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!

Windows XP: Prices, And One Reaction

timothy posted more than 13 years ago | from the all-this-and-so-much-more dept.

Microsoft 598

Jim42688 writes: "Looks like the prices Amazon was reporting for Windows XP a while back were right. On the back of today's ad for CompUSA, it lists the prices to preorder. Home Full, 199.99, Home Upgrade, 99.99. Professional full, 299.99, Professional upgrade, 199.99." Perfect timing -- Fwis writes: "Use your power as a consumer to Boycott XP. The site is now functioning smoothly, and we invite you to log in and participate in discussions, polls, and news stories related to Microsoft's release of the XP line of products." There are some interesting links on this page if you (or someone with purchasing power at your company) is considering XP.

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

Yeah (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245557)

Big Pirst Frosting!

bah, for windows users... (2, Informative)

2MuchC0ffeeMan (201987) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245559)

i'm a windows user... i'm sorry...

but anyway, check out these benchmarks of win2k vs winXP ... please read the WHOLE THING before flaming, becuase it says it's winxp rc2, but it's so much slower it shouldn't matter. p= 3

Re:bah, for windows users... (1)

psychalgia (457201) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245564)

its ironic: as i open that window I get a report from my 1000mhz Tbird w/ 256meg of RAM: Low System Resources.

Re:bah, for windows users... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245599)

The benchmarks are for Beta 2 NOT RC2

Beta 2 is considerably older, and unrefined. Not to mention all the icky debug code. Please check your facts before posting, else you look like a fool.

XP is fast, it rocks

Typographical error by AnandTech? (1)

Futurepower(tm) (228467) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245719)

AnandTech's review came out July 10, 2001. It looks like a typographical error by AnandTech. I doubt they installed an old version of XP to do the test.

Microsoft released RC2 on August 1. RC1 was released July 3.

Re:bah, for windows users... (1)

ToasterTester (95180) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245652)

Wake up rookie!

Until the Golden masters are made for ANY project/product there is still debug information in the executables. That bloats the size and slows performance. So performance tests don't mean squat. In fact because whoever does the tests can control the results, by the tests and hardware used, the only valid tests are the one you perform yourself.

Re:bah, for windows users... (3, Informative)

Chmarr (18662) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245664)

It wasn't release candidate 2 that was being tested, it was BETA 2. This makes a big difference, release candidates usually have all the debug information stripped out. The idea of a release candidate is to have a version of the code that could very well ship if nothing appears wrong with it.

Beta versions, on the other hand, often have a lot of debugging information built in that could cause bloat and lag.

Personally, I hate windows, and I'll be keeping XP at a very long distance. However, if we're going to rag a product, let's do it for the right reasons :)

I won't boycott (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245565)

I'll just pirate. Anyone know where I can get an .iso for Office XP and Windows XP?

office xp and windows xp have been out (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245583)


Is the boycottxp server down? (1, Troll)

jonestor (443666) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245569)


Pinging [] with 32 bytes of data:

Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.

Re:Is the boycottxp server down? (1)

psychalgia (457201) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245574)

yeah, shes toasted.

Re:Is the boycottxp server down? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245600)

Obviously he was so busy boycotting XP that he forgot to install a decent webserver. It's an easy mistake to make, probably.

It's a shame, in a way, I was looking forward to seeing his reasoning. Indeed, it will be a pleasant surprise if there is any reasoning.

invalid form key, please wait 20 seconds after hitting reply, this comment has already been submitted

Re:Is the boycottxp server down? (1)

Derci (101537) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245620)

Well, Netscape 6 tells me "connection refused". I don't think he has been slashdotted - it's too soon for that, no?

Re:Is the boycottxp server down? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245629)

It's refusing connections now. Previously it was shafted.

Re:Is the boycottxp server down? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245646)

damnit...that should be:

#debianorwhatever> ping

And I can surf it...

WindowsRG (3, Funny)

jeffehobbs (419930) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245572)

Personally, I'm waiting for WindowsRG. 49_winrg2.swf []

Re:WindowsRG (1)

a.tomaka (447587) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245582)

I know! I hear it is pretty good ;)

Re:WindowsRG (1)

psychalgia (457201) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245585)

i love how the clock changes a few hours every few seconds. Maybe the BIOS battery is dead...yeah, thats it, thats the ticket.

Boycott ? (1)

pdiaz (262591) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245573)

We'd better expend our time improving free software rather than Boycotting others (if the product is overpriced, it would not make a good sell anyway)

For the record:
I don't care paying for quality software (I've just spend 100 pounds ~ 130$ I guess, for Mathematica For Students, Linux edition) because I know there are some niches were free software isn't good enough yet.

boycott XP? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245575)

wtf for? If you don't like it, don't use it. But really, rabble rousing and grass-root pogroming support for a 'boycott' of an OS is just plain idiotic. Whoever thought this 'boycott' was a good idea had better step away from their computer for a while and consider it long and hard. Because it really does look like a case of little man syndrome- vicious hatred of winners and success for no other reason than to spite it...

Someone please explain why their is a freakin boycott?

Re:boycott XP? (1)

psychalgia (457201) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245636)

for the rest of you who dont have a dictionary, a boycott would be a group of people refusing to buy a product. Except rather than just _not buying it_ they will also band together into a group and give reasons why they aren't buying it. MS has decent products, just not for the price, thats one thing that might get me to buy it, another biggy would be that licensing garbage. You know, its not likely theyll change, but if were strong about it maybe they will. At the very least we can hope that gates gets a visit from the ghost of steve ballmer and three other ghosts at christmas in order that he "mend his evil ways."

Re:boycott XP? (3, Informative)

error0x100 (516413) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245728)

Perhaps you missed it in the news, but Microsoft was recently tried in court for illegally abusing their monopoly position to retain dominance and unfairly squash competition. It was generally called the "Microsoft antitrust trial", and not only was Microsoft found guilty, but the appeals court upheld the guilty verdict. So Microsoft's success was ill-gained - this is not just arbitrary opinions of some people, its a fact that has been not only found in court but upheld by the appeals court (or do you think all the judges are also just jealous of Microsoft's success?).

The reason for the boycott is basically that all the illegal tactics that Microsoft used to gain dominance are still being used, they continue to break the law, and the lack of competition that results from this is harming customers [] .

Did you really not notice this trial that was going on? It was very well publicised. Or did you just neglect to listen when the facts of the case were discussed in the media?

Only 5 minutes to... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245577)

/. Is that a record, or did the site go down right after posting by coincidence?

Why Boycott? (-1)

sucko (257144) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245578)

No really. What is this a protest against? This story is really bizare.
XP is gonna cost this much!! BOYCOTT!
But why? The pricing isn't any different as past versions of windows. What are you guys complaining about?

Re:Why Boycott? (1)

Jim42688 (445645) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245617)

Ummm... sucko, the reason everyone is complaining is because the home version is really crippled compared to even windows 98 or ME. and who wants to pay for a brain-dead upgrade with a pretty face?

Re:Why Boycott? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245642)

really crippled compared to 9x? how so?

Re:Why Boycott? (1)

deranged unix nut (20524) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245682)

Because unlike Win98 or WinME which are built on the unstable Win9x codebase, WinXP is built on the same codebase as NT4 and W2k. If WinXP even allows half of the Win9x apps that didn't run on W2k to run, it is well worth paying for the increased stability and application support.

W2k has not had any unexplained crashes on my system for a year. I have rebooted less than a dozen times this YEAR with w2k. There are application software problems, but they are predictable.

My only complaint with W2k is that many win9x applications are not compatible with it. WinXP (in the beta) appears to do a good job of solving that problem.

Re:Why Boycott? (0)

Computer suck! (455504) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245618)

its not linux, heance evil...

The site must be on XP (1)

amsmith (155751) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245579)

Show by example, good idea!
Slashdotted on Sunday.

Windows Xp May Be Ok (1)

ShishCoBob (516335) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245580)

Yes I know Windows XP will have may things that many people don't like. I for one though think it's more good than bad. Since it puts NT and 9x together I'm kind of glad that a lot of home users will now have an actual stable OS. I think that's a bigger thing than a bunch of features that many of I will most likely never use.

