It's fair to say that Microsoft has had a hard time selling Windows Vista. Since launch it's been criticised heavily, particularly for being slow and having lower compatibility with peripheral devices.

Microsoft's latest effort in the PR fight back is the Mojave Experiment.

Essentially, the Mojave Experiment compares people's preconceived ideas of Vista to their impressions of the OS when shown it out of context. A selection of users - none of whom use Vista - were asked to rate Vista from zero to ten - on average, they gave it 4.4. They were then shown the "next" version of Windows, called Mojave, and asked to rate this - they gave it an average rating of 8.5. You will of course be utterly astounded to hear that "Mojave" was just Vista in a different box. Quite a nice red box, for what it's worth.

Microsoft obviously believes - and I think they're correct to do so, to an extent - that this disparity is the result of people judging Vista on received opinion rather than actual experience. This is understandable - most people are only peripherally aware of operating systems, and coverage of the Vista launch in the mainstream press was less than glowing. If I'd never actually used Vista, I'd probably have a generally low opinion of it.

On the other hand, I'd suggest that there are other factors at play here, as asking people whether they like something can be surprisingly unreliable. Fundamentally, many people like to please. As Jakob Nielsen puts it:

In answering questions (particularly in a focus group), people bend the truth to be closer to what they think you want to hear or what's socially acceptable.

Many people also tend towards the dramatic - something that's certainly exhibited in the Mojave Experiment clips. One person gives Vista a big fat zero, drawing the score out slowly with a Sharpie for extra effect. This is then contrasted with Mojave, which of course gets another big zero - but, wait for it, with an equally big one before it! Go Mojave! But is this an accurate reflection, or merely the logical dramatic conclusion of a scoring scale that started at zero? To put it another way, would the same scores have been recorded if they were simply noted down in pencil on a pad, rather than scrawled secretively on an A4 clipboard then turned to show the audience?

I'd suggest that more interesting results might come from repeating the same experiment but using people who already use Vista day to day. If they can really be convinced that "Mojave" is better, that would speak volumes for the influence of poor reviews. If they can point out all the same problems, even in the "new" operating system, then those are surely the issues that Microsoft would need to address.

Criticisms aside, the whole experiment is a slickly produced bit of promotion and well worth a look if you have a minute. I'm not entirely convinced: in my personal experience Windows Vista works fine, but I won't be rushing to upgrade my XP computers. What's more, with the long boot times I'm finding it increasingly simpler to boot Linux unless I actually need access to Photoshop, Word or any of my Windows-only applications. But what do you think - is the Mojave Experiment proof that criticism of Vista is merely ignorance, or simply the latest desperate attempt to spin a poor product?