RSSNot just Vista: The operating system is dying, too
By Carmi Levy | Published July 6, 2009, 2:07 PM
Okay, so I raised a bit of a stink with last Friday's Wide Angle Zoom. So to make sure my position on Vista, operating systems, Microsoft and the future of the technological world under President Barack Obama's leadership are completely understood, I wanted to address some of the more...ah, pointed perspectives from the Comments section. I've paraphrased the wordings to protect the innocent. Here goes:
Vista is a great operating system. There's nothing wrong with it.
Technically, this is correct. Never did -- or would -- I say that Vista sucked. If it did, I wouldn't be using it on my primary laptop.
Microsoft continues to sell it, and will continue to provide support for it per its widely known schedule. But beyond the numbers, in a somewhat more spiritual context, Microsoft has already cut Vista out of the will. Marketing strategies that worked in 1999 don't work today as new form factors and ubiquitous wireless and broadband access have completely rewritten the OS landscape. The good old days, when Microsoft's dominance of the desktop was absolute, are over. We don't exclusively use desktops anymore, and the OS as we know it won't exist in a few years.
It's Vista's lousy timing to be the OS on sale when this process began to accelerate, but it's more than a little unfair to blame the product for this. Sometimes, the world just changes and nothing you can bake into a new-and-improved product can change that reality.
Microsoft messed up in releasing an OS that only ran properly on new PCs and ignored the needs of millions of existing customers.
By a show of hands, who runs out to the Best Buy at midnight and snaps up a shrink-wrapped box of a snazzy new OS? That may have been how we were introduced to Windows 95, but these days, we upgrade when we get new hardware.
I realize Betanews readers are infinitely more likely to have the technical chops to properly upgrade an existing machine. But the vast majority of the PC-buying consumers look more like my mother-in-law. They wouldn't know an OS from an S.O.S., and I'm going to guess you've never bumped into them in line at the big box store at midnight listening to the Rolling Stones croon "Start Me Up."
With the vast majority of operating systems delivered by OEM vendors on new machines, it's more than a bit silly to castigate Microsoft for ignoring its loyal base of millions of fans. Few of them really care that they're not running the latest and greatest version of Windows, and they'll be perfectly happy to upgrade when their existing computer gives up the ghost. When they go shopping, they're buying hardware, not operating systems. So forgive Microsoft for focusing its OS development efforts on something newer than a dust-covered Pentium II.
Microsoft is rushing Windows 7 out the door to recapture its OS leadership.
News flash: Microsoft still owns the OS market. Always has, and pretty much will for the next few years. As so many of you correctly pointed out, Vista was abnormally late to market. Microsoft usually follows a three-ish year cycle, and given Vista's abnormally long six-year gestation, Windows 7 more or less gets the company back on schedule. We can debate whether XP SP1 and SP2 merited "new OS" status until the cows come home, but the reality for Microsoft is we'll likely never see such big bang projects in OS-land again. Gradual evolution is the name of the game from here on out.
There are few other OS alternatives beyond Linux and Apple's Mac OS X.
Good point. One of the reasons why Windows has been as dominant as it is for as long as it has is because it combines a relatively easy-to-use UI with an ability to play nice with pretty much everyone's hardware. It's the biggest ecosystem out there, so developers and other third party vendors flock to it.
Is it technically better than anything else out there? We can debate that one until the cows leave home once again, but the answer is irrelevant. What matters is that it's good enough, and it has been good enough since Windows 3.1 finally relegated the command line-driven world of unfriendly DOS apps to the dustbin of history in 1992.
Vista isn't dead. It will live forever because some users just won't let go of it.
In a sense, every OS lives forever. In basements across the land, there are countless old machines running every form of DOS, Windows 3.X, 95, 98, and even Windows Me. The people who own these machines generally fall into two groups: enthusiasts who ardently love their old operating systems and can't bear to let them go, and regular folks like my mother-in-law who don't know the difference, and never saw the need to upgrade because it just worked. Generations of kids have grown up on supposedly obsolete hand-me-down PCs, and that won't change anytime soon.
But OS-huggers, mothers-in-law, and basement-dwelling kids don't make up the majority of the PC market. PC buyers do, and Microsoft, Apple, and every Linux vendor worth its salt will continue to focus on the folks with actual intentions of buying new hardware.
