Something bothered me then….

I started using computer in 1997, HCL-HP Desktop PC with 80486 100MHz processor (not Pentium), less than 100 Kilobytes of cache, 16MB RAM, 640MB hard disk and Windows 95 Operating System. I used to run applications like WordStar, then installed office 97 and AutoCAD 14 and some DOS based games.
With a 16 MB RAM, my computer used to take a couple of seconds to boot, another two or more seconds second to load AutoCAD despite it's graphical interfaces and complex algorithms. So what????
One issue started puzzling me off late... the minimum configuration available now is a 2 - 2.6 GHz Core 2 Duo, 2 GM RAM, 120 GB hard disk and Windows Multimedia (read it as vista - when you need a powerful OS, they will give a multimedia package). Surprisingly, the time taken for the programs to get started is increasing exponentially!!!... What went wrong???
As a basic impulse, there is a tendency to point an accusing finger to the added features of the Operating Systems and applications running in the computer. I took some time to compare the features of the OS and applications. Say win95 vis-à-vis Windows vista, Office 97 vis-à-vis Office 2007, AutoCAD 14 vis-à-vis AutoCAD 2008 etc. The features and tools have undergone a marginal change.... the functionalities are the same!!!
If not the added features that loads my PC, what is it??? It is nothing but the heavy graphics...
I vividly remember, when I used a 3D window OCX tool for Visual Basic, it increased my application size by about 50% and started slowing down my video memory significantly!
Consider a 2 second delay in loading a window in Windows Vista. Multiply it by number of Days X Months X Years and divided by hours... you will realize that Microsoft has kept us waiting for hours... multiply by the 20-25 million Windows Vista licenses sold ... that much of man hours wasted in front of PCs... sheer wastage of invaluable human resources!!!
Have you ever thought why Microsoft is making anything and everything animated? That too with heavy 3D graphics! Is that merely to give a "feel good" for users? What if I don’t want my Windows in 3D frames animated? Why can’t I opt for a "flat" operating system and application window? Why can’t I customize my operating system for better performance when it is a cakewalk to add customizations while programming the system?
Who are the other players benefit when Microsoft is loading it's systems with heavy graphics and animations? Intel is there in the first place, NVidia and ATI benefit from graphics accelerators, Hyundai and Samsung are the leading players in the run to increase the RAM speed and capacity...and there are a lot of players who welcome heavier application from vendors like Microsoft... If Microsoft makes the operating system “thin”, most of these companies will end up with a “thin” bottom line!
Is there any reason for not believing that this is part of collusion??? End of the day, who is the loser???