New computer: Windows XP 32-bit, Windows XP 64-bit, or Windows Vista 32-bit?

My new computer (Sager NP5793) is on its way and should arrive by the end of the week. It will, however, come without an operating system, so I will have to install that on my own. I possess the following:

Windows XP Ultimate 32-bit
Windows XP Ultimate 64-bit
Windows Vista Ultimate 32-bit

Given these three options, what operating system would you recommend I install on my new laptop? The notebook has 4GB of RAM, so if I go with a 32-bit operating system, not all of it will be recognized, but the amount is only about 500MB, I believe.

I will use the computer for work (word processing & spread sheets), gaming and other forms of entertainment (chiefly watching movies, surfing the net and so on). So far, I have been using Windows XP and am very comfortable with the system.

Note: I have asked this before and it was suggested to me that I obtain a Windows Vista 64-bit edition and use my CD-key with it, but that is currently not an option - it must be one of the above three systems for now.

 

XP Ultimate? Isn't that a pirated spinoff?

Rofl! No but seriously, what is that?

 

What? You can download a torrent of Windows XP Ultimate but you can't download a Vista 64bit oem image?

 

Sigh, XP Professional, Vista Ultimate - sorry for the typo!

 

XP Pro .. everything runs .. fast

who cares for the lost 1GB .. I can't fill up the other 3 in my system anyways, lol.

 

It depends on whether you like Vista or not. If you don't like Vista, use XP Pro 32bit. Skip XP Pro 64 bit due to lack of driver support.

 

Thanks guys! XP Pro 32-bit it will be! I do like XP and am not so enamored with Vista (though I certainly don't hate it). And thanks for the tip regarding poor driver support for XP Pro 64-bit!

It will be XP Pro 32-bit until Windows 7 arrives at which point... well, we will see how Windows 7 shapes up.

 

Go with Vista 32-bit or 64-bit, especially if you're waiting for Windows 7, because it is based on Vista. The longer you use XP, the longer it will be for you to get used to the new layout. You may as well practice and test everything on Vista now.

 

I would go Vista 64, its a lot more mature than the rest of the OS's listed (and yes, I have less problems with it than XP32). I have no driver or compatibility problems with all the software I run.

Dont even consider XP64 now that Vista 64 is out, driver support is non existent and it was never really released as a true desktop OS unlike Vista 64.

 

Go for Vista.

 

yea Vista 64bit will best way because it can use all your 4 gb of ram considering you MB and Bios supports 4 GB

 

Well, basically there's a scenario for each being best. In order:

*You really need all 4 GB of RAM. In that case, go for XP x64. Poor driver support, but it'll get you the RAM. Otherwise,
*You know XP works and like it. In that case, stick with XP x86. No use switching to Vista unless you know you need it or really want it for some reason. As Steve Jobs would say, Vista's a bag of hurt. It uses more resources, isn't as compatible, and isn't as stable. XP just works.
*You need Vista for some software or really want the latest OS. In which case, get Vista x86. Note that this will give you the lowest amount of operable RAM of any option, although it may be equal compatibility-wise depending on what you run.

I'm guessing you've already tried Vista though since you possess it? In which case you ought to be able to decide for yourself whether XP or Vista 32-bit is better for you.

Having looked at the Windows 7 articles about its interface, I don't think that's really that pertinent. Seven's layout is at least as different from Vista's as Vista's is from XP's, I'd say more so. You won't know Seven's interface from knowing Vista's, so there's really no point in using Vista just to be prepared for Seven's interface.

And really, Vista's is close enough to XP's (which is close enough to 98's) that it really isn't that bad adjusting to any new version of Windows since 95 from 3.11. Using the OS that works best for you now or in the short-term future is more important than being prepared for the next one in the Windows world.

 

I disagree, Apollo13. You take the words from Steve Jobs, a huge rival to MS, as credibility? Vista > XP, especially with the 64-bit versions. Have you actually tried Windows 7? Because it is very close to Vista for the interface and settings location, but very far from XP.

EDIT: For system folder structure, Windows 7 also uses the same and more logical method from Vista.

These are the latest official screenshots released by MS in October.

 

if you ask me, Win7 is similar to Longhorn than Vista was/will ever be

 

Longhorn, the NT 6.0, was the initial codename for Vista and Server 2008.

 

Yea , I Know stewie ... I am referring to longhorn when never came out of beta , as you know after longhorn beta 5XXX they completely changed core of os to win2k3 core and scrapped all the good stuffs

 

AFAIK, Vista SP1 shares the same kernel as Server 2008, this is why it's very important to upgrade to SP1.

 

The reason I bought all these versions is that my institution has a volume license deal with Microsoft, so I was able to buy all three of these OSes for less than $25 in total, but they don't carry Vista 64-bit here.

