I think some of you guys are approaching new Microsoft Windows with a different philosophy. When I had my old Packard Bell from 1997, it orginally ran Windows 95. I did upgrade it to Windows 98 and it ran just as well as 95. After that computer died, I decided after watching my father build his own system that perhaps upgrading an old machine to a new OS was the wrong approach.
When Microsoft builds a new OS, it looks at what technology is coming out around the time of launch or within a year after its launch. When Microsoft has enough technical information to include a new technology into Windows, it integrates it inside to push the technology forward. By constantly trying to upgrade equipment for a different era, you spend a lot of money on upgrades to the machine to keep it running. The investment cost in new memory, hard drives, graphics cards, DVD/CD drives, monitors, keyboards, mouse, and other peripherals eventually leads to new parts that don't get the full bang for the buck.
I decided I would start building my new machines on a six year rotation. Usually thats about the time when Microsoft launches a new Windows. Retiring these upgraded old machines and embracing the new technologies that the new Windows is built around, I found out that I was in the long term spending a lot less on components. I avoided many of the driver conflicts, compatability problems, and performance slowdowns that you get with keeping a system running. It has been my experience that in a 6 year computer life, a major refresh of hardware components at the 3 year mark is perfect. Its good for your cash and if your lucky, many of the components from the old machine can be reused in a new machine.
This is why Apple is having some issues with their hard core fans. They hold on to these outdated machines while Apple keeps string them along with legacy support. Its what kept Apple down in the 1990s. Now Apple is getting smart by getting rid of the old processors and jumping fresh on the intel platform. However, now Apple allows no competition in their hardware in the fact that Intel is the only processor manufactuer for Macs. I think that AMD has proven themselves as reliable and a damn good processor maker. Its so proprietary that competition cannot truely happen on such tightly integrated and proprietary platform.
I bought from Fry's a GQ machine that ran Windows Vista Home Basic. Thankfully, the ECS board inside had many upgrade options. Taking out its Sempron processor, I upgraded the mahcine to a Athlon 64 X 2 dual core processor on the existing board. I then upgraded from the onboard graphics to ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO. I then beefed up the existing 512 MB to 1 Gig of memory. I added a new 300 GB drive and kept the existing 120 GB drive as extra space. Finally, I installed Windows Vista Ultimate edition, thanks to an Anytime Upgrade. Now a machine that was a good starter PC, is now an agressive Ultimate Edition PC that still cheaper than any Mac. My remaining future upgrades include a memory bump to 2 or 4 gigs, an HD Monitor, and a new DVD drive. As it stands today, the PC runs Vista with no outstanding issues. Previous machines that were built fully from scratch, ran XP with no issues.
My feelings on Vista is that all Windows OSes are designed to push the technology foward. If thats the prevailing thought, then pushing a machine not designed for the OS is ultimately futile. By realizing that a new Windows OS means its time for a hardware change and a software change, you ultimately put the best engine in the car. It would be like trying to build a 2009 Camero but putting in a 2001 era 4 cylinder engine. Just like muscle cars need powerful engines to accent the design, Windows needs new processors, memory, drives, etc. By going with a six year rotation with a 3rd year upgrade of components, you get the most bang for your buck. You also get a Windows machine that performs better than most Macs.
I know some of you like the old machines and OSes, but looking at the security issues from 98, 2000, and XP, holding on to these platforms creates greater security instability. It was the millions of unpatched 2000 and XP machines that allowed blaster to have a chokehold on the internet. It took the Dallas Independent School Distict almost 6 months in erradicating Blaster because of their ancient machines. I even found a functional Windows 3.11 system hooked online in one of their libraries! I was shocked to see such an ancient machine in the XP and 2000 era. But it was able to hold the files necessary to transmit Blaster all over the district!
I think its important for Windows users to create a good schedule of updates and upgrades. Its even more important to know when to bury a system and not letting emotions get in the way of performance. Keeping your PC secure, getting the most out of your PC, and avoiding problems is learning when to let go of an old system is critical. Having a system that performs well and is cost efficient is a system that I like. Having one that hasn't been properly maintenanced, needing updates, and runs poorly often fustrates me.