For some reason I decided to waste some time replying to good old Tel. Here goes:
>"Please name these other operating systems. OS X? Nope, sorry that only supports a highly controlled range of systems?"
Actually I was thinking of Linux, which I use for my day-to-day stuff. It doesn't do the games I like, but it actually supports all of my hardware (because, as any fule kno, the drivers on Linux give support by chipset, not by manufacturer, which is one of the reasons why there are so many driver problems under Vista).
>"Surely the support of peripherals is not solely an MS responsibility, but that of the manufacturer."
Not actually relevant to my argument - I was expressing the point that existing hardware should be supported by an operating system. For instance, with Vista 64 bit I had to remove my sound card because there were no drivers for it (it's a Soundblaster 64 Live Value about 3 years old). Because it wasn't brand new it seems that Creative Labs decided that they would rather I threw away a perfectly good piece of kit and maybe buy a new sound card from them). I eventually decided to use the one built into the motherboard instead.
>" Go back to the specification on the box of that Maxtor hard drive that you bought - does it say it is compatable with Vista? If it doesn't is it fair to assume that said hardware will be guaranteed to work under Vista? Why isn't is Maxtor's responsibililty to offer this if it is possible?"
I'm not sure whether you are deliberately missing the point, or just being obtuse here. It never occurred to me that a removable hard drive wouldn't be compatible with an operating system which is supposed to be as good as the promises made about Vista- it's a USB hard drive for God's sake - that means it's a common, standard piece of equipment, not some exotic electrical speculum. Linux is OK with it, and so is Vista 32 bit (so I am told). XP quite likes it, too. It shouldn't need manufacturer's drivers. But I'll be a bit more careful in future (if my mouse pointer ever reappears and I start using Vista again).
>"I run Vista SP1 and have had no problems. I built a carefully thought out system that had modern components and a modern OS."
Good for you. I'm really happy for you. My PC is pretty modern, too. And really well thought out as well. Unfortunately I'm not psychic, so when I built the thing a couple of years ago I didn't sit down and think "I wonder if Longhorn will support this?"
>"I don't think I would ever have upgraded an older system from XP to Vista because you can never guarantee that they will work and I (personally) wouldn't expect it to (certainly it is not the sole responsibility of MS)"
And that's your problem - you are one of those people who just throw away perfectly good kit. That's your choice I suppose. Me - I like to keep perfectly servicable stuff for as long as it is working properly and does what I need it to. That seems like common sense to me. And better for the environment, too. I mean, does it really matter whether you have 800Mhz DDR or 1050Mhz? I'm not trying to calculate Pi to a grazillion decimal places.
I suppose I'm not persuaded really. My view though is that Microsoft do have a duty to support existing hardware. Then again, there ain't no money in that, is there?
Now I'm off to get a life. Byeee!