Need a stable platform to work with, so which OS is better ?

[Mark Natto]

I am in middle of making another PC for my daily tasks, the base hardware
would be :
Asus P5N-E SLI
8GB DDR2-800 (if going XP32 then 3GB)
GF-7300GT
Xeon E3110 Dual 3GHz-1333bus (the spare mobo I have wont take any of the
quad 45nm CPU and I am not keen on the Q6600/6700)

Most if not all of my software are 32bits, but I would like to take
advantage of the 64bit OS for memory when running VM, plus I do find XP64
seems to work a whole lot faster than XP32 on another test machine I have.
I am no great fan of Vista, since day 1 I have been battling with it for
clients, but with SP1 it restored a bit of faith so may be I should give it
a chance and use Vista64 Business as my core OS, but I would like some
feedbacks on people whom have used it for a while, I normally change my core
OS every other years due to the amount of software I need to install , plus
the time to customize it, it will then get imaged and use over and over
again, so a good solid foundation is a must.

Thanks

 

[Charlie Russel - MVP]

Re: Need a stable platform to work with, so which OS is better ?

You need 64-bit to take advantage of your RAM, so if you opt for 32-bit,
you're right to settle at 3 GB. As for Vista v. XP x64 - the driver
situation is better for Vista 64, and that advantage will only increase.
It's stable, I live in it. But it _does_ have a learning curve. OTOH, I'm
now quite happy with it, and running XP feels "dated". Both support 32-bit
programs equally well.

--
Charlie.
"Mark Natto" <natto@markresltd.com> wrote in message
news:uNkUpoq7IHA.4112@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>I am in middle of making another PC for my daily tasks, the base hardware
>would be :
> Asus P5N-E SLI
> 8GB DDR2-800 (if going XP32 then 3GB)
> GF-7300GT
> Xeon E3110 Dual 3GHz-1333bus (the spare mobo I have wont take any of the
> quad 45nm CPU and I am not keen on the Q6600/6700)
>
> Most if not all of my software are 32bits, but I would like to take
> advantage of the 64bit OS for memory when running VM, plus I do find XP64
> seems to work a whole lot faster than XP32 on another test machine I have.
> I am no great fan of Vista, since day 1 I have been battling with it for
> clients, but with SP1 it restored a bit of faith so may be I should give
> it a chance and use Vista64 Business as my core OS, but I would like some
> feedbacks on people whom have used it for a while, I normally change my
> core OS every other years due to the amount of software I need to install
> , plus the time to customize it, it will then get imaged and use over and
> over again, so a good solid foundation is a must.
>
> Thanks
>
>

 

[S.SubZero]

Re: Need a stable platform to work with, so which OS is better ?

With XP 32-bit, I could walk away from it and have no worries about it
running indefinitely.

With XP 64-bit, I could walk away from it and have no worries about it
running indefinitely.

With Vista x64, I could walk away from it and have no worries about it
running indefinitely.

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

Re: Need a stable platform to work with, so which OS is better ?

"S.SubZero" <ssubzero@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f5eeebb-cac6-4598-ab05-bb834904ee6f@a3g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
> With XP 32-bit, I could walk away from it and have no worries about it
> running indefinitely.
>
> With XP 64-bit, I could walk away from it and have no worries about it
> running indefinitely.
>
> With Vista x64, I could walk away from it and have no worries about it
> running indefinitely.


Vista and 64bits is the future but it depends entirely on your hardware and
what things you do with your computer, neither of which do you say anything
about.

 

[N Brown]

Re: Need a stable platform to work with, so which OS is better ?

"Colin Barnhorst" <c.barnhorst@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:F49AFEAE-5C69-47D3-B221-84C1F08FB196@microsoft.com...
> "S.SubZero" <ssubzero@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3f5eeebb-cac6-4598-ab05-bb834904ee6f@a3g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
>> With XP 32-bit, I could walk away from it and have no worries about it
>> running indefinitely.
>>
>> With XP 64-bit, I could walk away from it and have no worries about it
>> running indefinitely.
>>
>> With Vista x64, I could walk away from it and have no worries about it
>> running indefinitely.
>
>
> Vista and 64bits is the future but it depends entirely on your hardware
> and what things you do with your computer, neither of which do you say
> anything about.

The future is now!, (well on ny rig anyway) Looks like the hrdware you
listed would be fine,
what about input devices? What software? You need to check for 64 bit
Vista drivers and check
SOftware compatibility.

My experience On Vista 64 with a Kick mulimedia setup and doing audio/video
editing, Playing
some Games and researching the web ;-) is that Vista 64 Ulitimate is the
best operating system I've
worked with.

I believe that if Apple doesn't go 64 bit it will be their downfall.

N Brown