xp64 or vista64 or linux?

[brwnbread]

im getting over 6gb or ram soon and will need a 64bit OS to actualy use it... my problem is.. i dont know which one to get

i will be using 3dsmax, zbrush and photoshop mainly... and i will also use it for games and other general stuff

i heard vista was really buggy, but its been out for ages, hasnt it all been fixed by now?

i have XP 32, and this works fine and everything

i dont know anything about linux

thanks :D

btw, money isnt a problem

[Lamont]

Vista is fine, I am using it now.

[Twindragon]

I tried to use vista ultimate and when I got to the point where I formatted my drive and needed to install it..It wouldn't recognize my cd rom. Which is new. I went on forums and found that this was a common problem so I decided to go with xp 64 instead.

[cookepuss]

Vista 64 Ultimate. That's what I use. It just has the widest driver and app support. The complaints of bugs are just old, old news. SP1 corrected about 90% of the major stability and performance issues that otherwise plagued the initial release. Subsequent updates have only bettered the situation. It's at the point of being quite a solid and reliable workhorse. This thing about the zombfied return of the BSOD is simply rubbish.

Vista 64 is not only good enough for day to day work, it's also good enough for work where your wallet depends on it. Bank on it.

Driver support under XP64 has always been a tricky affair. With MS having dumped a bucket load of cash to make Vista more stable and attractive to the mainstream XP64 is simply an evolutionary dead end. Technically, even Vista's days are numbered, as Windows 7 appears to be around the corner and (reportedly) in a surprising state of readiness.

Linux, while the OS of geeks the world over, has never taken to the mainstream. So long as MS owns the PC market, stick with Windows. Also, since you stated a desire to use 3dsmax, Linux isn't an option, as there's no native port on non-MS systems. The only major CG apps with native Linux versions are Maya, C4D, XSI, and LightWave. 3dsmax is a Windows only CG solution.

[seven]

I also use vista 64 ultimate and have only experienced minor gripes.

One problem that I have not researched yet has to do with windows update wanting to download a raid driver for my redundant system. If it does this I have to run a window's repair on my os. All other updates have been fine and other than that I think it runs great.

[cookepuss]

I used to have a similar problem. Turn off auto update and just manually update every now and again. Once you've got Vista in a "happy place" it's always nicer not to rock the boat.

Critical patches to Vista aren't as frequent as they used to be. There are small patches here and there, but those are usually to fix minor exploits and such.

I stay on top of driver updates myself and pretty much ignore the WHQL stuff off of MS' update service. The non-WHQL stuff from the hardware devs are usually more stable and more up to date anyway.

What you should really do is take whatever patches and drivers that make up your most stable Vista setup and just slipstream them into your original install. Granted, creating an updated ISO of your original DVD or factory backup ISO isn't going to win you brownie points with "the man." However, it saves a LOT of time if ever you have to reinstall your PC from scratch.

[Deto]

I'm using xp64bit. I much prefer putting all power to whatever I'm doing with my computer, not to whatever I'm running the whatever I'm doing with my computer :)

Sure you can optimize vista greatly, even down close to what xp is, but it still is a resource hog. And at least what I can say between my vista laptop vs my xp desktop. The desktop is so much more win, but then again, the vista is on laptop. Hard to compare. But I've had alot of issues with vista so far, I myself wouldn't put it ever on my desktop.

What I like with xp vs vista is that xp is good out of the box, vista is far from decent. And I frequently have to reinstall eveyrthing anyways :D

What Cookepuss does is clever, too bad I'm not :D

[Lamont]

What I like with xp vs vista is that xp is good out of the box, vista is far from decent. And I frequently have to reinstall eveyrthing anyways :D
I've had more things WORK with VistaUltimate64 than XP64. And I made the mistake of getting rid of a scanner because it didn't work on XP64, but worked on Vista (I made a thread here when I was looking for one...). Also my HP multi-function printer didn't work on XP64 (or regular XP!!), but ran without installing drivers in Vista. I had to buy a new motherboard because of XP64 and now that's sitting in the top of my closet. A lot of drivers for things I had to use were still in beta when I installed Vista.

