<nessuno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1156171641.372381.297410@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Oliver Wong wrote:
"Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:2220711.3X0JsQDlbC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Why is it taking so long to deliver an XP service pack with a new
> theme?
> It
> would take over a year just to test...
It's dishonest for you to call Vista "an XP service pack with a new
theme".
I think "dishonest" is a little too strong...it's a sarcastic play on
Microsoft's own terminology, maybe not justified by the objective
measures of improvements made in a SP versus the jump to Vista...but
Roy is not the only person using this type of sarcasm, and Microsoft
invites it with its Orwellian terminology such as Windows Genuine
Advantage=Privacy Invasion for Piracy Check, Trusted Computing=We Don't
Trust You, etc.
I generally disapprove of the use of sarcasm or exageration because by
actually voicing it, you convince yourself of these sarcastic or exagerated
remarks internally. For example, (and yes, this is from personal
experience), if your significant other says "You never buy me flowers"
frequently enough, (s)he'll actually experience the emotional
resentment/disapointment/whatever of never having received flowers, even if
factually speaking, there was a point in time during which you purchased
flowers for him/her.
As can be seen by the replies in this thread, many people here truly
believe that Vista brings nothing more than a skin. In other words, they are
completely uninformed about the thing which they are criticizing. Wasn't
there a thread here just a few days ago that said you shouldn't be allowed
to criticize Linux if you don't know what you're talking about? I disagreed
with that stance, but shouldn't those who advocate that stance thus avoid
criticizing Vista if they don't actually know anything about it, less they
be accused of hypocrasy?
Anyway, I choose the word "dishonest" because if you were to tell
someone who didn't know anything about Vista that it was basically "an XP
service pack with a new theme" (and assuming this person knew what XP is
like and what service packs are), you would be strongly misleading them.
They would have certain expectations (for example, that it'd be free, that
it would mostly compose of security fixes, and very few non-security
features added, no additional hardware requirements, would be made available
via Windows Update, etc.).
- Oliver
|
|
