Amiga.org
The "Not Quite Amiga but still computer related category" => Alternative Operating Systems => Topic started by: Lorraine on December 21, 2008, 07:52:38 PM
-
/
-
next time let it out on the offending computer itself
-
Lorraine wrote:
everything I do asks for security confirmation.
Turn off UAC.
I checked the resources and average memory usage was about 1.5GB, but I suspect a lot of that is OEM stuff he hasn't removed.
Actual memory usage is probably nowhere near that. Vista uses unused memory for caching. It will be made available to applications as needed.
-
/
-
Lorraine wrote:
I still don't see why it's necessary though.
If the memory isn't needed by applications, why not put it to good use?
-
Windows NT has always done that. If you really want to know how much memory Windows is actually using, you'll need to forget what you've learned via Task Manager, read up on Windows memory management, and use Perfmon with a bit of statistical analysis. That's not meant to imply that Windows is hiding things from you--all the data is there. It's just sufficiently complex to warrant a bit of digging.
-
With Vista, the usual mouse and folders and icons way of launching programs has been made unusable because everything is all over the place. Its virtually impossible to find anything because there is no logic to it. If you look at most tutorials, the search function is used to first locate what you want then launch it. Thats why Vista does an index of everything you have on the hard drive when you first install it. Its THE way to work with windows now, forget icons which no longer resemble the things they represent, forget even the start menu, and good luck finding what you want by opening folders. Everything is Start Orb->search. Anything else is just too tedious. So why bother with icons to launch programs at all? Why not just replace the start up orb with a search widget?
-
Odd, I don't use Vista that way. Opening folders and clicking on icons seems to work for me. Not to mention the start menu and quick launch.
-
Argo wrote:
Odd, I don't use Vista that way. Opening folders and clicking on icons seems to work for me. Not to mention the start menu and quick launch.
Yes I thought so too. I tried to work the "Classic" Windows way like you but I quickly learned that PC magazine tutorials on Vista launch things with Orb-> search. I recently got Vista and too was using Start-menu or my computer to double click through folders. I looked at what other people-most of whom are just computer users, not geeks- around me were doing and they were all orb-> search to launch things. Try for example to find defrag, or disk partitioning tools by opening folders, and try with orb-> search "disk". See which is faster? For me this is the biggest shift in the way people use Windows. Very few people I know double click through folders or pin things to the start menu or orb->programs->program executable. They just orb->search
-
I also find if you download tweak VI by totalidea.com you can set things up like memory caching, DVD and what you probably want to look into is what the computer doing for "prefetching and superfetching". This causes the computer to pre-load programs that it thinks you are most likely to start up.
Tweak VI lets you reset what software the computer is caching (causing resources to get redistributed). I'd also look at services that maybe running and set to autostart. These also can be a pain if it's something you don't need like most people don't need PEN input services..
Even the freeware version of Tweak VI is worth running..
Tweak IV Page at totalidea.com (http://www.totalidea.com/product.php?Product=TweakVI)
-
use a program called autoruns to see what is running. This shows a lot more than the msconfig most people are used to and the interface is easy to use on it. Oh and its free.
-
can't stand the thing it did an automatic update, shutdown my system and rebooted without warning, now coming out of sleep mode changes my screen resolution to a blurry 1024 x 768 display. (sure there's a way to prevent that)I'll be glad when I get morph on a lap to....or even aros :lol:
-
OK look,
for a bunch of geeks you all are overlooking the obvious.
Windows Vista comes on a DVD, and the whole OS takes up about
10 GB to install on your hard drive, way way to much room for
me. Then to run with any speed at all, no lags or stutters, you'll need
at least 2 GB of ram, preferably pc6400 dual channel. I'm either running win xppro
or amikit or af. Oh and don't forget the dual core or even better
upgrade to a quad core. I have to deal with windows for my customers
but have started to migrate a select few to a linux based os.
They love it and since I build the servers and file systems
theres very little surprises. only problem will be going from
linux to xls docs or word docs, that comes next year. I'm thinking
about doing everything in adobe format. hmmm
down with windows!
LOL
Calde
-
Misleading marketing aside, i.e. the Vista Ready logo, I don't see anything wrong with Vista's requirements. Disabling all the visual bells and whistles (honestly, they add no value--who wants or needs pseudo-transparent window borders?) makes it quite usable on a reasonably spec'd system. That said, I still use Windows XP. For the moment, there's no compelling reason for me to upgrade.
