"Steve Easton" <admin@95isalive.com> wrote in message
news:Oja81RGrHHA.4624@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
[color=blue]
> My Vista experience has been fine. ( Vista Ultimate )
> However, I started with a Vista capable Core 2 Duo machine with plenty of
> RAM
> and Vista capable sound and Video.[/color]

Yes, and I should also add that I've seen Vista machines run great right out
of the box -- not to mention that I'll sleep a little more soundly with
Vista's security enhancements (including the dreaded UAC, although I, too,
have turned it off on on my personal machine). But I had to tweak Vista on
my kid's new Core 2 before I could get C&C to run (almost) as well as it
does on his old P4 with XP. (Fortunately, all I really care about are
business applications, but he's shown me a lot of ways that folks can
destroy their computers, so I like to keep him happy).
[color=blue]
> A lot of the problems I've seen posted here and other places seem to
> evolve around folks trying
> to run Vista on a machine that just can't handle it.[/color]

We had these experiences with XP and 2000, and even DOS/Win3.1: folks trying
to upgrade on the cheap. Those problems must be discounted.

Side Note: After years of trying to hide the folder tree from users (in XP
and 2000, Microsoft even put Windows Explorer on the Accessories menu), they
decided to base almost the whole Vista user interface on it. Well, better
late than never, I guess.

--
David Dickinson
eveningstar at die-spammer-die dash mvps dot org
Please reply only to the newsgroup, not by email.