PDA

View Full Version : How To Downgrade "Vista" to the "XP" Experience!



Quiet1onTheSet
05-06-2008, 01:40 PM
OK, boys and girls! Tired of your Vista Installation as it is currently configured?

Well, I just received notice from extremetech.com of this article which should be a big help to many, but I haven't applied the steps therein yet, as I am still shopping for a host PC for NewTek's venerable VT[5] system.

Nevertheless, as soon as I get that PC, with Vista -- I'm sure to implement a number of suggestions in this piece:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2292958,00.asp

Q1

ted
05-06-2008, 10:43 PM
But Quiet1, why would you want to go backwards? :D

mav3rick
05-07-2008, 01:52 AM
i switched back to xp ... from vista....

Quiet1onTheSet
05-07-2008, 02:20 PM
But Quiet1, why would you want to go backwards? :DNot doing that at all; instead, the article allows one to get more out of Vista, in the way of performance -- without the eye-candied attempt to compete with Mac OS 10's elegant appearance (while being devoid of OS 10's elegant efficiency).


I'm not going back to sucky old XP. Vista is awesome! In many respects it's not awesome, but it's the best Microsoft has to offer for now. I'm going to use Vista -- but efficiently.



"The antinomian notion that God is not, is imagined only by suppressors of the glaring fact of their ultimately having to give account to Him for prideful if not abominable thoughts and actions." -Anon

ted
05-07-2008, 06:33 PM
Don't get me wrong. I'm all for optimizing Vista for best performance!
I'll check that out as soon as I can. Thanks!

Matt
05-08-2008, 02:30 AM
I'm sticking with XP until I _have_ to "upgrade" to Vista

safetyman
05-08-2008, 06:05 AM
Vista makes XP look like an old hat to me now. Not switching back or making Vista look like XP -- I get great performance now. I have an XP machine in storage, maybe I'll make it look like a DOS machine.

Skonk
05-08-2008, 07:01 AM
Going from XP to Vista is a downgrade.

The people who say Vista is fine are people who's only experience of vista is on their new fangled uber PC which will clearly show improvements over their old one regardless of the OS. OR people who have already disabled most of the new "features" in Vista making it run pretty much like XP.

Titus
05-08-2008, 07:10 AM
I'm doing a dual boot for my machines, tired of Vista and its low performance.

Titus
05-08-2008, 08:15 AM
At this moment with only Mozilla opened, Vista is using 700 MB while on my other machine XP takes only 200MB. I guess this means less memory for LW.

Titus
05-08-2008, 08:26 AM
Well, that may be true but big LW projects are crashing (or saying need more memory) in Vista while on XP are doing fine

dweinkauf
05-08-2008, 09:03 AM
My my..... I just took a break from a scanning job on my old Vista-incompatible craptacular scanner and noticed this thread was active again. I thought I would share a story with you. Several years ago, I used a local independent technician to reconfigure one of my older computers. At the time, he wasn't sure he could stay in business for lack of work. A few months ago, when my 10-year-old P-III bit the dust, I took it to him to see what could be done. To my surprise, his repair shop was jammed with computers - many brand new. When I asked him what happened, he said, "one word - Vista." It seems that he can't keep up with the demand to "downgrade" to XP. With respect to my P-III, he advised me to go with Dell because he learned they weren't happy with Vista and offered their business customers a choice between XP and Vista. Needless to say, my choice was XP. So, I stripped my P-III of usable components and for $450 I got a brand new dual core computer with an extra hard drive, burner, and all the software loaded and configured. It was delivered in less than a week and all I had to do was plug it in and arrange the desktop icons the way I wanted them. End of story. Quite honestly, I hope the problems with Vista that people keep talking about can be resolved so the dinosaurs like me don't have to deal with OS configuration issues. It is also my hope that Vista can be made to work with older reliable hardware. When these two things happen, I'll certainly take another look. Until that happens, I'll stay here in the "dark ages" where I get a lot of work done without the need for all the new bells and whistles Vista has to offer. Well, got to run so I can fire up my craptacular XP system and get a Toaster project done before tomorrow's deadline.

Dexter2999
05-08-2008, 09:41 AM
neverko,

All of your opinions are biased in that you are running Vista on really nice new machine. Not everyone can afford the luxury of getting a new computer so the OS will run well. Every person who has weighed in on this issue comes to the same conclusion. IF YOU ARE BUYING A NEW COMPUTER GET VISTA. If you have an older one (and I would say if you can't afford a higher end one) stay with XP.

