Vista over XP?

Like it has been said a thousand times before. All software will not run the same on all computers! And I believe software was actually created to slowly drive us insane. And you know, it might be working.

 

Lol. The software I used to write always had a secret drive user insane module included. I think it backfired

 

Seems like you are talking about people being dishonest. This is a separate issue to having lots of experience with computers.

 

Every machine I've used has shown an improvement in speed with everything other than gaming or intensive editing of images/audio/video. This is of course on machines capable on handling Vista.

 

Seems?? I made it quite clear.

 

In other words: Superfetch might make the user experience a bit smoother (precaching of frecuently used files), but when tasked with CPU/RAM intensive apps Vista is indeed slower.

 

In other words, everything about the operating system (including boot and access times) except for gaming or other overhead-intense applications there is a noticable improvement. This makes sense, especially considering Windows gains more overhead with each release. Considering my clients aren't gamers or video editors, it's a non-issue. I'm a gamer with Vista on one machine and XP/Kubuntu on another.

As with practically every review has said, if you're a gamer it's still better to choose the older operating system (unless you want DX10), which is also standard Microsoft fare.

 

There really is no reason to play the swap game with customers computers as most hardware is getting very cheap. I would advise that you hone up a bit on your computer skills so you are able to tell about a tech and his or her shop before you let them work on or build you a comp. I never had a complaint in fifteen years because I was there to service my customers equiptment not screw them over.

 

bigc73542 ,i am only a user without the considerable experience you accumulated throughout the years,but i must point out a few discrepancies which emerged during this thread. You said:

With all due respect for your role what can be assumed from your words is that:

IF YOU DONT ADD ANY SECURITY APPLICATION Vista can boot all right,otherwise indeed it is very SLOW,in spite of doubling and trebling RAM & the rest.
Practically you say that vista CANNOT tolerate any added security which is not MS approved.
Shall we assume then that in your opinion Vista ,as it is ,is IMPREGNABLE and completely secure?
Do i have to assume you're happy to delegate ALL of your security to Microsoft,completely making 30 years of experience useless?

If not, what you say is highly detrimental to Vista,as it implies Vista does not want to be a secure OS.

I bet on it! You practically make a race with a 100LBS allowance in your favour...........not very fair.

I must assume you hate all non MS software? Perhaps you are an hardware expert only?

Then you added that on account of your expertise you tweaked Vista:

Then you absolutely denied of having performed ANY modifications to Vista OS:

Which of the two statements of yours shall we believe?Arent you a bit too anxious to defend Vista?

This means you believe Vista is ok out of the box from a security point of view.....
Are you about to be hired by Microsoft as a professional (MEMBER ASAP since 2004)?Or is it already so,or you REALLY think that UAC is better than SSM/ProSEcurity or other similar HIPS and that the Protected Mode in IE7 is going to protect better than any other security program available...

Why then you dont tell me how can i turn off Printers Sharing in Vista Premium? I'll greatly appreciate if you reply to this...

 

is this what do you want to do?

 

mata7,thank you,but if it were that easy in Vista PREMIUM i wouldnt have asked.
You showed Ultimate,in Premium i see:

Network Discovery off
File Sharing off
Public Folder Sharing off
Printer Sharing off(not installed)
Password Protected Sharing on

With ON you establish that only people with a user account and a password for the computer can share.
If you disable Password Protected Sharing and get an OFF, it only means that ANYONE can have access. Apparently,you cannot disable this feature.
If the computer is used by only one person there is no problem, and the problem itself is rather trivial,but it might be seen as an exploitable bug sometime in the future....perhaps?

 

I have used Vista for quite a while and i have had few problems with it and much prefer it to xp. It loads as do programs much faster then xp and all its small benefits make me much happier to use then xp. Having used both on the one computer I certainly know which one I would prefer.

 

I'm with BigC as well. I am running Vista Home Premium. Disabled Windows Defender. I'm running my favorite security apps: KAV, (on the moment AntiVir) and System Safety Monitor without problems. My experience also is that Vista is far more stable than XP. What I especially like is that the program is able to solve quite a number of problems by itself (had some problems with network adapter). I find it also very fast. The only thing I bought for my Dell 5000 bitburner was some extra RAM memory (have now total of 2 GB), but this was not necessary after all.
(N.B. The Dell Vista adviser program concluded my system was not capable of running Vista. Naughty boys ! )

On another partition I still run XP home because I have some cbt material that only runs on XP.

When XP just had been released you also had criticasters with sortlike comments you now read concerning Vista. Same movie different title. Within a short period of time most users will run a version of Vista and they will love it. Wanna bet ?

 

After some early issues and subsequent patches, Vista's infancy problems are dwindling down, but when you get past its 'eye-candy' I can't say I see any stability/reliability improvements over XP. And the indisputable fact is that in order to come close to matching the performance of XP, Vista needs a heck of a lot more hardware resources!

 

Its great that some vendors at least Dell offer now also XP pro on their machines,a minority in their line though,but they take the worldwide complaints about Vista serious.

 

You are way off base here. I have known BigC on these forums for as long as I have been on it. When it comes to computers, BigC has forgotten more than you will ever know. When BigC says something, just take it on face value that he knows what he is talking about.

As for my opinion on this subject, I have had 64 bit Vista Ultimate on an SLI rig for some time now. It took a long time for nVidia to get their drivers stable, but it is much better now. I have seen frame rates increase dramatically with driver updates over time too.

When I chose Vista, I chose it because I wanted to learn about Vista. If I had to choose now, I would chose Vista over XP on a new PC. It is stable and can easily be made to behave like XP, and runs just as fast.

XP is still nice choice, but I simply prefer to look forward, not backward. Unless there is an overriding factor, such as software or hardware requirements, I would recommend Vista so that you could keep moving forward.

If you have an older machine, like my Intel D850GB, then I would stick with XP and not upgrade. Just no reason to. If it is acting sluggish when it use to be fast, then you have other issues. Either tidy the system up ore re-install XP.

 

If you are going to try and pick my posts apart you might try and quote exactly what I have said in my posts. No where in my posts did I say that security software had to be MS approved. And no I have not deleted or stopped any services in Vista. There was no need as it ran just fine right after install. And you must really be hard up to make yourself look good trying to make me out as a Microsoft software lover, what a dunce you must be. No where did I say in my posts that MS was the best and all the rest wasn't any good and I did not say that I tweaked Vista Just that it was setup right not modified. I don't trust Microsoft much more than anyone else does to do what they say they will or can do. I use what MS apps I need that have shown themselfs to work the way I want. That does not mean I trust MS with my computer security. This is all of a reply you will get from me as you really don't want answers, I have seen many posters like you. All you are interested in is starting conflict or just outright flaming. I don't feel I need to defend my integrity or lower myself to your level with any further replys to you. Oh and selectively picking sentences out of my posts out of context to fit your needs really shows your true self.

 

Thats exactly the same results i keep hearing from the "have to keep moving forward" gang who no matter what just have to have the newest just because it's so-called latest.

Bahhh! Vista is not nowhere near and now seems was never intended to replace XP, just another $M option (bait if you will) to see how many would bite, but many got bit in return and have returned to XP again in spite of those so-called improvements.

HARDWARE is where it's really at if you're after speed, if it's stability you're after, many still lay claim to lean in XP's favor.

Personally, the next $M O/S just might have the right chemistry to replace XP for good, but IMHO, Vista will never meet that goal, SP1, 2, 3, or a ton of patches like bandaids.

 

CloseHauled,thanks for your remarks,but you are way off here: i am NOT complaining because i tried to upgrade to Vista with an old pc.As i said earlier,i am just using a recently acquired HP notebook,Turion 64 ,2GB RAM machine with Vista Premium, powerfull enough for Vista.
It's not mine and if i am forced to buy a Vista machine i will have a double OS,at least.

Easter,i agree with you entirely: perhaps next OS will be better,not this one,not now.



bigc73542,I am very surprised by your reaction,considering your vast experience.

In spite of having differing views to yours NOWHERE i gave you names or insulted you and i intend to keep doing it, even though you used the name of a poor living being whose only fault has been to serve well mankind for ages.

I must admit you may be right here,though,confronting our experiences i am just a nobody and if you knew about the amplitude of my IT mistakes you'd be right to call me a dunce.


It is interesting to note that No reply came from you to my relevant questions,anyhow,which you carefully avoided.

I am going to stop here with this thread,too,no matter what is said.

 

I used 'seems' to soften the sentence up to suggest that it is my interpretation. I did not want to put words in your mouth. I'm glad we agree on that though .

My point still is that you are talking about dishonesty where bigc is talking about experience with computers and they are different issues.