"johnm" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in message
> simply put.... don't.
> Besides the cost of the OS itself, you're going to have to factor in all
> of the hardware you'll now have to replace.
> As a lot of people here (myself included) have discovered, the UA lies.
> MS's latest marketing tool routinely tells people their hardware is just
> fine, but what it -doesn't- say is that in many cases there simply aren't
> any available drivers.
Indeed. The advisor is very limited in this regard.
> In your case, if the UA is telling you that you're only ready for Basic,
> don't even bother.
In general, yes, I see your point; if someone's computer can only run Vista
Basic then they need to think carefully about what value they hope to gain
from an upgrade.
However, If I were the OP I'd look into why, specifically, it made this
suggestion. It may be that this is something cheap and simple to address. Or
it may be a totally impossible pain in the hoop to upgrade. We don't have
enough info here to make that judgement.
> Vista is only Windows 95 v4.0 anyway.
Now this is just plain wrong. Vista is from a line of code that is not the
slightest bit related to Windows 95.