Microsoft deserves to get burnt for this big stinking piece of horse s*** called Vista. Being as over bloated as it is, they knew full well that their monstrocity would only work on faster, beefed up PCs. Some of the PC manufacturers are also to blame for going along with the deception and not making their machines more capable. Of course Mac users don't have to worry about this kind of c*** because Apple clearly states the system requirements about Leopard and all of the other releases of OS X. Apple's hardware releases aren't driven by a third party company. Dell and HP and the other PC makers are all whores to Microsoft.

Microsoft deliberately lying to customers in order to rip them off???

SHOCKED. I am SHOCKED I say.

This is SO unlike them ...

;)

It's really funny that one of their own succumbed by drinking the M$ koolaid. And to the tune of $2100. Do you think he got a refund? hmmmmm...

I can run Tiger on a G4 533mhz digital audio tower, 2001 vintage. Runs fine, in fact. The only thing that is sluggish is the video card performance, and I can upgrade that anytime.

If I were to resurrect my G3 B+W from 1999, I bet I could run Tiger on that too (not sure about Leopard).

Take that and suck on it, PC fanboys.

"some customers were more readily aware of what Vista would ultimately require than others."

Oh for pete's sake. Yes, some customers are computer geeks. The rest, by and large, are folks like my parents who are computer-phobic and just want the damned thing to work, and rely on Dell/the local PC geeks to tell them what they need.

is it possible to die from too much of it?

"Wal-Mart and other key retailers were also discovered to have contact Microsoft about their worries of a potential backlash stemming from the low system requirements suggested by the logo."

With shenanigans like this, it's a wonder more people haven't switched to a Mac. For $2,100, Mike Nash coulda bought himself a refurb'd Mac Pro tower which would run both OS X and Winblows.

where's testudo with his knee-jerk anti-Apple trolling?

*crickets chirping*

Actually, I installed Vista on a 4-year old Vaio that was upgraded. The video card was replaced and 1 GB memory was installed (about $120 invested, in all).

Believe me, I tried talking the owner into buying a Mac, but he insisted on Vista for now. I'll defend that the install (fresh install) and subsequent patches installed without a hitch. The machine certainly has acceptable performance for day-to-day work; in fact, it even can use the Aero effects or whatever MS calls it. No problems with any of the devices, either.

I'm no MS fanboy, but I gotta be fair: I can't bash it when it exceeded my expectations for an older PC. Now, before you get all worked up, I'm not going to switch back, nor would I recommend Vista over OS X (for the reasons everyone already knows).

I want to know what kind of computer some guy bought for $2100 and then can't run Vista on it. Makes you wonder about him, doesn't it? Probably bought it at Best Buy after talking talking to one of their 'geniuses' about it.

And don't forget Apple got caught in this same morass with OS X on the Beige G3s and 'full support for OS X' claims.

BTW, climacs, it's nice that you say you installed Leopard on your 533MHz G4, but isn't it interesting how, even though it runs 'fine', Apple has decided that its OS should not run on it? Arbitrarily making the decision for hosts of older mac owners that their hardware is outdated when, apparently, it's not (gee, had to smack down someone there!).

And isn't it nice you have a computer that you could upgrade the graphics card in. Too bad Apple doesn't make those anymore (at least to the point most normal people can afford).