XP vs Vista

[Bob Ayers]

Check this out:


http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9590_22-6220201.html

[michowski]

all vista is or a new look. Something that looks pretty. XP is still going to beat out vista I say. Thats why all computer sites like dell, sony, ect put xp back in because nobody wants vista. sp3 will be out shortly to for xp and its supposed to increase speed a lot from what ive read. Il be sticking with xp for a while longer.

[Natedog]

all vista is or a new look. Something that looks pretty. XP is still going to beat out vista I say. Thats why all computer sites like dell, sony, ect put xp back in because nobody wants vista. sp3 will be out shortly to for xp and its supposed to increase speed a lot from what ive read. Il be sticking with xp for a while longer.

Vista is pita JUNK. DO NOT buy Vista! If you're buying a new pc instead of building it like you should....go to the business section (not the home consumer) of the computer vendor's site and you'll find the option for XP there, not just VISTA. If you don't find the XP option, run to another vendor! Stick with XP preferably the Professional version...it works pretty well, is proven, drivers for most everything are compatible with it, uses way less ramm, I could go on and on. 2000 Professional was very stable and dependable and I stuck with that until just recently. I'll be sticking with XP for alot longer.

[Jspafford]

I have a copy of vista I used on my newer PC. It crashed the other day and I reloaded XP Media Center.... Vista is pretty, but after about the 100th time you have to push the "allow" button just to change a desktop background or something simple, it gets very old!

[Natedog]

And Vista needs 2GB of memory to run good....I've run XP just fine on 512KB, but 1MB to 2MB is alot nicer.

[michowski]

I got a free vista upgrade with my alienware Earlier in the year. I installed it and about 30 minutes later I formatted and put xp back on lol. Took literally 2 minutes for the stupid os to load. I have 2 gig of ram. Everything about it was really annoying. It was all for show and no real go.

[Psychopete]

My first PC ran DOS 3.1 on a 80x88 Tandy 1000. Talk about slow! I rocked a 486 25mhz for a long time when I was a kid, slowly moved up. I think I paid $100 for 4mb (might have been 8) of memory at some point to run the first Need for Speed demo. I remember being reluctant to upgrade to Win95 for the longest time.

Now I am CHEAP when it comes to PCs. My current PC was used, I paid $100, but it's a 1.4GZ, 512MB DDR of ram, 60GB HDD, 128MB ATI video, etc. My last PC was a Duron 1.1GZ, 394MB SDRam, 128MB GeForce, etc. Huge improvement... I just cobble parts together for the best machine I can build out of what I have availiable. I couldn't see my self buying a brand new machine, it will be obsolete as soon as I get it out of the door. Computer parts loose value worse than cars.

Vista is the most inefficient piece of software I've ever seen. The #1 thing that got me was that they're utilizing video memory for the operating system. Any operating system that needs 1GB of ram to run itself and other applications is outragous. Most of it is eye candy. Hopefully they'll still offer XP for a while, MS is basically sticking a turd in everyones face and telling them to eat it.

I just run Windows 2000. It works, and memory consumption is low. Once you run out, it starts paging to your drive (virtual memory), which REALLY slows things down.

Pete

[Twitch57]

vista is like aids
-you know you've been f---ed
and they have yet to find a cure

[TeamExploder]

I too like XP Pro really nice haven't tried Vista much but heard poor things about it, playing with it at circuit city was enough for me not to care much for it.

[JFA_Spyderman]

Yo,
we always joke around and say, "oh, so you got the vista virus."

[Jason]

I remember reading all the same crap when XP first came out. Wait for the first service pack if you aren't computer savvy. I have vista on my laptop and it is easy and good IF you know how to configure the security settings.

[Will]

My first PC ran DOS 3.1 on a 80x88 Tandy 1000. Talk about slow! I rocked a 486 25mhz for a long time when I was a kid, slowly moved up. I think I paid $100 for 4mb (might have been 8) of memory at some point to run the first Need for Speed demo. I remember being reluctant to upgrade to Win95 for the longest time.

Now I am CHEAP when it comes to PCs. My current PC was used, I paid $100, but it's a 1.4GZ, 512MB DDR of ram, 60GB HDD, 128MB ATI video, etc. My last PC was a Duron 1.1GZ, 394MB SDRam, 128MB GeForce, etc. Huge improvement... I just cobble parts together for the best machine I can build out of what I have availiable. I couldn't see my self buying a brand new machine, it will be obsolete as soon as I get it out of the door. Computer parts loose value worse than cars.

