Will Vista Basic contain enough functionality to compare with current XP Home Edition?I don't care about the Aero interface, as long as I still get DX10Any other pitfalls with Vista Basic?Thanks,Glenn

It is RAM limited. That I do know. 4 gig for Home Basic 32-bit. 8 gig for Home Basic 64-bit.Paul Thurrott recommendations and differences evaluation here:http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista_02.aspIn case you don't like to read, I'll summarise his conclusion by quoting directly:Do not purchase or use Windows Vista Home Basic. It's that simple.Allcott

I should also add, I have no intention of using Vista until well after the DX10 patch has been released for FSX (and that's not the patch to come in early 2007) and until it's had at least a year of use and the benefits are proven.If Thurrott is right - and I've seen different interpretations on this - and all 32-bit versions of Vista only support 4 gig of RAM, there is NO point in upgrading to Vista in the search of extra performance for the sim alone, as you can't put in enough to make the difference.Having said that, simmers don't exist in a vacuum, and there may be many other games and applications that do benefit from being migrated to Vista. But equally there will be plenty that won't work at all without patches or enhancements.Allcott

I don't think it can be said at this point if Vista Home Basic will suffice for FSX. I _think_ it will, but MS is going to try to upsell you to Home Premium. AFAIK, all the betas out so far are for "Ultimate", and I think maybe the release version of Vista Enterprise is in the hands of major MS accounts.scott s..

>I don't think it can be said at this point if Vista Home>Basic will suffice for FSX. I _think_ it will, but MS is>going to try to upsell you to Home Premium. AFAIK, all the>betas out so far are for "Ultimate", and I think maybe the>release version of Vista Enterprise is in the hands of major>MS accounts.>>scott s.>.>Well, it makes no odds to me as my employer has already made it a disciplinary offence for any remote worker to have business software on the same computer as Vista. But there are some serious differences between Vista versions and `Home Basic` doesn't read like the default version, despite its name. More like the `stripped down` model for simpletons. But I won't be using Vista anytime soon, even if I wanted to (which I don't, as Vista has a whole heap of legacy problems with my sound studio hardware and software).Allcott

Allcott,Thanks for the link. Good reading.After reading that article and looking at the feature list, I'm still not sure why I would need anything more than Vista Basic!I intend to use the 64bit version which will give me 8GB memory capacity and I don't appear to have any use for any of the other features that come with the upgrade to Premium.I'll have to wait and see....Thanks!Glenn

The 64-bit versions are the ones that will have the most problems in using older applications - they run 32-bit under an emulation program ansd will probably by much slower and more fussy than the 32-bit versions.I feel you have a risky strategy there, an I would not advise choosing a 64-bit OS purely for the RAM capacity.Allcott

Hmmmm,Interesting. I assumed that as the CPU is 64bit capable, I would have been better off installing the 64bit version of Vista. I wasn't really picking the 64bit version for it's memory capacity, more I expected better performance.Glenn

Of course, it will have a better performance with 64-bit applications.If you can find any ;)There will be no specific 64-bit patch for FSX, we already know that. What 64-bit means for DX10, I don't know, but I don't expect any increases unless the DX10 API is modified. Maybe a couple of years down the line, but by then your rig would be out of date anyway. Stick with 32-bit for now, is my advice. Unless you really want to be at the cutting edge of exploration.Allcott