Save XP!

[Zorg]

I agree with purplerat. When XP came out, it offered nothing new for users of 2000.

And now Vista offers nothing new for users of XP. So why bother changing.....for DX10? :lol: :lol:

 

[retro77]

And now Vista offers nothing new for users of XP. So why bother changing.....for DX10? :lol: :lol:

Good one. We were forced over time to upgrade to XP. We will be forced again to upgrade to Vista. Nothing really we can do, 'cept hold onto your copies of XP.

 

[purplerat]

And now Vista offers nothing new for users of XP. So why bother changing.....for DX10? :lol: :lol:

Yup, and people said the exact same thing when Direct X first came out with Windows 95. 16bit DOS gaming is definitly the way to go!!!

 

[notherdude]

given that you have to authorize XP through the internet, they can shut it off at any time anyway... All they have to do is send something through the net to require authorization and then shut the authorization tool off.

That's why at some point... we'll all be on linux prolly.

No, but you and a tiny contingent of contrarians will. The rest of us will move on if we have not already. Vista 64 works great for me.

 

[notherdude]

With XP as with all Microsoft software currently for sale, the registration key can be revoked.
Also WGA can be push updated to kill any install of windows software.
I just wish I could get my Pinnacle HDTV card working with GNU/Linux, it would be all over for MS in my house.

In XP Pro I open a browser window and connect to google in 4 seconds.

In Vista Ultimate the same action takes 18 seconds.

WHY?

Two (2) seconds to Google on my Vista 64 box. I think superfetch is the key for that speed. I can open up the 8 tabs on my home page in less than 5 secs.

 

[notherdude]

Vista is the new Windows ME.... You won't find anyone who builds performance systems using it as their main OS. I have migrated more systems back to XP in the last 6 months than I built in the previous 2 years. Especially laptops where performance is usually marginal. XP runs 100% faster on the average system. Yep, Vista has better security alright... I make a ton of money setting up home networks for people can't figure out to get Vista to communicate. You won't see any corporate support for Vista either.... This OS will have a very short life. Long live XP Pro!

Go to http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/index.php? and see how many extreme builders are using Vista 64. I was shocked. I thought most all of them would be XP but not so. I think the word is that Vista 64 on high end hardware is a good choice, if you know what you are doing and can live with some minor incompatibilities.

100% faster? You mean that one office benchmark? If you read the comments on the officebench blog you will see lots of variance in the results posted by users. They re-ran the test with aero turned off and someother bck Vista features and got very different results:

As for us, we just revisited the tests (again), stripping Vista to the "bone" by removing all of the eye candy and background services. We managed to get Vista closer (~40% slower vs. ~80% slower in previous attempts) to XP, but nowhere near on par.

This is just one benchmark and I think all of us here know how misleading benchmarks can be.

How about frame rate - look here, the gap is closed pretty much http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/amd_nvidia_windows_vista_driver_performance_update/default.asp

 

[Zorg]

Yup, and people said the exact same thing when Direct X first came out with Windows 95. 16bit DOS gaming is definitly the way to go!!!

So you admit that's the only reason to switch to Vista. I appreciate your honesty.

 

[night_wolf_in]

RIP xp. welcome vista. (sigh)

 

[colonelblake]

i dont use gui's i still use dos 6.1 and bbs sites....

 

[notherdude]

i dont use gui's i still use dos 6.1 and bbs sites....

I applaud you sir. I talk to my PC in straight binary. Avoids any misundertandings.

Seriously, the old systems had a lot of charm. I still have an operational Mac classic and a nice Dos 5 and windows 3.1 box I fire up from time to time.

 

[Shadow703793]

Right on the money.

I have clients that have contact-management and accounting programs that are STILL not Vista-compatible or have only become so in the last month or two. That's not entirely the publisher's fault or MS's fault, but it seems completely bizarre to me that it's been a year since Vista's release and it can't be adopted by some companies even if they want it.

This means YOU, Sage Software!

:lol: They had some kind of a contract (think it was for ACT) with my elementary school that I volunteered at (fixing up PCs, re-installing, trouble shootingetc). They did have compatibility issues with some other software that the county was running. (FCPS)

 

[pip_seeker]

Do you have any idea of what you are talking about?

Ok, you must have been living under a rock for the past years XP has been out.

Windows gives you 30 days to activate it... OR it won't work.



http://support.microsoft.com/kb/307890

 

[Zorg]

If they try to deactivate my valid copy of XP, that I paid for, then I will hack it. They won't do that though, they will just stop supporting it.

By the way, they haven't slated the elimination of support until 2012. Tack on a couple of years because of the bytch storm and that brings us to 2014. I say we just skip Vista all together. Except when we see their next offering, Vista will probably be preferable.

 

[notherdude]

If they try to deactivate my valid copy of XP, that I paid for, then I will hack it. They won't do that though. They will just stop supporting it.

As long as there are zillions of XP users out there still I doubt MS will stop issuing critical updates, anytime soon that is, of course no OS will go on getting support forever.

I predict windows 7 will appease a lot of the Vista unrest, though it will be basically Vista SE, by that time the driver/compatibility issues will be pretty much gone and 7 will use the same drivers, more or less, as Vista, thus making the move painless enough and the old Vista/7 hating hardware will be ready for the dump.

 

[Zorg]

I've got a Q6600 OC to 3G and I'm using duh XP. I don't need all the extra pigsh**.

But you are right, everyone will migrate over and they will work the kinks out of Vista. Soon enough the complaint will be about how no software runs on XP.

 

[carver_g]

Unless they completely break with past practices, they would never actually deactivate an operating system. Hell, I recently installed DOS v6 on an old laptop and installed Zork just for fun.

Yes, I'm old!

 

[I800C0LLECT]

True, but try gaming on Vista. So far DX10 is just BS.

They still don't have any game engines that are designed specifically for DX10

All these "DX10" games are liars. Add a couple extensions to a DX9 engine and *POOF*..."look at OUR DX10 game!!"

 

[notherdude]

They still don't have any game engines that are designed specifically for DX10

All these "DX10" games are liars. Add a couple extensions to a DX9 engine and *POOF*..."look at OUR DX10 game!!"

Right. I expect more game developers would be exploiting the full power of DX-10 if there was a market. And then we would see it shine on Vista both in terms of features/eye candy and performance.

Or maybe they are in the pipeline already? I don't keep up.

 

[purplerat]

So you admit that's the only reason to switch to Vista. I appreciate your honesty.

Sorry I guess the sarcasm of "16bit DOS gaming is definitly the way to go!!! " Didn't come through. People act like idiots when it comes to why "switch" to Vista. If you buy a system with Vista you're not switching to Vista. It's when you downgrade to XP that you are switching. So shouldn't the question by "why switch to XP" since most people buying PCs nowadays be getting Vista, not XP? But if you really want why I use Vista...
in no paticular order
1.) Media Center
2.) It's what I have - I didn't go out of my way to upgrade to Vista.
3.) Aero is actually pretty cool when doing serious multitasking. I use 2000 at work and both at work and home and can easily have 20 items open and working on at once. People can bash Aero as just eye candy, but I find it really helps with productivity.
4.)4GB RAM, and actually having it all available. I may hardly ever come close to needing it, but hey it's nice knowing it's there.
5.)Video game stability. When using Beta drivers, if there's an issue the game simply pauses for a moment while Vista fixes it and then goes back to normal. Never had a BSOD caused by Beta video drivers (only ever had 1 BSOD in a year+ of Vista).
6.)Better multi-core optimization.

Good luck in 2014 using XP with a Dou-Deco Core CPU and 16GB of memory trying to play DX12 games.

 

[purplerat]

I applaud you sir. I talk to my PC in straight binary. Avoids any misundertandings.

Seriously, the old systems had a lot of charm. I still have an operational Mac classic and a nice Dos 5 and windows 3.1 box I fire up from time to time.

Why don't we start a petition to get Crysis released on punch cards!

 

[n00b_SLicer]

Vista is a great OS but it still has problems. Security is much better compared to XP on most of the items. But XP still should be around, just in case since it IS supporting most of the the apps out there that still don't work on Vista.

XP has more holes than a #9 sponge.

 

[Zorg]

XP has more holes than a #9 sponge.

Informative video wasn't it? I think purplerat should probably watch it.

purplerat, I'll still have my Q6600 in 2014, so what are you talking about?

 

[randomizer]

I just hate the media centre, the GUI is too slow. That and the fact that it tries to open .rar archives as the default program :lol:

 

[bobbknight]

>your comp isn't good enough or hasn't gotten used to your habits. the >more you use vista the more it will precache your most used >applications so they start up faster...

The comp I am running Vista on is a new build with a Q6600 and 4GB of ram. And a 4GB readyboost usb drive. Hard Drive is Sata II with 32MB cache.
For Pre-cache to work how many times do I need to open a browser window 20,000?

The comp with XP Pro is a skt 939 athlon X2 4800 with 2GB ram and an 8MB cache hd.

Programs are faster on the XP computer.

As to my connection it is what it is, sure after the initial browser window opening I to can open many tabs quickly too.
This still does not explain the time differences between the two OS's.
No I am not running Vista 64, and of course thats going to be faster, the whole 64 bit architecture is faster.
To Compaire XP Pro 32bit to Vista 32 bit is closer to the apple to apple analogy. Where a compairison between XP/Vista 32 bit and Vista 64 bit is more apple to orange.
Now lets look at the two soon to be out service packs for XP and Vista.
XP SP3 increases the speed of XP
Vista SP1 does not increase the speed of Vista.

The only thing I like about Vista is the multimedia suite.

When XP came out I was one of the first to get it, I ran it on an Abit BP6 dual celeron motherboard with a dual boot of Win2K. By the way Win2K was better than XP at the time. As LSASS on XP hits the HD every second where in WIN2K it did not.

 

[Zorg]

You should run HD tune on that USB stick. I don't know what Vista needs as a minimum to call it ready boost, but from what I have seen most USB flash RAM has abysmal read times compared to the HD. I'm not even sure Vista would use it, given the fact that you have 4GB of RAM, but it wouldn't surprise me. I used RC1 and I don't remember it taking 18sec to get to the home page. Something is wrong, and that's coming from a Vista disliker. I didn't want to be a hater. :lol: