[rtfire1]

To this day my mother hates windows xp. Programe she has used on a few diffrent windows built pcs (3.11, 95, 98se, me and 2000) DO NOT work on xp. Its part of upgrading i would love to have some of my ibm os2 app work on xp it would make my life a little easyer at work (part of the app is from the late 70s). Vista is a great os I had a 3 month Learning curve and am still learning. i also dule boot on my laptop.

[CarlForster]

as business with 15 seats we fornd to following after installing Vista Business on 5 stations....
The Vista interface NOT liked
Vista slow and a resource hog
To find a fimaluar function too too many steps and hard to find.
Too much down time invovled and loss of productivity
COST
as for Office 2007 NO WAY
Interface NOT liked
Navigation too complex
Templates and Macros would NOT run or work from 2003 to 2007
Learning curve too big and downtime loss of income would have put us out of business.

We NOW have 5 licences that are useless.

We will be remaining with XO PRO and OFFICE 2003 PRO.

[netman2670]

This is why most businesses run tests before plunging into things like this. Why not invest in one license and try it out first? Don't blame MS for this. Blame your own process.

[waitinghope89]

I got vista sense the Beta versions came out, yeahh a lot of errors but sense day 1 i lked the way it looks. Then when i got it my comp was having problems crashing but with updates it got better only thing just a bit slow running on ASUS p5gd1, P4 3.4 HT, DDR400 3Gbs, ATI 128mb Graphic card, but for some reason it was still slow compare to how it ran XP Pro. But then i upgrade to ASUS extreme Striker, Intel Quad Core 2.4, DDR2-800 2GBs, Nvidia 8800 GTS 640mbs, runs EXTREMLY GREATTT!!! there is no way i would ever even TRY to put XP on this computer, NEVER had any errors at all.

[dojcin2000]

There some incompatibility among vista acroreader and some HP printers. No body try to solve the problem.

Boba Vankufer

[dwil49]

The biggest issue I have with it is that Virtual PC won't work on the Premium version, you have to get Ultimate. This is an application that worked just fine on XP Pro, and Microsoft is just trying to screw people out of more money. Well I've got a better solution. I kept the old PC with XP pro and Virtual PC runs just fine on it. And I still have my $159.

[JimH443]

I don't hate Vista, but I don't plan on changing OS's any time soon. Why should I? XP is doing everything I want, and doing it without any problems. Why should I spend money upgrading my system to be "Vista compatible" and yet more money on the new OS, when it doesn't do one darn thing for me that XP doesn't.
I'd STILL be running Win98 if it weren't for the fact that this computer came with XP. Win98 is capable of doing everything I need done.

[rgreen4]

Then there is absolutely no reason to switch. When you have to replace the computer, that is the time to change. In the meantime MS will provide security updates for at least another 5 years.

[abasi]

I am an IT Manager and I can tell you that we will move to MacOS before we move to Vista. In business no one cares about how pretty it is. Windows Vista had might as well been called Windows ME 2. It is only useful in the home, this is Microsoft's biggest mistake ever. Windows ME was not meant for business but there is a Vista business edition which is an insult to corporate computing.
Vista has helped secure the fact that we are living in a world where you can get fired for choosing Microsoft.

[rgreen4]

You may not personally like Vista, but major corporations are rolling it out. Our company has already started the rollout with several hundred workstations updated. The final count will be around 3,000 with the license fee for Vista and Office 2007 a cool $1.5 million. We have effictively skipped XP going from W2K to Vista. We have a lot of custom software written and it all works as advertised - because it was all written to the MS standards years ago. Even our 2004 era IBM terminal emulations work. These 3,000 workstations are in about 75 different locations, some without full time IT support, but those that have been upgraded are not having any problems above and beyond the normal.
One of the major complaints about Vista is the re-organizations of all the Control Panel controls, but since in the Corporate environment they are locked so the user cannot access them, that is not a problem. When you get right down to it, when you have verified the software, and removed the irritant of the different control panel, there isn't much difference. The major reason for change - W2K is at the end of it's life cycle and there was no benefit to converting to XP Pro which is about to be discontinued and entering the end of it's life cycle. They decided to go with Vista at the start of it's cycle, just as they went with W2K rather than NT 4.0 6 years ago.

[JimH443]

Just out of curiousity, why does its "lifecycle" matter? Does the OS no longer perform the necessary tasks?

