My post got all mixed up. The paragraphs are out of order.
Oh well, I don't see where we can edit our posts?
Are we allowed to mention this in this Forum? If not, guess a mod can move it.
Anyway, IMHO Vista will fail in the marketplace, at least for the next couple years. Why? Because most people are not willing to spend a hundred hours upgrading their programs to work with Vista nor willing to spend thousands on getting new versions of programs certified to work with Vista.
I don't know about anyone else, but I have four desktop and notebook computers.
I am sure over time MS will take steps to force us to use Vista, such as creating XP bugs, letting bugs loose on XP, not addressing XP, eventually dropping XP support and what not. But all this takes time, so I figure I have about three years before being left with no choice but to use a Vista PC. The only silver lining in that cloud is that by that time hopefully all the Vista bugs will be worked out, vendors will have come out with XP/Vista patches and "upgrading" won't require 100++ hours of my time.
So IMHO, for the next two years Vista will NOT fly off the shelves, people will put "sandbags" around their XP machines, and only "upgrade" when it becomes absolutely necessary.
Bonus comment: When Vista launched here in San Francisco, at the local CompUSA, few people attended the launch party. In fact, the TV news coverage showed few people at the checkout stand buying Vista. Most were buying the other items on sale. And they panned the Vista display to show that there were two to three people standing around. Perhaps this is most telling about Vista's prospects for the next few years.
Each would require a separate Vista license, so that is $400 for the "middle" Vista version.
Add to that the thousands I would have to pay for programs installed on the units, scanning, OCR, word processing, Adobe, accounting, time keeping, etc. And each of those programs have copied MS in requiring a separate licen$e for each machine. So that might total $3000.
I also have to anticipate upgrading equipment since some devices I have will no doubt not have upgraded drivers from the manufacturers. Also, MS has some pretty high requirements for average performance, from RAM, video cards, and hard disks. So equipment might run about $2500 or more. But that all depends on if I upgraded every computer.
Lastly, I have to add the hundred or so man hours required to make find the OS bugs, install the programs, look for program bugs, driver bugs, and other issues. Now I know everyone's value of their time differs, but if I even bill 1/5 of my hourly billing rate, that is $50 an hour. So that makes 100 hours [which is a low estimate] a labor charge of $5000.
So all totaled I would have to spend about $11,000 to upgrade to Vista. The way I see it, if you don't like my numbers, even 1/2 of that amount, $5,500, is unacceptable.
I remember when XP came out and the amount of time I had to spend trying to get things to work after using Win 98. In fact, it was a good two years before everything settled down and would run fairly reliably. By that time vendors and equipment manufacturers came out with XP drivers or programs, so things were great. But those first two years were hell, I have to say.
Back then I was mad at MS because they did not take into account, nor tell anyone, the hell one would have to go through to upgrade. Plus, back then they did not tell people "clearly, on the package" that only one XP OS could be installed per license. I was stuck having to pay about $600 to put XP on all my the machines I owned at that time.
IMHO I think most computer users share the feelings I have. In fact, I'm telling as many people as I can to NOT upgrade to Vista. They should wait it out and maybe even NOT buy a machine with Vista on it [because they are in for a surprise when they try to install their old programs on to a Vista PC. Fact is they will have to spend $1000++ to get all their old stuff to work on their shiny new Vista PC].
I also think a lot of people share my opinion that if XP is working fine, why change. XP is relatively stable [finally] and when crashes occur, nothing bad happens to the PC, unlike the old days.
Moreover, I have not seen anywhere on the Net or on TV where anyone has said Vista is a must have because [insert reason here]. Truth is, most reviewers have said there is not that much worth the trouble of changing to Vista. And most interestingly, few have referred to going to Vista as an "upgrade." Maybe that's because it really isn't. While there are some new things, some neat tricks and a different interface, in terms of an upgrade to the operating system, there is nothing new.