Steer Clear of Windows Vista Basic

Steer Clear of Windows Vista Basic
ARTICLE DATE: 02.14.07
By Lance Ulanoff

Windows Vista Home Basic could be the most pointless edition of Windows
that Microsoft has ever released. Let me be clear: I like Windows Vista.
I applaud it, in fact. It's the smartest, easiest-to-use Windows OS yet.
Most of the Vista editions Microsoft is rolling out make good, clean
sense—Business, Premium, even Ultimate, though that name does kind of
box Microsoft in for future versions (could they ever top Ultimate?).

Home Basic, which drops Tablet PC and Windows Media Center integration
along with the Aero interface enhancements, is another story. Here's how
Microsoft described it:

"If you simply want to use your PC for tasks such as surfing the
Internet, corresponding with friends and family using e-mail, or
performing basic document creation and editing tasks, then Windows Vista
Home Basic will deliver a safer, more reliable, and more productive
computing environment."

I'm sorry, but this simply perpetuates the myth that there's such a
thing as simple computing needs. The "surfing the Internet" part is my
favorite. It's as if Microsoft's marketers haven't been online since
2001. Surfing the Internet these days is about as far from basic as you
can get. Web 2.0 has turned many key Web sites into virtual client
applications. Yes, these are lighter than, say, true desktop apps, but
nowhere near as light and simple as the rudimentary HTML-based pages we
recall from the mid-1990s up until, say, 2002.
Joost

It's not just coding that's made Web browsing a more complex
CPU-intensive task. Virtually all popular sites feature video. News
flash, Microsoft: YouTube is perhaps the most popular site on the Web.

Document creation can be a pretty low-stress task, unless you're running
the latest version of Microsoft Office. Most recent editions of this app
suite eat up tons of processes and, of course, can create highly complex
documents. Most adult home users won't tap into this power, but I can
see high school and college students who still live at home creating
pamphlets, newsletters, and other more complex files, many of which will
incorporate graphical elements such as photos. This doesn't sound that
"basic" to me.—Continue reading...

Photos and videos are a major part of virtually every PC user's world.
Microsoft, you should know that. After all, you helped make it happen.
Even our grandparents take digital photos and mail them to loved ones.

What about e-mail? It's a nice, light application, with few resource
needs. Isn't it? Well, maybe 10 years ago. Consumer e-mail boxes are
filled with gigabytes of data, HTML messages and, of course, photos (and
even videos). And say your e-mails are always text-based and you rarely
get much of it; you still can't run e-mail without protection from
viruses and spyware. Each of those apps puts demands on system
components and the operating system itself. Suddenly, basic e-mail is
looking mighty complicated.

So what's the deal with Home Basic? I do notice that it's about $60
cheaper than the more multimedia-capable Premium Edition. And that's the
answer, isn't it? This is for OEMs who want to trim a few bucks off the
price of a PC while still appearing to offer the "latest thing."

This is nothing new. Dell, Gateway, eMachines, HP, and others offer
value PCs by cutting corners that you can't always see or recognize as
detrimental to your computing lives. So a DVD-R becomes a DVD-ROM drive,
or 1GB of memory becomes 512MB, or discrete graphics memory becomes
shared. All of these things can add up to hundreds of dollars in
savings. Vista Home Basic falls right into that same bucket. My guess is
that OEMs demanded this version from Microsoft, and it acquiesced
because it was still smarting from value vendors dropping MS Office in
favor of super-cheap WordPerfect.

So beware, friends, of too-cheap Vista systems. They may be running Home
Basic, and that means they may not be ready to fulfill anyone's
21st-century computing needs.

