Windows XP VS Windows Vista ( You Decide 2008 )

G

GuruPRO

CAGiversary!
so which one do you think is better
which one do you use
why do you think that ver is better then the other...

Windows XP FTW

it is better because its faster alot of older applications and games can run just fine...you may say "oh DX10 is why vista is better" please DX10 is nothing more then a ploy to get to jump on the windows vista hype wagon. Sure DX10 does add Amazing Graphics BUT at what risk..performance i would say ...if DX10 was on XP and they could do it with a patch or a hotfix, it would be amazing and run smooth and fast.

And hey if its not broke why fix it?

i see myself using XP for Years to Come

And i will not be force to move to vista

thats just my 2 cents
 
Sounds like you already have your mind made up.

I prefer Vista, while XP is a bit faster I find Vista to be just as stable if not more so than XP. It looks great. And while there might be some compatibility issues, I have yet to run into any as program updates have since patched for Vista compatibility.

But at the same time, I would never of paid for Vista had the DVD not come with my computer. I said the same thing about XP though as well, bought a new computer and it came with it when I was content with 2000 and was quite pleased with the result.

I think people hate Vista just to hate it, I can't think of anything that Vista does that would warrant it either. And if there are any problems then they will most likely be fixed in future updates and service packs.
 
I switched to vista a few months ago, I haven't noticed any huge performance increase or decrease at all over XP. Nor have I run into any compatibility issues I couldn't find a solution to via google. Consider me one of the lucky ones I guess but I don't see what the big deal is.
 
Vista isn't as bad as everyone makes it sound. The only game that I've had compatibility issues with is Homeworld 2 but other than that I've been able to play everything just fine (including MGS1 and Thief:the dark project).
 
I hate vista. I have yet to run any of the express programs on it so I do not know if they have been fixed but for games I have to say it sucks. DX10 is nothing to me if the game does not run. I have not been able to get the Mythos beta to run, COD4 I have to have a mic and headset pluged in in order to play it due to driver issues on Dell PCs running vista, Punkbuster does not want to work correctly and Bioshock was a pain in the ass to get to run correctly. I still dont know how I was able to get it to work.

I have an oem copy of xp that I almost put on but I really dont like puting an os on a computer that it didnt come with. I plan on geting vista 64 when I build a pc but I'm also going to run the OEM of xp and will chances are use xp more. Only downside is the fact that I wont be able to use the 8 gigs of ram that will end up being in the pc. However me building this wont happen for another 2 years or so. So maybe by that time I will like vista but I dont see it happening.
 
At this point, unless Vista makes my computer crap out gold eggs, I see no real point in upgrading. There is no advantage yet, and since MS is continuing support for XP until the next version of Windows comes out, I think I'll just stick it out. That being said, if I got a free, legitimate copy of Vista, then I'd consider putting on.
 
[quote name='GuruPRO']so which one do you think is better
which one do you use
why do you think that ver is better then the other...

Windows XP FTW

it is better because its faster alot of older applications and games can run just fine...you may say "oh DX10 is why vista is better" please DX10 is nothing more then a ploy to get to jump on the windows vista hype wagon. Sure DX10 does add Amazing Graphics BUT at what risk..performance i would say ...if DX10 was on XP and they could do it with a patch or a hotfix, it would be amazing and run smooth and fast.

And hey if its not broke why fix it?

i see myself using XP for Years to Come

And i will not be force to move to vista

thats just my 2 cents[/QUOTE]


1) your information is out of date, driver have caught up in Vista and XP is no longer faster

2) if dx10 could be put on xp it would be nice, because creating 10 problems to fix one is always a great thing. There is a reason why DX10 is Vista only. It would create a lot of problems in xp, since drivers are handled differently, and to make it compatible with all the legacy would cause a lot of problems.

3) as much as I know people love to sound stupid, no one is trying to force you to use vista. If someone with a gun shows up at your house to make you use vista please post it here so I can admit I am wrong.

4) please go and start this flame bait troll crap somewhere else.
 
I don't think Vista is the travesty people make it out to be. I'm just against participating in MS's never-ending update treadmill. If I buy a new Windows license, I want it to be for a total update, sort of like a Windows version of OS X. Until then, subsequent Windows releases will be bloated and slapped together, mostly to ensure backwards compatibility (which is arguably Windows' strong point -- applications just work...usually) Move to virtualization already!

Windows XP will be around for a long time if you want to stick with it. Sure, you won't enjoy fancy DX 10 effects, but most games will remain compatible with it. Hell, lots of games still work on Windows 2000.
 
[quote name='n25philly']1) your information is out of date, driver have caught up in Vista and XP is no longer faster

2) if dx10 could be put on xp it would be nice, because creating 10 problems to fix one is always a great thing. There is a reason why DX10 is Vista only. It would create a lot of problems in xp, since drivers are handled differently, and to make it compatible with all the legacy would cause a lot of problems.

3) as much as I know people love to sound stupid, no one is trying to force you to use vista. If someone with a gun shows up at your house to make you use vista please post it here so I can admit I am wrong.

4) please go and start this flame bait troll crap somewhere else.[/quote]


wow all i asked was what people thought...what is a "troll" anyways i dont know how to be one...wtf how is this flaming its a simple question if you dont like my thoughts about it then wank off..i never said someone is forcing me to move to vista, when i said that i ment by microsoft not letting windows xp users have a taste of DX10 for themselfs...sure they would be problems with that at the start but it would an easy fix...i never thought asking a simple questions would tighten the thong up your ass. I also dident state these were facts either. i just happen to like XP better then Vista. i bet if i said i liked vista better you would not have said a damn thing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Vista for me.

I have used Windows since the 3.1 days and I have been through all the iterations from then to Vista. Now, XP is a fine OS, no problems, so on and so forth. And so is Vista.

I believe them to be very comparable. In terms of compatibility XP has just as many old programs that do not work as in Vista. Now, personally I have only had one issue in regards to compatibility and that is that one game I bought(Broken Sword) did not work. Everything else has been flawless.

There is the problem of better driver support on XP over Vista. It is true BUT that is not an OS issue, it is not Vista's fault. The manufacturers and developers have had ample time to code proper drivers, it is not as though Vista is stopping them at every term, Vista has NOTHING to do with it.

In terms of asthetics, Vista has XP beat hands down, the interface is cleaned up and uncomplicated, although I do not like that some advanced things are hidden better, I do think it simplifies it for the average user. And if you do not like how Vista looks you can just as easily convert to a XP type layout. Aero looks nice, plain and simple. Makes working a bit less dreary.

Vista also has much better support from MS than XP did back when it was out. The automatic updates, although I do not have set to auto, make it really simple to down load the latest updates. Which come pretty often, more so(or at least it seems) than XP, but for sure with more ease. And when you install updates you have to reboot much, much less. Unlike in XP where with every patch or so you have to reboot.

In terms of speed, the depreciation in Vista is negligible. Many people argue that having 2 GB of RAM for Vista is a good amount, and I agree. And some may argue that XP needs less and that is also true. But if you play games you know that games become more and more power hungry so you chances are you will have 2 GB or more in any situation, and there is no added cost to Vista ownership. I have not had any issues in terms of performance when I switched to Vista from XP.

Vista does have some issue, namely the file transfer speeds. They were mostly fixed in SP1 but they are still a bit behind XP, but that is a small problem I can live with. Also, Vista has crashed much less on me than XP ever did, it is stable as hell.

DX10? Yeah, it is nice but that is all.

Many of you keep talking about upgrading to Vista, and I agree if you are paying for it then YES, it is not worth it. Was XP worth the several hundered dollar upgrade? NO, nothing really is. XP looked better after a couple years, no? Of course a new OS is not going to be worth what a company charges, it rarely does. I mean really, $100 for some new feature that adds little to the overall experience, no one cares. But, the arguement here was mainly on an OS to OS comparison in terms of features, and in that case I think Vista wins hands down.
 
[quote name='GuruPRO']wow all i asked was what people thought...what is a "troll" anyways i dont know how to be one...wtf how is this flaming its a simple question if you dont like my thoughts about it then wank off..i never said someone is forcing me to move to vista, when i said that i ment by microsoft not letting windows xp users have a taste of DX10 for themselfs...sure they would be problems with that at the start but it would an easy fix...i never thought asking a simple questions would tighten the thong up your ass. I also dident state these were facts either. i just happen to like XP better then Vista. i bet if i said i liked vista better you would not have said a damn thing.[/quote]

If you already have your mind decided then why post this? It seems like you do not want to start a discussion but a flame war. Your original post was completely one sided, when people make a thread it is to start a discussion. It is like starting a thread called "Anyone seen the Batman movie?" and having the first post be "It sucks dicks, bye". Also, spell check you posts.
 
I was dual booting Vista x64 and Win XP for more than a year (I used the beta quite a bit).

My recent PC upgrade I decided to not install XP at all. I really find no use for XP anymore. Everything runs great in Vista. I've had zero computability problems. Building a new PC is far easier with Vista because the driver support is more modern (floppy drive for SATA drives FTL).

The vast majority of people who say "vista sucks" would probably be more truthful if they said "my pc sucks; it's too old to run vista well". But sadly everything on this planet is either George Bush's fault, or Microsoft's fault.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='SNAKE EYES EX']The vast majority of people who say "vista sucks" would probably be more truthful is they said "my pc sucks; it's too old to run vista well". [/quote]

Possibly the most honest answer so far.
 
Vista is great...yeah, it's a resource hog compared to XP but the built-in search is fast, the OS itself is faster than XP, and it looks much better (not that XP can't use themes, just saying though). Overall, very pleased. For whoever mentioned the Mythos beta, i have built-in graphics and i could run it easily...
 
[quote name='yukine']Sounds like you already have your mind made up.

I prefer Vista, while XP is a bit faster I find Vista to be just as stable if not more so than XP. It looks great. And while there might be some compatibility issues, I have yet to run into any as program updates have since patched for Vista compatibility.

But at the same time, I would never of paid for Vista had the DVD not come with my computer. I said the same thing about XP though as well, bought a new computer and it came with it when I was content with 2000 and was quite pleased with the result.

I think people hate Vista just to hate it, I can't think of anything that Vista does that would warrant it either. And if there are any problems then they will most likely be fixed in future updates and service packs.[/quote]


:applause: I to have been Running 64bit Vista business edition since it's release. I love it, 64bit vista sees my full 4 gigs of ram, so I can have needed multiple applications open at once without any loss of performance. I game on it some F.E.A.R., crysis, cod4, NFS:Carbon, NFS:Most Wanted and all games ran fine. Just as a Test the ancient game DRIVER ran better on 64bit Vista than it has since windows 2000. Granted I no longer PC game, I still say Vista is the way to go, with my hardware (X2 4600+ cpu, 4 gigs of ram) Vista is faster than XP because Vista takes advantage of the extra hardware resources. I am of the school of thought 2 gig of memory stay witn XP but if you going to more you have to go 64bit to see it anyway so go with Vista, and also if you have 64bit CPU and Multi-Core Vista or Windows 2003 would be better choices, even linux if you don't care to game or do windows centric application usage.

Edit: PS I also run automatic updates downloads but install them manually but always install them just to counter people I work with that are on the Hate vista bandwagon just to hate.
 
Here's some points on what I believe are some common issues most tech savvy people feel is wrong with Vista:

  • DRM embedded into the OS
  • Large footprint required by OS (namely RAM)
  • Vista User Access Control implemented incorrectly
  • Too many skus
  • Sometimes slower
  • Too much OS bloat
Personally, I tend to agree with a majority of those based on my own experience with Vista, and have left myself to using Ubuntu/XP in the meantime. Microsoft obviously tried to do things right yet managed to screw up the implementation in the meantime.

The vast majority of people who say "vista sucks" would probably be more truthful if they said "my pc sucks; it's too old to run vista well".
Click to expand...


And that is probably part of the problem as well. The majority of users are not likely to pay out of the pocket to buy a computer with high-end specs just for Vista when the majority of use is going to be for internet/email/youtube/etc. Linux can manage to pull off a lot of the graphical fireworks that Vista does and requires no where near as much memory. Not that I'm suggesting that people should switch to Linux, but it goes to show that often times you can do just as much with a lot less.
 
While I am still quite the proponent of Windows XP SP2 (fuck Service Pack 3), my disdain for Vista is starting to quell. I recently (three days ago) bought a new dell laptop that I couldn't downgrade to XP (option simply wasn't made available). Needless to say, I have been pleasantly surprised at how functional Vista Home Premium has been. Of course, three days isn't enough time to establish an in-depth opinion but so far, my experience with Vista has been far better than it was during the six months I ran Vista RC1 and Vista 1.0.
 
What ever, all the Vista haters will have to move to vista. Sure DX 10 isn't a big deal now, but I'm sure there will be some real pretty games this year at e3 that will show off what it really can do.

I've been using Vista ultimate since 4/07 and have very little trouble with my apps. I really don't see windows 7 being released in 09. But if you can rock XP for 2 more years untill windows 7 (maybe) comes out. Then wait.
 
Vista for sure. It runs programs just as well as XP and loads them faster. I also have not had any problems running any programs. Other than that it looks better and has a few useful features. I still probably wouldn't buy Vista for a computer that already has XP, but for a new computer I would go with Vista.
 
Most people who prefer XP to Vista just hate change. Vista is superior in most aspects, but many users aren't open enough to give it a fair chance.
 
[quote name='Animefalcon']NEITHER
LINUX!
open source FTW [/quote]

I dual boot Ubuntu and XP. Does that at least give me 1/2 FTW? :D
 
I've made the jump to Vista. It was on my laptop and when it came time to getting a new desktop I decided to go with Vista over XP and I have no regrets (then again, my new PC pretty much manhandles Vista, if it were a cheap computer I may be singing a different tune). There's still a few minor things that annoy me, most notably a game or two crashing for no reason (glares at Command and Conquer 3), but since I have no problems with many other games I've concluded it's sloppy coding on the developer's part, not Microsoft and Vista.

