Time to buy a new laptop, need more memory and room for Photoshop and music projects. It's been several months since the subject has come up. At this point in time you can purchase a new computer with either OS.

Bottom line, is there any real advantage of Vista over XP, enough to warrent the time, cost, and hassel of replacing software programs, driver support problems, etc. I know some of you guys have gone through the process, any feedback appreciated.

Glenn

For $100 you can buy a 120gb hard drive. Basically, storage and speed are the game. Just a thought. I have no idea about Vista.

Vista is a mixed bag right now in my opinion. It has a lack of driver support at present and it's got a lot of bugs. Although the first Service Pack RC (release candidate) has been released recently and hopefully it will take care of many of the bugs and also add a lot of additional driver support to the mix.

It's your call Glenn. XP is a relatively stable and solid OS with tons of driver support. If you go with XP or Vista make sure you get a laptop with a minimum of 2GB of RAM in my opinion though. 3GB would be better yet especially since you're running Photoshop.

Also, if you are doing music applications you should at least consider upgrading the Hard Drive at some point to a 7200 RPM model. Hitachi makes a blistering fast 7200 RPM 2.5" HD. Seagate also makes a great 7200 RPM 2.5" drive. If you could buy a laptop with a 7200 RPM HD already installed that would be better yet.

Happy shopping!

Best,
Mike

Glenn:

Lots of discussion on XP vs. Vista. Here's one article you can read, there are many that tackle the same discussion:
Vista vs. XP

I will tell you this I upgraded to Vista on my Dell Laptop in Janauary of 2007. Since I work in IT I wanted to have some familiarity with Vista. By May of 2007 I was disgusted with the lack of a driver for a HP Laser color printer I purchased in January. Short story is I ordered another hard drive for my laptop then reinstalled XP on the new drive. Once in a while I swap in the Vista drive but I'm pretty much just using the drive with XP. It also doesn't appear that major corporate clients are moving to Vista. In some circles talk is that Vista is another Windoze ME, but of course that's just talk. IMHO if I were buying a computer today, I'd order it with XP.

I agree with Mike get a minimum of 2 Gig RAM

[This message has been edited by Stephenm52 (edited 12-29-2007).]

Hi Glenn
Vista SP1 is out in Beta form, (Final release early next year according to Microsoft) and general feedback is that while it tidies a few things up, it does virtually nothing for driver/software support.
Also out in Beta form is XP SP3, (Expected after Vista SP1) and the feedback from this, is that it adds a lot of features that are contained in Vista, but more importantly gives on average a 10% performance boost.
Personally I would stick with XP, (Particularly if you have older hardware/software) and follow the suggestions for hardware in the previous posts.
Hope this helps

Bill

Wow, that's a surprise. I thought XP was history for MS.

I've been using Vista for a year on a new computer and it is so much more compelling and functional than XP. I think it is much more stable than windows XP. I will say it is a memory and CPU hog, but if you are buying a new computer you can buy the resources you need to really give Vista a performance boost. I run a Dual Core 2.4 ghz cpu with 2 gig of ram. I overclock the CPU to 3.11 ghz and Vista screams.

The search tool on the start menu is amazing. Just type in a command, program, file, etc. and Vista finds it in seconds.

The list goes on and on, but I've come to really love it.

And most of the SP1 patches have already been made available to windows update users. There have been MANY (65) fixes and performance enhancements to Vista. some have boosted file transfer performance up to 35%.

I would not recommend upgrading a computer with Vista nor do I recommend the 64bit version. Do a clean install or a new purchase with the 32bit Vista and you should have a great experience.


------------------
Al Giordano
http://www.arrangerworld.com


Tyros 2, Yamaha P-250, Korg Triton Extreme 76, Roland VK8-M, DW Collectors Series Drums, Roland SPD-S.

Listen to Al he's got stock in Microsoft. lol, just kidding...

If you get a new laptop Glenn I would assume that the OS (either Vista or XP) will already be installed on it. But if someone was considering an upgrade from XP to Vista I wouldn't recommend it either. It would be much better and less hassle and trouble to do a clean install.

Okay here we go... Where to begin? Vista arrived in stores months late, forced untold thousands of users to upgrade their hardware, made mincemeat of software and drivers that worked perfectly well in XP, ended up lacking many of the bold-faced features we'd been promised, and came saddled with new and annoying set of video DRM schemes. At least Vista now boasts an option for downgrading back to XP.

Daily Techno-Babble offers a breathless "three reasons why Windows Vista is sinking like a rock," and while the story has a point, I don't really think that "limits on how Vista can be used under virtualization" is really the thing about Vista that is scaring away that many would-be users, nor are Microsoft's DRM provisions on high-definition video much of a big deal yet, as few users care about high-def on their PC right now. Don't get me wrong: I think all of these are factors that make Vista a poor OS, but they aren't the primary reason that it's "sinking like a rock."

