I never was convinced about Vista so didn't upgrade.
Now I am about to get a new laptop and will choose XP + SP3.

http://blog.scotsnewsletter.com:80/2007/12/01/windows-xp-or-vista

emes

If you are not really sure about XP either, I can send you a set of Windows 3.1 floppies. It's really easy on HD space, you can use your old 500 Meg hard drive.

Ray

3.1 runs good on a 40meg drive also.

LilJoe

http://www.pcqanda.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=2&topic_id=469105

I run Vista on three machines never had a problem with it. All my current hardware worked with it.
I know some people had printer problems with Vista, hardly the problem of Vista, printer company should have written drivers for the printer.
Most users want backward compatibility at some point this has to stop and user must by either newer software and or hardware that will run with the system.

Personally I wouldn't do that I have had no major troubles with Vista and people tend to keep laptops longer than desktops you will end up having a unsupported O/S.I like Scott's newsletter but this time I don't happen to agree with him.He also seems more of a mac guy now anyway.

I think I'm going over to the Mac side with my next laptop purchase soon. Apple is really impressing me.

Visit the Basement

John, that is a VERY good point (even though I'm avoiding Vista for various reasons, myself.)

.
Onward & Upward !
Sid

WINDOWS 10
ASUS P8Z77-V Pro MB
Intel i5 3750K CPU
8g Corsair Vengeance DDR3 RAM
Corsair Neutron 250g SSD

Other than the pretty GUI (which I do like), and drivers for more modern hardware, Windows Vista has more annoyances than useful features for me.

I wouldn't use Windows at all if not for a few games that don't have Linux ports.

I'm getting pretty close to ditching Vista and installing XP for my games. Too many problems... I never know if the next video driver update is going to blow up product activation or whether or not I'm going to be able to use my OS tomorrow. I completely distrust it.

At times, the only way I can access any control panel applet (including Windows update) is to open Windows Explorer, expand Control Panel, turn off Aero and reboot without it. Then I can open control panel normally, enable Aero and it works for a while.

Also, even my games are starting to screw up in Vista and I'm getting tired.

Grogan

I admit Vista XP is better for the Gamer. I do not have any problems getting to control panel. The only thing that bugged me was the UAC which I turned of. I only had to turn it on to install adobe reader 8.

Vista other wise has run fine for me.

Me too, I have no problems with Vista, & UAC is off.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enjoy life while you can, don't try when you can't 'cos you won't, then it will be too late.

Ianw

I wondered the same! That is not what I read.

My Mistake it should have read I admit XP is better for the Gamer

Have you ever tried adding a 2nd hard drive in Vista? What a PITA. Doesn't even work actually. A customer of mine purchased an internal SATA II 500 GB drive to be used strictly for storage and said he couldn't see it in Windows Explorer so I guided him over the phone on how to use the Disk Management console in Vista. He said he couldn't do it.

Well it seems initializing and formatting in Vista is a royal FUBAR. When he finally brought his computer to me, I couldn't even right click on the newly added drive to initialize it. Everything in the context menu was greyed out and the only option available was 'Properties'. Of course Vista's 'Add Remove New hardware' feature couldn't even pick up the new drive. What a PITA. I finally gave up on it and slaved it into an XP system where I finally managed to initialize and format it as a basic disk.

Makes me wonder what the heck MS was thinking with this stinkin' OS. Scot Finnie is right on the money. There's very little incentive to upgrade from XP to Vista in its current form. There are more annoyances in Vista than I care for and XP with all it's compatibility and stability is definitely the way to go for the average user.

I have two WD SATA 250GB drives in Vista. Installing drives in Vista is exactly the same procedure as in XP. I wonder why I never have the problems with computers that others have, and blame on everything in sight except themselves. There must be a reason...

Shelly

I have wondered about the same thing. Could it be unreasonable expectations?

I have 3 SATA drives in my Vista machine. I installed Vista with 2 of the SATA's with no problem and added the 3rd SATA later with no problem.

Visit the Basement

Yeah, everyone is incompetent except you, Shelly

Grogan

Plus, just because some have good experiences doesn't mean those who have problems are full of it.


There are probably thousands of different hardware combinations out there. Thousands of possibilities for Vista to error.

Visit the Basement

I suppose if I never changed anything, used only Microsoft's supplied drivers and didn't play games, I wouldn't have any problems.

I've never added a hard disk to Vista... there's only one partition it can read, so I can't comment on that.

I do, however, expect to not have problems. It is most certainly not any fault of mine.

