Vista requirements scam

[steve_hill4]

Interesting.

I installed build 5744 of Vista Ultimate on a machine at work about a week ago, to let people get to understand and play around with Vista. No Aero interface, no glass or flip 3D. The features that people most wanted to play with were not there. I looked at the specs of the machine again, 512MB RAM. Forgetting the age of the machine. So going across to another spare machine, I borrowed another 512MB out of there to switch all the effects on to play with. All worked well and people were strangely impressed by effects that Macs have had for years.

Anyway, 4 days later and I needed to put the memory back in the other machine. Back down to 512MB. Oh well, we've seen how it all works and learnt a fair bit. I went back to the Vista rig and glass was still there, in fat it hadn't changed at all, just got a bit slower. I set up another user to try parental controls for the internet, (to restrict web access on new display models without pass-wording them), and I could not switch it on in the new account.

Conclusion, Aero doesn't need 1GB of RAM to run, merely Vista requires 1GB of RAM in order to give you the option to switch it on. While I'm Microsoft aren't the first to do something like this, and I'm damn sure they won't be the last, surely if a user has plumped for Home Premium or above and has lower specs, it is their choice if they want their system to run slower because of Aero, even if it also transpires it makes it more unstable.

Microsoft, reveal your true motives.

 

[someguy]

I believe this is true of most system "requirements" to ensure that what you are trying to use on your machine works smoothly, or at least to an acceptable extent.

If they allowed any machine with Vista installed to enable these affects, imagine how many people (how many more people ) would be online bitching about how bad Vista's effects are.

 

[clevin]

I kind of feel aero need more VRam than RAM. So Im not sure if the change of RAM is really the problem at all, maybe some hidden settings.....?

Anyway, I think there are quite some gooe reasons for ur question (if that is in fact a solid case).

Since M$ doesn't control the hardware combinations of a windows PC, all they can do is to make sure (as they can) Vista's Aero will run well, so they have to make some limitations.

on ur computer, 512RAM runs fine, but maybe at some other ppl's machine, 512 isn't good at all for Aero.

 

[Swarmlord]

They should just have a dialog box pop up that points out the shortage of memory and then asks the installer whether they want their computer to operate at a snail's pace.

What bothers me about Microsoft most is that with all the improvements in processor, memory and hard drive speed that Microsoft thinks that the OS is entitled to the majority of it rather than the application software.

 

[abbottpc.com]

The video card is more important than the RAM is. You said the computer was old so i'm guessing the video card was not up to par.

 

[mkrishnan]

If they allowed any machine with Vista installed to enable these affects, imagine how many people (how many more people ) would be online bitching about how bad Vista's effects are.

Or rather how many more of the people online bitching about how bad Vista's effects are would actually be genuine Microsoft customers.

That is interesting, though... aside from the whole fake system requirements issue, there have been other notable recent times when similar kinds of weird workarounds cropped up to MS issues. With Windows Mobile 5, there was a really annoying issue that a PDA on a cradle connected to a computer would periodically wake and try to sync for no reason. The only way around it was to temporarily create a fake exchange server connection, which enabled menu options in the WM5 sync software that let you set how often automatic syncing would occur, turn it to manual only, and then delete the fake exchange server.... The weird thing about the whole business was that the automated syncing was happening on a computer without an exchange server to begin with.

 

[whooleytoo]

The transition period to Vista could be very, very interesting.

A key reason why Wintel dominates is backward compatibility - people have a lot of money invested in PCs, printers, scanners and other accessories, and software (not to mention having a lot of time invested in learning how everything works, how to troubleshoot etc.); which makes them understandably reluctant to switch.

If Vista presents as many problems as a move to Mac would, a lot of Windows users could come flooding over that wall..

 

[clevin]

The transition period to Vista could be very, very interesting.

A key reason why Wintel dominates is backward compatibility - people have a lot of money invested in PCs, printers, scanners and other accessories, and software (not to mention having a lot of time invested in learning how everything works, how to troubleshoot etc.); which makes them understandably reluctant to switch.

If Vista presents as many problems as a move to Mac would, a lot of Windows users could come flooding over that wall..

well, only if u assume those windows users want to abandon their XP, otherwise, they can just stay with XP.

for those user who is goig to enter the market, trust me, Im sure the transition from XP to vista is much easier than XP to OSX.

