Vista ... x9 or NT

Hi all ... happily running XP Pro SP2/Office Pro and considering Vista/Office
upgrade.

Not a techie but understand that XP Home was x9 based and XP Pro is NT (e.g.
XP Pro SP2 is NT 5.5?).

My question is: Do Vista(Windows 6?) Home and Business (Ultimate?) share the
same differences as XP? Heard Vista OS based on Win Server 2003?

All info appreciated and thanks in advance ...

Windows NT 4, 2000, XP, Server 2003, Vista are the same family of operating
systems with different succeeding versions that are referred to as
generations. They are all share the same code base with different versions
of it with a high level of compatibility.
--
Andre
Blog: http://adacosta.spaces.live.com
My Vista Quickstart Guide:
http://adacosta.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!E8E5CC039D51E3DB!9709.entry

2000 - 5.0
XP - 5.1
Server 2003 - 5.2
Vista - 6.0


"Rob Smith" <RobSmith@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:02A0E21A-29E9-4179-892B-F1745DFA978B@microsoft.com...
> Hi all ... happily running XP Pro SP2/Office Pro and considering
> Vista/Office
> upgrade.
>
> Not a techie but understand that XP Home was x9 based and XP Pro is NT
> (e.g.
> XP Pro SP2 is NT 5.5?).
>
> My question is: Do Vista(Windows 6?) Home and Business (Ultimate?) share
> the
> same differences as XP? Heard Vista OS based on Win Server 2003?
>
> All info appreciated and thanks in advance ...
>

"Rob Smith" <RobSmith@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:02A0E21A-29E9-4179-892B-F1745DFA978B@microsoft.com...
> Hi all ... happily running XP Pro SP2/Office Pro and considering
> Vista/Office
> upgrade.
>
> Not a techie but understand that XP Home was x9 based and XP Pro is NT
> (e.g.
> XP Pro SP2 is NT 5.5?).
>
> My question is: Do Vista(Windows 6?) Home and Business (Ultimate?) share
> the
> same differences as XP? Heard Vista OS based on Win Server 2003?
>
> All info appreciated and thanks in advance ...

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=785

Rob;
"but understand that XP Home was x9 based and XP Pro is NT"
You have an incorrect understanding.
Windows XP Home and Pro are NT based and both have nearly identical
code.
Because of that, performance and stability are identical for Windows
XP Home and Windows XP Pro.

Windows XP Home was intended to replace Windows 9x while Windows XP
Pro was intended to replace Windows 2000.
But that is not to be confused with what the predecessors are based.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"Rob Smith" <RobSmith@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:02A0E21A-29E9-4179-892B-F1745DFA978B@microsoft.com...
> Hi all ... happily running XP Pro SP2/Office Pro and considering
> Vista/Office
> upgrade.
>
> Not a techie but understand that XP Home was x9 based and XP Pro is
> NT (e.g.
> XP Pro SP2 is NT 5.5?).
>
> My question is: Do Vista(Windows 6?) Home and Business (Ultimate?)
> share the
> same differences as XP? Heard Vista OS based on Win Server 2003?
>
> All info appreciated and thanks in advance ...

"Rob Smith" <RobSmith@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:02A0E21A-29E9-4179-892B-F1745DFA978B@microsoft.com...
> Hi all ... happily running XP Pro SP2/Office Pro and considering
> Vista/Office
> upgrade.
>
> Not a techie but understand that XP Home was x9 based and XP Pro is NT
> (e.g.
> XP Pro SP2 is NT 5.5?).
>
> My question is: Do Vista(Windows 6?) Home and Business (Ultimate?) share
> the
> same differences as XP? Heard Vista OS based on Win Server 2003?
>
> All info appreciated and thanks in advance ...
>


Vista comes as a set of SKUs all on the same operating system code base i.e.
with an NT Kernel & System version of 6.0.6000.

E.g. there's Vista Home Basic, Vista Business, and Vista Ultimate and so on.
They are all basically the same operating system, but configured and
featured for differing customer requirements e.g. Vista Business is
configured and featured to meet the needs of business, campus, and
professional computing.

Saucy

On Mon, 3 Dec 2007 19:01:00 -0800, Rob Smith
<RobSmith@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

> Hi all ... happily running XP Pro SP2/Office Pro and considering Vista/Office
> upgrade.