Copyright (c) 2007 Ziff Davis Media Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Lance Ulanoff is dead wrong. He has forgotten Microsoft Bob. Windows 1.03
was pretty pointless, too, but that was before Ulanoff was born... Ben Myers

On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 14:48:44 -0400, Sparky Spartacus
<> wrote:

>Steer Clear of Windows Vista Basic
>ARTICLE DATE: 02.14.07
>By Lance Ulanoff
>
>Windows Vista Home Basic could be the most pointless edition of Windows
>that Microsoft has ever released. Let me be clear: I like Windows Vista.
>I applaud it, in fact. It's the smartest, easiest-to-use Windows OS yet.
>Most of the Vista editions Microsoft is rolling out make good, clean
>sense—Business, Premium, even Ultimate, though that name does kind of
>box Microsoft in for future versions (could they ever top Ultimate?).
>
>Home Basic, which drops Tablet PC and Windows Media Center integration
>along with the Aero interface enhancements, is another story. Here's how
>Microsoft described it:
>
> "If you simply want to use your PC for tasks such as surfing the
>Internet, corresponding with friends and family using e-mail, or
>performing basic document creation and editing tasks, then Windows Vista
>Home Basic will deliver a safer, more reliable, and more productive
>computing environment."
>
>I'm sorry, but this simply perpetuates the myth that there's such a
>thing as simple computing needs. The "surfing the Internet" part is my
>favorite. It's as if Microsoft's marketers haven't been online since
>2001. Surfing the Internet these days is about as far from basic as you
>can get. Web 2.0 has turned many key Web sites into virtual client
>applications. Yes, these are lighter than, say, true desktop apps, but
>nowhere near as light and simple as the rudimentary HTML-based pages we
>recall from the mid-1990s up until, say, 2002.
>Joost
>
>It's not just coding that's made Web browsing a more complex
>CPU-intensive task. Virtually all popular sites feature video. News
>flash, Microsoft: YouTube is perhaps the most popular site on the Web.
>
>Document creation can be a pretty low-stress task, unless you're running
>the latest version of Microsoft Office. Most recent editions of this app
>suite eat up tons of processes and, of course, can create highly complex
>documents. Most adult home users won't tap into this power, but I can
>see high school and college students who still live at home creating
>pamphlets, newsletters, and other more complex files, many of which will
>incorporate graphical elements such as photos. This doesn't sound that
>"basic" to me.—Continue reading...
>
>Photos and videos are a major part of virtually every PC user's world.
>Microsoft, you should know that. After all, you helped make it happen.
>Even our grandparents take digital photos and mail them to loved ones.
>
>What about e-mail? It's a nice, light application, with few resource
>needs. Isn't it? Well, maybe 10 years ago. Consumer e-mail boxes are
>filled with gigabytes of data, HTML messages and, of course, photos (and
>even videos). And say your e-mails are always text-based and you rarely
>get much of it; you still can't run e-mail without protection from
>viruses and spyware. Each of those apps puts demands on system
>components and the operating system itself. Suddenly, basic e-mail is
>looking mighty complicated.
>
>So what's the deal with Home Basic? I do notice that it's about $60
>cheaper than the more multimedia-capable Premium Edition. And that's the
>answer, isn't it? This is for OEMs who want to trim a few bucks off the
>price of a PC while still appearing to offer the "latest thing."
>
>This is nothing new. Dell, Gateway, eMachines, HP, and others offer
>value PCs by cutting corners that you can't always see or recognize as
>detrimental to your computing lives. So a DVD-R becomes a DVD-ROM drive,
>or 1GB of memory becomes 512MB, or discrete graphics memory becomes
>shared. All of these things can add up to hundreds of dollars in
>savings. Vista Home Basic falls right into that same bucket. My guess is
>that OEMs demanded this version from Microsoft, and it acquiesced
>because it was still smarting from value vendors dropping MS Office in
>favor of super-cheap WordPerfect.
>
>So beware, friends, of too-cheap Vista systems. They may be running Home
>Basic, and that means they may not be ready to fulfill anyone's
>21st-century computing needs.
>
>Copyright (c) 2007 Ziff Davis Media Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Hi!

> I'm sorry, but this simply perpetuates the myth that there's such a
> thing as simple computing needs.

I disagree. I've seen computers used for nothing but e-mail and web
browsing. I just finished setting up a system not long ago where the owner
does only three things--e-mail, Quicken and web browsing.

Vista Basic meets all of these needs and probably will do so until the end
of the system's useful life.

William

Bill,

While you are correct that "Vista Basic meets all of these needs ...",
so does Windows XP.


William R. Walsh wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> I'm sorry, but this simply perpetuates the myth that there's such a
>> thing as simple computing needs.
>
> I disagree. I've seen computers used for nothing but e-mail and web
> browsing. I just finished setting up a system not long ago where the owner
> does only three things--e-mail, Quicken and web browsing.
>
> Vista Basic meets all of these needs and probably will do so until the end
> of the system's useful life.
>
> William
>
>

Hi!

> While you are correct that "Vista Basic meets all of these needs ...",
> so does Windows XP.

Had it been completely up to me, the system would have been running XP. I
had concerns that the (old!) version of Quicken might turn upside down and
die on Vista.

The problem in this case is finding a system with XP on it instead of Vista
at all the usual retail store suspects (Best Buy, Circuit City, etc...). I
don't think either one is still carrying XP-based systems. I suggested
buying from someone who would still offer XP on a system, but this wasn't
accepted.

William

Microsoft has contractually strong-armed nearly all of its OEMs into providing
Windows Vista with nearly all of the computers. Exceptions are made, of course,
for large corporations and government agencies who would otherwise tell
Microsoft, Dell, HP and everyone else to go stuff Vista, exactly where to stuff
it, and detailed instructions of how to stuff it. So Dell sells XP systems, not
thru its home/consumer "channel", but thru the business and govt channels.

Likewise, copies of XP have mysteriously dried up in the retail store channel.

.... Ben Myers

On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 00:50:31 GMT, "William R. Walsh"
< m> wrote:

>Hi!
>
>> While you are correct that "Vista Basic meets all of these needs ...",
>> so does Windows XP.
>
>Had it been completely up to me, the system would have been running XP. I
>had concerns that the (old!) version of Quicken might turn upside down and
>die on Vista.
>
>The problem in this case is finding a system with XP on it instead of Vista
>at all the usual retail store suspects (Best Buy, Circuit City, etc...). I
>don't think either one is still carrying XP-based systems. I suggested
>buying from someone who would still offer XP on a system, but this wasn't
>accepted.
>
>William
>

On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 23:11:10 -0400, Ben Myers
<> wrote:

>Microsoft has contractually strong-armed nearly all of its OEMs into providing
>Windows Vista with nearly all of the computers. Exceptions are made, of course,
>for large corporations and government agencies who would otherwise tell
>Microsoft, Dell, HP and everyone else to go stuff Vista, exactly where to stuff
>it, and detailed instructions of how to stuff it. So Dell sells XP systems, not
>thru its home/consumer "channel", but thru the business and govt channels.
>
>Likewise, copies of XP have mysteriously dried up in the retail store channel.
>
>... Ben Myers


I concur. Obviously it's due to profit margin on Vista is so much
greater than XP and corporate sales are the main revenue of each pc
mfgr so they can afford to let them have XP where as to maximize
revenue on the consumer side, they push Vista instead of XP. Bottom
line to us is, the consumer gets screwed again and the sad thing, most
don't even know it because they buy into MS bs (much like software
licenses but thats already in other threads).

<RnR> wrote in message news:...
> On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 23:11:10 -0400, Ben Myers
> <> wrote:
>
>>Microsoft has contractually strong-armed nearly all of its OEMs into
>>providing
>>Windows Vista with nearly all of the computers. Exceptions are made, of
>>course,
>>for large corporations and government agencies who would otherwise tell
>>Microsoft, Dell, HP and everyone else to go stuff Vista, exactly where to
>>stuff
>>it, and detailed instructions of how to stuff it. So Dell sells XP
>>systems, not
>>thru its home/consumer "channel", but thru the business and govt channels.
>>
>>Likewise, copies of XP have mysteriously dried up in the retail store
>>channel.
>>
>>... Ben Myers
>
>
> I concur. Obviously it's due to profit margin on Vista is so much
> greater than XP and corporate sales are the main revenue of each pc
> mfgr so they can afford to let them have XP where as to maximize
> revenue on the consumer side, they push Vista instead of XP. Bottom
> line to us is, the consumer gets screwed again and the sad thing, most
> don't even know it because they buy into MS bs (much like software
> licenses but thats already in other threads).

