I'm getting my new system this week, and need to make the final decision whether to install Vista on it, or stick with XP. I was going to go with Vista, but after reading a lot of bad things about it, I'm tempted to stick with XP. All I'm going to do with it is edit video, it probably won't ever get hooked up to the internet..

System specs are the same as in this thread:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=95335

If you consider that it requires 6 GB disk space, where XP requires 1.5 GB, that driver support is seriously lagging, memory requirements doubled and you get the nagging 'Authorization' screens all the time, I wonder why people even consider installing it. My advise, stick with XP at least till SP1 is out.

As a videographer and software developer (for video), I have been using Vista since November 2006.

For routine video editing, I strongly recommend keeping with XP Pro SP2 or (if you can get it) XP Pro x64.

The only possible reason to go with Vista is if you want to use Windows DVD Maker. But I expect you have superior software to that!

I use Vista with the Adobe CS2/CS3 suites and a number of 3D apps without any problems (and I much prefer the overall OS to XP). However, if the machine's primary purpose is video editing, I'd also suggest XP64 for the time being.

(I do keep one XP machine around for the couple of apps I use that still have some issues with Vista (PFHoe and 3DS))

Since there are rarely any reasons to upgrade windows, I would say stay with XP. Can anyone name any feature that is worth being a glorified beta tester?

I just switched to XP. There is little difference between XP and windows 2000. All that matters is if it runs your applications and if it's stable. A brand-new OS is rarely more stable than one that has been out for a couple of years.

I just jumped through hoops and voluntarily voided the warranty on my 2 month old laptop in order to remove Vista and switch to XP.

Vista is slow and so many programs won't run on it. Stay with XP for at least a year.

Vista is working fine for me. Just get the drivers and software updates from the mfr's website up front. If you disable all the non-microsoft services and startup items, the boot-up time is fast. You can disable the nag screens/authorizations. I've grown to appreciate the confirmations, keeps me from inadvertently dragging a folder with 5000 items to the wrong place. You'll adjust to it without problems if you want to.

Vista's hybrid sleep mode and much improved search integration are enough by themselves for me. (I'm not suggesting anyone should/shouldn't upgrade; but as for whether there are enough reasons, it's not even a question to me which I work on.)

I am in the "no" camp on Vista. Too early to adopt a new OS with editing software not fully tested on it, period.

Well, my editing software is fully tested so I guess it's not too early for me, (period).

You'll make it work. If there's no reason to change then don't. It runs everything as good or better. Downloading updated driver support is the only issue.

I wouldn't consider that just because you install an OS and your software seems to work fine necessarily means that the software has been fully tested by the manufacture to be 100% compatable with the new OS.

What application are you using and does it carry the Windows Vista 100% certified logo?

Since there are rarely any reasons to upgrade windows, I would say stay with XP. Can anyone name any feature that is worth being a glorified beta tester?

I just switched to XP. There is little difference between XP and windows 2000. All that matters is if it runs your applications and if it's stable. A brand-new OS is rarely more stable than one that has been out for a couple of years.

This post really hit it on the head. Who needs a confirmation box to prevent them from deleting a folder with 5000Megs of stuff anyway? Besides, Windows XP warns you when you try to put something in the trashcan that is to big to delete. So, again, there really is no tangible reason to be upgrading the OS right now just for the sake of doing it.

Another guy above pointed out that his Magic Bullet software doesn't work with it. I'm sure a great many people out there can and will install Vista and it'll be alright and they won't run into problems. I'm just saying that there is really no reason whatsoever to put yourself in harms way.

Actually.. I wouldn't take my word for it... Just call the software designer of all your applications and ask them "Would you rather I run on XP Professional SP2 or Vista." In a year or so, this conversation I'm sure will be in reverse because new apps will have been developed around some of the technologies that Vista affords and it's possible apps will become more of a liability on XP than on Vista. This is similiar to XP and Win2000 today.

I can't stress enough, just because somebody installs it and it seems to be "running great" doesn't make it a wise thing to do.

Jon

I'm not being paid a commission by Microsoft. I'm stating a personal observation. It works for me. If it didn't, I'd say so.

People posing questions want to hear from the users. I think it would be very important to hear from someone directly who can't get Magic Bullet to work. Then we can work constructively to try and solve the issue, perhaps opening a sticky for known Vista compatibility problems.

I get the impression that Jon was merely pointing out a sensible methodology that the majority of broadcasters and smaller production houses adhere to. I don't think it's merely about critisizing a specific case where early adoption worked out for someone and their specific setup; If you want to adopt a newer product and it works out, great, but what if you're relying on your kit to get a program out the door and something unexpected occurs (besides all the usual potential gremlins) as a result of unresolved bugs. I think it may not be worth the risk until the bugs have been ironed out, after all why be a Beta tester. I suppose it's a weighing up process.
As an aside, only just adopted XP here at the bbc and with good reason.

My 2 bits.
Matt

I recently attended a little show/demo presented by Matrox and Adobe. During the demo they had some problems with the Vista software and needed several reboots and other little things. The basic consensus from all was that when it gets sorted out Vista will be fine and have some advantages but, for now XP is much better.

I have to say that the Matrox demo with Adobe CS3 was just amazing! I had already ordered CS3 from Adobe but will be canceling that order and getting the Matrox card which comes with a CS3 upgrade. Adobe and Matrox have a very close relationship and in fact you can't get a Matrox card without at least Adobe Premiere Pro 2.0. The new combo of Adobe CS3 and the new Matrox RT.X2, with it's new software for CS3, is just great!

And, for those who might think about going the Matrox route, it works with XP32 but not with XP64.

Mike

I'm not being paid a commission by Microsoft. I'm stating a personal observation. It works for me. If it didn't, I'd say so.

People posing questions want to hear from the users. I think it would be very important to hear from someone directly who can't get Magic Bullet to work. Then we can work constructively to try and solve the issue, perhaps opening a sticky for known Vista compatibility problems.

I have Vista installed on one system and XP on all others. Vista was an experiment and as such it was successful. It demonstrated quite nicely why at this moment in time you should not install it. Severe problems with the server, logging in to the domain, connecting to Exchange Server, unstable drivers, all kinds of network problems and the like, that even highly professional network specialists have difficulty in solving.

Okay, please get back ON TOPIC people! Dylan's question was about Vista and if it would be a good choice to use.

Please use FACTS when talking about Vista's performance. It's okay to describe user experience but don't make it into a platform or personal war. If you want to talk about how you wait to make sure everything is stable, that's cool too.

What is not cool here on DV Info is personal attacks, flame and platform wars. No need to attack someone for their opinion.

We will lock / edit the thread (I just did) if needed.

I'd say, if you have a spare license you can downgrade to XP SR2 until software catches up to Vista if you intend to use only one machine. I use two computers, one Vista Home Premium the spare one is an XP SR2. It depends on the mix of software you intend to use.

Windows Movie Maker can edit HD and works like a champ. Comes with Vista. I am trying out Vegas, it works except for the Media Manager which relies on an old version of MS SQL Personal. That piece is for the Media Manager which I don't care for anyway. All the free software tools like HDVSplit, MPEG Stream Clip, various codecs, DGIndex, Virtualdub, Virtualdubmod, Avisynth, and Audacity work.

You will tend to get the horrid "COM Surrogate" error when viewing thumbnails of M2T and DivX files. You can turn off thumbnails or do some registry fixes to ignore those. When installing codecs I learned to be cautious by using the 'System Restore' option in case something 'odd' happens because I didn't install with 'Run as administrator'. For the software above, it only happened for some weird codec packages which I've since not used.

There are a few things that still don't work with Vista. Cineform's trial software is still not 100% compatible. It can be installed and will encode but you can't seem to uninstall it properly. DivX 6 codec works for decoding. For encoding it's not all there. Version 6.6 seems to work better than 6.6.1 for some odd reason (not all profiles would be available, errors calling encoder ). Dr.Divx and DivX converter won't work at all. Not good if you're a Stage6 user.

