I have heard many comments that Vista was not as good of an OS as XP or 7
This is a stance, I've never understood. Vista IS 7. Nothing about 7 directly addresses any of the loud complaints made about Vista. The only real reason it seems faster is because the hardware is faster. There were some improvements here and there, but nothing anybody would possibly perceive. There are certainly a lot of changes to Windows 7, but the number of differences in no way justify the ridiculous disparity in popular opinion between Windows Vista and 7. Some people call Windows 7 a "Service Pack" for Vista, or that "Microsoft was fixing their mistake". Well that's a pretty dumb stance, since 3 years passed between Vista and 7, which was about average for Windows versions (XP to Vista was the exception to the rule).
I still hold to the opinion that pretty much the sole difference between Vista and 7 has nothing to do with software, but it all boils down to better marketing. An Open Beta that makes people feel they are actually involved; and, the beta's were free, which gave people a taste of Windows 7. A lot of those people
had never used Vista and were saying "well it's better than Vista".
Of course, the truth was that "it" was the marketing behind Windows 7, not anything about the OS. Many times I've seen people declare that Windows 7 "fixes" the mistakes Microsoft made with Vista. They can never seem to describe what these mistakes are, or provide even a single, discernable account where "This is a mistake with Windows Vista". But judging from the way they talk about Windows 7, clearly it fixes all these "mistakes". of course with such ill-defined mistakes that you cannot even describe them to a third party I find it hard to believe they can declare those mistakes "fixed" in Windows 7.
