Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / [LOCKED] Is Vista A Hard Drive Killer?

Author
Message
heartbone
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2002
Location:
Posted: 1st May 2007 21:24
Link
I had a real good time reading the comments on this page
Vista Sucks.

A few of the posts were funny (#80), some were enlightening (#66).
Like many web surfers, I found the page through a search engine link after typing in the phrase Vista Sucks.

Alarming were the comments on the page about the
constant hard drive access.
Read post #53. Also posts #25,43,46,63,69.

If I were a hard drive manufacturer I'd shorten or invalidate the warranty for Vista users.
It sounds like hardware abuse to me.

An interesting statistical fact filled report here:
Vista Sucks Performance

I'm unique, just like everybody else.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Benjamin
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 1st May 2007 21:34
Link
No.

Tempest (DBP/DBCe)
Multisync V1 (DBP/DBCe)
Back to top
Profile PM Email
GatorHex
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Apr 2005
Location: Gunchester, UK
Posted: 1st May 2007 22:10
Link
They probably need more memory, when memory is short Windows turns to the hard drive to help out.

If your worried about it buy a Raid spec harddrive they are designed for 100 yea MTBF in a high access environment and only cost about £10-20 more than normal.

http://www.KumKie.com http://bulldog.servegame.com
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Phaelax
DBPro Master
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Apr 2003
Location: Metropia
Posted: 1st May 2007 22:20
Link
vista screwed up my boot sector so much it took me hours to finally remove the OS completely and manage to install something better.


Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 1st May 2007 22:21 Edited at: 1st May 2007 22:22
Link
I heard that Vista is pretty good on the machines you buy it with, maybe it uses a lot of RAM, but so are most Microsoft products, but that's one of the disadvantages, there are plenty of advantages, like I said in your other thread, the OS you use is down to preference.

Did The Buddha have a Zen micro?
Back to top
Profile PM Website
David R
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Sep 2003
Location: 3.14
Posted: 1st May 2007 23:20 Edited at: 1st May 2007 23:28
Link
If you don't have enough RAM, as GatorHex pointed out, then HD access will be greatly increased, since Windows will have to use the pagefile on your HD as 'memory' more often than usual.

Vista is no more a HD killer than XP: If you put XP on a low-RAM config, it'll do the exact same thing.

EDIT: Also, most of the things in that Vista sucks blog are pure crud, or are extremely rare occurances. Eg.:

"Apps that never ran" - Vista just tells you if the app won't run. I haven't come across any apps that just don't run. And if the blogger knows they aren't running, and hence aren't compatible, why is he complaining? It's up to the vendor not MS to clean up apps for Vista.

"Firefox". If you click his link, it actually shows "I just found an interesting bug in Firefox v1.5.0.6 on Vista RC1". So he tested an outdated FF version on an RC Vista? yes, because that means Vista sucks... sure. FF runs fine. There is no twitching bug unless you're running 1.5 - why the hell is he running 1.5?

"Developer tools". MS have said VS2003 is no longer supported, irrelevant of Vista. And MSVC 05 runs fine at SP1. What the heck is this guy's problem, he's worse than Heartbone, creating constant FUD:

"and Visual Studio 2005 comes with plenty of disclaimers"

Install SP1 and Vista tech. refresh and it works. Yeah, that's a really difficult 'disclaimer' to deal with, isn't it.

I won't continue, because this article is also horribly out of date, which explains most of the purported 'issues'. At least get current articles Heartbone, instead of relying on the past to get mud to fling at Vista


Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
_Nemesis_
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2003
Location: Liverpool, UK
Posted: 1st May 2007 23:56
Link
I also decided to fire a couple of keywords at Google. Though, I don't take the rest of this community as idiots and I'm sure you can all type 3 words into a textbox and look for yourself: try the phrase Vista is awesome. You'll find more results for that than you will with the phrase 'Vista Sucks'

I think anyone who is thinking of buying Vista should do their own research. Like Seppuku says, each OS has their pros and cons, and if you think that one has a con so great that it is deemed inferior to another OS for your purposes, use that instead!

