Originally Posted by pauldovi
You are really missing out. Vista is the most stable OS I have ever ran. You see, Aero is the first hardware render GUI ever... all previous GUI's were software rendered. We all know software rendering is less stable than hardware rendering. This makes the GUI of Vista much more stable than any other OS.
The x64 version of Vista is amazing. No compatibility issues at all. Many say it is faster than x86, but I can't say, because I have never ran x86. x64 is also extremely secure because of its randomized kernel, which makes it very difficult for a program to gain malicious access to the kernel.
Vista only takes a performance hit on your computer if you have a slow computer. If you computer is pretty fast, yours will run fine on Vista. Complaining about the resources is silly. Welcome to the 21st century, now get 2GB.
One of the best features of Vista is the instant search. This east up anywhere from 200-600MB of your system RAM, but it will give back that RAM if another program needs it. Instant search is very cool.
You can always use vLite and make a lightweight installation of Vista...
I don't doubt your knowledge of the OS, or that it has some new components that make it better than XP. For me though, experience has taught me to wait before upgrading to the latest MS OS. Usually, by SP1, most driver developers have got their act together, most software has been ported and the OS it's self has been improved over the release version. It's also usually a bit cheaper to buy by SP1 as well, which is nice, because it tends to be a more complete product, with more complete support by then as well, so you're paying less, for something that's better...
I just know I'd be turning a lot of features/services/eye candy off when I upgrade. Most people wont do this, but I can't help myself, I just hate running stuff I feel I don't need. Day one of XP, I turned off the Retardo XP GUI theme and haven't turned it back on. I use it at work, but at home, it's the "classic" look for me. That's just how I am. I'll probably turn off the Aero interface as well, not because it's not pretty, or even practical, but simply because I don't need it. If it used 0.001% of my system resources, maybe I'd leave it on, but otherwise, I'm quite happy with "classic", if Vista has an option for it
It's also a question of costs. Over the next couple of months, I can either get an 8800GTS 320MB, or Retail Vista Home Premium. For the near future, almost all DX10 games are going to be backwards compatible with DX9c, so I know which I'm going to choose. New Year 2008 (January Sales in the UK) I'm going to be looking for a quad core on sale. Maybe mid, to late 2008 I will be looking towards getting a more mature Vista, but until then, I just don't see a compelling enough argument to buy it. It's not like Core2. When Core2 came out I was one of the first on Overclock.net to get one, even though they were stupidly expensive compared to their pricing now. But Core2 really made a difference, a huge difference, it blew my P4 away in every application and game. I just don't see Vista being a Core2 to XP's P4, not for me and not yet.