which do you prefer ? XP or Vista?

  • Thread starter Thread starter GodKiller
  • Start date Start date
Saucy said:
There's no preferring one or the other. XP is dead. Vista is where it's at.
Click to expand...

XP has a long way to go before it is dead.

Direct OEM and Retail License Availability will not end until
12 months after Windows Vista General Availability. System Builder
License will be available for 24 months.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/default.mspx

As far as "Mainstream Support" goes, WinXP Pro
will probably be supported for several more years.
I think officially, support for WinXP Home is suppose
a bit shorter.
Of course, support of Win98 SE and Windows 2000
was extended several times.

http://support.microsoft.com/gp/lifepolicy

Microsoft will offer Mainstream support for either a minimum of 5 years from the date of a
product's general availability, or for 2 years after the successor product (N+1) is released,
whichever is longer. Extended support is not offered for Consumer, Hardware, Multimedia, and
Microsoft Dynamics products. Products that release new versions annually, such as Microsoft
Money, Microsoft Encarta, Microsoft Picture It!, and Microsoft Streets & Trips, will receive a
minimum of 3 years of Mainstream support from the product's date of availability. Most products
will also receive at least 8 years of online self-help support. Microsoft Xbox games are
currently not included in the Support Lifecycle policy.

http://support.microsoft.com/gp/lifeselect
 
John Barnett MVP schreef:
Vista 'is' faster on high spec PC or 64Bit PCs. Standard 32 bit and
lower to mid range PCs Vista is a lot slower. Infact XP is faster.
On my machine, which is a 2.8Ghz with 1.5GB RAM the Vista boot up time
is exactly the same as XP (this machine dual boots bothe XP and Vista).
Shutdown is somewhat faster, but only fractions of a second. Program
startup is also slower than on XP, even worse if UAC kicks in.
Click to expand...
is that a P4 2.8? I have a 2.4 p4 and 1.5 gb, which i call midrange, and
boot time is almost twice as slow on vista thaN Xp, but shutdown is a
biit better. For the rest i think Xp is a bit faster. So you are saying
that an upgrade to say Athlon 5000 or E6400 would make it alot faster
than Xp? Specify alot...
 
GodKiller ha scritto:
which ? why ?
Click to expand...

Vista.

Easier GUI operations thanks to improved explorer, faster window
rasterization thanks to Direct3D-based interface, better looking and
feel thanks to Aero, better reliability, faster VM paging on flash
memories with ReadyBoost, UAC always alerts me when an application tries
to change system or precedently-installed files, and new user/kernel
mode WDDM video drivers improves system stability.

Every one of the issues above may be easily attacked, but in my humble
opinion it's only a matter of habits. There are people out there that's
been doing the same things for years on XP, and now simply does-NOT-want
to learn new procedures. My first hours with Vista had been something
like "oh, my God! where is it this feature? and where has this other
gone?". but after two days I enjoyed new features, menus and toolbars,
and now I simply can't get back to XP.

p.bes
 
paolo said:
GodKiller ha scritto:

Vista.

Easier GUI operations thanks to improved explorer, faster window
rasterization thanks to Direct3D-based interface, better looking and
feel thanks to Aero, better reliability, faster VM paging on flash
memories with ReadyBoost, UAC always alerts me when an application tries
to change system or precedently-installed files, and new user/kernel
mode WDDM video drivers improves system stability.

Every one of the issues above may be easily attacked, but in my humble
opinion it's only a matter of habits. There are people out there that's
been doing the same things for years on XP, and now simply does-NOT-want
to learn new procedures. My first hours with Vista had been something
like "oh, my God! where is it this feature? and where has this other
gone?". but after two days I enjoyed new features, menus and toolbars,
and now I simply can't get back to XP.

p.bes
Click to expand...

You're forgetting the outrageous cost probably because you didn't pay
for your copy. You are also forgetting the hardware upgrade cost. But,
hey, if you're rich, Vista might be the thing for you.

Alias
 
While many will require hardware upgrades, many will not.
The newest part on my computer is the 1.5 year old video card.
Vista works very well.

So maybe Paolo is not forgetting so much as you are assuming.
 
Both.

