to get a new desktop without vista on it? I'm sure vista is all great and everything, but I just wanna keep XP around.

7/8/2008 12:35:13 AM

Just build one and pick up an real copy of XP to go on it if you want the OS to be legit.

7/8/2008 1:00:10 AM

yeah that might be the course I have to take.

7/8/2008 1:44:23 AM

dell offers xp.

7/8/2008 2:07:37 AM

you can get lenovo thinkcentre desktop systems with XP.. these are business machines though, not gaming "rigs" with neon lights

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883108147

7/8/2008 8:42:32 AM

On a similar note, where can a student OEM XP license be obtained?

it seems that the UNC bookstore no longer carries it. I assume that's probably the same case with the NCSU bookstore...

7/8/2008 8:52:08 AM

the NCSU bookstore may still order it if you call but it will be almost full price

the only versions that you could get for $79.95 were the upgrade disks

although, im sure you could find a win98 disk around...

7/8/2008 11:04:25 AM

They have announced that they are pulling the plug on XP, so you will have to purchase a comp with Vista and "downgrade" (if you want to call it that) to XP

7/8/2008 11:07:21 AM

i have had zero problems on my vista machine, its more reliable than my xp machine

7/8/2008 11:26:14 AM

Quote :

"i have had zero problems on my vista machine, its more reliable than my xp machine"

7/8/2008 11:29:34 AM

for me, windows vista is like windows ME, except this time I'm smart enough not to use it and torture myself.

i'm probably going straight from XP to the next one, whenever it may come out. XP is good enough til then.

piracy ftw

[Edited on July 8, 2008 at 12:00 PM. Reason : .]

7/8/2008 11:59:19 AM

so you haven't used it, but you've determined it's the next Windows ME. Sounds like good reasoning!

7/8/2008 12:41:05 PM

I have Vista on my laptop.

But just put XP on my new desktop.

It's a pain in the neck. After you've turned off all the annoying features, you have a better looking XP that uses 50% more memory and runs 20% less software.

7/8/2008 1:11:42 PM

^^ i've never been to Baghdad but i'm pretty sure i'm making a good decision to not go there any time soon

7/8/2008 1:27:33 PM

Yes that's a logical comparison.

7/8/2008 1:48:38 PM

Quote :

"you have a better looking XP that uses 50% more memory"

again, I have to ask: "Is this a bad thing?" You'd rather have the memory sitting there in your computer, idle? What for? I agree, Vista does use more memory but it also runs snappier than any XP box I've built.

And 20%, really?? What software does Vista not run that XP does? I'm genuinely curious here.

Quote :

"^^ i've never been to Baghdad but i'm pretty sure i'm making a good decision to not go there any time soon"

Prove to me that Vista is to a computer as a war is to Baghdad and I'll subscribe to your newsletter. Hint: something you read on a blog doesn't count.


[Edited on July 8, 2008 at 2:14 PM. Reason : d]

7/8/2008 2:08:07 PM

Quote :

"And 20%, really?? What software does Vista not run that XP does? I'm genuinely curious here."

The 20% is inaccurate, I'm sure. I was just choosing a random non-insignificant but non-huge percentage.

In my personal experience, though:

-NCWise: the program teachers in NC use to record grades. This makes Vista a complete no-go.
-PeerGaurdian
-Filezilla
-Nero (although I've read that newer versions work)
-Knights of the Old Republic (I thought it might've been my laptop's video card, but the internets confirmed that it was Vista)

When I set up my dad's Dell with Vista, it was a peripheral masssacre:

-Logitech joystick
-Random old joystick that worked with XP
-HP scanner
-HP printer

7/8/2008 3:03:46 PM

do you realize you can run programs in XP SP 2 mode? It will make most, if not all, of the programs you listed work. Also, FileZilla and Nero both work on Vista. Haven't personally tried any of the others, so I can't say but I suspect you can get them to work one way or another.

The drivers were a mess when Vista was released, but I've installed it on about 5 machines recently with a wide array of hardware and have had no problems whatsoever (including 64-bit Vista, which shocked me).

My main point here is that it's the "cool" thing to hate Vista and most of the people who talk about it have no clue. It's no revolution, but it's a nice upgrade from XP if you ask me.

7/8/2008 3:46:09 PM

Nero didn't work because they were using a hardware hack in their ASPI drivers. It's been fixed and works like a champ in Vista.

Old HP shit doesn't work well because HP makes HORRIBLE drivers and has never bothered to bring their old drivers into compliance.

Any non-hardware interfacing application should work FINE on Vista if it runs on XP. Worst case as ^ said, use the compatibility options. They are much improved from XP and actually work now

Quote :

"again, I have to ask: "Is this a bad thing?" You'd rather have the memory sitting there in your computer, idle? What for? I agree, Vista does use more memory but it also runs snappier than any XP box I've built. "

It ain't snappier than XP. And yes, in this case it's a bad thing. A lot of that memory isn't just memory being used, its processor time and hard disk time coupled with them. Which is not a good thing, and it pisses me off that even after disabling services, it STILL abuses memory and disk paging/caching on things it doesn't need to. This, along with the UAC implementation are probably my two biggest irks with Vista.


[Edited on July 8, 2008 at 4:57 PM. Reason : .]

7/8/2008 4:55:32 PM