Windows XP x64 vs Vista x64

[D_Trace]

That's because you're inventing stuff, so there are no links to disprove it because noone thinks it.

You've said that Vista has no DRM, but i'm the one that's inventing stuff. Sure.

it's like me saying that you are secretly gay, there isn't a single thing you can really do to disprove it. No matter how many girls you make out with after that, some people, will allways believe you are. kind of like what you are doing with baseless Vista assumptions and out of context quotes and crap here.

The "baseless assumptions" were based on more and better links than you ever provided.

anyway here's one link

http://msmvps.com/blogs/chrisl/archive/200.../25/519180.aspx

Please READ the links ALREADY PROVIDED to you countless times. They disprove your simplistic link and go way beyond. Go read how protected content is fundamentally flawed, and can even be used to boldly attack the machine. Go read how a lot of home made HD content made with home cameras for personal use is already being blocked by DRM. READ DUDE, READ! Reduce your ignorance.

Again:

http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html

In the first paragraph of the link above you get the link below, that is an updated version that shows pretty nicely the realities of DRM in Vista.

http://www.cypherpunks.to/~peter/vista.pdf

READ!

And Ati and Nvidia where helping to develop the new driver model in Vista, like creative was helping with the audio layer, heck OpenAL wich is used for game sound is even a creative thing. These companies just like to throw excuses for why they can't write good drivers in time, when they helped develop the driver model.

Dude, Creative is NOTORIOUS for having lousy drivers. That's the reason for KXDriver's existence, the ONLY opensource driver for Win32, because Creative's drivers suck so much. That's why a poster IN THIS SAME THREAD has stated the he went back to XP because Creatives drivers don't work properly on Vista and lots of features of those cards simply aren't used. That's the reason for Daniel K's hacked SoundBlaster drivers. GET A CLUE.

READ THE LINKS ABOVE (again!). There are plenty of quotes from ATI complaining about DRM. Wake up.

Vista was designed to be a frigging black-box. Only you believe it's simple.

and the only DRM there would be on drivers is WHQL Certification, wich is only required on 64 bit, but recommended on all. andthis is just an automated quality check. they just send in the driver to MS and it passes through an automated routine wich checks for major obvius bugs and leaks and crap and then issues a certificate. If you run 64 bit you shouldn't be using non certified drivers in the first place. and the only reason this bugs developers is because they have to certify drivers and because they're required to provide both 32 and 64 bit drivers for certification.

Dude, READ THE LINKS ABOVE (again!). The entire PC industry is based on unsigned drivers. There's no such thing as "automated certificaton routine", if you want certification you have to talk to MS sooner or later. That why industry doesn't like it. Do you really believe that those cheap Taiwan manufacturers will actually get certification for the 64bit drivers of their $5 modems or NICs? Doesn't it explain the lack of drivers for 64bits, since most firms don't want to bend backwards just to make certified 64bits drivers for every cheap peripheral they make?

The unpopularity of driver certification was such that it led to the creation of Atsiv's 64bit "driver", that can encapsulate and install ANY DRIVER OR ANY CONTENT without certification. So much for "Vista security" isn't it?

Or go read about how the official ATI drivers also can be used to INJECT ANY CONTENT into Vista to bypass certification. Or go read how EVERY peripheral has to have built in cryptography support to be labeled "DRM-ready", and how it makes the hardware more expensive and worse (acording to numerous ATI quotes on the links provided above. READ DUDE. Learn something instead of just writing BS in forums.)

[HawkMan]

stop embarrasing yourself.

he entire PC industry is based on unsigned drivers. There's no such thing as "automated certificaton routine", if you want certification you have to talk to MS sooner or later. That why industry doesn't like it. Do you really believe that those cheap Taiwan manufacturers will actually get certification for the 64bit drivers of their $5 modems or NICs? Doesn't it explain the lack of drivers for 64bits, since most firms don't want to bend backwards just to make certified 64bits drivers for every cheap peripheral they make?

yes it is an automaed routine. wich is actually why that unviersal exploit tool for windows got their drivers signed. all he had to do was give MS some money and send in the code and he got it certified.

sort of bus right now otherwise I'd give more links.

[ozulus]

Most of the users out there couldn't re-install an OS even if we gave them step by step instructions, let alone trying it by themselves. It's just a fact. On top of that, new PC buyers won't have an XP disc to toss in to accomplish this task, among other problems with this idea. For some people money doesn't grow on trees, and trying vista isn't cheap. If you have no idea how to install an OS your idea is problematic.

