Windows Vista = Over 180 million licenses sold

[ahmad12]

Microsoft announced today as part of their annual revenues
'_announcement_'
(http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2008/jul08/07-17fy08Q4earnings.mspx)
that it has sold over 180 million licenses of Windows Vista so far. Wow.
What a failure.
Revenue growth was primarily driven by continued customer
demand for all products, including *Windows Vista, which has sold over
180 million licenses since launch*, the 2007 Microsoft Office system,
server software, and Xbox 360 consoles and games.
BTW: They announced '_140_million_copies_'
(http://www.techspot.com/news/29984-gates-140-million-copies-of-vista-sold.html)
sold two months ago. So Microsoft is selling 20 million licenses a month
on average. If that continues, Microsoft will sell over 220 million
copies of Windows Vista in its first two years on the market. Given that
XP is basically gone, it will probably be higher than that.
Microsoft made over $60 billion in fiscal 2008. Yikes.

Source: 'SuperSite Blog'
(http://community.winsupersite.com/blogs/paul/default.aspx)


--
ahmad12

 

[Sinner]

When you're the only viable game in town, the numbers aren't really
relevant.



"ahmad12" <guest@unknown-email.com> wrote in message
news:994d59c4d001d1e01145bee85cd3f9d6@nntp-gateway.com...
>
> Microsoft announced today as part of their annual revenues
> '_announcement_'
> (http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2008/jul08/07-17fy08Q4earnings.mspx)
> that it has sold over 180 million licenses of Windows Vista so far. Wow.
> What a failure.
> Revenue growth was primarily driven by continued customer
> demand for all products, including *Windows Vista, which has sold over
> 180 million licenses since launch*, the 2007 Microsoft Office system,
> server software, and Xbox 360 consoles and games.
> BTW: They announced '_140_million_copies_'
> (http://www.techspot.com/news/29984-gates-140-million-copies-of-vista-sold.html)
> sold two months ago. So Microsoft is selling 20 million licenses a month
> on average. If that continues, Microsoft will sell over 220 million
> copies of Windows Vista in its first two years on the market. Given that
> XP is basically gone, it will probably be higher than that.
> Microsoft made over $60 billion in fiscal 2008. Yikes.
>
> Source: 'SuperSite Blog'
> (http://community.winsupersite.com/blogs/paul/default.aspx)
>
>
> --
> ahmad12

 

[Yeah-whatever]

Sinner wrote:
> When you're the only viable game in town, the numbers aren't really
> relevant.

AND in no way reflects the ACTUAL end user count, something Microsoft
loves to omit because the ACTUAL end user count will be lower. Gotta
love 'em eh?

Cheers

> "ahmad12" <guest@unknown-email.com> wrote in message
> news:994d59c4d001d1e01145bee85cd3f9d6@nntp-gateway.com...
>> Microsoft announced today as part of their annual revenues
>> '_announcement_'
>> (http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2008/jul08/07-17fy08Q4earnings.mspx)
>> that it has sold over 180 million licenses of Windows Vista so far. Wow.
>> What a failure.
>> Revenue growth was primarily driven by continued customer
>> demand for all products, including *Windows Vista, which has sold over
>> 180 million licenses since launch*, the 2007 Microsoft Office system,
>> server software, and Xbox 360 consoles and games.
>> BTW: They announced '_140_million_copies_'
>> (http://www.techspot.com/news/29984-gates-140-million-copies-of-vista-sold.html)
>> sold two months ago. So Microsoft is selling 20 million licenses a month
>> on average. If that continues, Microsoft will sell over 220 million
>> copies of Windows Vista in its first two years on the market. Given that
>> XP is basically gone, it will probably be higher than that.
>> Microsoft made over $60 billion in fiscal 2008. Yikes.
>>
>> Source: 'SuperSite Blog'
>> (http://community.winsupersite.com/blogs/paul/default.aspx)
>>
>>
>> --
>> ahmad12
>
>

 

[Sinner]

"Yeah-whatever" <idaspud52@nospamhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:48830D7A.4070102@nospamhotmail.com...
> Sinner wrote:
>> When you're the only viable game in town, the numbers aren't really
>> relevant.
>
> AND in no way reflects the ACTUAL end user count, something Microsoft
> loves to omit because the ACTUAL end user count will be lower. Gotta love
> 'em eh?
>

When I bought my new Tablet, if I had been offered a choice, I would have
selected XP Tablet Edition. There is absolutely nothing about Vista that I
like. It's no more secure than XP, just a bigger PitA.

