When Vista comes, will you stick w/ XP or jump to Vista?

Vinny

Vinny

CAGiversary!
Feedback
216 (100%)
I'll stick with XP for a while... seeing as how MS supported 98 for so long, I don't think it'll be an issue. I know I'll miss out on some DX10 games but until I can afford a good DX10 card, that's not my concern.:)
 
i haven't bought a single copy of windows in my life. All my copies were borrowed from others including there keys. I had to get a bit more creative with Windows XP as I had to copy as many keys from the tops/sides of towers when I encountered some. Some worked, others didn't. I didn't install XP til a year later when I got the keys and discs while working at radio shack. :p
 
Why in god's name would I want to switch to Vista? Anything worthwhile has long been stripped from it and all that remains is a bloated GUI update that results in games running 15% slower under Vista than under XP. No thanks.
 
Aside from the fact that I know it will take quite a bit of time after launch to get all of the bugs fixed, there's nothing new there that makes me want to upgrade.
 
Considering I know nothing of Vista, doubt that I'll need/want it, and definitely don't want to pay for it, I think I'm fine with XP.
 
I'll probably switch to Vista as soon as I can get an OEM version... it's gonna happen eventually so I might as well take care of it now. My one hope for Vista is that it will (along with DX10) provide significantly better performance in games so that upgrading doesn't have to be a constant issue. Accessibility is probably the biggest issue with PC gaming since there's quite a few technical considerations that make it difficult for people to get into playing games so hopefully that kind of stuff will be addressed.
 
[quote name='Richlough']Not able to make DVD "back-ups" = no Vista .[/quote]Are you talking about backups of Vista, or backups in general?
 
That seems... impossible to block. Unless they prevent every single type of DVD-Video burn (which I can't see them doing), there's no way to do this.
 
I absolutely love vista, I find the UI to be very calming and my eyes don't hurt after long hours as I find it does in XP. I'm gonna ride my trial until it expires then I'll see if I care to buy it.
 
[quote name='Z-Saber']That seems... impossible to block. Unless they prevent every single type of DVD-Video burn (which I can't see them doing), there's no way to do this.[/QUOTE]

I had the beta & dvd shrink or dvd decrypter would not work .
 
I'll probably buy it for cheap through school and setup my system to dual-boot w/ XP and Vista just to check Vista out.
 
[quote name='Richlough']I had the beta & dvd shrink or dvd decrypter would not work .[/quote]What I'm saying is for the long term, such blockage will prove futile. People will always find a way around it. Short term, however, it could be an issue.
 
A quick Google search indicates that plenty of people are running DVD copying tools with no problems on Vista RCs.

There is vastly more to Vista than a massive GUI overhaul. The differences can be subtle to an experienced user but a vast array of things that confused people and lead to tech support calls have been improved. Also, a massive number of things that needed post hoc adjustment on XP installations are now standard.

The really big stuff is under the hood. Developers who've gotten a taste of the new infrastructure are very much looking forward to the day when they can write exclusively for Vista and what comes after. Much like the early Win95 era, it will take a good while before the difference can really be appreciated in packages beyond Office. (Even the first 32-bit rev of Office was lacking and didn't really make full use of the Win32 environment until Office 97.)

Since it's only going to be a few months before most new PCs ship with Vista, I have little choice but to get well acquainted with it so I can perform my freelance IT work. I have little interest in high-end PC gaming, so assembling a capable system won't cost much. I recently picked up a 256MB Nvidia 6200 AGP card for $25 AR. Someone more desparate for DX9 support can get an ATI 9950 128MB card from Fry's right now for $10 AR.

Beyond that, just make sure you have at least a gig of RAM and the slots to easily add more.

The 15% slowdown in games is something of a misnomer. That estimate was for Vista running on the same hardware as an existing XP system. But the majority of Vista systems will be new machines with far better specs than the average existing XP box. By the time Vista is hitting high market penetration an $800 system is going to have a quad-core CPU and other niceties that are not even on the market yet. The collective advantages of the new hardware combined with Vista will make that speed difference on old machines a passing memory.

