/

[Tension]

Vista`s a {bleep}ing {bleep}

[Argo]

That's because PC Magazine is not for the knowledgeable computer user but the common bearly computer literate computer user, as you noticed.

[LoadWB]

Reminds me of the times I've tryed to persuade people to turn system restore off on XP.

System Restore is extremely valuable.  I have dealt with numerous cases in which System Restore saved the day without the need to reload software or the operating system.

As well, the System Restore function creates a backup of the registry during reboots which comes in handy in cases of a non-bootable system.  Or when you make a big oops like I did where parsing a list of registry keys like this:

for /f %a in (reg.txt) do @echo [-%a] >> del.reg

Accidentally parses this:

HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\key

into this:

[-HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows]

And your half-awake, migraine-impaired mind lets that slip and deleted the entire Windows registry key!

(To avoid that, use "delims=" in the for statement.)

The Registry Hive File Loader accessing a snapshot of the registry from an early reboot, export of the Windows key, and WordPad, given about 20 minutes, and I had the entire key restored.

[kedawa]

i know your pain.
i've been using vista for about a year, and it does have some pretty annoying 'features'

it's the only version of windows i've ever used that ever required an F5 refresh of the desktop to see changes.

it's also the only version i've ever used that required me to move a folder higher up in the filesystem hierarchy in order to add files to it because the path length would be 'too long', only to allow me to put the folder right back where i moved it from afterward

the folder views are beyond messed up.  they're just plain busted and ms seemingly ha no desire to fix them

i recently switched from using a vga cable to a dvi cable for my lcd, which somehow managed to crash my AUDIO driver until i disabled the now unused (but still primary, wtf) vga output.

all of the features that used to be accessible as seperate tabs in xp's desktop properties window are now conveniently spread out over separate windows, including the completely unnecessary 'personalize' parent window.  brilliant

i still can't figure out how to check my ip address without opening a command prompt

it forgets the preferred order of my gamepads, and disconnects them when it goes to sleep  (sp1 mostly fixed this, though)

most of the games i've installed lock up if i try to launch them from the games explorer, which makes it utterly useless.

if i weren't so tired, i could probably come up with dozens of absurd problems i've had with it.  sp1 went a long way towards making the os usable, but there are a lot of problems not related to bugs or incompatibility that will just never get fixed.

[LoadWB]

kedawa wrote:

it's also the only version i've ever used that required me to move a folder higher up in the filesystem hierarchy in order to add files to it because the path length would be 'too long', only to allow me to put the folder right back where i moved it from afterward

This is absolutely sad.  Windows XP and before had a filename limitation of 256 characters (or 255, something like that) INLCUDING the path.  And that blasted "Documents and Settings" didn't help.  Why, oh why, does MS use an 8-bit limitation in a modern OS?  This was the hardest part of converting and office from Mac to Windows... suddenly they couldn't name their files with obscenely long names, and this has a very hard impact on roaming profiles.

I had hoped Vista would overcome this.

[keropi]

I have had no probs with Vista , I migrated from XP 4-5 months ago. The only thing I could not easily find was how to disable UAC (launch msconfig) and how to make the power button from start menu to shutdown the pc. other than that they are quite nice to run (assuming you have CAPABLE hardware) not to mention they are mandatory for DX10 gaming.

[meega]

kedawa wrote:

i still can't figure out how to check my ip address without opening a command prompt

I'm not sure why you want to... but anyway bookmark this:

http://checkip.dyndns.org/

[darksun9210]

inserting "windows vista" point of view.

fine for me yadda yadda yadda,
upgraded 32bit to 64bit, feels more responsive,
two year old laptop, dual core, 4Gb ram, 512mb nvidia Go7700, 160Gb 7200rpm, doesn't feel the need for re-install,
"just works"(tm)
can't get what i use on linux or mac,
all in all quite happy thankyouverymuch.

end of file.

[stefcep2]

Argo wrote:
That's because PC Magazine is not for the knowledgeable computer user but the common bearly computer literate computer user, as you noticed.

which is most PC users. I really think that launching from search is going to be the way that people do things in the future..

[stefcep2]

what i really hate about it is its multi-tasking eg the way it ignores my request to make a particular window active when i click on it or open the start menu until it finishes some crappy task eg indexing, defragging or some other rubbish that should have a lower priority.

how anyone can be happy with a system that multitasks so poorly and takes 3 minutes to be fully booted whilst running on several CPU cores, each running at 3000 mhz, in 3000 meg of ram is beyond me.

