Thoughts on Vista/What is Your Problem With Vista

By SNGX1275
Mar 29, 2007
Topic Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Tmagic650

    Tmagic650 TS Ambassador Posts: 20,451   +135

    With a good CPU like Intel's quad-core Q6600, 2GB of RAM, a good motherboard and video card, and monitor, Vista can out perform XP in speed, reliability, multitasking, gaming and security
  2. LNCPapa

    LNCPapa TS Special Forces Posts: 4,199   +228

    Vista SP1 had been release to the public already and had several good fixes in it. There were lots of changes in XPSP1 to XPSP2 - first place to look is your firewall.
  3. Tmagic650

    Tmagic650 TS Ambassador Posts: 20,451   +135

    Vista Sp1 has been released, but if Vista users have kept up with all the updates since it was released, there won't be too much new to notice. I was getting some "warnings" that disappeared after SP1 was applied, and hardware support has beed improved.

    ...and for those who live with their heads in the sand, there were big improvements in hardware driver support, security and stability between XP SP1 and XP SP2. XP SP3 basically incorporates SP1 and SP2
  4. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 10,004   +710

    Ok.......

    Not that I think for one minute that PCWorld knows anything about computers, but they have a slightly different take on this: http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/143608-1/test_results_does_sp1_fix_vista.html

    Perhaps if you peruse the article, you'll be able to tell us where they've erred.
  5. SNGX1275

    SNGX1275 TS Forces Special Topic Starter Posts: 12,263   +215

    Well thats Vista Buisness not Home Premium or Ultimate which gamers use. Vista has DX10, and is inherently more secure than XP, I also think I've heard something about it being better designed for multiprocessor/core systems but I could be wrong on that... That only leaves the speed and reliability to question. In my personal expierence I would say it may be a bit slower than XP, but it is every bit as reliable. I've not had a bluescreen/crash in Vista (although a COM service did crash on me, but definately didn't bring the system down, and a reboot fixed it) and I'm not sure I had any problems with XP either on this hardware.
  6. fullmetalvegan

    fullmetalvegan TechSpot Enthusiast Posts: 162

    I've heard that Vista is better for multi-core processor support also. XP doesn't also recognise the other cores and you need to patch it in order to have it work, Vista has native support so that's a plus. I think if you already own XP and are fine with it then don't upgrade, but if you upgrade your PC you might as well put Vista on it to be up to date.
  7. fullmetalvegan

    fullmetalvegan TechSpot Enthusiast Posts: 162

    That's a blatant load of crap. It is just as stable if not more stable than XP, for me it's been much, much more stable. It's hardly slower, if you people notice that it's 1-5 seconds slower on bootup and that irritates you, then I'm sorry but you maybe have a problem. =P Once Vista boots up it's just as fast as XP.

    Irritating... well, I find nothing irritating about it. It looks better than XP and has some nice new features like game browser. "Everything" is moved around? Might wanna stop downloading those weird ****** copies and buy a legit version then, cause "everything" isn't moved around in my version of Vista. Everything is exactluy the same as XP, one folder difference, instead of user files going in 'Documents and Settings' it goes in a folder called 'User'. If you found that change complicated, then, hmm, I question the IQ of such a person. =P

    windmill's comment isn't based on any factual evidence, just clear anti-Vista bias dribble which everyone is tired of hearing. Either post legimate thoughts or don't bother.
  8. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 10,004   +710

    In my experience, (admittedly limited), with XP and multi-core processors, XP (with SP2) lights up both cores just fine on my machine. (G31 chipset, E2200 Pent dual core).
    This is with Nero 6.6 manipulating DVD-Video files. Everything else happens too fast to worry about it.
    I think the dual core issues with XP have to do with ACPI issues and somehow also attach themselves to AMD CPUs. or (?) as the case may be.
    Guess #2 is that SP2 contains the update to which you are referring.

    I have no experince with quads, so I'm not trying to speak to their usefulness under XP.
    Imaging and encoding programs are written with multiple CPUs in mind, so they may adapt themselves to the multi-core environment without modification more easily.

    Here is the M$ update number for the dual-core issues in XP if you'd like to have a look....KB896256
  9. mv670

    mv670 Newcomer, in training Posts: 75

    this might be something i should find myslef easily but does anyone know how to check in vista if they have SP1 cause it does not say in the welcome center
    i also have a hidden update (KB9400510)...have no idea what that is
  10. AlbertLionheart

    AlbertLionheart TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 2,711

    I have to support people with it as well as XP so am about to embark on a dual boot system using XP Pro SPII and Vista 64bit. If it is raining it will get done this weekend.
  11. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 10,004   +710

    Damned if M$ Knows..........

    M$ doesn't seem to admit this update exists.
    The only search result for it that comes up is in a SERBIAN forum! Regrettably, I don't read Serbian. (Or other language that it might be, which uses the Cyrillic alphabet).
    Since M$ isn't talking, it probably has something to do with a "security update" involving WGA.