By your reasoning I guess we should all just skip school, college professors are idiots etc. Hardware review sites don't know squat about pc's. Millions of unsatisfied users of Vista are complaining about nothing etc. People with exploding laptop batteries must not know how to work their laptops. I can build a better cpu than Intel, so they should just quit the cpu business...I'm taking up open heart surgery tomorrow because I can do it better than doctors etc...You're thought process doesn't make sense. Ignoring a 100 PHD's? If a guy actually had that many, I wouldn't bother to question his intelligence on many things. That's a heck of an accomplishment...LOL. Surely he's smarter than I, especially when he comes backed with data.

At some point mountains of evidence must be paid some attention. If you can install an OS without problems and are more than capable of fixing your pc after a Vista snafu, sure try it. In all other cases, XP does everything Vista does, and usually faster, so why bother? A pretty face doesn't make it any better. Having said that, I have tried it (as have many that complain) and see nothing worth paying for. I don't see how you can surmise the majority of users here use Vista either. Numbers in surveys show otherwise. Numbers from Gartner, HP, Steampowered.com etc show otherwise. Based on numbers, XP is the dominant OS on the market by a LARGE margin. I find it humorous that you can so easily dismiss 99% of people's complaints as just twisting what others say and they've never tried the OS. Is that your professional opinion?...ROFL.

Sorry for the late response on this thread, but only today i really noticed this answer to my post.

First I never said ppl should skip school srsly.

I never said that you should go buy vista to experiment on any machine. I had the luck of being able to experiment it on a PIII-1GHz thanks to a campus license on Vista, nothing else. And I was simply telling my experience on it. Don't twist my words to make your silly case. Also each person should before complaining try it, if they can, but if they can't they can't say it's crap, because they don't know. What the PhD guys say most of the times doesn't matter, because you don't know how they tested things or are just anti-microsoft and anything they do is always bad. They just said "It's crap" and then everyone else repeats as if it was a religion and don't question it. That's why I never listen to them in this kind of things.

It's not a bad OS, it's more stable than XP and as fast as XP atm. So far the only problems I've had with it was with some driver bugs, nothing else. And with this I'm not gonna post on this topic again. Cause this has been way over debated and I think it's just ppl ranting at each other. (kinda what i just did :p)

[burnsflipper]

Using Vista64 since a long time and the only issues I had were related to old drivers, which I updated with the latest ones, and since then , everything is just peachy

my specs: Intel Quadcore q6600, 4 gb ram, intel dg31 motherboard & nvidia geforce 8800gt

[D_Trace]

stop embarrasing yourself.

yes it is an automaed routine. wich is actually why that unviersal exploit tool for windows got their drivers signed. all he had to do was give MS some money and send in the code and he got it certified.

sort of bus right now otherwise I'd give more links.

Talk about embarrassment.

HIS DRIVER NOT ONLY WAS NEVER CERTIFIED BY MICROSOFT OR VERISIGN, BUT IT WAS ACTUALLY BLACKLISTED.

READ ABOUT IT DUDE. LEARN SOMETHING FOR A CHANGE.

LOL. Go home.

Edited October 1, 2008 by D_Trace

[HawkMan]

Talk about embarrassment.

HIS DRIVER NOT ONLY WAS NEVER CERTIFIED BY MICROSOFT OR VERISIGN, BUT IT WAS ACTUALLY BLACKLISTED.

READ ABOUT IT DUDE. LEARN SOMETHING FOR A CHANGE.

LOL. Go home.

yeah, that happened AFTER he mentioned it all over "teh interweb". but before that it was on track to be certified, in an automated certification system.

but good job, you managed to completely ignroe he point of the post to focus on a minor detail that had no real relevance to the actual topic we where on.

nice use of caps to.. . I did mention that in yoru hurry to flame the completely unrelated point, you didn't at all cover the actual relevant point.

[D_Trace]

yeah, that happened AFTER he mentioned it all over "teh interweb". but before that it was on track to be certified, in an automated certification system.

So give me a link showing that his driver was about to be "automaticaly certified" but he blew it by telling "teh interweb".

How can one get a driver certified but can't talk about it before or after the fact. How would a shim that allows ANY CODE to be injected would be allowed to be certified in the first place. Think dude.

but good job, you managed to completely ignroe he point of the post to focus on a minor detail that had no real relevance to the actual topic we where on.

And now you managed to change the subject. Like you always do.

[ahhell]

Enough is enough. Mods need to close this thread.

[Eric Veteran]

So prove me wrong, Sherlock. LOL

Show me a single frigging link, Sherlock.

