Which OS should I upgrade to for Vegas 8.0

ErikS wrote on 12/15/2007, 7:02 PM

I have purchased Vegas 8 for my computer, I have been trying it out on my laptop, but I intend to REALLY install it for use on my beefier main computer.
I curently am running on Windows 2000 and need to upgrade to install Vegas 8.0, so what one should I upgrade to for best results now, and near future (ie, not upgrading again in a year) Vista, XP or even XP 64?
What are people fond of and such I kind of need to do this within the next week to finnish a project that I started on the laptop as a photo montage that the laptop chokes on (3D- 47 video tracks and one nested veg).
Thanks in advance!
Erik

Comments

dibbkd wrote on 12/15/2007, 7:09 PM

My vote would be for XP.

ushere wrote on 12/15/2007, 7:13 PM

ditto xp 32bit. 3gig ram, and on my e6600, vegas is a joy.

leslie

ErikS wrote on 12/15/2007, 7:14 PM

What about XP 64, any thoughts? Anyone using it?

dibbkd wrote on 12/15/2007, 7:33 PM

Stay away from XP64.

I don't have time to explain all the reasons why, but trust me on this one.

Maybe in a year or so.

deusx wrote on 12/15/2007, 8:29 PM

xp ( 32 bit )

But, it may run on windows 2000. I had all of my apps running on that without problems ( until about 2 years ago ) , even though most of them didn't officially support it.

You can try it, it may work ( try a trial version first, so you don't have to waste one activation in case it doesn't )

xberk wrote on 12/15/2007, 8:55 PM

Using Vista 64 on a Q6600 .. very happy with VP8.

UlfLaursen wrote on 12/15/2007, 9:17 PM

XP pro 32 bit is my vote

/Ulf

Opampman wrote on 12/15/2007, 9:24 PM

XP Pro

Chienworks wrote on 12/16/2007, 3:38 AM

XP Pro.

Why would anyone who has a choice in the matter even consider Vista?

Kennymusicman wrote on 12/16/2007, 4:40 AM

Because when it happens - Vegas 64bit.

I use Vista on main production machines and have great performance on the lot.

Cliff Etzel wrote on 12/16/2007, 5:12 AM

Stay away from XP64.

My experience is the total opposite so your statement is inaccurate for the most part.

As long as you do your homework on what is supported and what isn't, x64 XP Pro is in my opinion more stable that 32bit XP Pro. I have not had a SINGLE issue since moving to x64 in August of 2006 - the only BSOD was from OC'ing my processor. So if you want access to all of your RAM, a stable 64bit OS, then using x64 XP Pro is the answer. From what I can surmise, running x64 XP Pro on an AMD based platform appears to be more stable than on an Intel, but that is based solely on observation.

Generalities about an OS based upon uninformed opinions is a disservice to people seeking advice. There are several forum members here who will state that x64 XP Pro is a viable option - including myself.

Cliff Etzel - Solo Video Journalist
bluprojekt

riredale wrote on 12/16/2007, 8:39 PM

XPpro would be my suggestion.

blink3times wrote on 12/16/2007, 9:19 PM

"There are several forum members here who will state that x64 XP Pro is a viable option - including myself."
===============================
Yes... It's viable RIGHT NOW but it won't be for much longer. Various software manufacturers have already clearly stated that they will be moving forward with Vista 64 and will not be looking back. In other words, future software will be a crap shoot with XP64 and no official support. If your present system is XP64 then there is probably no reason to switch (for the moment anyway). But if you're building a new system then XP64 would be more of a step backwards. Not withstanding, there is nothing wrong with Vista Ultimate 64bit. I've been using it for at least 3 months now with no issues at all. I'm quite happy with it.

kentwolf wrote on 12/16/2007, 9:22 PM

XP Pro.