    If you're using automatic updates, your OS is likely patched to SP1 specs. If not, then no. You could check under "system specs". It isn't likely that systems are being shipped with SP1 installed until very recently.
  12. SNGX1275

    SNGX1275 TS Forces Special Topic Starter Posts: 12,263   +215

    Open the Windows/Start menu, right click on "computer" then choose Properties. That screen that comes up will say Service Pack 1 if you have it installed.
  13. mv670

    mv670 Newcomer, in training Posts: 75

    guess i dont have it it does not say "Service Pack 1"
    just says "home vista basic"
     
  14. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 10,004   +710

    Ok.......

    Here my curiosity is peaked. Will the system information convert to stating "SP1" by way of cumulative automatic updates, or only if you install the service pack as a whole?
  15. fstroupe

    fstroupe Newcomer, in training

    Be careful. It is supposed to be hard to do (according to various forums), but I had no trouble whatsoever adding Vista to a XP rig. I added another physical drive, installed Vista on it, and it went like a breeze.

    After a few months I decided that I will never use the XP drive, and decided to remove it. When Vista is added, it thinks that it is the only operating system, and when the MBR is built, it adds the other drive in the booting process. Vista considers its own drive C:, but the BIOS considers the XP drive the primary drive. When booting on a dual-boot with Vista, you get a screen in the boot process that asks whether you want to boot Vista, or "older Windows operating system.

    After a lot of googling and trying several fixes, I found out that you (probably) can take the boot file that Vista added to the other drive and merely copy it on the Vista drive. I don't know for sure, because one of the "fixes" was to delete everything from the XP drive. Well, I also deleted the particular boot file.

    So I have a blank hard drive sitting in my other rig that I don't use. Yes, a clean install will fix all. Its getting close to time for a clean install on that rig, so I guess I'll have an extra drive soon.

    There are supposedly a different set of problems adding XP to a Vista rig,

    I've been using Vista Home Premium 64-bit on my main rig for about nine months. I really don't see it better or worse than XP, its an operating system. I haven't had any driver support problems, and have only found a couple of programs that won't work on it...and a couple of others that don't work correctly.

    I've had Vista Ultimate 32-bit on my DDR3 test rig for 5 or six months, and changed it to Ultimate 64-bit this weekend, I got a 4 gig DDR3 kit to test. So far, I see no real benefits to Ultimate over Home Premium, nothing like the difference between XP Home and XP Pro. I really haven't had a lot of opportunity to use the test rig long term, as I do a clean install whenever I test a new motherboard, so it really hasn't been installed more than two or three weeks at a time.

    I guess the only real problems I've had with Vista is trying to install Catalyst drivers. Vista will always try to install drivers, and will install generic drivers if it can't find the real ones. It nearly always finds the correct latest drivers online. It can't find the Catalyst drivers, and even while you are installing them, it installs the generic ones...it is kind of a race to see which ones will be installed first. It usually takes two or three tries to get the drivers and Catalyst suite installed. (I've had less trouble by downloading the Catalyst drivers separate from the CCC, and install them separately)
  16. Mictlantecuhtli

    Mictlantecuhtli TechSpot Evangelist Posts: 4,916   +9

    The KB number is written incorrectly, it's 940510.
  17. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 10,004   +710

    A Rose By Any Other Name.....Is "WGA"

    Maybe the adding the extra zero is customary in Serbian (!) or (?) (see above)

    I was right about it being more WGA annoyance though, was I not?
  18. AlbertLionheart

    AlbertLionheart TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 2,711

    So I installed Vista Ultimate 64 bit today and the thing flies! Only problem my top hate software (ACT! 9.0) will not run on it. When I called Sage in the UK about this they seemed surprised and had no solution to offer. Just plain bl**dy useless.
    Get a rating of 5.9
  19. radnam

    radnam Newcomer, in training Posts: 53

    Hello

    Nothing too bad about Vista the only issue is that the updates that Microsoft releases for its Operating systems with out testing it properly is the issue

    Eventually as its their monopoly they expect all the other companies to adopt as per their wish. (The DNS update lately which caused internet access loss as it conflicted with many firewalls)

    They need to work with other companies and not just expect changes as per their wish.

    Anyways thats how the business world works.

    I can go on and on and on on tis topic.

    Good you find Vista helpful, but try and use any other Os like Ubuntu etc......

    Thanks for your responce
  20. fullmetalvegan

    fullmetalvegan TechSpot Enthusiast Posts: 162

    No need to try something else, Windows operating systems always run fine for me. =P

    And it has more support out there, i.e., weekly updates, etc. Being that Linux is open source you can't really have that option as easily right?

    <3 Vista.
  21. luvr

    luvr Newcomer, in training Posts: 74

    I'm not going to argue, but I'll simply suggest you give Ubuntu a try, and see for yourself at what frequency it updates. Won't exactly be "weekly," but may at times be twice or thrice a week--depending on what fixes are released.
    Of course, if you're perfectly happy with Windows, and you have no interest whatsoever in Linux (or anything else) anyway, then you needn't bother. In that case, I'll leave it up to you to decide if you are willing to take my word for it, or not.
Topic Status:
Not open for further replies.


Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...


Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.