Vista big mistake for MS? [Archive]

palese

08-04-2007, 02:07 PM

Now MS sees the hole it dug itself into, they just lowered the price by 50% in China and MS says the reason is to deter piracy:ROTF: Yea right:rolleyes: Like that would change anything, the numbers are down because no one is buying:yepp:

As everyone knows they delayed SP1 for Vista for god knows how long.

MS now says SP3 for XP is on the way again, they see the need to support this OS rather then throw it to the curb now.

Also note that DX10 is a failure with the people who publish games and only a few jumped on that bandwagon, I can recall what seemed like just yesterday that all the Vista followers said are you stupid!! DX10 is a whole new API and cold never be an addition to Win XP. Well that myth was dispelled when a member of the DX10 team proudly announced DX10 for XP was a simple task but we do not want to support XP any longer:yepp:

Want to bet we see DX10 for XP in the not so distant future:yepp:

Oh yes don't forget how MS shot Halo 3 in the foot with the Vista only requirement.
Yes XP had bugs but Vista is broken just ask nvidia.

[cTx] Nooc

08-04-2007, 02:34 PM

I didn't realize we had so many marketing professionals on this forum? Why are you wasting time on these forums? Go work for Microsoft, you'll be making millions predicting how well their products are going to turn out, all based on first few months of their existence, and all based on one sad closed-minded opinion.

Microsoft lowered prices in Chine. Fine. What did you expect them to do? That's the ugliness of piracy, it lowers prices until real companies can't compete, all at the companies expense. DX10 and Halo 2 are a way for Microsoft to promote their new product, you've got to have some exclusive features in it. Why would anyone choose Vista if XP offered the same thing? Think about it.

SP1 is "delayed", as if it was Microsoft's intention. It has been 7 months since Vista came out. Would you rather have a complete and healthy SP1 and have it later or a half-assed product and have it sooner?

Serra

08-04-2007, 02:36 PM

Now MS sees the hole it dug itself into, they just lowered the price by 50% in China and MS says the reason is to deter piracy:ROTF: Yea right:rolleyes: Like that would change anything, the numbers are down because no one is buying:yepp:

Well the fact that you can buy a pirated copy of Vista on the streets in China for $1 must not have anything to do with the fact that no-one there is buying it - stupid MS trying to lower prices to encourage people buying legit copies :rolleyes:

As everyone knows they delayed SP1 for Vista for god knows how long.

MS now says SP3 for XP is on the way again, they see the need to support this OS rather then throw it to the curb now.

Vista SP1 was never supposed to come out right away anyway and they weren't going to 'throw XP to the curb' [paraphrased]. Continuing support for old OS's - especially one which lasted as long as XP did - is the only reason MS keeps businesses using their operating system (and to extrapolate from there, if users didn't use MS products 40hrs a week at work, they wouldn't buy them for home either).

Also note that DX10 is a failure with the people who publish games and only a few jumped on that bandwagon, I can recall what seemed like just yesterday that all the Vista followers said are you stupid!!

I'm not aware of any game companies saying they're never going to release games for DX10 - afaik they're still full-steam ahead on that, it just takes awhile to develop a game for a new graphics system.

DX10 is a whole new API and cold never be an addition to Win XP. Well that myth was dispelled when a member of the DX10 team proudly announced DX10 for XP was a simple task but we do not want to support XP any longer:yepp:

Want to bet we see DX10 for XP in the not so distant future:yepp:

I know I saw a myth about enabling DX10 for XP awhile ago, but I'm going to hope that's not what you're referring to. I'll need a credible link for this before I can pass judgment (the last DX10 myth also came from an MS employee blog).

Oh yes don't forget how MS shot Halo 3 in the foot with the Vista only requirement.

Yes they did shoot Halo 3 in the foot if that is a requirement (not a gamer, not sure) - but they would be helping Vista, wouldn't they? Somehow I think current and future revenues from Vista far outweigh any potential sales from Halo 3 by several orders of magnitude.

Yes XP had bugs but Vista is broken just ask nvidia.
I won't much try to defend that Vista has issues, but I will say this much for them - XP had a long run and experienced a lot of growth in terms of applications and acceptance... shifting to a new code in many ways is a painful change, I don't think there's anyone out there who didn't see this coming. Give it a bit more time and I personally hope that MS can bring the compatibility issues out of the toilet - though I'm personally just going to bank on Vistas successor as an OS where they focus more on things like compatibility... so at least one truly positive thing will come out of it.

