Vista or XP?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mh64
  • Start date Start date
Hi, occam.

I agree. But to clarify...

Vista SP1 was RTM (Released to Manufacturing) yesterday, February 4, 2008.
It will take a month or so to hit store shelves. Some computer makers may
have machines with SP1 pre-installed before then, but be sure to check
first.

We've been beta-testing SP1 for months and the final Release Candidate is
looking good! <)

RC
--
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX
rc@grandecom.net
Microsoft Windows MVP
(Running Windows Live Mail 2008 in Vista Ultimate x64)

"occam" <occam@razor.dot.com> wrote in message
news:O4PzL4CaIHA.5984@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> mh64 wrote:
>> We are getting a new computer and generally only buy a new computer every
>> 5-6 years, so we take whatever OS comes on the computer at that
>> time(currently using XP with no real issues). I keep seeing all the
>> negatives & problems with Vista, is it really that bad for a
>> non-technical user like myself? Should I be opting for XP instead,
>> because if I do it seems to really limit available computer selection?
>
> Wait a month or so if you can -- and make sure the Vista version comes
> with SP1 updated (just released today). It is supposed to solve a lot of
> the instability issues of Vista.
 
On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 12:45:19 -0800, "Terry R." <F1ComNOSPAM@pobox.com>
wrote:

>The date and time was 2/5/2008 12:35 PM, and on a whim, Bobby Knight
>pounded out on the keyboard:
>
>> On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 20:30:18 +0100, "Rich T" <nobody@nobody.com> wrote:
>>
>
>>> He said that HE has not encountered significant issues, nor have I.
>>> Vista isn't everything it's touted to be....yet. As I remember,
>>> neither was XP at first.
>
>
>When people use that as an excuse for Vista, it doesn't hold water. If
>you remember correctly, most users moved from Win9x to XP (I'll leave Me
>out of it). Those who were using W2K didn't have the extreme
>incompatibility issues that plagued those moving from XP to Vista. In
>fact, XP was MORE compatible than W2K. XP was a major rewrite of the OS
>from Win9x. The same cannot be said about XP to Vista.

My opinion is different, but it really doesn't matter. I have had
very minor problems with both XP and Vista.
 
<thetruthhurts @homail.com> wrote in message
news:ugihq3t2nmmuq2ursggfvc5226162vdveg@4ax.com...
> new PC arrives. Vista is plagued with compability problems, many of
> which still exist even with SP1.

And you are plagued with mental problems but you still post here. Just FYI
 
"Rich T" <nobody@nobody.com> wrote in message
news:%23mt0Q4CaIHA.5900@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> What is so bad about a four year old scanner then? They are just as good
> as a brand new one.
> Same for webcams.
> No significant technical progress (except they are cheaper).
> So why make them obsolete?

Vista did not make them obsolete. Lack of updated drivers from the
manufacturer did.

No OS maker can assure compatability of legacy items...unless you
straight-jacket the market place with a true monopoly...such as APPLE!
 
thetruthhurts @homail.com wrote:

> On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:53:04 -0800, mh64
> <mh64@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>
>
>>We are getting a new computer and generally only buy a new computer every 5-6
>>years, so we take whatever OS comes on the computer at that time(currently
>>using XP with no real issues). I keep seeing all the negatives & problems
>>with Vista, is it really that bad for a non-technical user like myself?
>>Should I be opting for XP instead, because if I do it seems to really limit
>>available computer selection?
>
>
> For a non-technical user, you should definitely go with XP unless you
> intend to install zero apps and install zero peripherals after your
> new PC arrives. Vista is plagued with compability problems, many of
> which still exist even with SP1.


Only if you're a fukkin moron idiot like you...LOL!
Loser!
Frank
 
mh64 wrote:
> We are getting a new computer and generally only buy a new computer every 5-6
> years, so we take whatever OS comes on the computer at that time(currently
> using XP with no real issues). I keep seeing all the negatives & problems
> with Vista, is it really that bad for a non-technical user like myself?
> Should I be opting for XP instead, because if I do it seems to really limit
> available computer selection?

Well, mh64 -- I bet /that/ has clarified things for you :-)
 
Keep in mind that no matter how good a product is, you will see mostly
negative comments. People with problems tend to spend time looking for
answers. When everything works, they tend to be quiet.

