I'm finally back on after my puter crashed-- didn't loose too much info-- mainly have to rebuild my favorites list and reinstall some programs.

I have a new Dell with windows Vista, so I will let you know how it goes.

Skeet, was wondering where you were. Thought maybe you were on vacation. I also recently ordered a new Dell computer, but I stayed away from Vista, and specially ordered Windows XP. Glad to have you back.

My old computer had XP, so I figured I would go ahead and get Vista with the Dell and try it out for a little while-- if I have any problems, I will just format and reload with XP. At least this way I will have Vista and when they get all the bugs out I can just download the updates.

I have had Vista 3 or 4 months now. At first I was sorry I didn't stick with XP, but now that I am getting use to it, I starting to like it.

Skeet, I have always been concerned about losing my files and pictures, so about year ago I brought a backup drive. You can also buy a service where you can back your files up on line, which costs more in the long run, but even provides protection against fire, etc. I am sure the computer gurus here have some good suggestions concerning file backup.

Ned

I may do what my son is doing-- use the old puter (with a couple new drives) and install Windows Home Server. It will automatically backup your files and even alternate the disc it uses for backup so even if one of the server drives fail you have another recent backup. He has 3 computers and it takes care of all of them.

Another problem with Vista is the amount of the computer's memory that it requires.

The only reason why Vista sales seem to be increasing is that is being shoved down the throats of OEMs. For each new computer, Vista is installed and counted by Microsoft as sales figure even though 81% of the buyers are UPGRADING from crappy VISTA to a good XP. Actually installing VISTA over XP is known as DOWNGRADING in real life.

The very reason why the hardware industry loves and support Microsoft any way they can is that each new operating system will always be a greater resource and hardware hog than ever before. You would need faster, more expensive hardware in order to fully "realize" the potential of crapware.

Although Microsoft "recommends" a MINIMUM of 512mb of RAM for Vista most others in the know recommend a minimum of 1GB of RAM to ensure you have the ability to utilize the potential of Vista and all your computer programs. The minimum required memory to run Windows Vista only considers the required amount of RAM to run the operating system. Having only the minimum memory required will be a cause of frustration because of slow computer and application boot times, inability to efficiently run multiple programs at one time, and slow game performance.

Microsoft admits that Vista is Crappy compared to XP! From a Microsoft-owned site:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22031691/

Testers say XP could get faster than Vista

SEATTLE - Microsoft Corp.'s Windows XP operating system is about to get faster and Windows Vista isn't, according to a report that caused a stir online this week as industry watchers speculated that a zippier XP could keep customers from upgrading to Vista.

(MSNBC is a joint Microsoft - NBC Universal venture.)

Microsoft, however, said it's too early to evaluate the two service packs it plans to release next year.

Early versions are already in the hands of testers like Devil Mountain Software Inc., which helps big financial services companies track trading-floor computer performance.

Wellington, Fla.-based Devil Mountain Software ran several versions of XP and Vista through a test simulating common desktop computing tasks. It found the original Vista performed 50 percent to 100 percent slower than the prevalent XP Service Pack 2, or SP2.

Vista SP1, due out in the first quarter of 2008, barely improved the operating system's performance.

But XP SP3, scheduled for the first half of 2008, did improve on XP's earlier performance, running 10 percent faster than SP2.

That's a strike against Vista for IT professionals on the fence about switching, according to Craig Barth, the company's chief technology officer.

Kevin Kutz, director of Microsoft's Windows Client group, said the company is working on speeding up tasks like moving files between PCs, but it's a work in progress.

Michael Cherry, an analyst for research group Directions on Microsoft, said it's impossible to say if Microsoft has started tuning Vista SP1 for speed. Even if XP gets faster, consumers and businesses may still switch to Vista.

"It might be an acceptable thing to me if it were slightly slower but more stable," Cherry said.

Benjamin Gray, an analyst for Forrester Research, said businesses will upgrade to Vista regardless, to "stay current with Microsoft's support life cycle."

=============================

This also means that we have no choice but to convert over to Vista, eventually. Oh sweet monopoly... Can't live without it.

Never tested Linux???
You could have an unbelievable surprise!

Message sent from a free computer (Linux Mandriva).

We're using many kinds. Linux, Mac, Vista, XP, Win2k, even the prehistoric ones: DOS, Vax/VMS, Win 95, Win 98. Some of our very old customers we have to support.

And still I would say, majority of them are Microsoft based, so we kind of love-hate Microsoft. Linux are still not that practical for the desktop. We are too uncomfortable to run the program that we can get as we have no time nor the resources to evaluate for security of most of the linux programs. Other alternative is to make our own program, and it is costing beyond arms and legs to develop systems in linux, unlike windows, the linux programmers don't come cheap. We can get microsoft programmers from Walmart if we need to.

I am just a bystander but Sylvain, do you have anything to say to this?

"unlike windows, the linux programmers don't come cheap. "