One thing I do think about sometimes. A lot of linux distibutions come with various programs already on them that do things like cd burning and such. Now Windows comes along with new things built in. Before you would have to go get the program seperately. With linux it was already in there depending on what distribution you have. Now with XP these come with the OS. It's not exactly the same thing but still it kinda makes me think sometimes.

I will add though that I do think those prices are a little too high.

Re:Windows Xp May Be Ok (2)

anshil (302405) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245596)

What I got impression from is 'putting NT and 9x together' is only a marketing farce. It's the old NT core kernel after all, they want to let the 9x series dye, and only call the change in flowerly name :o)

Re:Windows Xp May Be Ok (1)

deranged unix nut (20524) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245648)

XP is built on the NT4/W2k core with a huge amount of support for 9x programs. A large amount of the development effort was spent on making XP run all of the 9x applications that were incompatible with W2k.

Re:Windows Xp May Be Ok (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245631)

Uuuh... Call me a troll, but NT stable? hmm...

I don't know why but I kinda feel MS' presence here. I mean boycottxp IS down.
The comments are weird considering they are truly coming from regular /. readers.

Am i being paranoid? Or MS just trying to sell its "brand-new-never-seen-before" program?

Re:Windows Xp May Be Ok (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245667)

Well, I've never had any problem keeping NT stable. Likewise, I've never had any problem keeping Linux installs stable.

You feel the presence of MS because your mind cannot comprehend other people being better at server administration than you. As a result, you seek conspiracy theories - any excuse will do. Obviously, Slashdot - home to many of the most vociferous and poorly-educated Linux 'supporters' on the web - is full of MS schills. There's no other possible explanation.

Re:Windows Xp May Be Ok (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245711)

Fer Chrissakes, system stability has very little to do with someone's administration capabilities. You're thinking security, which is completely different.

99% of all stability problems are driver related. If you had hardware where the manufacturer's drivers were well written and stable, then you'd likely have no problems. If on the other hand, the drivers were buggy, you're screwed and either must wait for new drivers or buy some new hardware.


Re:Windows Xp May Be Ok (3, Interesting)

Dimensio (311070) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245647)

Since it puts NT and 9x together I'm kind of glad that a lot of home users will now have an actual stable OS.

When I, as a home user, wanted an actual stable Windows OS, I went to Windows 2000, as did quite a few people I know. We did lose some legacy and DOS-based support but AFAIK Windows XP loses most if it as well (I understand that there is some kind of DOS compatability mode, but I don't know all of the details) and after getting used to Windows 2K, I don't see a need to switch just to get the little extra that XP offers. Also, XP Home Edition doesn't even have all of the features supported in Windoes 2000 (off the top of my head: advanced security features and SMP support) -- to get a 'true' replacement we would need to upgrade to Windows XP Professional. Again, why go to the expense and performance hit of an XP upgrade when we already have most, if not all, of what we want anyway.
One thing I do think about sometimes. A lot of linux distibutions come with various programs already on them that do things like cd burning and such. Now Windows comes along with new things built in.

Well...yes, but my understanding is that a number of third-party apps that people used to use for these purposes are crippled or non-functional. Apparently it's a 'bug' with the upgrades that XP has (and not an attempt for MS to force you to use their apps exclusively). Most of my friends with CD-R drives already have the software they need and they know how to use it -- it's pretty standard to get software with the drive. Maybe it's convenient for MS to offer seamless CD burning options integrated in the OS, but I could do without the overhead (and the crippling of my other choices).

Re:Windows Xp May Be Ok (1)

toast0 (63707) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245688)

also, IIRC win2k can not be upgraded to home edition.... only professional (unless they changed that at the last minute)

Re:Windows Xp May Be Ok (3, Insightful)

mindstrm (20013) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245650)

One problem with things being built-in... is that MS destroys any competition, and eventually controls the feature-set.

If people no longer need to get third-party software to burn cds, for example.... there is no longer a market for cd-software. Eventually, MS dictates the hardware interface to the manufacturers, seeing as how they are the only ones producing software, and pretty soon... you get the picture.

um.... no reply (1)

matchboy (519044) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245584)

did we overload it?

Re:um.... no reply (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245597)

Internal Server Error

The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request.

Please contact the server administrator, and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error.

More information about this error may be available in the server error log.

Apache/1.3.19 Server at Port 80

On another note, if I were to show my bosses this site to gain insight into xp, the gangstabitches would probably not go over to well in the corporate world in which I am enslaved.

Great Timing! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245605)

Less than a day after my post [] about how the "Boycott X" sentiment is a complete waste of time! Of course it was moderated down as a troll because I hurt some idiot's feelings.

Of course the Slashdot crowd will say they're boycotting XP. Anybody on this board who has every actually purchased a Microsoft product, raise your hand. Warez and computers that have windows pre-installed do not count. Come on, let's see those hands...

Oh, look, nobody!


Re:Great Timing! (0)

Computer suck! (455504) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245633)

Dam good game if you ask me.


Re:Great Timing! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245653)

And why wouldn't computers with windows pre-installed count? You are paying for it. Look at your bill, there's a nice big dollar figure next to MS Win. XX. I don't know where you got your definition of 'Purchase' from, but I'd find a new source for your dictionary needs.

How does it feel to be so stupid?

Re:Great Timing! (1)

gdchinacat (186298) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245663)

I purchased WindowsME about 4 months ago.....

price (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245606)

Home Full, 199.99, Home Upgrade, 99.99. Professional full, 299.99, Professional upgrade, 199.99."

Linux... Priceless

Re:price (0, Redundant)

krogoth (134320) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245626)

mod this up!!

10 seconds to read, 6 seconds to reply, a pricelss joke... priceless :)

XP isn't for me. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245608)

I got a copy of XP Pro (2600/final) last week from the usual suspects.. Installed it, played around with it for a day or two, formatted it away. XP is far too sugar coated for me and I think most slashdotter's that give it a try will say the same. You can turn some of it off but not enough. I like Win2k better and that is where I'll stay for awhile. XP isn't for me.

Re:XP isn't for me. (1)

a.tomaka (447587) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245645)

Exactly. WinXP seems a little bit too geared at the group that is entering the computer world, or who are just very casual users.

It follows the MS trend of being far too feature bloated once again!

Re:XP isn't for me. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245707)

Ya Windows XP 64 Advanced Server is really geared towards the casual user.

Stop trying to sound elite you morons "Windows XP is to much geared towards the casual user, I'm gonna stick with Win2k cuase I'm hardcore! ya!" Sorry, to people who use real OSes seeing windows users talking about how one version of Windows is more lame than another is just silly. It's all the same shit you peckerheads.

Windows XP is NT 5.1 you fools.

Re:XP isn't for me. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245724)

Wow you're gonna stick with Windows 2000? Damn you must be one hardcore hax0r d00d! That's l33t! I'm such a panzy i upgraded to XP right away becuase Windows 2000 was just so hard for me to handle. Dude your so good with PCs i bet you could get a job a CompUSA, or shit since your too hardcore for XP i bet you might even be able to get an MCSE.

Where is the the injuntive relief? (1, Troll)

jackb_guppy (204733) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245612)

MS is a monopoly... proven
MS has done "bad things"... proven
MS is still doing those "bad things"... proven
MS has added more "bad things"... shown

Why give them right to entrench these practics again, and fill the war chests...
Buy votes
Hire more lawyers


WindowsXP in the year 2401 (1)

afinlay (225703) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245615)

The page for Home Full [] states that WindowsXP won't be ready until "Thursday, November 01, 2401".

Oh well, at least M$ isn't pushing the envelope...

Re:WindowsXP in the year 2401 (1)

drwhite (456200) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245665)

lol...thats funny as $hit....2401?! i wonder if compusa servers r running windows? yup they r..i guess IIS/4.0 has a date flaw or

Re:WindowsXP in the year 2401 (1)

jkmiecik (242175) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245684)

Maybe Apache has a bug? Or Linux might have a problem not letting their users type in English.


LOL (T)hat(')s funny as $hit....2401?! (I) wonder if (C)omp(USA) servers (are) running (W)indows? (Yes) they (are). (I) guess IIS/4.0 has a date flaw or bug. LOL

Re:WindowsXP in the year 2401 (1)

drwhite (456200) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245703)

i dought apache has a bug...and compusa is not using apache...and y would linux not let users not type in english?

Re:WindowsXP in the year 2401 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245705)

Hey, that's not fair. Don't taunt the 'special' kids.

I for one will not upgrade again. (1)

OS24Ever (245667) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245616)

I think what pushed me off the fence was this:

I have been a Microsoft desktop OS user since after Windows 95 came out. Before that I used OS/2 1.3, 2.0, 2.1 and 3. Unfortunately they lost.

Here's what pushed me over the edge:

I need a hotmail account to get features to work. After updating to IE 5.5 SP2 quicktime 'broke'. Java VM is being removed and the users are left up to select their own. Windows Media Player is ingrained in the OS as bad as IE now, and I never have liked it.

I'm working hard on designing a desktop platform that my wife can use, and once that happens over the next few weeks, There will not be a Windows machine in my house on any of my 8 computers.

Re:I for one will not upgrade again. (1)

deranged unix nut (20524) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245657)

The interesting thing is that MS did a large portion of the OS/2 development. The people that wrote the OS/2 kernel then went on to develop the NT kernel.

I defected from MS four years ago, but after using W2k, I am now running MS products on half of my x86 machines again.

Boycott... but.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245621)

Well I would boycott but considering that I'm not even interested in upgrading ever to any future version of windows it would be a lie to say that I'm boycotting it. I dual boot linux and windows. Right now linux seems to satisfy all my needs so I do not need a new windows.

This is perfect.. (1)

LilGuy (150110) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245622)

Wow it's amazing how well this ties in with all the anti-ms bullshit that has been floating around slashdot lately.

Boycott XP? What the fuck. You're either going to buy it, or you're not. I seriously doubt they are going to change the price over a few measly boycotters.

They're pretty much assured all their clients will be running XP. Like when 95 came out, everyone switched. If you didn't you missed out on a lot of software because 3.1 couldn't run it.

So how about ya'll clam up. If you don't like it don't buy it.


Re:This is perfect.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245643)

XP is really sucky man, I'm not sure if people can get used to it like they did with 95/98. Have you used it yourself yet?

Re:This is perfect.. (1)

jkmiecik (242175) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245671)

Yeah, I've used it. You can turn the happy colors and look off, it looks just like Win2k does. It runs nicely. A few things could use improvements but all in all, it's a decent product.

You guys forget, about 95% of the world doesn't care what a bunch of geeks posting on a geek site say. Nothing is going to change.

Re:This is perfect.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245709)

you are exactly right! I am going to buy windows products, since they work great for me. and continue to fight adoption of linux in my company
since it is a step backwards, and nothing but a
distraction to work.

down with linux
down with slashdot

Boycottxp back up (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245632)

Ok folks, we've got the site back up, we'd love to hear what you have to say!

Re:Boycottxp back up (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245639)

No you don't :-)

WinXP to the consumer is just another release... (2, Insightful)

Sj0 (472011) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245641)

Lets see...Modified UI to make it look slightly different than the last version of windows? Yup. Lots of monopoly leveraging technologies designed to crush smaller companies ekeing out a living? Oh yeah. Requires an upgrade to the latest hardware? Bingo. Slower than the last release by a good factor? You bet. All I see, despite all the hype(that many slashdotters are buying into), is just another useless windows release. One that to the regular consumer, means more money down the tubes for hardware they don't really need to check their E-mail, and write letters in Wordpad. Of course, Microsoft will be kept afloat by the 'oh but this ones based on NT! It's stable!' fanboys out there, but anybody who has seen NT in action knows it's inadequacy on older hardware, and people are finally getting used to the idea that they don't really need the latest version of windows or the latest processor for what they do.

Personally, if support for windows 9x dropped to a certain level, I'd just stop using windows altogether. To be perfectly honest, as soon as I can play the majority of my windows games using linux and my savage4 accellerator on another, non MS OS, I'll drop windows altogether. I'm just sick and tired of seeing microsoft pushing it's competitors out the window by including it's own version of an existing utility.

I own original copies of OS/2, Beos, Caldera Opendos, and Linux Redhat. I also downloaded Xgui, Gimi, and a host of other shells. My opinion? I don't have enough choice still. I could run Xdos on my 8088 and still run dos apps. Why is it so hard for the US DOJ to crack this obviously abused (on a regular baisis) monopoly?

Oh yes, and look at every windows release -- you'll see a huge group trying to fool themselves that 'THIS one will be good!'. They existed in winME, why not this one?

Let The Invisible Hand Do Its Work (2)

bill.sheehan (93856) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245644)

Why boycott Windows XP? I'm not going to buy it for many reasons, not least of which is the price, but why boycott? The pricing clearly shows that their target market is business. I figure that any business that expends its capital on locking itself into monopolistic Microsoft products will simply spend itself into non-competitiveness. A prudent business will look long and hard at all of its options before writing a check to Redmond.

These are hard times. Everyone has to learn to do more with less. The IT department is not exempt from this economic reality. The CIO who blows the budget on the fastest new computers and the latest bloated commercial software had best keep his resume up to date.

"I didn't get rich by writing a lot of checks!" -- "Bill Gates" on The Simpsons

Re:Let The Invisible Hand Do Its Work (2)

erroneus (253617) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245722)

The invisible hand is tied.

Well according to Betanet... (1)

linzeal (197905) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245649)

Windows XP RCx has been cracked and the corporate edition is out of the bag along with two OEM isos.

How in the hell is this preventing piracy when all the real pirates have circumvented it? Does MS really think the pirates are so ghettoized that these no need to activate versions will not proliferate in the face of privacy concerns to every reasonable citizen out there (all 20000 of them)?

Link to Betanet []

Why should an MS user Upgrade ? (4, Insightful)

redelm (54142) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245651)

I just don't see any compelling reason. I have plenty of MS Win95 licences, and really see no need to upgrade those boxen. Just like my Linux & FreeBSD boxen who almost always are a few versions behind.

MS-Win95b is acceptably stable given enough RAM, HD and maintenance. The only thing that has caused me to upgrade a few to Win98 is USB cameras not installing on 95.

MS-WinNT may be more stable, but some hardware and software still refuses to run under it. I believe XP is an NT descendant, so I'd worry about this.

Upgrading is fine for journalists who have stories to write, and for other software reviewers. I just don't know why the rest of us should upgrade. To get a bunch of bugfixes & security patches? Feh! If I need'em, I'll get them separately.

a boycott makes us no better than M$ (3, Insightful)

roxytheman (463262) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245659)

If this software is good, then buy it, use it and enjoy it! Then again, if it is just a piece of crap, don't buy it, use it -or enjoy it! It is up to you! Boycotting a great piece of software just because it is made by M$ is wrong I think. I have never tried XP, and propably never going to buy it, but if it is good, people should have the right to use it, and maybe we can learn from it and improve out favourite penguin or devil-OSes ...

Boycott (0, Flamebait)

Caspuh (105645) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245660)

How humiliating. The site is still down.

Stupid Shits (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245661)

Give me a break.. a bunch of linux users don't like microsoft. How fucking often do we need to visit this? Oh wow!! linux users aren't going to buy microsoft products!! WOW that's a suprise!! I never expected that. But not buying them isn't enough, you need to form a support group to complain and rationalize it?!?! Give me a break and get a life.

Re:Stupid Shits (1)

jkmiecik (242175) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245694)

Totally agree. Like I said in another comment, no one cares what a bunch of geeks say.

For that price... (3, Interesting) (113202) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245662)

...they ought to bundle a free computer!

Seriously, are we approaching the day that windows will cost more than the computer it runs on for most people?

"Boycott" is defined as... (2)

dstone (191334) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245669)

"To abstain from or act together in abstaining from using, buying, or dealing with as an
expression of protest or disfavor or as a means of coercion."[] []

"An expression of disfavor"? Okay, it might be a stress release, but unlikely to accomplish much.

Or fighting coercion with coercion? Lame and hypocritcal. (The ability to coerce is one of qualities people dislike in a monopoly.)

When you install MS, you're installing Scientology (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245670)

The besty reason not to use Microsoft products : They're a Scientolgust conspiracy!

There's plenty of evidence :

All those two-letter product code NT, XP, ME are all scientologist jargon. OT "Office Two-thousand" is too.! See []

The disk defrag software is scientologist controlled! This was sufficient concern for the German government to ban it!

The "Satan" figure of Scientology is called Xinu (or Xemu, or Xenu). Clearly, this is a play on "unix". Scientology, and MS, is anti-unix!

That's more than Windows 2000 (2)

Animats (122034) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245675)

Windows 2000 Professional, boxed product, is $249 at As a pre-install, Windows 2000 Pro adds $99 to a Dell computer over Windows 98. XP at $299 is not a winner. The OEM deal has to be a lot better than this, or nobody will buy.

merging of the version?!? (1)

Papa Legba (192550) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245677)

I thought XP was supposed to be when all the version merged together no more win9x/NT break. It still appears that we have seperate version, now they are just on the same release cycle. It used to be that it took 2 to 4 years for a new release to come out on each side of the calender, home and office alternating. Now it seems that microsoft has merged these cycles and I am betting that we will see OS release every year to 2 years.

A further note why are they releasing a home and an office (professional) version? How much difference can their possibly be? Were is the server vesion I have seen announced.

I think microsoft is going to be in real trouble over this release because of these factors. Installations of windows 2000 were slow due to the random releasing of server version and confussion over what to apply were. This is just going to compound the issue. I know they are trying to bolster OS sales (windows 2000 has never taken off) but this is not going to help at all.

Re:merging of the version?!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245727)

They are the same OS, just with differnet things added in between the home and pro version, not even the same thing as 9x and NT.

Also there is quite a difference in the office XP's, the basic only includes Excel and Word and I think Publisher, while the full versions contain things like Power Point, Access, Frong Page.

Back up now (4, Funny)

Publicus (415536) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245681)

Hey, I'm an editor at, we got hit hard there but we're back up now and we should stay that way. It might be a little slow at first but keep checking back as the traffic levels off. We're excited to hear what you have to say.

Re:Back up now (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245704)

You're actually a fucking moron, but don't let that worry you, nigger.

Re:Back up now (1)

jkmiecik (242175) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245708)

You *were* up.

You dont have a choice (1)

t_allardyce (48447) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245683)

People just don't have the choice of not buying XP. As with most MS produce it will come pre-installed on most hardware. You'd have to go out of your way to buy a new system without windows - most people don't even know there are alternative OS's let alone be prepared to switch. People running ME/98 will most likely be tired of constant crashing etc. and will upgrade to XP. Microsoft will still have the big monopoly.. cough, market share.

People are paying for their own prison-cells. The things we saw in the development of XP (Secure music, weaning people off mp3s, raw sockets (the raw socket conspiracy theory)) are just the start, showing us what they really think.

I'd love to see (3, Interesting)

Dark Paladin (116525) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245687)

A version of Windows XP (because the only reason I still use Windows is for my ATI-TV card, and to review computer games) that only has these features:

1. Basic OS/Gui.
2. Directx 8

That's it. I don't want a media player, a browser, or all of the other stuff. If they had this out, I'd pay $30 for it, and be perfectly happy. If I wanted the other pieces (browser, chat module, blah, blah, blah), I could choose whether to buy them from MS, or go and use something else (so an extra $15 for MS Explorer, or I could put Mozilla on the box).

Now everybody wins. MS is happy because it gets $30 from me (and the potential of more money if I choose to pay $99/$199 if I want all the bells an whistles), the DOJ is happy (because it makes a truly level playing frield, since other companies can compete with the other add-ons (at least in theory)), and I'm happy because I can review my games.

Of course, I could be wrong.

Upgrading (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245691)

So can I upgrade from Windows 98 directly to XP or do I have to buy Windows ME and upgrade to that first?

Transparent Encryption? (2, Interesting)

dragons_flight (515217) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245692)

Does anyone know about the "transparent encryption" that they talk about in the professional edition?

I realize it's not likely to be really strong, but if it's decent (and not critically flawed in implementation), it might be an incentive for me to upgrade eventually. I've never seen a good encryption scheme for Win that wasn't a major hassle. If you know of one I'd like to hear of that too.

