Windows XP vs. Vista?

Hobbyer

Member
Feb 17, 2008
395
0
16
tommy2bit said:
Hobbyer, some good points but remember that the corporate work place is dictated by the office suite. The most powerful and champion being Microsoft Office. Microsoft doesn't make it for Linux. The open office platform isn't adopted as widely yet. Anyway, this is a major reason why the big companies pay $ to license microsoft OS, as the office and MS only apps are important. Microsoft knows this, this is why they do not make versions of their popular apps for Linux.
Of course I'm aware of basic common sense and why businesses use Windows since I've been saying all along that applications determine the OS. But let us not forget the players before Office... Lotus, Corel, WordPerfect, et all all had their chance to compete, and had serious market share too!. They could've become the standard but didn't.

Also, public accountants used Mac's for years and years in the early 80's, what happened? Didn't cut it.

And I wouldn't blame just Microsoft for not making stuff for Linux. No reputable developer in their right mind would spend money and effort developing their flagship software for Linux. Would Adobe? AutoDesk? Steinberg? Apple? (of course not for the same reasons).
 

Hobbyer

Member
Feb 17, 2008
395
0
16
Andy Stitzer said:
I didn't think there was much difference between 95 and 98. Windows 98 being Win 95 SP 6 or 7.

Hell I'd be using freedos or MS Dos if I could get some apps and get it connected to the internet with ease.
Loads up brutal fast even on a pent 166
MS DOS was the shit! I used to run an old school bulletin board system (remember those) on MS DOS prior to the internet taking off! Good old 14.4k modem days!
 

Keebler Elf

The Original Elf
Aug 31, 2001
14,793
473
83
The Keebler Factory
For clarity, I'm not buying a Mac. This thread is about Win XP vs. Vista. Folks, please, let's stay on topic. Linux and Mac discussions can have their own threads.

I'm still on the fence since it sounds like most of my programs will still (likely) work on Vista and it's forward-compatible with additional RAM as things develop.

On the other hand, there's more support for Win XP and I'm already somewhat comfortable with it, whereas buying Vista is a leap into the great unknown.
 

club69

Member
Jan 10, 2004
220
0
16
Hobbyer said:
I posted in another thread (can't remember which one), that it is the application that determines what O/S you should use. If it's for everyday email, surfing, and light use of specialized apps, some gaming, then your choices are abundant, pretty much everything.

If you need to use a specialized program, don't just install an O/S because it's so great and then find out later that your favourite app is not made for it. Realistically, this doesn't apply to 90% of people out there, but I just want to make a point of it since Keebler was concerned about software compatibility.
totally agree, excellent pt.
 

club69

Member
Jan 10, 2004
220
0
16
sorry for a bit off topic, but for those who used Vista SP1, do you think it is stable enough? or should wait for Vista SP2 to come out? i am thinking to jump ship from XP Pro to Vista.
 

mmouse

Posts: 10,000000
Feb 4, 2003
1,853
34
48
Andy Stitzer said:
I miss the squeal of the modem, because then you knew porn was a coming.
LOL that is so true. Gone is that delicious anticipation of seeing a JPG load line by line. And as for video, you'd have to wait hours. Now it's instant.
 

bogo

Member
Oct 16, 2007
348
0
16
Hey Keebler, I run Vista and it is fine. There is a lot of talk about issues on Vista I have not experienced any really. It is actually a pretty slick program in my none pro opinion. The version I am running is especially friendly to media which is a blast.
Go ahead and take the leap, the water is fine.
 

SilentLeviathan

I am better than you.
Oct 30, 2002
904
0
16
WoodPeckr said:
Saw an article on the web saying Windows7 will out by Xmas and if it follows MS tradition it will still have some bugs to work out.

Both Vista SP1 and XP are solid. I have the 32b versions and see no compelling reason to go to 64b. Put 4GB ram in my laptop and Vista SP1, 32b flys, it uses 3.54 of that 4GB ram which is OK with me.
However when I switch to Ubuntu 32b on that same dual boot laptop, it is even quicker....it really flys with that 4GB of ram.
It *might* be out by Christmas 2009. They haven't even been any RCs put out. If it comes out end of next year that'll be a the two year cycle that MS has usually strived for. XP was around a bit longer but otherwise MS has generally had 2 - 3 year release cycles.

Anway, Vista is great and even better with SP1. You may have problems with older hardware if the manufacturers have not release updated drivers. Vista 64 bit is fine but not really necessary unless you're running more than 4 GB of RAM or have 64 bit applications.

I haven't had any issues with Vista and almsot all of the ones I have seen other people experiencing are the result of crappy 3rd party hardware and software support and not the fault of Vista itself.

Long story short, Vista is fine to install.
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
47,063
6,192
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
Yeah, don't recall which Xmas they were talking about.
Anyways Vista SP1 32b runs fine with me also and really flys with 4GB ram.

But as said earlier, if I were getting a new PC it will have one of these new Intel Core i7 CPUs.
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
47,063
6,192
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
Thought that also but wasn't following it real close.....I don't get excited over beta releases....

Do you have a link? Heard a download was available of beta Win7.
 

jwmorrice

Gentleman by Profession
Jun 30, 2003
7,133
2
0
In the laboratory.
Original URL: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/11/08/windows_7_2009/
Microsoft: Windows 7 ready for Christmas 2009

Fill your stockings
By Gavin Clarke in San Francisco
Posted in Operating Systems, 8th November 2008 00:22 GMT
Windows 7 in time for Christmas? No, not this Christmas - but Christmas 2009.


Microsoft has reportedly (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-10084486-56.html) told PC and systems engineering partners Windows 7, the successor to Windows Vista, will be on PCs in time for the next holiday season.

That contradicts Microsoft's official party line that Windows 7 would not ship until 2010, three years after Windows Vista received its official launch.

The holiday buying season typically refers to six weeks between US Thanksgiving and the New Year.

If Microsoft is correct, and if this isn't a piece of outdated PowerPoint carrying an old ship date, that could mean OEMs getting Windows 7 by September 2009 at the latest to hit the holiday shopping season.

Microsoft's last big success was Windows XP, which launched in late October 2001, in time for that year's holiday shopping season. Windows XP had been put in the hands of OEM with a release to manufacturing two months earlier, in August that year.

All about Microsoft (http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=1706) blogger, and fellow MicroBite (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/11/07/microbite_2/) co-host, Mary-Jo Foley said (http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/) the whisper around the Windows camp fire is there'll be a Windows 7 beta the week before this Christmas, with the release candidate released in either the first or second quarter of 2009.

Why so fast on Windows 7? Microsoft is keeping the operating system simple and cutting any features aren't working and that might mutate into delays if work on them continues, based on what The Reg heard at last week's Professional Developers' Conference (PDC). ®



http://news.cnet.com/8301-10805_3-10080700-75.html?tag=txt
November 1, 2008 11:46 AM PDT
Windows 7 pre-beta hits BitTorrent
Posted by Suzanne Tindal


The pre-beta version of Microsoft's Windows 7 operating system released to developers at the Professional Developers Conference has already made it onto prominent BitTorrent sites, where thousands of enthusiasts around the world are currently downloading it.

Well-known BitTorrent sites such as The Pirate Bay and Mininova were at the time of publication Friday hosting multiple downloads of the newly aired operating system--both the 32-bit and 64-bit versions.

On The Pirate Bay, one copy of the 32-bit build had more than one thousand people uploading it, and almost 7,000 people on the way to downloading it. The 64-bit version was less popular, with the earliest copy available on the site having only around 100 people hosting a copy and around a thousand still downloading it.

There were complaints that the version offered wasn't the latest build, but instead the stable one given the delegates and therefore didn't have the revised taskbar. Complaints also abounded about how slow the download was considering the lack of people seeding the file.

The most popular link for the 32-bit version of Windows 7 on Mininova had a similar number of people downloading and uploading the file as that on The Pirate Bay, although the 64-bit version on this site was a rare breed with only one copy boasting 30 seeds and around 150 leechers.

Some people weren't excited. "There is nothing (sic) new in it," wrote one commenter. "I wouldn't recommend this to download. Waste of time. Happy with Vista."

Others called for a reality check. "Seriously people. This was just a PRE-beta release that was given out at a trade show so writers would write about the new version. This SHOULD NOT be downloaded with the intent of using it as an everyday system. It is just so writers could get a feel for what was to come."

Businesses might wonder what the new operating system will mean for their business. "I was in Redmond three weeks ago and had a sneak peek," said Peter Menadue, who holds the role of global director of solutions and technology, Microsoft solutions business within systems integrator Dimension Data.

"I think they've done a stellar job. Sinofsky's a genius," he added, referring to Microsoft's Steven Sinofsky, senior vice president of the Windows and Windows Live engineering group.

He said that what didn't come out in the press coverage about Windows 7 were all the bits of the operating system that would be interesting to enterprise, with aspects like application security, data security, and application deployment getting a facelift.

The support for virtualization was something Menadue flagged as being of interest to business, as well as Microsoft's pledge to maintain application and driver compatibility with Vista.

Dimension Data will get the M3 code for Windows 7 before the end of the year, which will allow it to start an early deployment program internally.

Menadue said there had been a lot of interest in the operating system because there had been much less information than there was on previous releases, with Microsoft carefully controlling what reached the press, but added that with the current climate, companies were focused "on the here and now."

These comments were echoed by Jo Sweeney, adviser at analyst firm Intelligent Business Research Services. "What tends to happen (in times like these) is that IT professionals get much more focused on proving and not improving," he said. "People will (move to) Windows 7 because if they can put greater management features into it, it will solve some of the problems of desktop computing."

More than 80 percent of IT costs go into the day-to-day running of IT, Sweeney said--keeping all the PCs running, making sure everyone has the right patches--and Microsoft's dynamic IT strategy, in which Windows 7 is a part, will make that easier by allowing the separation of applications and user profiles from the operating system. This will allow anyone anywhere on the network to access their profile.

People doing best-practice desktop management will already have realized those improvements, Sweeney said, with Microsoft's direction being a reaction to the market, although he admitted it was a good one. "How do they execute?" he asked. "Question mark."

Suzanne Tindal reported for ZDNet Australia.
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
47,063
6,192
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
jwmorrice

Thanks for the info.
 

Hobbyer

Member
Feb 17, 2008
395
0
16
tommy2bit said:
I think you may discredit Mac and Linux a little more than they deserve. Macs are quite popular platforms for musicians, graphic designers and publishers. Linux has a massive following, and despite what you say about applications there are tons of amazing open source software. As I said the primary reason is because Microsoft chooses to not make versions of their apps for Linux. Microsoft is a monopoly in the OS business, and I think if you understood this better you wouldn't put down Linux so quickly.
I understand monopoly's just fine (I studied and now work in capital markets). But the question then becomes, WHY are they a monopoly? And no, they were not born a monopoly.

You may want to read some of my previous posts regarding Mac's before repeating what I've already said (I run Leopard for music production). I've also used Linux, especially while I was in school since I was poor and couldn't afford a decent C compiler. It's also a great web server, and good enviro for coding.

Here's my last analogy regarding this and I'll refer to video games. It's the games that sell the consoles not the console itself. Doesn't matter if your system (i.e. O/S) kicks ass, you need the developers on your side to make the best games. Linux may be the best console but the best games are on Mac/PC. In true Microsoft fashion, the XBOX360 is a buggy, overheating POS, but it has killer games, and that's why it sells. My beloved PS3 is great console but where are the games Sony?!? I know, they're coming :(

I try to be as objective as possible and don't favour any O/S. I don't love Microsoft and don't hate Linux. But I simply can't look at someone in the face and tell them Linux apps are on par with those of PCs and Mac's. You get what you pay for.

Keebler... my apologies for taking your thread way off topic. Last post, I'm going to shut up about this debate now.
 

star_lord1

Member
Feb 18, 2008
209
5
18
Keebler Elf said:
So I'm thinking about buying a new computer. Pretty much everything but the monitor, keyboard, mouse, case, SATA hard drives, and speakers will be new. I have an external (USB) enclosure for IDE drives so that's how I'll transfer my old data over.

Key point: I don't really want to go to Vista but this thread is about the pros & cons of doing so. I know most people hate Vista (if I could do without it I would) but this is more about what's the downside to using XP vs. Vista on a new computer. I had been hoping to hold out until the new Windows comes out a couple years down the road but my current computer woes look like that's not an option.

I currently have an original OEM Win XP Home and I anticipate it won't work with the new system as too many components will be changing, so I'll very likely have to buy a new OS one way or the other.

1) From what I understand, the biggest problem is that XP can only handle 32-bit capability but Vista uses 64-bit. So if I use XP, I won't be utilizing the full capabilities of the system. How big an issue is this? If I'm not even going to notice, then it's not an issue.
64 bit is only relevant if your processor is 64 bit (i.e. AMD Athlon, Intel Xeon etc). A 64 bit OS offers you the ability to access RAM beyond 4GB. It is potentially faster if applications are compiled with 64 bit support but this is seldom realized.

2) What about old software? I have a bootleg Adobe Pro (which I actually use a fair bit, vs. just the Reader) and a bootleg Microsoft Office. Will these work with Vista? I'm thinking not, which means I'll have to replace them both. That means more money.
We use some old apps at work that do NOT work with Vista. We are unlikely to get updates for them either. Until these apps are replaced we will need XP. Replacing them will take time.

3) One of my biggest concerns is I keep hearing Vista isn't compatible with a lot of things. I'm usually not a front-of-the-line, get the latest and greatest type of guy. I usually wait a couple years until the kinks have been worked out as I don't need high performance computer parts. World of Warcraft is the most advanced game I've played and otherwise I just use my computer for word processing, surfing the net, and other basic tasks. No high-end graphics usage here.
As with number 2. Many older games won't run under Vista.

What are people's thoughts on the above?
I dislike Vista generally but then I don't need all of its features and love/hate always involves a lot of compromise - there's less with XP than with Vista.

As I once noted in a previous thread, if you go to SATA drives make sure that you use XP with SP2 as earlier versions do not have SATA support built in. You could, of course, have the drivers ready on floppy to load during the install process but it's a real hassle to get set for it. You could also try slipstreaming your XP install disk but that could be technically challenging (it is for most people).

BTW, at work we're finding that we need rely on XP less and less. Much of what we do can be done with Linux as well as with MS. Several people, including my boss, have switched entirely to a Linux desktop. In my particular case, I still need XP for a number of things but I'm seriously considering upgrading from a dual boot Vista/XP system to a dual boot Linux/XP system. For me, a developer, Linux offers a lot more than Vista.

PS The only thing I've really Vista to be good for is playing Halo 2 which is silly on the face of it since Halo 2 makes no use of Direct X 10 nor of Vista's unique features - pure marketing $(&($#.
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
47,063
6,192
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
2) What about old software? I have a bootleg Adobe Pro (which I actually use a fair bit, vs. just the Reader) and a bootleg Microsoft Office. Will these work with Vista? I'm thinking not, which means I'll have to replace them both. That means more money.
FWIW
Vista came with a 'Demo' of MS Office, PowerPoint Viewer 2000, Word, etc.
What I did was just copy over my version of the above from XP Pro to Vista with no problem this past february....it works fine on Vista....
 

Hobbyer

Member
Feb 17, 2008
395
0
16
tommy2bit said:
I completely agree with you. I think we are both thinking alike here, just started on the wrong foot maybe,, but all the points you just made I can't argue with.
Yeah, sorry I think I was a bit harsh in that last post. I'm pretty bad since I have a habit of getting off topic and rambling. Plus I get lost in big threads.

Anyway, enough of this IT shit, time for some pussy!
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts