XP or Vista?

Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by jojoman, Aug 12, 2008.

  1. jojoman macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2008
    #1
    Hi,

    Maybe this has been debated elsewhere, but I'm a student and a mac user,but for school purposes now I have to use visual studio, so I guess I have to install a version of windows on my mac now.

    So that brings me to the question: should I use xp or vista?

    I've used xp before I'm converted to mac, and I think xp is ok. Vista is obviously the newer os but I've heard a lot of bad things about it. Is Vista really that bad? I asked people who are complaining about vista and the usual answer is "it's just annoying" or something like that, but I don't know many concrete evidence of why it supposedly sucks. (especially, no offense, but among mac users I have heard a lot of complaints from people who hasn't used vista, and I don't want to be one of those.) Any opinions? Should I install vista or xp?
     
  2. nomar383 macrumors 65816

    nomar383

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2008
    Location:
    Rexburg, ID
    #3
    XP, unless you have to use Vista. Just my opinion
     
  3. GGJstudios macrumors Westmere

    GGJstudios

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    #4
  4. MorzillA macrumors 6502

    MorzillA

    Joined:
    May 16, 2007
    Location:
    Miami
    #5
    XP is the way to go for now, make sure that you search the forums for the proper way to set up and run XP on your Mac. Good luck!!






    :apple:
     
  5. clevin macrumors G3

    clevin

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2006
    #6
    XP is not supported anymore. And looking around, many people have bad impression about vista w/o even trying it.

    If you are going to use bootcamp, I sure suggest Vista. You can goto bestbuy or frys, and try a hand on with any Vista machine.
     
  6. nomar383 macrumors 65816

    nomar383

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2008
    Location:
    Rexburg, ID
    #7
    And see if bestbuy will let you bring your NAS and install Visual Studio too! lol
     
  7. arkitect macrumors 601

    arkitect

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2005
    Location:
    Bath, United Kingdom
    #8
    Supported or not, XP is the safer choice.

    And no, Clevin, (;)) that is not just a knee-jerk comment.
    On my Bootcamp partitions with the software we run Vista was a disaster.
     
  8. Rmafive macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2008
    Location:
    Richmond, Virginia
    #9
    I would go with xp, but if you like the look of vista, try downloading a theme to make xp look like Vista. By doing this, and not going with Vista, you will notice a big speed increase.
     
  9. jc1350 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    #10
    I've used both (been a Windows user until summer 2006 when I switched to Mac). I still have to use Windows at work and have 2 workstations, one with XP, one with Vista.

    XP.

    Vista is still not as compatible with things as XP is. One instance...Vista doesn't work with Site Executive (a content management system written in Cold Fusion)...at least not the version we have. And it's not strictly an IE thing as IE 6 and IE 7 on XP both work with Site Exec.

    Vista is the Windows ME of the NT series.
     
  10. ProwlingTiger macrumors 65816

    ProwlingTiger

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2008
    #11
    Go XP. Run away from Vista for now.

    XP is still supported. From Wikipedia and Verified:

     
  11. clevin macrumors G3

    clevin

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2006
    #12
    see, people keep using the words like "bad" "lame" "disaster", etc, etc, but hey, where are the evidences? where are the data? where are the facts?

    List them out, and let OP think for him/herslef if those are indeed what he/she would care.
     
  12. ProwlingTiger macrumors 65816

    ProwlingTiger

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2008
    #13
    XP
    -lots of driver support
    -runs faster
    -uses less resources

    Vista
    -some drivers not supported
    -uses loads of resources
     
  13. clevin macrumors G3

    clevin

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2006
    #14
    uses loads of resouces, just like leopard, if OP's mac runs leopard smooth, he sure can run Vista just as good.

    We are not in 2001 with 512MB RAM anymore, whats the fuss about resources?

    some drivers not supported, I bet 99% of the chance OP won't have problem with it, not to mention in the future, Vista has better chance get newer drivers than XP.
     
  14. ProwlingTiger macrumors 65816

    ProwlingTiger

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2008
    #15
    Vista is a known resource hog. Plus, if you compare benchmarks with Vista and XP, XP will out perform. Unless there is some specific feature you absolutely need with Vista, why get it?
     
  15. clevin macrumors G3

    clevin

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2006
    #16
    again, resource hog means what? is there any OS right now runs good at <1G RAM? other than Linux? If leopard needs 1G to run smooth, Vista needs 1G to run smooth, how is that Vista is a resouce hog while leopard is not?

    Needs more resource than XP, sure, but which one doesn't now? Tiger needs more resource than XP, leopard too.

    resource hog? how about leopard?

    XP outperform Vista? do you have any benchmark with vista SP1 to show the case? and show which beat which by how much?
     
  16. ProwlingTiger macrumors 65816

    ProwlingTiger

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2008
    #17
    1. Most acclaimed experts recommend 2GB RAM for Vista.
    2. Um..I have like 4 issues of PC World with Benchmark tests in em. Here's some links to keep you occupied for now til I locate online versions of the articles.
    http://news.cnet.com/Windows-XP-outshines-Vista-in-benchmarking-test/2100-1016_3-6220201.html

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/xp-vs-vista,1531-4.html

    And I could go on to find more...but there's just so many to choose from. I don't know where you come off directly comparing Vista to Leopard. The 2 do not have the same set of requirements just because they are the newest systems. Leopard can be run on older systems far easier than Vista ever could, or should. Perhaps you should find me evidence that 1GB in Vista will suffice.
     
  17. muldul macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2008
    Location:
    West Sussex, England, UK
    #18
    I have had no problems with vista on my pcs at home, neither have my friends running vista. I use xp for my macbook though as it runs faster than vista did
     
  18. clevin macrumors G3

    clevin

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2006
    #19
    well, Tomshardware's benchmark were made when Vista was first out. I was hoping there are new data you know... :eek:

    I can hardly trust those very much. for these reasons

    1. when Vista was first out, many graphic cards' drivers have problems with it, which should be solved now.

    2. The testing (in both cases) are using same hardwares for XP and Vista. but when you consider the minimum system requirement are quite different, and OSes are 6 years apart. sure today's "same" hardwares will benefit old system. Im sure 2G RAM will run Panther faster than leopard. But that can hardly be a good reason of choosing old OSes, since new one has more stuff to offer other than speed-on-same-hardwares.

    Still, to OP. try for yourself. People arguing numbers, impressions, but really have little to offer in terms of real world usage.
     
  19. ProwlingTiger macrumors 65816

    ProwlingTiger

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2008
    #20
    I believe newer tests have been done with Vista SP1. Turns out it still sucks. And with newer hardware. The test systems met the specifications.
     
  20. SkyBell macrumors 604

    SkyBell

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    Texas, unfortunately.
    #21
    There are very few reasons to choose Vista, and ton's of reasons to choose XP.
     
  21. aross99 macrumors 68000

    aross99

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2006
    Location:
    East Lansing, MI
    #22
    If you are going to use Visual Studio, why not use the latest OS from MS?

    We use it at work, and my Visual Studio developers love it. I'm not a heavy user, but for what I need, it works fine. I had XP before.

    It does take more resources, so I don't know how well it works in Parallels/VMWare, but in bootcamp it should be fine.

    My thought is that it's what comes on all new PC's and it's the current release from MS, so that's what you should use. I think it's gotten alot better with the patches/updates over the past year or so.

    I'm no Windows expert though - so YMMV...
     
  22. ProwlingTiger macrumors 65816

    ProwlingTiger

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2008
    #23
    Another sound voice of reason. Sure its newer, but that doesn't mean its better. XP is more stable, faster, and works better.
     
  23. aross99 macrumors 68000

    aross99

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2006
    Location:
    East Lansing, MI
    #24
    For a student who is only loading windows to occasionally use Visual Studio, do you really think he is going to have stability issues?

    Doesn't sound like he will be a hard core windows user...
     
  24. Rocio macrumors newbie

    Rocio

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Location:
    NC, USA
    #25
    I would go with XP Pro, I find it a lot simpler to handle and requires less memory partition on your Mac, especially if you are adding windows based programs to that partition. I, myself had to get AutoCAD for architecture school and the IT guys reccommmend XP since it is more stable because there might be some softwares that dont work well with vista, those tweaking problems etc.

    I run XP Pro via bootcamp and it runs very nicely, especially with AutoCAD being a greater software.
     

Share This Page