[VISTA] Vista is great, fast, and stable - Page 3

zoidbergmerc · 19th August 2009, 9:49 AM

I got Vista not long after it came out but it ran like a dog on my rig. Pretty piss poor rig at the time. Then I got my current setup and made the jump to vista x64 and never looked back. Now I run 7 but that's only because I needed to format and I thought I'd give it a bash

Dezza Bot · 19th August 2009, 9:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hankahanaka

one bone to pick with vista... subtle mouse acceleration. Windows 7 too.

It took me about 3 days to find the registry editing file that almost neutralises it.

can dig up link if anyone wants.

I've only noticed it in a couple of games (Bioshock and Fallout3) Bioshock is completely unplayable. But I'm pretty sure both of these issues are not the fault of the OS, but are the fault of the game designers.

I've gone to some effort to remove mouse acceleration since the 9x days but I'd like to know your fix too, just to make sure I've done it.

zoidbergmerc · 19th August 2009, 10:25 AM

I too strive to destroy all mouse acceleration from the land! please share with us your secrets!

Oblong Cheese · 19th August 2009, 10:41 AM

I don't like Vista because on a Core i7 920 and 6Gb RAM system, NO operating system should take >30 seconds to boot up.

vodkashot · 19th August 2009, 11:18 AM

I was an idiot who purchased windows vista ultimate. Ran scince day one of release till about 1 month ago. It always felt like it had alot background processes running, alot of games from 2007 didn't work with it, there was a tonne of driver issue until about 1 year ago, boot timing is slow and dx10 was pretty much a joke.

I moved onto the RC of win7, The difference is night and day for me. It clean, fast, supports all my hw, never froze or crashed. The only problem is that a few games don't work on it.

MR_PEA · 19th August 2009, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oblong Cheese

I don't like Vista because on a Core i7 920 and 6Gb RAM system, NO operating system should take >30 seconds to boot up.

i wonder why that is.... umm it could be your hdd's!!!!
sure you can get transfer rates over 100mbs but it still equates to longer then 30sec boot up times..
if you want to boot in less then 30sec, go back to dos!

zoki_007 · 19th August 2009, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oblong Cheese

I don't like Vista because on a Core i7 920 and 6Gb RAM system, NO operating system should take >30 seconds to boot up.

Who restarts their pc these days?

MR CHILLED · 19th August 2009, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zoki_007

Who restarts their pc these days?

I do, to save electricity, otherwise it would be on all the time.

Oblong Cheese · 19th August 2009, 1:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MR_PEA

i wonder why that is.... umm it could be your hdd's!!!!
sure you can get transfer rates over 100mbs but it still equates to longer then 30sec boot up times..
if you want to boot in less then 30sec, go back to dos!

This doesn't include getting a DHCP lease from my router either, because Vista does this after you login!

I only ever use it for gaming, so I have no other criticisms, but it really should not take longer than 30 seconds to boot. I am talking from the time Windows is actually involved in the process (after the bootloader) to the time I have a usable desktop.

Quote:

Originally Posted by zoki_007

Who restarts their pc these days?

People who don't need their PC on 24/7. Which is most people. It's only for games, so I only have it turned on while gaming.

Arbite · 19th August 2009, 1:22 PM

I love vista, after a few tweaks on install it was great. It loads significantly faster than xp, it doesn't slow down anyware near as much over time, and it is very stable.

MR CHILLED · 19th August 2009, 1:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arbite

I love vista, after a few tweaks on install it was great. It loads significantly faster than xp, it doesn't slow down anyware near as much over time, and it is very stable.

I've found exactly the opposite, XP was/is lightning fast, much much faster than Vista.

ShaggyMoose · 19th August 2009, 1:39 PM

Another generally happy Vista user. No issues with stability and for most tasks, speed. For some reason I think that copying still seems to take longer than XP, but that is subjective, not measured. Also, VAC gives me the shits occasionally, but mostly only old, poorly written apps require access or else obvious tasks such as installing something. I got onboard at SP1 though, so maybe it used to be as bad as they say. Certainly not the case now, but the damage is done.

Fortigurn · 19th August 2009, 1:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zoki_007

Used X64 since the day it came out. Loved it!! Never really had big problems with it..

Same. First service pack tidied up a few things and it felt a lot smoother. Second service pack and I noticed a significant difference in speed. I wonder if they tweaked the caching.

commancheau · 19th August 2009, 1:52 PM

As a tech I've used Vista x64 since rc1 and I love it, so much better than xp.

