Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft's "Mojave Experiment" Teaser Site Goes Live

timothy posted more than 6 years ago | from the resculpting-expectations dept.

Windows 464

MojoKid writes "Earlier this week, Microsoft was reported to be arranging a kind of 'blind taste test' to get die-hard Windows XP users to try Vista. They were told that they were trying a new OS, called Mojave. The report went on to suggest that users liked the OS, though they were actually running Vista. Now it appears Microsoft has put up a teaser site, with plans to show the actual video footage next week. Though the footage should at least have some entertainment value, it would be a bit of a reach to expect that the test methodologies were real-world enough such that users had to deal with things like user account control, driver updates, and broad application compatibility."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Hmm (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24356565)

Microsoft sucks!

Re:Hmm (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24356575)

I was going to write up a long wall of text deriding Microsoft's experiment, but when you put it concisely like that... I don't have to!

In other news (4, Funny)

Harmonious Botch (921977) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356571)

Researchers have conducting 'taste tests' have found that recipients of grits in their pants preferred having cold grits poured down their pants rather than hot grits.

Re:In other news (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24356671)

Linux is illegal! You are breaking the law, and hurting yourself and your family with your ILLEGAL SOFTWARE. Your ip has been noted and is being forwarded to the SPA with a reccomendation that they investigate your CRIMINAL ACTIVITY. Please destroy all your unpatriotic linux software before the government finally cracks down on you people and you all end up as lampshades or soap.

Obama never misses a chance for... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24356805)

self congratulation, vacuous platitudes, or flat-out factual errors. See his Berlin speech, for example. He claims that he doesn't look like Americans who've spoken there before. I guess Obamajesus forgot that Colin Powell and Condi Rice are also black. But then again, maybe The One considers those two black Americans to be Uncle Toms since they had the audacity to flee the Democratic plantation. Also, Obama claimed that walls that divide had come down in Belfast, when in fact there are more "peace" walls in Belfast now than there were 10 years ago, and residential segregation has INCREASED! What, no one in his mini-state department 300-person entourage checks facts? We're in for a change alright. This buffoon is clearly too dumb to be running the show. The change will be Obama shuckin' and jivin' for the American people while Pelosi and Reid work feverishly to convert the Republic into a socialist state.

Re:In other news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24357107)

Check the website: []

They used an HP Pavilion DV 2000 with 2GB RAM.

I'm sure they picked a system that set them up for success, but, do you think that anyone doing the same type of experiment wouldn't? When you see a Big Mac in pictures, it looks nothing like what you're going to get in the bag... You might still like it after you bite into it, but, it's not what was advertised.

makes you wonder (4, Interesting)

walshy007 (906710) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356577)

makes you wonder if they used a stock install of vista, or the upcoming vista sp1 etc. 'here, it's not a pile of crap'
(with each driver being run having been fully audited by microsoft, and everything tested beforehand to make sure it works)

A good test would have been to have them install the os themselves, on a box that could be randomly chosen from a large selection each with different hardware, and to see how well they fare with getting it all going.

Re:makes you wonder (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24356665)

makes you wonder if they used a stock install of vista, or the upcoming vista sp1 etc. 'here, it's not a pile of crap'
  (with each driver being run having been fully audited by microsoft, and everything tested beforehand to make sure it works)

A good test would have been to have them install the os themselves, on a box that could be randomly chosen from a large selection each with different hardware, and to see how well they fare with getting it all going.

I dare your ass to try installing Crack OS oops MAC OS SOME-FKING-NUMBER on ANY hardware of my choosing. And when it fails you can like the sweat of Steve Jobs ass.

LINUX FTW Biaaatch!

Re:makes you wonder (5, Funny)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356673)

Repeat the experiment with a "Vista Capable" set of hardware, the stuff MS is getting sued over.

Re:makes you wonder (5, Insightful)

JMandingo (325160) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357007)

I just did another downgrade from Vista to XP this week. A friend bought a brand new PC from Wal-Mart with Vista on it. He couldn't stand the fact that his 5-year-old machine at work running XP was more responsive than his brand new Vista box.

He wanted the downgrade bad enough that he traded me several XBox games to do the work. That is saying something right there. When I asked him if he liked the features on Vista he looked at me quizzically and scratched his head.

Never let bling interfere with usability. The "ooh, shiny" of fancy graphics and widgets lasts only a moment. On the other hand, usability issues will become increasingly frustrating over time.

Re:makes you wonder (3, Insightful)

Charcharodon (611187) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356683)

Vista Sp1 has come and gone five months ago, where have you been?

(with each driver being run having been fully audited by microsoft, and everything tested beforehand to make sure it works)

So kind of like an Apple? Do something that everyone raves about, but get put down for it. Sounds fair to me.

Vista ... rocks? (5, Funny)

PC and Sony Fanboy (1248258) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356789)

So, microsoft disguised vista as a good operating system... why don't they do that for EVERYONE?

