Well, would they really WANT hundreds of thousands of people installing Vista RIGHT NOW and finding all the bugs?

A soft launch is your best bet when you're dealing with beta software. Ahem.

Or is it that Microsoft's influence is so entrenched -- taken for granted, really -- that the company doesn't need to spend millions on an outlandish global marketing blitz? Certainly Windows was dominant in 1995, but now it's a fact of life, so most PC users are going to end up with Vista whether they know it or not. In 2007, Microsoft can afford to just get the word out to early adopters and wait for the rest to upgrade -- which they will -- on their own time.

Also, Windows 95 was such a huge advance from 3.1/NT that there was actually something to get excited about. Vista is an improvement, yes, but not a big one.

PS3 had long lines waiting outside during its launch and well... you know what happened with that. Long wait lines and sold out on launch day are useful to determine how many fan boys you have, but product success is hardly anything. I mean do you expect every new generation of iPods to have long wait lines and being sold out at launch in order to determine its success?

I'll buy Vista after Service Pack 1 is released.

Umm look at the SOURCE:

N.Y. Times Takes $814M Charge on Globe
Wednesday January 31, 5:48 pm ET
Associated Press

that's M for million in 1 quarter. you really have to try to do that. nice work Pinch.

nuff said.

Not planning on buying Vista... I'm still quite happy with my severely hacked & neutered XP. Once you remove all of the add-on crap that MS attached to XP, it's actually a nice OS. Also doesn't require a supercomputer just to power it on.

Also giving Linux a good looking over. With XP's end of life coming up in 2009, I need to figure out what my next move will be.

What's the benefit of upgrading? I have yet to read one article (or even worse, any MS marketing material) that explains any significant benefit I receive for upgrading.

I read somewhere (here?) that Vista works "better" on newer computers. I have an older computer that is still pretty decent and my Windows XP works just fine on it. I don't want anything to happen to my beloved machine that I use every day for work and for my internet addiction. I'm pretty much of a gadget geek/early adopter but in this case, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".

Or it could reflect the fact that an upgraded operating system isn't exactly the new Harry Potter book or anything. Are we at the point where unless there are people camping out in a line wearing costumes for months, your product isn't perceived as a success? Maybe we are.

Wait until Leopard comes out. That oughta be proven wrong ;-)

I'm actually wearing my Vista costume right now. Ummmm....pleather.

"works better" is a very vague term... If they're talking about reliability, my linux servers easily clock 6+ months of uptime at a time, My WinXP workstations clock about 3+ months of continuous uptime (stopped only by power outages). "Works better" in my book would be an OS that stays out of the way, doesn't have all sorts of cutesy pop-up shit, and uses as little resources as possible.

The amount of energy Microsoft pours into being boring drives me insane. Look at the orange sign. So many words, such bland communication. I get more excited reading the directions for cleaning products. And then there's their insistence on not only branding every piece of the OS with a name, but by using the name as a hook. "Ohh.. OneCare! Finally!" And they are actually using the word "ultimate" in a product name? Even the cross-marketing is weak. HP Personal Media Drive or HP Pocket Media Drive? Such dynamic differentiation!

Anyway.

For all the nice amount of ram and hard drive space not to mention two processors Windows Vista is pretty slow. I'll never buy it unless they actually make it useful. It does look nice though, but you can customize XP to look like that as well.