Any advantage of Vista over XP Pro, especially for video editing

I have recently rebuilt my entire computer, upgraded from a Pentium 4 to a
Quad Core, 4 MB DDR2, EVGA MB, 750 GB SATA HD, basically a very fast
hardware setup. My primary goal is to do DVD authoring faster, I have a Sony
HDR-SR5 HandyCam HD camcorder. The old system would take up to (combined) 12
hours or more to convert and then master a DVD that was origninally shot in
the AVCHD format that Sony uses and then mastered and burned using Adobe
Premiere Elements v. 3.0. I was going to buy Vista 32 bit thinking it might
be better for this purpose, but was wondering if the XP Pro I had been using
would be as good for this purpose. Also, would staying with XP necessitate
me doing a bunch of driver upgrades that Vista might already have in it. I
really liked XP, it is just that the system was getting slower and slower
doing things I needed to do as my computing tasks increased in complexity for
the hardware I had.

Rick

Windows Vista would be ideal for your new hardware setup.
Windows XP was designed for older hardware and requires
too many security patches to even approach the built-in
security Vista has. Vista is on the cutting-edge of the
future...Windows XP is fast approaching the end its useful life
as a modern operating system.

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows Shell/User

---------------------------------------------------------------

"Rick" <> wrote in message news:16A4761C-D00C-4962-9CB0-...
I have recently rebuilt my entire computer, upgraded from a Pentium 4 to a
Quad Core, 4 MB DDR2, EVGA MB, 750 GB SATA HD, basically a very fast
hardware setup. My primary goal is to do DVD authoring faster, I have a Sony
HDR-SR5 HandyCam HD camcorder. The old system would take up to (combined) 12
hours or more to convert and then master a DVD that was origninally shot in
the AVCHD format that Sony uses and then mastered and burned using Adobe
Premiere Elements v. 3.0. I was going to buy Vista 32 bit thinking it might
be better for this purpose, but was wondering if the XP Pro I had been using
would be as good for this purpose. Also, would staying with XP necessitate
me doing a bunch of driver upgrades that Vista might already have in it. I
really liked XP, it is just that the system was getting slower and slower
doing things I needed to do as my computing tasks increased in complexity for
the hardware I had.

Rick

Carey:
Thank you very much, I had a feeling that was the case. Time to buy some
software.

"Carey Frisch [MVP]" wrote:

> Windows Vista would be ideal for your new hardware setup.
> Windows XP was designed for older hardware and requires
> too many security patches to even approach the built-in
> security Vista has. Vista is on the cutting-edge of the
> future...Windows XP is fast approaching the end its useful life
> as a modern operating system.
>
> --
> Carey Frisch
> Microsoft MVP
> Windows Shell/User
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "Rick" <> wrote in message news:16A4761C-D00C-4962-9CB0-...
> I have recently rebuilt my entire computer, upgraded from a Pentium 4 to a
> Quad Core, 4 MB DDR2, EVGA MB, 750 GB SATA HD, basically a very fast
> hardware setup. My primary goal is to do DVD authoring faster, I have a Sony
> HDR-SR5 HandyCam HD camcorder. The old system would take up to (combined) 12
> hours or more to convert and then master a DVD that was origninally shot in
> the AVCHD format that Sony uses and then mastered and burned using Adobe
> Premiere Elements v. 3.0. I was going to buy Vista 32 bit thinking it might
> be better for this purpose, but was wondering if the XP Pro I had been using
> would be as good for this purpose. Also, would staying with XP necessitate
> me doing a bunch of driver upgrades that Vista might already have in it. I
> really liked XP, it is just that the system was getting slower and slower
> doing things I needed to do as my computing tasks increased in complexity for
> the hardware I had.
>
> Rick

Ask the pros and they will tell you..

KEEP AWAY FROM VISTA if you want to do Video and audio editing..

For Music creation and animations....vista is forbidden!

Vista sucks too bad for all this.. its a monster

You are asking in the wrong group.. in here you will find lots of MVPs and
Vistaboys
that will keep telling you vista is the best thing since sliced bread...

go ask some video editing forums.. and you will see that I am right..




"Rick" <> wrote in message
news:16A4761C-D00C-4962-9CB0-...
>I have recently rebuilt my entire computer, upgraded from a Pentium 4 to a
> Quad Core, 4 MB DDR2, EVGA MB, 750 GB SATA HD, basically a very fast
> hardware setup. My primary goal is to do DVD authoring faster, I have a
> Sony
> HDR-SR5 HandyCam HD camcorder. The old system would take up to (combined)
> 12
> hours or more to convert and then master a DVD that was origninally shot
> in
> the AVCHD format that Sony uses and then mastered and burned using Adobe
> Premiere Elements v. 3.0. I was going to buy Vista 32 bit thinking it
> might
> be better for this purpose, but was wondering if the XP Pro I had been
> using
> would be as good for this purpose. Also, would staying with XP
> necessitate
> me doing a bunch of driver upgrades that Vista might already have in it.
> I
> really liked XP, it is just that the system was getting slower and slower
> doing things I needed to do as my computing tasks increased in complexity
> for
> the hardware I had.
>
> Rick

To give you some info.. I do video editing too ...

vista was so bad and inflexible I was finally UNABLE to do the work on it,
and switched back to XP..

when back in XP everything worked at least 30% faster and I no longer ran
into problems...

What were the problems? I could write several PAGES! Performance was number
one,
then codecs, then display problems... ahhh!!!! it was a nightmare!

As I said again.. don't take my word for it, but don't take the word of the
fan-boys in here,
since they think vista is some god or something...

go ask the forums that specialize on video editing...

I am giving you a warning.. beware of vista!



"Taibear ios" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Ask the pros and they will tell you..
>
> KEEP AWAY FROM VISTA if you want to do Video and audio editing..
>
> For Music creation and animations....vista is forbidden!
>
> Vista sucks too bad for all this.. its a monster
>
> You are asking in the wrong group.. in here you will find lots of MVPs and
> Vistaboys
> that will keep telling you vista is the best thing since sliced bread...
>
> go ask some video editing forums.. and you will see that I am right..
>
>
>
>
> "Rick" <> wrote in message
> news:16A4761C-D00C-4962-9CB0-...
>>I have recently rebuilt my entire computer, upgraded from a Pentium 4 to a
>> Quad Core, 4 MB DDR2, EVGA MB, 750 GB SATA HD, basically a very fast
>> hardware setup. My primary goal is to do DVD authoring faster, I have a
>> Sony
>> HDR-SR5 HandyCam HD camcorder. The old system would take up to
>> (combined) 12
>> hours or more to convert and then master a DVD that was origninally shot
>> in
>> the AVCHD format that Sony uses and then mastered and burned using Adobe
>> Premiere Elements v. 3.0. I was going to buy Vista 32 bit thinking it
>> might
>> be better for this purpose, but was wondering if the XP Pro I had been
>> using
>> would be as good for this purpose. Also, would staying with XP
>> necessitate
>> me doing a bunch of driver upgrades that Vista might already have in it.
>> I
>> really liked XP, it is just that the system was getting slower and slower
>> doing things I needed to do as my computing tasks increased in complexity
>> for
>> the hardware I had.
>>
>> Rick
>
>

people like carey are doing so much harm to everyone by saying that vista is
fine and good...

No vista is not good for what he is trying to do.. in fact vista is no good
at all!

read my posts and ask around.. ask the pros...



"Rick" <> wrote in message
news:F2B63B9F-1792-43EB-9E54-...
> Carey:
> Thank you very much, I had a feeling that was the case. Time to buy
> some
> software.
>
> "Carey Frisch [MVP]" wrote:
>
>> Windows Vista would be ideal for your new hardware setup.
>> Windows XP was designed for older hardware and requires
>> too many security patches to even approach the built-in
>> security Vista has. Vista is on the cutting-edge of the
>> future...Windows XP is fast approaching the end its useful life
>> as a modern operating system.
>>
>> --
>> Carey Frisch
>> Microsoft MVP
>> Windows Shell/User
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> "Rick" <> wrote in message
>> news:16A4761C-D00C-4962-9CB0-...
>> I have recently rebuilt my entire computer, upgraded from a Pentium 4 to
>> a
>> Quad Core, 4 MB DDR2, EVGA MB, 750 GB SATA HD, basically a very fast
>> hardware setup. My primary goal is to do DVD authoring faster, I have a
>> Sony
>> HDR-SR5 HandyCam HD camcorder. The old system would take up to
>> (combined) 12
>> hours or more to convert and then master a DVD that was origninally shot
>> in
>> the AVCHD format that Sony uses and then mastered and burned using Adobe
>> Premiere Elements v. 3.0. I was going to buy Vista 32 bit thinking it
>> might
>> be better for this purpose, but was wondering if the XP Pro I had been
>> using
>> would be as good for this purpose. Also, would staying with XP
>> necessitate
>> me doing a bunch of driver upgrades that Vista might already have in it.
>> I
>> really liked XP, it is just that the system was getting slower and slower
>> doing things I needed to do as my computing tasks increased in complexity
>> for
>> the hardware I had.
>>
>> Rick

"Rick" <> wrote in message
news:16A4761C-D00C-4962-9CB0-...
>I have recently rebuilt my entire computer, upgraded from a Pentium 4 to a
> Quad Core, 4 MB DDR2, EVGA MB, 750 GB SATA HD, basically a very fast
> hardware setup. My primary goal is to do DVD authoring faster, I have a
> Sony
> HDR-SR5 HandyCam HD camcorder. The old system would take up to (combined)
> 12
> hours or more to convert and then master a DVD that was origninally shot
> in
> the AVCHD format that Sony uses and then mastered and burned using Adobe
> Premiere Elements v. 3.0. I was going to buy Vista 32 bit thinking it
> might
> be better for this purpose, but was wondering if the XP Pro I had been
> using
> would be as good for this purpose. Also, would staying with XP
> necessitate
> me doing a bunch of driver upgrades that Vista might already have in it.
> I
> really liked XP, it is just that the system was getting slower and slower
> doing things I needed to do as my computing tasks increased in complexity
> for
> the hardware I had.


I have been using Vista for over a year now, and I am still using XP for my
work. I am an architect and use ArchiCAD, Photoshop and ViZ 2007, as well
as a lot of other software. I find the OpenGL performance in Vista to be
abysmal compared to XP's. While a lot of this is due to the drivers for my
FireGL card, this is a common view amongst CAD users, and Vista has nothing
to actually offer as an advantage over XP when it comes to real workflow,
and is just slower at doing the same thing.

ss.

On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 09:56:00 -0700, Rick
<> wrote:

>I have recently rebuilt my entire computer, upgraded from a Pentium 4 to a
>Quad Core, 4 MB DDR2, EVGA MB, 750 GB SATA HD, basically a very fast
>hardware setup. My primary goal is to do DVD authoring faster, I have a Sony
>HDR-SR5 HandyCam HD camcorder. The old system would take up to (combined) 12
>hours or more to convert and then master a DVD that was origninally shot in
>the AVCHD format that Sony uses and then mastered and burned using Adobe
>Premiere Elements v. 3.0. I was going to buy Vista 32 bit thinking it might
>be better for this purpose, but was wondering if the XP Pro I had been using
>would be as good for this purpose. Also, would staying with XP necessitate
>me doing a bunch of driver upgrades that Vista might already have in it. I
>really liked XP, it is just that the system was getting slower and slower
>doing things I needed to do as my computing tasks increased in complexity for
>the hardware I had.
>
>Rick

Short answer, I would say there is little if any difference between
how XP and Vista perform under video editing jobs. I use Vegas, like
Elements it runs either in XP or Vista but if you expect improvement
in how anything that Vista itself brings to the table you may be
disappointed. It doesn't from what I've seen. Your gain will come from
a faster CPU and perhaps a slight boost from faster memory. In fact XP
could run Elemenets faster on such a system than Vista could. I don't
know, neither does anyone else... unless you actually test and see.

As far as time to complete that's more a function of how complex a job
you're doing and what you're including in the way of filters and
effects. In Vegas and I'm guessing in Elements as well the more
filters and effects you apply the longer rendering time takes before
you have a file suitable to burn to a DVD. I get anywhere from almost
1 to 1 if I don't change much to sometimes 15 to 1 ratios relative to
source file length. 12 hours to process for between 1 to 1.5 hours,
what you're typically going to burn to a single sided DVD is in the
ballpark. So if you're thinking upgrading to Vista will drop rendering
time by any measurable degree you're probably in for a let down.

I doubt the Vista DVD includes any drivers for Elements that you can't
get off the Adobe web site. In fact Adobe is one of several larger
software companies that hasn't be in a hurry to jump on the Vista
bandwagon.

That doesn't mean you shouldn't upgrade to Vista. It is the future, so
if you've just build a new system probably the way to go. I did. Just
don't expect any real performance boost from Vista itself, Your new
system should fly, but the point is it should fly regardless if you
use XP or Vista. Vista is mostly about phony security changes and a
"prettier" desktop. Beyond the usual changing things around just to
change things around, nothing to get excited about.

I want to verify what Synapse is saying..

I have setup many computers for architects and I have seen the exact problem
he says about
archicad..

You work faster with XP.. Vista has nothing to offer to you in your case..

but it will be a headache proving you a long list of problems to overcome if
you want to
make things work as they should.

Perhaps in 2-3 years with 8 or 16 core CPU's and software that has been used
on vista
again and again and made 100% compatible you may think again about Vista

if you want to play around.. vista is fine but for serious work.. vista is
unusable





"Synapse Syndrome" <> wrote in message
news:...
> "Rick" <> wrote in message
> news:16A4761C-D00C-4962-9CB0-...
>>I have recently rebuilt my entire computer, upgraded from a Pentium 4 to a
>> Quad Core, 4 MB DDR2, EVGA MB, 750 GB SATA HD, basically a very fast
>> hardware setup. My primary goal is to do DVD authoring faster, I have a
>> Sony
>> HDR-SR5 HandyCam HD camcorder. The old system would take up to
>> (combined) 12
>> hours or more to convert and then master a DVD that was origninally shot
>> in
>> the AVCHD format that Sony uses and then mastered and burned using Adobe
>> Premiere Elements v. 3.0. I was going to buy Vista 32 bit thinking it
>> might
>> be better for this purpose, but was wondering if the XP Pro I had been
>> using
>> would be as good for this purpose. Also, would staying with XP
>> necessitate
>> me doing a bunch of driver upgrades that Vista might already have in it.
>> I
>> really liked XP, it is just that the system was getting slower and slower
>> doing things I needed to do as my computing tasks increased in complexity
>> for
>> the hardware I had.
>
>
> I have been using Vista for over a year now, and I am still using XP for
> my work. I am an architect and use ArchiCAD, Photoshop and ViZ 2007, as
> well as a lot of other software. I find the OpenGL performance in Vista
> to be abysmal compared to XP's. While a lot of this is due to the drivers
> for my FireGL card, this is a common view amongst CAD users, and Vista has
> nothing to actually offer as an advantage over XP when it comes to real
> workflow, and is just slower at doing the same thing.
>
> ss.
>

Rick wrote:
> I have recently rebuilt my entire computer, upgraded from a Pentium 4 to a
> Quad Core, 4 MB DDR2, EVGA MB, 750 GB SATA HD, basically a very fast
> hardware setup. My primary goal is to do DVD authoring faster, I have a Sony
> HDR-SR5 HandyCam HD camcorder. The old system would take up to (combined) 12
> hours or more to convert and then master a DVD that was origninally shot in
> the AVCHD format that Sony uses and then mastered and burned using Adobe
> Premiere Elements v. 3.0. I was going to buy Vista 32 bit thinking it might
> be better for this purpose, but was wondering if the XP Pro I had been using
> would be as good for this purpose. Also, would staying with XP necessitate
> me doing a bunch of driver upgrades that Vista might already have in it. I
> really liked XP, it is just that the system was getting slower and slower
> doing things I needed to do as my computing tasks increased in complexity for
> the hardware I had.
>
> Rick

Firstly decide what editing software you wish to run... then decide
which hardware and OS is most suitable.

For instance see AVID's recommended hardware for their edit software...
- also check their forums.

Vista is proving problematic for some users due to poor hardware support
and poor/missing drivers.

As with most computer things; Ignore any "It should work, we're waiting
for a software update" assurances - if you don't see it working with
your own eyes it's probably 'vapourware'... fine if you want to be an
unpaid beta tester - NOT so if you have a job of work to do. ;-)


Guy