Why do I feel like the only one left on XP?

[Burnsy2023]

Would you believe that the place I work at are only now doing a slow rollout upgrade from Windows 2000 TO xp?

Yes. Businesses are well known for being slow at adopting new technologies, especially something like an OS company wide.

Burnsy

 

[TheVoice]

I'll make a prediction now: the reception for Windows 7 will not be good. My reasoning is that MS seem to have hinted that the whole UI will be changed. Users do not like change and therefore will not want to move.

So don't hope too much

Burnsy

Enough people seem to 'hate' Vista due to the interface (which isn't particularly different anyway, when all said and done), so if 7 is dramatically different, I hate to think what the response will be.

And yet, people will happily move to an entirely different, unfamiliar interface by switching to a Mac instead.

I always find the attitudes towards changes - specifically interface changes - an odd one. Seems like there's always a lot of people immediately moaning when something like Hotmail, MSN, Facebook, or shopping websites change their interface design. Instead of actually trying it for a while and realising that it's been improved, they immediately hate it and long for the old version.

 

[*Chris]

ive got xp and 4 gig of ram, tells you what i think of vista

ill upgrade when the time is right

 

[uv]

Would you believe that the place I work at are only now doing a slow rollout upgrade from Windows 2000 TO xp?

It's easier to support an OS when you've been supporting it for 8 years

Why upgrade client OS's when there's no extra features needed for the applications used?

For personal use, Vista is fantastic, but from a support point of view NT4 is still the way to go unless you're a relatively new business startup.

 

[this_is_gav]

You also don't get all the issues with pausing etc that you do with Vista.

Pauses? What the hell have you done to your Vista? :\

 

[Burnsy2023]

For personal use, Vista is fantastic, but from a support point of view NT4 is still the way to go unless you're a relatively new business startup.

You're being very silly now. Any business should at least be on a 2000 domain with active directory.

Burnsy

 

[Fire Wizard]

Theres too many clicks for simple operations, frequent pauses for no reason, and I've had many file permission/ownership issues caused by Vista.

Hello OspreyO, what do specifically mean when you say "Theres too many clicks for simple operations"?

Care to elaborate on what you mean by "frequent pauses for no reason" and "file permission/ownership issues caused by Vista" please?

Thanks.

 

[SimonC]

XP F.T.W

 

[this_is_gav]

XP F.T.W

Well elaborated on.

 

[Antar Bolaeisk]

Be careful upgrading to Vista, it's like a drug, once you start using it you're hooked.

Seriously though, upgrade when you want to. I do a lot of clean-ups and stuff for various people as a kind of side job and wanted to be prepared for people with problems on Vista so for me it was almost a necessary upgrade. Well, that was my reasoning behind but really I wanted to try out Vista for myself. I now find myself rarely using XP, generally only when I've screwed something up in Vista. Some of the new UI features take a bit of getting used to, such as the breadcrumbs address bar, but they become very handy once you do. As said though, don't upgrade unless you feel the need to.

I'm guessing you're feeling that need though if you're posting a thread like this and are just looking for an excuse/reason to the gf/wife/parents/yourself for such an outlay of cash. It isn't even that much considering it's possibly the single most important piece of software on your computer.

 

[SimonC]

Well elaborated on.

lol, I was just letting the OP know that he's not alone and couldn't be arsed to type out a 100 word post why I prefer XP over Vista and yes I have used vista...

But after alls said and done XP F.T.W coz its sweet

 

[uv]

You're being very silly now

I was being silly, but just exxagerating a point

Our users have recently migrated from 2K to XP, but from a core point of view they're quite similar, so the support remains the same.

tbh, it's not just the new OS variables that would make us wary of switching to Vista, the machines probably wouldn't have the brawns to run it

 

[TheVoice]

My laptop is still on xp. I doubt a Pentium M 1.7 ghz even with 2gig would cope well with vista.

It'd run surprisingly well actually; I installed Vista on my Dell 630m and it was very usable, albeit I didn't get the Aero interface because the integrated graphics weren't capable of it. There was a bit of slowdown when booting (easily avoided by using Hibernate, something all notebook users should use anyway), but mine only had 1GB of RAM so with 2GB it'd certainly be a smoother experience.

 

[swinnie]

I have ordered a new laptop and that will have Vista Home Premium, I chose Vista because I wanted to start to "future proof myself" in a simple, but effective way. Seeing as XP will not be supported in a few years and my laptop will still have life in it, I see no point in getting new computers with XP in them. You are not being forced to upgrade by anyone.

My other reason for going to Vista on my new laptop is that I wanted to spend some amount of time with it, get to find out how it really works, if it's faster than XP, and if I could live with it full time on my desktop. If I really want to I can get XP drivers for my new laptop, however I aim to stick with Vista, and eventually upgrade my system and get Vista x64 on there.

 

[Tetsu]

I'm still on X to pizzle

 

[Ratbag]

After reading all the horror stories about Vista on lower end machines I was a bit worried about my new Dell laptop with vista basic. Celery 1.8, 1GB RAM, intel graphics: 3.1 vista experience index......

Well after a bit of tweaking - uninstalling all the OEM crud, tweaking the indexing settings (this is something almost all users should do!), stripping down the services etc it runs just fine. Obviously no hardcore gaming but for internet access and media playing its fast and responsive.

However, I've got XP on my desktop PC and I won't be upgrading - theres no point if all your apps run OK.

 

[lokkers]

theres no point if all your apps run OK.

I think thats the key if i'm honest - if your current hardware and apps run fine on XP then stick with it. However, if you're building a new machine, or upgrading to 3gb+ ram, or you like to have the latest, then give Vista a go. It really is a step up from XP, but by all means upgrade when you need to or are ready to.

Personally, I really liked XP but I will never go back now.

 

[Linken]

I'd stick to XP, until you buy 4GB+ of RAM.

 

[OspreyO]

Hello OspreyO, what do specifically mean when you say "Theres too many clicks for simple operations"?

Care to elaborate on what you mean by "frequent pauses for no reason" and "file permission/ownership issues caused by Vista" please?

Thanks.

I noticed when I was switching between machines a lot that the Vista machines seemed to have more prompts requiring more clicks than you'd have to on a XP machine. That was my general impression after 6 months of using it. I mainly use XP now, and Vista infrequently, so I can't remember which specific tasks, I'd have to go back and compare a task step by step.

I find on Vista machines, the OS often has to go away and do a little think before continuing some operations. File copying seemed to do often. Maybe its checking permissions, folder types, indexing, or who knows.

I have a lot of data on NTFS/FAT32 external drives. I would frequently file I couldn't do things with certain files/folders. I'd give my self rights, ownership the works. But Vista just didn't want to play ball some times. I had no such problems working with the same data from a XP machine.

 

[OspreyO]

Pauses? What the hell have you done to your Vista? :\

I use a lot of different machines. I found it to be a common trait, regardless if it was a factory install or someone had installed it themselves.