'Dang, it's a shame lemmings don't use PCs.'
Bill Gates

I don't spend much of my day directly using any OS, I use applications that run on top of an OS.

You mean like using Google Desktop Search to find files and Outlook messages, because Windows XP's built-in search takes several minutes to make a search that GDS does in one second?

Of course OS X's Spotlight has done this without outside applications for a long time (with progressive search results even), and I thought Vista had copied this?

I think it's generally agreed that it's not going to help content producers here at all and that you'd be a fool to consider upgrading. I don't see any argument there.

If, later on, some good reasons to upgrade come to light then that's another story. For now, I find the idea pretty distressing that you can't buy a new machine without Vista. I don't know if this is really true-so much of what has already said has been patently wrong.

What about turnkey edit systems? None of those vendors are going to start to sell systems based on Vista right away. What about business customers? I can't believe they're going to buy Vista machines right now.

Using Vista because I have too? No, I'm not using Vista at all - yet. We have two systems sitting here for screen shots and I'm pretty sure the s__t is going to hit the fan very soon now as buyers of new PCs have problems, read forums, get wrong information, and start blaming problems on the wrong stuff. (or as people have problems and blame it on the right stuff. That could happen too.)

The bigger problem is that people who should be experts have a lot of misconceptions about Vista. I've had people who should know better say they thought the 4GB "issue" was solved by Vista. Some people who should know better thought that Vista was a 64bit OS. I've also seen some hints that people who should know will still miss-engineer things like HDCP. I think you're going to see some really botched hardware and software over the next year.

Rob Mack

I paid for the upgrade last night and downloaded the entire thing 3 times and the install still doesn't work. So far, not a very good experience.

Oh! Just did a search on the acronym .. didn't know that one.

Well, I'm really not sure what the emotion here is all about??

If you like it get it.... if you don't... then don't.

Me... well, I think I'll wait until the early adopters work out all the kinks... THEN, I'll revisit the issue.... and I feel NO guilt what so ever in watching the early adopters do all the work! :)

I've never used OR installed Google Desktop and if I do come accross a machine with it installed I prefer to remove it if possible.

Spotlight is great, I've had many good laughs at Mac users thanks to it.

It's not that there's anything wrong with either, it's the attitude that they encourage, that we don't need to be organised. There's around 60K files on this dinosaur PIII PC and I can find any of the files I need without searching, it's only a matter of being a bit anal about where things go so they can be found later.
Problem with Google Desktop and Spotlight is if you don't remember some defining attribute that can be searched for no search tool can help you. Conversely if you maintain a logical approach to filing things you don't really need a search tool.

FWIW..

If you install Vista after you purchased it on an upgrade license, M$ will deactivate the XP license so you can't use it again...ever.

"If you install Vista after you purchased it on an upgrade license, M$ will deactivate the XP license so you can't use it again...ever."

More FUD. Its not true. The only truth is that you cannot use both OS's simultaneously. If you upgrade to Vista, then you cant activate XP on another computer (spelled out in the EULA). If you go back to XP, you reactivate the copy of XP and can STILL use it.

makes sense.

Rob

Makes more sense and would be good sense to make sure you use one or the other, but not both. Good customer relations to let you go backward if you want.

Rob Mack

Patrick, you are taking this waaay to seriously. And it's not as if you've never "bashed" anything or anyone here.

Just lighten up and have fun.

Here's how to do a clean install using a Vista Upgrade disc.

I've read the posts and I can't find where anyone called any Vista users "stupid." I think you may be reading more into this that is there.

I received a free legit copy last week of Vista Business 32bit edition - after 3 failed attempts at the install on my AMD workstation, I sold it off to someone who just had to have the latest and greatest - no thanks M$ - x64 XP Pro works just fine for me.

When I did get it somewhat installed - my system slowed down dramatically - CPU cycles being eaten up - this an AMD 3800+ X2 AM2 with 4gb ram - it was a bummer with all the hoopla surrounding this release. I'm now contemplating a MAC after this latest experience. Final Cut Express is looking a little more interesting now. Need to look a little more at the osx86 project and maybe install the 10.4.8 hackintosh version to see if it is worth the switch...

I would hope people won't buy Vista just because it is new and they have gotten sucked into the marketing hype. For those that think they need it I would urge they reconsider but, if not, then good luck.

On a side note, here is an interesting article about a possible environmental impact of Vista.

"Future archaeologists will be able to identify a 'Vista Upgrade Layer' when they go through our landfill sites."

http://www.greenparty.org.uk/news/2851

Don't know what's happening in other countries, but here in Oz they're advertising Vista on TV without showing or telling anything about what it does, relying mainly on the word "Wow".

They're obviously targetting users without too much between the ears.

Guess I should read through all the above posts to dig out the answer, but is there a good reason for changing to Vista? If indeed it reduces throughput (render rate etc) then that seems a very good reason to leave it alone until there are strong disadvantages in sticking with XP.
That all new PCs will have Vista installed is obvious and the free inclusion of Office 2007 will be nice. I understand that the "free" Office 2007 is actually a fully featured trial copy that works for 6 months, when you get the choice of buying the key or not. Of course nothing created in Office 2007 will open in previous versions. This looks like the marketing technique used by the drug dealers -- get free hits until you're hooked.

Of course nothing created in Office 2007 will open in previous versions.

If that's true, and at this point I have no reason to belive it isn't, I would think that approach would be suicidal.

My Office 2003 is working perfectly. There is no reason for me to upgrade. So if those who do are unable to share documents with those who didn't (the majority?), then that seems like an awfully stupid move to me.

"If that's true, and at this point I have no reason to belive it isn't, I would think that approach would be suicidal. " This is done a lot, like vegas7 vegs can not be open in vegas6--4.

"Of course nothing created in Office 2007 will open in previous versions."

Of course, that is just not true and 5 seconds of searching would prove otherwise. Office 2007 has a Compatibility feature built into it so that all versions are compatible. I think this the problem with this thread. There are so many uninformed people that just say whatever they want about Microsoft / Vista. How many have tried it? How many have used it? The download I purchased never worked so I just returned it, was refunded, got it at Circuit City, upgraded and am enjoying the new experience. My initial was not "wow" as the advertising campaign states - it was more like "oh". I have 2 Macs and I have to say that I still think Mac OSX is way ahead of Windows but a PC properly equipped with Vista is still a great experience, surely not worth the doom and gloom I'm hearing on this thread.

People, by and large, do not share veg files the way they share documents. Two entirely different things!