Why Vista sounds worse

From today's Guardian.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jan/31/microsoft.technology

Summary: using ASIO, you'll need to increase your buffer size to compensate for Vista's clunky and resource-hogging OS.

I don't think this is new information.

Perhaps not, but actually seeing names of developers who are responsible for sorting this mess out and reading what they have to say about it was enlightening.

3 years?

I was just looking at our website visitor stats with respect to OS:

XP: 70%
Win2k: 4.9%
W98: 2.9%
Vista: 2.5%

I've omitted non-Windows figures as well as NT and Me (which are lower) - but you don't get the impression that Vista's really catching on, do you?

I can say that I will be building my own PC's from now on and HAPPILY installing them with XP.  I have no inclination AT ALL to touch Vista.  It's the old why fix it if it isn't broke.  And all I ever hear about is the new security in Vista.  I haven't had any worms/viruses in prob 4 years.  So, it will have to be a lot to change my mind.

I've read that WinXP will only be for sale until June of this year, after that only Vista. Anything to the contrary (aside from used and bootleg)?

No i heard the same.  But then i read where sales were extended 6 months?  Unless this June IS the 6 months they extended it.  But i also heard 5 more years for support....woohoo!  I just think its crappy how they can just stop making a product to "force" Vista on us.  Ha,  we will see how much XP prices go up on EBAY as retailers deplete their stock after production stops. 

But..on the other hand...there is probably so much stock in the world....   

The best account I can find of the present position is here; I haven't found it on Microsoft's own site - oh yes, here it is.

Look here for support with no SP - extended support costs real money.  Note that support with a service pack is longer

Paul

FWIW, since purchasing a laptop with a "downgrade to XP" option, that's what I've been suggesting to others that they do. It leaves the option open to revert to Vista if that ever becomes desirable. I think the versions of Vista that are supplied with this option all have the Microsoft program to do a full backup, so there's no need for panic about the lack of Vista installation DVD's.

What I can't find anywhere is a clear statement about how long this will be able to be offered.

The best account I can find of the present position is here; I haven't found it on Microsoft's own site - oh yes, here it is.

Look here for support with no SP - extended support costs real money.  Note that support with a service pack is longer

Paul

You are correct.  Yeah I only meant support as in calls.  No Service packs.

I advise anyone who wishes to continue to use XP to buy new copies of it now!

So in conclusion, is using Vista inevitable and unavoidable for all of us eventually?

No.  In terms of AA, possibly, for 'upgrades' probably.  MS never led the charge, in fact has done a fairly bad job of catch up, for digital audio (and some of the variables that made them a better choice then Apple in the very early days of home digital audio recording are no longer significant . . . While MS actually got worse in some of these areas the power of successive generations of hardware obviated some of need of efficient software). 

On an almost daily basis Linux is becoming a far more viable choice.  Plus the Linux community has a vested interest in demystifying dual boot systems (run an MS for biz app compatibility).  Existing hardware one can use with Linux is still a bit problematic.  RME supports it publicly, Lynx works with at least one distro, last time I checked MOTU is not public about support but drivers that work with their PCI cards are available.  I have not done an exhaustive search since last summer but IEEE1394 (FW) support is less then pristine . . .

The other issue is purely: if it aint broke what are you trying to fix with an OS upgrade?

I shifted base of operations last Dec. But until then I still had an 800 MHz AMD system running Win98SE that was capable of recording 24 trk without breaking a sweat (last of my SCSI drive trains) I used it at the end primarily for voice over and audio for video work (typically with far fewer then 24 simultaneous tracks).  Certainly nothing was 'wrong' with the system.  Typically, if extensive editing was required I'd network the audio to faster machines for mixing, but as my mind can't keep track of 160 tracks in real time what is a 'new' OS going to offer (Not saying that it can't, merely it always helps to know what you are trying to achieve rather then upgrading merely because everyone else is)

In addition, the integration between dedicated hardware recorders and GUI editing systems is far better then it was a decade ago . . . That option is not as cheap as a $400 desktop PC plus a soundblaster card . . . But something like the Alesis HD recorder and Linux front end GUI editor should, with a little judicious research (and some luck) last you for a decade (commercially, for hobbyists it could easily be the last 'recording' investment they need to make) . . . Imagine that: a stable recording platform that one does not have to replace every 18 months! Spend the money on microphones and fixing the acoustic environment in which you record!  (Admittedly, as my SCSI drive investment illustrates, shifting winds of hardware fashion can undermine even the cagiest investment, but while it is no longer efficient for my use one of the remote SCSI A/D/A systems is still in play as a snap shot recorder for a client.)

[all]

So in conclusion, is using Vista inevitable and unavoidable for all of us eventually?

No, not all of us.  I have also made my moves to change platforms.

So in conclusion, is using Vista inevitable and unavoidable for all of us eventually?

As long as the software you want to use continues to run under XP, then of course Vista is completely avoidable...