-
Vista`s a {bleep}ing {bleep}
-
That's because PC Magazine is not for the knowledgeable computer user but the common bearly computer literate computer user, as you noticed.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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/
-
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.
-
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..
-
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.
-
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 $20 a pop, and a processor/OS combined with hardware that only supports 4GB is quite OLD WORLD..
-
I've turned everything off which differentiates Vista from XP visually. There are still tens of processes which I could get rid of - mostly from the laptop manufacturer but I'm too lazy.
-
Got it on a laptop I just got given. It's coming straight off, going back to XP...
Loads of things I'd rather have had fixed before Microsoft made it look all fancy, such as the annoying thing of windows coming to the foreground just with a single click, I'd much rather have to double click, like on AmigaOs, makes more sense and is handier for copying something from one window to another.
Still, that wouldn't sell units...
-
Why not just scrap M$ 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!
-
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.
-
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.
-
Tron2k2 wrote:
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.
its ridiculous isn't it. We now have hardware which 3-4 years ago would be considered a super computer, yet the OS still gives us wait cursors when all you want to do is open the start menu. No vista says, I'll listen to you when I'm good and ready.. Or try and drag a solid window and watch it tear up as the OS struggles to redraw it even though its running on 4 cores and 3 gig ram 512 mb graphics card with super fast ram, but then you see it work smoother in Winuae. Put two Vista windows next to one another. How easy is it to tell which is the active one?- oh yeah its the one with the little red close window gadget in the corner. Really intuitive, isn't it?
-
Some facts:
The maximum path is limited to 260 chars for compatibility with legacy software. Paths beginning with \\?\C\... have a practical limit of about 32000 wchars.
32-bit Windows can use more than 4 GB RAM via PAE and AWE, but it's up to the application to use it. The "3 GB" limit is used in marketing materials by third parties, so users that install two 512 MB display adapters aren't surprised when they're mapped below the 4 GB boundary to make the accessible to 32-bit drivers.
Most delays in the shell can be attributed to waits in kernel code or deadlocks and race conditions in user code.
-
Trev wrote:
Some facts:
The maximum path is limited to 260 chars for compatibility with legacy software. Paths beginning with \\?\C\... have a practical limit of about 32000 wchars.
32-bit Windows can use more than 4 GB RAM via PAE and AWE, but it's up to the application to use it. The "3 GB" limit is used in marketing materials by third parties, so users that install two 512 MB display adapters aren't surprised when they're mapped below the 4 GB boundary to make the accessible to 32-bit drivers.
Most delays in the shell can be attributed to waits in kernel code or deadlocks and race conditions in user code.
whats PAE and AWE
-
PAE = Physical Address Extension. This means the CPU really has 36 address bits instead of 32. How do you get those extra four bits? You use the MMU. The addresses you use in your program are VIRTUAL addresses - they are translated into physical addresses by the MMU. The problem is that the CPU is still using a 32 bit pointer, so you get a max of 4 GB of space to address. Even worse, normally a program is only allowed to use 2 GB out of that 4 GB of space. The rest is reserved to the Windows kernel. Using something called 4GT (4 Gig Tuning), you can access up to 3 GB out of the 4 GB.
Suppose you need more than 3 GB. That's where AWE comes in. AWE = Application Windowing Extensions. This is a throw-back to the old EMS days on 16 bit PCs. This is good old-fashioned BANK SELECTING. You tell Windows to make a bank inside your 3 GB of space, then tell Windows to switch in and out banks of memory in that bank of space. With AWE, you can access that full 36 bits of addressable RAM (64 GB), but only a piece at a time inside that smaller bank.
-
Calde wrote:
OK look,
for a bunch of geeks you all are overlooking the obvious.
Windows Vista comes on a DVD, and the whole OS takes up about
10 GB to install on your hard drive, way way to much room for
me. Then to run with any speed at all, no lags or stutters, you'll need
at least 2 GB of ram, preferably pc6400 dual channel. I'm either running win xppro
or amikit or af. Oh and don't forget the dual core or even better
upgrade to a quad core. I have to deal with windows for my customers
but have started to migrate a select few to a linux based os.
They love it and since I build the servers and file systems
theres very little surprises. only problem will be going from
linux to xls docs or word docs, that comes next year. I'm thinking
about doing everything in adobe format. hmmm
down with windows!
LOL
Calde
For general MS Windows Vista usage, it doesn’t need a quad core CPU since slowest device in the system is the hard disk.
-
Hammer wrote:
Calde wrote:
OK look,
for a bunch of geeks you all are overlooking the obvious.
Windows Vista comes on a DVD, and the whole OS takes up about
10 GB to install on your hard drive, way way to much room for
me. Then to run with any speed at all, no lags or stutters, you'll need
at least 2 GB of ram, preferably pc6400 dual channel. I'm either running win xppro
or amikit or af. Oh and don't forget the dual core or even better
upgrade to a quad core. I have to deal with windows for my customers
but have started to migrate a select few to a linux based os.
They love it and since I build the servers and file systems
theres very little surprises. only problem will be going from
linux to xls docs or word docs, that comes next year. I'm thinking
about doing everything in adobe format. hmmm
down with windows!
LOL
Calde
For general MS Windows Vista usage, it doesn’t need a quad core CPU since slowest device in the system is the hard disk.
And why, may i ask does the damned thing need to access the hard drive soooo much? 4 gig of super fast ram and several megabytes of sup super fast cpu cache not enough? to do what, exactly? i am sitting here typing away in a web browser and other than punching the keys there is nothing else I'm doing yet the hard drive is ticking away and I've turned off indexing, defrag..so what the hell is it doing?
The text of the Encyclopeadia Brittanica fits on one CD ie 650 meg. An OS needs about 10,000 meg? Absurd.
-
I'm using XP x64 Edition, and I have little complaint. With more 64-bit Server 2003 drivers out there now that it's become more mainstream, I'm in good shape and do not have a single device missing drivers.
I hear Vista 64 is really good, but I'm not willing to make that leap just yet.
I do have some "legacy" applications (read that as some apps using an ancient SDK to avoid purchasing a new one, and others for $_DEITY knows why) which do not work in x64, so I run 32-bit XP in VirtualPC or VirtualBox for these apps.
XP x64, 8GB RAM, and it all works well. Were it not for Vista's phuqd up way of navigating the system, I'd move up to Vista 64. Feh.
-
Trev wrote:
Some facts:
The maximum path is limited to 260 chars for compatibility with legacy software. Paths beginning with \\?\C\... have a practical limit of about 32000 wchars.
I've not used this syntax. Is that accessible from Explorer?
-
@LoadWB
Yes, but I typoed the syntax. It's actually \\?\C:\... (or \\?\D:\..., etc.).
For anyone interested in Windows memory limits, check these out:
http://blogs.technet.com/markrussinovich/archive/2008/07/21/3092070.aspx
http://blogs.technet.com/markrussinovich/archive/2008/11/17/3155406.aspx
I'll concede that the consumer SKUs of 32-bit Windows XP can be limited to 3GB. It's unfortunate. Anyhow, run 32-bit Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition or a 64-bit Windows instead. ;-)
-
am sitting here typing away in a web browser and other than punching the keys there is nothing else I'm doing yet the hard drive is ticking away and I've turned off indexing, defrag..so what the hell is it doing?
That's what taskmgr is for - check what's happening.
I've turned everything extraneous off and just my antivirus software does those slowdowns every now and then, mostly when joining new drives to the system or downloading something.
-
/
-
You'll probably just need to streamline your setup in the same way, particularly if you're running one of the business SKUs and don't use the features designed for enterprise management. Windows XP Service Pack 3 added some of the additional management features available in Vista, so you might want to look into disabling those on Windows XP if you haven't already.
-
zipper wrote:
am sitting here typing away in a web browser and other than punching the keys there is nothing else I'm doing yet the hard drive is ticking away and I've turned off indexing, defrag..so what the hell is it doing?
That's what taskmgr is for - check what's happening.
I've turned everything extraneous off and just my antivirus software does those slowdowns every now and then, mostly when joining new drives to the system or downloading something.
I know its running stuff in the background but what is it doing, in the sense that its not achieving anything tangible to the user. Why doe sit need so much crap to run just so that i can get a window displayed on screen, make a TCP connection and move the mouse pointer and use the keyboard to type? As this is a rant thread, I'll rant some more..
I think we've lost perspective on the hardware specs that this OS is running on: hard drives are still 3.5 inch but store terabytes of data, that's unimaginable data density, hard drives rpm at 7200 and 10000, so data should be packed in and accessible very very quickly, we have GIGABYTES of RAM ( some are talking 8 GB !!!), 3000 mhz CPU's with on board caches bigger than system RAM of past machines, display cards capable of pushing pixels on screen at insane speeds, all communicating with multiple CPU's via super fast data buses, but I've still gotta wait for the start menu to pop up and draw itself on screen, or stay half drawn for a few seconds after i close it?
Overall hardware specs have increased by factors of 10, 100, or 1000, inj recent years, yet the user experience is just as frustrating as ever. What is the point of the hardware getting better if the OS just negates it all?
-
Progress...
-
stefcep2 wrote:
zipper wrote:
am sitting here typing away in a web browser and other than punching the keys there is nothing else I'm doing yet the hard drive is ticking away and I've turned off indexing, defrag..so what the hell is it doing?
That's what taskmgr is for - check what's happening.
I've turned everything extraneous off and just my antivirus software does those slowdowns every now and then, mostly when joining new drives to the system or downloading something.
I know its running stuff in the background but what is it doing, in the sense that its not achieving anything tangible to the user. Why doe sit need so much crap to run just so that i can get a window displayed on screen, make a TCP connection and move the mouse pointer and use the keyboard to type? As this is a rant thread, I'll rant some more..
I think we've lost perspective on the hardware specs that this OS is running on: hard drives are still 3.5 inch but store terabytes of data, that's unimaginable data density, hard drives rpm at 7200 and 10000, so data should be packed in and accessible very very quickly, we have GIGABYTES of RAM ( some are talking 8 GB !!!), 3000 mhz CPU's with on board caches bigger than system RAM of past machines, display cards capable of pushing pixels on screen at insane speeds, all communicating with multiple CPU's via super fast data buses, but I've still gotta wait for the start menu to pop up and draw itself on screen, or stay half drawn for a few seconds after i close it?
Overall hardware specs have increased by factors of 10, 100, or 1000, inj recent years, yet the user experience is just as frustrating as ever. What is the point of the hardware getting better if the OS just negates it all?
Or you could use a Mac... :-)
-
I've thought about Mac but here in Aus, Macs ARE expensive relative to the hardware specs eg Macbook Air 1.6 ghz 2gb ram 80 gb hard drive RRP $2899 Aus. I don't really care about the single block of aluminium, ultrathin stuff.
I'm thinking Apple more and more is about style over substance. And i don't like the way Apple makes perfectly good hardware obsolete when it feels like a series of model shouldn't be allowed to run their latest OS, which means you can get the latest Web browser etc.
I may borrow a mac for a week and see if it lives up to the hype..
-
Tried Vista on my Dual Core Athlon XP X2 5000+,4GB DDR2,blah blah blah,still runs slow compared to XP so i'll stick to that.
One other question:
We all know that the Amiga has a ram disc that keeps its data after a restart (Rad,i think it's called)and we know that ram disc utilities are available for windows...as far as i know,windows ram discs lose the contents after a reboot - are there any windows utilities out there that offer such?...or is that part of what makes the miggy so special?
-
I know its running stuff in the background but what is it doing, in the sense that its not achieving anything tangible to the user. Why doe sit need so much crap to run just so that i can get a window displayed on screen, make a TCP connection and move the mouse pointer and use the keyboard to type? As this is a rant thread, I'll rant some more..
I think we've lost perspective on the hardware specs that this OS is running on: hard drives are still 3.5 inch but store terabytes of data, that's unimaginable data density, hard drives rpm at 7200 and 10000, so data should be packed in and accessible very very quickly, we have GIGABYTES of RAM ( some are talking 8 GB !!!), 3000 mhz CPU's with on board caches bigger than system RAM of past machines, display cards capable of pushing pixels on screen at insane speeds, all communicating with multiple CPU's via super fast data buses, but I've still gotta wait for the start menu to pop up and draw itself on screen, or stay half drawn for a few seconds after i close it?
Overall hardware specs have increased by factors of 10, 100, or 1000, inj recent years, yet the user experience is just as frustrating as ever. What is the point of the hardware getting better if the OS just negates it all?