People have forgotten that XP could be quite impaired running on a machine that was considered high-end for Win9x. But how many serious gamers would be running such dated hardware by the time XP launched?
 
read direct x L will be coming XP which is a sorta direct x 10 for xp. For this reason and no cheaper Direct X 10 cards coming to late springish more like summer probally why jump. Crysis is the only big game named comeing that is big Direct x 10, i figure I will set back play crysis as good as it can be played without direct x 10 and wait until all the complaints of Vista get settled and lived with and a direct x 10 video card gets "cheap".
 
I'm waiting to upgrade my PC until Vista comes out. Right now im running on an Athlon 64 3400+ and its getting close to time to move to dual core. But really, doubling whatever RAM you have now should take away any performance hit that you may get from Vista.
 
i'll stick with XP for at least a year so that at least some of the bugs can be worked out. Anyone who used XP within the 1st year know how horrifically buggy it was. I'm also waiting until I upgrade to something a bit more suitable to Vista (read more than one core)
 
Persoanlly 98 is the OS of my chioce.

The only reason for me to use 2000 is that the NTFS format can hold a file above 3.99 gigabytes and I do not have to restart my computer when I leave my Win98 24/7.

Again Windows 98/2000 with a little tweak here and there is all I need. for Windows.

ME is probably better is some ways but to many faults
XP is just 2000 with more dumb ajustments.
vista...WTF is diffrent about Vista besides the GUI that looks like
a MacX/Apple OSX.

If I wanted apple I will just get one. Also in my work and intrests Apple OS is the top dollar.

Then Linux is friggin great and sweet on the space. Linux runs things under a DOS like level.

Also SunOSX, Open BSX, and so many other exprimental OS'es out there. You could even build your own OS interface also.
 
what bothers me is that Halo 2 for the PC, a game that is a few years old and nothing compared to HL2, REQUIRES VISTA ............. WTF?!?!!?!? No graphic engine upgrades or whatnot, just a port over from the xbox version and that is based on 2001 hardware and software tech..... screw that.
 
I see no reason to switch soon. I don't think Vista will support all the games I care about to start with, I don't want to spend extra money on Vista, and all of the best graphic games I play on my 360 (which is quite a bit more powerful than my current PC) anyway.
 
I'll actually probably partition my hard drive for Vista and compare the two. If XP is (at the time) superior, I'll keep XP. However, I'll definitely switch to Vista within a year or so.
 
I personally don't see any reason to switch over at all. I'm not a huge PC gamer, so the DirectX 10 doesn't really bother me at all. From what I've seen Vista doesn't offer a ton of upgrades over XP.

Unless I can find a copy very cheap, I'll be passing on Vista for quite a while.
 
i'll be on xp until i absolutely have to switch to vista. xp is pretty stable and everything supports it. nothing supports vista yet and they are just starting to get drives out for the video/sound cards etc. And vista costs a hell of a lot. The only thing i'd look forward to is to see the os take full advantage of the x2 64bit 4200. i wonder if it even makes any difference since most games/programs don't even take advantage of that.

T. Foolery
 
If Vista's "Windows Live" can do for multiplayer computer games what XBox Live did for console multiplayer... that alone makes it more than worth the price of the upgrade.
 
[quote name='tony72']If Vista's "Windows Live" can do for multiplayer computer games what XBox Live did for console multiplayer... that alone makes it more than worth the price of the upgrade.[/QUOTE]

Accessibility across the board is what Vista needs... and thankfully, it looks as though MS has realized that... at the very least, this and the supposed efficiency of DX10 should make Windows a far more viable gaming platform in a few years as people start to get Vista-based PCs.
 
I suggest to stick with Windows XP for a little while as I ran the release candidate for Windows Vista about a month ago and did not run as smooth as I would like on my PC. And as history goes on, any developer whether its Microsoft or Apple...the first release is not as polished as other revisions (Service Packs if you will). SO I say stick with Windows XP for at least a year...it's not like nothing will be compatible with Windows XP anymore.

but yeah, Mac OS X > Windows

easily.
 
Sticking with XP for at least 1-2 years till I build a new PC, I dont see why I'd need it now. I can play with it at work anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top