is vista actually worth getting

[Blitzen]

I don't agree with the opinion that it uses much more resources (x86). RAM usage is up, but that's due to the caching, which makes a hell of a difference to overall system usage after a few days (when it works out a pattern of how you work).

Hard drive usage is up if you leave indexing turned on - again, most of this is in the initial few days, and then after that it's all good and fast, and of course searches are much faster after that too.

System resources are more than XP, but very little more - 1gb RAM is fine here, and even with that startup time is much, much reduced over a similarly loaded XP. x64 will require more RAM for the same performance than x86 for equivalent performance though.

Very little that won't work. The biggest problem will likely be games with dodgy copy-protection methods - if there's no patches to sort it out, then you might be stuffed. Do a Google if there's any particular games you'd like to work to see if there's any others having issues.

Everything I use works here though on x32 - and my experience of XP x64 leads me to believe when I move to Vista on my main rig, that things will continue to work.

It's a little high maintenance at the moment, but overall, it's a very nice, smooth OS that's really slick to work with.

1. RAM usage = system resources. Thats my point.
2. Hard Drive usage - I agree with your point there and itsa good one.
3. 1gb RAM is just about adequate and thats it. Particualry if all the eye-candy is on. Machine nowadays, whatever the OS are considerably slower with less than 2gb.
4. 32Bit Vista is pretty decent and besides Nero, everything else runs great. When i upgrade my Rig on Wednesday i will not be using 64Bit Vista though, its gotta be sorted out first as there is very little support for it.

I agree, most don't know what they're doing. In my expierence, it's better than any XP out. It's much faster & almost every Software Vendor is Upgrading Drivers at will. It's the future & It will be the best yet!

You are joking aren't you?
The comment 'most don't know what they are doing' is detrimental to many here and you dont seem too clued up yourself tbh.
I most definitely do know what im doing and im a first hand user.

For starters, you are incorrect, most software vendors have been VERY slow off the mark, particularly the large ones (nVidia and Creative to name but 2).

Like i said, im running Ultimate and yes, it will take XP over, sooner rather than later i feel, but there is still a long way to go. A service pack has been announced for the 2nd quarter of 2007 already. If its that great then it wouldnt be needed that fast would it?

[this_is_gav]

1. RAM usage = system resources. Thats my point.
3. 1gb RAM is just about adequate and thats it. Particualry if all the eye-candy is on. Machine nowadays, whatever the OS are considerably slower with less than 2gb.

1. But that's irrelevant, as as soon as an application demands memory, that memory is released to it. Add a readyboost stick in there too, and it's even more smooth.

3. 1gb RAM is perfectly fine. I've got it on my HTPC with everything but games installed that I have on my main rig. 1gb is perfectly fine. x64 requires more RAM for the emulation layers though.

/me giggles like a girl at michigantoga - I get the impression (s)he's not going to last long

[MSIC]

A service pack has been announced for the 2nd quarter of 2007 already. If its that great then it wouldnt be needed that fast would it?

I agree with almost everything you said Blitzen, but if i can be cynical for a moment, i think the main reason that SP1 is due out so early is because MS know that alot of people (and enterprises) dont buy an OS until the first service pack.

One could argue therefore, that if MS theoretically decided to bring a service pack forward before it really warrants it, it'll sell more Vista's quicker.

[chuckskull]

I've picked up x64 home premium. It DOES use more resources no argument, but it runs far faster in normal desktop stuff. It always feels quick and responsive. On the desktop. it runs faster with 1gig of RAM than XP did with 2.

In games you lose some horsepower, but not much tbh. If you have 2GB, you should still be fine. For desktop use it run brilliantly with 1GB, if i was building a machine for gaming with vista right now I'd be getting 4gig of RAM though and seeing as you can get it for the same price 2gig was a week ago, seems like a good deal.

[ajbrun]

In games you lose some horsepower, but not much tbh. If you have 2GB, you should still be fine. For desktop use it run brilliantly with 1GB, if i was building a machine for gaming with vista right now I'd be getting 4gig of RAM though and seeing as you can get it for the same price 2gig was a week ago, seems like a good deal.

Any games I've tried so far have worked perfectly with 2GB. I may need to get another 2 when DX10 games come out, but for now it's fine. I'm sure 2GB will easily manage for games until next year.

[chuckskull]

Any games I've tried so far have worked perfectly with 2GB. I may need to get another 2 when DX10 games come out, but for now it's fine. I'm sure 2GB will easily manage for games until next year.

I usually play at 1600x1200 so it pushes it up, I usually forget not everyone has a monitor the size of a small village

[Blitzen]

I agree with almost everything you said Blitzen, but if i can be cynical for a moment, i think the main reason that SP1 is due out so early is because MS know that alot of people (and enterprises) dont buy an OS until the first service pack.

