Hmmm...lemme see if I can get this straight.
Most of Hollywood uses FCP or Avid, so for that reason, Vegas just is not up to the task of creating a Hollywood feature film. Is that what you're saying?
Your first para says there are more opportunities for Avid and FCP-talented editors. Can't argue with you there.
I can't find the logic between paragraph one and paragraph two, however.

Quick question. Does Vegas have Filmcut confirmation tools? In other words, can you cut a FILM on Vegas? Can you edit a film negative, then hit 'export' and get a negative cutlist that you can hand the negative cutter for comforming the negative?

At the end, they all do the same, only Vegas does it completely different. The feeling I have with it is that it was designed from an audio point of view and that the editing capabilities have been added later, I can't find any other reason why else they put so much emphasis on the timeline when you first open it and put your preview window very small in the bottom corner. All other Nle's do it just the other way around giving the preview and trim window the most attention.
I have tried vegas but couldn't get used to it, eventually I choose for an upgrade to PP cs3 and for my purposes it's just perfect.

I second that. Although I like Sony Vegas.... it just does not feel right to only have one video window. You do everything on the timeline, which is quick, but I just prefer doing it with a source and program monitor. So for me, Sony Vegas works for some tasks... I shoot a lot of music festivals and Vegas is more then up to the task to cut those. But I am also working on a documentary for which I prefer using one of the other tree. In my case, this is Adobe as I think they offer the most. And I also think that Adobe will become the industry leader in a year or 5 - 10. They have everything... After Effects, Illustrator, Photoshop, Lightroom, Flash... Visual Communicator. The more they integrate everything, the quicker you can work which is a huge time saver.

Douglas, I do believe you can edit Hollywood features on Vegas. I don't see why it would not be possible. But as of now, I haven't heard of a single big feature film which they edited on Sony Vegas. And that does lead me to believe that there are better applications for that particular goal.

But don't get me wrong.... I love Vegas for its strengths and will use it whenever I think it works best. In other cases, I will use Adobe Premiere CS3. Especially when working with other people and when doing a lot of work with .PSD / .EPS files as well as where Flash is important.

I hope Sony Media Software will improve a lot / add a lot of features to Sony Vegas 8. At least they seem to be the first to come out with 64-bit. Why can't they have a source/preview monitor? You don't have to use it right.... that would be a choice you can make. But one thing can't be denied... Vegas origin lies in audio and video was added to that later. The other applications were designed with video in mind and audio was less important. That also explains why Vegas is leaps ahead of competition for audio editing.

Simon, I don't think one is better then the other. But they are completely different. You do the same tasks. But the workflow, the way of thinking, the way you work is COMPLETELY different. In Vegas, you work directly from the timeline nine out of ten times. Where in the other programs, you work more with bins, a source monitor and a program monitor. Vegas does most things realtime... which is big plus but also different from the competition.

What I tried to say is that I believe there are more opportunities when you are an Avid or Final Cut editor then when you are working with Vegas. And in the US, this might be less of a problem. But in The Netherlands, you won't find Vegas training centers and I haven't encountered colleagues who where working with Vegas. They are all on Final Cut and Avid. And Adobe Premiere is also used sometimes. So when I work with other people, Vegas is not the best choice for me and that's why I decided to learn another editor. I have chosen Adobe, because I think the application is getting much better and with Adobe conquering the whole multi media industry, it can't be long before they take over Final Cut and/or Avid (especially in the low-end market). And as Adobe/Final cut are all based on Avid... the switch would require some training but won't be that big as switching from Vegas to one of the others.

I was very happy to get the VASST training series otherwise I would have already given up on Vegas after one hour in the trial version.

That was the biggest frustration for me, you can make some kind of semi trim window but it looks really strange having multiple previewwindows in some kind of timeline beside eachother. you also see this layout in the cheap nle's like pinnacle studio or magix videodeluxe as they also use just one videowindow.
For me a second "full" trimwindow is a must for easy and fast editing.

Why? To me it's just wasted space. When I'm in the trimmer, the screen shows me the trimmer. When I'm on the timeline, the screen shows me the timeline. When I'm in the Explorer windows, I can play things there as well. One screen, no muss, no fuss, no wasted space for a second view window.

I can remember seeing this thread about 5 months ago, wondering if I would ever be won over by Vegas from my Pro 2.0. Wow. What a difference 5 months has made. I find myself starting Vegas as my first choice all the time, now. My first feelings were that the program wasn't sophisticated enough.... seemed like something was missing. But everything seems to be there, and easier to use. In comparison, Pro 2.0 seems cumbersome and bloated.

I do like the ability to nest sequences in Pro 2.0, but haven't figured out any ability to do that in Vegas, but other than that, I think Vegas is working out real well.

It's not quite the exact same thing but Vegas will let you next an entire project on a new timeline. You can create a few projects and then just drag the projects onto a new timeline for final assembly.

You do know you can move & resize that window, right? :)

If you read my reply completely you will see I was trying to make a point by refering to the Vegas audio background.