Vista Rocks/Sucks. Period.

[MetalheadGautham]

Quad boot is a menace

why would anyone want to quad boot ?
nobody in their right mind will install windows, mac, linux, bsd, solaris and beos in the same system.

 

[gxsaurav]

why would anyone want to quad boot ?
nobody in their right mind will install windows, mac, linux, bsd, solaris and beos in the same system.

Lets just say some people like to play with different OS. What then?? Should the person change his habit???

 

[iMav]

why would anyone want to quad boot ?

To know how the OS differs and be in the perfect position with enough user experience on each platform to make comment & pass judgements

 

[Faun]

lool

 

[desiibond]

I just love the security and look of vista. Been long since I installed antivirus or antispyware. Lot Lot better than XP when it comes to stability and security. Fortunately, I don't have any peripheral that is incompatible with Vista.

 

[dheeraj_kumar]

Kalpik boy you sure are evil... I can imagine the evil smile on your face when you clicked the Merge button lol.. and you are indirectly supporting FOSS in this discussion by having a debian avatar eh? evil mod...

 

[ring_wraith]

Ok, so here is a quick conclusion of what GX and iMav have to say:

1) RAM lag is not caused by less RAM, or redistirbution of RAM contents.
Here you go:

Virtual memory does have its limits and these limits can be very 'limiting'. Suppose you only have 512 MB of memory (in addition to virtual memory), but the game you're running is using up to 1 GBs of memory (or more). Even with virtual memory, there's only place for less than half of that in RAM. You'd have to put the rest of it in virtual memory. If the game needs to access all of them at once, the operating system must swap between the RAM and the page file. In this situation, the processor will be able to quickly process the data in memory, but it may have to wait until the rest of the data (in virtual memory) is swapped from the hard disk - the hard disk is much slower than RAM. That's when you'll notice a sharp drop in frame rates - a 'stutter'. Frame rates will go back up once the hard disk finished reading (or writing) and all the data processed. With larger amounts of data, the hard disk will have to spend more time accessing data, so the 'stutter' can take more time. The worst scenario in this case will be if the game needs to access all these data all the time, then the operating system must continually swap data between RAM and virtual memory.

source : *www.tech-hounds.com/article12/ArticlesPage1.html

2)Quad booting is not a menace
I honestly don't think I need to say much here. Fine, go ahead, keep 4 OSs, wasting disk space, wondering where you installed what, installing multiple apps that fulfill the same purpose.

Also, why do you want to virtualize? So you can have a major performance hit? Do you get a kick out of that or something? Does it make you feel like an uber-geek?

3)Vista has better gaming performance than XP.
He He He..... what a joke.

4)Using the same PC, XP will slow down and Vista will not.
Again, he he he...

And saurav, the idea that I would take the advice of the shopkeeper is something I take personally. Do you really have to stoop to the level where you have to insult me to prove your point?

To know how the OS differs and be in the perfect position with enough user experience on each platform to make comment & pass judgements

So you went to all that trouble just so that when someone asked you, "Hey, which OS should I use?" you could give them an appropriate answer?

I guess that all the effort you put into quad-booting is disillusioning you from its many defects.

 

[iMav]

2)Quad booting is not a menace
I honestly don't think I need to say much here. Fine, go ahead, keep 4 OSs, wasting disk space, wondering where you installed what, installing multiple apps that fulfill the same purpose.

I very well know what I installed where, if you can't figure that out that is a problem with you not with people who use multiple OSs on their machine

3)Vista has better gaming performance than XP.
He He He..... what a joke.

I thought your proficiency in English was high. Guess I was wrong, this is what you asked:

Quick question : Do you face that problem to the same extent on XP?

and I replied Yes, which means the lag is the same on both OSs and not less or more which makes something better or worse

So you went to all that trouble just so that when someone asked you, "Hey, which OS should I use?" you could give them an appropriate answer?

It's a hobby.

I guess that all the effort you put into quad-booting is disillusioning you from its many defects.

Not really, I guess there is some problem with your fundamentals itself, effort into trying something tells you first hand how much trouble you faced with what and does not dis-illusion, rather clears all illusions

And after working with 4 different platforms, not to mention that I have troubleshot and made them work as I want to which gives me enough user experience to talk about which OS stands where.

PS: @Kalpil, you totally strangled the fun of having the 2 threads running simultaneously

 

[gxsaurav]

2)Quad booting is not a menace
I honestly don't think I need to say much here. Fine, go ahead, keep 4 OSs, wasting disk space, wondering where you installed what, installing multiple apps that fulfill the same purpose.

Also, why do you want to virtualize? So you can have a major performance hit? Do you get a kick out of that or something? Does it make you feel like an uber-geek?

At one point u r saying don't go for Quad Boot, & then at other point u r saying don't go for virtualisation & then u r saying Vista doesn't work with this & that...well, then if I have to use Motocross madness how Will I?

And sorry, I will not use only Windows XP as a primary OS. I got a 160 GB hard disk & don't like to keep my hard disk empty doing nothing. I fill only what I need it with.

Don't know about others but I have Windows Vista as the only OS installed & Windows XP SP3 in Virtual PC enviroement.

Virtulisation used to be slow but not any more with Intel VT + DIrectX 10 + Virtual PC 2007/Virtual Box etc

3)Vista has better gaming performance than XP.
He He He..... what a joke.

If you run a DirectX 10 game in Vista & same game with a DirectX 9 path in XP, then compare your self. Vista gives more performance in DX 10 mode.

4)Using the same PC, XP will slow down and Vista will not.
Again, he he he...

try running 10 apps at once in XP & tell me how fast it is.

Do you really have to stoop to the level where you have to insult me to prove your point?

Yeah, I luv to kick the arse of ignorant Fanboys . U don't like Vista fine, why r u justifying it. Who asked u?

 

[phreak0ut]

I'm sticking with Vista for now, 'coz it is much more stable with the graphic driver. It knows when the driver doesn't work and attempts to recover, which never happened in XP. This is the main reason I'm with Vista.

Yesterday I bought a really cheap bluetooth dongle. Installed fine(but there were issues due to a crappy chipset on the dongle) The best thing is, Windows Update found the latest driver for this crap piece of hardware whereas I was searching all over the net for the latest one!!

I ain't a fanboy. I use what is comfortable to me. Make your own choice. Don't like something, trash it and use what works with you

 

[tarey_g]

do
{

 Rocks.......!!!!!


 Sucksss!!!!!!

 Blah Blah !!!!!!

}While(till the Frustration is over)

Though the terminating condition wont ever be true.

 

[kumarmohit]

Alright back to the square one. now which mod would kind enough to lock this before we come to fistfights!

 

[eggman]

@TAREY_G:absolutely......ha ha

 

[anispace]

whats the big deal? if u like it use it or dont. Been using vista for 5 months now and imho its not that bad. Just dont feel like going back to my XP home edition. Never seen a BSOD since install ( although i never saw one in my XP also.

I just love the automatic driver updates, aero and the Vista games folder.

Although i must say recently the stupid folders dont remember their view settings. I enable the preview pane in the games folder and it appears even in other windows. Hope MS releases some update for this.

 

[eggman]

Although i must say recently the stupid folders dont remember their view settings. I enable the preview pane in the games folder and it appears even in other windows. Hope MS releases some update for this.

I dont face this problem!!!

 

[ring_wraith]

Yeah, I luv to kick the arse of ignorant Fanboys . U don't like Vista fine, why r u justifying it. Who asked u?

I hereby boycott this thread. I refuse to take part in a discussion where anyone makes a comment like the one above.

Call it what you want. I just call that comment low and uncalled for.

 

[MetalheadGautham]

I hereby boycott this thread. I refuse to take part in a discussion where anyone makes a comment like the one above.

Call it what you want. I just call that comment low and uncalled for.

+1
as with all windows threads, some people get too over heated up.
thats why I prefer using this time better, by looking at more important topics.