Personally, I’m pretty tired of people dissing Microsoft (mainly Vista) for “not working” or having slow boot times. Half the time, it’s probably the users fault, not knowing how to configure their PC for optimal performance and deleting unneeded start up entries.

It’s a fact, Vista requires more memory than XP, however RAM isn’t very expensive. We just want to have something better without keeping our end of the bargain. Which is to keep our computers, specifically hardware, at least partially up to date. Having more RAM than you need may seem a waste, but you’ll see why when you do your next OS upgrade.

Again, Vista requires more resources. But wouldn’t you expect that? XP required more resources than it’s predecessor.

Why does it seem that people using Linux distributions, such as Ubuntu, never have problems? First, Linux isn’t designed to be out of the box “flashy”. Second, if you’re adventurous enough to run a Linux installation, you probably know what you’re doing. Finally, Linux/Unix wasn’t originally developed to be for “new to computers guy” use. Virtually any operating system, if you know what you are doing, can run effectively.

Why don’t Macs ever seem to have upgrade problems? When you purchase a Mac, how much control do you have over what you put in it? Not much. When you buy a PC from a retailer such as Dell, online you can pick and choose exactly what you want inside. Apple does the thinking for you, but sacrifices hardware control. Microsoft makes the OS and not much else. So you can’t blame them that when you bought your PC it didn’t come with sufficient resources to run the upcoming operating system. You only have you or your retailer to blame.

Of course, then comes the dreaded compatibility problems. I know many people who would upgrade to Windows Vista, but can’t because their software doesn’t run properly on Vista. This really isn’t your fault but rather the developers’. They’re too lazy to upgrade their product to run with the latest version of the operating system. It’s possible they may not be lazy at all, and might not have the funds or time to put into the development.  You can’t avoid these kinds of changes. This happens with all operating systems, even Mac and Linux. Don’t go around blaming Microsoft for this one then.

The solution to all of this is to purchase hardware that not only will run Vista, but upcoming versions. Windows 7, which is the next version of Windows, will probably greeted warmly by those who can run it. Luckily, Microsoft has put more work on functionality than appearance.

This now, finally, leaves me to explain the title I chose for this post. For those who took the “short run” hardware that probably barely ran XP anyway, are “hooked” or “stuck” in XP. We’re also afraid to leave behind a interface we knew well for something totally different.

Let’s count some key points.

1. Vista has hefty resource requirements, but it’s not like it’s going to decrease with upcoming versions of Windows.
2. We’re lazy.
3. We’re afraid.
4. Not all software developers are willing to upgrade their software to run with the latest version of the operating system.
5. We don’t always consider long term hardware requirements and compatibility.

With all of that said, we can safely assume it’s not all Microsoft’s fault. Instead of blaming and pointing fingers let’s encourage and send helpful feedback. After all, it’s going to benefit us all. In the long run.