I am posting this from IE6 running under Ubuntu, using Wine.  Though an impressive feat, there are plenty of graphical glitches, and flash still doesn't work right (even though this is the primary reason advertised for using ie4linux).  Wine's been around for a decade now, and well, it's graduated from running notepad poorly, to running IE6 poorly.  I guess that's progress.

As for Window restrictions, I really don't understand what's bothering you.  If you purchase a legal copy, you will be able to run it.  There are some folks who run into problems (this is rare though) - they call Microsoft and then all is well.

If you purchase a legal copy, you will be able to run it.

Ha!  Says you.  I skipped Windows XP so when I bought (as in paid full retail price) for Windows Vista Home Basic, I upgraded directly from Windows 2000 Professional.  Allegedly, this is a capability of the Windows Vista installer.  As it turns out, this is not possible.  Therefore, I am forced to do the full install.  However, having done the full install, Windows Vista then claims that I am not allowed to use the license key, because it's an upgrade key and I did a full install.  Even the Windows KB article on this topic says you are supposed to do full install when "upgrading" from Windows 2000, but following their instructions doesn't work.

Windows telephone support has been utterly unwilling to help me with this problem, including the unwillingness to just refund my money.  I'm currently stuck with having to reinstall Vista every month when it self-destructs.

What explanation did Windows support give you for this?  I purchased an upgrade version of Vista, and installed it over XP.  All it did was ask me for my original XP key, which was legit as well, and it worked like a charm.    Was your Windows 2000 install legit?  Or did you get one of those "corporate license" specials where millions of people were using the same enterprise license key?  This was pretty common before WGA, and in fact was one of the primary reasons Windows implemented WGA.

You use the word "explanation" in relation to Windows support, therefore I surmise that you have never had to deal with these people.  They are barely above the level of an Eliza program.  The furthest I've ever got with them (it's like a game, eventually you run out of hit points) is being pointed to a particular Windows KB article with bonus instructions related to my problem, that didn't actually work.

Unfortunately, although Windows 2000 was running fine on my PC, I had carried over that hard drive from an older computer, and Windows 2000 cannot be installed from scratch on the new computer, so I really am stuck with Vista.

Windows 2000 just wanted me to punch in the license key that's printed on the CD case, and that was a reasonable form of copy control I think.  Not too intrusive.  I still prefer the Mac OS model where there's no licensing issues at all.  You walk out of the store with the software you bought and when you get home there's no interrogation.  It just works.

As for Window restrictions, I really don't understand what's bothering you. If you purchase a legal copy, you will be able to run it. There are some folks who run into problems (this is rare though) - they call Microsoft and then all is well.

Which is all well and good, until it's not all well and then you're screwed. If I buy and pay for something, it should always work - it shouldn't "phone home" every day. I bought Windows, I'm not leasing it (although I guess that's the model MS is moving towards). What other product would you tolerate that sort of behavior in? Would you buy a car that would phone home every day to make sure you hadn't bought a fake Chinese copy, and might just randomly not start up if the server tells it it's a fake?

I just wish there was a strong third-way company out there selling a decent competitor to Windows (i.e. that something like BeOS had taken off). It's a real shame that Apple continues to insist on restricting OS X to Mac hardware - it's made such strides that I think it really could compete with Windows if they'd sell it to run on commodity hardware, but I can understand their desire to be a boutique vendor. I'm hoping that Ubuntu (with Canonical behind it, developing it as a desktop OS) will finally push Linux over the edge to being a high quality desktop OS, but I agree with you that there's still some way to go.

"Which is all well and good, until it's not all well and then you're screwed. If I buy and pay for something, it should always work - it shouldn't "phone home" every day. I bought Windows, I'm not leasing it (although I guess that's the model MS is moving towards). What other product would you tolerate that sort of behavior in? Would you buy a car that would phone home every day to make sure you hadn't bought a fake Chinese copy, and might just randomly not start up if the server tells it it's a fake?"

Windows does not "phone home" every day - that's FUD, pure and simple.  When you check for updates, it validates that you have a legal, registered copy of windows.  I've been running two copies of Vista for over e year.  Never had a problem yet.  I actually had more problems with XP, which also has WGA.  Vista does indeed "just work".

