Getting rid of Vista and installing XP

[Deleted User]

aliEnRIK wrote: »

True ~ for the record though I really DO know what im doing
And the people I was talking about also know all about computers.

That's quite evident not only in the advice you've given on the boards, but the fact you can talk on a technical level without recycling the dross you see batted around about Vista by people who don't understand it at all.

Conor_3

esuhl wrote: »

XP is going to be supported until 2014!!! Hardly end of line! :rotfl:

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-xp/future.aspx

Only basic security updates. What are you going to do when hardware vendors stop releasing drivers for XP in a couple of years?

aliEnRIK

I personally cant see the hardware vendors just stopping XP support alltogether. Theyd be shooting themselves in the foot as theres still millions of users with XP.

converse

anewhope wrote: »

I find that the people who claim they hate Vista don't know what they're doing with computers.
Simple fact, encountered daily..

I experience completely the opposite: daily.

I work with some very influential IT people, and personally I've been a IT consultant for many years - and we are pretty much all in agreement that in a few years time the mess which is Vista will be regarded a close second to that of ME - this is a view shared with colleagues who are also MS partners. Equally, others don't share that view - it's all opinion isn't it?

Ignoring the fact that the were/are so many different versions Vista - which is crazy to start with, utterly confusing to a home user, let alone the other features issue (which has what, which is best etc.). In Vista as a whole, there are far to many security compromises, it's not locked down tight enough (very little inprovement over XP), it's style over substance, and most of the "style" are copied Mac features. My biggest problem is that it is an enormous beast, with far too much legacy code, completely inefficient.

Sure it works, sure it works with most modern software, sure it looks good. But over XP there is very little between them.

If the next version of Windows doesn't address these issues seriously, MS will be on the back foot, some think they already are, despite their enormous market share.

W2K to XP was a far greater leap IMO.

Many of our large corporate clients (and I'm talking multi-thousand-users, pan-european, EMEA, and global), have decided against rollouts, opting to bide their time with XP, and with all their office and bespoke apps perfectly happy under either system, there is no issue.

It'll be very unlikely that hardware manufacturers will suddenly stop supporting XP, many devices available today can have drivers downloaded for much older systems, so I'm with aliEnRIK on that one. Microsofts extension of support for XP is just another way to show they have not had the takeup with Vista as they first thought.

However as all threads here when someone asks how to install XP, either end up with OS bashing, I'll end with:

Use and install which you prefer as a home user, Vista really doesn't bring much to the table IMO, if you like it and all your software and hardware is compatible, great, if not, use XP.

[Deleted User]

converse wrote: »

I experience completely the opposite: daily.

I work with some very influential IT people, and personally I've been a IT consultant for many years - and we are pretty much all in agreement that in a few years time the mess which is Vista will be regarded a close second to that of ME - this is a view shared with colleagues who are also MS partners. Equally, others don't share that view - it's all opinion isn't it?

That's quite cliche. The mess that is Vista? Please elaborate.

I work with some of the best software engineers this country has produced with centuries experience in software development , and while no one views Vista as the ultimate operating system that there ever will be, it's universally acknowledged that this was an evolution of Windows that was not only essential but has gone a long way to undo the mistakes that XP was based on.

Ignoring the fact that the were/are so many different versions Vista - which is crazy to start with, utterly confusing to a home user

There's three. Home Basic, Home Premium x86 and x64.

let alone the other features issue (which has what, which is best etc.). In Vista as a whole, there are far to many security compromises, it's not locked down tight enough (very little inprovement over XP)

Such as?

it's style over substance, and most of the "style" are copied Mac features. My biggest problem is that it is an enormous beast, with far too much legacy code, completely inefficient.

I assume you're pinning Aero down as this, which is a far more efficient way of handling the UI than the DWM that XP utilised. Microsoft are between a rock and a hard place, you remove the compatibility with legacy and you automatically write off a large proportion of your userbase.

Sure it works, sure it works with most modern software, sure it looks good. But over XP there is very little between them.

In the fact they both run 32bit applications?

If the next version of Windows doesn't address these issues seriously, MS will be on the back foot, some think they already are, despite their enormous market share.

Such as?

W2K to XP was a far greater leap IMO.

I think your opinion is wrong, since XP by design is insecure.

Many of our large corporate clients (and I'm talking multi-thousand-users, pan-european, EMEA, and global), have decided against rollouts, opting to bide their time with XP, and with all their office and bespoke apps perfectly happy under either system, there is no issue.

Large corporations are very reluctant to upgrade no matter what, NT4 > 2K, 2K > XP because of incompatibility for bespoke software as you correctly stated, not to mention IT budgets that don't permit constant updating of hardware. IT is often neglected because those responsible for decision whether to upgrade or not aren't clued up and are very much of the mentality that what they have works so why allocate resources to it when it's not essential to the continuing operation of the business.

It'll be very unlikely that hardware manufacturers will suddenly stop supporting XP, many devices available today can have drivers downloaded for much older systems, so I'm with aliEnRIK on that one. Microsofts extension of support for XP is just another way to show they have not had the takeup with Vista as they first thought.

Microsoft are a business that will pander to their clients as long as they continue to buy licenses and generate revenue for their shareholders.

Conor_3

converse wrote: »

I experience completely the opposite: daily.

I work with some very influential IT people, and personally I've been a IT consultant for many years - and we are pretty much all in agreement that in a few years time the mess which is Vista will be regarded a close second to that of ME

You've obviously not been doing it for that long then - not long enough to remember that exactly the same arguments were being trotted out in the Win98 vs XP arguments that prevailed through 2001/2.

And you're thick, incompetent and a complete dumbass if you think that there's little difference between XP and Vista. There's plenty of differences but they're mostly under the bonnet and require REAL knowledge so I guess you'll never figure it out. How about the fact that drivers aren't allowed access to the kernel for a start? As for the driver ability claim, try finding a Windows 98 driver for most hardware released in the last few years.

Vista brings a lot to the table, you're just too stupid to figure out what it is. Stay in the pen with the other stupid incompetent sheeple.

mikem1986

i found this

http://badvista.fsf.org/what-s-wrong-with-microsoft-windows-vista

haha

Conor_3

Ah yes, the Free Software Foundation - a completely unbiased organisation.

[Deleted User]

mikem1986 wrote: »

i found this

http://badvista.fsf.org/what-s-wrong-with-microsoft-windows-vista

haha

What utter, utter, ill-informed rubbish.

davmail

Vista as it is,is crap,it hogs memory,is not compatable with LOADS of software,is buggy,mine won't even install SP1,says all sorts of stuff is not compatable,its a new computer,only 10 months old,I installed my old Lexmark printer,took 5 hours to print 1 page of text in b/w!!!!Had to uninstall the software for the printer,then use the 'compatability mode' to install as if I had XP,then it worked fine,have stopped all memory hogging stuff like Aero,gone into 'classic mode' and it works OK,This O/S should have been given out free,as we are all beta testing it for free,as it is still not right.If I could I would install ME on here.