Windows Vista is Windows ME II
By Jonathan Schlaffer
While I may hold this opinion to some extent, this is what a majority of our readers think as voted in a recent poll. There was a close tie between “It was rushed to market” (22 votes) and “Windows ME II (29 votes).”
There was the possibility of getting more votes in on this poll and that’s a technical limitation we’re working to overcome at this time but I didn’t see the trend changing any time soon. A majority of you seem to think that Vista is Windows ME II and indeed, some of the same complaints have been registered about Vista.
“It’s still a beta” walked away with 11 votes and “We should look hard for positive news” got 10 votes, “My answer isn’t here” got 5 but I’m not sure what other options there could have been.
Vista is slower than XP, just like ME was when compared with 98 for no good reason and it likes to crash more the XP does when faced with certain circumstances which vary from system to system but the same doesn’t necessarily drag down a XP system.
There are driver compatibility issues and backwards compatibility issues; which was done to increase stability and that may eventually work out but possibly not before Windows 7 is released.
When Windows 7 is released we may find entirely new issues with that. What do you think?
Related:
Entry was posted
on Sunday, April 20th, 2008 at 11:03 am
under 
Print This Post
Read more entries by Jonathan Schlaffer.
April 20th, 2008
Well obviously if you’re going to introduce changes to the coding (drastic or simple fixes) there are going to be some of them that introduce issues.
April 20th, 2008
Vista is 20% (or more) slower than XP because of the built in DRM in the operating system that greatly bogs down performance and creates incompatibility.
The built in DRM checks the user 60 times a second making sure that the user is not doing anything that MSFT, Hollywood and content providers deem inappropriate no matter what you think otherwise.
Get rid of the DRM in Vista’s operating system and you get rid of the issues surrounding Vista. It is the DRM in vista that gives Vista all the issues. If they kept out the DRM in the operating system (like they did with XP) we would not be having these issues.
April 20th, 2008
I could not agree more about the ME II thing. I wondered what was pegging the processor even when idle DRM explains it all. People are more excited about non-public-product core MinWin related to Windows 7 than they are about Vista - the New ME.
April 20th, 2008
There is NO PROOF that Vista’s speed has anything to do with DRM. Don’t believe someone bashing without proof. In FACT, NOBODY has been able to prove conclusively the exact cause.
April 21st, 2008
I disagree with the ME II labeling. I voted “It was rushed to market” simply because it was. It was delayed many times, and when that happens to any software, most of the time the end result isn’t good anyway. OS X was gaining HUGE speed and attention, and MS needed something. But to declare it ME II is unwarranted, and I think it’s a way to jump on the “let’s trash MS” bandwagon, that yes, I am tempted as well to jump on much of the time. However, it doesn’t crash and wipe itself out and have NEAR the amount of problems that ME had. I run it at work (simply to get familiar with it), and with a Pentium D 3.0 GHz and 3 GB of RAM, it runs decent (which, of course, would be way above “decent” for XP). I’m not saying I like it, in fact, I definitely would run XP instead of Vista at home. But to call it an ME is a bit extreme IMO. At least, it’s problems in an enterprise environment are a DIFFERENT KIND of a set of problems than ME was, though the amount may be near the same.