What is your plan for Windows Vista?

Unless money starts to grow on tree's, I'm waiting for a while until I purchase Vista. Only becuase I'll be purchasing a completely new system. Also, I'm gonna wait to see what happens with service packs. Hopefully after a few months they have most of the bugs not found in Beta testing worked out.

Besides, who needs Vista when we've got Stardock!

Unless money starts to grow on tree's, I'm waiting for a while until I purchase Vista. Only becuase I'll be purchasing a completely new system. Also, I'm gonna wait to see what happens with service packs. Hopefully after a few months they have most of the bugs not found in Beta testing worked out. Besides, who needs Vista when we've got Stardock!

MY thoughts exactly! While my current system is more than enough for Vista (AMD Athlon64 X2 4400+, 2 GB RAM, 512MB X1900XTX PCI-Express video card, 2-250GB SATA II hard drives), I'm gonna wait a few months for the bugs to be ironed out.
Also, that gives the hardware manufactures more time to get the drivers situation cleared up( esp. Creative).

I am going to build a Core 2 Duo system for it.  But I am not going to be standing in line to buy it the day it is released.

I'm gonna get the Vista Ultimate upgrade pack within a couple of months of release and will put it on my current home built system: Asus A8N VM mobo: AMD Athlon 64x2 4600+ 2.4ghz CPU; 3gigs of DDR400 RAM; Soundblaster Audigy 4 soundcard: Nvidia 7800GS 512mb GPU; Winfast Video Capture/TV tuner card; 19" Samsung flatscreen LCD monitor.

My current setup gives me a Vista experience of 4.4, but I can increase that to 4.8 by either upgrading or overclocking my graphics card. Anyhow, whilst I have ample room for expansion and upgradability, I'm going to stay with what I have for the time being and dual boot with XP Pro as my secondary OS for some things Vista may not be equipped to handle until later in the piece....when 3rd party developers have caught up with the new coding/layout, etc.

As for uses, well pretty much the same as XP: various multimedia interests, constant desktop alterations, surfing the net/WC/Stardock and emails....tho hopefully my ability to use art programs for skinning will improve, not that my talent (meaning lack of) will.

Were moving interstate in Feb 07, so it'll be at least couple of months or so after that, but I'm very much looking forward to running the full release and being able to fully install my HP 3-in-One software, which at this point RC 2 don't particularly like. With that fully operational, I'll be totally satisfied with Vista, given I've updated to Nero Premium 7 full version and resolved the burning, backup and imaging issues I encountered with Nero 6 outright refusing to install.

As soon as Kona pays me for the bridge, I might be able to afford it all.  

As soon as Kona pays me for the bridge, I might be able to afford it all.

Just rent him half of it....and the other half to someone else so you can double up.

I wasn't going to upgrade to Vista because of the cost/benefit ratio being too low.
But I may have lucked out through a promotion to get Vista Office and Office 2k7.

Free changes minds.

The easy answer: wait.  

I'm moving to Linux...   

I'm moving to Linux..

So you are downgrading then?

 

I'm moving to Linux...

Just don't forget to have your passport and work permit in order before leaving.

I'm going to hold off until AMD's quad-core CPUs, and the new physics graphics cards become standard and softwares for these technology prevail.

If Vista proves to run well under these new technologies, then it will be time for a new build under modern hardware; and Vista will be my OS of choice.

I figure about a year or so.

I'm not gonna to get Vista. If I buy a new PC with Vista on it I'm gonna say no to the EULA and either put Linux or XP on it. Then I'm gonna sit back and smile when threads like "I have to buy a new Vista License because MS said mine is pirated (Because when Vista called home things got fouled up. Vista is supposed to call home every 2 months)" or "I can't play any MP3 files because Vista says they are illegal" and stuff to that effect.

Why would anyone spend 500+ dollars for a buggy OS that barely runs on most hardware when XP does 90 percent of what Vista will do and is a bit more stable?

Why would anyone spend 500+ dollars for a buggy OS that barely runs on most hardware when XP does 90 percent of what Vista will do and is a bit more stable?

That a lot of assumptions for someone who isn't even running Vista. 

Well part of my statement is a bit true. XP is proven as an unstable OS. From BSOD to viri to spyware. Every Windows OS has been this way to date. So I would assume Vista will be no different. Heck MS has said no to more than half the new things that were suppossed to be in it.

But I believe I'm right about the hardware bit. Most folks are gonna need to upgrade.

And FWIW there is little Vista can do that XP can't.

*Side note: XP can be stable with the proper programs loaded and the proper keep up performed. In my reply I meant as a stand alone OS.

Well part of my statement is a bit true. XP is proven as an unstable OS.

LOL. 

But I believe I'm right about the hardware bit. Most folks are gonna need to upgrade.

I have been reading a lot and most people are not having a problem running Vista on their current hardware.  As with many things, if you want the best performance you will need some of the best hardware, it's hardly a "necessity". 

Well OK got me on that one. Anyhow suffice it to say I'm not planning on getting Vista.

"So you are downgrading then?"

No, He is getting two levels better than XP!

XP is proven as an unstable OS

That's the biggest whopper you've come up with yet.

No, XP in and of itself is not unstable. When you start adding fly by night software and click on those nasty "Check your PC for Spyware" pop up ads, THEN it becomes unstable. If you use it like it is intended, then it works pretty well.

No, XP in and of itself is not unstable. When you start adding fly by night software and click on those nasty "Check your PC for Spyware" pop up ads, THEN it becomes unstable. If you use it like it is intended, then it works pretty well.

EXACTLY what I meant. Doing that and NO anti-virus nor anti-spyware installed then yes it becomes unstable. read the last part of that post again.

So Kona, answer me this....if Windows (any version) is unstable, unreliable and thus unsafe to use, why is it, then, the MOST popular OS out there?

It can't be for the lack of trying by Apple/Mac...they've been trying unsuccessfully for years to increase their market share above to 8% to 10% OS-X is claimed to be the much safer, more productive OS, yet it falls well short in sales, as compared to Windows.

We must also consider the Linux distros...which are all FREE and available for everyone to install at will, whenever they like as often as they like. Surely that price tag should make Linux the most attractive OS out there, yet still languishes at the very bottom regarding market share.

Point is, MS must be doing something right to achieve a majority market share....and let's not get into the evil empire/anti-trust thing because consumers have options and are free to exercise them....and obviously do so, given that Apple and Linux both have loyal customers/fanbois and retain some portion of the market.

Every OS has its pros and cons, its up and down sides....not one of them is perfect, and I have no doubt Vista will have its fair share of bugs, etc....but, despite its high price tag, Vista will still outsell OS-X and outmarket Linux because - as I said before - Microsoft is doing that something right the others aren't.

Am I a MS fanboy? Nope, I just look at the bigger picture as see things as they really are. Windows sells better because MS constantly assesses the market and endeavours to create products that appeal/cater to the wider audience....whereas Steve Jobs is still too tied up in his own self importance and the exclusivity of the Mac to move towards what consumers really want at a fair price.....

And Linux, well they're pretty much in development and have issues with mainstream 3rd party apps running on their distros....in the future perhaps, and maybe their new alliance with MS could see them progress toward something as versatile as Windows.

So Kona, answer me this....if Windows (any version) is unstable, unreliable and thus unsafe to use, why is it, then, the MOST popular OS out there?

Because Windows is pre-installed on every new computer out there and folks use it. They can't afford a Mac and don't know or want Linux. If PC vendors gave folks a choice at POS maybe we would see a change.

And Linux, well they're pretty much in development and have issues with mainstream 3rd party apps running on their distros....in the future perhaps, and maybe their new alliance with MS could see them progress toward something as versatile as Windows.

It's NOT an alliance. Educate yourself.

Because Windows is pre-installed on every new computer out there and folks use it.

It's preinstalled for a reason. Vendors think it's the best OS out there to make sales.

If PC vendors gave folks a choice at POS maybe we would see a change.

      

When 99% of the software that people want to use is made for Windows, it would be a logical choice to choose a Mac or Linux.
It's a neverending circle. Windows is most popular, and the software is made for it because it is the most popular.
I agree with Starkers completely. Kona, you are always out in left field, gazing aimlessly into the spotlights. Someday a fly ball is going to konk you in the coconut if you don't pay more attention.

Well I like to be different you know. Some of my points are valid.