The (not so) Real Story On The Microsoft Laptops
- By: DigitalGhost [privmsg - website] On 4th Jan 2007 In
Well, at least it's the real story according to Dave Taylor who writes,
And so, the question that I'm amazed that no blogger seems to have asked is why didn't they send out the OS and let us install it on our own computers? ...Microsoft Vista is in fact a bear to install and has prohibitive hardware requirements...That's the only conclusion I can draw
Why is that the real story you ask? Well, because Dave said it is so. Where are the facts? Oh, you want facts for a piece entitled, 'Vista laptops for bloggers furor misses the real story'? Sorry. None to be found.
Dave Taylor gives us speculation and conjecture, even plausibility, but that's where the 'real story' ends. But making shit up and calling it 'the real story' is a lot of fun, let's try it shall we?
The only conclusion I can draw is that Microsoft's PR department thought that giving away laptops would generate more buzz than giving away a copy of the OS.
Damn, that was easy, let's try another.
The only conclusion I can draw is that Microsoft wanted to make it as easy as possible for people to evaluate Vista
And for the closer, how about,
That was the only conclusion Dave Taylor could draw, because that's the only conclusion he wanted to draw.
As for the question he's so amazed that bloggers didn't ask, well, they probably did, I know I did, but unlike Dave, I could draw more than one conclusion, so I chose the simplest one.
Link via Techmeme.
you could draw more than one..
and you chose the simplest one? Did you forget who sent out the laptop?
Not to turn into an MS slamming thread, but the suggestion that they don't want the install reviewed is IMO a *very* likely scenario. Realizing that the install process is a nightmare - and the uninstall likely worse - someone coming up with the idea of just sending out laptops to cover the problem sure seems like a simple and likely scenario to me. In fact, coming from a large corporation I'd be more inclined to believe that sending out laptops is more an atttempt to cover problems than it was some sparkling revelation to use social media to promote their product. It *is* the simpler answer.
Wheel,
If there are no facts, calling the story 'real' is a disservice to the readers, I don't give two shits about plausible theories. The two I used are just as plausible. On one hand you imply that MS is inept, (Did you forget who sent out the laptop) on the other, that they're sharp enough to think far enough ahead to cover up difficulties with installation.
>Not to turn into an MS slamming thread
That's exactly what the original writer did. 'The only conclusion I could draw' is bullshit.
In all fairness, if I was a
In all fairness, if I was a PR company working for Microsoft, spending Microsoft's money, I would send out laptops instead of CDs purely because the cost between them just doesn't matter.
This twat has a point though, there's no use sending review copies of an OS to people who can't install it - that will only get you bad publicity. FWIW I think the hardware requirements are the main problem. I've heard the Vista install experience is quite yummy.
However I agree that the piece is bullshit.
>calling the story 'real' is
calling the story 'real' is a disservice
(I haven't read the story, but) It's a great mind-control ploy that I use all the time, sort of a subliminal call to action or, in this case, to preset the mindset.
The real *probable* reason:
Piracy, or the prevention thereof.
Don't want those copies leaked, eh? Esp. since they may not be expiring and have pre-installed WGA-free corp keys.
>>hardware requirements are
>hardware requirements are the main problem
That's my thought. Why send out install CDs if the recipients' machines might not have the mojo to provide the full Vista, erm, "experience"?
Bingo
>preset the mindset
Some people's entire lives are preset. (Thanks Harold and Kumar)
Baseless MS bashing
Taylor's piece was nothing but Microsoft bashing, without sound reasoning on which to bash on about.
Just what is wrong with giving out free laptops, if you can afford it? If I were in charge of this campaign, I would have insisted on giving away laptops instead of CDs too. What OS isn't a pain to install when you're a busy person, and you may not have a computer available on which to experiment with? If I received a free Vista CD from Microsoft right now, I know it would be some time before I could free up the time needed to install it on one of my computers --- even if setup was a guaranteed, brainless 5 minutes. I'd still have to install my apps, move over my data, configure my preferences, etc..
Plus, why would I want to give out CDs? That's so AOL. Good on MS marketing for having the foresight to address these kind of things. I think it's part of a brilliant marketing campaign.
I think that they sent the lap tops to avoid install prohlems
"there's no use sending review copies of an OS to people who can't install it - that will only get you bad publicity"
Almost all tech jourlaists are not very techie (jerry pournell being one exception) so leaving it up to a journalist to isntall a very complex peice of software is just asking for trouble.
Ime still waiting for Jack (Gruniad) to Apolgise to me for rubbishing the X.400 UA that didnt work becuse his pc had Dos installed incorectly.