×

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!

UK Greens Declare Vista Bad For Environment

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the riding-the-hype dept.

Windows 290

schwaang writes "The UK Green Party says that Vista's DRM requirements will force many unnecessary hardware upgrades. Quoting: 'There will be thousands of tonnes of dumped monitors, video cards, and whole computers that are perfectly capable of running Vista — except for the fact they lack the paranoid lock down mechanisms Vista forces you to use. That's an offensive cost to the environment. Future archaeologists will be able to identify a "Vista Upgrade Layer" when they go through our landfill sites.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

290 comments

Linux is bad for it too (5, Funny)

suso (153703) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826292)

Linux users probably use more CD-Rs because versions of Linux have come out more frequently than versions of Windows. Think of how many Linux CD-Rs you've written since Windows XP came out years ago. Probably enough to make plastic to make a monitor casing?

Re:Linux is bad for it too (5, Funny)

ap0 (587424) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826328)

Plus, since many people keep around old computers and throw Linux on them instead of properly disposing of them, they are sucking up power unnecessarily.

Re:Linux is bad for it too (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17826424)

Whoever modded parent as Flaimbait needs a sarcasm check.

+1 irony

Re:Linux is bad for it too (3, Informative)

somegeekynick (1011759) | more than 7 years ago | (#17827028)

sudo apt-get dist-upgrade :P Btw, why use CD-R's when you have CD-RW's. P.S. I haven't gone through all the comments, and I don't care if the two lines above are redundant. ;)

Re:Linux is bad for it too (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17826350)

I'll bite, bitch.

Since XP came out? 2 CDR's. If you're so worried, do a network install.

You can suck it with your signature SPAM, too.

Re:Linux is bad for it too (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17826418)

lol. wanker.

Re:Linux is bad for it too (3, Informative)

jimstapleton (999106) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826396)

4 RWs, cycling. 2 For FreeBSD (x86, x86-64), and 2 for Linux (whicheverdistro someone has convinced me to try out recently).

They don't go in the trash.

Re:Linux is bad for it too (1)

smallfries (601545) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826438)

Why would you need to burn an install image onto CD-R? Is this a windows things that nobody has told us poor linux users amount?

Re:Linux is bad for it too (1)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826502)

I only have a wireless connection on my PC, and it won't boot off of the two memory sticks that I have. If you have a better way of getting Debian/Ubuntu on my box, I'd like to hear it. :)

No, seriously, I would!

Re:Linux is bad for it too (1)

smallfries (601545) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826860)

I normally use gentoo, so the different stages are quite easy to do on a harddrive. For a CD based distro, can't you make a small bootable partition on your harddrive and copy the files from the disk image onto the partition?

Re:Linux is bad for it too (3, Informative)

segin (883667) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826600)

At least CD-Rs can be easily recycled. My local recycling centre accepts old CDs as a recyclable material.

How many dgrees (0, Redundant)

jsnipy (913480) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826296)

Why monitors?

Re:How many dgrees (-1, Flamebait)

tont0r (868535) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826320)

Its a fancy way of saying 'we really dont know what we are talking about, but it gives us something to bitch about'

Re:How many dgrees (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17826428)

Vista's DRM will support High-Bandwidth Digital Content Protection (HDCP) which will regulate what types of periferals (monitors, sound cards, video cards, etc.) that can show, play, encode, decode, etc. the content. For example, you may not be able to watch a movie (or only be able to watch it at lower definition) unless your video card monitor and sound card are all approved by Mircosoft. HDCP will only be supported by new components hence the need to upgrade. Monitors are paricularly harmful to the environment because they contain quite a bit of lead. http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/question678.h tm [howstuffworks.com]

Re:How many dgrees (4, Insightful)

Waffle Iron (339739) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826842)

Monitors are paricularly harmful to the environment because they contain quite a bit of lead.

I've never quite understood all of the concern about monitors and lead. Almost all of that lead is vitrified in the glass, just the same way that leaded crystal drinking glasses are chock full of lead. If the lead is immobilized enough to drink out of, it wouldn't seem that monitor glass would pose a major threat.

