Microsoft Mojave Experiment

Discussion in 'Windows Applications' started by coathanger007, Aug 2, 2008.

  1. coathanger007

    coathanger007 Tomorrow Tweaking Today

    Messages:
    1,520
    Location:
    Australia
    Evidently spurred on by the reception it got at Thursday's financial analysts meeting, Microsoft has decided to move ahead with plans to turn the Mojave project into a full-fledged Windows Vista marketing effort.

    As first reported by CNET News, Microsoft last week interviewed XP users who were skeptical of Vista and showed them what it called a secret new version of Windows, "Mojave." It was in fact Vista. The results, according to Microsoft executives, were almost universally positive, with participants expressing surprise when told it was actually Vista they had been using.

    For now, Microsoft has put up a teaser site, with plans to show the actual video footage next week. (As I mentioned before, Mojave was something put together in the past couple of weeks by internal Microsoft people and is not the larger advertising campaign coming from new ad agency Crispin Porter and Bogusky.)

    http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-9999971-56.html

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igSlM3tl2zE&NR=1

    http://www.mojaveexperiment.com/#

    What do you think?
     
  2. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,332
    Location:
    new york
    vista definately has some image issues thanx to gates releasing it far too early and clearly under developed (as he admitted hinself by the way)

    now that they've gotten the market to beta test the os and root out the flaws, it's definately an improvement over xp but people are reluctant to give the vista logo a go

    I say it could use a new face so this is a good idea, however most people will recognize the marketing trick so they are going to have to offer something unique in this new version of vista which the original incarnation does not have
     
  3. Johnny

    Johnny .. Commodore .. Political User

    Messages:
    5,015
    Location:
    Happy Valley
    I love Vista. I find it more fun to play with than XP. Sure there were issues in the beginning, but XP had the same thing when it first came out.

    I am anxious to see what Windows 7 will be like, though ...
     
  4. rotjong

    rotjong Moderator

    Messages:
    573
    Location:
    The far side of nowhere
    I found the Mojave Experiment information to be more than humorous. It simply proves just how powerful word-of-mouth can be. Many of the people involved clearly stated that they had never used Vista but they heard how bad it was and had no interest as a result. A person hears something from someone else and without any actual personal verification they accept it as fact. While this is common in many cases it is also quite frightening. In this case it only pertains to an OS but in other situations it can be far worse.

    Nonetheless, the people who argue against this experiment say that the "test subjects" also didn't have to experience the troubling issues with Vista such as driver problems. So, the experiment didn't go as far as it should with the subject installing the OS themselves on their own system and then having to hunt down drivers as necessary. I agree that this part being missing does make a huge difference in the opinion of a user however I also blame many people for their problems using Vista by causing the problems themselves because they didn't pay enough attention to what they are doing and making sure their hardware will be or is compatible with drivers that exist for said hardware.

    I have been running Vista Ultimate x64 for a roughly four months on a system that I built from scratch. I've had no driver issues at all. In most ways I am very pleased with Vista however I have also had to adjust to the differences. I was never a Windows Explorer fan and the new changes in Vista are even more annoying to me. I really have very few complaints, however. I loved XP Pro but I haven't even booted into XP in 3 months.
     
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2008
  5. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,332
    Location:
    new york
    rotjong, the only real problem with vista was the problem gates documents himself, it was released far too under developed

    of COURSE people were reluctant to switch, thanx to people like myself who had TERRIBLE issues with stability and speed, I HAPPEN to have quite a bit of influence when I tell someone to wait a bit...my advice was EXCELLENT at the time and there were plenty of people with a far better reputation then I have who said the exact same thing

    (gates being one of them)

    xp was in fact more developed then vista at time of initial offering since it was a pretty face on windows 2000, most drivers were written, and don't forget, it was replacing a dos os so even with it's growing issues it was still a better choice for just about every user using the previous incarnation of windows

    the vista os is fine now but the image is horrible thanx it being released far too under developed...a new face is a fine idea but as I said, they are going to have to offer something new in order to call it anything but vista, otherwise everyone will know they are being gamed

    I STILL don't think anyone should switch to vista just for the sake of doing it, xp is still one fine os and vista does NOT offer too much more then xp for the average pc user...to me this is a waste of time until they go all 64 bit or until they make a solid state hardrive.

    I think the next great os will be a hybrid, solid state hardrive with mechanical storage to populate memory when the os boots.

