XP or Vista

Jabes · 11-20-2007, 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jutnm

i think most ppl who choose XP bc they have only experienced XP only and not the side of vista .................................................. ..........

yea or its just like my sig lol

cybereclipse · 11-20-2007, 10:24 PM

well, my laptop came with vista...and i upgraded to xp

IMO, vista is close to windows me in crapiness

im sure it looks pretty and all, but is it really worth all those system resources to run a pretty little sidebar??

mac osx FTW....
btw, im sure i will be flamed for this, but what can vista do that osx cant...
(except crash

)

Diamondsleeper · 11-20-2007, 11:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tlarkin

Yeah, it has totally been put down. I run lots of RAID environments for work, set up multiple RAIDs for audio recording and video production. I have both independent record labels and video production companies as clients. There are tons of articles on Tomshardware.com about how SLI is pretty much not worth the money. Running RAID 0 does not improve gaming performance, it does not give you more frames per a second, it may load the game slightly faster and you run a higher risk of failure since all data is stored across multiple drives and if one drive fails your whole RAID crashes.

I think I need to pull up a couple of those articles and read them to my computer and tell it to stop performing noticeably better in SLI and in RAID 0 so it will stop doing that. Its going against what is being written.

But regardless of that I think you are missing the point. Bascially, if you are able to affored SLI, then sure, do it.
It's like a car. Does a Porche cost 2 or 3 times what a mustang GT cost? Yes. Is the porche faster? Yes. Is it two or three times as fast? Course not.

Is SLI faster than a single card? Yes. Is it two times faster? Course not.

Why do people buy a Porche when they could buy a Mustang? Cause they CAN.

Btw, it's not "minute" gains. Lot of the newer games really benifit from SLI. You don't have to have SLI to run them, but that eye candy sure looks sweet.

INTELCRAZY · 11-20-2007, 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tlarkin

How is it more stable? Why have so many companies allowed users to downgrade to windows XP if it was so much more stable? You never see that. You didn't see downgrade options for XP, 2k, or even ME.

My XP machine at boot has like maybe 250megs of RAM being used when idle, my vista install on the same machine would have over 700megs of used memory idle. how is that more efficient? It is the band-aid approach.

Because the users are stubborn and too damn lazy to get used to a new interface and also b/c of ppl like you that blow it's performance issues out of proportion and attack forums with that BS. Bad thing is some ppl are gullible enough to believe you guys instead of learn with good, old-fashioned, first-hand experience. Just my opinion..

Diamondsleeper · 11-20-2007, 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by INTELCRAZY

Because the users are stubborn and too damn lazy to get used to a new interface and also b/c of ppl like you that blow it's performance issues out of proportion and attack forums with that BS. Bad thing is some ppl are gullible enough to believe you guys instead of learn with good, old-fashioned, first-hand experience. Just my opinion..

I believe you are right on that aspect to degree but I believe there is an added difference this time around. The compatibility issues. That is what is putting people off. Previous releases did not have this. It was an almost effortless switch. People in general don't like change all at once. Its just gonna take some time for everybody, including myself, to come around. We will let all the hardcore Vista enthusiasts who couldn't wait for it to come out, work out all the bugs. Then we will jump on board.

ThatGuy16 · 11-20-2007, 11:42 PM

Ok i honestly do not get were people are getting compatability issues! I run Vista x64 for three months and not a single problem... the only compatibility issue i could think of is if your trying to use something 10 years old .. doh' whos going to continue making drivers for something that old!?

tlarkin · 11-21-2007, 01:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diamondsleeper

I think I need to pull up a couple of those articles and read them to my computer and tell it to stop performing noticeably better in SLI and in RAID 0 so it will stop doing that. Its going against what is being written.

But regardless of that I think you are missing the point. Bascially, if you are able to affored SLI, then sure, do it.
It's like a car. Does a Porche cost 2 or 3 times what a mustang GT cost? Yes. Is the porche faster? Yes. Is it two or three times as fast? Course not.

Is SLI faster than a single card? Yes. Is it two times faster? Course not.

Why do people buy a Porche when they could buy a Mustang? Cause they CAN.

Btw, it's not "minute" gains. Lot of the newer games really benifit from SLI. You don't have to have SLI to run them, but that eye candy sure looks sweet.

You are correct and I agree with you. Because if you want a high end car it is going to cost you, just like a high end computer. My issue is that people just think its better when it comes to computers and it really isn't. Bench marks do not really show real world performance in any rate, where a test drive with a car does. I am not saying you shouldn't have bought it, I am just saying I think it is a waste of money. Then again even if I could afford a Porsche I probably wouldn't have one. I would much rather buy more property, but that is a personal preference.

I just think that a lot of marketing and tech jargin is thrown out that really confuses consumers and it really bothers me. The average person and even the average gamer doesn't quite understand them. I am just trying to set a few facts that a lot of companies have skewed with marketing is all.

Quote:

Because the users are stubborn and too damn lazy to get used to a new interface and also b/c of ppl like you that blow it's performance issues out of proportion and attack forums with that BS. Bad thing is some ppl are gullible enough to believe you guys instead of learn with good, old-fashioned, first-hand experience. Just my opinion..

I am old enough to have been alive and using computers on a regular basis for the release of 3.11, 95 a, 95 b, 95 c, 98, 98se, 2k, ME, XP. Out of all of those releases no company has allowed downgrades back to the earlier version, and with the exception of windows ME, Microsoft has never put out a more buggy OS that is so convoluted and feature stripped that is confuses the consumer into buy the Ultimate edition. We can sit here and argue facts all day long. It is a milestone of vista's stability that companies are allowing users to opt out of Vista installs and get XP.

