Why is it a "stinky policy"?
Microsoft has provided items both online & to retailers to show the
differences in the Vista versions.
Also kirk technically server 2003 is not a "newer OS". It was released over
a year before XP service pack 2.
Server 2003 is just the XP of server OS's right?
So tell me why MS couldn't have just added the common framework to do
previous versions?
Everything is in XP to allow it to happen other than the dialogs and common
framework.
That is easy stuff to back-port. Hell it's not even back-porting technically
since they are the same OS essentially.
No, you're just out to bash Vista because you want to cause a stir. That's
all you are. You're all sound, no substance.
That's why I refer to you as a moron. You don't even have the ability to
put up a decent argument.
Your big argument was that MS didn't think it was justified to have Previous
Versions in XP.
Did you ever think that in Starter, Home Basic, & Home Premium that they
also saw no reason for it?
Previous Versions is designed to allow rollback of files, which is most
useful in a corporate or business environment.
If you're going to do professional work you should buy the OS that does what
you need it to do.
Just like my wife, she runs Ultimate on her box because she needs those
features due to the WORK she does on it.
I have Ultimate on my desktop for the same reason.
My laptop, however, runs Home Premium. The reason for that being it's just
one more machine that can link together to store media files & share
information.
I don't need previous versions for that machine & if I do need to make
backups I can just use ghost.
Yes I realize this is a long ass post, but I felt that it needed to be.