I have been around since DOS 3.1 (and TOS 1.2) and I have yet to see an
upgrade that went totally smooth. Most of the time I did not like the new
version ( Actually I did not notice any change with TOS 1.4 except the
ability to recognize a gigantic 4 megs of memory). In the long run, as I
learned to work around the changes that conflicted with the way I used it
and when I found the new tricks that benefited me, I have always been happy
with the upgrades. OK some were really small improvements.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia 's Muire duit



"mh64" <mh64@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0E052ADD-743A-4E58-9414-88780E9AE765@microsoft.com...
> We are getting a new computer and generally only buy a new computer every
> 5-6
> years, so we take whatever OS comes on the computer at that time(currently
> using XP with no real issues). I keep seeing all the negatives & problems
> with Vista, is it really that bad for a non-technical user like myself?
> Should I be opting for XP instead, because if I do it seems to really
> limit
> available computer selection?
 
Rich T...Judging by what you are posting this is a problem with YOUR
computer...90% of what is obviously not working on your computer is running
just fine on mine and has been for a yr now...So is it really Vista if it
works on other computers ??..I am not picking on you just simply pointing
out that maybe it is YOUR computer....


"Rich T" <nobody@nobody.com> wrote in message
news:999EDCAB-B713-49BB-8689-1A13349D21D1@microsoft.com...
>
> "Carey Frisch [MVP]" <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message
> news:4F3D4EFE-5723-4C15-AFA3-EBA612371832@microsoft.com...
>> I've been using Windows Vista for well over a year now
>> and have not encountered any significant issues.
>
> No significant issues? How about answering some of my "insignificant
> issues" on this forum then?
>
> eg - completely random, unpredictable USB driver failures casuing repeated
> catastrophic loss of computer use - even mouse fails! Vista unable to load
> new hardware drivers etc?
>
> eg - massive problems with drivers for sound cards so it is impossible to
> use Skype on my Dimension 9200?
>
> eg - perfectly good software and hardware not backwards compatible - ie
> forced to throw out and replace a perfectly good HP printer, Adobe
> Professional 6.0, Garmin 1000 simulator does not work, Symantec Winfax pro
> does not work.
>
> Vista not even compatible with Microsoft products - eg appalling interface
> with Live One Care (which was a brilliant program on XP), Vista does not
> work with my Microsoft mouse, Vista shuts down because of DEP whenever I
> try to import a jpeg movie from my Microsoft PDA phone, Microsoft digital
> fingerprint reader making Windows sidebar gadgets unusable because of the
> red splodge over the gadget - and I could go on and on. I have repeatedly
> sought solutions to these problems on this and other forums and no
> answers. ANd then MVP claim there are no problems !!!! LOOOOOOOOL!!!!
 
"mh64" <mh64@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0E052ADD-743A-4E58-9414-88780E9AE765@microsoft.com...
> We are getting a new computer and generally only buy a new computer every 5-6
> years, so we take whatever OS comes on the computer at that time(currently
> using XP with no real issues). I keep seeing all the negatives & problems
> with Vista, is it really that bad for a non-technical user like myself?
> Should I be opting for XP instead, because if I do it seems to really limit
> available computer selection?

You've received plenty of good responses.

IMO, since you are buying a new computer,
go with Vista. Just be sure to get 2GB of RAM.

If you can get by until the manufacturers can release
computers with Vista SP1, that would be best.

Vista has improved since it was first released and I now
feel it is superior to XP. I was a bit underwhelmed when
it first came out. I never thought Vista sucked, but I did
expect more. But, I have grown to like it.

Bottom line- fundamentally, Vista is a better OS than XP.
It will take some getting used to, but you will.


-Michael
 
The date and time was 2/5/2008 6:03 PM, and on a whim, MICHAEL pounded
out on the keyboard:

> "mh64" <mh64@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:0E052ADD-743A-4E58-9414-88780E9AE765@microsoft.com...
>> We are getting a new computer and generally only buy a new computer every 5-6
>> years, so we take whatever OS comes on the computer at that time(currently
>> using XP with no real issues). I keep seeing all the negatives & problems
>> with Vista, is it really that bad for a non-technical user like myself?
>> Should I be opting for XP instead, because if I do it seems to really limit
>> available computer selection?
>
> You've received plenty of good responses.
>
> IMO, since you are buying a new computer,
> go with Vista. Just be sure to get 2GB of RAM.
>
> If you can get by until the manufacturers can release
> computers with Vista SP1, that would be best.
>
> Vista has improved since it was first released and I now
> feel it is superior to XP. I was a bit underwhelmed when
> it first came out. I never thought Vista sucked, but I did
> expect more. But, I have grown to like it.
>
> Bottom line- fundamentally, Vista is a better OS than XP.
> It will take some getting used to, but you will.
>
>
> -Michael
>
>
>

Curious. How do you feel it's "superior" in running mainstream apps,
which is what most users use on a daily basis?

