Is Vista how XP should be?

I had the opportunity to try Vista Home Basic for a week or so. This version
is limited to the very basic functions and none of the bells and whistles.

So far so good. It is stable and usable -- I like it.

But I am suprised that after all the time and money invested in developing
the product the end result is effectively a polished version of XP in terms
of interface and experience.

I guess I was expecting a more radical change. I'm not sure exactly what,
but new ways to manage files (offline and online), search and display
information. I was also hoping that the whole thing would be speedier.

Or is all of the above offered by premium versions of Vista?

Finally, if the choice is between a new PC with Vista Home Basic and one
with XP Pro, wouldn't the latter be a better choice as it's much less 'heavy'
and a more tried and tested system?

A dual-core CPU computer with 2GB RAM
and any version of Windows Vista will
out-perform Windows XP in a heartbeat. And
you'll enjoy the enhanced security built-in to
Windows Vista, not the added-on security needed
for Windows XP. I've been using Windows Vista
since last January and Windows XP is now a
distant memory whose life-cycle is coming
to an end.

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows Shell/User

---------------------------------------------------------------

"Lawrence" wrote:

I had the opportunity to try Vista Home Basic for a week or so. This version
is limited to the very basic functions and none of the bells and whistles.

So far so good. It is stable and usable -- I like it.

But I am suprised that after all the time and money invested in developing
the product the end result is effectively a polished version of XP in terms
of interface and experience.

I guess I was expecting a more radical change. I'm not sure exactly what,
but new ways to manage files (offline and online), search and display
information. I was also hoping that the whole thing would be speedier.

Or is all of the above offered by premium versions of Vista?

Finally, if the choice is between a new PC with Vista Home Basic and one
with XP Pro, wouldn't the latter be a better choice as it's much less 'heavy'
and a more tried and tested system?

not tried ultimate yet but home premium is also a lot like xp just alot
heavier on the ram. i like using it tho and havent really encountered any
major problems with it usually just new hardware drivers need to be
installed. Most of the controls are the same as xp.


"Lawrence" <> wrote in message
news:EEC359B8-D2A9-4D3E-B152-...
>I had the opportunity to try Vista Home Basic for a week or so. This
>version
> is limited to the very basic functions and none of the bells and whistles.
>
> So far so good. It is stable and usable -- I like it.
>
> But I am suprised that after all the time and money invested in developing
> the product the end result is effectively a polished version of XP in
> terms
> of interface and experience.
>
> I guess I was expecting a more radical change. I'm not sure exactly what,
> but new ways to manage files (offline and online), search and display
> information. I was also hoping that the whole thing would be speedier.
>
> Or is all of the above offered by premium versions of Vista?
>
> Finally, if the choice is between a new PC with Vista Home Basic and one
> with XP Pro, wouldn't the latter be a better choice as it's much less
> 'heavy'
> and a more tried and tested system?
>
>
>
>
>

How about the whole Aero thing? A gimmick or is it actually useful?

"matt hopkins" wrote:

> not tried ultimate yet but home premium is also a lot like xp just alot
> heavier on the ram. i like using it tho and havent really encountered any
> major problems with it usually just new hardware drivers need to be
> installed. Most of the controls are the same as xp.
>
>
> "Lawrence" <> wrote in message
> news:EEC359B8-D2A9-4D3E-B152-...
> >I had the opportunity to try Vista Home Basic for a week or so. This
> >version
> > is limited to the very basic functions and none of the bells and whistles.
> >
> > So far so good. It is stable and usable -- I like it.
> >
> > But I am suprised that after all the time and money invested in developing
> > the product the end result is effectively a polished version of XP in
> > terms
> > of interface and experience.
> >
> > I guess I was expecting a more radical change. I'm not sure exactly what,
> > but new ways to manage files (offline and online), search and display
> > information. I was also hoping that the whole thing would be speedier.
> >
> > Or is all of the above offered by premium versions of Vista?
> >
> > Finally, if the choice is between a new PC with Vista Home Basic and one
> > with XP Pro, wouldn't the latter be a better choice as it's much less
> > 'heavy'
> > and a more tried and tested system?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

When using Windows Vista Aero, open windows glide smoothly on
your screen when you move or resize them. There are no redraw
artifacts, latency, or "tearing" effects that you sometimes see,
particularly in windows that display dynamic content such as video.
Using Aero will give you an even more confident and stable
Windows desktop experience.

