Should I switch my OS to XP from Vista?

I hate Vista to be honest. I know a few people that do as well. I have a Windows 7 computer, one Vista, and one XP.
I need to know if i switch Vista to XP will it become unstable?Vista is like a chemically altered teenager, it randomly lashes out and condensends regulary.
Do you think it's worth the trouble of switching the OS of my Vista computer, as I love XP a great deal.Please weigh in.

My PC was originally vista and it runs XP fine, if you already have one with 7 then yeah, do it.

So your going to then have 1 pc on w7,and 2 x on xp-whats the point of that Dan.I dont know what youve got planned,but you could turn one into a xp/w7 dual boot.

If it were me I would have 1 xp computer used just for all those old dos games that wont play on w7 and use my w7 PC for eveyday stuff like burning dvds, internet and modern games. I dual boot now and its a pain in the arse if I fancy a quick go on a dos game and have to reboot. Dosbox is ok but games load at their original speed and you have to configure the c drive everytime and the window size which is more hassle than rebooting.

win7 man, not vista unless your pc has low specs. if it does, stick with xp but for games, vista has directx10

Win7 has lower requirements than vista.

Replying to #6

is xp's requirement lower than 7's?

Replying to #7

isnt it obvious? i mean you dont ask if Window 98 have lower requirement then winXP. do you?

Replying to #8

Why is it obvious? Because its older? Erm....win7 and vista....

Replying to #9

its obvious because its the way older os.... winXP is from 2001 while vista is from 2006. and win7 is last year if i'm not wrong.

Replying to #10

And that makes it obvious does it?

Replying to #11

doesnt it?

Stop the sarcasm

I wouldn't say obvious. Very likely is a much better description.
Going by your dates XP to Vista then Vista to Win7 theres about the same time gap between them, so if win7 is lower requirements why is it obvious that XP is?
Post Merge: [time]1290764163[/time]

Replying to #13

Nah i'm bored, its snowing and i'm stuck inside.

lewis9191 · #13Stop the sarcasm

that a sarcasm? i though it more like O rly, ya rly loop.

Replying to #14

its lNOT that low. i mean its not like win7 is build to run on PII. plus when compare to win 7, winXP is almost 10 years old. so what make you think a 10 years old OS have higher requirement then the latest with better GUI OS?

Replying to #15

So have processors got worse inbetween vista and 7?

Replying to #15

I thought we just went through why the age thing wasn't obvious

Replying to #15

When did I say I thought it did? Plus, Win7 was built to have lower requirents than Vista.

Replying to #16

i didnt say you did, i just point out its common sense.

Replying to #16

i didnt check, but by right it shouldn't cause there is a law that say processing power double every year. i think its call moore law or something (cant remember).plus correct me if i'm wrong, but win7 didnt change the possessor requirement and memory requirement (it still require 1Gz processor and 1Gb memory), i think they change the graphic requirement.

Replying to #16

it was obvious for me, cause there is no way a 10 years old OS have higher requirement then the latest OS. Vista on the other hand is a mistake, win 7 is a correction to that mistake, but i still dont like win7.

Replying to #17

So by your logic vista should have lower requirements than 7?

Replying to #18

calvin_0plus correct me if i'm wrong, but win7 didnt change the possessor requirement and memory requirement (it still require 1Gz processor and 1Gb memory), i think they change the graphic requirement.it was obvious for me, cause there is no way a 10 years old OS have higher requirement then the latest OS. Vista on the other hand is a mistake, win 7 is a correction to that mistake, but i still dont like win7.

you dont read my last message?.. do you?

calvin_0you dont read my last message... do you?

Yes, but i want you to say why its obvious.
7 is newer than vista but has lower requirements so age doesn't count, so why is it obvious to someone that is clearly not clued up on operating systems that xp has lower requirements than 7?
Processors have gotten faster so technology doesn't seem to count either.