I hate car analogies, but when I take my VW in for service, you'd better bet they'd refuse to service it if it weren't a genuine VW.

Well, you were wrong:

Microsoft's antipiracy tool phones home daily

By Joris Evers, News.com Posted on ZDNet News: Jun 8, 2006 12:25:00 AM Microsoft has vowed to better disclose the actions of its antipiracy tool once it is installed on Windows PCs.

The tool, called Windows Genuine Advantage Notifications, is designed to validate whether a copy of Windows has been legitimately acquired. However, it also checks in with Microsoft on a daily basis, the company confirmed Wednesday.

This has alarmed some people, such as Lauren Weinstein, a civil liberties activist, who likened it to spyware in a blog posting.

Microsoft disputes that notion. It said that WGA's regular call home is innocent and done for necessary maintenance purposes.

"The WGA Notifications program checks a server-side configuration setting to determine if WGA should run or not," a company representative said in an e-mailed statement. "As part of the pilot, this gives Microsoft the ability to disable the program if necessary."

Apparently they have since discontinued the daily phoning home, but WGA still does occasionally phone home at random times. There's no way to "opt out" of this by simply not running the update program - and if MS decides to turn the daily checking function back on from server side, there's probably nothing you can do to avoid it other than not connect to the Internet.

I've been running two copies of Vista for over e year. Never had a problem yet.

Again, this is all well and good, but do you really want to trust your data to an OS that has all sorts of potential built in self-destruct functions? Last August Vista's WGA suffered a world-wide outage. People have reported other problems as well. Will you accuse them of all being pirates, or technically inept? If Windows is so user friendly, should I have to call tech support just to get my legal copy to work? The risk of an outage like that simply isn't acceptable to me, especially considering that this is software I have paid for! If I am going to have hassles and aggravation, I would rather have them over a free system that I've not paid anything for.

WGA still does occasionally phone home at random times. There's no way to "opt out" of this by simply not running the update program

One way to opt out would be to install ZoneAlarm firewall and when it asks if WGA can access the internet, click "Remember this setting" and then click "Deny".

I said that windows doesn't phone home every day.  And it doesn't.  Apparently it once did in 2006.  I installed Vista in 2007.

I am aware of the fact that there have been issues with WGA.  The vast majority of folks though have no problems.  And I am not accusing anyone of being a pirate.  

I am not sure what sort of "outage" you are worried about.  If you fail WGA you have 30 days to correct the issue (or wait for MS to correct it).  Until then you don't have Aero or Windows Defender, and you have to suffer annoying popup notifications.  However would you get my work done?  It's an annoyance sure, but it's not a kill switch.

Do I like this software model?  No.  I'd prefer that WGA didn't exist.  But I accept it because I need windows to run the software I need to do my job.  If Linux could do what Windows does, as well, and as simply, I'd convert to using it full time in a hearbeat.  For now it's my backup storage server, web server, and tinkering playground.

I am posting this from IE6 running under Ubuntu, using Wine.

WHY?  

Ubuntu 64-bit has lots of problems.  Unless you have a really compelling reason to run 64 bit, like some crucial piece of software that requires it, you should not use the 64 bit version.

Have you installed msttcorefonts?  

64-bit Ubuntu seems stable enough for me - though Wine is almost totally unusable.  As my Linux server is semi-experimental I justed wanted to kick the tires on a 64-bit OS, and perhaps do something crazy like install 8GB of RAM and actually be able to use it all.  

I haven't had any serious issues with it though, other than the inability to run flash under 64bit firefox (some consider this a feature).  I am running true type fonts, with subpixel anti-aliasing, but they still don't look quite right.  Also whoever created the font engine need to read up on kerning.

64-bit Ubuntu seems stable enough for me - though Wine is almost totally unusable

I run Wine on 64-bit Mepis, and it works great. I run Photoshop, Raw Shooter, and MS Office 2003 with little or no loss of functionality.

I've been using "shady" freeware zip packages for quite some time on windows with no problems.  7-zip has been around for awhile, and it's awesome.  And then of course there's winzip, but I stopped using that only recently when it turned into a horrible piece of nagware.  But both XP and Vista have zip capabilities built into the OS and file manager.  On the other hand, Ubuntu's Nautilus doesn't appear to grok .tgz, instead it launches something called "File Roller" to explore archive files.