Windows Vista Aero Explained:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/pro...ails/aero.mspx

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows Shell/User

---------------------------------------------------------------

"Lawrence" wrote:

How about the whole Aero thing? A gimmick or is it actually useful?

"Using Aero will give you an even more confident and stable Windows desktop
experience"

Actually, so far the best experience for me has been the classic view with
the least possible features on (apart from ClearType). I'm a minimalist!

I'll have to test Aero and see if benefits go beyond the smoother and
aesthetic experience.

"Carey Frisch [MVP]" wrote:

> When using Windows Vista Aero, open windows glide smoothly on
> your screen when you move or resize them. There are no redraw
> artifacts, latency, or "tearing" effects that you sometimes see,
> particularly in windows that display dynamic content such as video.
> Using Aero will give you an even more confident and stable
> Windows desktop experience.
>
> Windows Vista Aero Explained:
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/pro...ails/aero.mspx
>
> --
> Carey Frisch
> Microsoft MVP
> Windows Shell/User
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "Lawrence" wrote:
>
> How about the whole Aero thing? A gimmick or is it actually useful?
>
>

"Carey Frisch [MVP]" wrote:

> When using Windows Vista Aero, open windows glide smoothly on
> your screen when you move or resize them. There are no redraw
> artifacts, latency, or "tearing" effects that you sometimes see,
> particularly in windows that display dynamic content such as video.
> Using Aero will give you an even more confident and stable
> Windows desktop experience.

This statement is simply untrue. The vast majority of third party tests show
Vista to be significantly slower than XP across the board. Microsoft's own
statments about SP1 indicate that this is the main issue they will be trying
to "fix."

That's open to debate.

--

----
Crosspost, do not multipost http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/mul_crss.htm
How to ask a question http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375
How to Post http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
__________________________________________________ _______________________________


"Carey Frisch [MVP]" <> wrote in message
news:C9D5A1B3-42F6-4E0F-B96D-...
>A dual-core CPU computer with 2GB RAM
> and any version of Windows Vista will
> out-perform Windows XP in a heartbeat.

Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:
> A dual-core CPU computer with 2GB RAM
> and any version of Windows Vista will
> out-perform Windows XP in a heartbeat.

Out perform how??
Certainly not on speed in my experience...

Guy


>And you'll enjoy the enhanced security built-in to
> Windows Vista, not the added-on security needed
> for Windows XP. I've been using Windows Vista
> since last January and Windows XP is now a
> distant memory whose life-cycle is coming
> to an end.
>

Old PC:

System: Intel Pentium 4, 3000 MHz
Memory: 2048MB RAM
Disk: Drives C, E
Video: NVIDIA GeForce 6600 GT
Internet: MSIE 7.0; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727
Windows: Windows XP Pro SP2
Score: 1760

New PC:
System: AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 3800+, 2000 MHz
Memory: 2048MB RAM
Disk: Drives C, D, E
Video: ATI Radeon HD 2400 PRO
Internet: MSIE 7.0; SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; Windows
Windows: Vista Ultimate
Score: 2351

Ref: PC PitStop

Windows Vista...the clear performance winner!

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows Shell/User

---------------------------------------------------------------

"Bigguy" <> wrote in message news:...
Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:
> A dual-core CPU computer with 2GB RAM
> and any version of Windows Vista will
> out-perform Windows XP in a heartbeat.

Out perform how??
Certainly not on speed in my experience...

Guy


>And you'll enjoy the enhanced security built-in to
> Windows Vista, not the added-on security needed
> for Windows XP. I've been using Windows Vista
> since last January and Windows XP is now a
> distant memory whose life-cycle is coming
> to an end.
>