Windows XP 32 bit or 64bit?

Post by **HoboJoe** » Thu Aug 14, 2008 6:18 pm

Funk, E wrote:I'd imagine that it's because Vista is currently fairly close to a piece of crap.

Agreed. Vista BLOWS.

Post by **Niode** » Thu Aug 14, 2008 7:51 pm

HoboJoe wrote:
Funk, E wrote:I'd imagine that it's because Vista is currently fairly close to a piece of crap.
Agreed. Vista BLOWS.

That's constructive. Thank you ever so much for input to this discussion. Have you even used it for longer than 10 minutes?

If you're going to subject yourself to using windows then you might as well get the latest version since everything in the future is going to be designed to be used with Vista. Until the next version of Windows again.

I'm not saying Vista is amazing, it's not. I use a Mac because Windows is annoying. I don't want to derail this thread with yet another OS Flame War.

It just doesn't seem to make sense to put anything but the latest version of Windows on a new PC.

Post by **HoboJoe** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 12:50 am

Yes it does make sense to put an older OS on a system because they''re going to be making games compatible with XP for many many years still. Plus by the time games stop supporting XP, well his computer's probably gonna be outdated anyway and Windows will probably have a new version and we can only hope it will be an improvement over Vista.
And yes I have a laptop with Vista on it so I have used it for more then 10 minutes, I just hate it because it is a resource hog, I don't need my OS to require 512 mb of RAM to run.

Post by **Funk, E** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 9:52 am

It absolutely makes sense to use an older OS--XP is more stable, less bloated, more secure, and there's an unofficial patch that'll let you run DX10, too. That said, I'm sure that Vista will be worthwhile at some point in the future--now, however, it's certainly not.

Post by **opethfan** » Sun Aug 17, 2008 4:49 pm

I've seen brand new (like, day or 2 old) dual and quad core systems running vista that have been taken to their knees. 2008 bought machines, no less. I installed Vista x64 on my Athlon 64 3500+ (at 2.42 Ghz) with a gig of DDR2 RAM, Geforce 6 graphics (and tried again once I had a Geforce

and it was still too slow to be usable. Bug or not, its unacceptable. I believe it was the Windows Update service killing it, but that doesn't matter. Mac OS X runs better on that machine, even though its 100% unsupported and using completely user made drivers.

Post by **The Apprentice** » Sun Aug 17, 2008 5:50 pm

Funk, E wrote:It absolutely makes sense to use an older OS--XP is more stable, less bloated, more secure, and there's an unofficial patch that'll let you run DX10, too. That said, I'm sure that Vista will be worthwhile at some point in the future--now, however, it's certainly not.

That's probably the smartest thing I've ever heard on this forum. Or maybe it just looks so much smarter because it's a smart comment surrounded by some very stupid ideas. Like for example, buying an opperating system just because at some point in the future that OS will be the most developed on, even though at the moment the older OS is supported almost universally by software venders and will be for the next few years.

Windows XP is the best option for the average computer user and most likely will be untill at least 2010.

Post by **Niode** » Sun Aug 17, 2008 8:07 pm

If it was me and I was building a gaming rig with those specs, I'd put Vista on it. purely for DX10. Why wouldn't you want to use the latest version of DirectX? That's what doesn't make sense to me. Why bother putting a 4850 in when a 8800GT will do the same job and cost less. It will probably outperform the 4850 at lower resolution DX9 games anyway.

I think a lot of you are neglecting the fact that you can always use both, I just don't see the point in not using vista with that rig.

Post by **HoboJoe** » Sun Aug 17, 2008 11:14 pm

Ummm....Niode don't wanna disappoint you but there is actually user development on DX10 for XP...I haven't looked into it much but I know it exists and it works, but they just need to come out with patches for each game I believe. So in the end...XP is still better. Just google it and you'll find plenty on it. Also Microsoft has pretty much admitted Vista is crap because they are slating their next operating system to replace it in 2010. So that would give Vista a 3 year run...as opposed to XP's 6 year.

Post by **Ivo** » Mon Aug 18, 2008 3:29 am

HoboJoe wrote:Ummm....Niode don't wanna disappoint you but there is actually user development on DX10 for XP...I haven't looked into it much but I know it exists and it works, but they just need to come out with patches for each game I believe.

That doesn't seem particularly reliable to me, considering the diversity of hardware and so on.

Ivo.

Post by **Niode** » Mon Aug 18, 2008 7:22 am

Yeah, i'm not really fond of using a flimsy implementation of something I can get easily on Vista.