 

[Canuck57]

"ahmad12" <guest@unknown-email.com> wrote in message
news:994d59c4d001d1e01145bee85cd3f9d6@nntp-gateway.com...
>
> Microsoft announced today as part of their annual revenues
> '_announcement_'
> (http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2008/jul08/07-17fy08Q4earnings.mspx)
> that it has sold over 180 million licenses of Windows Vista so far. Wow.
> What a failure.
> Revenue growth was primarily driven by continued customer
> demand for all products, including *Windows Vista, which has sold over
> 180 million licenses since launch*, the 2007 Microsoft Office system,
> server software, and Xbox 360 consoles and games.
> BTW: They announced '_140_million_copies_'
> (http://www.techspot.com/news/29984-gates-140-million-copies-of-vista-sold.html)
> sold two months ago. So Microsoft is selling 20 million licenses a month
> on average. If that continues, Microsoft will sell over 220 million
> copies of Windows Vista in its first two years on the market. Given that
> XP is basically gone, it will probably be higher than that.
> Microsoft made over $60 billion in fiscal 2008. Yikes.
>
> Source: 'SuperSite Blog'
> (http://community.winsupersite.com/blogs/paul/default.aspx)

Should that not be 180M bundled?

I bet the off the shelf box copy numbers will not be published.

 

[rasmasyean]

Check out this statistic...
OK here’s some rough calculations:
16.14% of internet users are Vista
'Market share for browsers, operating systems and search engines'
(http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=11)
1.4 billion internet users
'World Internet Usage Statistics News and World Population Stats'
(http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm)
Assuming the usage rate is consistent around the world…
1.4 billion * 16.14% = 226 million Vista internet users
The only way the user base would be significantly less than this number
is if for some reason, Vista users surf the internet WAY MORE than all
other OS's to skew the percentage up to 16.14%. I highly doubt this.
And it’s probably more likely that that some Vista users
don’t use the internet much because it’s for work mostly.
Hence more likely there are more than 226 million Vista users.

Chances are that Vista adoption in the “rich” (and more
regulated) hitslink logged nations is held back a little by the expense
of Vista. So that could mean that other “poorer” (and
don’t give a crap) nations have a much greater than 16.14% Vista
market penetration since you can like buy it at the local fruit shop for
like $1, etc.
'NationMaster - Software piracy rate (most recent) by country'
(http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_sof_pir_rat-crime-software-piracy-rate)
I wouldn’t be surprised if the real Vista number of users pushes
over 300 million.
Poor Microsoft shareholders...they should be making more money.


--
rasmasyean

 

[HappyAndyK]

Yes, Vista sales are far more than what they were for XP for a comparable
period.

--
http://www.WinVistaClub.com




"rasmasyean" wrote:

>
> Check out this statistic...
> OK here’s some rough calculations:
> 16.14% of internet users are Vista
> 'Market share for browsers, operating systems and search engines'
> (http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=11)
> 1.4 billion internet users
> 'World Internet Usage Statistics News and World Population Stats'
> (http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm)
> Assuming the usage rate is consistent around the world…
> 1.4 billion * 16.14% = 226 million Vista internet users
> The only way the user base would be significantly less than this number
> is if for some reason, Vista users surf the internet WAY MORE than all
> other OS's to skew the percentage up to 16.14%. I highly doubt this.
> And it’s probably more likely that that some Vista users
> don’t use the internet much because it’s for work mostly.
> Hence more likely there are more than 226 million Vista users.
>
> Chances are that Vista adoption in the “rich†(and more
> regulated) hitslink logged nations is held back a little by the expense
> of Vista. So that could mean that other “poorer†(and
> don’t give a crap) nations have a much greater than 16.14% Vista
> market penetration since you can like buy it at the local fruit shop for
> like $1, etc.
> 'NationMaster - Software piracy rate (most recent) by country'
> (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_sof_pir_rat-crime-software-piracy-rate)
> I wouldn’t be surprised if the real Vista number of users pushes
> over 300 million.
> Poor Microsoft shareholders...they should be making more money.
>
>
> --
> rasmasyean
>

 

[Shane Nokes]

Then explain why XP has more security bulletins that apply to it on a monthly basis?