Moreover, monitors would generally end up in a landfill with some kind of containment system. People fret about the 5 pounds of lead frozen in glass and buried in a landfill, yet anybody can go down to Wal-Mart, plop down a couple of bucks for a pound of lead airgun pellets, and indiscriminately scatter them around the environment. Why no comparable outcry about that?

Strange... (3, Informative)

tgd (2822) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826300)

I didn't have to upgrade a damn thing... on a two year old Celeron system.

Maybe MSDN Vista is missing the "upgrade all your crap" bit being set.

Re:Strange... (5, Interesting)

Corporate Troll (537873) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826442)

Two year old isn't really old, is it? My main desktop is from beginning 2003 and it's still a nice machine.

I found a perfectly functional P-IV 1.9GHz/512Meg RAM/40Gig HD/Dual-headed-matrox in the dumpster at the recycling centre. Booted it up, and a spyware infested Win2000 popped up in my face. That was fixed with a Linux install. How old is the machine I just described? It's perfectly capable of running WinXP. Vista, probably not all that much....

People throw away the nicest machines if for them it "behaves broken" or "because a newer version is out".

Those greenies may have a point, but I foresee golden times for dumpster divers....

Re:Strange... (2, Insightful)

tgd (2822) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826492)

Thats actually how I got the machine in question. A company was getting rid of it because it "didn't work" -- it was spyware infested. Its actually, I believe, a 1.8ghz Celeron or something like that. The drive is bigger, 60gb perhaps, and its got on-board video and sound. Nothing special. I bet the machine didn't cost $500 two years ago.

Vista runs fine on it. The "experience" score was a bit low, but everything worked fine.

People who want the latest and greatest whiz-bang crap may need to upgrade, but those people are the type who drop $3k on a gaming rig every few years anyway and secretly are looking for an excuse.

Is there a chance that the uninformed will be taken advantage of by the likes of Best Buy to buy things they don't need? Of course, but Best Buy does that even without the excuse of Vista.

Vista is 5 years more advanced than XP. Of course it needs more resources. Go compare what a Linux system typically would install nicely on in 1998 and 2003, or worse 1994 and 1999. I ran Linux on 8 meg systems for 4-5 years, now most installers won't even load in a system with less than 64 meg.

Re:Strange... (1)

jimstapleton (999106) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826512)

actaully, that machine could very easily run Vista if you don't mind turning off Aero. Vistas requirements aren't much higher than XPs without Aero.

I have seen XP running on a 200Mhz CPU with 256MB of memory, just as a rough metric.

Re:Strange... (1)

cheater512 (783349) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826856)

I should XP on a spare 166 laptop with 96mb ram. :)
It wouldnt be pretty.

Runs Gentoo fine however.

Re:Strange... (1)

jimstapleton (999106) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826870)

sounds painful. XP should have at least 256MB of RAM. 128MB works but HURTSBADLYOMFGPLEASEMAKEITSTOP.

Less than 128 requires you to tweak it by turning off a lot of services.

Re:Strange... (2, Interesting)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826638)

Up until about 8 months ago, I was running a PII 266 I got back in 1998. It fulfilled all my needs. But eventually all the RAM chips started dieing, and it would have cost almost as much for new RAM as it did to buy a new computer, so I bought a new computer, which cost more than the RAM did, but I wanted another computer that would last me 8 years. It's actually cheaper to buy a new PC than to buy even just Vista, so I think a lot of people will take this option.

Re:Strange... (1)

smallfries (601545) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826462)

Do you reckon? Or maybe the Green party is talking about business use of Vista. Most businesses aren't on a two-year upgrade cycle and your kit would be relatively modern for them. Most business used to use a five-year cycle, although snce hardware passed the point that it handled basic office tasks ok the cycle length has increased. I don't think that the average PC from 5-7 years ago is going to handle Vista without an upgrade.

Re:Strange... (1)

GreatBunzinni (642500) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826818)

And how many PC users are running two year old systems or younger? I'm not. I have a 3-year old laptop with 512MB RAM, a 7-year old desktop with 1024MB RAM and a 10 year old deskop with 256MB RAM. If I wanted to run Vista do you really believe that I wouldn't have to upgrade a single piece of hardware?

Re:Strange... (1)

Vexorian (959249) | more than 7 years ago | (#17827024)

My friend you make 2 year old sound as if it was as old as you could do, which it isn't . My comp is 4 years old and it is not exactly archaic

they forgot to mention (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17826318)

that running a desktop in hardware accelerated 3d mode all the time also means more power consumption...

Sure (0, Troll)

El Lobo (994537) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826324)

Sure, what's next, Vista is the principal factor of the Global Warning. You know, /. is sometimes funny. So many smart people and at the same time so many idiots reunited in the same place... People are SOOOO DESPERATE trying to make their point abd to demonstrate their holy theories: Apple=God, Linuxxx-Holy spirit, MS= Devil that they are willing to repeat lies and stupid theories just to get that internal confirmation that they so much need like a drug... It's just not so funny anymore... /, is just like yellow press but only even more stupid... and PREDICTABLE.... A cancer.

Re:Sure (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17826872)

You're clearly an MS fanboy. I read your sig... Go play with your spreadsheets.

Re:Sure (0, Offtopic)

Drakin020 (980931) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826898)

I love your sig. Linux haters unite! There needs to be some diversity in Slashdot...However because we are different we will get modded down.

I know why (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17826326)

Could it have something to do with XP's Teletubbies wallpaper still being included?

Am I missing something? (5, Insightful)

Erwos (553607) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826330)

I'm kind of confused. You see, the laptop I bought a couple years ago, which apparently has no support for HDCP or any of those other copy-protection measures, actually runs Vista _just fine_. In fact, my desktop, which is a relatively old AthlonXP 2500+ machine, ALSO doesn't need to be upgraded, beyond maybe getting a little more memory.

Look, DRM sucks. But DRM is no excuse to just start making up FUD. Vista is a hog, but blaming it all on DRM seems pretty inaccurate. Saying that everyone is going to start filling landfills just because their video card doesn't support HDCP seems like it's crossing over into "deliberately lying".

Re:Am I missing something? (4, Informative)

a_nonamiss (743253) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826410)

The whole DRM thing concerns high definition media. Have you tried playing Blu-Ray on said laptop? HD-DVD? If you did, I think you'd find that you can't play it in high definition. It will downgrade the signal if you try to play it on your 2-year old Celeron, and will not play in full 1080p glory. That's what all the bruhaha is about. It's not a big deal to some people (like myself, who has a 50-inch HDTV and could care less about playing it on his PC) but to others this functionality is important. The bottom line is we aren't getting what we paid for.

Re:Am I missing something? (5, Insightful)

kjart (941720) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826484)

Have you tried playing Blu-Ray on said laptop? HD-DVD? If you did, I think you'd find that you can't play it in high definition. It will downgrade the signal if you try to play it on your 2-year old Celeron, and will not play in full 1080p glory.

I doubt that a two year old laptop will have a Blu-Ray drive, so no, I don't think it would be able to play one. People will have to upgrade to enjoy such things, but this has nothing to do with Vista.

The bottom line is we aren't getting what we paid for.

Yes, I would tend to agree, but I don't think this has anything to do with the features in Vista or any other OS for that matter. It is the content producers choice to use DRM on their content and they are rightfully to blame for it.

Re:Am I missing something? (1)

cheater512 (783349) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826940)

This isnt related to HD-DVD/Bluray DRM. Microsoft puts on their own DRM in addition to the disc's DRM.

Your Celeron can't RUN HD content period. (0)

cybrthng (22291) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826522)

So whats the point? Vista isn't stopping you, your hardware is. HiDef is bandwidth/CPU intensive and old hardware isn't going to cut it. Thats not a fault of Vista. If you want HD playback on your laptop get a modern laptop. If you want HD playback on your PC you probably have a PC that isn't going to go to a landfill to begin with.

Re:Your Celeron can't RUN HD content period. (2, Informative)

Goaway (82658) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826548)

Vista isn't stopping you

Incorrect. It is stopping you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_Video_Path [wikipedia.org]

Re:Your Celeron can't RUN HD content period. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17826694)

For DRMed stuff that the end user chose to buy. I don't see what the problem is. At worst Microsoft is facilitating the doomed asshattery of others. At least with Microsoft's facilitation, it'll help to avoid the catastrophy of inviting more rootkits, and God know's what else they'd try. That DRM'ed products exist isn't something Vista foisted on anyone in anyway. There are even legitimate uses for them in the corporate setting. Aside from DRM generally not existing outside of internal business uses, Vista's take is probably one of the better ways to do things.