    I predicted that a long time ago and I believe that is what they are working on right now, about a half decade after I predicted it (most techies said I was batty at the time by the way and didn't understand or know about the concept of 64 bits being able to handle all the addresses necessary to make it happen)
     
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2008
  6. rotjong

    rotjong Moderator

    Messages:
    573
    Location:
    The far side of nowhere


    I'm somewhat confused by what you are referring to. Do you mean Windows 7 needs to be more than a new face on Vista or the Mojave Experiment being the new "secret" version?

    I do agree with most of what you've said. I didn't install Vista until right around the release of SP1. I would never have used XP x64 and I refused to upgrade to Vista 32-bit. I also wanted to have the ability to make use of 4+ GB of memory.
     
  7. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,332
    Location:
    new york
    I mean simply calling vista "mojave" isn't going to do the trick overcoming the terrible reputation vista created for itself, they are going to have to give it something vista doesn't have in order for the new name to be effective

    for instance, that new file system that was supposed to be released with the original vista, or maybe a 3d desktop by default, that would be just about enough to do the trick I think...I personally would like to see the operating system intalled into rom but I know that isn't going to happen

    imagine that though!

    there is definately the technology to have the entire os on rom, basic in out system can still be there but man I would love the entire os preloaded into rom

    I like to point out, even before I knew there would be issues with vista I said the release would be a disapointment for microsoft, xp is too good an operating system and vista wouldn't be a big enough improvement to have people want the os as desperately as they wanted the other new releases from microsoft
     
  8. Sazar

    Sazar F@H - Is it in you? Staff Member Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    14,905
    Location:
    Between Austin and Tampa
    Vista didn't create jack. The vast majority of issues were created for Vista by crappy 3'rd party support, which was still a heck of a lot better than for XP.

    People threatened to sue over a number of things and naturally to release within a specific timeframe, they did release it without some previously highlighted features and so forth.

    The operating system was still fine and polished enough for daily use in a primary system. Ask Matt or myself or Net, people whom I would consider to be power-users with a variety of peripherals and people who were still able to get very usable and positive experiences.

    XP had far more issues when it was released and the fact you keep bringing up XP to compare Vista with, even though Vista is for all intents and purposes faster, smoother and more usable in real-time usage just shows that you had some issues.

    I have not yet had a show-stopper issue other than Nvidia's absolutely horrendous drivers. That's it. Everything else has just worked.

    Microsoft is going to great lengths to show just that. I see nothing wrong with this. I mean Apple has yet to be held accountable for their false accusations, Microsoft is not stooping to their levels and is instead proving what is a known fact. The majority of bad-mouthing of Vista is not only false, it also happens to be from people who have never even used Vista.
     
  9. rotjong

    rotjong Moderator

    Messages:
    573
    Location:
    The far side of nowhere
    There is no "secret" new OS, though. They only said that so that the people with preconceived notions would take "Mojave" at face value with an open mind rather than their existing opinions of Vista.

    This was simply an experiment that they did and apparently someone decided the results were enough that it should be used for PR purposes because it clearly shows that a vast majority of people who are anti-Vista have not even used the OS at all and simply took the word of others as to why it is so horrible.

    Vista was too big a change and the hardware requirements necessary to make full use of it were pretty extreme for older systems. Throw in the total insanity of the whole "Vista capable" fiasco. Many people simply don't want to upgrade because to them it isn't worth it. In my case I did want to upgrade, I wanted the ability to make full use of 4+ GB of memory and I wanted DirectX 10 support and that just wasn't possible with anything less than Vista x64.

    To be honest, I think the Mojave Experiment does a perfect job of showing exactly how wrong things can go as far as marketing and word-of-mouth badmouthing. It's obvious that many people hold negative opinions of Vista everywhere you look. Where did they get these opinions? How do these people who have never used Vista have the ability to "know" how bad it is?

    I like Vista x64 but that takes nothing away from how solid I consider XP Pro. I consider XP to be my fallback in case I have a problem with Vista and there have been a few cases where I needed to flash firmware and I was unable to do so in Vista. I had to boot into XP to flash the firmware and then boot back into Vista. That was a result of driver signing and Vista x64.

    I don't fault anyone for not wanting to use Vista. As long as they can give me valid reasons and have actually used the OS then I can respect their decision. If they've never even seen the OS then I just shake my head and move on.
     
