The PokéCommunity Forums

The PokéCommunity Forums (https://www.pokecommunity.com/index.php)
-   Off-Topic (https://www.pokecommunity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=23)
-   -   Windows Vista vs. Windows XP (https://www.pokecommunity.com/showthread.php?t=135976)

Apple Inc. May 3rd, 2008 8:28 AM

Windows Vista vs. Windows XP
 
It is as the title states. Tell me what you think about the two Operating systems and which one you personally think is better.
ill Start

Windows XP: I think Windows XP is great because of all of it's compatibility with software such as older versions of Office, antiviruses, etc., It is also customizable to look like Vista with free software called Vista transformation pack and it transformed my comp to look like Vista, bootup and all.

Windows Vista: Okay, Vista i have to admit does look pretty nice with all of the nice graphics and styles, but lets face it, it has a lot of glitches and compatibility problems. I tried to install Norton Anitvirus on a Vista laptop that belonged to my teacher and it ended up not working, so they needed a newer antivirus.

But which one is better to me?

I Personally believe that Windows XP is in 2nd place as that is what most offices, schools, and households still use due to it's simplicity, but now Vista wins for me as it hasn't caused any problems yet for me and runs extremely well. The only thing that bugs me is that confirmation when you try to install something. But it's just there for your safety.

Legobricks May 3rd, 2008 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garfieldlover94 (Post 3552268)
Windows Vista: Okay, Vista i have to admit does look pretty nice with all of the nice graphics and styles, but lets face it, it has a lot of glitches and compatibility problems.

I can remove the aesthetic from my equation because I hate the Vista look. This effectively nulls Vista's only main asset. :0

I see Vista as some kind of attempt to stop customers using their faithful older programs, forcing them to buy new ones catered for Vista. A lack of decent backwards compatability is apparently also present in seventh generation gaming consoles (namely the Wii, Xbox 360 and PS3). Most everyone I know of who involves themselves in the details of computers goes for XP.

For me, it's obviously XP. Vista is superfluous.

Eureka1 May 3rd, 2008 1:19 PM

They are remarkably similar to the point that you couldn't appoint one as superior.

The only factor that should really be considered is system spec. If you only have a single core CPU and 1GB of less of RAM, XP is going to run a lot better for you than Vista. For those who have the PC to run Vista properly, go with it.

I'd have to say XP is still the better operating system, but I'm trying Vista and have yet to install XP again, so M$ may have fixed it.

j_ May 3rd, 2008 2:27 PM

Last year, I tried Vista for a month or so and hated it. Maybe it's coz the machine I was running it on wasn't powerful enough (Single Core AMD Athlon 64 3200+, as I seem to recall), but...

I've been using Vista for the last month, and I love it. Can't imagine going back to XP for day to day stuff! Seriously I haven't found anything critical that doesn't work (My Action Replay, thats about it). FWIW, I'm running the 64bit version on an Intel Core 2 Duo 3ghz, with 4gigs of ram (Soon to hopefully be 8!) :P

Garfieldlover94, why would you even want to install anything Symantec? I haven't touched their products for years, good riddance to them. NAV got bigger and more annoying each year, until I switched to AVG. Symantec software should be left alone, quietly in the corner, never to be installed.

So yeah, Vista SP1 is nice if you have a decent computer to run it on. And by decent, that means at least a dual core 2ghz processor, and a minimum of 2gigs of ram. Otherwise, its slower than molasses on a cold day.

Oh, and UAC is teh win. Specially when combined with TeaTimer.

Apple Inc. May 3rd, 2008 3:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by j_ (Post 3553382)
Last year, I tried Vista for a month or so and hated it. Maybe it's coz the machine I was running it on wasn't powerful enough (Single Core AMD Athlon 64 3200+, as I seem to recall), but...

I've been using Vista for the last month, and I love it. Can't imagine going back to XP for day to day stuff! Seriously I haven't found anything critical that doesn't work (My Action Replay, thats about it). FWIW, I'm running the 64bit version on an Intel Core 2 Duo 3ghz, with 4gigs of ram (Soon to hopefully be 8!) :P

Garfieldlover94, why would you even want to install anything Symantec? I haven't touched their products for years, good riddance to them. NAV got bigger and more annoying each year, until I switched to AVG. Symantec software should be left alone, quietly in the corner, never to be installed.

