• MS' Mojave Experiment

    MS' Mojave Experiment

    Techtree News Staff, Jul 30, 2008 1900 hrs IST

    In spite of the ingenious Mojave Experiment, the debate about the Vista's worth continues.

    mail share


If there is one Operating system that has been slammed with the worst reviews and almost universally loathed, it has to be the Windows ME. That said, what could have been the reason for those responses? Was it the OS itself that was unspeakably bad or did the reviews go overboard and make it look unusable? We can't really say!

We had similar reactions in 2007, when Vista was launched. It "consumed too many resources", "needed super-computer-like hardware to run", "had annoying pop-ups asking you for confirmation even if you wanted to change your font". To add insult to injury, arch-rival Apple had the super slick Mac OSX Panther, which not only offered eye candy, but was also easy to use out of the box - or so said the reviews. And, with boot camp, you can run Vista as well - if you really wanted to.

So what does the Big M do?

They came up with the Mojave Experiment, where unsuspecting users who'd succumbed to the "stereotyped" notions of Vista and wouldn't touch the OS, were asked to watch a video demonstration of what they were told was its forthcoming "Mojave" Operating System. What the subjects weren't told was that they were actually watching a demo of Windows Vista in action - an OS that most participants had previously said they wouldn't purchase under any circumstances.

Respondents were chosen from the focus group organizer's database, called at random, but then selected based on having a low perception of Vista (<5 rating on a scale of 1-10).The 120-odd participants on average, gave Vista a rating of 4.4 out of 10 prior to participating. The average rating jumped to 8.5 after the subjects watched the demo. Responses ranged from "it's awesome" and "the speed is incredible" to "I'd give it a 10"

So is it really all in the head?

The popular Apple ads depict Vista as a slow, buggy unfashionable OS compared to the hip and younger OS X. Apart from the reviews and the ubiquitous Apple ads, implementation of Vista in commercial environments too have not taken off and there have many reports about organizations asking OEM computer suppliers to actually "downgrade" the OS to XP prior to shipping. This means, it's not just the average Joe who is uncomfortable with the OS - even professionals who aren't as impressionable as consumer users, have been bitten by the "Vista sucks" bug.

As for the Mojave experiment, many users are complaining about the method used to survey. The respondents did not actually use the OS but were shown only a video of the UI and the speed. This method according to many is crude as the USP of any OS is the way it interacts with the user. A video showing some parts of the OS certainly is not representative of the way it works in real-life situations. Others, however, said the subjects' reaction to Vista was consistent with their own experience with the software.

Ingenious though the Mojave Experiment was, the debate continues...

Follow Techtree on Twitter

Related Links
Free Alternatives: Part 1
Now, Amazon On Your iPhone
Apple Releases Mac OS X Update
Tag keywords
Vista Apple Mac OS X Panther Mojave Experiment news software