True, much more of the software for windows is commercial, but this also means it's higher quality.  Sorry, it's a fact, in the aggregate, people do a better job when they are getting paid for their efforts.  Witness the dramatic improvement in Linux distributions when for profit corporations started to sponsor them by dedicated significant employee resources to their maintenance and development.  

Even if you prefer the free stuff Linux hackers have crafted, almost every piece of quality free software available on Linux has been ported to Windows.  I access my Linux box using Cygwin, a full Unix like environment that runs under Windows.  It  has the full GNU compiler tool-chain, almost every other Unix command line utility you'd want, supports X Windows, and can even run Gnome locally if you are so brave.  There's also a port of GTK for windows, so you can run things like the Gimp and Gaim natively in windows.  See here: http://www.ttcsweb.org/osswin-cd/ - a whole CD of free/open source software for windows.

Now, if MS somehow impeded or forbade all of this open source activity on Windows I think you might have an argument - but they don't - and today's Windows users can use just about every piece of software you use on Linux, or find a free native equivalent on Windows - and they can also run all the commercial software that Linux can't (and please, don't get me started on Wine).  

As a result I could never recommend Linux to family or friends.  For the average user, it will just be more frustration than it's worth once they want to do anything more than surf and read email. "Why won't my Ubuntix talk to my iPod?" is not an email I want to get from my mom.  Yes, I know there are iPod solutions for Linux, but compare them to the (free) iTunes for Windows - which do you think I am going to be able to talk my mom through installing and using?

7-zip has been around for awhile, and it's awesome.

This is very true - that's one big beef I have with Linux (or with OSS developers, I guess - it's not really the Linux developer's fault) - there are a number of open source programs for Windows that are actually far better than anything you can turn up on Linux. I actually run 7-zip under WINE in linux because I find it far superior to the default Linux Archive gui program. There is a 7-zip for Linux, but it's only command-line - no GUI. TightVNC is another program I run under WINE - there is a Linux version, but it sucks compared to the Windows version. Some other Windows-only free or OSS programs I miss include VirtualDub, Irfanview, and uTorrent. There are some programs that work better under Linux, though - mostly ones that use the gtk or Qt libraries. Pidgin (used to be GAIM), Gimp & Xchat all work much better in Linux than in Windows.

For the average user, it will just be more frustration than it's worth once they want to do anything more than surf and read email..

If they just want to surf, read e-mail, and play solitaire, though, Ubuntu is an excellent solution. I do highly recommend it if you're setting up a very basic computer for a member of the older crowd. My parents nuked their Windows computer with viruses (accidentally, of course) four or five times in less than two years. After the fifth reinstall I finally got smart and stuck Ubuntu on there. It's perfect for them - literally all they do is browse the web and check their e-mail (and my father sells some things on eBay on occasion). The big bonus there is that my mother loves the computer solitaire games, and if there's one place Linux gaming shines it's computer solitaire & Mahjong games. The big, added bonus is that there just aren't that many viruses out there targeting Linux, so the amount of shenanigans they could get into dropped 1000%. Haven't had to do a reinstall since...

For those kinds of users, sure.  But add a digital camera into the mix.  Add an iPod or other MP3 player.  Gah.  I realize that malware infestation can be a serious issue with XP, but I've managed to teach my family how to avoid them with some very simple rules:

1. Don't let you teen/young adults use the computer - get them their own laptop to trash - they are cheap.  This will cure about 90% of all malware prone machines.
   
2. Don't open email attachments other than pictures.  My family isn't running a business from their home email, there's no reason they need to ever open a word document or powerpoint attachment sent to them in email.
   
3. Don't install software from the web unless it's a big name company that you recognize.  If you don't know, ask me.  Adobe.com is fine, Mahjong from rz-00s2Te.games.ru is probably not.
   
4. Under no circumstances, never ever ever run or install any 'file sharing' program.
   
5. If you must run internet games, confine yourself to yahoo games - there's plenty there, and they are safe.

I also usually uninstall their anti-virus program, ya know, the one that allowed their computer to get malware infested without uttering a peep - they are amazed at how much faster their computer feels.

I regularly uninstall Norton on my friends' computers, however, I then install NOD32.  The speed gain remains.  Norton is simply a pig.  I have had no problems with NOD32, and it occasionally turns up a virus attachment, so I assume it's working.

