To Vista or Not to Vista that is the Question

testinz

macrumors newbie
Aug 19, 2008
11
0
Vista = loads of crap... I don't know why I have Vista on 3 computers at home.... I so want to downgrade them.
 

fivepoint

macrumors 65816
Sep 28, 2007
1,175
4
IOWA
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.
 

nick9191

macrumors 68040
Feb 17, 2008
3,286
32
Britain
XP is obsolete and pathetic. Vista is crap. It's not a good time to be a Windows user.

If I had to choose I would choose Vista, especially 64bit which is far more stable than XP can ever dream of being.
 

KRS

macrumors newbie
Aug 21, 2008
6
0
Yeah I'd go with XP I'm stuck with Vista, but Xp is just right for gaming
 

goinskiing

macrumors 6502a
Jun 25, 2008
914
11
Meridian, ID
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.
 

CWallace

macrumors 604
Aug 17, 2007
7,176
3,132
Seattle, WA
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.
 

fivepoint

macrumors 65816
Sep 28, 2007
1,175
4
IOWA
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.
This would not be a concern if he is just running BootCamp, correct?
 

Dobbs2

macrumors 6502
Jun 5, 2008
369
62
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.
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.
 

Diseal3

macrumors 65816
Jun 29, 2008
1,064
46
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
 

BlackMax

macrumors 6502a
Jan 14, 2007
901
0
North Carolina
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.
 

SnowLeopard2008

macrumors 604
Jul 4, 2008
6,772
8
Silicon Valley
Vista = loads of crap... I don't know why I have Vista on 3 computers at home.... I so want to downgrade them.
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.
 

na1577

macrumors 6502a
Jan 20, 2008
869
56
Windows XP, definitely. Vista adds a lot of features which are nice for normal use, but for gaming, Windows XP wins hands down.
 

testinz

macrumors newbie
Aug 19, 2008
11
0
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 :)
 

204467

macrumors 6502a
Jul 13, 2008
821
0
Philadelphia, PA
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.
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.
 

m1stake

macrumors 68000
Jan 17, 2008
1,518
3
Philly
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.
 

tjohanne

macrumors member
Dec 2, 2007
45
0
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!
 

nick9191

macrumors 68040
Feb 17, 2008
3,286
32
Britain
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.
 

Similar threads

  • SonicDaHerzog
2
Replies
2
Views
157
  • Fernandez21
0
Replies
0
Views
263
  • rpbrownphoto
9
Replies
9
Views
567
Replies
4
Views
441
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.