* Roy Schestowitz fired off this tart reply:
> Microsoft's Continued Vista Backpedaling
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
>| I was amused to hear that Microsoft has come up with a licensing arrangement
>| for refurbished machines, presumably to get more fees but also to keep people
>| from passing along the old OS. On most old machines, the OS is probably
>| outdated or filled with spyware. Whatever the rationale, and whatever
>| Microsoft hopes to get out of this idea, what fascinated me is that the OS is
>| going to be a version of XP, not a sleeker version of Vista.
> `----
>
> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2243187,00.asp
I find this more interesting:
While we're on the subject, why doesn't Micro-soft deliver or promote
an instant-on version of the OS shipped on nonvolatile memory as a
chip? I have been baffled for decades as to why the OS has to be
booted from a hard disk when it could be executable immediately from
ROM.
One partial answer is updates, of course. But does the OS itself
prevent itself from running in RAM?
--
The increasing percentage of Vista isn't growth -- it's molting.
|
|
