Author Topic: Which O.S. ? (Read 817 times)

Telstar · « **on:** December 29, 2006, 08:04:19 PM »

OK guys, i'm about ready to build a new (dual core) system, got everything except the operating system, but with the imminent release of vista, what should i do about that ?

64 bit windows xp
32 bit windows xp
vista

opinions please?

SkyChimp03 · « **Reply #1 on:** December 29, 2006, 08:19:22 PM »

Not vista:D

eagl · « **Reply #2 on:** December 29, 2006, 09:16:20 PM »

If you can find the deal, get 32 bit XP Pro or Media Center Edition with the "free" vista upgrade coupon. Once vista matures, you send in $10 and MS gives you a vista CD and license.

I think the version of vista you get with the coupon may depend on the version of XP you get, and with XP home you might only get vista basic which is pretty much just a slow version of XP without any of the new vista stuff...

Either that, or just find the cheapest OEM XP version you can find (32 bit still) and install that. You should be able to get legit OEM versions of XP home for about $89 and XP MCE for about $109.

64 bit... drivers not mature enough and it doesn't really help anything unless you're using a LOT of memory and some very specific 64 bit applications. Vista - why spend money for the privledge of using an immature operating system that no applications need yet? Wait for true DX10 games before going for vista.

eagl · « **Reply #3 on:** December 29, 2006, 09:17:22 PM »

If you really want the bling effect of a 64 bit OS, use a 64 bit version of linux

Get a second hard drive or partition your primary drive, and dual boot winXP and linux.

Or get a mac...

MrRiplEy[H] · « **Reply #4 on:** December 30, 2006, 05:19:22 AM »

If even XP64 driver support isn't done yet, one shouldn't even dream about getting Vista. 2 years from now it might be an option.

Skuzzy · « **Reply #5 on:** December 30, 2006, 06:57:27 AM »

If you want the most stable and best supported, then go with the 32 bit version of XP.

Telstar · « **Reply #6 on:** December 30, 2006, 08:04:48 AM »

thanks fellas, 32 bit it is then

Helrazr1 · « **Reply #7 on:** January 02, 2007, 09:29:08 AM »

I would stay away from Media Center. I purchased both XP Pro, and Media Center, and finally decided on Media Center, being that I do a lot with pics, and Vids. Wishing I wouldn't have gotten rid of the Pro. It seems that what they don't tell you is that MCE has compatibility issues with some softwares, common software such as Nero. Anyway, you surely cant' go wrong with XP Pro, check out here

Ray77 · « **Reply #8 on:** January 07, 2007, 09:28:53 PM »

Fedora Core 6.

38ruk · « **Reply #9 on:** January 07, 2007, 10:26:24 PM »

Is there really any advantage for gaming by using 32 bit winxp pro VS home? I always see that people recommend Pro but i figured that it would install unnecessary programs or protocol's that would just have to be disabled anyway. I'm really not sure, thats just my theory. Can anyone tell me and pro's or con's for gaming? thx

Kev367th · « **Reply #10 on:** January 07, 2007, 11:44:24 PM »

Basically the major difference between XP Home and Pro is that with Pro you can join a domain. Home only supports Workgroups.

Other diff -
XP Home - 1 physical CPU
XP Pro - 2 physical CPU's

In the case of XP treat physical CPU as physical socket on the board. (any number of CPU cores - with SP2 only)

I still prefer Win 2000.
Downside - It doesn't know the difference between physical CPU and cores, so a dual core CPU effectively means you can't use any more, or quad cores with Win 2000.
No fix is planned from MS for this.

What does it mean (minimum OS support)? -
Dual core - XP Home/Pro, Win 2000 Pro
Quad core - XP Home/Pro, Win 2000 Server

Single CPU/socket - XP Home/Pro (unlimited cores), Win 2000 Pro (single or dual core)
Dual CPU/sockets - XP Pro, Win 2000 Pro (single core only), Win 2000 Server (dual core max)

Basically for the Windows 2000 range each core counts as a CPU, XP can tell the diff between a core and CPU so your limit is number of sockets.

Oh and - Vista blows chunks.

MrRiplEy[H] · « **Reply #11 on:** January 08, 2007, 02:41:06 AM »

The thing with vista atm seems to be love or hate. Hardocp forums are full of Vista fans and they will not accept any negative remark about it.

Many other places have a totally opposite opinnion. Who to believe?

Maybe the conclusion is that if you're an IT expert with the latest and greatest hardware, Vista might work for you. For an average user it seems to be a nightmare at this development level.

I would probably try Vista unless it had so restrictive DRM built in - and I've been boycoting anything RIAA/MPAA related ever since they started suing people over p2p. I absolutely refuse to buy any hardware with DRM restrictions and naturally same applies to software.

You know, China is a wonderful place to shop from. They sell hardware with hacked DRM systems. I never bought a dvd player with a locked area code for example - I like to shop my DVD's from US. Same goes for macrovision, DVI-outputs etc.

Vulcan · « **Reply #12 on:** January 08, 2007, 02:38:40 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by eagl
If you really want the bling effect of a 64 bit OS, use a 64 bit version of linux Get a second hard drive or partition your primary drive, and dual boot winXP and linux.

Or get a mac...

FYI, only some core OS X libraries are 64 bit. Very little if not none of GUI is 64 bit.

Mac's are 64 bit in marketing-speak only.

llama · « **Reply #13 on:** January 08, 2007, 05:31:06 PM »

Another vote for 32-bit XP Home or Pro.

I tell you, if it weren't for the fact that I need to support people who buy new PCs that come with Vista, or that I had to write about it, I would never touch it.

-Llama

Skuzzy · « **Reply #14 on:** January 08, 2007, 08:44:54 PM »

I feel your pain llama. I really do. I am taking a last few shots at the lottery in the hopes of retiiring before this monster wreaks havoc on the computer kingdom and the poor souls who have to support thier applications running on it (uh, that would be me for one).