Steer Clear of Windows Vista Basic
in [Dell]
|
Prev: Dell CD-RW Drive?
Next: Installing new HD a 5150C
From: Doug Jacobs on 19 Mar 2007 14:59 Someone does not understand the difference between "hardware" and "software". The fact that MSWord is a huge piece of bloated software is not a failing of Vista nor the hardware. The fact that Vista's HW requirements make most people's PCs incapable of running a web browser is not a failing of the hardware. -- Win cash and giftcards just for clicking your mouse! http://www.netwinner.com/?signupCode=amuro98
From: Barry Watzman on 19 Mar 2007 15:05 I don't believe that you say any new computers from major OEMs preloaded with Vista in a configuration that only had 256MB of memory. The MS minimum for Vista is 512MB, and they won't approve any systems with less than 512MB as "Vista Ready" or "Vista Capable". But the subject of this message is well taken; Vista Basic is a bad joke that should be avoided by almost everyone. Doug Jacobs wrote: > Tom Scales <tjscales(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> Everyone sees a conspiracy at every turn when it is just good business. > > Of course it's good business! I'm sure the kickbacks that Microsoft is > getting from the hardware companies is very nice... > > I'm only half kidding here... Seriously, running ANY flavor of Vista is > going to end up sucking down large chunks of your hardware. It disgusted > me when I saw the local stores trying to foist systems onto customers that > would barely run Vista, much less anything like an application. I > guarantee you that just weeks before that very same hardware SKU had XP > Home loaded on it, at least making them a capable home system. But > now...Ugh. > > For instance, can anyone tell me why you would EVER sell a Vista system > with less than 1GB (MINIMUM!) RAM in it? Yet I still saw several "bargin" > systems shipping with 256MB of RAM and half of that was sucked down by the > video card. I'm surprised Vista even consented to even BOOT on such > hardware... But hey, $400 and the system's yours! > >
From: RnR on 20 Mar 2007 23:17 On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 07:25:39 -0400, "Tom Scales" <tjscales(a)gmail.com> wrote: > ><RnR> wrote in message news:n4rsv2d5qupk8dqnbf5ddipmskbpvn22os(a)4ax.com... >> On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 23:11:10 -0400, Ben Myers >> <ben_myers_spam_me_not(a)charter.net> wrote: >> >>>Microsoft has contractually strong-armed nearly all of its OEMs into >>>providing >>>Windows Vista with nearly all of the computers. Exceptions are made, of >>>course, >>>for large corporations and government agencies who would otherwise tell >>>Microsoft, Dell, HP and everyone else to go stuff Vista, exactly where to >>>stuff >>>it, and detailed instructions of how to stuff it. So Dell sells XP >>>systems, not >>>thru its home/consumer "channel", but thru the business and govt channels. >>> >>>Likewise, copies of XP have mysteriously dried up in the retail store >>>channel. >>> >>>... Ben Myers >> >> >> I concur. Obviously it's due to profit margin on Vista is so much >> greater than XP and corporate sales are the main revenue of each pc >> mfgr so they can afford to let them have XP where as to maximize >> revenue on the consumer side, they push Vista instead of XP. Bottom >> line to us is, the consumer gets screwed again and the sad thing, most >> don't even know it because they buy into MS bs (much like software >> licenses but thats already in other threads). > >How do you figure the profit margins are higher? > >The real reason is likely that they want to focus their support efforts on >Vista. Having dual support teams is very expensive. If XP is just in the >corporate channel, the costs are low, as most corporations essentially >support themselves. > >Everyone sees a conspiracy at every turn when it is just good business. > > Simple, look at the price of Vista and the price of XP where available now. Obviously they make more per unit with Vista than XP now and Dell I think wants to push Vista for that reason. I don't think the cost of support is that great considering they use overseas labor and if I recall CNN mentioned they get tax breaks for overseas offices.
From: RnR on 20 Mar 2007 23:22 On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 15:05:56 -0400, Barry Watzman <WatzmanNOSPAM(a)neo.rr.com> wrote: >I don't believe that you say any new computers from major OEMs preloaded >with Vista in a configuration that only had 256MB of memory. The MS >minimum for Vista is 512MB, and they won't approve any systems with less >than 512MB as "Vista Ready" or "Vista Capable". > >But the subject of this message is well taken; Vista Basic is a bad joke >that should be avoided by almost everyone. > Barry, I've read at least 2 professional reviewers who said the same as you. So I guess you are correct.
From: Ben Myers on 21 Mar 2007 01:24
And Michael Dell still has the balls to whine that Dell does not sell enough systems in India! ... Ben Myers On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 22:17:09 -0500, RnR wrote: >On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 07:25:39 -0400, "Tom Scales" <tjscales(a)gmail.com> >wrote: > >> >><RnR> wrote in message news:n4rsv2d5qupk8dqnbf5ddipmskbpvn22os(a)4ax.com... >>> On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 23:11:10 -0400, Ben Myers >>> <ben_myers_spam_me_not(a)charter.net> wrote: >>> >>>>Microsoft has contractually strong-armed nearly all of its OEMs into >>>>providing >>>>Windows Vista with nearly all of the computers. Exceptions are made, of >>>>course, >>>>for large corporations and government agencies who would otherwise tell >>>>Microsoft, Dell, HP and everyone else to go stuff Vista, exactly where to >>>>stuff >>>>it, and detailed instructions of how to stuff it. So Dell sells XP >>>>systems, not >>>>thru its home/consumer "channel", but thru the business and govt channels. >>>> >>>>Likewise, copies of XP have mysteriously dried up in the retail store >>>>channel. >>>> >>>>... Ben Myers >>> >>> >>> I concur. Obviously it's due to profit margin on Vista is so much >>> greater than XP and corporate sales are the main revenue of each pc >>> mfgr so they can afford to let them have XP where as to maximize >>> revenue on the consumer side, they push Vista instead of XP. Bottom >>> line to us is, the consumer gets screwed again and the sad thing, most >>> don't even know it because they buy into MS bs (much like software >>> licenses but thats already in other threads). >> >>How do you figure the profit margins are higher? >> >>The real reason is likely that they want to focus their support efforts on >>Vista. Having dual support teams is very expensive. If XP is just in the >>corporate channel, the costs are low, as most corporations essentially >>support themselves. >> >>Everyone sees a conspiracy at every turn when it is just good business. >> >> > >Simple, look at the price of Vista and the price of XP where available >now. Obviously they make more per unit with Vista than XP now and >Dell I think wants to push Vista for that reason. I don't think the >cost of support is that great considering they use overseas labor and >if I recall CNN mentioned they get tax breaks for overseas offices. |