Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Vista or XP??
jybgess
Member Posts: 355
If I get a new PC right after X-mas, should I get Vista or XP.
Comments
Personally I'd get a PC with XP, because they still need to work some stuff out. The only way I'd get Vista installed is if you plan on playing a game that requires Vista like Shadowrun and there are a few more but expect to have to play with Vista's UI and do some tweaking.
XP Pro, you do not need Vista yet. All current MMORPG are still on Dx9 except for maybe LOTRO which uses partial DX10. IF you plan to play any coming up feature title like Crytek then get Vista but you will need a DX10 compatible video card. Also if you plan on crytek I won't need to tell you that a $3000 PC wont still run it smoothly. With a full enabled DX10 game there is so much detail and awesomeness, I play a few DX10 games only on my Vista PC but play all my MMORPG on my Dx9 Xp Pro machine.
Vista should be the better OS once they do the first major release of SP1, however; vista has gotten tons of nice updates since that should of been called SP1 but it was not done that way. So look for all the good fixes to come in Q2-Q3 next year.
XP Home. You don't need XP Pro. It adds networking features for things like businesses. It adds no extra gameplay performance or features. And don't even bother with Vista. Until they service pack it, I won't be using that resource hogging piece of garbage.
/undecided
dual boot
____________________________
TheCore
I said Pro for a few reasons, it isn't much more then home now days and you get many features that are not in home. If you do any tweaking PRO offers the best performance.
Pro has better user control if your use to that and get home you will not have this. It is hidden for the most part such as power users etc.
Pro has support for 2 processors or dual core and home really doesn't offer this at least to my knowledge. Would need to check on that. Pro has some interesting remote desktop features not in home, if your at the office you can use your Pro to be a separate server for work. Home does not offer that feature.
Pro has a better disk usage. Pro can use the DDS and Pro has the logical disk manager. Pro also has a few other features not found on home like, better security with files. Pro also has better management resources not found on home that include a various user integrated features. Also you got to love the added network features found in pro. If you are using a network and try home you get many complicated steps to get it to work properly, with pro it just works.
I recommed Vista x 64 bit OS PRO if you plan to play modern games with at least 4GB RAM and a strong memory card. And XP 32bit PRO if you plan to have 1-2 GB ram to play not on max graphic quality settings.
REALITY CHECK
XP, ftw.
Vista is way too machine intensive, and unless you've got the cash (assuming you're a poor college kid like myself) to buy some ridiculous gaming box, you're going to lag on your desktop before ever running a game.
The only thing that Vista does that XP doesn't is enhance the annoyance that you get when you're trying to navigate system files. I've personally been a victim of being told I don't have permissions to administrative folders, after having logged in under my Admin account. Oh yeah, and it looks a little better too...
Running XP is a better decision than Vista; if you've got less than super memory, processing speed and/or graphics cards. If you've got exceptional all of the above, then I say go for it, but you'll have a hell of fun time dealing with permissions pop ups every five seconds when you want to browse any of your own files.
Might as well go to Vista, we all will one day,, I have been running it for about 5 months with out any problem, the biggest thing you have to remember is you get what you pay for. I run on a pure Intel platform, except HD and Video. it is stable as a rock. I host LAN parties all the time and everything seems to be very stable. now i have a player that has some issues, but i blame his hardware, some of the Hardware and Drivers don't meet the Microsoft HQL
http://www.wowarmory.com/guild-info.xml?r=Malfurion&n=Lock+and+Shackles&p=1
Guild info
Why do people keep thinking that SP1 for Vista is going to be a major upgrade? From what I have been reading it won't be and will only be a way of installing all the previous security updates in one patch. Vista won't change. The only major patch that I'm aware of is Windows XP SP2. BTW XP SP3 should be out soon and it's only a compilation of previous patches.
I said Pro for a few reasons, it isn't much more then home now days and you get many features that are not in home. If you do any tweaking PRO offers the best performance.
Pro has better user control if your use to that and get home you will not have this. It is hidden for the most part such as power users etc.
Pro has support for 2 processors or dual core and home really doesn't offer this at least to my knowledge. Would need to check on that. Pro has some interesting remote desktop features not in home, if your at the office you can use your Pro to be a separate server for work. Home does not offer that feature.
Pro has a better disk usage. Pro can use the DDS and Pro has the logical disk manager. Pro also has a few other features not found on home like, better security with files. Pro also has better management resources not found on home that include a various user integrated features. Also you got to love the added network features found in pro. If you are using a network and try home you get many complicated steps to get it to work properly, with pro it just works.
XP Home does support dual core. It just doesn't show the second core when you look for it in task manager: http://www.amd.com/us-en/Weblets/0,,7832_8366_7595~95364,00.html
I've got to leave in ten minutes though so can't talk much more about it. Suffice it to say, the average user won't use any of the features provided with XP Pro.
Note his avitar name [ J/K ]
Yea its true there are some advantages to having vista for the future mainly but as of right now the best system out of the two is Xp because it isant as bugged and mosre prgramsrun on it.
And what this measn is that not every piece of hardware has permission from micro$oft to exist so its not allowed to work that and that Vista is a resource hog.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Retired from: Neocron, Everquest, Everquest 2, Guild Wars, RF Online and Final Fantasy VII
Currently Playing : EvE Online.
So why tell him to Run XP might as well jump into Vista, providing his hardware is good
http://www.wowarmory.com/guild-info.xml?r=Malfurion&n=Lock+and+Shackles&p=1
Guild info
If you're getting a new OS get vista, I kind of wish I did on my new machine other than XP again.
And before anyone tries telling you oh but vista is so buggy/ect., I saw it on the internet/did the beta of vista! just stop. I've had a lot of experience with vista so far (on my roomates computer) and he hasn't had a problem running a game yet.
Eventually you will want vista for DX10 anyways.
XP. Vista slows ur pc down alot no matter how good your hardware is, compared to xp.
I'm building a new PC for my Dad next week and I've decided to stick with XP Home.
Vista just doesn't seem to offer any significant advantages to me.
DX10 is nice but it's going to be a while yet before the majority of games use it and to be honest the difference isn't exactly jaw dropping.
Add to that the fact that XP runs pretty well these days and with SP3 early next year it should be good for a couple of years yet.
If you like to be an early adopter or just want to have the latest then go for Vista. I doubt if half the horror stories we hear are true and I know a few people who are more than happy with it, I just don't see the need yet
If you EVER plan on running 4 GB or more memory on your PC then Vista > XP... But for the average user, XP is decent i guess. Don't expect too much support for it in a year or so since MS is phasing out support gradually on all 32 bit apps.
Vista's SP1 is scheduled for January, that should clear up many of the problems assciated with it.
XP, beyond any question of a doubt. When I play MP3s on my Vista machine, the sound actually breaks up when I move the mouse.
Chris Mattern
If you're buying a new computer using today's technology it's stupid to go with anything other than Vista. XP will not take advantage of your hardware. Buying a dual/quad core processor? Only Vista is going to take advantage of it as it's multi-threaded where XP is not. XP will speed up only as the core speed improves while Vista scales to the hardware. Better use of resources will allow Vista to take better advantage of todays tech like memory.
Any performance difference in gaming is minimal at best and is only visible in benchmarks. Considering Vista doesn't have DX9 in it and emulates it through DX10 the 3-4 FPS you might lose is actually quite impressive.
The key is to not get caught up in the message board "horror stories" because half them are as real as the average ghost story. People don't seem to be able to get it through there heads that if you put Vista on a Computer that can barely run XP it's not going to run well. They don't seem to be able to figure out that if you do something stupid it's not a bug in the software. Vista is by far the most stable OS ever released by Microsoft. Talk to a real representation of Vista users, not the angry forum folk and you're find that the majority of users are very happy with Vista and have into little if any issues. I laugh because the majority of the complaints of Vista come from people that have never used the US and just repeat and BS they read from any forum they can find, or obvious trolls that feel the need to crusade for Macs or Linux distribution of their choice.
It's human nature to fear what's new and different. XP's been around a long time, especially for an OS. The reactions going around are only natural and will start to go away withing a year or so. Go forth and get Vista on you're new computer, I personally guarantee you'll love it.
member of imminst.org
Thank you for that insightful analysis, Mr. Ballmer.
Vista is bloated crap, it runs slowly and inconsistently on hardware that will fly with XP. Don't get it.
Chris Mattern
Depends on the game in my opinion and how good your computer is. If you are going to play a game with DX10 and you do have a computer that can run it on max with Vista, go for it. If the game only has DX9 at the time, go with XP.
Well I was going to start quoting all the BS that is in this thread about Vista but it would have taken too much space. I am going to guess that the majority of people that complain about vista have never used it or installed it had one problem that they couldn't figure out in 3 min and uninstalled it. I have used Vista since release had absolutely no problem with any game new or old that i have put on it. All this reminds me of the 98 and 2000 users that screamed and complained about 2k and xp same complaints about being resource intensive blah blah blah same crap just a few years later.
to the OP go vista if you have half a brain in your head it is incredably simple to use.
My Vista machine was a replacement for a dead XP machine (motherboard failure) from the same vendor. I didn't want to get Vista, but I didn't have a choice. In spite of being notably more powerful than the machine it replaced, it runs more slowly and less reliably than the machine it replaced, and the sound has had numerous problems (the main remaining problem, which I mentioned above, the fact that sound breaks up if you do anything outside the application, still remains. It occurs with several MP3 players and other apps as well. I haven't switched back to XP because a) I'm not sure there are released XP drivers for all this box's hardware and b) I'm really not all that anxious to give MS *yet more* of my money. If somebody handed me a copy of XP with all the needed drivers, I'd re-install in a heartbeat.
Chris Mattern
If you EVER plan on running 4 GB or more memory on your PC then Vista > XP... But for the average user, XP is decent i guess. Don't expect too much support for it in a year or so since MS is phasing out support gradually on all 32 bit apps.
It will be quite a while before I feel the need for 4 GB of RAM, and when that time comes, I'll be getting a new PC anyway.A lot of people who like to give computer advice are people who do things to their computers that the vast majority of normal users would never do. Why do so many "experts" fail to understand how the average person actually uses a computer?
XP, beyond any question of a doubt. When I play MP3s on my Vista machine, the sound actually breaks up when I move the mouse.
Chris Mattern
That's not the OS, either your using up a lot of memory trying up what's needed for the audio, especially if you're used integrated sound, or there is an issue with your set up of your sound card if you have one. I listen to MP3's all day at work, and it's never done anything like that.
member of imminst.org