Vista took 5 years to develope, so it will be the least buggy OS that MS has produced, because of the long duration testing peroid. The majority of people that are having problems with Vista are the ones that are running hardware that is too old for Vista to fully support or support at all. You need a decent pc to run Vista, because 3 or 4 year old hardware for the most part won't cut it. I have ran Vista Gold both in x86 and x64 modes for over a month now, with zero problems. Vista's native drivers have worked perfect so far in both modes and so has all my 3rd party drivers that support Vista. All my programs that I used in XP work fine in vista even discontinued programs that are 3 years old or more have worked fine. AMD Athlon 64 X2 4600+ OC 2.7ghz 2GB Dual Channel DDR 3200 Nvidia 7900GT SATA II 2x 300gig 7200rpm 16mb cache RAID-0 Gigabyte Nforce 4 SLI

0

"It took five years, 10 000 employees and billions of dollars for Microsoft to give us Windows Vista, the next generation operating system. It is finally here and there is only one question I ask myself: "To upgrade or not to upgrade?" The answer is simple: "Don't upgrade". I know some of you can't wait to get to the "Submit Follow Up" section at the bottom of this article, or won't even bother to read further because you might think it's just another article bashing Microsoft. Not so. It is no secret that I don't like Microsoft Corporation - not because of its products but the way it does business. Everything I use on my notebook is Microsoft products, licensed and all. Vista facts The easiest way of defining the facts surrounding Vista is to look at the new additions and advancements on Windows XP. Vista added and improved a lot of the applications within XP, and the most noticeable is the new Windows Aero interface. A short list of additional features includes: * Upgraded Firewall and Defender, guards against attacks from the outside world * New menu, organising tools and search capabilities for storing and managing your documents * Windows DVD Maker * Parental Control * Windows Mail / Calendar * Windows Media Centre I think one of the biggest challenges for Microsoft was the security threat and flaws within XP. Vista promises to improve on this dramatically. I have to add in Microsoft's defence, since Windows is the most used operating system; threats against Windows users are so much more. It is not because Windows security is not already good; it just has so much more attackers to guard against. All other operating system from Apple OS to Linux's user base are so much smaller, protecting these communities are an easier task. Vista fiction So if the Vista facts are lists of additions and advancements made since XP, what is the Vista fiction? I can still remember when I first saw Windows XP, my first thoughts were that this is Windows 2000 with a Win Amp skin - nothing new, nothing better, just looks different. I was wrong, there were improvements - things worked better and it was actually easier to use. The same can't be said for Vista, it is not only a new skin for XP, it has a totally different look and feel, and is in some cases even faster than XP. My biggest problem with Vista is that it is not REALLY new. It's new in the sense that it is existing technology with a Windows logo on it. The interface reminds you a lot of an Apple Mac; the organising tools that of Google Desktop. I have no problem with Microsoft using existing technology and making it more user friendly and accessible to a wider base of computer users, but I don't like the idea that it tries to sell it as its own innovation - improving something can hardly be seen as innovation. As with XP, there were a lot of flaws in the system when it was first released, and as the new updates were published it became better. After Service Pack 2, smooth sailing was possible for the first time. Back to my question "to upgrade or not to upgrade" - upgrading will be for the worse just like global warming will become worse. Upgrading your home PC will not be a global disaster if it doesn't work as expected, but it will be wise to hold back for the next year until the first rounds of Vista Service Pack's are released. This also applies to companies wanting to upgrade their network. There is however a small factor to consider when upgrading - this will not only be an operating system cost, it could double your annual IT infrastructure budget for new hardware. Vista is a hardware resource killer." by Johan Brink Today's subliminal thought is: 'Calm down ... it's only ones and zeros.'

0

Vista is a hardware resource killer. This is the key concept. Don't upgrade. Wait a while for the best of the best PC's designed for optimum Vista performance to hit the market - in the year 2008 i_XpUser

0

"Vista is a hardware resource killer" Windows versions in general have always been that way and it is ultimately for the common good (technology-wise) IMHO. Anyone remember the pre-answering machine days, many folks scorned, while thers simply laughed at the idea. As a result, the concept was not adopted fairly quickly even when it became readily avalable to anyone that wanted it, because to many; there's nothing innovative about it - in terms of telephony & it's true, but only to a certain degree. However, the truth is there were literally unimaginable dependencies to stem from its development. My point here is, certain things will consistently seem redundant until they can be adequately harnessed, take the route core processing is going vs NUMA support that is only available in Vista. It can be said that (right now) it won't have an impact to a lot of home users, but you can't use that thought process to map out technological blueprints. You have to be thinking years ahead. My $0.02

0

I'm in total agreement with Cobra_R's response #7 & Sabertooth's response #10....both of those replies is what I would say as well & I wouldn't have said it better. There are people who are still pissed off due to the fact that ham radios are almost completely obsolete...not to mention, LOL, casette tapes, vhs/vcrs, big bulky computer monitors &/or tv sets. Stop with the Microsoft bashing haters! Down with the googles(goog), appples, firefoxes..etc. I mean damn, I have stock in Microsoft. OVERRIDE

0

"According to a study by Softchoice, 94 percent of PCs do not meet the system requirements for Vista Premium." http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,189... Today's subliminal thought is: 'Calm down ... it's only ones and zeros.'

0

Your quoted text/article title was edited by you. Do not leave out words. That article pertains to business pcs...and it doesn't mention what type of businesses. Who's to say that some business always use state of the art latest hardware/software and what businesses are still figuring out Windows 98. What if tomorrow the screen of choice would use somekind of heliodisplay technology. I'm pretty sure all of these anti-future anti-technological upgraders would try to convince the rest to continue using big bulky tv sets. face it things are getting better. no need to bash if u don't have the means and don't want to be the only one left behind. OVERRIDE

0

..... more evidence that Vista should have been here at least couple of years ago.

