*sigh* More Vista bashing... You clearly havn't used it and just leeching off other peoples comments.

I keep thinking back to that dark time when Longhorn and Trusted Computing was an ugly storm cloud on the horizon. I boarded up my windows (XP) and prayed "Maybe if I ignore the Vista, it'll go away?" the miracle has been that in essence, it has.

Now... The fact that Vista has not achieved the market penetration necessary to ensure it's continued existence is a light at the end of a scary tunnel to me. If Windows 7 turns out to be fast, efficient and innocuous, it will be my next OS.

I don't mind if they change how some things are accessed, I have to assume there will be a degree of support for the old way of doing things. All I'm really concerned about is the performance. It's gotta be tight, efficient and quick, and leave the resources to the games and the apps like it should.

I have a question for people in the know since this thread is about OSs. Should I keep my purchase of XP64 or should I change it too XP32? I have ordered it and it has not come into the shop yet so I wanted to know should I change because I am only getting it for dual booting my computer when Windows 7 comes out.

Jandau:

Eggo:

Jandau:
The thing I'm wondering about is, why would I want Windows 7? Is there any reason for me to upgrade? And I mean a practical reason. Not some technical mumbo-jumbo or promises of a golden future. I mean honest-to-god plain-to-see benefits to my daily activities.

Practical reason? You won't have enough memory in a year or two to run games in XP32 and good luck getting hardware/software support for XP64.

Is that practical enough?

See, now that's a good argument...

...except I won't have to worry about it at least until the next generation of consoles sine I've noticed that techincal advances in games tend to slow down to a crawl with each new console gen. My machine with XP can match the technological level of 360 and PS3, so therefore I'm set. I bought my computer a year ago, and even then it was no big deal, but it ran most current stuff on high settings. Fast forward about a year and NOTHING has changed, and I don't see it changing untill the next console generation.

So, any other practical reasons?

Windows 7 is already beating XP and Vista in startup times. Vista and Windows 7 both use a system called 'Superfetch' which memorises the programs you use regularly and uses your RAM as a cache so it'll load up very quickly. If you load up a program thats demanding on system resources the OS will free up the RAM automatically. I've had absolutely no performance issues yet. By compairson, every XP system I've had has slowed to a crawl after a year or so.

While I love XP, I'm going to be getting Windows 7 when comes out as that will be when I'll be rebuilding my machine. Why? It's simple. Sooner or later, PC games are going to need to turn to 64bit architecture to stay competitive with console games which I can't wait for for. XP, as much as I enjoy using it, has an atrociously bad 64bit OS version. On the plus side as well, the new Windows 7 is supposed to be more efficient than XP running the same hardware. Look up some of the results.

Eggo:

mooncalf:
I keep thinking back to that dark time when Longhorn and Trusted Computing was an ugly storm cloud on the horizon. I boarded up my windows (XP) and prayed "Maybe if I ignore the Vista, it'll go away?" the miracle has been that in essence, it has.

Now... The fact that Vista has not achieved the market penetration necessary to ensure it's continued existence is a light at the end of a scary tunnel to me. If Windows 7 turns out to be fast, efficient and innocuous, it will be my next OS.

I don't mind if they change how some things are accessed, I have to assume there will be a degree of support for the old way of doing things. All I'm really concerned about is the performance. It's gotta be tight, efficient and quick, and leave the resources to the games and the apps like it should.

XP wasn't tight, efficient, nor quick and it definitely didn't leave "the resources" to the games and the apps like it should. Vista comes far closer to this than XP ever could dream of doing and Windows 7 refines this even more.

Why aren't you using Linux? :p

Eggo's right on this one. If you want a tight, efficient and quick operating system, you go the Linux root. Or for RISC OS, but that's usually only recommended today if you're insane.

Eggo:
It all depends on whether or not all your hardware and software works with XP64, an OS which is notorious for its poor compatibility and support. I stuck with Vista 64 and XP32 personally.

Well I will be getting a new PC in a month or so. Any parts I get for my computer will be current and the system will be around the $2000 mark with an Intel board and Nvidia graphics, I am undecided on the RAM.

Eggo:

XP wasn't tight, efficient, nor quick and it definitely didn't leave "the resources" to the games and the apps like it should. Vista comes far closer to this than XP ever could dream of doing and Windows 7 refines this even more.

