Once again Microsoft is in court. No, not another antitrust case, but over the alleged misrepresentation in the marketing of Windows Vista; specifically, the “Vista Capable” stickers applied to a number of PCs. These computers are, in fact, able to run Vista — but only the most stripped-down Basic version that lacks the highly touted eye candy features like the “Aero” interface and the “Flip 3D” three-dimensional view of open windows. Also cited as deceptive marketing was the appearance of Microsoft chairman Bill Gates on NBC’s Today show on Jan. 29. On the program, Gates suggested that users could upgrade to Windows Vista for less than $100 US (again, referring to Vista Home Basic).
Opponents of the suit say that any computer capable of running any version of Vista is Vista capable, whereas others charge that the upgrade value of Vista Basic is insubstantial, and that Vista’s much-hyped visual effects represent the most tangible benefit to users. Essentially, Microsoft is promoting Vista’s special effects, while capitalizing on the public’s inability to distinguish the feature differences between the 6 versions.
With that in mind, Windows users looking to upgrade to Vista should have a minimum of a 1.0 GHz processor, 1 GB of system memory, and an Aero-compatible graphics card with at least 128 MB graphics memory and supporting DirectX 9 with Hardware Pixel Shader v2.0 and WDDM driver support. Additionally, you won’t want Home Basic. And if you want everything and the kitchen sink — Vista Ultimate — the cost is $399 standalone or $299 upgrade.
Is it worth it?
I don’t think so, but then I’ve long been a reluctant Windows user. I cut my teeth on an Apple II+ over 30 years ago, and was a fairly happy MS-DOS user through the late 80’s and early 90’s. But other than a brief fling with Windows 3.1, I’ve been mostly intrigued by the alternative offerings. For example, I loved IBM OS/2 and was saddened that it never really took off. MacOS and OS X were always a pleasure to use, to the point where I began to feel comfortable without a command line. And then there was Solaris, which I discovered in the early 90’s at university, and which introduced me to Unix and primed me for Linux.
Still, it seemed necessary to keep a Windows computer around, despite its increasing list of annoyances — continuous reboots after software installations/updates, virii, spyware, slow patch releases, having to reactivate Windows with some call center on the other side of the world after upgrading my computer, “Windows Genuine Advantage”, and now DRM…
We’ve now reached the point where running Windows is no more “easy” that running Linux. They’re just different.
Honestly, Linux is so simple to install and run today, anyone can do it. I bring my laptop to university regularly, where it is often borrowed by peers for writing, browsing, and other school chores. No one comments that it isn’t Windows, or asks me questions about how to use it, because the KDE desktop works like Windows. People don’t “use” operating systems, they use applications, and with Firefox, Thunderbird, OpenOffice, an instant messenger / image editor / music player / media player / photo manager of your choice (I like Kopete, GIMP, Amarok, Kaffeine and digiKam, respectively) — you’re set. And almost all Linux distributions come with all the necessary applications pre-installed (which is not true for Windows).
In my experience, most hardware is automatically recognized and properly configured by the Linux kernel, assuming you keep it up to date. The exceptions are accelerated 3D video and wireless LAN, which can be a bit of a trial sometimes. This isn’t a Linux problem so much as it is an industry failure to provide drivers. But there are a few excellent Linux distributions that include and configure these proprietary drivers, PCLinuxOS, Mepis and Freespire to name just a few.
While some have said that system configuration is easier on Windows, I think that has largely been erased by the proliferation of Windows-like control panels in Linux distributions like Mandriva, PCLinuxOS, openSUSE, and Ark Linux. Given the amount of time needed on Windows, to install and configure programs for Spyware, Virii, and then having to manually install all the application software you need to be productive (that are pre-installed with Linux), Windows is a huge time investment.
Of course, there is the fear of changing to a new platform. You can do it. I’ll bet it took you more than a couple of days to master Windows (especially if it was Win 3.1 or Win 95), but most people have forgotten what that was like — they just know they’re “comfortable” with Windows idiosyncrasies now. And that’s fine. But learning Linux’s differences isn’t nearly as hard as it was to learn Windows from scratch. Anyone can switch with only a few growing pains… when you’re ready.
Suggested links: Try PCLinuxOS, Mepis or use the Linux Chooser.
Leave a Reply