0

Vista version upgrade that i'd advise others not to go anywhere near is Vista Home Basic. This is a striped down version of Vista that voids a lot of the features that other Vista versions have to offer in which is why you would upgrade in to Vista from XP in the first place. So if you are buying a budget laptop or desktop this holiday season and you only see a coupon good for a Vista home basic upgrade, avoid it and extend your budget spend an extra 50 bucks more on a laptop or pc that comes with a Vista Home Premuim upgrade instead. It's well worth it. AMD Athlon 64 X2 4600+ OC 2.7ghz 2GB Dual Channel DDR 3200 Nvidia 7900GT SATA II 2x 300gig 7200rpm 16mb cache RAID-0 Gigabyte Nforce 4 SLI

0

I can tell you now that where i work >50% of the PC's would not meet the requirements for Vista Premium with all the fruit... but you have to remember that this is in a business environment.... firstly the company i work for will get volume licensing and use Enterprise (i would imagine anyway)... secondly, i dont really think the company i work for will care about Aero or any of the resource hungry innovations... they will be upgrading whenever it comes to that for continued support, increased stability, increased security etc. An no, im not an advocate for Microsoft... and I don't think i will be upgrading to vista any time soon. I just dont see a point in bashing this OS on these grounds... And anyway, in the resource debate... i heard a rumor in a few places that B2, RC1, RC2 were resource hungry because they were not yet optimised... took it with a pinch of salt like anything i read on here... but wondered if any1 out there using RTM had noticed if the performance/resource use was better???

0

hello, i have found no problems with vista RC2 expert pack and i will be upgrading to RTM soon thanks, If I know the answer I'll tell you the answer, and if I don't, I'll just respond cleverly David_Tiger

0

I currently triple boot XP Pro/Vista RTM/Kubuntu and I can tell you I do not have any "performance/resource" problem with RTM at all. BTW, RAM is 768MB. All on a 754 model A64 3400+ (Clawhammer) @ 2.2GHz.

0

i run vista ultimate from msdn with office 2007 and visual studio 2005 inside vmware in linux. i've had no problems with it using too much of my resources at all. the answer is: upgrade to vista

0

Still trucking along on my venerable 98SE. Stephen Fox Windows 98SE 4.10.2222 A DELL M233ST LATITUDE CP LAPTOP INTEL 586 MMX 233MHz; 128MB RAM

0

Upgrade XP to Vista? My question would be "Why"? For me I'm sticking with XP and take the $$$ and spend it on something else. I'm with XpUser. Don't upgrade. I'm happy with XP on 2 of my machines and 95 on my other. I don't have the need for Vista just to get a different look and feel. Just my .02 worth. Brian

0

"It took five years, 10 000 employees and billions of dollars for Microsoft to give us Windows Vista, ..." If this were really true, there would never be a SP1 or Sp2. It would be perfect out of the box. If I had that kind of time and that kind of money, you'd better believe I come out with something better than Vista. When XP came out there were over 60,000 flaws in the code. 23,000 of which were considered critical. And they still haven't fixed all those. I won't upgrade for awhile. It's going to be a pure joy to watch all these people whining about how most of their stuff doesn't work correctly anymore. Larry Today seems like a good day to chew through the restraints.

0

come on...it is no secret that WindowsVista will not only have a "different look and feel, but most importantly also that it will be more secure than the current choice OS. And if anyone would have "that kind of time and that kind of money, you'd better believe I come out with something better than Vista"...you still would not have a 100% secure system. I can't recall exactly who coined the famous phrase "there is no such thing as a completely secure system"... and I may have as well miss-qouted the exact phrase. I apologize. (Maybe someone out here will enlighten us to who that was) If you are not planning to upgrade yet, well then goodfor you, but as long as you upgrade & I know you will ;) If you plan to upgrade A.S.A.P. I applaud you for wanting the best of the best NOW!. OVERRIDE

0

http://www.speedguide.net/faq_in_q.... OVERRIDE

0

I did say "better," not perfect. :) So far though, Vista looks more like a cosmetic redress than much else. No one has a said that in a real environment they are impressed by the way Vista behaves. Not to mention the hardware issues, such as a lot of stuff won't work anymore with Vista. That may be a marketing thing. If MS had come out a year ago and said here's a HCL and you have one year to get you system in order, people would still have grumbled, but at least they wouldn't have to buy the OS fist to find out later their apps and hardware wouldn't work anymore. Today seems like a good day to chew through the restraints.

0

Just do the double boot for crying out loud, that way you can get used to the new system without actually moving to it...

0

I can write my college term papers on 98SE just as well as on XP. I can run any program on 98SE as XP, except all the new versions that don't run on 98SE don't include eye-candy, thank god :) As a matter of fact, a 95 machine can do anything a newer machine can with the exception of CD/DVD creation and playback. I think Microsoft is in for a big disappointment when Vista finally ships for consumers. The outrageous system requirements are just the icing on the cake. Many (if not most) people will need a new machine to run the eye-candy in Vista. We are talking about a revolution of Windows, not evolution. Microsoft still hasn't gotten rid of the registry which they apparently were supposed to do with 2000/XP. I think a lot of enthusiasts would be surprised just how many people continue to run 98SE. $499 is a lot of cash for eye-candy, especially with the economy the way it is, which is to say not great. People will be running XP for years, just as they did 95 and 98. Stephen Fox Windows 98SE 4.10.2222 A DELL M233ST LATITUDE CP LAPTOP INTEL 586 MMX 233MHz; 128MB RAM

0