Vista VS XP Pro

Discussion in 'other software & services' started by Metal425, Sep 21, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Metal425

    Metal425 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2007
    Posts:
    188
    Location:
    Southern California
    Well, I used to run XP pro, but I decided to take the plunge and try out Vista.
    I have been running Vista Home Premium for about 2 months now.
    I'm starting to notice some slow-downs but I think it's because Vista's effects and themes. I was wondering what would your advice be?

    Stick with Vista or Reformat and go back to XP Pro.




    Thanks,
    Matt
     
  2. WSFuser

    WSFuser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Posts:
    10,632
    Your choice. If you want better performance go back to XP otherwise stay with Vista.
     
  3. nexstar

    nexstar Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2004
    Posts:
    371
    Location:
    Southampton, UK
    You could try turning off some of the visual stuff first and see if that makes it ok for you.

    I've just reverted back my only Vista installation to XP and I have to say that I'm not regretting it :) .

    Graham
     
  4. Franklin

    Franklin Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    2,517
    Location:
    West Aussie
    I would get another hard drive and install XP on that as you might come across some tips on Vista and think damn, I wish I could have tried that.
     
  5. lucas1985

    lucas1985 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2006
    Posts:
    4,047
    Location:
    France, May 1968
    Looking at Vista's I/O Performance
     
  6. ErikAlbert

    ErikAlbert Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Posts:
    9,455
    Ditch winVISTA and go back to winXP. After 3-5 years winVISTA + 100 patches will be ready for you and there will be enough tweaking softwares to get rid of the useless gadgetry.
    I run Applications to do my job or hobbies, because an OS is unable to do this.
    What is so important about an OS that only runs your system and can't do nothing more than that ?
     
  7. lucas1985

    lucas1985 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2006
    Posts:
    4,047
    Location:
    France, May 1968
    A good OS extracts the best of a given system and improves the user experience. But yes, I run applications, no OSes.
     
  8. ErikAlbert

    ErikAlbert Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Posts:
    9,455
    I ran win2000proSP4 and now winXPproSP2, I don't see any difference as an average user, except gadgetry. If I want to see gadgetry, I watch cartoons. :)
     
  9. lucas1985

    lucas1985 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2006
    Posts:
    4,047
    Location:
    France, May 1968
    Do you want a difference? ClearType is an example of a useful feature.
     
  10. sukarof

    sukarof Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    Posts:
    1,714
    Location:
    Stockholm Sweden
    I find Vista at least as fast as XP, even with most of the bells and whistles turned on (hard drive grinding services like superfetch and indexing turned off though)
    All the software that I want to run, I can run in Vista.
    I have nothing to complain about really, except the price is really too high. After a couple of months of real use I find Vista to be a bit of a anticlimax, it is not the 8th wonder of the world. I will continue to use it since I spent all the money on it and have no problems with it and it looks nice, but if you are happy with XP I cant see no reason to spend the extra money on Vista. Maybe, if you´re a gamer, DX 10 compatible games (whenever they will appear) will add something revolutionary? I dont know.
     
  11. EASTER

    EASTER Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Posts:
    5,633
    Location:
    U.S.A. (South)
    Money is better spent IMHO on a Premium upgrade for hardware/software on XP rather then vista (formerly Longhorn). You can achieve lightning velocities beyond vista's even with some old fashioned ingenuity and tweaking.

    Besides, in my instance, i already have most everything that was tauted for vista right here on good ole XP Pro, minus the useless internal overhead changes called improvements. Security programs for XP are at an all time APEX also right now. You can completely customize XP to look "AND" perform the gadgetry features including sounds, appearances, skins, backgrounds, icons etc. with programs like VistaMizer and more.

    I just recently run across this what looks to be a Novice developer (maybe student?) who seems to be right on track with his own XP version of Flip 3-D.

    I checked it out and although it's a little rough around the edges, i was thoroughly impressed with the EFFECT! and no crash. Author's freeware website link is below for any interested in seeing yet another new creation to mimic vista for XP.


    WinFlip new release
     
  12. gkweb

    gkweb Expert Firewall Tester

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2003
    Posts:
    1,932
    Location:
    FRANCE, Rouen (76)
    Hello,

    If you are using a restricted user account under XP, then go to Vista as it makes things a lot easier to this regard (UAC prompts you for temporarily elevating privileges). If you are gamer, things are mixed : somes games works fine, others not. But if you want to play DirectX10 games (with DirectX10 compatible graphic card), go to Vista. If security is one of your priority, you may like the Vista IE protected mode, UIPI and ASLR.

    However, if you prefer a well tested, stable, and solid OS, without struggling to find compatible and stable drivers, stay with XP.

    It all depends on what you want from your OS, and the risks you are ready to take.

    Regards,
    gkweb.
     
  13. L Bainbridge

    L Bainbridge Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2006
    Posts:
    173
    Location:
    London,U.K.
    Couldn't agree more.
    More & more developers are showing us that Vista's visual effects can all have been executed on XP without the overheads -e.g.:
    VistaInspirat2 BricoPack - http://www.crystalxp.net/dl/en.gal.130.html
    ViStart - http://www.lee-soft.com/downloads/vista.php?language=english
    WinFlip -http://www.tokyodownstairs.com/cgi-bin/article.pl?select=works
    Thoosje's sidebar -http://www.thoosje.com/
    True Transparency - http://www.crystalxp.net/galerie/en.id.5139-truetransparency-lefreut-explorer-tools.htm
    Visual Tooltips -http://www.crystalxp.net/dl/en.gal.197.html

    Plus there's Window Blinds 6 (currently in Beta) which gives glass 'blur' effects as per Vista with the same overhead as XP Visual styles.

    Security-wise XP is at its apex both in terms of MS & external developers plus the drivers are all fully developed.
    I extensively beta- tested Vista & have decided to skip this OS if Microsoft follow their promised upgrade cycle, I suspect the next OS will achieve the balance of security & useability that Vista was striving for but IMHO fails to achieve. Providing of course MS can learn from this one.....
     
  14. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    8,696
    Hello,
    Since security is not an issue for anyone with a bit of common sense, what remains is the price, performance, stability, in all of which XP wins hands down.
    Mrk
     
  15. gkweb

    gkweb Expert Firewall Tester

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2003
    Posts:
    1,932
    Location:
    FRANCE, Rouen (76)
    Hello,

    I hardly see how common sense will protect you from a trusted website or forum that is hacked and using a 0-day exploit to infect visitors.

    Do not happen everyday ? Yes. But happens anyway.

    Regards,
    gkweb.
     
  16. Arup

    Arup Guest

    XP is far more mature and stable, all holes existing have been patched, the developers are veterans and know all the ins and out, for Vista to acheive that kind of stability, it would take a few more years, till then XP is the best bet for performance and stability.
     
  17. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    8,696
    Hello,

    Theoretically, true. In practice, not really.

    I would appreciate an example that can blast past Firefox or Opera ... even without content-management software like Noscript or such ...

    BTW, I place "using non-MS browser" under common sense.

    Mrk
     
  18. gkweb

    gkweb Expert Firewall Tester

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2003
    Posts:
    1,932
    Location:
    FRANCE, Rouen (76)
    Hello,

    Common sense in security, is also to foresee what could happen (be proactive), and not only reacting on what has happened and what is known. I'm sorry I do not have a link at hand to show you something that has happened, even if I remember one fact, but that doesn't change what could happen.

    For me, common sense and control do vanish past your computer. I mean you can be the smartest person, your control applies only to your computer, and everything you remotely access (forum, websites, etc...) is beyond your control.

    I don't think common sense can replace security. It is the most effective and the most important, but it has limits. Always consider there is smartest people than you on the Internet.

    I was only reacting to "security is not an issue with common sense".
    Anyway, I can agree you disagree ;)

    Regards,
    gkweb.
     
  19. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    8,696
    Hello,

    This could be an argument over words - and this could be an argument over practical implications of the said "common sense."

    Common sense means quite a few things - like not speeding at 150kph down a 50kph road.

    In the same sense, computer use can be modified to minimize uncontrollable factors to such extent that the marginal what-if is no longer a major concern.

    It is quite possible for a server to get hacked and benign content replaced with something malicious. But then, there's the matter of duration of such a problem, exposure, and of course, how the user treats digital content.

    It is also possible that exploits be planted on sites, forums etc, in hope to hack through browsers, but again, we have the issue of exposure, vulnerability of browsers etc.

    Now, as soldiers of the internet, we need to assess the threats. How likely things are to happen?

    It is not wise protecting against something that can occur in 0.0001% of cases, when there's the 99.9999% of other things to take care of. There's a far greater chance that a user will infect oneself accidentally or deliberately far before he stumbles upon a hacked site that will slice through a specific exploit of his site.

    Thus, if people adhere to a few simple key issues, the remainder becomes a non-issue. Yes, you can be hacked, but the computer can also die, get stolen, flooded, electrocuted, you can spill lemon juice on the keyboard etc. All possible. But should we worry?

    It's not the matter of smart - it's the matter of reality.

    Cheers,
    Mrk
     
  20. attila4000

    attila4000 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2005
    Posts:
    51
    Location:
    Rahway, NJ, USA
    i agree with nexstar. vista is better for people who dont know how to setup and run a limited user account. vista does it for you. but if Metal425 knows how to do this then stick with winxp pro and use a LUA. wait until vista sp1 is released.
     
  21. gkweb

    gkweb Expert Firewall Tester

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2003
    Posts:
    1,932
    Location:
    FRANCE, Rouen (76)
    Hello Mrk,

    I can see two issues here.

    The first, is on one hand the probability (that you freely set to 0.00001%), and on the other hand if we should care or not. In my job, I am used to care even about a probability of 0.1%. I cannot say to someone like a bank "do not worry, just cross your fingers, it is very unlikely to happen !". Oh and, any lemon juice won't infect my computer if leaked on the keyboard, don't worry ;) Applied to a home user, 0-day vulnerabilities (that are more likely to happen than 0.0000...%) worth to protect against.

    [EDIT] :
    I never said you should take care of your purpoted 0.0001%, and forget the other 99%. What I'm saying is that you should take care first of this 99%, obviously, and that the remaining %, as negligeable as it seems to you, deserves to protect against, above all when you can do it easily.
    [/EDIT]

    The second, is a confusion about the term "common sense". We both agree that common sense is the most important, however on one hand you say that security is not necessary if you use common sense, but on the other hand you say it's better to use Firefox. Switching browser and adding NoScript, is already more than common sense to me. In my opinion, common sense makes you install Firefox and NoScript, but Firefox and NoScript stop the baddies, not your common sense ;) It would be a nonsense to say that security is not needed if you have common sense, but on the other side to use security and to say it's common sense. Do you see ?

    In my dictionary, common sense is safe habbits, do not browse anything malicious, do not expose yourself stupidly by opening attachements, and so on. But as soon as you modify your setup (hardware router, browser, updates, etc...) it's already more than common sense, even if initiated by it ! :) If however you disagree and say that it is common sense, then for you common sense = security, and security = common sense, but then to say that you don't need security if you have common sense is madness :D

    To finish on a more sensible sentence, I think our problem is simply wording :)

    Regards,
    gkweb.
     
    Last edited: Sep 22, 2007
  22. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    8,696
    Hello,
    Well, agreed.
    Cheers,
    Mrk
     
  23. Dogbiscuit

    Dogbiscuit Guest

    Wouldn't the exploit in Webattacker, and Webattacker toolkit released last June, which use a Firefox vulnerability (MSFA 2005-50), among many other kinds of exploits, be an example of malware that targets and sails through Firefox?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 24, 2007
  24. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    8,696
    Hello,
    Send me a link via pm and I'll tell you if it would or wouldn't ...
    Mrk
     
  25. ErikAlbert

    ErikAlbert Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Posts:
    9,455
    I use "ClearType" in WinXPproSP2 (one of my tweakings), which is a big improvement, but I don't need winVISTA for that.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.