Defending Windows Vista

Vista is fully capable of destroying itself. Our daughter and son-in-law have just decided to scrap two Dell computers running Vista in favor of new iMac running Leopard. They are very tech savvy. One works for AT&T and one works for IBM. What brought about this change? Well, we sent our old iMac to our granddaughter two weeks ago after we got a new iMac. Once they had a chance to see the Mac OS side-by-side with Vista, there was no doubt which was better. Glad to say that they have come in from the cold.

The whole anti-Vista 'movement' has irritated me for quite awhile and it is nice to see someone in the press defending Vista. People have forgotten the bad press and problems that plagued XP all the way up to and including 2005. I found a few articles (thanks, google) that are strikingly similar to today's anti-Vista stories. http://halfbyte.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!433AF012736FFD06!283.entry

CNet, I am convinced, has a corporate 'bash-Vista' policy. They are, by far, the worst with Vista, and Microsoft in general. Listen to Buzz out Loud. Tom Merrit takes every opportunity he can to trash the O/S. Oh, yeah, once in a while, he says 'its not all THAT bad' but, generally, it is negative. CRAVE has showed no love for Vista. NEWS.COM puts any anti-Vista 'news'-no matter how small-in big, bold type.
The thing that really gets me is when APPLE releases a 'patch'that is really multiple patches, for FORTY PLUS problems and CNET either ignores it or puts in the smaller print. When Microsoft releases ONE or TWO patches for Vista, it is headline news. If Microsoft released a patch covering over forty problems, they'd devote the entire darn news.com home page to it.
ARGH!

Joe,
I got to just say this, perhaps your campaign to be an almost only one advocating Vista, should be telling you something. The public has generally decided that Vista is as bad as Windows ME, it just could be that they are right, and you are not. All you got to do is check out a few user forums and you get the idea that Vista is not popular, and has too many problems. Also, businesses have mostly decided to not deploy Vista, dosen't that tell you something?

Worse, you are losing credibility as a tech writer backing Vista as a "good" OS. While a few people like you might like Vista, Vista is causing a lot of pain and bad feelings for those who get stuck using it, and cannot downgrade to XP. In this manner, MS is causing a market shift in the future years, by forcing consumers to user Vista, that they may never be able to overcome.

Another reason that Vista is failing, is the main reason for Bill Gates to force Vista on consumers was the controlling factor of including DRM in the OS. He should have concentrated on making Vista truely a really good sercurity OS, rather than the half baked failing sercurity mess that it is.

Example;

Windows antivirus measures failing?

http://www.electronista.com/articles/07/12/24/windows.antivirus.failure/

Quotes;

"The third-party antivirus software for Windows PCs is buckling under the load of advanced security threats, German computer magazine c't reports in its latest issue. A comparison of 17 different antivirus tools show that while a few programs are adept at picking up known trojans viruses, such as AVG and BitDefender, most have seen a degraded ability to recognize malware that does not fit existing patterns. With the exceptions of F-Secure and NOD32, most halved their detection rates of unknown from 40-50 percent in January to just 20-30 percent. This places most Windows PCs at risk of catching a 'wild' virus before the antivirus software firms have a chance to update their signatures to recognize it, c't warns."

"
The software is also placing an increasing burden on the host computers, the magazine adds. The operating system's performance is more likely to drop while the antivirus utility runs in the background, while false alarms have increased and led people to believe useful files were viruses."

The most telling point is that Microsoft itself has given up trying to counter Vista's bad press, and is already talking up Dimdows 7.
Ultimately, you and Paul Thurrott and all the other Vista boosters may try to claim it's not all that bad, but the fact remains that, now that even Microsoft no longer believes that, Vista is a lost cause.
End of story.

i understand that msft has programs like thise of nuance, dragon 9 etc. if so are they being bundled into new desk tops?
what are the names of these programs and which nuance programs are they like? finally. all i read is that new vista is a joke and the nuance is the market leader in such software. my question is this. if msft bundles an equivalent or even a general likeness of nuance programs, why would anyone buy nuance when msft gives it away?

thanks in advnce

mark weiss

I work in a small IT company which, among other things, sells computers. It's characteristic of Vista acceptance by the users that every PC sold with Vista came back to us for downgrade(?) to Win XP. We are not talking about tech users here just your average every day user. Now i work in the IT for over 20 years and this is the first time (with the exception of Win ME) that an OS for MS had that kind of acceptance. I think that if a product is bad or at least not up to the standards the users will decide if it is good or not no matter how much marketing effort is done. And i think Lawrence D'Oliveiro has a point when he points that MS started talking about Win 7 so soon. It sure tells something. As for chips saying that Joe lost credibility i don't think that's the case. Everybody is entitled to his/her opinion as long as can back it up with facts (and sometimes without even that!)
Thank you an i wish everyone here a Happy New Year

Apple has already defined the public perception of Vista. Microsoft will kook pathetic if they try to push it now. Redmond has no concept how to define message, execute message and STAY on message. Ballmer says this might be happen, Gates says a different thing, div VP says another in a trade mag, a MS blog says another. People don't know who or what speaks for the behemoth anymore. Apple's messaging that comes from only 3 places: Advertising, Apple PR and Steve Jobs mouth. And they match. With a rollout that was missing-in-action, its no surprise Apple stepped in the void and told people just what to think about Vista.

Apple's ads about Vista aren't accurate as far as the technical ability of Vista goes, but that as far as perception goes are right. Some of it is true (confusing number of versions), most of it isn't or is overstated.
So Joe is spot on that MS have a PR problem on their hands that they need to deal with.

I too work in IT, and I too have had the pleasure of downgrading PCs, reactivating in xp, calling ms, etc; but Vista is NOT like Windows ME.

There are major improvements in the form of the DX10 based compositing window engine, search (somewhat anyway), printing framework with xps, security (sandboxed IE, ASLR, etc), media centre, and other minor bits...
Personally i'm just a little disappointed that after all this time the changes are somewhat less than expected; plus it seems very slow - at least to me...

Vista is not bad as the other blogs or people say. Mostly those blogs are anti-microsoft. SJVN is a perfect example. And Joe, I like the way you reply to his posts.

Vista is great for me and never turned back to XP. Vista has lot of good features.

So, Joe, there are many users who love Vista and we are with you Defending Vista :D

"longstanding journalistic practice of providing key influencers with review product."

Doesn't matter if it is longstanding or not. Doesn't sound like "honest" journalism to me, whoever does it. Sounds like longstanding marketing/bribing.

