Should I go back to XP from Vista? (Read on)

Hey guys, I was just wondering if I should roll back to Windows XP. My laptop clearly has enough power to run Vista adequately...

AMD 64 X2 QL-2 2.0GHz
3.0 RAM
Nvidia 9100M G 256MB

My question is whether or not I would see a noticeable performance boost?

Also... will Windows XP (32-bit) be able to read my 3.0GB RAM like Vista can?

Thanks

 

As others are likely to tell you. Use the OS that came with and was designed to run on your computer, be it XP or Vista.

 

Yes, your machine will see the 3.0 Gb of ram with Windows XP.

 

Yes, WinXp 32 bit will be able to read the 3 GB of ram. At this point I would go with Vista or Win 7 if you can. I see no point in going back to XP now. It is/was a good OS but it is old. Vista has been fine for me except I wish it was better on its resource of usage and was "snappier". But as others mentioned, running the OS that came with your machine would be the easiest and least time consuming since you won't have to go hunt don drivers and there won't be any potential hardware driver issues and such. but if you like tinker with your machine and have the time, then I would say go to Windows 7 when it is released.

 

Re: Should I go back to XP from Vista? (Read on)

no

 

Short answer: No.



Long answer: The only people still downgrading to XP at this point are people who either
-entirely unable to learn something slightly different
-afraid of Vista because of the negative hype that was around it.

Your system would run fine with XP, but if it came with Vista, I'd keep Vista.

 

If it's running fine now just leave it alone. Just make sure Vista is updated to the latest service pack ( SP2 ). You won't see any significant "boost" by rolling back to XP since you have more than enough RAM to run Vista properly.

 

If you have at least 2GB of RAM, I would suggest you to stay with Windows Vista instead of Windows XP.
1st, Vista is more secure and less bugs.
2nd, Vista have better maintenance tools on its own.
3rd, Vista uses DX10(will be DX11 soon) which allow user to have better gameplay and graphics.
4th, less and less programs(software/applications/drivers) will be support Windows XP.

 

I'd give Vista my vote too.

 

By rolling back, do you mean that you had XP to begin with? If it came with Vista, then leave it as is.

 

Pretty much what everyone else has already said.

 

That's the correct answer. If it's running fine, let it be. Occasionally hardcore techies will try something new even if what they have is working, but if what you care about is things working well, then if they are working well, let them be.

The long answer is not at all accurate. There's a large group of individuals and (especially) corporations that downgrade Vista to XP due to program incompatibilities - that group far outnumbers those Hep mentioned. There's also a large number of corporations sticking with XP because they know it will work with their network and they do not know that Vista will work correctly, and they can't afford to try an OS upgrade only to have their network crash (for an example of the problems that may occur when an institution tries upgrading to Vista without fully evaluating whether it will work, read here).

There will also be various other niche groups that will prefer XP to Vista for whatever reason - saying there's only two possible reasons overlooks many realities, especially when the reasons stated are purely about psychology rather than technology.

 

Maybe I should have been specific; I'm only talking about home users here. That is 100% accurate for home users.
People who have specialized software are obviously an exception.
Vista did not take well in the business market and has a very low adoption rate there.
Home users who refuse to adopt are just stubborn however.

 

Neither. Go with Windows 7.

 

The amount of money going to a Windows 7 license could be used for hardware upgrades instead, if needed or even a nice camera.

I would say, stick with whatever you have now, if you have issues and it's somehow the OS's fault, then try something else.

There's nothing wrong with Vista that would make a general user need to purchase Windows 7.

 

That's actually good advice.

If you have Vista running well there is no need to upgrade to Windows 7.

If you have an XP laptop (designed for XP) its possibly old and you may be better off buying a new laptop rather than installing Windows 7 on it.

 

You can use whatever OS you like since you're the one that's going to use it. XP, Vista, Win7 they're all fine. Each one has it's negatives and positives. Be happy.

 

Most positives has ... W7ndows

 

Ah, home users does change the picture a good bit. I still wouldn't say it's 100% accurate - there are home users that will downgrade to XP for compatibility reasons (that's why I switched to XP), but many of the reasons (including compatibility) are more pertinent to businesses. Some home users, like me, would rather use older OS technology than replace their old-but-good programs, though.

 

Are you using Aspire 4530?
If so google "aspire 4530 Windows 7 mod"

 

I dont really agree with what you said.
For me, as a home user, I perfer downgrad my notebook from Vista to XP is basically that I am used to XP than Vista.

And also one important point, is that both XP and Vista have different layout so depending on every home users what layout is best suited for them. I would say about 50/50 of home users perfer XP simply they like them

 

I'll probably end up going with XP on my new laptop when it comes in. I can't justify the cost for Win7, and the only disc I have for Vista is a Dell OEM.. Maybe some sneaky people will post a download of Win7 with a way to activate it, but until that happens I'm not going to bother trying on my own, or paying Microsoft way too much money for their OS. I'd be happy to pay $100 for 7 professional, but $200 for the upgrade or $300 for the full version? Nuh uh. I'll stick with XP thanks.

 

i was among the first to use vista beta when it came out, 64 bit from day 1, and also windows 7. i have 5 os's on my laptop, and use/change/destroy/rebuild them all. windows 7 is one of the best. i work on 3D CAD all day, every day. i am still learning lots all the time.
i use windows xp because it is still faster than any other os for me gaming on my laptop. (and i dont want any quotes from surveys or links to statistics) when win 7 (or 8...) can play a game faster than xp, i will change
it is still a poor show when m$ latest and greatest cannot outrun their 10 year old os.

 

Yeah, good call. An OS that is 10 years newer is only slightly slower on the same hardware. Except in benchmarks of course, where Vista usually comes up a little ahead. Let us not forget that in this time, hardware capabilities have multiplied quite a few times. For a fair comparison, do Vista on machine that was average at its launch compared to a machine that was average when XP launched.
Why not go down to Windows 2000, it blows XP's performance out of the water. No wait, drop down to 98SE, it's even faster. Comparing on all new hardware is stupid. Windows 3.1 would boot in what, a quarter second on modern hardware?
You're the exact kind of person I am talking about.

 

Why dont u try Win 7? I am preety sure you will be satisfied.

 

definitely agree. according to the specs, it has enough to run Windows 7 pretty well. Going back to windows xp is a no go. i dont get the logic as to why downgrade to an older OS. Vista and 7 are pretty good and bugs are there but thats something that will never go away. Most problems though are either users or way too much junk on the computer, creating too much conflicts.

 

I think it depends entirely on the programs you run.

Like I prefer Office 2007 on Vista over XP simply cause I can use start search to launch my documents.

 

One more advantage to add, you get inbuilt Win XP. Now what do want more than that? Latest best OS + OS you love =Win 7.

 

@Hep: Sorry you did not read my post. i said "it is still faster than any other os for ME gaming on MY laptop"
maybe you would have different results on your own setup and i am willing to take advice on speeding up win 7.
a fair comparison is xp on my laptop NOW, and Vista or Windows 7 on my laptop NOW, because that is the real world today. the fact that xp runs as fast as it does on modern computers is proof of how efficient it was written.

please read my post

 

Your phrasing "the fact that XP runs as fast as it does on modern computers" to me indicates how badly it is written.

If it runs the same on a 1,6GHz Pentium M with a 5400rpm drive that's 4 years old and 512MB RAM, compared to a modern computer say 1,5GHz Core1Duo (T9300) and 4GB or RAM and a 5400rpm 250GB drive then it is badly written indeed, as it simply doesn't use the capabilities offered by the hardware.

 

I agree that there is no need to move to W7 with your new notebook. But throwing out Vista and going back to XP is a bit drastic these days. And the pain to get XP drivers on new brands/models would cost you lot of time = $$$

cheers ...

 

no, it runs on a computer 10 years on as fast (faster) than the latest windows 7 even without using all the capabilities of the modern hardware. how fast would it be if it did?
xp is no beauty queen (although you can make it look good) but works and is fast. it can run every program i have, it can connect to a network and browse the internet. what more do you want from an os?
however, i would still have to say 'do not go back to windows XP' on a new laptop unless you know what you are doing, and dont mind being 'unsupported', but only because m$ have forced us into a move on and upgrade spiral. good for m$ sales and also hardware/software sales.

 

What excatly are you saying?

Hey, my 10 years on old computer runs XP, I know, I don't fully use my hardware?
Also - "go back" to Windows 7?
Its definitely not a step back.

I don't fancy another XP vs. Vist vs. Win7 debate, but this is headig towards one.
I suppose you can try running Windows 2000 - I guess it'll be just as fast, maybe faster tahn XP (thanks to whoever mentioned this before on here) - its time to move on.
Vista had its share of problems - but anybody moving to XP nowadays on a new laptop is making astupid mistake.

 

"Vista had its share of problems - but anybody moving to XP nowadays on a new laptop is making astupid mistake."

well said.

 

i would have to agree

 

For those looking for a synopsis, here it is:

The problem with saying that Vista is always better than XP, or XP is always better than Vista, is that it isn't a plain black and white situation. It depends on the individual circumstances, and such blanket statements can't apply to everyone.

For me at least, XP has an advantage over Win2K because many of the programs I have require XP, and thus wouldn't run on Win2K (I have no programs which require Vista). Although it really is more compatibility than performance for me - I can't recall ever wanting to switch to XP because Vista didn't seem fast enough.

And Win98 SE, besides the 2K/XP requirements of many programs, simply won't install on much modern hardware - for example, any computer with more than 1.5 GB of RAM. I actually did try to install it on my 2007 laptop, back when I didn't have access to XP and was trying to find some way to get the compatibility Vista had cost me. Win98, unfortunately, didn't come through.

And Win 3.1 does boot incredibly fast on a new machine. Even in a VM it does, but natively - whew, that's some fast booting! 1/4 second isn't that inaccurate once you type in "win" at the DOS prompt (the DOS memory checks take a long time with current memory capacities). And, at least for me, it actually did install and boot up and seemed to work properly. Though I never intended to use it for anything except using a Win98 SE upgrade license, and kept it less than a day.

Part of the goal of all this was indeed to see if I could actually do it, of course, similarly to my attempts to get Solaris to work well (thus far, always fruitless). But when it comes to compatibility, sometimes Win98 SE would be preferable to Vista (if it did run on today's hardware). On the whole, however, XP offers the best of both worlds for me - complete compatibility with both all of my software, and with all of my hardware. Neither the old Win98/2K nor the newer Vista/Win7 can offer both of those.

(note: this isn't specific to you - I've just noticed a lot of similar posts both here and elsewhere on the Interwebs)

I find it funny how many people just suggest "try Win7" whenever they encounter someone who is considering sticking with XP. Not that Win7 wasn't worth trying in beta/RC - it certainly was - but just that the automatic response is "try windows 7" rather than responding to the reasons someone prefers XP over Vista. Tacking on, "By the way, you might like Windows 7, and may want to try it" at the end makes sense, but having "try Windows 7" be the entire post brings to mind many of the Linux fans who are all about getting people to use Linux even when their audience has no good reason to want to quit using Windows. Sure, many of them do have reasons for being Linux fans, but the way they try to convert Windows users can be almost like trying to indoctrinate the masses in some high-falutin' philosophy the masses don't know why they should care about. It seems like a lot of Windows 7 fans are behaving the same way - just saying, "Jump on our bandwagon, it's the best!" with no real substance.

To put it in an analogy, it's like going to the rural peasant farmer who's already skeptical of change, and who's been using natural fertilizers and wooden plows and horses on his fields for generations and trying to tell him to adopt new metal plows, fancy machinery, and chemical fertilizers because it'll probably result in better harvests. Why's he to believe you, the industrial evangelist? He's been able to provide for his family perfectly well enough, so why make such drastic changes?

I'll give you that some of it is fear, uncertainty, and doubt over change, but compatibility is the other major reason (performance, etc. being other reasons as well). If by the problem being users, you mean the FUD, then perhaps so for a decent chunk, but there are logical reasons to use older operating systems.

And if you don't buy the XP over Vista example, consider the Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X transition. Apple actually recommended users stick with the older OS 9 and kept selling the older OS on most new machines because of its maturity and compatibility. It's a bit of an extreme case, but there are good reasons to stick with older software.

Now that's a legitimate reason to prefer Vista! Showing some reasoning and realization that it isn't all black and white!

XP Mode is an advantage for Windows 7. But it's still limited by the fact that it's a virtual machine. Namely, graphics is pretty iffy with virtual machine. If you want to play games or do CAD, you're probably out of luck (at least with Virtual PC and XP Mode - Parallels Desktop for Mac does halfway decent with graphics in a Windows guest, but that doesn't help for XP Mode). Perhaps with AMD's upcoming Opterons that will expand virtualization technology support, this will be changing, but until then, XP Mode won't quite be a *complete* XP environment in terms of actual functionality. And I suspect that Microsoft would have to upgrade XP Mode to take advantage of the upcoming Opterons' new virtualization technology, which I can't say I see as particularly likely at this juncture.

 

I use both XP & Vista Hm Prem & don't mind either O/S, stick with whatever O/S yr PC came with. Cheers. Min

 

It does indeed depend on circumstances. In my case, I have an XP set up with lots of licenced software that I've built up over 7 years or so. To have to rebuild and relicence is a real bore. So I've just moved my original XP installation to each new laptop by taking an image from the older one and performing a repair on the new system from my XP Pro master OS disk.
It wasn't difficult to find XP drivers for my Dell SXPS even though Dell only support Vista: there are several threads here about this. I will be installing Win 7 though as a dual boot alternate on the other half of the disk, once Dell release it.

 

ok, Apollo13, i would agree. its not black and white. thats why i have XP for my games and windows 7 because its the latest (and atm free). i have abandoned vista.
still not sure if i will buy it windows 7

 

I will say NO for XP.
I agreed with DetlevCM.

For me, Vista and 7 is way better than XP.
Especially on newer machines, Vista and 7 can fully utilize every hardware/specification unlike XP.
Go for 64bit instead 32bit. 32bit OS sucks.
Gaming performance, I would say XP not good either. I know you can have higher FPS on XP but in the sacrifice of beautiful textures.
Vista and 7 have better DirectX, which can boost gaming performance and texture rendering quality too. I wonder why people said XP gaming performance is better than Vista/7. I think it is due to the low resources of XP caused the better performance only. Test Vista/7 vs XP on a high-end machine, the result will be Vista/7 have better gaming performance than XP.

 

He has a 9100M...... He cant possibly worry about gaming performance

 

Vista has my vote too. I really like the properly integrated windows updates, the sidebar and the general feel of the OS.

 

It probably was mentioned earlier in this thread, but consider the case where driver support for XP could be troublesome. Your manufacturer is likely to make driver updates for Vista and Windows 7 rather than stick to XP.

My Vote: Stick with Vista or move up to Windows 7.

 

I haven't seen the OP post in a while... Would help to get a response from the guy.

 

although i will always be partial to cp and i hate vista because it is a resource hog. i have to agree with everyoneelse if it's not broken don't fix it . more and more hardware companys are building their products to where they only work with vista and above . as for windows 7 i tested it and wasnt to impressed by it although when it comes out i will not be opposed to trying it after all the bugs and improvements have been worked out . if vista is running slow for u then u might try the steps decribed here http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=166532

 

Updates is somewhat of a red herring. Once you have a working set of drivers and software there is no need for updates. Updates are only required because manufacturers are letting buggy drivers out the door.