POLL: Which Vista Edition will you be getting?

[stash]

Originally posted by: archcommus
Another question.

Say you have a valid XP Pro SP2 disc and key and purchase Ultimate upgrade. Does this require you to actually have XP installed before ever installing Vista Ultimate, or do you just need to enter your XP key and your Vista key anytime you want to install. I don't know because I've never purchased upgrade editions of Windows before.

Nope, you can do clean installs with upgrade versions. You will just need to keep the XP CD handy for verification purposes.

 

[archcommus]

Originally posted by: stash

Originally posted by: archcommus
Another question.

Say you have a valid XP Pro SP2 disc and key and purchase Ultimate upgrade. Does this require you to actually have XP installed before ever installing Vista Ultimate, or do you just need to enter your XP key and your Vista key anytime you want to install. I don't know because I've never purchased upgrade editions of Windows before.

Nope, you can do clean installs with upgrade versions. You will just need to keep the XP CD handy for verification purposes.

That's good. So you actually need to physically enter the XP CD during install? That's a bit more of a pain than just keeping my key handy. What if your disc gets unreadable for some reason a few years down the road?

 

[stash]

Yes, you have to feed the XP CD to setup during the install. Not sure about the unreadable CD, but I'm pretty sure you can get a replacement CD if you call MS and explain the situation.

 

[AmigaMan]

even though I'm a mac user, I'll probably still get Home Premium just to stay up to date. I'll probably install it on my old Inspiron 9200 laptop to see how it works. I may move it to my MacBook Pro if I like it enough...

 

[Link19]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42

Originally posted by: Link19

A comment like that makes no sense because Windows 98/ME were POS opertaing systems and should have died as soon as Windows XP was released.

Windows XP is already a good OS and you shouldn't have to move to Vista to be able to use the newest software.

If you play games, you have to move to Vista for DX10. If you want more than 2GB of memory per process, you have to move to Vista. It has its uses.

The 2Gb of memory per process limitation is a limitation of 32-bit opertaing systems. The same will apply with Vista 32-bit. You will need Vista 64-bit. You cna alos use Windows XP Profesisonal x64 edition to use more than 2GB of memory per process.

 

[KeithP]

Ultimate, but only because I know MS employees and get it at the MS store price. If I had to pay retail I would probably get Home Premium.

-KeithP

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: stash

(1)- What would you say that Vista offers over XP for the average corporate desktop? I've tested all the versions that have come down the pipe so far, and haven't seen much beyond the improved search features that would matter to the huge majority of users who run email/web, and a few core apps.

Well, I'm a security guy, so many of the features that I think would appeal to business are security related. I work in the US Federal government space, so there is large demand for many of these (not all security related), including:

BitLocker.
Storage of EFS keys on smartcards.
About twice as many group policy settings as XP.
IE7 protected mode
ActiveX installer service (ability to grant normal users the ability to install approved controls).
Improved remote assistance.
Drastically improved offline files.
Native IPv6 (OMB is mandating IPv6 by 2009 I think).
Drastically improved IPSec rule management that is integrated with the firewall.
WDS (Windows Deployment Services) and the associated tech, like ImageX...single image for all hardware on a common architecture (x86 or x64), easy image serviceability, etc.
UAC will make running as a standard user much easier than XP.
NAP (Network Access Protection)
CNG (Crypto-Next Generation, which includes modern crypto suites like ECC and SHA-2).

And that's hardly an exhaustive list.

Not to mention, now instead of VLK copies being distributed by these malcontents, we will see some other kind of hacked option, most likely being a local KMS spoof. Mark my words, you will see pirate Vista downloads all over the place, and nothing will have been accomplished beyond hassling their loyal clientele.

I think you have a valid point there, especially with the KMS spoof. But Microsoft has the right to protect their IP, to try to recoup lost revenue and to increase shareholder confidence. Piracy is costing the company 10s of billions of dollars annually, and that is one reason why the stock has been flat for so many years. But I guess we'll just have to wait and see if these new measures have any noticeable effect on piracy and/or if there is a backlash from the VLK user community.

Well put, you have my respect for some great info and a reasonable outlook on possiblilites. I'm interested in the economics behind the piracy issue. I am far from a piracy apologist, but I think that the vast majority of the pirated windows users are small-timers who either don't have the money, or wouldn't buy windows anyway. I think that probably they look a little unrealistically about the number .. x # of pirated copies probably is equal only to 1 out of every 100 of those translating into a legal sale. And flipping it over, the hassles involved with the anti-piracy measures may add up to reduced sales to the vast majority of legal customers (particularly on the business end).

It's a complicated issue, but I commed you for stating things very articulately, I look forward to seeing how this all plays out.

Good day

 

[DasFox]

Most of my computing is just for home use, nothing real serious, so for me, I'll change to get a 64x OS, to help my GameRig run better, at least I hope that will be the case, but if not, and CPU performance is going to be the only improvement and the gaming market is going to take a while to catch up to this OS, then I'll stick to XP.

Someone I read on DailyTech had this to say:

Games run 15% slower on Vista even Microsoft admitted it!

WOW now I'd like to hear something on this?

ALOHA

 

[stash]

Your game rig has 2GB of RAM, so I don't think you'll see any benefit from x64.