XP64 was badass, but I am having next to no issues with Vista Ultimate 64.

[Twindragon]

I haven't had any problems with xp 64 where drivers are concerned. I wanted to switch to vista ultimate 64 because I like to keep going forward with technology but unfortunately I ran into that dvd rom problem ...I also tried to install it on my old computer which is 64 bit capable and had problems installing as well..so instead I opted for xp64 and the only problems i've had is using quicktime because it won't run properly on a 64 bit machine I guess. or maybe its just xp 64 and my wireless card I had in it wouldn't work as well but again that might have just been a 64 bit problem not an xp problem. All of the programs I need work perfectly. I believe though that you might as well try to go the vista 64 ultimate route, maybe borrow it from someone if you know anyone who has it first before you buy to see if it will recognize your dvd/cd rom just in case lol

[cookepuss]

Sure you can optimize vista greatly, even down close to what xp is, but it still is a resource hog.
In the end, even if the forthcoming Windows 7 didn't run any leaner, what's the issue really? I might have complained if PCs topped out at 2GB and an idle Vista was eating 1.2GB of that. However, anybody looking for a 64-bit OS is certainly going to be running 4GB or more.

Honestly, you can pick up a budget family PC at retail chains like Best Buy for $650. That PC will have 6GB and still be CG capable. So, what do you suppose the budget workhorse PC that costs under $2k will get you? RAM is cheap nowadays. And if HDD space is an issue, consider this. Back in 2004, 1TB of HDD space might cost $500+. Getting that much space on your desktop would have been a luxury. In 2009, I've got 3.5TB sitting on my desktop and the most recent 1TB of it only cost $99.

As I see it, there's no reason to gripe about it unless your PC is full or your wallet is empty. The people complaining most are the ones at the bottom of the food chain.

1.2GB overhead seems like a lot if you're coming from the 32-bit world and your PC only has 2GB RAM. In the 64-bit world, where it's not uncommon to see sub-$1k machines with 8GB, that 1.2GB overhead is negligible.

A drop of water in a thimble is a lot. A drop in a lake is nothing.

It's ultimately a moot point. We can argue the same points, ad nauseum, regarding Windows VS DOS. What we can't argue is that time marches on without us, like it or not. As ugly as it is, this is the price you pay for progress. Nothing stays the same.

Relatively speaking, RAM and HDD are minor. What we should be complaining about is the unnecessary bloat that's consuming our CPU cycles and demanding workstation power just to check your e-mail.

But I've had alot of issues with vista so far, I myself wouldn't put it ever on my desktop.
Bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch. :)

I love it when people say stuff like that. When it comes down to it, what choice do you really have anyway? That's the thing about evolution. You either go with the changes or you end up rotting with the dinos.

From what I've read, Windows 7 hasn't even hit RC1 and is already performing like a final release. Like it or not, v7 is just around the corner. By the time Windows 7 makes its debut, XP64 is going to be just another legacy product that MS supports as a courtesy to those who that haven't yet invested in an expensive company-wide switch. For most home users or freelancers, XP64 is really DOA at this point. Holding back another week, month, or year isn't going to change that.

What I like with xp vs vista is that xp is good out of the box, vista is far from decent.
It's a matter of perspective. I have heard.... Hell, I have been a victim of XP64 madness. Getting XP64 up and running isn't always an easy task for everybody. The first time I tried it, XP64 crashed & burned on first run and had to be totally reinstalled. On the 2nd install, it ran, but only 75% of my hardware was driver supported, by either MS or the manufacturer. The missing 25% was too crucial for me to consider staying with XP64.