What really soured me was product activation blowing up out of the blue (video driver installation) and only giving me a 2 day countdown. Idiot stick phone support too. It wasn't even two full days, because at 8 pm the next night (actually the same calendar day as it happened around 2 am) it told me I had 1 day left. It would have been gone, if the activation didn't magically work when I tried it again. It could only have been activation server problems and that's another issue I take exception to. It illustrates what's so wrong with needing to ask permission to use your $300 OS.

Grogan

.
Onward & Upward !
Sid

WINDOWS 10
ASUS P8Z77-V Pro MB
Intel i5 3750K CPU
8g Corsair Vengeance DDR3 RAM
Corsair Neutron 250g SSD

I had that problem when I did a software update to the controller MS recommended. But a 5-minute phone call to MS rectified the situation.

We were just having a suppliers Christmas Party tonight when the subject of Computers came up. I had just spent an all nighter fixing three computers in one go. Guess what was the first subject that came out of a friends mouth from the dinner table?

His 22 year old Son had just spent a ton of money on a new Laptop, loaded with Vista. After three months he was ready to heave it out the Window. He has a Log Book program ( Amatuer Mountain Bike racer ) that run's perfect on his desktop with XP. Worked fine on his old laptop with Win 98.

No way, come heaven or he** can he get it to work on his new laptop with Vista. He is very computer savvy and has tried just about everything. He spent over 20 hours, long distance, with Tech Support. No solution found.

Finally, in desperation, he went out and bought a new Retail Edition of XP home SP2. Wiped the HD clean and installed XP. Log Book program now works without a hitch and new laptop seems to be much faster.

Just another customer who was not impressed with Vista....

He has a Log Book program ( Amatuer Mountain Bike racer ) that run's perfect on his desktop with XP. Worked fine on his old laptop with Win 98.


He should check with maker of program to see if there is a Vista compatible program available. Not every older program is going to work on Vista and it's not MS fault. Not every old program worked on XP or on Win 98.

It is silly of a user to think every OS is totally backwards compatible.

I am sure we all have programs that work on Windows 3.1 and 3.11. Would you expect them to work on Vista?

I loved Norton Commander as a file manager however when I upgraded to XP it would no longer work. I worked fine in 98 as long as loaded the patches but not in XP.

I just moved on found something that worked in XP and it also works in Vista

Nonsense!

There is no reason to expect any old program to work in Vista. Thankfully, Microsoft abandoned the requirement that new systems had to be backward compatible when they released XP, and many programs were not usable in XP. It was this blind worship of backward compatibility that held back major improvements in Windows for years.

To improve security XP will not allow access to Level 0, and forbids many direct calls to hardware. Vista carried this forward with additional restrictions that are designed to improve security and stability. Most well written XP programs will work in Vista, either in regular or compatibility mode. Many utility programs will not.

I found that I have to periodically reboot an XP machine to restore top performance. I have never had to reboot Vista except while installing some programs, or hardware.

Yes I had to buy or switch to some new programs or hardware to use Vista. I was well aware in advance that I would have to. I gave up a few programs I have used for years. I do not care to live in the past. There are still a few things in Vista that need correcting, and could not have shown up in testing until the OS was put in the hands of Joe Six-pack, and these will be fixed in future Service Packs.

With literally billions of combinations of hardware and software in use, some unforeseen bugs are and were inevitable in Vista and in every other OS ever written. In spite of this, Vista is by far the most solid Windows OS ever released. Any problems I found were because of something I did, and I was able think my way through, and to fix. One thing I never did was to blame anyone else for my own blunders. I stopped doing that at about 16.

Shelly

This all brings up a question that's been lurking in the back of my ming. Is there a compatibility mode in Vista that will simulate an XP install, for instance? I've never had an occasion to use this function, in XP that is, and have often wondered how successful it is.

And that leads to another question. If Vista is so radically different from XP but can still install as if it were XP, is there a portion of XP hidden in Vista to alloew this to happen?

Just curious.

It's really hard to believe Vista is better than XP when all my Adobe software (Photoshop CS3, InDesign CS3, Dreamweaver CS3, Illustrator CS3) work much faster in XP and are sluggish in Vista.

Not everything new is better, just like our president.

>Some people only use their PCs for just surfing the web, checking E-mail, posting on forums, or watching DVD, which of course, wouldn't find any compatibility problem on any OS, even Win95 would do those above tasks perfectly<

Yes that is exactly the point.....
Certain people express an invincibility to computer problems, this is most likely because they are only fractionally as software demanding and experimental with their systems as others (including me

I am presently running XP with about 3/4 of the 1.2 Tb HD space filled with a LOT of software and data. Anyone thinking I'm going to even try to set that up on the latest half baked OS should not hold their breath....even my new laptop which prompted this thread, will have many items including graphics software, requiring XP.....

