kaled - 10:39 am on Oct 1, 2007 (gmt 0)

I use Vista for testing software but, otherwise, I use XP.

My experience is that Vista has lots of little problems, some design issues, some user-interface issues and, all sorts of things have changed for no apparent reason other than some half-wit thinks change == progress.

The user interface is pretty but functionality is worse, for instance, on the most recent open-file dialog (try Firefox) there is no parent-folder button/icon (but Alt-UpArrow will do the job).

Unless SP1 sorts out a lot of the user-interface issues, I think many people will continue to hate Vista even if MS fix almost everything else (which I doubt they will).

XP SP2 is stable and will run all software (other than MS Vista Games) for the foreseeable future. The only security benefit of Vista is User Account Control, which, whilst sensible in concept, has not been implemented well.

Furthermore, if MS permitted Data Execution Prevention (DEP) to be enabled by manifest (an XML file embedded in modern windows apps) then all internet-aware apps could be made substantially more secure without having to change a global Windows setting that can break other (older) apps. Indeed, if DEP could be switched on for individual apps, it would be possible to issue a warning when an internet connection request is made by an app that is not DEP-aware. Since DEP is not required except in the context of internet security, you would think this approach would be blindingly obvious. However, MS only provide the ability to switch off DEP for individual apps - totally barking mad (and proof if any were needed that MS just don't have a clue what they're doing when it comes to security).

Kaled.