Obscured

08-04-2007, 03:06 PM

palese

Want to bet we see DX10 for XP in the not so distant futureThere will be now DX10 for Win XP because Microsoft won't make things even worse. DX10 is one of the Vista's key features.

TouGe

08-04-2007, 03:46 PM

Oye Vey, palese.

palese

08-04-2007, 04:39 PM

WOW 5 vista users and all in denial:ROTF:

jimmyz

08-04-2007, 04:59 PM

how exactly is it a mistake ? if you don't get vista you get ...what xp right. so microsoft still sells you software. then in a year or so when vista is working good and new applications have phased out xp support you buy it.
face it m$ has the top 2 operating systems in the market.

[XC] Lead Head

08-04-2007, 05:44 PM

I have Vista and I like, pretty responsive and fast, but for the most part its very good, its defiantly better then XP. The only mistake MS made with vista is charging so much for it. Windows XP is much to old to continue to support, the sooner XP support is done, the more MS can focus on their next OS. Consider this, Windows XP had a lifespan of around 6 years, Ubuntu on the other hand has a new version every 6 months or so.

Speederlander

08-04-2007, 07:26 PM

WOW 5 vista users and all in denial:ROTF:

I think YOU are the one in denial. Vista is fine, it honestly has no more issues than XP had when it came out. I haven't had any of the complaints you see people posting, half of which I tend to think are exagerated or B.S.

NickS

08-04-2007, 07:45 PM

I love Vista. Been using it since spring, now all the desktops in the house are on Vista 32 bit.

2x using Home Premium, mine using Ultimate. I think it rocks. Gaming is great, it's responsive, drivers are A-OK, couldn't be happier.

littleowl

08-04-2007, 08:29 PM

Now MS sees the hole it dug itself into, they just lowered the price by 50% in China and MS says the reason is to deter piracy:ROTF: Yea right:rolleyes: Like that would change anything, the numbers are down because no one is buying:yepp:

As everyone knows they delayed SP1 for Vista for god knows how long.

MS now says SP3 for XP is on the way again, they see the need to support this OS rather then throw it to the curb now.

Also note that DX10 is a failure with the people who publish games and only a few jumped on that bandwagon, I can recall what seemed like just yesterday that all the Vista followers said are you stupid!! DX10 is a whole new API and cold never be an addition to Win XP. Well that myth was dispelled when a member of the DX10 team proudly announced DX10 for XP was a simple task but we do not want to support XP any longer:yepp:

Want to bet we see DX10 for XP in the not so distant future:yepp:

Oh yes don't forget how MS shot Halo 3 in the foot with the Vista only requirement.
Yes XP had bugs but Vista is broken just ask nvidia.

I like vista so far! I have been using it for several months now! As for vista being broken well I wouldn't expect anything less from M$! But so far this is the best OS m$ has made! just cost way too much!!!

b1lk1

08-04-2007, 08:46 PM

Vista doesn't worry me half as much as the fact that they are already planning the launch of Vista's replacement in 2 years time. XP is old, but functional. Vista should have been a service pack for XP that M$ charged money for, not a completely new OS. I agree too many people are bashing it for no reason, and most problems with Vista are definitely user error, but the bottom line is that it costs way too much for what little new stuff it offers.

Obscured

08-05-2007, 02:45 AM

I'm using Vista (Business) as well and don't experience any issues with it. The problem for Microsoft is a plenty of rumors around compatibility with old programs - many people are just afraid of those mythical issues (more precisely: there are some issues of course but nobody make you install officially incompatible software).

Salmiak

08-05-2007, 05:40 AM

Why would anyone choose Vista if XP offered the same thing? Thats very true and also very sad.

Yes they did shoot Halo 3 in the foot if that is a requirement (not a gamer, not sure) Yes it is official and well known for some time now.

There a company who promisses some compatibility libs that makes Halo2 (and presumably also other software from Vistas) run on XP, but afaik they didnt show anything yet.

I won't much try to defend that Vista has issues, but I will say this much for them - XP had a long run and experienced a lot of growth in terms of applications and acceptance... shifting to a new code in many ways is a painful change, I don't think there's anyone out there who didn't see this coming. Give it a bit more time and I personally hope that MS can bring the compatibility issues out of the toilet - though I'm personally just going to bank on Vistas successor as an OS where they focus more on things like compatibility... so at least one truly positive thing will come out of it. The very sad thing about all that is, that nobody really needs a new system from MS with "new code" and lot of bugs.