MS is likely to sell a LOT of vista over the years. That is hard to deny, but it is not clear to me if it is because people want it, or just want a computer, and with MS's near monopoly presence, it will likely be Vista.

Microsoft should focus on the strengths of Windows. Millions of applications and hardware to choose from. The average user using 3-4 main applications such as browser, mail and word processing won't notice that. Macs are good enough for this job or even equivalent to Vista. That's the problem Microsoft has to solve when selling to the average consumer, that is how to sell something, that is probably not going to be used most of the time by the average user, but it's what mainly differentiates you from competition.

Your kidding right ?

Vista is perceived as a bad operating system because a few bloggers took a pot-shot at it 12 months ago, and because its now fashionable to knock Vista ?

thats it ?

Nothing about the ridiculous user security, the DRM, the 'so-so' performance even on blazingly fast hardware, the lack of compatiblity, the lack of drivers on first release, and its annoying habit of always moving the user profile directories back to the same volume that Vista is running on, deleting files ?

I had to check the calendar, make sure it wasnt April 1st.

Move on, Joe. Accept that Vista had all the hype, all the tame magazines pushing it that MS could buy, all the free advertising and the paid-for advertising.

And it lost. Because it was over-hyped in the first place, the backlash was all the more powerful.

And as for the 'Mac vs Vista' Ad. Come on. You have to have a degree in hacking Vista to get it to even become stable enough to get into the ballpark.

And all thats before Mr Average consumer discovers its got the DRM system from hell built right in. Yes - folks - just as DRM is being removed from music, here's old Vista with the 'I think your playing unlicensed content - I'm either going to slow right down or stop completely'. Nice.

10 out of 10 for being contrary. But the reason that folk still persist in reading this column - and god this is getting tougher all the time - is to read proper, grounded analysis of what MS is doing.

And right now they're doing Badly.

--* Bill

If anyone thinks that Vista is worth having, go and read what Sean Hederman wrote at:

http://dotnet.org.za/codingsanity/archive/2007/12/14/review-windows-xp.aspx

You'll quickly conclude that Vista REALLY is the piece of junk that it is described by virtually everyone but Joe. I have my personal experience.

Hey, Joe! How much swag do you get from MSFT per month?

We the public no longer have any belief in people like you that want to feed us crap posts that ask us if we are going to believe our lyin' eyes or you.

VISTA = Junk. Period. End of story.

Next decision: go with a 10 (yeah, who could believe it?) year old OS like XP that has been patched for security reasons more times than an NYC street after winter (and which runs as slow as molasses in January because so much code has been replaced and so much virus protection must be layered on top of its already diminished capabilities; did I mention Vista DRM, etc?)

OR

a modern OS like the Apple OSX 10.5.

I used Win machines for more than two decades (since the Compaq 16mHz 286 in 1986) but have moved over to a Mac.

The resons are clear: I am fed up with being force fed with craplets that take too much time and efforts to remove. (Why must buying a Win machine be like getting mugged or raped?) I am fed up with startup that takes six minutes; I am fed up with shutdown that takes two minutes if it does not hang altogether; I am fed up with (fill in the blank - do you have two weeks more to read more?).

The truth is that MSFT has abused its monopoly so badly, so often, so intensely that I am willing to make the money and time transition to an entirely new computer and OS rather than have to be fed up each day with regurgitiated Vista garbage from the rotting Redmond heap.

I will not be crapped upon by the Redmond Bloatfarm Dungpile any longer. I put up with more than two decades of abuse from the CrapHeap.

As e.e, cummings wrote in his poem: "there is some shit I will not eat..."

Goodby to MSFT SH!T forever.

VISTA = DUNG, useful only for spreading on fields.

Some time ago, I upgraded a PC my kids use to Vista. Number of problems=0, number of viruses=0, performance=good.
I have no problem with Vista and there are millions like me who also don't. So please, save your evangelism for church and let MS get on producing the stunning products that they do, even if they don't always get it completely right first time.

I have been using Vista since last November and there have been problems. The current problen is with Nvidia software. Does anybody remember trying to get Roxio products to work with XP?

Vista is the best OS Microsoft or any other company has ever released.I'm using it from the beta testing times and It's amazing to see how they've updated it during this course of time.
If apple thinks PC users are fools, then we already know who's the actual fool (spents$$$$ for a candy...)
Apple stands on ipod platform, which is already shaking with some new players.So they're just terrified that MS will make inroads in that market too.But MS is on a strong OS platform and if they come up with a strategy to block ipod usage with PCs, I bet iPod sales will be down to earth. What they don't realize is they're in business bcos of MS OS and so maybe they're calling themselves as fools (their ad).
Thanks Joe, for bringing this up. MS relies on good word of mouth from users like us and not on ad gimmicks atleast for its desktop stuff.
I'm a software engineer using Pcs for more than 20 yrs, and I would strongly recommend using Vista for office and home use.They've already come up with all the required drivers to support millions of devices and so I would say go ahead with vista upgrade confidently. I'm also using the SP1 beta now. It's just awesome.

There're millions of satisfied customers like me who want to take a stand against this Vista bashing and (fool label).We're planning to start an online campaign for this to show who the real fools are. We're pround to be using Vista.

chips Says :
"...businesses have mostly decided to not deploy Vista, dosen't that tell you something?"

@chips :
"When will your company upgrade to Windows Vista and Office 2007?"

This year
6%
Between 2008 and 2010
16%
Between 2010 and 2012
9%
We will look at alternatives before making a decision
69%

Jonathan H Says :
"I have no problem with Vista and there are millions like me who also don't."

@Jonathan H :
Any proof?

Dimitris Says :
"I work in a small IT company which, among other things, sells computers. It's characteristic of Vista acceptance by the users that every PC sold with Vista came back to us for downgrade(?) to Win XP. We are not talking about tech users here just your average every day user."

whatever Says :
"I too work in IT, and I too have had the pleasure of downgrading PCs, ..."

Chakkaradeep Says :
"Vista is not bad as the other blogs or people say. Mostly those blogs are anti-microsoft."

Joe Says :
"Yesterday, I spoke with a VAR buddy who has several large clients in the Washington, DC metro area. His largest client, a sizable software developer, is sticking with XP because he demanded it. For a short time, the company president used Vista on a new, Sony VAIO T series notebook but later switched back to XP."

"Everyone--every single person--that I put on Vista has switched back to XP," he said. "It's too complicated."

cloudshine Says :
"There're millions of satisfied customers like me who want to take a stand against this Vista bashing and (fool label).We're planning to start an online campaign for this to show who the real fools are. We're pround to be using Vista."

@cloudshine :
Maybe the real "fools" are Vista users?
"Why Vista "fools" me on deleted files?
...
Everything works fine in XP but but I just do not understand what trick the Vista is playing."

@_ :
**These are my opinions only and in no way are they meant to offend anyone. If for any reason you feel the need to contact me in any way regarding these posts, especially for inappropriate wording or a perceived derogatory statement, please feel free to contact me. I am all over the Internet and you can find me there.**

Why swim against the zeitgeist, Joe?

Based on the responses here, one would think that Windows Vista is an abject failure. Add Vaughn-Nichols' fantasies to the mix, and you have a veritable feast for bashing Microsoft.

However, the reality is about as close to being what they hope as Alpha Centauri is to Earth.

Fact: Windows Vista isn't going anywhere.

It is one thing for enterprises, which generally have licenses for Windows XP to downgrade, but can all these moms & pops tell us where they get all these license keys for downgrading to XP?

Isn't it niiice to hide behind the anonymity afforded by the Internet (thanks, user=chips, for digging me out :)) and proclaim all your downgrade fantasies?

Vaughn-Nichols at least allows us to see the into the bizzaro world he inhabits; indeed, how do you explain how he takes the same information we get, and, due to some cosmic transmogrification, arrive at the absolutely ludicrous conclusions he does?

Now every semi-yobless, box-slapper Linux-head feels the need to offer trite anecdotal tales of downgrades. Why don't you give us real data? How many exactly? Where's the beef, dudes?

Stop swimming upstream with some obscure 1% Linux distro, or any Unix of any kind.

Windows Vista, the OS for the rest 95% of the world.

John Obeto Says :
"Windows Vista, the OS for the rest 95% of the world."

@John Obeto :
"Vista Adoption Far From a Done Deal"
...
"... report, which found that while only 2 percent of PCs in enterprises are running Vista so far, ..."

I read the Hederman article, and have had none of those experiences at all using Vista. Its been all good and I wouldn't go back for anything!

User=n0neXn0ne: only 2% of enterprise PCs are using Windows Vista(tm).

Did your article also mention that about 100% of retail PCs since January of 2007 have Windows Vista?

I have my wife, one of my three kids, myself and several people in the company for which I develop software all using Vista. Complaints: 1. That's all... and that complaint is only from my ten year old about one particular game that doesn't like Vista. Everyone likes the appearance and performance. Vista is without a doubt the BEST os ever developed. Most people complaining about it are using 5 year old machines and ten year old printers. Its success in the marketplace is not in question, Microsoft bashers aside. I wouldn't expect businesses to update existing hardware to it, most didn't do so with XP either. They may wait another 6-12 months before ordering new hardware with it. Won't matter a bit, Vista will still replace it. We have a brand new Mac in the house (wife does phone support for Apple). OS 10 really doesn't appeal much to any of us. The interface is vanilla plain, it's not any faster at anything than a comparable pc, and we've already had to re-install the os once when Apple tech support couldn't straighten out some issues. Honestly, people, find something more productive to do with your time, Microsoft isn't an angel nor is it a demon. Just the most successful software company in the world, by an order of magnitude. Why does that bother a few people so badly?

John Obeto Says :
"...
about 100% of retail PCs since January of 2007 have Windows Vista?"

@John Obeto :
"Microsoft Extends XP's Sales Life"
"Microsoft's OEM and retail partners will offer Windows XP for an additional five months until June 30, 2008 the software maker has decided after receiving complaints that customers are not ready to cut off and switch to Vista."

Bob G :

"...Microsoft isn't an angel nor is it a demon. Just the most successful software company in the world, by an order of magnitude. Why does that bother a few people so badly?"

@Bob G :
Maybe? "Microsoft dirty tricks that were never revealed"
"...18 states and the District of Columbia that sued Redmond several years ago."

Bob G,
5 year old machine xm... I don't know about 5, but Vista runs fine on my 4 year old machine with a mediocre graphics card. Actually it gives me a decent performance index of 3.8 only because of the graphics card. I see adds in stores with computers selling for 180 Euros.That's another issue, besides old hardware.I doubt that these cheap machines get score a higher perf index than my 4 yr old machine.
Even with old hardware you disable superfetch, Volume Shadow Copy, Aero and indexing service and you get XP like functionality that runs decently on a 10 year old hardware. Other than that driver availability and software compatibility is 100% responsibility of the vendor, not Microsoft. They had plenty of time to come up something compatible and most of them did sooner while others later.

George said it best.

Despite whether Vista is or isn't a good OS, the Apple PR machine has already branded it a failure. Combined with it's poor (and late) deployment, hardware issues at launch and the inability to convince current XP users to see the "value" in upgrading, it will limp along until the next OS release.

While clearly not the disaster I've heard that ME was, it sure isn't the winner Microsoft expected.

And Microsoft sat on their hands while Apple continued to continuously roll out very clever / funny commercials making everyone who uses Windows and Vista look like the biggest butt wipes on the planet. For the young and hip (or those who want to appear to be as such), Apple is where it's at.

I'm still happily on XP and, unless I suffer a computer disaster, probably won't be upgrading to a new system until whatever OS follows Vista. (And yes, I have used Macs extensively at work for the last five years, I still prefer Windows.)

But Joe: those would make some really great commercials. Hopefully someone in advertising at Microsoft is reading.

I don't think I would have Mac Dude and Vista Dude side-by-side booting the Mac Book Pro against a Vista laptop, as Vista Dude would probably be waiting a lot longer for his machine to boot up than would Mac Dude.

Also, what JW fails to mention is that if OS's are so passe, why does MS charge so much for an OS (forget about Vista Basic) that isn't that much better than XP?

I think MS doesn't strongly market Vista because there isn't much to market, just a more expensive, some would say less efficient OS that at least for now doesn't add much value to the user experience (and can in fact detract from it)>

Bob H

i like the ad idea. two problems...

In the first ad you can have Bill using a Mac and shave 20 minutes off the time it takes to complete that task. Heck, wouldn't want him to miss his plane!

In the 2nd ad the Mac guy would be finished browsing the web, downloading music, syncing his phone, drinking his coffee before the Vista machine ever let "PC Guy" browse the web.

Vista (and more importantly) IE7 have taken users back to the dark ages. I use both PC's and Macs and i have never seen a more annoying application that IE7. This is what MS likes to call security but the problem is that it gets in the way of the user unlike any application from Apple.

This has always been the problem with MS and others who try and copy Apple. When the iPhone was released everyone rushed to build devices with a touch-screen. It has nothing to do with the touch-screen and everything to do with "user experience". This is something that MS has never (and will never) understand.. period.

I reviewed Windows Vista and I was fair and critical of my review of the new OS. What has disappointed many users is that Vista was not here sooner. A lot of the features touted in the OS were promised from late 2003, but because of the delays in development and Apples close watch of PDC 2003 they were able to bring some of Vista's features to market quicker with the release of Tiger.

But a lot of the negativity towards Vista is really attributed to persons in the Open Source community and cult like Mac community, people who have long been against the Windows platform in the first place. Windows Vista is doing well in the market place, a lot of Company's are planning their deployments, every OEM I am aware of offer it by default on their systems. People are upgrading to it and strong installed base results for the OS is proof of that, Vista is around 100 million PCs now. Mac is still at the stagnant 25 million for the past 10 to 15 years, Linux is a blip and the fact that even staunch Linux users have Vista in dual boot configurations with their favorite distributions prove even more they cannot resist the platform no matter how much they speak against it.

We don't really know what Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols is running at home, but I wouldn't be surprised to see Windows on all his machines, because he seems to know every little detail about Vista and XP which could only be formed from intense use of the OS. People don't make a decision based on partial/biased reviews of the OS. They go out and actually use the OS and form an opinion on their own. The Mac and Open Source community don't realize they are actually pushing people to Vista. When people here the negativity, they say to themselves, I have to check this out to see what its all about and they are ultimately proven wrong and get to see Vista on its own merits and mesmerized by its features,'SECURITY' its improved productivity and end up actually wanting to upgrade or buy a new PC with it preinstalled.

The adoption of the premium Vista SKUs such as Ultimate and Home Premium are so strong. People love Vista, its just that persons who don't have a problem with it are not complaining, so you end up hearing the ones who have never used it instead who's ultimate aim is just create FUD without actual facts.

I read a guys review of an Apple MacBook and the guy spends most of his time complaining about Vista when he is suppose to be reviewing the MacBook, but spends half of the review, reviewing hearsay about Vista. So its the perception thats infiltrating peoples minds. But consumers are smarter than that and are not gonna listen to people who actually live in an IT bubble. Vista is probably 2007's biggest hit and it will be even more of a major hit for 2008.

I use IE7 and Vista everyday, Sean, you have no idea what you are talking about when you say it returns users to the dark ages, seriously. The article is spot on, it makes people feel cool to be different, so they rush to attack the majority. Vista has sold over 88 million copies, that is the fastest OS adoption, EVER. Those people are too busy with tripple-A apps and games and having fun with vista to spam forums all day with their OS-religion, unlike bored linux and mac users who have no interesting apps or games and lame OSes.

I'm about as positive a Microsoft advocate as there is out there.

I upgraded to Vista soon after it was released. My DVD drive was no longer recognized, and my system as as slow as could be.

Even Vista software I installed, such as Norton 360 for Vista, did not work properly, and slowed down my PC even further.

Yes, there were some new beautiful windows to play with, but after a few mouse clicks, I was back to being presented with regular Windows XP dialog boxes.

Oh, Vista has quite a few improvements under the covers, but who cares when it's slow, inconsistent, and offers very improvement (if any) to the average user.

I don't think Vista is being bashed unrealistically.

It's really quite amazing how bad it is, and how little it offers.

And, yes, I had to upgrade my Vista back to XP, and, since that time, have been asked to do the same for 6 other friends.

It is clear that Joe Wilcox wrote this article for the sole purpose of being a contrary voice in the sea of public opinion. There is not much here that really points out the facts of the flawed user experience, the requirement for exponentially higher system resources, and no real cutting edge innovation associated with the product.

Joe P wrote: "It is clear that Joe Wilcox wrote this article for the sole purpose of being a contrary voice in the sea of public opinion. There is not much here that really points out the facts of the flawed user experience, the requirement for exponentially higher system resources..."

Hi, Joe,

I've covered those topics previously. At the bottom of the post are links to 17 others, where all those topics are covered at length.

Joe

*snort*. The Open Source and Mac press branding Vista a failure:

Sorry chaps, but just a few posts back you were all out there reminding us Open Source and Mac folks that we represent only a few percentage points of the market. Press costs money, paid for by ads. I only see a couple of Mac and Open Source magazines on the bookshelves.

Lets see. "PC Week". Is that a Mac and Open source magazine ? No. Does it rip into Vista ? Yeah.

Dont go blaming little old us if the planet thinks Vista stinks - were only a few percentage points remember.

And back again to the "Mac==Expensive". 5 macs ugpraded to Leopard for £125 (sterling). Same price here in the UK for 5 Vista PC's at £400 each ? £2000 sterling. Who's the overpriced puppy here?

Or £4,500 for a fully loaded Dell XPS. £1200 for a macbook pro. (Another £96 for 4gb of Ram). Which one runs Vista the fastest?

Folks. Stop blaming poor Joe for trying valiantly to defend Vista's honor. Good try, Joe. Bet you didnt think both sides would tear into this piece, huh?

Just makes you look like a shill, defending the indefensible. Why not rip into Microsoft for shipping a stillborn product? Isnt that what "Microsoft Watch" is for ? Not 'Microsoft Love' ?

Me ? I loved Vista for about a week. The following 7 weeks were a nightmare, then I went out and bought a mac. For each of my family members.

After 20 years in IT building, supporting, coding-for, and managing Microsoft systems.

If your not having problems with Vista right now - good for you. Just wait... You've not even tested the shonky DRM system yet...

---* Bill

Vista 64 is a joke.

It's hard enough getting drivers for the damn thing but then microsoft go and slap a 'must be signed' enforcement on this situation means it's damn near impossible in some cases to get drives. Well at first it was ok you could run some commands via bcdedit and allow unsigned drivers. Yes you the user had a 'choice' to say, hey its ok by me I am happy to have unsigned drivers. But then in their ultimate wisdom Microsoft had a KB that corrected this 'flaw'? and the only way to run unsigned drivers is f8 at boot. Hmm how the flook can you press f8 remotely? Awesome! I can only think they are forcing this as a way to get people acustomed to signed drivers together with TPM so we can all have unhackable pc's. I like Mac's they don't treat you like a criminal, they actually let you do stuff, Vista feels like a policeman enforcing its policies on you to make you 'feel save'. Well sometimes its better to be able to break free.