So yeah, Vista SP1 is nice if you have a decent computer to run it on. And by decent, that means at least a dual core 2ghz processor, and a minimum of 2gigs of ram. Otherwise, its slower than molasses on a cold day.

Oh, and UAC is teh win. Specially when combined with TeaTimer.

It was all I had at the time. Besides, I can install it as much as I'd like. I normally use Trend-Micro as it works great for me. But this has nothing to with the two OS's now does it

Zanacross May 3rd, 2008 4:40 PM

Misconceptions about vista

Very educational. Latios makes some very good points in that thread and I think you should read and then take some of that in.

I agree with Latios. Most people don't know how to use Vista. Why downgrade an OS because of the way it looks? Don't you realize you can change it?

Now XP. Thats one I hate. Its look is yuk. Its slow. Theres no freaking search bar

I could say more but I have a server to setup.

Red1530 May 3rd, 2008 5:35 PM

I have to go with Windows XP because I have heard bad stories with Vista.

Zanacross May 3rd, 2008 6:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red1530 (Post 3553955)
I have to go with Windows XP because I have heard bad stories with Vista.


Stories. Not trues just stories. I bet you haven't tried Vista. Go try it before you listen to crap.

Gummy May 3rd, 2008 6:05 PM

But it is a fact that XP is compatible with many more programs than Vista, and that's why it has my vote.

Zanacross May 3rd, 2008 6:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gummy (Post 3554056)
But it is a fact that XP is compatible with many more programs than Vista, and that's why it has my vote.

I use all the programs I need to just fine. Please find me a list of incompatible programs and a list of compatible programs and I will believe you.

Most of you are on crap machines that date back 70 odd years.

Also I am a vista fan boy. Its got so many features. Nice graphics, cool search feature, gazillions of tools. Do i need to go on?

Zet May 3rd, 2008 7:22 PM

my friends vista laptop's harddrive melted in 10mins, stories? are the plan truth about the powering fail lvl of vista? sure you can change vista's settings but its like "ZOMG DID YOU JUST DO THAT? NOW WHY THE **** DID YOU TURN OFF THE ENHANCED SECURITY?" etc

and as for the search bar for XP download one or make lol but my answer is XP is overall faster than vista and is currently better

edit: XP has better looking graphics than vista if you know what you are doing

Zanacross May 3rd, 2008 7:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aniki (Post 3554332)
my friends vista laptop's harddrive melted in 10mins, stories? are the plan truth about the powering fail lvl of vista? sure you can change vista's settings but its like "ZOMG DID YOU JUST DO THAT? NOW WHY THE **** DID YOU TURN OFF THE ENHANCED SECURITY?"LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES and you know it.

and as for the search bar for XP download one or make lol but my answer is XP is overall faster than vista and is currently better


Its not really faster then vista. and you know it.
Why should I have to go found a search bar for it. i want one built in.

Zet May 3rd, 2008 7:27 PM

my computer starts up in less than a 30seconds, and you know vista takes longer than 40seconds to load

Young Stunna' May 3rd, 2008 7:27 PM

How about Microsoft sucks...

I vote Leopard!!!

Zanacross May 3rd, 2008 7:30 PM

39 seconds to be exact and you know it

Unlimited NiGHTS May 3rd, 2008 7:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zanacross (Post 3554358)
39 seconds to be exact and you know it

So much for your point of view...

Anyway, I'd pick XP over Vista, since that's just what I'm used to.

Zanacross May 3rd, 2008 7:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unlimited NiGHTS (Post 3554373)
So much for your point of view...

Anyway, I'd pick XP over Vista, since that's just what I'm used to.

I was sort of joking

It does take about 40 seconds to load though. But think about all the features it has to load.

:<

Eureka1 May 3rd, 2008 9:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aniki (Post 3554344)
my computer starts up in less than a 30seconds, and you know vista takes longer than 40seconds to load

Jesus Christ. Why don't you compile a gentoo install, it'll load faster than XP, therefore superior?

Don't think so, and that's an awfully weak argument.

Also, anyone with Vista on their laptop deserves their laptop to melt.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aniki (Post 3554332)
XP has better looking graphics than vista if you know what you are doing

Installing bloat to remove the teletubbies theme? Luna looks crap, and so do all user made themes.

Acrutheo May 3rd, 2008 10:01 PM

Personally, I prefer Vista. I haven't run into any compatibility issues, my computer is capable of running it so I don't experience all this slowness that everyone talks about, and it just looks better. I'm still happy to use XP, though, and for most people wouldn't recommend buying Vista by itself, but rather to wait for when you need a new computer.

Zet May 4th, 2008 1:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eureka1 (Post 3554541)
Jesus Christ. Why don't you compile a gentoo install, it'll load faster than XP, therefore superior?

Don't think so, and that's an awfully weak argument.

Also, anyone with Vista on their laptop deserves their laptop to melt.



Installing bloat to remove the teletubbies theme? Luna looks crap, and so do all user made themes.

as you said i did a weak statement this is also weak

Tsugaru May 4th, 2008 2:42 AM

XP>Vista. I love Vista's theme, however, performance wise I still prefer XP. XP loads quicker and the overall thought of more compatibility. XP for the win.

Bianca Paragon May 4th, 2008 6:24 AM

There is seriously nothing Windows XP does, that Vista doesn't do better. I mean it.
The *only* machine I run XP on, is a Pentium III server and that's because it's too slow to run Vista. All my machines run Vista as a preference, and those that are servers run Server 2008; which might as well be Vista :D

DragonFir3 May 4th, 2008 12:16 PM

64-bit Vista can be very usefull, if you're not a n00b. See, Windows XP and 32-bit Vista can only accept 3Gb of RAM, but 64-bit Vista accepts infinitive RAM, so if you think well and have a double-core processor, then 64-bit Vista can be very usefull (especialy if you're a passionate gamer).

Bianca Paragon May 4th, 2008 2:42 PM

Actually, 32 bit Windows 'accepts' 4GB of RAM just fine - infact, 32bit Windows Server 2003 accepts up to 128GB of RAM, thanks to PAE. But consumer models of Windows, such as XP and Vista aren't able too utilise more than the 4GB barrier; which unfortunately includes video card memory, BIOS shadowing, and any other cache memory that you may have onboard. So, just say you were running 32bit Vista/XP, on a schmick new Core2Q system, with a pair of last years monster, the 8800GTX 768MB, in SLI? You'd only see about 2.5GB of memory XD

Zanacross May 4th, 2008 4:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acrutheo (Post 3554598)
wouldn't recommend buying Vista by itself, but rather to wait for when you need a new computer.

I agree with that part.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sawaa (Post 3555621)
There is seriously nothing Windows XP does, that Vista doesn't do better. I mean it.
The *only* machine I run XP on, is a Pentium III server and that's because it's too slow to run Vista. All my machines run Vista as a preference, and those that are servers run Server 2008; which might as well be Vista :D

Vista 4 life :)
Amiright?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DragonFir3 (Post 3556678)
64-bit Vista can be very usefull, if you're not a n00b. See, Windows XP and 32-bit Vista can only accept 3Gb of RAM, but 64-bit Vista accepts infinitive RAM, so if you think well and have a double-core processor, then 64-bit Vista can be very usefull (especialy if you're a passionate gamer).

I thought 64 bit was crap for playing games on?
I might be wrong


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:23 PM.


Like our Facebook Page Follow us on Twitter © 2002 - 2018 The PokéCommunity™, pokecommunity.com.
Pokémon characters and images belong to The Pokémon Company International and Nintendo. This website is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Nintendo, Creatures, GAMEFREAK, The Pokémon Company or The Pokémon Company International. We just love Pokémon.
All forum styles, their images (unless noted otherwise) and site designs are © 2002 - 2016 The PokéCommunity / PokéCommunity.com.
PokéCommunity™ is a trademark of The PokéCommunity. All rights reserved. Sponsor advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service. User generated content remains the property of its creator.

Acknowledgements
Use of PokéCommunity Assets
vB Optimise by DragonByte Technologies Ltd © 2023.