Over at Gizmodo ... comparing disk read/write speeds between XP/SP3, Vista RTM and Vista SP1. This should interest everyone considering using Vista with FSX (since FSX is highly dependent on disk read speed as it relates to performance.)Hands down winner: XPhttp://gizmodo.com/337768/battlemodo-windo...-shipping-vistaBy a long, long way. Something is just not right about Vista. Makes me wonder what the cost of all that DRM is as it relates to disk performance.With the record companies finally figuring out that DRM is the enemy of sales ... one wonders whether the boys in Redmond are paying attention.

The test you are referring to is most certainly flawed, as so many on 'expert sites' these days are. The difference in speed with network transfer points most certainly to a wrong setup in Vista, which e.g. by default installs more up-to-date protocols than XP. This so-called "test" makes no mention of how the network was configured on both test machines. It's hardly scientific. I am not a MS a really excited user and was very sceptical towards Vista, but after testing FSX under both XP and Vista on my new rig, I am staying with Vista: much smoother and better memory management.

I did not conduct the test, and so I cannot vouch for the methodology, but note for the record that Vista file copy and read/write issues are widely understood - by computer scientists - and the issue been acknowledged by Microsoft, with specific attempts to correct the problem in SP1.