Honestly I don't see the point in updating to Vista just now. Maybe after it has been out for a while, and the REAL good&bad lists are out. At the moment it's too early to say anything. Looking at XP... the ONLY reason I ever upgraded to that one was the better stability, and the better support for power saving features.

Most of the features on Vista are, so far, completely irrelevant for my home use. WinFX? Who cares. Display Foundation stuff? Who cares. WinFS? Last I checked it was slower than molasses in January.

I skipped Win2k, never missed it. I might skip Vista, unless there is really a compelling reason to buy it. Which there is, at the moment, none that pertains to me.

I agree.

Microsoft has never been able to support their OS with all the features that OSX and Linux (yes, I said linux) have already. What makes them think they can now? I feel that these features in Vista could easily be done through third-party applications (such as using AppRocket for the Spotlight search....). I don't want my OS to do ****. I want to run the programs that I want to run, and deny access to those that I (myself, not Microsoft) deem inappropriate for my system. If OS makers continue to throw these features into the computers of people who don't them, I'm going to get very pissed off. I'm definitely getting Linux on my system, hopefully by the end of this week.

Unless Vista comes with some free RAM and a hell of a good processor, I'm just not buying it.
It will be typical to see Microsoft sell Vista to the uneducated people around the globe (if they have the money).

When Windows Vista is released at the start of 2007 Millions of people will be running out and buying it but I will not.

sry pal', but i dont think so, many rumours say that if a user want to use the new windows system vertion, he most have a powerful computer, with at least 2 Gb, of memory Ram...

I think the sentiments about not wanting to upgrade are why Vista is late. Microsoft realizes (not to hackle anyone but) windows XP is a pretty darn good operating system, and people dont want to change. I know that I feel no particular urge to upgrade, and computers are my lively hood. I only upgraded to XP, from 2000, in the last year(And that was only because BF2 required XP). The office that I do tech support in still predominantly uses 2000, because everything already works the way users expect it.

I use my computer to use applications. Browse the web, read and write E-Mail, write software, remote access to help people with tech support, play with my photographs, and occassionally edit a home movie (I use the MS movie maker thingie, cant beat the price!). I dont use it to manage my music collection, which I hear that windows already does expertly. But I do use it as a DVR, which it does expertly. Finally every couple of months I might play a game for a week or two.

Vista doesnt help me (or the other myrad of windows consumers) do anything new, and windows is already very stable. Until there is some reason for me to upgrade (see why I upgraded to XP) I think the take up of Vista will be slow (as it was with XP).

A lot of the discontent I think is people forgetting how computers were just 10 or 15 years ago. Back when windows 3.11 was the operating system, people rebooted with great regularity. When 95 was release, it was a massive improvement in stability. I dont think I have ever seen XP crash (and im tech support) without accidently installing a crappy driver. In my tech support position the users don't even know to try rebooting as a trouble solving technique anymore.

Personally, I think this is a great place to be. The upgrade churn PC users were on for 15 years in the 80's and 90's is over. Now everything just works. A lot of the noise around MS is the haters. They hated MS for so long, they forgot why they hated MS, and just know that they do. (Read a slashdot thread with all the people claiming that XP is unstable, vulnerable???, I think someone in that equation is unstable, but its not windows) I think I saw a Star Trek episode about that once, lol.

Finally, the retail copies of windows are expensive, because MS is negotiating. Go buy a OEM copy from New Egg for a $130, and skip the shiny box. At $130 windows is a great value. Also, just go ahead and ignore whatever the haters say, when has anything of value ever come from a hater?

P.S. I am no windows fan boie, I tech support it just about every day of my life. I better than most know its problems.

in my own opinion i think that windows vista shouldnt be much of a concern anyway. I dont want it and I think that microsoft is going to have a lot of trouble selling it. Unless you want 'enhanced media' and a seethrough bar thinggy, then there are options... 'enhanced media': ok you will be able to download windows media player 11 for windows xp/2000, no problem!

see through bar thinggy: download f****** windowblinds and then a vista tranformation pack.

And I also don't see the point of "flip 3d windows" WHO CARES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I know I don't

You are right Adamness ............. most of the uptake will be from "new systems" as MS will quickly turn-off the tap for XP installs on new.

