I have heard a lot of criticism about Windows Vista, which has caused a lot of people to second guess whether they should make the upgrade. I have had both visitors of the site, family, and friends all ask me whether they should upgrade to Vista…and my response each time is “will you benefit from it?”
Personally I have made the upgrade because there are a lot of things in Vista, such as the Desktop Window Manager and search indexing, that made the upgrade worth it for me. I’m always keen on testing out the latest software and developments, so in order to do that I needed to make the upgrade to Vista.
Most of the time I tell people that it isn’t necessary for them to rush out and upgrade their operating system unless they are really adamant about getting it. In that case I try to caution people that they might have some software that doesn’t work quite right or possibly even some hardware troubles, but in the end things tend to go smoothly.
Last night I was reading a rather interesting post by Nik Cubrilovic, who is the CEO of Omnidrive and a writer on TechCrunch, about his experiences with Vista. For an entire year he was using Mac OS X for his primary operating system until all of a sudden he just couldn’t get it to boot. Then came the ultimate plunge…he decided to give Vista a shot:
I have been using Mac OS X as my primary OS for almost a year now, but last night I switched back [to Windows] … I can’t believe I didn’t switch back sooner, the main difference is that the interface is much much smoother and neater and despite popular belief performance is actually fantastic. I was used to waiting on Mac OS X while my standards apps would open up – Quicksilver, Firefox, Skype, etc. but Vista goes almost straight into the desktop and most apps boot very quickly.
I didn’t expect it to be like this, I didn’t want Vista to be this good – I was expecting to boot back into OS X and live happily ever after, but damn, this is one fast, slick and nice operating system. If you are a Mac user try it yourself, install boot camp and Vista and it will feel like you just added another CPU and doubled your RAM – I can’t see any evidence for any of the reports of Vista being slow or power-hungry.
…
In the past 15 years I have gone from DOS, Windows 3.1, Windows 95, Linux, OpenBSD, Windows 98, Windows 2000 (a nice OS for the time), XP, FreeBSD, Mac OS X and now Vista and working with Vista this weekend reminds me of the first time I ran an early preview of Mac OS X and spent an hour running my mouse across the dock (back in 2000).
He then dives deeper into the Mac OS X vs. Vista comparison pointing out the differences in Media Center/Frontrow, transferring settings, and handling media. This was a refreshing view on Vista after having read dozens of articles detailing why one should switch to Mac OS X, and in a comment on Nik’s site he mentioned why he wanted to write the article:
What actually spurred me into writing this is that I had read so much about Vista and most of those posts were negative, and I made the same mistake many others did and didn’t even try it out – it is by no means perfect but it is pretty damn good.
Paul Thurrott (a Windows guru) did make a good point though, and that is how Nik was running a year-old copy of Mac OS X and comparing that to a fresh install of Vista. After a fresh install nearly any operating system will probably seem to run lightning fast when comparing it to another that has gotten bogged down with a year’s worth of junk.
In another article by Paul he talks about the status of Vista after the first 100 days. In that article he covers both Vista sales and compatibility, and one paragraph really hit home for me:
What’s interesting is that Microsoft is caught in a Catch-22 in some ways. Customers want the company to innovate, but often don’t like the side effects of that work. For example, to make Windows Vista more visually exciting, Microsoft changed the graphics architecture, but then some users complained that their video cards were no longer compatible.
I hear complaints all the time about Microsoft not doing enough to “reinvent” the operating system, but the biggest concern for most customers is compatibility. Some say that Microsoft should scrap everything that they have and just start from scratch, but at the same time they want all of the previous applications and hardware to work perfectly. I often compare this kind of thing to gas mileage in cars where people want to get hundreds of miles to the gallon, but they don’t want to pay for the upgrades to receive the benefits.
I’m not trying to be a Windows evangelist here, but having used Vista for over a year (I tested Beta versions) now I can say that it is much better than XP. If you have tried Vista yourself how does it stack up to the other operating systems that you have used?

I like Vista a whole lot. I do like it better than XP as well. I haven’t even yet delved into the OS much at all. I am just a bit too busy and want to do other things with my time.
Like RC Helicopters for example.
I just had to get that in the blog as well. The other thing I like and is a huge part of my life (except for recently with all the rain down here) is road bicycling.
I too have run the betas of Vista and have grown so accustomed to it and the Aero interface that I just can not switch back.
I just really do not like the UAC in it’s current form. I do think it is a necessary evil. However, MS should let the user specify certain programs to bypass the UAC checking. Heck, they can make it fairly difficult and technical to do so, but just do it for us that want it. For example, why should I have to allow programs that I use all the time and know to be non threatening each time I run them? Let me select those to permanently allow.
I honestly believe that this functionality exists because the MS applications I use do bypass the UAC. MS Office, MS Money, and MS Streets and Trips for example. I am hoping that eventually this “Undocumented” feature will surface.
We would be disappointed if you didn’t!
I don´t know why but Vista is very slow for me. I have both, XP and Vista and the latest hasn´t convinced me yet. Slow for booting up system, slow for shutting down, slow for opening my software, etc.
I don´t know…
It could be slow due to your hardware?
@OldManDeath: The UAC thing is the only thing that I don’t completely like about Vista either. Luckily right now I don’t have anything that is overly annoying when it comes to the prompts, except for some of the Mozilla software that I run nightly versions for.
I have a feeling that in the first service pack that is released they will update the way the UAC works, but I’m giving them a break on their design flaw because after all it was their first stab at such a system. I’m just happy that they finally jumped in and implemented such a system.
It is probably because of your hardware, but I just read another post today that said they got Vista Basic to run on a system with just 512MB of memory, and it ran quite well:
[blogs.zdnet.com]
Hi. Well, I have a D965SS MOBO, Pentium D 2.8, 1GB RAM, 320GB Hard Disk. I believe I comply or in some cases exceed Vista Requirements.
I have heard of people having the same complaints as me. I´ll wait until a SP1 is released.
Wow, your specs are pretty similar to what I have. In my experience Vista is actually faster than XP.