>Most all of the people that >write all this neg about Vista have no idea about what they are >talking about.
Agreed. >Vista is a good program and is superior to XP. Sorry, I disagree. I'm a kernel-mode programmer. I do Windows operating-system level work for a living. For a lot of reasons, Vista was ill-fated from the start. From the decision to write the shell using managed code (reversed), to the creation of an entirely new installation procedure (that precludes anything resembling a "normal" upgrade), to the requirement that x64 drivers be signed, to the inclusion of UAC (even in its final, "toned down" version), to the fact that it shipped based on the date and not because the bugs were out of it... Vista is a problem. It is NOT true that ever OS release is alike. Windows 2000 was a very destabilizing release, and (much like Vista) had a LOT of problems when it was released. Many users (and companies) simply skipped Windows 2000 in favor of staying with NT V4, which was MUCH more stable. On the other hand, Windows XP was a *very good* operating system at the time it was released (I installed it on my personal machine as soon as it went "gold"... something I would NEVER consider doing unless the OS provided significant advantages). Windows Server 2003 SP1 (and later) is a *very* good operating system (which I, again, installed as soon as it was released). I seriously suspect that Vista will be one of those releases that many companies (and many users) just skip over. I wouldn't run it on my personal machines and don't recommend others run it. I'm gonna stick with XP wait to see how Windows 7 turns out. de Peter K1PGV
