Microsoft Vista or Hardware, who should be Blame?

Make poor people can't effort the latest gadget of computing %26amp; who should be blame Microsoft Vista or Hardware Which is Support it %26amp; Running it.

Microsoft Vista or Hardware, who should be Blame?www.microsoft.com

Vista has nothing to do with the price. You can get a vista operated pc for 300, the hardware is what makes the computer the most expensive. So, actually the hardware is to blame.

Microsoft Vista or Hardware, who should be Blame?microsoft windows xp internet explorer

Hardware, that's more expensive than software.
definately vista is at fault. almost all hardware out there works on XP.

if they were smart, microsoft would have based vista on XP so the drivers would be backwards compatiable.
Actually both are to blame %26amp; don't forget the user... There are compatability with anything when it's not ALL made by the same mfg. If it runs then compatability is not really the issue. The HW mfg's must fully understand the OS/SW their HW will be running. The PC user must know as well. If you build a large engine, put a small fuel system on it %26amp; try to tow something, who is actually at fault for the performance. I say the FULL PC mfg.(the individule who picked the components for their needs) He/she is the one who made the wrong decisions in regards to the ultimate question. "What will the PC actually be used for ?"
Almost all current computers can suppport vista. It is neither the hardware nor the software, it is the people who fall susceptible to product advertising and other things that companies do to sell you stuff.

The people who fall susceptible to these things I refer to as consumers. If you don't do what the retail stores tell you to or shop at them, and shop online at somewhere like newegg you will save a lot of money around upwards of 50%.

And also Vista is not based on XP which is actually a good thing because microsoft has not really put out anything new since NT platform. We should all have applauded microsoft for this unappreciated feat of actually putting out a new OS and not just re-shelling the old one. And actually If you bought a half decent computer and not a cheap one when XP came out you should still support vista. This is because It is the PC platform. Almost all PC platform OSes are intercompatible but not with the Mac platform. This can all get very confusing.

neither hardware nor vista is to blame. The large companies like microsoft taking advantage of the unfortunately poorly educated public (consumers) are to blame.

Vista was actually designed for poor people. There is a version called Widows Vista starter designed for third world or developing countries however it is not availiable in the U.S.A. or Europe.
No one is to blame. Who in the world told you that you could always have the latest gadgets if you can't afford them? Must be the same people that tell you that you can have the finest medical care in the world, just because you are living, or live in the best home in the world because you like it.

There is nothing wrong with not having the latest gadget, and sometimes having the latest is more of a pain then it is worth, but the point isn't to give everyone in the world the same things, and think that is "fair".

Why does Vista require more expensive hardware? Simple Microsoft wanted to make something that pushed the current limits. That way the people that can afford it will buy it to get the new features and in time that will actually drive down the price for both the software and the hardware, so that when they move on to Vista two you might be able to afford Vista 1. Or would you like to still be on machines that only run DOS?