Vista I will not be buying

Bob I wrote:
Hello Bill,
The fact there is no "CD provided" is due to the PC manufactures
decision to not provide one. It has NADA to do with Microsoft, Bill G,
retail copies or the price of tea in china. Please lose the rant and
place the "blame" on the two people it belongs with. The uninformed
purchaser and the cheap customer.


MS could very easily make it part of their OEM System Builders agreement
that OEMs supply Install CDs to all customers, but MS doesn't. Instead
MS has been pressuring OEMs not to supply Install CDs, so MS does
deserve most of the blame why OEMs don't supply Install CDs.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

kurttrail wrote:
MS could very easily make it part of their OEM System Builders
agreement that OEMs supply Install CDs to all customers, but MS
doesn't. Instead MS has been pressuring OEMs not to supply Install
CDs, so MS does deserve most of the blame why OEMs don't supply
Install CDs.

So.. What you are saying is that since OEM System Builders were given a
choice to give a CD and they didn't - so it is Microsoft's fault for not
requiring that free enterprise businesses provide a proper installation CD?

I actually cannot speak for the pressure from Microsoft of "not providing
CDs" - honestly the first I heard of that - I mean - $.05/CD to make a copy
of the OEM CD before selling it to the customer and I cannot see that
Microsoft would know any different - "pressure" or not.

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

Shenan Stanley wrote:
kurttrail wrote:
MS could very easily make it part of their OEM System Builders
agreement that OEMs supply Install CDs to all customers, but MS
doesn't. Instead MS has been pressuring OEMs not to supply Install
CDs, so MS does deserve most of the blame why OEMs don't supply
Install CDs.

So.. What you are saying is that since OEM System Builders were given
a choice to give a CD and they didn't - so it is Microsoft's fault
for not requiring that free enterprise businesses provide a proper
installation CD?

No what I'm saying is the MS is using pressure to on OEMs to influence
their choice.

I actually cannot speak for the pressure from Microsoft of "not
providing CDs" - honestly the first I heard of that - I mean -
$.05/CD to make a copy of the OEM CD before selling it to the
customer and I cannot see that Microsoft would know any different -
"pressure" or not.

It not about the cost of the CD. OEMs are contractually forced by MS to
provide some sort of OS recovery. MS just prefers it is images linked
to certain hardware, not true reinstall CDs.

MS could VERY EASILY make the OEM contractual obligation to supply true
Install CDs, but they don't, so in my book, MS deserves most of the
blame why OEMs don't supply true Install CDs.

You have every right to disagree, but I think most people would tend to
believe that MS is at the very least partially at fault as to why OEMs
don't supply true Install CDs.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

kurttrail wrote:
MS could very easily make it part of their OEM System Builders
agreement that OEMs supply Install CDs to all customers, but MS
doesn't. Instead MS has been pressuring OEMs not to supply Install
CDs, so MS does deserve most of the blame why OEMs don't supply
Install CDs.

Shenan Stanley wrote:
So.. What you are saying is that since OEM System Builders were given
a choice to give a CD and they didn't - so it is Microsoft's fault
for not requiring that free enterprise businesses provide a proper
installation CD?

kurttrail wrote:
No what I'm saying is the MS is using pressure to on OEMs to influence
their choice.


What pressure? I'm askig this as a curiousity - not an argument. I really
want to know.


Shenan Stanley wrote:
I actually cannot speak for the pressure from Microsoft of "not
providing CDs" - honestly the first I heard of that - I mean -
$.05/CD to make a copy of the OEM CD before selling it to the
customer and I cannot see that Microsoft would know any different -
"pressure" or not.

kurttrail wrote:
It not about the cost of the CD. OEMs are contractually forced by MS
to provide some sort of OS recovery. MS just prefers it is images
linked to certain hardware, not true reinstall CDs.

MS could VERY EASILY make the OEM contractual obligation to supply
true Install CDs, but they don't, so in my book, MS deserves most of
the blame why OEMs don't supply true Install CDs.

You have every right to disagree, but I think most people would tend
to believe that MS is at the very least partially at fault as to why
OEMs don't supply true Install CDs.

Yes - but everything you said still points to "in the end - the OEM could
take the extra effort needed (if any) to provide a CD with the product if
they so desired."

