|windows xp using vista upgrade package|
| 11:47 am on Apr 29, 2009 (gmt 0)|
hello, has anyone seen the microsoft windows vista upgrade package. I currently have windows home edition and have recently been reciving random errors when it boots up ive tryed my best to keep it clean using cccleaner defraging reguraly using antivirus and antispyware but still i sometimes randomly have problems so was thinking about buying a new os(vista upgrade)(bear in mind i mainly use it for games / webbrowsing)
questions are :
1. whats better windows xp or vista
2. should i just reinstall windows XP
3. buy a windows vista upgrade package
4. if i did buy windows vista upgrade package would it work with the os i have (windows xp home)
[edited by: bill at 1:20 pm (utc) on April 29, 2009]
[edit reason] No signature files please [/edit]
| 12:24 pm on Apr 29, 2009 (gmt 0)|
If you don't have any serious data on the system your most cost effective route would be to format and reinstall. Home is not as robust as Pro, but does run pretty good as a clean system.
If you play a lot of different games it is possible some critical files have been modified or corrupted over time.
I'd avoid Vista.
Hang on for a bit, Win7 will most likely appear this year. By most reports it is a better user experience than Vista...and will include an XP mode which means your existing apps will continue to work.
| 4:01 pm on Apr 29, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Vista is a memory/resource hog so unless you have a high spec system, XP will be better for you.
Bear in mind, security software (anti-virus, firewalls, etc) can cause as many problems it solves, as can registry monitors/cleaners etc. Also, defragging frequently is a total waste of time on most systems.
In this case, a repair install should be your first action. It's unlikely to fix anything in your case, but it's certainly worth trying. If that fails to work a clean install is your best bet. (If necessary, backup first.)
> XP Home is not as robust as Pro
I've never studied this closely, but so far as I'm aware, XP Home and XP Pro are more or less identical, however, some features are disabled/removed in XP Home. Stability should be similar (but XP Home may have a poorer reputation since Pro is more likely to be used by people who know what they're doing).
| 2:41 pm on May 5, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Make sure you don't have a flaky hardware problem before you commit to anything. That is a bit tough to diagnose.
One thing to consider is Moore's law. ie, technology doubles every year and a half for about the same price. IOW, if your machine is more than about 4 years old, consider looking at a new machine. In many cases the cost of the machine is comparable to the cost of a new OS when you factor in the speed of the new hardware.
Is your current HD formatted as NTFS? I have found that drives that were formatted as, or are formatted as FAT32 are flakier than a bowl of granola cereal.
If you have FAT32 or did have it, consider a new machine.
One of the major hardware manufactures offers a downgrade from vista to XP pro on their new machines for 100 bucks.. THAT should be a wakeup call to M$... Hey guys, we are willing to pay 100 bucks per machine to NOT run vista...
| 1:36 am on May 8, 2009 (gmt 0)|
|IOW, if your machine is more than about 4 years old, consider looking at a new machine. In many cases the cost of the machine is comparable to the cost of a new OS when you factor in the speed of the new hardware. |
That would probably only work if someone were paying full retail for one of the most expensive OS packages offered. There are many more affordable ways to get an OS licence.
One free example would be to try out the Windows 7 RC beta on your hardware. It has a licence that's valid until June 2010.
|Is your current HD formatted as NTFS? I have found that drives that were formatted as, or are formatted as FAT32 are flakier than a bowl of granola cereal. |
Interesting analogy. However I've always found the granola I buy to be remarkably un-flaky. It usually consists of clumps of herbs. ;)
There are arguably uses for FAT32 partitions. For example, many experts over the years have suggested placing your swap files onto a FAT32 partition for increased speed. The presence of a FAT32 partition wouldn't always be that strong of an indicator.
|THAT should be a wakeup call to M$... Hey guys, we are willing to pay 100 bucks per machine to NOT run vista... |
Not necessarily. There are a lot of corporations with legacy applications that need to run in a 32-bit XP environment. For them it's a necessity, not a preference. That might be one of the reasons that Windows 7 will have XP mode [webmasterworld.com] on certain versions.
As has been well documented, Vista has higher hardware requirements compared to XP. Here is the Windows Vista: System requirements [microsoft.com] and a handy Windows Vista Upgrade Advisor [microsoft.com] you can download and run to check whether your current hardware will handle Vista.