I'm on 5353 which is really stable - so much so I've moved to it for my production system. Having said that the official advice remains "this is a test build and therefore shouldn't be relied upon in production". I like living on "the bleading edge of technology" so I'll take my chances.
Doug cites 5381 as being equally stable.
Once you've tried a stable build of Windows Vista it's hard to go back to Windows XP
It must be nice to have the $$$ to afford the cost of a subscription. I am sure there are plenty of us out here wishing we could try Vista, I know I do. Nice to hear you guys are enjoyiing it so much. It give us that much more to look forward to.
I just installed 5381 which I believe may be the last release outside MS before beta 2. In contrast to your experience I have continued to have problems of various kinds over the past few builds. The last thing that I would be doing is trusting it in production mode right now from my personal experience.
It is my belief that different hardware configs can make a substantial difference to the experience. To be responsible I feel that you should describe your environment rather than a "blanket" I now find it to be stable and possibly create problems for others.
As far as Vista itself is concerned, ie. interface, features, etc. I agree that I could "really get used to it!".
Just my 2c worth.
I see you're using it on your tablet; how good is it on there? Am getting an M400 later this month and was thinking of putting it on in a virtual machine.
hir8er> Please take a look at http://blogs.technet.com/steve_lamb/archive/2006/05/12/428095.aspx as I've written it in response to your comment.
Following my post about recent builds of Windows Vista I received a comment from hir8er pertaining to...