Help Save Xp!!!

[ClayMeow]

I think we have several good examples of why arguing over the internet is stupid. Calling someone a "MS employee" because he likes Vista? Give me a break. Last time I checked, this forum was for people expressing their opinions on various products by various manufacturers. I never heard anyone calling someone an "nVidia employee" when they've stated nVidia cards are better than ATI, yet god for bid someone doesn't hate MS . Well now, he MUST be an employee!

[road-runner]

I think we have several good examples of why arguing over the internet is stupid. Calling someone a "MS employee" because he likes Vista? Give me a break. Last time I checked, this forum was for people expressing their opinions on various products by various people. I never heard anyone calling someone an "nVidia employee" when they've stated nVidia cards are better than ATI, yet god for bid someone doesn't hate MS . Well now, he MUST be an employee!

When I was reading his post it sounded like a salesman so that is what came to mind sorry if anyone if offended but it was opinion...

[Puck]

I don't really mind if I get 60 fps vs 75 fps or shave off a few seconds here and there when performing various windows tasks (opening windows, copying files, burning, office tasks, etc) .

That is the difference, most enthusiasts do. If I spend a bunch of cash on a high end rig to enjoy benchmarking and some high res gaming, I am not going to cripple it with an underperforming OS just so I can be "up to date".

 

This is a valid point. People complained about XP when it came out. And they finally ended up adopting it and enjoying it... when the hardware caught up. But it's going to be a while for a lot of users to catch up to Vista hardware-wise, and in the meantime they're going to wait and use XP which offers pretty much the same feature set and doesn't require any change or purchases.

 

I still do not think it is a valid point, since eventually people learned that xp can be streamlined and made to look and perform very similar to win98(like I have done). Also, XP has benefits that make upgrading to it worth it. Vista is totally different, and cannot be optimized enough to be competative(yet), and does not offer enough benefits over XP to be worth the upgrade IMO. Upgrading for crossfireX is one thing, but upgrading for prettier smoke and just to say you did is another.

 

Maybe SP1 will fix its lackluster performance, and then I will think about upgrading to it - but until it can at least match the performance of XP I see no reason at all to pay money to go slower.

[RimX]

Vista does not perform at the same level as XP, nor does it overclock as well.

I didn't know that you could overclock software.

 

Well I am using Vista and loving it. A lot of people are complaining about UAC and it bothering you when you try to install things. But let me say one thing SECURITY IS NOT CONVENIENT you people need to understand that. Now I'm not saying that you don't need any other security apps, I'm also running COMODO Firewall it does beat the Windows firewall. I have yet to run into a single Compatibility issue that supposedly, according to every anti-Vista person I talk to, this OS is rampant with. You know give it up Vista is a good OS, yea so it needs more resources than XP, really is that a surprise? XP needed more than 2000, 2000 needed more than 98, 98 needed more than 95, 95 needed more than 3.1, and I'm going to finish this 3.1 needed more than DOS. Here is another thing is that there are so many people that keep saying that Vista suck that hasn't even used it, and using it on a comp at a best buy doesn't count. I'm not saying that this is the case with people on here but I have talked to some of my friends that say that and have never once touched it.

[Kash]

But let me say one thing SECURITY IS NOT CONVENIENT you people need to understand that.

 

Man, my Macbook must be really insecure since it doesn't happen to nag me all day long...

[Verran]

I didn't know that you could overclock software.

We all know what he meant.

 

But let me say one thing SECURITY IS NOT CONVENIENT you people need to understand that.

My XP install never bugs me with stupid approvals when I perform basic tasks. It pretty much never bugs me with security at all. And yet, I haven't had a security problem with XP in years! Security IS convenient. Maybe you just have low expectations.

 

I have yet to run into a single Compatibility issue that supposedly, according to every anti-Vista person I talk to, this OS is rampant with. You know give it up Vista is a good OS, yea so it needs more resources than XP, really is that a surprise? XP needed more than 2000, 2000 needed more than 98, 98 needed more than 95, 95 needed more than 3.1, and I'm going to finish this 3.1 needed more than DOS. Here is another thing is that there are so many people that keep saying that Vista suck that hasn't even used it, and using it on a comp at a best buy doesn't count. I'm not saying that this is the case with people on here but I have talked to some of my friends that say that and have never once touched it.

The rest of this is just responses to the lowest common denominator of Vista complaints. Yes, there are plenty of people who complain about Vista without knowing. Yes, some idiots argue stupid and irrelevant points. But instead of focusing on that (since you can't change it), why not join in the discussion of less idiotic complaints? Just because some beefs are stupid doesn't mean they all are. Focusing only on the trivial stuff just means you don't have a response to the non-trivial.

[ClayMeow]

My XP install never bugs me with stupid approvals when I perform basic tasks. It pretty much never bugs me with security at all. And yet, I haven't had a security problem with XP in years! Security IS convenient.

Nor does my Vista.

[Verran]

Nor does my Vista.

I don't doubt that at all. I'm well aware UAC can be turned off. But clearly RimX's machine does, because he seems pretty defensive of it.

 

I was merely responding to (and discrediting) the words in uppercase bold underline

[ClayMeow]

I don't doubt that at all. I'm well aware UAC can be turned off. But clearly RimX's machine does, because he seems pretty defensive of it.

 

I was merely responding to (and discrediting) the words in uppercase bold underline

Heehee, understood

[Rehit]

in order to have any sort of overclock...

it has to be stable.

you cannot achieve as high a stable overclock with Vista as you can with XP.

this is not a mere few FPS, but a signifigant amount.

the difference between 3.8 and 4.1 is a lot larger than a few FPS.

it seems people would understand that many of us here wold resist an OS that dropped our performance.

last time i checked this was the Overclockers Club...

i do not begrudge anyone their Vista or their opinion of it.

but i will not be swayed from the truth.

it is slower...

period.

[kendellrt]

UAC is great for me because I can monitor when my wife and son are trying (or accidentally) to install ActiveX or other apps. In XP I could never get the whole run as admin and type in the password thing to work - it does in Vista. To keep UAC active but not have to click on yes all the time try the following reg tweak:

 

Switch UAC to quiet mode - keeps it on but supresses prompts for admin and user both

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Policies\System]

"ConsentPromptBehaviorAdmin"=dword:00000000

"ConsentPromptBehaviorUser"=dword:00000000

"EnableLUA"=dword:00000001

 

It works great for me.

 

I do miss some of the things in XP, like the up a folder button that Neo mentioned. As well as the toolbar buttons that you could customize like the delete, copy to and move to buttons. Neo, if you know how to get those buttons or features back without having to go to the file menu, let me know.

 

One thing that I think is great is that the WMM actually works and doesn't crash every 2-3 minutes as it does in XP. It is also great that it has the DVD maker so that you don't need a third party program to burn your WMM file to DVD. I also love the parental controls because my son is only six and I don't want him to run into stuff he shouldn't, on purpose or on accident. He can't mess with stuff in the control panel and the like, either. I just wish that you could set a time limit of use per day instead of just what time of day it can be used.

 

For some serious tweaks that make a huge difference with your experience, try TweakVI.

[ClayMeow]

I do miss some of the things in XP, like the up a folder button that Neo mentioned.

I don't get why anyone would want to get that back? Vista's implementation is 10 times better. You see the full directory breakdown and can quickly and easily click on whichever directory you want. It's just like the "up" button, except if you're 5 directories deep, you don't have to click "up" 5 times to get to a directory you want, in Vista it's just one single click.