PearVistaPC

[yizzel]

PearPC on Vista running about the same speed as XP. Just can't run as many apps simultaneously as I usually do in XP.

[SAK `]

What do you mean by that? Is there any disadvantages beyond multitasking in Vista whether you run OSX or not? There shouldn't be unless you have a slow computer riding on your shoulders. 2GHz is suitable for Vista, but anything below that could sometimes make things worst. I am sure that after learning from other people's facts and opinions, Vista can drink away hardware component resources (RAM, CPU, HDD) if the consumer does not put together the right combination.

Just can't run as many apps simultaneously as I usually do in XP.

$.@.K.

[Alex]

Vista is awfully slow for me, even with a Athlon 64 3200+, 512MB of DDR RAM. I'll try it out again when I get a Socket AM2 Athlon64 X2, DDRII RAM, new graphics card and SATA-II hard drive. Maybe it will be faster then

[yizzel]

What do you mean by that? Is there any disadvantages beyond multitasking in Vista whether you run OSX or not?

Yeah I was referring to multitasking, which is due to only having 512Mb RAM. I'd go as far saying that you need at least 1G RAM(min.) to get the same level of usability as XP. Speed isn't an issue until you run low on RAM.
The only other disadvantages is software compatibility. BlueSoleil's bluetooth manager causes BOD and RivaTuner won't even install.
Apart from that Vista runs great.

Vista is awfully slow for me, even with a Athlon 64 3200+, 512MB of DDR RAM.

That's more or less what I'm running. It's definitely not slow for me. My first impression was wow this is faster than XP. Vista boots faster and loads apps faster but once everything is loaded and running there doesn't seem to be much difference speedwise.
The only thing that is noticeable slower is graphics. I've got a nVidia GF 6200 and in XP I run RivaTuner which allows me to unlock 4 pixel pipeline to match (almost) GF 6600GT with overclocking, however RivaTuner doesn't run on Vista *right now*. Despite that, this budget card is powerful enough to fully run the Aero Glass interface.

[Alex]

I have that card, that's definitely what slows it down for me. Also the hard disk speed can affect it, I have a quite old Maxtor 80GB IDE drive, Vista is always hammering the drive.

[yizzel]

Yes my GF6200 is the slowest component according to Vista’s experience index, followed by the HDD then RAM and finally the CPU.
I don’t get why Vista needs so much grunt from the GPU when my Mac with it’s p*ss weak ATI TNT 32Mb GPU effortlessly runs OS X’s interface.

You need more then 512Mb RAM, that’s why Vista is giving your HDD a hard time. Still a decent drive should improve things. I got 2 HDD’s 1x 80G PATA and 1x 80G SATA. I got Vista running on the PATA because I didn’t want to disturb XP on the SATA drive. I switch between booting XP/Vista by changing the drive boot order in the BIOS.

[Alex]

Vista has a boot manager which can dual boot XP and Vista, or you could use a 3rd party boot manager such as GRUB or XOSL