Oh, Aero is pretty but sometimes gets turned off by incompatible software ... like DGIndex, VLC Player and DivX.

I'd say, if you have a spare license you can downgrade to XP SR2 until software catches up to Vista if you intend to use only one machine. I use two computers, one Vista Home Premium the spare one is an XP SR2. It depends on the mix of software you intend to use.

Windows Movie Maker can edit HD and works like a champ. Comes with Vista. I am trying out Vegas, it works except for the Media Manager which relies on an old version of MS SQL Personal. That piece is for the Media Manager which I don't care for anyway. All the free software tools like HDVSplit, MPEG Stream Clip, various codecs, DGIndex, Virtualdub, Virtualdubmod, Avisynth, and Audacity work.

You will tend to get the horrid "COM Surrogate" error when viewing thumbnails of M2T and DivX files. You can turn off thumbnails or do some registry fixes to ignore those. When installing codecs I learned to be cautious by using the 'System Restore' option in case something 'odd' happens because I didn't install with 'Run as administrator'. For the software above, it only happened for some weird codec packages which I've since not used.

There are a few things that still don't work with Vista. Cineform's trial software is still not 100% compatible. It can be installed and will encode but you can't seem to uninstall it properly. DivX 6 codec works for decoding. For encoding it's not all there. Version 6.6 seems to work better than 6.6.1 for some odd reason (not all profiles would be available, errors calling encoder ). Dr.Divx and DivX converter won't work at all. Not good if you're a Stage6 user.

Oh, Aero is pretty but sometimes gets turned off by incompatible software ... like DGIndex, VLC Player and DivX.

Great information. Another option is to install both operating systems, and choose one at boot time.

I've never seen the com surrogate error viewing m2t thumbnails. They've been working work fine.

I would suggest AT THIS TIME, stick with Windows XP, unless you know for sure all your legacy stuff will work. Even WinXp64 may be a chancy proposal, again, is everything compatible, are there drivers for peripherals available, etc?

For example, I have a printer and a label maker that they are trying to orphan (and of course, make me replace) -- no drivers available in Vista per manufacturer decree. I managed to hack them into working, but would not recommend this. The time and effort would be better spent editing, IMO.
I also had to do a $50 upgrade Nero to v7, my viruscanner needed upgrading and I elected to splurge $40 on a Aero capable video card to discover the "experience" I had apparently been missing for all my life.

I am still at 1Gig, but this is not my NLE machine, but the one I do general business on. My Sony Vegas NLE (WinXP32) can easily gobble up 2gig ram rendring, so I would suggest 4gig is minimum for a Vista NLE rig, as even Dell recommend 2gig ram for general business use. Whew...

At this time, the corporate I.T. consensus is you won't see much uptake until a major service pack comes out. I have yet to hear a really good business case presented to go to Vista from Microsoft at this time. They have some tools coming down the road that will likely cause us to upgrade eventually, but presently, it's not ready for primetime IMO. Not all the pieces are there. In fact many corporations skip every other upgrade, both on MS-Office and the OS. I suggest we consumers might wish to do likewise, unless ,as WinXP immediatly proved to be, a huge improvement vs cost is found.

From a personal perspective, I am running a dual boot XP32 & Vista, trying to learn the new OS. My impression is more CPU, more RAM, more HDD space consumed to pretty much do the same thing I could do in WinXP32 with Google Desktop search. Widgets are nice, but again available as a bolt on in XP. Presently I am just not seeing the payoff, though the balance will change down the road as it tends to do.

I am trying to run it "stock" not changing the defaults to see what it's like. It's generally more clicks and less easy to get around in when leveraging my deep XP knowledge. Simple example. In the START,RUN, in XP, just type "h:" to go to H:, in Vista it launched the first app that starts with "H." "H:\" wil launch H: Sure I will adjust, but mildly annoying.

As for general use, I am underwhelmed, even after upgrading my video card to Aero capable card.

Eventually this equation will change and some of the advantages of Vista will start being reflected in software, but right now, I would recommend the gl slow approach, and ensure all your HW/SW is compatible.