Windows XP Still using XP

[OS Master]

And dont believe the story's about Vista, there not true

Well I would base reviews on something about Windows Vista, but I would like to see hard facts rather than opinions. Maybe a test between XP and Vista on the same PC opening the same version of the same program. It wouldn't be easy to set up, but we could see the differences (if there are any) between the two OSes.

I don't think Vista is as bad as people say, but some of the issues they complain about do hold up.

 

[Kyle]

Vista RTM Includes alot of drivers, I suggest you try it. You might like it more.. And dont believe the story's about Vista, there not true

All the stories are based on truth. You pretty much need a 3.2 GHz equivalent PC, with 3 GB of RAM, an 8 series Geforce, or 2XXX Series ATI or better to run Vista without hiccups.

I have a 3 GHz equivalent laptop, with 2.5 GB of RAM, and a 6 Series GPU, and it runs SLOWWWW, even with all eye candy turned off, all unnecessary services turned off, only the GPU panel, msn, and the sidebar staring.

The story about vista is that it's a resource hog, and it runs slow on computers built during the XP period. The story is true.

 

[Jack]

I still use XP because my GPU is not capable of aero, I have no negative experiences with Vista and I am saving up for a new laptop with vista preinstalled

 

[Matt]

Vista RTM Includes alot of drivers, I suggest you try it. You might like it more.. And dont believe the story's about Vista, there not true

All the stories are based on truth. You pretty much need a 3.2 GHz equivalent PC, with 3 GB of RAM, an 8 series Geforce, or 2XXX Series ATI or better to run Vista without hiccups.

I have a 3 GHz equivalent laptop, with 2.5 GB of RAM, and a 6 Series GPU, and it runs SLOWWWW, even with all eye candy turned off, all unnecessary services turned off, only the GPU panel, msn, and the sidebar staring.

The story about vista is that it's a resource hog, and it runs slow on computers built during the XP period. The story is true.

My laptop got a single core 1.86GHz CPU and 1GB of RAM, and a X300 Mobility card and it's not slow. I can play portal on medium at 800X600 and get 20+ FPS, and AERO is enabled.

And dont believe the story's about Vista, there not true

Well I would base reviews on something about Windows Vista, but I would like to see hard facts rather than opinions. Maybe a test between XP and Vista on the same PC opening the same version of the same program. It wouldn't be easy to set up, but we could see the differences (if there are any) between the two OSes.

I don't think Vista is as bad as people say, but some of the issues they complain about do hold up.

Vista will run slower of course, but XP runs slower than 2000, 2000 runs slower than 95, etc, so screw it, let's all go back to Windows 95.

 

[Snake]

Vista RTM Includes alot of drivers, I suggest you try it. You might like it more.. And dont believe the story's about Vista, there not true

All the stories are based on truth. You pretty much need a 3.2 GHz equivalent PC, with 3 GB of RAM, an 8 series Geforce, or 2XXX Series ATI or better to run Vista without hiccups.

I have a 3 GHz equivalent laptop, with 2.5 GB of RAM, and a 6 Series GPU, and it runs SLOWWWW, even with all eye candy turned off, all unnecessary services turned off, only the GPU panel, msn, and the sidebar staring.

The story about vista is that it's a resource hog, and it runs slow on computers built during the XP period. The story is true.

Something must be messed up on your computer then. I have run Vista on a system that is close to Matt's laptop and it ran fine.

 

[OS Master]

Vista RTM Includes alot of drivers, I suggest you try it. You might like it more.. And dont believe the story's about Vista, there not true

All the stories are based on truth. You pretty much need a 3.2 GHz equivalent PC, with 3 GB of RAM, an 8 series Geforce, or 2XXX Series ATI or better to run Vista without hiccups.

I have a 3 GHz equivalent laptop, with 2.5 GB of RAM, and a 6 Series GPU, and it runs SLOWWWW, even with all eye candy turned off, all unnecessary services turned off, only the GPU panel, msn, and the sidebar staring.

The story about vista is that it's a resource hog, and it runs slow on computers built during the XP period. The story is true.

