It’s fairly well known that I run windows xp on my home computer (for my work I have a MacBook Pro). The only reason I run Windows XP on that thing ( it’s acctualy a triple boot system: Windows XP, FreeBSD 6.2 and Ubuntu) is for playing games. ( I’m still an avid Battlefield 2 player).
So why won’t I upgrade to Windows Vista? There are a couple of reasons:
- Hardware requirements
The hardware requirements, if you really want the full vista experience (and that is the point, isn’t it?) are way to steep. I can’t run it that well on my Athlon XP 2400, even though I have a geforce 6600 in there.
- To many editions
Who came up with this anyway? I can understand the old: ‘home’, ‘professional’ editions, they each serve their intended audience well. But with vista there are a staggering 6 choices, each more expensive then the other. Apple just has a version for the desktop, and one for the server. Nice, clean, simple, doesn’t raise any questions. With Vista, even someone who is considered a computer / technology expert like me doesn’t have a clue what version to get.
To upgrade would not only mean a fair dent in my wallet for Vista itself, but also for new hardware. I would need at least a dualcore CPU, 2GB of ram and an 8800 GeForce. Nice, but with a baby due in June, I don’t think it’s within my financial reach for now.
I am contemplating on making my next home computer a Mac Pro though, and then it will become a viable option. But that is still a long ways away for the time being.
Now, the hardware requirements for Vista aren’t really that steep. According to Microsoft’s own advisor, Vista should run on my AMD Athlon XP 2400+, with 768MB of RAM and a GeForce 6600GT. However, to make real use of the operating system I would need the mentioned specs, I don’t want vista to bog down the performance of my computer, when I need to those resources for games.