Shoutbox

quote:

---

Originally posted by ShawnZ

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jarrod

quote:

---

Originally posted by ShawnZ
windows XP isn't supported by microsoft anymore

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Microsoft
We plan to provide support for Windows XP until 2014.

---

*checks date
sources: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-xp/future.aspx

---

http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?LN=en-gb&C2=1173
mainstream support is over

---

Which means nothing for the normal consumer.... XP will be supported till 2014 as Jarrod said.

The only difference between mainstream and extended support is that you can't claim a warranty anymore, or request a feature change. And free incident/personal support isn't given anymore either. All things which are hardly used anyways (most people don't even know they exist or where to go to request that kind of support).

And it is not because MS stops all support for an OS that the OS suddenly wouldn't work anymore or that people stop using it or stop developping for it. Bug-wise XP has become very mature, which is something you can hardly say about Vista and Win7. Although Vista and Win7 are, out-of-the-box, indeed more secure than XP. But that also means they are, out-of-the-box, more 'restricted' (which some people find very annoying).

Personaly I would not switch to Win7, especially if you are used to XP and already have some computer experience. If you are just a 'beginner', than it might be another case. Either way, personaly I think it is still way to early and there are still too many problems with it (especially driver-wise).

Oh, and performance-wise: both Vista and Win7 run slower than XP in my experience. That is, the thing is that most people do not make a fair comparisson. They compare a very much used XP on a pentium4 with a brand new Win7 on a quad core so to speak. Of course Win7 and your programs, are going to run faster in that case.

But if you compare all the (32bit) OSs on the same machine, with the same amount of usage and programs (the more you do, install, remove, etc on an OS, the slower it eventually gets in the long run), with the same default out-of-the-box settings (eye-candy etc), than you would find that XP is the faster though.

Of course the question would be if such a comparisson is usefull. I mean, why would you run a 32-bit XP on a brand new 64-bit quad core monster with 6GB of RAM? So, in the end, the question shouldn't be which is faster, but is your PC powerfull enough to benefit from the new OS? If so, then by all means get the newer OS. If not, then you will not gain much performance by installing a newer OS, on the contrary, everything might run a lot slower.

Then there is also the work performance of yourself. Using the new OSs (Vista and Win7) also means learning a few new things as the user interface is changed compared to XP and its predecessors. Many stuff can't be found anymore in the places you are used to, but are moved somewhere else. For some people this might be a problem. This is by the way one of the reasons (together with the obvious extremely high costs) why companies will not move to new OSs as fast. In fact it usually takes many many years before they move to a new OS.

quote:

---

Originally posted by segosa

quote:

---

Originally posted by alegator

quote:

---

Originally posted by segosa

quote:

---

Originally posted by alegator

quote:

---

Originally posted by ShawnZ
the point of upgrading isn't to make your system faster, it's for security/reliability/new features... windows XP isn't supported by microsoft anymore

that being said, there are many areas of win7 where speed *has* been improved (like boot times) but there are generally much better reasons to upgrade

---

Yes, I know that Win7 provides new features/reliability/better securiity compared to XP, that's the idea behind upgrading. But if all that will come at the expense of a much slower performance (specific to my system) then it might not be worth it, specially since as I said I'm having no issues with XP.
As far as official support for XP, Microsoft will keep releasing security patches for XP until 2011 (at least that's what I read).

---

Perhaps you would be better off sticking to XP for now, and then switching to 7 when you get a new computer. That's what I did.

---

Yes, I plan on getting a new Win7 PC anyway. After 8 years with the same PC I guess I deserve it!

---

Out of interest, what spec is your current PC?

---

It's a Dell Dimension 8200, came originally with WinXP SP0, 2Gb RDRAM, P4 3.06Ghz HT, Intel 850 chipset, ATI Radeon 800XT AGP, Turtle Beach Santa Cruz sound card, WD500Gb IDE, LG GSA H42N DVD burner, Lucent PCI WinModem, Intel Pro /100M PCI NIC.
The Win7 Upgrade Advisor reported everything compatible except for the sound card, but there's a workaround or else for $24 I can get a new compatible card.
Of course, even then, I won't be able to enjoy DX10 or 11, I'll be stuck with DX9 as my system only accepts AGP cards.

I'm using Windows 7 right now. Boot times are faster, FPS in games is slightly lower.

There are so many little niggles that I have with XP that are fixed in Windows 7. For example, you can now move maximised windows to another monitor without an addon. Or when watching videos in full screen in Windows Media Player on your primary monitor, the taskbar no longer floats on top if you alt-tab out. Oh, and I think libraries are godlike.

Your PC will probably run Windows 7 just fine, but I think the CPU/GPU will be knocking the low 2-3 scores...

Not worth it just now anyway. RC1 is still a bit buggy. Sometimes when I lock the screen WoW will just exit. And it appears it won't resume from standby properly, either that, or my ACPI tables on my new motherboard are broken.

quote:

---

Originally posted by alegator
It's a Dell Dimension 8200, came originally with WinXP SP0, 2Gb RDRAM, P4 3.06Ghz HT, Intel 850 chipset, ATI Radeon 800XT AGP, Turtle Beach Santa Cruz sound card, WD500Gb IDE, LG GSA H42N DVD burner, Lucent PCI WinModem, Intel Pro /100M PCI NIC.

---

That's a little better than I'd have expected from 2001.

Windows 7 is said to perform about the same or even slightly better than XP on marginal hardware.  That would be a massive improvement over Vista.  It is also much nicer than Vista.

I'd probably not bother to upgrade looking for performance, but you can certainly do so if you are tired of XP and want to try something new.  The user interface improvements are worthwhile, I think. 

It really depends on how hard this will be for you to do.  I don't think an in-place upgrade is even an option and wouldn't recommend it if it is -- you will be looking at wiping your system volume partition clean.  You will have to back up data, find new drivers and do other things which are not necessarily difficult for technically inclined users, but could be a daunting task if you have never done anything like it. 

Assuming you are going to go with the legally available RC release, this is also something you will have to do again before the March of next year, when it expires.  Microsoft says the RC (and various betas) will not be in-place upgradable to the release (although there are reports that it works).  This may not be a problem if you plan to get a new computer before then.

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised

quote:

---

Originally posted by ShawnZ

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jarrod

quote:

---

Originally posted by ShawnZ
windows XP isn't supported by microsoft anymore

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Microsoft
We plan to provide support for Windows XP until 2014.

---

*checks date
sources: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-xp/future.aspx

---

http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?LN=en-gb&C2=1173
mainstream support is over

---

Which means nothing for the normal consumer.... XP will be supported till 2014 as Jarrod said.

The only difference between mainstream and extended support is that you can't claim a warranty anymore, or request a feature change. And free incident/personal support isn't given anymore either. All things which are hardly used anyways (most people don't even know they exist or where to go to request that kind of support).

And it is not because MS stops all support for an OS that the OS suddenly wouldn't work anymore or that people stop using it or stop developping for it. Bug-wise XP has become very mature, which is something you can hardly say about Vista and Win7. Although Vista and Win7 are, out-of-the-box, indeed more secure than XP. But that also means they are, out-of-the-box, more 'restricted' (which some people find very annoying).

Personaly I would not switch to Win7, especially if you are used to XP and already have some computer experience. If you are just a 'beginner', than it might be another case. Either way, personaly I think it is still way to early and there are still too many problems with it (especially driver-wise).

Oh, and performance-wise: both Vista and Win7 run slower than XP in my experience. That is, the thing is that most people do not make a fair comparisson. They compare a very much used XP on a pentium4 with a brand new Win7 on a quad core so to speak. Of course Win7 and your programs, are going to run faster in that case.

But if compare all the (32bit) OSs on the same machine, with the same amount of usage and programs (the more you do, install, remove, etc on an OS, the slower it eventually gets in the long run), with the same default out-of-the-box settings (eye-candy etc), than you would find that XP is the faster though.

Of course the question can be if such a comparisson is usefull. I mean, why would you run a 32-bit XP on a brand new 64-bit quad core monster with 6GB of RAM? So, in the end, the question shouldn't be which is faster, but is your PC powerfull enough to benefit from the new OS? If so, then by all means get the newer OS. If not, then you will not gain much performance by installing a newer OS, on the contrary, everything might run a lot slower.

Then there is also the work performance of yourself. Using the new OSs (Vista and Win7) also means learning a few new things as the user interface is changed compared to XP and its predecessors. Many stuff can't be found anymore in the places you are used to, but are moved somewhere else. For some people this might be a problem. This is by the way one of the reasons (together with the obvious extremely high costs) why companies will not move to new OSs as fast. In fact it usually takes many many years before they move to a new OS.

---

I generally agree with what you said, my Dell PC was originally meant for XP and I intend to leave it that way, too many programs and tweaks installed so probably not worth the effort. In addition, my current sound card, HP printer and HP scanner lack drivers for Vista and Win7.

quote:

---

Originally posted by andrewdodd13
...Your PC will probably run Windows 7 just fine, but I think the CPU/GPU will be knocking the low 2-3 scores...

---

I installed Win7 RC in a separate hard drive for testing purposes and also to get familiar with the GUI. It actually felt very good, boot time was much improved (however Norton Internet Security was not installed which increases boot time), and in general I felt very comfortable working with the new GUI, it also felt quite fast and responsive. These  are the "Windows Experience Index" scores as rated by Windows 7:
PROCESSOR:              4.0 (P4 3.06GHz HT)
MEMORY (RAM):          4.3 (2Gb RDRAM)
GRAPHICS:                 5.9 (ATI RADEON 800XT)
GAMING GRAPHICS:      4.6 (ATI RADEON 800XT)
PRIMARY HARD DISK:    4.9 (I used a very old IDE IBM 60Gb HD for testing)

BASE SCORE: 4.0 (Determined by lowest subscore)


It seems that my 8 year old Dell is performing much better than expected!

quote:

---

Originally posted by alegator
BASE SCORE: 4.0 (Determined by lowest subscore)

---

a score of 4 is actually pretty good, my mom's laptop is 1-2 and its fairly speedy (no glass, of course)

quote:

---

Originally posted by alegator
however Norton Internet Security was not installed which increases boot time

---

i wouldn't recommend installing any norton crap to begin with

My Windows score is 4.9 and that's with a fairly new mid-range processor and graphics card... Just shows W7 will run on quite an "outdated PC"... does this mean people won't upgrade as often?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spunky
My Windows score is 4.9 and that's with a fairly new mid-range processor and graphics card... Just shows W7 will run on quite an "outdated PC"... does this mean people won't upgrade as often?

---

It just means that more people will be able to upgrade to Win7 without investing in new hardware.