We haven’t been through a week of Vista’s retail release, and already folks are looking forward to the next version of Windows. The article also brings up the interesting point that Microsoft isn’t really competing against Apple or Linux, the new version of Windows is competing against XP, and a good reason for average users to upgrade.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Windows Vista Down
- Thread starter Rich Tate
- Start date
LstBrunnenG
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2003
- Messages
- 6,676
I love how in the same sentence there's a complaint about how the OS was delayed and about how they released the OS before drivers could be written.
The way I see it, either the OS was late or the developers were blindsided. Let's face it, RTM was 3-4 months ago.
The way I see it, either the OS was late or the developers were blindsided. Let's face it, RTM was 3-4 months ago.
I am using Vista right now on my Laptop. It takes longer to start/shutdown comapred to XP and it uses 315 megs on a clean install versus 110 megs for XP. I did get it to 249 megs after I disabled a ton of stuff and I am using Classic View. I knew it was bad when it uses 211 megs in safe mode. BTW: These numbers are before I install anything. Also, ATI Tray Tools doesn't work in Vista
FromTheLou
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2006
- Messages
- 1,118
And somehow this is Microsofts fault?
Team Obi Juan
Your Local Postmaster
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2005
- Messages
- 23,276
vista automatically uses more ram, instead of letting it just sit there, wasted
The OS can do more, so naturally it's going to use more ram. Plus this is 2007, 1gb has been the recommanded amount of ram for years and 2gb the enthusiats level.
If you feel like you're running out of ram, there's readyboost feature where you can plug in a usb flash stick and it'll act as a better/faster virtual memory.
But you got 1gb of memory, what are you going to do with that if not Windows? Games? You don't have enough to fully load BF2 or other high end games, only partial and the rest virtual memory. So there's no difference if windows takes up 250mb or 500mb.
On XP I get up to 400-500mb just surfing, filesharing, good background programs, e-mail, word, burning, etc. I've done the same things on Vista RTM and it's only like 100mb more.
I hope we don't fall into a Black Viper age again, it's useless to turn windows features off, you're not saving anything, not even battery life, ram gets the same voltage always. Just enjoy the features.
Interesting article. I remember talking to the IT guy for the college at my univ. and he said they wouldn't be transitioning to Vista for a while. Then I remember reading that the next OS from MS would be around 2012. Then I thought, uh, so you like buy it for a few years use? I guess these universities wait around until it all is pretty good.
Only gripes I have about vista are ...
a. None of the gadgets have any value
1.1 Tried to get slide show gadget to browse a SMB share on OS X and it can't
1.2 Tried to get the weather gadget to find my zip. I found a city 100 miles away.
b. Sure, drivers will be hard to find initially.
c. I remember reading the speedfan blog and the dev there can't even find out how to setup a digital siginature for his 64 bit vista builds.
Whatever, at least it looks pretty
Only gripes I have about vista are ...
a. None of the gadgets have any value
1.1 Tried to get slide show gadget to browse a SMB share on OS X and it can't
1.2 Tried to get the weather gadget to find my zip. I found a city 100 miles away.
b. Sure, drivers will be hard to find initially.
c. I remember reading the speedfan blog and the dev there can't even find out how to setup a digital siginature for his 64 bit vista builds.
Whatever, at least it looks pretty
If you're going through that much BS to use Vista, stick with XP. Vista isn't XP, and unless you give it time - meaning installing it and using it instead of worrying so much about "making it more like XP" then you simply don't have any ground to stand on.
Doing what you're doing to Vista by stripping it down, so to speak, and trying to make it like XP is equivalent to buying a Ferrari, taking off the body and then dropping a Ford Grenada body on top of the chassis.
I spent nearly two decades worried about performance well past the point of extremes, and I can do it better than most when it comes to tweaking and optimizing. Give me the best machine Falcon Northwest, Alienware, VoodooPC, or any other boutique computer maker can produce and I'll make it 20% faster in 30 mins, guaranteed.
But at some point you have to stop doing that shit or it'll drive you insane. You have to actually use the computer and not let it become the focus of the never-ending and infinite quest for "the next .01% boost" that so many people never seem to get. I always ask:
"How fast is fast?"
because I can always make it faster; the question is: why bother if the machine is still idle 95% of the time, save for running a distributed computing application that uses idle cycles for something?
Do yourself a favor and just install Vista and be done with it. Over time you'll get to a point where all the past stuff disappears and you suddenly get it... "Ok, now it makes sense" and then you're home free.
As for the ATI Tray Tools, that's ATI's fault, not Microsoft's, and certainly not Vista's. It's this kind of statement that gets people into trouble since it has no basis to work from.
I like Vista. I love the new Media Center, even if it is mostly just added bling. My 360 extender works great. I got two HD and two analog tuners in the machine and it handles them all.
Vista's decent built in volume stripe feature meant I coulld finally get three drives on raid0, since the intel controller would only allow two drives per stripe set. It was SIMPLE to configure compared to futzing with some text base BIOS BS.
As to perf? It records tons of TV to the 1TB stripe set and plays it back reliably and smoothly. DVDs look great. MKV and assorted other containers play fine with halii and ffdshow installed. Even vsfilter works great, which shocked me.
Personally I'm surprised it's as good looking and as stable as it is giving the foot-dragging on the part of the hardware community with drivers. By the behavior from the likes of nvidia and ati you'd think Vista just came out of nowhere and blindsided them.
Vista's decent built in volume stripe feature meant I coulld finally get three drives on raid0, since the intel controller would only allow two drives per stripe set. It was SIMPLE to configure compared to futzing with some text base BIOS BS.
As to perf? It records tons of TV to the 1TB stripe set and plays it back reliably and smoothly. DVDs look great. MKV and assorted other containers play fine with halii and ffdshow installed. Even vsfilter works great, which shocked me.
Personally I'm surprised it's as good looking and as stable as it is giving the foot-dragging on the part of the hardware community with drivers. By the behavior from the likes of nvidia and ati you'd think Vista just came out of nowhere and blindsided them.