Building semi-dedicated PC Sage client: Which windows version?

[mmanville]

I am a new Sage user planning my first install. I've already determined that I am going to be running the Sage Server on WHS (Windows Home Server), and I will use one (eventually more?) HD300 extenders in the house.

However I want to have the SageTV client in the family room be a PC running Sage client, so I can continue to use my BluRay+HDD drive to play rentals, etc. I have already acquired an Atom 330 Ion board and a SFF case and a SSD (solid state drive) for boot drive for this purpose (want boot to be fast!) , running on 2gb ddr2, the only thing left to decide is version of Windows to put on it. Hence my question ... is there any reason to choose (or avoid) one OS over another?

I expect this box to be used as a dedicated sagetv client about 95% of the time, but it may occasionally find some light duty for web browsing, etc.

So, which OS? For both XP and Vista, I literally have extra copies lying around, so that is the main appeal -- no cost. If it's just going to be a dedicated Sage client box, it maybe a bit of a waste to blow $ on a new OS Win7 license? Win7 however has some appeal because it has built in TRIM support for the SSD, no need to manually set up (probably schedule?) wipes etc like I would have to in XP. Win7 is supposed to have better boot times, but with the SSD I think that consideration is minimized. In addion on XP's (and Vista's) side, maybe I can use nLite to create a leaner OS install & imporve their boots. Other than those factors, I know of no reason to chose one over the other based upon what I can think of (well, since I have both XP and Vista licenses, the main advantage of choosing either of those, I would probably rule out Vista just because it'd be more demanding on the putt-putt Atom processor, and also I don't really want to have to wrestle with UAC in Vista again)

But the problem is, I don't know if there are factors with SageTV client and that would lead me to chose flavor of OS over the others. Could anyone who has an opinion be so kid as to share their thoughts? Thanks!

[PLUCKYHD]

WINDOWS 7 It truly is worth is for the w7 video decoder alone.

[SCPRedMage]

If you need to choose between two OS's from the same developer and can't figure if you should pick the older one or the newer, pick the newer. Eventually, Microsoft WILL stop supporting XP. Specifically, they've moved to only releasing security hotfixes for it, and they're scheduled to drop THAT on April 8, 2014.

Buy Windows 7, and you'll get more life out of it.

[Bizarroterl]

+1 for Win 7. Trying to save a couple bucks by using an old OS is short term thinking.

[Fuzzy]

Win7's boot is also MUCH faster... though honestly, I wouldn't expect you to be booting the device all too often. Much better to just let it sleep (win7's hybrid sleep is quite awesome). Wake up time on my i3 based client is faster than it takes the tv to power on. I don't think the SSD is really going to gain you anything on a sage client. You may be better off using that as a system drive in a real desktop somewhere. Once the sage client is up and running (which, if using standby, would be all the time), it really doesn't use any hdd access. Stick whatever old HDD you have in there, and it'll work just fine.

Win7, though, is definitely worth it. The power management is better, the video pipeline is MUCH better, and the boot/wake speed is faster. An upgrade license (since you've got a lot of XP's and Vista's laying about) isn't that expensive. (around $100) probably cheaper than that useless SSD was.. ;-)

[mmanville]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

Win7, though, is definitely worth it. The power management is better, the video pipeline is MUCH better, and the boot/wake speed is faster. An upgrade license (since you've got a lot of XP's and Vista's laying about) isn't that expensive. (around $100) probably cheaper than that useless SSD was.. ;-)

Yeah I have Win7 on a couple other boxes. Just trying to save money on what will really be more a static appliance than a general purpose PC, that's all.

BTW, I'm not sure if you've ever used an SSD but ... I find it ironic that you say its useless in the same paragraph you extoll Win7 because of its faster boot. Just sayin' ;

Thanks everyone for their replies. Yeah, I'll probably just bit the bullet. the more I think about the TRIM issue alone, the more I decide I don't want to have to manually manage that in XP.

[mmanville]

Originally Posted by SCPRedMage

If you need to choose between two OS's from the same developer and can't figure if you should pick the older one or the newer, pick the newer. Eventually, Microsoft WILL stop supporting XP.

lol, but you're talking to a guy who just took down his last Win98 box (email+web station for my mom) three years ago. I usually find my upgrade cycle is driven by hardware, not software.

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by mmanville

Yeah I have Win7 on a couple other boxes. Just trying to save money on what will really be more a static appliance than a general purpose PC, that's all.

BTW, I'm not sure if you've ever used an SSD but ... I find it ironic that you say its useless in the same paragraph you extoll Win7 because of its faster boot. Just sayin' ;

Thanks everyone for their replies. Yeah, I'll probably just bit the bullet. the more I think about the TRIM issue alone, the more I decide I don't want to have to manually manage that in XP.

I actually talked about faster wake speed, which in an HTPC, is really all that matters. an SSD is just soo expensive for something that really won't come into play on a sage client.

[mmanville]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

I actually talked about faster wake speed, which in an HTPC, is really all that matters. an SSD is just soo expensive for something that really won't come into play on a sage client.

Hmm. I guess I'm planning to to be shutting it off and on (in some sense of the word) a lot. Treating it just the same way as the stereo system and TV it will be hooked up with. You wouldn't shut a dedicated client off (or perhaps hibernate) after you're done watching, then turn it back on when you come back later?

[Fuzzy]

I let it sleep... S3 sleep on a modern PC uses about as much power as the system does when "shutdown" or hibernated. About the only 'extra' electrical use is the SDRAM refresh, which is really very little.

[mmanville]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

I let it sleep... S3 sleep on a modern PC uses about as much power as the system does when "shutdown" or hibernated. About the only 'extra' electrical use is the SDRAM refresh, which is really very little.

Hmm, food for thought, perhaps I'll reconsider. Thanks!

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by mmanville

Hmm, food for thought, perhaps I'll reconsider. Thanks!

Some numbers to chew on from my recent i3 based client build:

On/Idle  = 46W
HD MPEG2 = 57W
SD MPEG2 = 50W
HD H.264 = 56W
BluRay   = 55W
S3 Sleep = 2.2W
S4/Off   = 0.4W

At $0.15/kWh, that is a savings of <$2.50 a year doing a full shutdown or hibernation(S4) vice using S3 sleep. Personally, I'll let mine sleep, and not care whatsoever about boot-up time.

[SCPRedMage]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

I let it sleep... S3 sleep on a modern PC uses about as much power as the system does when "shutdown" or hibernated. About the only 'extra' electrical use is the SDRAM refresh, which is really very little.

Hybrid sleep is identical to the standard S3 sleep, except that it also hibernates (S4) at the same time. If it then loses power, it'll resume as if it hibernated, otherwise it'll resume from sleep. You can also set it to fully hibernate after a period of time, which is useful for laptops.

All the speed of S3, with the reliability of S4. If you have Vista or 7 (and your system doesn't pitch a fit with hibernation), I don't really see a reason to use S3 instead...

[Fuzzy]

I was talking about power usage. Hybrid sleep IS S3, especially when talking about power usage. Whether you have Hybrid sleep enabled or not, S3 sleep is S3 sleep.

[SCPRedMage]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

I was talking about power usage. Hybrid sleep IS S3, especially when talking about power usage. Whether you have Hybrid sleep enabled or not, S3 sleep is S3 sleep.

I understand the point you were making; I was just pointing out that hybrid sleep will also ensure that your system can resume in the event of a power outage, as well as being just all around awesome for laptops. Forgetting that you left your laptop in S3 results in dead batteries and lost work, while with hybrid sleep even if you DON'T set it to completely shut down after a while, you'll still be able to resume once you've got the laptop back on AC power.

In other words, I'm pointing out another advantage for Windows 7, although this was introduced in Vista.

And yes, I know you mentioned it first, but you didn't explain what it did, so I felt it needed elaborating.