Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
To Vista or Not to Vista that is the Question
- Thread starter Fonzijr1964
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Defiantly XP, for stability and less errors and annoyances, Vista is only if you want eye candy and loads of futures you will never use.
Not that I want to be the one jumping on the 'get vista' bandwagon... because I don't. But I wanted to make sure you knew that Vista would be a better choice if you were connected to the internet. Vista is far more secure than XP. As far as everything else goes, being "pretty" is Vista's only other benefit I can see. It is significantly slower, and compatibility problems with hardware persist endlessly.
If you're going to be logged onto the web, get Vista. If not, don't consider anything other than XP.
If I was held at gunpoint and asked whether I wanted a modern Vista 64 bit system or a 10 year old XP system, which may run a bit faster... I'd choose the Vista system in a heartbeat. But then again, I have an "issue" (as my wife so gently puts it) with new technology.
If you're going to be logged onto the web, get Vista. If not, don't consider anything other than XP.
If I was held at gunpoint and asked whether I wanted a modern Vista 64 bit system or a 10 year old XP system, which may run a bit faster... I'd choose the Vista system in a heartbeat. But then again, I have an "issue" (as my wife so gently puts it) with new technology.
Vista 64 for sure. Updates for most programs these days are geared specifically for Vista and support (not all though). You probably wouldn't go too wrong with XP either because I'm sure there are plenty of stable versions out there. Of all the Vista "Flavors" I've tried I have had the least problems with Vista Ultimate 64 and Business 32. I'd like to try Vista Business 64 sometime.
I use Windows XP 32 because I both want to be able to read my Windows HDD from the Mac-side without needing any extra software (so I keep the drive as FAT32 which Vista does not support) and I like Parallels, which currently does not support Windows Vista x64.
Once Parallels adds Vista x64 support, I will replace XP with Vista.
Once Parallels adds Vista x64 support, I will replace XP with Vista.
Ok, I don't know if I'm understanding this or not... I'm not that technical on fat vs ntfs. My external hdd is in fat 32 so my ps3 can read it and my friends macbook, and also my windows desktop which is home premium 64 bit. I can add files, music, videos and pictures between all 3 just fine. Forgive me if I'm not understanding.
If your games require DX10 then get Vista. The port for XP is not quite there yet (only in alpha).
See here: http://www.techmixer.com/download-directx-10-for-windows-xp/
See here: http://www.techmixer.com/download-directx-10-for-windows-xp/
Windows Vista Ultimate 64 bit all the way, SP1 and constant updates really advanced the OS from what it was. I'm Currently running that on my mac AND my main windows desktop and have no regrets. Games run wonderful, can Install more then 4 Gig of RAM and windows will utilize it! FPS rates remain high and games never lag. Hope I helped!
-Diseal3
-Diseal3
XP is the way to go without a doubt and this is coming from someone who works with XP and Vista on a daily basis at the office. Save yourself a lot of headaches and go with XP.
you can downgrade, heres the article.
anyway, XP as TEG said, the answer is always XP for the terms compatibility, lower-end system, faster, not a rip off, etc. I'm not trying to bash Vista, but these are facts. XP has more games, and I'm not sure if CAD programs have gone to Vista, they might, I'm just not sure.
I don't know why you would claim that vista is better for web than XP.
Vista added a layer of user-unfriendly pop up on every action.
XP can use IE 7 so it has the security protection that Ms. has been advertising about. But who use IE nowaday anyway? Firefox is the way to go.
Just put a router between the XP machine and the internet and you are safe.
Go you with the user-friend XP and it will save you a lot of headache.
I can downgrade to XP but I don't have that much time reinstalling everything
Vista added a layer of user-unfriendly pop up on every action.
XP can use IE 7 so it has the security protection that Ms. has been advertising about. But who use IE nowaday anyway? Firefox is the way to go.
Just put a router between the XP machine and the internet and you are safe.
Go you with the user-friend XP and it will save you a lot of headache.
I can downgrade to XP but I don't have that much time reinstalling everything
How could someone ask you to use a 10 year old XP system? Microsoft released XP on October 25, 2001. XP is not even 7 years old.
I use Vista 32 on a relatively fany PC that's about a year old. The compatibility issues no longer exist, it doesn't crash, and I turned off the ACCEPT? DECLINE? windows. Drivers aren't a problem. I have all the eye candy turned off, performs very well. All of my old games work, obviously all new games work. Perfectly stable. I'd go with 64 though.
Have you used Vista? The pop-ups only come up when you are adding or removing a program.
Why the Vista hating?
I don't understand all the complaints about Vista. I run Vista 64 bit, and I have never been so happy with any other version of Windows before. In half a year I have hardly had a system crash at all - just the ones I've asked for by overclocking. It's fast, it looks good, and I have had almost no compatibility issues.
It runs on an Intel 2.5 Quad Core 45nm 1300MHz processor, 8 GB RAM.
Compare it to OS X, I will not, but until you run Vista 64 bit on proper hardware, please don't disrespect it!
I don't understand all the complaints about Vista. I run Vista 64 bit, and I have never been so happy with any other version of Windows before. In half a year I have hardly had a system crash at all - just the ones I've asked for by overclocking. It's fast, it looks good, and I have had almost no compatibility issues.
It runs on an Intel 2.5 Quad Core 45nm 1300MHz processor, 8 GB RAM.
Compare it to OS X, I will not, but until you run Vista 64 bit on proper hardware, please don't disrespect it!
Sorry to say but the majority of the people who hate it have been swept up in the vista sux crowd.
The facts:
Vista 64 SP1 is far more stable than XP
XP cannot use more than 1 core if its life depended on it. The home edition doesn't even have SMP (symmetric multi processing).
Vista 64 SP1 is much faster than XP if you have a fast system.
Yes most of the time Vista is slower, so what. XP and Ubuntu are faster than OS X, does that make OS X worse? F*ck no.
The facts:
Vista 64 SP1 is far more stable than XP
XP cannot use more than 1 core if its life depended on it. The home edition doesn't even have SMP (symmetric multi processing).
Vista 64 SP1 is much faster than XP if you have a fast system.
Yes most of the time Vista is slower, so what. XP and Ubuntu are faster than OS X, does that make OS X worse? F*ck no.