New OS

[MiretanK]

server 2008 then?

[cottonvibes]

Originally Posted by Fadingz

I have 8G of RAM, so I need the 64bit :/
but XP 64 is really not stable ><

thats alot of ram! :O

yeah i've heard XP 64bit isn't good either.
but i don't think 64bit vista is any more "stable".

[DB7]

Originally Posted by cottonvibes

in the month i had vista, there was nothing "good" about it.
it was so bad, i deleted my vista partition.

most people agree that Vista is one of Microsoft's worst OS's. If you think its a good OS, then you're the minority.

The thing is most people don't hate Vista, it is jsut that the people who do are the most vocal.

I've yet to see someone who hate Vista say anything more than you about why they dislike it, all I seem to see is people repeating the same old "I tried Vista but ended up hating it and deleting/formatting" without actually saying WHY they hated it.

Sorry I do get the old lines of "Vista is incompatible with my programs" or "there are no drivers for Vista" and of course the old chestnut of "Vista uses so much of my RAM". All of which is quite frankly rubbish because in my experience of going for ME to XP, far more programs and drivers were broken than when I moved from XP to Vista.

I have said this before but I really do feel odd supporting Vista when I am not using the operating system, I am using XP myself. I simply do not fault Vista for its performance, rather it's butt ugly looks.

Originally Posted by Fadingz

I hope they can do a cheap/free upgrade from Vista to the next OS

Cheap I could see but I certainly doubt they would give it away.

[RockmanForte]

Originally Posted by cottonvibes

thats alot of ram! :O

yeah i've heard XP 64bit isn't good either.
but i don't think 64bit vista is any more "stable".

I thought windows xp professional x64 bit is good. I do not understand.

[Squall-Leonhart]

Originally Posted by cottonvibes

thats alot of ram! :O

yeah i've heard XP 64bit isn't good either.
but i don't think 64bit vista is any more "stable".

what?

WHAT?

WTF.

XP64 is more stable then Vista x64

1. Theres no System crash when you have more then 4GB of ram, and an nvidia card (there is in vista)
2. Theres no USB2 + 4GB problem (there was in Vista for about 4 months)
3. XPx64 drivers are very common these days, and you can even install Vista x64 drivers on XP64 in most cases, (excluding video drivers)
4. Theres no Digital signing requirements, meaning no mucking around needed to load device drivers.
5. With SP1 installed, XP64 is as stable as Server 2003 x64

[RockmanForte]

I want to ask you.. If I have windows xp professional x64 sp1 I can update it to sp2 or sp3 ?

[PCXL-Fan]

Originally Posted by RockmanForte

I want to ask you.. If I have windows xp professional x64 sp1 I can update it to sp2 or sp3 ?

Yup. As long as your copy is legal and those service packs actually exist

[P_RePTiLe]

The thing is, do we even need a new os - the program that is the base background interface to run programs and browse files.

XP does that excellent these days, so as long as Microsoft wouldn't create new "functions", new directx and so on - and make them exclusively for a new os, there would be no need for a new os at all. it works already.

The irritating thing is that we will be forced to replace xp sooner or later, just because they want to sell a new product, when they could just make everything work with xp into the future.

This irritates me greatly.

[RockmanForte]

Originally Posted by PCXL-Fan

Yup. As long as your copy is legal and those service packs actually exist

Thanks.

What do you mean as long as my copy is legal ?

[NamesSolidSnake]

Originally Posted by RockmanForte

Thanks.

What do you mean as long as my copy is legal ?

As long as you didn't pirate it and you actually bought it, then you're fine.

[RockmanForte]

Oh, I got you. Thanks.

[cottonvibes]

Originally Posted by Squall-Leonhart

what?

WHAT?

WTF.

XP64 is more stable then Vista x64

thats what i said.

[Exodus]

Hold on... does that mean my prediction of Vista being ME's bastard grandchild come true?

[PCXL-Fan]

No vista is longhorn after a lobotomy. And then a sledgehammer in the face

[Squall-Leonhart]

Originally Posted by Exodus

Hold on... does that mean my prediction of Vista being ME's bastard grandchild come true?

yes,.. its also a descendant of Windows 98 First Edition.

[DB7]

Originally Posted by Squall-Leonhart

1. Theres no System crash when you have more then 4GB of ram, and an nvidia card (there is in vista)

This is the first I've heard of this problem in the year and a bit that Vista has been in the market, would you mind pointing me at some sources about this?

Originally Posted by Squall-Leonhart

4. Theres no Digital signing requirements, meaning no mucking around needed to load device drivers.

There is no digital signing needed for Vista x64 either, it'll just have a UAC popup (if you have it turned on) and a warning about the driver being unsigned (which XP also gives you) and then the driver will install.

Originally Posted by P_RePTiLe

The irritating thing is that we will be forced to replace xp sooner or later, just because they want to sell a new product, when they could just make everything work with xp into the future.