 

[InlineFive]

Originally posted by: DasFox
Most of my computing is just for home use, nothing real serious, so for me, I'll change to get a 64x OS, to help my GameRig run better, at least I hope that will be the case, but if not, and CPU performance is going to be the only improvement and the gaming market is going to take a while to catch up to this OS, then I'll stick to XP.

Someone I read on DailyTech had this to say:

Games run 15% slower on Vista even Microsoft admitted it!

WOW now I'd like to hear something on this?

ALOHA

For general consumers 64-Bit won't make a big difference, yet. However I think it does show promise as Microsoft is migrating their next-generation server products to a 64-Bit architecture. That has to mean something for the future ot 64-Bit.

 

[archcommus]

Originally posted by: DasFox
Most of my computing is just for home use, nothing real serious, so for me, I'll change to get a 64x OS, to help my GameRig run better, at least I hope that will be the case, but if not, and CPU performance is going to be the only improvement and the gaming market is going to take a while to catch up to this OS, then I'll stick to XP.

Someone I read on DailyTech had this to say:

Games run 15% slower on Vista even Microsoft admitted it!

WOW now I'd like to hear something on this?

ALOHA

That's not surprising, I'd expect that given it's a newer, "heavier" OS. It does more and looks prettier, so of course it's going to eat more resources, including CPU cycles, GPU cycles, and memory. Wouldn't you expect that to lower game performance a tad?

 

[ITJunkie]

Originally posted by: pkme2
Not at this time. My Win XP Pro 32bit works for me.

bingo. Probably won't move to Vista until they have SP1 out for it and/or wider software compatibility.

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: Link19
You should have made the option, I will stick with Windows XP. Not everyone wants to move to Vista.

MS can't force us to move to Vista. Some people simply don't want it.

Windows Vista isn't even a real 64-bit operating system. It is pseudo 64-bit code on top of a native 32-bit architecture!!

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: archcommus

Originally posted by: DasFox
Most of my computing is just for home use, nothing real serious, so for me, I'll change to get a 64x OS, to help my GameRig run better, at least I hope that will be the case, but if not, and CPU performance is going to be the only improvement and the gaming market is going to take a while to catch up to this OS, then I'll stick to XP.

Someone I read on DailyTech had this to say:

Games run 15% slower on Vista even Microsoft admitted it!

WOW now I'd like to hear something on this?

ALOHA

That's not surprising, I'd expect that given it's a newer, "heavier" OS. It does more and looks prettier, so of course it's going to eat more resources, including CPU cycles, GPU cycles, and memory. Wouldn't you expect that to lower game performance a tad?

Vista was supposed to do some snazzy thing where it shuts down a bunch of services while games are running, therefore, theoretically making games faster. I just remember hearing this, I have no idea if that functionality made it into the final build.

 

[stash]

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: Link19
You should have made the option, I will stick with Windows XP. Not everyone wants to move to Vista.

MS can't force us to move to Vista. Some people simply don't want it.

Windows Vista isn't even a real 64-bit operating system. It is pseudo 64-bit code on top of a native 32-bit architecture!!

lol

 

[f1sh3r]

already have a copy of ultimate ordered from intel's retail edge. pretty much free at that

good deal, but ive been using linux a lot more. vista is a drm trap :shocked:

 

[InlineFive]

Originally posted by: stash

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: Link19
You should have made the option, I will stick with Windows XP. Not everyone wants to move to Vista.

MS can't force us to move to Vista. Some people simply don't want it.

Windows Vista isn't even a real 64-bit operating system. It is pseudo 64-bit code on top of a native 32-bit architecture!!

lol

Please don't provoke the troll.

 

[mastertech01]

Almost as soon as XP was released it was being offered on the For Sale forum for 160.00 average for Pro, so is 300.00 realistically going to be the average price on these forums when Vista Ultimate comes out? Maybe for those who have to have a retail box 12 seconds after the official release, but I bet you can find deep discounts shortly after.

 

[Twinpeaksr]

DOS 6.2, don't fuss with all the graphical stuff. Just upgraded from PC DOS 5.0 last year!

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: Twinpeaksr
DOS 6.2, don't fuss with all the graphical stuff. Just upgraded from PC DOS 5.0 last year!

Command Line FTW!!

 

[uallas5]

Originally posted by: stash
Business, Enterprise and Ultimate are the only ones with Remote Desktop.

But does this mean you can't RDP into a home edition computer? All i care is RDP out so I can use it with my VPN into work. Sometimes this is a lot quicker and easier than pulling my laptop out for just one thing.

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: uallas5

Originally posted by: stash
Business, Enterprise and Ultimate are the only ones with Remote Desktop.

But does this mean you can't RDP into a home edition computer? All i care is RDP out so I can use it with my VPN into work. Sometimes this is a lot quicker and easier than pulling my laptop out for just one thing.

I'm sure it means only for the server. If worse comes to worse, you can use the old TS client.

 

[stash]

Yeah I was speaking to the RDP server. There should be client in Home Premium.

 

[Smitty308]

NONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[n7]

If i was paying full prices, i'd buy Vista Home Premium.

But since i am getting Ultimate with my Intel Retail Edge bundle if they ever ship it, that's the route i'm going.