Why aren't you using Linux? :p

Fair call, fair call! My migration story to XP is rather involved. My alternative to XP at the time was SuSe Linux which had then recently broken user-friendly ground.. But SuSe wasn't prepared to install my video card easy-like, and so I gave up on it. My next choice (as I see it) is between Ubuntu and Win7. :)

Actually support for XP has been extended to 2014, and Vista extended to 2017 you can find the info here:

http://support.microsoft.com/gp/lifeselectindex

I have seen some of the testers comments on another board about Windows 7, they have nicknamed it Vista SP2, lol Anyway I look forward to Windows 7 as well, I switched to Vista a while ago and never looked back at XP, glad it's gone actually, after learning more about system security it's really a wonder why anyone continues to use it. Oh well, another strange fact about Windows 7 is it's odd version number 6.1 not 7 as you would expect. Microsoft claims it is compatibility with older software, not sure I believe that.

Eggo:

perfectimo:

Eggo:
It all depends on whether or not all your hardware and software works with XP64, an OS which is notorious for its poor compatibility and support. I stuck with Vista 64 and XP32 personally.

Well I will be getting a new PC in a month or so. Any parts I get for my computer will be current and the system will be around the $2000 mark with an Intel board and Nvidia graphics, I am undecided on the RAM.

If you're building a $2000 computer, there is utterly no reason for you to pick XP64 over Vista 64. Unless you're a real pro and going to stick 2 gigs of RAM in it :p

I was planning on getting W7 and from what I understand it is pretty much Vista with a facelift, I will probably get a copy of Vista in the coming months but for now I want to get ready to just migrate my current computer into the new machine. So from what I am hearing I should get XP32 because XP64 is the uncared for version of XP?

mooncalf:

Eggo:

XP wasn't tight, efficient, nor quick and it definitely didn't leave "the resources" to the games and the apps like it should. Vista comes far closer to this than XP ever could dream of doing and Windows 7 refines this even more.

Why aren't you using Linux? :p

Fair call, fair call! My migration story to XP is rather involved. My alternative to XP at the time was SuSe Linux which had then recently broken user-friendly ground.. But SuSe wasn't prepared to install my video card easy-like, and so I gave up on it. My next choice (as I see it) is between Ubuntu and Win7. :)

Is your GPU NVIDIA or ATI? If it's an NVIDIA card, they've recently made it a lot easier to install those cards using NVIDIA's repositories in openSUSE. I'd imagine that as ATI is part of AMD now, that their GPUs will soon become even easier to install, because AMD appears to have a good relationship with Linux developers.

I like vista. My only complaint with it is that it is too resource hungry. Games run 15-30 frames per second slower and a larger amount of ram is required. Apparently windows 7 will be an improvement in this area and still look and feel like like vista, so can't wait!

Eggo i just resantly changed from vista to xp becouse mainly dew to the fact even tho i have a up to date gaming pc which i biult my self and trust me i know what am doing, the bench mark tests for fps on a fav game of mine is xp fps 200, vista fps 50. This does not seem to be pritty smart, plus with up to date gcard drivers vista still blue screened at lest once a day.

The wireless speed was also only about 60% of xp wireless speeds.

Eggo how can this be an improvment?

Other point about people not accestping the amount of space windows use. End of the day a OS is a peace of software that lays between the hardware and programs, it should be simple and fast not like microsoft who add nob and bells on which no one use`s. I bet % of people hear are gamers seeing its a gaming fourm and we like fast software to run our games and dont like 20/30 background programs that we never use slowing our pc`s down.

Am a programer and trust me if games where more compatable with Linux, Linux would be my number one OS, they way ahead of mirosoft, but with Linux it is not noob frandly which i think is a good thing but becouse of that people buy windows.

Linux i love you never leave me <3

oh and mac is just way over priced even tho it has a very stable well made OS

Edit: spelling am very dyslexic

Eggo:
At this point, you should just stick with XP32 and wait a couple months with a crippled machine and get W7 when it comes out instead of purchasing 3 OS's in a single year.

That was my plan but this PC at the moment is knocking on heavens door. On top of that I am doing a computing course and compiling programs on this thing is annoying, even worse is running VMs in a network.

Honestly your friend seems to just be crying about the dumbest thing. Good lord I learned to use Vista fully in about a day.

The_root_of_all_evil:

Have they already forgotten what WYSIWYG stands for?

No, they've just re-written it to suit their egos.

When You Stop Intuitive Windows You're God.

"Ha ha, foolish XP using mortals, look how they struggle..."

