Sunday, May 25th 2008

Technology Analyst: Get Over Vista Hate

A reporter and technology analyst for the Washington Post recently took a rather strong point of view regarding Windows Vista and XP. He accepts that Vista has it's flaws, such as "steep hardware requirements, its strict anti-piracy measures, its sometimes-intrusive security measures, its incompatibility with some older products." However, he points out that the current market behavior, which is something along the lines of "don't upgrade until Vista gets better, and beg to keep XP on shelves" is not doing Vista or Microsoft any good. He points out that XP is not a historic monument in need of preservation, and is more like an old car: it's had a good run, but in view of some XP flaws when compared to Vista strongpoints, it's time to move on. The analyst also pointed out that fundamental supply/demand economics is keeping Vista from rising to greatness. As long as the market holds on to XP, and refuses to move on to Vista, software makers will not see a very good reason to adopt or support Vista, which causes most of the problems Vista has today. You can read more details at the source link.Source: Daily Tech
Add your own comment

157 Comments on Technology Analyst: Get Over Vista Hate

#1
farlex85
Haytch said:
The main issue here is that they are asking XP users to ' get over it '.
Better hardware required to keep up with XP ? So the better hardware will run better on XP!
Vista is shit, everyone knows it, they even know it! They are already over it, and are bringing out the new o.s very very soon. Vista was a marketing strategy to elude users to making a purchase, most making a dual purchase back to XP. MS won big time, so did their shareholders.

Windows7 seems promising as did XP after the many versions between XP PRO & 98se. I have no doubt that the majority of windows users will jump from XP to Windows7. I just hope they dont kill this one too. Please let me pick what i want to install because i cbf pulling it apart and putting together my own version.
Its strange, someone would say something like everybody knows vista is shit, even when there are plenty of people saying they love it. :laugh: Its also still just rumours about windows 7, Bill Gates said something, Microsoft themselved denied it, who knows. The main issue of the article is that there is no real reason to dislike vista at this point other than simple lack of knowledge and bias, something that has become pretty clear in this thread I think; and that this vista hate and xp clinging is causing the progression of the new os and new features to be a slow one. Case and point, dx10, which should have more games by now, but developers are scared to put them on their games as a nessecity for fear there will be lots of complaints from xp owners. Make them make vista better, don't ask them to keep an outdated os lacking the features trying to drive us forward.
Posted on Reply
#2
erocker
Why doesn't Bill Gates just come out and bluntly say "Make your own O/S or just STFU!"? Most of my computer illiterate friends love Vista. I don't love it, but it works. After I set it up the way I like it, my machine doesn't know the difference. Well... Except for my RAM.
Posted on Reply
#3
jtleon
Gots to horn in....

DrPepper said:
I like vista alot and even though people complain about driver crashes it happens on xp too, anyway usualy I put up with it until there is a fix.
I suppose U wouldn't care if your VISA transaction crashed....U now owe 20x more in your next statement....no prob right? U'll pay it and wait for the bank to pay U back right?

As we are already computer dependent, RELIABILITY is the RULE...not the OPTION!!!

LOL
jtleon
Posted on Reply
#4
jtleon
What the heck?!?...I can't believe my eyes....

Easy Rhino said:
yes, they want your money. but they also don't have the resources to continue to innovate AND continue to support the older technologies.
Rhino,

So Ur saying MS is going broke, right? That $43BILLION CASH offer to buy Yahoo was totally smoke & mirrors?

With all respect Rhino....you gots to read a newspaper or watch TV occasionally!

LOL
jtleon
Posted on Reply
#5
Wile E
Power User
jtleon said:
I suppose U wouldn't care if your VISA transaction crashed....U now owe 20x more in your next statement....no prob right? U'll pay it and wait for the bank to pay U back right?

As we are already computer dependent, RELIABILITY is the RULE...not the OPTION!!!

LOL
jtleon
You missed the point of his statement I think. He was saying that XP is just as prone to get bad drivers as Vista.
Posted on Reply
#6
jtleon
OK...So screw the XP customer base...right?

Wile E said:
I agree with the analyst. People need to get over it. Vista is not a bad OS, and XP is getting long in the tooth. It's time to move on, so the developers do too.
Hmmm.....I feel rather sympathetic for you Wile E. I know I'm not smart...as all the experts that disagree with you!

http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2008/04/03/230125/vista-ignored-as-businesses-wait-for-windows-7.htm

But You keep up the good fight!!!!