How do you figure the profit margins are higher?

The real reason is likely that they want to focus their support efforts on
Vista. Having dual support teams is very expensive. If XP is just in the
corporate channel, the costs are low, as most corporations essentially
support themselves.

Everyone sees a conspiracy at every turn when it is just good business.

One counterpoint to this argument about cost of support provided by vendor is
that XP is more stable, has fewer defects, therefore requires less support for
any computer owner, whether consumer, business or government.

Sorry, the Microsoft conspiracy is as obvious as it has ever been. Microsoft
has its OEMs by very short hairs, and Vista is what WILL(!) be shipped unless
businesses demand otherwise (as most sensible businesses will do until they have
qualified all their hone-grown apps with Vista). This satisfies two
objectives. Microsoft gets the desired penetration of Vista into the
marketplace. Lean over and grab your ankles for that one. OEMs are happy to
sell Vista systems, which require more hardware to run even half-baked, and
therefore are more profitable. But Vista support by name-brand vendors is and
will be a sinkhole for money... Ben Myers

On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 07:25:39 -0400, "Tom Scales" <> wrote:

>
><RnR> wrote in message news:...
>> On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 23:11:10 -0400, Ben Myers
>> <> wrote:
>>
>>>Microsoft has contractually strong-armed nearly all of its OEMs into
>>>providing
>>>Windows Vista with nearly all of the computers. Exceptions are made, of
>>>course,
>>>for large corporations and government agencies who would otherwise tell
>>>Microsoft, Dell, HP and everyone else to go stuff Vista, exactly where to
>>>stuff
>>>it, and detailed instructions of how to stuff it. So Dell sells XP
>>>systems, not
>>>thru its home/consumer "channel", but thru the business and govt channels.
>>>
>>>Likewise, copies of XP have mysteriously dried up in the retail store
>>>channel.
>>>
>>>... Ben Myers
>>
>>
>> I concur. Obviously it's due to profit margin on Vista is so much
>> greater than XP and corporate sales are the main revenue of each pc
>> mfgr so they can afford to let them have XP where as to maximize
>> revenue on the consumer side, they push Vista instead of XP. Bottom
>> line to us is, the consumer gets screwed again and the sad thing, most
>> don't even know it because they buy into MS bs (much like software
>> licenses but thats already in other threads).
>
>How do you figure the profit margins are higher?
>
>The real reason is likely that they want to focus their support efforts on
>Vista. Having dual support teams is very expensive. If XP is just in the
>corporate channel, the costs are low, as most corporations essentially
>support themselves.
>
>Everyone sees a conspiracy at every turn when it is just good business.
>
>

Tom Scales <> wrote:

> Everyone sees a conspiracy at every turn when it is just good business.

Of course it's good business! I'm sure the kickbacks that Microsoft is
getting from the hardware companies is very nice...

I'm only half kidding here... Seriously, running ANY flavor of Vista is
going to end up sucking down large chunks of your hardware. It disgusted
me when I saw the local stores trying to foist systems onto customers that
would barely run Vista, much less anything like an application. I
guarantee you that just weeks before that very same hardware SKU had XP
Home loaded on it, at least making them a capable home system. But
now...Ugh.

For instance, can anyone tell me why you would EVER sell a Vista system
with less than 1GB (MINIMUM!) RAM in it? Yet I still saw several "bargin"
systems shipping with 256MB of RAM and half of that was sucked down by the
video card. I'm surprised Vista even consented to even BOOT on such
hardware... But hey, $400 and the system's yours!


--
Win cash and giftcards just for clicking your mouse!
http://www.netwinner.com/?signupCode=amuro98