Vista vs. XP

The ubiquitous operating system, discussion of its (many) flaws, and how to mitigate the risks of those flaws

Vista vs. XP

Post by BuTTHeaD on Sun Feb 01, 2009 5:06 pm
([msg=17232]see Vista vs. XP[/msg])

Which is faster and better?
BuTTHeaD
Experienced User
Experienced User
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 4:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Vista vs. XP

Post by xcurious on Sun Feb 01, 2009 5:23 pm
([msg=17233]see Re: Vista vs. XP[/msg])

linux
- Apologies to all who I have flamed in the past. Thanks mods for unbanning me.


ckw100 wrote:so i have been pacticeing my batch file hacking for networks
xcurious
Experienced User
Experienced User
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 3:49 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Vista vs. XP

Post by Andomis on Sun Feb 01, 2009 5:33 pm
([msg=17235]see Re: Vista vs. XP[/msg])

Depends on what you are using it for. Vista security wise, functionality, looks, compatability (now- used to not be), and all of its small tweaks over the years since xp makes it better as a overall OS for anyone who knows 2 cents about computers. However, vista has alot of resource problems, and tends to be slow. So for my work machines I use windows vista, and love it, but for any of my servers I use XP (if not linux/a true server OS) because of its performance speed being higher than vista's. Windows 7 will replace any arguements between these, because it will combine the good features of vista with the speed of xp.

You cannot really say which is better, but you can say which does specific tasks better.
"I'm choking on that four letter word, it sticks in my throat as i read the words YOU wrote..."
User avatar
Andomis
Experienced User
Experienced User
 
Posts: 75
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 8:50 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Vista vs. XP

Post by BuTTHeaD on Mon Feb 02, 2009 4:31 pm
([msg=17274]see Re: Vista vs. XP[/msg])

Alright, now which is better for gaming?
BuTTHeaD
Experienced User
Experienced User
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 4:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Vista vs. XP

Post by Andomis on Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:44 pm
([msg=17284]see Re: Vista vs. XP[/msg])

Currently I would say XP because most games were made for it.
"I'm choking on that four letter word, it sticks in my throat as i read the words YOU wrote..."
User avatar
Andomis
Experienced User
Experienced User
 
Posts: 75
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 8:50 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Vista vs. XP

Post by DenyTheTruth on Sat Feb 07, 2009 2:22 am
([msg=17496]see Re: Vista vs. XP[/msg])

Andomis wrote:Currently I would say XP because most games were made for it.


I disagree.

Doom 3 would not play (multiplayer co-op, mind you, so it was a mod) with my quad-core on XP. I had to install Vista to get the affinity on my Q-core to work properly and play the game. I was experiencing frames around 5 to 10/s with a computer that can play Crysis on max settings.

I would say it depends on your hardware specs and what games you're attempting to play. If you have a single core and possibly a dual-core, XP. If you have a quad-core, Vista.

Note: This is my opinion based on one game that I enjoy very thoroughly. I would probably kill for a chance to work for id or blizzard and I would definitely kill for a Doom 4. All statements made above are directly related to my obsession with Doom.
~ Parruption in Coradise ~
User avatar
DenyTheTruth
Poster
Poster
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:54 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Vista vs. XP

Post by The_Computer_Wizard on Sun Mar 01, 2009 2:49 pm
([msg=18974]see Re: Vista vs. XP[/msg])

to put it simply, vista is good if and only if you have enough resources to pump into it
(like i have 3gb of ram a dual core and a 512mb graphics card)
i run vista and i love it

compatibility problems are less and less the longer its out, and it is better for gaming than xp (especially because of DX10, and yea i know there are hacks for xp but they barely work if at all) as i have not seen too many games that dont work (2 or 3, but one i saw, KOTOR2 has a vista fix)

if you have anything less than a gig of ram go with xp, as vista will run WAY too slow (granted there are ways to mess with it to make it run better, but for the average user it is a good minimum for 1gb)

XP is a good solid os. As far as a server goes i wouldnt use vista. There is no need to have your server need that much more resources to run the OS, not to mention server 2003 works and is easy to set up, plus vista, xp, 2000, and many others are perfectly compatible with it just fine
vista server pretty much offers no bennifits as far as i know

Personally i run all three, Vista on a partition, Ubuntu on a partition and VM, and XP as a VM
Image
User avatar
The_Computer_Wizard
Poster
Poster
 
Posts: 119
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 9:02 am
Blog: View Blog (0)



Return to Microsoft Windows

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests