I dont think the 2500 or 2800 will have any problems.
It may be a little slow, but not too much.

Im going to install it on my 1.7 Centrino Dell laptop, with aero, and ill tell you how it performs after the weekend.

People that try betas can instantly tell how the final optimised and polished product will run Alan, nevermind the listed running requirements.

They can also read tea leaves and are clairevoyants.

IMO the number of die hard MS haters that will turncoat when they realise Vista is actually going to be the mutts nuts is going to be so high youll think this uncanny.

i hope M$ get it right with this new OS, but IF its even HALF as slick, efficient, stable, easy to use AND flash as Mac OS X, ill run down Oxford Rd in Manchester with my pants around my ankles... it aint happening, not in this iteration of Windows, anyway...

People that try betas can instantly tell how the final optimised and polished product will run Alan, nevermind the listed running requirements.

They can also read tea leaves and are clairevoyants.

my sarcasm detector just shot off the scale.  

The Beta is an indication, nothing more.  The actual benefits of upgrading from XP to Vista arent all that great if 2k3 is anything to go by (The Kernel is just the 2k3 SP1 after all).  Still using NTFS rather than WinFS as well, i was kindof looking forward to a new File System that wasnt prone to corrupting the MBR and BSODing when you breath on it wrong.  Looks like well have to wait for the 1st service pack, if then.  Thats actually allowing for the target date of late 2006/early 2007 actually being hit at all.  If not then its likely the actual benefits of upgrading arent enough to justify it.  I stuck with Win3.11 until i was puashed into 98, then I stuck with 98 until 2k got SP1.  Ive not long ago moved my systems over to XP and even though my MSDN Access allows me free OS Upgrades these days i wont install Vista on any of my main machines.  If i want to know how reliable Vista is going to be then ill use my 2k3 machine more often, then put the performance at about 75% after adding things like Aero in.  

Ill probably end up on vista at some point, but im not in any rush to install it and use it as my main OS.  I only user Windows to play games these days, most of my work is run under either Solaris or SuSe because I prefer them overall.  Though Solaris is an even bigger bitch than windows to actually configure.  

I doubt I will upgrade straight away, like most people.

The only people that will are those that especially need the features or that want to do it because they can. Or to prove how big a geek they are, who knows.

When i do upgrade ill likely kill everything i dont want to use, on installing XP on my own systems one of the 1st things i did was switch off all the fancy effects and deactivates the themes.  

I just detest the whole MS bashing bandwagon that rolls on for the sake of it.

Im hardly bashing it, just that there is no need for anyone to upgrade anyway.  ITs marketing, pure and simple.  Ive heard a number of people saying how much faster Aero is than the present system.  Personally i found it anything but, however that may improve in the final Beta or Release Clients.  Im not TBH holding out much hope though, by its nature its going to be resource hungry, though why a UI even needs the level of detail its promising ill never know.  Personalyl im an old Mac user (systems 6-8) and ive used Linux/Solaris/BSD as my day-to-day operating environment for years depending on what ive decided to learn.  

No one can compete with them because no one in their right mind would pay for anything even half as:

Quote from: soopahfly

slick, efficient, stable.

because that is all the competition can come up with. Linux is good because it is free, but lets not pretend its ideal for the home user.

Vista will be the choice for anyone that wants an easy going life with a reliable OS and a grabbag of media functionality out of the box, without having to apt-get stuff/things.

 
The main thing with Windows is that people are used to it, Its great because all the hardware that is supported, all the applications that are written and because you can learn it at school.  People are just used to using it.  The only time it is going to be knocked off its perch is if either MS Go bust (very unlikely), or if another company of equal standing can actually produce an OS Branded correctly.  The only company that springs to mind who could even attemptt aht is Google.  They have the money, manpower and knowledge to produce an OS that is uber scalable, uber stable and uber fast.  They have done it already in a server farm environment.  Despite that its still up int he air if they will ever actually release that OS on the world, though indications are that they have no interest in doing.  Would love to see a Google Branded PC though, someone needs to shake things up and at least threaten MS, while showing the Linux fanboys that their OS is lacking in just as many areas as Windows.  

oh i know how clueless the majority of users are.  Where I work we deal with the technical retarded daily.  Personally I wouldnt even give these guys a functioning OS, they would be given icons as they needed access to applications, and no way would they ever be allowed to play around with the settings.  

MS we are pretty much stuck with, they arent the simplest to use for novces, Apple still hold that title, however they are familiar.  It doesnt matter that its not the best.  It works well enough for most people.  Office is the annoyance, and also maybe the key in the end.  While MS Stick to using proprietory templates all but a minorority of users will stick to office.  If they are eventually forced through market pressue to go to ODT format then office will almost certainly switch round in the home market.  TBH i cant understand people who do spend £300 on Office, no home user needs all the macro functions and something like Open Office is more than adequate for them.  THe business world will always use MS Office regardless, its a standard they wont liek deviating from.