 |
|
 |
|
On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 09:28:52 -0600, Bruce Chambers <...@cable0ne.n3t
Find some new friends that know quite a bit more about computers and
operating systems?
Seriously, though, it's true that Vista is more resource-intensive than
was WinXP, just as *every* new OS always has been more demanding than
its predecessors. Hence, on the same hardware, the older OS -- assuming
it will install and run -- will almost always perform a bit better than
the newer OS.
However, as you're getting a new machine that has presumably been
designed and configured for running Vista, you won't see the same sort
of performance issues as experienced by those who installed Vista on
inadequate hardware.
Additionally, there could be a couple possible adverse repercussions of
which you should be aware. First and foremost, if the specific computer
model in question was designed specifically for Vista, there may well be
no WinXP-specific device drivers available to make the computer's
diverse components work properly. Consult the computer's manufacturer
about the availability of device drivers. Secondly, removing an
OEM-installed operating system and replacing it with another will almost
invariably void any and all support agreements and, possibly, even the
warranty. You would, at the very least, have to re-install Vista before
getting any support from the manufacturer. Again, consult the computer's
manufacturer for specifics. Thirdly, there will be the additional cost
involved in purchasing a WinXP license for this new computer.
Secondly, as this is a work computer, it belongs to your employer. (If
you're self-employed, this point is moot.) You may not, and would not
in most places, be permitted to change the OS.
--
Bruce Chambers
Help us help you:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin
Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell
The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 08:48:57 -0700, "Ken Blake, MVP" <...@this.is.an.invalid.domain
On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 21:22:42 -0600, "Johnson L" <...@yahoo.comwrote:
Three points:
1. I recommend Vista, which in my experience has fine performance as
long as you are using it on a modern computer with adequate
components. For example, almost everyone needs at least 2GB of RAM.
2. Your friends' recommendations make no sense to me. If it comes with
Windows Vista, Windows Vista is what you should use. Use it, not just
for a week or two, but for several months, giving yourself enough time
to learn and understand the differences between it and XP. Then--and
*only* then--should you decide for yourself whether you think changing
to XP is preferable. Then if you decide to change, it will be as a
result of *your* opinions, not other people's, and on *your* hardware.
3. The new version of Windows, Windows 7, will probably be released
under a year from now. If it were me, I wouldn't even consider
changing from Vista to XP. Your choice should be whether to stay with
Vista or go to Windows 7.
--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
Please Reply to the Newsgroup
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 23:41:12 -0400, "JS" <@
Use your old PC (with XP installed) to test the
apps you develop for XP compatibility. Take
the new Quad Core and use it for Vista and
or make it a Dual Boot system. Do all your
new development in Vista especially if the Boss
puts his or her foot down. This way you will
get familiar with Vista and in doing so will have
a leg up when Windows 7 is released.
I'm an XP user who made up my mind to use
Vista as little as possible but Windows 7 for
whatever reason doesn't seem all that bad so
I would expect a fair amount of XP users to
skip Vista a move to 7 once the bugs have been
flushed out.
As for Vista's performance issue, with a Quad core
and 4 or more GB of memory it should be fine for
a development environment unless it Gaming. Also
if you company uses SCM software you need to
check to see if Vista can support your SCM interface.
--
JS
http://www.pagestart.com
"Johnson L" <...@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous Wrote:
On Apr 19, 8:41 am, "JS" <@
i would recommend windows xp if you go by performance issue because it
is definitely much lighter than windows vista.
but windows vista is more secure than windows xp it accomplishes this
feature by use of UAC which necessarily lays lots of restrictions and
if you have to do administration tasks you will hate windows vista
UAC.
That being said if you large amount of main memory i.e Ram then you
can go for windows vista.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 10:19:34 -0600, "Johnson L" <...@yahoo.com
Thank you for your help. What does SCM stand for, Scheme Implementation,
or Service Control Management, or Source Code Management?
"JS" <@
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 13:05:49 -0400, "JS" <@
Software Configuration Management
It a means of controlling and documenting software
builds/versions (a more powerful alternative to Version
control software like "Clear Case, CVS and others")
New development can not start until approved by
someone in management, files are checked out of the
repository which assure the developer always uses the
currently release version of the file to be fixed/upgraded
and then checked back in the repository for the part of
the lifecycle would be for example "regression testing".
When the entire software product has completed as testing
and reviewed by a Software Quality Control person and then
approved for a General Release Baseline (Backup) is made
and becomes part of the repository.
It's a good way to track what changes were made, why they
were made and when the changes were made/tested and approved.
If you what to learn more visit CM Crossroads (of which I am a
member) and check out some of the white papers.
http://www.cmcrossroads.com/content/blogcategory/132/248/
List of Forums:
http://www.cmcrossroads.com/component/option,com_fireboard/Itemid,593/
--
JS
http://www.pagestart.com
"Johnson L" <...@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 10:31:30 -0600, "Johnson L" <...@yahoo.com
"Johnson L" <...@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
Well, for now I would like to install Windows Vista and XP as dual-system on
my computer, for best compatability and performance as well. Maybe I should
add Linux as well.
Does anybody can provide some hints on how to add Windows XP as dual system?
Or provide me a link? Since the computer belongs to the employer, I don't
want to ruit it.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 13:12:39 -0400, "JS" <@
The general rule of thumb is to install
XP first and then Vista for a dual boot.
However as mentioned by Bruce there may
not be XP drivers for your new PC. Even if
there are I would remove the existing drive
and use another drive as a test to see if XP
installs and you have no driver issues.
--
JS
http://www.pagestart.com
"Johnson L" <...@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 13:27:34 -0400, "georgew" <...@yahoo.com
is vista 32 or 64. i would think about useing 64 bit not 32 one???
"JS" <@
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 11:27:46 -0600, Bruce Chambers <...@cable0ne.n3t
Normally, the older OS must be installed first unless you wish to
acquire and use some 3rd-party partition and boot management utility.
(In which case you have to follow the instructions provided by whatever
3rd party solution you select.) However, this KB Article (not for the
faint of heart or technically-challenged) explains how to repair the
Vista boot process after installing WinXP:
Windows Vista no longer starts after you install an earlier version of
the Windows operating system in a dual-boot configuration
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/919529
MS-MVP John Barnett's Guide is considerably more user-friendly:
http://vistasupport.mvps.org/install_windows_xp_on_machine_running_vista.htm
--
Bruce Chambers
Help us help you:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin
Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell
The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 22 Apr 2009 04:34:33 -0700 (PDT), "tre...@googlemail.com" <...@googlemail.com
XP is way lighter and faster then Vista,I know I have a newer pc that
has Vista preinstalled and it hogs to many resources.I then downgraded
(more like upgraded) to Windows XP and it's alot better and more
faster.
For more information http://groups.google.com/group/trevor-hook
Regards,
Trevor Hook
On Apr 18, 8:22 pm, "Johnson L" <...@yahoo.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|