Windows Vista and XP Head To Head

thefickler sends in an article comparing Windows Vista and Windows XP in the areas of security, home entertainment, GUI, parental controls, and networking. The author clearly believes that Vista wins across these categories.

i agree

[redi99]

i've been using vista for about 3 weeks now. under heavy usage (i.e. running a bunch of apps, nntp downloading, unzipping some archives etc..) xp does seem speedier, but other than that, vista rocks. it's stable, great to look at, and easy to use. using ribbons in the address bar so that any folder along your path can be browsed is very handy. they've addressed little nagging issues , for example hitting f2 to rename a file highlights the filename but not the extension. the administrator account is turned off by default, defender runs automatically, defrags are set up on a weekly schedule by default, and the searching is blazing on indexed drives. games seem to run well, and all my devices were installed automatically during installation. the resource monitor is excellent, and running services are listed in the task manager along with processes and apps. i've managed to muck it up a few times installing software, but in all cases i was installing versions meant for xp, not vista, and each time booting the last known good config has gotten me right back. they've done a great job with this o/s.

Re:Well then,

[Osty]

I guess it's time for a new PC. I don't know that I can live without IE 7's new 'anti-phishing' filter.

While I'm sure you're being facetious, you do realize that IE7 is available for XP and has the anti-phishing feature, right? If you still want to stick with IE6 (or have to, like if you're running Win2k), you can get the same anti-phishing protection from the Windows Live Toolbar [live.com]. It's all the same technology, backed by the same store of anti-phishing data.

Re:Randomization?

[Atlantis-Rising]

I was at a Microsoft Vista technical review where they explained this as being an anti-buffer overflow attack; since the locations of the specific items within an assigned memory space are randomized, the chances of targeting a buffer overflow to a specific chunk of the program's assigned memory is drastically reduced.

Wiki has it here, as Address Space Layout Radomization. [wikipedia.org]

Article Text for impending slashdotting

[Umbrae]

So you've heard all the hype about Windows Vista, but wonder what it means for you. Here's the definitive guide on how Microsoft's Windows Vista stacks up against XP:

SECURITY FEATURES

XP: In the original Windows XP, and with the first service pack or SP1, both versions still in use today, Windows XP has a built-in firewall that gave relatively good protection against hackers breaking into your computer.

The 2nd service pack, or SP2, improved the firewall to protect you from people trying to get it, and bad programs trying to get access out to the Internet, but it is still considered relatively basic compared with commercial offerings. Anyone serious about security should replace it with a good third party firewall or Internet security suite. All versions of Windows XP are also able to be set to download Windows updates automatically.

VISTA: Vista has a similar but improved firewall to Windows XP SP2, but anyone who is serious about their security will still replace it with a third party firewall or Internet security suite. Internet Explorer 7 has an 'anti-phishing' filter, but is known to slow down your surfing experience a little as sites you visit are checked by Microsoft's servers for phishing attack dangers.

However IE7 and Firefox 2.0 have both been rated as only having partial success in detecting phishing sites, and as such have both earned a rating of 'pretty terrible' for anti-phishing prowess by us at Free Access (Tech.Blroge).

A new 'user account control' system tries to protect you from yourself, so you don't accidentally make changes to important system settings without being warned first. However pressing the 'ok' button lets you do whatever you want anyway, and experienced users will just be annoyed. What did I do? I turned it off completely and am not bothered by it anymore. You'll probably do the same, too.

Windows also has a new 'randomization' layer, which slightly changes the memory configuration of every Vista machine to make it harder for co-ordinated attacks to affect scores of machines at the same time.

Vista also has made protections to the 'kernel' or core of the operating system, with a protective measure known as 'PatchGuard', but this only extends to the 64-bit version of Vista, a version which most of us won't be using for at least a couple of years. Most consumers will be using the 32-bit version of Vista which does not have 'PatchGuard' built-in.

HOME ENTERTAINMENT

XP: Windows XP has always been able to play mp3 and video files, CDs, DVDs (with third party software), streaming media files and other forms of digital media with relative ease over the years.

An updated version of Windows XP, known as the Media Center Edition upgraded the digital media experience of Windows, giving it a dedicated interface to watch, record and pause live TV, play photos, videos and music, listen to FM and online radio stations and more.

VISTA: Finally, the Media Center capabilities comes built-into most versions of Windows Vista aside from the basic, entry level version. It has also been enhanced over the previous version, although reviewers claim it has not received as much of an improvement as the rest of Windows has over previous versions.

Vista also plays most other forms of digital media through it's own Windows Media Player software, with a whole host of competing media players available to download, many free of charge, from the Internet.

GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACE

XP: Ridiculed as being the 'Fischer Price' version of the Windows 2000 interface, Windows XP was still a fresh update upon its release 5 years ago. Today, however, will still perfectly functional, it is starting to look a little long in the tooth, with Apple's Mac OS X offering Vista like graphics for several years already.

VISTA: Very cool looking 3D icons, transparent 'glass' windows and other lovely eye candy such as the 'Flip 3D' way of flipping through open windows. This new graphics system is called 'Aero'. However this will re

Re:Inquiring Minds Want To Know...

[Meatloaf Surprise]

Stop taking the statement out of context. This is an article about Vista and the paragraph in which this statement lies discusses Windows XP and the fact the interface looks old compared to OSX and Vista. Since the article is about Vista, of course it's going to define other things in terms of Vista. That in no way suggests that OSX had stolen or copied Vista in any way, simply, he is comparing the two interfaces using the one the article is about as the source for the comparison. Hopefully, this explanation is enough. If you would like further reasons as to why I'm right, please see your sixth grade English teacher.

Re:It better.

[11_biznatch_11]

"why the new system requirements are so ridiculously higher than XP is something I'm still waiting on a good answer for"

Actually the minimum sytem requirements are pretty low, and I could run it on my over 6 year old laptop. It's just the Aero interface that requires all the extra hardware. Minimum requirements [microsoft.com] 800MHz CPU, 512 MB RAM, SVGA, 20GB HD with 15 GB free, CD-rom drive.

XP 1700+, 512MB, FX5200, 200GB 7200RPM - Vista OK

[Marbleless]

Vista works fine on that config .. about the same as XP. Some things are a bit faster, some a bit slower, overall it's about the same.

This must be the shortest review I've ever written ;)

Re:ROFL

[dogfriend]

Macs started using file extensions with the introduction of OS X in 2001. I think its a holdover from NextStep. You are probably thinking about the "Classic" Mac OS which used a Type and Creator Code for each file. That system is still supported, but file extensions are used when the file doesn't have the Type and Creator code.

Re:i agree

[lukas84]

In my opinion, the most useful enhancements made to vista are "under the hood".

* Much improved group policy support (Including MUCH better 802.1x and Wireless provisioning)
* Improved networking support (Locations), Firewall settings based on location (XP had Domain/Not Domain, Vista has Domain/Home/Public)
* UAC/Virtual Folders allow even businesses without IT support staff to run as non-admin
* I18N. It sucked in XP. It sucked HARD in XP MUI. It works fine, and they have done a lot of work on it in Vista
* Local Shadow Copies. I love it. Had them on servers since 2003 was out, always missed it locally
* The search interface/new start menu. A good gradual improvement, no revolution
* The new system control, a good gradual improvement

I've been using Vista on my Desktop machine (3Ghz PIV, 2048MB, some DirectX 9 Nvidia Card) at work since early Betas (We're a microsoft partner), and switched i switched my laptop (P-M 1.7Ghz, 1024MB, some DirectX 8 ATI Card) to RTM as soon as it hit MSDN.

It works okay on my laptop, albeit a bit slower. This was expected, and will probably buy a new laptop soon anyway (as the machine is already 2 years old).

I can't say im impressed with vista. There are several, very good enhancements. They would've been impressing 2 years ago. Now? Not so much. Vista is a good step in the right direction, especially for companies and enterprises (I18N!). For home consumers? Not so much. The forced obsolecence with DirectX 10, meh. Most people will switch their OS at home when they buy a new machine. Hardcore gamers will earlier because of DX10.

Re:It better.

[Nightspirit]

You can still change the windows theme to classic and it will run as fast as 2000 or xp. Only in aero mode does it require for some reason tons of ram and cpu power. Turning off the widgets helps too. Basically anything from the past 4 years should be able to run vista at least classic mode.

The one benefit of Vista will be to stop manufacturers from putting crappy integrated graphics into laptops (even apple does this on the non-pro line).

Re:It better.

[lukas84]

Nope. Intel will release DX10 compatible integrated graphic chipsets soon.

Re:It better.

[Antiocheian]

> Every new version of Windows is considered bloated compared to the previous one

With one exception: MS DOS 5 (which was leaner than DOS 4) and Windows 2000 Server. Win2k, with the exception of Internet Explorer, was quite lean.

In fact, ~is~ quite lean. You can still use it for every application that runs on XP. The only deficiencies (from my point of view) is the slower boot and hibernation, lack of Cleartype no software network bridges.

Re:Inquiring Minds Want To Know...

[Anonymous Coward]

rtfa -again.

perfectionally functional >>> refers to XP

long in tooth >>> referring to XP again

os x offering vista like graphics >>> a simple statement providing background info as to why vista's interface while finally refreshing xp's dated gui, that it isn't all that impressive as os x has been out for years.

comprende? no where in that paragraph is anyone taking a shot at your precious os x.

dumbfuck.

Re:It better.

[Kuciwalker]

As I understand it, in DX10 all cards must support all of the features of DX10 or be non-compliant; in 9.0 cards could pick and choose certain features to support or not.

20GB HD with 15 GB free ?!

[Why Login]

Are you kidding? I have a 4 year old laptop with 40GB hard drive. You know, it is kinda difficult to dedicate 15GB to an operating system only on a 40GB hard disk.