What Microsoft "pressures" the OEMs to do really isn't relevant. Get an OEM
CD - copy it hundreds/thousands/more times onto cheap blank CDs (or use the
OEM CD Microsoft can provide) and when selling to your customers - even if
your install is a little different in terms of overlaying software - provide
the OEM Windows XP CD along with the sale of the computer - they paid for
that after all. You could still make the system recoverable/installed by
you in whatever way is most cost effective - and in the end when the
customer comes here asking about a reinstall because Microsoft Windows XP is
messed up because of some Microsoft patch that didn't agree with
software/hardware on their system - at least they will not get the response
of, "Well, it looks like your OEM did not provide a true Windows
installation CD.." and the OEM will likely keep a customer and get
recommendations because they did the extra nickels worth of effort.

The whole "Microsoft Pressures" thing is a joke in my opinion. Your parents
likely "pressured" you into not doing a lot of things - some of which you
did despite the pressure. Friends, family, etc - all day long doing the
same thing. There's no "pressure" for the OEM System Builder NOT to provide
the nickel CD.. By that I mean even if some wording exists that makes it
seem like they SHOULD NOT do that - Microsoft isn't in the room with them
when they sell the computer - isn't in the room with them when they take the
troubleshooting call - isn't in the room with them when their customer comes
back asking for a CD to reinstall Windows. Business Sense says to give the
nickel CD out to customers - even if it is just "another" way to install
Windows XP over the normal weak-effort hard drive image method normally
given to a customer to restore to the "purchased" state.

It's still a decision - pressure or not. Don't smoke, don't drink, wear
your seatbelt, etc.. It's a choice the business person in the end has to
make. They can do whatever they choose. When I sold computer system I
always gave the customer three choices when it came to the OS and recovery:
OEM CDs (less expensive), Retail CDs or they could go buy their own OS and
do the installation themselves. I never lost a single customer from that -
they usually appreciated the choices.

Is Microsoft to blame because people submit to any pressure? Just because
the mountain is there doesn't mean you HAVE to climb it. Just because the
alcohol is sold doesn't mean you have to drink it. Just because the cigar
was offered to you doesn't mean you have to smoke it.

Sure - I will go as far as to say that *if* there is some wording somewhere
that URGES OEM System Builders NOT to provide restoration CDs with their
systems (that they sell) - then Microsoft shares the blame. *If* there is
wording somewhere that does more than URGES such a thing, then Microsoft can
have all the blame. Just like other advertisers and such sell products -
they are "somewhat" to blame for the consumption of those products.. But if
there is no "Do it this way or you cannot use/sell the product" - in the
end - the PEOPLE SELLING the system who chose to do it one way or the other
are the ones to blame on how their system was sold and the methods they
chose to put in place.

And any argument that the hard drive image method is easier/cheaper.. hah -
that's funny. I have a blind aunt who can copy CDs.
(Didn't say you said it - but just thought of counterpoints..)

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

Shenan Stanley wrote:
kurttrail wrote:
MS could very easily make it part of their OEM System Builders
agreement that OEMs supply Install CDs to all customers, but MS
doesn't. Instead MS has been pressuring OEMs not to supply Install
CDs, so MS does deserve most of the blame why OEMs don't supply
Install CDs.

Shenan Stanley wrote:
So.. What you are saying is that since OEM System Builders were given
a choice to give a CD and they didn't - so it is Microsoft's fault
for not requiring that free enterprise businesses provide a proper
installation CD?

kurttrail wrote:
No what I'm saying is the MS is using pressure to on OEMs to
influence their choice.


What pressure? I'm askig this as a curiousity - not an argument. I
really want to know.


Shenan Stanley wrote:
I actually cannot speak for the pressure from Microsoft of "not
providing CDs" - honestly the first I heard of that - I mean -
$.05/CD to make a copy of the OEM CD before selling it to the
customer and I cannot see that Microsoft would know any different -
"pressure" or not.

kurttrail wrote:
It not about the cost of the CD. OEMs are contractually forced by MS
to provide some sort of OS recovery. MS just prefers it is images
linked to certain hardware, not true reinstall CDs.

MS could VERY EASILY make the OEM contractual obligation to supply
true Install CDs, but they don't, so in my book, MS deserves most of
the blame why OEMs don't supply true Install CDs.

You have every right to disagree, but I think most people would tend
to believe that MS is at the very least partially at fault as to why
OEMs don't supply true Install CDs.

Yes - but everything you said still points to "in the end - the OEM
could take the extra effort needed (if any) to provide a CD with the
product if they so desired."

