San Jose Business Daily

Only serius answers only; shouldn't a new OS like Vista make things better rather than worse?

Coming out with a new OS that is worse than the one previous defies the fundamental practices of new product development. Was there a need for a new OS in the first place? Even if there were, why would you not make it great?

Public Comments

1. I agree. My boyfriend just bought a new laptop and his says Vista is just weird. I don't think advanced technology is necessarily better =/
2. See what happened with vista isnt about it being a worse OS its just about it being user friendly and being compatible with your devices (printer, fax, ect.)plus a few bugs... but they tried obviously they wouldnt just throw money away.
3. Not enough testing...and greed. New graphics and features that require more horsepower, memory and graphics capabilities. I'm not an Apple person but at least they're on the right track making their OS more like Linux.
4. Well technically Windows XP was worse when it first came out and there were a alot of users sticking with Windows 2000. But after Microsoft came out with Service Packs 1+2 Windows XP didn't have as many bugs or errors as it used to and more and more people switched over. It really is the same it's just that Vista was publicized more than XP so more people got it and more people noticed the bugs it had. I still use Windows XP because Vista hasn't had all the bugs worked out of it yet, and I'm sure once everythings taken care of and they release a Service pack or two I'll switch to Vista. I must point out, though, that when I ran Vista on my PC which I built, I didn't have any errors, I've found Vista will run reliably on AMD processor based machines, but the Software compatibility issue still arises and thats also why I was forced to switch back.