Well, it appears Vista has become the Windows 95/Windows ME disaster of this decade. It seems that most people who have tried it, especially on laptops, have found it to be a useless resource hog, with cool graphics, but not much else ot offer.
Count me amongst that crowd. I tried it on a fairly higher-end laptop with 2 gig of RAM, and even after getting all the pre-installed crap off the machine, you could go to lunch waiting on the thing to boot up. Any click to open a new program was painfully slow, and I would have returned the laptop had Sony and Microsoft not finally relented, and agreed to send out an XP disc to those requesting it. I got mine right away.
Microsoft was attempting to “end-of-life” (EOL) XP fairly quickly, but has now given in some, and will allow PC manufacturers to continue to install XP on some machines. The caveat seems to be that XP can only be installed on their cheapest machines. What does this tell you? That the machines the manufacturers want to have to provide the least support for are the ones you’d want to have the most stable OS, and that is clearly XP.
As further evidence that Microsoft is recognizing the disaster that is Vista, they have announced a rush to get Windows 7 to the market. I think we had most corporate users (the big software buyers) refusing to make the move to Vista, so MS had to do something. I just hope they don’t do like they did with 95 and ME, and just rush them to market as an interim step. But I think Microsoft is realizing they’d better treat Vista as the interim, and get something out there that works.
Here’s my suggestion, make it leaner, meaner, faster, and less resource intense. It’s the OS, so we should rely on the “programs” to do the heavy lifting. For some reason Microsoft wants to continue to bloat the OS.