If you can't explain or refute that then should you really be claiming that XP is more secure?
"Sinner" <sinner@gatesofhell.org> wrote in message news:SHEgk.4349$jT6.2545@bignews5.bellsouth.net...

"Yeah-whatever" <idaspud52@nospamhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:48830D7A.4070102@nospamhotmail.com...
> Sinner wrote:
>> When you're the only viable game in town, the numbers aren't really
>> relevant.
>
> AND in no way reflects the ACTUAL end user count, something Microsoft
> loves to omit because the ACTUAL end user count will be lower. Gotta love
> 'em eh?
>

When I bought my new Tablet, if I had been offered a choice, I would have
selected XP Tablet Edition. There is absolutely nothing about Vista that I
like. It's no more secure than XP, just a bigger PitA.

 

[Shane Nokes]

Exactly, which means a larger adoption rate.

People like to ignore that little fact though
"HappyAndyK" <HappyAndyK@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:6DD9F6D3-885F-46D2-812E-D878C43A260D@microsoft.com...
Yes, Vista sales are far more than what they were for XP for a comparable
period.

--
http://www.WinVistaClub.com




"rasmasyean" wrote:

>
> Check out this statistic...
> OK here’s some rough calculations:
> 16.14% of internet users are Vista
> 'Market share for browsers, operating systems and search engines'
> (http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=11)
> 1.4 billion internet users
> 'World Internet Usage Statistics News and World Population Stats'
> (http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm)
> Assuming the usage rate is consistent around the world…
> 1.4 billion * 16.14% = 226 million Vista internet users
> The only way the user base would be significantly less than this number
> is if for some reason, Vista users surf the internet WAY MORE than all
> other OS's to skew the percentage up to 16.14%. I highly doubt this.
> And it’s probably more likely that that some Vista users
> don’t use the internet much because it’s for work mostly.
> Hence more likely there are more than 226 million Vista users.
>
> Chances are that Vista adoption in the “rich†(and more
> regulated) hitslink logged nations is held back a little by the expense
> of Vista. So that could mean that other “poorer†(and
> don’t give a crap) nations have a much greater than 16.14% Vista
> market penetration since you can like buy it at the local fruit shop for
> like $1, etc.
> 'NationMaster - Software piracy rate (most recent) by country'
> (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_sof_pir_rat-crime-software-piracy-rate)
> I wouldn’t be surprised if the real Vista number of users pushes
> over 300 million.
> Poor Microsoft shareholders...they should be making more money.
>
>
> --
> rasmasyean
>

 

[Rich]

"Sinner" <sinner@gatesofhell.org> wrote in message
news:e3Cgk.4318$t32.543@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
> When you're the only viable game in town, the numbers aren't really
> relevant.

ditto for your comment

Rich

 

[rasmasyean]

Shane Nokes781718 Wrote:
> Then explain why XP has more security bulletins that apply to it on a
> monthly basis?
>
> If you can't explain or refute that then should you really be claiming
> that XP is more secure?
> "Sinner" <sinner@xxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:SHEgk.4349$jT6.2545@xxxxxx
>
> "Yeah-whatever" <idaspud52@xxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:48830D7A.4070102@xxxxxx> > >
> > > Sinner wrote:> > > > >
> > > >> When you're the only viable game in town, the numbers aren't really
> > > >> relevant.> > > >
> > >
> > > AND in no way reflects the ACTUAL end user count, something
> > Microsoft
> > > loves to omit because the ACTUAL end user count will be lower.
> > Gotta love
> > > 'em eh?
> > > > >
>
> When I bought my new Tablet, if I had been offered a choice, I would
> have
> selected XP Tablet Edition. There is absolutely nothing about Vista
> that I
> like. It's no more secure than XP, just a bigger PitA.

Actually, since 64-bit is obviously more secure, then that should have
been the choice. Unfortunately, media and flaming bloggers do not
really know what they are talking about so it influences the "lay"
people and as they follow along with the crowd mentality and before you
know it, like rumors they get twisted. Then people make make uninformed
decisions. It's all about headlines and overstating facts to grab
attention. People just love strife, especially since MS is so big, so
many people just don't like them, unless you are a shareholder or
something. It's human nature.


--
rasmasyean

 

[Sinner]

Never mind that the number of computer users has increased more than 2 fold
over the same amount time, then the ratio of sales to possible sales doesn't
look all that good. I've never met a statistic I couldn't bend.


"Shane Nokes" <shane@hotwiredpc.nospam.cXoXm> wrote in message
news:ED374C7E-0C21-4527-9117-EBABE7453476@microsoft.com...
Exactly, which means a larger adoption rate.

People like to ignore that little fact though
"HappyAndyK" <HappyAndyK@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:6DD9F6D3-885F-46D2-812E-D878C43A260D@microsoft.com...
Yes, Vista sales are far more than what they were for XP for a comparable
period.

--
http://www.WinVistaClub.com




"rasmasyean" wrote:

>
> Check out this statistic...
> OK here's some rough calculations:
> 16.14% of internet users are Vista
> 'Market share for browsers, operating systems and search engines'
> (http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=11)
> 1.4 billion internet users
> 'World Internet Usage Statistics News and World Population Stats'
> (http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm)
> Assuming the usage rate is consistent around the world.
> 1.4 billion * 16.14% = 226 million Vista internet users
> The only way the user base would be significantly less than this number
> is if for some reason, Vista users surf the internet WAY MORE than all
> other OS's to skew the percentage up to 16.14%. I highly doubt this.
> And it's probably more likely that that some Vista users
> don't use the internet much because it's for work mostly.
> Hence more likely there are more than 226 million Vista users.
>
> Chances are that Vista adoption in the "rich" (and more
> regulated) hitslink logged nations is held back a little by the expense
> of Vista. So that could mean that other "poorer" (and
> don't give a crap) nations have a much greater than 16.14% Vista
> market penetration since you can like buy it at the local fruit shop for
> like $1, etc.
> 'NationMaster - Software piracy rate (most recent) by country'
> (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_sof_pir_rat-crime-software-piracy-rate)
> I wouldn't be surprised if the real Vista number of users pushes
> over 300 million.
> Poor Microsoft shareholders...they should be making more money.
>
>
> --
> rasmasyean
>

 

[Sinner]

Apparently, you don't comprehend the written word well. I didn't say XP was
more secure. I said, "It's(vista) no more secure than XP."
"Shane Nokes" <shane@hotwiredpc.nospam.cXoXm> wrote in message
news:08E46657-1019-4D7A-AF13-29A337A20817@microsoft.com...
Then explain why XP has more security bulletins that apply to it on a
monthly basis?

If you can't explain or refute that then should you really be claiming that
XP is more secure?
"Sinner" <sinner@gatesofhell.org> wrote in message
news:SHEgk.4349$jT6.2545@bignews5.bellsouth.net...

"Yeah-whatever" <idaspud52@nospamhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:48830D7A.4070102@nospamhotmail.com...
> Sinner wrote:
>> When you're the only viable game in town, the numbers aren't really
>> relevant.
>
> AND in no way reflects the ACTUAL end user count, something Microsoft
> loves to omit because the ACTUAL end user count will be lower. Gotta love
> 'em eh?
>

When I bought my new Tablet, if I had been offered a choice, I would have
selected XP Tablet Edition. There is absolutely nothing about Vista that I
like. It's no more secure than XP, just a bigger PitA.

 

[rasmasyean]

Sinner781952 Wrote:
> Apparently, you don't comprehend the written word well. I didn't say XP
> was
> more secure. I said, "It's(vista) no more secure than XP."
>

That statement is actually wrong, btw. Much of Vista was built with
the lessons learned from XP regarding security. I think that’s what the
replier was intending to say. If, however, you are accusing the Vista
developers of doing a horrible job regarding this aspect, then you’ll
have to provide some evidence of this. As of today it still stands that
Vista IS more secure than XP. Vista 64 is even more secure.