One could argue therefore, that if MS theoretically decided to bring a service pack forward before it really warrants it, it'll sell more Vista's quicker.

Good point!
Alot are holding off for this. It'll prolly only include a few games anyway

[j.o.s.h.1408]

so in theory, visra 32bit is more stable than the 64bit?

umm might give the 32bit a go on my laptop that has 1gb ram

[Dorza]

Good point!
Alot are holding off for this. It'll prolly only include a few games anyway

It also has to do with the fact that Vista by Microsoft's own admission has "High Impact Issues". After SP1 comes out I'll consider buying a new PC with vista but not before. As for the memory discussion going on, I personally wouldn't put less than 2.5Gig in a machine thats going to be used for anticipated next gen gaming.

[chuckskull]

so in theory, visra 32bit is more stable than the 64bit?

umm might give the 32bit a go on my laptop that has 1gb ram

Theoretically 64bit is more stable. In real life though theres still too many issues, like driver compatability etc etc. Unless you can think of a reason you need 64bit, stick with 32. I bought it because i wanted 4gig of RAM, nothing more.

[TheAnimus]

stability between 32bit and 64bit editions is a two way street.

Its a case of older code vrs newer code. Generally older code is more tested, so more stable, yet newer code has many design fixes (this time we can do it 'properly' is the prase) but often new bugs as such.

I'm arogant, yet i wouldn't say one is more stable.

Thing is vista has many nice tweaks, its a new UI is loverly, and i've spent about £400 making a new media PC that can run it.

I've found it a lot nippyer, but then again i'm using hardware that has driver support, and 2gig of ram.

That said my tablet pc is still running XP.

In short, if your bored, go for it, if not no rush.

[Dazzyman]

Hi guys (first post in here rest in Mesh hehe),

Would you say its good for games then? Im due to get Vista 32bit with my core machine couple of weeks (nice and fast 2.66 duo 2gig ram and 8800gtx) but Im in two minds whether to format and put my old xp on (or dual boot) as Ive heard problems with certain games from some peeps (Im a gaming nut and Ive read about probs with COH). I love tweaking always have and have been since getting my first PC 15yrs ago (usually build but its cheaper this time to buy one for me).

Im not bothered about loosing abit of horespower on vista32bit now for games just as long as they work and its stable (im only going to run at 720p ie 1280x720 on my 46" Sony X anyway) so do I keep or wipe until SP comes out?

[ajbrun]

So far, I've tried CS:S, flatout 2, civilisation IV warlords and oblivion, and they've all worked perfectly. I haven't tried this system on XP though, so I have no idea what fps I'd get using that OS, but I'm sure with CS:S as least, you'd get a big decline in frames. It's still a lot more playable than my old system was on XP though .

[Steve]

CnC3 demo's readme file says 64-bit Vista isn't supported.

Not sure if that means it won't run, though.

[Saracen]

i've seen everyone talking about vista the last couple of months but would actually like to know is it worth gettting

i know it has dx10 but dx 10 games are a long way off so what is it actually gonna do in terms of benefiting me if i were to upgrade

pros and cons please all

I'd say there are distinct advantages, and distinct drawbacks. Which apply to you depends on your usage.

Advantages include the fact that however we look at it, Vista is going to be the future of Windows. Over time, we'll have little choice but to move to it. However, how much time that'll be is another matter. I don't see most businesses rushing to upgrade, so XP has a shelf life for a while (probably in a small number of years) yet.

Another benefit is that the revised driver model should significantly increase the system stability and security, in that it makes it harder for illicit software to get in. However, "harder" doesn't mean impossible, and it remains to be seen what happens with future viruses, trojans, etc. It should, however, neutralise a lot of the techniques currently in use.

Ironically, that self-same driver model is also a weakness, since it requires much hardware to have new drivers. That's fine if you can get them, but for older hardware, it may never be supported.

Another benefit is Bitlocker security, and the extension of encryption to boot drive data. It'll help secure a lot of company laptops ... but if you aren't a company, you may not be bothered. And even if you are, you'll need a version that supports Bitlocker and not all do.

Downsides would include the increase hardware demands, driver incompatibility, time and maybe training needed to get the best out of it, cost of replacing/upgrading some incompatible packages, etc.

Sooner or later, most of us will end up migrating. Personally, I'm not in any searing hurry.

[Rum]

I purchased Vista 64bit soon as it came out... and "i'm loving it" yes some of the drivers I require for my bits and pieces are not yet available and the ones that are I feel are not up to scratch.

Everyones working hard to get new drivers out, we'll just have to wait a little.

All is good though and I like it