vista's better than xp?

[Hair|Trigger]

Maybe it's because people have grown to know way more about computers than they did in Win98 and early XP period.  They pay a great ammount of detail towards little things like "oh noes I can't play worms on my ocmputer anymroe".    

I still like Windows vista, and SP1 will surely change what all you XP junkies think of it.  The quick accessibility of Vista combined with its fkin sexy visiuals make it something to adore.

[FliesLikeABrick]

Yeah but it's not the same kind of difference is it.... The bulk of Vistas resource whoring just goes into fannying about with pretty graphical effects rather than actually contributing to the physical interfacing of the system.

Except Vista uses the GPU for the interface, unlike Windows which uses the CPU.  It's actually much more efficient that way.  The resources (I assume you mean RAM) are used to cache programs for quick loading, so yeah, it'll take up a lot of space.  However, when you need RAM for a game or something, it'll clear the program cache as needed, so it shouldn't be a problem.

Just take a look at the Wikipedia article for Vista.  There's a TON of new features, as well as architectural changes that aren't immediately visible to the average user.  It's not a bad OS by any means, just an immature one.

For everyone's reference, it is called Microsoft Windows Vista not Microsoft Vista.  This is still a Windows product.  I'm getting tired of everyone calling it "Microsoft Vista" and saying things like "This isn't Windows, guys, it is far better than Windows ever was!"

Windows.  Vista.

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

For everyone's reference, it is called Microsoft Windows Vista not Microsoft Vista.  This is still a Windows product.  I'm getting tired of everyone calling it "Microsoft Vista" and saying things like "This isn't Windows, guys, it is far better than Windows ever was!"

Windows.  Vista.

Funny that you didn't call out tehsnipah, Mangled*, 8th_account, Hair|Trigger, or even me for referring to Windows XP as simply "XP," even though it's such a big deal that we're only referring to Windows Vista as "Vista".  I don't think any of us implied that it wasn't a version of Windows.

EDIT: Okay, I did, but it was a typo.  You'll notice that my first post didn't even refer to XP as a variant of Windows.  I know that both XP and Vista are versions of Windows, as are 3.1, 95, ME, and anything else that the average person uses to run programs.  (And YES, I am aware that there is another OS called Linux, and yet another one is called OS X.)

[FlyingForehead]

I heard that vista uses the graphics card more than Xp whitch runs on the processor. Only heard that dunno if its true.

Any benefit from that is COMPLETELY undone by the extent to which Vista wastes your computer's resources

All of our brand new dual core laptops on campus that have Vista run much slower than 5 year old XP machines.

Wow, we have that same problem. Our brand new dual cores get shat on by the 3-4 year old XP machines. Still, my XPS lapop shits on them all

[Hair|Trigger]

For everyone's reference, it is called Microsoft Windows Vista not Microsoft Vista. This is still a Windows product. I'm getting tired of everyone calling it "Microsoft Vista" and saying things like "This isn't Windows, guys, it is far better than Windows ever was!"

Windows. Vista.

Whoa...  What's up your arse?   And when did anyone call it Microsoft Vista?  

If thinkto urself is the "Grammar nazi"  then you are the Grammar Hitler

Ontopic-
My dual-core laptop running Vista and 1GB RAM has survived over the few months i've had it.  However, vista seems to be messing around with it a bit.  The CPU usage would go up to 100% and stay there every now and then, requiring that I restart my laptop.  It usually happens if I play soldat on it, or during a highly demanding operation.  Soldat runs pretty sluggish on it aswell, so I only play soldat on it to test any mods that I happen to be working on.  I blame Vista for being so instable.  When it came to BF2, the game ran fine except for a bit of lag due to my 1GB ram, but it diddn't cause any probs.  So at least the OS leaves BF2 players alone.

[M.rSnow]

I heard that vista uses the graphics card more than Xp whitch runs on the processor. Only heard that dunno if its true.

Any benefit from that is COMPLETELY undone by the extent to which Vista wastes your computer's resources

I didnt say it was a +...

[Will]

I'd say if you don't play games, and work on web design/use office programs alot/do any graphics editing, ubuntu is a far better alternative for vista. Damned that DirectX crap...

Anyway, I'd say XP is better than vista, just because I'm used to it, and the support isn't right just there yet.
But Vista will soon become another XP, just wait for some service packs and a new windows version

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

For everyone's reference, it is called Microsoft Windows Vista not Microsoft Vista. This is still a Windows product. I'm getting tired of everyone calling it "Microsoft Vista" and saying things like "This isn't Windows, guys, it is far better than Windows ever was!"

Windows. Vista.

Whoa...  What's up your arse?   And when did anyone call it Microsoft Vista? 

I accidentally referred to XP as just "Windows," implying that Vista was not a version of Windows. =P

[The Bone Collector]

XP is indeed more stable than Vista. Vista doesn't run any good old games (unreal tournament, and it crashes running NES ROMS) where as XP has that support. If I wasn't a gamer, I'd personally stick to Mac OS X Leopard (and stay there). But seeing as I am a gamer, I'll stick to XP. I won't switch to Vista 'till they make it less resourse-hoggish, and have better support for gamers. Direct X 10 isn't worth my time unless I have a decent computer/graphics card/money to upgrade.
Personally... Vista is a P.O.S. My friend has a 1gb RAM laptop, and his computer runs worse than my old 512mb XP laptop. Why would I switch to something that has nothing that XP doesn't have?

[FliesLikeABrick]

For everyone's reference, it is called Microsoft Windows Vista not Microsoft Vista. This is still a Windows product. I'm getting tired of everyone calling it "Microsoft Vista" and saying things like "This isn't Windows, guys, it is far better than Windows ever was!"

Windows. Vista.

Whoa...  What's up your arse?   And when did anyone call it Microsoft Vista? 

I accidentally referred to XP as just "Windows," implying that Vista was not a version of Windows. =P

You saying that made me just bring up the point in general, a lot of other people intentionally call Vista "Microsoft Vista" including news sources.  You saying what you said just made me want to address a larger audience about the matter.

Microsoft vista

[Mangled*]

I just call it Vista... There's no need to say Microsoft or Windows or anything else with it because everybody knows what your talking about... same goes for XP. Although I would say Windows XP if someone I was talking to didn't know what 'XP' alone meant.

With 98 and 95 you have to say Windows really... otherwise they're just numbers.