windows vista, windows xp, or linux

which os are you using

  • Total voters
    118
  • Poll closed .
Vista on two machines and XP on the third. I have Vista on machines that can handle it because since I've tried it, I love it. I have XP on my laptop which wouldn't be able to run Vista.

I stick with Windows because I have specific applications that I'm used to (and don't want to change) and because I like to game.
 
Vista on 2 machines. On the laptop the power management is far better than XP. The desktop machine has DX10 hardware, might was well take advantage. Gaming is an issue, so Linux is not an option.
 
Depends on uses...

I'd pick Windows over Mac any day, but depending what it is for I would use Linux as well.
 
I should make a poll "WHY THE HELL ARE PEOPLE STILL MAKING VISTA VS XP POLLS FFS??"

1. I'm retarded
2. I'm a flamebaiter
3. I'm a troll
 
I'm using Vista because it's the best OS available for any computing platform.
 
I use all 3 on different computers throughout my house.

Windows Vista 64 and Gentoo Linux 64 on my main desktop, Windows XP MCE on my wife's laptop, and Windows XP Pro on my desktop in the spare bedroom for the scanner, printer, and our zunes (because they only work in windows).

I also use linux on various computers I have and that I donate to other people, and on my parents computers.
 
Vista here, but I'd rather be on xp.

I'm using vista because I need to learn it for my job.
 
I'm using Vista because it's fast, stable, looks great, and has a great UI. It's an improvement over XP in pretty much every aspect. As for Linux, I don't have the inclination to go over to it as my main OS since a lot of the programs I use in Windows aren't cross-platform and don't have any real equivalents in Linux. Plus, no gaming.
 
Vista Ultimate x64 - Because it's ultra-stable, very secure, highly compatible, it can address all 6GBs of my ram, and looks very nice. Since I installed Vista x64, it's been trouble free and never crashes, though I leave it up all month until patch tuesday. It's hard to imagine how it could be better.
 
If I take all the computers I use regularly at home into account, then I use XP32, XP64, Vista64, Unbuntu, Win98, and DOS.

DOS/Win98 is my legacy game box to play legacy games, I have terrible luck with DOSbox
XP32/Unbuntu on my old gaming rig. XP32 for games/local game servers, Unbuntu for most other uses.
Xp64/Vista64 on my new gaming rig. This is the one I use the most. Plan to drop XP64. It is great, but kind of redundant with Vista64 also installed on that pc.

I prolly use Vista64 the most, so that is how I answered the poll.
 
XP
Network Security cannot be improved enough on Vista.
I cant run decent IP blocking software on Vista32 without lack of monitoring and there is nothing at all for Vista64.
I will only have a 64bit OS next, so Vista32 is out and Vista64 isnt secure enough :)
 
All 3 OS. I have vista 64 ultimate, ubuntu LTS 64, and xp 64 on my main computer. Vista home premium on both of my daughters computers. Window MCE on my HTPC comp in the living room. And on my server I have Ubuntu Server LTS 64.
 
devil22 said:
Vista Ultimate x64 - Because it's ultra-stable, very secure, highly compatible, it can address all 6GBs of my ram, and looks very nice. Since I installed Vista x64, it's been trouble free and never crashes, though I leave it up all month until patch tuesday. It's hard to imagine how it could be better.
Click to expand...

+1. Vista 64 is a very good O/S.
 
I have a Vista Ult x64 disc but refuse to use it for now...
XP has been rock solid and stable for me but I also dual boot Ubuntu 8.04 + KDE4.1 on my main system and my laptop. Most days I stay in Ubuntu unless I want to play a game (CS:S or SOSE).
when I did play with Vista, it caused nothing but problems in the OS, with linux and with the boot record so I had to run a low level format and boot record reset before I could get XP installed, then Linux took over the boot record and not a problem between these 2 since.
I even have a Wubi setup on my AthlonXP 3000+ system
 
Windows XP Professional x64

Why? Because it's the fastest, most stable, and most mature OS at the moment.
 
Vista x64 because its amazing with good hardware, XP is obsolete, and Linux is just LOL
 
Vista is crap, XP is stable with the proper security software and Linux is the most stable and mature of any OS out there. the unix/linux shell has been around long before DOS
 
screwballl said:
Vista is crap, XP is stable with the proper security software and Linux is the most stable and mature of any OS out there. the unix/linux shell has been around long before DOS
Click to expand...

Vista is not at all crap. It's one of the most stable OSes out there, it performs great, has a nice UI, and has a ton of security features. As for Linux, the fact that Unix has been around for a very long time is meaningless (especially since Linux and Unix are two completely distinct operating systems). You can pretty much guarantee that if Linux was as popular as Windows, there would be as many security issues with it as there are now for Microsoft's OSes. Plus, there's the learning curve to get over. Not that Linux distros aren't good OSes, but they aren't as amazingly bulletproof as the fanboys claim.
 
screwballl said:
Vista is crap, XP is stable with the proper security software and Linux is the most stable and mature of any OS out there. the unix/linux shell has been around long before DOS
Click to expand...

I know you've already ignored what I've said in the other thread since you can't seem to provide any evidence of your generalizations, but I'll reiterate just "in case" you've missed it: you need to provide an argument (not just an unfounded conclusion) that "Vista is crap". FYI, "I've had a few driver problems" doesn't prove what you're trying to tell all of us.
 
Zero82z said:
Plus, there's the learning curve to get over. Not that Linux distros aren't good OSes, but they aren't as amazingly bulletproof as the fanboys claim.
Click to expand...

One could argue that learning command line, were it to have been part of EVERYONE's learning curve, would be a non-issue. But you could also argue nobody would have started heading to computers without a GUI...

As a DESKTOP, no, they are not as bulletproof as the fanboys would have you believe.
As a SERVER, you can lock those down to pretty much whatever you need it to be...
Web server? Lock down everything other than port 80.
File Server for a LAN? Controlled by your router- lock down everything external.
I also believe the same exists for Windows servers as well. It's just 9/10 you start running into issues when multiple vendors, services, programs get on the machine, increases your visibility.
 
All of the above?

Vista 64-bit on my gaming PC
XP32 VM on the gaming PC for old games which don't play nice with 64-bit
Linux on the server, where it belongs
 
TechieSooner said:
One could argue that learning command line, were it to have been part of EVERYONE's learning curve, would be a non-issue. But you could also argue nobody would have started heading to computers without a GUI...

As a DESKTOP, no, they are not as bulletproof as the fanboys would have you believe.
As a SERVER, you can lock those down to pretty much whatever you need it to be...
Web server? Lock down everything other than port 80.
File Server for a LAN? Controlled by your router- lock down everything external.
I also believe the same exists for Windows servers as well. It's just 9/10 you start running into issues when multiple vendors, services, programs get on the machine, increases your visibility.
Click to expand...
Linux has it's share of freakin' HUGE security holes. For example:
The flaw in Debian's random number generator means that OpenSSL keys generated over the past 20 months are so predictable that an attacker can correctly guess them in a matter of hours. Not exactly a comforting thought when considering the keys in many cases are the only thing guarding an organization's most precious assets. Obtain the key and you gain instant access to trusted administrative accounts and the ability to spoof or spy on sensitive email and web servers.
Click to expand...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05/21/massive_debian_openssl_hangover/
 
Azhar said:
I should make a poll "WHY THE HELL ARE PEOPLE STILL MAKING VISTA VS XP POLLS FFS??"

1. I'm retarded
2. I'm a flamebaiter
3. I'm a troll
Click to expand...

Pretty much. I have no idea what going onto a forum with several thousands of users and asking them all what OS they use is supposed to accomplish. There isn't even any reasoning.

I'm up for 2. and 3. and probably 1. Can I vote all of those?
 
vista home premium 32bit.. its going great for me. not 1 BSOD in 1.5 years.. lol.. decent for gaming.. but i dont game that much anyways. I am also yet to have any hardware troubles

I do use linux too.. but atm im having some problems with it >.<
 
TechieSooner said:
One could argue that learning command line, were it to have been part of EVERYONE's learning curve, would be a non-issue. But you could also argue nobody would have started heading to computers without a GUI...
Click to expand...

That would probably be too much of an obstacle for non-technically-inclined people. But understanding one command line doesn't mean you can use another - I'm familiar with MS-DOS, back from the days of Windows 3.1, and thus with CMD now, but I'm not great with bash and *nix seems to have myriad little utility applications with arcane syntax. I know it's a lot more powerful than MS-DOS, but I find myself poring through a lot of man files whenever I use Linux.

Oh, and since I replied, I may as well answer the original question: Vista x64, which is stable, fast and has numerous small improvements in security and ease-of-use (Start Menu search!) which make it preferable over XP to me.
 
Where is the "all of the above" "plus a few more" button? Many of us here work with computers for a living....logically many of us have more than 1 PC....more than 1/2 a dozen often...some with more than that!

XPp on several home rigs
Server2008 on laptop
XP on laptop
PCLinuxOS on laptop
Ubuntu on laptop
Vista on office workstations
SBS2K3 on home rig
PFSense on laptop
Server2000 on a few boxes
Server2003 on a few
 
I love and use Vista x64. If gaming were not an issue though I'd definitely be using Linux. It has come a long way in the past few years and has several superior qualities. I'm slowly migrating toward having a linux partition for general and work use and a small Vista partition for gaming, that's the ultimate goal anyway, however Vista x86 will stay on my HTPC because of the blu-ray DRM nonsense.
 
TechieSooner said:
FWIW, that's OpenSSL, not Linux.
It's like a flaw in Microsoft Office, and blaming Windows.


I don't disagree at all that Linux has its own issues, though...
Click to expand...

Nope, this was an issue caused by a Debian dev changing OpenSSL code.

That said, I use Vista x64 on my desktop, dual boot Ubuntu 8.04 and Vista x64 on my laptop, run Ubuntu server (6.10 maybe), and Ubuntu 8.04 on my lab computer. I'd say Ubuntu on the desktop (particularly Xorg/compiz and Firefox/flash) is the most unstable of them all, sadly.
 
I think these polls are interesting because of how the numbers keep changing. I remember before SP1 how much of a contrast the polls showed with XP vs Vista.

Vista
 
XP32, because there isn't enough support for Win2k anymore (cries for Win2k, the best OS of all time).
 
Vista x64/x32 on all four computers because I need RDP and IE7 and all the other goodies needed to do my job from home.

OS X on the two that support it because really I prefer Apple. lol
 
Zero82z said:
Vista is not at all crap. It's one of the most stable OSes out there, it performs great, has a nice UI, and has a ton of security features. As for Linux, the fact that Unix has been around for a very long time is meaningless (especially since Linux and Unix are two completely distinct operating systems). You can pretty much guarantee that if Linux was as popular as Windows, there would be as many security issues with it as there are now for Microsoft's OSes. Plus, there's the learning curve to get over. Not that Linux distros aren't good OSes, but they aren't as amazingly bulletproof as the fanboys claim.
Click to expand...

Vista is WindowsME version2... sure Me was stable and worked well at first until people actually started using it... why do you think they dropped support for it so quickly? And with Vienna/Windows 7 due out within a year (supposedly), it looks to be the same situation. Security is only as good as the underlying xcode... and when there is a security vulnerability that allows a hacker to completely take over Vista and bypass all security.. yeah thats nice and secure..
http://www.webmonkey.com/blog/New_Vista_Attack_to_be_Unveiled_at_Black_Hat_Conference
Unix is the core/base code, Linux is based on unix, OSX is based on unix... so at the very core of the OS, they are the same. It is the software and everything else on top of it that differentiates between them.
with linux, very few security problems arise from the core of the code itself such as with windows, most of the time it is user error by changing something on the system.
Learning curve? What learning curve... install it, open the browser and surf the internet. When was thew last time you used a modern Linux distro... they have been a hell of a lot more stable and secure than any Windows install I have ever seen.

Cyrilix said:
I know you've already ignored what I've said in the other thread since you can't seem to provide any evidence of your generalizations, but I'll reiterate just "in case" you've missed it: you need to provide an argument (not just an unfounded conclusion) that "Vista is crap". FYI, "I've had a few driver problems" doesn't prove what you're trying to tell all of us.
Click to expand...

so I need to repeat that my 15 years experience in the tech industry plus testing Vista since it was known as Longhorn Beta for you to trust me? I am not entitled to form my own comments based on facts of hundreds of faulty Vista installs (due to the OS, not user/hardware error)?
Try asking for info rather than using some pedestal you put yourself upon to look down on the "n00bie" according to the forum title...
I may be new here but not to the industry...
 
screwballl said:
so I need to repeat that my 15 years experience in the tech industry plus testing Vista since it was known as Longhorn Beta for you to trust me? I am not entitled to form my own comments based on facts of hundreds of faulty Vista installs (due to the OS, not user/hardware error)?
Try asking for info rather than using some pedestal you put yourself upon to look down on the "n00bie" according to the forum title...
I may be new here but not to the industry...
Click to expand...

I never mentioned anything about "n00bie", since I couldn't care less, but here are a couple of points:

-Why does your experience not match the experience of many people in this forum?
-What is faulty? For example, x piece of hardware in y configuration will cause z driver issue. If your "hundreds" of installs went wrong because of the OS, then you have to tell us why.

Since you're the one accusing, you have the burden of proof so that you do not spread misinformation. Otherwise, you're exactly the type of person that makes Microsoft perform generally unnecessary experiments like Mojave to prove their point, since people will just read your (still baseless until proven) generalizations without thinking twice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top