I have a new laptop running Vista Home Premium and it sucks. I am waiting for the Vista Ultimate upgrade to arrive in hopes it will be more stable. And I happend to have all the transparency and animated windows turned off and it looks like Windows 2000....looks like HOME.

dweinkauf
05-08-2008, 10:38 AM
My three reasons for not jumping into the Vista black hole: (1) I have a lot of old but great hardware (some of which works better than the new stuff out there) that won't run with Vista; (2) I don't have the money to buy (or, should I say, waste on) new hardware just to satisfy an OS; and (3) I simply don't have the time, energy, experience, or interest in configuring a new OS that requires time, energy, experience, and interest to accomplish that task. I did buy a brand new computer to replace an old one, but the three reasons above dictated that I stay with XP. For those who can afford the new technology and have the time to devote to OS configuration issues, I say go for it - get Vista and enjoy!

Jim_C
05-08-2008, 10:51 AM
I've had to take Vista off of every machine that came with it due to an incompatibility with the main program I wanted to use.
One of which is Windows Media Encoder. Go figure.

cresshead
05-08-2008, 11:19 AM
not all vista pc's are working fine with lightwave as you already know...i suspect that if craig could put xp onto his el cheapo acer then lightwave would be usable.

i myself have grown to like vista..i have a 32bit vista on an acer laptop with a nvidia card and it runs ace...plusd a quadcore desktop 64bit ulitmate and runs fantastically...

i've just ordered NEW asus eee pc [9inch screen] which comes with xp!...that should be fun..putting 3dsmax and lightwave on it for modeling/animating on the bus!

Quiet1onTheSet
05-08-2008, 11:26 AM
Vista makes XP look like an old hat to me now. Not switching back or making Vista look like XP -- I get great performance now...
Somehow this topic is spinning in a direction it ought not necessarily go.

I wouldn't imagine that the purpose of the article (see link in original post) is to "make Vista look like an old hat (i.e., Windows XP) at all, nor is it to push Vista backward into an erroneously imagined "XP mode".

Rather, its purpose is to give the user a guide so as to have Vista behave in a manner that's more commensurate with maximized performance, and without some of the unnecessary glitter at the expense of genuinely "great performance".

Q1

Quiet1onTheSet
05-08-2008, 11:40 AM
It performs lovely on my system as is completely rock solid.How new is the machine you're running Vista on, and what kind of power are you flirting with?


...you Vista haters that probably haven't used the OS for any extended period of time probably wouldn't understand or care anyway. So do keep with good old XP, but stop slamming Vista, it's a really solid OS unless you have a craptacular PC configuration.Not-so-nice, over-generalized, narrow view you've articulated there.

Q1


"The antinomian notion that God is not, is imagined only by suppressors of the glaring fact of their ultimately having to give account to Him for prideful if not abominable thoughts and actions." -Anon

Quiet1onTheSet
05-08-2008, 12:03 PM
I have a signature with that info... Doh! Paid attention to the bold-typed, system specs in your signature, neverko, only after the timer ran out for editing my post, as I summarily sought to retract my query regarding your admirably-running, Vista system specs. Thanks for stating the obvious!

[Rightly humbled]


"The antinomian notion that God is not, is imagined only by suppressors of the glaring fact of their ultimately having to give account to Him for prideful if not abominable thoughts and actions." -Anon

Dexter2999
05-08-2008, 12:06 PM
A whole different issue is with PC vendors who sell "Vista" PCs that the hardware and drivers doesn't really run Vista well. This makes people jump on Vista as the bad, bad OS, when the problem really lies elsewhere.

That is one valid way of looking at it.

But another way to look at it would be to ask, "Would this hardware that isn't good enough to run Vista work acceptably with another OS?"

Vista may be great on the right system. But the fact is that it is an OS that is somewhat demanding in its requirements. This isn't just a few people having problems with it. It is a healthy chunk of the population...who as I hinted at before, can't all afford a top of the line PC.

Compare it to a race car. It is the optimization of performance of speed and handling, on a track. But race cars aren't practical transportation for the general public. The doors don't open. They don't have anywhere to put groceries or the kids. They get crappy gas mileage.

