Buying Vista Questions

[PanzerKrieg13]

Hey guys, I'm curious of a few things.

#1. I know the main difference between Vista Business and Vista Ultimate is the Bit-Locker drive encryption, plus some other stuff. But is there any performance or usability differences between the two? Basically curious if I should just save a few bucks and go for Business over Ultimate.

#2. There are lots of versions of Vista, just not Business and Home and Ultimate, but OEM, upgrade and "full DVD (or CD) versions". Question, which is better to buy? I own previous versions of Windows, so I know upgrade version should work. I'm also aware that Vista limits itself to one machine (at least w/ OEM), so the OEM limitations won't be a problem. Now, does the "full version" have any benefit over the previous two, or should I simply save some cash and go upgrade or OEM?


I've only been using Vista exclusively for about a month, so I'm still very new to this OS and I'm just trying to figure out the details. Thanks guys. I also apologize if these questions have been answered, but I did not find them via search. Though I may have overlooked them.

SemperFi,
- Joey

[bbz_Ghost]

This is my 3,000th post here at the [H]ardForum, so I'll try to make it a good one.

In response to your questions:

1) That's pretty much it, as you specified. If you have no use for Media Center (there are alternatives that offer more features/functionality), and no use for BitLocker (TrueCrypt is free iirc and offers more features/functionality), and some stuff like Dreamscene (some video playback software can do the same thing), then Vista Business will work just fine for you. The codebase is the same; the differences like in the items I just mentioned, perhaps a few Admin tools but I'm not 100% sure about those, and that's about it. Save yourself a few bucks and get Business and have a solid OS. Vista Business is what was designed to replace Windows XP Professional, which was never really meant for "home" or consumer use - that's why Windows XP Home was created.

2) The differences work out like this:

- There are Retail boxed "Full" versions of Vista you buy in stores, typically paying full retail price or somewhat of a discount. These are the Full installation versions, that don't require any proof of previous OS ownership, that are designed primarily to be installed on a clean hard drive without any issue(s).
- There are Retail boxed "Upgrade" versions of Vista you buy also, usually at a discount from the Full version because you own a previous version of Windows so Microsoft is cutting you somewhat of a break on the cost. They require some proof to be installed properly, either a previous Product Key, an actual CD of the prior purchased product, or some other method. Personally I've never used any upgrade versions of any Windows OS so I can't say precisely how Upgrade versions of Vista work, perhaps someone else will.
- There are OEM copies that are "branded" as Dell, Gateway, HP, eMachines, IBM, etc. These versions only install on the hardware brand that they are tied to; they can't install - they won't install - on any hardware from some other OEM. These typically are not something a consumer can just purchase at their leisure.
- There are OEM System Builder copies, ones that consumers can get from places like Newegg online or Fry's in B&M locations. Same software as the Retail Full versions, not available as Upgrade versions (only Full), and you can buy the 32 bit or 64 bit editions separately. The downside to these editions is no support from Microsoft whatsoever - you can't call them for any technical support if you have an OEM System Builder copy installed; you're totally on your own.

Best practice: Always get the Full version, and in this case it's either get the Retail Full boxed product, or the same product as an OEM System Builder copy, your choice.

3) 3, 4 years ago 64 bit OSes and software were... well... if it wasn't a Linux distro or the high end Itanium failure from Intel, they just didn't exist for any decent reason. But that was then, and this is now. Today, because of Athlon64 processors and Intel's lineup of Celeron Ds, Pentium Ds, Pentium 4s, and most notably the awesome Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Quad processors, 64 bit computing is finally here, right now. The benefits are increased RAM capacity and access/usage of all of it, increased memory bandwidth when utilitizing 64 bit code (not twice as fast but maybe 10-30% in most 64 bit applications).

As for 32 bit applications running on a 64 bit OS, there's really no issue aside from a slight performance hit - but in today's world of 3 GHz dual core processors, who gives a rat's ass that a 32 bit spreadsheet tabulates 4% slower in a 64 bit OS than it does on the 32 bit version of the same OS? It's pointless, and the performance differences are negated basically by having such high end machines in the first place.

Today's suggestion if you were to look back over the past year of postings in this forum, especially with respect to 32 bit Vista vs 64 bit Vista, you'd find more people praising the 64 bit version than the 32 bit. The people praising the 32 bit version will be looking at games as the one thing they simply can't lose a few frames per second in, and those people would then probably go a step further and just recommend XP anyway. But their attitude comes from that narrow perspective of gaming, which is really still just a niche in the big picture.

