http://www.news.com/Windows-XP-outshine ... 20201.html
Vista has more overhead than XP, just like XP has more overhead than 2000. That extra bloat is going to slow it down, one way or another. Not to mention that Microsoft doesn't have a reputation for turning out highly optimized code....New tests have revealed that Windows XP with the beta Service Pack 3 has twice the performance of Vista, even with its long-awaited Service Pack 1.
Vista, both with and without SP1, performed notably slower than XP with SP3 in the test, taking over 80 seconds to complete the test, compared to the beta SP3-enhanced XP's 35 seconds.
Vista's performance with the service pack increased less than 2 percent compared to performance without SP1 -- much lower than XP's SP3 improvement of 10 percent.
I wonder if he needed one shovel or two to fling that load of crap.... Here's a reality-based translation: The world wasn't ready for a new version of Windows that requires a lot more CPU power, memory, and video power just for decent performance. Most people aren't inclined to shell out $95 - $320 for a new operating system, then turn around and spend hundreds of dollars more for the hardware to make it run as well as what they currently have."Frankly, the world wasn't 100 percent ready for Windows Vista," corporate vice president Mike Sievert said in a recent interview at Microsoft's partner conference in Denver.