Styleforum › Forums › Lifestyle › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › Window XP vs. Vista
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Window XP vs. Vista

post #1 of 31
4/27/08 at 7:02pm
Thread Starter 
Has MS solved all the Vista bugs? Should I go for Vista or stick with XP? Am I going to able to use all my existing periherals (external HD, printer, DVD burnes) with Vista?
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 31
4/27/08 at 7:35pm
Vista is still a POS. Everyday I hear someone in my class having Vista issues (and they seem to happen at the most inopportune moments). I have both on my machine, and I used Vista less than 10x since I installed it more than 6 months ago.
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 31
4/27/08 at 7:38pm
Vista uses too many resources, has no performance advantages to date over XP, requires certified drivers which affects many hardware pieces, and isn't compatible with lots of older software. This is a deal breaker for me. I just ordered XP-SP2 last Monday.
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 31
4/27/08 at 8:09pm
I have Vista Ultimate and XP on my machine. I almost always find myself booting into Vista just because it's 'newer'. I definitely agree with what visionology said about the basic problems with Vista but I have not run into any of them myself. It doesn't affect any programs that I run, and the resource issue isn't a problem since my laptop is a beast.
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 31
4/28/08 at 8:23am
I've heard a lot of negatives about Vista, mostly about compatibility issues, but I recently build a brand new gaming machine with Vista Home Premium and after turning off all the incessant notifications I'm pretty pleased with it. It's a pretty attractive OS, there are some better features in searching and exploring files (once you get used to them) but other than that it's basically the same as XP in my day to day use. I would definitely do some research to see if all of your existing peripherals are supported, though.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 31
4/28/08 at 8:35am
I was chatting to a public affairs lobbyist from Hong Kong the other week about Vista. He is pretty active in lobbying against its adoption from an ecological point of view. His position on it is that its consumption of system resources is forcing a lot of people to have to turf entire systems at worst, or processors, graphics cards and ram sticks at best in order to run the OS they have just 'upgraded' to. He has an interesting perspective. Damn hippies
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 31
4/28/08 at 2:24pm
I'm still trying to figure out what vista has over Xp that's worth the extra computing power required to run it. So far, my answer is: zilch.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 31
4/28/08 at 3:18pm
I have personally been enjoying Vista over the last few months. I upgraded my computer to Vista as a trial when it first came out but it had a couple major bugs that made it a deal-breaker for me. The major one was that moving files to my external HD or even between partitions took a very long time. The other two were that my favorite software firewall didn't work with it and when watching movies in full screen the screensaver would still come on. I went back to XP. When SP1 came out, I decided to try it again. Well technically before it came out since I got it early from a torrent. All the bugs were fixed and I'm quite liking it. It just seems a lot more fluid to me in terms of multi-tasking; something which I do quite a lot of as I'm pretty sure I have undiagnosed adult ADD. I don't play video games and that often seems to be a large quibble with Vista's performance. I'm quite happy and not going back to XP. All my software works and works well.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 31
4/28/08 at 3:37pm
xp, im using vista because it came pre-installed on my gaming macine but it needs alot of work, it just feels fat and slow.

they have completely screwed up the IP stack as well, they should have stuck with the one they had before.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 31
4/28/08 at 3:53pm
I considered Vista but I have thousands of dollars of software for my work on my current comp and I can't afford to have them not work. I went to Adobe's tech support lines and they don't support my versions in Vista at all. That was enough for me.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 31
4/28/08 at 3:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkNWorn View Post
I'm still trying to figure out what vista has over Xp that's worth the extra computing power required to run it. So far, my answer is: zilch.

Then you shouldn't be able to figure out anything that XP has over NT4.0...

Quote:
Originally Posted by mussel View Post
Has MS solved all the Vista bugs? Should I go for Vista or stick with XP? Am I going to able to use all my existing periherals (external HD, printer, DVD burnes) with Vista?

Don't go Vista if you are upgrading, but if you are buying a new computer Vista would not hurt. Printers, external HDD and DVD burners should have no problem running Vista. Hardware compatibility problems will only likely to arise when the device has been discontinued.

I have been running Vista (24/7/365) since early 2006 (Beta 3). It's been extremely stable (even compare to XP SP2) and has not even crashed once. I reboot my system once several weeks even, instead of forced blue screen reboot in XP.

The only beef I have with Vista is its network media file caching problem, where if you open a folder of 20+ 1.5GB media files over WiFi, it would take at least 2 minutes to find all the files. It happens because Vista tries to fetch sequentially the cover picture for all the media files, size, resolution and compression before moving on to the next file. It makes sense for media center PC but doesn't make a lot of sense for my usage model.
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 31
4/28/08 at 4:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by vitaminc View Post
Then you shouldn't be able to figure out anything that XP has over NT4.0...
Just off the top of my head: built-in wireless management, and support for most wireless cards out there. Other than making snarky little comments, what are you doing with Vista that you can't do with XP--which, at the same time, is using less resources?
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 31
4/28/08 at 4:59pm
Yeahhh I've had Vista for about 8 months now. Problems, problems, problems. It's gotten to the point where I just ordered XP this morning and will scrub Vista off the face of my earth and load XP on there.
It was a new problem every week.
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 31
4/28/08 at 5:29pm
I have XP on my desktop but I went ahead and got a laptop with Vista. So far I haven't really had any "technical" issues with it, but it just seems clunky to me. Everything seems "hidden" and it takes me a while to figure out how to work it, because it seems designed to do everything for me instead of making it easier for me to use it. It's frustrating when you actually want to take control of the machine.
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 31
4/28/08 at 5:31pm
Vista to me seems like Microsoft's version of OS X, but of course it is nowhere as good as OS X.

Jon.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Lifestyle › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › Window XP vs. Vista