  10. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,332
    Location:
    new york
    cannot disagree more, the majority of vista issues were with speed and drivers that WERE certified by microsoft, it was NOT a hardware issue it was an os issue, those that were running with old hardware had their own deserved issues, those running with hardware specifically designed for vist had a VISTA issue and not third party problems though those too


    completely untrue and a systems operator had to be nuts to switch to vista, obviously their dated hardware was an issue AND even with hardware that was designed FOR vista they ran a risk that was counter productive UNLESS they had issues with xp that vista solved, those issues were hard to find indeed

    now sazar, you are not under the impression that since you had no issues that means nobody did, are you?

    the issues were documented and abound, you had none and had an excellant experience, I'm sure plenty of people were like yourself, you know as a fact plenty of people had issues like I did

    cannot disagree more here again, xp was a far better os then the os's it replaced, whatever issues you might be referring were an easy trade over the stability issues of the os it replaced

    you had an excellant experience with hardware that had it's certified drivers working correctly, others, like myself did not, I have no problem understanding that you had an excellant os from the beginning, why do you have a problem understanding that others had huge issues that were VISTA caused, not third party, not hardware

    I have always been a fanboy of microsoft, however when there are issues I have no problem recognizing it, I soon fell in love with the os as you know but the issues I had were common, were not caused by anything other then the os or microsoft's certified drivers

    I have never understood the fanboy mentality of apple users, just as I don't understand the fanboy mentality of ms users, when there are issues that are known the proponents of the os need to get on board and acknowledge that there are those issues, otherwise they do not get resolved

    thanx to people they respect like myself and thanx to their support board, ms did a fine job resolving the issues with speed, copying files and their certified driver issues and I am proud of them for that excellant effort but those of you who had no issues need to accept that there were plenty of us who had them

    the bad mouthing of vista WAS not false, copying files, crashing out of the box, and whatever other issues their sp1 resolved, and that CORRECT critisism resulted in a terrible image for the os, a WELL DESERVED terrible image

    microsoft has resolved the issues for most of us and now ms has to find a method to overcome the reputation vista CREATED FOR ITSELF

    now sazar, I understand, you had a wonderful experience out of the box, you understand I am sure, there are plenty of us who simply did not

    the reputation vista has is deserved and even though he does it through a dodge, even gates says so, now microsoft can get on with correcting that image
     
  11. Sazar

    Sazar F@H - Is it in you? Staff Member Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    14,905
    Location:
    Between Austin and Tampa
    You can disagree all you want. The error lists prove that the number one culprit for errors are things like the Nvidia drivers (no.1 by a LONG shot) and so forth. If you google it, I think you'll find that the OS itself is ranked much lower in terms of actual faults.

    My previous desktop was over 3 years old and my notebook also is well over 2 years old. My notebook works in a mission critical environment where most of my colleagues run Vista, in a corporate environment where 24/7 stability is required.

    Do you consider that dated? I sure do and yet Vista runs smoother and has far superior memory management than XP did. Most large business systems/federal systems have a life cycle of approximately 3 years. There are several current mandates for Energy Star compliance as well so hardware is coming in line with those guidelines for many organizations.

    Also, if you read the lawsuits, you'll notice that it wasn't Microsoft that came up with those little badges and in fact the systems in question CAN run Vista, just not the premium/ultimate versions with Aero enabled. Btw, did I mention I am running Aero on full on my notebook with an Intel 950 IGP?

    I typically use my system to it's full potential. Naturally, if I am able to run a stable system while throwing so much at it and not having issues, I expect anyone else with half a brain to be able to do the same. I certainly don't think that's unreasonable amigo :)

    Actually, no I don't :)

    I know SOME people who have had multiple issues and in your case, I was and still am under the impression that it is the package you have in use that is leading to the instability. I can't place the finger on the operating system for those issues. Some others have brought up issues such as file transfers and those are known items that have been addressed. There are still items to be addressed since nothing is perfect but overall, it's pretty polished.

    Look up any industry report referring to failures @ time of introduction. Windows XP has numerous issues and there was a massive lack of support for the OS by 3'rd party vendors upon release. Comparatively, Vista had a vastly superior drivers database.

    If someone is using a product with WHQL drivers, it should work within parameters. Given that the number one cause for OS errors thus far have been WHQL drivers from Nvidia, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that other people are having issues caused specifically by shoddy drivers rather than the OS itself.

    http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/pos...t-paints-picture-of-buggy-nvidia-drivers.html

    [​IMG]

    Microsoft certified drivers? They have an automated process to approve drivers from 3'rd party vendors. See the chart I have included above. Microsft related faults are below 18%. The remaining driver issues are over 82%. Microsoft is not designing the drivers used by other companies.

    I have nothing against criticism. I myself have my own particular issues with Vista but there are no show-stoppers and I can see when the fault is being incorrectly assigned.

    What certified driver issues are you suggesting are Microsoft's fault? The ones that 3'rd party vendors put together?

    Actually, other than things like the copying files issues, the overwhelmingly vast majority of the issues are in fact NOT microsoft's fault. Again, I put it to you to read about the various lawsuits, including the one being conducted re: the stickers where Intel is the culprit, NOT Microsoft.

    And again I put it to you that the issues are not so much Microsoft's but the vendors who did a crappy job with the drivers and fanboi's with pirated copies of XP who did not want to switch to Vista.

    Even now, on tech forums, the majority of complaints revolves around DRM and stupid things like that which have 0 impact on usability of a system. So what if you can't pirate an OS as easily as another one, that person's opinion doesn't count anyways since they are not a consumer.

    And that's what Mojave proves :) The vast majority of the issues with the reputation come from people who have no working knowledge of the OS or have experienced issues emanating from 3'rd party products.

    Again I have to correct you and say that Vista did not have a reputation created for itself. It worked out the box and worked just fine. Numerous reports have proven this.

    I fail to see where Gates says that Microsoft says Vista sucks there. Did you? There is a 5 year Window that the interviewer asks Gates about, Gates does not say Vista sucks in there, nor does he point out the dozens of products Microsoft has released in that time-frame.

    You might need to find me a better video of Gates saying Vista Sucks amigo ;)
     
  12. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,332
    Location:
    new york
    sometimes I don't understand the links you provide believing they make your point when in fact they make the point opposed to your own, the graph you show makes my point not yours, (more below)and I'm surprised you posted it

    so, now you are saying there is no problem with "obsolete hardware" when it comes to vista?

    you seem to think that your experience means everyone should have the same experience and I am dumbfounded

    you are one of the very small percentage who had two gigs of memory or more and I believe you were running dual core processor as well, you seem to think everyone was running the type of hardware you were

    users needed to have what you had to switch to vista, about as much resources as their old hardware would support, most people surely did not have two gigs of memory (ps, as far as I can see this os needs three gigs not two but that's another discussion)

    however both agree with this, if a person didn't have the resources they should have never installed vista as a system critical box and those people can blame themselves not vista

    I happen to have at least half a brain I believe sazar, my system (which was specifically designed for the vista, it was not obsolete hardware) would not run it, nor could you or anyone else make it run as a stable os...until the distributer rewrote their bios and changed those (microsoft certified) drivers, these drivers ms should have never certified, one of them was the wireless card and that was in addition to the video driver

    but what's the difference, these drivers were certified and should not have made it through Microsoft's process, yet they did thanx to whatever excuses you choose to make for ms

    did you know that sp1 created a new issue for me worse then the bios, wireless and video issues I had?

    closing a file AFTER sp1 would actually crash explorer on my latest box! (not my original box)

    judging from your response on this thread, since sp1 didn't cause this issue for it's not an os issue, and since one of my machines didn't have the issue, that means it wasn't an issue for me either

    now an important point;

    this was one of those issues Microsoft CLAIMED had "unknown" origins, it does not get reported as an "os issue" yet I know as a fact sp1 caused the problem not that "unknown" character

    the issue was recently resolved with one of the ms patches, but the cause is still listed as "unknown" (according to ms).

    first you responded by saying you didn't know people had issues, then you amended that to say you did, not following your fanboyishness here Sazar:)

    now that they've fixed the issues vista was shipped, I agree

    I looked it up, then I looked again, I tried every search term I can think of, I can't find what you are talking about

    maybe my search terms are flawed but I can see no similar criticism of xp on release, xp actually SOLVED "driver hell" and had FEWER driver issues then the os it replaced, the biggest complaint I can find is that it did not properly support dos, so please post for me the link, prove to me the error of this feeble memory and my flawed search terminology, post your google results that show users had stability issues when xp was released surpassing the stability of the previous windows os

    my entire experience with those switching to the new operating system known as "xp" is exactly what my search turned up;

    it was beloved from the start, the only people I knew who complained were those who moved from their professional os, (windows 2000) to xp, which they clearly should not have done till xp stretched it's legs, 2000 was an excellent stable system and unless xp offered a feature they needed then no system critical should have switched operating systems, as then, the same thing holds true for vista.

