Leonardo, you’re right. If Microsoft’s operating systems were so bad as many journalists think, then they were already bankrupt.

Jim, the point is that drivers come from third-party vendors. You can’t blame MS for their sluggishness. The same applies to third-party applications. It is unbelievable how many software vendors still have problems with Vista after such a long beta period. And don’t you think that Windows 2000/XP were indeed better than Windows NT? Don’t you remember the daily bluescreens with NT? XP is the first Windows that is really stable. Unfortunately, it is quite insecure. It seems that with Vista, they solved this problem, too.

Lets keep this in perspective…nothing is said regarding how large of a team there was for Vista compared to XP as well as any changes made to how they compiled the info they needed and how it was all implemented. This is all relevant. Their excuses for delaying and still not getting it all right are rather amusing.

Basically I’m calling them out on this as it’s been widely known about their compatibility problems with well known products like different video cards. It would be hard to believe that they put more effort into getting older or rarer products to work better than some of the newer or more popular products.

I agree wholeheartedly that in the long run Vista should be a much better OS than XP was. The same was said about 2000 and XP as well though. Nothing new except your basic PR BS.

All in all I see Vista with alot of promise but don’t have much confidence in MS fullfilling that promise. The problem is the company, not the OS.