Buying a new PC today. Should I get Vista or XP?
 

Went to Best Buy and ALL the systems they sell have Vista on them. I can get XP but only if I order online and have to wait for them to ship it.
Ive never even seen Vista. Is it good?
Anyone have an opinion of Vista or XP?

Neither. XP sucks and Vista is so DRM heavy. Switch to Mac.

not an option. have too much software that runs on windows and dont want to fuck with it.

If you have some old peripherals (webcam, printer, etc)... stick with XP.

If you don't and aren't afraid of change, go with Vista. Despite the hype, it is the better system.

If you run anything other than, say, notepad... make sure you have 2 gigs of RAM for Vista. More would be even better.

I've got Vista on this laptop, but I'm still sticking with XP for a year or two yet. Let the rest of the world work out the bugs, I'll stick with what I know works for now.

Xp if you have to choose from xp and vista

Xp all the way.

Vista is by far better than XP. It runs better, way faster, looks nicers, no crashes. Its the best OS ive ever worked on.

A lot of people cry about Vista because of one reason. They are morons. Vista needs a lot of tweaking after you install it because its really setup for dumb people. It tries to control ever movement you make. It sucks but it can all be turned off and once you tweaked it you have a perfect OS.

There is no way i would ever go back to XP after working on Vista now.

I can guarantee you its 100% better than XP and all the complaints about it are made by people who have no clue. They are wrong, not Vista.

Buy it, you wont regret it.

You dont need more than 2 gigs for Vista and actually its not recommended to use more than 2 as it can slow things down.

I have 2 gigs and its MORE than enough to run Vista so im not sure what you are talking about. Also exactly WAHT bugs are you talking about. Please let me know about all these bugs because i havent found one so far. Not a single one!

DRM heavy? You know you can turn anything off right?

So youre basically saying go with a mac because Vista is DRM heavy??

See what i mean? People are morons. They have no clue. They just recommended this and that and half of them didnt even try Vista i bet.

Give me ONE good reason.

What he said. Agree 101% :)

I would go for Windows XP because many applications are still not working on Vista

Many? All the main progs I use, photoshop, dreamweaver, fireworks flash, office etc ALL work fine...
So, are these 'many' programs obscure ones or what?

Please give some examples...

Well, i guess some software doesnt work but let me tell you, using normal webmaster tools and a few games and some other stuff, how many times that happened to me so far: Zero

So what do you base that on? Because you read it online? Or are you using that many odd programs?

how can having too much memory slow things down?

Well sorry but i have no time fuck around to tweak something that is suppose to work out of the box. I have shitloads of programs. On CD's and bought online. I want the shit to work PERIOD.

I don't care if it looks better. All i care is the cash $$$ If i have to fucking work out a box, i'm loosing time (money)

XP all the way (until i'm 99.9% sure i can install everything)

<--- XP Pro X64.

There is so much BS being told about Vista. I wonder why. Half of the people bashing it havent even tried it but at the same time they seem to know everything about it. Its like a trend to bash Vista. If you dont do it youre not cool. Doesnt matter everything you say about it is BS.

Don't ask me. I did some research before buying Vista and it was recommended not to buy more than 2 gigs. And true or not you really don't need more anyway. All this BS that Vista needs AT LEAST 2 gigs is another random story that someone invented.

It took me a whole 2 hours or so to get everything running the way i wanted.
Please stop posting on gfy. I bet you spent quite some hours here. Youre losing money.

And can you fucking read? I said i havent had ONE program that didnt work on Vista. Now please leave, you dont have time for this.

I hear yah, but I think you should really think twice about Vista...
Its actually VERY good. I heard a lot of horror stories, and when I went to get my new PC, I also walked into the store with the attitude of 'I want XP on it'...
Like you I needed something 'NOW' and didn't want to wait for a special order so I took Vista...

Im glad i did :) Its been great!

Now the tweaking that Franck describes is really no different to the same amount of tweaking that you'd end up doing to a brand new XP install anyway...
We all need to tell the OS (whatever it may b) which programs we want to associate files with... ONCE... then its done... Set it and forget it...