    if the drivers were Microsoft certified then it is in fact an operating system issue, it is also in fact a Microsoft issue, it is obviously ms's certification process, but blaming the vendors after they certified their drivers doesn't fly, the blame does not shift FROM Microsoft since they certified those drivers and shouldn't have, it is in fact an ms issue and an OS issue, NOT a vendor issue
    there you have it, your own graph, the Microsoft caused issues are just short of 20 percent...that's one in five

    this is what you are defending, one in every five issues using vista are actually caused by the operating system and you think a system operator should switch to this OS.

    that one in five figure is bad enough even without the driver issues but we absolutely must add certified drivers to the OS slice of that fault graph

    your pie graph wants to separate the two, which is fine for tracking and fixing the problems but never the less, those driver issues are OS issues not vendor

    once add those ms certified driver issues we see a much worse then one in five fault rate, about half of the problems were caused by Microsoft and vista, one in two...this thing was less then half complete and that figure doesn't even address that 17 percent "unknown" slice of the graph which is going to add significantly to the OS caused problems as well

    what do you suppose "unknown" means?...we don't even know yet if that percentage is OS code, driver code, hardware incompatibility, we have no idea but we do know as a fact at LEAST some of those issues are vista caused problems

    you posted this graph as proof of your point, I simply do not get it, even using your reasoning as far as the drivers being the vendors fault, one in five issues were caused by the OS, that's not acceptable to too many people

    even if we accept your "the drivers were written by the vendors" excuse (which I do not, Microsoft certified those drivers), you are trying to make the case that an OS that expects 20 percent of the users to have OS issues is an acceptable product to release, I am saying there is no way a system critical OS should be switched to an OS which will numbers where no less then 20 percent of the issues are the victim of the OS

    you continue to excuse Microsoft's performance regarding these drivers and their certification program and I have to remind you, the issue is NOT the vendors fault it's the os's, it's Microsoft's certification process and how the OS handled those certified drivers, it is NOT a vendor issue, if Microsoft handled the certification process as they should have these drivers would have been corrected before they reached market

    the vendors had a rush to market CAUSED by Microsoft, they wrote drivers and had them certified, the OS could not run those drivers and you continue to blame the vendor rather then the OS or Microsoft and for the life of me I just don't get your reasoning

    that's because of the accurate reputation the operating system earned for itself, that some boxes would be fine, such as yours, some would be horrible such as mine...those were facts not fantasy

    Microsoft has to come up with a marketing method that overcomes the reputation vista created for itself

    I have no problem with people who took the advice from people like me that they needed to avoid vista until it was fixed, those who do more then play for fun with their OS SHOULD have waited until this thing was more complete and as I said, vista earned the reputation it has, (as your graph clearly demonstrates)

    so the numerous reports that show users like yourself trump the numerous reports that show issues?

    I cannot follow your reasoning, there were issues, we all know about the issues, they were vista issues not vendor issues though you insist otherwise and the OS deserved the reputation it created


    of course I did, that's why I posted the link, I'm surprised you didn't see it

    that's the best one we're gonna find and you can see gates say so himself in the video, he will tell you more about the vista issues when he releases the next OS but he says it loud and clear right there

    Sazar, you had an excellent out of the box experience, good for you, I did not and plenty of others did not

    your own pie Gray shows about 18 percent of the issues were completely vista caused issues, I'm sorry Sazar, even accepting your argument about the drivers being the vendors fault, (I don't accept that argument) 18 percent completely Microsoft issues means as a fact almost one in five problems are entirely vista's doing...that's simple math and this OS earned the terrible reputation it now owns

    I couldn't care less WHY Microsoft certified these drivers they did they shouldn't have, if those drivers were the problems that's an OS issue and a Microsoft issue not a vendor issue, these MICROSOFT CERTIFIED drivers failed, all that matters is that they didn't it doesn't matter not why they did since it is Microsoft who did the certification

    they had their drivers certified, THAT'S why they certify drivers in the first place and ms needs to either correct that ridiculous program or get rid of it so a driver issue really will be the vendors fault instead of Microsoft's

    the ms vista support board is HUGE with issues and again, the reputation vista has is well deserved, ms and vista brought it on themselves

    now that the OS is closer to 100 percent complete, gates has the uphill battle vista created for itself, he needs to change the well deserved bad reputation of vista, (as documented by your graph I might add), gates had no such battle changing the reputation of xp

    and again, even though these issues are resolved for the most part, I still think a person is batty to switch to the operating system unless it has a feature you need that xp does not offer

    you can have the last word, it's obviously clear we won't agree with each others point of view
     
    Last edited: Aug 9, 2008
  13. yertthedestroyer

    yertthedestroyer Awesomeness on Fire

    Messages:
    13
    Location:
    Tucson, Arizona
    I'm sick and tired of anyone saying XP had fewer issues at launch. Anyone saying so has a seriously defective memory.