[rtfire1]

microsoft will not suport it people trying to fix programing problems is what i was just told by one of my company progarmers

[rgreen4]

When Microsoft develops an OS, there are three stages to the life of the software. First is the development stage, normally around 3-4 years for a major development. Vista was a little longer, refuting some of the charges that it was "rushed". When the software is initially released it is referred to as RTM (Release to Manufacturing). That starts it's service live, during which it is actively supported and updated. These updates may be functional as well as security. This stage normally lasts around 5 years, as is about to end for XP. This stage typically ends when the software is no longer produced into the supply chain, and with the release of SP3 for XP and the end of sales in June, it will enter the extended support phase.
This phase is also normally 5 years. During this phase MS commits to still providing security updates, but that is all. Last summer, that phase ended for Windows 98, at which time HP pulled the Win98 drivers off its website. For those who use Win98, it still runs, it still works for the devices already connected, but new devices may present a chaltlenge.

They do this to allocate their programming resources. Their Vista Team is in the early stage of it's service life, their XP team is about to enter the extended support phase and be downsized. Just in time for those resources to be applied to exapand the development team of Windows 7. (XP is internally NT 5.2, Vista is NT 6.0 and now they are working on 7).

[ratdog]

I am thinking of buying a new computer for my home/office. The program I use the most is Microsoft Office 2000 Pro. Does anyone know if this program will run on Vista?

[Vercer]

So far I've been able to run versions of Office dating back to 97 without a problem on Vista.

[LindaA]

Sorry, but with all due respect, RedBaron60, we do NOT "...all have to evolve," especially if we're "evolving" only for the sake of evolving, like switching to Vista just because it's the latest thing.

I have absolutely NO interest whatsoever in Vista. The ONLY way I would ever even TRY Vista would be if I were to get it for free like you did. I certainly wouldn't pay good money for it. From all that I've heard and seen of Vista, the ONLY things that set it apart from XP are primarily of a cosmetic, not a practical, nature, so even if I could afford Vista, I would stick with good ol' XP.

You know the old saying, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," and XP "ain't broke." As far as I'm concerned, the only reason Microsoft even came out with Vista in the first place was to make another gazillion dollars.

[rgreen4]

I do not know what negative reports you have been reading, but as a Vista user with a home network, I can tell you that it is easier to network.
Most of my printers are network connected so I don't have to leave a computer on the print from another computer, but in order to answer another members question about print sharing, I hooked up an ancient HP 4P printer via the parallel cable to my test bed desktop (a new build up I use as a test bed. It will boot to Vista, XP or W2K, but unless I choose differently it boots to Vista). I turned on the machine expecting the New Hardware found routine to go through and install the device. Instead I got a ballon advising me that the HP 4P had been installed and was ready to use. No hassel, no New Hardware Wizard to click through.
The Snipping Tool makes it easier to clip sections of the screen to a jpg file to send, without having to do a screen print to paint and then edit.

The Drive Management will partition the system drive on the fly, so you don't have to go to a third party partitioning program or reformat and reinstall.

I like the sidebar, I know you can get add-ins to XP to add one, but they are clunky and most have to be manually added.

I have been using Vista for 9 months now, and find it far more stable and reliable than the XP MCE that came on my Media Center PC, and installed it without question on my new build, and did not hesitate when my new laptop came with it. I love it.

[rgreen4]

That's good to know. I have also installed Office 2000 as a test to answer a question. I bought the Home & Student version of Office 2007 because I could legally install it on three machines. I have three installations of Vista. The difference between the previous versions of Office and 2007 makes the difference between XP and Vista pale in comparisson.

I have gotten used to Office 2007 now, and like many of it features. The Home & Student version is only about $122, and has Excell, Work and Powerpoint along with One Note. Thats about $40 per machine! If you need Outlook or Access, then you have to pay a much higher tariff.

[LindaA]

rgreen4, for me, most of what's new in Vista is nothing but graphics gimmickry. Snipping tool? Sidebar? Drive management? So what! I neither have any need for, nor interest in, any of that stuff, so they're all nothing but more gimmicks to me. If I don't need 'em, they're gimmicks, and I don't like gimmicks! As for networking and a Media Center PC, well, I don't do networking, and I don't have a Media Center PC, so none of what you said about that stuff applies to me. All I want to do with a computer are word processing, e-mailing, and surf the 'Net and XP is perfect at all of that. For me, anything beyond those functions is, IMHO, nothing but screen clutter and a frivolous waste of time and my computer's resources that can be put to better use.
Windows Vista? You're welcome to it! Be my guest!

[rgreen4]

Windows 3.1 had that functionality, but as most of us grow, we want to do more.

No one is saying you have to change. You stated that Vista was all glitz and gimickry. Well, that all Windows has ever been, DOS 1.0 ran the machines well, but people started wanting improvements - So MS started adding improvements, beginning with color monitors and more storage of a floppy disk with V1.1.

If you don't want to change, no one is forcing you to. There are after all, some users still running Windows 98 and even 95, who felt and maybe still do the same way about XP. That doesn't prevent the othe 99% from wanting something better. Just because you don't want it doesn't mean it's not useful, it just means that you don't want it.