Two points here:

1. First, these are two separate upgrades. The operating system and
Windows are two completely different things, and you shouldn't think
of them together this way. You can upgrade either or both, and you
should evaluate whether you want to do this independently for each.

2. If you are happily running what you have, *why* are you thinking of
upgrading?

A change of operating system should be driven by need, not just
because there is a new version available. Are you having a problem
with Windows XP (or whatever you're running) that you expect Vista to
solve? Do you have or expect to get new hardware or software that is
supported in Vista, but not in XP? Is there some new feature in Vista
that you need or yearn for? Does your job require you have skills in
Vista? Are you a computer hobbyist who enjoys playing with whatever is
newest?

If the answer to one or more of those questions is yes (and your
hardware is adequate for Vista--a *big* "if," by the way), then you
should get Vista. Otherwise most people should stick with what they
have. There is *always* a learning curve and a potential for problems
when you take a step as big as this one, regardless of how wonderful
whatever you're contemplating moving to is. Sooner or later you'll
have to upgrade (to Vista or its successor) because you'll want
support for hardware or software that you can't get in Vista, but
don't rush it.

I'm personally happy with Vista. If you were buying a new computer, I
would unhesitatingly recommend that you get Vista on it. But upgrading
is a different story.

Much the same is true of Office.


> Not a techie but understand that XP Home was x9 based and XP Pro is NT (e.g.
> XP Pro SP2 is NT 5.5?).



No, not correct. Both are versions of NT. They are both NT 5.1. In
fact, XP Professional and XP Home are exactly the same in all
respects, except that Professional has a few features (mostly related
to networking and security) missing from Home. For most (but not all)
home users, even those with a home network, these features aren't
needed, would never be used, and buying Professional instead of Home
is a waste of money.

For details go to
http://www.winsupersite.com/showcas...xp_home_pro.asp

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/whichxp.asp

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/...y/choosing2.asp

Also note one other point not mentioned on any of those sites:
Professional allows ten concurrent network connections, and Home only
five.


> My question is: Do Vista(Windows 6?) Home and Business (Ultimate?) share the
> same differences as XP? Heard Vista OS based on Win Server 2003?


Yes, Vista in Windows NT 6.0.

Just as with XP, Vista's various editions are all based on the same
core of code. The differences between them are in the set of features
each edition has.

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

Thanks Ken and all who replied ... have the idea now.

You are correct Ken, and thanks am happy chappie with XP Pro/Office Pro ...
understand also that MS will support XP Pro for next 5 years which is a
definite bonus ... thanks again.

"Ken Blake, MVP" wrote:

> On Mon, 3 Dec 2007 19:01:00 -0800, Rob Smith
> <RobSmith@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi all ... happily running XP Pro SP2/Office Pro and considering Vista/Office
> > upgrade.
>
>
> Two points here:
>
> 1. First, these are two separate upgrades. The operating system and
> Windows are two completely different things, and you shouldn't think
> of them together this way. You can upgrade either or both, and you
> should evaluate whether you want to do this independently for each.
>
> 2. If you are happily running what you have, *why* are you thinking of
> upgrading?
>
> A change of operating system should be driven by need, not just
> because there is a new version available. Are you having a problem
> with Windows XP (or whatever you're running) that you expect Vista to
> solve? Do you have or expect to get new hardware or software that is
> supported in Vista, but not in XP? Is there some new feature in Vista
> that you need or yearn for? Does your job require you have skills in
> Vista? Are you a computer hobbyist who enjoys playing with whatever is
> newest?
>
> If the answer to one or more of those questions is yes (and your
> hardware is adequate for Vista--a *big* "if," by the way), then you
> should get Vista. Otherwise most people should stick with what they
> have. There is *always* a learning curve and a potential for problems
> when you take a step as big as this one, regardless of how wonderful
> whatever you're contemplating moving to is. Sooner or later you'll
> have to upgrade (to Vista or its successor) because you'll want
> support for hardware or software that you can't get in Vista, but
> don't rush it.
>
> I'm personally happy with Vista. If you were buying a new computer, I
> would unhesitatingly recommend that you get Vista on it. But upgrading
> is a different story.
>
> Much the same is true of Office.
>
>
> > Not a techie but understand that XP Home was x9 based and XP Pro is NT (e.g.
> > XP Pro SP2 is NT 5.5?).
>
>
>
> No, not correct. Both are versions of NT. They are both NT 5.1. In
> fact, XP Professional and XP Home are exactly the same in all
> respects, except that Professional has a few features (mostly related
> to networking and security) missing from Home. For most (but not all)
> home users, even those with a home network, these features aren't
> needed, would never be used, and buying Professional instead of Home
> is a waste of money.
>
> For details go to
> http://www.winsupersite.com/showcas...xp_home_pro.asp
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/whichxp.asp
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/...y/choosing2.asp
>
> Also note one other point not mentioned on any of those sites:
> Professional allows ten concurrent network connections, and Home only
> five.
>
>
> > My question is: Do Vista(Windows 6?) Home and Business (Ultimate?) share the
> > same differences as XP? Heard Vista OS based on Win Server 2003?
>
>
> Yes, Vista in Windows NT 6.0.
>
> Just as with XP, Vista's various editions are all based on the same
> core of code. The differences between them are in the set of features
> each edition has.
>
> --
> Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
> Please Reply to the Newsgroup
>

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 19:33:00 -0800, Rob Smith
<RobSmith@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

> Thanks Ken and all who replied ... have the idea now.
>
> You are correct Ken, and thanks am happy chappie with XP Pro/Office Pro ...
> understand also that MS will support XP Pro for next 5 years which is a
> definite bonus ... thanks again.


You're welcome, Bob. Glad to help.


> "Ken Blake, MVP" wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 3 Dec 2007 19:01:00 -0800, Rob Smith
> > <RobSmith@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all ... happily running XP Pro SP2/Office Pro and considering Vista/Office
> > > upgrade.
> >
> >
> > Two points here:
> >
> > 1. First, these are two separate upgrades. The operating system and
> > Windows are two completely different things, and you shouldn't think
> > of them together this way. You can upgrade either or both, and you
> > should evaluate whether you want to do this independently for each.
> >
> > 2. If you are happily running what you have, *why* are you thinking of
> > upgrading?
> >
> > A change of operating system should be driven by need, not just
> > because there is a new version available. Are you having a problem
> > with Windows XP (or whatever you're running) that you expect Vista to
> > solve? Do you have or expect to get new hardware or software that is
> > supported in Vista, but not in XP? Is there some new feature in Vista
> > that you need or yearn for? Does your job require you have skills in
> > Vista? Are you a computer hobbyist who enjoys playing with whatever is
> > newest?
> >
> > If the answer to one or more of those questions is yes (and your
> > hardware is adequate for Vista--a *big* "if," by the way), then you
> > should get Vista. Otherwise most people should stick with what they
> > have. There is *always* a learning curve and a potential for problems
> > when you take a step as big as this one, regardless of how wonderful
> > whatever you're contemplating moving to is. Sooner or later you'll
> > have to upgrade (to Vista or its successor) because you'll want
> > support for hardware or software that you can't get in Vista, but
> > don't rush it.
> >
> > I'm personally happy with Vista. If you were buying a new computer, I
> > would unhesitatingly recommend that you get Vista on it. But upgrading
> > is a different story.
> >
> > Much the same is true of Office.
> >
> >
> > > Not a techie but understand that XP Home was x9 based and XP Pro is NT (e.g.
> > > XP Pro SP2 is NT 5.5?).
> >
> >
> >
> > No, not correct. Both are versions of NT. They are both NT 5.1. In
> > fact, XP Professional and XP Home are exactly the same in all
> > respects, except that Professional has a few features (mostly related
> > to networking and security) missing from Home. For most (but not all)
> > home users, even those with a home network, these features aren't
> > needed, would never be used, and buying Professional instead of Home
> > is a waste of money.
> >
> > For details go to
> > http://www.winsupersite.com/showcas...xp_home_pro.asp
> >
> > http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/whichxp.asp
> >
> > http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/...y/choosing2.asp
> >
> > Also note one other point not mentioned on any of those sites:
> > Professional allows ten concurrent network connections, and Home only
> > five.
> >
> >
> > > My question is: Do Vista(Windows 6?) Home and Business (Ultimate?) share the
> > > same differences as XP? Heard Vista OS based on Win Server 2003?
> >
> >
> > Yes, Vista in Windows NT 6.0.
> >
> > Just as with XP, Vista's various editions are all based on the same
> > core of code. The differences between them are in the set of features
> > each edition has.
> >
> > --
> > Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
> > Please Reply to the Newsgroup
> >

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
Please Reply to the Newsgroup