This is the only thing that I can see as an add-on: The enhancements include a simplified activation system, a network access protection module that borrows from technology used in Windows Vista, and improved support for cryptographic algorithms.

But to answer your question, I am sure there are things not listed in that short article pulling from a blog.

j razz

I'm guessing, but I bet there are some kernel updates too, such as tighter integration ready for server2008 and domains tricks that this brings.
Also, some serious patching taking into account all the security flaws it has had so far.

Afterall, just think of how huge a step SP1 into SP2, it was almost a new OS..Whilst I Doubt this version will go so far, it's going to make XP better than it is.

Well, I'm glad MS listened to its customers -- Vista is fine for those liking visual bells and whistles, but one pays a price for it in terms of resources used. XP certainly has its flaws, but as I and others have stated here in the past, the longer one can delay having to go to Vista, the better, IMO.

Has anyone thought that this may be the way MS wrecks XP by bringing into xp the bloatware copyprotection/security stuff that bogs down vista, making vista more palatable. I have two copies of vista home premium now gathering dust somewhere. Heres the beta of the new Free Ibm Lotus Symphony Office Suite

http://symphony.lotus.com/software/lotus/symphony/home.jspa

Think about it for a minute. MS depends on XP due to its corporate clients - it's not about to kill that off.

Vista is not a bad OS, you just need to be prepared for it.

People complain when MS is full of security holes, and then complain when MS does something about it....sigh

People complain when MS is full of security holes, and then complain when MS does something about it....sigh

i'd happily put up with ANY "security" issues 2k has so they would keep it a "living" OS & not have the market abandon it. but that doesn't make them $$.

SP3 could do what SP2 did & break lots of software that needs to be re-coded/compiled because programmers used "unsafe" methods (last I recall, everybody used those methods, even MS).

Why would anyone in their right mind mess with any "beta" upgrade from Microsoft?
People have enough problems with their "official" releases?

John

Exactly what I would say, John - I never do unless it is in pure test enviroment, and I really need it...

/Ulf

Why would anyone in their right mind mess with any "beta" upgrade from Microsoft?
LOL... indeed!
Randy

Time will tell, but I still think MS has made a fatal error with Vista. Can someone mention ANY feature in Vista that corporate users will absolutely need? I suspect they will hang on to XP and start beta projects in Ubuntu, then migrate over gradually.

I especially see this happening outside of North America, where many governments and businesses will intentionally avoid being beholden to MS. As for Ubuntu, you just gotta love software that calls its releases "Feisty Fawn" and Gutsy Gibbon."

Time will tell, but I still think MS has made a fatal error with Vista. Can someone mention ANY feature in Vista that corporate users will absolutely need? I suspect they will hang on to XP and start beta projects in Ubuntu, then migrate over gradually.

Got that right. At my company - (5600 users worldwide) we immediately remove any trace of Vista on any new PCs and get XP on for deployment. We have told Microsoft straight up (via our large enterprise agreement) that we will never be moving to Vista and have easily been allowed to keep our XP licenses flowing.

There is nothing that Vista can provide that XP does not already deliver for our business environment. And we are certainly not interested in investing anymore money into bleeding edge hardware just to run this bloated OS.

Many companies that we deal with are singing the exact same song. XP is more that good enough for the next few years.

VP