I understand what you are saying, sort of. Don't have a clue what you mean
by OS to OS syncing. I don't understand what you would want sync'd? Really
what we are syncing is application to application stuff, files, really. To
make that worthwhile you need to have comparable applications on each
platform. If you install AS on XP, you sync is files, media and IE
favorites. If you install WMDC on Vista you can sync files, media and IE
favorites. Same capabilities. If you install Outlook on either platform you
get the added benefit of syncing the PIM info. Unfortunately while Outlook
used to be provided, in most cases, it no longer is. Word and Excel are
supported on WM and their files can be sync'd. Do you believe that MS should
provide a copy of Office so you can use those files on your desktop? The
sync capability is there, it is the applications that are missing.
I'm not sure I believe that MS is behind not providing a copy of Outlook
with the devices anymore. I never bought a device from MS, I bought them
from Compaq, Dell, HP. They bundled the Outlook, and I expect they licensed
it from MS. I expect the OEMs chose to quit doing that, not MS.
Unfortunately, I think the view of reality from the OEM marketing/accounting
depts (and MS as well) was that these were largely enterprise devices.
Enterprises used MS Office versions that came with Outlook, and the majority
of users already had a copy. I have unused copies of Outlook laying around
that came with PPCs, because I already had Office, with Outlook on my PCs,
and typically it was newer than what came with the device.
If you are currently syncing with Outlook, what version of Outlook are you
syncing with? Is it 2000, as that is buried in your question? Not sure why
you are interested in upgrading OSs if your applications hail from the turn
of the century. If you have a version of Outlook (or Office w/Outlook) that
is relatively a peer with XP, I would bet it runs fine on Vista.
If you don't like Outlook, that is your perogative, but I don't see that you
should expect MS to support syncing multiple PIM applications.
Don't get me wrong, I think it would be great if WM sync'd with Vista
Calendar and Contacts, but it is not like MS is not providing capability
they did provide in XP.
BTW, Vista actually provides more 'sync' capability out of the box than XP
did. You don't even have to load WMDC to access the WM device as a psuedo
removable drive. You could never before go to your friend's house and
transfer files to his machine without having AS loaded on his machine and
connecting as a guest. You can do that now with Vista...without WMDC. I am
pretty sure you can even sync media files with Vista, without WMDC as media
sync is really a function of Media Player and it only used AS as the
conduit.
For what it's worth, I wouldn't try to load anything but the most basic
version of Vista on the machine you indicated in the first place...if that.
I don't think you will be happy with the performance, unless you are like
one of those turtles on TV that do the DSL vs Cable Internet ads. This is
not a guess, I have loaded Vista on machines similar, and a bit better than
that, and it does run, but I did not find it pleasant and reverted to XP on
those machines. Not sure what you think you will get out of Vista. It has
some nice new features, but they are not worth the performance hit I believe
you will see. So, I agree. Keep your upgrade money, but don't make a Vista
Contacts and Calendar solution your trigger. What until you can get your
hardware and apps up to a suitable level for the OS.
BTW, the sync speed to a media card in a WM device, vs in a card reader is
not hampered by your PCs speed, nor would it be significantly faster with a
better machine, disregrading the bit of boost you would get with a 2.0 USB
on the PC, which I expect you don't have. It is due to the way the transfer
is implemented. I agree it is pathetic, but that's the way that is.
--
Sven
MS MVP Mobile Devices