Re:makes you wonder (5, Insightful)

erroneus (253617) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356783)

Are you suggesting that Microsoft would actually go through the trouble of "stacking the deck"? The very same Microsoft whose presentations are famous with the likes of Bill Gates plugging in a scanner and getting the BSOD in front of the whole planet? To suggest this would suggest that Microsoft has learned from their mistakes which I find unlikely. In order to learn from your mistakes, you have to first admit to yourself that you even MADE a mistake which is not something Microsoft is known for doing. In fact, this whole exercise is about trying to say "you guys are all just prejudiced against Vista! You never gave it a fair chance!" rather than admitting to themselves that Vista is a mistake and that cutting off WindowsXP is an even bigger one.

Re:makes you wonder (1)

Tony Hoyle (11698) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357167)

They were caught doing it in court, so yes they would go to that trouble in heartbeat.

I'm wondering if it was a 2008 server in a client build with some of the bling switched on... with 90% of the CPU sucking services disabled it ends up a reasonable OS.

The other way to stack the deck is to run it with at least 4gb of memory and a blazing fast processor. Hand picked hardware with the best drivers goes without saying.

Re:makes you wonder (3, Insightful)

mrscott (548097) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357151)

Where do I begin? Modded "interesting" because the poster has no clue what he's talking about or because there are so many lemmings on Slashdot? What else would they do? Do a test where it was going to fail?? The upcoming SP1? If you're going to bash something, at least have a clue first. Install the OS themselves? How many normal people are really going to do that? More than likely, they're buying a new computer and it will come with Vista. Which, by the way, will probably be well tested so that there are no driver issues. Is selling a computer with working Windows also considered stacking the deck in your world? I hate going on the offensive, but some of the Vista talk is just... stupid. Do you people really expect MS to just roll over on this? If you do, you're more than just a little naive.

Hardware (4, Insightful)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356585)

They were probably running on top of the range hardware as well, a grahics card with 1GB of RAM, system with 4GB of RAM and a Quad core processor etc.. most people accept that Vista looks nicer, but looks are not everything to those who have to use their computer every day for work.

Would have been funny if they tried to do this when Vista was first released and one of the tests was 'delete a file' :p

Re:Hardware (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24356661)

>They were probably running on top of the range hardware as well, a grahics card with 1GB of RAM, system with 4GB of RAM and a Quad core processor etc..

Except that they were not. The linked site says they were running on HP dv2000 with 2Gb RAM.

Re:Hardware (1)

Lucas.Langa (922843) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356781)

Except that they were not. The linked site says they were running on HP dv2000 with 2Gb RAM.

Surely you mean 2GB (or even more precisely 2GiB but nobody seems to actually use that one...)?

b is for bits and by using it for bytes you make baby Stallman cry.

Reference: []

Re:Hardware (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24356981)

Surely you mean 2GB (or even more precisely 2GiB but nobody seems to actually use that one because it not only sounds dumb, it really is stupid)?

Fixed that for you.

Re:Hardware (0)

blind biker (1066130) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356803)

If you believe this, I have a huge bronze statue in New York for sale, real cheap. I like you, I think I'll definitely sell it to you even cheaper.

Re:Hardware (1)

Lando242 (1322757) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356965)

If you are referring to the Statue of Liberty I think you will find that she is made of a copper skin on an iron framework. Besides, most people try to sell the Brooklyn bridge, not ol' Liberty.

Re:Hardware (1)

blind biker (1066130) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356977)

But I am not most people! You insensitive cloth :)

Re:Hardware (1)

Kent Recal (714863) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356849)

Core Duo 1.8 GHZ, 2G Ram ... Something makes me think that this is still beefier than what most Joe SixPacks are running at home.

Re:Hardware (2, Insightful)

jo42 (227475) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356851)

Make the fsckers run it on a 2.4 GHz P4 with 256 MB RAM.

Re:Hardware (2, Interesting)

loraksus (171574) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357127)

I'll put $20 down that their test rig wasn't running an antivirus, since those kinds of apps kill performance like nothing else on Vista.
Also bet you UAC was off.

In any case, MS claims this was is a "demo" which suspiciously sounds like "video" or at least a restrictive environment.

Speaking of controlled environments - the "ooh shiny" does make it seem much faster than it really is if you're not running a side by side comparison. People are more than willing to wait 1.25 seconds to open up "Computer" if 3/4 seconds is spent in animated windows, fades and icons filling in.

Honestly though, from a marketing standpoint, it's time to just give up marketing Vista and time to start praising the virtues of Windows 7.
Redmond should be happy with the money they are making bundling the OS with new hardware sales.
At this late stage, marketing money is just being pissed away. They sure as hell aren't going to convince anyone knowledgeable to "upgrade."

Also from a marketing standpoint, it would be nice to release some "Ultimate Extras" so the MS fans who dropped the extra $200 on ultimate don't feel like they got screwed. And I mean "now", not "3 months before the release of Windows 7 in a last minute attempt that will be seen as disingenuous and only serve to piss people off"
Get an damn intern to write a few screen savers or something.

Re:Hardware (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24356729)

Thank you for once again upholding to the longstanding /. tradition of not reading the site/article before making comments about it.

Re:Hardware (1)

OneMadMuppet (1329291) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356829)

It was a HP Pavillion DV2000 w/2GB RAM. Yeah, a laptop.
More likely a Core Duo model than a Turion.
The video would be either a GeForce Go 7200, Go 6150 or a Go 430.

Re:Hardware (1)

marcushnk (90744) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356907)

read the teaser site link
System: HP Pavilion DV 2000 with 2GB ram.

Not really a supercomputer :-P

But see my other post... this proves nothing, Vista isn't too bad to use for the first few hours... its medium to long term real world use that shows it to be a complete pig of an OS.

Re:Hardware (1)

Tony Hoyle (11698) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357197)

It does tend to fall apart over time.. the dev one I worked with for 9 months was so insane at the end it refused point blank even to tell me if the network cable was plugged in, telling me I had no permission to d oso.

I've never understood this.... (5, Insightful)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357013)

My (limited) Vista experience is on a laptop with Celeron CPU, 1Gb RAM and Intel graphics.

It seemed to run just fine to me, Aero included.

I wounldn't have Vista for other reasons but maybe Microsoft is right - people like you need to take a second look.

Re:I've never understood this.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24357137)

It's very simple, you're on /. - the site where people bash Vista despite never having seen it running, let alone used it...

Re:Hardware (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24357105)

you might find that the computers were all standard HP DV2000 with 2GB ram, try clicking through next time.

Vista isnt that bad really. (1)

tristian_was_here (865394) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356589)

The only problem with Vista is that it requires a decent machine and a dedicated video card.

BTW I am running Fedora 9 while typing this post.

Re:Vista isnt that bad really. (1)

mabster (470642) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356655)

I run Vista on my Dell D400 laptop from around 2003, and it's rock solid. It won't run AERO Glass obviously, but it's fast enough to run Visual Studio 2008 etc.

Re:Vista isnt that bad really. (5, Insightful)

peragrin (659227) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356743)

yet my powerbook G4 from 2003 can run an OS with all the features of Aero, shadows, full screen , semi transparent menus etc just fine. You could install ubuntu with full compiz functionality on the same hardware as you have now.

Aero shouldn't require a third of the resources that it does, and should run just fine on your laptop. The fact that it doesn't is indicative of Vista's poor design.

Re:Vista isnt that bad really. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24356669)

I'd say that you need a dedicated machine to run Vista, i.e. one machine dedicated to running Vista and another one on which you run all your programs.

Re:Vista isnt that bad really. (-1, Troll)

Charcharodon (611187) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356697)

Define decent machine, and no it does not require a dedicated video card.

I've got an AMD X2 3800 machine, from like 4 years ago, sitting in the corner running it just fine.

You can find hardware that old at "here I don't want it anymore prices". So unless you are homeless or a dirty hippy, exactly how hard is it to upgrade?

Re:Vista isnt that bad really. (1)

Tony Hoyle (11698) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357213)

BS it's 4 years old. The chip wasn't even released until 3 years ago and unless you paid top dollar for it it'll be probably at least a year newer than that.

It's also a pretty decent processor compared to what a lot of people are running.

Re-education center (2, Insightful)

msgmonkey (599753) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356607)

You see all it requires is for users to be re-educated and they will love Vista. The same way that if only goverments could re-educate the voters they'd have nothing to gripe about.

Re:Re-education center (1)

leomekenkamp (566309) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357017)

My initial reaction to your post: "Ha, funny!". Then there was a 3 second period where my head seemed completely blank. After that the strong suspicion came up that you were dead-serious...

Only Vista? (5, Interesting)

dword (735428) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356615)

Why didn't they give the users multiple flavors of the most colorful operating systems they never tried (Vista, OSX, Kubuntu, etc) and ask them which one they liked best?

They gave them Vista and asked them if they liked it... That doesn't say much because nobody (most importantly THEY) knows if they'd like OSX more.

Re:Only Vista? (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356635)

You must be new here... (as a geek / in IT / in Microsoft tactics).

Re:Only Vista? (5, Insightful)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356653)

Why didn't they give the users multiple flavors of the most colorful operating systems they never tried (Vista, OSX, Kubuntu, etc) and ask them which one they liked best?

Why? Oh I don't know really.. Maybe because Microsoft doesn't want to publish something that says that users like Mac OS X best?

Re:Only Vista? (5, Funny)

Monoman (8745) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356701)

Great PR job. I KNEW the Iraqi Minister of Information would land on his feet somewhere.

Re:Only Vista? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24356967)

Great PR job. I KNEW the Iraqi Minister of Information would land on his feet somewhere.

You're kidding so the rumors were true that Osama Bin Laden landed the job of heading Vista development and he's been in Redmond all this time?

Re:Only Vista? (3, Insightful)

Haeleth (414428) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356873)

Why didn't they give the users multiple flavors of the most colorful operating systems they never tried (Vista, OSX, Kubuntu, etc) and ask them which one they liked best?

Because that question is irrelevant. This isn't about trying to convince people who don't use Windows to use Windows, or about trying to convince people that Windows is the best OS ever. The message Microsoft is going for is simple: "If you like XP, you'll like Vista too."

(And I happen to agree with them: I'm not particularly fond of Windows, but having used Vista, I can't see where all the hate is coming from. My personal ranking is Linux > OS X > Vista > XP.)

Seems desperate (5, Insightful)

Dice Fivefold (640696) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356641)

I think this is a bad move by Microsoft. It only makes them seem desperate. By making this viral campaign, they openly admit that vista so far has failed in the consumer market.

This campaign really focus on the wrong issues. The main complaints over vista has never been that it isn't shiny and dazzling enough. The problems was that it makes older hardware painfully slow, the UAC annoyance, incompatible drivers etc. These are not things that a user notices in a 10 minute demo. This campaign shows nothing.

Re:Seems desperate (1)

Admiral Ag (829695) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357157)

It's a normal move for them. They have very little in the way of savoir faire when it comes to dealing with consumers.

Exhibit A is the Zune software screen that looks like group sex. I mean, WTF is this trying to say... []

Re:Seems desperate (1)

mrscott (548097) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357171)

Been using Vista for a long while now...

UAC isn't that bad anymore. Annoying at the beginning, but you get used to it and it's not really all that intrusive.

Vista was handily panned in its initial reviews. The average computer user is afraid of it based on what they've heard from friends and the media. This campaign is intended to change the perception of the product, not to *show* anything.

I will give you "makes older hardware painfully slow" but that's it. Most people will get it with a new computer and, for that purpose, it's just fine now, especially with SP1.

Re:Seems desperate (1)

Darkon (206829) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357207)

the UAC annoyance

What is this "UAC annoyance" of which you speak? I ask in all seriousness because I've been using Vista almost since it was relased and the only times I see UAC are when I'm either installing something or futzing around with files which don't belong to my user account, both of which would seem to be valid reasons to prompt me.

They have a point (3, Insightful)

Charcharodon (611187) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356663)

Yawn.... the first 100 posts of "Why I hate Vista and MS is the devil, any other OS is better post" will prove their point.

75% of the whiners haven't ever installed it, and the other 25% tried to put it on a 6 year old budget "Dude I got Dell" computer the first month after it went public.

I don't even think there is even a dead horse anymore to beat. You guys are just masterbating now.

Re:They have a point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24356733)


Re:They have a point (5, Informative)

SirSmiley (845591) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356747)

I recently installed vista ultimate 64 bit on my athlon 3800 dual core and upgraded to 4 gig of ram so i needed a 64 bit os to take full advantage...the 32 bit xp could only recognize 3.37 thinking of going back to xp and using the 3.37 gig because vista is definitely using more ram and the performance is actually worse. Bootup time is simply unacceptable, it is about three times longer than xp if not four. That is with a 32meg cache on a new 500 gig sata2 seagate barracuda v 11 drive. Running apps take on average 2-4 times longer to open

Re:They have a point (1)

Stormwatch (703920) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356827)

Give Linux a try, perhaps?

Re:They have a point (3, Insightful)

Danzigism (881294) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356863)

i have the 32bit version running on a 2.4ghz core 2 duo with 2gb of RAM and a simple geforce 7900 card and it runs incredibly well. for AMDs, I highly recommend the 64bit version. i've seen it boot up in less than 30 seconds on some AMDs. but i wouldn't even bother using the 32bit version because the difference is definitely noticable. this isn't microsoft's fault though. software manufacturer's need to step up to the plate and get the 64bit architecture rolling because it's been on the shelves for the past 15+ years with barely any real progress thanks to software.

Re:They have a point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24356875)

Bootup time is simply unacceptable

How long is it taking on your system?

Re:They have a point (1)

mpeskett (1221084) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356953)

Could get yourself the 64-bit version of XP... except they probably aren't selling it any more.

Still, you could get it from other sources.

Re:They have a point (1)

Kneo24 (688412) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356969)

For any person interested, boot-up times on Vista take about a minute, if you don't seriously optimize it. There's a bunch of videos on YouTube ranging from 30 some odd seconds to a little over a minute. The faster ones have a PC that's been seriously optimized.

Some people even went out of their way to show that XP would boot faster on hardware that was slightly slower (un-optimized, I assume).

From my personal experience, Vista does boot a lot slower than XP. No user, experienced or not, should have to deal with an OS that takes forever to load these days. The hardware we have is powerful enough.

Re:They have a point (1)

Dude McDude (938516) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357019)

For any person interested, boot-up times on Vista take about a minute, if you don't seriously optimize it.

Sorry, but this is nonsense. An out-of-the-box installation of Vista gets me to a workable desktop in 34 seconds on my system. (Which, granted, is no slowpoke: e8200, 2GB of RAM, Samsung Spinpoint 16MB 7200rpm)

Re:They have a point (1)

mrscott (548097) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357187)

First of all, Vista is DESIGNED to use more RAM. It tries to anticipate your needs and load things into RAM ahead of time. And yes, Vista does have a lot more overhead, but 4GB is plenty sufficient!

On the slow boot up - not good, but the RAM thing - by design.

Re:They have a point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24356757)

I must be one of the 101th % since I bought a laptop about 6 months after Vista release preloaded with it and it still ran extremely poorly and even if it wasn't constantly swapping, things like UAC are seriously annoying. (which is not suprising as it has been designed by security experts to intentionally be annoying)

Re:They have a point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24356761)

Why would I PAY for an awful Operating System when I have already payed for Windows XP thrice, and it performs better? Just to know first-hand that it sucks? Surprise! I've already seen it in action on some friends' computers, and not only does it seem bad, they all agree that it is bad!

