Im building a new gaming machine, and for a while i have know ill need vista 64 bit for direct x 10 and to use over 3.5 ish Gb of ram. I pretty much decided on Vista home basic hoping to dodge most of the features i dont like with Vista, and cuz its just cheapest. Then today, so ive heard, home basic has all the features i dont want, and that possibly i will need ultimate to actually get support for newer hardware. I dont know if this is true or not, but then it sounds like id NEED ultimate. Id prefer the computer to blindly follow orders... Secondly, it needs to work well with new hardware and be compatible with the drivers. Also, Ultimate puts me over budget, meaning id have to cut back on hardware . So, do i need ultimate to get everything i need for gaming, or will a cheaper version do?

-btw, i dont even want the visual features so whatever version can cut back most on its performance hit is best, i even run xp in classic mode...


***You guys do w/e you want with this thread, but i cant build my machine anymore so i dont care about it.

Kinda wierd thing i jsut found.
http://techreport.com/articles.x/11734/1
kinda like a conspiracy theory against vista and stuff. Says the oem versions could be bad in the future if microsoft starts enforcing all the validations stuff strictly. As in, replacing the cpu could make you repay for it? I personally think the article is off the deep end, but what do you guys think about it?

The article you are linking is dated 12:21 AM on January 30, 2007. Vista OEM EULA is the same as XP.

[/quote]The article you are linking is dated 12:21 AM on January 30, 2007. Vista OEM EULA is the same as XP.[quote]

Oops didnt see that lol. Well id say their idea was pretty much wrong then.

Im thinking the lack of support thing with home basic was fake too... I might just settle for home premium since it should fit in the budget...