Something must be messed up on your computer then. I have run Vista on a system that is close to Matt's laptop and it ran fine.

I have a 1.73 Ghz Dual-Core processor with 1 GB of RAM, and I use Aero. While I agree with Windows XP is noticeably faster, it isn't as bad as you say. The browsers start quick and browse well, and applications like MS Word, FileZilla, AVG Antivirus, etc. start well too.

Vista will run slower of course, but XP runs slower than 2000, 2000 runs slower than 95, etc, so screw it, let's all go back to Windows 95.

I'm not denying that Windows 95 would be faster than anything else (then let's go back to DOS!), but you have to remember that the hardware gets better as well. Ten years later computers will run Vista like it's Windows 95.

 

[brian_g]

I dunno, I always found that Windows 98 SE ran faster than 95 (2.5, the version with USB support)...!

It's true about the hardware advances. I initially ran Windows 95 on a Packard Bell with a i486DX (66mhz or there abouts) and 4MB RAM, not to mention the huge 260MB hard disk. It ran terribly, although the computer ran 3.11 like a modern machine runs XP

Back to the topic of conversation though - I dual boot Vista and XP. I use XP for music software as there are a huge number of issues with sound card drivers and some plugins. I'm using Vista for pretty much everything else now, and it runs fine (SP1 helped performance quite a bit).

 

[thej762000]

I've been using XP for ages, since 2002 at least.. I've tried Vista on some laptops and experience ranges from so-so to terrible. That being said, having now tried the Win7 Beta on my desktop I will most certainly buy it when it's released, and I don't care how pricey it is(I still have my Win98B full install disk, verrrry pricey when it was new, but very useful for using with XP upgrade disk). Win7 is just such a nice place to be, looks just as good as OSX, and, in my opinion, is easier and more intuitive to use than OSX. Why pay $2800+ for a Mac Pro(which if you're not editing HD video all day I don't see why you need it) when I can have this??

 

[Radenight]

I think it's safe to say that we will all be still using Windows XP in some way or another for many years to come.. I use XP PRO SP3, Vista and I have been using Windows 7 since build 6801... I absolutely love Windows 7 and think Microsoft has a real winner on their hands this time. I will definetely be buying a retail copy of Win 7 once released! That being said, I will also still use XP once and a while.. I think XP has become more then just another Windows OS... it's so damn stable and functional now that it's become something noone really wants abandon, and rightfully so... why abandon "perfection"? With dual/triple boot setups being so easy to do these days I really don't think anyone needs to abandon XP.. I often wonder though if Windows XP would be near as popular with users if Vista had been released 2-3 years after XP's release instead of 6 years... somethin to think about..

 

[brian_g]

I agree, Windows 7's performance (especially for a beta) is fantastic. I'm running software I couldn't with Vista (the only reason I was dual booting XP and Vista). The OS overall feels a lot 'lighter' than Vista does and I've yet to recieve any errors (touch wood). Keep up the good work MS.

 

[Doc]

I'm still using XP as my primary OS. I am impressed with this beta so far. If this trend keeps up, I will be a future Windows & Ultimate user.

 

[Ageless Stranger]

I have too many operating systems to take care of for my own good, my wife and children use XP on their machines. I dual boot between Vista home and Ubutnu on my laptop, Vista Ultimate and Windows 7 on my desktop box, and XP at work.

I still love XP for its small(er than Vista) memory footprint

 

[Kylethedarkn]

I always keep a drive with Xp for those times when things aren't compatable with Vista or 7

 

[jimbo45]

Hi all -- I run Windows XP as a Virtual machine --still using some old "Plotter" and Minidisc hardware which work fine on XP but not on any OS > XP. The manufacturer for the old plotter has long since gone out of business and SONY won't upgrade some of their Minidisc stuff to work with VISTA.

I have the VM data on a USB drive. Just start Vmware on any machine I have and fire up the XP machine -- works an absolute treat and don't even need to have the VM on an actual fixed disk. You can Network Virtual machines anyway so they can share data with "Real Machines" on your network.

Virtual Machines are a great way of running "Legacy" / old / unsupported hardware on modern machines. You can also clone them, move and copy also - .