I was on my mother's computer the other day and realized she didn't have a firewall...after I set it up, the grandkids whined and moaned about having to authorize programs, until I showed them the constant IP probes she was getting, and told them about my boss's computer that was used as a porn server without his knowledge.  Much quieter now.

and told them about my boss's computer that was used as a porn server without his knowledge

Seems to me that many kids would see this as an advantage.

My boss said, "The worst thing was that it was gay porn, so there wasn't anything there I wanted."

much more of the software for windows is commercial, but this also means it's higher quality

Closed-source software is not always made with the user's best interests at heart.  They try to lock you into proprietary formats, which can screw you years later when their product loses the market share war and can no longer be bought legally.  They incorporate copy protection schemes that compromise performance.  They rudely insert references to their product all over your system, like adding an extra item to the desktop context menu that takes seconds to initialize and gives the user no useful functionality, or sticking pointless unhelpful advertisement-icons in the notification area.  (Yes, I KNOW I have your antivirus program installed.  Fine.  Now GET OFF MY SCREEN).  I remember I once bought ad-blocking software (this was in 2000, long before FireFox and Adblock), and after an "upgrade" the software began displaying a banner for a few seconds every time I started up.  The entire reason I bought the thing is that I hate ads -- why would they possibly think this would make their product "better software?"

it's a fact, in the aggregate, people do a better job when they are getting paid for their efforts.

But open-source software can pay, too, just under a different revenue model.  Firefox makes multiple millions of dollars for Mozilla.  There's also the support model.

almost every piece of quality free software available on Linux has been ported to Windows

Post-Vista, Windows people don't get to argue that they have all the software Linux has anymore.  Here's software that's available for Linux but not for Vista: drivers that can operate my Iomega USB floppy drive.

To do any ordinary file operation, like split a large file into parts...

In what way is that "ordinary"? Why would you ever want (let alone need) to split a large file into parts?

Windows is a platform that Microsoft uses to sell you to other software vendors

Considering the amount of revenue that Microsoft generates from selling dev tools versus the amount of revenue generated from OS licenses, I'd say you got the situation precisely backwards. But even if it were true, you'd have to admit that the amount of good software available for Windows compared to Linux would make it a very positive thing indeed.

You'd want to split a large file into parts so that the individual parts might fit on a CD or DVD or into some other finite space, or because your email provider has a limit on attachment size, or for a variety of other reasons.

I've never really had a need to split files any time in the last 10 years, but from my Vista system:

joshv@Newton ~
$ which split
/usr/bin/split

You can get a bunch of Unix utilities that have been ported to Windows, including split, gzip and gunzip.  I've been using them for years on Win98, Win2K and WinXP.  I haven't tried them on Vista yet though.

http://unxutils.sourceforge.net/

Well, I get a pop-up that says the memory cache is too small and that a swap file is being opened.  Or else the system just starts running slow, so I reboot and it's back up to snuff.

Releasing memory was always a problem with older versions of Windows, maybe they improved it with XP.  I dunno, I just use the thing, and I find, just like in the old days, an occasional reboot seems to make it healthier.

Yeah, well programs that eat up all the memory are not the fault of the OS.  Windows task manager provides a way for you to find these programs and kill them - try that the next time you think you need to reboot.

Windows never could

I haven't tried with Vista (mostly because my only Vista install is on a laptop that gets turned on and off a lot), but a Windows 2000 box will run for a year without a reboot. (Except for reboots required for installation of certain security patches.)

I think a lot of people have dodgy hardware but don't realize it.  Their computers crash and they blame it on Windows (or Linux).  The real problem is they or Dell saved a nickel by using a power supply that isn't quite up to the task, or 1/2" of dust inside your PC really isn't beneficial, or upholstering it in shag carpet might have been a bad idea.  I never, ever had Windows 2000 crash, although I have had Vista crash rather often.  I've been told this is the fault of NVIDIA.

I think a lot of people have dodgy hardware but don't realize it

That, and Norton Antivirus.

" VMS on a DEC Alpha cluster could do that.  Windows never could. "

That's just plain wrong.   I work with Windows based servers that have uptimes in the year+ range all the time.  Take any of the NT based OSes, install them on server grade hardware and they run forever.  NT 3.1, NT 4, Windows 2000, XP, Server 2003, Server 2008 - they are pretty much bullet-proof when not forced to deal with flaky consumer grade hardware and drivers.

Well, I hate to rebut an ad hominem attack with another one, but George Ou has been Daring Fireball's Jackass of the Week a dozen times or so.  He's a professional ass-talker.

It wasn't my intent to take a side on the Ou vs. Guttman argument - Ou's blog post just happened to be the first thing I ran across when doing a search on the topic. I could have picked ay number of other pages that said basically the same thing as Ou, so I don't think his credibility has anything to do with the issue one way or the other.

You may read Microsoft's explanation - it explains the working of Vista's video DRM as well as the reasons behind it - and pretty much takes the wind out of the sails of Guttman's hyperbolic essay.

Did you actually read MS's supposed technical response (which in reality is PR)?

Gutmann addresses it after his paper, and another source does as well.

For example, they claim that the Hardware Functionality Scan will not impair the ability of the open-source community to write drivers.  Microsoft's white paper on the subject contradicts this, saying that GPU functionality is used in HFS, and that how this is implemented will have to be kept secret to prevent someone from emulating it.  Another example is the echo-cancellation; MS talks around this one as best they can, but what it comes down to is that it will break existing echo-cancellation (this is confirmed by the author of MS's blog post in the aforementioned white paper).  Still another: increased hardware costs; MS says the costs won't be passed onto the consumer, whereas ATI says they will.  Who should we believe?  MS admits its copy protection scheme requires additional resources.  The blog post says it won't require hardware acceleration for video playback, but again, their white paper says specifically that it does.

So we can believe the white paper they wrote to describe content protection in Vista, or we can believe the heavily PR-influenced and double-speak-ridden blog post in response to people getting pissed off about content protection.  I know which one I trust more.

Q: What do you think of western civilization? Gandhi: I think it would be a good idea.

For example, they claim that the Hardware Functionality Scan will not impair the ability of the open-source community to write drivers.  Microsoft's white paper on the subject contradicts this, saying that GPU functionality is used in HFS, and that how this is implemented will have to be kept secret to prevent someone from emulating it.  Another example is the echo-cancellation; MS talks around this one as best they can, but what it comes down to is that it will break existing echo-cancellation (this is confirmed by the author of MS's blog post in the aforementioned white paper).  Still another: increased hardware costs; MS says the costs won't be passed onto the consumer, whereas ATI says they will

None of that has anything at all to do with your original complaint. You claimed, "Vista refuses to play 'premium' content (which is anything 800x600 or above) if you don't have movie-studio-approved hardware," and that's plainly not true.

If your actual problem is something about open source drivers, then say so. But your real complaint is with current intellectual property law, not with Microsoft.

" My gf has a high-end Dell laptop (designed to be a gaming machine) which runs Vista and is sloooowww.  And I've done all those things you're supposed to do to keep it running quickly (spyware, defrag, etc.)."

Did you add memory?  2GB minimum.  2GB can be had for less than $50 these days.  I have a 2GB core 2 duo laptop and a 4GB core 2 duo desktop, and both are quite snappy under Vista.  I witnessed a Vista laptop with 512MB of RAM once though - unusably slow, it turns out the laptop had 1 GB installed, but one of the chips had become unseated.  With 1GB it was still no speed demon, but it was at least usable.

It's got 2GB on there already.  That's sorta my point: 2GB is plenty for an XP machine, but it's a minimum for Vista; ergo slower performance.  And I know that's how it goes, but when that performance hit comes without any real gain, it's not worth it.

Q: What do you think of western civilization? Gandhi: I think it would be a good idea.

My 2GB laptop handles Vista just fine - certainly no faster than XP on the same machine (it was purchased with XP), but not noticeably slower.

My machine has 2GB of memory and a 1.8 GHz AMD Turion, and it's plenty fast.  I think her mistake was getting a Dell, as they suck horribly nowadays.  I used to be a loyal Dell customer, then they started sucking.  I just got an HP about 6 months ago, and it's awesome.

sierra tango foxtrot uniform

"I think her mistake was getting a Dell, as they suck horribly nowadays.  I used to be a loyal Dell customer, then they started sucking.  I just got an HP about 6 months ago, and it's awesome."

