XP 64bit or Vista
-
I have heard horror stories of friends using Vista and nothing but complaints, I am buying a power house computer today (Quad core) and I assume I need a 64 bit OS. I plan on dual booting with Ubuntu but need Windows for various tools. What happens if I install Windows 32bit on a 64bit quad core? Is Visat that bad, even for an experienced computer user who can tweak it? Is it stable? Is it just the constant security questions that have hindered user experience?
XanderXP wrote:
Vista and nothing but complaints
Yes, that is very true. There is hardly anything there to impress you, unless you are into things like Aero, animation etc. For those of us, hardly ever wanting to change the default wallpaper, it is hard to justify the benefits. However, if you wish to upgrade in the future to Win7, then go for the Vista, and just do not expect things to be the same as WinXP. I am also currently configuring my new PC with a Vista Business, it is frustrating to say the least - but after sometime you will get use to its way of doing things. I cannot tell how long it took me to configure my start up menu to a reasonable form. I am currently testing Norton UAC, if this also does not work well, I will disable the UAC completely and have a peace of mind. Best regards, Paul.
Jesus Christ is LOVE! Please tell somebody.
-
VIsta is crap, especially for power users. You can run a 32 bit OS on a 64 bit machine if you want/need to. I still run 32 bit b/c every time I tried to go 64 bit, it was a nightmare, and now I am OSX most of the time, which just works in 64 bit ( because Apple sell the hardware AND software and the issue was always drivers ), and I am happy to run 32 bit in my VM.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. "I am new to programming world. I have been learning c# for about past four weeks. I am quite acquainted with the fundamentals of c#. Now I have to work on a project which converts given flat files to XML using the XML serialization method" - SK64 ( but the forums have stuff like this posted every day )
Christian Graus wrote:
VIsta is crap, especially for power users.
Christian Graus wrote:
the issue was always drivers
Just becuase hardware manufacturs don't write drivers properly doesn't make the base operating system "crap". We use 64 bit Windows OSs on 64 bit hardware and they are rock solid - having made sure the hardware and drivers we were using were good enough. Most people (and it seems you fall into this category) don't distinguish between the operating system and the third party drivers. Since most drivers run in ring 0, they have the capability to cause all sorts of havoc if they aren't written properly.
-
Christian Graus wrote:
VIsta is crap, especially for power users.
Christian Graus wrote:
the issue was always drivers
Just becuase hardware manufacturs don't write drivers properly doesn't make the base operating system "crap". We use 64 bit Windows OSs on 64 bit hardware and they are rock solid - having made sure the hardware and drivers we were using were good enough. Most people (and it seems you fall into this category) don't distinguish between the operating system and the third party drivers. Since most drivers run in ring 0, they have the capability to cause all sorts of havoc if they aren't written properly.
Electron Shepherd wrote:
Just becuase hardware manufacturs don't write drivers properly doesn't make the base operating system "crap"
True. Vista is just crap, in every possible way. The driver issue is more speaking to the 32/64 bit question.
Electron Shepherd wrote:
Most people (and it seems you fall into this category) don't distinguish between the operating system and the third party drivers.
Well, most people who come here are literate, but thanks for playing.
Electron Shepherd wrote:
Since most drivers run in ring 0, they have the capability to cause all sorts of havoc if they aren't written properly.
Yes, I am well aware that most people who complain about Windows stability, have driver issues. I am not saying Vista is unstable, I am saying it's crap.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. "I am new to programming world. I have been learning c# for about past four weeks. I am quite acquainted with the fundamentals of c#. Now I have to work on a project which converts given flat files to XML using the XML serialization method" - SK64 ( but the forums have stuff like this posted every day )
-
Electron Shepherd wrote:
Just becuase hardware manufacturs don't write drivers properly doesn't make the base operating system "crap"
True. Vista is just crap, in every possible way. The driver issue is more speaking to the 32/64 bit question.
Electron Shepherd wrote:
Most people (and it seems you fall into this category) don't distinguish between the operating system and the third party drivers.
Well, most people who come here are literate, but thanks for playing.
Electron Shepherd wrote:
Since most drivers run in ring 0, they have the capability to cause all sorts of havoc if they aren't written properly.
Yes, I am well aware that most people who complain about Windows stability, have driver issues. I am not saying Vista is unstable, I am saying it's crap.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. "I am new to programming world. I have been learning c# for about past four weeks. I am quite acquainted with the fundamentals of c#. Now I have to work on a project which converts given flat files to XML using the XML serialization method" - SK64 ( but the forums have stuff like this posted every day )
Christian Graus wrote:
Well, most people who come here are literate, but thanks for playing.
I don't understand this. Playing what?
-
I have heard horror stories of friends using Vista and nothing but complaints, I am buying a power house computer today (Quad core) and I assume I need a 64 bit OS. I plan on dual booting with Ubuntu but need Windows for various tools. What happens if I install Windows 32bit on a 64bit quad core? Is Visat that bad, even for an experienced computer user who can tweak it? Is it stable? Is it just the constant security questions that have hindered user experience?
Definitely Vista 64 bit. XP 64 bit never worked great for me. Other choice is WIndows 2003 or 2008 64 bit. But never use XP 64 bit.
-
Christian Graus wrote:
Well, most people who come here are literate, but thanks for playing.
I don't understand this. Playing what?
Whatever it was you thought you were playing at when you completely misread my post and insulted me.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. "I am new to programming world. I have been learning c# for about past four weeks. I am quite acquainted with the fundamentals of c#. Now I have to work on a project which converts given flat files to XML using the XML serialization method" - SK64 ( but the forums have stuff like this posted every day )
-
Vista 64 is just fine, especially if you have 4+ GB of RAM. I use it for pretty much everything. Do not get XP64. Absolutely horrible. Not so much the OS, but it's very hard to get stable drivers for it depending on the hardware. 32bit windows works fine on quad core.
// Steve McLenithan
-
I have heard horror stories of friends using Vista and nothing but complaints, I am buying a power house computer today (Quad core) and I assume I need a 64 bit OS. I plan on dual booting with Ubuntu but need Windows for various tools. What happens if I install Windows 32bit on a 64bit quad core? Is Visat that bad, even for an experienced computer user who can tweak it? Is it stable? Is it just the constant security questions that have hindered user experience?
I don't know what the people here have against XP x64. Really.. The "64bit driver issue" is almost gone now (unless you have truly old hardware, but you don't, since you're buying a new pc). And besides, Vista x64 needs 64bit drivers as well so that isn't any better. The choice between XP (speed) and Vista (eye candy) is yours to make really Why do you assume you need a 64bit OS? The reason there is so much crap in the x86 instruction set is that they kept it backwards compatible - you could run DOS on a quad core. It will think it's just a very fast 8086 with only 1 core though. 64bit is nice if you have more than 3GB ram and/or you do many things like encoding video, and otherwise, well, it won't really get in your way usually but that would be all. There is a slight performance benefit for 64bit programs (32bit programs run about as fast as on a 32bit OS, some people claim 1% difference) To be sure you will have absolutely no problems at all, you could just go for 32bit XP. You might waste a little ram that way though.
-
Whatever it was you thought you were playing at when you completely misread my post and insulted me.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. "I am new to programming world. I have been learning c# for about past four weeks. I am quite acquainted with the fundamentals of c#. Now I have to work on a project which converts given flat files to XML using the XML serialization method" - SK64 ( but the forums have stuff like this posted every day )
Well, I wasn't intending to insult you, just as I'm sure you weren't intending to insult SK64.
-
I have heard horror stories of friends using Vista and nothing but complaints, I am buying a power house computer today (Quad core) and I assume I need a 64 bit OS. I plan on dual booting with Ubuntu but need Windows for various tools. What happens if I install Windows 32bit on a 64bit quad core? Is Visat that bad, even for an experienced computer user who can tweak it? Is it stable? Is it just the constant security questions that have hindered user experience?
Put it this way, Vista x64 as my only operating system on my desktop (32 bit version on a laptop) and no issues at all with it and 2 years of solid running since then. Never had Vista x64 crash on me (not even caused by other programs), security questions aren't an issue because I understand they're there for a reason and they don't get in the way of my workflow. Then again I run a very limited set of programs and they either just work or and were probably designed according to the guidelines in the first place.
