Last message on previous page:
I just got back from the Las Vegas 'office 2007, Vista, launch across America'
Seminar, and most of the features they are pushing, are ones, you can have in XP, or similar, but at an added cost, or at least usage through th rid party software. The main thing they were pushing was the new search engine within VIsta its self, and yes, its kind of cool, but really, the service really knocks the piss out of the CPU when its indexing (first thing I noticed during RC2), and while once everything is indexed, things are definitely faster search wise, indexing takes a good long time, when you have 1.5 + TB storage (such as myself).

For myself, I dont plan on getting Vista any time soon, but I was pretty much impressed from what I've seen with Office 2007(will run under XP also), and their other business oriented products are looking good as well. I do know that when I do upgrade to vista, it will be the ultimate version, but then again, thats more than a year away for me, maybe even two . . .

Adoption is not inevitable: look at Windows ME.

For any platform to succeed it must have a killer-app. Vista has none. This is Windows ME all over again. I hope Vista dies the same death as ME and Microsoft is forced to come out with a real OS like they did with XP. Of course it took ME and 2000 to flop before they came out with XP… (2000 runs OK but it takes forever and one day to load and shut down)

There is a big problem with Vista taking up too much harddrive space: backup and restores will be painful. So will virtual machine. You need a light OS so that backups and VM are as painless as possible. Btw: Vista does not support VM and you are violating your perchase agreement if you try to VM Vista. VM is a very cool thing that XP does well and Vista wont.

Some people like these new things:
-New Aero interface – you will turn that off the moment notice how much faster you pc runs w/o it.
-Superfetch – there are ram-disk programs you can buy for XP that do the same thing. Also, there are ram disks you can buy.
-Sleep mode – XP does this.
-DX10 – there are no games for X10 yet!!! And they could make DX10 run on XP if they wanted to and it would probably run faster. We can prey that someone will crack DX10 so that games will run on XP – this would help make the game industry money so someone might get paid to make this crack…
-64 bit and multi proc – XP _PRO_ does this MS still hasn’t worked out the bugs – I bet they wont now that Vista is out…
-IE7 and Office07 – XP does this
-Search your PC – Google has a free download for this and it uses very little ram
-Encrypted HD – XP does this

Again, where is the killer app?

OK people! Win98SE was the same speed as XP but XP was way more stable and ran every app that 98 would plus it could see more then one cpu. XP’s was a smaller and tighter code set then 2000 and loaded way faster. XP kicked 2000’s and XP’s ass. Nuff said on that!

Lots of people are staying stuff like this: “My guess is that once we start adapting programs more and more for Vista, it will become more evident of Vista's newer capabilities and functions, particularly with a high-end PC.”

NO! Vista is way to much of a resource hog to ever compete with XP! Kernel lockout is making this even worse.

I don’t think too many people will switch to some other os, I think most will just keep XP until the next os just like we did with ME and 2000.

They world cares about more then games? Well, the world didn’t take to ME too well.

I will be running XP stripped-to-the-bone for a while it seems – 79 MB of ram at boot on install. With all my apps running I might hit 300 MB until I load a game. BTW: games are supposed to take lots of resources because of their graphic – that’s the price of graphics. Vista should be just as small and tight or better then XP when you turn Aero off.

Oh, I think the code bloat is to make it harder to fileshare

Superfetch can be enabled in XP registry (google EnableSuperfetch XP)

DX10 software will be backwards compatible with DX9 the same way DX9 software is with DX8, etc.

Vista's "enhanced" security is unproven, and if previous experience is anything to go by, it is already broken

Vista is simply the next land grab by M$: DRM, enhanced (although already broken) copyright protection, attempt to kill OpenGL, etc.

with any luck consumers won't buy into all the promotional BS and Vista will die on the vine

Sure is alot of Microsoft haters out there.

Though I hope for the fall of Vista as well, I guess I just hope for it, not because I hate Microsoft, I just don't like Vista (or XP that much) I hate this need to have an overly pretty GUI and I sure wish there was a theme that I could run that striped away everything I didn't really need. You know a Power Users theme.

I also, am totally against them making DX10 a vista only thing. I understand part of the reasoning, of wanting to have a new OS with a all new DirectX. But I think you have to allow the XP users to have a choice.

What still amazes me, is the difference between MAC users and Windows users are. Mac users dance happy dances and praises Apple everytime a .1 release of their new OS X comes out (which is alot more often than windows) and Windows user curse Microsoft even though it's been 5 years since that last OS release.

I guess if Microsft spent more time being better than Apple, then simply trying to make their OS look and feel like an Apple, then windows users wouldn't despise them so much.

I think it's a golden turd. MS gets your gold and you get their turd.

A idea for the people who want to try vista and have 160gb hard disk or more With 2 partions 80gb each or higher. is setup a dual os. Like windows xp verson and windows Vista verson. Untel they get all the bugs out of Vista.

But it comes down to one thing. We are going to have to change some time. Best bet to wait untel it cheaper.

And in my case, for vista ultimate, they get a usd 200 premium simply because I live in AUS! AUD 751 (USD 580)... WTF was the AFTA all about...?

(fortunately, I had already planned a holiday to Hawaii...)

Wow, there are loads of ppl here that are def. not getting the picture. Kinda scary actually...

All of the buzz surrounding DRM is nothing but FUD. First of all, the DRM in Vista doesn't do anything with your currect media (DVD, CD), but only with new formats like HD-DVD and Bluray. So, you'll experience no performance drop while you're not playing one of these discs. That Peter Gutmann guy should have done his homework a little better.
Secondly, a lot of ppl blame MS for incorporating the DRM in the first place, which doesn't make any sense. I mean, what did you expected them to do? MS doesn't stand a change against all of the big movie studios so not incorporating DRM means that we won't be able to play the new formats under Vista. I'm sure Apple will do the same thing with the new version of OSX (and get away with it). Linux will probably not get any DRM and subsequently Linux-users won't be able to play HD-DVD or Bluray movies. Pity for them, but don't blame MS. Blame the MPAA.

As for the article, I think it completely misses the point with respect to OpenGL. Anybody who has done some research into OpenGL knows that the best solution for running OpenGL under Vista is to use an installable client driver, since it's a much faster solution than Vista's native OpenGL support. ATi just released a driver-set which has a OpenGL ICD incorporated. nVidia's ICD has been available for longer. Yet, the test system in the article uses an old ATi driver which doesn't have a ICD, thereby making all OpenGL-benchmarks not even worth looking at.
Also, the benchmarking in the article strikes me as incomplete. For example, the way in which Vista uses dual-core cpus is very different from how XP does this. Therefore, a multitasking benchmark should have been part of the article.

Wrong on every account. Three strikes, you're out!

Thing is with me is Untel I see the software. see how it works and everything. I can t base my view on it. Like when I was moving from windows 98 to window xp pro. I always started dual boot.

One thing I notice and this is where the Pre Teen to Teens are going to hate. Is the control. Basicly Mother and Fathers are going to be able to block games they dont want the kid to use.

So games Parents need to look at the games that have ratings.

Also They can control the timeline the pre Teen to teens can be on the computer like 4 to 9pm.

Block websites that they dont want anyone to go on.

Basicly it like the tv setup now. Playboy and such.

All I can say Pre Teens and Teens beware.

I have to agree with you for the most part. I have see no issue at all with DRM.

As for the benchmarks it not really an issue if they get it to about a 10% performance hit. Because if your that close to your target performance you need a upgrade with either OS. Gamespots benchmarks claim that just want to see others confirm that. Driver stabilitly does need to get sorted out though.

It is not a fair comparison, Vista vs. ME. ME was a minor graphical update plus some new functionality, badly implemente. Vista is a major system redesign. ME lacked stability, and, as you mentioned, features. Vista is entirely different. Now, you may not be satisfied with the features, and that's a valid point. But comparing Vista to ME is downright silly.

And whatever Abidemi said, which is pretty much regergitating what I had said in the numerous posts in a nice concise manner. Except I wouldn't say "article completely misses the point," but rather it should be like one of those CPU charts, updated as new drivers become available. It is a little silly that it was released prior to many of the driver releases.

how about results for 4x4 systems wasnt there a feature of vista that was said to improove performance of this power hungry system

(please no argueing about how power hungry 4x4 is i merely want to see if there is an improvement)

Probably because the only place useless enough to put Vista articles is in the most useless section of the forumz. i.e: Cooler and Heatsinks
-cm

Looking at that we see tom's w/o the 7.1 drivers for vista, but they use them on the XP machine... strange.

It would seem to me that you would want drivers from the same revision time for a true comparison. Yes, vista vs. XP drivers is not apples to apples. (drivers are different) but you would still be closer b/c of release times than brand-new ones vs. month-old ones...

The firingsquad review is not all glowing, openGL being a big snag but the fact that there is ANY improvement at all says that tom's should have gotten the new drivers. JMO of course, and I still think the site does good.