Vista or XP?

We are getting a new computer and generally only buy a new computer every 5-6
years, so we take whatever OS comes on the computer at that time(currently
using XP with no real issues). I keep seeing all the negatives & problems
with Vista, is it really that bad for a non-technical user like myself?
Should I be opting for XP instead, because if I do it seems to really limit
available computer selection?

 

I've been using Windows Vista for well over a year now
and have not encountered any significant issues.
I would highly recommend Windows Vista for your new computer.
Make sure you order at least 2GB of RAM.

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows Shell/User

---------------------------------------------------------------

"mh64" wrote:

We are getting a new computer and generally only buy a new computer every 5-6
years, so we take whatever OS comes on the computer at that time(currently
using XP with no real issues). I keep seeing all the negatives & problems
with Vista, is it really that bad for a non-technical user like myself?
Should I be opting for XP instead, because if I do it seems to really limit
available computer selection?

 

My computer was getting old and I thought I needed to upgrade. I bought a
new Dell that came with Vista. I didn't really want Vista from all I heard
but after a while I resolved all the issues. Most of them were caused by a
misunderstanding of how the new OS worked. Now everything is stable.

I would suggest if you are changing out ALL your computers, get the fastest
Dell you can, make sure it has at least 2 gig of Ram (4 works slightly
better but not much...depends on applications) and the biggest drive(s) you
can get.

Bob F.


"Carey Frisch [MVP]" <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message
news:4F3D4EFE-5723-4C15-AFA3-EBA612371832@microsoft.com...<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> I've been using Windows Vista for well over a year now
> and have not encountered any significant issues.
> I would highly recommend Windows Vista for your new computer.
> Make sure you order at least 2GB of RAM.
>
> --
> Carey Frisch
> Microsoft MVP
> Windows Shell/User
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "mh64" wrote:
>
> We are getting a new computer and generally only buy a new computer every
> 5-6
> years, so we take whatever OS comes on the computer at that time(currently
> using XP with no real issues). I keep seeing all the negatives & problems
> with Vista, is it really that bad for a non-technical user like myself?
> Should I be opting for XP instead, because if I do it seems to really
> limit
> available computer selection? <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

 

There are two primary considerations for a new PC with Vista. First
will all your existing peripherals ( Printer, Scanner, Camera...) work
with Vista. Secondly do you have any software that you'll want to use
on the Vista machine. Some software is not compliant.
Vista is not bad, that's a public perception that has taken hold. As to
choosing XP that's an option but over your 5-6 year life cycle XP is
set to become unsupported by Microsoft. There are other things to
consider such as the fact that new peripherals will soon have ONLY
driver support for Vista. If you buy a new machine with XP you may
lock yourself out from using newer devices. The same thing may apply
to newer applications they may only run on the Vista platform.

"mh64" <mh64@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0E052ADD-743A-4E58-9414-88780E9AE765@microsoft.com...<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> We are getting a new computer and generally only buy a new computer every
> 5-6
> years, so we take whatever OS comes on the computer at that time(currently
> using XP with no real issues). I keep seeing all the negatives & problems
> with Vista, is it really that bad for a non-technical user like myself?
> Should I be opting for XP instead, because if I do it seems to really
> limit
> available computer selection? <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

 

On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:53:04 -0800, mh64
<mh64@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
>We are getting a new computer and generally only buy a new computer every 5-6
>years, so we take whatever OS comes on the computer at that time(currently
>using XP with no real issues). I keep seeing all the negatives & problems
>with Vista, is it really that bad for a non-technical user like myself?
>Should I be opting for XP instead, because if I do it seems to really limit
>available computer selection?<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

-----------------

My personal solution to this same question was to buy a computer with
Vista on it (alas), but to make sure it could run XP if I chose to
install it later. Not all computers that come with Vista will run XP
due to lack of drivers, or lack of support from the vendor. None of
the ones I checked on from Sony or Toshiba for example, at the time I
was looking.

I ended up with an HP/Compaq laptop which HP assures me will run XP
and which they will support. Check with them about individual models
though - don't take that as a blanket statement.

Anyhow, I've had Vista a week or so. I spent hours figuring out how
to turn off all the Vista eye candy, indexing, Vista interface, etc.,
et al. As a result I now have a system that looks pretty much like my
old XP system and which I've been happy enough with thus far. I still
have XP in my back pocket though if things become untenable.

Good luck.

Bill

 

Vista, of course, but don't expect to use your 5-year old scanner or your
4-year old webcam, not that you couldn't, but have those drivers been
updated?


"mh64" <mh64@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0E052ADD-743A-4E58-9414-88780E9AE765@microsoft.com...<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> We are getting a new computer and generally only buy a new computer every
> 5-6
> years, so we take whatever OS comes on the computer at that time(currently
> using XP with no real issues). I keep seeing all the negatives & problems
> with Vista, is it really that bad for a non-technical user like myself?
> Should I be opting for XP instead, because if I do it seems to really
> limit
> available computer selection? <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

 

"Carey Frisch [MVP]" <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message
news:4F3D4EFE-5723-4C15-AFA3-EBA612371832@microsoft.com...<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> I've been using Windows Vista for well over a year now
> and have not encountered any significant issues.<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

No significant issues? How about answering some of my "insignificant issues"
on this forum then?

eg - completely random, unpredictable USB driver failures casuing repeated
catastrophic loss of computer use - even mouse fails! Vista unable to load
new hardware drivers etc?

eg - massive problems with drivers for sound cards so it is impossible to
use Skype on my Dimension 9200?

eg - perfectly good software and hardware not backwards compatible - ie
forced to throw out and replace a perfectly good HP printer, Adobe
Professional 6.0, Garmin 1000 simulator does not work, Symantec Winfax pro
does not work.

Vista not even compatible with Microsoft products - eg appalling interface
with Live One Care (which was a brilliant program on XP), Vista does not
work with my Microsoft mouse, Vista shuts down because of DEP whenever I try
to import a jpeg movie from my Microsoft PDA phone, Microsoft digital
fingerprint reader making Windows sidebar gadgets unusable because of the
red splodge over the gadget - and I could go on and on. I have repeatedly
sought solutions to these problems on this and other forums and no answers.
ANd then MVP claim there are no problems !!!! LOOOOOOOOL!!!!

 

mh64;597205 Wrote: <!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> We are getting a new computer and generally only buy a new computer
> every 5-6
> years, so we take whatever OS comes on the computer at that
> time(currently
> using XP with no real issues). I keep seeing all the negatives &
> problems
> with Vista, is it really that bad for a non-technical user like myself?
> Should I be opting for XP instead, because if I do it seems to really
> limit
> available computer selection?<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

You'll want to go with Vista.

Just be sure you get the fastest computer you can, and depending on
your budget, 2 - 4 GB memory.

Once you've confirmed 64-Bit driver availablity for all you devices,
you way even want to consider using Vista x64. Most newer software that
will work under XP will work ok under Vista x64


--
dzomlija

_____________________
Peter Alexander Dzomlija
-Do you hear, huh? The Alpha and The Omega? Death and Rebirth? And as
you die, so shall I be Reborn...-

-Download MP3 Media Properties Explorer: --http://www.phx.co.za-

- ASUS A8N32-SLI-Deluxe
- AMD Athlon 64 Dual-Core 4800+
- 4GB DDR400
- 128MB ASUS nVidia 6600
- Thermaltake Tai-Chi Chassis
- 1207GB Formatted Storage
- Vista Ultimate x64
- CodeGear Delphi 2007See my rig at:

 

What is so bad about a four year old scanner then? They are just as good as
a brand new one.
Same for webcams.
No significant technical progress (except they are cheaper).
So why make them obsolete?

Vista is a rip off - just forces users to shell out loads of dosh for
replacement hardware and software that has no significant advantage.

Would you throw away a car every three or four years? Of course not! But
Vista insists that everything older than three years is "obsolete"!!!!

Tell me, what can Office 2007 do that Office 2003 cannot do? Answer -
absolutely nothing to anybody who lives in the real world.



"Cameron Snyder" <dntbther@tellpacbell.net> wrote in message
news:e3oP1uCaIHA.220@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> Vista, of course, but don't expect to use your 5-year old scanner or your
> 4-year old webcam, not that you couldn't, but have those drivers been
> updated?
>
>
> "mh64" <mh64@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:0E052ADD-743A-4E58-9414-88780E9AE765@microsoft.com...<!--coloro:green--><span style="color:green <!--/coloro-->
>> We are getting a new computer and generally only buy a new computer every
>> 5-6
>> years, so we take whatever OS comes on the computer at that
>> time(currently
>> using XP with no real issues). I keep seeing all the negatives & problems
>> with Vista, is it really that bad for a non-technical user like myself?
>> Should I be opting for XP instead, because if I do it seems to really
>> limit
>> available computer selection?<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
> <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

 

mh64 wrote:<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> We are getting a new computer and generally only buy a new computer every 5-6
> years, so we take whatever OS comes on the computer at that time(currently
> using XP with no real issues). I keep seeing all the negatives & problems
> with Vista, is it really that bad for a non-technical user like myself?
> Should I be opting for XP instead, because if I do it seems to really limit
> available computer selection?<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

Wait a month or so if you can -- and make sure the Vista version comes
with SP1 updated (just released today). It is supposed to solve a lot of
the instability issues of Vista.

 

i like vista, but it does have its problems, thats why these forums
exist. i was happy with XP SP2, it was very stable and did not have
many issues with most hardware/software. however i felt the need to
learn about vista and the only way to do that is to live with it. if a
problem arises i don't mind spending time resolving it, but this can
drive some people insane when all they want to do is use the computer
for whatever. vista is good to look at and very intelligent when
plugging in periferal devices, but is very resource hungry and needs
tweaking to perform better. so in conclusion it much depends on your
temperament and whether you want to learn vista. decide between want
and need.


--
MIC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MIC's Profile:
View this thread:

 

On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:53:04 -0800, mh64
<mh64@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> We are getting a new computer and generally only buy a new computer every 5-6
> years, so we take whatever OS comes on the computer at that time(currently
> using XP with no real issues). I keep seeing all the negatives & problems
> with Vista, is it really that bad for a non-technical user like myself? <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->


Whenever anything new comes out, you hear about people having problems
with it. That's because those having problems are looking for help,
and are the most vocal. For example, if you're reading about problems
*here*, this where people come with their problems, not with their
successes. You get a very distorted view of what's going on in the
real world here; as someone once said, "hang around a transmission
shop and you will think that all cars have transmission problems."

Moreover, most problems, by far, that people report here have nothing
to do with defects in the software. They result from people's
ignorance, from bad or inadequate hardware, from old drivers, from
viruses, from spyware, and so on. And except for very rare situations,
they always get a fix for their problems, and in most cases, that fix
is a very simple one to implement.

My experience with Vista has been very positive, and I'm happy with
it. But be aware that there are differences between XP and Vista, and,
as with anything else new, learning to get accustomed to those
differences can take some time and be frustrating at first. Give
yourself time to learn and get accustomed to what's new.

<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> Should I be opting for XP instead, because if I do it seems to really limit
> available computer selection?<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->


If you were asking about upgrading an existing machine running XP, my
reply would be to go slowly and not rush into it. But to me it makes
no sense to get a new machine with yesterday's operating system. Yes,
get Vista, not XP.

Just make sure that the machine you get has adequate hardware for
Vista. In particular, most people should have at least 2GB of RAM, and
I wouldn't recommend getting less.


--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

 

The date and time was 2/5/2008 10:53 AM, and on a whim, mh64 pounded out
on the keyboard:
<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> We are getting a new computer and generally only buy a new computer every 5-6
> years, so we take whatever OS comes on the computer at that time(currently
> using XP with no real issues). I keep seeing all the negatives & problems
> with Vista, is it really that bad for a non-technical user like myself?
> Should I be opting for XP instead, because if I do it seems to really limit
> available computer selection?<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

Well, you can see the good and the bad by the replies. I would ask
yourself;

1. Is there anything Vista offers that I need?
2. Is there any hardware or software that I currently use that I will
have to purchase because it won't work in Vista? Can I afford the upgrades?


--
Terry R.

***Reply Note***
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

 

It's not Microsoft that is making the hardware obsolete, it is the hardware
manufacturers who do not want to write a Vista driver and would rather you
purchase a new piece of hardware.
--
Paul


"Rich T" wrote:
<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> What is so bad about a four year old scanner then? They are just as good as
> a brand new one.
> Same for webcams.
> No significant technical progress (except they are cheaper).
> So why make them obsolete?
>
> Vista is a rip off - just forces users to shell out loads of dosh for
> replacement hardware and software that has no significant advantage.
>
> Would you throw away a car every three or four years? Of course not! But
> Vista insists that everything older than three years is "obsolete"!!!!
>
> Tell me, what can Office 2007 do that Office 2003 cannot do? Answer -
> absolutely nothing to anybody who lives in the real world.
>
>
>
> "Cameron Snyder" <dntbther@tellpacbell.net> wrote in message
> news:e3oP1uCaIHA.220@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...<!--coloro:green--><span style="color:green <!--/coloro-->
> > Vista, of course, but don't expect to use your 5-year old scanner or your
> > 4-year old webcam, not that you couldn't, but have those drivers been
> > updated?
> >
> >
> > "mh64" <mh64@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:0E052ADD-743A-4E58-9414-88780E9AE765@microsoft.com...<!--coloro:darkred--><span style="color:darkred <!--/coloro-->
> >> We are getting a new computer and generally only buy a new computer every
> >> 5-6
> >> years, so we take whatever OS comes on the computer at that
> >> time(currently
> >> using XP with no real issues). I keep seeing all the negatives & problems
> >> with Vista, is it really that bad for a non-technical user like myself?
> >> Should I be opting for XP instead, because if I do it seems to really
> >> limit
> >> available computer selection?<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
> > <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
>
> <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

 

By the way Office 2003 works fine in Vista.
--
Paul


"Rich T" wrote:
<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> What is so bad about a four year old scanner then? They are just as good as
> a brand new one.
> Same for webcams.
> No significant technical progress (except they are cheaper).
> So why make them obsolete?
>
> Vista is a rip off - just forces users to shell out loads of dosh for
> replacement hardware and software that has no significant advantage.
>
> Would you throw away a car every three or four years? Of course not! But
> Vista insists that everything older than three years is "obsolete"!!!!
>
> Tell me, what can Office 2007 do that Office 2003 cannot do? Answer -
> absolutely nothing to anybody who lives in the real world.
>
>
>
> "Cameron Snyder" <dntbther@tellpacbell.net> wrote in message
> news:e3oP1uCaIHA.220@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...<!--coloro:green--><span style="color:green <!--/coloro-->
> > Vista, of course, but don't expect to use your 5-year old scanner or your
> > 4-year old webcam, not that you couldn't, but have those drivers been
> > updated?
> >
> >
> > "mh64" <mh64@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:0E052ADD-743A-4E58-9414-88780E9AE765@microsoft.com...<!--coloro:darkred--><span style="color:darkred <!--/coloro-->
> >> We are getting a new computer and generally only buy a new computer every
> >> 5-6
> >> years, so we take whatever OS comes on the computer at that
> >> time(currently
> >> using XP with no real issues). I keep seeing all the negatives & problems
> >> with Vista, is it really that bad for a non-technical user like myself?
> >> Should I be opting for XP instead, because if I do it seems to really
> >> limit
> >> available computer selection?<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
> > <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
>
> <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

 

"mh64" <mh64@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0E052ADD-743A-4E58-9414-88780E9AE765@microsoft.com...<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> We are getting a new computer and generally only buy a new computer every
> 5-6
> years, so we take whatever OS comes on the computer at that time(currently
> using XP with no real issues). I keep seeing all the negatives & problems
> with Vista, is it really that bad for a non-technical user like myself?
> Should I be opting for XP instead, because if I do it seems to really
> limit
> available computer selection?<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

Sure, get Vista if you want to buy almost all new hardware and software. See
how your boss likes that.

 

"Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
news:i8ehq3podlj84nfc67bgrhh3vicom785lh@4ax.com...<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:53:04 -0800, mh64
> <mh64@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
><!--coloro:green--><span style="color:green <!--/coloro-->
>> We are getting a new computer and generally only buy a new computer every
>> 5-6
>> years, so we take whatever OS comes on the computer at that
>> time(currently
>> using XP with no real issues). I keep seeing all the negatives & problems
>> with Vista, is it really that bad for a non-technical user like myself?<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
>
>
> Whenever anything new comes out, you hear about people having problems
> with it. That's because those having problems are looking for help,
> and are the most vocal. For example, if you're reading about problems
> *here*, this where people come with their problems, not with their
> successes. You get a very distorted view of what's going on in the
> real world here; as someone once said, "hang around a transmission
> shop and you will think that all cars have transmission problems."
>
> Moreover, most problems, by far, that people report here have nothing
> to do with defects in the software. They result from people's
> ignorance, from bad or inadequate hardware, from old drivers, from
> viruses, from spyware, and so on. And except for very rare situations,
> they always get a fix for their problems, and in most cases, that fix
> is a very simple one to implement.
>
> My experience with Vista has been very positive, and I'm happy with
> it. But be aware that there are differences between XP and Vista, and,
> as with anything else new, learning to get accustomed to those
> differences can take some time and be frustrating at first. Give
> yourself time to learn and get accustomed to what's new.
>
><!--coloro:green--><span style="color:green <!--/coloro-->
>> Should I be opting for XP instead, because if I do it seems to really
>> limit
>> available computer selection?<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
>
>
> If you were asking about upgrading an existing machine running XP, my
> reply would be to go slowly and not rush into it. But to me it makes
> no sense to get a new machine with yesterday's operating system. Yes,
> get Vista, not XP.
>
> Just make sure that the machine you get has adequate hardware for
> Vista. In particular, most people should have at least 2GB of RAM, and
> I wouldn't recommend getting less.
>
>
> --
> Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
> Please Reply to the Newsgroup<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

