MithraPride

News story:

http://www.informationweek.com/news/sho ... =204203975

"Windows XP Significantly Outperforms Vista, Tests Show
Windows XP trounced Windows Vista in all tests, regardless of the versions used or the amount of memory running on the computer, says Devil Mountain Software." -InformationWeek.

I'm so glad I didn't waste money to upgrade.

Hehehehehe And people think I'm nuts when I tell'em newer isn't always better. I ran 98 until XP was out then ran 2k until they stopped supporting it. And only then did I even switch to XP.

I kind of thought that was obvious.

Really when you think about it, XP will always out perform Vista. Why? The same reason why OS9 > OSX.

Its the whole Graphical interface Vista uses. That, and Vista is newer (Thus, buggier).

It'll be awhile before we see XP falling behind. That'll be when 8 GBs of Ram becomes the norm. And that won't be until sometime in 2012 or so. Because once we hit that limit of 4GB on x32 systems, we'll be forced to go to x64 on XP or Vista x64.

The only reason why you should upgrade to Vista is for Direct X10... and if you're a nutcase who wants the best in graphics. Otherwise, stick with XP until you're pretty much forced to go to x64 bit systems. And by that time, Vista should be stable.

Yeah it's never a good idea to get a Microsoft product when it's new

Think I used Win98 until 2002/2003

New Operating Systems are generally pretty buggy and not truly ripe for widespread use for at least 5 years after their initial release. Besides, this is Microsoft. If they can screw up, they will!

The real problem with Vista is that a lot of new systems (especially laptops) don't support XP. They have drivers that are vista-only.

It's not just the bugs that make Vista so bad right now. Everyone that ran out and upgraded from XP when it came out, then found that everything runs slower didn't realize that all their programs are based on and written for XP. Vista is a different system, yes like other Windows versions, it is backward compatable, but have any of you run an old WIN95 game on your XP system? It takes forever to finally get started and then doesn't necessairily run as best as it could. Why? It's coded for 95.

Nothing has been coded to work with Vista yet aside from the drivers that come with new computers that have Vista installed. Give it a year, software companies will partner with Microsoft like they did when XP came out 5 or 6 years ago and begin writing everything to take advantage of Vista's strengths. (Not that I know what they are, I've only seen the system once and that was on my boss's new laptop when she was trying to figure out how to download music lol)

@Okuzza It's only been 5 or 6 years since XP was released, if it takes them that long to finally get Vista working properly and enough base programs to make it worthwhile to upgrade, something is seriously wrong at Microsoft. Vista came out in January this year. I give it til the middle of next year before everything you see will be properly coded for Vista. That gives the software companies and computer companies and hardware companies to have a good 18 months to get things out of development and into full production.

*sigh* at misinformation..

Been running Vista Ultimate 64 bit for 4 months now.

There is Zero noticable gameplay difference between XP and Vista on my system.
It has not crashed a single time.
It has far better memory management then XP ever did.
I can tab between windows far faster and with fewer application crashes then in XP.
It handles media Center activities better
I have not encountered a single bug in every day use the entire time. (Every day use for me includes; gaming, hosting a webserver, hosting a game server, streaming hd content wirelessly, and general internet browsing) Every piece of software I own, Works just fine in Vista. the compatibility issues are being blown way out of proportion and most of it is idiot user not software. I have yet to find anything other then Antivirus software that was 2 years old in my collection that does not work.

Specs:
Core2Duo E6300
4Gb DDR2
8800GTS 640mb
640gb Raid Array SATA hdd
SB X-fi plat.

does XP outperform in synthetic benches? yes..but who gives a flying crap about then if you cannot actually notice the performance difference? I for one do not.
Simply put Vista like XP when it came out is not made for lower tier machines. Period. However 90% of the hate directed at it, just like 90% of the hate directed at XP when it first came out is Misguided at best, flat false at worst. Home editon like all home editions blows.

Vista, like all MS OSs was not designed for today's machines, but tomorrows.

Tivia wrote:Core2Duo E6300
4Gb DDR2
8800GTS 640mb
640gb Raid Array SATA hdd
SB X-fi plat.

The test used 1 and 2 Gb machines, like most of out here do.

From the start Vista was the most stable OS release the big M ever did. But it was also the most resource intensive OS yet, just like every MS OS before it.

I stuck with DOS for a looong time due to this same issue. Perhaps on my next upgrade I will go to Vista.

Yep, as I said you have to have a machine for it. Just like XP, just like 98 etc etc.

However do keep in mind 1 thing.

The cost of 4gigs of ram today, is far cheaper then 1gig when XP hit.

Or for the average comparison of what you need minimum to have a good experience.

The cost of 2gigs today is Way under what 512mbs cost when XP came out.

I think the mistake people make is they look at the amount of ram Vista uses and they panic. Lets be honest though, If you look at what it cost then, vs now Vista is one of the most Lean OS's ever produced by MS. Simple formula of $/MB.

Regretfully the major problem is the large OEM's are still sheering customers out of $200 for a 2gb memory upgrade. When the average consumer can buy 2gb of memory for under $100.

Most people's machines are still fine though. Who the hell wants to buy a completely new machine with top dollar parts just so they can use the latest OS? That's just another bs way Microsoft is using us to spend tons of dollars on a shitty OS.

Not really the RAM but the Dual-Core CPU that's pricey. People upgrade machines for games, not for Operating Systems.

I used DOS until games started turning into Windows Only

Base Dual core AMD
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6819103222
$50

Base Dual Core Intel
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6819115031
$129

Both are vastly faster then the average single core. Not really certain what you mean by the cost of a Dual core being too high. If you have a fairly competant gaming machine then chances are it will run Vista just fine. For the record, Vista does a better job of unloading it's resources when playing any full screen game. I have an LCD display of system resources and Most of my games that used to tack on another 400megs on XP, only tack on 100 in Vista because unlike XP, Vista unloads about 300 megs when an application takes over (Hence the better memory management).

Now if you are running on a bare minimum requirements to game? Then sure you are probably going to have problems. Vista was not made for machines that just "Scrape" by. However given you can build an extremely nice gaming rig for under $700 now that will run nearly any modern game with at least medium settings plus Vista without issue, It might be time to start bugging santa or of you no longer have santa, pinching the pennies like I do. Lets be honest here, if your machine is currently incapable of running Vista and you are a gamer. Chances are you are long overdue for an upgrade unless you just are not buying any new games. If you are buying new games though, Vista is not pushing you to upgrade, the games are. Vista is just something you put on to the new gaming rig to enhance the experience.

I remember running the Vana'diel Bench in both XP and Vista and getting about 5000-6000 in XP and 3000 or so in Vista. Of course, the bench is old and might not be the best judge, but I remember getting a bit more lag running through some areas of Windurst the small amount I played around in Vista. This was months ago though so I don't know if SE has done any upgrades.

I was always a bit disappointed by this, and haven't went back to Vista since, and most of my other games (Orange Box, World of Warcraft, F.E.A.R.) had pretty much the same FPS, maybe 1% difference higher or lower. Maybe I was just seeing things though. I'm not really feeling up to wiping my HDD and reinstalling/updating FFXI to test it in Vista again for some time.

Also, specs. My computer SHOULDN'T have any problems in Vista. I shouldn't need a GeForce 8800Ultra and 4+GB of RAM to play effing FFXI.

AMD Athlon64 X2 4600+ (2.4Ghz)
2GB DDR2 RAM
Nvidia GeForce 7600GS (Will upgrade... at some point, probably to a 7900GS at the lowest and a Radeon HD 3000 series or GeForce 8800GT if I can find one)

My how prices have dropped, I upgraded my machine last xmas I think (or was it the one before)... £21 cheapest AMD dual-core and £41 cheapest Intel dual-core

I have a 2.21GHz AMD Athlon with 1GB RAM and a GeForce 7600 GT.

All the games I have run fine on this machine

Well in other news

It took me a tad over a year to pull it off, but i successfully Killed a PS3.

Yep as of a hour ago Sony issued me an RMA because I am l33t like that.
On the bright side, I am out of the 1 year warranty and they are fixing it anyhow which is pretty cool.

Sadly, I just bought a new game Boo I say..Booo

Anyhow I figured the sony hate club would enjoy this.

As someone who is on their third 360 in less than a year I can honestly say I hate you.

I wish I had it as bad as you, Tiv.

RMA? What did you do to it?

Still on my first 360 in little over a year

Sugami wrote:RMA? What did you do to it?

Still on my first 360 in little over a year

First one gave the RROD after installing an update (Oddly enough, the day after my Maat victory) and the second one's DVD drive quit two days before Mass Effect and WotG released (Glares at Maat).

So clearly what I did, Sug, is go 1/1 on Maat which has clearly pissed him off.

Keavy wrote:

Sugami wrote:RMA? What did you do to it?

So clearly what I did, Sug, is go 1/1 on Maat which has clearly pissed him off.

Which proves that Maat >>> Chairman Bill.

I was asking what Tivia did to the PS3 but okay

So, going by the properties of Maat...

Having beaten RDM Maatt. My PC's motherboard should explode. My Wii's remote should hit the TV and (sp)richolete into my monitor. My PS3 and my sister's Xbox 360 will sneak out on day, and I'll find the Xbox's Disk Drive stuck and trapped in the PS3'd Disk Drive by some miracousl means.

And also, my PS3 will catch the 360's aids. So within a few months, both systems will explode.

Thats my theory...

Fiye wrote:So, going by the properties of Maat...

Having beaten RDM Maatt. My PC's motherboard should explode. My Wii's remote should hit the TV and (sp)richolete into my monitor. My PS3 and my sister's Xbox 360 will sneak out on day, and I'll find the Xbox's Disk Drive stuck and trapped in the PS3'd Disk Drive by some miracousl means.

And also, my PS3 will catch the 360's aids. So within a few months, both systems will explode.

Thats my theory...

You lost to Maat before you won. I won on my first go and I didn't take it seriously.

THAT is what pissed him off.

Well

I was playing a game, and suddenly I found myself enjoying it quite a bit. Then the game froze up, had to hard power it down and it never would boot up again.

Clearly the fault is mine. I made the mistake of enjoying a game.

Tivia wrote: Clearly the fault is mine. I made the mistake of enjoying a game.

By god we can't be having that now can we?

Clearly the mistake you made was lining Mr. Sony's pockets with money

But... I beat WHM Maat on my first try... and RDM Maat in less than 10 tries. HELL MUST BE COMING TO ME SOON!

I've been enjoying my PS3 (Though, a little less than a force feedback cock piece) quite well and it hasn't asploded. Though, the controller did decide to die for a minute.

And my Wifi on it sucks on CoD4 sometimes.

Well all is not bad I suppose.

So Sony shipped me a box via UPS 3 day select. It arrived last Friday as expected.

Said box came with a series of instructions (demands) of what must be in the box for them to process my RMA.
1) The Ps3 (duh)
2) The power cord (erm...ok I have 50 of those so no big deal)
3) A Itemized proof of purchase (yea..you see I had the unit over a year and my gamestop upgraded their system. So all I had was a Generic purchase showing a game stop purchase in the amount of $$$$, I figured they would call me and give me some static about this)
4) The Video connector (yea about that, I tossed it a year ago because I have high quality monster cables, and like hell I am sending you those. so I opted to send nothing and Expected a phone call about it as they state they will call if any problems)
5) Usb charger (anal)
6) Controller (bleh fine)

So I box up everything I have and ship it expecting to get a call sometime around the first of the years griping at the lack of certain items. They provided me with an Overnight insured shipping label to return so that was pretty decent. I shipped it Monday and forgot about it. So Wednesday I get an email from Sony and opened it up. Contents of email are effectively "We have processed your RMA and have shipped a new PS3 to you, the tracking number is blah blah blah". Cool..

Wait...what? No argument? well damn that is nice. No argument, no delays, and they told me 10 to 14 business days and turned it around in one, And they are sending me a new one with a new warranty not a refurb. How sweet is that? So Net result is I was out of warranty, and missing key things they wanted. I got free shipping, no hassle and a brand new ps3 with another year warranty, and all under 2 weeks total turn around from the first phonecall. I am one happy camper right now.

PS3 have like the lowest breakdown percentage of any console with about 3 out of 1000 breaking down.

Yea it is pretty solid.

On to something else, Interesting note about the Wii. I have found that mine overheats frequently, or at least it did. It would do this even when I powered it off with the remote leaving it essentially "suspended" as I could never power it back up with the remote. I would have to pull the power cord to reset it. This was highly irritating to me to say the least. So on a whim I bought a usb powered fan/Led base for the wii and left the fan running. Had that now a couple of months and it works perfectly now. Can turn the wii on and off with the remote without issue. So for anyone who has a wii and has that particular issue, just get you a base fan.

Got Assassin's Creed a few days ago..the 26th to be exact. I cannot put this game down. It is really really good. If you own a PS3 or a 360, I highly suggest you buy it. I got it at best buy on sale for $37, and that so far was the best thing I bought for myself this year, especially since all the other PS3 games are $59. As an addendum Mario Galaxy is pretty good as well.

Bought the Simpsons movie since everyone hyped it as being really good. I have to admit I am a little disappointed. It was decent, but fell far short of the hype. I would say I am glad I did not waste $20 going to the theatre to watch it...but I wasted $20 buying it so..yea. This one I knew I should have rented and I did not..eh oh well.