LOL
jtleon
Posted on Reply
#7
Megasty
Just how much longer do you think MS will support XP? 1 yr..2, come on. XP is already 7 friggin yrs old. Its not going to last forever just like desktop based computing isn't. A GUI isn't everything. OS's are becoming more average user friendly by the second. XP was a buggy POS when it first came out & so was vista. Only time healed XP wounds & the same will happen with vista. MS never corrected most problems with its "new" OS's while they were still "new". Grab vista while you can so you can see its development firsthand b4 the next buggy POS arrives.
Posted on Reply
#8
Easy Rhino
Linux Advocate
jtleon said:
Rhino,

So Ur saying MS is going broke, right? That $43BILLION CASH offer to buy Yahoo was totally smoke & mirrors?

With all respect Rhino....you gots to read a newspaper or watch TV occasionally!

LOL
jtleon
with all due respect, you don't understand business. microsoft has a ton of money. they also have a ton of competition because microsoft is more than just an operating system. they own stock in a lot of other companies and they make business deals all the time. it is a competitive world. do you want microsoft to continue to fully support windows 95 because there might be people out there that have 12 year old computers? of course not. sometimes companies need to push forward in order to stay ahead of everyone else. so that means that they have to pull resources from older programs in order to continue growing at the rate their shareholders expect. their shareholders want them to innovate because that is how you make money. sure, they could pay all sorts of money to continue supporting windows 2000 and XP but that would slow them down. you and i dont know their situation. perhaps this is a pivatol moment for them. regardless, if you think you can do better, then by all means start your own software company.
Posted on Reply
#9
Easy Rhino
Linux Advocate
Megasty said:
Just how much longer do you think MS will support XP? 1 yr..2, come on. XP is already 7 friggin yrs old. Its not going to last forever just like desktop based computing isn't. A GUI isn't everything. OS's are becoming more average user friendly by the second. XP was a buggy POS when it first came out & so was vista. Only time healed XP wounds & the same will happen with vista. MS never corrected most problems with its "new" OS's while they were still "new". Grab vista while you can so you can see its development firsthand b4 the next buggy POS arrives.
i agree. it is amazing how short term our memories are. XP was GARBAGE when it came out. now it is great. it took years to work out all the problems. quality drivers were especially scarce. my guess is that most of the people on here are in their mid-teens so they dont really know of the time that XP sucked and windows 2000 was all the rage. hell! i even remember people complaining about windows 2000 and they wanted better support for windows 98 :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#10
Rebo&Zooty
Easy Rhino said:
a lot of you have missed the point. you whine because vista does not perform as well as windows xp using the same hardware to run applications and games. but every new OS requires higher specs because of consumer demand for functionality and accesibility. you want vista to be better than XP at running applications? then you do it. you start coding and see how it goes. oh whats that? you dont know how to code? then how can you possibly complain about something you dont have the ability to change. you can either buy it or not. that is your role as the consumer. if enought people dont buy it then microsoft will get the message and their next OS will address those problems. but dont expect some miracle OS that will never crash and run crysis at 1,000 FPS on ultra high settings. i dont see the point of all this complaining. you are wasting your energy.
acctualy it dosnt REQUIER higher hardware to improove an os, as can be shown with a decent linux distro(noobuntu is effectivly vista in linux flavor.....heavy on resorces and slow)

check out vectorlinux soho unsing enlitenment, if you want a flashy gui, its got it, if you want speed even on OLD ASS HARDWARE that wouldnt even run windows XP, guess what YOU GOT IT!!!! no joke, i have done it, and it works, so this "you need to force hardware upgrades to add fetures/functionality/accessability.

fact is MS COULD DO IT, but they dont because they want to insure you buy a new puter every couple years, and this is im sure enlarge to keep their pockets full, not just via hardware sales but you know that the higher up's in ms do invest in hardware maker stocks, so its good for them if your forced to buy 16gb ram and a 4ghz quadcore and a 500gb, as well as a 512mb dx10 videocard in order to run their next os, because it insures they make money off the software and off then investments in hardware makers, woot woot guess thats all for the best in your eyes tho.

