I don't own Windows Vista, yet, but I'd like to know if it's worth getting it now, or waiting? I wanna get the ultimate version, cause I heard it was the best for like gaming and stuff.
I'm not going to install it just yet, because I don't know how to remove XP without erasing my stuff.
I make no attempt to hide my distain for vista and as such I have not got it (and probably never will), from what I hear though it is fairly bad for gaming (no opengl support currently) and there are a few other misc. bugs. link (there are numerous similar reports on most IT sites as well): http://tomshardware.co.uk/2007/01/30/xp-vs-vista-uk/ That and you can surely expect a whole host of virii and malware to spring up soon as well. My suggestion is to stick with XP for a while, it is probably safer, more stable and nicer to work with. Not to mention there is nothing of great interest that "requires" vista.
Every Vista version has the ability to install over and upgrade Windows XP. Although I'm not sure why the Ultimate Edition is best for gaming. I thought it added a bunch of business productivity stuff. In Addition: Getting a Windows OS immediately is a bad reason for exactly what FAST6191 mentioned. Wait until the first Service Pack. Thats usually a safe milestone.
Don't upgrasde just yet. I read that it is best to wait about 6 months before you make a decision. Reason being is that there will be bugs and kinks that Vista will have. Do you want to give Microsoft $200 AND be a beta tester for them? Also, some programs and some graphics cards do not work with vista. So, give it 6 months for manufacturers to come out with updated firmware or drivers. Besides, I saw vista in action. Its just like windows with a little redisign. Its like they copied the Mac OS.
FAST6191: You, sir, are an idiot. Nvidia and ATI's current drivers support opengl. Nvidia's leaked 100.XX drivers (they are on laptopvideo2go) run perfectly, they are on level with the XP drivers. All Windows versions have security issues and viruses and similar junk. Be smart or Run AV and you will be fine. XP is not safe at all. Vista has numerous security features that XP does not. Vista is as stable, if not more so, than xp, I've been running it since RTM and I haven't had it crash yet. Nice to work with? Sure, if you don't want Aero, desktop image/video previews, and flip 3d, but otherwise, Vista owns XP in that area. Go away. Never post again. Thank you! -MTW Now, as far as actually running Vista goes, I've had no problems so far. HL2/CSS/DODS all run with no FPS loss in comparison to XP. TDU runs perfectly, Defcon (Opengl game) runs at full speed, along with Prey and Doom 3. WoW runs perfect, GW runs perfect, and even Red Faction and Tribes 2 all run with no issues in Vista.
-MTW-, you're harshing my mellow baby! If ya got something to say, say it without the vitriol. This has been a public service announcement.
Vista is better than Windows XP. I have been running it for about 6 months including the beta releases. I think alot of the bad press regarding Vista was due to the beta's having issues. Vista is more stable than XP from my experience. It's networking functions are much better. I have been able to fully network it with a laptop running XP Pro without any problems, remote access works too. Vista runs faster than XP if you have a recent vintage pc. In short it looks like a prettier version of XP but has really been redone from the ground up. You'll notice this when you run it. It is made to run on the most modern PC's so if you have a computer with the specs to run it I'd get it. You can check this by downloading the windows upgrade advisor from microsoft. That being said there are some negatives: -The previously mentioned opengl issues. Runs great with directX. I haven't tried an OpenGl program in a while. There were issues with some of the earlier betas rendering OpenGL very slowly but as another user said so eloquently these issues have been worked out in the latest drivers. -Some peripherals, especially those made by HP, will not be compatible with Vista. Check the manufacturers websites for compatibility. -It's harder to avoid buying the full version. Windows Authentication is tougher than it was in XP. I've seen very inexpensive OEM copies for sale at newegg though if you want to avoid future issues. -Some people don't like the User Authenication interface. Those same people don't like viruses so I think there is a give and take....and you can turn off the UAI if you choose to. The UAI is kind of like a super user asking, "Do you really want to do this"? You hardly notice it after a while. Other than that I have had no problems with the final version of Vista. I'm sold on it even though I was cursing it when I was running the beta 2 version.
I'm avoiding it for as long as possible, my friend swears a lot more at his computer because of it and I swear enough as it is. Flangeferrets.
Ouch. 1. Fair enough I was wrong (any word on intels opengl support?), I am sure many similar arguements could be used for other drivers and apps though (remember the attempt to pull raw sockets from XP). 2. Agreed XP is not safe but it appears to at least have a modicum of safety when used sensibly. Vista is brand new and security just means it hassles the end user that little bit more, I still bet a halfway determined script kiddie could mess it up somewhat chronic. 3. There is a reason I and everyone else I do PCs for wants to use the old 95 style interface (possible exception being the start bar), wants desktop image/video previews disabled (which exist both inbuilt and by 3rd party stuff), 3d desktops also exist for XP but that is a different game. By nice to work with I mean I can just about pull various power user settings in (although earlier versions made this easier) as well as install stuff I want without issue, "security" does little more than aggrivate. Feel free to chastise me for this and it might just be me being out of the loop (and I know some of those titles are farily popular) but I have played none of them. I stand by my remarks though and probably would not even use/suggest someone else use vista in its current state even if it was free. Give it time and it may shape up (although by the but it does there may be some very viable alternatives) right now I can see absolutely no reason whatesoever to upgrade. I suppose I better throw the whole DRM laced buisness in as well but that is pretty much a moot point.
