I was just curious about this (seriously).
I mean, a real (scientific) reason, and not that "everybody else seems to be
doing it, so we feel obliged to", or "that it can play better games".

I didn't feel obliged to. In fact, my doctor recommended against it due to
my health issues. <eg>

I think your question should be more like: Are you happy you upgraded from
XP, or another OS, to Vista? But ask the people that did. Most here
probably haven't, or they wouldn't be here. OTOH, the people in the Vista
newsgroups either upgraded from XP or another OS, or are first time Windows
users. They could answer better.

Windows Vista General Newsgroup:
news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsof....vista.general

Windows Vista Mail Newsgroup:
news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsof...ows.vista.mail
--
Bruce Hagen
MS-MVP Outlook Express
Imperial Beach, CA




"Bill in Co." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:uH3TQJ$(E-Mail Removed)...
>I was just curious about this (seriously).
> I mean, a real (scientific) reason, and not that "everybody else seems to
> be doing it, so we feel obliged to", or "that it can play better games".
>

On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 21:36:50 -0600, "Bill in Co."
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I was just curious about this (seriously).
>I mean, a real (scientific) reason, and not that "everybody else seems to be
>doing it, so we feel obliged to", or "that it can play better games".
>
Howdy,

Based on what I have read, I have wondered if it is not some
perverse XP marketing scheme.

We shall see...

All the best,
--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."

I use Vista Ultimate x64 and am delighted with it. I also use XP but mostly
on test boxes now. I'm not anti-XP. I'm just very glad to have an OS that
is rock-solid stable.

"Bruce Hagen" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:OPHQkT$(E-Mail Removed)...
>I didn't feel obliged to. In fact, my doctor recommended against it due to
>my health issues. <eg>
>
> I think your question should be more like: Are you happy you upgraded from
> XP, or another OS, to Vista? But ask the people that did. Most here
> probably haven't, or they wouldn't be here. OTOH, the people in the Vista
> newsgroups either upgraded from XP or another OS, or are first time
> Windows users. They could answer better.
>
> Windows Vista General Newsgroup:
> news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsof....vista.general
>
> Windows Vista Mail Newsgroup:
> news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsof...ows.vista.mail
> --
> Bruce Hagen
> MS-MVP Outlook Express
> Imperial Beach, CA
>
>
>
>
> "Bill in Co." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:uH3TQJ$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>I was just curious about this (seriously).
>> I mean, a real (scientific) reason, and not that "everybody else seems to
>> be doing it, so we feel obliged to", or "that it can play better games".
>>
>

"Bill in Co." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:uH3TQJ$(E-Mail Removed)...
>I was just curious about this (seriously).
> I mean, a real (scientific) reason, and not that "everybody else seems to
> be doing it, so we feel obliged to", or "that it can play better games".

When I bought my previous laptop (5 years ago), it came with Windows XP. I
was sufficiently struck with it as an operating system that I upgraded my
desktop to XP and apart from one or two applications that wouldn't run, I
never regreted it.

I recently had to replace my laptop and it came with Windows Vista. I have
to say that I do not feel anything like the same desire to update my
desktop. I find it clunky; things are no longer in their logical place.
The changes to the visual appearance are completely unnecessary. And as for
the ability to display all the windows in a 3 dimensional view: what is that
all about? Oh, and it is a complete memory hog.

You could probably get a bunch of reasons as to why if you asked in a
Vista group.

Bill in Co. wrote:

> I was just curious about this (seriously).
> I mean, a real (scientific) reason, and not that "everybody else seems to be
> doing it, so we feel obliged to", or "that it can play better games".
>
>

"Bill in Co." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:uH3TQJ$(E-Mail Removed)...
>I was just curious about this (seriously).
> I mean, a real (scientific) reason, and not that "everybody else seems to
> be doing it, so we feel obliged to", or "that it can play better games".
>

Because it's more secure. I haven't heard any more complaints about how
terrible is is that I heard in 2001/2002 about how terrible WinXP was.
Often the same people who used to say not to install XP are now saying to
stick with XP.

I would not upgrade an existing machine. Wait until it's time to replace
the machine.

--
Frank Saunders MS-MVP IE,OE/WM
www.fjsmjs.com
Do not reply with email

"Frank Saunders MS-MVP IE,OE/WM" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>"Bill in Co." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:uH3TQJ$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>I was just curious about this (seriously).
>> I mean, a real (scientific) reason, and not that "everybody else seems to
>> be doing it, so we feel obliged to", or "that it can play better games".
>>
>
>Because it's more secure.

C'mon... just how "secure" does it have to be?

Or does it do a better job of protecting dummies who do file-sharing,
who blindly open e-mail attachments, who never check for security
updates, who blindly visit strange websites, who download files from
those strange websites, who believe popups that tell them their
computer is at risk, who click links in an email telling them that
their PayPal account is going to expire soon (even when it's been sent
to the wrong account), etc. etc.

They deserve what they get ;->

Bill in Co. wrote:
> I was just curious about this (seriously).
> I mean, a real (scientific) reason, and not that "everybody else
> seems to be doing it, so we feel obliged to", or "that it can play
> better games".

Because it's there, silly.

PD43 wrote:
> "Frank Saunders MS-MVP IE,OE/WM" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> "Bill in Co." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:uH3TQJ$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> I was just curious about this (seriously).
>>> I mean, a real (scientific) reason, and not that "everybody else seems
>>> to
>>> be doing it, so we feel obliged to", or "that it can play better games".
>>>
>>
>> Because it's more secure.
>
> C'mon... just how "secure" does it have to be?
>
> Or does it do a better job of protecting dummies who do file-sharing,
> who blindly open e-mail attachments, who never check for security
> updates, who blindly visit strange websites, who download files from
> those strange websites, who believe popups that tell them their
> computer is at risk, who click links in an email telling them that
> their PayPal account is going to expire soon (even when it's been sent
> to the wrong account), etc. etc.
>
> They deserve what they get ;->

Yuuup. Real security comes from within, and being careful what you do,
and not operating system patches.