Quote Originally Posted by eatup View Post
Pardon me? I can get up to 8X the fps in DirectX 9 games in XP (compared to 7/8).
8x as many FPS? So, if you only get 30 frames per second under Windows 7, you were getting 240 frames per second under Windows 8. That seriously doesn't sound right. I could see a little swing in either direction, but not 8x as many.

Quote Originally Posted by eatup View Post
Also, my NET 3.5 apps run 8X more smoothly in XP compared to 7/8 (I've benchmarked it to 7/8 using the NET 4.5 version, which is more "native" to 8).
I don't know what to tell you there. While I work for a software development company, I do systems admin stuff for a living. But I don't have any developers in house grumbling about wanting to get XP machines back because it did everything better.

Quote Originally Posted by eatup View Post
So, you're telling me all these stats indicate XP is an inferior OS to 7/8?
Yes, I do feel XP is inferior and you are better suited with a new OS on your newer hardware. For example, 32bit Windows XP won't do much with that 8GB or 16GB of RAM, it will only provide you access to 3.25GB of it. And 64bit Windows XP was just terrible. There is a lack of TRIM support for SSD's under XP, you have to get support from the hardware vendor if they have it. Dual monitor support is far better in 7 and 8. Accounts were actual admins in Windows XP and thus boxes were often attacked. The newer limited user model is much improved in that respect. Not perfect, but a step in the right direction.

The biggest reason I find that people like to continue running XP is that it was easier to pirate by having a VLK.

If it's working better for you, I'm happy for you. I didn't love XP when it was out and the second that 7 came out, I was done with XP.