If we're making the comparison of XP32 vs Vista32, then the issue is much more clear. I agree with you. Given the choice, XP32 is a much better performer than Vista32 out of the box. Then again, as I said, you're never given a choice anyway. You don't still use Win98se anymore do you? ;) In the PC world, choice is an illusion. Welcome to the Matrix, fellas :p

I've had more things WORK with VistaUltimate64 than XP64.
My point exactly. I wasn't willing to give up my scanner or printer. If I had to, maybe. There was definitely never a way I was going to give up my backup HDD simply because nobody made a XP64 driver for my RAID controller though. That was a deal breaker for me.

Also my HP multi-function printer didn't work on
UGH!!!!! Don't get me started on HP.

I mean, I love HP printers, but HP is such a nightmare when it comes to driver support. They have this lovely unofficial policy of planned obsolescence. You buy a HP printer now only at your own risk. There's never a guarantee that they'll support it with new drivers under the next OS. When they do promise a new driver, you better not hold your breath. I dumped a $600 HP in favor of a $99 Brother laser because of those shenanigans.

[brwnbread]

cooool, thanks everyone...

so the obvious choice now, is vista ultimate 64, so im getting that =D

[Lamont]

cooool, thanks everyone...

so the obvious choice now, is vista ultimate 64, so im getting that =DWhat?! It's clear that everyone here is rooting for Linux.:lucky:

[rv_el]

I use Vista 64 Ultimate. XP64 will not be supported.

I hope the move into the next OS is smooth (and cheap). I just bought my damn Vista not too long ago! :).

[Maph]

I use XP64 as it's very stable on my system, haven't had a single crash so far. I've yet to try vista64 on my machine, but since I'm using a dual quad core setup, I'd need one of those fancy pants versions, and I've got better things to spend my hard earned cash on atm. :)

Perhaps I'll make the switch if windows 7 is decent enough to do so. :)

[poopinmymouth]

Another Vista 64 user here. Just recently upgraded from 32 bit XP, really needed the extra memory. Using 4 gb now, but wouldn't mind 8! hahah. One thing I didn't like, is that the same programs I was using on XP seemed to run slower on Vista (max 8, pshop 7, and C4D 9) but once I got 64 bit versions for Vista, all is good. Wouldn't have minded sticking with my tried and proven solutions though.

[brwnbread]

cool, im udpatiing from XP32 aswell; im just wondering whether to do a clean install or just 'upgrade' it...

also, does anyone actualy use macs lol? i thought they were sposed to be good for art

[cookepuss]

cool, im udpatiing from XP32 aswell; im just wondering whether to do a clean install or just 'upgrade' it...
It's a question of priorities.

On the one hand, upgrading virtually guarantees that the transition will be as smooth as possible. On the other hand, there's usually a good chance that you bring over whatever excess baggage and bloat that managed to accumulate since your last installation.

With a clean installation, you'll have to go through the tedious process of backing up your data and reinstalling your apps. That can take a lot of time, especially if you have to hunt down missing or OS specific drivers. On the other hand, once you're up and running, it's like having a new PC again. All of that HDD and registry clutter from "your former life" is gone and it's party time.

Personally, I prefer clean installation. Just make sure that you get an accurate listing of your installed hardware, codecs, and such before you clean install. Playing a guessing game later on can be a nightmare otherwise.

also, does anyone actualy use macs lol? i thought they were sposed to be good for art
Got one Mac here, but it's not being used for anything more than an additional render node. I've always been a PC guy. Early on, it was the wider selection of games that hooked me. As time wore on and I was already firmly entrenched,it was the widest, most notable selection of 2D/3D apps kept from making the Mac switch. Personally, I've always liked to dig under the hood and Macs have always shielded the end user too much from that stuff.

[brwnbread]

i got vista64 :D

i haven't installed much yet, but... it works so far

thnks for advice n stuff



also, I added something to my gallery :) check it out...
http://www.gameartisans.org/gamecon/galleries/artwork.php?uid=5931&aw=2320


EDIT: awww man, zbrush doesnt install properly, its coming up with some side-by-side error...

EDIT EDIT:got it working =D