Is Vista Worth?

[Sohail]

Vista's just a RAM eater and isn't worth it. I don't really have anything else to say about it though i really don't like it. I would really prefer Mac OS X as it's never failed me and always gets the job done .

 

[port5900]

Vista fills up the RAM for processes that you might start up later on. Free RAM is just a waste of RAM. This technique was taken from Linux . RAM really is cache and its job is to bring up processes to be used faster.

Think of it as the Pizza guy and the Chines guy standing at the corner of your block waiting for you to call, but they already have what ever you usually order fresh and warm waiting in the car. With XP the would have to cook the food and bring it over. get it?

" And the most important rule of cache design is that empty cache memory is wasted cache memory. Empty cache isn't doing you any good. It's expensive, high-speed memory sucking down power for zero benefit. The primary mission in the life of every cache is to populate itself as quickly as possible with the data that's most likely to be needed-- and to consistently deliver a high "hit rate" of needed data retrieved from the cache. Otherwise you're going straight to the hard drive, mister, and if you have to ask how much going to the hard drive will cost you in performance, you can't afford it."

This was taken from:http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000688.html
a must read for every computer person

 

[theafterthought]

Very interesting article, thanks port5900. Sounds like a better way to handle RAM and will probably be something that will be improved on in future OS's, though it's advantages on paper and in actual use probably differ quite a bit. The fact remains that Vista still USES more RAM though...

 

[Smith6612]

Hey, if you don't like Vista using RAM, shut off the advanced searching abilities and Aero. That'll free up loads of RAM for you, and again will be wasting RAM. My gaming computer starts Vista up in 20 seconds, and if it can boot that quickly over 2GB worth of programs, then there's no need for me to shut anything off. Besides, it runs crazy fast, so there's no need for me to even bother shutting stuff off. The CPU with Vista only runs at 5% usage when I'm using Vista, and when not doing anything, sits at 0% all the time.

 

[Pi606]

Hmm...from what I've seen, Vista's only good if your computer can handle it. I'm still running XP, but I have a Vista Skin for it.

 

[HomerJ]

Vista fills up the RAM for processes that you might start up later on. Free RAM is just a waste of RAM. This technique was taken from Linux . RAM really is cache and its job is to bring up processes to be used faster.

Think of it as the Pizza guy and the Chines guy standing at the corner of your block waiting for you to call, but they already have what ever you usually order fresh and warm waiting in the car. With XP the would have to cook the food and bring it over. get it?

" And the most important rule of cache design is that empty cache memory is wasted cache memory. Empty cache isn't doing you any good. It's expensive, high-speed memory sucking down power for zero benefit. The primary mission in the life of every cache is to populate itself as quickly as possible with the data that's most likely to be needed-- and to consistently deliver a high "hit rate" of needed data retrieved from the cache. Otherwise you're going straight to the hard drive, mister, and if you have to ask how much going to the hard drive will cost you in performance, you can't afford it."

This was taken from:http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000688.html
a must read for every computer person

Yeah, I know about caching, I just assumed that whatever was reporting RAM usage wasn't counting cached libraries. After all, cached RAM can easily be swapped out, it's essentially free, just not wasted.

 

[knightcon]

You can't compare Vista to any other operating as it is simply a new pice of software. Every piece of software on the market when it first came out had its share of teething problems. Vista is simply Microsofts attempt to completely rewrite how their O/S frameworks operate in an attempt to make the system look better and function better, taking advantage of new graphics and processor technologies. When XP first came out it was widly viewed as a terrible piece of software as people where used to using windows 98/me/2000. Vista will eventually gain general acceptance in the wider computer users community once most of the bugs and faults have been worked out, you just need to give it them time it needs to develop

 

[kkenny]

I saw an offer where you could get Vista for free if you gave up your privacy to microsoft for like 3 months.

I'd highly doubt that. Unless if the Vista was like trial software loaded or something.

 

[cybergig]

I'd highly doubt that. Unless if the Vista was like trial software loaded or something.

I doubt Micro**** would do something like that, THEY HAVE TO BE EXPENSIVE! Everything is about the money and ****ty coders for them.

 

[Jords]

No not really all you get is a better looking Desktop etc. and Direct X 10 and then it eats up a lot of Ram for that so I'm sticking with Windows XP.

 

[Socius]

My experience with Vista:
http://socius.exofire.net/news/?p=9

 

[Smith6612]

Sounds like that laptop had some bad memory or messed up

 

[Socius]

Perhaps, but on the other hand, you never know what people have done to show case models

 

[Relemar]

I would go out purchasing Vista on a disk. I'd get a laptop with it on though It's pretty good, beats XP slightly. With resource usage, I don't really like those aspects of Vista.

Look and feel is a charm

 

[hopper]

I mainly use my PC for Audio production software, and on transferring my software from my XP computer to my Vista computer I found that none of it would work - there were issues with running the ASIO driver, which Microsoft strangely decided to completely replace with a driver that is far less able than the previous one (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_Stream_Input/Output). This rendered Vista useless for my needs! There was no benefit to me running XP and Vista side by side and so I went straight back to XP. It seems to me Vista forces the XP generation of software to conform to it, rather than being backwards compatible in the first place, which is ridiculous. But I guess it depends on what you're using your computer for, for other purposes there are probably some advantages...

forcing software to conform to the new standards has been micro$oft's MO for like.. forever

Vista doesn't have to have drivers installed for hardware, it will ignore it if need be. Saying this, you can dual-boot Vista and XP and use XP for hardware/software that Vista doesn't support.

On newer computers, drivers aren't an issue since Vista is more than likely to have drivers for the hardware.

what are you talking about? OF COURSE vista needs drivers for hardware, just because it might ship with a generic driver that sorta kinda works doesnt mean it doesnt need one.

 

[tnl2k7]

Well, I'll give my opinions and reasoning behind them, I'm not flaming =P

I think Vista sucks. I used it for a couple of months (December - January) and got seriously peeved with it.

The search indexer is crap. The idea of adding a desktop search system is a good one, granted. The idea of it being in the start menu is brilliant, it makes sense, just hit the Windows key on your keyboard and voila. But the indexing service that takes control of making the file searchable never gives the hard disk a break, it's constantly spinning the disk up to check it over for modified files. The Mac OS X Spotlight feature is much better.

Then there's the interface. Why the heck did they remove the tool bars from Windows Explorer? It takes a whole lot longer to perform tasks having to try and find the menu items in the context menu or crippled 'Aero' interface. I hate it.

WTF? I thought Vista was supposed the 'most secure version of Windows to date'? Eh? What? Pardon? A bug with Windows Metafile that's been around since Windows 95 (or was it 3.1?)? You gotta be kidding me here. And let's not forget that the first ever security hole that was found in Vista was with none other than Microsoft's own anti-spyware tool, Windows Defender.

And what about the added bloat with the fresh install? DVD creator....why would I use that? I'm a web/graphic designer for cryin' out loud! Windows Movie Maker and all that too, is it really needed?

Plus, there's the laughable fact that the old Microsoft Management Console still hasn't been updated to match the new Vista UI. Now that's what I call lack of effort.

I really don't think Vista is worth the plastic it's creepy new box is made of. I HATE it. All it is is Windows 3.1 with layer upon layer upon layer of bloat. Or Windows 3.1 with a new interface that would give the lying, disrespectful anti-christ of the computing industry some more billions.

But if we don't upgrade, Microsoft will force it upon us by not providing us updates for XP. *Shakes head.* Sorry if this post seems as if it's a flame, it's not. I just feel that us, as consumers, have been ripped off with this new Windows release. The previous, Windows XP, was a real step forward for Microsoft. It's pricing wasn't too bad and it was a reliable, secure OS. I feel that Vista is where Microsoft have taken two steps back and are going the wrong way.

In short, Vista isn't worth it. But you're gonna have to 'upgrade' sooner or later.

-Luke.

 

[port5900]

well i was reading some articles on digg, sorry I cant reference it cause i did not book mark it. But Windows 7 Will becoming out in 2010-2011. Alot of businesses are telling MS they they are not upgrading to Vista. They will wait till Windows 7. So that means MS will be forced to continue support for XP till Windows 7. Even if MS stops supporting XP. I dont think a problem will arise untill 3rd party software makers drop support for XP, and that cant happen cause there just to much XP users. My suggestion as I will be doing this..Stick to XP it aint going no where.

 

[tnl2k7]

port5900,

You've got a point, Microsoft seems to be having problems killing off XP, but I can't see them being forced into anything. They're the ones with the upper hand, what Bill and Steve say goes.

I can't see my school or any of the local businesses bothering with Vista, I have to keep helping people buy and install copies of XP, nobody wants Vista.

There's gonne be REAL trouble when Dell, HP, Lenevo and Mesh and such stop support for XP, I reck on Linux distributions may see an increase in uptake.

I'll make it clear that I'm running Ubuntu Linux 7.10, 8.04 is released tomorrow but I've grabbed the current release candidate and am about to install it.

Luke.

 

[Sohail]

Most people i know don't like Vista because it eats up so much RAM, sometimes you have to install updates before you shutdown even though you don't want to and it has quite a few glitches too... That's why i stick with Mac .

 

[Livewire]

My experience with Vista:
http://socius.exofire.net/news/?p=9

Thats not Vista. Aries.sys is NOT something that comes with Vista by default.

That's Sony, sent with their compliments.

Google it, comes up as this: http://www.symantec.com/security_response/writeup.jsp?docid=2005-110615-2710-99

And I quote:

Updated: February 13, 2007 11:47:04 AM
Type: Other
Publisher: First 4 Internet Ltd.
Risk Impact: High
File Names: aries.sys
Systems Affected: Windows 2000, Windows NT, Windows Server 2003, Windows XP
Behavior


SecurityRisk.First4DRM is a rootkit that hides any processes, files, folders, or registry subkeys that start with the following string:

$sys$

Note:

• This rootkit was designed to hide a legitimate application, but it can be used to hide other objects, including malicious software.
• Customers running Norton Internet Security 2005 AntiSpyware Edition, programs from the Norton 2006 line of products, and Symantec AntiVirus Corporate Edition 10.x can make use of the product's remediation functionality to remove this risk.

Symptoms


Any processes, files, folders, or registry subkeys that start with or are renamed to start with the following string are hidden from view:

$sys$
Transmission


This security risk is part of the XCP software present on some Sony BMG content-protected music CDs. When a CD containing this software is started from a CD-ROM, the security risk is automatically installed on the compromised computer.

As much as I hate vista I have to defend it there, cause that's also XP. For more on that look up the Sony DRM Rootkit Scandal, it buggered more than one pc (including two I own).



Edit: Oh yeah, staying on track. I'm not big on Vista cause it has the system requirements it does. Rivals some of the games I put in this pc, and the OS isn't designed to BE a game :S

Still, once pc's catch up to it it'll be fine, gives time for MS to iron out the bugs too.