Poll: Windows XP RC2 - The Bomb or a Bomb?

[JuryDuty]

From what I've read, WinXP will play MP3s just fine, but it won't rip CDs to MP3 format--just WMA. If you want to rip in MP3 format, you just have to get a third party program.

 

[Electrode]

Seeing as most people will never even use WMP8, I don't think secure audio or crippled MP3 ripping will be a noticible issue.
Hell, I didn't even know WMP ripped CDs until all the MS anti-MP3 hype came up. 🙂

Anyway, I used to think Windows XP was going to be the worst thing EVER, but, like Noriaki, the more I hear about it, the better it sounds. Last night I signed up for the preview, and I am starting to think that XP is going to be the best thing EVER!

It's amazing what a little knowledge can do to your opinion of something.

 

[Tallon]

Actually, from what I've seen you don't even need third party software. Just need the codec.

 

[lucidguy]

<< Seeing as most people will never even use WMP8, I don't think secure audio or crippled MP3 ripping will be a noticible issue. >>



It seems that way now, because the shipping version of Win XP will conveniently disable automated media licensing. People will get a false sense of security when they copy their mp3's over (or make new ones) without having to authenticate them to the Microsoft Thought Police. But you're forgetting about a &quot;new feature&quot; in Win XP: Automatic updates. The user does not get a say in which updates to apply, or when. Win XP takes care of &quot;Windows Update&quot; for you in the background, without hassling you, or informing you, or receiving your consent. In this respect, Win XP is becoming more and more like a Tivo or DirecTV unit.

I bet my left testicle that one of these updates is going to be mandatory licensing of all media files on the Win XP partition. Microsoft hasn't spent all that money on DRM technology research, just to have people not use it (as would be the case if it were purely optional). They will have to force it down the throats of all WinXP users in order to ensure that it becomes the &quot;standard&quot;.

This is why we all love Microsoft of course. (Sarcasm)

 

[coolVariable]

<< It seems that way now, because the shipping version of Win XP will conveniently disable automated media licensing. People will get a false sense of security when they copy their mp3's over (or make new ones) without having to authenticate them to the Microsoft Thought Police. But you're forgetting about a &quot;new feature&quot; in Win XP: Automatic updates. The user does not get a say in which updates to apply, or when. Win XP takes care of &quot;Windows Update&quot; for you in the background, without hassling you, or informing you, or receiving your consent. In this respect, Win XP is becoming more and more like a Tivo or DirecTV unit. >>



Ignorant Linsux hugger!
WRONG:|

 

[lucidguy]

<< WRONG:| >>



If you honestly believe that, then by all means upgrade to Win XP. But I expect an Anand reader to be smarter than that. Microsoft has forced Netscape out of the browser space by mandatory inclusion of IE on all user desktops. They are making no secret of their intent to force AIM out of the IM space by mandatory inclusion of Windows Messenger on all user desktops. If you don't think that they will do everything in their power to force uncrippled music formats (mp3, ogg, vqf) out of the digital music space, and try to take over the digital music space with DRM-crippled Windows Media, then you are very naive.

 

[Shudder]

It is possible what lucidguy is saying.

NEVER underestimate the stupidity of the end user.

After all, how many subscribers does AOL have again?

 

[JuryDuty]

I have to say, I love Microsoft technology, but I do agree with lucidguy. I think it's pretty evident that MS is trying to take over the IM and digital music fields with this next version of Windows. And I'm sure it will happen, too. The majority of users will probably switch their music to WMA format since they can rip and burn it right from WMPlayer. And the majority will use WIM since it's already on their system. It's easier.

I don't necessarily think Microsoft is out to control the world, but I do think they want to rule the market, and these items are natural progressions. If I were Bill Gates, I'd do it too. And as an end user who wants good, stable technology, I love it.

But I'm not nieve. It is a bit scary to think where this could lead in 5-10 years. Things change and before long we'll all be plugged into Microsoft's network and owe them monthly to use their operating systems and programs. And we'll do it because it'll be the only stuff we know. That's scary--real scary...especially since they'll have all our personal information.