What Microsoft "pressures" the OEMs to do really isn't relevant. Get
an OEM CD - copy it hundreds/thousands/more times onto cheap blank
CDs (or use the OEM CD Microsoft can provide) and when selling to
your customers - even if your install is a little different in terms
of overlaying software - provide the OEM Windows XP CD along with the
sale of the computer - they paid for that after all. You could still
make the system recoverable/installed by you in whatever way is most
cost effective - and in the end when the customer comes here asking
about a reinstall because Microsoft Windows XP is messed up because
of some Microsoft patch that didn't agree with software/hardware on
their system - at least they will not get the response of, "Well, it
looks like your OEM did not provide a true Windows installation CD.."
and the OEM will likely keep a customer and get recommendations
because they did the extra nickels worth of effort.
The whole "Microsoft Pressures" thing is a joke in my opinion. Your
parents likely "pressured" you into not doing a lot of things - some
of which you did despite the pressure. Friends, family, etc - all
day long doing the same thing. There's no "pressure" for the OEM
System Builder NOT to provide the nickel CD.. By that I mean even if
some wording exists that makes it seem like they SHOULD NOT do that -
Microsoft isn't in the room with them when they sell the computer -
isn't in the room with them when they take the troubleshooting call -
isn't in the room with them when their customer comes back asking for
a CD to reinstall Windows. Business Sense says to give the nickel CD
out to customers - even if it is just "another" way to install
Windows XP over the normal weak-effort hard drive image method
normally given to a customer to restore to the "purchased" state.
It's still a decision - pressure or not. Don't smoke, don't drink,
wear your seatbelt, etc.. It's a choice the business person in the
end has to make. They can do whatever they choose. When I sold
computer system I always gave the customer three choices when it came
to the OS and recovery: OEM CDs (less expensive), Retail CDs or they
could go buy their own OS and do the installation themselves. I
never lost a single customer from that - they usually appreciated the
choices.
Is Microsoft to blame because people submit to any pressure? Just
because the mountain is there doesn't mean you HAVE to climb it. Just
because the alcohol is sold doesn't mean you have to drink it. Just
because the cigar was offered to you doesn't mean you have to
smoke it.
Sure - I will go as far as to say that *if* there is some wording
somewhere that URGES OEM System Builders NOT to provide restoration
CDs with their systems (that they sell) - then Microsoft shares the
blame. *If* there is wording somewhere that does more than URGES
such a thing, then Microsoft can have all the blame. Just like other
advertisers and such sell products - they are "somewhat" to blame for
the consumption of those products.. But if there is no "Do it this
way or you cannot use/sell the product" - in the end - the PEOPLE
SELLING the system who chose to do it one way or the other are the
ones to blame on how their system was sold and the methods they chose
to put in place.
And any argument that the hard drive image method is easier/cheaper..
hah - that's funny. I have a blind aunt who can copy CDs.
(Didn't say you said it - but just thought of counterpoints..)

I heard it from people I trust that have said they've been pressured.
Like I said you can believe whatever you want. The general perception
is that MS is at fault.

And ALL MS needs to do is make it an OEM condition to provide real
Install CDs to all OEM customers, if they wanted to prove that they
really want all of the OEM OS customers to get the 5 cent Install CD.
Why do you think MS doesn't?

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

"kurttrail" wrote in message
...

I heard it from people I trust that have said they've been pressured. Like
I said you can believe whatever you want. The general perception is that
MS is at fault.

And ALL MS needs to do is make it an OEM condition to provide real Install
CDs to all OEM customers, if they wanted to prove that they really want
all of the OEM OS customers to get the 5 cent Install CD. Why do you think
MS doesn't?

Without a link to reputable source this cannot be trusted.

Peter A. Stavrakoglou wrote:
"kurttrail" wrote in
message ...

I heard it from people I trust that have said they've been
pressured. Like I said you can believe whatever you want. The
general perception is that MS is at fault.

And ALL MS needs to do is make it an OEM condition to provide real
Install CDs to all OEM customers, if they wanted to prove that they
really want all of the OEM OS customers to get the 5 cent Install
CD. Why do you think MS doesn't?

Without a link to reputable source this cannot be trusted.

Don't.

But do answer the question, if not publicly, for yourself. Why do you
think MS doesn't make OEMs to agree to provide true install CDs? MS
already gets the to agree to provide a recovery solution of some kind,
and 5 cent CDs ain't gonna break MS or the OEM.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

kurttrail wrote:
But do answer the question, if not publicly, for yourself. Why do you
think MS doesn't make OEMs to agree to provide true install CDs? MS
already gets the to agree to provide a recovery solution of some kind,
and 5 cent CDs ain't gonna break MS or the OEM.

