TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- Windows Vista...is it time?
Pages (2): [1] 2 »


Posted by LfmC on Jul-01-2008 13:46:

Question Windows Vista...is it time?

A fried of mine who works a system admin once said: "The transition from win98 to XP was a huge step forward. XP to vista is not" And I tend to agree with him. So I postponed upgrading the OS until Vista is stable/bugfree (enough) to work on.
It's been quite some time from it's release and some SP's were released, hardware support prolly much better now, but... Has the time come to switch?


Posted by echosystm on Jul-01-2008 14:02:

i got both vista and xp for free from my uni. i run xp purely because i just dont like vista very much, for no apparent reason. i guess i just dont like the feel of it.


Posted by alanzo on Jul-01-2008 14:11:

Don't fix what isn't broken. XP became much more stable than 98/2000 so it was worth to upgrade from there. I can't think of a reason to upgrade from XP to Vista.


Posted by B_man on Jul-01-2008 14:23:

...from my cold dead fingers.


Posted by alanzo on Jul-01-2008 14:30:

I think what it really comes down to is that an upgrade just isn't needed at this time. The technology hasn't advanced enough to warrant such a significant change. I can think of a reason to upgrade to Vista. DirectX 10 for gaming. That's about it.


Posted by TRNG on Jul-01-2008 16:05:

yeah dont bother upgrading to vista, it's a computer whore and the gui sucks


Posted by Mr.Mystery on Jul-01-2008 19:39:

Vista is a piece of shit.


Posted by Eric J on Jul-01-2008 19:52:

Why eat up CPU cycles for stuff you don't need? Even on Windows XP, you can turn off a lot of processes, such as the Print Spooler, that may eat up resources not needed on a workstation dedicated to your studio. Each individual process may not eat up a lot by itself, but if you have a whole lot of little process running they can add up fast.
Vista and XP wastes a lot of resources on things that are not necessary for a base production workstation.

Save those extra cycles for your DAW software needs.

Even in the Mac world, a lot of us have stayed with Tiger for now, since there aren't a whole lot of "must have" features in Leopard (although there are a lot of "nice to haves" like Spaces).

Your production workstation is not the place to be on the cutting edge of operating system technology.


Posted by atxbigballer1 on Jul-01-2008 19:58:

Windows 7 well be out soon!


Posted by [Alpha]Dave on Jul-01-2008 20:10:

I've just upgraded to Vista.. so far it works great! Yeah, I was a bit sceptic at first because all the rumors about it being so buggy. Sure, XP worked great for me! BUT as I have 4GB of RAM, I need a 64bit system. The 64bit version of XP (XP x64) is a real pain in the ass, becuase it's not very compatible. There weren't much drivers to it. I had to work with a crappy beta driver to my delta soundcard, wich crashed several times a day thanks to that. Apart from the soundcard, my digital camera and my webcam wasn't compatible to it either. And a few of other things. But for vista on the other hand, there is drivers etc. So that's mostly why I upgraded. Works like a charm so far!


Posted by Cetra� on Jul-02-2008 01:24:

Vista is to XP

as ME was to 98

I'm sorry, Vista is pretty broken and Microsoft aren't even trying to fix it!

They have focused their development on Windows 7 and sorta dropped vista as another bad egg in their repertoire

For producing though, XP is faster. DirectSound is emulated in Vista, as they completely abolished it. There is also like 1000000 more layers of API to work through now, which sucks out the performance of everything.


Posted by kitphillips on Jul-02-2008 02:57:

quote:
Originally posted by Cetra�
Vista is to XP

as ME was to 98

I'm sorry, Vista is pretty broken and Microsoft aren't even trying to fix it!

They have focused their development on Windows 7 and sorta dropped vista as another bad egg in their repertoire

For producing though, XP is faster. DirectSound is emulated in Vista, as they completely abolished it. There is also like 1000000 more layers of API to work through now, which sucks out the performance of everything.


The question is, why are you using directsound at all?
Vista is a waste of time though, even browsing the internet crashes my computer constantly, thankfully its not my main studio computer.


Posted by DJ RANN on Jul-02-2008 03:06:

quote:
Originally posted by Cetra�
Vista is to XP

as ME was to 98

I'm sorry, Vista is pretty broken and Microsoft aren't even trying to fix it!

They have focused their development on Windows 7 and sorta dropped vista as another bad egg in their repertoire

For producing though, XP is faster. DirectSound is emulated in Vista, as they completely abolished it. There is also like 1000000 more layers of API to work through now, which sucks out the performance of everything.


Very true. MS are not continuing vista so I can't really understand anyone switching to it now, especially when XP does the job the so well and hopefully they will get right with 7.


Posted by LfmC on Jul-02-2008 11:55:

Well I guess that settles it. No Vista in my home studio.
I posted a similar question on a PC "expert" forum and, strangely enough, they were saying the opposite. Vista being great and all.. Go figure..


Posted by echosystm on Jul-02-2008 12:14:

quote:
Originally posted by Cetra�
For producing though, XP is faster. DirectSound is emulated in Vista, as they completely abolished it. There is also like 1000000 more layers of API to work through now, which sucks out the performance of everything.


this is wrong. as far as i am aware!

vista is actually, technically, better for producing. the old implementation has been replaced by a better kernel level system with fancy doowacky scheduling. most good drivers can use this now, even with ASIO to some degree.


Posted by Zombie0729 on Jul-02-2008 15:19:

i posted this on GS but my vista is a lot more stable than my XP and all my plugs work on it. My latency is less on my sound card and my virus TI has zero jitter.

the only bit of kit that isn't working 100% is the waves mercury bundle which i bought years ago and don't even really use much anymore.

i'm very happy with vista.


Posted by Subtle on Jul-02-2008 16:41:

The only reason i would like to have Vista is that you can have more RAM in it.

But my XP is stable as a rock, wouldnt dream of changing.


Posted by DJ Shibby on Jul-03-2008 04:02:

every other windows os release is a flop imo


Posted by JustinMead on Jul-03-2008 04:20:

quote:
Originally posted by Zombie0729
my vista is a lot more stable than my XP and all my plugs work on it.


Posted by Cetra� on Jul-03-2008 05:28:

quote:
Originally posted by echosystm
this is wrong. as far as i am aware!

vista is actually, technically, better for producing. the old implementation has been replaced by a better kernel level system with fancy doowacky scheduling. most good drivers can use this now, even with ASIO to some degree.


Ah well, that's good I guess. Still though, removing direct sound was stupid


Posted by thecYrus on Jul-03-2008 05:42:

quote:
Originally posted by Zombie0729
i posted this on GS but my vista is a lot more stable than my XP and all my plugs work on it. My latency is less on my sound card and my virus TI has zero jitter.

i'm very happy with vista.


exactly the same here. vista works great with all my plugins and cubase 4, RME multiface, virus ti, sonnox (ilok dongle), korg (synchrosoft dongle), ...


Posted by mysticalninja on Jul-03-2008 05:51:

I have 4gb ram but only shows up as 3.25 in XP pro. Will vista fix that?
Also, will some vstis not work in vista?


Posted by thecYrus on Jul-03-2008 05:57:

quote:
Originally posted by mysticalninja
I have 4gb ram but only shows up as 3.25 in XP pro. Will vista fix that?
Also, will some vstis not work in vista?


a 64 bit operating system will fix that


Posted by echosystm on Jul-03-2008 05:58:

quote:
Originally posted by mysticalninja
I have 4gb ram but only shows up as 3.25 in XP pro. Will vista fix that?


only vista 64bit.

quote:
Originally posted by mysticalninja
Also, will some vstis not work in vista?


yes, some will not work in vista. i haven't come accross any yet, though.


Posted by MOK on Jul-03-2008 08:39:

quote:
Originally posted by JustinMead
quote:
Originally posted by Zombie0729
my vista is a lot more stable than my XP and all my plugs work on it.


And with quad core, 64 bit os, 4 gigs of ram, and a fancy fancy new shuttle case, I'm winning at life.


Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.