    You know what though? I have massive amounts of proof.

    XP's Launch was a massive flop, despite costing $250 million to advertise.

    Furthermore, it was buggy out the gate, but that was just the tip of the iceberg.

    XP was then hammered over and over with massive security issues the likes of which Vista users can only imagine.

    As in "Run code of attacker's choice", not something in which you see in Microsoft security bulletins anymore. Microsoft had to delay a new operating system for a third of a decade just to fix XP's security mess. In fact, XP being so bad made Microsoft change its ways in security forever.

    Everyone was complaining about how bad XP was. Of course, Microsoft execs were touting good sales, but unlike Vista, sales were much worst.

    So bad in fact, that even in 2005 companies were still rejecting XP. And not just companies, consumers too! Sales were so bad Microsoft actually had to extend support for older operating systems, being completely different from the action with XP.

    And of course, now that I've covered that XP has been less stable then Vista, I'll cover speed. Performance is largely up to par with XP if not faster, especially since drivers are reaching stability. That wasn't hard was it?

    I have to wrap up, saying that the idea of Mojave isn't to say Vista is good, its to say, drop your bias, and go reevaluate Vista, you might just be surprised at the result.
     
    tdinc likes this.
  14. American Zombie

    American Zombie Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    2,934
    Location:
    Seattle
    Did you read the article from that link?
     
  15. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,332
    Location:
    new york
    that's a good post with good valid links to show xp was indeed as buggy as vista, proving sazar's point

    interesting to me, I was I guess for xp was like sazar is with vista, my experience was entirely positive so I presumed others issues were not so bad

    good post
     
  16. Johnny

    Johnny .. Commodore .. Political User

    Messages:
    5,015
    Location:
    Happy Valley
    Yep, vista is great. The problems came because the third party hardware companies didn't get drivers out for them till late. So the fault is not the OS, it is the hardware developers :)

    Of course, does anyone remember xp going through the same thing when it came out? people were complaining left and right about. As the drivers and hardware became more compatible with it, it turned out to be the best OS that M$ ever produced.

    I'll say it again - I LOVE VISTA !! :)
     
  17. Shamus MacNoob

    Shamus MacNoob Moderator Political User

    Messages:
    4,199
    Location:
    L'Ile Perrot Quebec
  18. rotjong

    rotjong Moderator

    Messages:
    573
    Location:
    The far side of nowhere
    Is it that surprising this happened if it all turns out to be valid? Also, you have to take into account how long Vista has been out before this was discovered and reported. I'm actually impressed. XP had security issues from the very beginning.

    Anyway, this thread is about the Mojave Experiment and what it proved. Quite simply, it proved that many people are stupid sheep. They listen to all the propaganda and they listen to the wrong people in most cases.

    I know many people who have never even sat down and used Vista that would sooner switch to using a Mac than upgrade to Vista. Why? Because it's so horrible! It's the worst thing Microsoft has ever released. There is problem X and problem Y. I ask them, "And have you experienced this firsthand?" Of course, the reply is, "No, but I heard about it." What is proven? Many people are stupid sheep led by a blind shepherd right off a cliff.

    I will always love XP and I consider XP to be very solid [now]. Vista is still a work in progress. I am impressed by Vista, however, and it is growing on me.

    This also shows you that the Apple advertising compaign for the Mac has worked.
     
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2008
  19. Johnny

    Johnny .. Commodore .. Political User

    Messages:
    5,015
    Location:
    Happy Valley
    I agree, rot. The biggest bashers are people who either; 1: Know nothing about it, or, 2: Take what others say as the truth ...

    If people would learn to stop listening to other people, you wouldn't have most of what you have now ...
     
  20. chaos945

    chaos945 Moderator

    Messages:
    934
    Just like every other day; all windows flavours its the same. Market share could be a factor.

    Microsoft has made steps, albeit annoyingly executed, but steps towards securing its products.

    In my experience it is the user's fault most of the time when security is compromised. Perhaps Microsoft should do a blitz on education rather than marketing.
     
    Last edited: Aug 9, 2008