Vista or XP? 158 replies

Please wait...

DannyPhantom

The Internet ends at GF

50 XP

30th August 2008

0 Uploads

152 Posts

0 Threads

#21 12 years ago

Some very interesting posts there, people really getting there opinions out.

Still, we are at a stand-still in whether Xp is better than Vista (or visa-versa) This is certainly not the outcome I expected...




Kilobyte

What does the Fox say?

69,060 XP

23rd November 2002

0 Uploads

6,468 Posts

0 Threads

#22 12 years ago

You sound like some kind of announcer.




Spite'

I post to get attention

50 XP

20th March 2006

0 Uploads

66 Posts

0 Threads

#23 12 years ago

I voted Vista, tiebreaker. :D

Most of the people who say they hate Vista because it is slow is just because their computer sucks..




Mr. Pedantic

I would die without GF

234,620 XP

8th October 2006

0 Uploads

23,127 Posts

0 Threads

#24 12 years ago

I recently read a white paper about Vista's incompatability with HD media, as well as HD-ready video cards and other hardware. Can someone give me some more information on this?

People seems to forget newer OS suck more resources...try running XP on a 64mb ram that my Windows ME ran on just fine. Windows 98 could run on 32 ram Windows ME could run on 64 ram Windows 2000 was about 256 ram Windows XP is 512

Please, don't give me that. I tested Ubuntu with 512MB RAM for about two and a half hours, with compiz on Full/Custom. It worked perfectly fine. Even MS' own requirements state 1GB RAM for Aero. And to me, the two effects look roughly equivalent. To be fair, I couldn't do any Folding on 512MB and Compiz with any efficiency, but then, I couldn't do much Folding on 512MB on XP.




Sgt. D. Pilla

Uber Geek

50 XP

23rd October 2007

0 Uploads

3,473 Posts

0 Threads

#25 12 years ago

Vista for me Faster, More stable, more secure and just as compatable. Ram hog yes, easy to stop yes. Disable Superfetch, sidebar, and all the other crappy new Vista features.




Chocu1a

Feel my heat, Heavens on fire.

45,365 XP

2nd August 2005

0 Uploads

4,209 Posts

0 Threads

#26 12 years ago

So...I need to ask this this...How is Vista such a ram "hog"? I have yet to encounter an instance where I did not have access to or was unable to use a program that needed ram. In fact, almost all programs open & close & respond almost instantly(even Photoshop CS3). I am running Vista Ultimate x86 with stock features(except sidebar) & it runs smoother than XPpro EVER did with the same 2 gigs ram & dual core AMD processor. So,...please explain to me how Vista is sucking & bloating up my system when it runs faster & more efficient than XP did.




The_Computer_Wizard

The Force is strong with him

50 XP

10th September 2006

0 Uploads

321 Posts

0 Threads

#27 12 years ago

~Merrick;4552369It has nothing to do with how old your printer is (you only have approx 2 years of experiance, you have much more to gain.). It is just as easy to write a driver that works with vista as it is for those that work with xp. Especially when both use usb ( as most machines that are running xp use usb). I don't see too many serials around anymore. The majority that are still using serial, haven't graduated out of win 98.

And on your fourth point, why would you want to invest in a new pc just to run a new ( bloated, expensive ) os? It doesn't make financial sense.

Most people using xp still see what the issues with vista are. Did you pay for the vista you use ? Did you buy it when it came out ? sorry .. You said you did. so you spent the couple hundred dollars on an os that had major issues that they have finally culled and calmed. The biggest issue is the price. They didn't do much more work on vista than they did coding xp or even Me.

All vista is, is a copy of panther, which by the way runs smoother than vista at half the resources.

conclusion: You're right, for the wrong reasons IMHO. You aren't going to change many people's minds with this thread. Xp is still where you want to be unless you want a challenge of making your vista work for you.

And before you ask me what qualifies me to this. Nothing other than the fact that it is my opinion, and the fact that i have been working on pcs for over 10 years. Not to mention, I have vista ultimate, xp, linux and a mac with panther.

well apparently you fit in with my point that people are arrogant and naive. just because you don't see a lot of serial printers around doesn't mean people don't still use them, and after that rant of making me sound like an idiot for spending money don't even try and tell me they should go out and buy new ones through my job ive gone out to A LOT of businesses and homes for my job, and have seen A LOT of people still using old printers and things so don't write it off that people don't just because of your lack of experience

also who are you to tell me how to spend my money? seriously where the hell do you get off doing that? my old computer broke around the time vista came out and i needed to upgrade, and i said to myself "hmmm... should i spend the extra money on vista? im building a computer with enough resources, i need those resources anyway because of the high level of 3d work, and multitasking i do" so yea i spent some extra money, and honestly im glad i did because i like vista better

just because your a moderator gives you NO RIGHT to try and rip me a new one, especially when i was just VOICING MY OPINION which is what this thread was about




Warborg

Revenge was here.

50 XP

2nd August 2002

0 Uploads

1,833 Posts

0 Threads

#28 12 years ago

I waited until Dec 2006 to own my first XP (only because it came with a free upgrade to Vista) Within the first week it locked up...yes locked up. The only thing I was able to track the lock up to was a program that was designed to run on XP...hmmm....

Once I changed it over to Vista it ran fine...Even a year and half later no lock ups. It also ran just fine using Aero and the sidebar with 512mb.

The game that forced me to upgrade to 2gb also requires 128mb video card which is running on my stock 32mb just fine(Note: the game would still work with the 512 but it was slow).

I work in a factory that uses XP on almost all the computers, an engineer that puts the computers on the floor told my once the XP's have to be replaced after 2 years or so. Yet there are still Win2000 that have been there for over 7 years.




Warborg

Revenge was here.

50 XP

2nd August 2002

0 Uploads

1,833 Posts

0 Threads

#29 12 years ago

~Merrick;4552369

And before you ask me what qualifies me to this. Nothing other than the fact that it is my opinion, and the fact that i have been working on pcs for over 10 years. Not to mention, I have vista ultimate, xp, linux and a mac with panther.

Sorry but this doen't hold much water... I was writing my own programs on the TRS-80 computers back in the earlier 1980's. So that would put me at nearly 30 years of computers.




gentleman

Requires more minerals...

50 XP

13th June 2008

0 Uploads

153 Posts

0 Threads

#30 12 years ago

I've been with vista since about day one, and thought it was the biggest waste of money I ever spent, but after Microsoft got there act together by bringing out SP1 it doesn't seem a bad upgrade, in fact I'm starting to really like it,but I still wish it wasn't such a RAM hog :(