Comment Re:Well there you have it (Score 1) 619
I've been using Vista (business) for almost a year with no significant problems. I can't think of any conspicuous advantages so I see the clamor over pros and cons as a bit excessive.
It may be that Vista is much more secure than XP. It oughta be, but I don't know for a fact that it is, so I don't count that as a conspicuous benefit. However, if my computer was compromised and I was still running XP, the benefit of risk reduction would suddenly become conspicuous. While this claim is often made by Mac/Linux users, I've been running Windows since it came out and have never been taken out by a virus. I've intercepted a few nasties, but being careful and proactive has been an effective countermeasure for me.
Since the cost/benefit analysis picture changes dramatically with the size and requirements of the organization, I don't think there is much of a case to be made generally for one platform over another. On the contrary, I think there is a case to be made for a "don't care" strategy. Why should anyone invest in anything that is not open source and standards-based? That said, I don't consider buying Vista an "investment" as long as I am not making my data (and business) platform dependent. I'm a user, not a "partner."
Lastly, I've been off the upgrade wagon for many years. Upgrading the OS on a box is often more trouble than it's worth and that has as much to do with the increasing performance-cost ratio and MTBF (mean time between failure) as it has to do with artificial bloat. This is probably affecting upgrade statistics. Why invest in old hardware? I'd rather plan my next migration.
It may be that Vista is much more secure than XP. It oughta be, but I don't know for a fact that it is, so I don't count that as a conspicuous benefit. However, if my computer was compromised and I was still running XP, the benefit of risk reduction would suddenly become conspicuous. While this claim is often made by Mac/Linux users, I've been running Windows since it came out and have never been taken out by a virus. I've intercepted a few nasties, but being careful and proactive has been an effective countermeasure for me.
Since the cost/benefit analysis picture changes dramatically with the size and requirements of the organization, I don't think there is much of a case to be made generally for one platform over another. On the contrary, I think there is a case to be made for a "don't care" strategy. Why should anyone invest in anything that is not open source and standards-based? That said, I don't consider buying Vista an "investment" as long as I am not making my data (and business) platform dependent. I'm a user, not a "partner."
Lastly, I've been off the upgrade wagon for many years. Upgrading the OS on a box is often more trouble than it's worth and that has as much to do with the increasing performance-cost ratio and MTBF (mean time between failure) as it has to do with artificial bloat. This is probably affecting upgrade statistics. Why invest in old hardware? I'd rather plan my next migration.
