<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Microsoft: Win XP sometimes Faster than Vista SP1</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.gohacking.com/2008/03/microsoft-win-xp-sometimes-faster-than.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.gohacking.com/2008/03/microsoft-win-xp-sometimes-faster-than.html</link>
	<description>Learn How To Hack! Know more about Computer/Internet Security. Get Real Hacking Tips from Experts. Cool place to Learn Hacking</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 10:06:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: waffles</title>
		<link>http://www.gohacking.com/2008/03/microsoft-win-xp-sometimes-faster-than.html/comment-page-1#comment-13242</link>
		<dc:creator>waffles</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Jul 2010 10:21:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gohacking.com/?p=60#comment-13242</guid>
		<description>i&#039;ve allways thought vista sucks because after i got it my friends stuck with xp because they were complaining about how slow and stupid vista is but now since i see this post i can prove that they&#039;re about the same but when it comes to graphix and gaming i know xp beats vista hands down cause i have tried it</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i&#8217;ve allways thought vista sucks because after i got it my friends stuck with xp because they were complaining about how slow and stupid vista is but now since i see this post i can prove that they&#8217;re about the same but when it comes to graphix and gaming i know xp beats vista hands down cause i have tried it</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sahil</title>
		<link>http://www.gohacking.com/2008/03/microsoft-win-xp-sometimes-faster-than.html/comment-page-1#comment-13213</link>
		<dc:creator>sahil</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 2010 12:43:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gohacking.com/?p=60#comment-13213</guid>
		<description>yar i want to ask u about your post &quot;a virus prg.to disable usb ports&quot; . i am using usb keyboard and mouse. if i disabled my usb ports, i will not be able to give input to the pc. then is there any way to recover??? reply soon 
- sagarsahil84@gmail.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>yar i want to ask u about your post &#8220;a virus prg.to disable usb ports&#8221; . i am using usb keyboard and mouse. if i disabled my usb ports, i will not be able to give input to the pc. then is there any way to recover??? reply soon<br />
- <a href="mailto:sagarsahil84@gmail.com">sagarsahil84@gmail.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Slim0123</title>
		<link>http://www.gohacking.com/2008/03/microsoft-win-xp-sometimes-faster-than.html/comment-page-1#comment-2026</link>
		<dc:creator>Slim0123</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jan 2009 15:38:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gohacking.com/?p=60#comment-2026</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t know whatever they have tested above but I think I can share my experience with vista and xp

xp is faster than vista only on low end pcs, on todays medium class pcs, vista outperforms xp in almost every expect(May it be in terms of speed, security, networking, etc, )....

xp takes a loong time to start from a cold boot but vista starts as if it was never turned off....
the secret lies in the fact that vista makes efficient use of the hardware present in the system provided that you should give it some good hardware platform to perform.......

seeing is believing, so better you try it yourself if you have a computer with some good configuration(dont forget to install 64-bit vista if your system supports as it provides much more speed than its 32-bit counterpart)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t know whatever they have tested above but I think I can share my experience with vista and xp</p>
<p>xp is faster than vista only on low end pcs, on todays medium class pcs, vista outperforms xp in almost every expect(May it be in terms of speed, security, networking, etc, )&#8230;.</p>
<p>xp takes a loong time to start from a cold boot but vista starts as if it was never turned off&#8230;.<br />
the secret lies in the fact that vista makes efficient use of the hardware present in the system provided that you should give it some good hardware platform to perform&#8230;&#8230;.</p>
<p>seeing is believing, so better you try it yourself if you have a computer with some good configuration(dont forget to install 64-bit vista if your system supports as it provides much more speed than its 32-bit counterpart)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
