I have two copies of Vista, one given by Microsoft and one bought for evaluation.
I have a replacement 20GB HDD for my laptop on which I installed Vista.
The performance hit for using Vista was astonishing. My laptop is not the best spec by any imagination, I have a 1.7GHz P4M, 1GB RAM and 64MB video memory so it's no slouch, either.
The performance when running Linux and Windows 2000 is CONSIDERABLY faster as compared to Vista. So, if you want to crunch numbers on your computer system, avoiding Vista would be a Good Idea. If you want pretty effects and slow perfomance, Vista is the way to go.
Bearing in mind, throughout the lifecycle so far for Windows 2000, applying all the Microsoft patches as recommended, the memory footprint has increased by close on 50%, I would expect a similar hit on performance with Vista.
The paranoid cynic in me might suggest that LIMS wasn't about memory management at all, but a conspiracy to ensure hardware always needed constantly refreshing!
CISSP, C|EH, C|HFI