I still wanna see the cage match. :(

At the moment I'm very displeased with Vista's sucky backwards compatibility. There's a lot of old stuff I like to have access to that Vista just won't run at the moment. Once those issues have been fixed by them or 3rd party I'll reconsider. It's still a cool looking OS.

Vista was designed to forgo the backwards compatibility on purpose. Going forward it would be developmentally prohibitive to keep your OS Compatible with every part and every program ever made. Microsoft made the executive decision to let go of the old and focus on making forward building systems. For now its an Achilles heel for MS, though eventually it'll lead to better system stability as 10-20 year old devices and technology get phased out. As mentioned earlier its best on new machines and not much else. on the interim XP will still be widely available and fully supported to people who already own it.

Not that it's anything new. I remember it happening when I upgraded to 95, 98, and XP.


Just an FYI, everyone. This does not mean that MS is not going to SUPPORT XP anymore. Just not sell it. Hell, it took them until 2008 to stop supporting Win 98.

I made the decision when I got my laptop last year with Vista to just get all-new software and also get it with a good processor and loaded with RAM. I figured it was better to bite the bullet initially than suffer later.

It was a bit of work to download the Vista versions of a lot of softwares and I had to buy Paint Shop Pro Photo IX. Still, it was worth it to avoid the headaches I've heard about attempting to use old software.

Other than that, I've really had no issues with XP.

SpANG
Not that it's anything new. I remember it happening when I upgraded to 95, 98, and XP.


Just an FYI, everyone. This does not mean that MS is not going to SUPPORT XP anymore. Just not sell it. Hell, it took them until 2008 to stop supporting Win 98.

Even then, like I said, it won't be too hard to get a genuine copy for a few more years.

Personally I view vista as a useless resource eater. I don't see the point of upgrading my pc and ending up with the same kind of performance as I do on my old pc cause the new interface eats all of the memory, resulting with Photoshop working as bad on 2gb of memory as it does on 512mb on the old pc I am using now (not to mention having to upgrade to CS which I can't afford until used copies don't drop waaay in price).

Took me until 2003 to switch to XP and only because the new motherboard I bought had no drivers for 98. And the first thing I did was turn off the ugly blue look and return to the classical look. So the main selling point of Vista is lost on me. So far my visual taste has always collided with the choices made by whatever designers Microsoft has hired, and I doubt it'll change anytime soon.

Windows 98 was one huge memory hole, leaking bytes constantly so you had to reboot it every 12 hours or so, and after the initial fixes XP came out to be quite stable system.

The main problem with new windows versions is the much larger requirements which seem (and most likely are) inadequate compared to the new things added to the system. For me, XP already eats too much cpu, memory and hd space, and while I haven't made the jump yet, I am seriously pondering linux as my next operating system. I just need to find equivalents/replacements for every bit of software I use.

Aurora Borealis
And the first thing I did was turn off the ugly blue look and return to the classical look.

I don't think anyone who knows how to change the theme keeps it at that green/blue/silver monstrosity.

I never had the blue for long… I gave it some funky black theme. But now the XP machines aren't my main computer any more, and I lost the themes on one after I had to reinstall windows (problem with hard drive corruption, due to a power system fault, not a windows issue) So the theme on one of them is staying as the green one. It's not bad since I always have the task bar on auto hide, make all the green bars as thin as possible and have the full start menu.

My work comp is stuck with the blue though… It doesn't bother me too much since it stays at work ^_^

—————-
The resource usage on Vista isn't an issue for newer machines because they have so much more resources. BUT, XP would probably run a little faster on them. You can easily build a monster with 8 or maybe 16 gig of ram and 4 terrabytes of HD and all the rest of it… But it's not really worth it. Whatever you do there'll be hassles and performance doesn't really increase that much for the stuff you do every day, even massively complicated art in Photoshop. All you get are e-penis points.

ozoneocean
You can easily build a monster with 8 or maybe 16 gig of ram and 4 terrabytes of HD and all the rest of it… But it's not really worth it.

Hi, yeah, 3d modelling and uncompressed videos over here.

Also, windows XP can't address more than 3gb of RAM unless you get XP64, which has terrible driver support. Worse than Vista did at launch.

ozoneocean
The resource usage on Vista isn't an issue for newer machines because they have so much more resources. BUT, XP would probably run a little faster on them.

I used to have XP on this machine and the thing ran pretty damn good.
I used Style XP to take care of the look thing, i even had a Vista theme for a while.
It was fun.

anonymousposterchild

ozoneocean
You can easily build a monster with 8 or maybe 16 gig of ram and 4 terrabytes of HD and all the rest of it… But it's not really worth it.

Hi, yeah, 3d modelling and uncompressed videos over here.

It's the same with Vista. Only the 64 bit version, wich has less driver and program support can use the ram… So for normal uses you're just buggerising around with it to get it to work right for nothing.

With 3d and vids, definitely worth the hassle to reduce those render times etc. Outside of that though, it's not even going to increase your performance in games, assuming they'll run on Vista 64 bit. Not with the ones that are out now anyway, and for a while yet.

SpANG
People were screaming for their Windows 98 back, until they finally came out with Service Pack 2.

What, no one remembers the chaos that ensued when SP 2 came out? Something was wrong with it and a lot of people were forced to reinstall Windows entirely–an old friend of mine included. (Although that also might have been due to a virus he got from some German porn he downloaded….)

anonymousposterchild

ozoneocean
You can easily build a monster with 8 or maybe 16 gig of ram and 4 terrabytes of HD and all the rest of it… But it's not really worth it.

Hi, yeah, 3d modelling and uncompressed videos over here.

Also, windows XP can't address more than 3gb of RAM unless you get XP64, which has terrible driver support. Worse than Vista did at launch.

I plan on upgrading soon to about 2gb of memory, so that I can work in photoshop 7 on A4 format double spreads (so basically A3) at 600dpi :D
…and of course more hd space and a new dvd drive, the old one stopped reading movies and refuses to burn specific brands of dvds.

But considering my machine's 4-5 years old by now, I might be forced to upgrade the motherboard and the cpu too. Gah, the expences.

Actually, it's all a moot point, since I never buy premade machines but assemble it all from parts (with the help of more knowledgeable friends to confirm whether the choise of parts I made is wise or retarded) and I never used the OEM home editions of XP anyway.

At 4-5 years old you should have no trouble getting the ram and a new HD on your old motherboard. And if for some reason you do find it tricky, just browse an online store and get it sent out, it's so easy ^_^
I find that approach less hassle than installing a new motherboard T_T

I suppose if Vista can be improved like XP, I wouldn't mind getting it for my next computer. Although, I have an external drive and an Intuous 2 tablet I got when I purchased my first Dell back in 2002. I'm hoping that there will be a compatibility patch for those two hardware devices. But if worst comes to worse I'll back everything up on CD's. Still, I shelled out a lot of money for my drawing tablet and if it still works I'm not gonna replace it.

smkinoshita
I still wanna see the cage match. :(

Ozone knocks me down in the second round and I lose a tooth, but get back up at seven seconds. However, he then hits me square in the nose and I'm knocked out cold breathing. I know this because we wrote the script together.

ozoneocean

anonymousposterchild

ozoneocean
You can easily build a monster with 8 or maybe 16 gig of ram and 4 terrabytes of HD and all the rest of it… But it's not really worth it.

Hi, yeah, 3d modelling and uncompressed videos over here.

It's the same with Vista. Only the 64 bit version, wich has less driver and program support can use the ram… So for normal uses you're just buggerising around with it to get it to work right for nothing.

With 3d and vids, definitely worth the hassle to reduce those render times etc. Outside of that though, it's not even going to increase your performance in games, assuming they'll run on Vista 64 bit. Not with the ones that are out now anyway, and for a while yet.

Microsoft certified drivers for vista have to have both a 32-bit and a 64-bit version.

sandy
I suppose if Vista can be improved like XP, I wouldn't mind getting it for my next computer. Although, I have an external drive and an Intuous 2 tablet I got when I purchased my first Dell back in 2002. I'm hoping that there will be a compatibility patch for those two hardware devices. But if worst comes to worse I'll back everything up on CD's. Still, I shelled out a lot of money for my drawing tablet and if it still works I'm not gonna replace it.

