Vista and Xp

Is it possible to partition and instal xp and vista on the M17?
Will it give a lot of hassle with the two Os's?

 

Theres no point for xp.
But of course its possible.

 

XP is faster and gives better gaming performance.

 

i lold

filler

 

While I am inclined to agree with you, I must also say that it seems to also depend on the game and review you're looking at. For example look at Tweaktowns' review ( the same people that caused one hell of a fuss over newer cards running at x8 in desktops ) and Extremetechs' review, you see that each site gives different results.

OP - As long as you have a legitimate XP disk, can get a hold of drivers for the system, and dont mind rebooting everytime you want to switch OSs, you should be fine.

 

vitsa > xp in every single way now. xp is outdated and isnt secure. the only reason yo use it now is if you have something old that wont work on vista.

 

it would be hard to get xp drivers for m17, since AW won't support it.

 

OCZ might, and at any rate, you can usually find XP drivers on the component producers' homepages.

 

well, the m17 AW software will not be found for xp.

 

ahh.....but what if the OP wanted xp and vista64....

 

Are you sure about games that require DX10 ? I don't think so

 

And what games are DX10 only?

 

The M17 is still just a rebranded Whitebook. All the drivers are available on OCZ's site except for the video drivers which are available with the modder and support the newest 8.11 Catalyst drivers for XP.

If you check http://www.rkcomputer.net/rkcnotebooks/index.php?l=product_detail&p=103

They even include a custom DVD with the XP drivers.

Check here:

http://www.rkcomputer.net/rkcforum/viewtopic.php?t=1737

You can see the drivers support every critical function needed to get XP up and running.

Only thing is you need to either have an external USB floppy drive to load the Intel PM45 Raid drivers (to support AHCI), or slipstream your copy of XP with them and it will install automatically.

If you don't do this, you will get the BSOD of a lifetime.

 

Sorry guys, XP Beats vista period. There is absolutely nothing, save DirectX 10 which generally doesn't run that well on a lappy and provides minimal visual boosts , that Vista can do and XP Can't. They're built on the same exact Kernel.

Actually, I have 2 M1730's (don't ask why) with one running vista 64 and one running XP. The performance difference is significant with XP being superior for gaming.

-SLI runs better
-Games load faster
-alt tabbing in XP doesn't cause a 3 second delay with black screen and flashing when going to the desktop - it's instant and seamless

-again there is nothing vista can do that XP can't, the differences are 100% visual. XP is much faster. If you don't believe me you're just denying reality. I can guarantee that XP is superior for gaming performance and getting the most out of your hardware.

 

sooo...
do you think that it would be worth the time and the trouble to just go ahead and install Xp once i get the lappy with Vista 64?

 

Especially from hardware with >3.2GB of RAM.

And don`t bring XP 64 bit because in compare to really great XP 32 bit, 64 bit version is made ad hoc and it`s crappy and unstable .

 

Yea? Well #1, my earlier post disproves you, #2 Vista IS faster on MY laptop

 

I'm not debating that the numbers coming out of benchmarking programs will be comparable or identical.

My beef with Vista comes with the Buggy aspect. SLi problems. Buggy graphics issues with regards to alt tabbing etc. Unexplained stutters and slowdowns after a certain period of time. Strange hard disk activity even with indexing on. All of these factors combined lead to an irritating experience and do not exist in XP.

You would get more performance from Windows XP, give it a go

 

Ive never had any of the bolded ( I refuse to use SLI/Xfire or the like ) occur with Vista, and im using it without ANY updates. Ive had one issue with Vista, and that only occured after I removed my pagefile, after I re-enabled it, I havent had a problem since.

As I said before, I have used XP on this laptop; I have an XP cd along with a driver pack that was hosted online ( the G1Ss ability to support XP isnt supported by Asus ) and in the same tasks, Vista and XP were about tied ( Vista w/o SP1 and XP w/ SP2 ).

 

wow. Obviously not a lot of people around here have used the 64-bit incarnation of XP much.

I used it for over six months. Fantastic (and stable!) operating system. The core for it is actually the Windows Server 2003 64-bit edition's core. therefore, anything that polls the Kernel for the OS version would come back with Server 2003 x64, rather than XP.

With that in mind, the drivers for the 64-bit version of XP are directly compatible with the server 2003 drivers... The problem that stems from this is the fact that not a lot of low-end hardware has drivers for the Server OS's from MS.

Basically, what I'm saying is, if you cheaped out in buying components for your system, then XP x64 isn't going to work well. but if you bought higher quality parts, the chances are good that there's a driver built for you.

After the drivers go in, the system is more stable than XP, will crash/bluescreen less, and overall just perform. That's what the server series was designed to do. And like with other XP versions, the system is still configured to give the best performance to foreground applications rather than background services (such is the case for Server 2003)...

IMO, anyone who says any of the recent MS OS's are junk (with the exception of XP SP0, and Vista SP0), is just being ignorant... Especially with SP2 for XP and SP1 for Vista. Nearly all complaints and flaws have been completely eliminated.