My Computer Geek: "Don't get Vista 64. wait for Windows 7"

...the trick is getting someone who knows how to build high-quality build PC's correctly without adding all the junk and craplets on your machine. I ordered a DASH PC from these guys:

 

http://www.maingear.com/desktops/dash/

 

Vista Home Premium SP1 running on an AMD Quad-Core Processor (2.30 GHz) & 3GB RAM.

 

Best PC I've ever owned or used. EXTREMELY FAST, NIMBLE, and NO CRASHES.

 

- Ray

 

- Ray

My Vista x64 machine is running flawlessly...

 

...the trick is getting someone who knows what he talks about....

I still use XP Pro 32 bit, runs everything I throw at it just fine, and my CPU/RAM/etc. is top of the line from

over 2 years ago... I am tempted to run XP on a new rig! I played with Vista for about 4 months but it just

took up too many resources with not much of a trade off in features.

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832116515 - Granted it is the same price as Vista :-( You

could give eBay a looksie for a cheaper copy, I bet there are tons.

<b>Many folks here seem to be missing the "64".</b><BR><BR> 32 bit Xp is NOT 64 bit XP. <BR><BR>win2000 is not 64 bit; its 32 bit.<BR>Vista also has 32 and 64 bit versions<BR><BR>A GAINT reason to use a 64 bit OS is to us a 64 bit program like CS4 and use alot more ram. This might not be an issue for amateurs and folks who deal with small files; and folks who do not like waiting. For some folks they have been using 64 bit versions awhile; Server 2003; XP 64 bit; Vista 64 bit; this allows one to explore using CS4 and using more ram. Consider that when you preach using Vista, Xp or win2000 that you are preaching using just a 32 bit program; one that limits ram.<BR><BR>By the token of this title heading the consideration is a 64 bit OS on a windows box; most of us then assume the perpose is PHOTOSHOP and thus the latest version which is CS4 which allows gobs of ram; it breaks the old 32 bit barrier. Thus mentioning a mac, plain vist; plain Xp is backwards thinking; the chap wants a new 240 volt house like its 1946 and folks are peaching go back and start building this fantastic new house wired only for 120 volts. Its foolish to build a dream photoshop machine today for windows that will not fully use the new CS4. Its just how how many are foolish with money still during hard times; building up a dream box that many cost a grand and be handicapped with an ancient ram limit. Its like buying a camera that only takes dinky old obsolete memory cards; buying a 2008 calendar today.<BR><BR>64 bit windows OS's are different than a 32 bit version. Injecting comments about 32 bit versions is really vastly Off-topic; you are greatly handicapping a new dream machine to be really no better than one 1/2 decade ago. Notice the number "64" in the title. The man wants a modern 220 volt house and many folks are preaching to build an old 110 volt house like its still 1900. In like manner it might be abit dumb to preach buying a new old stock analog TV too; unless they are super cheap and one is on cable or has a convertor box. Many folks want a 64 bit OS to use new CS4 in windows; so strive to consider that mentioning a 32 bit OS is abit buggy wip era; ie wastefull of anothers hard earned cash. Flushing cash and bad investments has been the rage for many folks; it works for some when another is paying the bills; or if there is a freebie loan or grant. If its ones hard own cash; building up a new custom dream windows box today for photoshop thats capped with an old 32 bit OS limits the ram to the old era.

Thus in the windows world one has this 64 bit train one might try to jump on. <BR><BR>ie Server2003 / XP64, Vista 64, Windows 7, Windows 7's replacement, Windows 7's replacement replacement!<BR><BR>The longer you wait the cheaper they will be.

imho, if you dont use Vista or never used Vista your opinion on Vista is worthless. you bash because it is the

popular thing to do. i run Vista and have no issues. it does not take 30 minutes to start up, it takes a few seconds.

having first hand experience with it holds more value than hearing from a friend of a friend who used a beta version

that was not ironed out. is Vista good? yes. go with Vista64 then upgrade to Win7 when its time.

No problems here either Warren. It seems the only issues some people have with Visa (or PCs in general) are that they spend too many hours in front of the TV watching those moronic Mac ads trying to convince the world that PCs are only good for spreadsheets.

 

My Vista and XP machines don't crash.....all my cameras, printers and scanners work perfectly with Windows......and Photoshop works just as well on either platform. As to graphics professionals choosing Mac over PC.....well, if that were true, Adobe would release the 64bit Mac version first......so it's obvious what sells more.

 

The whole debate is pointless. Both platforms work fine. Choose whatever you like. But people need to quit spouting off the nonsense they see in the Mac ads as those of use who know better find those Mac ads the most moronic set of lies we've encountered in advertising.

Windows 7 is built with the same kernel as Vista and Server 2008.

 

Not much sense putting off a PC purchase to avoid Vista as Windows 7 is going to have the same kernel and the same basic architecture as Vista. Lots of links on the net with Microsoft's official statement on this--here is one of them:

 

http://www.informationweek.com/news/windows/operatingsystems/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=211800486

 

If you want to avoid Vista, get a Mac. And yes, you need a better geek.

Go open source! I use UBUNTU Linux - no viruses, add-ware, spy-ware, blue screens, no need for anti virus software. Fast, reliable, lots (thousands) of free software packages from repositories, just click install in Add/remove application. All applications update themselves with update service. Simple upgrade of distribution over the internet - just click or two. Includes lots of photo software for working with RAW etc. GIMP is very good substitution for PS, but you can make PS work on Linux with few tricks.

You got everything in one package for free Office suite included. And there is a lot of support online. A lot of eye candy if you like and it works on older machines also.

Go open source! I use UBUNTU Linux - no viruses, add-ware, spy-ware, blue screens, no need for anti virus software. Fast, reliable, lots (thousands) of free software packages from repositories, just click install in Add/remove application. All applications update themselves with update service. Simple upgrade of distribution over the internet - just click or two. Includes lots of photo software for working with RAW etc. GIMP is very good substitution for PS, but you can make PS work on Linux with few tricks.

You got everything in one package for free, Office suite included. And there is a lot of support online. A lot of eye candy if you like and it works on older machines also.

I have to thank Microsoft for having brought out Vista as that made me make the switch to Mac! I have had my iMac for

exactly 11 months today and have been very happy with it. Thanks Vista! cb :-)

I've noticed that most complaints about Vista involve upgraded XP machines or "custom built." IMO "experts" who build custom machines are less competent than factory production lines, which benefit by quality control systems.

 

I don't find Vista 32 any better than XP except for the additional RAM. Both have been rock steady (as was Win 98 and 3.1 in my experience).

 

If you scan or print you may find PC a better bet than Mac since most of those apps are initially designed for PC and then adapted to Mac.

 

Browse application troubles and you'll mostly find Mac, especially when new OS are introduced (PC moves from one to the next more smoothly). Graphic designers have preferred Mac forever, but photographers know graphic designers aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer :-)

The CD burner in Vista is retarded. Folks buy Vista create CDs and send them to loved ones and they cannot read them unless they have VISTA some or variants of XP. Its so retarded that a 1 1/2 year old Imac 20" Mac cannot read the bastard CD's' total freaks. The Microsoft chaps that do this should learn to eat their own manure for creating lame burner software that comes canned with Vista; one that creates bastard freak CDs by default;' that a subset of computers can read; ones that your Beloved stupid US government uses for bidding on jobs; CD's that many contractors cannot read. Thus this retarded VISTA CD burner issue drives up costs with government jobs; thus more waste.

PC vs. Mac vs. Linux discussions are like emacs vs. VI discussions, they tend to be religious in nature ;-) I am

a Linux user myself, but believe that I can post without too much emotional bias.

 

I just bought a MacBook Pro for my wife (it will be delivered tomorrow), and there is no doubt in my mind that it

will be a better choice than Windows for almost anything besides playing games. I possess an IBM Thinkpad T61p

which dual boots Windows Vista Ultimate, SuSE Linux and Ubuntu Linux. I dread the times, I have to boot Windows,

it is painfully slow.

 

If you can do without Photoshop, and if you can live with another application (bibblepro comes to mind) for RAW

work flow processing, I'd suggest Linux, otherwise get a Mac. Windows 7 is not here yet, and few people would

recommend any version of Windows until at least the first service pack has been published. My private suspicion

is that Microsoft is embaressed by Windows Vista. None of the companies I consult with have switched away from

Windows XP to Vista.

 

Just my 2 cents...

"different Unix (like) systems (HP, SUN, BSD, GNU/Linux), stability was never such a big issue."

 

I am unfamiliar with such systems. What photography related programs can be run on it, particular without having to learn and employ technical "tricks" as Darko mentions? As to the thousand free programs available, how about running the dozen or so that I already have and know, some well known programs, some lesser known, some photography related, some not. Also what about proprietary programs like firmware for cameras?

The fancy new graphics in Vista eat up more system memory than XP did. If you go Vista 64 with lots of memory this won't be that big an issue. If you're 32 bit with 4gb that means Photoshop will have less memory to run in and is more likely to start swapping to disk.

 

Apparently MS is trying to reduce the memory footprint in 7, a first for them.

Ok, i'll be another one of "those guys"

 

I switched from XP to Leopard/Mac, and have never looked back.

 

Unless you are involved in AutoCad work, or a big gamer, i'm positive you'd find an Apple to be a much better option.

I have used Vista since release with no problems. Most of the "problems" I see people complaining about are

attempting to run extremely old (worthless) software, or just plain ignorance on computer use. Most of Vista's issues

are just bad default settings from the factory, anyone with a little know how and patience can resolve these

annoyances. I personaly would not wait for Windows 7, that could be a ways off.

