Ugh...my post disappeared. Vista offers no benefits and it's hog of your computer's resources. It has the ability to make fast computers seem slow with no actual benefit. Oh and Chad, Microsoft started working on their new OS a long time ago. My sister knows a couple guys that work for MS and even they told her not to use Vista because it's just a money pit used to own noobs who don't know what they're buying or getting. It's kind of like how noobs buy Audiobahn because it has all that bling. Same concept behind it all.
Chad, your friend is obviously a noob as well. Just because he sweeps,mops the floors and cleans the toilets at a Microsoft owned building doesn't mean that he knows anything about Vista and why it was created and the support it will have. If someone tells you that an OS will work flawlessly they're morons. Every OS or even software has bugs and will not work flawlessly. Stop pwning yourself with noob commments. Start reading Maximum PC, you'll see that they install 2 operating systems onto their computers because Vista will not work with all of them now stop talking about how great Vista is because you're a PC noob! So am I though. Until I overclock my next PC to be stable at 6GHZ, can you say phase change cooling?
"Oh and Chad, Microsoft started working on their new OS a long time ago."
Seven years to be exact. And it is a trainwreck, Companies worldwide are switching back to XP Corporate because of (like Rob said) software incompatibilty, bugs, and the fact that it isn't stable as of yet. Microshaft are such dicks that they are not going to issue DX10 except inside the Vista platform... which means that we won't be able to run the new generation of games like BioShock and Crysis to their full potential on XP. There are hacked verions of DX10 around that will supposedly run on XP but I haven't looked into it too much yet.
I do computer repairs for my friends and others when I have spare time, and 90% of what I have seen lately is Vista related. Most printers built more than six months ago will not run on Vista no matter what you do. They are scrambling to develop updated drivers but in most cases they will not work. Vista is a failure, and as usual, Microshaft won't admit it and are including it on almost all pre-packaged computers for sale currently. If they don't fix this soon, I predict an even bigger clusterfuck than they experienced with Winblows ME. Google "vista sucks" for a look at the carnage.
Meh, I have my gaming desktop which dual boots XP pro and Linux Ubuntu. I have my laptop with vista on it because I like having something different at times. It has some capability issues with some older games, but I really have not had a problem. I play UT 99 on it without a sweat. People try to run it with a crappy computer and call it slow. It really needs about 2gb of RAM to run normal. It really helped when the first service pack beta came out. As far as running an older printer on it, I ran a printer I've had for 5 years on vista and worked flawlessly.
VISTA SUCKS!! I took a computer back after buying it because VISTA SICKS! You need a min. of 1gig ram and a 120gig hard drive. Vista uses 512mb ram just to run itself!!! Vista also uses a HUGE amount of your hard drive(like 45gigs) for itself.
The }honest} Min. requirements for Vista are: 1.7g DUAL CORE PROCESSOR 120g hard drive 1g ddr2 ram etc.
Not to mention all the Bu** SH*t problems Microsuck has with it! Bill Gates can go Fu*k himself with vista!
Joseph, you sound like you have no clue what you are talking about. Vista only uses about 5-6gigs for itself. 1gb of ram is NOT enough to run vista completely smooth, you will need 2gb. To say in general that "VISTA SUCKS" is false. It has some things it currently lacks in, but they are slowly but surely getting fixed. So you can't just say it sucks.
Compare the time each has been out. Vista has had allot less time so far to improve. But XP was the same way when it first came out. At least Microsoft tried a few new things with vista instead of the same stuff like all the other window's releases. Basically all they did between all the others all they did was change the graphical interface and improve a few things.
Performance wise, it is the same if you have the hardware. The only real problem is compatibility. It is basically a way of forcing people to get in with the new stuff and move away from the old.
btw to answer the copy question just get nero and select disc to disc copy. a xp disc can be copied like any other cd and as long as you have a reg key it will be fine. there is one catch if it's a newer xp home disc u need the original key to unlock the install process. once it's finally installed then u can enter whatever reg key u want. also if u call ms u can just ask for a key just tell them u have it on one computer only and u got a virus. the out sourcing makes it like a walk in the park to get a free key.
Compare the time each has been out. Vista has had allot less time so far to improve. But XP was the same way when it first came out. At least Microsoft tried a few new things with vista instead of the same stuff like all the other window's releases. Basically all they did between all the others all they did was change the graphical interface and improve a few things.
Performance wise, it is the same if you have the hardware. The only real problem is compatibility. It is basically a way of forcing people to get in with the new stuff and move away from the old."In comparison to XP Vista does SUCK."
Compare the time each has been out. Vista has had allot less time so far to improve. But XP was the same way when it first came out. At least Microsoft tried a few new things with vista instead of the same stuff like all the other window's releases. Basically all they did between all the others all they did was change the graphical interface and improve a few things.
Performance wise, it is the same if you have the hardware. The only real problem is compatibility. It is basically a way of forcing people to get in with the new stuff and move away from the old."In comparison to XP Vista does SUCK."
Compare the time each has been out. Vista has had allot less time so far to improve. But XP was the same way when it first came out. At least Microsoft tried a few new things with vista instead of the same stuff like all the other window's releases. Basically all they did between all the others all they did was change the graphical interface and improve a few things.
Performance wise, it is the same if you have the hardware. The only real problem is compatibility. It is basically a way of forcing people to get in with the new stuff and move away from the old."
What's funny is how computers running XP destroy computers running Vista in 3DMark and all other sorts of performance tests. Tell me why Vista is better? All the top scores have been achievied using XP and NOT VISTA, now stop with this bullsh1t thread. Vista was made for MS to make money plain and simple. Not only do you need to spend money for the OS but you need to waste money on actual hardware since it uses so much of your computer's resources at idle. /End of thread.
Did you listen to what I said in my post? The reason why XP is destroying Vista is because Vista has not had much time to improve. Am I saying Vista is better? No. I am saying that you cannot just say something sucks when it is new and in progress of improving. Vista uses allot of resources at idle due to the fact that it is a little more advanced than all the other window's releases. Also it would be perfectly fine if you ran about 2gb of ram and 1.7+DC. Wasting money on hardware? The computers I build for people I put 2gb of ram in automatically. As time has went on, the average amount of RAM in average computers has increased, along with every other part of the computer. It is always going to take better hardware and more use of resources to improve.
"Vista was made for MS to make money plain and simple." Prove it. Microsoft will send you a FREE copy of Vista ultimate just for joining a feedback program to improve "the vista expierence". To me that would be losing money? You take a few surveys about them asking you what problems you've had, and also you have a choice to log errors on your computer and it will send it to microsoft and you will receive solutions back within an hour. If they were doing it for ONLY money, don't you think they wouldn't go through all of this trouble just to make sure you are enjoying it?
Nobody could listen to what you said on that post...if someone can hear what you typed on the computer, they need to be in a rubber room...lol
BTW- I have Vista on one of my laptops and I constantly track how much memory is being used using windows task manager. When the computer is turned on, the only thing running is my OS and the computer is at 496mg of memory used. I can be using microsoft word, Powerpoint and have 6 web pages open and still don't hit a 1 gig of memory. I am doing it right now and just checked task manager and have 930mg of memory used currently. So, with that being said, I DO know what I am WRITING about. The only person on this thread who doesn't look like they know what they are WRITING about is you.
How does it look like I have no clue what I am talking about? Please point that out. I have been building/repairing computers since I was 9. I got my laptop with vista on it. Came with 1gb of ram. I was messing with it and It was ok, but not as fast as I wanted. So i upped it to 2gb. So much faster now. Don't talk about stuff you have never tried.
The speed of the comp. is not affected from mem. unless you max it out in which case the comp. has to write the memory in temp. files on hard drive becuase it has no more ram. Unless you maxed out the 1gig, having 2 doesn't help it perform. (this is comparing the same speed mem. to the same speed memory. If you have ram that is faster, that is a diff. topic altogether)
You said that you didn't think I know what I am writing about. I proved that I do.
As far as proving that you don't. I just did in my last post LOL. This was your direct quote about 11 posts up... "1gb of ram is NOT enough to run vista completely smooth, you will need 2gb."
I read your post. My computer on first boot was using 600-700mb (don't know how you are getting 400mb), leaving me with 300mb which is barely even enough to burn a DVD at full speed. You sure cant watch a movie on the computer while it burns. After a while, it was slow on boot up and struggled booting my messengers up. Once I upped it to 2gb with same speed, everything was lightning quick.
Your memory will bottleneck at somepoint for apps. like that because all of the other components are the same speed and have not been upgraded also.(Ie. hard drive, processor, etc.)
