Vista basic must be faster ?

T C · 3 Oct 2007 at 13:42

stickroad said:
You have Home Premium right?

Home Premium is definelty worth the pitty £10 over Basic.

premium on them all , definitley worth it on my media pc its perfect for the job but the laptop is a workhorse and i just want it to boot up quick and start apps quick i dont even need the sound never mind media centre , and i could do with binning all the bloat on the games machine for quicker boots

T C · 3 Oct 2007 at 13:47

stickroad said:
All my applications, games etc load instantly for me, so dont know what your problem with your system is.

i dont have a real problem as such , but everything can be improved or we would be at a standstill and still running win 95 on a p80

danbroad · 3 Oct 2007 at 16:02

I have to ask the same as the OP question - if this machine is purely a gaming device, why pay a penny more for unused features? Even if it's 'only' £10?

I just spec'd my new gaming rig, and went with 64-bit basic. I'd have gone XP [hell, I'd use DOS if it meant I could load games easily], but the native 64-bit and facility for future games sold Vista to me. I will not be using this machine for anything other than loading games - I have a mac for everything else, and so I already have one eye-candy OS. Although Aero looks as lovely as OSX [no mac-fanboyism here, I promise - I sit in both camps], if I don't need it, must I pay extra?

This is a genuine question - I asked in another thread if there was any reason I'm selling myself short. For an extra £10, if there's a gaming feature I'll need, then I'll swap my order straight away.

uv · 3 Oct 2007 at 16:04

T C said:
personally i would pay MS an extra £10 to remove everything but the core os so i could just start the pc and play a game

use vLite. You can pretty much fit Vista onto a CD after you rip half the crap out. Pay me a tenner, and I'll spend 2 minutes work doing it for you

T C · 3 Oct 2007 at 16:33

uvmain said:
use vLite. You can pretty much fit Vista onto a CD after you rip half the crap out. Pay me a tenner, and I'll spend 2 minutes work doing it for you

now you see you did your sen out of £10 when you posted a name that i could quite easily google

cheers

marc2003 · 3 Oct 2007 at 16:36

what a load of nonsense being spouted in this thread. the services that slow vista down - the ones that constantly thrash your hard drive (like system restore, indexing, defender)- are present in basic too.

none of the bonus features in premium/ultimate will take more system resources than basic.

sure if you don't need aero or media centre, then get basic. it's a no brainer. why ask? :confused:

personally, i think aero basic/windows classic themes are fugly. control panel/explorer look terrible. it's worth the extra just for aero. and this doesn't affect gaming at all. windows disables aero automatically when you run a game full screen.

T C · 3 Oct 2007 at 16:47

marc2003 said:
what a load of nonsense being spouted in this thread.

its not nonsense, premium uses more resources hence the higher minimum spec on the box

marc2003 said:
sure if you don't need aero or media centre, then get basic. it's a no brainer. why ask?

because it seemed to much of a no brainer to me are we really paying extra cash for a pretty desktop and a media player is that it ? i thought there must be something else to premium than just that, but reading all the replies the only thing people are arguing the toss for is these 2 things :confused:

i cant believe every thing i read on the net says to get premium and its really just a tarts os :rolleyes:

marc2003 · 3 Oct 2007 at 16:55

T C said:
its not nonsense, premium uses more resources hence the higher minimum spec on the box

since when do specs on a box mean anything? and you call yourself a gamer?

T C · 3 Oct 2007 at 17:00

marc2003 said:
since when do specs on a box mean anything? and you call yourself a gamer?

yer but no but yer but .................... has anyone actually used vista with 512mb ram it must be painful :rolleyes:

james.miller · 3 Oct 2007 at 17:04

T C said:
its not nonsense, premium uses more resources hence the higher minimum spec on the box

not when your gaming it doesnt, thats the point. for those saying you might as well stick with vista basic if its a gaming machine....you might as well stick with xp if its a gaming machine. after all, it is still faster than vista and your not just saving £10 are you? you're saving the entire cost of vista basic.

i dont see any point in vista basic at all.

T C · 3 Oct 2007 at 17:06

james.miller said:
not when your gaming it doesnt, thats the point. for those saying you might as well stick with visat basic if its a gaming machine....you might as well stick with xp if its a gaming machine. after all, it is still faster than vista

have you heard of dx10 ? and 64bit that works ?

and basic vista is cheaper than xp

james.miller · 3 Oct 2007 at 17:13

T C said:
have you heard of dx10 ? and 64bit that works ?

64 bit is needed for gaming is it?

and basic vista is cheaper than xp

not if you've already got xp

its ironic that your so vocal about saving a whole £10 over vista premium and yet your recommending people upgrade to vista basic from xp...for a whole £56.

T C · 3 Oct 2007 at 17:24

james.miller said:
64 bit is needed for gaming is it?

whats need got to do with anything ? want

james.miller said:
not if you've already got xp

its ironic that your so vocal about saving a whole £10 over vista premium and yet your recommending people upgrade to vista basic from xp...for a whole £56.

now you see you havent read the whole thread have you keep up

its a new build and according to the eula new mobo new os but thats another topic

but basically we are talking about if upgrading which option is better and whether its worth it

Energize · 3 Oct 2007 at 17:44

T C said:
you cant just say that without an explanation ............

Yes he can because aero is the only new thing vista has. So why buy vista if you don't get aero?

OspreyO · 3 Oct 2007 at 17:57

If your looking for speed don't get Vista.

http://www.simhq.com/_technology2/technology_110a.html
http://www.simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2330301#Post2330301

I use it on my laptop and I kinda like it. I'm not that interested in max fps if a games runs ok, that good enough for me. I like playing around with new stuff so hence I've stuck with Vista.

stickroad · 3 Oct 2007 at 17:58

OspreyO said:
If your looking for speed don't get Vista.

http://www.simhq.com/_technology2/technology_110a.html
http://www.simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2330301#Post2330301

I use it on my laptop and I kinda like it. I'm not that interested in max fps if a games runs ok, that good enough for me. I like playing around with new stuff so hence I've stuck with Vista.

Funny Vista runs slightly smoother and quicker for me than XP ever did.

Some of you guys must be a load of crap at the whole configuring an O/S.

Energize · 3 Oct 2007 at 18:25

stickroad said:
Funny Vista runs slightly smoother and quicker for me than XP ever did.

Some of you guys must be a load of crap at the whole configuring an O/S.

That or you can't configure xp properly...

barnettgs · 3 Oct 2007 at 18:40

Have a look: Vista Home Basic on 512MB? Hey, it works!

Vista Basic is actually faster than premium or higher.

T C · 3 Oct 2007 at 21:40

barnettgs said:
Have a look: Vista Home Basic on 512MB? Hey, it works!

Vista Basic is actually faster than premium or higher.

hehehehe i actually feel smug at the moment until someone shoots me down in flames again lol

nolimit · 3 Oct 2007 at 23:05

I wouldn't mind getting the Home Basic version if the cost was 40% cheaper then Premium. It would be good cheap upgrade to the DX10/64bit future proof OS.

But atm, I can't get use to the Aero visual style it hurts me eyes. SlanXP is the only way forward!!