 

I have never liked Macs, that platform is never going anywhere if Apple maintains the same closed platform they

always have. At least with Windows and Linux you have the option of using what hardware and software you want, for

ALOT less money.

Everytime windows releases a new version it gets hammered on by the initialy overly critical user geeks. That said, I am sure windows 7 will be an improvement over Vista just as Vista has been a great improvement over XP! I have been running Vista without smoothley and problem free since its release and have 10x more faith in it than I ever had in XP!

Apple or windows would both be safe bets, the open source such as linux however might be best suited to the computer geek who like play with and modify his computer more then he actually uses it... just my himble opinion.

I have vista 64 running smoothly and fast. I have quad core and 8gb ram and I am satisfied. The next version is always better ... next camera will be better, next sensor will be better.. question is when do yo want or need it.

I bought a Dell laptop just over a year ago which came loaded up with all those trial software goodies and other junk they want to sell you. When new it would take 8 minutes to start up. That time frame stretched to about 15 minutes in 15 months. I finally bought a new hard drive and installed XP which works ok except for a couple of unavailable drivers and am using that now. On the first hard drive I reinstalled Vista without all the junk and it seems to work fine. Maybe there is a lesson here and a reason why folks are having such different experiences with Vista. Maybe the poor performance is not Microsofts fault.

Everyone complained about XP before SP1, too

 

"If MS is still not able to provide a stable release for Vista, they will never be able to do that."

 

Did you read that off of a blog, IILka? Sounds like a bandwagon statement. Vista bombed for a number

of reasons, none of which applied to their previous OS releases and none of which will apply to

W7.

 

"Apparently MS is trying to reduce the memory footprint in 7, a first for them."

 

That is a goal and seems to be working from their demos a couple weeks ago. W7 is needed for smaller

devices, phones and netbooks, and if MS fails they'll be out of a large market instantly.

 

I'd be really worried if I was MS or Mac. One way or another, the whole world is going to 'cloud

computing' and google is miles ahead of either MS or Mac. I'm a convert. I no longer use any MS office software or

outlook. All my Word and Excel files are stored and worked on with goolge documents. Outlook was hooked up via

imap to my gmail and all 10 years of my email from outlook was sent to my gmail account. You can use your gmail

emial to route up to five other email accounts, so I send and receive as if it still from my other older non-gmail email

addy's. Gmail doesn't care if you use it to run your hotmail. Virus and spam filter is the best their is. My computer

has

never been cleaner and safer since switching to gmail. Going with goolge documents means no more backing up or

worrying about possibly losing my data with hdd crashes or viruses. Most importantly, all my docs are with

me at every internet connection. I open up my laptop at a cafe and there is all my documetns. No need to transfer

back and forth and update with my desktops. When there isn't an internet connection, google gears updates itself

when there is

one. And this all free on a googles robust Unix system. If it wasn't for my need of photoshop, I'd be doing Ubuntu

100% of the time with my cloud computing. 99% of the computer users out there only use word and email and

enjoy the net. They do not need MS or Mac for this already.

 

The gaming industry is the only reason we have wonderfully fast computers. They spend the money and keep pushing

the envelop. No other market warrants the need for companies like nVidia and Intel to keep putting out faster gear.

Once the gaming industry goes to the clouds, and it will as games will now be as fast as your internet connection

and

kids wont be spending thousands on the fastest frame rates and will also level the playing field for them, the

computing

industry will slow down on their R&D for better/faster hardware.

 

The business world spends a huge amount of resources trying to keep the internet out from the unwanted and

keeping

their MS world running. In other words, it's all contained on networks and security. This is expensive. Very expensive.

It

wont be long imo before the business community walks through the door and they have their own virtual world and

getting rid of their server rooms. The weakest link will now be their internet connection.

 

MS is aware of this new direction and I imagine is very worried as free and open source is quickly making

them redundant.

"Maybe there is a lesson here and a reason why folks are having such different experiences with Vista.

Maybe the poor performance is not Microsofts fault."

 

Vista got a bad rap because they released it under a time deadline and developed without Billy's watchful

eye. Both of these were first's for an MS OS. While developing it, they told everyone it would be backwards

compatible. So the vendors relaxed with driver support. Then the deadline came, Vista wasn't complete or

compatible, yet MS went "Here you go, here's Vista, use it and love it" yet it didn't run worth poo.

Add me to the list of people running Vista (64) with no issues. Photoshop CS4 runs really, really well on it. No crashes, no issues at all. Caveat: check for hardware and software compatibility BEFORE doing the install. The most common source of complaints is that something old no longer works.

 

go figure...

I run a bunch of apps going back to around 2000..they all worked on Vista from the get go. Perfect backward compatibility. No delays on drivers: nobody but a geek (ie incompetent) buys a new application for anything serious until it's been in place for 6 months or so...do they?