XP for video editing and ripping (until someone markets compatible Vista
programs).

Vista for everything else.

--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!
 
Actually it's $152 if you round up. And of course, not having any in stock,
it's very easy to put up a "low" price.
 
Gary said:
Vista Business $151
http://www.costcentral.com/proddetail/Microsoft_Windows_Vista_Business/66J02225/L68007/froogle/

XP Professional $150
http://www.costcentral.com/proddetail/Microsoft_Windows_XP_Professional_w_SP2b/E8504741/K42751/

Wow a whole dollar.
Click to expand...

Makes no sense. It appears to be a generic OEM copy, but I thought
business was sold only?

--
Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group:

"Price is actually no factor in piracy..." spoken by
Mike Brannigan

"But I'm not insulting people. I'm insulting Linux Loonies..."
spoken by Mike <[email protected]>

"No, I'm not sure. I was just making fun of Chad's typo."
spoken by Mike <[email protected]>

More great quotes here:
http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html
 
I prefer the one that runs a particular app the best. I don't have any
devices that don't run in Vista so I virtualize XP on Vista with VPC2007 and
drop into XP for a few programs that don't support Vista. After Jan 30
Vista will be the most current version of Windows so over time my preference
for Vista or XP will be decided for me by progress in the software offerings
in the market place.
 
Hi Jelle,

Yes my machine is a Pentium 4 (2.8Ghz). Not personally testing Vista on
various machines I can't really comment on whether the upgrade you propose
would increase speed 'a lot'. I can only go on the machine i am using at
present and, to me, mid-range or not, Vista is slow. My comments regarding
Vista being faster on higher spec machines was derived from a test performed
by another user. Unfortunately, i haven't been able to locate the post he
made regarding the results of his test.

--
John Barnett MVP
Associate Expert
Windows Shell/User

Web: http://xphelpandsupport.mvps.org
Web: http://vistasupport.mvps.org

The information in this mail/post is supplied "as is". No warranty of any
kind, either expressed or implied, is made in relation to the accuracy,
reliability or content of this mail/post. The Author shall not be liable for
any direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages arising out of the
use of, or inability to use, information or opinions expressed in this
mail/post..
 
GodKiller said:
which ? why ?
Click to expand...

XP.

It isn't a total triumph of hype and flashy graphics over stability and
actually allows me to get stuff done instead of (as Vista did today)
suddenly decide to let explorer hang for no reason whenever I tried to
connect to a Windows 2003 file server, when no other computer on the site
(Windows 2000, Windows 2003, XP, Apple OSX 10.4.8) had a problem with the
fileshares concerned.
 
What have you tried using for video editing? I've got VideoRedo, Cyberlink
PowerDirector/PowerProducer and Ulead DVD MovieFactory 5 all installed. All
work with no problems.
 
It's as dead as yesterday's news. All the retail computers now have Vista
capable stickers. XP is out, Vista is the new black. You point to the
support .. it's just life support .. things have moved on .. Vista is what's
happening now.
 
The screen I'm looking at is not XP's doing. XP died. Vista is the client
OS. Let's put it into a formula:

XP == PAST
VISTA == CURRENT

VISTA == THE_OS_TO_RUN
XP == THE_OS_TO_DROP

Dead gone, kaput, throw out on the ol' bit heap, dead duck, belly up ..
 
Saucy said:
The screen I'm looking at is not XP's doing. XP died. Vista is the
client OS. Let's put it into a formula:

XP == PAST
VISTA == CURRENT

VISTA == THE_OS_TO_RUN
XP == THE_OS_TO_DROP

Dead gone, kaput, throw out on the ol' bit heap, dead duck, belly up ..
Click to expand...

You're wrong. I suppose you thought that Windows Me was better than
Windows 98SE because it was newer. Vista is the Windows Me of NT and
you're just too gaga on having the "latest and the greatest" to realize it.

Alias
 
Saucy said:
It's as dead as yesterday's news. All the retail computers now have
Vista capable stickers. XP is out, Vista is the new black. You point to
the support .. it's just life support .. things have moved on .. Vista
is what's happening now.
Click to expand...

Are you trying to convince us or yourself?

Alias
 
Back
Top