• she/they

pdx queer dev, now an Old


cathoderaydude
@cathoderaydude

funny how only corporate IT can make a 10th gen i7 behave like this for 10 minutes on every boot


cathoderaydude
@cathoderaydude

a primary theme of the stream last night was the sony vaio shittop i brought home, which took three hours to do a recovery install. only 30 minutes, at most, was spent doing the reimage. the rest was installing shitware.


this thing came with literally dozens, perhaps over a hundred pieces of Commercial Malware. sony was on total autopilot, completely uninterested in whether their computer was any good; they loaded it to the gills with everything from office 2007 trial, norton internet security, and microsoft fucking works, to dozens and dozens of awful shitty flash games, and each was added with a separate installer even though it does nothing other than put a shortcut on the desktop... and start menu... and system control panel... and the fucking vista OOBE dialog. they not only put gallons of malware on there, they put it in so many places that you can't miss it.

this was circa 2008 and sony had already achieved the Modern Business Third Eye Opening, which is any or both of these conclusions:

  1. the product is not the product. the customer is the product, and the purpose of selling our thing is to get them to look at someone else's ads; thus, the performance and quality of our thing is utterly irrelevant.

  2. anything that happens in software has absolutely no associated costs, it is simply free real estate. thus, if we can shave off a single penny of profit by shoving some stupid ad in our customers faces, we can call that free money. if we do that 500 times, that's $5. hey, $5!

no modern corporation is above picking up pennies they find on the ground, no matter how much mud they have to stomp through to get there, no matter how humiliating it is. reputation is fake in their eyes, and they're probably right, so sony was willing to put ten thousand stupid ads on here that make the machine literally unusable because, in their eyes, the fact that it rendered their product moot was either irrelevant or simply worth it. if it takes mortifying themselves in front of 500 separate individuals to make $5, sony will take the $5. all modern businesses will.

assertions about why vista was unpopular removed


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @cathoderaydude's post:

in reply to @cathoderaydude's post:

You just go to "ADD OR REMOVE PROGRAMS". This isn't hard, you just open up the start menu and go to blah blah…

(Has anybody ever used that UI to add a single software program?)

My first Vista experience was pretty dang great. I'd gotten a Dell XPS 420 (haha funny weed number) and it ran very well. There was good cooling, a pretty good processor, 2 gigs of RAM which easily got doubled up to 4 when 7 64-bit came along. Only issue is that the box was a damn BTX.

i will have to disagree on the "vista was too gay" front, vista was largely hated because it was a very noticeable resource requirement bump (3d acceleration required, which was a big change at the time) and, as you point out immediately afterwards, every machine that shipped with vista was a huge, under-specced piece of shit

7 kept most of vista's looks and didn't have nearly the same level of disdain

3d acceleration was not required, virtually every netbook shipped with starter, which didn't even support DWM, and every other version of vista would happily run without a GPU.

7 shipped three years later at which point it was impossible to find a computer with less than a gig of RAM and most had two or more. that's the only difference.

nobody was making actual judgements of vista based on netbooks, or at least nobody in the circles i was in. it was always that it ran like absolute shit even on machines of the day.

starter wasn't even available in the us

The point I was making is that there were netbooks that ran it fine, so I'm not sure how far down you had to go to make it suck. But, while writing a reply, I got uncertain about it myself so I went back and did some checking.

Long story short, my assertion - and I believe I can back this up, but it's moot - is that vista did not have higher "hardware" requirements than XP. CPUwise, it ran fine on a P4, and it did not require a GPU. I was making the point about starter (which did ship here on many new systems, just not as a standalone OS) to illustrate that Vista is not married to DWM, and neither were any of the retail versions.

But it did require at least a gig of RAM. And I thought I remembered that being pretty typical for the era, but I just flipped through a PC Mag from early 2006, and yeah, nothing shipped with over 512MB. $1400 laptops and $1000 desktops were getting 512MB. It seems like you could get an upgrade for around $100 - but really, what you wanted if you were a power user was two gigs, and that was going to run you like $200+. I admit, that was a hardship that you could simply avoid with XP.

lol remember Windows Mojave? The sheer balls to run an ad campaign going "actually our OS is great, y'all are just lemmings". I don't think it sold a single copy but I'm sure it's why Windows 7 wasn't a refutation of Vista, just an incremental improvement with a new name so people would try it again.

The sheer volume of adware vomit on underpowered OEMs in the late 2000s was basically what kept the repair shop I worked in business. Like most of the work back then was just "Backup data, wipe and reinstall vanilla Windows sans malware but plus an AV that actually does anything and no I don't mean Norton".

I'd argue that Microsoft mismanaged Vista enough to do a lot of the tanking, itself. When they announced the next generation of Windows, it was weird, basically planning to make good on their threat to make everything in the universe out of distributed OLE objects, because obviously everybody wants to rent half their operating systems. When they realized that was going to be non-trivial, they scrapped it and went with "psychedelic Windows XP, and I was still hearing (from ex-Microsoft people I knew talking to their friends) that something like two-thirds of new and existing features were broken, a few months before release...

Also a major issue with Vista was, afaik, shitty drivers written without any care... By the time 7 was out, companies kinda understood the whole "oh we really need to make this stuff work huh" but Vista already got slammed.

...also UAC, for some reason UAC got so much hate for... no reason in particular? Like, there's a fucking setting for the whole... "just pop a "is this ok" modal but don't black the screen out" which works so damn nicely V: