I have been beta testing since beta 2 and its greatly improved. Still think XP is faster in most respects but Vista just seems to work without having to hack anything or use a ton of workarounds.

Still dont think its worth the $250 upgrade for Ultimate ($400 full) but since the price wont be coming down, might as well partake now since I get the education discount.

Yeah, since I was installing it on a laptop (so, obviously, I won't be upgrading the hardware), I purchased the full OEM version from Newegg.com for $200.

-Dan

>>>Shamefully, I admit, I like it even though I tried like hell not to. <<<

Try harder.

Kidding, but the OS is ridiculous. What is it offering you that XP/XP64 is not other than goofy visuals with the UI ?
Nothing, and better security my a**. This OS is moronic.

Not me. Waiting for my PCs to slow to a crawl, 'til they can't take no more. Which may be a while, because I'm finally cheaply upgrading my Dual PIII to an AMD 64 X2, and reinstalling XP on it. So I will have a P4 3.2 and AMD 64X2 as my main PCs.

When that won't run what I need to, I will upgrade to the Quad Cell2 machine (32 core, maybe 128 core by then) and run Mac OSXV and MS Vista2015 side by side. Oh, and Vegas 11.

24% slower renders is one reason not to buy it. And no OpenGL support.

"...we clearly advise against replacing Windows XP with Windows Vista if you need to run professional graphics applications.

We are disappointed that CPU-intensive applications such as video transcoding with XviD (DVD to XviD MPEG4) or the MainConcept H.264 Encoder performed 18% to nearly 24% slower in our standard benchmark scenarios. Both benchmarks finished much quicker under Windows XP. There aren't newer versions available, and we don't see immediate solutions to this issue."

Tom's Hardware Review

Me? We be laughing sooooo hard, but taking the door prizes & deals anyway. =?P

While I know most everyone here is DV -- well at least a lot of folks -- those doing any analog, if just to watch TV might get a bit PO'd if they haven't tried it yet. Same with audio folks... AFAIK media center, & it's underpinnings throughout Vista is set up for hardware encoding/transcoding. I've read that there's no immediate plans for anything to do with HD.

Respected psychoanalysts have forbidden any mention of Vista 64 bit since that [shudder] episode with the the 1st Beta. One more psychotic break, and... well never mind....

Not me. I value my render/encode speeds too much.

j razz

I won't install it til 2009 at the earliest. I am STILL running Win2K and love it 1000% better than the crappy winXP that's on my wife's pc and came preinstalled on my laptops. It has much more memory overhead and runs like '98 did. I'm sure Vista is even worse.

Win2K is what I'll continue to use for all major production work in 2007 and 2008.

Vista looks SLOWER than XP, which is slower than 2k:

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/29/xp-vs-vista/page4.html


It's all about microsoft making it's stuff harder to pirate, and kow-towing with next gen streaming media producers re DRM issues, NOT user experience, stability or speed.

Ain't drinking the MSFT koolaid,

Ken


p.s. but hey maybe I'll install it on the wife's pc for the heck of it, she wont mind, lol.
At least is looks shiny and new, she'll think it's cool. I know better. I hope sony/madison take note, and actually really improve V8 significantly, based on hundreds of comments we've all been posting. But I'm not holding my breath on that account either. Too bad sonic foundry doesn't still own Vegas, think of all the REAL improvements they would've made to the platform. But that's another issue.

Just my general thoughts on this as a consultant:

If you are running a business and depend on your machine to provide you money, do not upgrade when first available. This includes Vista, or Vegas 7d, or 7e, or 7f or 8a...

Ideally, you would have a separate machine to do preliminary testing prior to implementing in a "Production" environment. Test on real-life project to see if any anomalies occur, and test thoroughly. Compare finished projects from the older version with a finished project from the newer version.

And the most important of all: If you upgrade in the middle of a project, don't cry to the forum, please, when things go wrong, which they will 80% of the time. Always finish a project with a standard tool set. Supplemental tool upgrades are fine, but upgrading the main core tools mid-project invites disaster. Core tools I would define as Operating System, Main Application (Vegas).

I have just one horrible thought on this.
As far as I know (which isn't very far) Vista introduces a new interface between the OS and the GPU, replaces the old DirectShow or whetever it was called.

If Vegas is ever to support GPU acceleration I'd bet it'll be for the new interface in Vista, soooooo we might be kind of forced into it.

