[Foxylady48180]

I wouldn't worry about support date of 2012; they will extend that when the time comes. They have allready extended XP past the original date.

[rasmasyean]

I would assume with that kind of system you have all the parts needed for Vista (or if you're brave, Windows 7 beta). You ARE wasting some usable RAM unless you have XP 64-bit (which is not really that great for normal use).
All you have to do is copy you files to a DVD or something and do a fresh install. That's the best way. If it doesn't work, just do it over with XP.

[DOUGLAS666]

As a guess, how long do you think Vista may be supported for Ms. Foxy Lady?

[rasmasyean]

If you don't believe that you can get another computer / OS in 3 years if it's that important to you, then you have other things to worry about besides the support date.

[Foxylady48180]

No, I couldn't, but I wouldn't worry about it. As much trouble as they have had with Vista users, they aren't looking for any more hastles. And since they are still supporting XP, which I have, I don't think you have a problem.

[Foxylady48180]

That's the problem. Have too much for DVD;s and to be honest with you, I have no idea what to copy. I know I would need a protable hard drive, but that doesn't solve the problem of the file thing. When the day comes, I guess I will have to find out and I'll bet that this is the place to do it. There some people here that are REAL good with computers.

[rasmasyean]

You can then get a new Hard Drive and install on that. I'm sure you can get one for under $50.
Your old HD can be a "dual-boot" destination as well as storage. The file systems are both Windows so you have no problems using both HDs. Your MB, should have a setting "boot C: D:", etc. and newer ones can boot USB too.
Of course this takes a bit of opening up the computer work albeit pretty easy work, if you're not comfortable with that then it's your call. But this is actually the "better" way to do it if youre not sure. You can always delete the XP files for some extra room later on if you don't need to boot from it, but XP takes a small portion relatively anyway since it's pretty old.
Oh I just remebered that there is a FAT32 and NTFS difference in Windows. Maybe someone else can jump in on this as I forgot. It's been so long. But I believe if you had FAT32 (older) file system, there might be some incompatability with NTFS (newer).

[yankeeDDL]

@rasmasyean,

I has been using a PC with 4GB of ram and the 64bit version of XP since 2006. I had only issues with drivers for my wi-fi card but that was solved relatively easily.
I have no idea what you mean by "Windows XP does not support 64-bit mainstream": before I moved to Linux, I used Windows XP 64 just like any other Windows I ever used, included for gaming.

I'm not going to be teary-eyed when they change the OS on my office laptop: I have used windows since 3.1 and will continue using it. Here we have reverted every single PC or Laptop that shipped with Vista, back to XP.
When we won't have that option any longer, we'll deal with what's available. A few groups have been converted to Linux: saved the company a lot of money. But it's not possible for most groups because of MS Project and other MS Office-specific tools that we need to use. From work-related erspectives,Vista (or W7) offer no additional feature over XP (yes, of course there's a problem when MS drops support, but that's reinforcing the point: MS drops support of XP to push people towards W7: a choice that many would have not done unless forced).

[rasmasyean]

Your XP 64-bit experience is annecdotal. Driver and software support is minimal so you run a serious risk of running into a dead end. Anything can be "solved" but how much effort do you want to put into it. Basically, only people who used XP-64-bit use it for hardcore scientific apps. If you want to buy a printer or keyboard, or some fancy graphics card, there's a great chance that you can't use it in XP64. You are limited to the products that are made for that market. Vista64 is for consumers.

[yankeeDDL]

@Foxylady48180

your PC is very powerful. I would not expect any problem running any OS, in terms of "raw" horsepower.

If you're still on XP, then switching to Vista makes no sense at this point: you should wait for W7 to become available.

It all depends on what you need the PC for. In my case, I'm satisfied with XP and I will stick to it for as long as possible. I have looked at W7 already and there'll have to be a learning curve since there have been several changes to the interface. You can "play" with Windows7 or any other OS that you plan to move to by installing it in a virtual machine, or as dual-boot.
Virtual machine is usually easier (you can use VirtualBox to create one, which is also free), but the performances will be limited.

[yankeeDDL]

I have a very ... normal Epson Stylus Pro R300 and it worked well. I have a logitech webcam, wireless mouse, ...
I only had problems with a (very cheap) wi-fi USB dongle. Once I found out the chipset I got the 64-bit drivers off the net. Took a couple of hrs of searching.
Maybe I was lucky.
Never had any software problems: all of them run smooth, including games.

On the contrary, at work we could not get VPN to work on Vista64, and several PCs with older audio cards had an incredible amount of problems with Vista (32 bit in those cases) so in th eend we gave up and "downgraded" to XP.

[TechieXP]

There ot looking...the article is just trying to find a loophole. Look how bad Windows ME was. Even though MSFT pulled it off teh shelf after 1 year...they stsill support it. You can even still get Windows Updates for it last time I checked a few months ago.

[TechieXP]

There was nothing wrong with Vista. Vista's problem was the media constantly repeat bad stuff when it wasn't bad at all. They should have been beating at Intel for pressuring MSFT into laxing credentials for unning Vista, and they should have bashed MSFT for giving in. Either way MSFT learned a valueable lesson the hard way. I bet it wont happen again.

[smax013]

TechieXP said:

There was nothing wrong with Vista. Vista's problem was the media constantly repeat bad stuff when it wasn't bad at all. They should have been beating at Intel for pressuring MSFT into laxing credentials for unning Vista, and they should have bashed MSFT for giving in. Either way MSFT learned a valueable lesson the hard way. I bet it wont happen again.

Eh, kind of. Vista also suffered from a lack of drivers for existing hardware and from some programs not working with Vista. While this was to a large degree NOT Microsoft's fault, Microsoft does bear some of the blame. If you want to make the users of your OS happy, then you need to make sure it is backwards compatibile to some "reasonable" level. It was in this area that Microsoft did not due as well as they could have. While you will never, ever please everyone, you do need to make a "reasonable" attempt to try.

Microsoft could have learned some lessons from Apple in this area. Both when Apple went from OS 9 to OS X (a completely new OS) and when Apple went from PowerPC chips to Intel chips, they went WAY out of their way to not leave "older" equipment behind. Was Apple perfect in this regard? Nope. They did piss and leave some people behind, but they did manage to do it well enough that they did not have a serious backlash.

Microsoft, OTOH, botched the transitition to Vista enough by leaving old hardware and programs behind that they did face a backlash. Now, some of it was going to happen regardless...when you do major upgrades, not everything can come along for the ride. But, Microsoft could have done better in some areas.

To me, this does not mean that Vista is bad. Frankly, I kind of like Vista. I mainly use XP as my primary OS on my Windows computers because 1) my one computer's hardware might choke a little on Vista...it might be fine, but XP runs OK so why change...the other computer (a relatively new self built machine) runs Vista just fine...I dual boot between it and XP; 2) it is what I am used to...it takes time to get used to a new OS and how it might do some things a little bit differently...and that can eat at your productivity...so I still with what I know for now...plus, I am generally slow to fully shift over to new things...I generally take about a year to fully shift everything from an old computer to a new computer, for example; and 3) I am kind of like the corporate world...I like to test out new OSs for where I might have potential problems before I fully switch. None of that means that I don't like Vista...I rather like it. In many ways, I like it better than XP.

I will agree that Vista kind of got a bad rap...but I am also a firm believer that many times, perception becomes reality. Thus, while in "true" reality, Vista is not bad at all...to many people, since Vista got a bad rap, it became "reality" to them that Vista was bad. And this is the biggest area where Microsoft dropped the ball (although there might not have been a lot they could do about it)...they did not plan ahead or "forsee" ahead some of this stuff that would produce the "bad rap" and deal with it before it happened. I honestly don't know if that really could have really head it off or not.

And this is where Microsoft has a head start with Windows 7. Since Vista got such a bad rap and, as a result, had such a poor showing, many people have some preconceptions that Windows 7 can't help but be better, even if in reality it may or may not really be all that better than Vista. Thus, it is much less likely that Microsoft will face some sort of backlash with Win 7. The only possibility is if enough people don't believe the Win 7 is enough of an improvement over Vista AND Microsoft charges an arm and leg to upgrade...it that happens, then they could be in for another bumpy ride.

[TechieXP]

Yea I get ya...

But everytime MSFT releases a new OS, drivers are always an issue. That isn't MSFT fault. It isn't MSFT job to provide drivers for every single piece of hardware. Just like there is no way Santa Claus can deliever toys to billions of kids in less the 12 hours of darkness..yet people are guilible in believe he exist.

If you have a hardware in 2001...and you are to cheap to get something better in 5 ywars or so...then whose fault is it if it doesn't work. If you buy a printer for $99 and 5 years later it still works..then you're lucky. Look at cars...how many times have you heard people say...how it seamms when you make that lasy payment...or are about too...the car starts to fall apart.

Windows XP had the same issue with drivers. If in 5 years a developer of a hardware can't make drivers for their own devices...that isn't MSFT fault. Th etools are avail for free for driver developement for any OS. It is up to them to decide which hardware they shoose to support. and they don't have to support outdated hardware. Its pointless.

I manage to keep a system that I built onmy own...and it lasted be 3 cpu changes and several versions of Windows...A server board I purchased in 1995, use Pentium II Slot 1 I upgraded to P3..and the P3 coppermine...all on ghe same board. Survived Windows 95,98,98SE,ME..2000 and XP. And it could run Vista...but even I wouldn't advices that. I simply skipped P4 and when right to Dualcore...

Anyone could have had the needed hardware for Vista. In five years time, no one could have upgraded their hardware to run Vista...or chosen hardware that wasn't already support by Vista? MSFT always gets balmed because people never want to talk resposbility for their own actions.

Vista worked fine for me from day 1....even in beta. But I don't think with a 25% adoption rate that it was hardly a failure like ME was.

[noname]

you are right about most people not knowing how to install the new windows 7 operating system, I am using XP home edition and waiting for the new system to be out in the stores, all the stories I heard about vista put me off as the next one will be my last computer. Being retired we cannot afford to keep buying just to make Bill Gates richer and help him correct his mistakes. We were hoping to hook up my new PC with this one and share the all in one printer we plan on buying but now after reading the articles not too sure we will be able to do this, any ideas if we could still do it without having to buy 2 computers. Thanks