My Vista Ultimate Experience

F

ferrisnox

Gawd
Joined
Oct 11, 2004
Messages
775
I was a beta tester of Vista and still run rc2 on my Turion laptop. The laptop does okay, but I figured Vista would surely run really well to pretty well on my desktop.

XP screams on my desktop. While Vista Ultimate, I just found myself waiting, lots of HD grinding. I mean aero is nice looking, but not at the cost it is selling for and the performance its taking from my system.

Long story short I re-imaged my xp install and I am back to a blissful speed. I'm sure as they release patches, improve drivers etc... hopefully really tweaking it; performance will improve. For me personally it is just not a suitable operating system. I didn't try turning off aero to see if that helped but I may have to in the future.

Athlon 64x2 4600+
1.00Gig Dual channel Ram
74Gig Raptor 10,000rpm
Geforce 7600GS PCI-E
 
The initial hard drive activity is Vista using indexing to move things around, speed up your access next boot, and defragmenting.....etc.

It will get less as it is used, or you can turn indexing off.


And really, Vista runs better with 2gb of ram for the "best" experience.....2gb is kinda the new standard anyways....
 
i noticed that too, but after a few days all seems good to go.. i like it, i find it hard to dual boot. tho the drivers need updated, dam...
 
yeah you definitely should go with 2 gigs...that's what i'm running and vista ultimate 32 bit flys on my comp..it def. loads fast than xp pro...i'm also thinking about upgrading to 4 gigs of ram by the summer...and a new processor...seeing as how s939 cpu prices are dropping every month...
 
Indexing was turned off : ) I don't ever leave it on, so I'll have to pick some more ram and give it another shot.... I"ll wait till the drivers mature some more though. I honestly thought they would have much better drivers by now, since it went to business in November. They should have had a lot more done in terms of drivers, Vista Ultimate extras' and some of these stupid security issues like the voice command problem.
 
that voice command problem will probably only ever affect like .000001 people.... I mean really, its such a BS "flaw", I LOL'ed when i read abt it yesterday.

Seriously, its like saying "omg!! someone might be able to throw an egg at my new toyota, damn you toyota!!!11!!
 
Its not how many people the flaws affect, its how many damn strapon patches and bs you end up having to install. Plus the fact that over 5 million people we inovled in the beta testing, there should be little to bugs left, just updating of drivers and the new bugs they create. But I agree not a big one....but lets see how many more creap up:cool:
 
As an update, I picked up another gig of ram for a total of 2gig, and it is much much better. The difference is pretty profound. So I would say that people are not kidding when they say that 2gig is the minimum for decent performance.

Also in reply to the Linux !!!!!!. I have tried linux, we pretty much all have and while its an interesting product so is a nipple piercing but that doesn't do you any good either.
Linux needs to get its shit together if it wants to take on Windows. Its fine as business/server, but a workstation os it is not. There is a reason 90% of the population use windows, and its not a bandwagon thing... it just works. Linux is not there yet, but Kubunu is getting close.</close-rant>
 
ferrisnox said:
Linux needs to get its shit together if it wants to take on Windows. Its fine as business/server, but a workstation os it is not. There is a reason 90% of the population use windows, and its not a bandwagon thing... it just works. Linux is not there yet, but Kubunu is getting close.</close-rant>
Click to expand...



Exactly. WELL SAID.
 
Linux will never be competition for Windows, so why people keep seeming to think it will is beyond me. Getting its shit together might be a nice idea, but it's simply not going to happen in the long run. Why? Head over to distrowatch.com sometime and scroll down the page.

That's why.

It's too fractured, too many distros, too complicated to use effectively, oh I could go on and on, but we've all heard this countless times before.

If it was one company with one product that supported it strongly and offered it for a good price, and they made it not only more usable but more useful all around, then yes, a Linux distro might have a chance. As it is, none of them do, and none of them ever will.

</off_topic>
 
bbz_Ghost said:
Linux will never be competition for Windows, so why people keep seeming to think it will is beyond me. Getting its shit together might be a nice idea, but it's simply not going to happen in the long run. Why? Head over to distrowatch.com sometime and scroll down the page.

That's why.

It's too fractured, too many distros, too complicated to use effectively, oh I could go on and on, but we've all heard this countless times before.

If it was one company with one product that supported it strongly and offered it for a good price, and they made it not only more usable but more useful all around, then yes, a Linux distro might have a chance. As it is, none of them do, and none of them ever will.

</off_topic>
Click to expand...

True, there is too many distro, that make confusion to occasionally user (basic) but those day 3 come to the friendly windows is : Ubuntu, Open Suse, Fedora Core. The other (in my opinion for a specific user for a specific usage. But no doubt that Ubuntu ( Debian ) is one of the famous most used and gain popularity fast. Linux community doesn't want to be competitive with windows, but want to offer a free alternative to OS. And the reason that is not very popular its because its too complicated to install, manage, upgrade hardware driver , supported driver for new user, but once you get it , you want some more. But again its a matter of time that hardware distributor have fully support driver for linux dist. Also without gaming experience os its hard to mutate to a Os that doesn't really go well with gaming. But they need to stop to make tons of distribution that have some special feature that is worthless anyway if they want to gain popularity.
 
there are foudnatinos being setup to standardize many, many aspects of Linux.....

and as much as I defend MS, I would love it if Vista pushed many enthusiasts to Linux...it is a great platform if you take the time to learn it, and if more people down the knowledge chain pick it up, it is only a matter of time before the usability factor gets even better for it...

because seriously, we all know damn well that the world would be a much better place if the OS that ran 99% of all computers was open source, stable, robust, very easy to use, etc. If Linux was the #1 OS, most applications would be written for it, and at that point, it would become th silver bullet to everyone's OS needs....

one day, I hope, it will get there....

but until then, you guys are right, it aint there yet....
 
I am running Ultimate as well and it is DAMN FAST.

Boots faster than my MCE 2005 and it feels faster since it is Multi Core aware.

I don't like the folder browsing options or the search fields, but aero is very cool, the sidebar is awesome...


So far, I like it...
 
Yes, it does require more memory. This is a "modern" (bloated) OS, after all, loaded to the gills with (unnecessary) features designed to (de)stabilize and (com)promise (actual) security.

And since digital rights management is now the single most important function in your Vista-equipped computer, you'll need more CPU cores as well. (More cores compensate for the theft of previously-available resources.) But your content is more secure, right?

Actually, it's so secure that in some cases it can't be used at all...anymore.
 
inscape01 said:
<delete> don't want to start a flame war over ignorant comments.
Click to expand...

qft


my girlfriend has been running home premium on a Sempron @ 2.4ghz and with 2GB of ram, and for at least 1 whole minute after boot the whole system is very, very, goddamn slow and choppy, but after it settles, it is faast. The 2GB really make things load fast, everything is pretty much instantaneous because of the superfetch.

On her integrated Geforce 6100, Aero is buttery smooth too.

So yea, Vista's requirements aren't THAT bad. Really nothing an OEM computer from the last 2 years can't handle, and anything from the past year-now will just run it flawlessly.

And of course, ANYTHING with a discreet gfx card and 1GB of memory is good to go in every sense of the word
 
That 1 minute period where things are a bit choky (is that a word? :p) is where SuperFetch is retrieving the necessary information from the previous run and repopulating the RAM with that data to make that machine as fast as you say it is.

This is perfectly normal operation for Vista. The thing that most people do - and I'm not pointing fingers here - is to install Vista and then watch the RAM usage, watch the hard drive usage, and for the first day or so focus primarily on that and not much else in terms of performance.

Once they get past that, and use it for a day through the first week or so, all that stuff becomes a lot less relevant as the system smooths itself out and gets into a rhythm - seriously. Vista has it's own little way of doing things: it's self-tuning like no other OS has ever been, and it takes roughly a week of daily usage to normalize that routine to the point of stuff happening when you want it to.

bruce: I'm curious about that Geforce 6100 onboard video. I've got a chance to get an Athlon64 3800+ and a mobo with that video onboard today for a new machine. Can you tell me what the Aero score is for that setup, it's part of the Windows Experience score, it'll be the one in the middle.

Also, the 3D scores would be nice to see, but I'd guess they're going to be pretty low overall. But the Aero score is what I'm really interested in since I won't be adding a proper discrete video card anytime soon. Thanks...
 
ferrisnox said:
I was a beta tester of Vista and still run rc2 on my Turion laptop. The laptop does okay, but I figured Vista would surely run really well to pretty well on my desktop.

XP screams on my desktop. While Vista Ultimate, I just found myself waiting, lots of HD grinding. I mean aero is nice looking, but not at the cost it is selling for and the performance its taking from my system.

Long story short I re-imaged my xp install and I am back to a blissful speed. I'm sure as they release patches, improve drivers etc... hopefully really tweaking it; performance will improve. For me personally it is just not a suitable operating system. I didn't try turning off aero to see if that helped but I may have to in the future.

Athlon 64x2 4600+
1.00Gig Dual channel Ram
74Gig Raptor 10,000rpm
Geforce 7600GS PCI-E
Click to expand...

When I first installed I wasn't very happy with performance either. Everything definately took longer to start and run. I decided to give it time. After a few days of use and allowing it to do a defrag etc, things improved. It seems to take a day or two for Superfetch, readyboost, and defrag to tune things up. Now the HD isn't being hit nearly as often as it was for the first couple of days. Startup is now similar to what it was under XP for me. (fast) and my games and apps are starting up a bit faster than they did under XP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top