Vista + W7 vs. XP Pro

[joecass]

Is it just me, or does anyone else think that both Vista and Windows 7 suck compared to WinXP Pro SP3 ?
Been using XP Pro for years without any problems..... and before that, Win ME (that everyone hates) without a hitch.
Recently, out of curiosity from screwing around with my nephew's Vista laptop, I decided to put Vista on my old desktop,
and Win 7 Ultimate on my older laptop. For my money, both Vista & Win 7 ( and IE8, I might add) are annoying
compared to using plain old WinXP Pro SP3. Annoying.... and much slower I might add......

Vista looks nice, and Win 7 seems to be a fair upgrade, but a lot of things I'm used to...... are missing. It took
me forever to get my W7 desktop looking the way I like it, and I'm still having a problem figuring out how to install
Hotmail as the default W7 email program. Seems like a lot of nonsense going on.
On my old XP desktop, I could open as many Internet Exporer pages as I wanted without interfering with each other.
Now IE8 tells me what to do, with these stupid "tabs" that automatically close when they should stay open.

Putting Vista SP2 on my older XP desktop..... slowed it down to a crawl...... programs that worked fine on XP, just
moved to cyberspace somewhere, or seem to be on vacation.
I'm talking about fresh O.S. installs here, 32 bit, not upgrades......
I remember when Win 7 first came out, people were raving about it, I can't say I agree with that sentiment....

[freebird73717]

I've never been a big fan of vista. Now I do like win 7. Put it on my wife's laptop. Got it for free from the University she was going to school at.

I have XP on my main desktop and it does everything I want and need. I see no need to upgrade. However when I do eventually build a new system I will purchase win7 home premium to put on it. To me it's not worth an upgrade from xp on a system that is working just fine but it is worth it for a new computer build.

[redwudz]

I would take W7 over XP Pro any day. It's much more stable than XP. I do agree about them really messing up with IE8, IMO. I managed to remove most of it so it still resembles earlier versions. I also found a method to restore the 'Quick Launch' that MS deleted.

I wouldn't advise Vista or W7 on a older computer as it will run slow. My newer laptop runs W7/64 and the 64 bit part doesn't work with a lot of older programs. I would have rather had W7/32. It does run plenty fast though.

One place for information about fixing MS's 'mistakes' is: http://www.annoyances.org/exec/forum/win7

[jagabo]

Disable the Aero interface to speed things up on computers with slow graphics cards.

[bmo]

A lot of people say that XP Pro is "faster" than Win7 and Vista, but the thing is, which should be obvious to anyone who can do basic arithmetic, is it was engineered for computer hardware from 9(!) years ago. That's multiple lifetimes in the computer world. Of course it's going to run fast or faster on older and in some cases modern hardware than say, Vista or even Win7. The requirements for it aren't high by today's standard at all because it was built for decade old hardware. Imagine trying to to fit a Ford model T engine in a modern day model. Would it run? Sure. Would it run great and as fast as it did in the old model? Of course not.

Admittedly Win7 and Vista aren't for everyone, but it all comes down to what you're most productive with. I started using computers with Windows 3.11, moved on to 98, XP, Vista, and now use Win7. I've dabbled with multiple linux distros and even tried installing OS X on one of the computers I've built. I remember there was a time when I had the same sentiments as the OP in regards to upgrading to a new OS. I was using Win98 at the time, and my cousins asked why I wasn't using XP. I gave many of the same reasons the OP did for not switching, but it really came down to laziness. I didn't want to "have" to relearn how to do something I was so used to with Win98, but I learned over time through building my own computers that you really have to learn to adapt because the technology isn't going to wait for you. Sure I do have some gripes about Win7, but everything has a learning curve. You just have to hunker down and put in the time to learn all the nuances. However, all the stability and security improvements are worth the time spent learning the system and the supposed performance drop.

As redwudz mentioned, Win7 and even Vista from my experience, are way more stable than XP ever was. I'll use XP if I absolutely have to (i.e. pc hw > 5yrs old), but if I had my choice I'd be running Win7 over anything else. Runs smooth as butter on my overclocked i7 and I can get more work done. Anyway, end of rant. To the OP, give Win7 some time and decent hardware to stretch its legs, and I guarantee you you'll like it.

sidenote: switch to Firefox or Chrome

[usually_quiet]

I have the standard Windows XP SP3 on my 2001 Dell PC, and while I thought XP was still OK, the PC was really showing its age. I knew the day when XP is no longer be supported would come and I had heard the new Windows 7 Media Center was great, so when I built a new system last year I bought Vista Home Premium with a Windows 7 upgrade coupon.

Some things about Vista and Windows 7 Home Premium were different enough to cause a small amount of frustration while I was getting used to them, but neither sucks as far as I am concerned. My only real gripe is not being able to use my trusty old scanner and drawing tablet with my new PC because the XP drivers and the provided software don't work for Windows 7 or Vista. Only a couple of other programs won't run under windows 7, although I can use them with Vista. Another program actually works better in compatibility mode than it did under XP after SP3 arrived. The improved Paint and Word Pad programs are nice. I use the sticky notes quite a bit. Media Center has so far lived up to my expectations.

[bendixG15]

If your Hardware and software are happy with XP, then stay with it and be happy too.

Only reason to change any software is because the new software will do things the old software can't.

(I run XP on some machines and W7 on others)

[themaster1]

I take Xp any day, just use the bricopacks to have the Vista layout and it's a done deal, a good free anti virus like Avira and you're in heaven.I'd avoid Sp3 though, i stick with the sp2

[luigi2000]

It's just you (and few others on this site apparently) who are satisfied with a circa 2002 OS. Exec through app level data transfer speeds are much faster in Win7. This allows faster playout of media files. The integrated services are much more efficient. The shell (explorer.exe) is much more stable.

The first release of Vista was a resource hog that prefetched (slowly and unnecessarily) apps into the system memory. Vista SP1 is much better behaved. Win7 has an even smaller initial memory footprint.

If you are getting the job done with Xp/2000/98, then stay with what you've got. But don't be misled--Win7 is by far the best OS available. One caveat: if you don't have a multicore processor, then you can't play with the big boys.

Unsupported legacy hardware can run in 32-bit Win7 using 32-bit Vista drivers.

[Noahtuck]

@ luigi2000
Well, i must admit.... i also have somewhat of an attachment to XP Pro as i seemed to have the least amount of issues with it out of every windows version since Windows 95.

But i did chuckle a bit when i read

One caveat: if you don't have a multicore processor, then you can't play with the big boys.

A true statement but it still made me chuckle

But one thing i did notice, and i am pretty sure it is a typo, but your specs are listed as, "Pentium14x200mhz"
I don't think in the 200mhz days they even dreamed of a dual core let alone a 4 core

So i am guessing you have a 2.0ghz (2000mhz) quad core

But one really nice feature i like about W7 (which i stated in a recent thread) is the ability to download and install Windows XP Pro virtual machine and run Windows XP from your desktop under W7!!!


And as redwudz stated,
Installing W7 on an "older" machine or laptop is not really a good way to compare a modern OS to a OS that is several (9?) years old.....

That would be like comparing the Wright Brothers first flight in 1903 to the first moon landing in 1969.....

And i remember this one monkey that i knew back in the day, he used to say, they will never break the 700mhz barrier unless they go to xray because nothing can go faster than xray.....

Don't ask me, because even though at the time 550mhz was the fastest CPU, i still looked at him and asked him exactly how many different drugs he was on at the time because he sounded like a clueless stoned monkey!!
LOL!!

[El Heggunte]

Speaking for myself only:

--- I don't like resource-consuming "eye-candies" == Luna in XP, Aero in Vista and Se7en ;

--- The Se7en "libraries" in Windows Explorer are annoying ;

--- Se7en is just a glorified Vista

[Jim44]

I'd avoid Sp3 though, i stick with the sp2

That's not really good advice, since Microsoft has stopped supporting XP SP2. No more security updates/patches/etc. They are still supporting SP3, so if you're determined to stay 2 OSes behind (that's not a knock, we're still on XP Pro at work), at least use the version that's still supported and updated.

[bendixG15]

Went to a big hospital today for a checkup.

They are running XPPro on their Dells with LCD monitors.

[ranchhand]

I like them both (no, I am not a politician running for office ) and I am running W7/64 Ultra. I have noticed that I have far more options in Security and Permissions in Ultra than Home. If I were to purchase another version I would go Ultra for sure.

[RLT69]

Modern Operating System? Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain

For those who don't know:

Windows 2000 is NT 5.0
Windows XP is NT 5.1
Windows Vista is NT 6.0
Windows 7 is NT 6.1

NT refers to the internal designation of the Operating System. Windows 2000 was going to called NT 5 but Microsoft decided on a different naming strategy but internally it was referenced by NT number.

Windows XP and Windows 7 were upgrades to their predecessors.

Windows Vista is based on the Windows Server 2003 code base. Windows Server 2003 was released in 2003. Windows 7 is based on 7 year old technology.

So the phrase "modern operating system" is meaningless. So is bashing someone who is using 9 technology by someone who is using 7 year old technology.

Kids today

[budz]

I got XP Pro on most of my pc's but my AMD 630 Propus Quad system has a OEM W7 home which I'm satisfied with.

[SatStorm]

For encoding / filtering / video work in general / etc, win XP remains slightly faster.
Win7 are stable but for our hobby / Job (video processing), IMO it gives nothing.

There is an issue with some video editors that use lot's of RAM for buffering or whatever. So if you are into Adobe Premiere and so, and 4GB are not enough, there might be a need to move on Win7. For example, I tried Adobe Premiere Elements 8 with 4 GB or RAM on my XP machine ( with a 4 core CPU) and various messages poped up, regarding the amount of the memory on my machine.
Of course, I switched to Womble DVD Wizard and I did my job, but that may not be a solution for anyone.

Overall I don't suggest OS upgrade yet. And especially on people that doesn't have any money to spear.

IMO, don't upgrade if not neccessary. Spent the money on hardware and the correct software. And donate once in a while.

[lingyi]

Agree with using Vista and Win7 on new PCs. I still use XP in my older PCs, 1 Ghz laptop and 2.4 Ghz Duron.

I just switched my main PC (Quad Core Q6700 with 8GB RAM) from Vista to Win7 and finding Win 7 to be snappier. I've also installed it on an older P4 just to see how it does.

If nothing else, Vista and Win7 have ReadyBoost which really makes a difference in program loading. I have a 8GB Flashdrive (was 4GB on my Vista PC) and have Excel opening in <1 sec, haven't tried Photoshop yet, but am sure it will show a very nice boost too. When I was runing Vista, it would take <3 sec. and Photoshop CS4 went from about 1:30 min loading to <30 sec with ReadyBoost.

I have a 4GB SD for my P4 with 2GB RAM and am sure it will boost the speed nicely there too.

As for compatibility, still playing around with things, but if you can use XP Mode in Win7, it might solve some of the hardware compatibility problems. I'm able to get my Epson 900 recognized in XP Mode because of the USB support in the new Virtual PC for Win7.

I'm in agreement that you shouldn't fix it if it aint' broke (I held out with Win98 until Vista!), but actually believe Microsoft actually got it right with Win7 (liked Vista, but too much handholding with the UAC).