The other side of that is, you can't run a minivan on a track and get great performance. The engine is too slow. Too much weight. Center of gravity is too high.

So if Mario Andretti comes along and tells me that I need to get rid of my truck, because the formula car is better. Get stuffed Mario!! My truck runs fine and takes care of my needs and it is dependable (and I don't have any more payments.)

The problem is that formula car people have the clout to stop my truck from running. Fueling only high performance, I get left out. I am being told that my hardware is no good anymore and if I want to go, I have to trade up.

It's as bad as owning a Mac. ;)

Vista may be great for some but it just isn't for everyone.

dweinkauf
05-08-2008, 12:15 PM
I have to agree with Neverko about getting the best components in a system for the tasks you need to accomplish. My new Dell computer (mentioned in my previous posts) was purchased for home/office use (even though I sometimes use Mirage and TVPaint on it when I'm too lazy to turn on one of my other systems). I didn't need anything above what was in that system to accomplish the tasks I needed it to do. I didn't, therefore, need to spend money I didn't have for a "pristine" system I didn't need.

When I upgraded my Toaster workstation last summer, however, I had a NewTek dealer do it with what he thought were the best high-end components (motherboard, video card, SATA drives, etc.) he could get to do the job. He and I agreed my old SCSI raid (as a second raid to the brand new SATA raid he installed), burner and 8-year-old chassis were worth saving and including in the new system. By doing the system this way, and even having the him load and configure the OS and all of my software, I estimate I saved well over $3,000 over a comparable new system. Since the older very workable components in the system wouldn't work with Vista, we went with a dual-boot 32 and 64-bit XP OS which, by the way, was his preferred OS over Vista.

All I had to do when getting the system back home was plug it in, hook up the monitor, mouse and keyboard, arrange the desktop icons, and start working. I spent absolutely no time or energy on OS configuration - something, as I said, I have no experience with or interest in. The system is rock solid and I haven't found anything I needed above what is on that system to do the work I do. My 64-bit version of Lightwave 9.3.1 and 32-bit version of VT[5] absolutely scream on the system.

So, I do agree with Neverko about getting the best components to do the job you need a system to do, but I also believe that if older stuff works just fine and does what you need it to do, don't "fix" it.

dweinkauf
05-08-2008, 12:30 PM
Posted by Dexter 2999
So if Mario Andretti comes along and tells me that I need to get rid of my truck, because the formula car is better. Get stuffed Mario!! My truck runs fine and takes care of my needs and it is dependable (and I don't have any more payments.)

Great analogy! I drive a 50-mpg Prius for everyday travel at the inflated gas prices we pay, and a ten year old 4-wheel drive Ford Ranger with 230,000 miles on it to haul stuff and to get out of my driveway in the middle of winter.

Jim_C
05-08-2008, 12:30 PM
What is your main program that doesn't work?


Windows Media Encoder 9.
It 'supposedly' works with a bunch of hotfixes and junk, but we use it in a live situation for $$ making so in no way was I willing to chance it. Even after hotfixes it was still crashing at random times.
the other
BeyondTV
which I believe now works with Vista but at the time I bought the Dell with Vista Home Basic it did not.

Quiet1onTheSet
05-08-2008, 12:31 PM
So, I do agree with Neverko about getting the best components to do the job you need a system to do, but I also believe that if older stuff works just fine and does what you need it to do, don't "fix" it.
Well presented, balanced take on the subject AFAICS.

Q1



"The antinomian notion that God is not, is imagined only by suppressors of the glaring fact of their ultimately having to give account to Him for prideful if not abominable thoughts and actions." -Anon

Cageman
05-08-2008, 12:36 PM
Uhm... anyone having problem with Vista eating more memory here is a solution; get more RAM! RAM is so cheap these days... 4 GB RAM (Kingston) is about 50 bucks here in Sweden. Low memory footprint isn't really an excuse these days...

Titus
05-08-2008, 02:34 PM
Uhm... anyone having problem with Vista eating more memory here is a solution; get more RAM! RAM is so cheap these days... 4 GB RAM (Kingston) is about 50 bucks here in Sweden. Low memory footprint isn't really an excuse these days...

In Sweden... but in a banana republic the cost is more. Even so, it's a stupid solution to buy more hardware just because your OS requires more, my solution is to install XP and it works for me, thank you.