The other choice might well have been Balkinization of PC hardware as companies partner up and refuse to support the choices of non-allied companies. Vista just lets everyone choose their poison equally. Since I'm of the mind Draconian DRM shackling the end user is doomed anyway, only serving to increase the legitimacy of "piracy," there isn't much in the way of down side for me.

Re:Am I missing something? (1)

lucifig (255388) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826604)

Oh dear god! The 14 HD-DVD players and the 5 blu-rays they have already sold will be thrown into a landfill! May our children's children's children forgive us for that 24 lb mess we created when we upgraded to Vista.

Re:Am I missing something? (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826614)

The weirdest thing about this signal degradation, is that the CPU actually needs to do MORE work to bring you LESS quality.

DRM is crap because it lets the consumer pay for it to take away consumer rights whilst having absolutely no benefit to the consumer. If DRM ever managed to stop breaking copyright, it could be considered useful, but it doesn't. All it does is make honest consumers pay more to get their legal rights back, that were taken from them by DRM itself. DRM is extortion; "the more you pay, the less we'll steal from you".

Re:Am I missing something? (1)

Erwos (553607) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826654)

So, the issue is with HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, not Vista. I can play back 720p video just fine from unprotected sources.

Re:Am I missing something? (1)

kabocox (199019) | more than 7 years ago | (#17827032)

The whole DRM thing concerns high definition media. Have you tried playing Blu-Ray on said laptop? HD-DVD? If you did, I think you'd find that you can't play it in high definition. It will downgrade the signal if you try to play it on your 2-year old Celeron, and will not play in full 1080p glory.

What two year old consumer laptop had a blu-ray or HD DVD drive in it? He has most likely has a CDR/DVD combo drive or DVD burner either of which could read DVDs fine. I've been sick and tired of this whole HD tv crap for years already. I don't care. I'm not buying a $2000+ HDTV or drive gear that costs $800+ and re-buying my entire movie collection to watch it slightly differently. I might at some point in time spend $100-$200 on a HD/Blu-Ray combo player from Walmart and watch it on my existing TV so I wouldn't get any improvement. I could just some media companies only releasing their crap on one of the two formats and not DVD, which forces an upgrade. The only positive thing that I see about HDTV is that there are now more TVs that you can use for large low resolution computer monitors.

Re:Am I missing something? (1)

jimicus (737525) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826422)

Quite correct, but the great majority of folks are never going to upgrade their OS anyway - they'll just plonk down £300 on whatever Dell's advertising in the paper today. That's where the waste comes from.

Though TBH I think that's more a society problem than Microsoft's fault.

Re:Am I missing something? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17826426)

Look, DRM sucks. But DRM is no excuse to just start making up FUD.

While I agree, pro-DRM and anti-DRM groups have been using it to make up FUD on both sides for awhile now ...

Re:Am I missing something? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17826444)

As TFA states, its if you want to watch an HD-DVD or BluRay at full resolution that the DRM will kick in and deny you any "fair use" rights on anything but the latest kit. Unless, of course, you just downloaded the HD-DVD of bittorrent.

Re:Am I missing something? (0)

kjart (941720) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826782)

As TFA states, its if you want to watch an HD-DVD or BluRay at full resolution that the DRM will kick in and deny you any "fair use" rights on anything but the latest kit. Unless, of course, you just downloaded the HD-DVD of bittorrent.

How would you play a Blu-Ray disc on anything but "the latest kit" to begin with? Blu-Ray is itself new, not just the DRM that's placed on it.

Re:Am I missing something? (2, Informative)

heroofhyr (777687) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826480)

You didn't mention whether or not you've tried running any high-definition video playback on the machine. Nobody said Vista itself won't run on a computer/laptop that lacks DRM support in the display, just that HD video playback will be impossible. The quality will be automatically downgraded to quasi-DVD quality even if your non-HDCP monitor supports HD-DVD. In other words, you can probably play HD-DVDs on your laptop, but I'll bet the video looks exactly like a regular DVD.