At the end of the day, most people just don't care about their OS. As long as it makes all the important things work reliably and invisibly, they're happy. And that's the thing with Vista: While the enthusiast community rages on about how great Vista is or how much it deserves to forever burn in effigy, the rest of the world has moved on. Barring evolutionary improvements, the OS as we know it is as good as it needs to get. Form factors are changing, new players (Google, anyone?) are hedging into Microsoft's turf, and it won't be long before the OS fades from its formerly starring role in your local electronics store.
But that's a discussion for another day, and a future column.
Carmi Levy is a Canadian-based independent technology analyst and journalist still trying to live down his past life leading help desks and managing projects for large financial services organizations. He comments extensively in a wide range of media, and works closely with clients to help them leverage technology and social media tools and processes to drive their business.
I'm just glad, if true this is start of the end of microsoft as a monopoly
Score: 0
|English isn't my native idiom.
I disagree. Applications is the real problem. There's nothing new from this front. Some change on interfaces, but they got the limit of users needs. You can do everything, a long time ago, no matter if photo, sound, videos, etc. All OS are fine, if you don't install no apps. Can someone tell a thing that isn't possible to do today on a computer in normal basis? Oh, the slogan from IBM: think.
Score: 0
|After 2 Service packs and Vista Manager IT RUNS JUST FINE!
Score: 0
|might be worth pointing out that if this is the way computing is going, before Windows dies, OS X will die, linux already barely exists to the home user
i personally think Chrome OS won't exactly be the future but will be an extension of what we already use, full fledged OS's and perhaps own a netbook with a cheap or free bare bones OS
Score: 0
|Good read. It's true, the days of dominance for Microsoft are over. I don't even think they give a damn either.
I think the future of OS's lies in the hands of whom ever designs a platform that is equally lite weight, fast, secure, compatible and portable on any type of hardware; notebook, netbook, smartphone, Intel pc, AMD pc, whatever.
Score: 0
|"TITAN LEV (Linux Extended Version) by Affrody is a Linux distribution that is designed to provide users the ability to work seamlessly in both Windows and Linux environments"
in other words it just a linux distro with WINE installed and WINE does not work with 100% of windows apps
FAIL
Score: 0
|Although this article is good and I agree with what the author says, what is written is too simple. Like the tip of the iceberg which is only 10% of the whole iceberg.
To say people do not care about the OS is an understatement. When I used win 95 for the first time, I cared for the OS. I wished there was a better OS than win 95. Given a choice (and affordability), I would switched happily!! So would most of the users of WIn 9xxxxx.
Yes, Microsoft needs to make sure that if people were to pay for OS, it would be better than any free OS. I tried linux 10 years ago, pissed off with win 95/98/Me. I got even more pissed off with Linux.......though I managed to install it on my machine, I could not get most of the hardware working. Applications were not freely available. I had a dial up connection and could not get my modem to work with Linux and hence could not download whatever little was available. I moved back to windows wishing I had a better choice. Mac was simply not affordable at that point in time. So author is right in mentioning that windows survived because it ensured that it worked with most hardware with ease.
But after all these years, the scenario has changed. Free OS like linux have matured, quality applications are freely available. I have 3 laptops today and run ubuntu dedicatedly on 1 of them. It installed perfectly out of the box (even configured broadcom wifi automatically!). It is the best OS I have ever seen and works blazingly fast!! Quality applications are available for free download and there is no way one would miss windows (or even think of windows). So if microsoft were to charge people for OS, it must make sure that its OS is better than what is available for free. They therefore must keep on evolving windows and make sure they were ahead of free OS!!
Yes, from what I have seen so far, Windows 7 manages to come close to or as good as ubuntu. It does have some advantage in the sense that more commercial applications are available for windows (like photoshop, some games, proprietary enterprise apps etc.) than for linux. But thats about it. I would happily switch to ubuntu for rest of my life. I do not see the need to buy new hardware with Windows 7 when 2 of my existing laptops running windows give up!! Microsoft knows this and you can already see that Microsoft is selling preorder copies of Win 7 at dirt cheap rates!!
The OS has already become a commodity. You don't even need to go to local electronics store to buy it. Just go to the site of your favourite linux distro and get it for free!!
Ultimately Microsoft will have to provide windows free so that it can keep the windows platform alive. Maybe in distant future they will offer windows and office free, keep the platform alive and then charge for other applications that use windows platform!!!
Score: 0
|>"But after all these years, the scenario has changed. Free OS like linux have matured, quality applications are freely available"
I'm glad you find that "ItWorksForMe(TM).
However 90% of us need more than just surfing and light office docs. Those same applications (openoffice/gimp/firefox/pidgin) are also available on windows and runs even better (i.e. firefox is typically faster than on Ubuntu on the same hardware, try it yourself), and Windows is typically "free" when you buy a new or used PC. Plus the ability to run software at native speed like most 3D games, professional business software, kids education software, DVD/BD media and Music/DJ editing, Blu Ray playback, ITunes/Ipod, Blackberry Desktop, Palm DesktopSupport, etc. Plus Outlook, the one killer app Linux Desktop has no replacement for. (And please don't bring in evolution, that app is closer to outlook 95, yes I have used evolution)
>"Yes, from what I have seen so far, Windows 7 manages to come close to or as good as Ubuntu"
You have got to be kidding us right?
"Yes, I had problem with speed (still have since it boots very slowly) but this was resolved without much investment by using "Readyboost" feature in Vista!! I invested in a pen drive and it was much cheaper than investing in additional ram. The only issue that I face presently is that it takes minutes to boot and shut down"
I'm sorry, sounds like you have insufficient hardware and memory to run Vista. There is no true replacement for real RAM on your laptop/desktop. You should have at least 2gig ram minimum (total of $21.00 as of July 2009). Also, if your hard drive is nearing full capacity or runs at 4200RPM, that will also affect performance. On a side note, you cannot expect a stock computer made 9 years ago to realistically run Vista smoothly today (without some hardware upgrades). Or expect Vista to run perfectly fine with 512megs ram.
Score: 0
|it will be interesting to see vista sales after the release of win7.
unlike winxp, vista will likely not be worth the trouble or costs of keeping it on the shelves.
truly, it would seem we were "duped" because we believed that since lit'l ol' ladies test drove the software to church on sunday mornin's, it was supposed to be a good buy.
Score: 1
|TITAN LEV (Linux Extended Version) by Affrody is a Linux distribution that is designed to provide users the ability to work seamlessly in both Windows and Linux environments. It has a user interface customized for both Windows XP and Mac/OS users and enables files and printer sharing between Windows and Linux computers. TITAN LEV’s low requirements for memory, disk space and CPU power, make it a perfect match for any Netbook. Another significant advantage of this OS is the ability to synchronize your netbook with your home/office desktop. It also includes a pre-installed set of 150 selected programs that address the common needs of most PC users. The package consists of open-source programs, Microsoft programs and applications that were specifically developed by Affordy. This eliminates the need to search the vast open-source universe for the right application and the often intimidating open-source programs installation. Affordy provides premium technical support for the entire TITAN LEV package. For more details see http://www.affordy.com
Score: -3
|"Microsoft programs and applications that were specifically developed by Affordy."
Whew...
Almost fell out of my chair at that one. Affordy develops MSFT applications, do they?
Nice spam. May I suggest that instead of abusing Betanews policy to advertise your software that you instead contact them about perhaps setting up some sort of legitimate advertising?
It helps to avoid all the negative moderation, insults, death-wishing, and eventual banning that almost always results. :) (and of course, might actually help you *move* some product)
Score: 0
|So here's the DEAL - Make one (1) operating system that works and stay with it! Don't keep re-making the Wheel when a simple fix is all that's needed. M$ and all other company's that keep re-designing their programs just to get more sales Need to Re-think their tactics. I am so tired of purchasing a new program every other year that I'm about to toss my computer right out the door, run out and buy a couple of stacks of paper and a few pens and to hell with the electronic world altogether.
Score: 0
|Microsoft messed up in releasing an OS that only ran properly on new PCs and ignored the needs of millions of existing customers.
By a show of hands, who runs out to the Best Buy at midnight and snaps up a shrink-wrapped box of a snazzy new OS? That may have been how we were introduced to Windows 95, but these days, we upgrade when we get new hardware.
What the hell are you chatting about?
People who bought Windows Vista in the shop because they needed a computer got Windows Vista shoved down their throats, and not around midnight, also about a week or month after it was released!!!
They got underpowered computers that weren't ready for Windows Vista and Windows Vista witch wasn't ready (working drivers) for those computers!!
The not properly working driver even partially melted my graphics card,
this wouldn't have happened if their was a fair choice between Vista and XP!
Or if MS would care that their OS works and that people can rely on it!
(Needed a computer THAT DAY, could NOT wait a MONTH OR SO!)
With the vast majority of operating systems delivered by OEM vendors on new machines, it's more than a bit silly to castigate Microsoft for ignoring its loyal base of millions of fans. Few of them really care that they're not running the latest and greatest version of Windows, and they'll be perfectly happy to upgrade when their existing computer gives up the ghost. When they go shopping, they're buying hardware, not operating systems. So forgive Microsoft for focusing its OS development efforts on something newer than a dust-covered Pentium II.
It's development made efforts on forcing to upgrade again and again.
And tell me, I got a computer with a core Duo and an ati X1600 graphic card.
And the lag (like in online games, reaction time normally not noticable on a decent OS)
was horrible!!
This wasn't a Pentium II, but something after pentium 4.
It was THE NEWEST hardware AT THAT MOMENT, STILL VISTA DIDN'T MANAGED TO PLAY ALONG because of faulty drivers!!
DO you really think this is old hardware? Gues not!
MS really didn't cared about anything as long as they could release a new OS and sell a lot of it!
AMD and nVidia (and other graphic card makers) even didn't got the time to write some proper drivers!! Shame on you MS, this shows that MS just wants to get money for selling something 'new' not better and doesn't care if it will work on most people's computers!
Score: -1
|Manufactures like AMD and nVidia had a lot over a year from Vista Beta 1, until Vista was released, to produce decent drivers. You really don't think that is enough time?! The fact that hardware vendors did not get off their asses to make decent drivers, is not Microsoft's fault.
Score: 0
|Hate to be the one to tell you this, but no driver "melted your graphics card". Pure and simple, you bought a cheap piece of crap and got exactly what you paid for.
Score: 0
|Poor Daddy....you have bought into the Microsoft blame everyone but ourselves game. It certainly is not Microsoft's fault they created a horribly broken driver model and changed it completely shortly before Vista's launch. Of course, it is AMD's and Nvidia's fault Vista is a bloated, horribly designed, DRM infested, buggy pig. Of course it is not Microsoft's fault.
Score: -3
|@ bopb99: Is it so hard to properly quote someone? You start off with a " and end with a " and it makes reading much easier.
Score: 0
|Let's caveat this article: The demand for Microsoft operating systems are quickly dying out each passing year while the demand for Mac OS X is quickly Rising each and everyday. Massive difference between the two.
Once you go Mac, you just can't go back. Life Is Good On A Mac.
Score: -5
|That is of ofcourse if had one...
Score: 0
|more like if you can afford one!
Score: 0
|Life is so good on a Mac until you need parts and find they are expensive and hard to come
by,
Dream on little one and if your good Uncle Steve will let you have another glass of Grape MacAid.
Score: 0
|I like what Vista tried to be, but even with SP2 I find it sluggish and buggy. Thats on a Quad Core with 4GB ram. Vista was a great idea, but poor execution. Maybe 7 will get it right.
Score: 0
|"Vista is a great operating system. There's nothing wrong with it."
I'm not certain what is more amusing, that someone would actually say this, or that a journalist would choose to quote it and even affirm it.
Let me start by saying I have used Vista since Feb 07 on multiple machines, and it is my primary OS on my desktop computer. With that out of the way I would like to assure you that I actually do like Vista - mostly. But to say Vista is a "great" OS? And that "there is nothing wrong with it"? Bwahahahahahaha! Sorry but, wrongo!
Vista is an ok OS that tries to do too much and (proven by the performance of Windows 7) takes far too high a toll on system resources to warrant what it does. The only real upside to the disaster that was the Vista release and life-cycle is it laid the foundation for Windows 7 by teaching MS that people care more about performance than pointless features.
I think Vista can be summed up as the visual representation of Microsoft forgetting what an Operating System was meant to do. An OS shouldn't try to do everything, it's simply a platform for all of the functionality a user actually cares about.
Score: 3
|You also forgot "people who need DOS/Win3.1/95/98 for a particular program for a work related task either from a company that went dead, or because it is still under warranty for DOS/Win3.1/95/98 and upgrading the PC will void the warranty or because it works and they are too cheap or stupid to upgrade."