 

[lucidguy]

<< Things change and before long we'll all be plugged into Microsoft's network and owe them monthly to use their operating systems and programs. And we'll do it because it'll be the only stuff we know >>



This kind of ignorant commentary makes me lose hope in the coming generations of our nation. It seems like most of us have lost all of our thinking faculties. I will respond to the above in two bullet points.

* First, the burden is on Microsoft to show people why they should upgrade to Win XP. Since more than half the US households already have one or more computers, OS upgrades mean more (market-penetration-wise) than first time OS purchases accompanying first time computer purchases. Microsoft must convince this larger market segment (by definition, more-informed-than-average computer users, since they already have used computers for some time) that it is in their best interest to buy an OS that will cripple their music, disrespect their privacy, upgrade their OS as the Microsoft Thought Police sees fit, and cost them more money (on a recurring monthly basis) than they had ever spent before on software. This is not a value proposition, especially not for more-informed-than-average computer users.

* Today's graphical operating systems are more alike than different. Window managers, skinning utilities, etc, help users get rid of even inconsequential cosmetic details. Today, right this minute, I can skin a Win9x desktop and make it look and behave exactly like a MacOS 9.1 desktop using third party utilities. I can make a Linux desktop look and behave exactly like a Win 2000 desktop. I can probably make a FreeBSD desktop look and behave exactly like a OSX desktop, but Apple lawyers would sue me before I was done. You get the idea.

Once a computer user is competent enough to use one graphical operating system, he becomes fully qualified to learn the basics of another graphical operating system in a matter of days, and become fully proficient in it in a matter of weeks. As consumer electronics become more and more complicated (set top boxes, digital music streaming boxes, car-based computers) this fact will become more and more apparent. All graphical operating systems use a similar set of metaphors and behaviors. They all offer a similar set of services. There is very little to learn when one moves from one modern graphical operating system to another.

As the world becomes more and more netcentric, Microsoft's monopolistic practices become more and more desperate. They are indeed desperate - it is no longer a value proposition for consumers to stick with Microsoft software. I foresee a great number of Win 98 - Linux, Win ME - Linux, Win 2000 - Linux double boot installations in the near future, and I also foresee an enthusiastic adoption of Linux on the desktop as Microsoft continues crippling digital music with their DRM nonsense in Win XP. In 2029 A.D., people may love machines, but in 2001 A.D., people love their mp3's. Thank you.

 

[MasterHoss]

Hmm, I think the &quot;auto update&quot; feature in XP will be similar to WinMe in that you can choose not to have the OS install the updates automatically (it might require a &quot;back door&quot; way to achieve this--I'm not sure but they will have a feature that would disable auto update features).

More power to the Evil Empire if they can steal away AOL's technlogy. I really don't mind any company--except for AOL TimeWarner (netscape, nullsoft, real, wb, et. al.)

If M$'s incorporation of their new messaging program causes their membership to rise to anything close to AIM, good!!

 

[LordFortius]

Its not a back door thing- it actually has its own tab in my computer properties. Very simple to find, and very easy to disable. (Auto Update) And if you want, you can tweak the UI to be exactly like windows 2000, so you don't necessarily have to have it all sugar coated. If you get under the hood of XP there are actually some pretty interesting features.

Also- RC2 IS NOT OUT PERIOD. What you must have gotten in the mail is beta 2. It can't be some other more recent build either because microsoft generally doesn't send out internal builds unless of course you know people who know people who know people that run MSDN like me 🙂

 

[SergeantDan]

Lots of takes on this OS that has not barely even taken it first real step. True Funny Story. I remember saying to a group of guys in college, that Win95 sucked way more than Win 3.1. Then Win98 sucked way more than Win95. Then I learned to not stick my foot in my mouth anymore. OS' rarely get worse. Most programs written for OS' are the culprits these days. Technology hardware is ripping faster than software can keep up. These guys trashing WinXP just havn't given it a chance yet. And truthfully, how could they? The actual bug-free product has not even been released yet. If the finished product still doesn't do what it says it will do after giving it a fair trial, then trash all you want.

