FabricioGS Posted November 26, 2006 Share Posted November 26, 2006 Twice as much for overclocked systems. Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe75 Posted November 26, 2006 Share Posted November 26, 2006 Viper.Br, hard drives tend to fragment faster when overclocking, it just happens It can be from many things, poor drives, improper clock speeds, wrong settings in bios.... it just happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VN Man Posted November 27, 2006 Author Share Posted November 27, 2006 OK now it's time to play (NOT PLAY AS IN GAMES).... GUI looks good, I like this 3D ALT-TAB.... Now the "new" Nero version works....WOW What a backup speed.... Office 2007 now looks more user friendly than ever, this should takes a loads of work of support people, i.e. no more "how do I do this..."...... Jus got my hands on the demo DELL's RDX, GREAT Product, backup whole Vista mchine on ONE Removable "HARD DISK" cartridge....AND The speed is quite good at around 1128MB/Min....I still miss out of the box support for Tape Drive though, shame that MS drop built-in backup program that utilize tape drive.... In my opinion tapes is very good for archive, you can acidentally drop a tape and there would be no damage the same cannot be said of HARD DISK..... OK now it's time to play (NOT PLAY AS IN GAMES).... GUI looks good, I like this 3D ALT-TAB.... Now the "new" Nero version works....WOW What a backup speed.... Office 2007 now looks more user friendly than ever, this should takes a loads of work of support people, i.e. no more "how do I do this..."...... Jus got my hands on the demo DELL's RDX, GREAT Product, backup whole Vista mchine on ONE Removable "HARD DISK" cartridge....AND The speed is quite good at around 1128MB/Min....I still miss out of the box support for Tape Drive though, shame that MS drop built-in backup program that utilize tape drive.... In my opinion tapes is very good for archive, you can acidentally drop a tape and there would be no damage the same cannot be said of HARD DISK..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustBrowsing Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 As for the RAM issue, Vista isn't XP, and it's better than XP in many ways, most notably the RAM usage. Right now I've got 1.7 of 2GB of RAM in use with several apps running, and this Vista Ultimate 64 machine isn't slowing down - it's actually getting faster. Try loading up an XP machine with 1.7 of 2GB used and watch it choke like a dauchsund trying to chow down a T-Rex thighbone. Before you start spouting off about how much Vista sucks or how bad the RAM usage is, it'll do you well to go find out exactly why Vista uses RAM differently. For so many years now, Windows operating systems haven't managed RAM worth anything, and now that's all about to change with Vista's release. Vista doesn't let your unused RAM just sit there, it puts it to use, constantly, all the time, caching data you've not only used recently but in anticipation of using such data in the future, hence the "massive RAM usage" people are complaining about. You really sound like a Microsoft representative there ... just hope you know that ... you might be fine with Vista eating loads of RAM ... however many people (as I am) am not. I've heard that it's suppossed to do that, and it's perfectly normal for Windows Vista to just chow down on RAM. You might be fine with it, but me and many others (possibly on this messageboard....) am not. I think it's absolutely ridiculous the idea of "caching" RAM and using it constantly. While Vista is pretty; it's a massive dissapointment from the world's largest software manufacturer to make something as inefficient as Vista is. While both my desktop and laptop can run it fine, (laptop can't run Aero -- like many of the 1+ year old notebooks out there...) I really can't see myself using the Operating System. I'll stick with Windows XP; as it seems to be fine, and use Ubuntu on laptop and OSX on the desktop. While your reasoning might be completely correct - I can't say I'm buying what MS wants everyone to believe. I can't believe anyone would believe just using ALL the RAM possible is actually considered better management? WTF. Just my ... I know you won't agree .. but whatever .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
br0adband Posted November 30, 2006 Share Posted November 30, 2006 It's not a question of me agreeing with you, or you agreeing with me: the simple fact of the matter is (regardless of my thoughts or yours) Vista isn't an idle OS, period. If you do a bunch of the same stuff over and over again, as many people do - using the same photo editing software, open and close the same apps during the course of a day instead of leaving them open constantly as many people do, then Vista is going to watch that, it's going to learn your patterns of usage and then adapt itself to those patterns of usage and tune itself to work better and faster for you. I'm not a Microsoft rep, I just know how the OS works better than a great many people that just offer opinions based on what they may have read or what they've seen in a review here and there. I've put it through its paces of late, testing everything from top to bottom. Right now the testing is focusing on ReadyBoost and whether it's actually doing anything. It's easy for Microsoft to say "It makes your machine faster," but I've been doing this tweaking/optimization stuff for 20 years; just because someone says "It