XP OutShines Vista

lol :o,while this holds true (in my opinion) i barely really on cnet for anything but then again, i see this thread going down the road like the other xp/vista thread.
you just don't want to start arguments now :eek:
 
Im not starting an argument, i thought i would just share this report with people who may think its intresting.
 
tobywuk said:
Im not starting an argument, i thought i would just share this report with people who may think its intresting.
Click to expand...
yes i know you're not arguing
meanman said:
i duel boot xp pro and vista 64bit ultra and in my opinion vista is faster and smoother.
Click to expand...

eh here's what i was talking about, thats one typical expample, it's really difficult to make a neat thread without someone moaning about whats better or whatever !!! :rolleyes:
 
meanman said:
i duel boot xp pro and vista 64bit ultra and in my opinion vista is faster and smoother.
Click to expand...

i used to dual boot Vista and xp aswell....both 32 bit versions.

and i also think Vista is faster and smoother than Xp but the main reason i went back to xp is because i do like to game and as you can see i dont have the best rig so vista wasnt getting me as many fps in games as xp did. :D
 
I like both XP and VISTA but I felt XP was a nice transition into Vista. Vista I agree too runs a lot smoother and I have had less issues with vista than with XP. Ive also noticed a lot of the gruff people have with Vista can easily be shut off or changed to work the way you want.
 
I want to switch to Vista, since my new system will be high-end and my video card is DX10 native. If Microsoft would allow DX10 to be used on XP, then I would not switch.

Also, alot of people are saying Vista is like ME, I don't think this is true. When Windows ME came out, it immediately seemed to be a short term OS, especially because ME stood for "Millenium Edition", and there was already alot of talk about XP when ME was released. ME only lasted for about a year. I think Vista is going to last a while longer, but maybe not as long as XP. I just think that XP is getting very old, it's 6 already! It was definitely time for an upgrade.
 
MatrixEVO said:
I want to switch to Vista, since my new system will be high-end and my video card is DX10 native. If Microsoft would allow DX10 to be used on XP, then I would not switch.

Also, alot of people are saying Vista is like ME, I don't think this is true. When Windows ME came out, it immediately seemed to be a short term OS, especially because ME stood for "Millenium Edition", and there was already alot of talk about XP when ME was released. ME only lasted for about a year. I think Vista is going to last a while longer, but maybe not as long as XP. I just think that XP is getting very old, it's 6 already! It was definitely time for an upgrade.
Click to expand...

yea IMO its the mac people and the people that can't run vista on their pcs that are saying that

and I'm not trying to start a flame war
 
erm...lol
The tests, run on a Dell XPS M1710 test bed with a 2GHz Core 2 Duo CPU and 1GB of RAM
Click to expand...
well, that part i bolded explains exactly WHY it ran slower for them.

whenever anybody has problems with something i know about, i first look at there specs.
something i have noticed among vista users/triers is that:
nearly all of the people who complain about it being slow or have other trouble have less then 2gb of ram.
nearly all of the people who have no trouble with it have more then 2gb of ram.

so...its pretty obvious to me that ram is the main issue with people not being able to run vista nicely.

vista uses more ram then xp. so of course it will run noticeably slower then xp on a computer with only 1 gb of ram. thats why its easily possible to upgrade computers. besides that, EVERY OS ran slower then the previous one when put on hardware made for the previous one.
ie, vista runs slower then xp on the hardware that was made for xp
xp ran slower then 98 on hardware that was made for 98
98 ran slower then 95 on hardware that was made for 95
95 ran slower on hardware that was made for 3.1

each os released needs more ram and hard drive space then the previous OS and thus ran slower on hardware that was fine for the previous os.
 
zaroba said:
erm...lol

well, that part i bolded explains exactly WHY it ran slower for them.

whenever anybody has problems with something i know about, i first look at there specs.
something i have noticed among vista users/triers is that:
nearly all of the people who complain about it being slow or have other trouble have less then 2gb of ram.
nearly all of the people who have no trouble with it have more then 2gb of ram.

so...its pretty obvious to me that ram is the main issue with people not being able to run vista nicely.

vista uses more ram then xp. so of course it will run noticeably slower then xp on a computer with only 1 gb of ram. thats why its easily possible to upgrade computers. besides that, EVERY OS ran slower then the previous one when put on hardware made for the previous one.
ie, vista runs slower then xp on the hardware that was made for xp
xp ran slower then 98 on hardware that was made for 98
98 ran slower then 95 on hardware that was made for 95
95 ran slower on hardware that was made for 3.1

each os released needs more ram and hard drive space then the previous OS and thus ran slower on hardware that was fine for the previous os.
Click to expand...

well put
 
tobywuk said:
Check this link out, From Cnet stating XP is faster.

I just went back to XP from Vista yesterday and Im finding it much better.

http://www.news.com/Windows-XP-outshines-Vista-in-benchmarking-test/2100-1016_3-6220201.html
Click to expand...

The problem with Vista is it requires more from your system, if you have a slower system its going to be slow going. What has me worried is all the bugs I am hearing about. I hope by time I build my PC to replace this one the bugs have been fixed.
 
I thinks.... first half of '08. that's right, says so in the link. ;P Couple months away, It might actually be worth it to pick up that beta, 15,000 other people are currently testing it.. think of it as.. a unconfirmed testing, lol. Anyways, i haven't made up my mind yet.
 
Jabes said:
yea IMO its the mac people and the people that can't run vista on their pcs that are saying that

and I'm not trying to start a flame war
Click to expand...

jabes stop being an a**, now you really pissed me off, it ain't Mac users at all, get your mind right damn it :mad:
of course you are doing a war you just don't realize what you said, you don't realize that such comments (such as your sig also) pisses off people.
sorry to be so mean dude but you deserved it
 
Well if they dropped XP they'd look even more like an arrogant monopolized standard, damaging their image too much, possibly. Most people still use XP, and dropping all support would result in a bevy of unpatched security holes and that sort of thing. I think they should drop Vista, personally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top