No, I didn’t even get two minutes — I got a red screen of death one minute into installation. 
That was in the very early betas man… and yes hilarious to say the least.
I don’t love Vista either…but I just hate how people automatically follow the mainstream media (which like the Democrat nomination process recently…) just biases everyone’s opinions. It’s crazy IMO, if the media told everyone in the US to jump off a bridge, I’d bet half of them would.
Anyway, everyone please either use it for yourself for awhile, or read up on it more before commenting. That should go for any conversation.
[quote=Theros;2351085]Actually, your wrong about the XP being faster than Vista…as of right now (after SP1 basically), the speed of Vista outside of games and inside of games is basically the same as XP…
And also, how can you comment on it if you don’t even run it yourself? Your friend’s set-up could have been ****ty, which would have affected a lot of things, many of which wouldn’t have been Vista’s fault. Not defending Vista here…but I just think your complaints aren’t that valid frankly.[/quote]
It was a core 2 duo with 2 gigs of ram and a dedicated graphics card. I know exactly what the setup was, because they asked me to sort it out, it WAS ****ty and full of viruses etc.
XP running on the same computer is much, much faster. I’m not talking about games and benchmarks and rendering either, quite simply I’m talking about boot up time and general use, the time it takes to navigate around, even just open IE etc etc.
It’s horrible.
By the way, when I say fisher price, I am NOT talking about styling/design. Quite clearly it beats XP hands down there. I’m talking about functionality, which is bad.
And hey hey, hold your horses a second, I hope you’re not regerring to me following mainstream media etc.
I don’t read tech websites/magazines. They are incredibly boring to me, I’m interested in art/photography, motion graphics and games.
I had NO idea what the general opinion was about Vista before I used it, I mean really none at all.
All I knew was some people referred to a fair amount of things NOT being Vista compatible for the time being, so I thought I would stick with XP until Vista ran everything I wanted it to.
I was actually expecting to like Vista, for the simple reason that when XP came out, I thought it was better than any previous version of windows.
Logically, I thought Vista should be better than XP.
I was in for a big surprise, I disliked it intensely.
ok ok, as much as I would like to argue XP v Vista I have to stop this so we can get back on topic. SO BACK TO TOPIC!!
.soulty I already ordered the video card and everything this can be closed. I will res the workplace/office thread with a photo later.
[ot]
XP running on the same computer is much, much faster. I’m not talking about games and benchmarks and rendering either, quite simply I’m talking about boot up time and general use, the time it takes to navigate around, even just open IE etc etc.
Boot up time is actually significantly slower for XP… I don’t know what kind of tests you are running there (vista is about 25seconds if I remember right and like 10 coming out of hibernation, I generally only sleep my laptop so 3 second).
By the way, when I say fisher price, I am NOT talking about styling/design. Quite clearly it beats XP hands down there. I’m talking about functionality, which is bad.
The usability has been vastly improved over XP.
I’m starting to doubt you even used Vista.[/ot]
^ done, thread closed 
