[bobletman]

Alright guys as most of you have probably heard vista is coming out with a service pack during the first quarter of next year. So personally I think Vista is messed up beyond belief, Vista has compatability issues and uses up way to much performance and so on. Now M$ is claiming that they are fixing the compatability problems which I believe and they are also saying that they are gonna update vista so it uses less performance. I just want to hear someones opinion if vista would be more buyable after the 1st service pack.

[Advertisements]

you have to keep in mind most of the problems that vista has are caused by third party device drivers.

Most of the software vendors dont want to comform to microsoft driver creation rules(It cost them to much money, me thinks). Thus they make crappy drivers that dont support good process handling and proper thread operation in vista. That has been my big complaint so far. To keep track of some of the problems you find in vista or xp try using procmon by systernals. It makes some of the problems more visible. procexp is also a good tool for seeing more than taskman can.

The performance issue can be solved by turning off some of the extra features (eye candy).

BTW next gen of windows is veinna (did i spell that right?). So they already have bigger plans than vista. I heard (hear say) that it is going to be on a new type of file system also.

Edited by warrendubz, 16 October 2007 - 08:39 PM.

[warrendubz]

you have to keep in mind most of the problems that vista has are caused by third party device drivers.

Most of the software vendors dont want to comform to microsoft driver creation rules(It cost them to much money, me thinks). Thus they make crappy drivers that dont support good process handling and proper thread operation in vista. That has been my big complaint so far. To keep track of some of the problems you find in vista or xp try using procmon by systernals. It makes some of the problems more visible. procexp is also a good tool for seeing more than taskman can.

The performance issue can be solved by turning off some of the extra features (eye candy).

BTW next gen of windows is veinna (did i spell that right?). So they already have bigger plans than vista. I heard (hear say) that it is going to be on a new type of file system also.

Edited by warrendubz, 16 October 2007 - 08:39 PM.

[bobletman]

I find what you say is completely true and that you can turn off the a lot of the extra eye candy but what M$ claims is that they will be making it so that vista uses less ram and processing power. I mean vista idels at 1gig of ram which is outrageous at the moment. And i keep in mind that Xp had these exact same problems and I dont blame microsoft at all it is impossible to make a OP that is compatible with everythign but I believe that vista was released to early. I mean computer games in there system requirements now even have to put in seperate system requirements for vista because it uses way to much.

[bobletman]

Woops where it says OP i meant to say OS.

[PsychPosse]

I am just curious.. what processes are running when you say it is idleing at 1gig? How do you even know it is idleing at 1gig?

I am running vista ultimate and I have no issues. I quite like vista myself. I even like the eye candy. I don't tweak it for performance.. I have it set for style (appearance)

Even with a dreamscene running, sidebar and gadgets going.. It doesn't seem to idle at 1gig..
I have 4 gigs of RAM and the average idle is about 16%... which I think must be around 640MBs.. (im horrible at math) I also multitask heavily.. I have yet to have any performance issues.

I did have an issue one time where where a "startup.exe" was not shutting down.. I think it said "startup" I can't recall now.

Oh.. and the only process that draws a lot of resources on mine is the explorer.exe.. it runs at about 14%.. due to the dreamscene. If I put up a standard wallpaper instead of dreamscene.. my idle drops to around 3% average

I couldn't figure out what was bugging me about this ... now I got it. RAM doesn't idle.. it's just volatile memory space. The CPU is what is idleing.. (just to be technically correct) and it's idle rate is dependent upon what programs and behind the scene processes are running. The only impact RAM has is when there isn't enough of it and the CPU has to create virtual memory on the hard drive... for this makes the CPU work harder.

Anyway, as I mentioned before. My idle rate is low. My RAM usage, however, is around 30% (average), which I suppose is around 1GB. As I type this my DuoCores are running between 0% and 5%.

Edited by PsychPosse, 17 October 2007 - 12:23 AM.

[pip22]

It's always been the case that MS seems to release a new version of Windows too early for some, nothing new there. But MS were promising us that Vista would be released much earlier than it actually was, and they daren't leave it any longer for fear of losing would-be buyers to the Linux community -- a very real threat since it's free and has now matured into a real alternative to Windows.

Don't expect any service packs to improve Vista's memory requirements. Even assuming that was possible, it would require a re-write of the code from the ground up, and that isn't going to happen till Vista is replaced. As mentioned in this thread already, the only way to reduce RAM usage is to turn off some of the "eye candy" which is just about the only feature that distinguishes it from XP -- so why buy it? The answer, of course, is that we have no choice because it comes pre-installed on all new machines and there is now no option to demand XP instead. My bet is that sales of Vista would be much slower if we all had the option of choosing a pre-install of XP instead.

Edited by pip22, 17 October 2007 - 02:50 AM.