Interestingly, I notice that whereas when Vista was released nearly all new machines were offered as Vista only OS. Since then more and more laptop and desktop systems are being offered with the XP option. I guess that reflects market pressure.

emes

If you're talking about photoshop CS2, it works fine for me in Vista.

Visit the Basement

What are your hardware specs that your Adobe is sluggish in Vista?

Visit the Basement

Norton Commander works fine for me in Win XP Pro although I pretty much use Power Desk Pro now.

Upgrading to a new OS needs to take into consideration this compatibility issue. You need to identify which apps MUST continue to work, those that are expendable & the associated cost of the upgrade. If you aren't willing to undertake the hassle, don't upgrade & stick with your old OS.

A friend of mine is quite happy running Windows 2000 NT. He says it's stable, runs anything he wants, & causes no problems.

So, take your pick!@

FWIW, I'm waiting until the dust settles. With every new OS, MS can produce another ME.

Fred

I use Norton Commander very rarely. My point was that it CAN work. I had no expectation that it would, so I was prepared to give it up.

The point is: Changing to a new OS has many implications. It should be clear in your mind what the tradeoffs are when you go for the latest & greatest.

Fred

I haven't had any problems with Vista because I avoided installing it in the first place.
I have had quite a few calls from friends who have bought low to mid level laptops with Vista pre installed.

The word 'elevation' takes on a whole new meaning for them. Most of them have found that their Operating system is preventing them from using their new computers.

One lady called me a couple of weeks ago after trying and failing to put Yahoo messenger on her new computer. She finally gave up and called Staples where she bought the computer.
Their explanation to her was that:

'something is preventing you from installing that program and you will have to bring the computer to us so we can turn off whatever is doing it'

Can you imagine anything more bizarre?...

I've added a second HD on both my Vista machines; no problem.

I buy Dells, and always buy with one HD and minimum RAM, then upgrade them myself; save some $ that way, and its never created problems.

Ray

I just ordered three new Dell Vostro computers for the office with nothing on them but XP No bloat ware of any kind.

I know that eventually, the move to Vista will take place, so I ordered hardware that will easily handle it's requirements.

For now, I would rather install all of my XP compatible software and upgrade at a later date when I have time.

It's time for me to upgrade my lease agreement. I can get a new desktop PC that is loaded with XP or I can get one with Vista. Whatever I get it will have at least a dual core processor and at least 2 Gb of RAM. With this sort of computing power should I just go straight to Vista or is XP a more conservative option knowing I can upgrade to Vista later?

Holden

Intel Core i7-870 2.93GhzQuad Core 8MB cache, 8GB DDR31333MHz memory, Nvidia GeForce PCleGT2201GB, 1TB HD 7200 rpm SATA 3GB/s, Win7 Home Premium 64 bit, Edifier M3300SF, Nuforce uDAC-2, Fiio E7/E9 DAC/Amp combo, Sennheiser HD580

Get a high end machine and Vista. If you get anything less you will be joining the rest of the anti Vista group. It is obvious that Vista is excellent on the right machine, but full of problems on anything else. I was running the RC versions on my old P4 game machine, and loved it. On my new Dell laptop it is certainly not ready for prime time. I have three hard drives for it with PCLinuxOS-2007, XP Pro, and Vista Home Premium. Of the three, Vista is the most problem, slower and just not quite right. The video is definitely richer in Vista. Shelly is right in his experience, but might be on the other side if his computers were not as good as what he has. The problems most people have besides it being different have little to do with the user, though that may be true in some cases. Vista needs a Vista spec. machine.

On the other hand, on a lark, I thought I'd try to install and run my truly ancient Windows 95 "Gambling Tycoon" disk on my HP VISTA Laptop:
runs like a charm with no hitches at all; go figure.

I went back to the two stores and had another look and finally decided on a spec built machine. It has an Intel Core2 Quad CPU @ 2.40 Ghz, 2GB DDR2 RAM, NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT running....XPSP2. It flies!

After seeing Vista yesterday I thought that it was very pretty but what else did it really do that XP doesn't? Regardless, I can upgrade this machine to Vista very easily when I have to

Holden

Intel Core i7-870 2.93GhzQuad Core 8MB cache, 8GB DDR31333MHz memory, Nvidia GeForce PCleGT2201GB, 1TB HD 7200 rpm SATA 3GB/s, Win7 Home Premium 64 bit, Edifier M3300SF, Nuforce uDAC-2, Fiio E7/E9 DAC/Amp combo, Sennheiser HD580