The ONLY reason I'm slowly switching from Win2K to XP is much the same, HDV capture and SFPro 4 will not run under Win2K. I know the former can be gotten around but not the latter.

Think it might be a good time to buy a couple of extra WinXp licences, anyone know if M$ will continue to sell them?

Bob.

From what I understand, after tomorrow, MS wont be selling any additional licenses for XP and whatever is out there on the market and OEMs is whats out there. Info could and probably is wrong but its what I have heard.

"might be a good time to buy a couple of extra WinXp licences, anyone know if M$ will continue to sell them"

A friend of mine bought 2 XP retail late this afternoon. So I would say order or go buy tonight.

Why so much, or any at all, excitement about a new version of OS.

No work gets done by OS. It only has to not crash and run apps you need it to run.

Windows 2kPro still does all this, so why bother upgrading and just getting more fluff installed in the background.

If your system is stable, you should not upgrade until it is absolutely necessary , which is when your applications won't run any more.
There is just no point. ( other than testing, so Vista may end up on one pc soon, just for that purpose, but I don't see it on a workstation anytime soon. )

* No Academic incentive so no lure here

* No hint of graphics acceleration for Previewing

* No wife with laptop that I could experiment on

* No instability issues running presently

. . .eh?

No need here. I don't need something that could possibly upset my abilities to turn a penny. New OS? Maybe 2 years hence.

So, unashamedly, no.

I'm not upgrading until I find out how all the DRM that's riddled throughout the OS affects things.

out of curiosity ran the advisor - canon scan no driver, ditto printer. no sata. and that's not investigating the list of 'problem' programs...

oh, did i mention drm like krew?

old fart who's learnt the hard way

leslie

I heard that the UPGRADE versions (vista) will not allow you to do a clean install... Is this true??

I still have Win2K Pro on one machine but my experience with XP says it takes more abuse and has more drivers. I will take XP in a New York minute over Win2K.
JJK

Never mind... I found the answer... BIGROCK posted this little tidbit on the Avid board... You CAN NOT do a clean install with vista UPGRADE version.


http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/930985/en-us

Wrong information. You CAN do a CLEAN install. The only difference is that you cannot boot from a Home Premium Upgrade from the DVD. Upgrades have to start inside XP which then gives the options to either upgrade current OS or do a clean install of Vista. That person was wrong with their information.





SYMPTOMS
You purchase an upgrade key for Windows Vista. Then, you try to use the upgrade key to perform a clean installation of Windows Vista by starting from a Windows Vista DVD. However, Windows Vista does not let you perform a clean installation by using the upgrade key, and you cannot upgrade to Windows Vista.
Back to the top

CAUSE
This problem occurs because Windows Vista does not check upgrade compliance. Therefore, you cannot use an upgrade key to perform a clean installation of Windows Vista.
Back to the top

RESOLUTION
To resolve this problem, use one of the following methods.
Back to the top

Method 1
Upgrade to Windows Vista from an earlier, supported version of Windows that is already installed on the computer.
Back to the top

Method 2
Purchase a license that lets you perform a clean installation of Windows Vista.
Back to the top


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

APPLIES TO
• Windows Vista Home Premium
• Windows Vista Home Basic
• Windows Vista Home Premium 64-bit edition
• Windows Vista Home Basic 64-bit edition
• Windows Vista Starter

I found this on arstechnica.com
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070128-8717.html
_____________________________________
Upgrade versions of Windows Vista Home Basic, Premium, and Starter Edition will not install on any PC unless Windows XP or Windows 2000 is already on the machine in question.
_______________________________________

It doesn't mention the Vista business version which may be an exception?

Looks like there's a run on WindowsXP Home full editions, eg bestbuy.com is sold out:

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?type=category&id=cat01122

but thankfully Amazon.com does have them
http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Windows-Home-FULL-VERSION/dp/B00022PTRU/sr=1-1/qid=1170166115/ref=sr_1_1/103-4265888-5898245?ie=UTF8&s=software


looks like I've got to go buy a windowsXP home full version, if in fact it's not going to be sold anymore; I don't want "forced upgrades". Glad I still have my win2K install discs. thx .. even if it is just a rumor or whatever, it's prudent to have a full version installable winxp home on dvd somewhere anyways..

ken