Yes, it makes real sense to go incrementally.

 

On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 20:30:18 +0100, "Rich T" <nobody@nobody.com> wrote:
<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
>
>"Carey Frisch [MVP]" <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message
>news:4F3D4EFE-5723-4C15-AFA3-EBA612371832@microsoft.com...<!--coloro:green--><span style="color:green <!--/coloro-->
>> I've been using Windows Vista for well over a year now
>> and have not encountered any significant issues.<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
>
>No significant issues? How about answering some of my "insignificant issues"
>on this forum then?
>
>eg - completely random, unpredictable USB driver failures casuing repeated
>catastrophic loss of computer use - even mouse fails! Vista unable to load
>new hardware drivers etc?
>
>eg - massive problems with drivers for sound cards so it is impossible to
>use Skype on my Dimension 9200?
>
>eg - perfectly good software and hardware not backwards compatible - ie
>forced to throw out and replace a perfectly good HP printer, Adobe
>Professional 6.0, Garmin 1000 simulator does not work, Symantec Winfax pro
>does not work.
>
>Vista not even compatible with Microsoft products - eg appalling interface
>with Live One Care (which was a brilliant program on XP), Vista does not
>work with my Microsoft mouse, Vista shuts down because of DEP whenever I try
>to import a jpeg movie from my Microsoft PDA phone, Microsoft digital
>fingerprint reader making Windows sidebar gadgets unusable because of the
>red splodge over the gadget - and I could go on and on. I have repeatedly
>sought solutions to these problems on this and other forums and no answers.
>ANd then MVP claim there are no problems !!!! LOOOOOOOOL!!!! <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

Read again.

He said that HE has not encountered significant issues, nor have I.
Vista isn't everything it's touted to be....yet. As I remember,
neither was XP at first. Any compatibility problems that I've
experienced have been cleared up by contacting the app's support
group.

It's a drag that you've had this bad experience. Hope it works out
better for you.
bk

 

On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:53:04 -0800, mh64
<mh64@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
>We are getting a new computer and generally only buy a new computer every 5-6
>years, so we take whatever OS comes on the computer at that time(currently
>using XP with no real issues). I keep seeing all the negatives & problems
>with Vista, is it really that bad for a non-technical user like myself?
>Should I be opting for XP instead, because if I do it seems to really limit
>available computer selection?<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

For a non-technical user, you should definitely go with XP unless you
intend to install zero apps and install zero peripherals after your
new PC arrives. Vista is plagued with compability problems, many of
which still exist even with SP1.

 

The date and time was 2/5/2008 12:35 PM, and on a whim, Bobby Knight
pounded out on the keyboard:
<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 20:30:18 +0100, "Rich T" <nobody@nobody.com> wrote:
> <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro--><!--coloro:green--><span style="color:green <!--/coloro-->
>> He said that HE has not encountered significant issues, nor have I.
>> Vista isn't everything it's touted to be....yet. As I remember,
>> neither was XP at first. <!--colorc--><!--/colorc--><!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->


When people use that as an excuse for Vista, it doesn't hold water. If
you remember correctly, most users moved from Win9x to XP (I'll leave Me
out of it). Those who were using W2K didn't have the extreme
incompatibility issues that plagued those moving from XP to Vista. In
fact, XP was MORE compatible than W2K. XP was a major rewrite of the OS
from Win9x. The same cannot be said about XP to Vista.

--
Terry R.

***Reply Note***
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.