 

[steve_hill4]

The video card is more important than the RAM is. You said the computer was old so i'm guessing the video card was not up to par.

When I said old, perhaps I should have made it clear it was only a year old. Graphics were I believe 256MB dedicated VRAM, not sure the chipset. The point I was making was it was only checking system specs when switching on. Surely if it checked them once with 512MB and said no, then had checked again with 1GB in to allow me to switch it on, did it check again to see if anything had changed? I'm sure it knew, since Welcome Center told me I had 512MB in, so why not warn me that it no longer had enough memory to run Aero, do I want to continue. Even if it did this, why would it not allow you to get this message, when I tried with 512MB first time. Perhaps allowing you to select Aero, but giving a warning that told you resources were too low and what extra you needed before switching the option back to Vista basic.

well, only if u assume those windows users want to abandon their XP, otherwise, they can just stay with XP.

for those user who is goig to enter the market, trust me, Im sure the transition from XP to vista is much easier than XP to OSX.

Not by much, but I see what you mean.

I see quite a lot of people looking to purchase soon either waiting for Vista pre-loaded or have bought and will get their free upgrade. Those who have XP and haven't bought a new machine recently or are looking, they will almost certainly just wait for their new machine in a year or three.

 

[Swarmlord]

well, only if u assume those windows users want to abandon their XP, otherwise, they can just stay with XP.

for those user who is goig to enter the market, trust me, Im sure the transition from XP to vista is much easier than XP to OSX.

Especially since XP finally works and there will be support for it another five years. Unless XP was offering full 64bit support and would allow you to say assign an application to a specific processor or control cpu utilization, I don't see why anyone would rush out and purchase it. Microsoft missed the window (pun intended) of opportunity it had to really pump a new product release for cash.

 

[Manuel Moreno]

Interesting.
....
Conclusion, Aero doesn't need 1GB of RAM to run, merely Vista requires 1GB of RAM in order to give you the option to switch it on. While I'm Microsoft aren't the first to do something like this, and I'm damn sure they won't be the last, surely if a user has plumped for Home Premium or above and has lower specs, it is their choice if they want their system to run slower because of Aero, even if it also transpires it makes it more unstable.

Microsoft, reveal your true motives.

you need a capable GPU to run aero. Also you need the lastest vista drivers for your graphics card.
Aero runs fine here with 512MB of ram and an ati X300/128VRAM.

 

[timswim78]

Umm, so how exactly is this a scam?

Microsoft published hardware requirements for Vista that will allow Vista to run well. It's not like the cost of an extra 512MB is going to break the bank of anyone who is buying a new PC.

To me, it seems like more of a scam that Apple sells OS X computers with 512MB of RAM. It's even more of a scam when they have display units with 1GB of RAM next to signs that display the specifications and prices for 512MB systems.

 

[Marble]

It is pretty fishy behavior. I think it would be putting a lot of faith in MS to say that this "requirement" wasn't there to get more people to buy new PCs with Vista preinstalled. Mac OS X's visual effects are restricted based on the video card's ability to perform a certain effect (Quartz [pre-Radeon and similar] -> Quartz Extreme [Radeon and similar] -> Core Image [pixel shaders?] ), not an arbitrary RAM requirement.

 

[Eidorian]

I had Aero Glass running on a Latitude D800 w/512 MB of RAM and a GeForce Go FX 5200.

It was running but it wasn't very useable beyond one application at a time. The window preview was the biggest issue. One slip up over the taskbar with minimized programs and you'd be in for a slide show.

Aero doesn't surprise me much more then Quartz Extreme. I think it's just a reason to force people onto new hardware.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

It is pretty fishy behavior. I think it would be putting a lot of faith in MS to say that this "requirement" wasn't there to get more people to buy new PCs with Vista preinstalled. Mac OS X's visual effects are restricted based on the video card's ability to perform a certain effect (Quartz [pre-Radeon and similar] -> Quartz Extreme [Radeon and similar] -> Core Image [pixel shaders?] ), not an arbitrary RAM requirement.

to tell you the truth there is a lot of logic in that system. A lot of logic. M$ knows that the 512 system would strain the computer pretty hard with Aero and they would be taking heat for stuff that was really the fault of the computer being very very out dated. If you computer does not have 512 any more something just wrong. at least 1 gig has been the recommended min on computers for at least the past 2.5 years.