If they DID require it - would you complain (if it was the norm and this
conversation never existed) the opposite - that Microsoft should not push
the little OEM business-person into doing something they may not want to do?

Right now you are complaining because they left the decision up to the OEM
System Builder.
No matter the pressure - the power still lies there - the OEM System
Builder.
Now you want Microsoft to play more of a role in an individual
business-person's life and make them (per agreement) do something they may
otherwise choose not to?

To me it's like Motorcycle helmet laws..
Common sense says your head is softer than the pavement - especially at
speed.
Some places have made it mandatory that helemts be worn when riding
motorcycles - others have not.
I say let the rider decide.. If they are foolish enough not to wear a helmet
and die - so be it.

Business sense says you should provide as much customer service as possible
(within reason and cost) to keep that customer and get more business from
them and word-of-mouth. If you are too stingy to part with the nickel -
then perhaps your business will die and the balance continue.

I just don't see the point in forcing people to do something that is common
or business sense. Weed out the herd naturally. It's worked all this time.

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

Shenan Stanley wrote:
kurttrail wrote:
But do answer the question, if not publicly, for yourself. Why do
you think MS doesn't make OEMs to agree to provide true install CDs?
MS already gets the to agree to provide a recovery solution of some
kind, and 5 cent CDs ain't gonna break MS or the OEM.

If they DID require it - would you complain (if it was the norm and
this conversation never existed) the opposite - that Microsoft should
not push the little OEM business-person into doing something they may
not want to do?

Nope. If you know anything about me, you'd know I'm for what is best
for the individual consumer, and that would be getting the full install
CD.


Right now you are complaining because they left the decision up to
the OEM System Builder.

Again, I don't believe they really are. I believe the people that have
told me that they have been pressured by MS reps.

No matter the pressure - the power still lies there - the OEM System
Builder.

Even Dell has stopped supplying Install CD on many of its models.

Now you want Microsoft to play more of a role in an individual
business-person's life and make them (per agreement) do something
they may otherwise choose not to?

To me it's like Motorcycle helmet laws..
Common sense says your head is softer than the pavement - especially
at speed.
Some places have made it mandatory that helemts be worn when riding
motorcycles - others have not.
I say let the rider decide.. If they are foolish enough not to wear a
helmet and die - so be it.

Business sense says you should provide as much customer service as
possible (within reason and cost) to keep that customer and get more
business from them and word-of-mouth. If you are too stingy to part
with the nickel - then perhaps your business will die and the balance
continue.
I just don't see the point in forcing people to do something that is
common or business sense. Weed out the herd naturally. It's worked
all this time.

I'm really not gonna spend time arguing about this. You can believe
whatever you want. Most people that don't get true install CD already
blame MS for it, as you can see from those that complain about it in
this group.

I have good reason to believe that MS reps do apply pressure on OEMs not
to supply Install CDs. Can I prove it? Nope, but I trust my sources.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

kurttrail wrote:
I have good reason to believe that MS reps do apply pressure on OEMs
not to supply Install CDs. Can I prove it? Nope, but I trust my
sources.

That's fine - but I do not see it from my OEM System Builder sources - they
mostly provide OEM install CDs with their systems.

As for Dell, although most non-business Dells do not come with CDs now
without special ordering - the ability for the consumer to spend the nickel
(following the directions on the huge poster that comes in the box
explaining setup) and make their own actual Windows XP Installation CD is
available on all the models I have seen come through.

As for me believing whatever I want - that's a given - I'm not even trying
to change your mind..

I am saying that if all it that is going on is *pressure* and they are
buckling - the problem is the OEM System Builders not having any saq.

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

I won't be buying Vista anytime soon because
first I want and enjoy the Classic look and feel.
Want a Classic search, and a classic Microsoft
Explorer display in file name sequence. I can find
things faster in Classic mode.

If I wanted a gee-whiz GUI, I'd buy a Mac with
the latest OS. Don't need 3D glowing icons.

Secondly, my apps work fine. Really don't want
to buy new Vista-oriented software release
licenses. It makes no sense. Am not against
progress but where's the payback for me?

"evieg" wrote in message
...
"David Schwartz" wrote in
:


"Leythos" wrote in message
...

In article ,
says...

I apologize for the rant.

http://snipurl.com/hbl7

I have made my decision

Vista I will not be buying.

No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of
the computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or
adaware got into that protected area and a virus program could
not
clean it.

I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.

If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux
system.

So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to
steal media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor
to
limit you in any way?

That's not what he's saying. What he's saying is that he trusts
himself
more than he trusts his OS vendor. It's a question of who should
have
the keys to his computer, him or Microsoft. He chooses himself. I
would too.

DS



Pitiful arguments for and against. If you are against copying -
then
just don't do it! If you are for copying - then think outside the
box
and buy a scan converter and split your audio out - sending that to
a
standalone VCR/DVD recorder unit for about $129.00 (US) and shut up.

The folks who own the copyrights think folks are not smart enough to
realize that you can record things withou a computer - and most of
these
replies talking about invasion of privacy - lack or respect - etc.
just
need to learn that nothing can be protected from copying if you
think
outside the box.

cya!

"Uncle Joe" Uncle wrote in message
...

Secondly, my apps work fine. Really don't want
to buy new Vista-oriented software release
licenses. It makes no sense. Am not against
progress but where's the payback for me?

There's no obvious payback now, but in a year or so, it could become
more obvious. Support for newer hardware (much larger memory configurations,
for example) and support for more advanced applications. Two years from now,
you may find that "high power" applications are able to do a lot more on
Vista than they can on XP.

But until then, the only reason would be if you just can't live without
the latest gee-whiz features.

DS

David Schwartz wrote:
"Uncle Joe" Uncle wrote in message
...

Secondly, my apps work fine. Really don't want
to buy new Vista-oriented software release
licenses. It makes no sense. Am not against
progress but where's the payback for me?

There's no obvious payback now, but in a year or so, it could
become more obvious. Support for newer hardware (much larger memory
configurations, for example) and support for more advanced
applications. Two years from now, you may find that "high power"
applications are able to do a lot more on Vista than they can on XP.

But until then, the only reason would be if you just can't live
without the latest gee-whiz features.

DS

Add two more years to your estimations, and you may be close, and by
that time MS will be close to releasing its next OS.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

"kurttrail" wrote in message
...

There's no obvious payback now, but in a year or so, it could
become more obvious. Support for newer hardware (much larger memory
configurations, for example) and support for more advanced
applications. Two years from now, you may find that "high power"
applications are able to do a lot more on Vista than they can on XP.

Add two more years to your estimations, and you may be close, and by that
time MS will be close to releasing its next OS.

You are probably right on both counts.

DS

"And I really do not care about piracy that may or may not be going on in
China or God-only-knows-where."

Economics 404: Bill Gates and Microsoft compensates for the fact that 250
million Chinese XP users use pirated software by overcharging us to make up
for their lost foreign revenue. It does affect you.

"Has the whole world gone mad??"

Absolutely. (Smile.)



"Bill Turner" wrote in message news:MATYe.75569$7f5.58797@okepread01...

"DevilsPGD" wrote in message ...
In message
Leythos wrote:

In article , says...
I apologize for the rant.

http://snipurl.com/hbl7

I have made my decision

Vista I will not be buying.

No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.

I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.

If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.

So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to steal
media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor to limit you
in any way?

I have never bought an illegal piece of software in my life. I paid for a legal copy of Windows 95.
Windows 98SE, and just bought a new system with XP SP2 pre-installed. I purposely did not buy a Linux
machine, even though Linux has been my 'OS of choice' for many years now. I wanted to at least take a look
at XP before just going on about my business with Linux again. I will never buy another MS product.

I have had my system less than 3 months. I have had to 'start from scratch' no fewer than 3 times already.
God only knows why. At least I had my backups on CD to start from or I would have just chucked XP
completely. Every time I have had to go through the same 'product activation' as if I had just installed XP
for the first time. There is no CD with XP on it. They have seen fit instead to take up an entire 5GB
'hidden' partition with the OEM version of XP.

Is Microsoft so damned poor that they can not afford a CD for an OS that costs around $300 - if you pay full
retail?? Come on Billy G. Get on the clue train bro...

And I really do not care about piracy that may or may not be going on in China or God-only-knows-where.

The salt in the wound is that Microsoft does not even try to have a 'secure' environment. Things that they
have known about for years are still there, big gaping security holes you could drive a Mack truck through
and never hit the side.

What I do not understand is why the CIO's of places that get hit with the latest email worm or whatever,
that takes their systems down all over the world, just shrug their shoulders, install a patch that usually
makes things worse instead of better, and continue to pay MS outrageous license fees without batting an eye.

Has the whole world gone mad??

Simple consumers are treated like criminals by Microsoft. And they wonder why people are leaving in droves
to run Linux...

Soon as my download of SuSE 10 finishes I will be joining them. Back to my 'OS of Choice' where I don't
have to feel like I am some sort of a criminal...

laterzzz