*I worked at a day camp a few years back (2001 maybe?) and they were still using Win 95/98 because they insisted on continued use of a database program for archiving camper registrations.
*I worked at a hospital back in 2003 and the guy I worked for was still using DOS on an old Gateway piece of junk because the program which operated this radiologic film digitizer required DOS. I guess the company went belly up not long after he purchased the digitizer.
*I worked in chemistry last summer (2008) the company was using Win95 on a PC that was connected to a very outdated X-Ray spectrophotometer. They eventually upgraded to a brand new machine controlled by a PC using Windows XP, but the upgrade was well overdue (the machine was 10 years old!). Although in this case it is hard to justify buying a $250,000 machine every time Windows upgrades its operating system.
You might ask: "well why not purchase a brand new PC and just install the software on that computer to control the outdated hardware?"
In some cases they do this. Many hospitals you go to will run old hardware using terribly old software, however being operating on a brand new Windows computer. In these cases, the machine is out of warranty, however still serviced (for a fee) by the company, and the hospital is free to do what they want as far as the software control goes. But in the case that the machine is still under warranty the organization is rarely allowed to manually upgrade the controlling PC without voiding the warranty.
Score: 0
|I love the revisionist history of Vista. Vista was a broken, incomplete, bloated, disaster of an OS. To say anything less, is pure BS...in other words, Microsoft marketing speak. Microsoft marketing is based on the sale of new computers...that is where they can hide their outrageously high Microsoft OS tax, although the Netbook market makes that hard which is why you see the arbitrary hardware restrictions on the cheapest version of Windows Vista SP 2.5, i mean Windows 7. they need suckers to pay the super high prices for their OS.
The OS is not going anywhere for the foreseeable future. The same old paid for story...Microsoft is not a bad guy, there is competition, blah, blah, blah, blah....
Score: -4
|*laughing*
You're so amusing... I wonder what would happen if you actually ever had a clue before posting. Would you not post?
I'd explain, as so many others have, why the limitations *are not* arbitrary, but...just as you've never listened to the others, you wouldn't listen to me either.
...because just like you "know" Silverlight can't be hosted on non-MSFT servers (*laughing*), you "know" the limitations were arbitrary, and no facts, rationale, or evidence to the contrary will *ever* convince you otherwise. You'd actually have to be capable of reason for that to happen.
Score: -1
|sorry....what are you babbling about now?
Score: 0
|Microsoft is reserving the right to sue.
Now they try to get enough market penetration to have enough momentum to pose a tax on it!
Most people don't know what an OS is, and don't know you need the crrect drivers for it.
That's why it's dangerous letting mother-in-law-people upgrade their computers.
Score: 0
|@fatty:
*laughing*
Can't follow a direct response to your own post?
Is he that stupid folks, or does he just act that way so he doesn't have to actually "think" before posting?
Score: -2
|PC_Tool, i really try to give you the benefit of doubt sometimes, but i have no idea what you are talking about....and from the looks of it, either do you. Where in my post did i mention anything about hosting Silverlight? Wow. Forget to take the meds?
Score: 1
|I'd laugh, but it's just so sad...
Let me link it for ya: fatty being a genius...as usual
See, you "know" things the way the guy in the asylum "knows" aliens are out to get him. And no amount of reality will ever be enough to change that. So why even bother trying to point out the wholly *non* arbitrary reasons as to why there exist hardware limitations on Windows 7 Starter Edition to you?
You bound and determined to run your mouth off about products being "horribly broken" whether or not you have any clue at all about the products in question, which you obviously do not.
Score: 0
|This kind of analysis' are fueled by the bad reputation of Vista and the chain of derived panic.
After 7 comes in and replaces Vista as the current OS, non of this negative thinking will be present anymore.
Score: 0
|Anyone remember when Scott McNealy said this in the 1990's? Or when Marc Andreessen said it in the 1990's? McNealy and Andreessen became obsolete faster than the OS.
Sure, the OS is going away. And the US is converting to the Metric System. I'm sure my great great great great grandchildren will celebrate the day.
Score: 0
|you got my vote!
basically, microsoft pawned off vista as a race horse.
so what did we actually get...?
i've been kicking it for a while and it looks like a dead horse to me..
anyone have a sturdy catapult to launch dead horses into the sunset?
Score: 0
|Ah, the anti-ms flock has ridden up on that rusty bandwagon led by imaginary dead horses, and swarmed to this article like flies on a...well, you know.
Vista 64 has worked great for me. I'd appreciate them coming down on the cost, but I've paid more for graphics software and games than OSes by FAR. If you consistently had problems with XP, Vista, and plan to have them with Windows 7, then let me suggest an alternative root cause other than "HEY ITS MICRO$OFT'$ FAULT!"
Score: 0
|the $'s fit well ;)
Score: 0
|If you play Age of Empires, you can use a code that will use catapults to either launch cows or to launch peasants. Will that be close enough?
Score: 0
|"and it won't be long before the OS fades from its formerly starring role in your local electronics store."
Where do you shop?
At most, in *any* of the "Big Box" stores, there is *maybe* enough shelf-space for 6 boxes. OSes have never been a "starring" role in terms of product placement. The retailers don't make margin on them, at least, not compared to what an actual computer would get them.
From your perspective, honestly, the OS never lived (Except maybe briefly in the '95 era). No-one (statistically) has ever cared who made it or how popular it was. It was/is a tool to get things done.
Sure, we here, as you stated, debate ad-inifinatum the benefits and drawbacks of various OSes...because we're geeks. We've never had the majority and never will. Most folks just couldn't care less, and never have.
..and don't get us started on what actually *makes* an OS....if it's the kernel, the API's, dev tools, nifty little apps included, etc. And no, I don't want that to be a discussion for another day. ;)
Score: -1
|I agree AND disagree with you both.
I think more people than you know, care about how popular the OS is...but not popular in the term as we'd normally know it. I've mentioned in other articles, that I've come across soooo many people who have NEVER used Vista yet have thorough input on it. "Vista sucks"...why? "Because it's so slow", what do you mean? "It's a resource hog", how so? "It makes computers slow", I don't understand "Me neither, but that's what so and so told me"....
Have you never had conversations that have gone like this? And it's always the same few answers...which leads me to believe that the Mac campaign has done a bang up job on Vista, as well as early adopters and people who put it on old, run down hardware. It's bad PR and it worked, despite the fact that there's really nothing fundamentally wrong with it. XP went through similar kinks early on. It was just as demanding on the hardware of that period, but throughout the years the hardware got better, people upgraded and voila, a strong OS emerged. Vista hasn't been given that redeeming chance and with 7 coming, won't be....as the majority of new hardware released will be shipped with 7.
It's true, I don't think the OS has ever been the 'star'..of any big box, or otherwise electronic or computer store. People are going to buy that laptop or computer as long as it runs Windows....and Mac people are going to buy it as long as it has OSX, and Linux people will buy it and slap Linux on it - so in that regard it's not a big deal. So it'll stay the 'star' in that respect, as it always has been. Stores will use it as a means to an end, PR will dictate if they need to trump up the "free upgrade to 7!!!" or "free downgrade to XP!!" or "free downgrade to Vista (from 7)" etc.
This begs the question though - if retail sales of the OS aren't the majority sale, why on earth does MS continue to sell it for so much money? I was in a bit of shock when I heard that the retail versions were going for $199 for home and upward....basically the same crap MS did with Vista. Of course, 7 I think is a great product but not many people are going to want to buy a single license OS for $199. If MS understands that the OS is supposed to be transparent to the consumer, then why stick such a bright blinking neon light on it? And you can't really compare Snow Leopard to 7 as an 'upgrade', since Snow Leopard is more like a service pack than an upgrade, or like a different version of the same OS. It's like charging 100 for 7 32bit, and $29 to upgrade to 7 64bit, with a few apps slapped in to not make it look TOO bad.
I think the more people care, than those who don't. But they care in a different way, as I mentioned...they don't 'care' like we care. There are people going "Oh, it comes with Vista? oh no...can it be downgraded?"....and only those who are willing to go against what they've heard, fight the 'flow' of bad information buy it, try it...only they come to realize "hey, it's...not that bad". MS way of 'fixing' Vista's bad PR is with 7...and for the most part, they have. The OS won't be dying for now. It's as relevant as it has been for years, at least by feature and name.
Score: 0
|I waited until SP1 to purchase Vista Home Premium 64, and it works very well. My system has an i920 and 8 GB of RAM and Vista takes about 4-5 GB running your average power users set of apps. It's a good OS if you have the system to handle it.
Score: 0
|