Do you Like Vista?

[MilesAhead]

gonwk I haven't done the multi-boot thing in a while
so I can't recommend any sites from first-hand experience.

I've noticed some XP/Vista dual boot threads on this forum:

http://thevistaforums.com/index.php?

I have seen some mention that Vista can be touchy about
resizing partitions. I probably wouldn't risk it unless

a) you have a restore-tested working Vista image backup
so you can put your HD back together if things go sour.

or

b) it's your clunky old "test stuff out" PC and if it
breaks you'll just put it out with the trash.

[gonwk]

Hi Guys,

I think I am going to listen to both of you folks ... Chewy & Miles ... and leave things as stand ... Vista on one, and good old XP on the other.

Thanks guys,

G!

[MilesAhead]

gonwk it's not that setting up dual boot is so complicated.
I've done it serveral times and had stable systems. The frustrating
part, and what converted me to the "use what came preinstalled"
religion, is that even if you do everything right, that particular
flavor of OS might not like something about that particular PC.
Sometimes you can get stuck in an endless reinstall loop that's
very boring.

But it was a while ago and the cheap image backup software that's
available now wasn't around then. So if you feel adventurous
and have a backup you know will work, you might have some
fun messing with it. It's sort of "been there, done that"
for me. I guess that's why I watch other people play
tennis instead of getting out there myself. Old, fat
and lazy.

[soup]

I just thought I would let you know that I am no longer going to use Vista as one of my OSs. It's not because I ever found anything wrong with Vista, except for my SS8 2-way firewall. Everything that I do, I could do in Vista just as I could in XP. I am going to attempt within the next couple of days an install on the ex Vista drive of XPPro X64. Never did an install before so we will see how it goes.

[NightbladeXX]

NightbladeXX I'm just curious. When you installed both OS I take it you had XP on then added Vista? How did it go? I'm wondering because I've seen some stuff that if you have Vista to start, then put on XP you have to mess with Vista bootup files to get it bootable again. I'm thinking when I get the next machine I might add XP to this Vista machine so it doesn't seem so slow compared to the next(hopefully quad core) PC.

I had XP but blew it off the HD then installed a fresh copy of Vista HP

just did an upgrade from XP Home to Vista HP and man what a frickn PITA

mental note: never buy an upgrade edition of Vista, buy an OEM Full Version

then I went back and installed XP Pro on another HD using Acronis Disk Director I adjusted the Boot files

Now I have installed Ubuntu on another HD as well and its a triple boot

if you re worried about the boot files theres alot of inof out there about dual booting even on MS' site, thats where I started looking first

[dr_ml422]

hi fellas. i know several guys really into computing, and a lot of the other material that's covered here. some just finished building some really hi-tech pcs w/upgrades to verizon fios, and the one mistake they told me they made was putting vista in. seems like it's an individual preference based on one's hardware etc...

personally i'm staying away from it. let microsoft work out all those bugs,more or less, and even then think twice about it.

[Chewy]

hi fellas. i know several guys really into computing, and a lot of the other material that's covered here. some just finished building some really hi-tech pcs w/upgrades to verizon fios, and the one mistake they told me they made was putting vista in. seems like it's an individual preference based on one's hardware etc...

personally i'm staying away from it. let microsoft work out all those bugs,more or less, and even then think twice about it.

There's always been several advantages to building your own computer, microsoft just furnished another one when they released Vista and all the major maunfacturers quit offering windows xp as a choice.

[dr_ml422]

hear you loud and clear chewy. my friend told me it was literally hell w/vista. he had some parts shipped from japan and europe, and had to take everything out and start all over.

thought he was pulling my leg about how fast and clear that fios is. minutes to download a flic. seconds to burn a cd. had to run it by someone else who confirmed it.

the build is coming.

[MilesAhead]

NightbladeXX thanks for the input. I'm sort of dangling 'til I see
what AMD comes out with in the way of quad core. So I have to
keep myself occupied with software for a while.

[Jensen]

I heard the AMD quad core is supposed to have the same amount of pins as the duo. Which makes for an easy swap. This is just what I heard from a sales guy.

[Chewy]

I heard the AMD quad core is supposed to have the same amount of pins as the duo. Which makes for an easy swap. This is just what I heard from a sales guy.

they just came out and looking at the reviews they require an am2+ mobo,
of which newegg has a grand total of 5 available

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010200022+1070930149&name=AM2%2b%2fAM2

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103226

I'm putting an end to all this talk about it being good and bad. It requires an AM2+ socket to put into. If your motherboard doesn't have it, either don't buy it, or don't write a review on it.

salesmen??????????????

[MilesAhead]

Looks like they missed the boat for desktop machines by
Christmas. I'm lookin' forward to reading reviews of off the
shelf systems. Chewy do you know if this technology is essentially
the same as they were using in servers? IOW, it's already
essentially field tested? Or is it still untried stuff?

[Chewy]

the server chips have been out a few months, the only big difference is the server chips
support 2 or more per motherboard

they have tested well, beating the xeon clock for clock, as they should since they are a true quad core and the cores communicate faster, also they use less power, make less heat, but they are running at lower clock speed

so they really only compete at the entry and mid level

intel quad cores have not really been tested in my opinion, let's see how they fare after a year at higher temps

A lot of P4's and amd xp's burned up running too hot

Single core amd64's are probably going to outlast everything

[MilesAhead]

That sounds very interesting to me since I like to get price/performance
point around the $1000 ballpark. If I can get an AMD quad off the shelf for
under $1200 I'll prolly go for it.

[dr_ml422]

and to think i started a thread on quad cores so as not to side track this one w/a different one. go figure.

wow. i had no idea that a core whether single, duo, or quad would cost that much.

what would be a good ballpark figure 4 a really decent build? might as well have something to work w/as of now.