Sure that'd be nice but then Microsoft would see their cash begin to dry up because people would just begin to recycle their old copy of XP onto their new PCs. They'd then likely have to start charging for previously free updates like DirectX, which wouldn't exactly make them popular.

Originally Posted by Exodus

Hold on... does that mean my prediction of Vista being ME's bastard grandchild come true?

I never know how to reply to posts like these because I must be the only person in the known worlds that never had a problem with Windows ME, at least no more than I experienced with 98 Second Edition, but then again I did strip certain parts out with a component remover so perhaps that made the difference.

[S.SubZero]

Originally Posted by cottonvibes

windows ME was another failed OS, just like vista.

The sad fact with all the ME haters these days is that most of them were not old enough to use computers, much less old enough to critique operating systems, when ME was around. How old are you? I won't go into a long blurb about WinME, but it was hardly the train wreck history has made it out to be. It was by no means perfect, but at the time I liked it more than Win98.

----

Back to Vista and "Windows 7" and whatever...

I run Windows XP64 on my computers currently. It's rock-solid, very fast, and I have drivers for pretty much everything except the web cam on this laptop. I like it, and I recommend it to anyone that wants to try out 64-bit Windows with reasonable resource usage. I use it for gaming, applications, virtualization, whatever. It never gives me trouble.

I have tried out Vista x64. I ran it most of last year on my old laptop. It was generally fine, speed was a little iffy on gaming and file copying but that seemed to improve over the course of the year. Aero really grew on me, I really like it and sort of miss it when I'm in XP64. However, what I don't miss is the giant chunk of RAM Vista 'reserves' and the giant chunk of hard disk space it sits in. It's horribly bloated.. Fast, but bloated. When I use Vista I try to think I could use it full-time on both of my machines, then I get back in XP64 and I realize I don't really need it. XP64 is sick fast and does everything I need.

As for Windows 7, my previous sarcasm stands. Microsoft releases new operating systems. If my math is still up to par, if the next version will be "7" it would indicate we've had at least.. 6.. previous versions. Interesting. I also don't think anyone, not even Bill Gates, can predict when Windows 7 will be ready. Process this: It took Microsoft a *year* to crank out SP1 for Vista. A year. And that was with the knowledge that the entire industry was rejecting Vista wholesale. Rushing to please people, it took them a YEAR to do the first service pack. Do you realistically think that same fervor, that same drive, that same need to recover dignity, could release an ENTIRELY NEW OPERATING SYSTEM in another year? Note: it took five years just to whip up Vista. Do the math. Also figure in that Vista doesn't even have stuff MS was pimping early on. WinFS? Hello? In five years they could not finish that one feature, and maybe countless others. Keep that in mind.

[cottonvibes]

Originally Posted by S.SubZero

The sad fact with all the ME haters these days is that most of them were not old enough to use computers, much less old enough to critique operating systems, when ME was around. How old are you? I won't go into a long blurb about WinME, but it was hardly the train wreck history has made it out to be. It was by no means perfect, but at the time I liked it more than Win98.

i've been into computers since windows 95.
the crapiest PC i've ever owned was an eMachines that came with Windows ME pre-installed.
nothing but problems.

if you think Windows ME was a good OS, perhaps it is you who hasn't tried it out.


and its not like people just pick random OS's to hate.
theres are reasons why people hate ME and Vista.

[Squall-Leonhart]

Originally Posted by DB7

This is the first I've heard of this problem in the year and a bit that Vista has been in the market, would you mind pointing me at some sources about this?

Never heard of google?, sheesh, first place i hit is google when someone says something like this, so i can validate it myself. people are lazy

There is no digital signing needed for Vista x64 either, it'll just have a UAC popup (if you have it turned on) and a warning about the driver being unsigned (which XP also gives you) and then the driver will install.

one of Vista x64's security functions is it will not allow the installation of drivers which have not been digitally signed, for most, do not confuse digital signing and whql signing, they are both very different. a driver can be digitally signed without being WHQL signed, (but always needs to be digitally signed to get whql signed) Drivers that are not digitally signed, will not load in Vista x64 without using the disable enforced driver signing trick.

Sure that'd be nice but then Microsoft would see their cash begin to dry up because people would just begin to recycle their old copy of XP onto their new PCs. They'd then likely have to start charging for previously free updates like DirectX, which wouldn't exactly make them popular.

I would pay to get the Dx update on XP, infact i would pay Vista ultimate prices to get it, Vista is a more like a console Dashboard then an OS....

I never know how to reply to posts like these because I must be the only person in the known worlds that never had a problem with Windows ME, at least no more than I experienced with 98 Second Edition, but then again I did strip certain parts out with a component remover so perhaps that made the difference.

most people didn't even try to get Windows ME to run stabily, its possible, but it requires a few environment changes,
Windows 98 First edition had a crap load of problems, for many, it wouldn't even get to the second state of installing, Second Edition was rushed to the market to fix this.