Will you be upgrading to Vista?

[Lucas]

A simple question, Will you be upgrading to Vista?

If you say yes, please state What hardware you will need to update (if any).

If you say no, please state why?

And let's not get into a DRM, HDCP, HDMI, CIA, FBI, ARIA, iTunes, WMP, MAC, Linux war.. Thanks

Lucas

This is a public Poll... I think

[DaveRowell]

XP Pro will be supported for another 7 years so no need to rush right now especially whilst we wait for compatible drivers and applications to be produced and debugged.

[Trib4l]

No. Reasons:

1. Minimal software "just for Vista". Halo 2 doesn't cut it, and DX10 is still not a standard.
2. Configuration and driver issues. An OS should work out of the box with all my stuff. This is a vendor issue, but it's still an issue.
3. I've still got 7 years to have a good enough reason.

[wvpv]

I'm not touching it until SP1 comes out.

I never put much stock in a point-o release -- especially one from Microsoft.

[kbob]

and with a several main reasons-

one-just doesn't seem to offer anything in terms of an advantage over xp pro, at least for what I do.

two-the aforementioned lockdowns just make it really really unappealing to me.

there is a third-not sure I want to pay the vista tax regarding memory overhead et al (meaning I'd need faster and more memory, and hard drives with the large flash memory in them in order to really take advantage of vista's speed boost-something that would mean substantially upgrading an existing box).

Finally, and for me perhaps most important:

drivers and compatibility are really really lacking for what I do. The local MLS, two different data sources, along with a couple of local county official records sources, my main report writing software, my main (and locked in) sketching software, my vertical market vendor supplied database software-none are fully compatible with vista. Getting there, and there are work arounds-but I don't see a reason to risk screwing up my existing resources just for what amounts to a prettier interface at this point. For what it's worth-two of those programs, one of the data sources and the sketch software-are written in 16 bit code, not even 32 bit-so getting them to work as is on vista would be a challenge. Unfortunately, both are programs that I literally use every day, and for which there is no alternative at present (for the data source) and the cost of migrating the entire office (for compatibility purposes, our entire office must be on the same version of the sketching software-while newer versions can read older, they cannot save in a format useable by the older version) to the new version of the sketching software would be around $36-4000. High price to pay for just using a new operating system...and that's not taking into account needing to replace old hardware et al.

I'm not even sure about my printers, scanners, card readers, wacom tablets, video cards, sound cards (something I've heard nightmares about-and there appears to be no support for my long time friend-the sound blaster extigy, an external sound card based on the audigy platform). Having to replace any or all of them just to go with the latest and "greatest" doesn't seem to make sense.

As for office 2007-well, tell me why I'd like it better. from what I hear, there are some nice features...but also, everything is different. The menus, default storage locations, everything. At this point, from what I hear, its possible to make the latest version of OpenOffice act more like Office 200-2003 than the default interface of Office 2007. And from what I hear, classic mode in the new version still doesn't fully act like the older versions of office. Right now Office's main competition is the installed base of older office versions, and the fact that they changed the interface so much, that supporting both versions will be tough. Given that that support will be me-I've told our office that if they get the new version, they're on their own for at least the next few years.

re purchasing a new pc right now-I'd have to go with an xp box, not vista. I generally only get xp pro, so the lead time for primary support is fairly long anyway-and I tend to go through a system once every 2-2.5 years, so the length of support still outlives my needs anyway.

Not saying I'll never end up with a vista box-though I'm exploring the possiblities of using linux for my next work machine, if the software's I'm using go away from being locked into windows-something I and many others have been asking for now for years, and that they look like they're finally getting around to doing.

[MediaGuy]

No, not now. (Technically, I have, since I'm writing this on a Vista machine - but that's because I bought a new machine and Vista came with it. No machines in the development or presentation systems will be Vista for quite a while).

I would just be repeating what everyone else has said, so I won't give my reasons. But - I want to remind everyone here that, unless you're a Linux or Mac person, you WILL be upgrading, dictated by the timetable of your favorite software or (more likely) game.

[Lee]

Originally Posted by wvpv

I'm not touching it until SP1 comes out.

I never put much stock in a point-o release -- especially one from Microsoft.

Actually according to Ziff-Davis reports MS people are debating whether there should be a SP1 - the pros say "many people expect one" and the cons say "auto-updates have been working well with Vista".

Regarding the unnecessary comment "especially one from Microsoft", I've experienced (and am experiencing) non-Microsoft buggy products that seem to never get fixed. In my experience Microsoft actually does a very fine job, and I can't help wonder whether many competitors are simply envious of them and therefore become vocal critics.

Administrator's Note:

Fair Warning: We'll be watching this thread very closely. Keep your opinions civil and professional and there shouldn't be any problems. Sound like a 5-year-old and we'll delete your post.

[Lee]

For most people I'm not sure whether updating makes sense since Vista takes a leap forward that it becomes difficult to be backward compatible with older hardware. But of course, all new machines will offer Vista.

When previous versions of Windows came out, it has been reported that MS made the decision to be as backward compatible as possible, in order to avoid alienating as many people as possible.

On the other hand, it is reported that with Vista MS made the decision that incorporation of several new technologies would take precedence over remaining backward compatible. They claim that they got burned in several areas in the past by trying to remain backward compatible, and someone else pointed out that Apple has always downplayed the importance of being backward compatible.

What these reports don't say is precisely what "old" technology Vista might compromise. The only item I've read is that DirectX 9 will not be modified to be compatible with Vista (which uses DirectX 10) and they will not develop a DirectX10 for XP.

[NGRRFan]

When this car wears out I'll buy a new one.

[MediaGuy]

Originally Posted by Tim Eason

I don't wanna! You can't make me! MMMOOOOOMMMMM!!!!

Originally Posted by MediaGuy

I don't wanna! You can't make me! MMMOOOOOMMMMM!!!!

That's a little more like a 3 or 4-year-old. At five they start manipulation and arguing their case -- even if it sounds completely silly to an adult.