 

[lucidguy]

<< These guys trashing WinXP just havn't given it a chance yet. And truthfully, how could they? The actual bug-free product has not even been released yet. >>



We're not criticizing XP due to its inability to live up to its specs. There is every reason to believe that Microsoft will make a good faith effort to implement the specs well. The NT kernel is pretty stable and bugs are unlikely.

What we are criticizing is Microsoft's proposed specs. Automatic software updates as default. (Which most users will not know how to turn off) Windows Messenger on the desktop to anticompetitively leverage a desktop monopoly into an IM monopoly. Digital Rights Management (Also known as the Microsoft Thought Police) integrated into the OS in a way that will affect all of your media files without your consent or authorization. These specs are what we are criticizing, not their implementation.

 

[fivepesos]

damn lucidguy, u took those thoughts right from my head. i totally agree, they are using windows to leverage their monopoly unto instant messaging just like they succeded with browsers. media player is the same thing, its just as worthless monopolistic bloatware.

what i hate in this thread is people who are talking about how great RC2 is. they CANT KNOW YET. they are blindly believing microsoft will make XP great. bahh bahh YOU SHEEP bah bah. none of us can comment on RC2.

now ill send some of my personal comment on beta2. its a little buggy still (but hey its beta), the new gui is too simplified for MY tastes, and i dont think its added any new significant features to justify the expense of an upgrade (or even installing a *free* copy).

im not even saying XP will be that bad (win 2k is alright), but i hate all the damn microsoft sheep. and i am NOT saying that windows users (hell i use windows) are sheep, what i am sayin is this: people who praise XP RC2 as being the greatest thing ever are sheep. they havent even seen it. damn those sheep annoy me. wait and see, but my gut feeling is that XP will not offer any new features worth the upgrade.

 

[Shudder]

The beauty of Linux is its being open source.

For every windows user you piss off who moves to linux, you have the potential to add one more programmer to the Linux project.

XP doesn't seem bad.. but when the little things here and there we mention start to piss off enough people, you're going to have a LOT of people moving to something different. Linux was nothing 2 years ago to what it is today. A YEAR ago, user-friendliness-wise, Linux was considerably different. In another year or two it should be even better. I haven't left a Linux installation on my PC for THAT long ever, but each time I do it I like it more and more.

 

[BD2003]

I'm using XP right now. All of you who think that its gonna suck are wrong. Its a must have. For one thing, we have mega processors and RAM, why the hell not pretty up the interface?

The automatic updates can be easily turned off, and even when theyre on, it ALWAYS prompts you before installing anything. Mp3s and divx play and share just fine. You can install whatever drivers you please. The activation is a pain, but its been dealt with. Ie6 blocks cookies, so most sites arent going to be tracking you that way. And its got a built in firewall that been so far the most trouble free firewall I've ever used. Zonealarm had this annoying habit of asking me every time I started a new program if I'd like to aloow it access. Doesnt mesh too well with many 3d games. The xp one just does it.

The XP beta has been the most stable OS ive ever used, and its a BETA. Trust me, when you see it in action, you'll want it.

 

[lucidguy]

<< Zonealarm had this annoying habit of asking me every time I started a new program if I'd like to aloow it access. Doesnt mesh too well with many 3d games. The xp one just does it. >>



Does what? Do you have any idea what the Microsoft firewall is doing? Do you know if it's even working properly? How would you know whether Microsoft is blocking everyone except their &quot;select advertising partners&quot;? How would you know whether Microsoft is spying on your hard disk and uploading certain information? You don't know and you don't want to know. You just want to set it and forget it. You trust Big Brother Bill Gates. You trust that his closed source application works exactly the way he says it does. You are willing to entrust the security of your data to software produced by a company whose operating systems and webservers have had more exploits and backdoors than all other operating systems and webservers in computing history, COMBINED. TWICE.

People like you give geeks a bad name. You make us look stupid.

 

[Shudder]

How often do you install new programs that access the internet? I know the ONE second it takes to click yes the FIRST time you use a new program can really take a bite out of your day, but I'm glad programs like ZoneAlarm care.

