Fact: People don't forget the past, they just remember it differently.

IMO the transition to vista is the same as the transition to XP of a few years ago. back then the majority of people were still using windows 98SE and could not see any reason to change. XP had teething problems just like any new technology. Once service pack 2 for XP was released there was a huge surge of people migrating to the new O/S. I for one think XP is a great operating system and can see no viable reason to change to vista at this time, But later it will probably become a nessessity as technology moves on. I think vista should be given a chance to prove itself as it is still a very new O/S and really has not had the chance to show what it is really capable of.

I really don't see why people hate it.... I have had NO problems since the launch!

Bah Win 3.11 blows...Id rather stick to my Win 2.0 and all 16 colors.  

Wow - you have colors - I need to upgrade!

Wasn't 2.0 only available in Japanese?

Windows XP was never referred to as "Another Windows ME..." when it came out that I know of, but you sure hear it a lot about Vista, and its well deserved! Bad move Microsoft, very bad move.

GUIs are overrated.

*hugs DOS 3.0*

I don't recall there being as many hardware/driver issues with XP when it came out as there seem to be with Vista; as far as the problems of a user's existing peripherals and/or software being incompatible with Vista.

Every new MS OS has had the same idiots...[well, different ones...but same ideology] saying what they have is great...what is new is shite....I said it too when I ran 3.11 in preference to '95.

Get a grip, people....you're allowed to be a moron....at first.....then you need to learn that progress is exactly that....

Those who refer to Vista as another Windows ME must have a very short memory, or themselves never used ME.  ME never worked.  Period.  It would crash completely after running for a few hours.  You didn't even need to be doing anything and it would die.  Windows ME was so messed up on so many levels that you couldn't do ANYTHING reliably with it.  Vista, for all of its faults, quirks, bugs and compatibility issues has nothing in common with ME aside from the fact that some people are violently opposed to it.

 

The somewhat BIG difference is that it WAS a reason or ten to upgrade to XP, with Vista there's none.. except for the DirectX10 tease.

Oh, yeah, mustn't forget, you really gotta have all the DRM stuff (no need to be in charge of what happens on your computer anymore)... NOT!

On top of that, there's just about 2 years until "7" should be released (apparently)..
So Vista will never be as stable as XP before it's time to move on..

Really it is quite different, and I think people saying it's the same for Vista as it was back then either weren't using computers back then or have forgotten. At the office it may have been somewhat similar but then again people using 2000 at the office probabably didn't upgrade from 2000 to xp. The client upgrades at the office I saw back then were 95/98 to XP. Regardless XP was big with the home users, there were lines to get XP when it was released, I got mine the day of release there was a lot of buzz in the air. Yes there were hardware compatability issues, I remember people complaining about it, However... here are some things that are substantially different

1) There were no real lines to get Vista, at least not where I live
2) There was no real buzz in the air
3) Despite hardware compatability issues, XPs performance was still pretty good, Vista performance is much lower on the same hardware
4) The only thing home users really got in return for the performance tradeoff is a snazzy new interface... and if you are reading this you already know you can get that with good performance on XP using windowblinds. XP was a much bigger upgrade for people using 95/98. The majority of people I know skipped ME all together.(much like what could happen with Vista)
5) Most hardware issues for XP were driver related, Vista often requires new hardware not just new drivers.
6) People having problems after upgrading to XP complained alot too, however... compared to any OS release to date that I can remember(DOS was my first OS), I have never seen so many people downgrade back to XP after upgrading to Vista. I know a lot of home users who have it done it, and I know several companies who have and are doing it.

I do think for most companies it is only a matter of time before they switch clients to Vista, and it may coincide with server upgrades to 2008, but for many companies it is an expensive proposition because it is often not only a software upgrade that is required. Home users are a different story, Windows 98 got skipped by quite a few 95 users, ME got skipped by damn near everybody I know... I have a feeling Vista probably will do better than ME, but I doubt it will get the percentage of upgrades that Windows 98 or XP got.

The numbers Microsoft shows you is a simple count of licenses sold and OEMs greatly distort this number, it definately doesn't show how many people are actually using the OS. Granted on this site you probably have a higher percentage of people using Vista than the norm since people here are often more intrested in looks than functionality(not intended as an insult, I fall into this category myself)

I'm not saying Vista is bad, it just isn't doesn't have much to offer the home user(especially if you already are a windowblinds user) and distorting history is not going to encourage more people to buy it.

It's funny you mention this. I actually remember uninstalling Windows XP and re-installing Windows 98! That's how bad I thought XP was.

I'm using Vista right now and love it. I have absolutely no plan on ever reverting back to XP. Vista is just that good in my opinion.

I do think that all versions should include some of the nicer features, such as Shadow Copies(Mac calls this TimeMachine) and the Aero Interface.

But yea, you're right, a few years from now when the next major Windows OS comes out we're likely to see the same thing.