[url="http://www.devhat.net"]www.devhat.net[/url] :: Devhat IRC Network.
Current Project: ASP Content Management System
Back to top
Profile PM Email
heartbone
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2002
Location:
Posted: 1st May 2007 23:57 Edited at: 1st May 2007 23:59
Link
Quote: "12 michael | Thursday, March 08, 2007 at 1:09 PM
Vista sucks. The constant hard drive spinning is due the the uniterrupted polling going on for the indexing/search feature. Didn't anyone over at Microsoft think that a constant spin up of the disc would result in higher temperatures and lower disc lifetime? Sure you have near instant search results, but at the expense of the hardware and RAM. The constant spinning also results in a noisy box. Vista...don't go near it folks. I am running Windows Vista Business on a high end machine."

http://aspnetresources.com/blog/vista_sucks_redux.aspx

How is it out of date?
What has changed?

I'm unique, just like everybody else.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 1st May 2007 23:59
Link
Quote: "Vista is no more a HD killer than XP: If you put XP on a low-RAM config, it'll do the exact same thing."


Certainly does! Note to self: Don't go for low ram ever again.

Did The Buddha have a Zen micro?
Back to top
Profile PM Website
BiggAdd
Retired Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Aug 2004
Location: != null
Posted: 2nd May 2007 01:28
Link
Actually i believe this to be true. My Brother installed Vista Ultimate on a new Laptop. (3Ghz 200GB 1Gb mem... i think) And now hes getting a "Hardware Failure" boot screen. Vista has obviously messed up the boot sector of his hard drive, as when he did a complete format and installed on a different partition, it worked.

Back to top
Profile PM
bond1
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Oct 2005
Location:
Posted: 2nd May 2007 10:37 Edited at: 2nd May 2007 10:38
Link
Well I can say from my own experience so far that Vista is CONSTANTLY accessing the hard drive, the constant chirping is driving me crazy, even when the entire system is idle without any programs running.

And I have 2 gigs of ram. I've disabled System Restore since I use disk imaging for backups, and a few other processes. I just can't figure out why the HD is constantly chugging away whenever I boot into Vista. Definitely annoying though.

----------------------------------------
"Your mom goes to college."
My FPSC stuff at http://www.hyrumark.com
Back to top
Profile PM Email
heartbone
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2002
Location:
Posted: 2nd May 2007 16:11 Edited at: 2nd May 2007 16:13
Link
David R, you've made a juvenile personal attack on heartbone.
You don't have to answer my questions, but you should stay on topic from now on.

I'm unique, just like everybody else.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
David R
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Sep 2003
Location: 3.14
Posted: 2nd May 2007 19:29 Edited at: 2nd May 2007 19:32
Link
Quote: "David R, you've made a juvenile personal attack on heartbone."


Sorry, what? First off, stop referring to yourself in third person, and secondly, where is this juvenile attack?

I said stop using FUD, and stop flinging out of date content at Vista. Juvenile? Personal? Off topic? Everything I said was related to this content, because it's true: you're just harvesting random articles and presenting them as a current universal POV, and although you're not a corp, I'd definitely say it's FUD; not to mention the fact that half of them are either isolated incidents, or just complete and utter rubbish.

I'm not going to bother explaining myself again, because no doubt you'll just harvest and post another bundle of opinions that have absolutely no relevance at all.

EDIT:
Quote: "How is it out of date?
What has changed?"


* FF2 runs flawlessly in Vista
* Vista isn't an RC any more, so most of those 'flaws' probably don't even apply
* MSVC 05 works perfectly in Vista with SP1 + Vista tech refresh


Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
heartbone
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2002
Location:
Posted: 2nd May 2007 23:06 Edited at: 2nd May 2007 23:10
Link
Quote: "David R: First off, stop referring to yourself in third person, and secondly, where is this juvenile attack?"

First heartbone is an online persona, not "me".
Second, you can play dumb all you want.

Since you know so much about everything Vista
(and feel such a need to tell others about themselves),
why don't you set bond1 straight?
According to your knowing it all, he must be wrong.
Maybe 2 Gig isn't really enough.
Maybe he's imagining that hard drive running.

Or maybe you don't know it all.

I'm unique, just like everybody else.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
coolgames
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Sep 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posted: 2nd May 2007 23:33
Link
I've installed vista and it works perfectly fine. It started up in about the same amount of time as xp, maybe even less, but most of the time booting was before it showed the weclome screen. From there, it only take me 10 seconds to log in. I'm using 2.08 Ghz with 1 gb of ram. I installed doing a clean install from inside xp using an upgrade disc. It installed perfectly fine. To those who might have problems, it might be your bios rebooting into the install dvd after windows setup has restarted once.

Firefox works perfectly fine for me, I don't have any problems the article described. When the system is idle, it uses about 48% of my ram, which includes antivirus software that is running in the background. If you have 1gb of ram, then it runs smoothly.

In my opinion, the treeview "all programs" menu is much better. In my xp install, I had lots of apps and the all programs menu would fill the screen. The treeview may be harder if you have few apps, but if you have a lot of apps, then it is much nicer.

About the "lethal shutdown", what kind of an idiot would press the power button while his apps are runnning when he doesn't know what will happen? It is a new os, so not everything will be the same.

Heartbone, perhaps you should go try out vista for your self before you jump to conclusions about it. I'm sure you know somebody that has it installed and would let you try it out, if not you can test drive it online here: http://www.windowsvistatestdrive.com/
Back to top
Profile PM Email
David R
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Sep 2003
Location: 3.14
Posted: 2nd May 2007 23:36
Link
Quote: "First heartbone is an online persona, not "me".
Second, you can play dumb all you want."


Oh... the utter irony of this. Firstly, I don't care for your little "persona" charade; as far as I care, you are the persona you appear as on here; unless you're implying that you act completely differently in real life, which may indeed be a welcome relief from the consistent waves of copy-and-paste material "opinion" that you insist on posting in reply to essentially everything.

I hope that's the reason for this persona/person separation, otherwise your time is somewhat wasted. Next up, the "play dumb" comment. You tell me to stay on topic, and "knocked" me for juvenile comments, and then resort to that? Nice one Einstein. If my comments could be seen in any way at all as being juvenile, or implicative of a personal attack, then surely implying that I'm playing dumb counts too. Oh wait, I need to conclude this into a readable form:

Heartbone, you've made a juvenile personal attack on DavidR.
You don't have to respond to my opinions in any meaningful way, but you should at least avoid straying into the realms of posting other people's opinions as a cover up fro lack of your own.

Right, next...
Quote: "Since you know so much about everything Vista
(and feel such a need to tell others about themselves),"

I don't know where this 'royal we'/them comes from, but in case you haven't realised, I was talking to you. I don't quite know your issue with Vista, but you have compounded again and again the fact that

a) You hate it
b) You're afraid of change
c) You don't like forced obsolescence
d) You need to post any possible opinions harvested from the web, in order to create what seems to be FUD around Vista. You start a thread about every thing you find. That's entirely not necessary. Fine, you can dislike Vista, but please, for the love of God, don't just post a thread every ruddy time you find something that fits your opinion of Vista.

Because otherwise, we get the very one-sided view of something which simply isn't there: You just construe everything to fit your opinion. I was replying to you about the 'hard drive killer' aspect. Because, from what I have seen, it's just something that isn't there. Maybe it's because I have a fast seeking + read/write HD, I don't know.

So I suppose my point overall is, actually form your own opinion, and present it in a meaningful way, instead of just mindlessly dumping each and every Vista related article you find which fits your view of Vista. Or, put it this way: I could train a plant to do what you do in your posts, a bot even.


Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
coolgames
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Sep 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posted: 2nd May 2007 23:41
Link
Heartbone, why don't you post a list of what you hate about vista, not what other people hate about it. XP also accesed the hard drive when it was idle. It isn't somthing new, your just using it as an excuse to make vista look worse than XP.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 2nd May 2007 23:52
Link
Comes on dudes, chill, it's not worth it, as far as I was concerned, David R's post was on topic, it was his contradiction of the actual article you posted, I think the reason why he dropped your name heartbone, was the fact you posted 'Vista sucks', such a statement tends to wind people up.

Did The Buddha have a Zen micro?
Back to top
Profile PM Website
heartbone
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2002
Location:
Posted: 3rd May 2007 00:22
Link
Thanks for the link coolgames .
What I hate about Vista?

Hmmmmmmmm........

Vista killed Windows98 support.

Now I have to type something good about Vista for karma.

Vista encourages people to investigate Linux.

I'm unique, just like everybody else.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Xarshi
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Dec 2005
Location: Ohio
Posted: 3rd May 2007 01:05
Link
Yeah,xp is pretty much destroying my pc with little ram. I have like 256 mb of ram,so my computer is in a state of none use. I can only use the internet and an instant messenger. I can't even program anymore Maybe the 1.3ghz processor is another reason why my pc is dying. All I know is that I get a warning saying that xp has to incrase the virtual memory page thingy majig.

Hello
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 3rd May 2007 01:09
Link
Heartbone, every os has its advantages and disadvantages, and when there is the large OS upgrade, people will have issues, okay, you don't like vista, fine, but you're going around saying it sucks and implying everybody hates it...They don't I'm afraid, I'm not a huge Windows fan, but cut the crap.

Did The Buddha have a Zen micro?
Back to top
Profile PM Website
heartbone
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2002
Location:
Posted: 3rd May 2007 02:24 Edited at: 3rd May 2007 02:28
Link
Seppuku, I ran XP Home for 3 on my Compaq with 256 MB RAM years with no hard drive misuse problem.
Believe me I am sensitive to that sort of thing.

I only upgraded to 768 MB last fall.
Things did speed up a little bit, but Windows is not that snappy.

If you like Vista, OK.
I don't go around saying it sucks, I've personally only created one statement that nature and it was very balanced.
Buf if I did make posts like that, as I have that right you'd have to live with it, so you cut your crap and we will be OK.

Benny53, XP SP2 is what crapped the OS for low ram - 512MB became the defacto but unwritten minimum config!

I'm unique, just like everybody else.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
coolgames
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Sep 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posted: 3rd May 2007 02:52
Link
Quote: "Vista killed Windows98 support."


Is that the only thing you can come up with? Why should they still be supporting win98? Doesn't Microsoft have enough to worry about at the moment?
Back to top
Profile PM Email
heartbone
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2002
Location:
Posted: 3rd May 2007 03:42
Link
Quote: "Is that the only thing you can come up with? Why should they still be supporting win98? Doesn't Microsoft have enough to worry about at the moment?"

No.
Customer support.
I'm not referring to Microsoft support, rather the smaller third party hardware companies.

I'm unique, just like everybody else.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
coolgames
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Sep 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posted: 3rd May 2007 18:03
Link
So it's Microsoft's fault that other companies have bad customer support?
Back to top
Profile PM Email
David R
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Sep 2003
Location: 3.14
Posted: 3rd May 2007 18:30
Link
Quote: "I'm not referring to Microsoft support, rather the smaller third party hardware companies."


So, you dislike Vista because smaller companies (and not MS) don't support an OS that is nearly a decade old?

While you're at it, let's slam XP, because software developers don't support 3.1 either...


Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 3rd May 2007 18:53
Link
Heartbone, I have had God awful Windows XP experience and am giving Vista a chance, my point was your being very negative and 'Vista sucks' (As you posted in the first post) you even said it linking to out of date problems. Why complain about an OS when you're using Linux instead.

Did The Buddha have a Zen micro?
Back to top
Profile PM Website
David R
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Sep 2003
Location: 3.14
Posted: 3rd May 2007 19:26
Link
Quote: "Seppuku, I ran XP Home for 3 on my Compaq with 256 MB RAM years with no hard drive misuse problem.
Believe me I am sensitive to that sort of thing.

I only upgraded to 768 MB last fall.
Things did speed up a little bit, but Windows is not that snappy."


I agree there, because I ran an XP install with 256 for a long time too. But clearly Vista requires more RAM, so if you've barely got an XP-ready spec memory-wise, it'll be thrashing your virtual memory like crazy, and in the process, destroying your HD.

I haven't noticed any HD issues with my install at all, however Vista does rate my HD as a 5.1, so whether that affects my performance I don't know.


Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 3rd May 2007 19:33
Link
Sounds fair to me, although I don't think Vista should be a ram hog, this is what I would list under a disadvantage, remember when you run something, you should have that amount of ram free to run it fluently without harm to your comp, I get 128mb free on my system, so COD 2 doesn't run smoothly

Did The Buddha have a Zen micro?
Back to top
Profile PM Website
heartbone
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2002
Location:
Posted: 3rd May 2007 19:40
Link
Seppuku, Vista Sucks was the title of the page that I linked to in the first post.
The page is not out of date as you seem want to mischaracterize it.
Sure there were references to the release candidate, but it seems to me that majority of the posts were from early adopters.
Certainly you don't consider the April comments too old do you?

I don't know what me learning Linux has to do with anything here, I use many different OSes. Why the distraction.

You do not need to explain why you use Vista. You do and that is what is important.

Since you want me to explain why I'm posting about Vista....
(Purely due to economic considerations)
Vista is the first OS that reduces user functionality as compared to its predecessor.

Can we agree on that?
If so, can we agree that is a bad thing Seppuku ?

However this thread is about the hard drive abuse about which I'm hearing two different things.

Aren't you even interesed in this topic?

I'm unique, just like everybody else.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
heartbone
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2002
Location:
Posted: 3rd May 2007 19:44
Link
Quote: "So it's Microsoft's fault that other companies have bad customer support?"

That's a "red herring" coolgames.
The companies have limited resources, and most can not afford to support 3 flavors of consumer Windows.
9X - XP - Vista
Guess which one goes?

I'm unique, just like everybody else.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
David R
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Sep 2003
Location: 3.14
Posted: 3rd May 2007 19:50
Link
Quote: "Vista is the first OS that reduces user functionality as compared to its predecessor."


How? If you state something, you actually need to justify what you're saying. Because last time I looked, nothing you have said even comes close to justifying a reduced "user functionality". Also, surely "user functionality" would imply the functionality of the user themselves, not how they use the OS? You would be much better off just saying "usability".

Quote: "The companies have limited resources, and most can not afford to support 3 flavors of consumer Windows.
9X - XP - Vista "


Yes, choices choices: Supporting a DOS based OS of yesteryear, or two of the more stable NT based OS'es. You see, it's a generally accepted rule that when MS stop supporting their OS'es, so can developers: hence, now XP and Vista (the two 'nice' OS'es of the pack, dev wise) are the emphasis, developers have shifted their focus too.

Why support 98 and the 9x range, when an overwhelming majority use XP and/or Vista. Why support an OS range that can't even use Unicode correctly? (and Unicows only does 'fake' Unicode for 9X, before anyone brings it up).


Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 3rd May 2007 19:56
Link
if you have constant hard-disk accessing when on Vista, then you have far too many resources being used because it means Vista has had to fall-back to the Virtual Memory.

High-Demand applications like: AOL, Limewire, eMule, Kazaa, 4oD, McAffee, Norton, etc..
Kill Vista performance; seriously so!

Applications I'd recommend, that don't kill the performance even on a computer using 256MB Physical Memory.

Anti-Virus: Microsoft Live! OneCare
Firewall: Microsoft Live! OneCare
Spyware: Microsoft Live! OneCare
P2P: Bit Torrent (from Bittorrent.com)
Media Player: iTunes with Quicktime

Media Player 11, works alright but only once you've optimised the system or are running 512MB Physical Memory (preferably DDR2)

To optimise the system, I'd HIGHLY recommend SpeedCache to be turned on, and Indexing turned off. With Indexing Off, searching is slower.. but not even close to as slow as what it is on XP.. this said it also slows down your system because it constantly has to update the Index file.
I would also recommend changing your virtual memory setup to 384MB - 768MB (per Hard Disk) on ATA, 768MB - 2048MB (per Hard Disk) on SATA. If you have Raid turned on then keep to what ATA use.