Re:They have a point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24356793)

They don't have a point. Why don't you ask yourself why Vista is slower than XP?
The answer is: because it employs DRM technology to limit what the users want to do with their computer. Unless somebody argues its slowness is due to the new and shiny desktop effects, in that case I'd remember him how most Compiz much more spectacular effects run just fine [] on the EeePC 701.
An operating system should be aimed at solving technical problems, not legal ones; Vista is slow because it is less powerful than XP to most users or it's poorly coded, or probably both.

Re:They have a point (1)

Lord_Sintra (923866) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356807)

Graphics stuff is a large part of the problem for Vista's speed. Just because Compiz is well codeed, and thus efficient, doesn't mean that anything doing flashy effects is.

Re:They have a point (0)

blind biker (1066130) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356837)

I don't even think there is even a dead horse anymore to beat. You guys are just masterbating now.

I think the word that you tried to type is "masterbaiting", as in, trying to entice, through persistent criticism of Windows Vista, Bill "The Master" Gates himself into a reaction of some kind, like, for example, masturbaiting.

Re:They have a point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24356881)

75% of the whiners haven't ever installed it, and the other 25% tried to put it on a 6 year old budget "Dude I got Dell" computer the first month after it went public.

Well, Windows XP will work fine on that 6 year old computer. So will Ubuntu+Compiz. So, why is it acceptable for Vista to not run adequately on that machine?

Re:They have a point (2, Interesting)

datapharmer (1099455) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356887)

Well I haven' complained yet, but let me chime in. I haven't installed it, I didn't need to. I used it on a brand new acer laptop where it was preinstalled by the manufacturer. The machine is a core 2 duo with 2 GB ram and and X3100 graphics which was the best available onboard chipset from Intel at the time of purchase.

Problems with Vista that you notice very quickly (but not in 10 minutes):

1. Windows Firewall, UAC, and Norton (preinstalled) fight constantly over control of the PC. If you go online for very long you will go nuts from messages asking you to turn on or off norton or windows firewall because one is better than the other and then more messages asking if the decision you just made is the decision you wanted to make. This repeats over and over no matter what you choose until you minimize the warning messages or go insane.

2. The power management doesn't warn you when the batteries are low and doesn't sleep the computer no matter what settings you choose. It is always fun to play "guess when we hibernate", especially since their handly little "we'll hide random tray icons" means you are less than informed about the remaining battery %.

3. The OS doesn't allow the computer to step-down the speed properly when doing simple things like word processing, so the fan goes nuts and the computer has actually gotten to dangerous heat levels and shutdown.

4. IE 7 gives abort retry fail messages in a loop every 3d time or so it is used. We finally figured out that if you hit abort about 17 times it will go away and will work for a couple web pages before crashing out. We used those couple webpages to download firefox which works until the machine gets too hot and shuts down.

5. Wireless doesn't work properly. It doesn't always detect networks even when they are in the same room and often won't connect to secure networks even if it detects them, or it will stop responding and the only thing that will get it to connect to ANY network after that is running the network repair 5 or 6 times which does god knows what saying no network problems found the first 5 times until the 6th time it says network repaired and working.

Note that none of these problems were experienced running ubuntu on a bootable cd or on XP after tracking down drivers, and all these problems were experience out of the box, and continued after installing Vista SP1.

I'm sorry, but if literally being unable to check email, visit a website, or type a document without a bunch of messages, warnings, errors, and failures doesn't equal a bad user experience, I don't know what does... perhaps their next operating system can poison my cereal too.

Re:They have a point (1)

StatureOfLiberty (1333335) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356949)

Yes, Vista looks great. I'm running it on two (new) machines now. Now that I have it working, I actually like it. But, it has been a long road to getting a usable configuration. The average user would have a heck of a time getting to this point (unless of course all they use is IE and Office).

I had crazy problems like: The OS writing app configuration information to 'Virtual Store' and reading from the original file locations. Let's see a non-techie figure that one out.

In the start menu folders you cannot create a shortcut (even as the administrator) via explorer. You have to do it on the command line. Yep, really consumer friendly.

Also, why did they screw up the sound so badly. I can't bring up one mixer and set input and output levels. No, I have to go digging through the sound device configuration dialogs and look at each device individually. Nuts!

None of this has anything to do with hardware.

It takes more than a 10 minute demo to see Vista's ugly side. I will stick with Vista. If you can work through the quirks, it is an improvement over XP. But, I can certainly see why many gave up and went back.

My crazy problem is... (1)

justthinkit (954982) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357215) the way they broke Media Player (and maybe most dialog boxes). With XP, and who knows how many OS versions before that, you go alt-F, O and you are looking at your files. Then you go shift-tab and you are IN your files. Well, with Vista you are never in your files (via the keyboard). You will end up in a lot of strange places, but never will you highlight a file. Since I rely on this constantly in XP, this single problem is enough of a FU to make me not want to use Vista ever.

This brings to mind a similarly sucky breakage. Windows 95's sound recorder v1.0 would not respond to the keyboard until you clicked somewhere on the menus, then all would be normal. They quietly fixed this at some later date but the point was made: "We don't want people to be too productive, or they won't want to upgrade, so let's insert random WTFs throughout the OS, to be fixed (or not) in the future once we add new WTFs to replace them." aka the upgrade treadmill.

10 minutes? (5, Funny)

Lucas.Langa (922843) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356681)

So... it just finished booting up?

Only a demo. NOT a test (1)

rduke15 (721841) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356689)

It seems to me that this was NOT users testing a system, but instead was a (10 minute) demo shown to users. So it wouldn't mean anything. All demos always look good (or someone needs to be fired quickly).

Or did I misunderstand it?

Stop Microsoft Violence! (3, Funny)

smitty_one_each (243267) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356705)

Roseanne Roseannadanna: The violence in our cities must stop! Innocent people are traveling around on the Intertubes and finding themselves assaulted by violent corporations. Now they are using electrical gun-things to shock ordinary citizens when they innocently go to certain places.
Chevy Chase: Uh, Roseanne, that's a teaser site, not a taser site.
Roseanne Roseannadanna: Oh. Never mind.

If you believe this, I have a huge bronze statue (0, Flamebait)

blind biker (1066130) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356723) sell you real cheap.

Yeah, maybe they did run Vista - on an overclocked Bloomfield with 4GB RAM and 15000 RMP RAID0 drives. Plus they secretly tweaked Vista "just a little bit", nothing "relevant enough to disclose" in the article.

Or maybe they just flat out, you know, DIDN'T run Vista at all there. Is that a much bigger lie than bribing ISO members (or bribing non-members to become members and then...) to vote in favour of OOXML, and then say that OOXML won on its own merit?

Re:If you believe this, I have a huge bronze statu (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24356919)

Or maybe they did run Vista on the hardware they stated, and you're just another anti-Vista fud-spreader bouncing around in the Slashdot echo chamber?

Marketing Reboot (4, Interesting)

dalmiroy2k (768278) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356775)

Microsoft may got something here.
I don't think Vista's requirements are a problem at all for people with at least a 2 year old pc.
Vista's main problem is marketing related. They didn't stick with only one household version (ultimate) like OS X does, instead they offer you 10 versions like "starter, home basic, home premium" and people gets irritated and confused.
This Mohave thing looks like a facelift making the product less microsoftish and more Web 2.0/Apple inclined.
It may work with people who got seducted with a Macbook if they cash in good press, enough ads and TV spots.

sigh (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24356801)

I cant say this really suprised me. Seems like people foam at the mouth if you start talking about vista just because its from microsoft.

I work with a guy who really prides himself as being an tech god. We were looking at laptops because we both needed one, and of course all of them had vista. I was treated to him bitching how he couldnt find one without it. I asked why he didnt like it and he simply said it was because of all the problems people were having. I asked if it was the fluffy interface or the driver problems or even just the new-ish interface. He simply grunted it was because of all of it and said he never actulay tried it yet. I later learned he hasnt even had the chance to sit down and watch someone use it 0_o I think a huge chunk of people are like this, and it makes me die inside a little every time I hear it.

If your someone who isnt really a big geek I can understand the attitude. Of couse if your a IT person and your too lazy or retarded to simply find a fix for it and go on with your life, you should just grow up.

That being said, I use XP and I intend to as long as I can. If I have to change I will, and I wont be bitching the whole way down that road.

Re:sigh (2, Interesting)

Datamonstar (845886) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356931)

I used to be just like your boy there, until yesterday when I took my fist tech call on Vista and was treated to 15 mins of "initializing your desktop" right after setting up the software. This was on a brand new, right out of the box system that should have been as simple as plug it up, turn it on, change the date/time, make a password and start browsing. But no, it took 15 mins to "setup" even though everything was already installed and the desktop was drudgery to navigate with more than 3 windows open. Absolutely unacceptable that there's NOTHING the average user can do to change that and I really feel for the people who are stuck with such a bad product product because there's nothing else to really compete with it and they don't have the knowledge or means to simply install XP or Linux as an alternative.

Desperation? (5, Interesting)

ISurfTooMuch (1010305) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356855)

This smacks of some desperation on Microsoft's part. I mean, if they have to avoid telling people they're using Vista, then they're acknowledging there's a negative perception of the OS out there.

And this, IMHO, is what trips software makers up. If your product is perceived negatively, then you'd damn well better find out why and fix it. I've said this about OpenOffice for a while now. Is it slow? Maybe a little. Not terrible to me, but maybe a little, and there are certainly some people who think so. So try and work on that. The same goes for Vista. For better or worse, people don't like it, so find out why and address those issues. Don't just try to convince people that their opinions are wrong.

The problem, of course, is that MS has invested tons of money in Vista. Whether it's a turkey or not, it's perceived that way, and MS realizes it, hence this site. But when people have made up their minds, it won't be easy to solve the problem simply by telling them they're wrong. Address their complaints instead, and you might convince them.

Hands-off experience with an OS (4, Insightful)

golodh (893453) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356857)

The report does say that the test subjects never had hands-on experience with the OS.

Having a hands-off experience with an OS is like examining a car in the showroom: its mileage is just great as long as you don't start the engine.

In addition, my guess is that that Microsoft ensured favourable test conditions (top-of-the-line hardware, plenty of Ram, hardware graphics acceleration, and a nice clean install without crapware).

This "Mojave" demonstration might be good publicity though, but only as long as people don't start to question what exactly was shown and whether or not Microsoft provided unrealistically favourable test conditions. For one thing seems pretty obvious: Microsoft didn't use a $498 Dell computer from Wallmart as a test platform.

Re:Hands-off experience with an OS (2, Funny)

jcr (53032) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356877)

whether or not Microsoft provided unrealistically favourable test conditions.

Of course they did. The test subjects didn't have to deal with installing or registering it.


Re:Hands-off experience with an OS (4, Insightful)

W2k (540424) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357005)

No need to guess, if you had bothered to follow the link, you would have seen that the hardware used was a HP Pavilion dv2000 with 2 GB RAM. As you can tell from the specs [] , this is a low-end laptop with only a Core Duo T2400 processor and Intel integrated graphics.

I can see the purpose behind this kind of test - it's very, very popular to hate Vista even though there are very few actual problems with the OS (especially since SP1). We switched to Vista at work right after it came out and while there were a few rough edges to start with, I never felt like going back to XP. Vista is simply better in every way except performance on low-end systems.

Of course, with the anti-Vista hatefest still going on, there's little Microsoft can do but try new marketing approaches to get that message across. They're hardly running out of money, after all. Unfortunately this means that Windows 7 will likely be Vista with a new name and some of the rough edges smoothed out, to pull the same trick as the "Mojave Experiment" - give Vista a different name and people might like it.

Re:Hands-off experience with an OS (1)

BorgDrone (64343) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357201)

The MS Marketing department really needs to have a chat with the Coca-Cola marketing department and ask them about this thing called "new coke [] ".

How don't they know ? (3, Interesting)

burni (930725) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356871)

This is the question which bothers me when reading about the "mojave experiment", how can it be that those ppl. haven't seen anything of vista and so could not recognize it on sight ?

I know how Vista would look - as 90% of /.readers did - when it was a beta, a thanks to independent software distributors.

So what have they changed, that those "experienced users" haven't recognized it as vista, or were they drugged before or even bribed ?

Was it really Vista or was it Windows Server 2008, which seems to be the better Vista ?

I think of this as a usual MS market scam, but it reminds me to a similar kind of annoying advertisement IBM was persuing
for OS/2 Warp 3.0.
It was on german TV, don't know if it was somewhere else on TV, featuring a small headed blondi-like secretary who was just to dumb to understand how real multitasking would make her work easier, and how OS/2 would push her climax to a new orgasm*)

By the way if it wouldn't be possible to turn off all colourfullness on WindowsXP I wouldn't use it either and
stayed with Windows 2000, or I would have poisoned the search dog, burned the wizzard and clamped the paper clip.

*Warning this is a pleonasm.

It takes a while to really start pissing you off (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24356885)

I tried windows Vista, initially I didn't really hate it. The improved I/O scheduling for instance was quite noticeable and nice. However after a while the non accelerated GDI graphics of older applications really started to piss me of. Eventually I switched back to XP, because I just couldn't stand the slow redrawing of Visual Studio and Photoshop anymore. Mind you, this was on a Pentium 4 2.533 GHz, perhaps it's not as horrible on a faster machine.

proves nothing (1)

marcushnk (90744) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356891)

Just about any OS is nice and fun to use for the first few hours of use.

Watch how aggravated people become when trying to use "Mojave" in the real world.
After the first few days they'll be annoyed, after the first few weeks they'll be pissed off and aggravated.
After a few months they'll want to swap back to XP/Linux etc

64 bit xp isn't bad (1)

Kupfernigk (1190345) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356897)

Why is it that XP 64 bit (apart from lack of driver support) isn't at all bad, and Vista, also presumably based on Server 2003, isn't all that good?

I run both XP64 and Ubuntu 8.04 on identical hardware side by side (test lab) with a happy absence of problems on either, and the Server 2003 SP hs worked just fine on XP. Microsoft can build something that is solid and just works. So why don't they? (needs a naivete tag here). I would happily run either OS on my notebook but driver support is the problem in both cases. Why didn't Microsoft make the 64 bit switch when they could have done (I know, because the original Intel dual core couldn't run it...but that was years ago.)

The only thing wrong with MS 64 bit is that stupid name change to "Program Files (X86)" complete with vacuous spaces and brackets which should never appear in file names. Why didn't they leave it alone for back compatibility and just put all the 64 bit code in a folder called "Programs"? Time to stop, Kupfernigk, it's hot and you're rambling.

How desperate! (2, Funny)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356911)

Microsoft's attempts to pull their Edsel out of the mud reminds me of a line from an old Albert Brooks movie:

"Wouldn't it be great if desperation made us more attractive?"

Rest assured, it's like the coke tests (4, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 6 years ago | (#24356961)

You remember the coke ads where the "randomly selected" participants invariably chose coke over the other brand? No, really? What did you think you see, a "representative average"? Or just the ones that actually chose coke, no matter whether that was 90 or 10 percent of the people "tested"?

It's like those "interviews" where they try to show just how dumb the average Joe is. Go out on the street with a world map and let people point out Iraq. Sure, 90% might find it, but when you only show the 10% who search for ages and finally point to India or even Florida, you "show" just how dumb the population is.