EXACTLY! I have been ranting about the exact same things for the past 10 years (at least). You'd think that by 2008, Windows could at least open a frigging menu or popup without leaving the screen half drawn! User interaction should be TOP PRIORITY!
The next version of Windows will probably use the GPU to speed up the GUI, but I bet they'll add loads of useless crap (and DRM checks) just to slow it down again. Then we'll see posted comments like "why is my 4Ghz 8-core PC so [beep]ing slow!".
It's a tragedy that BeOS didn't catch on. They had the right idea. On a 200Mhz PC with 64Mb RAM, it boots fully in 5 seconds. Window opening is nearly instantaneous. Applications open in 1-3 seconds. Everything feels fast - like it should be. BeOS is old and dead now, but if it had survived, I'm sure it would absolutely blow Vista away. (on the same hardware, running applications of the same complexity)
I may borrow a mac for a week and see if it lives up to the hype..
I did the same and found it didn't live up to the hype. I was extremely disappointed. It's better than Windows (what isn't?), but it can still be very frustrating and limiting. Linux was even more disappointing.
-
/
-
@jasper
I can see how it might be done on a Windows box, but the recoverable RAM disk was designed to solve a performance problem that no longer exists: running a DOS from floppy disk(s).
-
the encouraging thing this time around is that long-term PC users themselves are having enough of their hardware being seriously hobbled by Vista. The PC market is maturing, a large slice of it is onto the second or third OS, and many are far from happy that it takes them longer to do things they did before on new hardware that SHOULD BE far faster. If MS "does another Vista", I hope that it might be the tipping point where people just say " Forget it, MS. I'll stick to my XP machine until its circuits burn out, and no money for you this year or the next or the next." History tells us no empire has lasted forever.
-
by stefcep2 on 2008/12/26 5:51:55
the encouraging thing this time around is that long-term PC users themselves are having enough of their hardware being seriously hobbled by Vista. The PC market is maturing, a large slice of it is onto the second or third OS, and many are far from happy that it takes them longer to do things they did before on new hardware that SHOULD BE far faster. If MS "does another Vista", I hope that it might be the tipping point where people just say " Forget it, MS. I'll stick to my XP machine until its circuits burn out, and no money for you this year or the next or the next." History tells us no empire has lasted forever.
Very well put, stefcep2 !! The sad fact is, however, is that the Wintel cartel has nearly a stranglehold on the PC market. I have heard employees at computer stores (read: PC stores) ouright lie to get someone to buy a PC versus a Mac, or Linux machine (what's a MEEGA ??? ) There may be hope, tho, some Linux distros are getting almost idiot-proof... typing this on my Xandros (based on Debian) machine now :-D
Worst thing that ever happened on this machine, my modem stopped working once, I just re-ran the 'Connection Wizard', after 5 mins., all was well. And it's not too shabby for a 633Mhz Celeron w/ 128 MB RAM ... (But Xandros' Control Center says it's a 631MhZ Celeron :-? ... Oh well...
-
Microsoft does have issues with scalability in their desktop products, and while most of the operating environment is modular, the relationships between various components aren't well documented.
I think we also need to consider the state of the hardware market. CPUs today are pretty much the same speed they were five years ago, and not every software problem benefits from parallel processing, larger caches, higher bus speeds, and the other changes the industry has made to mask the performance cap.
Salespeople, particularly at department and electronics stores, are usually just poorly educated. They base their recommendations on marketing and sales incentives. Spending sixteen hours a day in World of Warcraft does not turn a salesperson into a PC expert. ;-)
EDIT: And the fact that everyone assumes "PC" means "Microsoft Windows running on an x86[-64]-compatible processor" is evidence of the success of Apple's attempts to differentiate themselves. "PC" used to mean all personal computers, IBM, Apple, Commodore, Atari, et al included.
-
I have joined the Vista involuntary buyers club;but it really doesn't seem that bad so far,as my new Compaq AMD X2 feels pretty snappy.
I have burnt ubuntu amd64 and will try that AFTER burning a set of restore disks since none are included with new computers.
I may end up using Kubuntu,like Kde better than Gnome.
Matter of fact I am online now with Kubuntu/Konqueror running on my HP (usually XP) desktop.Amiga.org looks fine with this browser.
We just have to use the best available tool .