The main problem I've found with people's view of Vista is bad press and trying to use xp drivers with it.

These are the same issues I dealt with whenever there is a new Microsoft OS

When XP came out there was a huge push from customers to keep using Win98 as they had read bad things about XP, this was really big with gamers.

Once I explained the advantages of the new OS and that you cant use the drivers from the previous OS, most people embraced the newer version.

As I tell people, try it and make up your own mind.

yanman · 19th August 2009, 2:32 PM

So how many of you have actually deployed Vista in an enterprise? No I'm not talking about a small business with 3 PC's and a server under the receptionists desk.

19th August 2009, 9:49 AM	#31
zoidbergmerc Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Hobart Posts: 875	I got Vista not long after it came out but it ran like a dog on my rig. Pretty piss poor rig at the time. Then I got my current setup and made the jump to vista x64 and never looked back. Now I run 7 but that's only because I needed to format and I thought I'd give it a bash __________________ netGameRadio - internet radio for gamers. \| Intel Corei7 920 @ 4Ghz \| FoxConn Flamingblade \| 6GB G.Skill Trident \| 2x 500GB WD RAID0 \| 2x EVGA GTX 285 SuperClocked SLi \| 3x 24" BenQ nV surround \| Intel Core2Quad Q9550 @ 3.6ghz \| ASUS P5Q Deluxe \| 4GB Kingston HyperX \| OCZ Vertex II 60gb \| 2x Samsung 1Tb RAID0 \| HIS Radeon HD 5870 2GB \|

19th August 2009, 10:25 AM	#33
zoidbergmerc Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Hobart Posts: 875	I too strive to destroy all mouse acceleration from the land! please share with us your secrets! __________________ netGameRadio - internet radio for gamers. \| Intel Corei7 920 @ 4Ghz \| FoxConn Flamingblade \| 6GB G.Skill Trident \| 2x 500GB WD RAID0 \| 2x EVGA GTX 285 SuperClocked SLi \| 3x 24" BenQ nV surround \| Intel Core2Quad Q9550 @ 3.6ghz \| ASUS P5Q Deluxe \| 4GB Kingston HyperX \| OCZ Vertex II 60gb \| 2x Samsung 1Tb RAID0 \| HIS Radeon HD 5870 2GB \|

19th August 2009, 10:41 AM	#34
Oblong Cheese Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Brisbane Posts: 9,831	I don't like Vista because on a Core i7 920 and 6Gb RAM system, NO operating system should take >30 seconds to boot up. __________________ My Website \| My Computers \| Grado Labs Alessandro MS-1, Shure SRH-840, Topping TP30

19th August 2009, 11:18 AM	#35
vodkashot Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Sydney Posts: 175	I was an idiot who purchased windows vista ultimate. Ran scince day one of release till about 1 month ago. It always felt like it had alot background processes running, alot of games from 2007 didn't work with it, there was a tonne of driver issue until about 1 year ago, boot timing is slow and dx10 was pretty much a joke. I moved onto the RC of win7, The difference is night and day for me. It clean, fast, supports all my hw, never froze or crashed. The only problem is that a few games don't work on it. __________________ Am3 Phenom II X6 1055T@ 4.1ghz, ASUS M489TD PRO, AMAZE 5870, X-Fi Xtreme Gamer, G-SKILL 4GB , Corsair HX750W

19th August 2009, 1:39 PM	#42
ShaggyMoose Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Sydney "indefinitely"... Posts: 212	Another generally happy Vista user. No issues with stability and for most tasks, speed. For some reason I think that copying still seems to take longer than XP, but that is subjective, not measured. Also, VAC gives me the shits occasionally, but mostly only old, poorly written apps require access or else obvious tasks such as installing something. I got onboard at SP1 though, so maybe it used to be as bad as they say. Certainly not the case now, but the damage is done.

19th August 2009, 1:52 PM	#44
commancheau Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 12	As a tech I've used Vista x64 since rc1 and I love it, so much better than xp. The main problem I've found with people's view of Vista is bad press and trying to use xp drivers with it. These are the same issues I dealt with whenever there is a new Microsoft OS When XP came out there was a huge push from customers to keep using Win98 as they had read bad things about XP, this was really big with gamers. Once I explained the advantages of the new OS and that you cant use the drivers from the previous OS, most people embraced the newer version. As I tell people, try it and make up your own mind.

19th August 2009, 2:32 PM	#45
yanman Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Hobart Posts: 5,747	So how many of you have actually deployed Vista in an enterprise? No I'm not talking about a small business with 3 PC's and a server under the receptionists desk.