It's pretty unfair to bash the OS when the developers don't put their best effort forth to make sure their software runs smoothly on it. Microsoft has gotten a lot of hate that truly should have been directed more at the software developers instead of the OS itself.

I still use XP at work and I still enjoy it, but the gap between the two has been truly narrowed by a large amount. I think that if people were willing to give Vista a honest shot (and had a somewhat decent computer as well) they'd be pleasantly surprised.
 
[quote name='SNAKE EYES EX']
The vast majority of people who say "vista sucks" would probably be more truthful if they said "my pc sucks; it's too old to run vista well". But sadly everything on this planet is either George Bush's fault, or Microsoft's fault.[/QUOTE]

Well if my PC is to old to run Vista then dell should have never put it on it. I don't like Vista however I think in another year or so I will end up likeing it, atleast after SP2. My biggest issue with it is how much of a pain in the ass it has been to get the few games I put on it to run correctly. After that it is the messages I get about what I'm doing. It seems like I get 2-3 messages everytime I download/install something that I never got on XP.

Also if you are a programmer then until SP1 you could not use Vista unless you got lucky and some how got everything to work. I bought a laptop for school that I ended up taking back due to Vista. With all the updates I could not get SQL to let me do anything with it. I would try to set up the database and when it tried to make it nothing would happen and it would crash. Thats what it would do to most people. If it didn't do that then you ran into the chance of one of two things. Your program would link up to SQL and work fine or it would not work at all. You would build the program and try to run it only to find that it could not see SQL. You could then take that program and all the SQL files needed load it on a PC with XP and it work fine.

I found all that out by reading it on Microsofts help forums. So lack of the driver support from the start could be some what due to the fact that the Express programs did not run correctly when Vista first came out.

If I can get punkbuster working correctly then for the most part I am fine utill I run into another program that will not install correctly.
 
[quote name='captainfrizo']It's pretty unfair to bash the OS when the developers don't put their best effort forth to make sure their software runs smoothly on it. Microsoft has gotten a lot of hate that truly should have been directed more at the software developers instead of the OS itself.[/quote]

The entire Windows system is lazy and bloated, from Microsoft on down to the developers. Renewed competition from Mac and Linux (in the sub-notebook arena) should light a fire under everyone's ass.

But the question still remains: why should drivers, programs, etc. have to be updated just so Microsoft can continue making money? It's stupid and inefficient for everyone and the only ones who benefit are MS's shareholders.
 
Oh I don't know, Windows only makes up about 89% of the O.S market. Leaving your programs incompatible is totally acceptable!
 
You're missing the point. I'm saying that it's irrational to perpetuate the current Windows-dominated system because it's incredibly inefficient. Microsoft wants money so it introduces a new operating system, phases out the old one, and everyone goes along. The current treadmill results in wasted code and wasted time for what's fundamentally the same computing experience. Microsoft's stranglehold will be gone within 15 years so I try not to fret too much over it.
 
[quote name='Serik']The entire Windows system is lazy and bloated, from Microsoft on down to the developers. Renewed competition from Mac and Linux (in the sub-notebook arena) should light a fire under everyone's ass.

But the question still remains: why should drivers, programs, etc. have to be updated just so Microsoft can continue making money? It's stupid and inefficient for everyone and the only ones who benefit are MS's shareholders.[/quote]

I don't completely disagree. But OS X isn't exactly a diet OS versus any Windows OS since OS X was released. It's also RAM hungry and quite bloated. OS X's great compatibility stems from there being a few hundred Mac configurations compared to millions for the PC.

I'm fairly amazed there is a stable OS like Windows that can support so many programs and hardware configurations. Windows 95, ME and 98 were fairly crap. But from Windows 2000 to XP, to Vista, MS has done a pretty darn good job of delivering a stable OS that runs more software on more hardware than anything out there.
 
There are a couple good things about vista i forgot to mention

DirectX 10
Nice Updated GUI

and maybe ill give vista a go again since i have not used it since it first came out. i will duel boot vista and xp

forgive me i am typing from my cell phone
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Serik']Microsoft wants money so it introduces a new operating system, phases out the old one, and everyone goes along. The current treadmill results in wasted code and wasted time for what's fundamentally the same computing experience. [/quote]

How is this different from any other company? They all want money and they all introduce new products. The new products that have new features(whether they are any good is another question) that make people want to upgrade. In fact Apple is even worse with more OS updates to OSX that they charge for every time. But regardless of that all I am saying is that it is dumb to call a company greedy and say that all they want is money, because no matter how a company acts or the kind of image it displays it is still just there to make money for some.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top