Given that Vista sales seem lackluster at best, what's the hang-up? I think it's something far more simple than the reasons that DTB offers up.

So what's turning people off of Vista? Here's my take, in order of importance:

1) Price. There's no way around this one. Upgrading to Vista doesn't just mean spending up to $400 on software, but also cash on RAM and video card upgrades, or buying a new PC altogether. If Vista was a $100 upgrade that anyone could use, it'd be a top seller, I'm sure.

(If you get a laptop or desktop with Vista already installed it is more cost effective you realize of course.)

2) Nothing new to see here. Love the visual style, but does photo tagging and 3-D window flipping really merit an upgrade?

3) It's annoying. I don't know any Vista user who hasn't turned off User Account Control, which nags you with an "Are you sure????" prompt every time you try to do anything beyond run the calculator. Yet UAC is the linchpin of Vista's vaunted new security system. Without it, it's really no different than XP.

4) Tons of stuff is incompatible with Vista. An acquaintance of mine got a new PC with Vista preinstalled. Neither her scanner nor her printer had Vista drivers ready. Both peripherals cost several hundred bucks, and now they're essentially paperweights (though the printer, at some unforseeable time in the future, may work again). Lots of software won't run on Vista, either, but it's the hardware incompatibilities that are daunting. (Update: Looks like the scanner driver's finally ready.) I guess no pay dirt for Stephen52's printer yet though.


5) It's confusing. Everything that XP could do, Vista can do... only it's buried under a different menu and it has a new name. While average users probably never use many of these settings, power users have found themselves starting from scratch to relearn Windows.

6) It's busted. Try connecting to a printer on your network that's hooked up to an XP machine. Or try downloading a file with a third-party application and then accessing it via another PC on the network. I won't go into a list of the endless bugs and flaws with the design of Vista, because I don't really have to... they are already well known. Perhaps the service pack will indeed exterminate a host of those very same bugs and flaws although there is no definitive word yet if it has.

But if you feel daring Glenn then go for it. Not everybody is having major problems with Vista. Take Al for instance..

Best,
Mike

PS: Material was used in quoting from Worst Tech products of 2007 including Yahoo Tech and Daily Techno-Babble.com >> You are now free to move about the country...

Happy New Year to all!

I bought a laptop for my daughter with vista preloaded last year.

I found the answer http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=904 0318

About downgrading I mean.

Xp works so well compared to its predecessors I keep thinking it wasn't broke so why did they try and fix it. Yeah I know money.



[This message has been edited by mikeathome1 (edited 12-29-2007).]

Music Card/Driver/Chipset compatability is a delicate thing without putting a brand new OS in the mix - I wouldn't touch Vista for at least another year.

Thing is - I wasn't aware you had a choice.

If you're buying a NEW machine, I understood they ALL came with Vista and XP is now not able to be "bought" anywhere.
(Although you guys say you can "downgrade" now, so...)


Al, that search function I already have on my XP machine.

It does the same thing as your Start menu search tool (if I understand you correctly)

I agree - it let's you find ANYTHING in seconds, and I use it CONSTANTLY.

But if it's already on XP, why upgrade to Vista????

Lots of guys in my area went with vista, then switched back to XP-Pro because of the hangups and headaches. I've been using XP Pro for a little over a year, it's very stable, and it's compatible with all my ME programs.

Good Luck,

Gary

------------------
Travlin' Easy

My friends in the Computer business are saying that MS decided to complete the SP3 Pack for XP because of the general malaise of the public in buying Vista...or to put it more down-to-earth..Vista is going to be a thorn in MS's side for a long time and may go the same way as other models (already mentioned here).
cheers


------------------
Eddie from Rotherham
Skype:eddiefromrotherham
www.yamahakeyboards.info

Stay with XP. Even if you buy a new computer with new hardware, XP will use it better, you will have a blazing fast PC compared to Vista. Take RAM usage for example: just booting the OS and going to task manager you will see a 250MB RAM usage on XP and 800MB Ram usage on Vista. Now even if you have 2GB there's plenty of RAM wasted only to give you eye-candy effects and slowing down CPU.

Also, hardware-assisted audio from Vista is compromised, without special drivers, cards like Creative X-Fi or Audigy can't use the special hardware features under Vista.

Well I'm certainly not going to defend Vista to anyone. I'm just offering my opinion with my experience with it. It is the OS of the future. If you are not comfortable with new technology and need the comfort level of proven mature technology stay with XP. I'm a technologist and my company is migrating all 60,000 desktops to Vista and I need to get comfortable with the OS.

My home needs are actually more more rigid than my business needs. I have in fact tweaked the crap out of Vista to the point where it is Fast, Reliable, and efficient. In many respects, it is more secure than XP, does networking and Internet much better, and does seem to be more robust in some areas than XP. Please keep in mind, I have already upgraded my computer to the Vista Service Pack 1 updates which address many performance and compatibility issues.

Is Vista perfect, No way. Microsoft has done some really stupid things with this OS. But long term, Vista is poised to be one heck of an Operating System.

As far as the search goes, take a look at the following article to explain the differences between search on XP and Vista. Bottom line is there is a new search engine in Vista which indexes your entire hard disk much like Google Desktop. As a matter of fact, Google challenged MS to remove this feature as it infringes on their product/patent/technology.
http://www.bentuser.com/article.aspx?ID=332&page=1

In closing I will say that I am not the type of person who is easily influenced by opinions. I am the type of person who likes to try things out for myself and learn first hand the pro's / Con's regarding new products.

When all is tallied up; both pro's/con's, I give Vista a firm Thumbs Up and I am actually quite confused by folks that are having difficulty with it. It's probably attributed to a rigid mindset that keeps thinking that Vista is XP and it is not. It's an entirely new OS with new paridigms. Just keep an open mind and learn to embrace new technology and you will have a better time evaluating/using Vista.




------------------
Al Giordano http://www.arrangerworld.com


Tyros 2, Yamaha P-250, Korg Triton Extreme 76, Roland VK8-M, DW Collectors Series Drums, Roland SPD-S.

[This message has been edited by kbrkr (edited 12-30-2007).]

Many good responses here, but this makes the most sense for MY needs. I'd rather be making music and playing tennis than spending time taking on the Vista challange right now. Thanks to all replies.

At present time, Vista is in pretty much the same situation as XP was after introduction.

When You compare Win98 to Win XP, until SP2, XP was to buggy, to slow, quite unstable, and practically useless as an operating system for doing some serious business.

The history repeats now, Vista is still in some kind of "unfinished state", some great features announced a year ago are missing (indicating that the OS was finished in a hurry for a marketing reason), some features (security) is so lossy implemented so most users are turning it off, current XP drivers are useless and new drivers are very few, laptop users experiencing very low battery autonomy (compared to XP), program compatibility is also an issue, so You have to check each specific program to test if it would work.

All in all, no matter what You hear, do not buy Vista (e.g. downgrade from Vista to XP if You were "forced" to buy it). Otherwise, you might be investing Your money into busted product (remeber Windows MilleniumEdition).

If the 60.000 desktops are used for office work, better if they migrate to Linux (Fedora or Ubuntu)... this would save a LOT of money...

I'm just kidding here... but...
I use Linux in my office and never see the necessity to launch that crappy WIndooze again...



[This message has been edited by mrdave (edited 12-30-2007).]

Theoretically Vista has the potential of being an excellent operating system at some point. But at present it falls way short in my opinion. If what Al is saying is true about Vista SP RC1 then it seems Microsoft is on its way to making Vista a little more palatable to the masses. But the reports that Vista's SP RC1 hasn't added any additional driver support to the mix is troubling to say the least.

Why the lackadaisical approach by Microsoft in providing desperately needed driver support? I think the main reason is that in Microsoft's mind (which would be Bill Gates noggin I dare say) it all revolves around marketing and the making of money and not necessarily the consumers who buy their products. Vista requires component upgrades, peripheral upgrades and also software upgrades for probably the majority of people who upgrade to Vista. Which further drives and expands the technology industry but also, for people like you and me, we are the ones who end up fueling the industry and lining their pockets in the process. If Microsoft was more diligent in providing driver support for older hardware and in providing better support, integration, and compatibility with older software, that would mean you and I wouldn't need to buy near as much new hardware and software to run Vista and therefore the computer industry conglomerate would stagnate and suffer financially as a consequence. In other words Microsoft WANTS you to buy new hardware and software (preferably their software of course ) to keep fueling the technology sector and all the while keep lining Microsoft's and other computer companies pockets in the process. And because Microsoft essentially has the world by the tail because of its predominance in the OS market most people therefore bend and sway to Microsoft's leading and direction and they begrudgingly do the upgrade dance. Some, like Al, who are technology enthusiasts, do it willingly and with a smile on their face but most people dread the thought of pouring hundreds, if not thousands, of additional dollars just to upgrade to an OS which has proven to be severely lacking in many ways and in which it predecessor i.e. 'Windows XP' has shown to be relatively stable, robust, and also works with peoples older hardware and software. Yes, it is true that Microsoft will soon pull the support plug on Windows XP, but at least they will give it another shot in the arm with SP3 before they do. I think it is in 2012 or 2013 when Microsoft will officially pull the support plug on XP PRO. XP Home on the other hand will only be receiving support until 2009 I believe. But hopefully between now and then Microsoft will have improved Vista sufficiently enough to make it a desirable upgrade. And who knows, the way Microsoft repeatedly launches new OS offerings every few years, something completely different and better than Vista may be knocking at the door by then. >> I won't hold my breath about the "better" part though. That, or possibly millions or even billions?? of people will have made the switch to open source versions of Linux in the next several years and quite possibly knocking Microsoft off its high horse in the process. Time will tell. But for now I'm sticking with XP and refuse to do the Vista upgrade dance. Much like I refused to do the Tyros to Tyros2 upgrade dance with Yamaha. Tyros3???.. maybe. If it has 76 keys and is more than just an incremental upgrade that I think the Tyros2 was compared to the Tyros. And Ian says no 76 key Tyros3 so my future prospects for a TOTL 76 key arranger are off on the horizon with another keyboard manufacturer such as Korg, Roland or possibly Ketron. But I digress..

Back to Microsoft: until Microsoft can prove to me and to the world that Vista is actually worth its upgrade price tag I refuse to fork over my hard earned cash for it. And in its present state I don't think it is worth the price unfortunately. And I myself am also a tech enthusiast at heart but needless to say I am a little more cautious than some of my comrades.

Best,
Mike

[This message has been edited by keybplayer (edited 12-30-2007).]

Mike,

Just a correction to your post. Microsoft does not write nor provide drivers for hardware nor are the responsible for doing so. The hardware manufacturers are responsible for this. In my case, I have two Canon printer which are now obsolete because Canon decided not to write drivers for these printers but instead wanted me to purchase a newer model with updated drivers!!!

Canon is no different from HP, Creative, Logitech, etc... they will not spend the money on developing new drivers for older (3years old) equipment.

It isn't a Microsoft problem.



------------------
Al Giordano
http://www.arrangerworld.com


Tyros 2, Yamaha P-250, Korg Triton Extreme 76, Roland VK8-M, DW Collectors Series Drums, Roland SPD-S.

HOw about neither.... go Mac.. I'm about to..... as soon s I get the money saved up I'll be switching...


Jeff

Hi Jeff
You are aware that there is significantly less music software available for the Mac, and what is available is usually more expensive.
Upgrading to new technologies also cost an arm and a leg on a Mac, but is relatively cheap on a PC.
If you use the Windows available on the Mac to run your programs, then you will be paying about 3 times the price of a PC for the same performance.
If you really hate Microsoft, why not try Linux (Windows emulation is also available) as it costs a fraction of the price of a Mac, and does pretty much the same.
If however you want something that looks the part, then a Mac is probably the better bet. (Personally I buy a computer to use and not to look at)
Another option

Bill

I realize that Al. Microsoft though does work in collaboration with the hardware manufacturers in the provision of their drivers. When you buy an operating system Microsoft has already included thousands of drivers to work with various hardware peripherals and thus making it necessary to meet certain system hardware requirements on the computer system to hopefully get everything up and running in short order upon install of the OS. As far as Service Packs go I am assuming Microsoft could provide additional collaborative drivers in their Service Packs but I'm not sure this is a normal procedure for them. Possibly not, but it would be nice if they did. On the other hand if some manufacturers choose not to collaborate with Microsoft in providing drivers for older hardware (with the inclusion of the Service Pack if indeed Microsoft chooses to do it that way) then of course that would leave Microsoft's hands tied and the end user constrained to upgrade his or her hardware. If the manufacturer itself chooses not to provide a stand alone driver then the person is stuck in the same situation of having to upgrade, just like you had to do regarding your canon printers. Either way, there is collaboration to get the driver(s) to work under a certain operating system environment e.g. Vista, etc. The manufacturer still has to collaborate with Microsoft regarding Vista's source code to be able to get the manufacturers software driver to work under Vista or some other OS. But yes, it is the hardware manufacturer who provides the driver(s). But again, there is collaboration with Microsoft to get the driver to work under any given OS environment, whether or not the driver from the manufacturer is included in an OS or Service Pack or stand alone.

Manufacturers a lot of times don't want to put in the R&D to make drivers for older hardware and for apparent reasons. It's about money pure and simple. Or to better put it: "greed" in my opinion. They want us to keep fueling their business profits so they withhold drivers making it necessary for us to upgrade, and all the while hoping you will purchase their brand again in the process. Or maybe I should do this..

Some manufacturers are better at providing drivers for older hardware so it helps to choose manufacturers appropriately based on those considerations.

Best,
Mike