Back To Xp?
 

I hear alot of people are switching back to win xp from vista, I'm proud to say
that i've been running vista for 3weeks without any problems. What's the deal?

The only problem I have seen with my Vista is the lack of vendors of software comming on board to support it. Appart from that I don't understand why people don't like it. If it is for the fancy new interface you can easily disable that.

I've been running Vista for about a year now. There have been a few hiccups with Vista not running some of my older software correctly, but most of they were fixed when I ran them in "XP mode" per se. In addition, Vista SP1 has solved my only other big outstanding problem (one of my external HDs not being recognized). Other than that though, I have had no worries about using Vista, all my games work a-ok and my system has been very stable.

I understand the mindset in staying with XP, we know how it works, but Vista isn't going away and is the natural progression of things in due time (it might take awhile though). I think SP1 has solved a lot of big issues though so Vista shouldn't hemorrhage any more large numbers of users.

I believe it has more to do with the propaganda surrounding vista than it having actual issues to keep users from switching. Especially when people have judged it from its buggy beta releases.
I've been on windows vista x64 for a soild year as well. And the worse thing it gave me was a program error due to a compatibility issue. Which was solved by downloading an patch for that program.

Vista isn't particularly buggy or unstable, it just fucking blows ass and some stuff may not have very compatible drivers or any drivers at all.

-You can't use a real admin account from a fresh install.
-It takes hours to degay the OS once installed after you finally get a real admin account going. XP only takes a few minutes to degay.
-It applies retarded permissions to the partition it's installed in; so when you dual boot a superior OS like XP XP cannot access many files.
-the control panel has a lot of retarded shit, many easily found vital configuration panels in XP are now in retardedly hard to find places.
-The os suffers a 20% performance loss over XP for fairly obvious reasons. Unless you're some braindead MS fanboi, then it may not be so obvious. It may have been due the fact I was using the 64 bit version, but things like mIRC loaded VERY sluggishly in Vista while it was instant in XP (nearly top of the line pc).
-It suffers from the same non-disableable lsass hard disk thrashing as XP (later service packs) does. What the hell is MS trying to hide here? (You probably won't notice this unless your OS is installed on a loud disk like a raptor - this is on a clean install with nearly all services and annoying background stuff disabled and no programs running) Linux does not thrash your hard disk while idling, why in the flying fuck should XP/Vista?

I could go on and on. I'll only use the OS when I actually need to use it: through piracy. I'd rather shoot myself in the face than contribute to those scammer's riches and faggotry.

I've never really had a problem with Vista, and I ran it for a good year before reverting to XP a few days ago. I didn't really have a reason to, beyond the performance boost, and being able to run the games I play at a better framerate/speed/etc. In Vista for some reason they just ran sluggishly; everything else was fine.

The one thing I don't like about Vista is the lack of 'support' for XP MSstyle files. Granted, Vista was built with a different UI, but being able to use XP visual styles would have been a nice addition.

Meh, half the stuff I run with Vista either has a buggy uninstall, or it corrupts on me and completely wastes space on my laptop.

I have to format this thing eventually, but I want to back up everything I've been saving on to here so far, just so I don't lose everything.

As nice as Vista looks, it still has a bunch of problems for me, which is why I'd prefer to go back to XP until Vista and everything I want to run for it is completely stable.

This.

I had to revert back to XP because there were no good drivers available for most of my networking hardware, and a lot of other peripherals I have for my computer. There were drivers out there, but they ran like total shit. And I'm not going to buy a whole bunch of new hardware just to get stuff optimized for Vista when my old stuff works just fine on XP.

XP also outperforms for most uses in terms of system resources. The only reason I could really see using Vista is for DX10-required games.

Makes sense i guess should watch out and have my vista downgrade ready just in case
...but would you rather have a mac? I remember the old apple back at school havent been a fan sense then...

Well, if you're worried about driver incompatibility in upgrading to Vista of XP, then you're not going to have much luck installing a Mac OS.

Oh, please. The driver issue has been solved since 6 months after Vista's release. Vista runs far faster on both my laptop and desktop than XP did - the 'slow' complaints are of people comparing freshly-installed systems. Vista takes about a week to get used to your habits and get the caching working right, but after that, it flies compared to XP. It's considerably more secure, it looks better - it's the superior operating system in every way.

Not really sure why it even matters what it looks like. You can just run windowblinds on XP for the same effect without it being a bloated PoS in the process.

I admit I haven't tried Vista in a long while now, but the significantly higher system requirements for something that's only marginally better was a turn off to me, not to mention the previously mentioned driver compatibility issues which contrary to what some believe still exists for plenty of hardware out there. Sure, most things are covered but most isn't "all" which can still create issues.

It's not exactly hard to see why some people wouldn't want to switch just yet.

And not 'all' are covered with XP either. What's your point?

Also, what 'higher system requirements'? I'm running it on a P4 2.4Ghz with 1GB of RAM perfectly. If you don't have a machine that "new" (that's, what, 2002?) of course you shouldn't be upgrading to Vista. But if you have a machine made in the last 5 years or so, there's no reason you can't. Especially since RAM prices are dirt cheap.

So is that why people have made the transformation pack for theXp
to keep it xp but a vista look? That's kinda smart

I was running Vista x64 for nearly 6 months before I went back to XP around the time SP3 was publicly available. Why?

-Vista explorer is nearly unusably slow compared to XP
-Adobe Premiere Pro CS3 was constantly attempting to fill up 1.2gb of RAM on a 2gb physical RAM system; in XP it takes up a paltry ~70mb of RAM
-Same problem with Firefox, but less drastic
-On my GeForce 8600GT, XP performs better in every game, from UT2004 to Crysis

Plus other assorted Vista complaints I can't remember.

Sadly, my TV Tuner still doesn't have any drivers (and probably never will), so I've been stuck with WinXP even after I built my new computer.

A computer I got 3 months ago had driver issues, and I had been using Vista for more than a week, installing all the updates, and downloading driver after driver, still to no avail. And I'm not even talking about obscure hardware things here (linksys wireless card/router). You've just been lucky.

It's nice when things work. But it's a pain in the ass when they don't. I guess it depends on whether you like taking risks or not. Personally, I didn't experience anything "positive" enough while using Vista to make it worth it. Sure, it's prettier than XP, but if I want a pretty OS, I'll hop on my Powerbook and eyegasm over Aqua/Leopard.

It's too bad service pack 1 for Vista isn't really effective unless you're under a corp. environment. The main improvement, from what I've seen, is a better transfer rates in large constructed network topologies.

And no, Vista didn't 'fix' the driver issues. Yes, there was a hotfix, but in order to get external devices (Zune...yes, Zune) to work I had to remove this hotfix. Not only that, when I first tried to install Service Pack 1 beta on my dev box at work...it failed. After consulting with multiple people...I was pretty much told to 'refresh my machine.' Thanks guys. :/

I'm more excited about Windows 7 than I was Vista. Vista is slop. Greatest thing about Windows 6 is the implementation of Windows Deployment Services on Longhorn. :)

EDIT: The only reason why I think Vista has a little bit of gangster in it is ONLY because of DirectX 10. If you have the means to purchase directX10 support material...do so. CAN'T be disappointed. :)

I have not tried Vista on my own machine, but I know people who have bought it with it either pre-installed or installed it themselves. They could hardly get the simplest things to work. Everything they tried to do was a struggle. Though this was before they released the first service pack. I have had little experience first hand, aside from the constant clicking saying that YES I want to install this program, which is irritating.

I've had to go out of my way a for a lot of BS in vista (inluding modifying my bios <3 antipiracy failure) but so far the only program I couldn't run was a bot for some godawful mmo, and a monitoring tool that crashed randomly (fine in xp).

First thing you need to do in vista is disable UAC and get on the real admin account, or you'll be emo fucking pissed fast.

Don't Shut Off Vista UAC, There's A Better Way - Microsoft Blog - InformationWeek

How do you get a Real Admin account? Found it nvm

http://www.rlslog.net/make-yourself-...ator-in-vista/

Except that totally defeats the security and the point of UAC. Following that guide is a horrible idea.

If you're going to make yourself full admin its pointless to have the UAC anyway. And as long as you're not a fop, you're not going to be at a loss for security with full control. Anyone that claims its stupid to have incomplete control over the computer you paid for clearly doesn't have enough confidence not to make a huge mistake with their pc.

I've actually been running Vista for about half a year to 3/4 of a year now. I've not had much problems with it. The only issues I have with it are an incredibly slow restart time. For some reason it takes a LONG time to shut down. I've clocked a few times where, from the time I press "restart" to the time I'm logged back into Vista and it finish loading, and it's approached the 3 minute mark a few times. I've since then gotten used to it though. I haven't had any problems, but opening up task manager and seeing 88 processes just seems a bit excessive. It's not slowing my system down, but that may be because I've got a relatively speedy computer. I've had no issues with drivers, and I've had relatively few issues with applications. Most, if not all, of those apps were fixed when I just got a newer version.

Part of the issue might also be that I "upgraded" to Vista from XP because I was too lazy to reinstall all of my applications. That might be causing problems now, but from my experience, I haven't had much go bad with Vista.

EDIT: Personally, I have UAC off. I really don't feel like being asked every time I launch a program or connect to anything to confirm my actions.

I had vista and vista caused me a lot of problems
I have a two 2gb DDR 2 ram on my computer and it took a allmost all my ram space
not all games support vista I'm not convince vista it's for me there still bugs in the system but I'm sure soon it's will be a more friendlier for the home users