ie8 fix
madison

Hardware 2.0

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

And Windows 7's killer feature is ...

By | June 29, 2009, 5:07pm PDT

Summary: I keep hearing about how Windows 7 is going to be just the CPR that the ailing PC industry needs to get itself out of the hole it’s in. It seems that folks, both consumer and enterprise, are going to be flocking to their favorite OEMs and throwing cash at them in exchange for brand-spanking-new PCs running Windows 7.

I keep hearing about how Windows 7 is going to be just the CPR that the ailing PC industry needs to get itself out of the hole it’s in. It seems that folks, both consumer and enterprise, are going to be flocking to their favorite OEMs and throwing cash at them in exchange for brand-spanking-new PCs running Windows 7.

OK, I like Windows 7. It’s a nice, robust OS with a jazzed up interface and a few new features. But here’s my question - what’s the Windows 7 killer feature that’s going to be pulling people to the PC stores in their droves to buy these new systems? Sure, there’s always those folks that must live on the bleeding edge when it comes to technology (I’m one of those people), but when it comes to the masses (both consumer and business), I’m having a hard time seeing what would make people go out and spend money on new systems before their current system becomes obsolete.

I’m guessing that analysts are counting on all those people who were put off by Vista and stuck with XP to rush out and spend on new systems. After all, some 60% of systems out there are still running the aging OS. While I can see this happening to some extent, I don’t see this having a big effect when you look at the big picture. The chilling effect that the PC industry is experiencing isn’t down to Vista, it’s the recession, and unless Windows 7 puts extra money into people’s pockets, I don’t see PC sales increasing dramatically until the overall health of the economy improves.

This is doubly so for business. Unless Microsoft can make a clear case as to how 7 will make businesses faster, lighter on their feet and more productive, I see companies doing what they’re already doing, and making their existing hardware last longer. There’s no doubt that businesses will eventually need to move on, sooner rather than later when it comes to those companies still using XP (the majority from what I can tell). But even with that said, I can’t see businesses doing anything as silly as rushing to adopt a new OS. I still say that SP1, as has been the case with previous incarnations of Windows, will be the event that IT managers will be keeping an eye out for.

The thing that’s missing in Windows 7 is a killer feature. Windows XP will still be the benchmark for both new hardware and software for some time to come. Sure, Windows 7 brings new stuff to the table, but there’s nothing there that you really need. Put a PC running XP and an identical system running 7 side by side, and both PCs will be able to carry out the same tasks, and I doubt that in real world conditions that there would be any difference in time taken to carry out those tasks, or the reliability of each of the systems.

Forget the hyperbole. Forget the nonsense comparisons to Linux and Mac OS. Forget eye-candy. What people really want to know is how Windows 7 will put more money in their pockets or free up more time.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes is an internationally published technology author who has devoted over a decade to helping users get the most from technology.

Disclosure

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

All opinions expressed on Hardware 2.0 are those of Adrian Kingsley-Hughes. Every effort is made to ensure that the information posted is accurate. If you have any comments, queries or corrections, please contact Adrian via the email link here. Any possible conflicts of interest will be posted below. [Updated: February 23, 2010] - Adrian Kingsley-Hughes has no business relationships, affiliations, investments, or other actual/potential conflicts of interest relating to the content posted so far on this blog.

Biography

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes is an internationally published technology author who has devoted over a decade to helping users get the most from technology -- whether that be by learning to program, building a PC from a pile of parts, or helping them get the most from their new MP3 player or digital camera.

Adrian has authored/co-authored technical books on a variety of topics, ranging from programming to building and maintaining PCs. His most recent books include "Build the Ultimate Custom PC", "Beginning Programming" and "The PC Doctor's Fix It Yourself Guide". He has also written training manuals that have been used by a number of Fortune 500 companies.

