Hasta la vista, Vista!

The answer is “not a lot”. If you buy a modern PC with dual core processor, at least 2GB of RAM and/or a decent dedicated graphics card (as opposed to an on-board graphics chip) you are likely to be wondering what all the Vista-bashing is about. There will still be some annoyances, such as User Account Control and some video codecs causing program crashes, but you will still get an operating system that has a nice modern-looking interface and, well, generally does its job in an OK sort of way.

So how did Vista come to be the target of so much derision? To understand that you need to see Vista not from the perspective of someone buying a typical Vista PC of today, but of someone transitioning from XP a year ago.

Vista introduced new and very resource hungry user interface technology. In truth, quite a hike was needed in computing power to run Vista properly. However, PC vendors were selling a lot of PCs that were “Vista capable” but only just, in order to keep prices down. The result was that buyers would spend good money on a machine that looked good on paper but performed like a pig.

Then factor in that the only significant new selling point was the 3D graphical interface technology, but it wasn’t used all that impressively and the novelty soon wore off.

Then factor in that early on Vista was plagued by incompatibilities, specific performance issues and bugs. No worse than XP had been in its day, but that was a long time ago and people forget.

Then factor in the long gestation, the sense of anticipation, the completely over the top hype from Microsoft set against the actual experience: a slow, buggy OS (when compared with a by now very mature XP) and just a bit of not very exciting eye candy to show for it.

Then factor in some general drift in public sentiment away from Microsoft for a variety of reasons.

Then factor in the age of the blog. Blogs like this one, started by real Vista early adopters who experienced all the things described above and now had the perfect medium to share their opinions with the world. Not that I’m claiming credit for denting Vista’s reputation single handedly. But all the blogs and negative press in general have, collectively, taken their toll.

So the Vista of today is pretty much alright, but the reputational damage is done. Microsoft will want to usher in Windows 7 (AKA Vista SP2) as soon as they can in the hope of leaving their Vista woes behind them. I’m not confident about their chances.

Having a pop at Vista is very much in vogue, but XP had its own problems when it first came out. It was shunned for a year by gamers because they couldn’t get it to perform. All new versions of Windows (or indeed any OS) are wont to require something of a “settling in” period.

While Vista is not the first version of Windows to be criticised by early adopters and reviewers, it has though been a particular disappointment, especially in view of the long wait followed by all that “The WOW starts Now!” hype. Maybe also consumers are getting less tolerant, generally having higher expectations and less patience. To make matters worse, Microsoft have lost a little of the “automatic choice” sheen. Perhaps this is down to Apple’s advertising campaign, and the emergence of strong alternatives to common MS software, eg Firefox vs Internet Explorer.

Possibly the biggest reason, though, is that Vista’s tardiness in materialising has given XP plenty of time to mature and ripen into a tried and tested performer.

Back in the day, people were used to a new version of Windows coming out every 2 or 3 years. Of course each new version had its teething problems, but as no-one had had the opportunity to enjoy a well-rounded, mature OS they got used to living with the odd niggle and incompatibility. That has changed, now. Users had grown comfortable and cosy with good old dependable XP, which had long since had all its wrinkles smoothed out. When buggy, niggly, underperforming Vista appeared on the scene it didn’t so much make a splash as give everyone a cold bath.

What we can learn from this is that OS vendors probably rattle out new versions too frequently, in the normal course of events. They are more driven by sales than user needs. There is nothing wrong with creating a good OS like XP and deliberately giving it a good run so that it can be tweaked to perfection, allowing users to enjoy it at its best for a few years. And when it is pensioned off the replacement should be worthy of the hype, and have been in alpha, beta and if necessary gamma for long enough that it is genuinely “ready for use” when it hits the shelves.