I am not comparing it to the PS3. I am saying it's been proven (because of another console that happens to be the PS3), that pop up is reduced when you install to the HD.

I am sure there is a reliability and noise factor as well.

Forget the PS3. Why did they not give the option to install to the HD when there is an obvious advantage to doing so? If the game played the same regardless (meaning the only advantage was a few seconds of load times), then who cares. I don’t think that is the case.

A few reviews have said the pop up is very distracting at times. Why not avoid it if you can? They could have if they had given you the option.

Well I wasn't really responding to your post. 

Personally I don't think MS wants to go down that road with installs because it  makes them look silly for not putting hard drives on all of them, and that they don't want all the 20gig hard drives filled with installs.  I mean, you really only get like 17gig, and that's only like 4 or 5 games of installs.  What a terrible use of space given the limitations.  And if you let it be used for GTA, then where do you end?

Its funny that people forget that the reviews state that both versions have pop ins and frame rate issues but the 360 tends to have a little more but not enough so to effect there review scores(why people forget this part is beyond me?). Would it have been nice to have the option of installing the game? Yes I have to agree the option would have been nice and maybe we will see this with later games. My point is all reviews have said that it is only a slight egde the ps3 has so why is there this big fuss. The ign video head to head shows no diff what so ever(then again the vid quality isnt amazing). I think many people on here look at there consoles like sports teams and are always trying to prove which team is the best. The game has almost perfect scores for BOTH versions any diff must be very small indeed.

To the guy above. What about the people who got the 20gig ps3 or even the 40 think of all the ps3 games that have installs.

So what i gather, the 360 apologists argument is essentially it is ok for a company to give a technically inferior version(pop ins and such) as long as they give the consumer and opportunity to buy more "exclusive" content later.... right this is good news...... MS: "sorry your game runs worse but give us more $$ and we will give you some extra content." Man starcraft i thought you do not turn a blind eye to 360's faults? What happened? So you don't mind getting a gimped version as long as MS gives you the opportunity to shell out more money for extra stuff?

Erm...how is it not complete..? even the reviewers said the issues are minimal.

http://www.gamesradar.com/xbox360/grand-theft-auto-iv/news/gta-iv-360-vs-ps3/a-2008042812150303074/g-2006051014323586065
Heres a link to a vid showing both versions over at gamesradar where they say that the diff really is very min and doesnt have any effect on the play. Take waht you will from it

Their conclusion seems to be in line with everything else I've read, but the choice of footage is questionable as the "complaint" about the 360 has to do with draw in, which shouldn't be an issue with a cut scene in a bedroom.

 Who cares? That disparity already exists in the form of caching to the hard drive, which GTA IV does. If you don't have a hard drive, loading times and pop-in become even worse on the 360. It should be an option and Microsoft's policies are the reason it isn't as the technical capability is absolutely there.

ur thread title is misleading
just because it reads it off a disc doesn't mean it's not complete

 It's an interesting quasi-troll, isn't it? The thread title is extremely trollish but the content of the OP is actually quite worth of discussion, minus the usage of the word "incomplete."