Haytch said:
The main issue here is that they are asking XP users to ' get over it '.
Better hardware required to keep up with XP ? So the better hardware will run better on XP!
Vista is shit, everyone knows it, they even know it! They are already over it, and are bringing out the new o.s very very soon. Vista was a marketing strategy to elude users to making a purchase, most making a dual purchase back to XP. MS won big time, so did their shareholders.

Windows7 seems promising as did XP after the many versions between XP PRO & 98se. I have no doubt that the majority of windows users will jump from XP to Windows7. I just hope they dont kill this one too. Please let me pick what i want to install because i cbf pulling it apart and putting together my own version.
hell even bill gates effectivly admited that vista sucks, need proof.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3a2zqRc1jvs

yeah, thats a ringing indorcement for their new os aint it, the owner of the company effectivly saying it sucks and is unpolished.........

Wile E said:
Ummm, output can be disabled on XP as well. Both audio and video, just like Vista.

But like I said, that's easily defeatable, on either os. Again, not a good argument.

And why do you keep brining up extended support for corporations? We all know corporations have different needs than standard desktop users. That's not the scope of this article, and just another red herring for you to try and use to make Vista look bad.
you dont read well do you?

under xp IF ms dissabled video output the would be open to lawsuits and WOULD LOOSE, the eula dosnt allow it, under vista it does and it also allows "degraded playback" of media if ms/mpaa/riaa dont like your hardware, for the love of god READ what i said.

as to corp users, alot of people cant deal with their home system and work system being diffrent, you got no idea how many people i have seen get their vista machien put back to xp simply because they cant deal with the diffrances, im not saying ppl like us couldnt, but alot of computer MORONS/AOL users cant coap with things not being the same in both places, i even heard one lady at best buy paying geek squad to install xp for her say that was her reasion, she liked vistas look, but couldnt deal with how diffrent it was from her system at work, so she bought xp online and payed geeksquad like 280bucks to install it for her(stupid ppl make geeksquad rich......)

but you dont see that, you see, "vista is newer, so vista is better, woot woot for vista, everybody should change now!!!"

Also something about xp, im not an xp fan, its been a headake for me to deal withdue to botched critical hotfixes (untested shit that breaks drivers or bsod loops ppls systems) but its still better then the experiance with vista i have had to date, and if you read its EULA, well the xp eula is far more forgiving and kind to the end user then vista's.

you know in vista you arent even allowed to "trouble shoot" os spicific problems/limmitations and find workarounds? yeah thats in there, if you do that, you just broke your contract and they can dissable your system if they like leaving you with a very expencive paperweight.....NICE!!!!

beyond_amusia said:
Just watch, people will cling to Vista like they cling to XP now when Windows 7 comes out. lol.
On the other hand, they may leap from XP to Windows 7.... As of now, an install of windows 7 M1 requires an upgrade from Vista, so MS may just give the XP lovers the finger and say "vista to 7 only, not XP to 7" lol. Then again, there is always a clean install...
who cares? its stupid to "upgrade" anyway, you just endup with more problems and a buggyer slower system if you do an "upgrade" from one version of windows to another.....


erocker said:
Why doesn't Bill Gates just come out and bluntly say "Make your own O/S or just STFU!"? Most of my computer illiterate friends love Vista. I don't love it, but it works. After I set it up the way I like it, my machine doesn't know the difference. Well... Except for my RAM.
because even he feels vista is unpolished crap?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3a2zqRc1jvs

Megasty said:
Just how much longer do you think MS will support XP? 1 yr..2, come on. XP is already 7 friggin yrs old. Its not going to last forever just like desktop based computing isn't. A GUI isn't everything. OS's are becoming more average user friendly by the second. XP was a buggy POS when it first came out & so was vista. Only time healed XP wounds & the same will happen with vista. MS never corrected most problems with its "new" OS's while they were still "new". Grab vista while you can so you can see its development firsthand b4 the next buggy POS arrives.
http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?LN=en-us&p1=3223&x=19&y=8

try till 4/8/2014
Posted on Reply
#12
jtleon
Rhino...Do U work for MS?

Easy Rhino said:
....sure, they could pay all sorts of money to continue supporting windows 2000 and XP but that would slow them down. you and i dont know their situation. perhaps this is a pivatol moment for them. regardless, if you think you can do better, then by all means start your own software company.
All sorts of money??? A fully matured product does not cost "All sorts of money" to maintain support!!!

Understand that operating systems are perfected by the USER...not MS. That is called BETA testing....and for W2K and WXP that BETA testing has been ongoing for the past 8+ years..and continues as I write this message. That why we have SP1 SP2 SP3 SP4...and on and on.

You also need to face the FACT that MS is an extremely profitable company---Primarily due to the success of 2000/XP over these 8+ years. MS has all the liquid they need to maintain these products for 20+years.....without even feeling a pin prick!

Finally, there is no TRUE competitor for MS Windows....except for MS itself---basically MS management dropped the ball with VISTA----this has been the biggest downfalls of all monopolies/dictatorships in history-----self destruction!!!

I do appreciate Your enthusiasm Rhino - keep researching this issue - don't just take my word for it!

Regards,
jtleon
Posted on Reply
#13
Megasty
Rebo&Zooty said:
try till 4/8/2014
I'm talking about full blown support as in patches. It'll be dead in a year. Happy EOL XP :D
Posted on Reply
#14
jtleon
Age descrimination.....for SHAME!!!!

Easy Rhino said:
......my guess is that most of the people on here are in their mid-teens so they dont really know of the time that XP sucked and windows 2000 was all the rage. hell! i even remember people complaining about windows 2000 and they wanted better support for windows 98 :laugh:
Dude....a very big mistake on your part!!!!

LOL
jtleon
Posted on Reply
#15
Easy Rhino
Linux Advocate
Rebo&Zooty said:
acctualy it dosnt REQUIER higher hardware to improove an os, as can be shown with a decent linux distro(noobuntu is effectivly vista in linux flavor.....heavy on resorces and slow)

check out vectorlinux soho unsing enlitenment, if you want a flashy gui, its got it, if you want speed even on OLD ASS HARDWARE that wouldnt even run windows XP, guess what YOU GOT IT!!!! no joke, i have done it, and it works, so this "you need to force hardware upgrades to add fetures/functionality/accessability.

fact is MS COULD DO IT, but they dont because they want to insure you buy a new puter every couple years, and this is im sure enlarge to keep their pockets full, not just via hardware sales but you know that the higher up's in ms do invest in hardware maker stocks, so its good for them if your forced to buy 16gb ram and a 4ghz quadcore and a 500gb, as well as a 512mb dx10 videocard in order to run their next os, because it insures they make money off the software and off then investments in hardware makers, woot woot guess thats all for the best in your eyes tho.
stop being silly. i was using enlightenment on freebsd back in 1999. i know all about streamlined GUIs on light operating systems. you are comparing apples and oranges. microsoft isnt making their operating systems more complicated to appease hardware manufacturers, they are doing it to continue supporting EVERYTHING available. that is not an easy task. why do you think OSX runs so well? because it is a closed system that only supports specific hardware and software. vista is available to anyone. any manufacturer can apply of a license and get ahold of the code and create their hardware to work with vista. that is an enormous task on microsofts part to continue to support thousands of companies on both the hardware and software side. so please stop with the BS.
Posted on Reply
#16
Rebo&Zooty
Easy Rhino said:
with all due respect, you don't understand business. microsoft has a ton of money. they also have a ton of competition because microsoft is more than just an operating system. they own stock in a lot of other companies and they make business deals all the time. it is a competitive world. do you want microsoft to continue to fully support windows 95 because there might be people out there that have 12 year old computers? of course not. sometimes companies need to push forward in order to stay ahead of everyone else. so that means that they have to pull resources from older programs in order to continue growing at the rate their shareholders expect. their shareholders want them to innovate because that is how you make money. sure, they could pay all sorts of money to continue supporting windows 2000 and XP but that would slow them down. you and i dont know their situation. perhaps this is a pivatol moment for them. regardless, if you think you can do better, then by all means start your own software company.
but you fail to take into account that ms was and still is making $ off XP sales, and they avoided for many years having to "innovate" by keeping xp working well for the majority of buyers, its cheaper to keep a current system up to date then it is to "innovate" a new one, the thing is that vista isnt really innovation, its simply a moded version of server 2003 pro with a max inspired gui........thats not innovation, its a hack job as bill would admit if he didnt want to tank vista sales ;)

Easy Rhino said:
i agree. it is amazing how short term our memories are. XP was GARBAGE when it came out. now it is great. it took years to work out all the problems. quality drivers were especially scarce. my guess is that most of the people on here are in their mid-teens so they dont really know of the time that XP sucked and windows 2000 was all the rage. hell! i even remember people complaining about windows 2000 and they wanted better support for windows 98 :laugh:
drivers wherent the problem, the fact xp like vista was put out early, both where in a beta stage, xp at least tho didnt break half the apps people use on a daily basis......

drivers, well 2k drivers where quite mature by then, and xp uses 2k drivers so...the only ppl that had issues finding mature drivers where the ones who couldnt read up and understand that xp is just 2k with more crap slaped ontop, same kinda ppl who insist that server 2003 cant game because there are no drivers for it :P (2003 uses 2k/xp drivers.....)

vista was pushed out a good bit early, they should have waited, kept the open beta going, work out the buggs, then put vista out in an SP1 stage for retail, sales would have been far better by then, hardware makers would have had drivers ready, and alot of the population would have already been using it and addicted to it.
Posted on Reply
#17
Megasty
Easy Rhino said:
i agree. it is amazing how short term our memories are. XP was GARBAGE when it came out. now it is great. it took years to work out all the problems. quality drivers were especially scarce. my guess is that most of the people on here are in their mid-teens so they dont really know of the time that XP sucked and windows 2000 was all the rage. hell! i even remember people complaining about windows 2000 and they wanted better support for windows 98 :laugh:
:laugh: the transition between dos & win 3.1 was the most traumatic for me. People were complaining about how 95 & 98 was the same, how ME was BS, how 2000 was just going back to 98 after the ME mistake, & how XP was a buggy POS based on the BSOD. So I guess its nothing new but just when are they going to get over it :confused:
Posted on Reply
#18
Rebo&Zooty
Easy Rhino said:
stop being silly. i was using enlightenment on freebsd back in 1999. i know all about streamlined GUIs on light operating systems. you are comparing apples and oranges. microsoft isnt making their operating systems more complicated to appease hardware manufacturers, they are doing it to continue supporting EVERYTHING available. that is not an easy task. why do you think OSX runs so well? because it is a closed system that only supports specific hardware and software. vista is available to anyone. any manufacturer can apply of a license and get ahold of the code and create their hardware to work with vista. that is an enormous task on microsofts part to continue to support thousands of companies on both the hardware and software side. so please stop with the BS.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10kg2aSB8q4&feature=related

IF you used it in 99 you where using a far older version then is avalable now, thats like saying "i used explorer back in 1995" when windows explorer has evolved alot since then.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10kg2aSB8q4&feature=related

yeah so your just got pwnt for saying you gotta make things run worse on the same hardware to get nice gui fx, thats a load of crap, acctualy watch the videos, they show things people ooooo and aaaaaaahhhhh about in vista, but done without high end hardware, the first video can be done on a 266mhz p2 with 208mb ram and a 4mb trident videocard......try that with anything ms has made......

as to osx running well, yes closed platform helps, BUT osx is just a variant of bsd, and bsd if setup properly will run just as well, maby not as flashy (well till u dig around and find the mac gui/window managers that are avalable for it)

as stated, ms makes $ on both software they sell and the hardware thats sold due to their investments in said companys, they have a vestedintrest in forcing you to buy a new computer or upgrade your current one.
Posted on Reply
#20
Rebo&Zooty
Megasty said:
:laugh: the transition between dos & win 3.1 was the most traumatic for me. People were complaining about how 95 & 98 was the same, how ME was BS, how 2000 was just going back to 98 after the ME mistake, & how XP was a buggy POS based on the BSOD. So I guess its nothing new but just when are they going to get over it :confused:
most of the crying i saw and heard about 2k vs 9x was due to people not understanding the os they moved to, the fact that it wasnt based on 9x at all, i had to many times explain that tho it looked the same/simlar it wasnt even close to the same under the hood.

