WinXP MCE + high end video + 4GB RAM = (quad core, Vista, work)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Think of all the nagging that they are not enduring with XP, think how much better applications run, the lack of compatibility issues with applications.
Not sure how you use your computer, but I interface very little with the OS, I run applications, the OS only manages the launching of those applications, memory management, hardware management, and the file system. XP does an excellent job of doing all that, and just stays the hell out of my way, without asking ad nauseum "are you sure", or complaining because I disable the inbuilt nanny.
I'm glad you like Vista, but I'm not sure what your goal of criticizing people that are running the most stable version of Windows ever comes from, or why.
Think of all the nagging that they are not enduring with XP, think how much better applications run, the lack of compatibility issues with applications.
Not sure how you use your computer, but I interface very little with the OS, I run applications, the OS only manages the launching of those applications, memory management, hardware management, and the file system. XP does an excellent job of doing all that, and just stays the hell out of my way, without asking ad nauseum "are you sure", or complaining because I disable the inbuilt nanny.
I'm glad you like Vista, but I'm not sure what your goal of criticizing people that are running the most stable version of Windows ever comes from, or why.
I turn UAC off so there's no more nagging than XP. All of the programs I use run just fine in Vista but then I don't insist on running stuff from 1997. If I did, I'd run them in a VM. Vista is just as stable as XP in my experience. I'm laughing at people screwing themselves out of 1.5GB of RAM because they're stuck in the past.
I'm laughing at people screwing themselves out of 1.5GB of RAM because they're stuck in the past.
Sticking with what works. Vista offers nothing that I want or need, yet would lighten the wallet by several hundred dollars. Same reason I drive a 12 year old truck, there is nothing a new truck offers, except payments.
This is not a "Vista vs. XP" issue at all - it's a 32-bit vs. 64-bit OS issue. Anyone with Vista 32-bit would have the same memory addressing issues as the person with XP 32-bit.
This is not a "Vista vs. XP" issue at all - it's a 32-bit vs. 64-bit OS issue. Anyone with Vista 32-bit would have the same memory addressing issues as the person with XP 32-bit.
100% correct The OP seems to have missed that fact.
If Vista is so great, why is Windows 7 being advanced so fast by M$. RC is due out next month.
It's not being advanced "so fast". MS is back on schedule of a new version every 2.5-3 years. Six years of XP was an anomaly. XP SP2 should have been an interim release in itself and in fact was initially planned that way. Microsoft has admitted that going six years between releases was a mistake.
This is not a "Vista vs. XP" issue at all - it's a 32-bit vs. 64-bit OS issue. Anyone with Vista 32-bit would have the same memory addressing issues as the person with XP 32-bit.
Here's the problem with that. He wanted media center. There's no XP MCE 64 bit. To address all of his memory with XP, he'd have to get XP Pro x64 and give up media center. And 64 bit XP has terrible driver support compared to Vista64. He could have gotten Vista Home Premium 64 bit (which is pretty much the default OS on new PCs these days) and gotten media center and all of his memory. He's got a screaming fast quad core water cooled system with a 7 year old OS that can't even address more than 2.5GB of RAM.
Here's the problem with that. He wanted media center. There's no XP MCE 64 bit. To address all of his memory with XP, he'd have to get XP Pro x64 and give up media center. And 64 bit XP has terrible driver support compared to Vista64. He could have gotten Vista Home Premium 64 bit (which is pretty much the default OS on new PCs these days) and gotten media center and all of his memory. He's got a screaming fast quad core water cooled system with a 7 year old OS that can't even address more than 2.5GB of RAM.
I agree. It's pathetic how so many are clinging to XP on high end systems that really would benefit from Vista. I can totally understand on a low end or older system, but there comes a point where you just have to move on.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.