Adrian also runs a popular blog under the name The PC Doctor, where he covers a range of computer-related topics -- from security to repairing and upgrading.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
98
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

The only relevant "killer feature" for any OS is...
Jeff Dickey 15th Aug 2009
Time. Not just the time waiting for boot, or for an app to start once
the system's booted - but the time lost to grossly negligent security;
inconsistency between software (even from the same vendor); "bit rot",
where things just drag slower and slower as time goes on without any
visible reason, until the system is reinstalled and "it's just amazing
how fast this is now..."

I used to reimage my systems every 3 months from Windows 3.0 on
up to 98 and 2000; with XP I let that slide to every 4-5 months. Then I
got hit by six system-disabling compromises within a month -
on a fully-patched system with up-to-date AV software (x2), anti-
spyware, personal firewall software (and a reputable hardware firewall
running its own level of protection). I got 14 billable hours of work
done with my 3 Windows PCs during that month. Seven contract
deadlines blown to smithereens.

I switched to Macs and haven't had a down hour since. Knowing
that every time I sit down at the keyboard, useful or interesting things
will happen is an incredibly liberating feeling. And I say that after
20+ years with Windows - I've developed for every version of Windows
from 1.0 beta going forward.

I hope Windows 7 is successful - and by 'successful' I mean 'delivers
1% of 1% of the value that the hype promises' and 'helps Windows
usees be better Internet citizens by making their systems more
resistant to botnets'.

I'll tell you what would be a killer feature: the ability for one of
these $300 PCs you can buy now to run, day in and day out, without
$300 a year paid for security software - and without running any
greater risk of insecurity than my Mac or my Symbian-OS phone.
That's not going to happen in any scenario that doesn't include
multiple nuclear strikes on Redmond and Hyderabad. While I'm quite
happy that the preconditions remain safely remote, I'm less sanguine
about moving back to Windows anytime soon - or recommending a
Windows PC to the couple hundred people who ask me every year
"what PC should I buy?"
0 Votes
+ -
RE: And Windows 7's killer feature is ...
Cylon Centurion 29th Jun 2009
My bet for businesses would be XP mode. They would be able to upgrade to a new OS while maintaining the backward compatibility.

Both types of users will be able to benefit from W7's enhanced reliability features. I know I have used the repair wizards more than a few times, and they take no technical know-how, which will benefit the "joe- Sixpack" user.


That said however, I'd would like to ask this question: Is there such thing as a killer feature?


Operating systems today, have reached a plateau of sorts. Weather it be Windows, Mac or *nix (*shutter*), There really is no incentive to upgrade. They all offer the same thing.... A platform to run your programs on.
0 Votes
+ -
I Agree...
GoodThings2Life 29th Jun 2009
At this point, OS upgrades, in my mind, should introduce new ways of getting work done more efficiently and effectively... more UI based improvements than anything else.

New features and improvements throughout should always be a goal, absolutely, but the killer feature can be more evolutionary than revolutionary and still create a better experience.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
@GoodThings2Life
Adrian Kingsley-Hughes 30th Jun 2009
"OS upgrades, in my mind, should introduce new ways of getting work done ..."

Again, I agree, and this has been how Windows has been sold for years. But that whole "introduce new ways of getting work done" can bring with it a lot of costs that need to be justified.

See, I think that this is the only valid Windows/Mac comparison, and that is that both OSes right now are at a stage of being evolutionary not revolutionary, but the problem for Microsoft is convincing people to switch. For Apple it's just a new OS on new hardware they sell ...
0 Votes
+ -
Very True
JasonJD48 1st Jul 2009
Vista was a bigger leap from XP than 7 is from Vista, keeping in mind 7 is really NT 6.1 (to Vista's NT 6.0) and before that we lived with 2000/XP (NT 5) for an unprecedented number of years prior to Vista.