makes your machine faster" means jack {censored} to me until I can prove it for myself. So far, there's nothing out there that can take ReadyBoost into consideration when it comes to any noticeable performance improvement using it over not using it. It is a better OS underneath, a much better OS than XP was at its release, and that's really the gist of all this: People are bitching and whining about Vista which isn't even out yet in almost exactly the same ways they complained about XP when it came out. "It's pretty, but..." "It uses too much RAM..." "I can't afford a new video card just to run this bloated OS..." "What was Microsoft thinking..." etc etc ad nauseum. Same arguments, same pointless debates. Just think what things might be like 5 years from now when Vista is at the point in it's lifespan where XP is now and what Microsoft will come out with next. Then we'll be doing this all over again. The way I explain the RAM usage is like this: if you had a Ferrarri, and you never drove it over 55 MPH, that's an awful waste of potential, ain't it? I mean, knowing you've got several hundred horses under the hood just waiting to tear loose and show you what it can do, and never flooring it... what a waste. That's XP and all the old versions of Windows. Potential in the form of improved file system caching, improved data I/O operations, improved application performance, etc. Vista is the Ferrarri with Enzo himself behind the wheel just merging onto the Autobahn. Stand back and watch it fly... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REVENGE Posted November 30, 2006 Share Posted November 30, 2006 XP had some prefetching implemented, but Vista takes this to some new extremes with superfetching. Now, as for using up loads of RAM, I'm just curious as to how many of us who use Vista will actually have this become a major performance problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FabricioGS Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 It's not a question of me agreeing with you, or you agreeing with me: the simple fact of the matter is (regardless of my thoughts or yours) Vista isn't an idle OS, period. I´ve been testing Vista build after build and I must agree with you. Honestly I´m fed up with it. I´ll wait 4-6 months 'till have some good drivers and at least a major Service Pack or something. Right now I can´t abando XP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murcielago585 Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 you can stop with your "not yet" bs now because Vista is now a commercialproduct, starting today it officially ships to business'. Haha, its just funny to see most of you talking with your "not yet" spoken like true microsoft praiser. I am running the same version that is afficially out to business customers so saying it isn;t ready and we can;t judge from non-retail version is {censored}, start pulling out your butt-plugs because it is. Microsoft should have worked much harder to make vista a fast transition, you can;t say your os is out november 30th and still have many compatibility issues with software and drivers. Think of what apple did, switching from PPC to intel came before anybody would expect and with an excellent solution to their compatibility issues with rosetta. I'm jsut trying to say, make your excuses, have your fun, still a shatty os. http://www.engadget.com/2006/11/30/microso...vista-business/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bptba93 Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 on this ram issue...doesn't mac os x do the same exact thing?...sigh... an another of apple's operating system copied into the overloaded vista.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VN Man Posted December 1, 2006 Author Share Posted December 1, 2006 That is what I am trying to say when I start this topic. No backward compatibilities means less sales.... There are not many people willing to do the upgrade to Vista and on top of that have to pay for all their other software upgrades to make it fully work as in their OLD XP... I make a mention of Apple Rosetta and nobody make a slight bit of notice to that....I mean if Apple can do it then I am sure Microsoft can do it too (it is the same platform after all...albeit 32/64 bits)... "Not Yet"...OK maybe "Not Yet" fully support ALL Hardware but "Not Yet" on software is just BS... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
br0adband Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 Well it seems intelligence loses out again to "the quick fix." But whatever. Just because Vista is shipping in Business editions doesn't mean it's ready for prime time yet. ATI and Nvidia aren't going to put out real drivers anytime soon, either, and for anyone getting Business to play games, well, there's that intelligence hard at work again, eh? And that's all most people give a flying {censored} about anyway: "How fast does it play <xxx>?" My points are still valid just as they were when I made them. As for the RAM issue, Vista releases RAM if the system realizes an application needs it, it's that simple. If you'd just spend some time reading various sites or FAQs about Vista, you might learn something about how it works and why it's better than all previous versions of Windows. bb on this ram issue...doesn't mac os x do the same exact thing?...sigh... an another of apple's operating system copied into the overloaded vista.... That copying thing goes back a long long way. Consider that Apple didn't just create OS X out of thin air in a weekend of drinking and eating pizza, like another poster just implied. Apple had been working on OS X using a BSD code base since mid-1999; it took years to make it work as well as it does now. It's not a "Point, Click, New OS" thing, it took a lot of effort to change over to an entirely "new" platform even though Unix isn't "new" by any meaning of the word. Again, reading is fundamental - you can learn a lot about Macs and OS X and how it came to be if you spend some time doing research. There is almost nothing original about OS X nor Vista, nor any other computer operating system that exists on the planet today, Linux distros included. It's all been copied, changed, recopied, mutated, copied yet again, and regurgitated over and over. The guy that is the one person most directly responsible for today's graphical user interface actually came up with the idea in the early 1960's and then tossed the original concept sketches into a desk drawer till he went to work at Xerox PARC years later. When he opened the drawer again and decided to try and make it real, a short time later Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak came by for a visit, liked what they say, and the rest is history. bb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murcielago585 Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 I still don;t understand why there is so much reason to defend this os. First of all, as always i get my annoying pop-ups telling me just about everything vista feels like telling me at the bottom right. Evertime i want to install the slightest program i get my screen to freeze and make me allow the program to be used, i don;t need any warning to install a program without a any reason behind it, i wouldn't have wanted to install a program if i didn;t want to. As much as i love media center, and this is something microsoft has over apple, a big plus, still doesn't feel stable, especially with dvds and tv. I have many programs, to name two, limewire and vlc that feel the need to disable the aero glass, and again, I get another annoying warning for. The thing i love the most though has to be the random defragmenting vista likes to do, oh and you know when vista wants to defragment, you get teh beautiful scratching noise from you hd and everything seems to run about 500% slower, gotta love it. There are too many things to love, i can;t tell you about them all. ah, one of my favourites has be to that when i decide i don;t want to surf the net and want to close ie 7, i close it and get a nice box in the middle of the screen trying to figure out why the program unexpectedly shut down and asks me if i want to report it to my beloved microsoft. haha, still doesn;t know when i want to close a program which is supposed to work seemlessly anf for vista. This is almost boring me, but when i have more whining to do, i'll let you know. as much as this seems to be all minor problems, when these things happen all the time whith programs you use all the time, just shows how weak it really is. I don;t use it too often but i find it amusing just to see how successful microsoft has been and jsut to show why micosoft has delayed this os for us so we can experience and seemless and painless transistion from xp to vista. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
br0adband Posted December 3, 2006 Share Posted December 3, 2006 In all of that I didn't see one valid point, just a constant stream of whining about Vista which isn't even out yet - for Business customers it's now available, but from your stream there it's obvious that you use MCE and other multimedia features, so Business isn't for you. It's a new OS, and nothing you've said so far is any different than the stream of similar complaints and comments that appeared when Windows XP was first getting to public beta stages and well into the RC stage and then well into the RTM stage for almost 2 years before people finally said, "Ok, it's ok, no big deal, it runs ok." I'm not defending Vista, I'm merely blowing holes a mile wide in the ignorant comments people make about it that simply have no basis in fact and are drowned in personal opinions that are the problem. If you're bored with it, and you sure seem to be, stop running it. But at least do some research on why things work how they do in Vista, and then you'll have some ground to stand on. bb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollcage Posted December 3, 2006 Share Posted December 3, 2006 Evertime i want to install the slightest program i get my screen to freeze and make me allow the program to be used, i don;t need any warning to install a program without a any reason behind it, i wouldn't have wanted to install a program if i didn;t want to. osx does the same thing, only you have to enter your password too. it provides a major layer of security, because when software that you don't want tries to install, you can say no. I have many programs, to name two, limewire and vlc that feel the need to disable the aero glass, and again, I get another annoying warning for. that would be a problem with java, it's not MS's fault... The thing i love the most though has to be the random defragmenting vista likes to do, oh and you know when vista wants to defragment, you get teh beautiful scratching noise from you hd and everything seems to run about 500% slower, gotta love it. there's nothing randowm about the defragmentation, if you would look around, it is set to a schedule. change it or turn it off it it's interferring with your work. i don't think vista is the best thing ever, but it's not bad. as far as driver and program compatability problems go, it's not really MS's fault. people blaming MS for that stuff be like having blamed apple for adobe not releasing a ub of photoshop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobNyc Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 Just installed the latest release BillGates.RTM.Final have nothing bad to say about it . I haven't tried much things yet but just wanted to look into services and disable all them craps I dont need. I love it so far more efficient than xp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VN Man Posted December 4, 2006 Author Share Posted December 4, 2006 Well it seems intelligence loses out again to "the quick fix." But whatever. Just because Vista is shipping in Business editions doesn't mean it's ready for prime time yet. ATI and Nvidia aren't going to put out real drivers anytime soon, either, and for anyone getting Business to play games, well, there's that intelligence hard at work again, eh? And that's all most people give a flying {censored} about anyway: "How fast does it play <xxx>?" Did I ever talk about playing games If people do not understand the words "In The Games", maybe I need to re-phrase that... What I mean when I said that you have to buy extra programs (OR even upgrade the programs you have to be "Compatible" is just BS). Do you use "NTBackup", it is available since Windows ´98. Most SMB uses it to backup/archive their data, it is "missing" in Vista...OK we have backup to disk and DVD-ROM. How robust are those compare to tape.... OK you might say that OS X does not have "Backup Software" and "Time Machine" do only backup to disk. But since "NTBackup" is included from start why drop it now?? Granted Vista has many features "Build in", including "NFS Service",etc... useful for some.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe75 Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 Has anyone gotten down to 11 days until needing activation? Mine has said 11 days for the last 4 days and I have not tried any time cracks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobNyc Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 http://vista.kanateq.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tripleboot Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 Looking forward to my free copies of Windows Vista Business and Office 2007 Ya snooz ya loose..... http://www.powertogether.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
br0adband Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 It'll be March or even April before any of us actually get our Vista Business copies, but I ain't in no hurry... bb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Takuro Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 One thing I've noticed is that I haven't gotten any viruses in Vista yet. There haven't even been any prompts telling me something was blocked, like Norton Antivirus used to do. Either Vista's security is better, I've become smarter at avoiding malware, there aren't viruses specifically targeting Vista yet, or all of the above. Vista isn't so great at running XP apps it seems. XP definitely managed to run 95/98/ME software much more smoothly. However, part of me is actually happy about this. I've never been a fan of "backwards compatibility." Let's put it this way: if you keep looking behind you, it'll slow your progress forward. Microsoft should consider the mistakes and strong points of antiquated software, but they don't have to necessarily support it. A lot of visual effects are choppy, but everything is fast. Aside from very bad video drivers, which are in the hands of ATi and nVidia, I'd have to say Vista is pretty solid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDoggyca Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 I personly think they shoudl drop all backwords compadiblity MS woiuld free up somthing like 4 gig of code doing sooo.... instead jsut add Veurtal PC 2007 for a free downlaod to be able to install windows 98 and soo n with in vista so u can use there old program the way they were ment to be on the OS u have today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe75 Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 I personally think they should have full backward compatibility and it should be flawless form the actual OS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Takuro Posted December 11, 2006 Share Posted December 11, 2006 I personally think they should have full backward compatibility and it should be flawless form the actual OS Much easier said than done. Either new programs take a hit, or old programs take a hit. One or the other has to be held back to compensate. I rather drop old apps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
br0adband Posted December 11, 2006 Share Posted December 11, 2006 VirtualPC 2007 is currently in beta; is a free download for Connect members, which is free to sign up for; and it'll be a free download once the project is completed, Microsoft has already committed to giving it away for free. Soooo... be on the lookout for it, I'd guess it'll be done right around the time Vista is launched on January 30th, or sometime very soon thereafter. bb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts