Last I checked XP home didn't support or utilize dual cores, but XP Professional does.
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.
Vista or XP?
- Thread starter kevindosi
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Last I checked XP home didn't support or utilize dual cores, but XP Professional does.
No. Cores ≠ Processors. In Microsoft lingo a processor is one socket as anyone with even a quad core CPU and XP Home can verify.
Although it mainly depends on what your purpose with Windows is I would recommend XP. Ive been using the (not available through retail) corporate version of Vista for a couple of moths now and it has been mixed blessing. Im particularly disappointed in the likes of HP. My 3 year old scanner and photo printer are only partially, read: very basically, supported in Vista. Very opportunistic. My almost 4 year old PC, in spite of having 2 GB of RAM and 320 GB of disc space doesnt cut it anymore. Anemic display adapter being the main cause. XP with the latest service packs and drivers plus one of excellent free anti-virus programs can still do the trick nicely. It is very stable and will run any program.
Vista is really not that pretty. I use it everyday, and hearing this 'pretty' comment is like hearing that Macs are better at graphic design. It holds very little weight.
OS X is tons prettier.
OS X is tons prettier.
After trying to get Vista Ultimate to work properly in both Fusion and Parallels, I finally ditched Vista and loaded XP Pro in Fusion. I haven't benchmarked it or anything, but it feels like it runs twice as fast as Vista ever did. It boots faster, suspends faster, resumes faster, and the applications all run faster. Of course, the first thing it did was download over 80 updates, but that's MS for you...
Go with XP.
Go with XP.
It has to be XP if you are any kind of purist because Vista is bloated, a resource hogger, has not fully optimised drivers, generally worse like for like graphics performance, and Microsoft can't even update icon resources with old icons still present from back in the old days of Windows 2000! You're best to stick with what you know is best and that's XP. Vista = unwanted crap.
Absolutely. Go with a "known quantity". Vista is still teething, and will continue for some years. Look how long it took XP to get to the level of stability and security it is now!
Was in the same situation as the OP before reading this thread, want a Windows OS to run in Parallels, was swaying towards XP as not to fussed about all the fancy stuff in Vista, and when i went on my brothers Vista laptop it just confused me!
So after reading this i've definatly decided to go XP, but i can't find anywhere that sells it! anyone know of somewhere in the UK that sells XP?
So after reading this i've definatly decided to go XP, but i can't find anywhere that sells it! anyone know of somewhere in the UK that sells XP?
So true!
I hated Windows XP until SP2 was released. Prior to that it was Windows 98SE or 2K for me.
Well, I guess I'll be the contrarian here, but I really like Vista so far! I'm an experienced Windows user who has recently "embraced" OS X--I refuse to say I'm a "switcher" because I happily run both platforms, and both have their strengths and weaknesses. I've loaded Vista Ultimate on my new 24" Alu 2.8 GHz C2E using Boot Camp, and it runs fine. I don't find it to be particularly slow, though obviously XP is faster.
Most of the moaning you hear about Vista is the same as you heard about XP when it first appeared--"bloated" code (compared to Win2K or Win98), lack of drivers, compatibility problems, etc. These issues are real indeed, but to be expected whenever a major OS overhaul comes along. Vista will mature over the next few years, and these problems will become a distant memory. Of course, XP will be around for a long time, too. But, as time goes on, the compatibility balance will slowly tilt in favor of Vista.
So, what to do? The advice I'd give anyone is as follows: if you have a copy of XP laying around that you can legally install on your Mac, then by all means do it. There is nothing you NEED in Vista right now, and you'll benefit from the maturity of XP. However, if you need to buy a license anyway, the decision becomes more difficult. Vista IS the future--like it or not, Microsoft drives the Windows world (and therefore most of the computing world), and Vista will become the dominant desktop platform over the next few years. Although I originally intended to install XP on my Mac, when it came time to shell out a few hundred bucks for a license, I reconsidered and decided to look forward instead of backwards. No doubt I'll have to put up with the growing pains that Vista will bring, but so far I'm glad that I've taken the plunge.
I'm an experienced Windows user who has recently "embraced" OS X--I refuse to say I'm a "switcher" because I happily run both platforms, and both have their strengths and weaknesses. I've loaded Vista Ultimate on my new 24" Alu 2.8 GHz C2E using Boot Camp, and it runs fine. I don't find it to be particularly slow, though obviously XP is faster. Most of the moaning you hear about Vista is the same as you heard about XP when it first appeared--"bloated" code (compared to Win2K or Win98), lack of drivers, compatibility problems, etc. These issues are real indeed, but to be expected whenever a major OS overhaul comes along. Vista will mature over the next few years, and these problems will become a distant memory. Of course, XP will be around for a long time, too. But, as time goes on, the compatibility balance will slowly tilt in favor of Vista.
So, what to do? The advice I'd give anyone is as follows: if you have a copy of XP laying around that you can legally install on your Mac, then by all means do it. There is nothing you NEED in Vista right now, and you'll benefit from the maturity of XP. However, if you need to buy a license anyway, the decision becomes more difficult. Vista IS the future--like it or not, Microsoft drives the Windows world (and therefore most of the computing world), and Vista will become the dominant desktop platform over the next few years. Although I originally intended to install XP on my Mac, when it came time to shell out a few hundred bucks for a license, I reconsidered and decided to look forward instead of backwards. No doubt I'll have to put up with the growing pains that Vista will bring, but so far I'm glad that I've taken the plunge.
Well, I guess I'll be the contrarian here, but I really like Vista so far!
That is what I thought a couple of months ago. There are some improvements, certainly. Little things, like leaving out the extension if you right click on a file to rename it. Important things like ‘previous version’, the desktop implementation of volume shadow copying. Because of my job, I’ve been using the corporate version (it has all the goodies) since its release. Microsoft has been getting a lot of opposition because of the less than secure implementation of user rights. In a standard XP setup, the default user has admin rights. In Vista that issue has been addressed. But the execution is very awkward. I bet nine out of ten users disable the feature with devastating results.
I have only two issues with Vista, naming system requirements and lack of driver support from major manufacturers.
I have been using Vista for about 4 months now I think. I have it installed on both my Office PC and my home PC. The first month using Vista was awkward. The change in the control panel and some of the GUI. The most interesting change is the start menu going under the programs menu has made it hard to adapt.
After using it I have found it to be perfect and I see the advantages from XP. Most people here will say bad stuff about it becuase of the adaption to new a new GUI.
I wont' ever go back to XP now that I have Vista. Once Vista SP1 is released which is very very soon it will really make things better.
After using it I have found it to be perfect and I see the advantages from XP. Most people here will say bad stuff about it becuase of the adaption to new a new GUI.
I wont' ever go back to XP now that I have Vista. Once Vista SP1 is released which is very very soon it will really make things better.
I've been using Vista since september of last year (yup, before Vista was released. I was using Release Candidate 1). I personally like it.
Before using it, if you have any peripherals that you'd like to use in Vista, make sure there are drivers for it.
I think Vista gets too much flack from people who simply don't know what they're talking about, never have used Vista or blame MS for other companies mistakes.
A common example is that Vista uses a lot of RAM.
This is actually due to something called Superfetch, which can account for about half of your RAM being consumed after a few hours of use (and is why Vista's RAM usage may start out as 500 megs when first starting up to soaring to close to a gig after a few hours). Superfetch caches your most commonly used programs in memory to help them load faster.
When you use an application that needs memory, Vista will release memory for the program. However, 2 gigs of RAM is really needed for Vista. I used my Dad's laptop, which has only 1 gig of RAM, and it was pretty slow, but then again, it was mainly because Lenovo loaded a bunch of crap onto it.
Before using it, if you have any peripherals that you'd like to use in Vista, make sure there are drivers for it.
I think Vista gets too much flack from people who simply don't know what they're talking about, never have used Vista or blame MS for other companies mistakes.
A common example is that Vista uses a lot of RAM.
This is actually due to something called Superfetch, which can account for about half of your RAM being consumed after a few hours of use (and is why Vista's RAM usage may start out as 500 megs when first starting up to soaring to close to a gig after a few hours). Superfetch caches your most commonly used programs in memory to help them load faster.
When you use an application that needs memory, Vista will release memory for the program. However, 2 gigs of RAM is really needed for Vista. I used my Dad's laptop, which has only 1 gig of RAM, and it was pretty slow, but then again, it was mainly because Lenovo loaded a bunch of crap onto it.
Correct. All good points. It seems vista is hit or miss with people. Some people will have no compatibility problems/issues, others will.
I say just stick with XP for the reasons mentioned above. Furthermore, You might want to wait for XP service pack 3. It will be released in the coming months. You'll thank yourself because right now the install for xp sp2 takes a few restarts to get all the updates/patches. Quite annoying.