I can't escape Windows because I write software for it occasionally, and need the ability to work with Word/Excel/Access file types.

I heard somewhere (but have no idea if its true) that the encryption requires a different file system be implemented (NTFS vs FAT32, IIRC). How would this affect an upgrade?

Re:Transparent Encryption? (2)

citizenc (60589) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245726)

From what I understand, what transparent encryption does is when you save documents to the "My Documents" folder, Windows XP will encrypt the files so that other user accounts cannot access those files.

viva xp (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245693)

I would be very interesting denying Linux distributions include stuff other than the kernel. I would then like to see the sucess of such strategy. You blame Microsoft for including the IE in its OS, whereas the same time linux kernel extends itself (see khttpd) and linux distros like suse include plenty of CDs of free software (6+ I think)

Trying out XP vs actually using it (1)

LordSnow (516535) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245697)

Seems to me that even if everyone decides not to 'use' XP, at least most everyone will try it out. Slashdotters are a curious bunch and I doubt many will be able to keep their hands off of a warez copy of the OS. Like me, dling it now. =)

In other news (0, Offtopic)

generic-man (33649) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245698)

I would like to formally announce that I am boycotting the Audi A8 sedan. I feel that its list price of over $62,000 [] is entirely too high, and that it would be advantageous for consumers to buy a more practical sedan.

I would also like to announce the establishment of an Internet petition [] to urge Audi to stop selling cars. We as consumers cannot tolerate this excessively high pricing scheme!

Don't make me bring Ralph Nader into this. You saw what he did to Al Gore. Just wait until he starts fighting against corporations.

Re:In other news (1)

Legion303 (97901) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245710)

Your analogy would hold if you changed "Audi A8 sedan" to "broken-down Yugo with no wheels."


Grass roots movement (2)

Alien54 (180860) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245713)

People need to also talk this up on Talk shows:

Well, mr. talk show host, I was talking to a friend who was testing this new version of Windows, and boy is it a dog"

[insert reasons that the talk show host can agree with]

just enough to poison the well. simple reasons for regular folks, like the whole Passport fiasco.

heck telling them the plain truth about the copy protection stuff and registration stuff will do the job.

now mind you, I would never do something like this, but you can't even make a copy for your kids machine, or for your wife. You got to buy a whole nother copy! I paid my money. I should be able to do what I want with it!

That should be good enough to do the job.

- - -
Radio Free Nation []
an alternate news site based on Slash Code
"If You have a Story, We have a Soap Box"

OT But (0, Offtopic)

rosewood (99925) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245715)

DId anyone else see the DMCA story repost about Time Warner cable? Now its gone? Wtf?

And your point is? (0)

bradleyjay (413670) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245717)

So WindowsXP is going to sell for $199.


SQL Server is $1500. Who gives a shit? Why should I boycott XP just 'cause it's $199?

Why don't you people get a fucking life and quit bashing MS for no reason?

Already! (2)

BlowCat (216402) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245720)

I guess I'm already boycotting Windows XP, all other versions of Windows, as well as OS/2, GNU/Hurd, NetBSD, Solaris, AtheOS and whatever else is not installed on my computer.

Boycott makes sense if I would buy something but I don't in order to "punish" the manufacturer. How many slashdotters would buy Windows XP if not this boycott?

naked young kiddies?? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2245721)

are there any nubile young 13 year old girls around here that i can rape? i especially like ones that squeal when you stuff your dick in there mouth. thank you.

-- the real J'Raxis

Bloated code? (1)

mantis78 (170556) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245723)

Microsoft did it again? Or at least they are

They tarnished the generally positive word of
windows to mean chances of getting your machined

Now, they are trying to do the same to the practice
of eXtreme Programming (XP). Programs written
with strict adherence to XP should be compact
and powerful, not bloated and slow.

They must have taken the concept of paired
programming to the extreme. With all the
young boys and girls at Redmond fighting for
the keyboard, what a shame to paired programming.
Double the time waster, double the bloat!

Windows XP for free? (2)

joestar (225875) | more than 13 years ago | (#2245725)

WindowsXP Vs. Linux Mandrake: Some Aesthetic Observations is the title of this excellent article [] that I recommand to read.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?