Windows Vista Enterprise

[oviradoi]

Hello. I have downloaded Windows Vista Business from MSDNAA, i get a free license because I am a student.

Now I see that they have also added Windows Vista Enterprise to MSDNAA.

I have been looking everywhere to see what difference there is between the two editions, but I came up with almost nothing.

Can anyone tell me the differences between the Business and Enterprise editions of Windows Vista?

[weEvil]

Wikipedia -> Search "Vista" -> Table Summarizing Editions

[comcc]

@weEvil

I read the Wikipedia Windows Vista entry with interest but I did not see the table you mentioned.

@oviradoi

I can't say with certainty this is true for Vista as well, but for Windows XP, the Enterprise editions did not require activation through Microsoft. I do know that the same Vista Ultimate Enterprise disk can be used to install Vista on different brand machines without needing activation, so I would assume the behavior is similar. From my (limited) experience, their are no other noticable differences between Enterprise editions and standard editions of the same level (i.e. Vista Ultimate non-Enterprise vs. Vista Ultimate Enterprise). If this is not accurate, someone here who knows all of the details please be kind enough to share your knowledge with us all, as I would like to know as well.

Edited November 28, 2008 by comcc

[weEvil]

It got updated from last I read.

The chart is gone. The information is now in Wkipedia -> Windows Vista -> Further Reading (right pane under basic info) -> Vista Editions

[Octopuss]

more bloatware i'd say

[weEvil]

more bloatware i'd say

You can say that after you read the differences between the two. But you didn't. Don't be a jerk.

Here's a table that's easier to read than going through Wikipedia: http://www.mydigitallife.info/2007/01/27/w...son-and-matrix/

[Octopuss]

I can only judge from trying Vista 64 ultimate or whatever the one step lower type is... And that is bad enough

[comcc]

Thanks for the correction weEvil, now we know the difference.

Edited November 29, 2008 by comcc

[weEvil]

I can only judge from trying Vista 64 ultimate or whatever the one step lower type is... And that is bad enough

Vista is not like its predecessors. Its designed to use more memory.

I had it on a CoreDuo T2080 laptop with 1GB of memory. It was a dog. As soon as I upgraded the memory to 2GB it made all the difference.

I also compared it to XP SP3 on the same laptop. Although it uses more memory, it is much more responsive and most operations like copy, cut & paste, compressing are either just as fast or a little faster. There are benchmarks done which you can find on the net which support my claims.

Try it yourself. Get a computer with at least 2GB of DDR2, and an Athlon X2 or a Core2Duo. Something new-ish.

Install XP64, then Vista 64. You will be surprised at the results.