You need to try it for a while. You'll go back to XP and you'll feel like you're driving an old truck.
FAST6191: Intel? What, are you using one of their on-board POS video "cards"? You are wrong, again. Vista UAC is designed to prevent that. UAC prompts when you run some idiot script-kiddie's app. A few other features prevent access to the files that the app would attempt to delete. The windows firewall has been revamped, and now actually blocks attempts by those apps to send data back to "home". What you are saying is that XP is more secure because it doesn't have the security measures that Vista has. Oooook..... Ok, that's your choice. Have fun with no Aero/Flip 3d Vista is perfect. It needs more Ultimate Extras, and I'd like the final version of Dreamscene. It is so much better than XP SP2 is. More secure, better looking, more features, etc, etc, etc.
this is a good read if you can be bothered (its quite long) http://kadaitcha.cx/vista/dogsbreakfast/index.html
The funniest thing was that he had a computer rating of 1.0 Otherwise the guy is a crybaby and probably should wait until dos 8.0 comes out
Actually I just built a new machine with some nice geforce 7900s in SLI but intel are probably the most popular make of graphics card in terms of volume (and pricewise), I was just cuious. "XP is more secure because it doesn't have the security measures that Vista has". Yeah that is correct (if only becuase everyone disables the nagging): 3rd party stuff seems to always serve me better than anything MS has ever dreamed up and from what I have seen and done it remains that way (same applies to just about everything MS has ever done with the possible exception of office) For the record XP would say oi do not delete that too, preventing some skiddies app from deleting/corrupting my documents (which in my opinion is far worse than a simple reinstall) is still just as difficult though. no Aero/Flip 3d, such things can be implemented with XP. I will spend some (more) time testing it (probably not by choice) but I doubt my opinion will change in the near future (DownwardSpyral was right about Vista SP1 probably being the first bearable stage). Until then Vista will be in my opinion Windows ME take 2, do not get me wrong there are some nice ideas that I might even grow to like but the implementation fails at this time. Guess we have a difference of opinion Edit, no need to reply for this but I have no interest in getting involved with a flamewar either and GameGeezer's comment below about the windows 3.1(1) upgrade rings true for me (although it is perhaps not that big an update). One bit of aero emulation: http://www.softpedia.com/get/System/OS-Enh...tion-Pack.shtml although "any implementation of those in XP would be illegal", do you work for microsoft legal by any chance?
i tested out beta 2 of vista on my laptop a month or two ago, it felt a bit clunky but looked pretty cool. Microsoft have made some significant improvements in the security side of things (prompt whenever u try to run a program). Overall i enjoyed using vista, but i think ill stick with my linux box for another year or two until vista matures. I really want to try the live background!
Argh. XP is less secure. You can turn off UAC and run any shitty third-party hackjob of anti-malware detection that you want, if that is what you believe is more secure. Aero/Flip 3d are both Vista exclusive, and any implementation of those in XP would be illegal, unless MS did it. Vista is XP 2. It does not, in anyway, resemble ME. ME was a trainwreck. Vista is the next generation of Windows, with so many new features that you'd have to be an idiot/be running a crappy box to not rush out and buy it right now. I present facts, you argue with your "opinion". XP is far less secure than Vista. I am not talking about whatever POS AV/Anti-Malware app you run, I am talking about the standard box, running XP SP2. Vista blows XP away in terms of security. End of thread.
This whole argument reminds me of when windows went from 3.1 to windows 95. People didn't like the file finder, and the memory requirements and the security measures..etc. They thought 8 MB of ram was ridiculous. I like XP and Vista. Both have worked equally well for me....but I have half a clue and sort of expect little glitches at the beginning of an operating system and accept them as the price paid for being an early adopter. XP and Vista are good. Vista will just take advantage of newer systems power a little bit better...just like windows 95 did. Edit: The heck with this Vista stuff. My R4 just showed up!
No Vista is not perfect. I don't see any reason to upgrade to Vista, unless I want to make older apps unusable. There one or two DX10 games which looks interesting, but that's it Several audio applications, such as Nuendo and Pro Tools with their plugins have trouble running on Vista. My big bro installed Vista, therefore I know. Oh and I haven't got the hardware I wished I had for a Vista upgrade. So I'm staying XP till I get a new computer.. Then I might install Vista. The biggest main blow was that Bill Gates didn't finish the new file system which was supposed to be AWESOME for Windows Vista... It's definatly one of the biggest things they need to improve with windows.
Wait so every time you run a program Vista asks you if you really want to? UGH, that would get annoying and old, fast.