 

[fivepesos]

i honestly havent read or used the XP built-in firewall. ive seen what microsoft claimed to be a firewall in win2k (their tcp/ip filtering), and cmon, thats no firwall. my basic requirements of a firewall is simple: dynamically detect and protect against port scans while rate limiting DoS attempts. can winXP's firewall detect scans (i realy dont know)? and does winXP offer something like syncookies to rate limit specific types of commonly used DoS attacks?

even if they do add a good firewall, is it enough features to warrant a purchased upgrade? let me run down the main features that ive seen (ive only used beta2): new skinnable gui, integrated media player (more functional now), integrated messenger client, and promised increased reliability (although i sincerely doubt its any better than win2k, which win2k was pretty good). is this enough features to warrant an expensive upgrade in the current OS market? its a personal decision, i choose not.

IMO, microsoft has learned that consumers arent demanding a great reliable operating system. they are demanding integrated features and pretty looking guis. microsoft is of course in the bussiness to make money, it makes a product that will sell licenses. that is NO guarantee that it will be a good or innovative operating system. microsoft is in the bussiness to make money not make a great operating system. i dont blame them for having capitalistic ambitions but just remember, capitalism doesnt make a great operating system.

so XP is gonna have all these user-demanded features, so what? ever since i started using linux, ive known that i dont have the same demands from an operating system as most users do. if youre like me and demand a little more from your operating system, then XP's new features are unwanted and undesired.

but to answer the thread, is XP gonna bomb? no, its gonna sell licenses cause users demand the features XP promises. it only bombs for microsoft if it doesnt sell. would i shell out money for it, no. do i think its anything innovative? no, microsoft seldom innovates, it integrates. do i think its moving the computer industry in a bad direction? yes. will it make a few more people switch to linux? god i hope so.

 

[BD2003]

<< Does what? Do you have any idea what the Microsoft firewall is doing? Do you know if it's even working properly? How would you know whether Microsoft is blocking everyone except their &quot;select advertising partners&quot;? How would you know whether Microsoft is spying on your hard disk and uploading certain information? You don't know and you don't want to know. You just want to set it and forget it. You trust Big Brother Bill Gates. You trust that his closed source application works exactly the way he says it does. You are willing to entrust the security of your data to software produced by a company whose operating systems and webservers have had more exploits and backdoors than all other operating systems and webservers in computing history, COMBINED. TWICE.

People like you give geeks a bad name. You make us look stupid. >>



I know for a fact the MS firewall is working, as I've seen it in action. I've gotten people to test it. Its blocked my own AIM file transfers and wont allow me on IRC because of ident protection. I'd even go as far as to say its more full featured than zonealarm, and allows much more flexibility in what you block.

Why should I be scared of bill gates? Are you so paranoid that you think MS is going to come knocking on your door? Maybe MS is going to call your mom cause you've been looking at too much porn. I for one would rather trust my data to a company that has a lot to lose, rather than an open source project where noone has anything to lose. Windows have so many exploits because theyre so widely used and scrutinzed.

Besides, what is your big problem with MS? Some things may be buggy, but thats to be expected of programs of such a great magnitude. Go use your crappy linux, and feel good about yourself that your OS is a pain in the ass to use. Personally, I'll stick with the easiest to use OS, with support for every and anything.

Idiots like you give people a bad name.

 

[lucidguy]

<< Windows have so many exploits because theyre so widely used and scrutinzed. >>



When someone has said something as ridiculous as the above with a straight face, then there is absolutely no hope of talking reason to them.

If someone honestly believes that a closed source application can be more secure than an open source application where no backdoors can be hidden, and no bug can remain undetected, then there is absolutely no hope of talking reason to them.

One only wonders how Microsoft managed to do such a good job at groupthink on the likes of you.

P.S. Microsoft has nothing to lose. They are not accountable for any loss you may have, financial, emotional, physical, or otherwise, due to use of their software. It says so right there in their EULA.

At least open source programmers have good hearts, and will make a good faith effort to address your concerns if you have problems using their software. Microsoft has no heart (it is a corporation, corporations are not people) and since they have no legal responsibility to address bugs (due to the EULA) they evaluate every bugfix from a PR-versus-cost perspective. They let millions of bugs remain unsolved because it is cheaper to ignore them than to fix them.