@Levente Szileszky, @ Ed and @Richard tanswell
Other than discrediting a quote based on your own opinion, did you reply actually have any merit? Was there a point?
I deployed Vista on a new HP laptop in December 2006 for a single user. This was a test.
2 Months later after hearing nothing from him at all (yet his collegues were still calling the helpdesk as the usual intervals) I had a quick meeting. He loved it. The mobility, the performance improvements (yes that's right - it was quicker as we didn't need 100+ bits of a extra sys util crap installed as Vista does it all out of the box whereas XP needed drivers and 3rd party apps. Such as Bluetooth, finger print reader, wifi etc.)
After a fantastic end-user response, and the helpdesk stats of 0 calls (with XP he had an average of 3 a month) it was sold. It cost us nothing as we had enterprise agreements with MS with software assurance, and we replace our hardware every three years.
@ Richard tanswell
You are showing your ignorance regarding how Vista works. As usual you look at a little chart in task manager to see how much ram is in use. Congrats.
If you cared to actually look into the technology you are slagging off, Vista loads are much as possible into RAM. Free, unused RAM is pointless RAM.
Vista will load as much as it can into RAM regarding bit of the OS internals that are likely to be used as RAM is faster than virtual memory on a HD. As soon as I fire up Photoshop CS3 XTD Vista drops what isn't needed / used / required from RAM and loads up Photoshop instead.
It's a very efficient way of using memory. This feature is called SuperFetch:
After you’ve used a Windows Vista system a while, you’ll see a low number for the Free Physical Memory counter on Task Manager’s Performance page. That’s because SuperFetch and standard Windows caching make use of all available physical memory to cache disk data. For example, when you first boot, if you immediately run Task Manager you should notice the Free Memory value decreasing as Cached Memory number rises. Or, if you run a memory-hungry program and then exit it (any of the freeware “RAM optimizers” that allocate large amounts of memory and then release the memory will work), or just copy a very large file, the Free number will rise and the Physical Memory Usage graph will drop as the system reclaims the deallocated memory. Over time, however, SuperFetch repopulates the cache with the data that was forced out of memory, so the Cached number will rise and the Free number will decline.
There's also the ReadyBoost and various other technologies used in Vista to reallocate memory allowances to improve perfomance and give RAM centric applications priority when required. It's essentially a RAM optimsation technology.
I suggest you research the OS you are slagging off before simply pressing CTRL+ALT+DEL and assuming the worst.
Oh, and the box I'm typing this up on now has the Mcx1 (media centre) user, my account and my sons all logged in at at the sametime. I'm using under 700Mb RAM. (I have 1.5Gb)
Out of the box Vista uses less power. This is due to the new sleep functionality, dynamic processor power management and a new system that prevent apps from stopping a system from entering sleep mode.
Additionally, the new GPO's and Powercfg.exe utility allow admins to centrally manage the power settings of Vista machines on the network. This can be used in large networks to dramatically save power and thus money. This couldn't be done using GPO's in XP.
Power consumption & Managemnt: Vista Vs. XP