Like the start menu. Its different. I didn't like it... So right click on start, properties, and check 'Use Windows classic start menu'...

That's it... Job done. Took all of ten seconds... Now I like the start menu...

Put simply, Vista 'Just works'... I know that sounds like a 'mac' commercial from a few years ago, but put simply... Its the truth.

The key thing to remember, is this. When you are FIRST installing an application, instead of just double clicking the .exe RIGHT click it and choose 'Run as admin'... Then EVERYTHING, and I mean EVERYTHING that i needed to install, installed first time.

Now there's nothing in it for me to suggest vista... Hell, I dont get a commission LOL and Im not just being pedantic, like those guys who always say... 'Get a mac'... Im just saying, from one webmaster to another, or from one guy who relies on his system 'WORKING' to earn his crust, to another...

That if your getting a new PC, DONT BE AFRAID OF VISTA...

Vista is NOT the devils spunk...

PS: i like poo...

Fabien doesnt have time to read this shit. Time = money.

Vista = piece of shit

get xp pro

God, another fucking imbecile.

Please oh wise one, please explain why its a piece of shit. I cant wait.

there is NO reason to use vista yet. its still in its infantile stages.

xp works

glad to see you still whoring that sig for $ franck..

Vista does have some issues with the firewall, to allow micro$oft to collect info from you it does not block any programs from 'calling home' so it leaves you open to trojans. There may be some 3rd party solutions.

to say mac is not an option is silly.....


you just run windows on your mac there prob solved... so when you want a comp that works you run osx when you want a computer that gives you shit you run windows easy.... prob solved

LOL

so you take pride in being able to master an ugly OS thats defaultly setup for dumb people?

nice!

Here dumb fuck, i turned my sig off for this post so when i say dumb fuck i actually mean it and its not just for sig views :thumbsup

So have you tried Vista already dumb fuck? Or is your opion based on posts like this on gfy where other people who never tried it say it sucks?

Well dumb fuck? Did you?

I don't like how everything in vista is renamed and moved around. It's been basically the same for so long, why change it?

What is?

I only screwed with vista twice. But from what I recall, pretty much everything in the control panel is renamed, and the wireless networking stuff is all moved around (in the wireless properties) and hard to find at first.

The whole discussion was about XP vs Vista, not hardware related, so... no offense but your post didn't add any value to this thread :)

Vista is for people who are too fucking dumb to use Linux

https://youtube.com/watch?v=xC5uEe5OzNQ

Why dont you answer me dumb fuck? You seem to know a lot about Vista. Did you ever use it?

Come on, youre not gonna tell me you never installed it on your computer right. I mean that would be too fucking pathetic.

I hope you're right in regards to Vista being a better platform. I've had my suspicions of that being the case for awhile now, but as FedEx'll be knocking on my door with a Vista laptop on Monday, I hope those suspicions pan out.

That aside, though... could you give me a source for the statement you said above? With all due respect, More RAM = slower machine is what _sounds like_ a random story that someone else invented.

It makes no sense, insofar as I can reason. How can more memory slow you down?

Would appreciate a source. Thanks.

alert alert

keyboard warrior franck is on the prowl and has his posting quota to meet :1orglaugh

i'm not even going to give you my time of day, LOL.

You use Vista and think its the best thing to come out of Gates dickhole since the cum you just sucked out of it. I bet you dont even know how to use linux.

Vista sucks! XP media center is way better, but it is hard to find anymore...

It's something i read more than once while reading about Vista but yes like i said, i could be another "myth". I'm trying to recall where i read it. I'll see if i can find a link.
Anyway about the memory 2 is enough to start with. I have 2 gigs and not needed more so far. So where these stories come from that you need at least 2 gigs....beats me.

Here you have your answer:

have a new Windows Vista computer. I have the Ultimate version, with 4 gigabytes of RAM. However, when I look under System, it shows only 2.8GB of RAM. What happened to the rest of my memory?
Mike in Bloomington, IN, listening on WGCL 1370 AM

Sorry to say, I’m afraid you’ve wasted your money. The rest of your memory is sitting idle. Windows can’t address it.
This is going to get a little technical. But it’s important for people who want to build killer machines. Many motherboards will hold a maximum of 4GB of RAM. But that doesn’t mean Windows can use it.

Let’s get the math out of the way first. Windows Vista comes in two basic versions—32-bit and 64-bit. The biggest difference is the amount of address space each can access. The former can access 4GB of address space. The 64-bit version of Vista Home Basic can access 8 terabytes of address space. The other four versions can access 16TB.

(Mathematically, a 64-bit operating system could access 16 exabytes of address space. That’s 4 billion times the 32-bit limit, give or take.

(All 32-bit operating systems have a 4GB limit on address space. It is imposed by mathematics. The problem is not limited to Windows Vista.)

OK, so let’s get back to your question. You have 4GB of memory, but Windows only sees 2.8GB. That’s because system RAM is only one thing vying for address space. Your machine has hardware that needs address space, too.

For instance, the video card is really hungry. According to Hewlett-Packard, a 256MB video card needs AT LEAST 256MB of address space. So let’s say you build a big-time gaming machine. You install a 512MB video card. Throw in your PCI-E bus system and numerous other pieces of hardware. You could eat up half the address space.

Those pieces of hardware get the first bite of address space. RAM gets the rest. So, in that case, the 32-bit version of Windows would only access about 2GB of RAM.

How’s that for a kick in the teeth? You spend a fortune for top-notch hardware, and inadvertently cheat yourself out of memory!

So, can you solve this problem with Windows’ 64-bit version? Maybe, maybe not. The machine itself has to provide more address space. And you need a 64-bit microprocessor.

The latter is no problem. Both Intel and AMD make gobs of 64-bit microprocessors. Before you buy such a machine, though, make certain the chipset supports the additional address space.

Let’s assume the machine offers tons of address space. In that case, all of the RAM would be fully utilized. But that’s only if the application you’re using (a game, for instance) is also 64-bit.

Unfortunately, almost all applications are 32-bit. That is certainly true of consumer applications. When they run on 64-bit Vista, they use emulation. This emulation is called Windows on Windows 64, or WoW64. And they can only access 2GB of RAM!

I’m afraid the consumer world just isn’t ready for 64-bit Vista. It makes more sense in the corporate world. There, mammoth programs might exceed 4GB in size. With the extra memory accessible in 64-bit operating systems, these programs can be loaded into RAM in their entirety. That makes them run much faster.

In fact, we looked at servers on Dell’s site. We found one option offering 32GB of RAM. That costs a mere $12,000 extra!

It looks to me like you’re snagged, no matter what you do. Online, I found people whose machines accessed as little as 2GB of RAM. These people had 4GB of RAM installed. Needless to say, they were hot under the collar. But, like you, they have no realistic solution.

RAM is cheap today, so lots of people are interested in maxing out. But when I bought my Vista Ultimate machines, I went for 2GB. Frankly, that’s a good number. It runs Vista very well. Much more, and I’d risk running out of address space.

No doubt, you hate wasting money. You might consider selling 1GB of your RAM.

I have more tips on RAM and memory on my site:
• Running low on virtual memory
• Adding more memory
• Find out what type of memory your computer needs
Have a great weekend and thank you for your support of my show and newsletters! I appreciate it!

Kim :)

which leads me to believe what they are saying that Vista is a glorified Me. as the debate gose on

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Holy shit, you really never used it!! :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Thanks! Thanks for proving my theory that all this Vista bashing comes from fucking imbeciles like you who know everything about it and havent even used it :1orglaugh

Really, im happy you did this. It proves what a total fucking moron you are. Unbefuckinglievable :1orglaugh

Aha another Einstein. Please tell us why Vista sucks. I can only assume you tried it right?

<--- has 8 gigs of ram and his XP can use it all :)

I'm picking XP, thanks.

sucks every store only sells Vista, but Ill order online.

Why exactly?

http://la.gg/upl/CIMG2648.jpg

next please, LOL.

I would love to see you take a pic of you using Linux...oh wait...

notice how Franck stops posting once he gets proven wrong? says a lot about him.

lol god I love this forum for all of its sigwhores, keyboard warriors and wannabe webmasters.

B L O O P S