Did you hear about how great the new version of Windows, "Mojave" is?

[Vertigo]

I use a dual boot of XP and Vista, I liked the way Vista looked, and it has some good features. But early on there were a lot of compatibility issues with the OS, a lot of those problems have been worked out. So, it's turned into a pretty solid OS, all in all I like it and am getting more and more to the point of using it exclusively on my main rig.

[Tavarin]

I shifted exclusively to Vista a year ago and never once had a problem. Everything was compatable for me, and I had to download less drivers myself for my vista setup than for XP on the same system. Plus with a decent computer the Vista experience is fast, beautiful, and easy. You just can't go into it thinking it's XP or you'll be lost.

Also, I don't know what this ability to transfer to macs is. Macs are annoying and it's hard to find anything, even with Vista smarts.

[luciusad2004]

Macs are annoying and it's hard to find anything, even with Vista smarts.

Was it actually hard to find things or do you just think it should work the way windows does? Once you give it a little bit of time (more than a few hours) things become pretty predictable because apple strives for a generally uniform interface. And as far as where apple sticks you files, that seems to be pretty logical and straight forward as well. I have a hard time finding things in windows after coming from a month or so on my GF's mac.

[iandh]

What's so powerful about Vista over XP?

I have Vista and I find it's powerful alright as in taking more resources and causing FPS hits in games. If you have XP there is still no reason to upgrade to Vista unless you want DX10, that's the only reason. Vista still needs to be more stable and there are still driver issues (I'm still missing 1). Vista is pretty much worthless except for DX10 to me, widgets/gadgets/whatever are disabled already and the "transparency effect" for titlebars is useless still I can't even consider it eyecandy effects. The UAC doesn't even bother me it's more of an annoyance but it stops lesser users from doing wrong stuff at least.

Just fyi, the latest tests I've seen show Vista SP1 now slightly faster than XP SP3. I've seen a couple other recent tests as well, but here is the first one I dug up:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...2302495,00.asp


Overall my problems have been identical to XP, the occasional driver issue, or installation error. The main thing that I have noticed though, is a massive increase in overall stability... much more graceful recovery from program/driver errors- XP would fall flat on its face in those instances.

There are many deciding factors, but IMO gaming performance shouldn't be one of them. Vista SP1 is actually better now in gaming than XP. Several members on another forum I frequent conducted personal tests to confirm this. I personally haven't had a need to run an install of XP yet or I likely would have done some testing myself.

[crenn]

Another piece on Mojave.

http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/38637/128/

[Tavarin]

Was it actually hard to find things or do you just think it should work the way windows does?

It's more the lack of individual file menus that drives me nuts. I hate how the main file menu changes to suit the program since with my multi-monitor setup I usually just click the file menus in other programs to do things. I also hate the dock. I find it inefficient and annoying. But that's just me. I know what I can do with a Vista machine, and I will stay with it. My hatred of macs shall not end.

[luciusad2004]

It's more the lack of individual file menus that drives me nuts. I hate how the main file menu changes to suit the program since with my multi-monitor setup I usually just click the file menus in other programs to do things. I also hate the dock. I find it inefficient and annoying. But that's just me. I know what I can do with a Vista machine, and I will stay with it. My hatred of macs shall not end.

Fair complaints. I never pondered the idea of how efficient the menu system would be on a multi-monitor system. And i can see the inefficiencies of the dock as well.

[Quakken]

If you have the computer to comfortably run vista, then do it. I don't, so I don't run vista. If I were to get a new PC, I would be torn between 64 and 32, my m-audio box doesn't have drivers for 64, but I would want ALL of my hardware to be utilized. Quite a predicament.

[AMD Killa]

What's so powerful about Vista over XP?

I have Vista and I find it's powerful alright as in taking more resources and causing FPS hits in games. If you have XP there is still no reason to upgrade to Vista unless you want DX10, that's the only reason. Vista still needs to be more stable and there are still driver issues (I'm still missing 1). Vista is pretty much worthless except for DX10 to me, widgets/gadgets/whatever are disabled already and the "transparency effect" for titlebars is useless still I can't even consider it eyecandy effects. The UAC doesn't even bother me it's more of an annoyance but it stops lesser users from doing wrong stuff at least.

A hell of a lot is better. I love the search function as soon as you open the start menu. With XP, I find my self getting really annoyed with the cascading menus or what ever they are called. If you have XP, stick with it unless you want to buy vista. However, for a new computer, go for Vista. A pentium 4 and above is fine for vista, depending on the clock speed. You dont need a 5GHz quadcore to run vista.

I get annoyed when people think they can run vista on a 800mhz pentium 3 with 512 mb ram and a geforce 2 series card. Even XP would choke with those specs.

Another thing that annoys me, is that people think it's microsoft's problem if a driver is incompatible. The fact of the matter is, is that microsoft provide a new driver model for vista. It is up to the MANUFACTURER to write drivers that are compatible with this new driver model. Microsoft were very kind to include the old XP driver model as a combatibility mode, but poorly written drivers for XP will probably fail here.

Vista can survive graphics failures way better than xp can (I use both ATI and nVIDIA). Also, vista is not prone to 100% processor usage when windows is looking for updates, unlike XP.

On my laptop (1.8GHz AMD sempron, 2GB Crucial 667mhz RAM, ATI 1150 Xpress series), vista was definatly a lot smoother than xp. My laptop scored a 3.2 because of the onboard graphics. Everything else was a 4.0 and above.

Dont tell me that vista is rubbish. Microsoft software has been perfectly fine for me. Its other software writers that cannot follow proper coding standards.

Im not going to flame macs, as I have barely ever used them. I really dont understand why people say to always use macs, or always use XP. If people are happy with what they have, that should be the end of it!

Sorry about my rant, I've just been watching jeremy kyle, he knows how to solve an argument (Not that I watch it that often)

[Drum Thumper]

Anything Micro$oft related is rubbish. I only use it at the moment for two reasons:

1. Laptop is still under warranty
2. I need this crap for school

As soon as I graduate, I'll be blowing XP off of my home system for good. Red Hat, here I come!