Another benefit to running 64 bit Vista is that the drivers for all hardware for that OS need to be digitally signed, meaning they have been tested by Microsoft itself and "signed" (given their thumbs up approval) for 64 bit Vista. This one action alone can ensure that 64 bit Vista is MORE STABLE and A BETTER OS than the 32 bit version where driver signing isn't an absolute requirement to install them. Yes, there are ways to get around the driver signing enforcement in 64 bit Vista, but doing so just causes more problems than it's worth more often than not - it compromises the stability and reliability of the OS, period. The workaround is not something I recommend: my recommendation is always to buy hardware from a company that considers the driver signing important enough to do it.

And yes, we get these questions constantly, and I don't mind answering them for people again and again and again (and I don't copy and paste shit either, I type out every last word), but it's all about how the questions are presented. You stated yours clearly, with a curious request thrown in for good measure. You didn't just "Oh Vista sucks, tell me why I should run this POS OS..." which is what causes the problems.

If you have more questions, ask.

One tip, and this is a bit of self-promotion so sue me. Read the following two articles/threads that I created earlier this year to help new users with some aspects of Vista they might not be up to speed on and you'll end up having a much better Vista experience in the long run. No I don't get paid for this shit, I just know my shit, and I like to help. Good luck... :D

Vista, Admin rights, UAC, and You
(http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1170936)

The best Vista tip I can offer and one that is sorely needed (http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1164682)

ps
Forgot one aspect: You can't buy the 64 bit versions of:

Vista Home Basic
Vista Home Premium
Vista Business

in stores unless you purchase the OEM System Builder version of those products. Those products only come in 32 bit version in Retail Boxed products and Upgrade versions. Ultimate comes with both a 32 bit installer DVD and a 64 bit installer DVD in the Retail box. To get the 64 bit installer DVD for those versions mentioned above, there's a page at Microsoft's site you visit, put in your information, pay a roughly ~$10 shipping and handling fee, and they mail you the 64 bit installer DVD. The key that comes with the 32 bit DVD you purchased is good for the 64 bit installer DVD also so don't lose it. You are entitled to use it for one or the other, but not both at the same time. Hope this helps...

[Danny Bui]

Epic 3000th Post. :)

[creach]

Epic and very helpful. I'm planning to buy Vista in about a week and that cleared up a lot of confusion. Thanks for that, Ghost.

Congratulations on 3000 posts, by the way :cool:

[PanzerKrieg13]

bbz_Ghost,

I wanted to say thank you for your lengthy and informative post. I read it all, just as I read the additional posts you linked. You helped to clear up some confusion and provided solid information. I think my buying choice has been made easier.

I also wanted to say thank you for answering my questions in the first place, I know you get asked these over and over, but when it comes to Vista, I am a complete "newb" so my only resource is asking for help.

My last question, you mentioned one key for both the 32-bit and 64-bit discs, but you cannot use both at the same time, but my question is this, if I were to install 64-bit and not like it (or what have you), can I wipe the drive and then proceed to install and use 32-bit without issues registration key wise? Or will it prevent me from doing so because I have already used the key for 64-bit?

Thanks much...

SemperFi,
- Joey

[Rebel44]

Yes you can use you Vista 64bit Product Key to install Vista 32bit - all you would need is Vista 32bit DVD.

btw. I have Vista Home Premium 64bit and I didnt have any problems (installed in May 2007)

[bbz_Ghost]

There is a chance, a small one but it exists nonetheless, that when and if you dump the 64 bit version (I can't see a reason to do it but...) and go back to the 32 bit version, if you activated the Product Key using the 64 bit version you might get stuck when trying to activate the 32 bit version. I've never done such a thing - meaning switch from 64 bit back to 32 bit and using the original Product Key - so I can't say if you'd be required to contact Microsoft and ask for a new Product Key.

The typical "manuever" is, if the call becomes necessary, you call Microsoft and say you had <xx> version installed but the motherboard died on you, now you've rebuilt the machine and the old key was activated on the hardware. You're not ripping anyone off; you paid for Vista so you're just asking for another key which is acceptable.

If you purchase the OEM System Builder edition, either 32 or 64 bit, they might give you some grief because those keys are supposed to be tied down to one installation on one machine forever, but even so, if that machine died (bad mobo being the most likely reason for a rebuild), you'd still end up calling for a key. Again, they might give you some hassle on the phone, but in my experience and reading the experiences of others, most people when calling just say "My mobo died and I had to reinstall" and they get a new key in a few minutes, done.

It's not as hard as it might seem, so, if you need to ask for a new key to continue using your purchased Vista, the option is there.

Hope this helps...

[PanzerKrieg13]

Well, I went out to BestBuy and dropped $400 and change on Windows Vista Ultimare (full version w/ 32-bit and 64-bit DVD's). Performance comes at a price. But I do hate to spend that kind of money, especially considering this will be used on a new laptop (+ accessories) I just dropped nearly $2,000 for.

That said, since this is not OEM, I hope no problems will arise if I chose to wipe the drive and install 32-bit. But I will be installing the 64-bit DVD here in a few moments on a freshly wiped drive.

Also note this being used on a laptop, so the whole "motherboard died and rebuilt it" won't work, though I can claim the laptop was sent in for service and arrived repaired. I don't I will need to go that far however, if Vista activation is anything like XP (which I hope it is).

Side note: I hate using a new operating system. I've gotten to the point of self-proclaimed expert via XP, and I feel like such a "newb" using Vista. Argh!

SemperFi,
- Joey

[bbz_Ghost]

Don't use the key. :)

That's my advice. Install Vista x64 and don't use the key. When it asks for the key, uncheck the box that says "Activate when online" and then press Next. Vista's installer will pop up a box about "Yadda yadda yadda strongly recommend you put in the key now yadda yadda yadda." Just click No - not Yes, you have to click No on the popup - and the next screen will/should list all the available editions. Choose Ultimate or whatever version you actually DID purchase and then click Next, and continue from there.

Not entering the key will give you a "grace period" of 30 days usage without needing to activate which locks down that key to that installation permanently.

That's 30 days to use Vista x64 and find out what the dealio is. If you don't like it, you can wipe and reinstall Vista x86 32 bit and see what the dealio is there also. Once you're satisfied of your choice, THEN you input the key where necessary (Press Windows + Pause to get the System Properties up, that's where you can enter/change a Product Key) and then activate with it.

Good luck...

ps
Doesn't necessarily have to be "my mobo died," but "a virus wiped out my system" or something else. It's a little white lie, yes, but you did pay for the OS - both versions, hence using the "grace period" to figure out which one you wish to stick with. Sorry I didn't mention that aspect before.

[PanzerKrieg13]

That's actually a good idea. Something I did not think about, nor did I know you had the option to either not enter the key or activate it upon installation. Very cool. I will give that a try.

That said, I checked out the Asus website and went to the downloads section for my particular laptop model and I did find nearly all (if not all) hardware is (or should be) supported under Vista x64, thus not providing me with too much BS I have to shovel while getting this blasted contraption to work...

Thanks for the tips. I will also borrow some of those tweaks and tips you provided links for.

Oh, and shifting back to a comment you made in a previous post, I have bad mouthed Vista, for example this quote from another thread on another forum:


What the f%%k is with Vista? Who made the decision this operating system was finished and ready to be released? And who made the decision to not include XP as an option for default operating system?


I suppose frustration and admitted Vista ignorance don't mix. Anyway, wish me luck on yet another Vista adventure.

SemperFi,
- Joey

[bbz_Ghost]

The extra cool side benefit of Vista x64?

Everything for Vista, be it hardware or software, that comes with the "Made for Windows Vista" logo or sticker or some branding with the actual Microsoft Vista logo on it MUST have full compatibility for Vista 32 bit and 64 bit versions.

Ain't that cool?

It's a new thing that Microsoft finally put in stone, so to speak. To get the logo/product certification either for hardware or software so the "Made for Windows Vista" seal/logo/sticker can be attached, the products MUST pass 32 bit and 64 bit compatibility testing from Microsoft itself. Drivers, software, hardware, etc... it's all gotta pass to get that privileged logo or sticker.

This makes the logo certification a lot more complicated now but, in the long run it works out better for the consumer because it means the stuff has been properly tested and Microsoft gives it a thumbs up or it doesn't get the logo on it at all.

So, any new hardware and any new software that's been released since Vista hit store shelves at the end of January this year will be logo certified by Microsoft for both 32 bit and 64 bit versions. No worries... you're covered.

