Journal: Vista vs. XP for home...

I was reading this article http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9041959&intsrc=hm_list and had to post a reply to it. I felt that the reply was useful, so I'm replicating it here.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
*she* got the point...
Submitted by Figures... on October 12, 2007 - 10:04.
reply | report this comment
I spend my days working in UNIX (Solaris) and linux (RedHat). These are fine operating systems that I have a clear view into. I can see and touch every process, port or service. Out of the box I have finite control of everything. I quite enjoy my job. I write perl scripts for data collection and analysis... it's nerdvana.

But that's work. When I get home, I don't want to invest that much time into using a computer. I have a houseful of people and pets to play with, projects that need my attention, groceries to buy, etc. When I finally do have a few minutes to sit at the computer, I don't want to have to worry about all of the jiggery pokery crap. I want to turn it on, play a game or two, check my mail, surf a couple of websites (news and comics), then turn it off. With the expectation that this computer will just work exactly the same the next time that I turn it on.

Your mileage may vary...

I've had x86 machines since the early 90's. I've run every version of Windows since 2.0, used almost every type of application (from Lotus 1,2,3 and Autodesk Animator to Adobe Photoshop CS2 and Unreal Tournament 2004) available. There's no question that there is a wider audience (read: wider market) on the Windows side, but it amazes me that the users in this market are so tolerant of the inherent instabilities all the way along. If Microsoft made cars, you'd be pushing these beautiful monoliths off the freeway at least once a month. Sure, after a reboot they're fine again, but...

I've also had a Mac (for about two years) - loved it. I did a lot of photo-manipulation and graphic design at the time (previous career), and it was the appropriate tool at the time. Application selection was easier, as there was often only one or two tools available for any task that you were working on. I must say, that this was the primary reason for me returning to the x86 world.

My current desktop computer (at home) has XP on one disk, Solaris x86 on the second, and I've been exploring Vista on the third. The computer is new, and Vista works well on it. But, I haven't found any exciting reasons for me to switch to Vista yet. All of the applications that I run (or expect to purchase) still run well under XP. I'm not about to give groundbreaking testimony on performance comparisons, but overall I'd say that they are close enough that I don't notice a speed difference between OSes.

Until a new breed of applications (that I don't already have a license for) arrive, I don't honestly see a reason to switch to Vista. My preview will expire in about 8 days. I don't see a reason to buy a license, so I'll go back to doing my simple home-type tasks in XP. I don't think that I'll regret this decision this year, but maybe come summer of 2008, there'll be a killer app that I'll just need to have, and it will only run under Vista...

If I were to buy a new computer with Vista pre-loaded, I would use it. I don't have any applications that won't run under it. It's not as bad as a lot of the press suggests. In fact, as far as operating systems go, I do like it. I just don't see the value for an average home user like myself.