I doubt it. If it isn't intuitive then we need to fix it. - Chris Maunder
-
Electron Shepherd wrote:
Just becuase hardware manufacturs don't write drivers properly doesn't make the base operating system "crap"
True. Vista is just crap, in every possible way. The driver issue is more speaking to the 32/64 bit question.
Electron Shepherd wrote:
Most people (and it seems you fall into this category) don't distinguish between the operating system and the third party drivers.
Well, most people who come here are literate, but thanks for playing.
Electron Shepherd wrote:
Since most drivers run in ring 0, they have the capability to cause all sorts of havoc if they aren't written properly.
Yes, I am well aware that most people who complain about Windows stability, have driver issues. I am not saying Vista is unstable, I am saying it's crap.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. "I am new to programming world. I have been learning c# for about past four weeks. I am quite acquainted with the fundamentals of c#. Now I have to work on a project which converts given flat files to XML using the XML serialization method" - SK64 ( but the forums have stuff like this posted every day )
Christian Graus wrote:
I am saying it's crap.
Funny thing about that. Everybody who can't get it to work right says it's crap and everybody that can says it's great. And it's been that way with every MS OS from the beginning. Take for instance Windows ME. It worked great for me for over a year and solved every hardware and driver issue I had with WIN 98. So, my question then is, Do you not like Vista because it won't work on your machine or because you can't get it configured properly? :)
Looking for ebooks? Visit www.activitytreasures.com
-
VIsta is crap, especially for power users. You can run a 32 bit OS on a 64 bit machine if you want/need to. I still run 32 bit b/c every time I tried to go 64 bit, it was a nightmare, and now I am OSX most of the time, which just works in 64 bit ( because Apple sell the hardware AND software and the issue was always drivers ), and I am happy to run 32 bit in my VM.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. "I am new to programming world. I have been learning c# for about past four weeks. I am quite acquainted with the fundamentals of c#. Now I have to work on a project which converts given flat files to XML using the XML serialization method" - SK64 ( but the forums have stuff like this posted every day )
Vista isn't crap only some of the pc's trying to run it. I've NEVER had a problem with an OS, even Windows ME. I had a big problem with a PC, it was a Compaq, and I got rid of it. Problem solved. There is nothing wrong with Vista that a little research, reconfiguring and bringing your pc in tune with it, that cannot be solved. :) Oh yeah, as an afterthought, haven't you been trying to run Windows on a MAC? :wtf: You wouldn't try to install a Ford engine in a Chevy would you?
Looking for ebooks? Visit www.activitytreasures.com
-
Christian Graus wrote:
I am saying it's crap.
Funny thing about that. Everybody who can't get it to work right says it's crap and everybody that can says it's great. And it's been that way with every MS OS from the beginning. Take for instance Windows ME. It worked great for me for over a year and solved every hardware and driver issue I had with WIN 98. So, my question then is, Do you not like Vista because it won't work on your machine or because you can't get it configured properly? :)
Looking for ebooks? Visit www.activitytreasures.com
Dirk Higbee wrote:
Everybody who can't get it to work right says it's crap and everybody that can says it's great
I can make it work, I use it all the time, to test my apps for the poor suckers who have to live under it. When I try to rename a file, it asks for my password three times, then says it won't let me do it, is that me, or the OS that is stupid ?
Dirk Higbee wrote:
So, my question then is, Do you not like Vista because it won't work on your machine or because you can't get it configured properly?
It works, I don't like it because while extra security is a good idea, MS blew it on usability in just about every possible way. They also failed to properly advise developers that for the first time, a lot of our old code was just going to stop working. Some products died rather than rewrite for Vista, you know.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. "I am new to programming world. I have been learning c# for about past four weeks. I am quite acquainted with the fundamentals of c#. Now I have to work on a project which converts given flat files to XML using the XML serialization method" - SK64 ( but the forums have stuff like this posted every day )
-
Dirk Higbee wrote:
Everybody who can't get it to work right says it's crap and everybody that can says it's great
I can make it work, I use it all the time, to test my apps for the poor suckers who have to live under it. When I try to rename a file, it asks for my password three times, then says it won't let me do it, is that me, or the OS that is stupid ?
