xp vs. vista

[ns400r]

Something seriously wrong then somewhere, latest benchmarks show Vista very close to XP and even beating XP in some games.


No way I'm getting that much of a hit even with my 7800GT card.

Lataest benchmarks are other peoples, not mine. With mine there is a 20-25% difference in games. General Windows tasks and Vista is great and I've no complaints.

 

[Mr Jack]

I use beta and official drivers by Nvidia and ATI which are signed

My question about beta versions was just that - a question. Thanks for answering.

if the company in question can't be bothered to get them signed then that's their problem not Vista's or Microsoft,

Well, yes, it is Microsoft's fault because they have chosen to limit your ability to control your own system regardless of your own knowledge or competence. And regardless of who's fault it is, if I need to use a driver that isn't signed I need to use it.

Btw if I did come across 16 bit software I'll probably ditch it for 32 bit version or something silimar from a different company that offers 32 bit version,no real excuse nowadays to be using 16 bit software still.

I don't always have that choice. If the project I'm working on uses a 16-bit program I won't necessarily have the choice of replacing it and likely won't without cost in terms of wasted time and inconvenience.

As to modified drivers,you should know installing those can be risky why compromise your system?

Because I trust myself to install software on my system intelligently. What you say is, after all, equally true of anything else I install on my PC - it can be risky but if you know what you are doing those risks are minimal. Certainly I have never once had a problem resulting from installing unsigned drivers - whereas I have had problems from signed drivers. Signing is no guarantee of validity.

To my mind the only real reason to choose 64-bit Vista is the choice of 4Gb of memory, well, I don't think that is worth the compromises.