Top 5 Reasons for Vista’s Failure???
October 9, 2008 by Milo Riano
Filed under Computers
Jason Hiner has written over at ZDnet an article which lists the top 5 reasons why Windows Vista failed.
I agree on only two of his five reasons. Below are my comments on each of his reasons:
5. Apple successfully demonized Vista – why do people keep on putting Apple on the equation? Jason himself has outlined that Windows XP alone is running on 800 million computers. Counting in Vista, Windows 95/98 (Yes, I know a lot of companies who are still using Windows 95/98), and Microsoft Servers (NT, 2000, 2008) clearly suggests that Apple is NOT IN THE EQUATION. The only equation on the alleged failure of Vista is Microsoft and XP itself. Period.
4. Windows XP is too entrenched – Like I said, Microsoft and XP is the only competitor of Vista. I agree with Jason on this.
3. Vista is too slow – Yes, I agree. Microsoft should have magically kept Vista on a low requirement running PC.
2. There wasn’t supposed to be a Vista – there is supposed to be Windows Vista. I have no doubt that Microsoft made extensive research on pushing another shrink-wrapped software and Windows Vista was just the answer. Unfortunately, the unstable characteristics of Vista did not bode well with consumers and enterprises. Microsoft has been getting away with this approach for so many years and with so many product releases. But today, given the strength of XP, Vista was going to be an uphill battle with the problems it presented during the launch.
1. It broke too much stuff – just four days ago, I downloaded a newly built software from one of the service vendors I have subscribed to; And to my surprise it was crashing on Windows Vista. I immediately emailed the owner of the service, and they apologized for this. Today, they have fixed the problem and the software is running smoothly with Windows Vista. I am pretty sure it was only a quick fix and a few lines of code that their developers had to do to make it work in Vista; but clearly, they forgot about it. Vendors like this and the hundreds of vendors who should have been on top of Vista as part of their high customer support should have done their job and Microsoft should not be blamed for this. Vista did not break stuff; vendors didn’t care about it, despite Microsoft’s continuous reminder to vendors months before it was released.
Nonetheless, it can still be argued that it caused Vista’s alleged failure.
Alright, did I say I agree on only two of Jason’s 5 reasons? I think I’ll include this one as well.
The article is here.
If you look at statistics, it doesn’t look like a “failure” to me…
OK here’s some rough calculations:
18.33% of internet users are Vista
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=11
1.46 billion internet users
http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm
Assuming the usage rate is consistent around the world…
1.46 billion * 18.33% = 268 million Vista internet users
The actually user base would be significantly less than the above number only if for some reason, Vista users surf the internet WAY MORE than all other OS’s to skew the percentage up to 18.33%. It’s probably more likely that that some Vista users don’t use the internet much because it’s for work mostly. Hence there is likely more than 268 million Vista users.
Hitslink logs statistics in the “rich” (and more regulated) demographics. Here Vista adoption is probably held back a little by expense. So that could mean that Vista adoption in other “poorer” (Gov’t don’t give a crap) nations is much greater than 18.33% since you can like buy it at the local fruit shop for like $1, etc.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_sof_pir_rat-crime-software-piracy-rate
Hey, if you include ALL of Asia? 500 million Vista users??? ;)
Also, check this out…
Vista – a $6 Billion Dollars Operating System
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Vista-a-6-Billion-Dollars-Operating-System-44096.shtml
I don’t really know what the markup of it is but for simplicity let’s assume that they make $100 off each license on average (which is a conservative estimate wouldn’t you say?).
If my math is correct, that’s $18 billion dollars as of the last public claim of 180 million copies sold.
Microsoft: 180 million Vista licenses now sold
http://arstechnica.com/journals/microsoft.ars/2008/07/18/three-months-later-180-million-vista-licenses-sold-in-total
If my math is correct again…that’s TRIPLE the initial costs!
Of course they likely spent a little more after-market like for Jerry Seinfeld and stuff like that but I don’t think it’s anywhere near $12 billion dollars.
5. The iPod helped a lot of Apple sales.
4. I went through many upgrades in a corporation myself. From what I remember, NT->2000 took 3 years after release, 2000-> XP took 3 years after release. This was for a large corp. I’m sure smaller ones were easier. You have to put it in perspective. A lot of people who write these things have no real world IT experience. Most efforts like these are not “public information” as well. And it’s not like you can find all this presumably “inside information” on the internet back then on upgrade efforts back then which you can now use to compare modern times.
3. No Vista is not too slow. You don’t know how to use it or are using a cheap low budget computer. Mine is NOT slow. Look up SuperFetch, Disk Defragmenter…heck just look at Wikipedia’s Vista and figure it out.
2. Maybe, but they have positioned the technology leading into Windows 7 and integration into the new server technologies, Surface computing, mobile computing, and touch screen computers. It takes time…not overnight.
1. Yes, compatibility with old stuff I would agree is a hindrance for some companies sporting expensive equipment. However, it just takes some effort to make it work and find a solution. It’s not “impossible” but just adds a little to the cost of upgrade and has to be justified. You’ll be amazed at what professional IT teams can do. People tend to think that just because you can’t find a solution on the internet, it can’t be done. In reality, those who find a solution seldom share it with others on the internet. If I find a solution, why do I want to let my competitor know?