Carol, look at the time difference between windows xp and windows vista. Of course XP is going to be faster. It's been around 5 years longer. I really dont think you can compare XP on a modern system to Vista on a modern system. XP might be faster but it also does not take advantage of newer hardware like vista does. Thats like saying Windows 3.1 runs faster on my pentium 200 than windows 95 does. You simply can't use a blanket statement because you will be sacrificing a lot when you make the move from one generation of an operating system to another. There is a lot of nice functionality in vista and a lot of new features which are more under the hood which make the user experience that much better.-Josh
Interesting point of view - precisely what do I get extra with Vista (apart from DirectX 10 which I don't need and has been artificially denied to WinXP users) ?
As far as resource hungry, in this day and age, WHO CARES? I mean really. Unless you are a gamer, which you can then tweak vista to use quite a bit less, why have all of those resources just sitting around doing nothing? Microsoft realized this and now make the OS take advantage of the hardware. Yes, memory light programs are nice but you pay for that in performance unless the program does ONE TASK like utorrent or calculator. I would rather my hardware be put to use than just sit there idly in CASE I might, for one hour, require every bit of power it has.
Sorry I care - why should users buy faster and faster hardware and bigger and bigger hard disks just so that the operating system can suck up the resources like a sponge. Personally I want Windows to get less resource hungry and allow my applications to take advantage of faster CPU and memory and larger faster hard disks rather than have every generation of windows use more and more resources and systematically throttle my applications. This isn't just to do with gaming but if you deal with large video and photo files and want to process them it does make a huge difference.
Having played with Vista over the last few months the only things that seem to have changed between XP and Vista are:
- Huge amount of resources required to install Vista
- Direct X
- Ruined Windows Explorer
- Settings for things like networking made much more difficult to track down
- Clickfest to find or do anything
- AERO interface (so what - it doesn't add much of interest if anything but demands huge resources)
- A few security features (which many users simply turn off because they drive you nuts)
Have I got something wrong?
At least with Windows 7 they seem to be taking a radical approach to the GUI but I really wish they would be much more radical and provide a transparent VM environment for backward compatibility. Trouble is it will be the worst of both worlds - people will be complaining like mad with Windows 7 as software is broken in the new GUI and yet we will have yet another layer of compatabilty crap to install.
Before long it si going to take a BluRay disk just to provide the installation media!