As for the features, yes a lot of them are useful, and in OS terms "sexy"(no, I don't need to get out more..... I was not referring to them literally !! ) In excess of 90% of the "new" features, we in the Mac OS X world have been using for some time already, and can only hope - for you MS types - that MS make them work nearly as well as they do under Mac OS X. I saw a neat presentation the other day where BG was making big of the new features in Vista, and someone had overlaid the video/graphics with a tour around a Mac OS X desktop. For example as BG was describing what could be done with MS "new" feature called "gadgets" (widgets to the rest of the world, the video demonstrated amongst others "Fox Sports" - see the link(s) here = Link + Link + Link


MS is now a follower, not a leader

Both MS and Apple develop upon ideas that have been around for a while, so neither is necessarily a leader or follower.

In the end it comes down to user choice and what feels comfortable to use. Vista and OSX may not be for everyone, and people should go with what they feel is right for themselves, rather than be influenced by the thoughts/opinions of others.

WOW!
WOW!
It sounds almost to good to be true. We are losing alot of things that will require a period of adjustment.

I am conserned about:
1) Firewire being removed and no mention on how B. Gates is getting around his 51 Million Dollar House, know Multiplexor or anything;

2) The problems that "Microsoft is promising to put digital rights management (DRM) embedded into Windows Vista, this takes control of data away from a PC owner and can give it away to any third party" in conjunction with RIAA requirements that you need to have purchased rights for two downloads, one for the system and a second for output to your iPOD. If not you will be charged $3,500.00 for each event and they take your matchine! My view is, if I bought XYZ from the store I can do what ever I want. I can make my own rip's, I can take several movies and make thes into what ever I want because I have purchased the Licence Rights. RIAA, you can kiss my rosey read ass all the way to hell and back;

3) With these concerns why can't we just remove this functionality, I saw no mention of this being required for Multimedia Content or for Windows Media Player 11;

4) Perhaps I should get a router and keep this system now, as it looks like these things are going to make having a good time very difficult with my legacy system that are not concerned with Who, What or Why in Media, it plays, no problem.

If I have something misspelled, oh well, that means I'm not an elephant.

The only downside of Vista, it seems, is the fact that I'll have to buy new parts for my computer to run it

People are thinking they have to replace the computer (that is already running XP) to be able to run Vista. I seriously have to ask: are they *that* thumb-fingered and/or hamhanded that they are unable to properly use a screwdriver? Or did they make a major error when originally buying that computer and went with integrated (onboard) graphics, sound, networking, etc.?

CPU: P4 2.6 or better or Athlon XP/64 3000+ or better (despite what you think, Vista runs just fine on even this old workhorse)
Graphics: AMD/ATI: 9600 Pro/X1300 Pro or better (AGP/PCI/PCIe)
nVidia: GeForce 6xxx series or newer (AGP/PCI/PCIe)
The only reason I am recommending the GeForce 6xxx series as opposed to the FX 5xxx is *driver support*: nVidia's Vista driver doesn't support the FX 5xxx and lower.
RAM: 1 GB or more (If you don't have 1 GB or more in your PC, even if you're running XP, I have to ask *why not*. Upgrading RAM is easily the *easiest* way to breathe new life into a seeming-old PC; what's more, it's still relatively cheap.)

All the above recommendations make perfect sense even if you decide to stick with Windows XP, so you can't keep using *that* excuse forever.

"I honestly don't see the problem with this. Don't most people want a better faster PC anyways? I mean if you seriously want a new OS why not have a better PC parts to use it? It makes no sense to have say Vista if your PC is not up to it. If you PC does what you need it to do with the parts you have currently and the windows it has does what you need I don't see why you would need to consider Vista at all. I don't know it just makes no sense to me. "

Guys. Even if it's just parts that's a ton of pollution.

Agreed. While my desktop system is über, I would not say so much about my laptop, which is actually running Vista also (albeit a test copy, whereas I've gone full conversion on the desktop). Doesn't sound like such a big deal unless you consider that my laptop is an 800mhz P3 (min spec for Vista) with ATI Rage Mobility M1 graphics (not even a driver available, I "tricked" a driver for the closest ATI card there is on), no driver for the sound (But I managed to get the XP driver from HP on), no driver for onboard ethernet (but I managed to use a generic 3com), no driver for the PCMCIA Wireless card (but I managed to use a generic Atheros)... windows update actually provided a modem driver. AND - once I got everything working - the only place slowness really shows up is in bootup speed - it is a bit off on that part. But once booted, it runs very well - almost as well as XP.

The laptop is an Omnibook 6000, Pentium-III 800mhz, 512mb ram and an upgraded 80gb hard drive. I've put money into upgrades in it over the years I admit, but it is *still* an ancient beast at heart with a 1.0 "Experience Index" score - and it actually runs Vista better than many computers used to run Win95! So I don't know what all the bitchin' is about.

ERM.... has anybody noticed that this thread has been necromanced?