--
Terry R.

***Reply Note***
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
 
"just forces users"
Not at all.
Why would you say such a FALSE statement?
You have a CHOICE of whether to CHOOSE to upgrade or not.
Stay with Windows XP or whatever you are using if the does what you
need.
A 6 year old HP printer worked for me on Windows Vista until it died
several months ago.

If you CHOOSE to upgrade to Windows XP to Windows Vista, research in
advance to see what if anything needs upgrading.
Much older hardware and software will not work, but much will.
Contact the specific manufacturers to determine Windows Vista
compatibility of your essential software and hardware.

This is not new to Windows Vista.
It has been true every time an new operating system is installed.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar


"Rich T" <nobody@nobody.com> wrote in message
news:%23mt0Q4CaIHA.5900@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> What is so bad about a four year old scanner then? They are just as
> good as a brand new one.
> Same for webcams.
> No significant technical progress (except they are cheaper).
> So why make them obsolete?
>
> Vista is a rip off - just forces users to shell out loads of dosh
> for replacement hardware and software that has no significant
> advantage.
>
> Would you throw away a car every three or four years? Of course not!
> But Vista insists that everything older than three years is
> "obsolete"!!!!
>
> Tell me, what can Office 2007 do that Office 2003 cannot do?
> Answer - absolutely nothing to anybody who lives in the real world.
 
"Terry R." <F1ComNOSPAM@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:upWLP7HaIHA.5164@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> The date and time was 2/5/2008 6:03 PM, and on a whim, MICHAEL pounded out on the keyboard:
>
>> "mh64" <mh64@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:0E052ADD-743A-4E58-9414-88780E9AE765@microsoft.com...
>>> We are getting a new computer and generally only buy a new computer every 5-6
>>> years, so we take whatever OS comes on the computer at that time(currently
>>> using XP with no real issues). I keep seeing all the negatives & problems
>>> with Vista, is it really that bad for a non-technical user like myself?
>>> Should I be opting for XP instead, because if I do it seems to really limit
>>> available computer selection?
>>
>> You've received plenty of good responses.
>>
>> IMO, since you are buying a new computer,
>> go with Vista. Just be sure to get 2GB of RAM.
>>
>> If you can get by until the manufacturers can release
>> computers with Vista SP1, that would be best.
>>
>> Vista has improved since it was first released and I now
>> feel it is superior to XP. I was a bit underwhelmed when
>> it first came out. I never thought Vista sucked, but I did
>> expect more. But, I have grown to like it.
>>
>> Bottom line- fundamentally, Vista is a better OS than XP.
>> It will take some getting used to, but you will.
>
> Curious. How do you feel it's "superior" in running mainstream apps, which is what most
> users use on a daily basis?

Vista is superior in memory management and managing overall
system resources. That's led to a more stable operating system.

For me, that's meant fewer program lockups and rarely a blue screen.
The blue screens I experienced were early on. I've been using Vista
regularly since June 2006, and as my primary since Dec. 2006.
I feel like I've been using Vista forever now. XP looks dated to me.
I have Vista installed on two desktops and one laptop, and those
machines work great. None of them are brand new either. They
originally had XP Pro installed.

Look, I wasn't overly thrilled with Vista in the beginning. I really
expected more. Not quite sure what I expected, but I certainly
didn't feel the "wow". I don't like WGA and how horribly it works
at times for a lot of users, and anyone who defends that implementation
are fools and shills. I'm still amazed there are those who continue to make
excuses for WGA and how badly Microsoft has messed up with using it.
Those morons disgust me.

WGA aside, Vista is still a better operating system than XP.

Microsoft didn't force anyone to upgrade their existing computers.
And if those XP computers work fine, then don't upgrade if you
don't want to. New computers can even be purchased with XP
if you know where to look.. it's not hard finding them. Especially,
if you buy online. XP isn't going away anytime soon and Microsoft
will be supporting it for several more years. I don't see what the big
deal is. But, as time goes on, newer hardware may not have XP
drivers, that's why I suggest for users buying a newer computer to
go ahead and make the transition to Vista. Even more so with
SP1 being released to manufacturers. Vista has improved since it
was first released and so has the software/hardware made for it.


-Michael
 
That depends on their hardware and software,
Unlike you, I will not assume the OPs hardware and software is
incompatible.
Many find there are no issues while others do.
That is why it is essential to research all essential hardware and
software first.

Windows Vista performs well for me on an alder desktop and an older
laptop.
The only addition is more memory.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar


"Pete" . wrote in message
news:MC3qj.7184$J41.1506@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net...
> Sure, get Vista if you want to buy almost all new hardware and
> software. See how your boss likes that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Strange,
I successfully use two older computers, a desktop and a laptop.

Your ASSUMING the needs and limitations of the OP show much of your
own blind bias since you simply know to little to make the judgment
you have made.
Many have no compatibility issues while others do.
that is why it is important to research essential hardware and
software first.
ASSUMING such as you have done does little to help since it ignore the
OPs situation in favor of your blind bias.

Your continued inability to use technology is reflective more on your
own inability and less on anything else as long as you continue to
ASSUME.

You should research what it means to ASSUME since you regularly ASSUME
in your judgments.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar


<thetruthhurts @homail.com> wrote in message
news:ugihq3t2nmmuq2ursggfvc5226162vdveg@4ax.com...
> For a non-technical user, you should definitely go with XP unless
> you
> intend to install zero apps and install zero peripherals after your
> new PC arrives. Vista is plagued with compability problems, many of
> which still exist even with SP1.
 
Come on now........the press is all over Vista for compability
problems. La de de da, you a MVP, got this M$ POS to work. I am
assuming you would deem yourself a technical user. THE OP ISN'T


On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 03:11:09 -0700, "Jupiter Jones [MVP]"
<jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote:

>Strange,
>I successfully use two older computers, a desktop and a laptop.
>
>Your ASSUMING the needs and limitations of the OP show much of your
>own blind bias since you simply know to little to make the judgment
>you have made.
>Many have no compatibility issues while others do.
>that is why it is important to research essential hardware and
>software first.
>ASSUMING such as you have done does little to help since it ignore the
>OPs situation in favor of your blind bias.
>
>Your continued inability to use technology is reflective more on your
>own inability and less on anything else as long as you continue to
>ASSUME.
>
>You should research what it means to ASSUME since you regularly ASSUME
>in your judgments.
 
You're trying to be cute (or something) but I for one find it annoying.

Terry R wrote in message
> The date and time was 2/5/2008 6:03 PM, and on a whim, MICHAEL pounded
> out on the keyboard:
 
R. McCarty wrote:
> There are two primary considerations for a new PC with Vista. First
> will all your existing peripherals ( Printer, Scanner, Camera...) work
> with Vista. Secondly do you have any software that you'll want to use
> on the Vista machine. Some software is not compliant.
> Vista is not bad, that's a public perception that has taken hold. As to
> choosing XP that's an option but over your 5-6 year life cycle XP is
> set to become unsupported by Microsoft. There are other things to
> consider such as the fact that new peripherals will soon have ONLY
> driver support for Vista. If you buy a new machine with XP you may
> lock yourself out from using newer devices. The same thing may apply
> to newer applications they may only run on the Vista platform.

Or the Linux platform.

Alias

www.microscum.com
www.ubuntu.com
>
> "mh64" <mh64@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:0E052ADD-743A-4E58-9414-88780E9AE765@microsoft.com...
>> We are getting a new computer and generally only buy a new computer every
>> 5-6
>> years, so we take whatever OS comes on the computer at that time(currently
>> using XP with no real issues). I keep seeing all the negatives & problems
>> with Vista, is it really that bad for a non-technical user like myself?
>> Should I be opting for XP instead, because if I do it seems to really
>> limit
>> available computer selection?
>
>
 
The date and time was 2/6/2008 7:02 AM, and on a whim, Bob pounded out
on the keyboard:

> You're trying to be cute (or something) but I for one find it annoying.
>

Do I look like I care?

--
Terry R.

***Reply Note***
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
 
thetruthhurts @homail.com wrote:

> Come on now........the press is all over Vista for compability
> problems.

So you base all of your opinions on "press releases" right?

La de de da, you a MVP, got this M$ POS to work. I am
> assuming you would deem yourself a technical user. THE OP ISN'T

That you can't get Vista to run properly and most users can points to a
probable problem between your little brain and the keyboard.
Frank
 
Back
Top