It's a pity the article is so poorly written. It sounds like a Mac fanboy. While supposedly talking about Vista and its' lack of innovation, the article spends more time talking about Apple, and what an [H] editor thinks/says about Apple. While we may agree with nearly all his points, this article will not be persuasive for the typical Windows user.
He should have talked mostly about Vista, comparing it to multiple competing OS choices (XP - which the target audience would be familiar with, OSX, Linux distros). Spend time on the high cost vs few useful feature additions (vs XP). Cover the activation & DRM annoyances. The confusing multiple upgrade options - Vista isn't exactly a single OS. Even though it ships as such, with different features being unlocked with license keys.
Cover compatibility issues with current software, changed workflows that require retraining, relatively hefty (expensive) hardware requirements, and weird glitches like Windows security labeling Norton Utilities as a trojan and recommending removal. Actually, it might be right about that last, so don't mention it.
Give a more in depth look at the Longhorn features that were promised, but later cut. The fact that Vista arrived very late even with the feature cuts, and the fact that the final price wasn't cut - it increased vs XP's price. These are things that Windows users will notice.
Most of them don't care where M$ stole the features from, so long as they get those features quickly & cheap. The article should have emphasized that Windows users are getting neither.
Top
