People who keep kicking Vista like an unwanted cat are doing so on what basis?
- Companies aren’t adopting because it’s pre-SP?
- All those Apple ads trying to sell you an even more restrictive system?
- Hardware issues?
- Misguided opinions based on how it runs on XP-era hardware?
- The usual drivel from unsavory, unbalanced quarters like the FSF?
We went through a lot of the same stuff when XP was released. Things that were made for Win9x didn’t plug and play so well with XP. XP pre-SP1 (and 2) was a bit buggy — that’s why they’re called service packs, and that’s why corporate clients aren’t early adopters. And it’s no surprise that no matter how good Microsoft does something, their corporate (Apple) and anti-corporate (FSF) critics are going to try to scare people away with misleading and often hysterical claims.
It’s ironic in their ads that Apple admits XP backwards-migration is occurring. Look at the stats: Apple isn’t making a dent in Vista sales, XP is. Whether Apple or FSF or anyone else likes it, Microsoft rules the world of software. Vista isn’t going to be their Waterloo.
Vista SP1 release candidate is available; release is scheduled next week. Ziff Davis’ Ed Bott is putting it to the test. His initial set of tests look very promising. Microsoft makes some major fixes, including how Vista handles caching between mismatched transfer speeds.
…[T]he file transfers under Vista SP1 were dramatically faster than the Vista RTM times. For the directory full of many small files, the… throughput was more than 300%; for the large files, the speed… was roughly 260%. Note that you can expect similar results when transferring files from Vista to systems running Windows XP or Windows Server 2003.