Dirk Higbee wrote:
So, my question then is, Do you not like Vista because it won't work on your machine or because you can't get it configured properly?
It works, I don't like it because while extra security is a good idea, MS blew it on usability in just about every possible way. They also failed to properly advise developers that for the first time, a lot of our old code was just going to stop working. Some products died rather than rewrite for Vista, you know.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. "I am new to programming world. I have been learning c# for about past four weeks. I am quite acquainted with the fundamentals of c#. Now I have to work on a project which converts given flat files to XML using the XML serialization method" - SK64 ( but the forums have stuff like this posted every day )
Christian Graus wrote:
They also failed to properly advise developers that a lot of our old code was just going to stop working
Funny, that happens every time a new version of VS comes out.
Looking for ebooks? Visit www.activitytreasures.com
-
Steve McLenithan wrote:
Do not get XP64. Absolutely horrible.
So untrue. It's like XP, but 64bit. None of that Vista crap. And there are plenty of drivers for it (unless you have an ancient printer)
Think there are loads of problems with running 16-bit software (which is more software than you'd think) though...
-
Think there are loads of problems with running 16-bit software (which is more software than you'd think) though...
-
Steve McLenithan wrote:
Do not get XP64. Absolutely horrible.
So untrue. It's like XP, but 64bit. None of that Vista crap. And there are plenty of drivers for it (unless you have an ancient printer)
I could not disagree more. I've helped a lot of friends that went the XP64 route, especially with gaming. nvidia chipset drivers are especially flaky on XP64
// Steve McLenithan
-
I could not disagree more. I've helped a lot of friends that went the XP64 route, especially with gaming. nvidia chipset drivers are especially flaky on XP64
// Steve McLenithan
-
I don't know what the people here have against XP x64. Really.. The "64bit driver issue" is almost gone now (unless you have truly old hardware, but you don't, since you're buying a new pc). And besides, Vista x64 needs 64bit drivers as well so that isn't any better. The choice between XP (speed) and Vista (eye candy) is yours to make really Why do you assume you need a 64bit OS? The reason there is so much crap in the x86 instruction set is that they kept it backwards compatible - you could run DOS on a quad core. It will think it's just a very fast 8086 with only 1 core though. 64bit is nice if you have more than 3GB ram and/or you do many things like encoding video, and otherwise, well, it won't really get in your way usually but that would be all. There is a slight performance benefit for 64bit programs (32bit programs run about as fast as on a 32bit OS, some people claim 1% difference) To be sure you will have absolutely no problems at all, you could just go for 32bit XP. You might waste a little ram that way though.
harold aptroot wrote:
I don't know what the people here have against XP x64. Really..
Same here. In fact, I'd say that I had to manually locate and install more drivers for my hardware for XP x86 when it came out than with XP x64. With XP x64, I only had to download video drivers, but then, who ever keeps bundled video drivers anyway? That being said, it's been over two years since I installed XP x64 on my machine and as a dev/testing box, it currently needs to be wiped/reinstalled--and the OS has been so good to me that I'm still going to reinstall XP x64 on it (even if Win7 is out by the time I decide to wipe/reinstall--I'll have it on other machines to tinker with, but this one still have XP x64 on it the day it dies...why try to fix what's not broken)
-
VIsta is crap, especially for power users. You can run a 32 bit OS on a 64 bit machine if you want/need to. I still run 32 bit b/c every time I tried to go 64 bit, it was a nightmare, and now I am OSX most of the time, which just works in 64 bit ( because Apple sell the hardware AND software and the issue was always drivers ), and I am happy to run 32 bit in my VM.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. "I am new to programming world. I have been learning c# for about past four weeks. I am quite acquainted with the fundamentals of c#. Now I have to work on a project which converts given flat files to XML using the XML serialization method" - SK64 ( but the forums have stuff like this posted every day )
I have had far less problems with Vista than with XP. I consider myself to be a "power user".