Discussion Board
(37) Comments
Ashok
,New Delhi, on Aug 01, 2008 10:03 AM
Ubuntu with compiz runs very well on 256 MB RAM, needs only 4GB of disk space, where all kind of applications (office, scanner, mediaplayer, browser, email client etc) are also installed (similar setup on XP takes 10+ GB) Compiz gives 3D effects ....Vista is nowhere close. and Its all for FREE....who need Vista or OSX
Report abuse
Lucas
,Sacramento, on Jul 31, 2008 12:00 AM
Vista is not BAD, it is just no where NEAR as good as it A) was supposed to be given the hype and LONG development; B) should be compared to linux and mac os x; C) could be considering its MASSIVE requirements for anything but the home basic version. Also, on launch it WAS bad because so few existing programs / drivers worked. Microsoft had an option: have an awesome, streamlined OS and NO backward-compatibility; or have a good, bloated OS that DOES have backward-compatibility. Since they chose the second option, it was ridiculous that so much from XP didn't work. But regardless of why its good or bad, the experiment was stupid. Sure they said "the speed was incredible" - everything in the demo was being run on a beefy system. Had these people experienced the same demo on their home machines, they probably wouldn't have made the comment. Especially if they showed XP doing the same thing faster. And would they have said "it's awesome" if they had also been shown demos of Mac OS X or Linux with Compiz? I doubt it. Vista is not enough, too late, with too many restrictions.
Report abuse
Rachel
,Brooklyn, on Jul 31, 2008 08:06 AM
Beefy system? I think not! The site says the computer used in the experiment is an HP Pavilion DV 2000 with 2GB RAM. Correct me if I'm wrong but that computer isn't even available to purchase anymore and it's a couple of years old!
Report abuse
Rachel
,Brooklyn, on Jul 31, 2008 08:00 AM
Participants were not shown a video, if you dig a little deeper and watch some of the spots on the site, you can see that there was a person guiding them through the OS.
Report abuse
Kevin
,Vancouver, on Jul 30, 2008 08:46 PM
Vista is a Wonderful Operating System. Sure the system requirements are a little high, but its well worth it! Also, the author of the article needs to confirm something with Microsoft, you claimed that they watched videos, but from the videos on the website, it looks like they are demonstrating it live. Get the facts right, or your just another of those people that are making Vista look bad because your jealous!
Report abuse
whizkidd
,Mumbai, on Jul 30, 2008 11:58 PM
Kevin, I am the author of the article and will certainly look in to it. Thanks for pointing that out. At the same time, let me assure you that I certainly am no Vista hater. At the same time, I'm happy with XP, and do not see any reason for an upgrade. Biased? Certainly not! :)
Report abuse
John Scalla
,Monterey, CA, on Jul 30, 2008 08:30 PM
I find it interesting that people complain about Vista when I have yet to have anything go wrong. Many windows users I know who use Vista have not had a problem and we are all geeks to the core. If I have to update my hardware, that's fine with me. If you want to get the next generation operating system, you NEED to update your hardware and (Oh my) pruchase new, updated programs! Stop complaining, we got Vista till Windows 7, which WILL be built upon Vista's architecture.
Report abuse
Robert
,Windsor, on Jul 30, 2008 08:42 PM
Hey John Me too I love Vista I bet it is because we are using hardware that is powerful enough to run Vista .
Report abuse
nathan hale
,washington DC, on Jul 30, 2008 11:41 PM
ok, robert you are seriously being a troll. It's great and all that you like vista. but you keep saying you don't hear a good argument for not going to vista, but everyone has given a perfectly rational argument. You simply won't recognize any opinion that disagrees with yours. This is the sign of a truly ignorant person. Stop trolling and telling everyone how ignorant they are when you can't even make a good point yourself. you're using circular logic to defend something just because you are ok with it's technical short comings. -nathan hale
Report abuse
Nate
,Vero Beach, on Jul 30, 2008 09:11 PM
IF Intel (long-term partner of MS) won't deploy Vista on their machines, that should tell you something.
Report abuse
Nate
,Vero Beach, on Jul 30, 2008 09:18 PM
After reading other peoples comments I'd like to point out that Vista required 10 TIMES the HD space as XP and about 4 times the RAM to accomplish what???
Report abuse
Mike
,Cincinnati, on Jul 30, 2008 10:31 PM
