Thar Shaddin

I just did. I just wondered if anyone else had bothered.

Not me. My brother says it runs slow, so I haven't bothered.

Runs faster than XP did, for me.

I haven't. I'm waiting to see how it runs on our work computers. They're switching over at some point, and I don't want to jump on that bandwagon without personally seeing what's in store.

Does anyone know: is it backwards compatible? I'd heard an ungly rumor that it's not, which is retarded and I hope is just an ugly rumor.

It is. I've been hunting out compatibility settings galore to play all my old games.

Haven't had a problem with it yet, which is strange, since it's still MS software...

I hate Bill Gates and all affiliated .... things

Why would I willingly use up more RAM, more hard drive space, get annoying 'security' messages, potentially slow down most processes, potentially break many of my games, and support the advancement of that godawful operating system while getting absolutely no features that I will ever use or ever want to use?

No chance in hell.

If there was any reason at all to upgrade to vista that I could fathom, I might say there was a pig's chance in hell. But I still don't think there would be.

Jenica Sabiny wrote:Does anyone know: is it backwards compatible? I'd heard an ungly rumor that it's not, which is retarded and I hope is just an ugly rumor.

The simple answer is "sort-of". It is -mostly- backward compatible, but that does not mean everything will work. In fact, Eve online only recently managed to get their game to work with Vista, and this has caused a slew of problems with no end to complaints.

. . . this(^) is why.

Exactly as I've read and heard, Frug. I could get a free upgrade since I bought my computer "made for Vista" or some BS, but I didn't want to. XP is fine for what I want. I don't want all the fancy screens, I was annoyed with the "fanciness" of XP when it first came out. I prefer my computers utilitarian except for games, games should be pretty.

I still think it's faster. And to be honest, I had 256 MB of RAM under XP, which I later upgraded to 640 MB. I didn't see much improvement.

Installed Vista - I generally find I have 70% of my RAM free in standard desktop mode, and that is WITH the nifty sidebar and all the other slightly useless things Vista does.

Everything seems a lot faster in Vista, maybe that's just me seeing the benefits of my extra RAM but games load and play faster and smoother, apps like Firefox take mere seconds to load compared with agonising minutes under XP.

The only disadvantage I've found so far under Vista is the added HDD usage, and the added boot load times. Neither of which are particularly immense flaws with the OS. Overall, I like it a lot and would recommend it.

Normally, I hate MS. But I actually think they got something right with Vista. And well they should, really, since they had six extra years work on the fucking thing.

Mainly my problem is with compatibility. I'm afraid a lot of my games won't work with it. I need my computer games!

Your XP took minutes to load Firefox? Well, that's just odd.

Minutes? With 640 MB? Holy cow.

Yeah. I know. Hence the jumping on the bandwagon.

It's not XP's fault that was happening. I assure you.