To (Quote) Bill Buchan :

*snort*. The Open Source and Mac press branding Vista a failure:
----------------------------------------------------
Bill, I too find it amazing that the Micro$oft Shills and M$ PR machine now have to resort blaming the Problems on all the bad responce to Vi$ta by the public on anyone but those who made this defective and poorly engineered piece of software. Vista is the Xbox or Windows ME of operating Systems.

But we can't really expect Micro$oft to stand up and admitt
that Vista is a bad OS, and do the right thing, refund the money people have paid for it, and at least give them an XP Pro disk to replace it. Although Linux is probably the best option to replace Vista.

Micro$oft has been hunting for someone to blame for the Vi$ta problems, first it was the OEM's, then the manufacturers that made device drivers, then because of the poor uptake, (according to Ballmer) it was the bloody pirates. Its clear that Micro$oft does not have an once of backbone, and just admitt the truth. Cannot believe that I wrote truth and Microsoft in the same sentance.

When will M$ fix some basic problems with Windows? Sercurity has been a problem for over 10 years now, and the best that M$ does is to put a used too small bandaid on the sore and infection. Now they create more problems for the users with Vista and the greatly increased use of DRM. Vista is a regression of an Operating System, and most user know it, which is why the uptake is so slow, and only on new machines, except for the $hills.

HOORAY! Microsoft has just pushed out, as an optional Microsoft Update, a new NVidia GeForce driver for my graphics card. Now all the goofy things that Vista did, like those short pauses when it appeared to be contemplating its navel, have disappeared.

Those of you who are old enough may remember back to the early days of XP. The solution to almost everything was "get yourself a new graphics driver." History repeats itself.

Folks who use Automatic Updates may never know that a new driver is available for their graphics card. And they will continue to curse Microsoft.

I think it's pretty revealing that all the pro Vista comments here are so ridiculously positive.'The best OS ever', 'having fun with vista','I wouldn't go back for anything'.

Doesn't anybody thinks it's 'OK', 'alright', or 'it's a little better'.

In a sea of discontent, these posts seem a little too over the top to be real opinions.

Joe, as you've documented very well this past year, Vista's problems started long before it was released, with its best features scrapped and its insane EULA, that essentially says that Microsoft software can dictate what and how often you can update your hardware.

No corporation is going to tell me — or give itself — control over something it cannot control simply by writing it in its EULA. It's the equivalent of a George Bush signing statement. After I bought my copy of x64, I was deeply disappointed at its horrid performance, even on the fastest system money could buy. Vista's damnation is fully deserved.

I spent all day messing around with an old ThinkPad to bring it up to speed and install some new apps on it.

Part of the process involved copying and creating some files on a Vista machine because it was the only one that could run an ISO function at the time.

Right in the middle of all this I was stopped short because Vista told me I didn't have "permission" to change a file. Huh?

So, I then had to fool around for ten minutes digging into some arcane menu to create a file "permission" so I could do things with it.

This is why Vista is a failure. It gets in your face at the wrong times, and impedes your work. This makes the user hostile to the product.

Vista will always be a 2nd rate product because it is more fuss and bother than it is worth. After today's irritations Microsoft has my "permission" to put vista in an archive where the sun don't shine.

Andre De Costa,

I'm with ya as far as Vista getting an unfair rap goes. But being mesmerised with features and it being *the* success story of 2007... come on, mate!

You're being about as fair and balanced as a Mac fanboy.

Vista was a major black-eye for Microsoft when it was first released. I believe that one of the biggest mistakes was that this was Microsoft's first operating system that catered to the major copyright holders of the world and not to the actual users. Oops. That's why (I believe) that people see lots of annoying pop-ups and permissions issues and such. And the more adventurous users tend to get lost deeper in the DRM woods than the average user.
Vista, like any operating system with different and/or better security than XP and previous versions will have issues with application compatibility and drivers. In this way, Vista started out a lot like Linux: better security but with with app and driver shortcomings.
Another reason that I believe is that Microsoft felt forced to issue Vista before it was ready. They had hoped that their funding of the SCOG lawsuit (via shady licensing payments to SCOG for something that SCOG doesn't even own) would delay the competition (namely Linux-based systems) but that little sojourn is ending very badly and without the intended effects. And their patent sabre-rattling hasn't helped quickly enough either.
So Vista was very complex, aimed at the wrong customers, and needed to be released before it was ready. All in all, it was off to a very bad start. But Microsoft has endless oodles of money to throw at the problem, and it apparently been getting better. Just like most of their stuff (crappy Windows 1.X and 2.X), shakey Windows 3.X, and hokey Windows ME, Vista will eventually come around.
But it gave the Mac and Linux platforms a little breathing space and the recovery of Vista to the glory of past Microsoft successes will be more interesting to watch.
But I don't subscribe to the theory that poor Vista performance is the responsibility of the users to fix by throwing money at new hardware. That's just plain wrong. Using that logic, then people who receive poor service, crummy meals, cramped seating, and endless security hassles from the airlines have only themselves to blame: they should just upgrade their hardware to their own personal business jet and bypass the airlines and their draconian security. See how easy a problem can be solved just by upgrading the hardware? Didn't think so.

Vista Frustrations run amuck...

The general opinion out there, you know the public among the Internet says Vista sucks. I've pointed out my experience with Vista and all in all, it does suck overall. Maybe Microsoft should of sold Ultimate for $49.99 or something, I mean the cost amount, the frustration amount for this product is too much, even for $49.99.

I've really tried the product for some time on a killer machine that far exceeds the recommended hardware/software requirements of Vista.

I've even tried the SP1 RC beta and boy is that a mistake. Like I said before, my favorite OS by Microsoft to date is W2K Professional. I have a machine, a year old DouCore that I've been running Vista on, and a machine that is seven years old that is still running Service Pack 4 on Windows 2000, and my development servers run Windows 2000 Advance Server, they've been running smoothely for over 5 years straight without so much as a burp and the only time I remember rebooting those is when I install something that requires a reboot.

XP Professional is a wonderful operating system, especially when you disable the "Fischer Price" look to it. I am not a gamer, but an author and developer professionally -- So why do I need most of the crap. No I opt for stability, speed, or what I call, a nimble operating system that just needs to operate 24/7.

I just installed the unofficial SP5 for Windows 2000 on my 2000 box and everything continues to run great. Yes, W2K does need third party software, you know, non microsoft applications such as firewalls, antivirus, and of course antispyware amongst other things -- So what, and yes, companies out there still make apps specifically for W2K, and XP. Windows 2000 Professional still works just fine after all these years and installing it requires no activation and I know Microsoft has the least control on this operating system out of the three.

