Alright. It's time to weigh in.
I have been using Vista for quite a while now, and while it does have its shortcomings, it is a dramatic improvment over XP.
I've listened to a lot of the reasons that Vista = FAIL, but I think a lot of them boil down to the requirements that the OS takes to run properly. Let's face it, as computers have gotten faster and RAM more abundant, EVERY operating system out there has gone out of its way to take advantage of the extra resources. Some more than others, but they've all adapted.
So, let's examine some of these requirements for "Windows" past.
|
Released |
Processor Speed |
RAM (MB) |
HDD (MB) |
| Windows 95 |
Aug-95 |
20 Mhz |
4 MB |
50 MB |
| Windows 98 |
Jun-98 |
66 Mhz |
16 MB |
210 MB |
| Windows 2000 |
Feb-00 |
133 Mhz |
32 MB |
700 MB |
| Windows XP |
Oct-01 |
233 Mhz |
64 MB |
1.5 GB |
| Windows Vista |
Januery 2007 |
800 Mhz |
512 MB |
15 GB |
If we were to graph this, we would see that with the exception of storage, the requirements have risen at a fairly constant rate over the years.
The most important thing that I see here is that big gap between 2001 and 2007. From my perspective, what has occured is that there are a considerable amount of computers out there dating back to the turn of the millenium that were more than capable of running XP and still are, but are simply not powerful enough to meet Vista's minimum requirements. This is also a large reason that business and corporations are not jumping on the upgrade. It would mean purchasing a whole stock of new computers.
That large gap was Microsoft's biggest mistake. By sticking to a more frequent release schedule they not only minimize the gossip of issues, but also minimize the whollop of new system requirements.
The other major reason that a lot of people are griping about Vista is program compatibility. A lot of programs simply will not run on Vista. Especially if you are running 64-bit. While Microsoft has gone out of its way to ensure backward compatibility, they should not be responsible for making a program that was written in 1995 work on a modern OS, that is the job of the software manufacturer/developer. I would also stipulate that if you are a company using a program that old, and the manufacturer has not released an update to allow it to run on today's more modern systems, then you should seriously investigate newer options. Other OS's don't even bother with backwards compatibility, leaving it entirely the problem of hte developer to release an update...those of you using an Apple product will know what I'm talking about.
Regardless, it has been a year and a half now, SP1 has been released and there are very few remaining glitches. If you haven't tried Vista yet, give it a try... an honest try. If after a few weeks, you are still dissatisfied and agree with the naysayers, then by all means, downgrade to XP and continue griping.