Xp still outselling Vista

Vista has had a host of issues, understood, and I know many have been addressed already. All major OS's have a host of issues upon release, and takes some time to improve.

That being said, for me Vista doesn't work because it:

(1) isn't compatible with my full library of software
(2) isn't friendly with my existing hardware, whether MS's fault or not, it still is an issue
(3) changes features that you should be able to revert to legacy but can't
(4) degrades gaming performance
(5) offers zero compelling new features that makes me want or need to upgrade

If you bought a new laptop or PC that came with Vista and you're satisfied with it, fine, I'm happy for you. But if it doesn't meet your needs or causes issues why should I use or like it?

I spent my hard earned dollars on a copy of Vista. It doesn't perform for me the way I'd like. Why should I continue to use it when XP runs perfectly fine? Why should I have to suffer the break-in curve. I'll revisit it when it offers something for me other than an "ooh ah" interface, or when I'm forced to go back to it.

For now Vista sits on my hard drive alongside my XP, just waiting patiently for that first time I can't do something in XP that I need to do in Vista. After well over a year, there's been zero need other than to do benchmarking comparisons.

 

I don't think anyone really cares what OS anyone else prefers. XP, Ubuntu, OS X, Vista...it doesn't matter, so long as it suits the individual using it.

I think what people react to in these threads isn't that someone prefers XP, but rather the percieved XP fanboy-ism coupled with a general Vista Sucks overtone. (Not saying you're an example of such a thing.) When I see people talking about how Vista is slow even on new equipment, won't run any of their apps and crashes all the time, I have to wonder how much of that is based on experience and how much is just repeating what they've heard. Because I've run Vista on several different machines of all specs since the October 2006 RTM, and I've yet to experience any of that. Sometimes I wonder if I just got ahold of some mysterious "good" copy.

Should somone run out and pay money to upgrade an existing XP machine to Vista? No way I'd recommend that...unless the individual really wanted to. But nearly every day on these forums you'll see a post from someone waiting for a new laptop and asking whether they should blow away Vista when they get it and install XP...because they heard Vista sucks. It's just crazy.

Just curious which apps you have that aren't Vista compatible? Not saying that you don't, but I run a pretty wide range of apps and I've yet to run into any issues...x64 included.

 

+Rep Fountainhead. Couldn't have said it better myself.

It's not a Vista vs XP debate for me. I just get tired of everyone bashing Vista when they have hardly any experience with it.

 

You really should try the temporal anomaly driver. It lets you upgrade to Windows 2020 today. Unfortunately, I cannot post a link as that would introduce a paradox.

 

I saw a beta of this. The multi-sense holographic interface is cool at first, but it runs COD9 at 2 FPS slower than XP sp2, and no one is writing anything for DX17 yet anyway. It just doesn't seem to offer enough substance beyond all that silly sensory-candy. I'm sticking with XP.

 

No, that must have been Windows 2018. Due to the curvature of space-time, the beta of Windows 2020 actually came out after GA, in 2024. However, to really fully utilize Windows 2020 you have to open an ethernet wormhole into Internet 4.2 and run FireFox V9 across the transient interdimensional quantum psuedo state pulse-based network.

 

I think Verizon blocks those ports on my end. That sucks.

 

Is that better than the geriatric driver, which, BTW, comes in two flavors, left turn-signal stuck on and right turn-signal stuck on?

 

Are you from Ballard?

 

Fountainhead - iTunes has issues. Palm desktop has issues (yes I still own one of those antiquated devices). Granted I have x64 Vista, which I know has more issues than 32bit versions. But I think it's silly considering how cheap RAM is these days not to be able to take advantage of it.

 

Yeah, I have iTunes running fine on 32-bit but I don't run it under x64, so I can't say about that. As far as Palm Desktop...all I can say is that it ran fine last time I used it...under Windows 95 I think.

But like I said, whatever works. We've got a bunch of machines here, older and newer. We're about half and half Vista and XP. It's all good.

 

How well does Microsoft Virtual PC 2007 run with Vista x64? That might be an option as well. But for gaming, XP is still preferred for now.

 

It doesn't support any 64-bit operating system as a guest - it emulates a 32-bit processor. So...not at all. Unless you mean running VPC2K7 on Vista 64. In which case it supports the non-home versions of Vista x64. But it should also run just fine on the home versions despite the lack of official support - it runs fine on Home Premium x86.

Any comments on XP outselling Vista were lost in the bamboozlement of Windows 2020, Internet 4.2, and the warping of the space-time continuum...I think a like would indeed cause a paradox...

 

I play games on my desktop so I use XP, which gives an overall better gaming performance.....I will have VISTA on my laptop just because I will have to pay more for downgrading to XP and I don't think VISTA is that bad....but I know it isn't worth upgrading....but hey....my upgrading cost less than downgrading.... so I will go with VISTA!

 

I have the best of both worlds! a Dell desktop with windows XP, a Gateway laptop with Windows XP, and this HP Dv6700 with Vista Premium. I really like Vista now, once i got to know everything on it. It was really different, and hard to like, but now, No problems.

 

I mean running Vista 64 as main OS, and running XP 32 in VPC2k7?