1. automatic compilation of program/system/hardware failures with links to posible solutions. 2. automatic driver lookup (that works, xp's version doesn't work very well through my experience) 3. built-in bluetooth stack for bluetooth stereo, don't have to buy blue soleil. 4. built-in google desktop like searches 5. automatic defragmentation There are many more benefits. Remember, these benefits the average joes who do not know how to fix their computer when something goes wrong. For all the pro out there, the majority of windows user only know how to perform the basic things, open program, copy paste, etc. They do not know why a program fail, they do not know how to recover, they do not know how to defrag to keep their pc at tip top condition. Thus, for all these automation to work, a great deal of resources is needed. If you are a professional and doesn't require these automation, go into services.msc and shut them down.
Report abuse
RetardKiller
,Chicago, on Jul 30, 2008 10:57 PM
I really wish you people could look back further than 2 years. If any of you were around when Windows 2000 arrived, it was the exact same comments "It's so bloated", "nothing runs right", "I can't run my 20 year old DOS program on it". Then came XP, and it was the same story again. Big companies such as John Deere took almost 3 years to begin full-scale deployment of XP (moving for Win2K), and XP SP2 was almost out by then. Updates and improvements are a way of life in computers. Look at what apple does. They goe from 10.3 to 10.4 to 10.5, and you have to buy each release. Getting 6-7 years outta of XP is great, but it's time to move on. Quit crying.
Report abuse
Chris.B
,Saint Marys, GA, on Jul 30, 2008 07:51 PM
Let those same test subjects interact with "Mohave" and try to install programs, setup an internet connection, run it on a mchine with only 1GB ram, organize and move files from one folder to another and all of the other things an average user expects to do with an OS and see if their ratings are still as high.
Report abuse
Robert
,Windsor, on Jul 30, 2008 09:03 PM
Chris I don't know where you got your information but my copy of vista automatically found my internet connection and set it up .I run my laptop on 1gb of ram its slow but that is because you actually need 2 gb . those minimum requirements Microsoft put out are just that minimum meaning Vista will run but at its minimum performance .As for the folders have you heard of drag and drop or send to have you actually even used Vista I do not think you have .
Report abuse
RetardKiller
,Chicago, on Jul 30, 2008 10:51 PM
Who still uses only 1GB of RAM? It's like $20 for another 1GB DIMM. Quit being a cheap, and join the 21st Century - we'll wait for you.
Report abuse
Larry Cunningha
,Las Cruces, NM, on Jul 30, 2008 08:10 PM
Vista is STILL a bloated pig; Windows users who have productive needs avoid it like the plague. It drags down the fastest computers.
Report abuse
Robert
,Windsor, on Jul 30, 2008 08:52 PM
Larry I am running an Intel quadcore and its lightning fast and so are the Intel dualcores .SO if you have fast machine man you really must have done something to mess it up .
Report abuse
Chuck
,UK, on Jul 30, 2008 09:24 PM
I have a 3 year old Athlon64 3200 with 2GB RAM and a GeForce 6600 (a modest spec, by today's standards) at home and Vista runs as well as, if not better, than XP on my work machine, which is a Dell Precision with a dual-core Xeon and 4GB of RAM. I cannot back this up with figures, but in day to day use, my 3 year old computer feels just like my brand new Dell workstation. This is, I am sure, due to Vista's superior caching and resource management. It is XP that wastes resources; Vista *makes full use* of available resources. It's not the same as 'bloat'. YMMV if you have hardware more suitable for running the 6+ year old XP. But that's just my own experience. Those people I know who aren't as technically inclined but have used Vista for a while now are generally apathetic towards it. They certainly don't hate it. When asked, they usually respond along the lines of, "it's alright," shortly followed by a shrug. If MS had given it the understated, cool and sophisticated look of OS X, I reckon it would be liked a whole lot better. Instead they have inflicted on us the truly awful and amateurish Aero Glass instead. Surely they have the cash to hire a decent UI design team? Hell, go hire some of the kids on DeviantArt or NeoWin who are producing the nice skins for XP. The more talented of them are obviously far more skilled than MS's own UI team.
Report abuse
RetardKiller
,Chicago, on Jul 30, 2008 10:45 PM
If you by a $200 computer, of course it will underperform. Gamers don't buy onboard video cards and expect to play Counter Strike or COD4 with settings maxed out. That's like buying a Toyota Prius, and expecting it to perform like a Z06 Corvette on the race track. I'm running an Athlon X2 6400+ with a GeForce 8800GT, and the system performs incredible. It even runs well on my Athlon X2 4400+ with a GeForce 6600GT and my Athlon 64 3000+ with a GeForce FX 5200. It you buy cheap hardware, expect the performance to match the price. As far as the OS, it still runs great on hardware bought in the last 2-3 years. Most of the problems that "caused" the bad press was poor driver support from 3rd party manufactures. Otherwise, download whatever flavor of Linux. I hear there are about a dozen or so games that run on it.
Report abuse
gweedo
,Washington, on Jul 30, 2008 10:44 PM
I think a larger question is: why should an operating system take SO MUCH of your system resources. Isn't that what your applications are supposed to use. So, are you supposed to use your computer to do things (run applications) or to run the OS so that it allows you to do things. A bit philosophical but goes to the heart of computing. It's a tool to accomplish things, not something you have to fiddle with so that it allows you to do things. Enter Apple.
Report abuse
r. decline
,edge city, on Jul 30, 2008 10:43 PM
ok, overlooking the idea that people are somehow finding it acceptable that their operating system needs 2gigs of ram.... vista is terrible. got it early on some new machines, hadn't read much about it expect what was on the MS website..and found myself pulling my hair out quickly afterward. course this doesn't even include the crazy version/feature/requirements/price options when just trying to buy it...or the unfulfilled promises of buying the higher priced vistas... it is junk. what it adds just is not worth the needed hardware upgrade most have to do and the cost isn't worth it. why anybody thinks that a company that can't even get a browser right can do an operating system is beyond me.
Report abuse
cjoki
,Houston, on Jul 30, 2008 10:15 PM
I bught a brand new hp dv6500 series laptop (turian 64 x2 1.8 and 2gb ram). My first impression of the system was, hey this is not too bad, kinda nice (if you have the hardware). Then I needed to get the system ready for the work I do, web/database developement. The security system used by Vista is way to intrusive. I designate a program to run with admin rights under my login, then I should not have to confirm it every single time I start it. Also, I have had a continuous problem with IE 7 locking up while surfing google. I usually switch to FF and have no propblems. I have had some programs simple shut down without an error message. These same programs worked just fine under xp. Vista after running vista since Nov 2007, I can say I am not impressed. Any OS that forces as many hard reboots, mystery shut downs and security nag screens ranks low...low ....low in usability. Oh and my experience level with windows goes back to the days of ms-dos and win3.1 And I have made a number of small programs for various versions. I am very comfortible with windows....which is like saying Army Intelligence ;)
Report abuse
IdiotKiller
,Chicago, on Jul 30, 2008 10:29 PM
For the "I am very comfortible with windows" comment, you seem pretty ignorant. You do know that you can turn UAC off (the "security" prompting), right?
Report abuse
Robert
,Windsor, on Jul 30, 2008 09:23 PM
My impression is that most of you are whiny little cry babies You either have the hardware to run Vista or you don't every new operating system requires faster more powerful hardware .You could not run XP on a PC made for Windows 95 and have a good experience doing it . Build your own Computer like I did and then you can choose what hardware you want if you buy one of those bargain PC's you deserve what you get you need a good sized dual or quadcore CPU if you want a lightning fast PC if you are to cheap to invest in the right Hardware stay with XP.but please do not try to discourage people who may be ready to step into the future just because you are afraid or to cheap to .You are probably some of the same people who moaned and groaned about XP when it first came out .
Report abuse
Nate
,Vero Beach, on Jul 30, 2008 09:50 PM
Robert, do you by chance work for MS? You are replying to most of the comments here (except mine) and always seem to be excessively in support of Vista. What does it offer for its HUGE increase in system resources? Aero?
Report abuse
Nick
,League City, TX, on Jul 30, 2008 07:36 PM
That still doesn't change the enormous amount of system resources Vista uses relative to what XP uses, requiring much more memory when you could just install windows XP and be perfectly happy.
Report abuse
Robert
,Windsor, on Jul 30, 2008 09:35 PM
Every new operating system requires more resources that is a fact . If you are not prepared to spend the money on new hardware then you should stay with XP. So far I have not seen any legitimate complaints about Vista. If you lack the skills necessary to Use a PC and by the way there is allot more to using a PC than typing a letter or sending an email you need to learn to deal with software problems because even Apple computers have bugs.So before you go blaming the operating system for all your problems you might want to take a good look in the mirror you little cry baby .
Report abuse
Johann botha
,Brakpan, on Jul 30, 2008 09:12 PM
I got Vista and to be honest I miss XP. Half my software doesn't run. It may look great but what value do I get as a business user to upgrade to Vista???? Better looking screens and annoying popups?
Report abuse
Phil
,TU, on Jul 30, 2008 08:04 PM
Exacly, users got 10 mins show of Vista on preinsalled machines, probably fast 'beasts'. They did not have chance to expirience any problem or to figure how much resources Vista requires to run smootly (if it was running smoothly).
Report abuse
Robert
,Windsor, on Jul 30, 2008 08:48 PM
Phil that is the point you must have hardware powerful enough to run Vista and it was the same with XP if you tried to run it on a PC that came out with Windows 95 you would have the same problem either you change with the times or you get left behind just don't try to ruin it for those who may want to move on .
Report abuse
Brooks
,Birmingham, Al, on Jul 30, 2008 08:08 PM
While Vista is not the greatest OS I have ever used and definitely has some usability issues out of the box, it is still miles above WinME. ME was so unstable, that it was a joke. I bought a new PC from Dell that came with ME. From almost the time I first turned it on, it was blue screening. It did this several times a day and it was bone stock from Dell. I stuck Windows 2000 on it and it was rock solid and I used it for almost 4 years without any problems.
Report abuse
Ryan
,Provo, UT, on Jul 30, 2008 07:59 PM
I'm just curious where they got this idea. More than anything it reminds me of the newest Pizza Hut and Carl's Jr. commercials that show people in a fake restaurant talking about how delicious the food is, then being shocked to find out it comes from a fast food place. I can't wait to see the ads they put out from this.
Report abuse
Ryan
,Provo, UT, on Jul 30, 2008 07:53 PM
In 2007, Apple had OS X Tiger and OS X Leopard. Panther was released in 2003 and replaced by Tiger in 2005.
Report abuse
XPforMe
,Mississippi, on Jul 30, 2008 07:48 PM
The simple fact of the matter is, Vista is ANNOYING. It is, in fact, very slow. It does consume far too much of the computer's resources to run. Worst of all, those aggravating pop ups that you have to click on to do anything on the computer. It also doesn't allow the main user actual administrative rights in most cases I've seen. MS should have taken the XP format, which has been debugged and is still in use in most places, and expanded it with more bells and whistles. Vista is a flop. If I have to start using it, I think I'm going to consider a Mac. Let them bring that "Mojave Experiment" in front of me. I would ask them to log on their normal user name and remove a program they no longer wanted (which I found to be far too difficult with Vista). That also expands into the realm of spyware and virus removal, which is a pain in the rear as well. As for the Windows ME OS, if you could get past the stinking blue screens every 5 minutes, it was about the same as XP. The bluescreens and errors are what flopped ME.
Report abuse
Christian
,New York, NY, on Jul 30, 2008 07:46 PM
They still don't show in the video how Vista asks for permission for every thing you change or do. I had an HP Notebook and I couldn't even open the pre-loaded HP software without Vista asking me if I'm sure I want to open that program. They need to see how Vista is like. Give them a free Vista computer for a week and see if they still hate vista. P.S. After having my HP for 8 month's I got a MacBook Pro and I'm loving it! MUCH better than Vista.
Report abuse
manny.b
,Westcliff on Sea, on Jul 30, 2008 07:42 PM
Microsoft really are trying to throw money away. They have announced that a new operating system will be available in 2 years either with less processor usage or utilising touch screen. Why should anybody want to spend out for something expensive which only game players rate as usable and involves upgrading computer hardware to have it outdated in two years. Even if it was so much better than (XP) it would not be financially viable.
Report abuse

Opinion Poll