No disagreement, here.  My last Dell was pure junk.  The H-P dv6000 Pavillion laptop that I'm using now is worlds better than the Dell.  At $800 with just about everything I could want, I think it was also a pretty good deal.

there's only one way to find out...

That's interesting, because I've seen more problems from HPs than any other brand (except Toshiba) at our help desk.  Dells definitely aren't what they used to be, that's for sure.

I'll probably need a new laptop sometime in the next year or so; as much as I love my Macbook Pro,  I'm not sure if I can justify $2,000+ when I can get a comparable PC for $500-$800 (and on which I would likely install Linux).  Anyone out there aware of any good mid-range notebooks?  Especially if I can get it cheaper with no OS pre-installed.

Q: What do you think of western civilization? Gandhi: I think it would be a good idea.

I think the Lenovo ThinkPads come pretty highly rated, and you can pick up a decent one for the price range you describe.
I didn't get one because I wanted a 17" screen, and I didn't see any that fit the bill, but I did a lot of comparisons, as my company was picking up the tab for the new one.

sierra tango foxtrot uniform

I wonder if that's because HP sells a lot of machines, though.  It stands to reason that the top sellers == more support calls due to sheer numbers.

I am not completely rah-rah about HP, however.  I spent a considerable amount of time ripping out software that was just useless, and worse, redundant.  The HP Pavilion I bought had Norton fuckwit utilities installed, and HP loads up a bunch of hoo-hah that is also useless.  I mean, it was insane.  Not one, not two, but THREE 'firewall' apps.  Two spyware catchers.  Norton "I must stand between you and every application" virus thingummy, HP then has a bunch of redundant garbage that it loads, such as "May I step on your wireless configuration?"  Vista has all of the things that these boat anchors provide, except the AV stuff, and for that I never stray from Avast!  

After all that tweaking, performance increased by easily 50%, and the system is awfully stable.   This is a software development machine and now I run all the stuff I need and performance is snappy, running a local Postgres database and a Java Application Server.  I play games, but not the kind that require screaming performance (Medieval: Total War runs great, though).  

The trouble that people are having, I am betting that a good deal of it is because of scarce resources and apps stepping all over each other.  Lifehacker had a thing a while ago about trimming down your Vista installation, and I recommend that for anyone who installs it.   Trouble is that your average user isn't going to know about all that, and they will be left thinking that Vista is shite.  I do think that OEMs bear some of the responsibility here, though.  They all want to claim they provide so much value for the money, but the machine you bring home is hobbled out of the box by all the 'enhancements' and 3rd party bullshit that comes with it.  

sierra tango foxtrot uniform

On that I wholeheartedly agree: easily the majority of our service requests are "my computer runs too slow."  And it's painful to see computer literally new out of the box that take 5 minutes to boot.  Msconfig is your friend....

I appreciate the feedback.  Lenovos are actually what my school issues (and by that I mean sells) to students who don't bring their own.  The new ones are slimmer than the previous models (we just adopted a new model for next year; don't remember which one off the top of my head).  That's been my one complaint with PC laptops; there's not a one that can compete with my Macbook Pro in terms of size and weight.  I also wonder if they're as durable; I've dropped my MBP onto asphalt (and I'm 6'4", so it had a long trip down) and all I did was scratch up the case.  I'm not sure a plastic-cased laptop would do as well.

Q: What do you think of western civilization? Gandhi: I think it would be a good idea.

If you're prone to dropping your laptop, you should look into the Panasonic Lifebooks.  Spill-proof keyboard, shock resistant HD, very nice display.  Not cheap, and the battery life leaves something to be desired, but I was that close to getting one.

sierra tango foxtrot uniform

Oh yeah, I have seen those around.  It looks like it (this model, anyway) got decent reviews, but it's even more expensive than a MBP.  At that point I'd just as soon go for a Mac.

Q: What do you think of western civilization? Gandhi: I think it would be a good idea.

Yeah, but can you spill a cup of coffee on a Macbook's keyboard?

sierra tango foxtrot uniform

That's true, but I've been good about that aspect at least (knock on wood).  I'll just have to wait and see what's available when I'm in the market, I guess.

Q: What do you think of western civilization? Gandhi: I think it would be a good idea.