--
rasmasyean

 

[rasmasyean]

Sinner781951 Wrote:
> Never mind that the number of computer users has increased more than 2
> fold
> over the same amount time, then the ratio of sales to possible sales
> doesn't
> look all that good. I've never met a statistic I couldn't bend.
>

Care to back up your words with some form of evidence?
If not, then bending hot air is more likely what you are good at.


--
rasmasyean

 

[Sinner]

"rasmasyean" <guest@unknown-email.com> wrote in message
news:628d4ab6b76e62d648871f93cd3f494d@nntp-gateway.com...
>
> Sinner781952 Wrote:
>> Apparently, you don't comprehend the written word well. I didn't say XP
>> was
>> more secure. I said, "It's(vista) no more secure than XP."
>>
>
> That statement is actually wrong, btw. Much of Vista was built with
> the lessons learned from XP regarding security. I think that’s what the
> replier was intending to say. If, however, you are accusing the Vista
> developers of doing a horrible job regarding this aspect, then you’ll
> have to provide some evidence of this. As of today it still stands that
> Vista IS more secure than XP. Vista 64 is even more secure.
>
>


I hope your evidence isn't the number people complaining viruses, worms,
trojans, etc., in these newsgroups. Just because Vista makes you click a
button a couple of extra times before it will do what you've requested,
doesn't make it more secure.

 

[Yeah-whatever]

Sinner wrote:
> "rasmasyean" <guest@unknown-email.com> wrote in message
> news:628d4ab6b76e62d648871f93cd3f494d@nntp-gateway.com...
>> Sinner781952 Wrote:
>>> Apparently, you don't comprehend the written word well. I didn't say XP
>>> was
>>> more secure. I said, "It's(vista) no more secure than XP."
>>>
>> That statement is actually wrong, btw. Much of Vista was built with
>> the lessons learned from XP regarding security. I think that’s what the
>> replier was intending to say. If, however, you are accusing the Vista
>> developers of doing a horrible job regarding this aspect, then you’ll
>> have to provide some evidence of this. As of today it still stands that
>> Vista IS more secure than XP. Vista 64 is even more secure.
>>
>>
>
>
> I hope your evidence isn't the number people complaining viruses, worms,
> trojans, etc., in these newsgroups. Just because Vista makes you click a
> button a couple of extra times before it will do what you've requested,
> doesn't make it more secure.
>
>

Funny you should mention that. I removed a Trojan off a Vista computer
this evening. LOL, he said he NEVER got any sort of warning at all when
it installed it's self. Yep, really secure. Oh, and I removed Norton's
Internet Security and installed Avast. Norton didn't catch "Jack."

Cheers

 

[rasmasyean]

Yeah-whatever782088 Wrote:
> Sinner wrote:> > >
> > > "rasmasyean" <guest@xxxxxx-email.com> wrote in message
> > >
> > news:628d4ab6b76e62d648871f93cd3f494d@xxxxxx-gateway.com...> > > > >
> > > >> Sinner781952 Wrote:
> > > >> That statement is actually wrong, btw. Much of Vista was built with
> > > >> the lessons learned from XP regarding security. I think that’s what
> > > the
> > > >> replier was intending to say. If, however, you are accusing the
> > > Vista
> > > >> developers of doing a horrible job regarding this aspect, then
> > > you’ll
> > > >> have to provide some evidence of this. As of today it still stands
> > > that
> > > >> Vista IS more secure than XP. Vista 64 is even more secure.
> > > >>
> > > >>> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I hope your evidence isn't the number people complaining viruses,
> > worms,
> > > trojans, etc., in these newsgroups. Just because Vista makes you
> > click a
> > > button a couple of extra times before it will do what you've
> > requested,
> > > doesn't make it more secure.
> > >
> > > > >
>
> Funny you should mention that. I removed a Trojan off a Vista
> computer
> this evening. LOL, he said he NEVER got any sort of warning at all
> when
> it installed it's self. Yep, really secure. Oh, and I removed
> Norton's
> Internet Security and installed Avast. Norton didn't catch "Jack."
>
> Cheers

I don't think anyone would say that Vista is immune to viruses. Just
be because you got one doesn't prove anything as many people get viruses
trojans spyware, etc. 50 caliber machine gun bullets go through
soldiers armor. Does that mean soldier armor is "not secure" so they
shouldn't wear it? ROFL!

