Microsoft's new operating system, Windows Vista is to going to be launched in January 2007, replacing what, apparently is a now redundant XP. Today MS published the minimum and recommended specs for running Vista:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4996998.stm

Should I want to run it at full spec, then it means a new pc for me (and mine's only a year old). The problem MS has is that they are launching a product just after the peak period (Christmas) on a market which doesn't neccessarily still exist. Though XP has had its security issues, on the whole its a very stable OS and for the average user there are few faults with it. I'm not convinced that MS know why XP needs to be replaced, other than that's the business model they work from: continually replacing software that if it had been made right in the first place wouldn't need replacing. Look at Word 2003. Its utterly shambolic - the epitome of lazy programming. They could fix it, but why should they now that there's a new version of Office coming out soon.

Of course MS is a company and companies sell stuff to stay in business. The problem comes when you reach complete market saturation. When you look at a pc you look at Windows xp, much the same as when you look through a hole in your wall, you look through glass. Now there's fancier glass around, specialised glass. Windows 3.1 was your standard glass, 2000 and XP your double-glazed and tinted.

What's Vista going to be?