Jim_C
05-08-2008, 03:04 PM
Does anyone game with Vista?
IS DX10 making a difference? I mean are games taking advantage of it?

Dexter2999
05-08-2008, 03:09 PM
Uhm... anyone having problem with Vista eating more memory here is a solution; get more RAM! RAM is so cheap these days... 4 GB RAM (Kingston) is about 50 bucks here in Sweden. Low memory footprint isn't really an excuse these days...

Again, a true statement but it is biased in that you run a 64bit system. You perception is based on your personal experience instead of looking at the overall market.

Some people are running 32bit and have RAM ceiling limits. Unless I am misinformed. How much RAM will Vista 32 bit address? Will you be able to run that huge scene you cranked out in 64bit mode when you have to switch back to 32bit to use the plug ins you need?

I was looking to buy ProTools software the other day. They still haven't certified it to run under Vista. Now, ProTools isn't some little legacy program. It is THE standard in Post Production Audio. Keeping your system to spec and maintaining that system for optimum performance becomes difficult when the OS is discontinued or the OS auto updates and suddenly you find yourself with a broken system.

I just want them to stop helping so much. Stop making assumptions. Not everyone wants auto updates. Not everyone's system is even connected to the internet. Not everyone wants to buy a new system with Yahoo search assistant built into the browser. This isn't just Microsoft it is software makers in general.

I spent the day last week restamping my Vista Laptop, that I got in January, because somewhere in the machine apparently three different calls were being made to the "svchost" functions at the same time (resulting in three separate instances.) EVERYONE apparently wants to auto update Vista, Quicktime, Flash, Adobe Version Cue, Google toolbar assitant, etc... Anyway, the three simultaneous calls to the "svchost functions" rendered my new laptop a doorstop. Restamp it and it works great. So what good is a $1200 hp laptop if I can't load the software I need to do my work? I know how to use my computer. Leave things alone. Stop helping already.

I spent my one day off restamping the computer then removing the crapware that ships with it. I still don't have my plug ins loaded back on.

By the way, I do have Photoshop CS2, LW9.3.1, Google Search Assistant, Quicktime, and even some download managers running smoothly on my P1.3GHZ machine I built 8 years ago and it is rock solid. So when I try to put pretty much the same things on a new computer and it gacks, I am left less than enthused. Apparently CS3 may be more demanding than CS2. I am willing to admit that isn't automaticaly the OS fault. But when everything is so close to the same, it sure makes one lean that way.

meatycheesyboy
05-08-2008, 03:30 PM
Does anyone game with Vista?
IS DX10 making a difference? I mean are games taking advantage of it?

From what I have read, not many games are taking advantage of DX10 to any large extent yet. But this same thing happened with DX9. After it's release most game were still DX8 and 7 for about 2 years afterwards.

And now for my personal experience with Vista. I run pretty low end hardware (Intel e4300, old Geforce 6800, 4 GB RAM) and Vista is rock solid stable for me and is also quite snappy.

So, to each there own but I have no problems on relatively slow old hardware.

Cageman
05-08-2008, 05:16 PM
Again, a true statement but it is biased in that you run a 64bit system. You perception is based on your personal experience instead of looking at the overall market.

Some people are running 32bit and have RAM ceiling limits. Unless I am misinformed. How much RAM will Vista 32 bit address? Will you be able to run that huge scene you cranked out in 64bit mode when you have to switch back to 32bit to use the plug ins you need?

Of course, I always assume that anyone looking to get Vista also looks for a new computer. I would never, ever install Vista on my dual AMD (32-bit system). I simply can't upgrade the RAM on that one without paying a small fortune (old RAM, old architecture).

My sentiment is this; if you get a new computer with at least 4GB ram, Vista will run very well and there is plenty of memory left for LW, Photoshop and a bunch of other apps running simultaniously, especially if you are working on scenes that doesn't require more than what LW-32 bit can handle.

A solution to huge scene problem is to simply split it up if you need to drag it into LW-32.

Cageman
05-08-2008, 05:21 PM
In Sweden... but in a banana republic the cost is more. Even so, it's a stupid solution to buy more hardware just because your OS requires more, my solution is to install XP and it works for me, thank you.

Yep... but everyone reading this thread may not be in your situation though. The prices for HW in Sweden is probably low compared to other countries, but at the same time they do reflect the global market as well. And, yes... IF you are going to utilize the full capacity of a 64-bit architecture, a 64-bit OS with plenty of RAM is the ONLY way. You can of course go for WinXP x64, but as far as I know, it is a dying OS.

A third solution wich I know someone else mentioned is to go for a dualboot if Vista for some reason is "scary" to use (and yes... I have a dualboot myself). :)

Cageman
05-08-2008, 05:35 PM
I was looking to buy ProTools software the other day. They still haven't certified it to run under Vista. Now, ProTools isn't some little legacy program. It is THE standard in Post Production Audio. Keeping your system to spec and maintaining that system for optimum performance becomes difficult when the OS is discontinued or the OS auto updates and suddenly you find yourself with a broken system.

I hear ya... and that is why proper reasearch is good (and possibly why these threads pop up). There are a multitude of sites showing tricks to get Vista to be less automated, giving the user more controll. So far, I have only stumbled across a bunch of games that doesn't work under Vista x64 and therefore I have good old XP as well. In your case with ProTools, there isn't really much option as I see it; you'll have to stick with XP for that one.

We run Vista x64 at work as well (LW, Maya, Modo, Motionbuilder, Premiere, Fusion, AE, Photoshop) and they all work very, very well.

EDIT: So far, we have yet to move over to 64-bit versions of the above mentioned apps.

Titus
05-08-2008, 06:33 PM
Yep... but everyone reading this thread may not be in your situation though. The prices for HW in Sweden is probably low compared to other countries, but at the same time they do reflect the global market as well. And, yes... IF you are going to utilize the full capacity of a 64-bit architecture, a 64-bit OS with plenty of RAM is the ONLY way. You can of course go for WinXP x64, but as far as I know, it is a dying OS.


The problem basically is that I don't have just one machine, I already made an investment on several machines besides the couple we have in the office. I'm seriously considering the downgrade since it's (theoretically) free. I'll be trying to buy more memory as soon as I can but I have salaries to pay too.


A third solution wich I know someone else mentioned is to go for a dualboot if Vista for some reason is "scary" to use (and yes... I have a dualboot myself). :)

I'm planning that route also for my PC. It's a HP 6090 and comes with a capture card, a BD/HD DVD drive among several goodies and it was customized from the factory to work with Vista.

Trankonia
06-01-2008, 10:31 PM
I find it quite amazing that some people are so self righteous that if you want to back down from a Vista you must be a Vista hater or you know nothing about Vista.

Have you ever thought that perhaps the reason people might want to back off Vista is because of the lack of drivers and compatability with applications that they might have spent hurndreds or even thousands of dollars on?

Yes, some of the driver issues are because of the manufacturers not stepping up. But lets face it Vista has not been a major winner for Microsoft and because of the lackluster market (outside of retail systems) companies are not financially compelled to write the drivers.

If you truly believe that Vista is great for your purpose and use then that is fantastic. However, that does not apply to all users as their configurations, equipment, devices, and applications vary widely.

Yes, the UI is much better (still trying to catch up to Apple) but a fancy UI is usually not needed or desired for many applications. I can tell you first hand that Corporate America certainly has not jumped on board with Vista. There really is no return on investment with Vista in the corporate world for most businesses.

At the end of the day... it's whatever floats your boat. Unfortunately Vista is like a torpedo for mine.

Trankonis

IMI
06-06-2008, 04:17 AM
Pi$$es me off to find out the Call of Duty 4 mod tool won't run under Vista. I haven't tried it yet, but the read me says it won't, although "some users report success running it in XP compatibility mode". I haven't tried that yet, though. I do have an XP 64 partition, but COD 4 is installed under Vista x64. Would be kind of a nuisance having to go back and forth.
I don't blame that on Vista though - at least I think I don't - but I have to wonder, being that COD 4 is only a few months old, why would the mod program not run under Vista? I haven't come across any programs which won't. Well, my APC UPS software constantly complains it's not communicating with my box, although it is communicating, just fine, and works perfectly. And my Soundblaster software reports errors if I open it from the main menu, but fine if I use the individual shortcuts. But aside from that, all my other programs work, even the older 32 bit ones.
What is different about the COD 4 mod tool that it can't run under Vista? Anyone know?

Titus
06-06-2008, 09:16 AM
Several programs don't run under Vista, my worst complaint is with this program, (http://djv.sourceforge.net/). I don't know what's different with Vista.