Re:Am I missing something? (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826622)

Yes, but there is no reason to get Vista if you can't run its new features. Personally, I don't even feel that the new features are worth the money, but that is beside the point. I know plenty of people who upgraded from 2000 to XP..and then chose an XP interface that mirrored the 2000 interface. Why? Why did they pay all that money for the same kernel doing the same thing with the same interface? The same is try for Vista -- why pay all that money for Vista, if you are going to use an XP-esque interface, and run the same programs you ran on XP? Is there something about the word "Vista" that turns people on?

Re:Am I missing something? (1)

Delkster (820935) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826634)

My first impression was also that the article was completely clueless. When I read it again, though, I realised that it was, at least to some extent, because I had tried to read it from my point of view of a technically literate person while it had actually been written for someone who wouldn't understand the technical side even if it were (superficially) included. As a result, a non-technical person may be better able to understand the points the article -- although that still requires them to pay attention -- but, on the other hand, some adapting and possibly reading between the lines was needed for me to understand what the point was.


Direct quote from the article:

All computer hardware, such as monitors and sound cards, will have to obey Microsoft's rules for encrypting content in order for consumers to use Vista to play 'premium' content, such as Blu-Ray and HD DVD disks.
(emphasis mine)

That is actually at least partially true because, if I've understood correctly, all (kernel-space?) drivers are required to be signed, or you won't be able to play HD "content".



This, however, is a possibly questionable statement (from TFA):

All computer hardware, such as monitors and sound cards, will have to obey Microsoft's rules for encrypting content in order for consumers to use Vista to play 'premium' content.
My initial impression was that the article was claiming that MS forces all hardware manufacturers to actively encrypt something or to implement DRM in everything. When I read it more closely, I came to think that it might mean passive obeying instead: that is, not writing drivers or making hardware that bypasses the DRM. That, considering the more or less forced driver signing, is probably true. However, the article could be clearer about it. Now it feels a bit like propaganda that gives a wrong impression without really lying.

I haven't followed the Vista driver-signing issues closely enough to know but at least at one point I got the impression that the 64-bit version of Vista would require all drivers to be signed in any case. That may not be true, but if it is, the point is even more important.



A dupe? (0, Offtopic)

BA_Draku (1043900) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826332)

Wasn't this story posted here before?

Re:A dupe? (0, Offtopic)

niconorsk (787297) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826580)

Ah, but one should know that one can measure the value of a story by how often it has been Slashdot. If it has only been posted once, clearly it can not be of much note.

Re:A dupe? (0, Offtopic)

RDW (41497) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826774)

It's a story about the Green Party. OF COURSE it has to be re-cycled!

stupid (5, Insightful)

otacon (445694) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826340)

Future archaeologists will be able to identify a "Vista Upgrade Layer" when they go through our landfill sites
No we won't...the same reason we don't have a mainframe layer or black and white TV layer and the same reason we don't have a sword layer...people aren't going to buy new stuff to run software that does the same stuff...if you are going to buy a new computer and it comes with vista great, but people are really overestimating the market demand as far as the average PC user and even most 'advanced' (I use that term loosly) users.

Re:stupid (1)

zakezuke (229119) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826598)

No we won't...the same reason we don't have a mainframe layer or black and white TV layer and the same reason we don't have a sword layer...people aren't going to buy new stuff to run software that does the same stuff...if you are going to buy a new computer and it comes with vista great, but people are really overestimating the market demand as far as the average PC user and even most 'advanced' (I use that term loosly) users.

I'm sure somewhere there is a black and white layer, probally started sometime in the 80s when it became totally unfashonable to have a working TV ontop of a non-working one. Forunatly said B&W layer probally had tubes without the usual kilos of lead. It wasn't until the pong era that x-rays really became an issue.

There certainly is a gun layer somewhere, not that guns are obsolete, but the military tended not to be big on given their more excelent automatic hardware to civilians, so they would rather dump than melt down.

The monitor layer is what the greens seem to be offended by. CRTs are nasty ass things to dump.

People aren't going to buy new stuff to run software that does the same stuff? Well, not counting the people who i've spoken to who were so impressed with vista they plan to buy a new pc just to run it, but thanks to DRM, and hand shaking displays and video cards, if you want to do HD you gotta upgrade.

