How Much Does a Vista Upgrade Cost? 321
dptalia writes "Microsoft has rolled out its Vista upgrade program, where people can buy a qualifying PC with XP today and upgrade to Vista later for free. This article talks about what free really means. Some companies, such as Dell, charge $45 for converting to Vista Home from XP home. And then comes the question of actually trying to upgrade your computer... Is "free" really worth it?"
Cue standard slashdot responses: (Score:5, Funny)
2. It'll cost me nothing because you can't upgrade *nix to Win*
3. Profit!
4. I already read this on digg.
5.
Cue standard slashdot responses: (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
You forgot the ponies (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
One glaring one you missed: (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Cue standard slashdot responses: (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Cue standard slashdot responses: (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Cue standard slashdot responses: (Score:4, Insightful)
I have learned from my past mistakes what the upgrade treadmill problems are.
I was running DOS. On top of that I installed Windows 3.1. On top of that I installed the Windows 95 Upgrade (the one without IE included) and installed IE as a seprate program. This process took several years and went through several hardware upgrades such as memory, hard drive, and later motherboard and CPU. Each re-instalation was a major pain. I learned quickly never to do upgrade upon upgrade again. It just takes too long. Windows 98 was a replacement, not an upgrade on top.
What I learned is the upgrade is nice IF the upgrade is a replacement, not an upgrade that requires a prior qualifying product to be already installed.
In a nutshell. If the upgrade is a stand alone fresh install, that if fine. Doing an install and then doing an install, and then doing an install... Forget it. You will regret it on your first hard drive replacement.
So.. To properly answer the question.. I need to know what kind of upgrade we are talking about. Does it do a fresh install, or does it require the prior qualified (auth per WGA perhaps) version installed? I would hate to do the recovery from a dead hard drive to include install, configure networking for phone home, patch, WGA auth, install service packs, upgrade, re auth with WGA, install applications such as MS office, re auth with WGA, etc.
To repeat the question, Will the upgrade install on a bare new hare drive or does it need a pre-qualified install of the prior version? Using the Genuine Windows sticker number is not a problem. Doing an endless install on install is a problem.
Re:Cue standard slashdot responses: (Score:5, Informative)
I have learned from my past mistakes what the upgrade treadmill problems are.
I would agree with you if I hadn't tried Debian GNU/Linux. The big problem of Windows is that it doesn't use a database managed installation system. When you remove a program under Windows (add/remove program in control pannel), what Windows does is simply calling the uninstaller of said program. Then it's up to the uninstaller to handle the uninstallation properly. When the uninstaller asks you something like "This is a shared library, are you sure you really want to remove it ?", you'd better say no unless you are really really sure. This is because Windows doesn't use a database managed installer, and hence cannot determine whether a given shared library can be safely removed or is used by another program. For the very same reason, when Windows is upgraded, it cannot be determined if the components that are removed/upgraded will be incompatible with installed programs or not. I have been running Debian Sid for more than four years now, upgrading the packages every days. Still no major problem for me.
Anyway for the case of Windows, I would tend to agree with you anyway ...
Re:Cue standard slashdot responses: (Score:5, Informative)
From my experience (upgrade versions of Windows 2000 and XP), qualifying prior versions have never needed to be "installed" to perform a "replace/fresh/clean/start-from-scratch" install using an upgrade version. When installig on a bare hard drive, the upgrade version might ask you to pop in the previous version's CD for proof. I didn't use the upgrade version of Windows 95 like you did, but didn't it ask if you wanted to wipe the hard drive and start from scratch (instead of upgrading "on top" of the old installation)?
Just like previous versions of Windows, Windows Vista upgrade versions will still allow clean installations and in-place upgrades (that's what Microsoft calls them). MS describes these options on this page: Upgrade Planning for Windows Vista [microsoft.com].
Heck, I'll just cut-and-paste the relevant info from that page:
The options
You can upgrade from your current edition of Microsoft Windows XP or Windows 2000 to a corresponding or better edition of Windows Vista by purchasing and installing an upgrade copy of Windows Vista. Depending on which edition of Windows you are running and the edition of Windows Vista you would like to install, you have two options for the installation process:
In-place upgrade
You can upgrade in-place, which means you can install Windows Vista and retain your applications, files, and settings as they were in your previous edition of Windows.
Clean install
Upgrading to Windows Vista with a clean install means that you should use Windows Easy Transfer to automatically copy all your files and settings to an extra hard drive or other storage device, and then install Windows Vista. After the installation is complete, Windows Easy Transfer will reload your files and settings on your upgraded PC. You will then need to reinstall your applications.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I can tell you never did the Windows 95 upgrade. It does not boot. It does not install from DOS. It does require Windows 3.X which requires DOS. After that to get on the web, required installing a browser such as IE seprately. After my 3rd system rebuild, I swore off upgrades on upgrades and opted for fresh installs only.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
How exactly is it "10 years behind what the market demands"? If the marked demands an operating system for those who can't even figure out how to use a word processor, or can barely write an e-mail without asking for help, maybe we don't want to fill that need. For those who are willing to put some effort into thought, and probably an extra five minutes every week or so, there's the Ubuntu series, and there's the series derived from Red Hat Linux.
If the market continues to fill demands for those who put
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why should an operating system require effort? Computers are supposed to do work for us, not the other way round.
You can say what you want about microsoft but at least they don't tell you to upgrade the kernel or compile modules when you want to install some hardware.
Re:Cue standard slashdot responses: (Score:4, Informative)
That problem has been solved. The software is there.
The issue right now is marketing and distribution.
Ubuntu with Automatix does everything you want, easily.
Installing Ubuntu from the live CDs is too easy.
And they send you the CDs for free, if you don't want to download them, or don't get them from a friend (at least 5 friends of mine converted with my CDs, successfuly, and with Ubuntu 7.04 I'm planning on all my familiy as they need new OSes).
Microsoft beats them, because you get Windows readily installed on new computers.
It's not feature of the software per se, but a distribution issue.
I think that the focus should be there, right now. Not about the software itself, but improving the way it gets distributed, and marketed.
Once it is installed, there is another issue, Automatix, that takes care of codecs, and proprietary software(there you get the ability to share pics with your friends with Picasa, just like your friends do it).
After that, using and administering Ubuntu is a walk in the park. A consistent interface, very easy. Installing new stuff is done in two ways. Most stuff is either preinstalled, like OpenOffice, or comes through the Package Manager.
Proprietary stuff comes from Autmatix. No hunting for the downloads.
There, the distribution problem is solved much more easily in Ubuntu.
I think that with better distribution, and more publicity, Ubuntu is ready for the desktop, when ease of use is our target. Or at least it's a lot more ready than XP.
Re:Cue standard slashdot responses: (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Vista will be a fine OS in a couple years time. We all know this. After it's gone through it's rough first couple years ( because MS released it just to get it out the door,not necessarily because it was done ).
Re:Cue standard slashdot responses: (Score:5, Insightful)
Experience, mostly. After having been lied to, screwed, blued and tatooed you get cynical. You get handed crap and are expected to make it work. You are seen as a cost center, when your contributions can be very useful to an organization. Managers insist on treating IT as a factory assembly line 'reach for the lowest common denominator' type job when it is a knowledge based skill based job.
When POS vendor hardware or software fail, the vendor blames the IT department. When the IT department is incompetent, they blame the vendor.
You give everything, weekends, relationships, holidays, mental and physical health and then get laid off anyway. See also http://www.adminspotting.org/ [adminspotting.org]
And MS is one of the worst. They promise it is easy. And it is easy, if you don't actually want to solve any serious problems. It's OK for for a few minmal classes of problems (web shopping cart, hierarchial accounting system) but not so great for actual business problems. The reason so much COBOL is still out there is that most programmers still haven't progressed far from COBOL.
ERPs are great, if you can change your business practices to fit the ERP. Which is totaly backwards, the software is developed to fit the business, not vice versa. Consultants for the ERP de jour swoop in, pick up fat pay checks and then leave the IT departments to hold the bag.
There is no good reason for Vista. Windows server 2003 and XP could serve for another 20 years under a nice incremental improvement process. But no, MS is going to once again pull the rug out from under us. A whole new class of security holes, new libraries, new incompatibilies and if you were dumb enough to pay for certs, a whole new set of certs. SQL Server 2000 was around for about 7 years, that gives you a reasonsable ROI. Changing every 2-3 years leaves you no ROI as by the time things stabilise, you have to change again.
I'm done. 9 months from now I will be in another field. Have fun, suckers....
(Damn, 3 glasses of wine and I am ranting and raving. I am getting cranky in my old age...)
Re: (Score:2)
There are not many reasons to buy a 64 bit PC right now when it comes with 32 bit XP. To consider that I'd buy one and then outright buy Vista when it's released is bizarre. The fact is that most computer buyer's do use windows and will continue to use windows.
This really is something that MS must do to appease the hardware providers they deal with constantly. That it may prove to be an inconvenience (doing an install twice and losing your settings) is unfortunate but it will at least offer
Huh? 64-bit XP exists. (Score:3, Insightful)
How does Vista change this?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
As for a lesson in how the world works, most innovations in big companies are acquired. It's cheaper to watch 10 startups and follow what the market wants, realize which approach will work then buy them, as opposed to gambling/putting a stake in the
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Yes.
More to the point: The free software/open source software community is not a market, and I really don't like the business-speak that comes to the surface every time free software comes up. The goal of everything is not profit or some idea of "winning." Sometimes people just like to share things that they've written to be useful, in the hope that it will help someone else.
I don't write code for a living; instead, it's a
Re: (Score:2)
"If it doesn't matter if you win or lose," said Whorf brusquely, "then why do you bother keeping score?"
Whorf? (Score:2)
This doesn't sound like something Benjamin Lee Whorf would say...
*scratches head*
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Here's the thing: There's a lot more companies that use software, as opposed to companies that make and sell software. If a company buys a piece of software from another company for $1000 it increases the GDP by $1000. If they get similar piece of software for free, then GDP does not increase. But in both cases the user receives the benefits of the software. So is GDP accurate measure h
Re:'Vista' happily overwrites MBR to stop Linux bo (Score:2)
You know, I was going to dismiss that as a troll, but it's really quite a delightful rant. I can't help imagining how that would read as rap music though.
Re:'Vista' happily overwrites MBR to stop Linux bo (Score:3, Informative)
Yeah, unmodifiable.
My Computer > C Drive > Sharing and Security > C$ > "Do Not Share This Folder"
Fuck me, that was hard.
(Now, an argument about it being enabled by default, that would have a lot more merit.)
Then, however, I read this:
Re: (Score:2)
a recent "install" experience (Score:5, Interesting)
I recently built my own machine... 2G memory, .5TB (2 SATA
drives), 3.06Ghz dual core... all very cool.
I spent almost 2 weeks getting my XP Professional installed and
working properly (for what reason would an OS not come with PS/2
generic mouse drivers?). The sound was a nightmare to get
running, the video was a joke. Fortunately (I guess), a lot of
the drivers came with the motherboard (as one might expect), but
the installation and configuration was amazingly tedious, and
error prone.
I'm convinced one part of the horrible nature is that even today it seems that EVERY driver, EVERY re-configuration demanded a reboot though in my wildest imagination, I couldn't think of a rationale -- this continuity interruptus makes for a tedious, drawn out, error-sprinkled, bad-taste-in-the-mouth experience.
I finally shook out all of the bugs (oh, yeah, about 100+ XP updates -- the CD was pre-SP1, go figure), got a SCREAMING machine, absolutely delighted with the configuration and performance.
Now, to be on-topic, I can't begin to imagine these upgrades will be problem free, I can't even think they'd be problem-sparse. It's non-trivial work installing from scratch, much less considering layering something as big as Vista over an existing XP. I wouldn't want to do it. I've read enough reviews from people with bollixed machines (granted, they were working with release candidates) -- there will be a LOT of people out there who've committed too much data and personal work (blood, sweat and tears) on their new XP machines -- and they're going to lose data.
It's interesting to note the article recommends upgrading to Vista by doing a clean install. That's not really upgrading XP, that's installing Vista. How many people will not have had their data backed up properly ahead of this? How many will be left with applications that ran on XP that won't run on Vista?
The article is probably right, this is MS' olive branch to vendors who had hoped to roll out the new machines with brand spanking new Vista already installed. It's a PR debacle and nightmare in the making. Fortunately for MS, that would be mostly irrelevant.
(To contrast, on same machine described above, I took the new Mandriva, booted up, installed and got completely running, all sound and video working perfectly -- in less than 2 hours!
Funny, for my life I could not find a satisfactory solution (or even find a google solution) to get the XP dual boot file configured properly to reference the Mandriva... Finally gave up, and let lilo handle it, the configuration was painless and flawless. Go figure.)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I deal with Windows, Exchange, Office, because my employer will bear the costs.
When I shell out my own money for a new machine, I buy an Apple. I pay money to never have to write this story. I am fortunate to have the money to do that (not that it's a huge premium), but I love being able to buy a new machine and well, start using it immediately to do useful work. It even helps me migrate from my old machine in a useful way. In minutes.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not exactly a Windows fan (I don't even use it), but I fail to see what is good about Macs in this respect. As a Mac user, you build your own computer because you can't build your own computer. If you go off and by an happy little supported Dell PC, it will work. Ok, it's missing some things at first, like a decent web browser, and Windows just generally stinks, but that's a separate issue than what he's talking about.
Re: (Score:2)
For the life of me I can't figure out how you could have all this difficulty unless you had a bad BIOS driver or something.
I've installed xp pro on countless machines (including ones with a ps/2 mouse) and the only problems I've had was when bad hardware was installed ($5 chinese off-brand soundcard from frys, what was I thinking?) or I had to look up RAID drivers.
I do agree with you about rebooting nightmare. Google slipstreaming windows XP for how
Re: (Score:2)
My question is why the hell should win2k work fine with that configuration, and XP broken? Microsoft tell me that XP is faster and more reliable, easier to use
Re:a recent "install" experience (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:a recent "install" experience (Score:4, Informative)
The problem with that line of thinking is that the Christmas season presents sales opportunities that simply don't come around again later in the year. No one wants to get a coupon for a Vista computer in their stocking, and a computer with XP pre-installed simply isn't as competitive an offering as a computer with Vista installed would be. That means that a significant amount of money that would have gone towards PCs this Christmas will probably go towards something else. OEMs are pissed, and rightly so. Missing the Christmas season is the unpardonable sin in the retail business.
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of people buy stuff & then never fill out the rebate & mail it.
It all depends on how much the freebie is worth. The less it's worth, the low
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
In all honesty, though, what would retailers do about it? Ditch Microsoft and start shipping PC's with Linspire?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Kubuntu Experience (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
lack of Quality Assurance.
I mean seriously, Fedora, Ubuntu, et al don't even come CLOSE in terms of usability compared to Windows. Mac OS X does. BeOS did. Linux still is and always will be a hobbyist OS. I happened to find out today that the SCTP vulnerability in the linux kernel (back in 2.6.14 days) exists because of lack of standard checks in the kernel that were outlined in the draft proposal (read: lazy
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I build custom machines for a living and often I'll be installing 3-4 machines at a time. I own the business and I do this on my own. I p
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently it's possible to do this. Instructions are about 3/4 the way down [vsubhash.com]. I wouldn't call this "easy", but it will get you Linux without overwriting your MBR, like the article says. Though there's really no need to be apprehensive abo
Windows isn't that bad (Score:2)
XP includes them, so how did you have trouble here?
You didn't have to reboot after installing each driver, just when you're done installing all the ones you need.
This sounds like the source of most of y
Re: (Score:2)
Re:a recent "install" experience (Score:5, Informative)
Your sound and video were the gimped versions that are installed with the Linux distro. You still need to go out and download the proper 3d accelerated optimized drivers from the chipset vendors. Same for sound. Sorry, but that's just a fact of life for Linux, at least it was the last time I installed it.
If you didn't have support for your USB keyboard or mouse you had non-standard components. Albeit rare, some are out there. My customers are always told to buy for something other than price. In other words, never buy that el-cheapo mouse that is not a recognizable name or you'll pay in time and gas trying to get it to work and then driving back to the store to return it.
The issues described in his posting are demonstrative of a lack of experience and/or prioritization.
After 5 years of distribution with a large number of new products released over that half decade it would be no wonder that some people have problems with some new components and their drivers.
XP HAS NEVER HAD A PROBLEM WITH PS2 DRIVERS, EVER.
If you have a problem it is your problem not XP.
I do not in any way support Microsoft and I do not care to protect their name or business. It isn't my job to police for them and I don't care what anyone I encounter does with XP legal or otherwise. It just isn't my problem.
I do dislike the fact that Microsoft has stolen, deceived, and broken so many laws to get and maintain their monopoly. I hate monopoly companies. But I can honestly say that those comparative stories about XP vs. Linux are not giving the fully story to the readers, so I am commenting.
Re:a recent "install" experience (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course your Linux boots up and everything works dandy but then you have to install the proprietary drivers from the hardware vendors because they don't want to release some information about what fits where in the register and how to call certain functions so you can play your favorite games with faster 3D acceleration. Since that is not painless, it's an inherent problem with Linux, not the proprietary hardware you bought.
Of course Windows doesn't come with all those drivers pre-loaded, you have to install them yourself. That your keyboard or mouse or network card (and there's a bunch out there that don't work vanilla) isn't working on startup isn't relevant, you don't need to use those to
My idea: buy an open source supportive or supported video card, they're out there. Run any vanilla linux and it will work right-out-of-the-box. Or buy a Mac, all your proprietary stuff that works right out of the box. Or buy a combination of proprietary hardware and linux and get the hassle of typing 2 lines on command line to get NVidia drivers working or buy a proprietary operating system with a half-ass Dell and spend the next 3 days setting up your system or buy an utterly old system from the year 2001 where XP should have all drivers for and spend only 1 day installing patches, upgrades, virusses and reboots.
Re: (Score:2)
It is easy to blame microsoft in this situation, but I have installed XP on about 30 different IBM laptops without a problem, so I am quite happy with it.
The ps2 mouse and keyboard prob
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Some non-free Linux distros (eg Mandriva Powerpack) do come with official nvidia drivers. Does XP?
just like XP, IF you needed it. For office work and simple games the Linux GPL drivers are just fine.
Same for sound.
Er no actually. Most of the GPL drivers for most sound chips are perfectly adequate.
Re: (Score:2)
And yet, if it works in Linux and not Windows, Linux still deserves praise for hardware compatibility, which it gets a TOTALLY undeserved bum rap for. Heaven forbid Linux support something that's non-standard and actually freely document it, as opposed to the myriad Windows drivers that are completely non-standard and non-open, which people have to reverse-engineer(ATI, anyone?)
N
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
To finish installing XP, you need to go download video drivers, sound drivers, network drivers, motherboard drivers, etc. Hell, you can't even install on many SATA systems without having a floppy drive and teaching XP how to talk to a SATA controller.
To make Vista have accelerated 3D, I still n
Re: (Score:2)
(You are comparing retail versions, right?)
Once online, the updates (easy urpmi is your friend) downloaded and installed the latest version.
The 3D tools worked flawlessly.
Installing Windows from scratch is a long, drawn out PITA, for anyone.
Especially compared to ANY modern commercial Linux distro.
Saying it isn't does not make it so.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
This is one of the reasons that I get a little skeptical about how so many people like to judge a linux distribution by its installer. A lot of reviews I've read over time of linux distributions have focussed almost entirely on the installer. It's true that most people who use Linux (unlike Windows) will need to install it at some point, and installation is quite important because of t
Re: (Score:2)
Then there's something wrong with the hardware, as I've installed XP (plain and SP2) on several machines with USB keyboards without any issue at all.
I don't know what your problem was, but it wasn't the OS.
Re: (Score:2)
But that seems to be precisely the point. If only trained professionals or computer nerds with lots of experience can install XP properly what hope is there for the rest of us? It shouldn't be like that.
A PS/2 driver is no use to anyone if you can't find it. See if you can work out the relevance of this classic quote:
"I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What free really means (Score:3, Interesting)
So it's similar to some open source service providers charging for installation and support, even the software itself is free.
This deal is not meant for bargin-hunters, but for people who really need a new machine right now, and the only thing holding them off is the operating system.
Depends on how nerfed you want your OS to be... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
this new setup came out around sept 2005.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you sure? I've purchase a few OEM copies of Microsoft software with spare power supplies and other useful bits since then.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And before anyone asks, I use XP for gaming and
As for XP installation, it took me two tries to get it just right. The fir
I plead the Chewbacca defense (Score:2)
PJ: Dammit!
Linus: What you sa
Re: (Score:2)
(NB: I probably won't upgrade to Vista anyway, it doesn't seem worth it.)
Well.. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
How about a downgrade coupon .... (Score:4, Insightful)
Buy your PC now and get the upgrade cheap (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Not a matter of importance. (Score:5, Insightful)
This is just a little fan on the flames to convince hold-outs (as others have correctly indicated in this thread). Once Vista begins shipping, it will be installed ubiquitously on nearly all comodity machines and the influence on the bottom line of the cost will be, for the most part, unaffected.
Re: (Score:2)
a)a machine powerful enough to run Vista well
b)actually care about upgrading their operating system
The answer is "not many". I can count on one hand the number of people I know that have upgraded the operating system on their PC. Almost everyone just buys a new PC. Especially these days, where every 12 months you can buy an $600 machine that is TWICE as fast as the $600 machine you bought 12 months ago.
Upgrades are pointless, is what I'm saying. And even if NO ONE upgr
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Need a new term (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
The pleasures of NOT upgrading (Score:5, Funny)
On the one hand, not buying Vista is a Genuine Advantage in many ways...
but by not buying a PS3, I save more money and also get the bonus of not upgrading to newer DRM.
Thank goodness I can afford to do both!
In other words... (Score:4, Funny)
We screwed up. Please don't go selling Linux PCs this Christmas.
Regards,
Bill
Do it right. (Score:2)
If you want a free copy of Vista, do it right. Just wait until you can buy a copy pre-installed on a new computer. With the new MacBook Pros out that's what I'm thinking of doing. By the time Leopard comes out my little G4 will be two years old. I can replace it, get a free copy of Leopard, and I'll have gotten a good use out of my current Powerbook. Plus there is always the chance of another speed/RAM bump or price drop by then.
But a "free" upgrade is a crock. You'll almost never get it.
I remember gettin
You got the wrong idea (Score:5, Insightful)
The point is if you need to buy a PC, you don't need to wait for Vista, but buy it now with XP, and get Vista later for free.
As you probably imagine, quite a lot of people are holding hardware purchases, waiting for Vista pre-installed machines. What Microsoft does is keep the market going versus stifle sales right during the Holiday season.
In fact, it's a very sweet deal if you ask me, since Vista is gonna be crap until SP1, and you get to enjoy worry free XP experience until Vista is stable: then upgrade for $0. Best of both worlds.
The Beginning of The End (Score:5, Insightful)
I expect Windows to hang around for a long while yet, but I expect that this is where it will begin to actually decline. Their business and marketing models have been pushed past the point at which their products will continue to carry them: they have no technology advantages anymore (most of those they had before, they bought or stole), they are pricing themselves out of the market, and they have been making both installation and use of their products more difficult rather than easier. The only advantage they have had has been a stranglehold on market share and thus hardware vendors, but they have begun to lose that leverage as well. Given their heavy-handed (and monopolistic according to the courts) business practices, I doubt many people will really suffer very much from their passing. After all... their major competition is actually free.
Re: (Score:2)
It may not be worthess, but it sure as hell ain't worth $400 per freakin' reinstall!
Hell, the EULA fiasco is making me switch back from XP to 2000. I don't need Microsoft getting any bright ideas about using WPA and WGA to retroactively enforce the Vista license on XP ("But, gee, that's what the EULA always meant, we just clarified it"). So if Linux gives me similar functionality to 2000 without putting up with end-of-life problems, I'll be satisfied.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Huh? It's the same price as always... (Score:2)
No, they've lowered it... (Score:2)
Been There, Done That (Score:2)
If the Vista upgrade is not capable of doing a clean install, I would stay far away.
Just insert the CD for validation... (Score:2)
Any computer company that discounts it.... (Score:2)
Think about it this way. Assume XP gets 3 teraflops out of your machine. Comparing the stats between the two OSes, you'll see XP is about half the specs or so. So in theory it will do twice as much, Vista will then get around 1.5 Tera flops.
Of course this isn't the way it works, double the specs just means double the requirements, so it might be more 2 tera flops vs. 3 tera flops. But the point is any computer running Vista will only last a fraction as lon
Bargains this Christmas season on XP machines?? (Score:2)
Yes, I do already have Linux boxes under my desk hooked to the 4 port KVM switch, SuSE, Ubuntu and Freespire. I'm thinking that, hopefully, I'll never feel the need to use Vista since L
Not sure but (Score:2)
using the desktop I was upgrading "talk about productivity".
How much does a Vista upgrade cost? (Score:2)
FUD (Score:2, Funny)
just... (Score:2)
The usual: Firstborn son, soul and many nights of cursing, pleading and finally resignation.
Re: (Score:2)
Almost ALL of the software I have installed is on D. I haven't yet found anything that gives a choice of installation directory that doesn't work there. There's occasional software that puts stuff on C though -- most recently and notably because of the size of this installation portion, VS.Net 2005 Express Editions. This sor
Re:Someone who has actually installed Vista, thric (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)