This reminds me of a quotation from my stat course. "Figures never lie, but liars figure".

Back in the late '70's when the hated double nickle (55) MPH speed limit was in effect, a survey was promoted buy the Georgia DOT that said 85% of drivers supported the lower speed limit. On the highway, actual surveys showed that 78% were driving over 65.

When they examined the dichotomy, they discovered the GDOT survey was taken among drivers waiting in the State Patrol Offices to renew their drivers license.

Surveying 3,000 PC that happen to have this software loaded and then extrapolating it over the hundreds of millions of PC's is very poor statistical analysis even if it does serve a prejudged position and provide a catching headline.

Perhaps they can provide information about who has this software loaded? Only 3,000 PC's? That's not even a good sized national company, and we know they have a standard image across their PC's.

---

Thanks to Solar Wings for the special siggy.

You keep posting this same statement, yet there are at least three members who have contradicted you in each post. Vista is not slower than XP on my machine and it dual boots both Vista and XP. Vista does not stall, does not freeze, does not blue screen. Nor does XP. The last Blue Screen I had was with Win98 some 5 years ago. I have Vista on three machines, and all three are doing just fine thank you.

---

Thanks to Solar Wings for the special siggy.

One of my daughters has Vista on her new Dell laptop and she loves it. One of my favorite columnist from About.com says he's had it for awhile and has no problems. From all I've heard Vista probably would not preform well on my almost two year old laptop without significant upgrades in my hardware. I'm satisfied with my PC as is. If I were in the market for a new one I'd be OK with trying Vista as long as I had the option of downgrade.

I'm still not quite convinced with Vista as a whole. Many people seem to like it but they had to adapt. I was told by a college professor that Vista will probably be at it's best in around 3-4 years. I think I will also keep my XP.

"According to data ...35 percent of Vista-equipped PCs have been downgraded to Windows XP." Taking that number into consideration, that means that 65 percent are still running VISTA. Still not too shabby! I happen to be one who has used VISTA since its retail launch and have been extremely happy since the beginning. Having hardware that was ready for VISTA went a long way to a positive experience.

microsoft should spent there money on making XP a bit better and at a lower cost to them....xp2 is a great o.s. to much money was spent on vista and it is not worth it.....

I have run Vista on a number of PC's, and it is my personal experience that it runs much more slowly than XP does, even when given more than adequate hardware. My current PC is home built gaming rig with an Intel E8400 (dual 3.0ghz processors with 6mb cache), 4gb of PC8500 RAM, a GeForce 9800 GX2 video card, and a 750gb Seagate SATA-II hard drive with 32mb of cache. I have Vista Ultimate 64-bit installed on one partition and Windows XP Professional 32-bit installed on another, with all my games available to both OS's. I can say without reservation that my games work much better under XP than they do under Vista, even given the obvious advantages of DirectX 10 in Vista. One game in particular, Company of Heroes, which was chosen to showcase DirectX10, still plays better under XP.

I will say that Vista's performance did benefit from SP1, but it still lags behind XP by a significant margin. I will also say that for me, Vista has been very stable. I might even go so far as to say that it is a little more stable than XP, but not by much.

I do not see large corporations making the jump to Vista any time soon. The learning curve is significant, the security model is so different from XP that EXTENSIVE testing will have to be done in corporate environments before Vista can be deployed with confidence, especially in places that run custom or home-grown applications. Getting all the techs up to speed will play a big role as well. The move from 2000 to XP was considerably more gentle than the move to Vista could ever be.

I'm very curious to see what Vista's successor looks like....