Mac has been on OS X for pretty much the whole decade, at least Windows has moved a major revision (NT 5 to 6) in this time. But then again the difference in the degree of stagnation on either end may be in each company's emphasis (software company that can make hardware vs hardware company that can make software)

That said Windows has always been like this going from 3.1 to 95 was a revolution, 95 to 98 to ME more an evolution; ME to XP a revolution, XP to its various drawn out new service packs an evolution. XP to Vista a minor revolution, Vista to 7 an evolution.
0 Votes
+ -
"repair wizards"?
nizuse 29th Jun 2009
So you mean to say that "7" crashes as well?

Yes boys n girls - We Put People On The Moon over 30 years ago... and now we have ... VISTA! (and a rewarmed flavour of it called 7)! (but it still needs repair wizards - cough cough).
0 Votes
+ -
FUD
Cylon Centurion Updated - 29th Jun 2009
Name me an OS that doesn't crash, and I'll reward you with a million dollars.


The only tow wizards I had to use were hardware related, and networking related, and they were both resolved without one single restart, or blue screen. happy
0 Votes
+ -
So you had application crashes?
nizuse 29th Jun 2009
Shees! Must be Windows!

Still stuck with crashes! And.. this is supposed to be an 'evolutionary advance' over that dog Vista? LOL!
Are you really making such a ridiculous claim?
0 Votes
+ -
I believe they are changing it's color
InAction Man 30th Jun 2009
No more BSODs for you, now you'll have

S omeOtherColor S creen O f Death

But it's the same thing basically, only Aero enhanced.
  • Flagged
But then M$FT Bigots like Ye had to open their bilious traps and let fly with their usual uninformed, from the bloated lips of Bullyboy Ballmer, pronunciamentos....

As it happens, Windows 7 is the first MSFT OS I've actually LIKED using since 98SE. It's lightweight enough to run on five-year-old equipment yet plenty powerful, it's a LOT more intuitive than Vista ever was (or even XP was initially), and it manages to be secure without being a skootch about it. I'm running the RC on my wife's old Sony laptop for casual use (e-mail, Web surfing, listening to audio streams), and am impressed enough that I think I'd like to upgrade our whole household with it once it's finally out. Even my wife, who hates change, likes it....





0 Votes
+ -
Did I say that?
Cylon Centurion 29th Jun 2009
Will you quit putting words in my mouth?


I had a bit of trouble with my NIC card... A problem that was quickly addressed by a driver update, and a few missing drivers after a fresh install, something that was also fixed. All via Windows 7's repair wizards.


Wow. Try doing that with XP.


Now quit putting words in my mouth!
0 Votes
+ -
Morew FUD
Cylon Centurion 30th Jun 2009
My system running Vista has an uptime of 10 days... 0 crashes. The only reason Vista was off, cus I booted into my Windows 7 partition.
0 Votes
+ -
"Only reason Vista was off (etc.)"
nizuse 30th Jun 2009
Sure. Yep. We Do Believe That.
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
Are we setting our expectations that low?
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
I have a home file server that is always on and gets frequent use whether streaming media from itself to another netowrked computer, serving files or backing up files to another computer. It is on 24/7 and its only off during a power outage beyond my UPS battery length or when I reboot it, no crashes, and its on pretty old hardware. 2 years so far, no issues. I can't speak for Windows Vista or 7 in this arena but XP serves me well without need to reboot. I wonder how you would know though since you run Lumux.
0 Votes
+ -
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
I read the article...
JasonJD48 5th Jul 2009
And was unimpressed, not having to reboot for updates would not be a huge deal to me personally. I am happy I have a stable OS that doesn't crash or require frequent reboots and thats all I want, you can keep Linux and Ksplice
0 Votes
+ -
Horse pucky
DaveN_MVP 1st Jul 2009
My office desktop runs Vista Ultimate 24x7, and reboots only once a month if required for patching. Same at home, where it's Vista Ultimate upgraded to Win7 RC. I've never had a single crash on either machine, one 16 months old and the other built when Vista shipped.
0 Votes
+ -
Just read the article, Hmm kay?
InAction Man 2nd Jul 2009
Then we can talk.
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
My up time:
evilkillerwhale@... 2nd Jul 2009
I installed Windows 7 when the beta came out. It was left on day and night until my battery died one day in my laptop (forgot to charge it). It came out of hibernate, and something felt a little off, so I restarted. That was months later. Now I have the RC. It's been up for weeks and weeks. I can unplug and replug my tablet 10 times ad day, connect and disconnect my mouse, and everything. It's awesome stable. But you'd already know how stable beta's are, since Linux users don't actually buy the releases like RedHat, right? I mean, what is Ubuntu anyway, but a Windows Beta? Oh wait, it's 'Nix, and that changes EVERYTHING. Like the ability to run programs correctly without me writing any software for myself, plug and play devices only working after I find some other guy's hacked driver, and sites not liking my operating system. Oh well. No biggie.
0 Votes
+ -
I would venture to guess that over 80% of the crashes/BSOD's blamed on Windows are not Windows problems at all and are the result of a faulty driver or some application installed by the user. So Microsoft has to be responsible for all the faulty code written by its third party vendors? The only time I have had Vista BSOD was when I had failed hard drive. The minor crashes (usually caused by third party software/drivers) recover much nicer than XP and I have yet to have a crash where Windows did not fully recover or recover enough to save your work and reboot. The logs produced by these crashes are much more helpful and give better results to have the problem resolved and every one of the crash issues I have seen (and there have only been a few) all point to third party. So quit spreading FUD.
0 Votes
+ -
but why does microsoft sign the drivers then if they cause crashes. The driver signing make it microsofts fault. They should check the drivers better. Crashes by unsigned drivers are the manufacturers fault, crashes by signed drivers are microsofts fault.
0 Votes
+ -
Posting Wizard
compudog 3rd Jul 2009
I guess all your experience with Win 7 really makes your posts relevant.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
@NStalnecker: Maybe ... but ...
Adrian Kingsley-Hughes Updated - 30th Jun 2009
... I'm having trouble seeing where XP Mode ends and Hyper-V starts. XP Mode is interesting but I'd hate to have to manage it on any scale, even say a dozen PCs. I'd much rather an XP license to use the way I saw fit to be honest because I'd rather deply XP via VMware than Virtual PC ...
0 Votes
+ -
True...
Cylon Centurion 30th Jun 2009
It does have it's shortcomings. I hope Microsoft can fix these before the product goes Gold.
0 Votes
+ -
Don't be shy...
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
I believe they are reffering to...
ShadowGIATL 1st Jul 2009
the lack of features and flexibility in XP Mode. XP Mode does not support systems without hardware virtualization support, which makes buying PCs for companies planning to use this feature a bit tricky, and management of the standalone Window Virtual PC environment is undesirable compared to centrally managed VMware.

It all depends on your personal tastes and/or the company's needs as to whether these are deal breakers or not. But the question of whether Windows Virtual PC comes up short next to the likes of VMware? VMware wins in features, and Windows Virtual PC wins in easy to use. There are almost always trade offs.
0 Votes
+ -
Win7's Killer Freature isn't Virtualization: it's XPbeing EOL'ed. Businesses who have hitched themselves to the MS train have no choice but to start testing Win7 and preparing for the upgrade cycle which will have to happen in 2011.
0 Votes
+ -
Right
Richard Flude 30th Jun 2009
XP is a dinosaur that needs to be retired. Vista was an abomination, so a
move there wasn't possible.

Windows 7 should provide the opportunity to move to a current day OS
(ala Mac OS X Leopard) with a clean hardware refresh (many XP PCs are
over 5 years old).

Windows 7 is what Vista should have been, but wasn't. Finally we can let
XP rest in peace.
0 Votes
+ -
what?
xuniL_z 1st Jul 2009
Vista was an abomination, so a
move there wasn't possible.



Really?

Initially it was thought that the adoption of Vista has been generally low, due to largely poor reviews and harsh criticism, but a later Gartner research report predicted that Vista business adoption in 2008 will actually beat that of XP during the same time frame (21.3% vs. 16.9%)[79] while IDC had indicated that the launch of Windows Server 2008 served as a catalyst for the stronger adoption rates.[80][81] As of January 2009, Forrester Research had indicated that almost one third of North American and European corporations have started deploying Vista.[82] On a May 2009 conference, the Microsoft Vice President said for big businesses, "Adoption and deployment of Windows Vista has been slightly ahead of where we had been with XP".[83][84] In its first year of availability, PC World rated it as the biggest tech disappointment of 2007,[85] and it was rated by InfoWorld as #2 of Tech's all-time 25 flops.[86] The internet-usage market share for Windows Vista after two years of availability (as of January 2009) was 22.48%.[87] This figure combined with World Internet Users and Population Stats yielded a user base of roughly 350 million[11], which exceeded Microsoft's two-year post launch expectations by 150 million.[9] The present user base is roughly 390 million by the same statistical sources.

Within its first month, 20 million copies of Vista were sold, double the amount of Windows XP sales within its first month in October 2001, five years earlier.[88]
there have been significant positive reviews of Vista, most notable among PC gamers and the advantages brought about with DirectX 10, which allows for better gaming performance and more realistic graphics, as well as support for many new capabilities brought about in new video cards and GPUs.[92] However, many DirectX 9 games showed a drop in frame rate compared to that experienced in Windows XP.[93][94][95] These results were largely the consequence of Vista's immature graphics processing units drivers, and higher system requirements for Vista itself.[96][97] As of mid-2008, benchmarks suggest that Vista SP1 is now on par with Windows XP in terms of game performance.[98] A May 2009 survey by Valve Corporation indicated that 39.9% of gamers are running Windows Vista or Windows 7 beta (46% of which are 64-bit versions).[99]


Wow, one third of North American and European businesses have done the IMPOSSIBLE, when we mix reality with your statement, Richard.

wink
0 Votes
+ -
XP's killer feature?
rseiler 29th Jun 2009
By implication, it must have had one. What was it? Did normal people really care (or know) that it was the first consumer-aimed OS on the NT codebase?
0 Votes
+ -
It wasn't Windows 98
Fred Fredrickson 29th Jun 2009
XP was the first decent Windows OS to be marketed to consumers. Win2k was good, but was primarily marketed as a business OS. Most consumers compared XP to Windows 95/98 and suddenly realised how functional and stable a consumer OS could be, without realising IBM had done it with OS/2 Warp many years before.

It's a great loss to consumers that IBM never really understood PCs (or DEC - OpenVMS was streets ahead of anything MS had until perhaps Vista).
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Well, there was ...
Adrian Kingsley-Hughes 30th Jun 2009
... reliability, vastly improved device support, power management, application isolation ... and that it wasn't Windows Me!
Isn't the same list more than applicable to Win7? Add to that, "much improved UI", and it's not XP!
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Yeah ...
Adrian Kingsley-Hughes 30th Jun 2009
... but look at the OSes XP was up against ... little separates 7 from Vista or XP.
0 Votes
+ -
well,
evilkillerwhale@... 2nd Jul 2009
there's one thing that's got to be seen there. Comparing Windows ME to XP really wasn't that big of a difference either. It was just a revamped UI with a lot more stable system. The driver change in XP wasn't that phenomenal, either. Vista shipped with over 2 million devices supported, and people still complained. When you compare 3 million drivers (I have no idea the real number in 7, and I only think I remember in Vista) to the 2 million in Vista, it's a huge difference, but a lousy percentage. Xp can add 50 over ME's (it felt as if) 0, and it's an infinite change.

I'm a huge fan of 7, and I actually liked Vista. Vista felt better than XP did, and was more stable, and then 7 just blew Vista away. I never have any problems with 7, it's a quiet OS (no pop ups) and it's totally useful. XP mode just takes a few more worries away about legacy programs that I COULD need to run at some point.
Sorry about the poor writing here, I'm tired.
0 Votes
+ -
XP Killer Feature
JasonJD48 1st Jul 2009
"Did normal people really care (or know) that it was the first consumer-aimed OS on the NT codebase?"

