the healing process can begin.

    Many times I’ve been tempted to say, “The hell with Microsoft.” and to switch over to a Mac.  After carefully weighing what I’ve already invested in numerous software and hardware, the cost of making that switch would have been cost-prohibited.  If it wasn’t for the fact that I’m a system builder and if it wasn’t for the fact I enjoy putting parts and components together creating a kick-ass machine, I would have made that switch to a Mac a very long time ago.

    Microsoft has to begin or continue its forward-thinking approach if it wants to be competitive and to “remain” competitive in this dynamically ever-changing market.  But Microsoft’s pride can be its own downfall such as did Lucifer’s pride.

    We are aware that you can please some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time.  However, looking inwardly to ourselves critically and honestly is the only way for improvement; looking outwardly of ourselves critically and honestly what people constructively say  makes us even more better!

    Be honest and be true to your heart.  Everything else will fall in place so Vista (Vienna)-easily.

    There's something here that everyone at Microsoft can learn.  And remember, if you can't lead or follow... just get the heck-out-of-the-way.

  • mrmckeb
    26 Posts

    Good Work Jim. I understand where you are coming from with the Mac argument... Microsoft has changed since then and I hope you guys can hold the Apple back.

  • brand
    4 Posts

    Wow.  A majority of these responses are just a terrible.

    First off, you can't come into a man's house and steal his wife and kids.  Why not just criticize him on some Linux fan-boy forum?

    Mac OSx is "invulnerable to virusses" (sic) because viri are not developed for Linux.  Windows is everyone's target, simply because of the wide adoption.

    Don't you all think that Windows is the most widely adopted OS for a reason?  Vista will clear the hurdle of business and pleasure, that  the latter, supposedly, OSx takes care of.

    I've been using Windows since 3.1, and, just the other night, while setting up a RAID and installing Server 2k3 while sitting on the phone at work for 6 hours with a co-worker.  We got successfully distracted for at least 15 minutes by discussing things like the glee we felt when installing 35 floppied Windows 95, the "turbo button," and other great classics.

    I welcome Vista and think it'll be awesome.  I really like the switch in persona that Microsoft has taken; and it hasn't even become cheesy.  I can see it now: John Hodgman dressed like some hipster, and Justin Long commenting on how he looks different, but then John can't hold back and starts talking about business again.  So be it, at least Microsoft is trying to be as cool and hip as your Mac.  Hey, it's not like I'd be using a Mac ever anyway...

    Keep up the good work all you Microserfs!

  • someone
    156 Posts

    I like MS and criticize them to improve. I really hope that MS keeps a watch on small features of their competitor's products...Mac OS X's full-fledged killer applications.

  • dugbug
    5 Posts

    Allchin,

    1) Can we stop saying that vista is the "best OS we have ever delivered"? I mean, what does that prove? Are you soothing the concern that windows 3.1 may be better? :)

    2) While you didn't do it in this post, please ban the words "super excited" from the microsoft vernacular.

    Thank you,

    -d

  • assono
    4 Posts

    These are supposed to be comments??? Danwarne, are you ons something? I think everyone is getting a little overpassionate about PCs.

  • quux
    2 Posts

    Although a lot of fuss will be made about this by people who think MS is the evil empire and gladly use any out-of-context quote or shred of evidence they can to prove their point, I can completely see what you were saying, Jim.

    And I am glad you said it. You were right: Vista was off the rails and needed to be brought back in line. I'm looking forward to my copy.

  • Walter
    2 Posts

    Dear Jim,

    for ages I have been interested in OS's. I started out one day with Windows 3.11 for Workgroups. In recent years the plaque of virusses etc. drove me to the switch of platform in 2003. Just for the usability reasons. I am finding out that de Mac platform accomodates me perfectly, although my employer bounds me to use Win XP. How can you assure me, that Vista won't be like XP ? Will it be invulnerable to virusses as well as OS X ?? THanks and as Dan said....don't be afraid to show your colours....take advantage of both platforms (but don't dare to copy more)

    Greetz Wouter

  • It's OK, Jim. Be honest about what you think: the Mac brotherhood is ready to accept you with pride. Show your true colours: you know your true heart is with an iMac. In a fruity colour.