I feel microsoft needs to start making a gamers windows, there make home windows, professional windows, for xp and vista, if they made one for games, keeps it simple and fast they may just beable to keep everone happy.

In my honest opinion, what a load of bullshit? Why did they bother releasing vista if they were planning to release another operating system in so fucking soon? That's just retarded! Well someone would say that it was for the money, BIG profits to the evil company and such, but imagine something like this: You are a person who thinks that you have to buy vista at some point to keep up with the progress (you know, like that little thing called DX10). Once you finally buy them some prick comes and announces "Hey you know something? The new shiny OS you just bought? It's obsolete! MUA HA HA! You've been rick roll'd! Go buy Windows 7 now you dirty horrible monkey man!" It's like a fart in the faces of those who actually bought vista! As for me, well I modded my XP and I pretend it's Vista now :P

Confirms my point... They just want our money and then when they get it they fart in our faces!

Soulkiller3:
I feel microsoft needs to start making a gamers windows, there make home windows, professional windows, for xp and vista, if they made one for games, keeps it simple and fast they may just be able to keep everyone happy.

This would be a great solution. Of course Microsoft is too important to think about us, the freakin peasants (gamers)!

Russian_Assassin:
Confirms my point... They just want our money and then when they get it they fart in our faces!

Soulkiller3:
I feel microsoft needs to start making a gamers windows, there make home windows, professional windows, for xp and vista, if they made one for games, keeps it simple and fast they may just be able to keep everyone happy.

This would be a great solution. Of course Microsoft is too important to think about us, the freakin peasants (gamers)!

Is there anyway someone could change your stance on Microsoft?

From what i know it was not planned to relise windows 7 so soon, but vista is a dirty word to most pc users and instead of carring on improving a OS that is not selling they have desided, to strip vista to its bare parts and rework the software give it a new name (even tho its still basicly vista) and sell it makeing more money then they would of if they just tryed to fix vista. They admisted vista was a failure when they anounced win7 and the added 5 year xp support. They had to carrer on supporting xp seeing 70% of they custormers still use it :P

To be honest, my biggest gripe with Vista barring the annoying UAC of course is that it feels actually feels slower to use that XP was. It did seem more sluggish, whether it was literally resources of using it.

One of the two.

Committing games to DX10 only is paramount to commercial suicide for that game

i don't see why all the hate on windows 7... from what i've heard it's going to be vista with new UI elements and less resource hogging. where exactly is the catch you talk about?

this jason guy seems to be whining about changes that can be nullified by changing settings. big d, i've been running with the winXP 98 interface since i switched from win98.

Honestly I didn't mind Vista...

is this in genral or when you are useing alot of ram?

perfectimo:
Is there anyway someone could change your stance on Microsoft?

Why would you want to do such a thing? Would you kindly specify what is it about my stance that upsets you?

Eggo:

corroded:
To be honest, my biggest gripe with Vista barring the annoying UAC of course is that it feels actually feels slower to use that XP was. It did seem more sluggish, whether it was literally resources of using it.

One of the two.

Committing games to DX10 only is paramount to commercial suicide for that game

An extra 6GB makes Vista 64 feel a hell of a lot more responsive than XP32. But that's my machine and all the ones I've built. I wish I could see this sluggishness in action.

Nah, nah, you miss the point, it's most likely not operating sluggish, but rather sluggish in operation. It feels more difficult and annoying for me to use, basically. I think i could change the menu back to classic style, but frankly i'd always liked XP wide menu but without the search programs sort stuff.

For Joe Average user, running 15 1080p videos means nothing, they run the only one they are watching, end of the day, the advantage of DWM and DX10 isn't actually worthy of upgrade solely by itself.

Most techies stay away from Vista. Techies make the recommendations for other people, as they are knowledgeable in the area. We had three vista machines in the whole company, a dev test bed, the managing directors (and he complained he wanted XP back, which he will get), and a ASP.NET developer.

Granted, i haven't used it lots but it hasn't endeared itself like 98/2K/XP did, it felt like an uphill struggle for me to use it, as quickly and efficiently as i use XP

Russian_Assassin:

perfectimo:
Is there anyway someone could change your stance on Microsoft?

Why would you want to do such a thing? Would you kindly specify what is it about my stance that upsets you?

I just wanted to know because you are only trolling if you are posting an anti-Microsoft view point in a thread solely about Microsoft operating systems.