As b1lk1 wrote - there should have been continuing support (possibly forever) for (atleast) XP instead.

The only one who need the new system is MS. To make some money obviously.

CandymanCan, Speederlander, NickS, littleowl - so you dont mind that your new system si wasting system resurces like crazy and making your new computer run like PII-500 ?
You dont mind that you have to buy brand new hi-end hardware just to met its minimum requirements in the 1st place ?
Are you sure you dont mind ?

I have older computer (PIII machine) and run Win2k. Now I plan to buy a new machine. I'll install 2k again and will experience huge speed-up.
If I installed Vistas on my new computer, it would be as if I stayed with the old one, only wasted a lot of money.

lawrywild

08-05-2007, 06:09 AM

Thats very true and also very sad.

Yes it is official and well known for some time now.

There a company who promisses some compatibility libs that makes Halo2 (and presumably also other software from Vistas) run on XP, but afaik they didnt show anything yet.

The very sad thing about all that is, that nobody really needs a new system from MS with "new code" and lot of bugs.

As b1lk1 wrote - there should have been continuing support (possibly forever) for (atleast) XP instead.

The only one who need the new system is MS. To make some money obviously.

CandymanCan, Speederlander, NickS, littleowl - so you dont mind that your new system si wasting system resurces like crazy and making your new computer run like PII-500 ?
You dont mind that you have to buy brand new hi-end hardware just to met its minimum requirements in the 1st place ?
Are you sure you dont mind ?

I have older computer (PIII machine) and run Win2k. Now I plan to buy a new machine. I'll install 2k again and will experience huge speed-up.
If I installed Vistas on my new computer, it would be as if I stayed with the old one, only wasted a lot of money.

Wasting resources? :confused:

I'd much rather have my ram being put to use (having the applications I use most often pre-allocated in the memory, for example) than it just being idle and having 3.5GB free :rolleyes: Otherwise there's no point in having it. Also, since vista uses more ram, companies have to released higher capacity modules thus leading to lower ram prices on the middle capacity ram (1GB sticks). Which is good for everyone, mainly WinXP fanboys... Oh and my pc is no slowed down to a P2 500Mhz. I bet you've never even tried/used and gotten used to vista. You're just reading bullsh*t fanboyism comments on the interwebs and regurgitating what you've read. :clap:

Oh, and I'm another very very happy vista user with no problems at all. :cool:

jimmyz

08-05-2007, 06:20 AM

so true about the ram usage. it's not like it is using cpu cycles. the super prefetch works very well. i just wish the delay when istalling things would get fixed it leaves the impression that it is slower than it is.

[XC] Lead Head

08-05-2007, 06:49 AM

Thats very true and also very sad.

Yes it is official and well known for some time now.

There a company who promisses some compatibility libs that makes Halo2 (and presumably also other software from Vistas) run on XP, but afaik they didnt show anything yet.

The very sad thing about all that is, that nobody really needs a new system from MS with "new code" and lot of bugs.

As b1lk1 wrote - there should have been continuing support (possibly forever) for (atleast) XP instead.

The only one who need the new system is MS. To make some money obviously.

CandymanCan, Speederlander, NickS, littleowl - so you dont mind that your new system si wasting system resurces like crazy and making your new computer run like PII-500 ?
You dont mind that you have to buy brand new hi-end hardware just to met its minimum requirements in the 1st place ?
Are you sure you dont mind ?

I have older computer (PIII machine) and run Win2k. Now I plan to buy a new machine. I'll install 2k again and will experience huge speed-up.
If I installed Vistas on my new computer, it would be as if I stayed with the old one, only wasted a lot of money.

Sorry your completely wrong there. If anything Vista is FASTER on my Opteron then XP was. Boots up faster, apps load faster, its just all around better. It does not blow resources either, It takes your most frequently use applications, and caches them into memory, if something needs that space, those cached apps are instantly purged to make room. Vista's minimum requirements is a slow 1GHz P3. On any semi modern cpu, P4 2.x and A64 3k and above, Vista will run perfect. I ran Win2k for a while, but after a bit, it gets tiring with its limitations, and lack of support, and after around 1.5-1.8 GHz or so, Win2k just does not get any faster. The way you talk of vista shows that you have no experience at all running it, and that you are very ignorant. If vista ran that bad, we would not be using it.

Obscured

08-05-2007, 09:06 AM

so you dont mind that your new system si wasting system resurces like crazy and making your new computer run like PII-500 ?
You dont mind that you have to buy brand new hi-end hardware just to met its minimum requirements in the 1st place ?
My system isn't wasting system resources like crazy and isn't making my mid-end PC run like P2-500. I don't have to buy a new brand hi-end hardware to work freely in Vista with Aero and multitasking. What am i doing wrong? ))

Today my system is C2D E6400/ASRock 775i65G/2*1024Mb DDR1 PC3200 Hynix/AGP 128Mb GeForce 6800 (@ 410/900 MHz, 12pp/6vp)/200Gb Samsung SP2004C/etc.... and it works perfect with Vista. Hell, even Celeron D 336 (2.8Ghz, 533Mhz, 256Kb) + 1Gb RAM + 6600GT work fine with Vista.

Only 600Mb of RAM are used after 5 hours of working (without system tweaking).

NickS

08-05-2007, 10:42 AM

Salmiak

08-06-2007, 02:01 AM

http://www.ozhardware.com.au/content/view/18/1/1/2/

http://www.ozhardware.com.au/content/view/18/1/1/3/

I should also apologize. I got carried away and exagerated the speed drop when trying to show my point.

Still as you can see you are loosing significant part of the machine power to your new OS.
And what are you getting in return ?
Nice transparent theme you can install under XP too ? (win.blind)

Brings me to a question to you: why exactly you installed and keep using the new system ?

Okda

08-06-2007, 02:27 AM

QFT. It's just as fast as XP, imo. Some things are even faster (namely startup and launching of applications like FireFox thanks to ReadyBoost & my 2GB Corsair Flash Voyager GT).

does readyboast really give a performance boast in normal computer usage ?

lawrywild

08-06-2007, 08:24 AM

My system can have better uptime with Vista too. XP felt sluggish over 2 days or so but with Vista it still feels fresh after 3 or 4 days uptime..

David_L6

08-06-2007, 10:45 AM

Vista is OK in my book. I have machines with the following installed: XP Home, XP Pro, Vista Business, and Vista Ultimate. They all work. I'm more familiar with XP Pro so I'd have to say that it is my favorite. The more I use the computer with Vista Ultimate on it the better I like Vista though.

Serra

08-06-2007, 11:36 AM

WOW 5 vista users and all in denial:ROTF:

Actually I'm not a Vista user. While I do own a legit copy, I don't actually use it myself because I've just been spending too much time on other projects rather than testing compatibility with programs I have. I don't have an issue with Vista itself, but I do acknowledge that some of the programs I use which were created well before the OS may not work on it (as has always been the case).

The only one who need the new system is MS. To make some money obviously.

Wrong, wrong, wrong! I hate when people say this because it's just not true. If it were true we'd still all be using DOS/3.1/95/98/2000/ME (okay, not ME).... progress doesn't occur by people saying "this is good enough, if anyone tries to reach beyond I'll just call them greedy".

Vista has implemented a number of things (even if in a spotty manner - I really can't comment one way or the other) which have the *potential* to offer much better service than XP ever could. Further, when Server 2008 comes out, I'm sure they're going to implement some features for domains which could only be realized in either a complete XP re-write or in Vista.

Soulburner

08-06-2007, 03:18 PM

My system can have better uptime with Vista too. XP felt sluggish over 2 days or so but with Vista it still feels fresh after 3 or 4 days uptime..
That's odd. I'll use S3 Standby for a month or two at a time, and every day that I flick it on its the same. XP has never gotten sluggish over time for me.

sick_g4m3r

08-06-2007, 04:27 PM

Kobalt

08-06-2007, 04:33 PM

What the hell is with Vista networking? I was installing a wireless router at my friend's house the other day who has a Vista laptop, and I could not get the laptop to even see the network, as if the router wasn't even broadcasting the SSID. I spent around an hour chatting with linksys and fiddling with the laptop and router settings with no luck. Finally I brought my XP laptop over, and what do you know...it picks up the network and connects immediately! Granted it could be another issue non-related to Vista (the same wireless adapter on each laptop though), but even trying to configure the adapter was ridiculous. You have to go through 4 pages just to be able to view the network adapter's properties and configure it :down:.

Nick04263

08-07-2007, 10:00 PM

does readyboast really give a performance boast in normal computer usage ?

When it is working right it can. The performance gain is noticeable but eventually the ready boost drive fails or Vista forgets it is there.

Vista is not a mistake. It is the inevitable change that had to happen. The mistake came when the first versions of the software came preloaded in new desktops. Many a problems surfaced from incompatibilities and errors. Eventually Vista will be the smooth running windows version that XP is. However, computers grew out of Microsoft's realm a long time ago and Vista is an inferior OS.

Operating Systems should work in the background and allow you to forget what you are even using. They shouldn't dictate what applications you can use with them and what hardware you need.

Machinus

08-07-2007, 10:06 PM

Didn't I already start this thread?

adamsleath

08-08-2007, 01:00 AM

Operating Systems should work in the background and allow you to forget what you are even using. They shouldn't dictate what applications you can use with them and what hardware you need.

:clap:
finally; something i can agree with :hehe:

max0

08-21-2007, 04:42 AM

My system can have better uptime with Vista too. XP felt sluggish over 2 days or so but with Vista it still feels fresh after 3 or 4 days uptime..

4 days :rofl: Get a real OS eg linux and see uptime of years.. 4 days :ROTF:

nn_step

08-21-2007, 04:48 AM

Considering less than 1/4 of their income comes from Windows, I don't see this as a big mistake. Rather I see it as a lower performing section of business.

naokaji

08-21-2007, 05:26 AM

the main problem with vista was (and with certain hw still is) the p*ss poor drivers... (or non at all)....

most of the things it has can be disabled... so.. dont like something it got... make it go away... just like you did with xp.

i dont think it was a mistake for ms to do it....
xp was getting old....
xp was (and actually still is, dual boot ftw) the oldest part in my comp....

but, for the future...

if they ever make another os that requires the masses to upgrade their hw... then they should go all the way and make it a revolution and not yet another evolution.

Vienna

08-21-2007, 06:26 AM

Wasting resources? :confused:

I'd much rather have my ram being put to use (having the applications I use most often pre-allocated in the memory, for example) than it just being idle and having 3.5GB free :rolleyes: Otherwise there's no point in having it. Also, since vista uses more ram, companies have to released higher capacity modules thus leading to lower ram prices on the middle capacity ram (1GB sticks). Which is good for everyone, mainly WinXP fanboys... Oh and my pc is no slowed down to a P2 500Mhz. I bet you've never even tried/used and gotten used to vista. You're just reading bullsh*t fanboyism comments on the interwebs and regurgitating what you've read. :clap:

Oh, and I'm another very very happy vista user with no problems at all. :cool:

Agreed, I'm using Vista on my Macbook Pro, on both my Desktop systems, and if anything it feels faster and much better in Vista than XP. And games run fine, and while this may be because I'm an ATi Whore fanboy, the game performance from xp to vista, is pretty much the same/non noticable losses, like 1 or 2 fps loss for every 100fps I'm getting. I know that on the green side there are larger drops, but even then I don't think their that large in games.

anyways I want to add that using Vista feels nice and way more refined than XP, pretty much the same feeling I had when I frist came over to XP from 98 (Which ironicly enough, every Vista hater here, was making the same arguments about XP).

Salmiak

08-27-2007, 04:47 AM

Wrong, wrong, wrong! I hate when people say this because it's just not true. If it were true we'd still all be using DOS/3.1/95/98/2000/ME (okay, not ME).... progress doesn't occur by people saying "this is good enough, if anyone tries to reach beyond I'll just call them greedy". No, we woun't be using DOS, we would be using 100% working and 99% patched version of - say - win 95. Which i fact would not be win 95 anymore, but constantly upgraded but still fast, prooven, stable and patched, highely upgraded version of it, with features that are now in 2k or XP instead.

Instead, every 6 years we get crappy, non-polished, non-finished, bugy, brand new OS, that force us to learn the newly twisted gui and settings system, is slower then the previous version and doesnt offer anything new that's actually needed or usable, that the old versions didnt have.

More so, At the same time we cant choose to stay with the older, functional, patched OS, because MS is dropping support for it and so are the HW and SW vendors.

And does MS do all this every 6 eyars, because they only want the best for us all ? Because they want to simlify and fasten our work ? With more bugy and slower new system ? Start to think.

Vista has implemented a number of things (even if in a spotty manner - I really can't comment one way or the other) which have the *potential* to offer much better service than XP ever could. Further, when Server 2008 comes out, I'm sure they're going to implement some features for domains which could only be realized in either a complete XP re-write or in Vista. And what EXACTLY are those 'things' with 'potential' ? You didn't mention single one.

Locke

08-27-2007, 11:37 AM

my question is to get Vista 64 premium or ultimate, the premium i can find for $75 cheaper

Obscured

09-19-2007, 02:25 AM

Locke, Premium is the same as Ultimate but much cheaper.

ownage

09-19-2007, 03:21 AM

Microsoft is one big mistake

RPGWiZaRD

09-19-2007, 05:39 AM

I don't have that much problem with Vista as an OS but M$'s way of developing a so called "new" OS that seems to scale like 2x in resources requirement. That it's a new OS shouldn't necessarily mean it has to be more demanding since people have powerful comps today than a few years ago. No the OS should only provide us as efficient way of using our resources as possible. For me performance & functionality are the big keys I want in a OS. But unfortunately M$ doesn't provide a version like that, which would have a very scaled down appearence functionality, perhaps a lighter shell handler etc. and only provide the important functionalities especially those new for this OS and all kinds of support for the latest stuff in the hardware market etc.

nn_step's XSOS 3.0 concept is a perfect example EXACTLY how I want an OS to be like. M$ couldn't even spell optimization right! M$ doesn't give a crap for enthusiast segment, only business and the "home family computer" concept.

Obscured

09-20-2007, 10:26 AM

The worst thing about Vista is... GUI. It is redesigned but not improved. So Mac OS X GUI or Ubuntu's GUI or even XP's GUI are more usable.

Grafton

09-25-2007, 05:50 AM

alll i know about vista is that it's new and i remember when xp came out i avoided it like the plague ( loved my win98se ) i plan to do the very same thing hold on to win xp for about 3 more years and think about upgrading vista does everything i want it to, minus halo2, but thats not enough of a reason to switch dont really care about dx10 as i only have a dx9 gpu ( that works great btw ) so IMHO buy the time i switch over vista is in all likeliness to be as stable and bug free as the xp system i am leaving @ that point.

Obscured

09-25-2007, 11:53 AM

nn_step's XSOS 3.0 concept is a perfect example EXACTLY how I want an OS to be like.
What's that? Tell me, tell me! :)

nn_step

09-25-2007, 02:08 PM

What's that? Tell me, tell me! :)

A Clean, Efficient 64Bit OS Designed for multiple processors and minimalist overhead. (DX10 included)

awdrifter

09-25-2007, 02:41 PM

Vista is not a mistake, the mistake is the users that switching to Vista right after it came out. In 1-2 years when the bugs are all fixed and the computers have more cores and rams, Vista will be great.

Obscured

09-25-2007, 03:15 PM

nn_step,
hmm... sounds interesting. Linux kernel?
Where can i find/read any FAQs or general info about your XSOS 3.0?!

The_Beast

09-25-2007, 03:33 PM

XP loud and proud

Obscured

09-25-2007, 03:57 PM

Wait, nn_step...
How is DX10 included in XSOS 3.0 dispite of its propriarity? Do you mean OpenGL with DX10 features?

Please, post any links on a general info or FAQ about XSOS.

MikeB12

09-25-2007, 04:56 PM

:sofa: :sofa: :sofa: :sofa: :sofa:
http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/9853/20070216logovistamr3.jpg

nn_step

09-25-2007, 05:22 PM

Wait, nn_step...
How is DX10 included in XSOS 3.0 dispite of its propriarity? Do you mean OpenGL with DX10 features?

Please, post any links on a general info or FAQ about XSOS.

It is included to promote the USE of DX10 in Modern Games.
Think of V3 as what Microsoft wants Vista to be, Little legacy and alot of Wonderful features.

Because we do not include vestigial features nor support beyond the standard handful of applications and current popular games, we have much more freedom and much less overhead. Providing a light, fast, and Clean Operating system that promotes Development for the Microsoft Vista 64bit Platform. To further enhance the industry adoption of the new standard, this Operating system is freely available to all Microsoft customers with a valid copy of Microsoft Windows. Microsoft doesn't not take any responsibility nor claim for any incompatibilities between our operating system and previous Windows products. We are not liable for any misuse or abuse of this product. For Further details please read the Standard Microsoft EULA.