I'm curious what laptop you purchased, if you can offer than info, and what Vista came with it which was probably Home Premium.

Thanks...

ps
It's relatively easy to change the default boot OS on a dual boot machine in Vista. Same way you do it in XP, actually. System Properties - Advanced - Startup and Recovery - Settings - Default OS. Simple.

[PanzerKrieg13]

Little update. I got Vista Ultimate installed. I have not really gotten around to tweaking it or installing any applications, just getting the drivers installed and updated, and getting Windows updates taken care of. But I will say this, I am very happy and very pleased thus far. It moves far faster and much smoother than Home Premium supplied by Asus. It's using a fraction of the memory with fewer services. I can't wait to get this tweaked and get all of my applications installed.

Note #1. I used the x64 64-bit version. I am very pleased. All of the hardware seems to work and drivers were not a problem. And only one of them gave me a warning, but probably because it's a modified video card driver for my laptop w/ a modified inf file. Looks like I will use this x64 version for a while and if all continues to go well, I will activate it.

I do have one problem though. I am not getting any sound from my X-Fi Audio Notebook card. I have the proper Vista drivers installed, and Vista seems to find the device "working properly." In addition, my default onboard audio is disabled and thus no device drivers installed. I also configured Vista just a bit to see if I could get the card working, but no luck yet. Not sure why.

Thanks for your help. Much appreciated. I feel a lot better and I'm happy to get this working. Now just hope the sound is my only problem and I'm looking forward to continuing my Vista adventures.

Note #2. I bought an Asus F3SV-B3 laptop that came with Vista Home Premium. Supplied by Asus and modified by Asus with their garbage and horrible programming.

SemperFi,
- Joey

[bbz_Ghost]

More than likely the issues you're having with audio are related to how Vista works with sound devices now. Microsoft, in its infinite wisdom (yeah, right, what a crock) decided to dump DirectSound, the very basis for Windows audio for the past 10 years or so since DirectX really first appeared. The effect is obvious: sound devices just don't work quite the way they used to.

One other aspect of this is the inclusion of a driver that follows a structure that Intel helped created the architecture for called UAA - Unified Audio Architecture. This is supposed to make things easier, but as you've probably discovered without even realizing it, the stuff just trips over itself and becomes more complicated than necessary.

There's a UAA driver from Intel that typically needs to be installed, then there's a UAA driver from Microsoft that goes on after that, and then your "normal" audio device drivers. It's a tricky bitch to get working, really, and it's the only aspect of Vista x64 that gave me any grief whatsoever last year (about 1 year ago exactly) with a Gateway Core 2 Duo laptop I had purchased. The Sigmatel soundchip on it needed that Intel UAA driver, then the Microsoft UAA driver, and then I had to hand modify the damned .inf files because Gateway didn't want people using that laptop with any 64 bit OS at the time.

Vista wasn't out just yet last November - Vista Business was, but that wasn't something Gateway messed with. So I had to hand modify the .inf driver files I found for the Sigmatel 64 bit drivers, and it was a total pooch screw I assure you. Took me like 2 days of trying till I actually got it working, with help from someone over at the PlanetAMD64 forums - that's a true wealth of information over there about 64 bit code, applications, software, drivers, etc. You name it, a far greater resource for 64 bit related info than this place is overall.

So, it'll take a bit of work but you'll get it up and running soon enough.

Good to see you're having fun with it...

[haggy]

Glad I decided to read posts instead of asking the same question.

I just wanted to say Thanks BBZ and Panzer - I had the exact same question and the response by bbz was perfect.

I am in the process of building my new machine - almost every part bought off this forum haha. I was not sure what the benefits were to running with 64 and this helped a lot. I am looking forward to my items showing up this week so I can put it all together and see how it runs.

I did have one other question - If I decide to do Raid0 (I have heard it is a good performance increase) - Will Vista Ultimate recognize this at install or do you need to load drivers from a floppy? I am using a Asus Striker Extreme board if that matters.

Thanks for any help!!

[bbz_Ghost]

I'll be flat out honest with you, right here and now (and people call me rude because I am typically so blunt, but whatever):

Forget messing with RAID 0.

Seriously.

It's not worth the time to set it up (usually takes a few seconds, but even so...). It's not worth the additional risk involved (if 1 bit gets out of place, the entire RAID 0 array is pooched, period). And it's not as much of a performance booster as most people would like to believe.

You are far better off getting 2 or more hard drives, preferably something really fast in terms of STR (sustained transfer rate), low access times, and lots of space if that's what you want. The Western Digital Raptors are still the kings of the hard drive world from the Joe Average, consumer that happens to own a computer, perspective. The performance is simply unmatchable by any other drives on the market today. I just made a post here:

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?p=1031710143#post1031710143

that might make it easier to understand why the Raptor is the king right now, so take a read if you can spare a minute or two. Yes, putting two Raptors in RAID 0 will give you a serious boost in speed on read operations but in the long run, and because of the inherent risks involved with RAID 0 just to get a few more bytes per second, the general recommendation is: don't do it. Just keep the Raptors separate, and configure them the right way (a pagefile on each drive is considered optimal, size depends on the amount of RAM you have) and then you'll get a quick, fast, highly responsive system with nearly zero risk for data loss.

Why take the chance for 1 bit out of place? It only takes 1 bit to go wrong, flip the wrong way, and literally you could lose every byte of data on the array. I'm going extreme there, but that's because I end up being the kind of person that gets called out at oddball hours of the day and night to fix someone's machine that crapped out after I suggested they not build a RAID 0 box and they did it anyway. Guess it doesn't matter: just means they're having to pay me twice for the job. :)

Here's an article I think anyone that is interested in RAID 0 should read. It's intelligent, well written, and the guy that wrote it has a financial stake in a company (he owns it) that builds boutique PCs for people, and one of the most requested options is RAID 0. He explains why he prefers to not build boxes with RAID 0, and I agree with him 100% across the board. It's just not worth it.

Why RAID is (usually) a Terrible Idea (http://www.pugetsystems.com/articles.php?id=29)

But as always, RAID is up to you. It's your hardware, so do as you wish with it. Yes you can eek out a few more percentage points in performance, games will load a tad faster, read operations a bit quicker, but that always looming possibility of everything getting blown away like a house of cards in a tornado is a good reason to just set up a clean, smooth, and optimized system using no RAID at all. RAID 1, for mirroring, is awesome if you have data and a system that simply has to work. RAID 5 or some other derivative if necessary too, but RAID 0? No way in hell I'd ever use it on my hardware.

Hope this helps...

ps
As long as Vista can detect the RAID controller on the motherboard (you might need to load the controller drivers on a floppy, a CD/DVD, or a USB stick before you go through with the installation), then yes it will work with the controller just fine.

pss
And welcome to the [H]ardForum to you too, haggy.

psss
Read the comments in the forum from that RAID article also at: http://forums.pugetsystems.com/showthread.php?t=2486 - a lot more discussion and useful info and opinions there also.

[haggy]

Damn BBZ - That was more than I could have hoped for - Thanks.

After reading those articles I have to think it is not worth it, especially since I do not truly need it and I was not looking forward to getting two new hard drives matched up for the function. I can stick with my current drive and put that money towards the video card I wanted to get.

Thanks for the welcome as well - I have been around for a little over a year in the For Sale section since it is possibly the best place on the net to buy quality used parts at a good price - and you rarely, if ever, have to worry about a bad description or faulty product.

[PanzerKrieg13]

Well, I have some good news. Last night I played around for a bit and finally got audio to work from the X-Fi audio notebook card, but only using headphones. I have yet to figure out linking the card to my built in speakers, but the information about the UAA drivers might solve the problem. I'll try and get those going tonight. Thanks again. Vista Ultimate and 64-bit combination are proving to be a bit impressive and I'm having some fun exploring the inner workings of this OS. I'm also happy to be using my laptop, I don't want a $2,000 paperweight.

@ Haggy: I think Vista should recognize any RAID configuration due to the drivers that didn't exist in previous versions like Windows XP now being included. In Windows XP, I always have to use a driver(s) on a floppy disk in order to setup a RAID config. This PC, now a spare/back-up, has been running a RAID-0 config with two Raptor drives for years now.

That said, thanks to BBZ for the information regarding RAID. Very interesting. I once wrote a lengthy paper on RAID technology, I will have to try and dig it up somewhere.

BTW: As I continue to experiment and explore, I see this thread lasting awhile and covering more subjects not yet discussed. Perhaps off-topic in regards to the thread title, but whatever.

Thanks,
- Joey

[Finn]

Bbz is right, raid 0 is generally a bad idea and probably more so with Vista. We've all seen how screwed up the I/O is.