They might not of known that specific technical information, but they knew it was far more stable, and therefore had far less downtime than 9x. Though I never found even 9x to be as unstable as a lot of people made it out to be, XP was light, customizable and stable, it featured a cool up-to-date GUI but it and many options could be reverted to 9x style either for preference or perfomance.

I do think Adrian has a point about there being not as much to put your finger on to justify the cost, but I think he underestimates the combination of factors, including MS ending XP support, a bigger boost in security that Vista/7 have an eventual shift in hardware/software away from XP as it becomes more distant in the rear-view mirror and the fact that some people will just want something fresh, working part time in retail people are still buying a surprising number of $500 plus comsumer electronics, and businesses I think will tend to get scared both by the growing age of both their OS and hardware.
0 Votes
+ -
Killer Feature?
GoodThings2Life 29th Jun 2009
The UI is the "killer feature" for me. It's much more useful than any incarnation previously found, and I genuinely find myself struggling without some of the new shortcuts found with the superbar when I'm on my XP work systems.

But overall, no, I'd agree that there's no single killer feature except this one: it's Windows Done Right. It's a version that Windows users can be happy with and productive with and knock Apple down a few pegs with.

It's the overall package that makes Windows 7 worthwhile, and it's the first release since Windows 2000 that I've been excited about throughout the development process. Heck, I didn't even like XP until they stabilized it with SP2, so W7 being solid right out of the gate makes it very exciting.
0 Votes
+ -
Solid out of the gate?
AdventTech67 30th Jun 2009
Say what? If you are calling 2,000+ bugs out of the gate solid, then I'd
hate to hear what weak would be.
0 Votes
+ -
What OS do you use?
bobiroc 30th Jun 2009
Is your OS Bug free? How many bugs does any version of MacOSX have at release. Anyone got those numbers. Besides the release is still 4 months away and if you think Microsoft is not working on fixing any bugs during this time you are naive. I take it you are a SuperProgrammer and everything you write if 100% bug free. Man I wish I could be you. Every OS, Every Software has bugs. There are no exceptions and I don't care if it is some little shareware app written in someones basement or an application/OS from a major company like Microsoft, Adobe, Apple, etc.. I don't have details of these 2000+ bugs but if you have any links that you care to share we will be happy to look them over and shoot down your argument a bit more.
0 Votes
+ -
And Linux has how many??
kaninelupus 30th Jun 2009
Given the fact that we STILL have no mainstream distro, things are forever being patched or rereleased.... yup, sounds like *nix is just soooo perfect. Given that it's been around for decades, one would have thought a little more progress would have been made!!
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Credit where it's due ...
Adrian Kingsley-Hughes 30th Jun 2009
... the UI is nice. It's especially nice if you run big screens. I still think that the Start menu needs more work ... i think it would help users no end to not have to wade through so much junk that accumulates (help files, uninstallers, web links, read me file link ...) to find the app they want.
0 Votes
+ -
I like the Start Menu
bobiroc 30th Jun 2009
I find I do less "wading". Click on the start button and type what I am looking for into the search and usually after just a few letters the program, file, or setting I am looking for appears in a very short list. The UI is very intuitive and I think that the overall usability of OS is its best feature. After taking a short time to get used to it everything is easier to find and the UI is very task oriented. What I mean by that is when you are working on a certain task just about everything you need that is related to that task is at your finger tips and 1 - 2 clicks away.
Problem is the avg user doesn't want to type, five letters or two. They want to click. They want easy navigation through the menu.

"After taking a short time to get used to it everything"

and they DON'T want to relearn anything.
0 Votes
+ -
When I first used NT, I was impressed by how smooth it seemed.

Win 7 has that same smooth edge over previous versions. It is something that just gives confidence, but it is seen in all the little things.