The reason you want different sizes is because of bandwidth. More than 768MB on ATA and it'll just end up hurting performance.. Vista is defaulted for SATA which is why performance can seem poor.

I'd also strongly recommend ONLY using Windows Live Messenger, because AIM, Yahoo! and Trillian while not taking up much processor resources it takes up very valuable Physical Memory.

Oh as far as the VM goes, you could use down to 128MB - 512MB; but you should generally use 768MB/2048MB as the top amount because otherwise it's too large for bandwidth of the connection. Also you want more base RAM to begin with, because otherwise it takes longer for it to index the rest as and when required.

Less than 128MB and Vista can't initialise Win32 properly.

For more optimisation when you're an admin you can use the task manager to see what services are now running. Use this to make sure you have the basics running taking up the least amount of memory. Ignore processor requirements as unless you have the basic 800MHz CPU this just won't be an issue ever. Once you have a well optimised services list then switch to the services configurer, and set everything you don't need to "manual", those which aren't important for start-up (i.e. Microsoft Live! OneCare) set to automatic(delayed).

This will help optimise boot performance and overall performance.
Also I'd strongly recommend you set-up admin priviledges for each application you install, and also sort them between applications and games. It won't help performance but stop the annoying "accept" on every damn operation.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
heartbone
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2002
Location:
Posted: 3rd May 2007 19:58 Edited at: 3rd May 2007 20:04
Link
OK, I agree David R, I'll rephrase it.
Vista reduces usability.

About the 98 support going bye-bye, of course it's perfectly understandable.
I was correcting coolgames misinterpretation So it's Microsoft's fault that other companies have bad customer support?
of my followup statement to "Vista killed Windows98 support.".

They killed Kenny.

Quote: "To optimise the system, I'd HIGHLY recommend SpeedCache to be turned on, and Indexing turned off."


Yes Raven, from my understanding of the many users posts I figured that it was something that just had to be turned off.
Micrtosoft must default it to on, as it is a super new feature.
Just like those extra query panels that you all learn to disable.

Perhaps bond1 will return with more information about his experiences.

I'm unique, just like everybody else.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
hessiess
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Mar 2007
Location: pc!
Posted: 3rd May 2007 20:32
Link
Quote: "Is that the only thing you can come up with? Why should they still be supporting win98? Doesn't Microsoft have enough to worry about at the moment?"


win98 is the best os microsoft ever made, everything since is extremly slow. yes im using xp, but only becose i dont have any choice over what os i use, the computer rely belongs to the lea. and becose i dont know were to find win 98 cd.

learn blender, you will never regret it.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 3rd May 2007 21:09
Link
Quote: "win98 is the best os microsoft ever made, everything since is extremly slow."


Windows Millennium Edition, was MUCH quicker.
Although most people couldn't stand it's habit to crash whenever you sneezed. I've not experience that sort of instability using Windows ME, and in-fact I used it from release until 2003 on a dual-boot system with Windows 2000 (used purely for Maya) when I finally took the plunge and installed XP Professional.

XP Home was an abomination, just far too unstable.

Also Windows 2000 and XP could be optimised far more than 98 ever could, it was possible to get faster desktop performance from them without much effort. Just a case of switching off a few un-required service, and optimising the Virtual Memory. Plus a weekly defrag, and disk clean-up helped.
They also had much better DirectX and OpenGL performance.

I've never understood peoples' feelings to stay in the past with Operating Systems. Especially not towards 98, given 98 was as bad as the original release of 95. I took my copy back to the shop and got my money back after it crashed constantly for a week, went back to 95c until WinME.

Windows 98SE was aparently the most stable, but personally never used it. This said technology HAS to move forward.. If you want to keep using an early 32-bit OS, without the ability to use DirectX9, .NET plus having the security of a building that's been condemned for 10years then go ahead.

Personally I'm sticking with Vista as it's pretty damn good.
It's the most stable OS they've ever put to market, and in-fact the only real gripe I have is the performance from memory access.
I'm sure that will be fixed in time.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 3rd May 2007 21:27
Link
HB, I don't like being patronised, chill your tone a bit man. Vista may be having issues at the beginning, but I've had heard several cases where there are issues, it's just an new OS problem, people use it because they like it, I don't see why you're being so negative about it...

Did The Buddha have a Zen micro?
Back to top
Profile PM Website
hessiess
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Mar 2007
Location: pc!
Posted: 3rd May 2007 23:26 Edited at: 3rd May 2007 23:32
Link
Quote: "
Windows Millennium Edition, was MUCH quicker. "


i have never used me, so i dont know what its like.

i have never had win98 se crash on me.



i dont care about dx9 or .net, i carnt program. i use blender and yafray, im not interested in gaming anymore. modaling and anamating is mutch more interesting

ive had my share of problems with xp, it somtimes freses for no resen and reloads explorer, clering everything i was working on. it takes 15 munites to become usable after loging on,during this piriod nothing will open. becose of this i never shut it down, just hibonate it and reatart it ocatinaly wen i actualy have time to wate for it to load.

learn blender, you will never regret it.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
NeX the Fairly Fast Ferret
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Apr 2005
Location: The Fifth Plane of Oblivion
Posted: 3rd May 2007 23:37
Link
I want to know what the HELL is taking 512MB. Vista is supposed to be more reliant on GFX cards, so it can't be many images. Not sounds, because that shouldn't take more than 8MB. And that's pushing it. Really, what on Earth takes 512MB to load? Bloated code?


Since the other one was scaring you guys so much...
Back to top
Profile PM Website
coolgames
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Sep 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posted: 4th May 2007 00:25
Link
Perhaps there's a reason that MS said that you should have at least 1 gb of ram for home premium and above? And about the comments in the article that you told us to look at in your first post, I sure hope that they ran the vista upgrade advisor. MS defenitely told that you should make sure to run it before installing vista.

Quote: "That's a "red herring" coolgames."

I misunderstood your statement about the customer support. I wasn't meaning to post a "red herring."

Also, the "red herring" thing. All your posts about vista have been red herrings. The way the articles were worded, they took isolated incidents and made it sound like every other person has that problem too. I'll repeat, why don't you go check vista out for yourself?

About my so called

Quote: "
The companies have limited resources, and most can not afford to support 3 flavors of consumer Windows.
9X - XP - Vista
Guess which one goes?
"


I assume you meant they will now support vista instead of win98.
How ironic is that? One of the major arguments against vista is that no programs work on it. How can they make their programs work with vista if they continue to support win98 instead of moving ahead to vista?
Back to top
Profile PM Email
heartbone
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2002
Location:
Posted: 4th May 2007 01:12
Link
Raven, I suppose that this thread of yours is now null and void?

I'm unique, just like everybody else.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
heartbone
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2002
Location:
Posted: 4th May 2007 01:13
Link
Seppuku, I don't like being patronised, chill your tone a bit man.

I'm unique, just like everybody else.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
bitJericho
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location: United States
Posted: 4th May 2007 01:32 Edited at: 4th May 2007 01:33
Link
Quote: "Raven, I suppose that this thread of yours is now null and void?"


This looks like he's asking a question, not giving an opinion:S (Other than the implied, 'In a perfect world, I would choose linux over windows') I suspect, now I'm not speaking for Raven of course, that Raven chose windows over (or uses windows with) linux due to program compatibility reasons...

Or he pirated it and so it didn't cost him anything

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 4th May 2007 20:53
Link
Quote: "Seppuku, I don't like being patronised, chill your tone a bit man."

??? I'm not even going to bother, I know it's not worth it.

Did The Buddha have a Zen micro?
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Ewokuk
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th May 2007
Location:
Posted: 6th May 2007 12:41
Link
Right time to clear up a few things with a few facts.

I have just built a brand new pc with 4gb pc6400 ddr2. I have installed a fresh copy of vista.

Every time i boot, it sits there constantly accessing seemingly random files non stop for about 5 minutes. I have indexing turned off and physical memory in use is 25%.

so
1: this hdd bashing is NOT being caused by accessing the page file when i have 3gb ram that isnt being used
2: it ISNT being caused by the indexing crap
3:it ISNT being caused by having it run a load of programs at startup because ive disabled loading the junk bits and pieces (adobe crap, nero crap, antivirus prog).

I havent disabled any of the default services that are running yet so unless one of them is doing something to require a whole load of hdd file access whenever i boot, something is very wrong.

you can see what files are being accessed if you run the performance monitor under admin tools/reliability and performance monitor. click the little down arrow on the Disk bar and itll show you exactly what process is accessing what files, and i had svchost accessing a whole load of random files (including files that seem to be related to amd 64 when i have an intel and have never had an amd in this pc). unfortunately it doesnt tell you WHICH service that is part of svchost is causing all the accessing.

yes clearly not enough ram will cause heavy hdd access, but that is NOT the case here.
Back to top
Profile PM
IanM
Retired Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Sep 2002
Location: In my moon base
Posted: 6th May 2007 17:11
Link
If you continue to watch your RAM, you should see it slowly be used up. This is due to Vista's 'SuperFetch' pre-caching system.

Basically, in Vista's world, unused memory is wasted memory so it fills it with files that you may use later. It's supposed to refine which files it loads as you use your system more and more - can't say from personal experience as I've not knowingly seen a Vista machine yet.

Linux does something similar - it uses free memory for caching, but only caches files as you access them, rather than doing a prefetch.

For free Plug-ins and source code
http://www.matrix1.demon.co.uk
New Utility plugins collection
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
jasonhtml
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Mar 2004
Location: OC, California, USA
Posted: 6th May 2007 17:17 Edited at: 6th May 2007 17:18
Link
well thats a stupid thing to put in an article. as long as you have OVER 1gig of RAM and a decently made HDD, you should have no problems. the only reason they say that is probably because they had like 512mb of RAM(vistas MINIMUM requirement) and vista was accessing the page file a lot. i have vista and 2gigs RAM and i dont notice it doing anything strange

Souls of Aemos Divided Tests - WIP
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
_Nemesis_
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2003
Location: Liverpool, UK
Posted: 6th May 2007 17:55
Link
Quote: "well thats a stupid thing to put in an article. as long as you have OVER 1gig of RAM and a decently made HDD, you should have no problems. the only reason they say that is probably because they had like 512mb of RAM(vistas MINIMUM requirement) and vista was accessing the page file a lot. i have vista and 2gigs RAM and i dont notice it doing anything strange"


Ditto.

[url="http://www.devhat.net"]www.devhat.net[/url] :: Devhat IRC Network.
Current Project: ASP Content Management System
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Chenak
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Sep 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 7th May 2007 00:28
Link
I have 1 gb of ram and windows vista business edition 32 bit fully updated and i have had no problems at all whatsoever. I have updated all the drivers making sure everything is more or less vista compatible and everything I run in it is perfect, although dbp runs at a slightly lower framerate.

Amount of ram being used on Vista is around 200mb with nothing running, memory useage in XP pro with nothing running is 340mb for some reason. No constant hard drive access, seems to be even less than xp at times.

I've had many people complain to me that vista is a pile of rubbish, after a few minutes I discover they are running Norton... so uh yer.

I think windows vista is a very nice OS, and at least pretty much everythings working. As for user functionality... Everything in vista is customizable as long as you know where the options are.

Not very user friendly but it is possible to get rid of UAC and annoying things like that which are bound to be fixed at some point if they get enough compliants.

All in all it was a lot better than the windows xp release which hailed the "Windows XP sucks" throughout the internet.
Back to top
Profile PM
Benjamin
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 7th May 2007 00:31
Link
Quote: "Not very user friendly but it is possible to get rid of UAC and annoying things like that"

Annoying things like that are a security feature, and are present in other operating systems, not just Vista.

Tempest (DBP/DBCe)
Multisync V1 (DBP/DBCe)
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Back to top

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-11-18 16:29:08
Your offset time is: 2024-11-18 16:29:08