…

Did you try Wacom's site, by any chance?

http://www.wacom.com/productsupport/drivers.cfm?os=Vista&product=XD&CFID=3361513&CFTOKEN=73626269

anonymousposterchild
Microsoft certified drivers for vista have to have both a 32-bit and a 64-bit version.

Come on man, you know better than that! ;)

Jeebs, I bought my nice high powered comp in November last year and when I looked around for those 64 bit drivers, it was quite patchy to say the least. And I'm talking main stream companies here, not little fish. Heh, even my Video card, an Nvidia 8800 GTX only had a beta driver for Vista 64.

ozoneocean

anonymousposterchild
Microsoft certified drivers for vista have to have both a 32-bit and a 64-bit version.

Come on man, you know better than that! ;)

Jeebs, I bought my nice high powered comp in November last year and when I looked around for those 64 bit drivers, it was quite patchy to say the least. And I'm talking main stream companies here, not little fish. Heh, even my Video card, an Nvidia 8800 GTX only had a beta driver for Vista 64.

That's nvidia's fault. Their 32 bit drivers don't have half the functionality of the XP ones. Most vista drivers without 64-bit support are ones that used a cheap verification workaround.

edit: Also, if one of them was a creative labs card, that's kinda your own fault. Creative Labs tends to discontinue drivers when a new OS is released. Plus they make shitty products.

My fault? lol! I wonder how that could be?
Yep, it has a Soundblaster card, but one made quite a bit after Vista came out, and it still has driver updates even now ;)
(Remember, I did that checking back in November when I got the machine)
Face it, I was right on the point about the drivers. :)

ozoneocean
My fault? lol! I wonder how that could be?
Yep, it has a Soundblaster card, but one made quite a bit after Vista came out, and it still has driver updates even now ;)
Face it, I was right on the point about the drivers. :)

Well kinda yea, part makers are always coming out with new drivers. For every OS, not just Vista. Its par for the course that they'll always be coming up with patches.

Obviously.

But the point was that, at least from my experience, and contrary to the Vista policy that APC quoted: while drivers did exist for the 32 bit version of Vista, 64 bit ones were absent.

For new hardware.
For mainstream products.
From big companies.
A long time after Vista was introduced.

…do I have to make it any clearer?

ozoneocean
Obviously.

But the point was that, at least from my experience, and contrary to the Vista policy that APC quoted: while drivers did exist for the 32 bit version of Vista, 64 bit ones were absent.

For new hardware.
For mainstream products.
From big companies.
A long time after Vista was introduced.

…do I have to make it any clearer?

No sir, you have to accept my challenge to fisticuffs.

Fine.

But only by Queensbury rules.

…And you have to put your pants back on.

ozoneocean
Fine.

But only by Queensbury rules.

…And you have to put your pants back on.

Are you a woman, or are you French? London Prize Ring rules.

And you speak as if I ever WORE pants.

I've been needing a new computer for a while now but I keep putting it off… I don't really care about XP vs. Vista (I mean, I'm gonna have to use Vista eventually, no point whining about it) but my problem is that I have a lot of programs installed on my old computer that I don't seem to have the install discs for anymore :/

I have nothing against shiny buttons. And I left my menu bars as the blue default because it matched my desktop… :[

anonymousposterchild
Are you a woman, or are you French?

I can't decide. My hair indicates the former, my beret; the latter. Perhaps I'm a French woman? :)

In which case I shall have to marry and then cheat on you with a series of artistic itinerant lovers. HA!

anonymousposterchild
And you speak as if I ever WORE pants.

Fine, but that blue chiffon skirt clashes with your eye-shadow.
I was trying to be nice about it…

skoolmunkee
And I left my menu bars as the blue default because it matched my desktop… :[

ewwwww >.<

I suppose you get used to it… I don't mind it so much on my work comp because the colour is duller so the blue and green don't glare out with that eye searing duo-chromatic assault.

…I'm very colour sensitive ^-^

ozoneocean
…I'm very colour sensitive ^-^

Gawd you're the girliest man I know

Ooooo
*blush*




lol!