But let's for a moment assume that yes, 90 percent of their participants said that Vista is nice. Ok, it is. Hey, it sure looks great. Especially when you offer nothing to compare it to. Give someone who's hungry a Hamburger and he'll tell you it's great. Especially when you don't offer him some steak at the same time.

Anonymous Coward (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24356989)

M$'s mojave's site is running on Apache/Cent OS
How ironic :/

The right way to conduct such a test .... (4, Interesting)

yelvington (8169) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357037)

The right way to conduct such a test would be to pull a random low-end, Vista-certified PC from the shelf at Wal-Mart or Best Buy and then see what happens, starting with the unboxing process.

One of the many ways in which Microsoft aimed a BFG9000 at its own feet was certifying hardware incapable of running Vista. Hundreds of thousands of laptops were shipped with 512MB of memory. "First run" on such a system can take up to 45 minutes as Vista actually has to install itself first. Then the machine is so crippled by lack of RAM that even running Solitaire is interrupted by wild disk activity accompanied by random lockups of the user interface.

If you want to run Vista, you need to spend the price of an Macintosh on the hardware. And if you're going to do that, you might as well get a Mac in the first place.

There's nothing wrong with those half-gig laptops, by the way. They're great when running Ubuntu.

probably great with infinite resources and new h/w (1)

petes_PoV (912422) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357039)

I'm sure that with top 'o the line hardware and huge amounts of resources (CPU speed, memory, disk space) then Vista will run very nicely.

However, I don't feel the need to go through a huge upheaval: replacing pretty much every component of my machine and learning a different set of "stuff" just to run the same old applications that I use daily.

The machine I have runs very nicely with XP on 512MB and a modest 1.2GHz processor. I've been running it like this for years with no complaints, problems or compatability issues and until a new, killer app. comes along that only runs on Vista then I plan stick with this for the next several years. When I do get to the point of upgrading, I plan to keep this setup in a virtual environment, probably with a Linux host.

Slight error found (1)

noidentity (188756) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357073)

Apparently there was a slight error in the experiment. It was found that Windows XP was actually installed on the machines, not Vista.

Tag (1)

is as us Infinite (920305) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357079)

I chose to tag this 'itwasatrap'


I guess they didn't notice... (0, Flamebait)

hyades1 (1149581) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357095)

...when their machine started running like a 386.

Apple wannabe? (0, Flamebait)

theolein (316044) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357113)

At first I thought that publicity stunts like this are more the kind of thing that Apple would do (Mac vs PC videos), and then I thought that is exactly what Microsoft is doing: They're not only trying to emulate Apple in the OS and mp3 player space, now they're also trying to emulate Apple's marketing.

Thing is, stuff like this doesn't really work without a strong brand, and while Microsoft itself is a strong brand, Vista absolutely isn't.

No, what this really says to me is: Pure desperation. Microsoft have dug itself into such a hole with the mess that is Vista, and the Vista brand is by now so bad that even non-techs no longer want it, that they have to rely on hiding the brand to try and fix it.

we replaced regular OS with folger's crystals (0, Flamebait)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357121)

"Hey, which cola did you like more, A or B?"

"I liked A. Was it Coke?"

"Both were Coke."

"So, what's making them different?"

"I dipped my balls in sample A."


"I dipped my balls in it. You like the taste of my balls."

Windows Vista, we dipped our balls in it.

So vista really IS a beta!? (0, Flamebait)

Cpt. Fwiffo (42356) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357141)

The fact that 90% of the respondants went along with saying that a beta was really cool is nothing new. Have fancy new features and it's in the bag.

But for the study...

These people had their expectations lowered by being told it was a BETA...
So this is just a study showing that vista is a nice as an operating system in beta.

For a proper release product however... I think market has shown that it really, *REALLY* isn't at that stage.

Well? What's the Plan? (2, Insightful)

Luke O'Connell (1046942) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357149)

OK, poor call by Microsoft. Seems like a pretty pants way of recovering from a bad situation... but surely there is some logic to trying to avert Vista prejudice. I have not used Vista extensively... I switched to Linux in the Windows XP era and haven't looked back... but I have to admit that I have become afflicted by Vista prejudice promoted by the tech community. Have I properly trialled Vista before reaching my conclusion of it being the spawn of Hell? No. Have the majority of Vista-haters out there? I wonder. So yes, I can see why this would seem like a viable test, although they needed to keep it a closed one, and then work on the findings.

QUIT it already (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 6 years ago | (#24357191)

if you are down to running margarine commercial like tests to make the public accept vista, its time to let it go.

work on your next version, windows 7, dont load it full of drm shit just because a few dinosaurs in big media asked you, make it modular, and you will sell.

but, i really dont think that you will be able to resist the pressure from RIAA, MPAA and other shit.

I've tried out Windows 7 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24357193)

It's like Vista, but without all the stability issues and overall powerhog attitude that you can expect from it.

The first day of this OS has been more stable than Vista ever was and i even think more apps worked on Windows 7 than on Vista directly after install without issues, but i won't go as far to compare it with XP. It hasn't reached that point of OS maturity.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?