As for it not turning off when you drop below 1 gig again why the hell would M$ bother putting that check in there. VERY VERY few people ever reduce the amount of ram in there system. It general always goes up or stays the same. So they leave out that possibility of a bug happening with a check because once areo turned on by having enough ram it general a safe assumption they are not going to reduce it.

Also M$ makes more money off people buy retail versions of XP and version to upgrade than they do selling to OEM so why would they push people to buy new ones. It is worth more money to have them upgrade there computer themselves. The amount that places like dell pay for each copy of the OEM is less than what consumer would pay for an upgrades. Quite a bit less. Hell consumer OEM copies are not that much more over an upgrade verson of XP.

 

[someguy]

to tell you the truth there is a lot of logic in that system. A lot of logic.

I see no logic in a system that enables a feature based on an action, yet does not disable the feature when the action is undone. Call me crazy.

 

[SMM]

well, only if u assume those windows users want to abandon their XP, otherwise, they can just stay with XP.

for those user who is goig to enter the market, trust me, Im sure the transition from XP to vista is much easier than XP to OSX.

You might be assuming too much.

 

[clevin]

You might be assuming too much.

use data to convince me, plz

 

[mkrishnan]

I see no logic in a system that enables a feature based on an action, yet does not disable the feature when the action is undone. Call me crazy.

I think that, usually, when we install an irritating program and it leaves behind something even when you turn it off, we call it malware.

 

[ITASOR]

Well, this is similar to Apple's requirement that Tiger needs USB to run. If you want the HD out of an iBook Clamshell, install Tiger on it, and put it back in it runs it just fine with enough RAM.

 

[whooleytoo]

well, only if u assume those windows users want to abandon their XP, otherwise, they can just stay with XP.

for those user who is goig to enter the market, trust me, Im sure the transition from XP to vista is much easier than XP to OSX.

I think there's a definite and significant 'lunatic fringe' who can't wait to get the latest and greatest on their machines, whether they really need it or not. If it turns out that Vista won't run on their PCs, I'm not sure they'll exactly be content to stay on XP until Vista 2.0 comes out; so they'll need to buy a new machine.

And IF they buy a new machine, it's worth considering a Mac. The transition to Mac is a lot easier now, with Parallels/Boot Camp offering compatibility, and with iLife on every new Mac, there's not a huge investment in software required either. (Speaking of which, I can't understand why Apple doesn't include iWork with every new Mac, like iLife. I can't imagine they're making a lot of money off it as it is).

 

[someguy]

I think that, usually, when we install an irritating program and it leaves behind something even when you turn it off, we call it malware.

You may be on to something. Link

 

[eluk]

Also viruses come free unlike Vista.

 

[7on]

I think there's a definite and significant 'lunatic fringe' who can't wait to get the latest and greatest on their machines, whether they really need it or not. If it turns out that Vista won't run on their PCs, I'm not sure they'll exactly be content to stay on XP until Vista 2.0 comes out; so they'll need to buy a new machine.

And IF they buy a new machine, it's worth considering a Mac. The transition to Mac is a lot easier now, with Parallels/Boot Camp offering compatibility, and with iLife on every new Mac, there's not a huge investment in software required either. (Speaking of which, I can't understand why Apple doesn't include iWork with every new Mac, like iLife. I can't imagine they're making a lot of money off it as it is).

probably a hidden clause saying Apple can't put an Office Suit on a Mac or MS will pull their Office.

 

[clevin]

I think there's a definite and significant 'lunatic fringe' who can't wait to get the latest and greatest on their machines, whether they really need it or not. If it turns out that Vista won't run on their PCs, I'm not sure they'll exactly be content to stay on XP until Vista 2.0 comes out; so they'll need to buy a new machine.

And IF they buy a new machine, it's worth considering a Mac. The transition to Mac is a lot easier now, with Parallels/Boot Camp offering compatibility, and with iLife on every new Mac, there's not a huge investment in software required either. (Speaking of which, I can't understand why Apple doesn't include iWork with every new Mac, like iLife. I can't imagine they're making a lot of money off it as it is).

i agree with what you said, i just totally not sure about the percentage, I kind of feel
1. majority will not change machine for vista, especially business users
2. majority don't know that much about computer when they buy a new machine, so all the advantage u listed about Mac may not be useful anyway.

in a word, ur logic is perfect in a computer elite world, but not so in vast majority of the current users on market.

But im not sure, so a reasonable data can convince me easily.