And you talk about foolishness. LOL

Vista's HDCP implementation is a path. If you want to play HDCP content it goes through secure channels from the computer through the video card to the monitor. If it's not protected content it goes via the non-HDCP path. If you're missing part of that chain you won't be able to play it without hacking.

But DRM support has to be already there and running, doesn't it? Even if you don't use DRM content. That's because it is PART OF THE DRIVERS. But you PC is different uh, Sherlock?

No. Services can be stopped and started on demand.

Again:

http://gizmodo.com/342920/holy-crap-did-bi...y-windows-sucks

"Is HawkMan an idiot?"

"Wait until he leaves the room, then i'll be more open to give you a blunt answer"

The above is essentially what Bill Gates said about Vista, but hey, sheeeesh, of course it's nothing. It's just an invention. There's nothing between the lines, Sherlock.

"Room for improvement" and "sucks" are not equivalent.

[Ran Sagy]

This is probably why the Mojave Experiment was even needed, Looking at certain people's comments here.

Sticking to age-old half-rant posts made by obscenely uninformed people is no source with credibility of any kind.

I know what my experience is like. I've been using Vista since the RC stage on various machines, Including older ones like AthlonXP-based machines with 1GB of ram, And Quad Core systems. Vista ran wonderfully on all of them. I've been running Vista Business 64bit for over a year now without any flaws what so ever, No missing drivers and every other crap people like to make up.

Simply put, It's a better version of XP64. If you have any knowledge about IT and technology in general, You would know what I'm talking about. But hey, Keep repeating opinions of clueless online pundits while you're at it. You're doing our work for us.

You value their word? I value the word of people who actually tried using Vista. I believe the word of every IT person i work with that has tried Vista and is satisfied with its behavior and performance.

However, I do NOT believe the word of people with such poor expression skills.

To answer the OP's question, I would definitely try Vista x64 bit on for size. See if it fits your purpose, If your favorite hardware and software works as intended, And so on. It is my personal opinion you will have a better experience than on XP64.

In the end, I believe the OP got his answer. This discussion no longer serves that purpose, And should probably be locked.

[D_Trace]

Vista's HDCP implementation is a path. If you want to play HDCP content it goes through secure channels from the computer through the video card to the monitor. If it's not protected content it goes via the non-HDCP path. If you're missing part of that chain you won't be able to play it without hacking.

Yes, Vista has a LOT of paths. If you use protected content then all non-protected interfaces will be actually turned off (on the fly).

Vista is constantly checking everything you do so you don't infringe anybody's IP. For the protected content to be actually "protected", even somes buses on the system have to be hidden and everything has to support encryption. There's more hardware, overhead and costs everywhere in the chain for this to happen. The user is treated as a suspect, and the Wintel PC, that is successful exactly because it is "open", is slowly being closed by DRM. The ironic part is that all this "protection" is actually broken if you are a little persistent and actually can be used AGAINST security (if your make a virus that is flagged as "protected content" by Vista, the the game is over, your antivirus or Vista itself can't barely touch it anymore). It just serves to make life miserable for users and developers.

No. Services can be stopped and started on demand.

But the kernel and most drivers can't. And DRM is built into everything, not just services. Vista doesn't trust itself, so to speak, a lot of communicatons between processes, services, etc, is encrypted.

"Room for improvement" and "sucks" are not equivalent.

He didn't have or was induced to choose Vista, the main product of his company that was already under bad lights. He could had gotten away by naming other "lesser" product. But the chose Vista.

And of course the interviewer would not ask "which product do you think suck the most?", he has to choose his words somewhat carefully, so he chose "room for improvement" or "polishing".

[D_Trace]

Simply put, It's a better version of XP64. If you have any knowledge about IT and technology in general, You would know what I'm talking about. But hey, Keep repeating opinions of clueless online pundits while you're at it. You're doing our work for us.

If you have any knowledge at all you'll backup your claims.

Start by explaining why Vista was banned from a lot of businesses. Or why MS was forced to extend XP's lifetime and licences availability (look at XP SP2c). Or why OEMs sell Vista licences but the computers actually ship with XP installed. Or why 80% of GAMERS, who would be a prime target for Vista, still use XP even with DX10 videocards, good CPUs and enough RAM.

http://steampowered.com/status/survey.html

You value their word? I value the word of people who actually tried using Vista. I believe the word of every IT person i work with that has tried Vista and is satisfied with its behavior and performance.

However, I do NOT believe the word of people with such poor expression skills.

That's because i'm not a native english speaker, dummy. Resorting to grammar to compensate the lack of arguments is a classic strawman.

And (as written before in this same thread...), i've used ALL version of Windows from Windows 3.0 to Server 2008 x64. And windows NT 6 so far is the worst Windows of the NT family.

Edited October 1, 2008 by D_Trace

[Eric Veteran]

^^^ *sigh* Another uninformed user ruining a thread. OP: Just go with Vista x64 if you can afford it. XP x64 is pretty much a lame duck. Microsoft doesn't even support it with Windows Live. The installer refuses to run.

[Ran Sagy]

For all your unyielding faith in giving backup to your claims, You haven't provided the slightest in defense of your claims. How many DX10 games are out there? That should satisfy your gaming claims.

Businesses banning Vista? Prove it. I know most business i work with (and i am a Software Developer and System Analyst, so i actually work around real IT companies including Microsoft, HP, Dell, SAP, and various other local IT companies) do use Vista for newer machines and slowly are upgrading their older. Adoption rate numbers for Vista ARE as good as previous NT systems, And that has been backed up by various surveys NOT affiliated with Microsoft. Proof? Search Neowin archive for articles. There were plenty posted here already.

Also, I'm not a native English speaker myself. I still don't write in CAPS AND SAY LOL AT THE END OF EACH LINE. Basic Etiquette - I'm not suggesting you write perfect-grammar English.

[D_Trace]

For all your unyielding faith in giving backup to your claims, You haven't provided the slightest in defense of your claims. How many DX10 games are out there? That should satisfy your gaming claims.

So you think that 80% of gamers haven't migrated to Vista because there aren't enough DX10 games?

If Vista was undoubtely better people would use it even for DX9 games.

Businesses banning Vista? Prove it.

http://www.informationweek.com/news/window...cleID=207801049

http://redmondmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=10071

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/new...tel-dumps-vista

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Top-Securit...sta-55104.shtml

http://news.cnet.com/Federal-agencies-ban-..._3-6166868.html

Not only corporations are avoiding Vista, but also the government.

Edited October 1, 2008 by D_Trace

[Ran Sagy]

80% of gamers don't just buy a new machine and hardware to play the same games on Vista. As more graphics cards with DX10 support are introduced and more new game ( and engines) utilize DX10, So does the usage of DX10 and Vista increases accordingly.

One article from that bunch seems to have any sort of validity to it - The Remondmag one.

I'm not sure where that survey pulls its data from, But its completely reverse to what i have personally seen in the field in the last year. Mac in the workspace? I haven't seen a single IT corporation using Mac OSX server or client as real workstation machines yet. As for business usage, How is Windows 2008 Server for adopt rate? Many people are deploying said product with Hyper-V machines as an alternative to VMware. Same code base, Slightly different packaged product with service configuration.

- Two articles are from March-May 2007. Which does not say a lot for the current situation, At all.

- As for what Symantec has to say - Excuse me? We're talking about the company who complained it cannot get it's software running properly in Vista without Kernel hacks. Also to remind that every other company, save Symantec and Mcaffee, did just that.

- The Inquierer? You are seriously bringing Inqueirer articles as a credible source? You can go over it's article list and find much more amusing 'facts' than Vista. And thats after Intel specifically worked with Microsoft to make its lower-end integrated graphics get accepted on the Vista Driver Model, And are developing DX10 support with Larrabee, Their GPU project. So much for Intel dumping Vista.

[usman767]

Too true.

Vista is XP SP3....with a new TCP/IP stack, new audio stack, upgraded kernel, huge security improvements, performance improvements, stability improvements (primarily in the improved driver infrastructure), etc.

So yeah, totally the same.

well said, vista is light years ahead of windows xp in terms of functionality and improvements...

[usman767]

Yes, Vista has a LOT of paths. If you use protected content then all non-protected interfaces will be actually turned off (on the fly).

Vista is constantly checking everything you do so you don't infringe anybody's IP. For the protected content to be actually "protected", even somes buses on the system have to be hidden and everything has to support encryption. There's more hardware, overhead and costs everywhere in the chain for this to happen. The user is treated as a suspect, and the Wintel PC, that is successful exactly because it is "open", is slowly being closed by DRM. The ironic part is that all this "protection" is actually broken if you are a little persistent and actually can be used AGAINST security (if your make a virus that is flagged as "protected content" by Vista, the the game is over, your antivirus or Vista itself can't barely touch it anymore). It just serves to make life miserable for users and developers.

Where is the proof? It seems pretty technical so u may have the mivcrosoft support documents meantioning the fact, isnt it? or any other credible source?

DRM functionality is also included in xp, while playing high defination content... same as vista.

[Ran Sagy]

And one would assume it is probably the same in Linux and OSX, unless they refuse to provide support for their users to play BluRay content.

[D_Trace]

80% of gamers don't just buy a new machine and hardware to play the same games on Vista.

They don't have to buy a new machine. They just have to install Vista on what they already have since most of them are already powerfull enough. Hard to believe that 80% of gamers just buy an OEM PC w/ a pre-installed OS and only change it when they buy a new computer. Specially after all the hype concerning Vista and gaming.

Where is the proof? It seems pretty technical so u may have the mivcrosoft support documents meantioning the fact, isnt it? or any other credible source?

Well, look at previous posts and find the link.

And yeah dude, besides a link showing Bill Gates bashing Vista, I also have a lot of official MS documents criticizing their own products... they do it every day... LOL

No source will be credible enough for you, isn't it? You'll keep repeating "where's the proof?" while just avoiding to read the links already provided, which are technical enough. For you people a credible source can only be Microsoft bashing its own product, anything else is not true.

Here's the same fact contained in the Inquirer article (Intel will skip Vista), but i guess this one won't be good enough either uh?

http://www.informationweek.com/news/window...cleID=208801142

Meanwhile, no one provides a link to counter anything i've said. They just keep asking for sources that can be found in 5 minutes with google if they wished. Since they cannot come with anything of their own, they must keep the other party busy by asking for sources for the most basic things.

DRM functionality is also included in xp, while playing high defination content... same as vista.

So how about a link saying the that XP's DRM is just like Vista's?

But be aware that, if I don't like it, I will keep asking you for more sources ad eternum without providing anything of my own.

What a waste of time. Bye.

[Ran Sagy]

What do we need to prove? We're just saying you're talking non-sense. Can you show me an official Intel decision about not using Vista, Despite them developing software and hardware that is Vista\DX10 dependent. And despite you have no facts regarding Vista's DRM-infestation. Or any of the other points your raise.

Bye. Next time prove anything you've said. Posting to articles which just iterate the point without any actual statistics or facts isn't showing anything.

[NEVER85]

If you have any knowledge at all you'll backup your claims.

Start by explaining why Vista was banned from a lot of businesses. Or why MS was forced to extend XP's lifetime and licences availability (look at XP SP2c). Or why OEMs sell Vista licences but the computers actually ship with XP installed. Or why 80% of GAMERS, who would be a prime target for Vista, still use XP even with DX10 videocards, good CPUs and enough RAM.

http://steampowered.com/status/survey.html

Yeah one survey = 80% of the world's gamers. I get equal (if not slightly better) framerates in Vista x64 than I ever did in XP with an AMD Athlon X2 5000+ processor, 4 GB of RAM, and an ATI Radeon HD 4850 video card. I've switched back and forth between XP and Vista on this machine to see if the XP fanboys like you have ANY sort of actual reasoning behind your incessant "XP IS BETTER THAN VISTA LOL" types of comments, and each time, I see nothing to back up your claims. The ONLY reason you people are so attached to XP is because it was Microsoft's mainstream OS for far longer than any other OS they ever created, hence people got too used to it. Vista was delayed time and time again because Microsoft's main priority was FIXING the sorry piece of **** that XP was. It was such a terrible operating system that Microsoft basically gave you a new OS (XP SP2) for free. Since there was nothing else in the mainstream other than XP for over 5 years (October 2001-January 2007), you can't bear to let go of it. Deny it if you want, but if Vista (or another MS OS) came out in the interim, say 2 years before Vista's actual release date, I'm willing to bet the vast majority of you XP fanboys wouldn't be so eager to keep XP.

[Eric Veteran]

So you think that 80% of gamers haven't migrated to Vista because there aren't enough DX10 games?

If Vista was undoubtely better people would use it even for DX9 games.

http://www.informationweek.com/news/window...cleID=207801049

http://redmondmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=10071

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/new...tel-dumps-vista

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Top-Securit...sta-55104.shtml

http://news.cnet.com/Federal-agencies-ban-..._3-6166868.html

Not only corporations are avoiding Vista, but also the government.

That's just asinine. They aren't upgrading to Vista because they don't need it. It has nothing to do with the quality of the operating system. Are you that same 12 year old that was arguing til blue in the mouth from last week?

[maplecookie Veteran]

Unfortunately this thread has dissolved into just bickering and is completely off topic.

If anyone has questions about if they should install xp or vista on their computer, please start a new thread.

Thread Closed