XP is very much alive and the most popular as far as the Microsoft Operating Systems goes and by the looks of it, going to be that way for some time to come. As an IT person that owns his own business, I've spent a lot of time "downgrading machines to XP Pro from Vista and making a lot of money thanks to Vista -- So no amount of fanfare on how good Vista is, is certainly not going to change the crappy reality of Vista in the real world.

Why labotomize your system for the facade of stability, security, and productive operability by putting Vista on a computer, please, why do this to yourself -- I've done it, been there, and paid the price in hours and hours of being frustrated.

I will run XP and for that matter, W2K until things will not run on this platform any longer, or can't run on these OS's any longer. In reality, I just don't see an end to these "working and productive" operating systems and the day that these do, is the day I look elsewhere than Microsoft.

I've been with Microsoft for many, many years and I am one that is now beyond frustration and the time consumption of playing the Redmond game.

"Vista sets 2007 land-speed record for copying and deleting"

When I got my new Vista machine back in March, I kept my old XP in case there were problems with Vista or some program I couldn't run on Vista. The two are connected by a KVM.

Once a month I boot it up to run Windows Update and patch ITunes/Quicktime and Acrobat. The rest of the time it is stone cold off. I don't miss it.

This article was clearly written by someone who hasn't had to deal with constant querulous cries for help from friends and clients who've gotten Vista. Not "how do I deal with a new interface"; more like "it doesn't work."

Clue: Please write about the real world.

What a sophomoric article... It's not that Vista is pilloried for being just good (not great).

It's that Vista is a huge step backwards from XP.

Microsoft deserves the raspberries they're getting for Vista.

The people squawking about problems with Vista may be overlooking the most basic rule about new operating systems. You don't put them on your current hardware. Move to the new OS when you replace your hardware and you will be reasonably unscathed.
On the other hand it has to be acknowledged that by the time MS reached XP SP2, most business users had everything they required from an OS.

Stop being an apologist for Microsoft! Vista is dreak at its worst. I've been using a new HP system for three months with Vista Ultimate loaded and it is the worst! System services just stop working - like Windows Installer right in the middle of an installation. There's at least seven other system services that will stop working a dozen times during every session. Even installing Office 2007 was a nightmare (other than the nightmare trying to use it - that's a separate story). It took me working WITH Microsoft 50 hours to get Outlook to retrieve my email. Even the new replacement for Outlook Express would not work correctly.

I'm going back to XP Pro as soon as possible!

I just finished building a new PC. I installed a new OEM copy of XP PRO on this machine. Vista? No way. It's not bashing, it's common sense. I wanted a new PC that worked like my older (aging) PC, only faster with newer hardware and more storage. I need an OS that's proven, and reliable, and that's XP. Vista has proven itself over the past year to be anything but that. I wanted nothing to do with it.

I just finished building a new PC. I installed a new OEM copy of XP PRO on this machine. Vista? No way. It's not bashing, it's common sense. I wanted a new PC that worked like my older (aging) PC, only faster with newer hardware and more storage. I need an OS that's proven, and reliable, and that's XP. Vista has proven itself over the past year to be anything but that. I wanted nothing to do with it.

I just finished building a new PC. I installed a new OEM copy of XP PRO on this machine. Vista? No way. It's not bashing, it's common sense. I wanted a new PC that worked like my older (aging) PC, only faster with newer hardware and more storage. I need an OS that's proven, and reliable, and that's XP. Vista has proven itself over the past year to be anything but that. I wanted nothing to do with it.

I just finished building a new PC. I installed a new OEM copy of XP PRO on this machine. Vista? No way. It's not bashing, it's common sense. I wanted a new PC that worked like my older (aging) PC, only faster with newer hardware and more storage. I need an OS that's proven, and reliable, and that's XP. Vista has proven itself over the past year to be anything but that. I wanted nothing to do with it.

The comments on this article says it all: "Vista Sucks!"

Its seems that 80%, or more, of the people commenting here actually prove that this article is full of hot air! If Vista is so good why are the majority of users and readers commenting here dicing it? Good question and the answer should be obvious - the very readers of this article proves it - Vista is a dud!

Microsoft is focusing more on the so-called great new Windows 7 OS because they know that Vista is no good. What they are saying about Vienna is exactly what they said about Vista - they lost all credibility with most people and rightfully so.

When the best parts of Vista, Aero, transparency, animated desktops, etc. are all inferior copies of OS X you got to wonder about Vista. Millions of people who use Vista say its bad and no matter what you write or what Microsoft says can't or will change that one itty bitty bit.

The comments on this article says it all: "Vista Sucks!"

Its seems that 80%, or more, of the people commenting here actually prove that this article is full of hot air! If Vista is so good why are the majority of users and readers commenting here dicing it? Good question and the answer should be obvious - the very readers of this article proves it - Vista is a dud!

Microsoft is focusing more on the so-called great new Windows 7 OS because they know that Vista is no good. What they are saying about Vienna is exactly what they said about Vista - they lost all credibility with most people and rightfully so.

When the best parts of Vista, Aero, transparency, animated desktops, etc. are all inferior copies of OS X you got to wonder about Vista. Millions of people who use Vista say its bad and no matter what you write or what Microsoft says can't or will change that one itty bitty bit.

I found it quite remarkable to see your words reflect what I have said. Microsoft ceased being a quality technology company quite a while ago and is now a marketing machine for poor products. As you said marketing is the only thing that can possibly save Vista. Fortunately, users now have the internet as a tool to view honest end user opinions. The plain and simple facts are that unending poor user experiences avalanche any fairy tale "WOW" campaign that Microsoft can deliver. Microsoft has stopped beating this dead horse and you should too. That is unless you want your reputation to continue to slide downhill.

I found it quite remarkable to see your words reflect what I have said. Microsoft ceased being a quality technology company quite a while ago and is now a marketing machine for poor products. As you said marketing is the only thing that can possibly save Vista. Fortunately, users now have the internet as a tool to view honest end user opinions. The plain and simple facts are that unending poor user experiences avalanche any fairy tale "WOW" campaign that Microsoft can deliver. Microsoft has stopped beating this dead horse and you should too. That is unless you want your reputation to continue to slide downhill.

I purchased an HP Pavilion 6265 laptop in April '07 with Vista Home Premium installed. I chose 2Gb of RAM for this system as well. My laptop has performed flawlessly over these past nine months and I really like Vista. No problems at all and it seems more resilient than XP.

Consumers were forewarned that this OS would require more RAM. 1Gb is not enough. I suspect many users are trying to scrimp along with XP configurations when tryng to upgrade to Vista. I don't think this is a good strategy. My system grabs fully a third of the installed 2Gb just for housekeeping but I expected this. No complaints. It works great and I would not regress to XP.

What's all the hubbub? Do folks just like to bash Microsoft?

People wait FIVE years and they get a "not so bad" OS? That sucks, Joe. People did expect better, and rightly so. Vista was a cruel disappointment and it still has MAJOR flaws. It's not a good OS, at least not when compared to OS X or Linux in terms of security and stability. Vista is a dead LOSER.

If Micro$oft had taken only a year to get Vista out, maybe it wouldn't make people feel so bad. But they took MUCH LONGER. People have every reason to pan Vista. And they should continue doing so.

Joe "must" defend Vista....??
Why?

Criminal behavior and crappy software.
Not worth the effort Joe....

Joe "must" defend Vista....??

Whatever for Joe? Why not call it what it is, a Vi$ta train wreck.

There is not one reason to upgrade from Windows 2000 or XP to Vista, except when buying a new laptop. DirectX 10 is a bummer, as the Vista gaming experience is so bad, slow (about half of XP with DirectX 9), and incompatiable with most games, video drivers, etc. Sercurity, is probably better and cost less for free sercurity programs once you work enough installing everything into XP than the half baked annoying UAC in Vi$ta.

Only three things have increased for the average user in Vi$ta, 1. The Price 2. More DRM 3. more WGA. You can point to little features in Vista, which one can find a better freeware software for XP with just a little bit of searching on majorgeeks.com.

I would say that Joe, you are out of touch with the public, your readship, and what is good and bad with Vi$ta. Even M$ seems to stopped talking about the "WOW." Its all Seven now, which will most likely be some more warmed over slightly changed Vi$ta code, and a whole lot of vaporware.

I have read through most of the postings and the ones bashing vista over a Mac aren't worth the actual thought they put into writing them. I have friends who work for apple and truly until apple decides to try and compete with Microsoft on a bigger scale... then they should just continue selling iPods... I have been running VISTA for a year and a half... and there is absolutely nothing I can't do or make play in the OS. I have had to figure a few things out, BUT anyone with a little intelligence should be able to do so... AND the people who say they are tech savvy and give up on the OS, should give up on all technology and maybe go read a book. I find that most of the time if people have to put any thought into anything they give up.

I am a long time user of MS OS's. I also do tech support for windows machines. Over the years I've used 3.1, 95,98, 2000, NT4, XP, and now Vista. I've had to troubleshoot all of the above and Me (ugh!).
So I know from whence I speak.
Quite simply, Vista is a dud.
I've seen a number of articles that defend Vista, and not one that states anything Vista does better then XP. Not one! Joe, your defending Vista but you don't give even one reason to use it over XP.
I bought my new PC (an Acer Aspire T180) back in April to replace an old HP Pavillion running Win 98 bought back in 2000. I kept the HP for my seven year old to use. Sad to say, I still have to use it to do some of my work. A little while ago I decided to do a little comparison between the two. Here's the results:

Win 98 runs on Celeron 500mhz, 192MB RAM
Vista Home Basic runs on Athlon 64 3500, 1 GB RAM
Both machines have been pared down to the bare essentials for os processes, plus firewall and anti-virus(avast av and zonealarm for 98, avast av and Win firewall for Vista)

Vista loads and is ready to use, on average, 25 seconds faster than Win 98. That's a whole lot more processor and memory for a lousy 25 seconds.

Vista had less blue screens (I'll give it that, I've only had 1 in the 9 months I've had it).

Freezes when using software that needs 128 MB or less goes to 98. About half of what I get with Vista. Unexplained freezes, even.

Internet speed, even.

Program compatability, 98 by a mile. Ive been able to run programs that require 256 MB of RAM and at least Win 2000 os to run on my old machine (slowly to be sure, but run they do!). I have a hard time getting a number of Vista ready programs to run correctly on Vista, this is a year after it came out.

Ability to run/play/burn a cd, 98. The built in DRM in Vista makes it impossible to play an older cd, run a program from a cd, etc., unless I play a DRM cd first.

I could go on and on, but I won't.
Only Windows Me was/is a crappier os than this, and that was the crappiest os I've ever had the displeasure of dealing with.
You blew it with this one Microsoft!

Playing devil's advocate:
Yes, I know that the best way to make a blog work is through discussion and controversy (that's why that you attack Apple, Google and Ms every so often- albeit Ms less often now.)

But this only works when your articles are balanced. If this is lost, so is your credibility (remember that's the only thing backing you up) and thus your readership will dwindle. In other words, if you like Vista, fair enough. But OBJECTIVITY is basic.

Lastly, remember Google. Only a click away from oblivion( if its credibility is lost.)

Some news about Vista:
Vista deactivates me for upgrading motherboard firmware
blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=938
Anytime you upgrade a motherboard BIOS you pretty much have to hold your breath because a botched installation will result in a bricked motherboard. But Microsoft seems to be well on its way to bricking my Operating System after I successfully upgraded my BIOS. Now I’m going to have to call Microsoft tech support and see how I’m going to resolve this headache. I’ll update this post with how they respond.

Oh and I hope your Christmas gifts are a lot better than mine. Merry Christmas and happy holidays!

-------
Battlemodo: Windows Vista Service Pack 1 RC1 vs. Shipping Vista
gizmodo.com/337768/battlemodo-windows-vista-service-pack-1-rc1-vs-shipping-vista
Quote:
"Then when we compared the current shipping version of Vista with its upcoming service pack, there wasn't much difference, with the Service Pack speeding things up by 0.865% in the PCMark tests. The only part of it that's bugging us is the network file transfer speed got even slower in the SP1 release candidate. Also continuing that bothersome disk speed problem is the way Vista couldn't read and write on that speedy 15,000rpm SAS drive anywhere near as fast as XP did."

However, that might be like saying, "Other than that, how did you like the play, Mrs. Lincoln?"
--------

James Says :
"I upgraded to Vista soon after it was released. My DVD drive was no longer recognized, and my system as as slow as could be.
...
I had to upgrade my Vista back to XP, and, since that time, have been asked to do the same for 6 other friends.
...
Even Vista software I installed, such as Norton 360 for Vista, did not work properly, and slowed down my PC even further."

Then ;

James Says :
"I have been running VISTA for a year and a half... and there is absolutely nothing I can't do or make play in the OS. I have had to figure a few things out, BUT anyone with a little intelligence should be able to do so... ..."

Some news about Vista:
Vista deactivates me for upgrading motherboard firmware
blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=938
Anytime you upgrade a motherboard BIOS you pretty much have to hold your breath because a botched installation will result in a bricked motherboard. But Microsoft seems to be well on its way to bricking my Operating System after I successfully upgraded my BIOS. Now I’m going to have to call Microsoft tech support and see how I’m going to resolve this headache. I’ll update this post with how they respond.

Oh and I hope your Christmas gifts are a lot better than mine. Merry Christmas and happy holidays!

-------
Battlemodo: Windows Vista Service Pack 1 RC1 vs. Shipping Vista
gizmodo.com/337768/battlemodo-windows-vista-service-pack-1-rc1-vs-shipping-vista
Quote:
Then when we compared the current shipping version of Vista with its upcoming service pack, there wasn't much difference, with the Service Pack speeding things up by 0.865% in the PCMark tests. The only part of it that's bugging us is the network file transfer speed got even slower in the SP1 release candidate. Also continuing that bothersome disk speed problem is the way Vista couldn't read and write on that speedy 15,000rpm SAS drive anywhere near as fast as XP did

From these tests, what advice would we give Microsoft? Figure out what's slowing down those network file transfers and disk speeds. Other than those two anomalies, with both the shipping version and SP1 RC1 of Vista, you'll see faster speeds.
However, that might be like saying, "Other than that, how did you like the play, Mrs. Lincoln?"

Microsoft could spend billions to promote Vista and the perception will be the same.... Windows Me was tolerated, but how could a company the size of Microsoft, with thousands of computer engineers creates something like Vista, please please stop defending Microsoft, it is the bigger Software company in the world not Madre Theresa. They didn't do any research before, just put some new colors, changed the name to other and this is Vista, please we have seen more robust development in Ubuntu, more bling bling and if you mix Apple, Apple is a portion of Microsoft and created more appealing products, faster, quality reach, people like Apple products for what it represents to the end user... I am proud of having a computer that behave the way it has to behave...

Probably too late, and too far down the list to matter, but I have a wireless home network composed of 1 XP Pro, 1 XP Home, 1 Vista Business desktops, and 1 Vista Home Premium laptop. All have the same Netgear hardware and software (laptop is Broadcom) I never have trouble keeping the Vista computers connected, while the XP's drop connections regularly. All the computers have 2 GB of RAM except the XP Home which has 1 GB. It's not the locations either, the XP Pro desktop is within 15 feet of the router. So on my network and my large famiy who use it, we all try to get to the Vista machines first. Go figure.
A couple of very cogent points have been made in the above posts:
1. Vista should be installed on a NEW or recently UPGRADED system.
2. 2 GB of RAM is required for Vista to run smoothly.
3. The DRM and frequent warnings ARE frustrating. If you don't like them then off UAC and take FULL Ownership of every Folder on your computer. Not at all hard to do one or both modifications.
Finally, I own neither an Apple or run Linux, but I also don't build model railroads or snow ski. Got nothing against those that do any of the above, but I'm nobody's fool for doing what I choose or running whatever OS I choose, or for enjoying doing it. So take your gripes about Vista to Starbucks, maybe they'll give you a free cup of coffee.

Have you tried viewing this page under Firefox on Linux?

I think you have a missing somewhere.
And why the line-of-text-is-a-paragraph style. It is awful!

Chris Ahlstrom

Frank:
UBUNTU!? Robust? I think not. I've installed that turkey twice now, on different hardware, and the result has been the same. After light use-like using Firefox or playing one the several silly games, the thing stops responding. I let it sit and nothing. Restarting the machine is the only way to get it back. Yeah, the eye candy is tasty and is why I tried a second time. On both installations, I was instructed that there were updates. I updated the installation and, upon the reboot, it failed. I was given very detailed instructions on how to 'fix' the problem, but, you know what? Was not worth it. In both cases, I wiped the drive and put XP on it. Rarely have I EVER had to do that with XP. Ubuntu 7.04 and 7.10 BOTH died the same way. Not again. And, yeah, I'm not a Linux person. I probably did something wrong and I hate command lines. If it takes more than two or three command line operations, forget it.

I read the article expecting a review. I found no value proposition to help me justify the extra 2GB of RAM required for the same performance level or dealing with huge compatibility issues that are promised by Vista. This was not a review. If I submit that Vista doesn't suck as much as some writers insist, that still leaves the fact that Vista sucks or, at least, it's not insanely great.

I´m sorry freetards, but Windows platform rocks despite of all your campaign against Microsoft and Windows. Live long to Windows.

Here some more thought for the M$ Shills to chew on;

Microsoft's Vista named #1 tech disapppointment of 2007

http://omx.bloggingstocks.com/2007/12/18/microsofts-vista-named-1-tech-disapppointment-of-2007/

read the comments section, the public has voted already. Businesses are looking elsewhere than MS now. What do you $hilltards among us do not get?

To me it all boils down to this:

1) Vista is slow, slow, slow

2) If the OS can't copy files in a reasonable amount of time, then have the high school intern who coded that part of the OS redo it until it works!

A day or so ago I wrote about my frustrations with Microsoft's Windows Me II (Vista Ultimate) and I too have tried Linix, several different flavors to include Linspire. I just went out a purchased an Apple Mac Pro 8 Core Processors with two 30" cinema HD displays with Leopard as a operating system. I spent a lot of money on this system so far and a good thing I have a big office. I also have a Mac friend who is on it right now showing me the "errors" of my ways in sticking with the Microsoft way of life for so long. I have all the productivity that I need or used to from the Microsft platform as I am looking over my shoulder at Windows XP running virtually on my new Mac.

I can see with the Adobe Photoshop, Illustrator and iworks that I will be leaving Microsoft in just a couple of months, except for running the occational office 2003 through virtual means on the Mac until I become more proficiant.

I cannot thank Microsoft enough for their hard work in driving me to Mac, though expensive as this Mac Pro may be, I hope I will get the peace of mind as I deserve -- Sure, I expect glitches especially with Leopard and who knows where I might end up in a year from now, and I will keep everyone posted on my Mac Adventures...

well, a lot of people like look at vista and say, hey can i do what i do on the web better or faster than with xp? will my computer boot faster, and smoother ? what about cost? xp is cheaper.

For starters, Joe, without coming right out and saying it, you imply that lots of very intelligent people either don't know what they're talking about where Vista is concerned, or they're just liars. That's pretty offensive, and almost enough to make me stop reading right there. But I didn't.

You make some good points, on both sides of this issue.