Glad I took the plunge

[FlyinBrian]

You would think you would see chicken little outside screaming "the sky is falling" by reading forum users experience with Vista. I came here to post my comments.

I finally upgraded to Vista x64 today and I love it. I am glad I went ahead and took the plunge. The new interface is very stylish and even though I have 64 bit I havent had any problems runing 32 bit programs. So if you are on the edge like I was dont be afraid, take the plunge.

 

[general]

Why plunge when the experience doesn't really offer you anything but an OS that is less efficient in using resources? I'm happy you like the pretty gui, but it doesn't make your programs run any better or let you run programs you wouldn't have before. Even on XP most advanced users turn the memory wasting fancy graphics off. I don't see why you'd want your system wasting resources on eye candy when it could be using them to run your apps.

 

[bbz_Ghost]

Why plunge when the experience doesn't really offer you anything but an OS that is less efficient in using resources? I'm happy you like the pretty gui, but it doesn't make your programs run any better or let you run programs you wouldn't have before. Even on XP most advanced users turn the memory wasting fancy graphics off. I don't see why you'd want your system wasting resources on eye candy when it could be using them to run your apps.

Same reason people climb mountains, race cars, run marathons, skydive, etc. Because they can.

The OP did say he was glad to take the plunge, so why take the time and put forth the effort of wasting all those precious XP resources loading up your browser just so you can come here, see someone else that is apparently quite happy with their decision to run Vista, and rain on the guy's parade?

How is his running Vista any more wasteful than your silly comments, eh?

 

[Catweazle]

Ever considered, general, that people might have more machine than is really needed for the tasks they run?

Most 'advanced users' I've come across don't actually bother disabling interface features because they have little need to. they're running systems which don't struggle with the tasks asked of them.

90% or more of all work performed on PCs will happily run on systems several years old, after all.

You're not under the misapprehension that somebody whi isn't constantly stressing their syustem to the limits of its potential couldn't possibly be an 'advanced user' are you?

 

[calebb]

Why plunge when the experience doesn't really offer you anything but an OS that is less efficient in using resources? I'm happy you like the pretty gui, but it doesn't make your programs run any better or let you run programs you wouldn't have before. Even on XP most advanced users turn the memory wasting fancy graphics off. I don't see why you'd want your system wasting resources on eye candy when it could be using them to run your apps.

Incorrect. My PC runs significantly faster in Vista than XP

The largest performance boost is due to SuperFetch. Learn about it here.

Then when it comes to gaming, using the Aero interface gives you a significant advantage over WinXP. The more you know. (and knowing is half the battle... the other half is stopping all this FUD!)
Cliff's notes version:
WinXP "eye candy" versus no "eye candy" : 5% performance penalty.
Vista w/Aero versus no Aero: 0% performance penalty

 

[FlyinBrian]

Yes, your right the new memory scheme is a big improvement. I happend to have a spare 1gb flash drive that uses usb 2.0 and low and behold it did boost performance some. Im guessing they use the flash memory as a pagefile instead of the hard disk.