Someone said its OK if you have capable hardware.  Well my experience is that the critical thing is RAM: you NEED 2 gig minimum and 3 gig preferably.  But the CPU-if its 2-3 years old or newer and about 1.6 ghz and higher-makes little difference, even if its a multicore as vista is not multithreaded.  But 32 bit vista can't use more than 3 gig RAM so it aint gonna get any faster than what your getting today, even if you up your cpu's speed or cores.  So barely two years after its release, its performance has already maxed.  What a joke.

[DonnyEMU]

Not really true, I run Vista Ultimate 32-bit on my little netbook all of the time, it has 1 gig of memory and I use an SDHC 4 gig card.

You just don't have your vista optimized properly.. You can turn off search indexing really easy.

Here are two ways:
Navigate to Control Panel/System and Maintenance/Indexing Options. There you can remove all locations or only those you use rarely.

It is also possible to disable indexing for a certain drive or enable it only for selected folders. You can do this by changing the Properties of a drive or folder (right click on drive letter in Windows Explorer).
 
The fasted way is to simply disable the Windows Search service. Run Services (just type “Services” at the Start Search bar), right click on the Windows Search service and select “Properties”. Then choose “Disabled” for the start type. Afterwards, you have to stop this service by right clicking on it and selecting “Stop”.

The first option is the one you will quite often find on the Web. But I found out that Windows Search remains active after disabling it this way. The second option works, however, it takes quite long time until all files in all subfolders have been excluded from indexing. Thus, the third option is the best one. You don’t have to reboot, as with the first option, and if your want to enable it again later, it will cost you just a couple of mouse clicks.

After initial indexing I turn this feature off and make sure on the services control panel that I have it set as not an autostarting service.

Every computer I have besides the netbook is running Vista X64 which has none of the limitations of memory, or anything else. I suggest if you have a machine running 32-bit vista that you go out and buy a high speed USB memory stick that's at least 4 gigs in size. They end up costing from $20-40. Plug in it and choose READYBOOST on the autorun pop-up when it show up (If you have a SANDISK you might have to reformat the USB stick to make this option available).. You'll see a boost in speed there too..

An option I already mentioned besides turning off the search indexer is also turning off automatic windows defender scanning and turn off automatic windows updating.

All of these are user setable options. Your idea of performance max doesn't mention you have ran Tweak VI (totalidea.com) which will let you reorganize memory back to the way the old NT and Vista organized it and it will also let you set the pre-fetching and superfetching options whichs tries to smartly pre-load applications it thinks you will try to run so they appear to load faster. This also takes up valuable memory..

In your case I recommend three things and you'll see better performance:

1) Tweak VI
2) A high speed USB Memory Stick for ReadyBoost
3) Turning off the Search Indexer when it's completed initial indexing..

64 bit Vista has none of the things you are having issues about and it supports much larger memory footprints but requires you to have a 64 bit cpu which nearly three years after it's release are cheap and affordable.  

In todays world, I buy an 8 gig memory SDHC card for $20 a pop, and a processor/OS combined with hardware that only supports 4GB is quite OLD WORLD..

 

[zipper]

I've turned everything off which differentiates Vista from XP visually. There are still tens of processes which I could get rid of - mostly from the laptop manufacturer but I'm too lazy.

[detz]

Got it on a laptop I just got given. It's coming straight off, going back to XP...

Loads of things I'd rather have had fixed before Microsoft made it look all fancy, such as the annoying thing of windows coming to the foreground just with a single click, I'd much rather have to double click, like on AmigaOs, makes more sense and is handier for copying something from one window to another.

Still, that wouldn't sell units...

[TjLaZer]

Why not just scrap M$ and go Apple!

You can install Mac OS X on your x86 laptop!!


Yes that is what I did on my Dell D630 laptop.  

Goto Insanelymac.com and look on their forums about the x86 project.

I have Leopard 10.5.5 running on my Dell and it works great!  Even installed E-UAE on it with Hi-Toro.  Runs really well!

[Tron2k2]

Wait..  What?  I am going to buy this OS on a modern dual core or more CPU with two gigs minimum of RAM and then..  I need a 4GB USB stick to make it faster?!  is that what you're telling me??

My god, what kind of piggy OS is this?  And the advantage of this versus XP is exactly what now..?

I'm sorry but this is just the most absurd thing I've ever heard of-needing a USB stick to make your OS faster!  I thought that's what efficient coding, plentiful RAM and 8MB hard drive caches behind modern IDE interfaces were for?

My next x86 box will have Linux on it for sure!  Or maybe AROS if it gets a tight web browser.

[zipper]

 I need a 4GB USB stick to make it faster?!  is that what you're telling me??

It's not fast enough to give more speed.