[QUOTE="Gog"]

Forget about Vista Starter. It's a seriously crippled version for third world countries only. It doesn't include things like directx, you can only run 3 programs at the same time and it only supports up to 1 GB ram.

Snaptrap

Does that include background apps? I was just looking for a version of Vista that isn't loaded like Ultimate. I have no need for all those included programs. I already have most of the things like Direct X backed up for installation. My goal is to get a simple version of Vista that isn't a resource hog. Perhaps basic would be the best choice.

Aside from not running Aero, Basic won't run any better than Home Premium. Aero doesn't affect performance much at all, plus it looks nice.

That Mac Pro deserves Home Premium. :D

Starter isn't necessarily designated for third world countries. However, it is designated for countries where the general population is starting to pick up using a computer. Of course, for Microsoft, they had a good number of nearly pirate-free years when Windows first exploded in the United States. They aim the Starter Edition at emerging markets where they fear a much wider percentage of the population will resort to stealing Windows, would could become an overwhelming trend of they don't establish a large base of legal users. It is extremely limited in its scope (for cheapness' sake).

Vista is a system hog and games probably run a bit worse on it, but I think you should get a laptop running Vista. You're free to install XP on it, but if you were to not at least have a copy of Vista around, you're going to be sorry down the line when you have to buy it. Most laptops on the market right now have no problem running games on Vista, and many of Vista's negatives, like hardware incompatibilities and driver bugs, will be significantly reduced if you buy a brand new computer, as opposed to upgrading an old one. It would be stupid to not get Vista. Most of those who downgrade to XP admit that one day they'll be installing Windows Vista on their machines, but they're just going to wait until Vista is good and ready to do the job. At this point in time, XP is really not a long term alternative to Vista.

I downgraded from Vista to XP myself on my computer, but I'm not sorry I paid for Vista. Before long it will be absolutely necessary and it is a nice operating system.

Well I doubt the game is designed for Mac + with spec like this, do not expect to run it very well if you use bootcampMam00th

[QUOTE="Xx_AxL_xX"]

I liked the touch, too ( mostly because of the large screen for videos ). But I need a high capacity for the movies, that I'll convert from DVD's I rent ( just to make sure, I can do that with a DVD to IPOD converter thing, right???? ).

And another thing, I originally saved up for the 80 GB ( before the 160 GB came in ) . And now, the 80GB's price has went down while the 160GB has the 80's old price. Should I buy the 160 or 80? I mean I know the 160 is too much but.... I just need some opinions

Large_Soda

Ripping DVDs is illegal, but yes you can do that. You like the Touch screen, but need more storage for movies, you like he 160GB for capacity, but I think the screen size will be too small, for all of those movies you wanna watch.

Ripping DVDs that you own isn't illegal, but what he's talking about most certainly is.

The iPod touch is a wonderful PMP and over time will probably because the standard iPod over time. However, at this point, the costs are pretty drastically inflated. Apple is making about 92% profit of each if you factor out the production and materials cost. While Apple is known for taking a wide margin out for themselves, most of this likely has to do with research and development. The touch screen alone isn't enough to warrant paying $350 for a 16GB player. This is all relative of course, I own a first revision 5G iPod and already have 30GB of storage, which I've filled up, so I can't see myself paying another $350 for a smaller player.

My advice on the touch is wait until they come out with something better. Apple has more than paid for the R&D on the iPod and the design pretty much sells itself, so the unit has gone from costing $500 to $250, and capacities have skyrocketed. There's no getting around the sheer awesome bang for the buck that the iPod classic is.