Great way also of testing new (and Old OS'es) although of course always remember that the Virtual Machine's Virtual Bios is different to your "Real one" so very hardware specific stuff (unlike conventional drivers) which actually query the real hardware won't give you a sensible result. If you use the published Windows / kernel interfaces then most stuff will work in a VM.

Games (which make serious use of the Video hardware) and video streaming such as playing DVD's etc are usually not available with Virtual machines --these types of apps work on the host. Audio streaming etc is no problem on a VM nor is any kind of USB device so long as the published interfaces are used to access the hardware.

Cheers
jimbo

 

[djwayne]

I keep two drives loaded up and ready to go....one with XP and all my programs, and one with Vista, which I cleaned off and now have Windows 7 on it.
I only will plug in one drive at a time, while working with the beta os, as I don't know what kind of effect it might have on a different drive. I'm leary of putting both drives on at the same time do to a bad experience I had a few years ago, I tried to re-format one of the drives, but both were re-formatted and I lost eveything. So now I'll only run one drive at a time. This also isolates the unused drive from any viruses that may infect a drive that I'm using. This also gives me a quick back up in case of a crash.

 

[Number5]

Widows XP MCE .. If I want to do any serious work.
Seems to me that M$ has forgot there’s a difference in the purpose for, and the display of, Icons and Thumbnails.
e.g.… Since when - is a Thumbnail of the contents of a pdf file an Icon ???

If Thumbnails make such great Icons … Then why didn’t M$ make all file types a Thumbnail ??
I can’t see what I have on my double wide desktop … It’s a royal mess.

Also .. Why did M$ remove the ability to customize a Right Click Context menu for specific file types ??
In XP, I can customize the file type context menu so my primary “open withâ€Â￾ choices are listed at the top and a single click is all that’s needed.
This saves the hassle of having to click on “open withâ€Â￾ ... (and take a multiple choice test) …
Then go hunting for my choice, and hope I don’t have to browse the programs to find it.

If M$ want my money (again) .. They’ll make an OS that’s easier to use .. not harder.
I’ve already donated to the M$ poverty fund 3 times now …
Once to see what Vista was all about .. Wish I could get my money back.
Twice to get a new Vista Computer .. In case my main computer got problems I couldn’t fix.
Thrice .. to get XP MCE to fix the new Vista Computer .. So I can use it.

I’ve heard that W7 is being called Fixta …
But I can’t see that it fixed anything .. From my users point of view.

 

[MsYau]

And i have no real urge to upgrade to vista, not after all the problems about drivers and software support I have heard for it

Anyone here still on XP aswell?

I got an XP on my computer.

But my computer just make me don't like XP no more.

It might because my computer has 4GB of Ram......haha

 

[lwerker]

I am using Vista on my home build PC, and it was running smoothly. Last week, when the Windows RC 7100 was release for free, i first installed w7 on a MS Virtual Server environment on my Vista, and it worked like a charme. After that i repartitioned my hard drives, and installed windows 7 next to my Vista in a dual boot. Windows 7 rc 7100 seems to be robust system. I dont dare to switch over completely yet but if my experience keeps on being positive i will gradually move over from Vista to W7.

 

[tyrrell]

Why stuck on Vist or XP?

I have been testing Win7 for almost a week now.
I must say that I'm very satisfied so far. No lagging, fast web movement, nice look and a generally positive experience.
And the computer i have installed it on is defenitley no the fastest. (Dell Latitude D600)
Ty it out!

 

[john3347]

"so screw it, let's all go back to Windows 95. "



NO, NO, NO, NO!!!!! If I had broken a law every time I performed an "Illegal Operation" in Windows 95, I would be in jail for 13 lifetimes. Millenium would be 100 times preferable to 95. (HP printer drivers and a weekly system crash was the only problems that I ever had with Millenium) I have never obsessed over speed, but Windows 2000 was far and away the "smoothest" and POSITIVELY most stable of ANY OS I've ever used, including XP and Windows 7. Windows 95 was the most unstable and Vista is running a close second to 95. (I have used most MS desktop OSs since DOS3)