Vista Performance: Is it really that bad?

Here is what Adam Breindel wrote: Vista Performance: It Really Is That Bad, which I saw via Robert Scoble’s shared google reader list.

My comments in reply:

Enjoyed the post, and I am going to "sit on the fence" with my reply (ie. I kind of agree with you, but don’t)

My background, spent the best part of 30 months as a Vista Beta TAP tester, and was involved in the SP1 test program.

We’ll disagree on NLA.  NLA is used by Windows Firewall to determine what network you are on.  If you are a member of a Domain, Windows Firewall will give you a Domain profile.

We’ll agree on Aero Glass.  Think it was Corey Hynes who said something like "You’ll run it for 10 ten minutes, then shut it off".

Performance.  Yes it is more resource hungry.  SP1 does improve things though.

For a corporate environment, give me Vista.  There are plenty of benefits to make it worth it (UAC for a start).
For a home user, Windows XP please.  I’ll even settle for Windows 2000, in a pinch.

My current work machine?  Dual processor 3.0ghz, 2gb ram,  Dell machine running Windows 2000.
The sitting on fence part?  Have not noticed a whole lot of usability difference between Vista and Windows 2000.