I did not find Vista anywhere near what some people describe it as. It would seem that they are not using the same OS as I have been. I have used it for the last two years (almost) for most of every day and the computer is left on almost 24/7. I would still be using it if the HDD under it had not died. Now we are using Win 7 and it just works!

Someone described Vista as an 'abomination'. Really, I wonder how they would describe the OSs that until recently have been used on British Navy warships - extremely flakey (like, fail at any time) and needed several personnel to just keep them going daily. These were replaced by Windows to substantially improve reliability. I really wonder what the person who used that term really does with their computers - perhaps they shouldn't be allowed near them, or perhaps they got the name mixed up with someting else, or perhaps they just cannot open their mouth or write with anything resembling reality. To that person, I say if you are going to use big words, at least try to use them in a way that at least gives you some credibility, otherwise you just come off as a noisy dipstick!
0 Votes
+ -
There's no such thing as a killer feature
MissingMatter 29th Jun 2009
I don't understand the whole killer feature mentality. There is no such thing as a universal killer feature. If there is any killer feature, if it different for every person.

For some peoeple it may be DX 11. For some poeple it may be new networking features, or the taskbar.

Since I have a tablet PC, W7's killer feature for me is multitouch and new inking features.

For other people, there could be a collection of features which as a package are compelling enough to upgrade.

To impose that a new OS must have a universal killer feature is just ridiculous.
0 Votes
+ -
Sure there is
mdemuth 29th Jun 2009
Just ask Apple.
With Snow Leopard, the Mac OS goes Intel only.
How far behind do you think everyone else is?
When you can no longer get apps or updates, hardware or support, you have little choice but to jump on that forced-update treadmill and shell out good money after bad.
Maybe that is a 'pay us or be killed' feature?
0 Votes
+ -
I wouldn't call that a "feature"
MissingMatter 29th Jun 2009
I think we're talking about features which make you want to switch, not features which force you to switch.

I'm sure Microsoft could pull all support for XP tomorrow, and a lot of people would start thinking about switching simply because of that. However, no one in the tech community would be calling that a "killer feature"
0 Votes
+ -
Time. Not just the time waiting for boot, or for an app to start once
the system's booted - but the time lost to grossly negligent security;
inconsistency between software (even from the same vendor); "bit rot",
where things just drag slower and slower as time goes on without any
visible reason, until the system is reinstalled and "it's just amazing
how fast this is now..."

I used to reimage my systems every 3 months from Windows 3.0 on
up to 98 and 2000; with XP I let that slide to every 4-5 months. Then I
got hit by six system-disabling compromises within a month -
on a fully-patched system with up-to-date AV software (x2), anti-
spyware, personal firewall software (and a reputable hardware firewall
running its own level of protection). I got 14 billable hours of work
done with my 3 Windows PCs during that month. Seven contract
deadlines blown to smithereens.

I switched to Macs and haven't had a down hour since. Knowing
that every time I sit down at the keyboard, useful or interesting things
will happen is an incredibly liberating feeling. And I say that after
20+ years with Windows - I've developed for every version of Windows
from 1.0 beta going forward.

I hope Windows 7 is successful - and by 'successful' I mean 'delivers
1% of 1% of the value that the hype promises' and 'helps Windows
usees be better Internet citizens by making their systems more
resistant to botnets'.

I'll tell you what would be a killer feature: the ability for one of
these $300 PCs you can buy now to run, day in and day out, without
$300 a year paid for security software - and without running any
greater risk of insecurity than my Mac or my Symbian-OS phone.
That's not going to happen in any scenario that doesn't include
multiple nuclear strikes on Redmond and Hyderabad. While I'm quite
happy that the preconditions remain safely remote, I'm less sanguine
about moving back to Windows anytime soon - or recommending a
Windows PC to the couple hundred people who ask me every year
"what PC should I buy?"

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix
Click Here
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix
ie8 fix