Well, I am used to XP and do like it that's for sure. As to trying Vista, I have only done so indirectly, when trying to help my sister with her computer during the summer. She had problems running games, but SP1 managed to solve the compatibility issues. UAC came straight from hell and caused no-end of problems, but turning it off helped a great deal. Having done these things, I can only think of two issues I have with Vista. One of these is simply lack of familiarity - I am already familiar with XP and not so with Vista and the other is the 'stickiness' of the mouse cursor - when I move the scroll-bar, for example, it 'locks' to the scroll-bar until I unclick it. I am also a bit concerned that it's more demanding on the computer than XP - not that my new machine will have any problems, but I do like it when the computer is lean and clean and hopefully with as few extraneous processes running in the backround as possible.

 

Steve Jobs actually said that about Blu-Ray, not Windows. I reapplied it to Vista as it seemed to fit my experience with Vista (five months of using Vista as a primary OS) quite well. I know Steve Jobs is no reliable source on Windows, and actually like Apple as a company far less than Microsoft.

Granted, I only used XP x86 and Vista x86. On my post-Vista hardware, and post-XP software, Vista caused nothing but trouble, whereas XP worked quite well. Hence why Vista seemed like a "bag of hurt" (convenient phrase). However, it does seem to agree better with other people's hardware on average, and probably has improved somewhat since SP1 Beta. And I never had that scrollbar problem.

I have not actually tried Windows 7 - if you know a way too, please tell! I'd certainly like to - my plan is to try it when the public beta comes out.

By system folder, do you mean C:\Windows\System32? Or the general structure Vista builds upon installation? I can't recall any particularly great changes, other than that instead of C:\Documents and Settings\<Name>\My Documents, you have C:\Users\<Name>\My Documents. But it's quite rare that I dig around subdirectories of C:\Windows\System32 - most of my activity there is just pasting files.

You have a point about gadgets in the first screenshot, first row. Those are new. But how much preparatory adjustment does that take? I'd also contend that the start menu was more or less the same in Vista as XP, and 7 is a more significant departure from either.

The major change from XP to Vista in the next screenshot is that you can go back in the directory structure by clicking on a part of the path. Otherwise it's quite similar - it took virtually no time for me to adjust. And 7 is similar to Vista there.

The third screenshot is of an element new to 7 - 7 being more different from Vista than Vista from XP.

The fourth screenshot is interesting - haven't seen it before. I'm guessing by it and your "have you actually tried Windows 7" comment that you have it somehow. Nice Microsoft connections . The primary interface difference I see there is the Paint interface, which also is much more different from Vista to 7 than Vista was from 95.

The next one shows Jump Menus - also new to 7 from Vista. Vista did introduce Desktop Search in the start menu, but I believe you can download that as an add-on to XP from Microsoft as well.

The second-to-last screenshot is also new to me. But it's not a feature in Vista. Sure looks a lot more handy than current settings, though!

And the tab previews in 7 can be somewhat acclimated to in Vista, true. But you can also do so with Opera web browser, current for all versions of Windows since and including Windows 95. So there's no need to use Vista for getting used to the concept of tab previews. And really, I've yet to find it that useful - and I can still use that nigh every day even without Vista.

You seem to have had more hands-on experience with 7 than I have. But if anything your screenshots have reinforced my thought that 7's interface will be more different from Vista's than Vista's from XP. In 64-bit, I'll grant that Vista may be as good as XP due to XP x64's poor support, but in 32-bit I maintain that XP is better than Vista for the majority of users (not necessarily a huge majority, but over 50%). And Vista x64 isn't an option for Destrel, so it makes sense to discount it for this topic.

 

Let me put it this way:
I have a Macbook Pro
My wife has a 1520 with Win XP
My daughter's new 1525 has Vista, while her older Toshiba had Ubuntu

I therefore consider myself quite OS-agnostic and enjoying trying as many as possible (my MBP dual boots in XP and has an Ubuntu virtual machine).
During my last job I used Vista and 2003 Server.

That being said, I'd recommend XP 32-bit over the other two. It is a very *personal* thing, but I just cannot stand Vista (look and performance wise). Others have had positive impressions; *I* haven't (and yes, I tried both original and SP1). I have very, very, very high hopes for Win 7 and so far I'm really liking what I'm seeing.
I have never used XP 64-bit, but I have only heard bad reviews about it.

Hope it helps!

 

Yeah, I have decided now - Windows XP 32-bit it will be! Thanks for all the advice!

 

Now that Obama won, we can use XP 64-bit without a problem.

 

Because it's change we can believe in?

IDK, I'd rather have Windows 7 be the change we can believe in - and it's coming out closer to the inaugeration anyways. XP x64 was mid-Bush.

 

Vista 32-bit Ftw!