comparing 9x with nt core is like comparing a windup toy with a sports car.........(since ppl here like car annaligys.
Posted on Reply
#21
Easy Rhino
Linux Advocate
Rebo&Zooty said:
but you fail to take into account that ms was and still is making $ off XP sales, and they avoided for many years having to "innovate" by keeping xp working well for the majority of buyers, its cheaper to keep a current system up to date then it is to "innovate" a new one, the thing is that vista isnt really innovation, its simply a moded version of server 2003 pro with a max inspired gui........thats not innovation, its a hack job as bill would admit if he didnt want to tank vista sales ;)
technically that is innovation. and yes, i understand the shortcomings of vista, but it is no different than any of the other microsoft operating systems before it. the fact that people were suprised by vistas early problems is retarded.
drivers wherent the problem, the fact xp like vista was put out early, both where in a beta stage, xp at least tho didnt break half the apps people use on a daily basis......

drivers, well 2k drivers where quite mature by then, and xp uses 2k drivers so...the only ppl that had issues finding mature drivers where the ones who couldnt read up and understand that xp is just 2k with more crap slaped ontop, same kinda ppl who insist that server 2003 cant game because there are no drivers for it :P (2003 uses 2k/xp drivers.....)

vista was pushed out a good bit early, they should have waited, kept the open beta going, work out the buggs, then put vista out in an SP1 stage for retail, sales would have been far better by then, hardware makers would have had drivers ready, and alot of the population would have already been using it and addicted to it.
hindsight is 20/20. and XP was just as bad as vista was during its transition. it is true that history changes over time.
Posted on Reply
#22
erocker
Hmm. Eyes. Check! Ears... Check! Nope, no problems there. Please don't insult my listening and visual skills. Personally, I like basing the information I give out to people from my own personal experiences. Not by what some journalist writes on a website. You can throw all the links you want at me. Fact of the matter is, It's my job to keep 20+ computers going all of which run either XP or Vista. I'm comfortable using either O/S and can make either of them run like I want. If you feel like you need to listen to the "professionals" go right ahead mate!:toast:
Posted on Reply
#24
Rebo&Zooty
Easy Rhino said:
technically that is innovation. and yes, i understand the shortcomings of vista, but it is no different than any of the other microsoft operating systems before it. the fact that people were suprised by vistas early problems is retarded.




hindsight is 20/20. and XP was just as bad as vista was during its transition. it is true that history changes over time.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/innovation

in·no·va·tion (n-vshn)
n.
1. The act of introducing something new.
2. Something newly introduced.

innovation
Noun
1. something newly introduced, such as a new method or device
2. the act of innovating


i dont see how copyed fetures of another os are innovation.........

thats like saying rubber tires are an innovation because you painted ur name on the side of them....
Posted on Reply
#25
Easy Rhino
Linux Advocate
Rebo&Zooty said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10kg2aSB8q4&feature=related

IF you used it in 99 you where using a far older version then is avalable now, thats like saying "i used explorer back in 1995" when windows explorer has evolved alot since then.
i have been using freebsd since version 3.0 was released. my gui of choice was enlightenment which didnt run very well believe it or not. instead i used fluxbox and programed the gui myself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10kg2aSB8q4&feature=related

yeah so your just got pwnt for saying you gotta make things run worse on the same hardware to get nice gui fx, thats a load of crap, acctualy watch the videos, they show things people ooooo and aaaaaaahhhhh about in vista, but done without high end hardware, the first video can be done on a 266mhz p2 with 208mb ram and a 4mb trident videocard......try that with anything ms has made......

as to osx running well, yes closed platform helps, BUT osx is just a variant of bsd, and bsd if setup properly will run just as well, maby not as flashy (well till u dig around and find the mac gui/window managers that are avalable for it)
yes i have seen all the great things linux OSs can do. that isnt a surprise. that has nothing to do with my point that vista is geared to work for the average person which means sacrificing code for functionality for users and accesability for hardware manufacturers and software developers. if it were as simple as you make it out to be then MS would have surely done it by now. but microsoft has a different agenda, and it isnt to force people to buy their OS. you can buy a MAC or you can install ubuntu. both work very well in the office and at home. however both dont have the massive support infrastruture MS has.
as stated, ms makes $ on both software they sell and the hardware thats sold due to their investments in said companys, they have a vestedintrest in forcing you to buy a new computer or upgrade your current one.
yea they have a vested interest. what is your point? that microsoft shouldnt try to make money?
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment