How will Vista run?

[SnesR0X]

Good news to hear, welcome to the cult-
I mean family

[bah]

Which of the 300 versions, each slightly more crippled than the last, are you using?

Do you at least get the full aero UI?

[nomi]

I use Windows Vista Business.. if that is what u are asking!

[Cap'n 1time]

I use Windows Vista Business.. if that is what u are asking!

After a quick google i found this site wich compares the different versions of vista and explains whats what.

# No games, not even Solitaire *
# No Media Center or Xbox 360 functionality
# No BitLocker hard drive encryption software
# No Ultimate "extras", which could include games and special utilities
# Inability to install new languages for use in Windows
# No Movie Maker or DVD Maker
# No Parental Controls
# Inability to run UNIX-based applications (through SUA)

It appears to do the full non crippled Aero wm. The missing media center and inability to run unix based stuff (by the commercial applictaion) might be a bit annoying, but you can live without both and 3rd party options might already exist(cygwin for unix stuff).

[scarph]

what i mean is, if you want a new computer, and you get faster hardware, you get the os that needs better hardware. xp was not meant to run with dual core computers. with the advent of dual cores we can sacrifice a little of their awesome power for a more sightly interface. so far with regular windows update and disk defrags i haven't had any issues with vista. uac is a hassle, but everyone turns it off.

[Cap'n 1time]

what i mean is, if you want a new computer, and you get faster hardware, you get the os that needs better hardware. xp was not meant to run with dual core computers. with the advent of dual cores we can sacrifice a little of their awesome power for a more sightly interface. so far with regular windows update and disk defrags i haven't had any issues with vista. uac is a hassle, but everyone turns it off.

This I would agree with. You probably arnt going to get great results with a 1.5 ghz x86 processor, 256 megs of pc133 ram, and a geforce 4 video card. I dont know this for sure, but i assume its true. This set up would have been ideal for windows xp on release.

You certainly arnt going to get good results on a 500 mhz 486, 64 megs of pc100 ram, and a 16 megabyte non hardware accelerated graphics card. This setup was probably Ideal on windows 98's release, but i dont exactly remember since it was 10 years ago and I was very young.

Even so older (but not ancient) hardware will probably be better supported after sp1, thus making it run smoother and faster... in theory.