Re:stupid (1)

Oriumpor (446718) | more than 7 years ago | (#17827006)

Now as far as the home user goes you're absolutely right. There's little reason (besides DirectX 11 or some equally abhorrant abomonation) to upgrade to Vista unless you need a certain feature only it can provide. However, microsoft has been really good about making their next release NECESSARY to compete for X reason. Now to the intelligent technologist that marketing bullshit isn't anything new, but to the devoted follower it is proof positive that shit needs to be replaced.

They'll create some *native* mode that offers *better support* for *higher end platforms* in their next iteration of domain services that requires you only run vista to get the full benefit of their management environment or some hogwash to that effect. Just wait the MCSE's eat that shit up.

Gates' probable response (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17826346)

If I were Bill Gates reading the announcement I would probably sponaneously orgasm. Whoever said that Microsoft's view is that you can buy anything is more right than they could have imagined. It seems you can buy a relationship with your OEM's that money just can't buy.

Future archaeologists will be able to identify a "Vista Upgrade Layer" when they go through our landfill sites.'"
Just put yourself in the position of an OEM reading that.

oh please (4, Insightful)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826352)

Future archaeologists will be able to identify a "Vista Upgrade Layer" when they go through our landfill sites

Number of people wo will buy Vista retail - tiny
Number of people who will upgrade an old PC just to run Vista that they just bought - tinier
Number of people upgrading who will toss out perfectly good vid cards/monitors rather than building a secondary PC - all 3 of you.

Re:oh please (2, Insightful)

KiloByte (825081) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826420)

No, ordinary folks toss out the whole perfectly good computer.
Already a lot of them prefer purchasing a new machine instead of paying a sizable part of the price to have it "repaired" by removing spyware.

Re:oh please (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17826490)

Yes, people always upgrade only the necessary components, and don't run out and buy a new computer as a whole, discarding of the entire old one as useless. This is why Dell went bankrupt years ago. In your world. In the real world, however, people aren't that smart.

Triggers Broom (1)

CmdrGravy (645153) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826586)

Ironically these people should take lessons from Trigger, the dimmest bulb in Peckham and think about the parable of his broom.

Personally I've been using the same computer for over 8 years now. Fair enough it might have a different monitor, mouse, case, motherboard, powersupply, more hard drives etc but it's the same computer all right.

Vista defaults to Standby, not Power off! (5, Insightful)

xaxa (988988) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826362)

The "Shutdown" icon in Vista no longer shuts down the computer -- it just puts it into standby! To shutdown properly you have to select the option from a tiny menu. This is going to waste a lot of energy, since people won't realise the difference.

You can change it (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17826550)

I managed to change it back to shutdown by going through the advanced options in Power Options in the control panel. I'm not in front of my Vista machine right now so I can't give you the details, but you should be able to find it.

Re:Vista defaults to Standby, not Power off! (1)

jamesl (106902) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826994)

Which brings it into line with every other appliance (except maybe my can opener) and electronic device sold in the last 10 years. Hell, my car even has a flashing red light to warn miscreants that a force field is in place and any disturbance will will wake the neighbors.

CompSci students - heads up! (5, Funny)

Rufty (37223) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826364)

Free linux workstations coming soon to a dumpster near you!!!

(Worked for my Masters, could work for you, too...)

Re:CompSci students - heads up! (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826468)

HAha! I always loved being able to run something light like NetBSD on old computers that people think "no longer work." Of course, it is interesting that people think their computers are no longer good enough, especially these days. Yeah, that P5 I toyed with ran a bit slowly, on 64MB ram, but a computer from 2004 with 512MB+ would be fine running just about anything (except Vista). The best part is that most people who upgrade continue using their computer the same way -- they don't even use the new capabilities the upgrade offered them!

UK Green Party is stupid...is it really news ? nt (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17826378)

Happy not be a nerd :)

Upgrade? (1)

LiquidFiend (1050386) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826382)

Companies upgrade their computers bi-yearly, they get rid of all of their old computers. What's going to be different about Vista? I think that most people who want to use the Aero desktop for Vista will already have computers that can run it due to the games they play already. I am using Vista with an on board P.O.S video card, runs smoothly.

Besides the video card most computers will not need to be upgraded. Even if they do, chances are that even if they kept XP they would need to upgrade for future software bundles. I agree with the people above, this is not news, and hardly /. worthy.

full bore into the (billy) gates of hell (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17826404)

'course heis not the only gates advocating for debt&disruption nowadaze? greed/fear/ego have been shown to be the DOWnfall of more than a few 'civil'izations.

all this as opposed to joining the creators' wwwildly popular planet/population rescue initiative/mandate?

from previous post: many demand corepirate nazi execrable stop abusing US

we the peepoles?

how is it allowed? just like corn passing through a bird's butt eye gas.

all they (the felonious nazi execrable) want is... everything. at what cost to US?

for many of US, the only way out is up.

don't forget, for each of the creators' innocents harmed (in any way) there is a debt that must/will be repaid by you/US as the perpetrators/minions of unprecedented evile will not be available after the big flash occurs.

'vote' with (what's left in) yOUR wallet. help bring an end to unprecedented evile's manifestation through yOUR owned felonious corepirate nazi life0cidal glowbull warmongering execrable.

some of US should consider ourselves very fortunate to be among those scheduled to survive after the big flash/implementation of the creators' wwwildly popular planet/population rescue initiative/mandate.

it's right in the manual, 'world without end', etc....

as we all ?know?, change is inevitable, & denying/ignoring gravity, logic, morality, etc..., is only possible, on a temporary basis.

concern about the course of events that will occur should the corepirate nazi life0cidal execrable fail to be intervened upon is in order.

'do not be dismayed' (also from the manual). however, it's ok/recommended, to not attempt to live under/accept, fauxking nazi felon greed/fear/ego based pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking hypenosys.

consult with/trust in yOUR creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

GUI landfills? (4, Funny)

ciaohound (118419) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826432)

Why would a landfill upgrade to Vista? Are they currently on XP? Are they even x86 architecture? I could see putting Java on them, for the garbage collection.

Kickbacks from Hardware Manufacturers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17826460)

Microsoft and the hardware companies are in bed to get everyone to spend 1000's of dollars on hardware for an OS no one really needs.
Could someone explain why it is that Aero needs atleast a 128MB video card when it doesn't do anything beyond what Object Desktop has been doing

Kittens (3, Funny)

MyNameIsEarl (917015) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826466)

As if being bad foor the environment wasn't bad enough, everytime someone upgrades to Vista God kills a kitten.

Re:Kittens (1)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826616)

everytime someone upgrades to Vista God kills a kitten.


      Good. I hate cats anyway. I'll be sure to buy a few extra copies!

Re:Kittens (2, Funny)

AxminsterLeuven (963108) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826906)

Bit of a moral dilemma then, isn't it? 'cause every time someone installs Linux Steve Ballmer throws a chair at a puppy...

FUD (3, Insightful)

cybrthng (22291) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826488)

Vista isn't negating all that hardware, the Movie Studios are. You have the same problem of not being able to run protected content no matter WHICH platform you choose. If Linux ever gets High Def DVD or if MAC's ever get Hi-Def DVD you bet they too will be DRM'd

What a load of rubbish. (4, Insightful)

Toby_Tyke (797359) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826514)

They might have a point if millions of people were going to rush out and buy Vista. But thats not going to happen, so the Green Party is, sadly, talking rubbish.

Far and away the vast majority of PC users will be sticking with their current XP install until they buy a new PC, which will come pre-loaded with Vista. And even then, people don't tend to throw away their old PCs if they still work. They tend to keep it around as a second machine, or pass it on to a relative (instant recycling).

I hate DRM as much as the next Slashbot, but come on. Thousand of people dumping perfectly good hardware so they can watch HD-DVD movies? I don't think so.

Re:What a load of rubbish. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17826798)

Thousand of people dumping perfectly running mp3-players or portable cd-players, so they can buy new stylish ipods? I don't think so...

Vista kills puppies! (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826528)

It's true. If there's someone who will have to choose between buying Vista and feeding their dog, they might choose Vista and the dog will starve. If you care at all about puppies, avoid Vista.

I mean, I like anti-MS FUD as much as the next guy, but please ground it in some sort of reality.

Vista upgrade is not required (1)

192939495969798999 (58312) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826538)

The summary makes it sound like you HAVE to upgrade to Vista. If no one upgrades, then Microsoft will have to continue to support XP, etc. There's nothing that says you HAVE to upgrade to Vista if it's all that bad.