My first computer I bought new (my wife did, I had never used a computer before) in 1995--I still have it. It was a Pentium 75 Packard Bell with maybe 4Mb Ram. It's now sporting a 200Mhz MMX overdrive processor and 120Mb ram with the video memory upgraded with 2 weird 500K chips to 2Mb. I bought it with 3.1 on it, upgraded to 95, then to 98. It was running poorly by then with what we were using it for, so I bought a Compaq--which died in three years. Then I used a couple laptops. Then I got Windows XP. For grins, I put XP on the old PB and you know what? It's useable. When this POS Toshiba takes it's semi-annual vacation to the service depot, I use my 12 y/o Packard Bell--it's fine if you aren't folding DNA. XP is by far the best Windows system so far. A lot of the old sotgware won't work with it, but it does a damn good job without needing vendor software.

[kunar]

why use either when there are more capable operating systems widely available for free?

[Wicked_Sludge]

if i had to take a guess, i would say that its aero, vistas 3d desktop, that is making vista so hated. my girlfriend has a new dell with the basic vista installed and it looks and acts just like xp and has yet to crash or cause any problems.

[Evan]

Vista is a good OS, if you do a little configuring and have the right hardware. People load it up on their XP machine and expect it to do just as well as XP performance-wise, even though Vista is 6 years newer. It would be like loading XP on a Windows 3.11 machine and expecting the same speed.

This same talk occured when XP came out. Windows is a good OS for both client and server platforms, which is why so many people use it and why so many large businesses rely on the server platforms to run their operations.

[HareRazor]

I am running vista on my computer with an AMD 3600 X2 and 1 gb of ram(working on saving my pennies the second gig). It runs great. I think it's pretty much the same deal with XP, you buy a computer from HP or whoever and they load a bunch of unneeded software that all seems to load up on startup and it makes the computer slow. My gf bought a laptop with vista loaded on it and I wiped it almost immediately and installed XP because they preloaded so much garbage on it. It would make so much more sense to just make a CD pack and let the owner load what software they want.

[BlackBII]

I hate Vista more than gay people(no offnese intended) I just bought a laptop with Vista and it sucks. I can't load XP because the setup won't recognize the hard drive, so lame.

I am a part time tech. support for a big company and Vista has caused more headaches on my part than my ex-girlfriend.

An OS that requires 2gigs just to run is redicurus, My laptop with Vista (Ultimate, Just upgraded, for free, made no difference other than some programs actually work now) has 2g ramm and a 2.5 ghz processor and it still runs like win 98 on 64 megs of ram-Gay!

[Evan]

I hate Vista more than gay people(no offnese intended) I just bought a laptop with Vista and it sucks. I can't load XP because the setup won't recognize the hard drive, so lame.

I am a part time tech. support for a big company and Vista has caused more headaches on my part than my ex-girlfriend.

An OS that requires 2gigs just to run is redicurus, My laptop with Vista (Ultimate, Just upgraded, for free, made no difference other than some programs actually work now) has 2g ramm and a 2.5 ghz processor and it still runs like win 98 on 64 megs of ram-Gay!

Vista does not require 2GB of RAM just to run. Your laptop may have some kind of problem with it. Vista runs quite nicely on my 1.5GHz laptop with 1.5GB of RAM. That's with Aero and all that crap enabled too.

The upgrade from Win 9x to XP also caused massive headaches for many companies.

[BlackBII]

Ok, sorry, it does not require 2 gigs but I cannot imagine what it would run like with out those two gigs, like we are talking 3.0 slow:icon_thumby:

There's nothing wrong with it, other than it has Vista!

[COPPERHEAD85]

like evan said.when XP came out everybody said it sucked and hated it........iam running vista with 1 gig with no problems.i like it myself..........just my 2.

[CJREX]

OK, I am going to unleash the Vista bomb how-to.

No, on second thought I won't. Not a good thing to put out for common use.

Best Buy, Circuit City, etc. wouldn't care for all their machines being frozen. Heck, usually you can walk through the display machines and a high percentage are displaying errors anyway.

Let's just say that any Vista can be easily bluescreened in around 6 seconds. :icon_hornsup:

Ubuntu and OS X FTW :D

[COPPERHEAD85]

so just because you can you go into a store and f-up pc's...........

[CJREX]

so just because you can you go into a store and f-up pc's...........

No, that's why I didn't post how. Because a lot of people will.

It is just very funny that even though MS tries to say that the BSOD is a thing of the past, it can be invoked easily on their supposedly best OS (many arguments as to whether it is best as evidenced by this thread. I personally prefer XP over Vista, and Linux/OS x over XP).

