Thundercleets wrote:

>
> Relative to XP Vista does suck.
> On it's own it just needs work.
>


Well, I don't know. I'm not going to go so far as to say there's
absolutely nothing wrong with Vista, but on the other hand I don't find
it be ten times as worse as any other Windows release either. The
success rate of compatibility with all of my devices and applications
has been quite high, and most of the cases of system instability or
blue screens that I've encountered have occurred when I was still
trying to assemble a collection of stable drivers and programs/hardware
devices that were Vista-friendly. That was a long time ago. (There
was this one time, though, when my system blue-screened for no apparent
reason on a couple of occasions during shutdown. I can't recall it
happening since then, however.)

I love Vista's interface and features, and performance hasn't been a
problem. Granted, I was initially running it on a dual-core system,
and now I have a quad-core. No matter what operating system you have,
with specs like that, you should expect it to be responsive.

UAC can be annoying at times, but you get used to it (at least I have).
I've noticed a few bugs too, but most of them have been isolated
incidents.

>
> People were upset about it for the price tag (99.00 USD for Vista
> Basic and 479.00 USD for Ultimate?)
>


I will agree that the pricing for Vista is a little too unreasonable.
I was lucky enough to be able to get a really good deal on a legit copy
of Vista Ultimate, so I didn't have to pay anywhere near the full
retail cost.

>
> You will without a doubt, have a better "experience" with XP if you do
> not need support for DirectX 10.
> For an ever better gaming platform get a PS3, the graphics are as good
> or better at 1/3rd the cost.
>


I don't dislike consoles (I own an original Xbox), but I like to game
primarily on my PC, probably because I consider this machine to be my
general-purpose computing platform, so I use it for a little bit of
everything.

>
> Quad core is nice and even faster under Linux since Vista still does a
> absolutely horrible job of load balancing and process distribution.
>


To be totally honest, there are times when my security maintenance
chores do have an effect on the performance of the rest of my system;
it really all depends. Sometimes it seems to have varying degress of
impact, sometimes it doesn't. Tonight, for example, I played some
Unreal Tournament 3 again while AVG was working in the background, and
other than the fact that the game took longer to load, any evidence of
a virus scan being concurrently executed was virtually unnoticeable.