Internal Emails Released In Vista Capable Debacle 314
An anonymous reader writes "As previously discussed, Microsoft's attempt to shield itself from further discovery over the Windows Vista Capable debacle has failed and more internal emails have been released. Although Microsoft has successfully kept CEO Steve Ballmer away from the witness stand on grounds the he 'has no unique knowledge of the facts in this case,' emails suggest otherwise. An email was released in which Intel CEO Paul Otellini thanks Ballmer for listening and making changes to the program allowing their 915 chipset to pass the grade: 'I know you did it.'"
Re:Ummm... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yeah, and? (Score:4, Insightful)
Er, citation needed? Have you ever worked at Microsoft?
Re:Yeah, and? (Score:2, Insightful)
You're right. We 3rd-world programmers suck. We tend to use something awful (C/C++/Java) and not the awesome technology in which the legacy code I received from my company, written in the 1st-world. The greatness that Microsoft Access 97 is.
Don't be a douche. There are as many awful 3rd-world programmers as there are in the 1st-world.
Re:People want cheap computers (Score:5, Insightful)
[The] hardware manufacturers and OEMs [have been] trying, and horribly failing, to deliver [fast computers with brand new technology] and maintain their profit margins (which can't be done for a fast computer at $399 in a retail store).
The definition of fast can either mean a measurable metric like MIPS or clock speed, or it can mean what most consumers mean, which is "Look, Mom! Word started in less than 10 seconds!"
The problem is not that the hardware manufacturers have been unable to keep up with consumer demand for new ideas and more speed. Look at the numbers on a video card or stick of RAM today, and compare it to the same components from your computer a decade ago. They've gotten quite a bit faster and have quite a few more features, if you haven't noticed.
The problem lies in the software we're running on said hardware. The software has gotten so big and so bloated, it just "looks like" the hardware hasn't gotten any better. 30 gigabytes of HD space, a 256MB Graphics Card, and 2GB of RAM just to run an operating system? Absolutely unnecessary.
The reason we bash Microsoft is because we're not brainwashed into thinking that Windows is the only game in town. We've used Linux, Mac, and BSD. We know that they're all viable operating systems that do what Windows does, and in many cases, do it better. Is Vista a viable choice? Sure it is. Is Vista the best choice? That depends on who you are, what your goals are, and what your mindset is.
Where is Intel in all of this? (Score:5, Insightful)
The motion for summary judgement [nwsource.com] makes it pretty clear that Microsoft was in the wrong, but so was Intel.
It's pretty clear that Intel couldn't get it's shit together and kept foisting its shitty 915 graphics on HP, Dell, etc., for use in high-margin notebooks. The OEMs were screwed because Intel was the source for chipsets that made the value proposition of low-end notebooks work.
Microsoft is the one getting sued, but Intel is at least as culpable and incompetent, IMHO.
Re:Ummm... (Score:2, Insightful)
How is Intel a 'partner'? They aren't an OEM, they're a component maker. Intel should no more be a Microsoft partner than, say, Seagate or nVidia.
Re:The 915 is Vista Capable? (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't think the case will work: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's unclear if the revelations will advance the plaintiffs' central claim in the class-action lawsuit -- that Microsoft artificially increased demand by allowing PCs that could run only the most basic versions of the Windows Vista operating system to be called Vista Capable.
That is where it will all fall apart for them IMHO. I can't see how you can argue that it increased demand. People that were looking for the Vista Capable logo were at least considering getting Vista if not planning on getting it. If you weren't planning on getting Vista than the Vista Logo wasn't a deciding factor in your purchase decision, so again MS can't be blamed.
At best people could argue that they thought that they bought a premium version of Vista and didn't find out until they were trying to install it that they wouldn't get the Aero Interface, and other candy. But they still are able to run a version of Vista so it is still Vista Capable IMHO. Also, I'm not sure if it was the same everywhere, but at least were I'm from there was always a footnote saying that it would run Vista Home Basic on any advertisements that used the Vista Capable logo.
Not evidence that Ballmer knew Vista was crap (Score:5, Insightful)
If Ballmer *didn't* know that Vista was crap, then he is incompetent. If he *did*, then he's a crook. Pick one.
On second thought, pick both - incompetent crook is SO reminiscent of the "Old Microsoft".
Just look at what Microsoft's biggest selling point for Windows 7 boils down to - "It isn't Vista."
Advertisers. (Score:1, Insightful)
Actually, Sweaty B was telling people, "Advertisers, advertisers, advertisers, baby!" [slashdot.org], but it's not fair to shift blame outside of the company. They alone made the decisions, which drove Intel out of the graphics market [slashdot.org], removed XP driver compatibilty at the last moment [slashdot.org] and loaded Vista with enough anti-features to insure it's complete failure [slashdot.org].
Re:Ummm... (Score:5, Insightful)
What are you talking about? AMD aside, Intel and Microsoft have long had a "special" relationship. Whether that's proper or not is another issue.
Re:People want cheap computers (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure people want cheap computers, just like they want anything else to be as cheap as possible. Nobody likes to spend more than they have to.
The fact remains though, a number of people will spend more as long as they believe that they "get what they pay for". That's why Apple has been so successful, really. They charge more for nicely configured systems with more expensive case designs and better support (you can still take one in to any of hundreds of retail stores for servicing, unlike any other major brand of PC I can think of).
Vista's problem is, it doesn't really make people feel like they "got what they paid for" in many cases. You generally need twice as much system memory as you did with XP to get comparable performance, and all the pretty f/x demand an actual 3D graphics card with decent capabilities. (Sure, it runs fine without that, but then you're negating one of the benefits that was supposed to make a user feel like they really had something "slick" when they used it.)
When you buy a machine that actually runs Vista well, you're not buying a low-end bargain machine -- so that means people have higher expectations for that extra money spent.
I don't think it delivers on those expectations -- and SURELY won't when you go the budget machine route.
Re:WTF? (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Yeah, and? (Score:3, Insightful)
If you ask me, Windows 7 will suffer many of the same problems
The #1 problem of Vista was the poor performance on the average hardware available for sale at the time of the release.
All software has bugs, but Vista just needed more machine than was possible to sell at a low enough price to get a large uptake.
Microsoft will "solve" this problem with Windows 7 by doing nothing but let Moore's Law lead to the inevitable faster hardware for the same price. At this point, Windows 7 looks to be nothing more than Vista with just enough changes for people to say "ooh, shiny new", but none of those changes are significant enough to require more machine to run them.
Add in the fact that it will use the same drivers as Vista, and Windows 7 will have much better hardware support at launch, which will also help the PR.
Basically, Microsoft couldn't sell a crappy OS last year, but next year they hope to convince people to buy a service pack for that same OS just because they give it a name different from "Service Pack 3".
The irony of this situation (Score:5, Insightful)
is that Microsoft has, in the past, successfully navigated this kind of situation before. In fact, they were the beneficiary.
Remember OS/2? Highly regarded for its technical quality, however it required a princely amount of RAM. Ideally you needed something like 8MB of RAM, back in the day when this added over $500 in current era dollars to the price of the system. Add this to the cost of the OS itself, and you didn't have high adoption.
Microsoft did a classic market segmentation move: they had Windows 3.1, which ran in 2MB of RAM, and NT 3.x, which ran in 8MB, and provided easy upgrade paths between the two products.
What seems really ... odd to me today is the way Microsoft is trying to segment and position its markets. All this Vista Home/Professional/Ultimate business. You may think Windows 3 was a POS, but it addressed a legitimate market segment: people who didn't wanted to do basic computing tasks without dropping the better part of a thousand dollars more for a more powerful system. There may have been all kinds of good reasons for them to go with a better system, but they had other uses for the money.
I look at a box of Windows Vista Super-Duper Ultimate, festooned with bullets, sitting next to Vista Business, Vista Home Premium and Vista Home Basic, and I'm supposed to sort myself into the appropriate market segment by studying the bullets festooning each package. What in the world were they thinking? Don't they study their own history?
Going by their own history, they should release Windows Basic and Windows Advanced. Windows Basic would be XP stripped down to nothing and capable of running in 512MB of RAM on any chipset manufactured in the last five years. Windows Advanced would be Vista with all the bells and whistles and need the latest and greatest chipsets.
I'd make Windows Basic really cheap, but make network login and sharing an add-on, so that corporations who wanted to use it would pay something between the cost of Windows Basic and Windows Advanced, and feel like they're getting a deal. Even the UAC business would have been less of fiasco here. People who wanted to take their chances could go with Windows Basic. IT Departments choosing Windows Advanced could piously tell their users that they were being protected from harm.
Microsoft failed with Vista because they wanted to drag the world onto a product it wasn't ready for, and tried to segment the market in totally meaningless ways.
Re:Ummm... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Where is Intel in all of this? (Score:3, Insightful)
On the contrary, Microsoft is a business, a publicly-held one, and they're expected to make the most profit possible. Looking out for their bottom line IS their business.
The problem for any business is really whether they elect to take short-term profits or invest for the long term. Any business can make a fast buck by screwing over their customers; the downside is that over the long haul they tarnish their reputation so much that the customers don't come back, the investors don't want to be associated with them, etc. Building for long-term growth means you weigh the cost of pissing off your most likely source of recurring revenue.
In the US there seems to have been a mentality of short-term focus. I guess the assumption is once you burn through one quick money-making scheme, you just move on to the next--sell your shares and move on to the next up-and-coming business. You can make money this way, but in the long run it's very inefficient and the market will punish such behavior.
Oh look. The market did. At least as far as repackaging debt is concerned. Eventually it will catch up with Microsoft, too. (By which time Ballmer and crew will be long gone...)
Re:Yeah, and? (Score:3, Insightful)
You might find that the reason you are not getting the same respect I do is not becuase you wear a skirt (as your profile page says) but because you start your arguments with broad generalities and blatant stereotypes. When you say it's a cultural thing that "they lack initiative" it puts people off, becuase no matter how many examples you site I can site an counter example. I've worked with plenty for people from India and all over the world for that matter and I can tell you you are making grossly wrong generalities about them. Conversely I work with Americans that couldn't make a decision to save their lives. Maybe this is becuase of your work environment. Maybe you should consider working for a different company that works to bring diversity in to the workplace, maybe Target just doesn't do it right. I don't know. No one culture is better than any other culture in our field and if you can't accept that then your going to find your professional experience getting worse and not better.
Funny enough I was just complaining that my company (a leader in national defense hardware and software) was insulting my intelligence by sending out diversity in the workplace emails and requiring us to go to lectures/sessions on why it's important. I couldn't see how my generation could be in need of seeing things from a different POV, assuming we around the same age you've proved me wrong.
Re:I don't think the case will work: (Score:3, Insightful)
If you've got $500 to spend on a computer and the ones at that price point say they're Vista capable, you're now going to consider getting Vista. On the other hand, if only $1000 computers say they're Vista capable, you're not going to be in the market for Vista. Thus, letting lower end computers be called Vista capable increases the demand for Vista.
Now, should a computer that can technically run Vista but without all the features be allowed to be called Vista capable? At best it's purposely misleading. MS should have had their stickers say Vista Home Capable or Vista Professional Capable.
Re:Ummm... (Score:5, Insightful)
I would hope all those companies have some sort of partnership with Microsoft. It's in the best interest of everybody to understand what the other is doing. Microsoft should understand how Seagate handles data, what graphics capabilities are on the nVidia roadmap, and what changes to instructions and new capabilities are coming down the line for new CPUs.
One example where communication with other component suppliers is SSDs, and the changes to software needed to better handle data for performance and reliability. Microsoft better be talking to the drive manufacturers directly, not with Dell, so they come up with a total solution for both hardware and software sides.
Re:The pointlessness of software-by-lawsuit (Score:5, Insightful)
If I purchase a product because it will work with X. And it does not work with X, then I have been harmed. I am out the money paid for the product. If the vendor promised me the product would work with X, and knew the product would, in fact, fail horribly with X. That's usually called fraud. In any event, I am due a full refund of the purchase price, and potentially some recompense for the time lost and aggravation caused by the vendor being a dipshit. Generally speaking, if a product fails to perform as a vendor advertises, they will refund your money *and* offer you some form of apology, be it verbal, or in the form of monetary gain.(gift cards, 10% off next purchase and the like)
Re:How Is A Slow Vista System Good For MS? (Score:3, Insightful)
Because the poor SOB is going to go out and buy a new computer, and that new computer will come with a Vista license as well. So MS gets 2 sales.
Then Windows 7 is released ahead of schedule, and people buy an upgrade, or a new computer ahead of schedule. Its Win-Win for M$.
Re:Pseudo-Intellectuals (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yeah, and? (Score:1, Insightful)
Stop and think a moment. Microsoft Office can't use Windows code due to anti trust issues, why do you think Windows can use Office code?
Everyone at Microsoft would prefer to share, but they can't. It's not about the Devs, or even (shudder) management. It's about the lawyers.
Re:went to a small tech show this week (Score:2, Insightful)
That was pure luck on Intel's part, though. They'd been pushing for higher and higher GHz, while AMD focused on (and was severely beating them on) the work-per-tick front. That's why AMD CPUs all have the 4800+ or whatever label; in theory, they do the equivalent work of a 4.8 GHz (Pentium) CPU, despite being clocked at only half that. The Pentium 4 series was a dead end, and Intel had no way out.
Then an Intel research group in Israel came up with a heavily modified version of the Pentium 3, the Pentium M. It drew very little power and got a lot of work done. Intel was fortunate enough to see the value of this chip, and threw more of its research budget in along those lines. That's where the Intel Core series came from, and that's what's now whipping AMD's ass.
But if it wasn't for the research group in Israel that had been exploring how far a P3 could go, Intel would still be lagging behind.
I kind of doubt Microsoft has that sort of thing going on anywhere, unless Microsoft Research decides to finally release an actual product. They're stuck on their Pentium 4 - they just keep on pushing a technology that's well beyond any reasonable point of marginal returns.