Re:Vista upgrade is not required (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826772)

" If no one upgrades, then Microsoft will have to continue to support XP, etc."

Huh? Why would they have to do that?

OH, come on (0)

JamesP (688957) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826542)

FUD's got a limit. I guess people are enjoying it when it is agains MS, but anyway, spreading disinformation is pretty much not good

Yeah Vista causes cancer, everything you see in your computer, if it is not Vista approved will look garbled (and even your eyes will look fuzzy after using Vista). And BillyG eats kittens for breakfast.

Come on people...

Faster PC's may be good for environment? (2, Interesting)

Knutsi (959723) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826592)

It seems to me that faster PCs in the past have brought them more and better functionality, making them replace other, potentially more enviromentally unfriendly technology. Not sure how the math on this works out tho'.

EU gets Vista-N, no media player = no DRM (3, Funny)

Marbleless (640965) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826612)

Since good Europeans would be buying the -N editions without media player, they can't play DRM content anyway!

So why would they need to upgrade their monitor? ;)

A bit over the top (1)

fizzbin (110016) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826704)

it would have been much better if the Greens had provided more technical details than laying on the leftist rants. I doubt if many on Slashdot need to be convinced that DRM is bad, but to a lot of suits in the corporate world, this doesn't help convince them.

Get Serious (2, Insightful)

Luscious868 (679143) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826736)

I hate sensationalist crap like this. Vista won't require a hardware upgrade for relatively new systems unless you want to experience all of it's bells and whistles. IMHO that's beside the point completely since most consumers will stick with the operating system they have until they buy a new PC that will be preloaded with Vista anyway. I know I'm in no rush to upgrade our systems where I work (and I'll never do it at home since I ditched my PC a year ago in favor of a Mac). I won't even bother taking a look at Vista until it's been on the market for two years. Let others deal with the inevitable bugs, security issues, driver problems and software compatibility issues. I'll stick with XP as long as possible. I just don't see very compelling businesses reasons to justify an upgrade to Vista. I see a lot more reasons for consumers to make the leap but as I mentioned above they'll do so whether they need to or not when they buy their next PC.

Throwing away computers!? BLASPHEMER! (1)

GodInHell (258915) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826852)

Throwing them away...

But then where do I host my gigs and gigs of porn, store all my old music I don't like anymore.. what machine would I retrofit into my arcade chasis and set up as my MAME/LAME and SNES9X machine?

Maybe what we really need is a creative linux hacker to buy up old machines, throw some apps on it to do home server functions, and then sell them back to the old users. What could they do? Just as an example, put one in the kitchen with a touch screen that you could use to track inventory, bring up recorded cooking shows, hold a recepie index, address book, and notepad for the family. -- the trick is to do it for less than $300, and maybe this is the time to do it?

-GiH

The Real Environmental Issue (2, Insightful)

giafly (926567) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826914)

The real environmental issue is, from the article:

Vista requires more expensive and energy-hungry hardware, passing the cost on to consumers and the environment
I don't think anyone could seriously argue with that. But assuming most people don't upgrade until they would have bought a PC anyway, the following claim is exaggerated:

There will be thousands of tonnes of dumped monitors, video cards and whole computers that are perfectly capable of running Vista - except for the fact they lack the paranoid lock down mechanisms Vista forces you to use.

Stupid Article (-1, Flamebait)

Milican (58140) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826962)

No I didn't read the article. The summary was good enough for me to realize that it is the stupidest article I have seen posted on here in a long time. If there was some sort of "Shitty Award" that Slashdot gave out I nominate this article. How many ways can people jump on the bandwagon and bash Vista? Hey if you are going to bash it at least have some decent ammo. Why not blame the MPAA for ramming HDCP down our throats?

JOhn

it might be microsofts fall.. (1)

terrible2u (1057990) | more than 7 years ago | (#17826996)

as the european union files a lawsuit against microsoft because ms breaks rules that were set by the commission für Interoperable Systems (ECIS). after already in 2004 it was stated that ms uses their dominant position, as windows is not interoperabel with other vendors products. now with XAML they even try to be on the internet just as dominant. my first post by the way..
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...