You're average user, sure may like vista, those on the fence are on the fence, your more advanced user who has used other OSes, will see its flaws and not want to touch it. I have it on a test system, been running it since release. I still have issues with it. I mean it still breaks basic networking, which is completely lame.

I also never blow anything out of proportion, I typically have very straight forward answers with something to at least back it up.

INTELCRAZY · 11-21-2007, 02:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tlarkin

I am old enough to have been alive and using computers on a regular basis for the release of 3.11, 95 a, 95 b, 95 c, 98, 98se, 2k, ME, XP. Out of all of those releases no company has allowed downgrades back to the earlier version, and with the exception of windows ME, Microsoft has never put out a more buggy OS that is so convoluted and feature stripped that is confuses the consumer into buy the Ultimate edition. We can sit here and argue facts all day long. It is a milestone of vista's stability that companies are allowing users to opt out of Vista installs and get XP.

You're average user, sure may like vista, those on the fence are on the fence, your more advanced user who has used other OSes, will see its flaws and not want to touch it. I have it on a test system, been running it since release. I still have issues with it. I mean it still breaks basic networking, which is completely lame.

I also never blow anything out of proportion, I typically have very straight forward answers with something to at least back it up.

If I am correct, all/most of those OS's had a button that said "Start" correct? I know of users who won't go to Vista b/c they can't open that. Now, you just tell me how much more stupidity is out there than that. That came from a small biz's office that I have ties to.

Yes, you do have evidence and I do mess with a bit of software... I can't blame it on MS, directly or indirectly a user must see to blame it on the software company who made the software that won't run in Vista. I do think Vista has better program crash control, maybe that was new b/c a lot of crappy programs crash... Aren't you running a RC1 or RC2 on that test system?

And as for buying Ultimate, what the Hell? A small/medium business doesn't even need Business or Home Premium. The only reason I got computers for a biz that had Business Edition, is b/c it made me look better, an accountant won't figure out they don't need it too quickly. I must agree on convolution, I should I have put Home Basic on those mothers and forgotten it

But, the ppl that are putting Vista down are ppl that work with computers for accounting, bookkeeping, etc. and work with XP everyday. I was asked how to 'connect' to the internet in Vista(connection was DSL)

I am saying the ppl that 'muckrake' about Vista are mostly morons and are confined to a cubicle or office all day, every day.

I cannot put Vista down as for functionality, I can put it down for the marketing scheme and I will not 'upgrade' to XP.

PC eye · 11-21-2007, 03:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mep916

I've read that Microsoft is ditching the 32bit platform completely - as opposed to combining the libraries. What do you think?

What MS plans and what you have been hearing are two different things. The next desktop version of Windows due in 2010 according to some sources will be the last seeing 32bit editions there.

Q: Will Windows 7 be available in both 32-bit and 64-bit versions like Vista?

A: Though I had expected Windows 7 to ship only in 64-bit versions, Microsoft now says it will be the final Windows version to ship in both 32-bit and 64-bit versions.
http://www.winsupersite.com/faq/windows_7.asp

amosf · 11-21-2007, 08:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tlarkin

I am old enough to have been alive and using computers on a regular basis for the release of 3.11, 95 a, 95 b, 95 c, 98, 98se, 2k, ME, XP.

eh what?

They only came out last decade! I was using PC's when they come out. I was also using PC's when DOS came out. I was using PC's before DOS came out. I was using PC's before they were called PC's

And I am not an old guy

Stop making us pre windows people sound old

View Poll Results: XP or Vista
Windows XP	47	58.75%
Windows Vista	33	41.25%
Voters: 80. You may not vote on this poll

11-20-2007, 10:24 PM	#122 (permalink)
cybereclipse Platinum Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Glendale, CA Age: 18 Posts: 829	well, my laptop came with vista...and i upgraded to xp IMO, vista is close to windows me in crapiness im sure it looks pretty and all, but is it really worth all those system resources to run a pretty little sidebar?? mac osx FTW.... btw, im sure i will be flamed for this, but what can vista do that osx cant... (except crash ) __________________ HP Pavilion 764n Custom & Toshiba M115-S3094 200GB Hard Drive/80GB Hard Drive 1024 MB SDRAM/1024 MB SDRAM (DDR2) Pentium 4 2.66 Ghz/Intel Centrino Duo RIP 11/14/08/WinXP/Mac OSX86 FOLDING FOR THE GOOD OF MANKIND: F@H Team 44358 To View The Rest Of My Profile Hit Alt+F4 P.S. Can I eat your brain? Visit My Blog!!

11-20-2007, 11:42 PM	#126 (permalink)
ThatGuy16 Diamond Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: USA Age: 99 Posts: 5,482	Ok i honestly do not get were people are getting compatability issues! I run Vista x64 for three months and not a single problem... the only compatibility issue i could think of is if your trying to use something 10 years old .. doh' whos going to continue making drivers for something that old!? __________________ CPU: C2D E8400 @ 4Ghz 1.24v HSF: Apogee GTX MB: Gigabyte X38-DS4 Ram: 2x2GB G. Skill DDR2-1068 HDD: 320GB Seagate PSU: OCZ GameXStream 700w OS: Vista Home Premium 64bit GFX: 2x HD4850 Crossfire LCD: LG 22" L226WTQ 3DMark06: 20826

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Vista Software Compatibility	The Astroman	General Software	61	04-22-2008 05:30 PM
which windows vista package to get	robina_80	Operating Systems	39	03-17-2008 03:39 AM
Windows Vista Compatible Incompatible Hardware Guide	jimmayor007	Video Cards and Monitors	0	09-01-2007 08:25 PM