So far so good but I have not seen enough improvement over XP to make it worth while paying for it. XP was a huge improvement over 98 and ME but Vista just seems to be more of XP. The 64-bit edition will probably be the main upgrading factor. So far the beta version seems perfectly stable so I have every confidence in the final release. Installation was painless and simple although newbies may easily mess up the dual boot as the default is to upgrade. I just added an extra hard drive and installed it on that partition. All my hardware was automaticaly detected making installation easier than Windows XP. My main concerns however is Linux, I expect Vista to cost at least £100 for the none crimpled versions so people way well go for 64-BIT versions of Linux to upgrade instead. I am currently testing the 32-bit version however. My specs are:- Sempron 2800 32-BIT (Socket A, 256kb l2 cache) 512MB RAM ATI Radeon 128MB 9600 SE VIA based ASROCK motherboard (full size) Vista is installed on my second drive, an old 80GB Deathstar with 2MB Cache. So basicaly it is a lot faster than I thought but it is not as different as I thought either. I shall be sticking with XP unless Vista costs less than £50.