Battle of the Windows: Throw away Vista SP1, and keep XP SP3?
By Mike Ferro
Skip Vista, and stick with XP? That’s what one reviewer has sugggested after extensive beta testing both service pack 1 for Vista and service pack 3 for XP.
Vista the next generation operating system and the successor to XP has had a rough start, with stiff hardware requirements and hardware compatibility issues even to this day. Unfortunately, even I was unable to escape the compatibility issues Vista poses with my sound card.
With XP SP3 soon to arrive it seems like this service patch adds more refinement to an already well tuned machine. SP3 contains updates which patch bugs to applications that were introduced in SP2 such as Media Player 11 and IE 7. SP3 also contains upgrades to network functionality and new version increments to the older management tools that have been neglected for some time, such as MMC and Windows Installer. All in all, SP3 seems to be an excellent service pack addition to XP.
In stark contrast, Steven Vaughan-Nichols at CIO criticizes Vista SP1 for not addressing hardware compatibility and network issues without having to jump through several hoops. Service Pack 1 seems to improve a few things without actually improving much of what consumers have been complaining about.
The final verdict seems to be, with all the issues Vista still has after over a year being on the market, it may be wise to just avoid Vista altogether and stick with XP SP3.
It’s quite interesting how things will play out considering the next generation of Windows (Windows 7) is slated to hit the market in a couple years (2010). Will Vista become a footnote much like Windows ME, in the history of operating systems?
Note: XP SP3 was slated to arrive April 29th but was delayed due to compatibility issues with Microsoft Dynamics Retail Management System.
Related:
Entry was posted
on Saturday, May 3rd, 2008 at 4:04 am
under 
Print This Post
Read more entries by Mike Ferro.
May 3rd, 2008
That’s false statement about vistas stiff hardware requirements as XP:s requirements were way stiffer when people upgraded from 98 to XP. This really should let it go once and for all here.
ME didn’t show:
- new direct x for gamers
- new features to OS
- new codebase
- 64 bit OS
- better support for new dual core and quad core processors..
etc.
So Vista really can’t be the same as ME. ME was a flop and useless without anything new but Vista is going to deploy it slowly because there really is something new to provide.
May 3rd, 2008
I found it funny btw how blogger just repeats itself every day to get weight to his words and don’t read the comments on his blog..
Yeah hardware requirements blah blah…
May 3rd, 2008
“Skip Vista, and stick with XP? That’s what one reviewer has sugggested after extensive beta testing both service pack 1 for Vista and service pack 3 for XP.”
————————————————–
Most IT departments are skipping Vista and sticking with XP until Windows -7 or until hell freezes over. Sounds like they know what they are doing.
May 3rd, 2008
I am concerned that MS might deliberately create instability into XP SP3 just to get people on the rickety Vista SP-1 bandwagon.
May 3rd, 2008
Life is funny really… More people use Linux today than people using Windows 98 back in 1999. It seems that since XP came out is when computers hit huge. All the old Windows 98 crowd went to Linux while the mass went to XP. Microsoft is dealing with a completely new crowd than back in 2001. People went to XP or Linux it was a rift. Now they are trying to force Vista on people who don’t want it. People wanted new Windows back then.
May 3rd, 2008
Did NOBODY go 95 to 98 to 2000 to XP? All this talk of a hug jump from 98 to XP, what about 2000 in between?
Plus, bash all you want, but the advances in computing technology between XP and Vista have been FAR greater than happened back between 98 and XP. Vist has a FAR greater hardware challenge. And personally, I could care less if Vista didn’t support legacy hardware. At some point an MS OS has just GOT to say “no backwards hardware support” and make a clean break from the past. If not, it will continually bloat and noone will use it.
May 3rd, 2008
lol, ok we know now that XP in SP2 or SP3 flavors like to run faster then Vista. I really get tired of people talking about what they don’t like about Vista. I’ll say this … Vista is a success by the comparison to XP’s release, and let it be. If you have XP on your PC then keep it, but if you get a laptop with Vista you are going to have a more enjoyable experience the you think. There are a lot of little things and improvments to Vista that many people don’t know. Yes, there are bad things, but it’s just normal for a new Microsoft OS launch… do people forget XP horrid launch so soon?
throw out that tatered and worn out sweater that is XP, and don’t be afraid if to get a new Vista one. It is ok you will live and find a new world to explore and learn. It is the future. Learn it now and get a jump on people.
May 3rd, 2008
It’s not a comparison with XP you should be making, it’s ME. XP has a ton of things to offer, System Restore, native wireless support, system file protection et al..ME was tossed out there as a
stop gap with some Y2K patches and minor networking improvements. It was universally reviled as well, and rightly so.
Vista as a percentage of the OS market lags badly over XP at the same length of availability. XP gave some gain for the pain. There was no huge pressure exerted to extend previous Windows versions. XP is hardly worn out and tattered . The current version has been continually updated and improved. OSX came out at the same time period, is it tattered as well?
Microsoft doesn’t seem to share the same feeling of it being the future, it looks like getting 7 out is in overdrive. There are real, viable alternatives and the club of having no other choice is outdated. Anyone that takes the “thank you sir, may I have another” while trusting MS to make it right deserves what they get.
Seek help, you have battered wife syndrome.
May 3rd, 2008
linux is for geeks, until some one make it more userfriendly, then there’ll be a chance for linux, else screw all, esp finidng the right software, linux sux.
May 4th, 2008
Me: wrote
linux is for geeks, until some one make it more userfriendly, then there’ll be a chance for linux, else screw all, esp finidng the right software, linux sux.
————————————————-
I don’t know, except Linux Mint 4.0 found all the drivers, and XP could not. Linux Mint 4.0 installed faster than XP and lol…did I mention it is free? And a few hundred thousand computers are converting to Linux around the world….someone must be happy with it.
Yes Linux needs improvement, but it is far better and more usable than ever. Many are doing dual booting with Windows and Linux and getting the best of both worlds.
———————————————
DavidB:Wrote
“Did NOBODY go 95 to 98 to 2000 to XP? All this talk of a hug jump from 98 to XP, what about 2000 in between?”
———————————————–
Windows 2000 is one of Microsoft best releases of all time. It still runs on two of my computers, and can still do a fair portion of modern applications yet.
Low hardware requirements, no WGA, no online activation and overall good performance for its age. If one ranked the greatest OS’ of all time… Windows 2000 would be # 2 just behind XP.
May 4th, 2008
Vista is the most pointless OS out there. Seriously, I fail to see what it adds to the windows lineup other than eye candy.
*DirectX10 makes no visible difference to games, if anything games run like an anemic mule (even with DX10 hardware) whereas they absolutely fly on windows and don’t look much different.
*Vista may have better multiple core support but has anyone see any advantage over XP?
*Menu system is all screwed up. They’ve used the Russian doll system for menus, everything is hidden inside something else. I gotta click 3 or 4 more times compared to XP.
*WTF is the deal with the UAC?! I want to headbutt whoever came up with that one.
*Pointless differences. Considering VIsta is just XP with a new, heavy shell, they could’ve made it compatible with XP drivers but for some reason they didn’t. It seems the changes they made were just to show that Vista was a different OS to XP and for no other reason.
May 4th, 2008
Bob
I like the vistas menusystem, you just can’t use the Vista.
UAC? I turned it off so where is the problem? I don’t see any problem here and SP1 made the UAC better..
Vista is based on server codebase so it isn’t the XP with new shell.
That’s why XP drivers don’t work. It really is different OS. Saying it’s the new ME is completely rubbish as it’s not even made from XP codebase.
May 4th, 2008
I found it funny how this site keeps saying there is demand for the support of the XP as even the win2000 has the support for the year 2010.
May 4th, 2008
I have a computer with 2.8 gigahert of processor and 1024 mg of ram and 256 megabyte of video card and windows vista make feel my computer like shit, and XP make feel my computer like a winner and brand new pc.
May 5th, 2008
I keep waiting for someone to enlighten me what the majority of user can do with Vista that they can’t do with XP.
The ME references have to do with a cobbled up, rush to market OS to get MS some income that was universally hated. I was talking about the marketing and perception of the OS.
“linux is for geeks, until some one make it more userfriendly, then there’ll be a chance for linux, else screw all, esp finidng the right software, linux sux.”
The above is why I don’t care If Linux ever gets a major percentage of the OS market.
Tarzan User makes me remember how nice the internet was before AOL put the lowest common denominator online. Does millions of users running as root so they don’t get those pesky password prompts sound like fun?