Here's the description of the security enhancements. Take it for what
you will, man.

'Windows Vista - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia'
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Vista)
http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_ff_x64.asp

And if you don't like the warning pop-ups, just turn it off. You can
do that, too.


--
rasmasyean

 

[Sinner]

"rasmasyean" <guest@unknown-email.com> wrote in message
news:c42f0f2b2431716df7c92761383023bc@nntp-gateway.com...
>
>
> I don't think anyone would say that Vista is immune to viruses. Just
> be because you got one doesn't prove anything as many people get viruses
> trojans spyware, etc. 50 caliber machine gun bullets go through
> soldiers armor. Does that mean soldier armor is "not secure" so they
> shouldn't wear it? ROFL!
>
> Here's the description of the security enhancements. Take it for what
> you will, man.
>
> 'Windows Vista - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia'


Oh Yeah, Wikipedia. Now there's an irrefutable source for ya.

 

[Yeah-whatever]

rasmasyean wrote:
> Yeah-whatever782088 Wrote:
>> Sinner wrote:> > >
>>>> "rasmasyean" <guest@xxxxxx-email.com> wrote in message
>>>>
>>> news:628d4ab6b76e62d648871f93cd3f494d@xxxxxx-gateway.com...> > > > >
>>>>>> Sinner781952 Wrote:
>>>>>> That statement is actually wrong, btw. Much of Vista was built with
>>>>>> the lessons learned from XP regarding security. I think that’s what
>>>> the
>>>>>> replier was intending to say. If, however, you are accusing the
>>>> Vista
>>>>>> developers of doing a horrible job regarding this aspect, then
>>>> you’ll
>>>>>> have to provide some evidence of this. As of today it still stands
>>>> that
>>>>>> Vista IS more secure than XP. Vista 64 is even more secure.
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I hope your evidence isn't the number people complaining viruses,
>>> worms,
>>>> trojans, etc., in these newsgroups. Just because Vista makes you
>>> click a
>>>> button a couple of extra times before it will do what you've
>>> requested,
>>>> doesn't make it more secure.
>>>>
>> Funny you should mention that. I removed a Trojan off a Vista
>> computer
>> this evening. LOL, he said he NEVER got any sort of warning at all
>> when
>> it installed it's self. Yep, really secure. Oh, and I removed
>> Norton's
>> Internet Security and installed Avast. Norton didn't catch "Jack."
>>
>> Cheers
>
> I don't think anyone would say that Vista is immune to viruses. Just
> be because you got one doesn't prove anything as many people get viruses
> trojans spyware, etc. 50 caliber machine gun bullets go through
> soldiers armor. Does that mean soldier armor is "not secure" so they
> shouldn't wear it? ROFL!
>
> Here's the description of the security enhancements. Take it for what
> you will, man.
>
> 'Windows Vista - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia'
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Vista)
> http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_ff_x64.asp
>
> And if you don't like the warning pop-ups, just turn it off. You can
> do that, too.
>
>

Hehe, It wasn't MY computer but a clients. After reading many unfounded
claims of Vista's security, I have to laugh, and occasionally comment.
AND turning off warnings is a good idea for the general user? As they
tend to become less frequent with normal usage for many people, there is
no reason to turn it off. I counsel my clients to pay attention to what
they are/were doing when a warning pops up and act accordingly with
their response. If they are not sure, the best action is to deny and
call to find out if it's ok or not for the next time. Anyway, I have
cleaned my share of crap of of Vista machines. (Already)

In the end, no matter what OS you use, one must practice "safe hex,"
have a good AV installed and up to date... LOL, and as I read in the
previous post in this thread, use like 13+ root kit checkers, plus
spyware scanners, spyware blockers etc. Yep real secure. Oh, and I
really don't care about more secure than another, it should be designed
as close to bullet-proof as possible. <sigh>, but nothing is nor will be
perfect. ...YET anyway. What I don't like is people painting a pretty
Vista security picture. It's still quite vulnerable.

I have and use Vista Ultimate, practice very safe hex, have and keep an
anti virus up to date. No probs on mine so far... Well as far as virus
problems go. Other problems, well that's another story. (But not too bad)


G'day