A question; XP versus Vista

My friend and I have been researching laptops. As of late, due to the actions taken back in June 2008, XP has been phased out for the most part, being replaced by Vista. We would prefer XP but apparently, we don't have much of a choice.

So, can you please ease our minds on whether we should push for XP or let change happen and pick up Vista? We've heard that Vista has numerous bugs, cannot play certain older games and for the most part, is just plain unpopular while XP is stable, less buggy, more compataible with games and so on.

Can you please convince us which to go with when it comes to gaming laptops? Thank you!

 

Vista is great. Don't believe everything you hear.

 

Vista with all the patches and stuff it now works. The reason why some do not like it is because it is the first big chance in the OS's for microsoft. So really it is just a new look. But I have had a harder time finding usefull windows (like one that tell temps and such). I think Vista is not made for a computer person. It is made for the not so computer savy person while those who are are intended to adapt. But after a few weeks it has turned out to have no problems.

 

I upgraded to Vista last week (dual-boot), and I am loving it....!! Its cool, and has a pleasent and friendly UI....!!
Dual-boot with XP and Vista....I normally do the heavy duty stuff in XP..!!

 

Vista is an all-around solid OS once you get used to the UI changes. I would highly recommend it over XP.

 

Can't speak specifically to gaming, but I'll say that Vista is the most stable Microsoft OS I've ever used. And I've used every one of them (including the various NT flavors) since DOS 3.2. There's absolutely nothing wrong with Vista.

 

Go with Vista. It had its little quirks at early stages but the OS has matured a lot in the past year.

 

Count me in as another Vista supporter. Vista is quicker and more stable than XP ever was. And to think, I hated Vista at first. Just goes to show what a little time and energy put forth to learn something new will do.

 

Vista is fine. XP is fine. If the notebook has a good amount of RAM, vista will probably be better for you because of DX10 support.

 

All I can say is that Vista is easy to use, fast and efficient OS overall. Microsoft have made this new OS because XP was around for ages and required a 'better' replacement and it seems like most software developers are now aiming to program for Vista.

 

Vista is "unpopular" because people who have never used Vista go around saying "We've heard that Vista has numerous bugs, cannot play certain older games and for the most part, is just plain unpopular while XP is stable, less buggy, more compataible with games and so on."

See how that works?

 

They also run pre historic hardware. haha

 

Ok, you got me. Haha. Alright, we'll give Vista a chance. Thanks, everyone!

 

This is the other Devonaire i actually have uised vista didn't really notice a diff other than aesthetics

no the last question is CAD and engineering programs ill look on goodgle but from any one whit first hand exp can vista work with engineering progs.? if so then im sold

 

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID=123112&id=8446045


erm nvm ill get vista its cheaper and it works with cad now YAY im happy again .. now i need to know about which gpu


Single Nvidia Quadro FX 1600M Graphics with 512MB DDR3 Video Memory
or

Single Nvidia GeForce 9800M GT Graphics with 512MB DDR3 Video Memory

planning on playing mainly RPG and mmos Fable 2, dont care to much for first person shooter and crysis, but then again teh sager 5796 doesnt offer quadro i think id have to do it on my own
not sure

 

Vista is now better but to get it run faster and smoother, you need to tweak it as much as you can. Actually i'm running Vista Ultimate (fully tweaked) on one of my computers and it's fast and stable just like XP. But for more serious work, i still rely on XP to get things done.

actual experience is better. personal judgement is still a personal opinion.

 

If you really want to use XP, but aren't ready to buy a new system (or the one you're about to buy doesn't come with XP), buy a retail copy of XP, either from eBay (use paypal or a similar payment device to .protect yourself from scammers, though) or from places like Tigerdirect, _Newegg, or even the big box-stores, like BB or Staples.

 

my 3d mark scores were higher on xp then vista. i prefer xp, but it is your choice.

 

Vista works great on new systems. A lot of people had problems trying to upgrade their old systems from XP to Vista. But on current hardware, it runs just fine.

 

I'd give Vista some more time before using it. Don't get me wrong, it's stable, but since its release, there are still plenty of software companies working on getting their program(s) to work on the Vista. Even with patches, I'm still having some issues running some of the programs that I used to run on XP.

Ah well. I'm personally an XP advocate, but I'm pretty sure everything will work out in time. I'm giving it a bit more time before I fully switch to Vista (I have one laptop running Vista for an all-around testing, but all of the other computers in my house still run XP.)

I don't think the Vista is too bad. I've been noticing a lot of progress from it lately so it's just a matter of time.

 

I agree with you on all points, with two exceptions: (i) I don't, and won't, run _Vista, and (ii) when the time comes (April 2014, to be more precise), I'll be switching to linux, not _VistaII (aka Win7).

 

i too agree.... but by 2014 i hope that linux can gain some ground in the area of # of installed units and much more MAINSTREAM software... it's hard to convert my client base to LINUX without software that they can easily use.

 

That is, unfortunately, the big open question (no pun intended ). That is also the area where Microsoft will compete the hardest, to the detriment (once again) of the individual user, who will most likely be offered another gelded version of a corporate network OS.

However, it seems that there's a reasonable chance that, by 2014, there will be a sufficiently stable, useable core of OS and apps. I think that part of this process will come from more and more software providers realizing that there's enough money to be made in (a) customizing the initial setup and (b) providing continuing after-sale support - both inevitable functions even with Microsoft's operating systems and applications, that the actual initial sale of the software itself need not be the primary profit-driver, and that the ability to piggy-back specialized proprietary applications off of the open-source foundation of linux is sufficient to provide a reasonable opportunity to retain control over the dissemination of your systems packages and to build nae-brand recognition and goodwill.

Ultimately, however, only time will tell. Nonetheless, since I'm just an individual "consumer" user, and I am pretty sure that I'll get the shaft from MS on Win7, I will have less difficulty than your commercial clients making the full transition to linux when I have to.

 

Talk about not helping the OP at all in his own thread But I totally agree with you....I'd love to see Linux really finally become mainstream, it'd be bout time. Right now, even though I use it a bunch, there's not much keeping me off Vista other than the fact its "open-source" and free.

 

No, no -- all of this is quite alright. I'm glad I managed to spark some discussion. This'll help in the future, when we decide. My friend's currently at camp so he won't be around for a bit. Thanks everyone and if you can, keep the suggestions coming.

 

Well, it might have helped the OP decide whether to take a gamble on not getting shafted too badly by MS and Win7 by sticking with the Win OSes and going with _Vista, or going with WinXP and using the next 6.5 years to practice getting proficient with linux so that, in April 2014, he can be ready to jettison MS OSes entirely and shift to a linux variant once security support for XP runs out.

 

Do you expect games to continue without increasing the system requirements to run them? Not really no, Operating systems is the same.
Sure if you are running games, you will lose a couple frames, imo 3 or 4 at MOST. But the stability smoothness is a very reasonable trade off me.

 

Another Vista supporter just chiming in. I've used XP for the past 5 years on my Inspiron and (like others) was a little nervous about Vista coming with my new notebook. I've had it for a month now and I'm already learning the ins and outs of the OS. To me, XP now feels like Windows '98 when I am booting up my old lappy.

As for Linux, taking over Apple (or coming anywhere near MS) by 2014 is probably stretching it. The reason OS X is so popular now is because it's simple for the average computer illiterate person to use. Linux is far from user-friendly for the average (dumb) user. Also, the fact that it's free open source is great and all, but that is probably it's downfall actually. Until someone is able to establish a 'building block' OS that's widely accepted as Linux the user base will probably plateau.

 

Vista ain't bad. Up until a month ago (when I tried it on a decent machine) I hated it. Now I dont mind.

 

Unfortunately, individual consumer users such as yourself do not drive OS development for Microsoft, and OS X is too expensive and too fanciful to ever take the place of the Win OSes as a commercial workhorse OS. Given that, and given the intense resistance MS is getting from businesses to the idea of switching over to _Vista, there is a real window of opportunity for a business that builds a semi-proprietary system (i.e., more than just the OS on the individual computers, e.g., the OS - open source linux, plus proprietary commercial document management apps and network management apps) to make a really tempting case for businesses to start planning on making their next upgrade away from Microsoft; at the very least, going that way would not require a change in hardware for the very large number of companies using hardware that cannot support _Vista - there are a large number of such companies because the trend for corporate networks has been to go with a variant on the thin client model, where a lot of the software resides on the company servers, allowing each user to get by with fairly skimpy hardware - like the _Dell Optiplex GX-270.

That resistance, by the way, arises because of the fact that, given the much heavier resource demands made by _Vista, most businesses with large numbers of computers would not only have to upgrade software, they'd also have to upgrade hardware. For example, as I sit here (goofing off at work, again ), I am typing this on a _Dell SFF Optiplex GX-270, which most definitely will not run _Vista. All told, we probably have about 200 of these systems in use right now, and having to terminate the lease early in order to switch to new hardware capable of running _Vista would be a major expense, and an unnecessary expense because, quite frankly, the network is running just fine on XP-Pro (SP2 at that!).

All that leaves Microsoft having to wage a defensive fight for the next 3-1/2 years or so, until Win7 is ready for prime time, and at a point when more of its traditional customers have made arrangements to dispose of their current hardware in a cost-effective manner. Quite frankly, I don't think Microsoft is up to the challenge.

 

Check this out

These are the top scores for 3D Mark 2006. If you notice, only two of all the runs were done in XP.

 

Interesting. So, it isn't that big of a deal if we choose to stick with XP or go with Vista; either way, we still win out, somehow. Maybe Vista will be the best choice for us, since gaming is one of the main focuses of the laptop. Thanks everyone.