Microsoft Reveals Windows Vista SP1 Will Install XP?????

LINK

It seams that the only way to easily fix all of Vista's problems is to downgrade it back to XP.

So, for all of you who paid $400 for viusta ultimate, you will now have a $400 XP now.

Unfortunatly, if one carefully reads the ula you must accept, this is within M$'s legal rights.

They will now put all the vista effort into the next operating system from M$, currently called Windows 7.

This reminds me of when M$ introduced windows 98 ME edition. It was also a complete disaster, followed a year later by windows 2000-a big improvment.

Once this is done, I wonder if all the driver/program incompadability issues will go too.

I wonder if the load vistaXP- as it will be called - will go down to xp levels (Vista is currently 40+% heavier load VS XP Pro. ( That means for the same hardware, Vista is 40% or more slower and produces 40% lower benchmark scores.

This IS a big deal, I will post more as I find it.

Anyone else got any more info/thoughts/comments-remember ATS TAC!!!!!

I'm sure this is a satire/joke article.

Yeah it's just for fun/entertainment.

About

Called "the world's greatest tech humour site" by The Register, BBspot creates entertainment for the geekier side of the world. BBspot produces a variety of features like fake news stories....

www.bbspot.com...

I like the other headlines:

Microsoft Purchase Evil from Satan

Microsoft's Antispyware Tool Removes Internet Explorer

lol

I wonder if the load vistaXP- as it will be called - will go down to xp levels (Vista is currently 40+% heavier load VS XP Pro. ( That means for the same hardware, Vista is 40% or more slower and produces 40% lower benchmark scores.

Just to clear something up, Vista does not slow down your computer by 40% nor does it make benchmarks perform 40% slower. Generally, Vista will be 0-15% slower than XP depending on hardware and as drivers, and hardware mature, the diferance will begin to shrink, or maybe reverse.

There are a few select benchmarks where Vista is faster than XP.



[edit on 25/9/07 by JimmyCarterIsSmarter]

Dude, you got me all thinking for a second, lol.

reply to post by JimmyCarterIsSmarter


You are wrong, simply put.

I have done benchmark testing-3d mark 01,03,05,06.

On the very same hardware, it averaged about 40% lower scores.

Now that said, benchmarks are not programs that we use everyday. They test a wide range of systems and subsystems for their max available performance.

There is still a clear slowdown with vista.
From poor driver support to incompadability with some programs

Let us not forget the mythical SP1 for Vista claimed to be between 600 and 900+ megs.
To put that in perspective, XP service pack one-redistributable-is about 130 megs in size.
XP service pack 2-redistributable- is about 260 megs in size.

So we have 130, 260 and now 600-900 megs-yes, I think there are still many issues with vista.

LINK



Just an example of others seeingt major slowdowns with Vista compared to XP.

[edit on 9/25/2007 by mrmonsoon]

Vista will only be significantly slower than XP in various programs if there's some 'teething' issues, or you're running dead slow hardware. For example, Vista is a giant memory and processing hog, so will NEED a dual core computer with atleast two gigabytes of RAM to run Vista half decently. If you're running Vista on a Pentium 4, 1gb RAM, X300, then it's no wonder it's 40% slower. That laptop is decent, I would encourage the review site to delete all the crap Dell installs on it, then install, fresh, bandnew drivers on it. It will NOT be 40% slower.

According to every single source I've came across using real hardware, Vista fares only a few percent slower than XP.

Toms Hardware: Vista is 2.8% slower 3dmark 06, all games but one were only 6% slower on Vista. Some applications were 90% slower, however, it is clear that they obviously had some incompatibilities.

www.tomshardware.com...


AnandTech: In 3dmark06, Vista is a few hundred points behind XP, however, it's not a rather significant diferance because both scores are around 10 000 points. Other applications generally not significantly slower on Vista.

www.anandtech.com...

HardOCP: Ditto.

enthusiast.hardocp.com...

As for me, I am not prepared to waste a few hundred dollars 'upgrading' to a new Operating system when it clearly offers little above Windows XP only with loads of incompatibilites. However, the notion that Vista is 40% slower than XP is just wrong.

What hardware are you using?

[edit on 26/9/07 by JimmyCarterIsSmarter]

I would like to say that in my Athlon 1900+ with 512MB RAM, Unreal Tournament 2004 is slightly faster on Vista than on XP.

All other benchmarks I tried showed the same thing, none or little performance penalty on Vista.

Programs that use the .Net framework are faster on Vista than on XP.

But this is only my case, I am the only person I know that uses Vista (since August 2006), and the only problems I had were related to Windows Media Player and those only did happened on the Beta and RC versions, they disappeared with the final version.