[BlackBII]

Ubuntu and OS X FTW :D


+1
I am now on Ubuntu

[alaskan155]

vista, windows XP bandaide/filler till windows 7(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_7)


the past
Windows Me , windows 98 filler/bandaide till xp

person when i go dual-core, im switching to 2003 server

[Simple_serf]

nah...98 was the filler until 2000

I have to agree with ubuntu being better, however, in this day of win printers and winmodems and Wineverythingeleses, I don't always have the time to deal with hardware conflicts. I run ubuntu/XP pro on my laptop and XP home on the desktop. I started out with XP the first week it was introduced, and I have no desire to so that again. Additionally, nither of my machines can run Vista so who cares!

I started back with a Commodore PET, then to 2 64's, and an SX-64 portable. Then on to an Apple IIgs and a Mac Power PC 6500 with OS 8.0. I don't really care for PC's, but you do what you gotta do. It doesn't hurt that because of the deprecaition I can build one out of parts for next to nothing. Try doing that with a Mac.

[Robin Hood]

And Vista needs 2GB of memory to run good....I've run XP just fine on 512KB, but 1MB to 2MB is alot nicer.

Ok. If you can get XP running on 512KB of ram you show me proof.

Assuming you mean 512MB - Thats MEGA bytes not Kilo.

Vista is a good operating system.

Its too security conscious because face it computer users these days are hopeless morons.

of course XP is going to beat vista, it uses a lot less resources but vista is more future proof.

32bit XP can handle only 3.5GB of ram
64bit XP can handle up to 64?GB (i think)
and so can vista.

Sure, vista sucks a lot of resources, but it is more advanced. It can do more things.

The article shouldn't be any surprise. Think of this in a ranger-ish way

you have a 3.0L engine and a ranger
or a 3.0L engine in a peterbilt truck.

which is going to be faster?

[Robin Hood]

And to the ubuntu guys, if everyone knew how nice it was, more people would use it, but due to its short comings (having to use the console to set some things up) the non computer savvy people are going to stay away.

[Ranger#1]

vista home premium ftw im rinnin on 3gb mem pentium core 2 duo 160 gb hd

[Wicked_Sludge]

we recently got the girlfriends vista machine hooked to the network and are starting to realise what a resource hog it really is. her 1 gig, 2.8 GHZ dual core is only slightly faster than our XP laptop with 256MB and 2.4 GHZ single core. luckily she has 3 more ram slots to fill, so it'll be recieving upgrades soon. still amazes me how much resources vista sucks down though.

[koda6966]

I have a copy of vista I used on my newer PC. It crashed the other day and I reloaded XP Media Center.... Vista is pretty, but after about the 100th time you have to push the "allow" button just to change a desktop background or something simple, it gets very old!
Yeah, it does get quite annoying. You can adjust it somewhere so that it's requests are limited.. can't seem to remember where I went to do that though.

Vista is pita JUNK. DO NOT buy Vista! If you're buying a new pc instead of building it like you should....go to the business section (not the home consumer) of the computer vendor's site and you'll find the option for XP there, not just VISTA. If you don't find the XP option, run to another vendor! Stick with XP preferably the Professional version...it works pretty well, is proven, drivers for most everything are compatible with it, uses way less ramm, I could go on and on. 2000 Professional was very stable and dependable and I stuck with that until just recently. I'll be sticking with XP for alot longer.
And Vista needs 2GB of memory to run good....I've run XP just fine on 512KB, but 1MB to 2MB is alot nicer.

Vista is amazing, and if you only have 512KB-2MB your computers from the stone ages. I'm guessing you meant MB and GB not KB and MB. Anyway, even 512 MB ram is obsolete now days. Memory is EXTREMELY cheap. If your computers old enough to be operating with MB then you need a new one, and if you bought a new one like that, you threw your money away.

Vista = Wonderful. Also, Vista isn't a pretty XP. Vista is the new OS while Windows 3.0 is going to be the new "vista" since people like you throw the vista name threw so much shit. Half the people that say vista sucks don't even know what they're talking about. And the other half put it on an OLD system made for an OS of a lower quality that demands a less capable computer.

Sure, if your only going to spend a few hundred on your computer go for XP, you won't have a good enough one to enjoy vista anyway. My Vista runs faster and smoother than ANY XP I have ever used in my lifetime.

[LITTLE FOOT]

i like vista, i never have a problem with it. i use it on all three of my computers.

[Ranger SVO]

I'll stay with XP. I currently own 3 computers, two XP Computers and one Vista Machine. From personal experience XP works much better

http://blip.tv/file/340692/

Hopefully the next Windows OS, Windows 7 is a bit better. But I won't bet on it. So for now we'll just have some fun with it.

http://gadgets.boingboing.net/2008/10/14/microsoft-announces-1.html

But then doesnt Vista have almost as many versions

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2007/02/02/

[cr_the_machinist]

I like working with Vista. I was very pessimistic at first when I bought my first computer and it had Vista. It turned out to be great. For what I do, it basically runs itself. It's great for what I do. All of my old XP programs I like to use work fine and I run into less problems compaired to XP. The family computer runs on XP and it has been reloaded countless times. It always seens to start to act up within a year and the shtf.

[Mark_88]

I mentioned this the other day...I went into Business Depot this week looking for something and saw XP Pro on the shelf...last year it was simply unavailable...I guess demand is greater for XP than the retailers thought and they brought it back due to popular demand...

I'm going to upgrade to XP...I like it...it works with my dinosaur computer...and the bugs have been worked to the point of having them stand up when you say STAND UP...

Vista is JAFOS...

[Evan]

Both Vista and XP are good operating systems, esp. compared to Windows 9x.

Only problem with Vista is you need some higher-powered hardware to run it, but nowadays that's pretty cheap.

[rjppunk]

I use pc's for gaming and vista blows as far as that goes. Lots of games arent vista compatible plus its just buggy. Media center isnt much better though. I stick with good old xp pro service pack 2

[DannyG]

Currently I run Mac OS X, Windows XP Pro SP3, Vista Home Premium, and Ubuntu. I prefer OS X/Ubuntu, am really comfortable with XP Pro.

The funny part is Vista for me is awesome, I use it for my DVR, it hasn't crash (that wasn't caused by me).

Personally I am a high level tech with decent programing skills, and for me I like OS X the most, Windows XP/Vista second and Ubuntu thrid (only for the console need for certain setups and not everything can run on it, hardware wise.)

I used to be the Anti-Vista guy, now I realize that most customers I deal with have the wrong version of Vista.

I have tried it all and worked on it all. Can't complain to much. It all boils down to getting what suits your needs the best.

[fleck]

Vista is perfect if you have the proper hardware. It is beautiful and it has a couple of features XP doesn't that I use almost every day. Windows 7 will blow everything out of the water though.

Good to see other computer geeks here loving Linux. Once I build my 2nd system I'm going to have my Linux box be for storage and downloading and my new Windows system will be strictly for gaming and multimedia.

[superdave1984]

Here's my main gripe with Vista. Try networking a Vista box with an XP box. Or God forbid a 2K box. It's not plug and play by any means. More secure maybe. But more headache definitely. I'll wait for Win7 and then see if I want to move from XP.

[Wicked_Sludge]

ive got an xp desktop and a vista desktop connecting to the network through an xp laptop....how do you like them beans? :icon_rofl:

it was all plug and play.

[superdave1984]

You are in the minority.

[LEVE]

Try networking a Vista box with an XP box. Or God forbid a 2K box. It's not plug and play by any means. I hated Vista. But then I ran Vista 64bit and I had to eat a little crow. Then I upgraded my computer.. bigger...bigger... faster... faster. I installed Vista 64bit Ultimate edition and it's worked flawlessly. Tonight, in fact, I reformatted the hard disk (leaving the 8mb partition untouched) to see what would happen. I had backed up the computer to another hard disk last night.

It took only a few minutes to restore the computer to full operation.

I have this computer networked to the following computers:
One XP-home system
One ME system
One Laptop running XP-Pro
One Linux system (Ubuntu)It took a while to figure out the Vista way of doing things, but after that there's been no problems.

I would NOT recommend Vista for a computer that is marginally configured for it's use.

I also downloaded a beta copy of Windows 7 and I like it better than XP or Vista and tested it for a couple of weeks. I will buy it when it is released

[DannyG]

Here's my main gripe with Vista. Try networking a Vista box with an XP box. Or God forbid a 2K box. It's not plug and play by any means. More secure maybe. But more headache definitely. I'll wait for Win7 and then see if I want to move from XP.

I have found that networking in Vista is more user friendly than in XP or 2K, I also have no problems connecting through OS X.

Most problems come from improperly configured routers/switches, and workgroup/computer name issues.

Best bet is always suspect the physical media first, then work on the software protocols next. Also remember that if you have passwords and such on a machine, it could limit connectivity.

Also make sure you know the passwords and how items are shared, and check user permissions which can limit anyone but the owner from finding or using a file or drive.

I have dealt with to many network sharing issues. That and I have been up for almost 20 hours. :icon_confused: