Which OS XP, VISTA-32-64 for new Notebook-Netbook

Conservative lamo still running XP-SP2, still avoiding that SP3 download nag screens but in market for new notebook-netbook so have to reevaluate OS issue, am I an for still avoiding SP3-Vista-32-64 etc ?

Considering "Elite" ThinkPad SL500 with "Genuine Windows Vista Business with Windows XP Professional Downgrade"

vs:

Lenovo IdeaPad Y530 - 405165U (Vista Prem-32, NVIDIA GeForce 9300M 256MB, 3GB RAM) & 405166U (Vista-64,same GPU, 4GB RAM)

I do still work in a business environment dominated by XP but like multimedia, should I even be considering Vista 32-64 ?

 

Vista is not all that bad, I used to love XP and hated Vista, however when I made the jump it wasn't all that bad.

If you do get Vista get Vista 64, that'll futureproof it.

If your business demands programs that won;t run on Vista, get XP then.

 

My votes vista 64 bit. Its really nice.

 

I have to agree with the people who say Vista is quite good, ever since I have my Vaio I like Vista

About 32 vs. 64Bit - its difficult to tell, look at my signature, follow the link and I hope it helps you decide.

 

Thanks, your advice about if I opt for Vista for new pc, get Vista 64 vs 32 to futureproof it makes sense but I'll still have to find out if Vista will be an issue with any business apps (which is why I was thinking about Windows XP Professional Downgrade option however that's only an option for the SL500)..

It's funny how you & others still say Vista is not all that bad compared to XP when an OS upgrade should by design be far superior. Vista Ultimate edition looks best-the complete OS though overpriced & many people still seem to complain Vista is a bloated resource hog even on relatively new hardware ?

 

With 4GB of RAM, you have nothing to worry about.

Vista gave me what I wanted as a consumer, and that was superior security and reliability. With modern hardware (the key is to get 2GB of RAM or more), I see Vista (esp. 64bit) as superior to XP. Also, if you are interested in using it (preferably with a TV tuner) using Media Center in Vista is an absolute joy. Xbox360 media extender ftw!

 

I have Vista Business - unless you find a good reason to get ultimate stick with Business.

 

I wouldn't be so sure about the 'futureproofing' idea. With Vista uptake so bad, developers will be reluctant to produce things for Vista only (it will cut them off from 70% of the market). Unless you plan to keep the machine for 5 years or so.

Meanwhile, Vista may look nice, but it slower and fatter than XP while doing the same things. Vista can be tweaked, but so can XP. That's no small issue on a netbook. Also Vista is still having tons of backward compatibility issues both with apps and drivers, so you're more likely to lose functionality with Vista + back (in time), rather than with XP + forward (in time).

As to 64 bit - yes go for it, if you like googling for drivers. There are no major (mass market) apps that need or even use it. The extra million GB RAM are useless unless you do lots of AV work (unlikely, as you mention a netbook), and most day-to-day apps have an address space usage of 2GB. That said, if you go for Vista, it being less than lean (depending how you like the prefetch thing), you should definitely have more than 2GB.

 

Ehm... I think your post isn't entirely correct.

Tons of issues with Vista - yes, ancient hardware that shouldn't run Vista anyway.
Issues with current hardware and Vista are rare.

Applications - many to most applications will run in compatebility mode under Vista.

64Bit - if you process large amount of files it is useful - in fact a fellow forum member uses Photoshop CS4 in 64Bit and he said it sped things up - if you do work on files several 100 Megabytes or even 1GB and larger its definitely a good thing.
64Bit can handle more data faster - but see my signature for an extensive post on 32Bit vs 64Bit.


Edit:
And what I forgot - for most people Vista is more stable.
Additionally Vista tweaks itself. XP doesn't.

 

Agree with the hardware point, although I prefer an OS that works with everything I own rather than forcing me to buy new stuff. So I stick with XP. Vista gives me nothing better, just a potential headache.

Disagree with the software point - I switched back to XP after believing that SP1 (and the passage of time) would fix the issues. It didn't (for me and many others - just google 'Vista compatibility issue' ). Different people use different apps and may not even know this issue exists. I would advise anyone to do a list of all their 'old' apps before taking the plunge. Compatibility mode is, unfortunately, not all it's cracked up to be.

Agree with your point on large files in Adobe CS4 (although that's about the realistic limit of 64bit real-life usefulness at the moment). However the OP mentioned netbook, which is an unlikely appliance to be heavy duty work of that sort. So why give himself the driver pain in the neck?

Vista tweaks - there is not an issue of a PC magazine (or even NBR OS forum) that does not contain a 'Vista tweaks' section. The tips there are designed to make a slow OS (by comparison with other OS's) work better. People who are aggressive with these tips can get speed respectable (ie = to XP). However doing the same 'surgery' to XP puts XP back into first place again (for speed).

 

Get Vista32 and 3gb ram.. Its fine.

 

I also would hesitate to agree with you. I am a late adopter of Vista (Home Premium). I am not a demanding computer user in the sense that I am not inclined to play around with the technicalities of either the hardware or the software. I am, however, on my machine for over 14 hours a day. Coming from XP Pro SP3, I have found Vista to be generally snappy. It is also stable. No application that I use has had problems with Vista. My biggest concern was with my HP 3-in-One unit and with a few external hard drives that I have. All worked like a charm with Vista.

Lastly, with Win7 on the horizon, the compatibility issue will be more a problem with XP rather than with Vista. So, I am not sure that moving onto Vista is a such a bad thing. Since I am basically unconcerned with the 64-bit option, I have no idea how that pans out with Vista.

The caveat, of course, is whether the applications and peripherials that the OP uses or plans to use 'play' with Vista or not. That alone, I think, will determine - rather should determine - the option that the OP should go for.

So, for example, I am looking to get a netbook in the immediate future. Most netbooks either come with XP or with a linux flavour. I would prefer to have either a version of Vista (lite) on it, or wait for Win7. If it is the former, I may want to investigate upgrading some elements of the hardware such as RAM. If it is the latter option, I will just have to twiddle my thumbs and wait for the release of Win 7. Alternatively, of course, I could load up Vista on the netbook and upgrade the OS when Win7 is released.

Cheers!

PS: I think the SP1 release was the major factor that improved Vista from my perspective. I am hoping that the impending release of SP2 will lend further weight to this non-technical optimism!

 

Hmm, I think some applications cause trouble for people because people don't "play around".

For me I have 2 applications, that per se won't quite run.
Maple 9.5 (yes, I know its old... but it works)
SAS (stats software)

Both can be sucessfully installed and ru n in compatebility mode.

Especially Maple is a touch temperametal on instal, requiring different compatebility settings on different computers (???) but else, it works fine.
Also, Google - sometimes Google will give you old news - you don't know how current these reports are - and how many were written by Vista basher.


The idea for the OP to list his applications is definitely a good one.

 

I had originally bought a Vista copy back when it first was released, and ran into a bunch of problems with my graphics card (an NVidia card). Furthermore, I was running on an NVidia-based motherboard, which also had driver issues with Vista. Needless to say, I decided to go back to XP Pro until NVidia released drivers that were at the very least stable.

Fast forward to SP1, and a new AMD-based motherboard and voila... no more lock ups, speed was improved and wireless performance was much better. With Vista SP2, the performance is even better. I now do very intensive tasks on my desktop, which involve running a virtual version of Vista ontop of a Vista host machine. It's been rock solid for the past 2 years now.

I keep around XP Professional as a virtual machine just for fun now. I am also playing with W7 in a virtual machine as well, and I like it so much that I intend to do an upgrade to it on my desktop.

 

Just to clarify...when I said I don't 'play around' I mean the following:

1) I don't open up the innards of my laptop
2) I don't mess around with the registry

I do, however, if I am faced with a software/ hardware problem....

1) Ask on NBR
2) Look for workaround
3) look for replacements
4) Take my machine to someone who knows a lot more about hardware than I do

But, touch wood, I have not faced any major problems as of yet. And, you guys on NBR have been more than helpful at all times.

Sorry for being OT.

Cheers!

 

Vista Ultimate is great. Might be a resource hog but upgrade your hardware and you'll be set. People used to complain about XP when it came out and some people still use 2000 today. IMO, upgrade whenever possible, and work out the glitches later. I'm on Windows 7 But as for 64-bit, I agree, double check compatibility on the Microsoft website. Hell to deal w compatibility issues sometimes. Couldn't get Symantec 11 Enpoint Protection to run on this thing.

 

So if a new notebook (e.g. Lenovo IdeaPad Y530) offers both 32 bit ("405165U" with 3 GB RAM) & 64 bit ("405166U" with 4 GB RAM) Vista, the latter for only $20 more, I should go for the latter?

If I go for the Elite SL500 instead or also I will likely pay the $30 extra for both Vista & XP option.

Refs:
http://shop.lenovo.com/SEUILibrary/...-category-id=811FB24E497B4DBC8494650A23798A6D

http://shop.lenovo.com/SEUILibrary/...-category-id=470B0F10C05B42BF83330C5211DCE0FD

http://shop.lenovo.com/SEUILibrary/...-category-id=3028784E14494EB697E744B7DC445A1A

 

This is something you have to decide.
For the "average" user there may not be an advantage to 64Bit, for a "professional" user it could be disastrous if its one of the rare software that doesn't work under 64Bit - or it can be a saviour because you work on large files on a daily basis.

Read, read, read and decide yourself what is better for you.
We cannot answer that question for you, but we can help you decide.

 

I'd say 64-bit vista, i have it on mine but because of some incompatibility and just so i have it if i want, i am duel booting with xp-32bit.

 

This is another reason why I seem to want hardware redundancy but I should look into the dual boot at some point:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=how+to+dual+boot+xp+and+vista&aq=1&oq=how+to+dual+b

Not sure I'll have the chance to look through that process before though, is the dual boot really a viable alternative ?